245 replies to this topic

[zudukai]

i think OP should simply rephrase himself saying: 300dmg should be the goal for "minimum participation" in a firefight.

ignoring every playstyle and build, and put it simply (and perhaps more welcome to the "ears") if your goal is to fight and kill mechs, you should aim to achieve more then 300 damage.

obviously for every single unit that DOES NOT intend to fight (or dies early) makes this number go up for the whole TEAM equally.

[Snowren]

zudukai, on 30 October 2015 - 11:33 PM, said:

i think OP should simply rephrase himself saying: 300dmg should be the goal for "minimum participation" in a firefight.

ignoring every playstyle and build, and put it simply (and perhaps more welcome to the "ears") if your goal is to fight and kill mechs, you should aim to achieve more then 300 damage.

obviously for every single unit that DOES NOT intend to fight (or dies early) makes this number go up for the whole TEAM equally.

why does it matter, I'm apparently the devil himself, or an egotistical maniac looking to whoo women with my MWO skills.

Anyways I'm done with this post let's move along you've all had your fun insulting me.

[Airu]

To the OP, buy spider 5V do 500 damage in a match and post a screenshot here. When you do you have already answered your question. For now, I don't believe you actually can.
If you ask me to do the same, I can flood this thread with such games, but I still consider 300 damage and 2 kills in a mech with 12pts alpha a good game.

[Repasy Cooper]

Snowren, on 30 October 2015 - 11:05 PM, said:

The point is why do we salute and cheer on people who have such low contribution. Why should we say wow grats good job on 300 dmg. Why do we allow such a low performance to affect what we call good matches.

I'm not here to claim i'm amazing. But because of people who say 300 dmg is all you need to do people never improve.

it's like saying wow! silver in league of legends is high elo.

I mean I've never attacked any of you in this thread. Yet you all Reply with petty insults
"[color=#959595] I get regularly so and such damage, and my best matches of damage were such and such." Please. Toot your own someplace else. You can do 0 damage and still help your team win. You carry hard. That and $5.75 gets you a venti at Starbucks. [/color]"

etc....

Yes there more to it then dmg in this game, Though honestly with the way it is currently not much. Let's be real scouting isn't very important in matches with pug's, and those lights that kill mechs from behind all usually tend to do superior dmg.

Why should we say that 300 dmg is an GOOD amount. That's the purpose of the thread. But what ever you can call me show boating or tooting my own horn or w/e.

You can insult me etc....

I'm stop posting since all of you seemed to be getting upset.

Btw if I wanted to toot my own horn i'd post screen shots etc... Not brag in a post.

I seriously lol'd at this post. That doesn't happen often, so congrats. The only question on my mind after reading this garbage is which is bigger: your skill, or your ego.

I will look for you on the battlefield, surat.

[jss78]

You see these statements once in a while, "you should be doing 500/600/700 damage in an average game".

The math doesn't add up. So if everyone's doing that on average -- who the hell are you shooting? Are there 36 mechs in the enemy team where you're playing?

[The Lost Boy]

To the OP, youve insulted many with your overemphasis on the importance of doing damage. You can NARC, TAG, ECM, UAV, and shoot at and not hit an enemy, and still be very critical to your teams success. You are thinking soooo 1 dimentionally. Unlearn what you have learned. Spend 5 dollars for a PIRATES BANE, play 500 matches in it and tell me if you still feel the same.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

To be honest after having a number of good matches during my play I feel that when I have a normal match of a kill or two and 200-400 damage that I didn't really do much. Then If I only get a single kill and a match score under 200 I feel like I pretty much failed. When I get those matches where I take out at least an entire lance and do 500+ damage then I feel I was doing good.

Of course thats specifically for games in which I am trying to simply put out damage to kill enemies. I also feel good if I'm running an AMS Kit Fox and don't let a single ally fall to LRMs.

Simply put I might be setting my bar a little too high, but I like it up there, looks nice.

Edit: humblebrag: Good match for me was that last one when I was upgrading the basic skills on my Black Knight where I got 3 solo kills on a loss. I killed a Dire Wolf and Battlemaster that were both gunning for me at once while I was alone after my buddy had died (after doing very minimal damage, I think he might have actually just tried ramming them). After I finished those two off a Shadow Hawk came to finish me off since I had a ripped open CT but I turned the tables on him hard. The rest of my team died off though and I was crushed under the tides of the enemy force after spending a minute hunting them down to see what I could do.

Edited by Dakota1000, 31 October 2015 - 12:48 AM.

[Zookeeper Dan]

OP: Google Dunning–Kruger effect.

Which cognitive bias are you?

[Alekzander Smirnoff]

I've snagged four kills in a round only doing ~250 damage. Opportunistic firepower trumps tossing around 1000 LRM's only to do squat.

[Chados]

Damage totals are only one metric. I'm firmly in the camp that says 250+ is good game, I've been a part of plenty of solo queue drops where the losing team had one guy over 1000 and the rest were in the 150 or lower range...beaten 12-5 by the team that had no one get more than two kills and 250 damage each. But the winners all were over 200 damage each and were getting flanking, counter ECM lock damage, most-damage kills, tons of assists, lots of team focus.

I almost always shadow the Atlas or the Dire Wolf, bringing along a Summoner, Thud, Jester, or other close support mech, and add my firepower to his/hers. A great fun match recently paired my bone stock SMN-P with a Stormcrow in the canyons. I stuck to him like Velcro. We teamed up and simply MURKED upon the enemy. He ended up with the Ace of Spades. I had ten assists and no kills. I don't remember how much damage I did, honestly. But the Crow pilot and I made a great team in that game. Wish I could remember his or her handle!

[Repasy Cooper]

Chados, on 31 October 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

Damage totals are only one metric. I'm firmly in the camp that says 250+ is good game, I've been a part of plenty of solo queue drops where the losing team had one guy over 1000 and the rest were in the 150 or lower range...beaten 12-5 by the team that had no one get more than two kills and 250 damage each. But the winners all were over 200 damage each and were getting flanking, counter ECM lock damage, most-damage kills, tons of assists, lots of team focus.

I almost always shadow the Atlas or the Dire Wolf, bringing along a Summoner, Thud, Jester, or other close support mech, and add my firepower to his/hers. A great fun match recently paired my bone stock SMN-P with a Stormcrow in the canyons. I stuck to him like Velcro. We teamed up and simply MURKED upon the enemy. He ended up with the Ace of Spades. I had ten assists and no kills. I don't remember how much damage I did, honestly. But the Crow pilot and I made a great team in that game. Wish I could remember his or her handle!

Currently, the Summoner is my favourite command mech! It may not have the same firepower potential as other mechs in its weight class, but JJs and a good engine give it enough maneuverability to be very adaptable and responsive during a fight. I take this to full advantage by keeping towards mid-rear of allied forces, giving movement and flanking orders while firing my ER PPC from range. I only move close once I see a good opportunity to help an ally finish off a big mech fast, or to respond with covering fire for an ally that's in a pickle.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

Don't focus on getting damage totals. Focus on making things explode. Components, whole 'Mechs, whatever. Higher damage will come on its own as you get better at that.

Focusing on your damage total can lead to bad behavior, such as leaving an enemy alive longer so you can pump more alphas into the few components they have left intact. I see lots of that in my tier, especially during events. Efficient kills win games, not high damage scores, regardless of how PGI has the scoring system weighted right now.

If you can get a ~250 damage game with two solo kills or KMDD assists, then you did well no matter what OP says. If you destroyed more tonnage in 'Mechs or equipment than you dropped with, you pulled your weight and then some. It's just a shame that PGI still scores based on inefficient hurt puking instead of clean, quick kills and component destructions.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

250-350 damage is what you should try to average over the long term to be consistently contributing to your team's damage count.

Assaults and heavies should aim a little higher perhaps and light mechs will average less than that because you'll randomly explode from time to time. But, as a general piece of advice to players who want to know a target to aim for 250-350 is a good choice.

[oldradagast]

Snowren, on 30 October 2015 - 11:05 PM, said:

The point is why do we salute and cheer on people who have such low contribution. Why should we say wow grats good job on 300 dmg. Why do we allow such a low performance to affect what we call good matches.

Where is this magical fairy tale realm where those "lesser" beings are being congratulated so often exist? Because I mostly see butt-hurt try-hards running the show. Or, are you actually raging over random compliments other people are getting in general chat in game? Wow...

Seriously, what is it with the hyper-competitive sociopaths crawling out of the woodwork lately in the forums?

We've got people whining about how "lesser beings" are now and then congratulated for doing "only" 300 damage, people whining that the Halloween event is now "too easy" because "bads" might get rewards instead of learning to "up their game," and an entire tirade in the General forum about how "weak and illogical people are ruining the game."

It's like listening to a bunch of genetically engineered lunatic "super men" spout off about how they need to do something about all the inferior people cluttering up the world around them. All this for a random little game. Unreal!

Edited by oldradagast, 31 October 2015 - 04:34 PM.

[Eldane]

So my 200-300 dmg games in my TDK where i get 3 kills mean I suck because you pull 600+ dmg gsmes in a DW and get no kills?

[Void Angel]

Don't feed the troll.

[Kangarad]

Nobody has mentioned Flamers yet. I iz dissapointed.
Flamerz are teh anti PSR anti DAmage points stuff you allways need to equip.
They wont do damage but when an enemy dies due to overehating well its basically your kill even if its marked as a suicide AND you did 0 points of damage against em.

But yea f those rare flamer users... they gain nothing and lose, regardless of how good they do.
iv'e hchanged my 2x20artemis + Flamers build because Ive had amatch where everyoen wwas yousing ecm... I had no tag and only killed 1 guys with teh flamers... doing 0 damage and gaining 0 points that match... thats 20k c-bill for gettin stomped.


btw how much damage do you need to headshot enemy mechs? not much.


I kind of think that the damage relation for all this is not realy good, either you are killing enemys and assisting your team , or your just scratching the painting of enemy mechs and both can result in the same damage numbers.


As a mainly LRM player i've been loosing some PSR points since battles are either 200+ to 1k+ damage wins vs losses with less than 125 damage resulting in losses always being -2 psr while wins are +1 or +2 psr... and win / loss mostly depends on your team.

tbh. I think that 200+ damage is enough since you can cripple or kill some mechs with that ammount of damage depending where and with what you hit em.

[BigFatGator]

Take your last 10 matches. Screen shot end screen. Median damage will be in 200-300 range. That's why.

/close thread

[Tesunie]

I personally aim (as a general goal) for 5 points of damage per ton as an average match damage score for a mech. This is about efficiency of tonnage you brought to the field of battle, and how well you used it.

At 5 damage per ton, we are looking at a Locust that does 100 points of damage being as efficient with it's tonnage usage as an Atlas that did 500 points of damage. Some variation is to be expected, which is why I say about 5 damage per ton per match.

When I figure out my mech's stats, I take the total damage dealt, divide by total matches played, and then divide by the tonnage of the mech. A 4 is decent, a 5 is expected. Above that is really good.


Also, there is only so much damage potential on the field at a given match, so not "everyone" can get 500+ damage a match. Well, not unless they all aim for every component possible (which has been proven to be a rather ineffective means of dispatching an enemy). So, eventually, someone will have to preform under that threshold. Just like with getting kills. When people scoff that other players didn't get 3-5 kills a match (or per death even), it's incorrect. There are only 12 mechs on each side, and only 12 kills (excluding team kills) possible for the entire team. If one teammate gets 3 kills, that means that 2 teammates will be getting 0 kills. Same application with damage.


This is a team game. Damage is more or less shared, as well as kills. Not everyone can get really high damage. Actually, 200-300 damage a player on a team as an average is considered good, and a team that deals that much damage together (about 3000 damage total) has probably already won that match.

As a player vs player game, every time you dealt damage, someone else had to take that damage. Every time someone got a kill, someone else had to die. For every match that you won, someone else had to lose. This is the nature of a player vs player environment. With no infinite respawns and no healing possibilities, that leaves only so many kills possible, and only so much damage potential.

[Nightshade24]

Snowren, on 30 October 2015 - 10:12 PM, said:

Meh you all seem to be missing the point.

To: Woofler

If your telling me every single point of your 200-300 dmg comes from pin point alpha striking into key area's, I'm sorry sir then I'm calling your a liar! There is no possible way you don't accidentally spread dmg onto other components. Maybe once in a 100 matches do you get every single point of dmg into important area's.

To:Nighshade24,

I fail to see your logic. One of my best matches came from a thor who it's not as you say a timberwolf. I'm not basing this on a chasis or the op mech of the game. To me wether I'm in a crab/wolfhound/jenner/Orion or any other off meta mech sub 300 or 300 seems like a horrible amount and I don't agree with it being something to consider as a good match. I fail to see the logic of doing so.

As well that's great that you listed all the Armor vaules of front torso's. But can you honestly sit there and tell me when you do you 200 dmg that you Hit CT and ONLY CT on the same MECH every time? Because I call BS!. you talk about skill that means that the enemy also has skill. Proper hill peeking and side twisting really lowers the amount of dmg you do one component.

regardless of weapon type YES im including LRMS you should be able to pull 300+ no problem. I just don't understand why people salute those that do such minimal dmg.

As I said, that was the general situational variable benchmark.
Would you rather want me to give you stats on what happen when someone does an equal percentage of damage across the whole mech including head until he cores everything simultaneously and than slowly works at killing it? Because I do not really care if it gives you 3000 damage or not but taking the literal entire game to do so would be quite difficult, especially the fact you have the heat efficiency to nearly non stop firing at 12 enemy mechs long enough as well as somehow get your 11 team mates to not fire. That doesn't really make you a good player or have a good mech and I told you that 200 is a 1:2 ratio approx with high accuracy. That means if you get anywhere between killing one person and damaging another that still is you carrying your weight and above. rather it be 1:1.2 or 1:1.5 or what ever.

Now we are leading on to the topic of the meaningfullness of damage. Which can really change the topics around... because taking the AC 20 hunch of a hunchback is much more heavy impact to it's performance than Side torso of say a Stormcrow. While a Centurions or Wolverines arm could mean it is the end of it of the sad sad site of a direwolf legged...

What about a quick kill to the back of a mech before he finishes your team mate off or if those damage was just machine gun/ LRM/ AC 2 supression fire that mainly caused damaged in terms of destracting the enemy instead of actually focusing damage.

200 damage all CT, 200 damage all Rear, 200 Damage crippling enemy weapons, or a mix. It's hard to really say which is best as it depends on weapon and situation- even when considering meta weapons as the damage of a large laser is done differently over the damage of a gauss rifle...

I do suggest you look around your matches more often. Look at how many people get 200-300 damage. Look at how many kills/ kill assist/ their match score. You may find them having the same or nearly the same matchscore than you but do way less damage than you and this is for good reason.