28 replies to this topic

[Mr 144]

Bored, 'cause these forums are really lacking in discussable content lately...


Grrr....premature posting...a common problem in males around 40

To be fair, a decent ALRM30 set-up costs...
8 crits for the artemis launchers
16 tons for the artemis launchers
5 tons ammo minimum
Total: 13 criticals + 21 tons
Possible add-ins...
Module cost (decay+range)
BAP (1.5 tons+2 crits)

while the pair of PPCs cost...
14 tons for the PPCs
6 slots for the PPCs
however many DHS tons and crits you feel justify the heat.
Total: ?

Discuss...
20 pin-point at limited range bracket
vs
33 spread capable of indirect...or...at the optimum 500 meters of both....very nice spread damage.

Edited by Mr 144, 02 January 2014 - 03:34 AM.

[Asmudius Heng]

PPCs nearly every time.

It is the travel time and constant misses of LRMs that ruin the stats not just the spread damage.

It is too situational most of the time basically.

A lot of good teamwork can change that but LRMs should be used sparingly IMO

[Mr 144]

Asmudius Heng, on 02 January 2014 - 03:50 AM, said:

PPCs nearly every time.

It is the travel time and constant misses of LRMs that ruin the stats not just the spread damage.

It is too situational most of the time basically.

A lot of good teamwork can change that but LRMs should be used sparingly IMO

See, but that's my point. You're thinking of LRMs from the noob sit back and spam perspective. At 500 meters with LoS, is it really that much of a difference? 900 meters, they both have the same flaws...implemented in different ways. The LRMs, while able to do full damage, will most likely miss the most of the time, while the PPCs, although thy hit, do neglible damage.

Nothing is built in a vacuum...and I can run builds with equivalent alternate weapons using both...
AC/20 + 2xMLs
2xAC5 + 2xMLs
...so tonnage/crits is not as big of a factor as it originally seems.

[Asmudius Heng]

Mr 144, on 02 January 2014 - 03:58 AM, said:

See, but that's my point. You're thinking of LRMs from the noob sit back and spam perspective. At 500 meters with LoS, is it really that much of a difference? 900 meters, they both have the same flaws...implemented in different ways. The LRMs, while able to do full damage, will most likely miss the most of the time, while the PPCs, although thy hit, do neglible damage.

Nothing is built in a vacuum...and I can run builds with equivalent alternate weapons using both...
AC/20 + 2xMLs
2xAC5 + 2xMLs
...so tonnage/crits is not as big of a factor as it originally seems.

at 500 meters, yes it is still a difference. Your PPCs will be striking the location you want with more regularity while the LRMs still scatter the shots. Also you can still dodge LRMs throguh cover at 500 meters unless you are caught in the open. The PPCs will work no matter what.

LRMs have huge potential but it is mostly not realised when facing decent players. The teamwork needed to get the most out of LRMs consistantly is difficult to achieve. PPCs on the other hand work in nearly all situations.

LRMs also have the ECM issue forcing you to take TAG and even then its going to confound you occasionally.

LRMs have a serious implementation problem which I have posted about many times but for this discussion it boils down to:

PPCs give you a huge amount more consistancy which is preferable to situational potential.

[Mr 144]

Asmudius Heng, on 02 January 2014 - 04:06 AM, said:

at 500 meters, yes it is still a difference. Your PPCs will be striking the location you want with more regularity while the LRMs still scatter the shots. Also you can still dodge LRMs throguh cover at 500 meters unless you are caught in the open. The PPCs will work no matter what.

LRMs have huge potential but it is mostly not realised when facing decent players. The teamwork needed to get the most out of LRMs consistantly is difficult to achieve. PPCs on the other hand work in nearly all situations.

LRMs also have the ECM issue forcing you to take TAG and even then its going to confound you occasionally.

LRMs have a serious implementation problem which I have posted about many times but for this discussion it boils down to:

PPCs give you a huge amount more consistancy which is preferable to situational potential.

yep...sounds well and good. The problem I've faced recently, is in actual use. It seems I actually do much bettter with the pair of LRMs...even with all the many shortcomings, than with the pair of PPCs. Again...all of my test builds run similar alternate weapons, so it really boils down to the direct comparison.

LRMs without a pinpoint damage option does not work well for me, but once you can allocate 1/2 your firepower into pin-point...the difference in higher spread "softening" damage seems to make up for the lack of extra pinpoint.

I've run both sides...
2xPPC + 2x AC5
2xPPC + AC/20
Vs.
2xALRM15 + 2xAC5
2xALRM15 + AC/20

The ALRM builds always have room to run 2xMLs as well with decent heat thresholds, where the PPC builds can not. Rarely, the PPC builds can run a pair of streaks to help balance out the "back-up weapons".

While I would agree in a vacuum that 2xPPC beats 2xALRM15....the actual builds that smartly use the two play entirely differently.

"Comp 12-man" play excluded...I actually think the Lurms are better in practice.

[stjobe]

Pin-point instant damage wins over spread every time; it's probably possible to calculate how much faster a dual-PPC 'mech can core an Atlas than a dual-LRM-15, but I can't be arsed. It will be a hell of a lot quicker though, if anyone feels up to the task.

And, to keep harping on, that is why ACs need to become burst-fire and PPCs need to become beam-duration. Instant damage needs to go.

[Asmudius Heng]

I use LRMs and do well with them also ... but when i look at how quickly i can eliminate an enemy mech PPCs still seem to be superior. LRMs d more damage but if i aim well with PPCs i get a much better bang for my buck.

That being said, LRMs can be effective when used in a lance, but i would prefer 3 mechs be bringing direct fire and only a single LRM mech.

1. LRMs can be fired over your friendlies while tight confines can stop your direct fire/
2. If you can catch an enemy in the open you can fire your LRMs more times as they are cooler so can loy down enough spread damage to be a little better than PPCs
3. If can get a good spotter then you can do decent indirect fire while your PPC mates trudge over terrain.

It is very subjective based on skills and mindset ... I enjoy LRMs a lot because they are a challenge to use well for instance but the logic and my gut instinct tells me PPCs are a better main weapon to go with unless you are building a premade lance with LRMs as a particular role.

[Mr 144]

stjobe, on 02 January 2014 - 04:21 AM, said:

Pin-point instant damage wins over spread every time; it's probably possible to calculate how much faster a dual-PPC 'mech can core an Atlas than a dual-LRM-15, but I can't be arsed. It will be a hell of a lot quicker though, if anyone feels up to the task.

And, to keep harping on, that is why ACs need to become burst-fire and PPCs need to become beam-duration. Instant damage needs to go.

In practice, it's not as lopsided as you think....

Testing Grounds: Forest colony (yada yada not the best place to compare, but it provides a static reference point)
Target: Atlas CT at 250m
2xALRM15 + 2xAC5 + 2xML : 13 seconds...last volley dropping the MLs to prevent shutdown.
2xPPC+2xAC/5: 14 seconds with sutdown...16 seconds without
2xPPC+AC/20" 15 seconds with shutdown...17 seconds without

Don't take these as gospel...I did it quick just for a quick comparison...

[Turist0AT]

I dont know, Ive seen allot of LRMs lately, Matches are won by one team spraying down the other with missiles. Dare i say PPCs vs LRM are ballanced? 20 pinpoint vs 33 spread, one that requers LOS other does not. I would have said PPCs but just that recent games have me reconcider.


(PUG, not that cheese fest 12 man)

[Spheroid]

I would take a Treb over a BJ-3. Maybe LRMs are better, I haven't seen a lot of 2x PPC K2s of late.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Depends on the setup.

Cat C1, 2 LRM10s.
Cat K2, maybe 2 PPCs
Thunderbolt, 1 LRM10, 1 PPC

I suppose it depends on the chassis and what I feel like *shrug*

[CygnusX7]

ON1-VA-Rarrr or Meow?

[Sug]

Mr 144, on 02 January 2014 - 04:51 AM, said:

Don't take these as gospel...I did it quick just for a quick comparison...

Don't worry we won' t

Lots of weapon/mech/etc values are different in the training grounds. Also the dummy mechs don't' have full armor. Also they're standing still.


But yeah in the Training grounds LRMs just wreck every target. They're like 15% as effective in real matches though.

I been running my Founder's Catapult with 2xLRM15s for almost 2 solid years but I've given it up in the last couple months because LRMs are just so weak compared to anything else. I went from never using ballistics to almost exclusive ballistics since October. Just so much easy mode.

[Kubernetes]

I take PPCs every time over LRMs, but ideally I like LRM carriers on my side. IMO their best benefit is that it forces mechs to run for cover rather than massing up to shoot you in the face.

But as an actual weapon in indirect mode? I'm lucky if 1/3 of my missiles hit. They're good for getting killshots, but in terms of real damage output they're awful.

[Roadkill]

Mr 144, on 02 January 2014 - 04:17 AM, said:

While I would agree in a vacuum that 2xPPC beats 2xALRM15....the actual builds that smartly use the two play entirely differently.

"Comp 12-man" play excluded...I actually think the Lurms are better in practice.

My guess would be that you're playing in 4-mans?

In a decent 4-man - not even a good one - a couple of LRM-15s are better than a couple of PPCs. Why? Because trajectory. I'm not even talking about indirect fire - just the fact that you can fire LRMs over the heads of your teammates. 4 Mechs all trying to shoot the same target get in each other's way, but not if one of them is firing LRM-15s from the back.

I find that less effective when pugging for two reasons: 1) you have to spend extra concentration trying to coordinate with the other pugs (even if it's just using them to your advantage), and 2) you have to be able to fend for yourself for when the pugs abandon you (either by dying around you or by running off without telling you).

A well-played LRM-equipped Mech is beastly in a group. All those derps whining about LRMs being no-skill weapons are... well, derps. They're very easy to use. They're difficult to use well.

[Corvus Antaka]

Sug, on 02 January 2014 - 09:45 AM, said:

I been running my Founder's Catapult with 2xLRM15s for almost 2 solid years but I've given it up in the last couple months because LRMs are just so weak compared to anything else. I went from never using ballistics to almost exclusive ballistics since October. Just so much easy mode.

This is most telling for me. once long ago the dual lrm15 cat was as frightening as the quad ac/5 jaegger. no longer so. LRMS have taken many nurfs. it would not be so bad but for ECM though, which really is the stick that breaks the camels back. without ECM lrms as they are now might be just fine.

[SerratedBlaze]

I feel like LRM can be quite good but PPC is in general a better solo weapon. As we speak my team is losing because the enemies all have an LRM 5-15 and a few fast spotters meaning we are getting rained on with noplace to hide (our ecm ran off, and the natural cover isn't doing it) wihtout being able to shoot back at the damage dealers.

My main has been a CPLT-C1 with 2LRM20, TAG, and 2 ERLLas for many months and can do really well but it depends entirely on the team. Essentially if I can get my own target with TAG the enemies can PPC me and i'll be dealing with all of their missiles for a solid 2 minutes no matter the cover. But if there is a compatent medium or light that actually holds a target my missiles alone can get it the kill by softening the target up in brutal salvos. Though LRM as a main weapon means anything built for speed can go in the the kill unopposed unless teammates give a scrap about you. Sadly I don't like waiting 5 min for the team to move out of base.

My 2nd mech is a K2 with dual ERPPC and 2AC/5. The alphas hit at least as hard as I am hit back if the enemy is quick to shoot as I peek over the hill. And at pretty much any range if I can see it I can kill it.

So overall, if you are a scared little [redacted] and hide behind the ECM atlas like most players you may find LRM to be your best friend.Aaand waste many many missiles. But if you want to function with or without allies go for direct fire. Take some of both to be helpful in all situations. LRM are great sidearms because they fill a role that nothing else will.

[Mercworks]

I personally like to use the two weapons in combination. I have an Awesome variant that does double ALRM15s and double PPCs in the arm. I tend to boat less now than I did before the NERFAGEDDON of lrms and use the ALRM launchers when I close and when I shift between battles to get constant damage coming at an opponent, and then switch to and AC20/ML combo or double LLs for close in knife work.

[LordBraxton]

I think having 1 LRM boat on your team is a great idea, but only for the suppression factor.

If an enemy assault mech is caught in the open, LRMs do insane damage, but otherwise they just chew cliff face

[Mr 144]

Roadkill, on 02 January 2014 - 10:00 AM, said:

My guess would be that you're playing in 4-mans?

In a decent 4-man - not even a good one - a couple of LRM-15s are better than a couple of PPCs. Why? Because trajectory. I'm not even talking about indirect fire - just the fact that you can fire LRMs over the heads of your teammates. 4 Mechs all trying to shoot the same target get in each other's way, but not if one of them is firing LRM-15s from the back.

I find that less effective when pugging for two reasons: 1) you have to spend extra concentration trying to coordinate with the other pugs (even if it's just using them to your advantage), and 2) you have to be able to fend for yourself for when the pugs abandon you (either by dying around you or by running off without telling you).

A well-played LRM-equipped Mech is beastly in a group. All those derps whining about LRMs being no-skill weapons are... well, derps. They're very easy to use. They're difficult to use well.

Actually, I 90% PUG these days But your second paragraph is spot on. That IS the advantage of "indirect fire" I'm refering to...not sit-back-and-lob from 900m. It's not like you need some mythical "spotter" either...plenty of targets if you stay short-to-mid range.

Your reasons of ineffectiveness in pugs is also true if you boat...which I don't consider a pair "boating". All my LRM builds are more than capable of taking care of themselves...usually MLs, 1-2 ballistics or (ick) SRMs.

I almost never see an LRM boat do well these days...but LRMs composing somewhere around half your firepower? that seems to be very effective....hence the comparison to a pair of PPCs...which also usually only composes half your total firepower as well.