Alternate LRMs fire mode

[cyofee]

I for one don't care about CLRM arcs, I only want ATMs and MRMs to be more resistent to LAMS.

[Frostiken]

Since when has LAMS ever been an issue regarding MRMs?

[(TLL) Heretic]

Since when has LAMS ever been an issue regarding MRMs?

Since very recently, there's a glitch reported where an entire MRM swarm will be knocked out if MRM X is destroyed.  I've not experienced it (but I don't use MRMs much anyways due to their tracking to Narc, regardless of if you want that or not).

ATMs will be fine once the LAMS model is reworked I believe.  In fact, upgrading LRMs to ATMs would be a common practice on clan machines after ATM introduction, therefore I see no reason why ATMs can't replace LRMs on most of the Clan Primes.  After all what would you rather have on your TimberWolf Prime, LRM20s or ATM12s (yes I know there's a tonnage difference here, but there doesn't have to be in MWLL)!  Thats 40 points of damage in the LRMs, 24, 48 or 72 points of damage in the ATMs(depending on what ammo you are using).

But we are better off taking Vlaads advice, understanding that its on the Devs radar, and wait and see what Soon^TM brings us!

[Terragent]

ATM-12 is only two tons heavier than a cLRM-20 - three tons lighter if MWLL doesn't give cLRM launchers their weight discount, in fact. I'd love a Mad Dog prime with paired ATM-12...

[~SJ~ Blhurr]

If the devs aren't listening then why are we still talking.

[CGB [CoffiNail]]

ATMs will be fine once the LAMS model is reworked I believe.  In fact, upgrading LRMs to ATMs would be a common practice on clan machines after ATM introduction, therefore I see no reason why ATMs can't replace LRMs on most of the Clan Primes.  After all what would you rather have on your TimberWolf Prime, LRM20s or ATM12s (yes I know there's a tonnage difference here, but there doesn't have to be in MWLL)!  Thats 40 points of damage in the LRMs, 24, 48 or 72 points of damage in the ATMs(depending on what ammo you are using).

No, see the DEVs cannot simply just change the Prime mech's loadouts so drastically, You think new players bitch and moan about how half the variants are not their cannon ones, what do you think will happen when the players come and see Cougar Prime with 2xATM 9, 2CLPL, Mad Dog Prime 2xATM12, 2xLPL, 2xMPL, Summoner ATM12, LBX20(see this is simply a upgrade for it, not a drastic change), ERPPC, Timber Wolf with 2xATM12, rest of load out.  You would have people coming on here screaming bloody murder to the Primes.  No, sadly Heretic your idea is a nice one for gameplay wise, but it would cause WAY more headache to them, that is why you would never see the Clan Primes with ATMs

If the devs aren't listening then why are we still talking.

Why? Because we are just as passionate about playing this game as the DEVs are at building it, coding it and making it look sexy. EVEN if the DEVs simply think, oh that player is whining again.

You know DEVs i am saddened that you think a player who plays you mod nearly nightly, and has done so for a year and a half is out to 'get' you. I would LOVE to honestly know how often you guys actually get to play. Not test, not debug, but actually get to sit down and play your mod for three or four full rounds.  I do this 4 days of the week at least, often i get in a small game on the days I cannot at night.

You DEVs may think that some players are out to get you, but seriously some players have more freaking passion and love for this mod then the DEV team.

[Vlaad]

I wont get involved in this thread any more. But for any further discussions.

1. Yeah I do understand Vlaad, but the thing that really boggles my mind is when it seems 90% of the community wants it that way and a bunch of your DEV team want it that way, why is it not?

2. I know you DEVs make the game for yourselves first the community second and all.

3. I just do not understand why the leads of the DEV team want CLRMs to play a support, when it changes the whole dynamic of the Canon styled Clan omnimechs that are designed around direct fighting.

1. That claim is not correct, and I am someone who would like to see more from lrm. I bug alphatesters for their opinion... Opinions are divided on that topic even more so on the dev team.

2. Dead wrong. It was 4 am when I posted (I did play the game for good hour and a half though). You guys will see "soon^tm" why. In addition in my "spare" time (4am-6am *bows head in shame*) i did work on stuff that was argued a problem some time ago. NDA and moral obligations prevent me on saying what. But that "drydicksaturday" was not intended only for myself... Aurailius worked with me to get some things working... TOMTOM also... Cygma was pestered also... And im only speaking for people that I know and only for one day lol! Most of the mapers have community in mind and coders usually do what is said that has to be done. Im sure its not interesting mopping up code and going through feedback just for "yerself". And keeping different teams/fractions functioning...

3. In the grand plan of balance and features to come slapping a change just does not cut it. There are MANY people working on game, ergo, many opinions. Its a slow and tedious process getting everyone to see/agree. All that some of you guys do when pressing this (haarp rogue server/calling on stand people) is giving someone who potentially does not agree with something like this/trolled to rage a good argument why it should not be there. It is indeed detected on dev radar... Is it not enough?

*4* Most of us DO come from community and work for community. We remeber where we are from. Arguing differently from your computers does not benefit us in motivation to work since that is, in essence only thing that we have.

[1N4001]

ATM-12 is only two tons heavier than a cLRM-20

But also needs more crits, pumps out more heat and offers even less salvos per ton.

Alas, considering that balance factors like crits are completely utterly ignored here, heat being literally flushed away in an instant and weight shuffled on a whim anyways...

...yeah.

Wait, what point am I arguing here anyway? Ah yes, CLRM arcing sucks. I can get behind that.
...I'll just stand over here. Please continue.

[=KoS= Saber15]

Alas, considering that balance factors like crits are completely utterly ignored here, heat being literally flushed away in an instant and weight shuffled on a whim anyways...

...yeah.

MWLL has a system similar to MW4's slots - you can only fit certain weapons in certain slots. It's basically the crit system. You can't cram in ridiculous shit like 8 ER small lasers in one arm like in BattleTech, as MWLL limits stuff to what can physically fit there - no LRM20s mounted in a Warhammer's side torsos.

[1N4001]

Alas, considering that balance factors like crits are completely utterly ignored here, heat being literally flushed away in an instant and weight shuffled on a whim anyways...

...yeah.

MWLL has a system similar to MW4's slots - you can only fit certain weapons in certain slots. It's basically the crit system. You can't cram in ridiculous shit like 8 ER small lasers in one arm like in BattleTech, as MWLL limits stuff to what can physically fit there - no LRM20s mounted in a Warhammer's side torsos.

That would work nice if it was implemented on top of crits.  What are the 2 limiters for mounting equipment? tons and crits.
Now we take away crits. A PPC weighs 7 tons, an LBX10 11 tons. I'll assume both would use 'large' slots.

Which would you rather take? Of course, depends on the situation...but most likely the LBX, of course. It needs no additional heatsinks and is only a little heavier. The fact that the LBX needs more than twice the crit space is completely punched out of the equation!

And now you have to start tweaking tonnages to get the same result. Which in turn means that many of our Primes and other variants become crippled or dropped in favor of boats and dual-this-dual-that loadouts.

[Wraythe]

Alas, considering that balance factors like crits are completely utterly ignored here, heat being literally flushed away in an instant and weight shuffled on a whim anyways...

...yeah.

MWLL has a system similar to MW4's slots - you can only fit certain weapons in certain slots. It's basically the crit system. You can't cram in ridiculous shit like 8 ER small lasers in one arm like in BattleTech, as MWLL limits stuff to what can physically fit there - no LRM20s mounted in a Warhammer's side torsos.

That would work nice if it was implemented on top of crits.  What are the 2 limiters for mounting equipment? tons and crits.
Now we take away crits. A PPC weighs 7 tons, an LBX10 11 tons. I'll assume both would use 'large' slots.

Which would you rather take? Of course, depends on the situation...but most likely the LBX, of course. It needs no additional heatsinks and is only a little heavier. The fact that the LBX needs more than twice the crit space is completely punched out of the equation!

And now you have to start tweaking tonnages to get the same result. Which in turn means that many of our Primes and other variants become crippled or dropped in favor of boats and dual-this-dual-that loadouts.

This is very old but check it out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRvqRHszJho

[=KoS= Tripod]

Alas, considering that balance factors like crits are completely utterly ignored here, heat being literally flushed away in an instant and weight shuffled on a whim anyways...

...yeah.

MWLL has a system similar to MW4's slots - you can only fit certain weapons in certain slots. It's basically the crit system. You can't cram in ridiculous shit like 8 ER small lasers in one arm like in BattleTech, as MWLL limits stuff to what can physically fit there - no LRM20s mounted in a Warhammer's side torsos.

That would work nice if it was implemented on top of crits.  What are the 2 limiters for mounting equipment? tons and crits.
Now we take away crits. A PPC weighs 7 tons, an LBX10 11 tons. I'll assume both would use 'large' slots.

Which would you rather take? Of course, depends on the situation...but most likely the LBX, of course. It needs no additional heatsinks and is only a little heavier. The fact that the LBX needs more than twice the crit space is completely punched out of the equation!

And now you have to start tweaking tonnages to get the same result. Which in turn means that many of our Primes and other variants become crippled or dropped in favor of boats and dual-this-dual-that loadouts.

I'd rather take the PPC

More range, better damage (at least it feels that way), no ammo dependency, shakes the enemy's screen and heats them up
It's only drawbacks are the heat it makes and that it's not nearly as good against air

[Kelmola]

The thing is, LRM arcing would not be as big of a problem if they were more manoeuverable. I still remember that in MW2 (non-arcing) CLRM's were the best anti-air weapon. Lock on, fire, scratch one VTOL. However, the MWLL reality is that they barely hit moving ground targets, and paradoxically Arrow IV's are the best long-range  (ATM does the job on short range) anti-air missile (yeah, I know, anti-air Arrows were introduced in CBT in Jihad era).

Now, I'm not saying that LRM's should be some sort of mobile SAM system, but I'm sure that by tweaking the manoeuverability of LRM's and CLRM's on a given range, people would hardly notice that CLRM's cannot be fired in direct-fire mode.

Still, to return to the original topic, giving an alternative indirect fire mode for (C)LRM's would also be cool.

[CGB [Blackthorne]]

Man, a lot of points being made all over the place. Lets see if I can keep some sort of order to my post 


1. Indirect fire mode for LRMs.

Not sure how this would be implemented... Sure changing the angle that they leave the launcher would be pretty simple, but how would you switch between weapon modes (link it to Active/Passive radar? or worse, adding another mode to weapons groups). How would you target a location on the map? Besides, if the Devs did add this later feature, everyone will be complaining that you cannot target Longtoms that way. I'd like to see the location where my last Longtom shell impacted on the minimap as well, but I highly doubt that it will ever be added. Minimap targeted artillery would probably be game breaking and would only lead to more camping...

There was also a point made about, due to the low damage per missile and the inaccuracy of indirect fire weapons, the indirect fire LRMs would either be useless or if the damage were increased they would become overpowered during normal use. I think this is a valid point and should be taken into consideration.

Indirect fire LRMs, even with their current low damage would be very useful in flussing out BA possitions from a safe distance. I'm surprised that nobody has seen this potential use yet...


2. CLRM direct/non-arching fire.

This would be a nice feature, but it does blur the line a bit between the other missile systems, imo (even if that is how the clans would/did use them). Every missile would be capable of firing straight and it could make it harder for a noob like me to figure out what I'm fighting against. 

Also, I think the point about the risk of overpowering one of the modes damage is valid for this as well. LRMs do enough damage that to use them in close combat would be overpowered and would make SRMs and MRMs less attractive, imo.


3. LAMS with ATMs and in general

I'm interested to see how the Devs rework the LAMS. I personally avoid using ATMs in game because, with their current ammo and salvo size limits, they are wasted at range against an opponent LAMS and because their minimum range (which I like by the way) makes it difficult to use them close enough to an opponent with LAMS that most missiles will hit.

I very much like the idea of making ATMs take 2-3 LAMS hits to be destroyed.

I also like the idea of being able to shoot down missiles with my RAC-2 or MG, but this will never happen while LAMS is so OP because it would be a game breaker. I have no hope of this ever being implemented, but I thought I'd throw it in there anyway...

Having a key to turn on/off LAMS would be nice (especially if they used up a lot of heat). Alternatively AMS with an ammo restriction would be another nice option and would be lore accurate for IS mechs. Probability of being implemented: Low-to-none.


4. Devs

I love Mechwarrior/Battletech. I love MWLL. I love the people who make this possible (that means you, Dev team). Thank you for such a sweet mod and know that, while these debates do get a little heated from time to time, we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for your efforts and for the great job you have been doing.

Just look at all the MWLL posts on the Mechwarrior Online forums and you should know that we appreciate you all. It's not often that a mod ends up being a competitor to a triple-A title (even one that's not released yet).

Also, while on the subject of MWO, I've heard that they are using the newest iteration of the CryEngine. I wonder if this could be due to the fact that MWLL has made such a good use of Crysis? You guys have pretty much proven that this engine can support Battlemech sized combat and you deserve props for that.


EDIT: Sorry I wrote a book 

[=KoS= Tripod]

If you've played on HAARP's server (I have) that you'd know that CLRMs shooting straight out of the launcher are in no way OP

Even the Vulture that boats them like mad is still barely a threat. Their tracking is so shit that even a Thanatos can easily dodge half of them and even when they hit head on they still only get you to like yellow or if you're something with paper for armor then orange

Definitely not OP or even something I consider a primary target when I saw one with a group of other mechs
The other missile types still totally overshadow them in close. They're kinda like ACs. Sure, you can take some ac5s and hit out to really long distances, but the ac20 which can only hit at much smaller distances would rape an equivalent tonnage of ac5s at it's range

Hell, I'd like it if not just clan ones could hit at that distance, but IS ones as well, just without tracking locks (only dumbfire) until 300 meters