Skydance
Apprentice Dev
MechWarrior
 Offline
Posts: 223
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: February 28, 2008, 01:25:12 AM » |
|
I may be mistaken, but I'm fairly sure none of the chassis at initial release will be packing ATMs or Heavy Lasers.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nebfer
Bondsman
Offline
Posts: 44
|
|
« Reply #16 on: February 28, 2008, 09:57:44 PM » |
|
In the regular game LRMs have a minimum range where thy are less able "to hit" you. Though Clan LRMs don't have this min range due to IIRC a typo that has never been fixed.
In game LRMs have this range pattern
[6min] 7 short, 14 med, 21 long
With the range scale being 30m (though there are other range scales).
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 28, 2008, 10:00:19 PM by Nebfer »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Raptor Khatib
Bondsman
Offline
Posts: 19
|
|
« Reply #17 on: March 05, 2008, 12:10:00 AM » |
|
in mech2 they didnt have ATM's they only had sSRM's and LRM's
however sSRM's would annihilate you at close range (as they should)
LRM's would not lock on under a set range 500m i think ? dunno been long time since i played it
but you could still fire them dumb fire and they would just launch straight
quite often half the missiles would not explode but just disappear
but many of them would still explode , sometimes you would get lucky and all your missiles would detonate
but it was not a weapon you could rely on in close range
but at long range... oh baby and the Timber Wolf has 2x cLRM20 in stock
and people wonder why it is such a fierce mech
in the MW:LL team took the same compromise as the MW2 team id be happy
i think it makes sense to to neuter the weapon completely in short range
but to make it very ineffective works well i think
Which brings the point to the ATM system. Its not like the LRMS which should not be able to be fired at point blank and you don't have to worry about the SSRM range limitations. But the counter is cost would be say being a very expensive weapon system to deploy along with having possibly either less dmg or slower travel speed but being usable at all ranges would give it a very nice spot in clan weapons tech but without it being over bearing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kit Lightning
Resident Necromancer
MechWarrior
Offline
Posts: 247
πάντα ρει, και ουδέν μένει
|
|
« Reply #18 on: April 04, 2008, 08:04:02 AM » |
|
I prefer the good old fashioned hiding behind a friendly atlas, they got too much armour anyway, they dont need all of it!!!!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :argh: |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Marrak
Bondsman
Offline
Posts: 17
|
|
« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2008, 01:01:48 AM » |
|
I wasn't aware of the clan LRMs lack of a minimum range being a typo? I actually thought that's why the STREAK system was designed (it was clan tech first, right?).
How I always saw it was the LRMs were used for long range bombardments for clans, but could be used for fights if the distance was reduced. Meanwhile STREAKs were able to be much more efficient at short range, and could deliver a greater punch when you figured damage and heat between the two missile systems.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Flyingdebris
|
|
« Reply #20 on: April 16, 2008, 03:47:02 AM » |
|
are we keeping the missle damage at cbt values? It'd be nice to have the missle increased in punch, but divided in ammo count by however much their damage is multiplied. Feels weird having missles that individually do less than or equivalent damage of a machinegun burst.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Marrak
Bondsman
Offline
Posts: 17
|
|
« Reply #21 on: April 16, 2008, 03:02:43 PM » |
|
AGree with Flyingdebris and that reminds me of another point: one of the things that really annoyed me with MW4 was how the missiles were treated; each group of 5 was one "shot". MW3 had the right idea, LRM 20 fired 20 missiles.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Flyingdebris
|
|
« Reply #22 on: April 16, 2008, 03:48:02 PM » |
|
i work with a lot of ex mw4 devs actually. In one conversation one of them mentioned that the primary reason the weapons fired the way they did (projectiles "sticking," missles in thick groups, etc) was for network issues. having 20 projectiles would take up more network bandwidth than just having 4 for an lrm 20. However technology and internet speeds have since improved, so i don't think thats much iof an issue now as it was then. If you recall, mw3's biggest problem was netcode.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TheEnigma
|
|
« Reply #23 on: April 16, 2008, 06:42:13 PM » |
|
If you recall, mw3's biggest problem was netcode.
 If you played MW3 online it was blatantly obvious. Lag shooting was always a challenge though |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Masakari
I wont forgot to brung it next time :downs:
MWLL DEV
Star Captain
Offline
Posts: 1074
Better safe than sorry.
|
|
« Reply #24 on: April 16, 2008, 07:45:42 PM » |
|
Sup halo/halo ce netcode
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 :conspiracy: How i play this is it just for making it or playing and making it
Fail |
|
|
Defender
I like Shiny Things.
MWLL DEV
Star Captain
Offline
Posts: 994
|
|
« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2008, 10:43:39 AM » |
|
If you recall, mw3's biggest problem was netcode.
If you played MW3 online it was blatantly obvious. Lag shooting was always a challenge though It wasn't just a Challenge, it was an Art. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
IgnisTemper
Bondsman
Offline
Posts: 42
|
|
« Reply #26 on: April 21, 2008, 05:26:43 PM » |
|
Not art, the lottery  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
