39 replies to this topic

[Aim64C]

I think I've found our problem:

http://mwomercs.com/...o-confirmation/

At this - it won't matter what is done to LRM damage. The damage application is inconsistent and simply junk.

LRMs are completely broken until there is a patch for this. You may do damned good damage... or you may just make a lot of pretty lights.

[Ningyo]

Yes that video is a perfect example of the hits either not being recorded at all. There are multiple other bugs findable in the data though. for instance some matches LRMs are doing more damage than they should per hit. This cannot be attributed to hits not being recorded.

Also aside from bugs the data helps figure advantages of smaller and larger missiles per volley, and other things. For instance based on my data in an average match with Artemis an LRM15 in a 10 tube slot will deal 87.5% of the damage a LRM 20 in a 20 tube slot does. Now I am waiting for AMS to become common again and I suspect that will partially reverse, though still 4 LRM 5 will do noticeably more damage per missile launched than 1 LRM 20. These types of things can make a difference when building a mech.

[Iscarius]

I don't have that much hard data, but I feel like LRM boat Stalker was kicking [donkey] last night. It has LRM15x4, TAG, and Artemis. Tried both playing in a group with one Atlas-DDC friend, and later pure PUG. Most matches I was earning about 150,000 c-bills and 1000+ xp. Overall damage was probably similar to what was posted here, maybe better: occasionally as low as 150, more often at least 300 or commonly 500 or 600. I'd usually have at least 1 kill with many assists, often multiple kills up to 4. Rarely died.

Here's the best data I can give. My overall KD ratio sucks, it's 0.88. (I've only been playing for a couple months and I've had to grind through eliting a lot of crappy mechs.) My Stalker-3F has a KD ratio of 1.87. I've only done 26 matches on it, and it had <1 KD before I turned it into a missle boat yesterday. It also has a 1.89 win-loss rate. My next best KD is 1.27 on the Cat-A1, next best win-loss 1.59 on Raven-3L.

In short, I feel like I was almost single-handedly wiping out teams and carrying matches. I think people got so used to not worrying about LRMs that they're not prepared to deal with an LRM boat. So when their tactics adapt, I think it'll be more balanced. Either that or LRM boats are OP again.

Edited by Iscarius, 05 June 2013 - 06:21 AM.

[Ningyo]

Yeah until people bother to put AMS or use any of the 10 or so tactics to reduce missile damage, they do kill fairly well.

As far as the high exp and Cbills from matches you tend to get a lot of assists and a kill or 2 which adds up fast. My testing boat would probably do much better if I tossed the TAG and made it LRM 60 + 2LL (1 ML is useless, 2LL can reach out and hurt things)

I suspect in a week or so your damage numbers will drop by 20-50% as people learn to deal with them (maybe even more if you go up in ELO from winning)

A quick comparison from my experiences:
Atlas standing still facing me: 3-4 70 missile volleys (210-280 missiles) to kill from full health (compare to 3-4 4PPC alphas)
Atlas standing still facing any other direction: 6-7 volleys to kill (420-490 missiles)
Atlas moving toward or away from me while facing me: 4-6 volleys to kill (280-420 missiles)
Atlas moving sidewards facing me: 5-7 volleys to kill (350-490)
Atlas torso twisting: 5-7 volleys to kill (350-490 missiles)

AND due to various bugs and missile behaviors an atlas is probably the EASIEST mech to kill with them. Fast small mechs are nearly impossible to kill. A jagger or cataphract will take as many or more missiles than an atlas to kill (some miss, and the ones that hit do less damage, and are spread over more of the mech)

[NinetyProof]

You realize that your whole premise of doing this "in game" and against "live targets" means your numbers are completely worthless right? Too many different variables with too little consistency means your statistics are not worth the time you took to gather them.

Plus, your ignoring the issue of "tube limits" ... so a Catapult A1 with 6x15 tubes or a Catapult C1 with 4x20 tubes is going to deliver more punch (or miss) then your 3F with 2x10 + 2x6 and that difference can be huge.

Variables like ECM, AMS, Mech Speed, Terrain Cover and ... of course ... Target Skill / Awareness are all HUGE factors that are never the same. Especially ECM cover and/or losing locks.

What's worse if your ELO is going to climb or fall as you do this. The more you play, and the more you win, the better opponents you play, meaning the better they are at dodging.

Not trying to discourage you here, but I really don't see a way to accurate measure this in a live environment. Your better off testing the difference in DPS that tubes / heat make in the training grounds then trying to do overall Damage in a constantly changing live environment.

Edit: BTW, I have gotten anywhere from 150 to 650 damage in my 5M since the patch (2x20, 2x15, 4ML, art, tag).

Edited by NinetyProof, 05 June 2013 - 08:49 AM.

[Ningyo]

Testing grounds was never updated, unlike game so it still uses high splash missiles from before recent patches, totally different base damage and flight paths too.

You are correct these things can never be fully accounted for, I have provided a ton of detail in my spoilers, and pretty sure my ELO has not gone up or down significantly(still see many of the same player names, seems play quality about the same and my W/L record is near 50/50 (my K/D is more like 2:1 and other factors might be raising it slowly hard to say) If you wish I can try to add more details I did record more but I find it difficult to put so much in a legible format in these posts. I just added some notes on ECM and AMS usage. I also have the maps fights were on and conquest/assault recorded if you want me to add those in.

On the tube limits I actually found this data very revealing since apparently missile spread size is calculated based on how many missiles are launched from a single launcher per volley (so a LRM15 in a 10 tube slot will launch a medium spread 10 missile volley, and a small spread 5 missile volley, A LRM 20 in a 20 tube slot will launch a large spread 20 missile volley) This noticeably increases missile accuracy for smaller numbers of tubes. The counterpoint to this is a smaller volley will have fewer missiles get through AMS (so far almost no one is using it). (You can find accuracy figures in my data I precalculated them for you)

[Xeno Phalcon]

I may have slightly skewed one of bobs test runs by going BAWBS GOT A STULKER WITH LARMS! and stuff.... also blind rushed him, raven kesploded me though.

Edited by Xeno Phalcon, 05 June 2013 - 09:44 AM.

[Bobdolemite]

Xeno Phalcon, on 05 June 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

I may have slightly skewed one of bobs test runs by going BAWBS GOT A STULKER WITH LARMS! and stuff.... also blind rushed him, raven kesploded me though.

This is true lol, I got super rolled that match. Then I violated my cardinal rule about not qqing while testing *facepalm* Some of the matches get really frustrating.

a few of the matches in the data sets are funny, once people realize you just have LRMS they gang up on you fast =) Which is of course tactically sound.

Part of me wants to include ml's though im not good enough at math to separate out the other weapons =/

[Bobdolemite]

Shameless bump for new ALRM 15 Data

After this set of matches I can definitely feel increased usefulness, the average damage has gone up some but the most noticeable change is increased kills / assists. As always these are all pug matches and the results vary greatly depending on the way the game unfolds. Anyways enjoy the new data. ALRM 20 data coming tomorrow.

*Got another PGI employee though it read IGP and he claimed to be a tester, never seen that backwards tag before - Keep an eye out for it*

[Volthorne]

Bobdolemite, on 05 June 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

*Got another PGI employee though it read IGP and he claimed to be a tester, never seen that backwards tag before - Keep an eye out for it*

Infinite Games Publishing (IGP) are the Publishers - the people with purse strings, if you will - of MW:O whereas PGI are the Developers. Yes, they have their own unique avatar. If he said he's a tester, he probably is.

Edited by Volthorne, 05 June 2013 - 10:16 PM.

[Boogie Man]

Ningyo, on 05 June 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

Testing grounds was never updated, unlike game so it still uses high splash missiles from before recent patches, totally different base damage and flight paths too.

Testing Grounds is still doing the damage bug on center torso vs arms and side torsos. Right now in testing grounds LRM do 2.2 damage to center torso and 0.85 damage to arms and side torso. I put a ticket in with PGI about this bug. So in testing grounds center torso is taking 200% damage and arms and side torso take 77% damage per missile. I have no way of testing this on live server without someone on the other team willing to let me bean them till their armor is stripped and having no one on either team interfering so basically impossible. I do think this bug is on the live servers though which is why everyone thinks the missiles are only hitting center torso.

[Ningyo]

NO as I said testing grounds WAS NEVER UPDATED, unlike game so it still uses high SPLASH missiles from BEFORE recent patches, totally DIFFERENT base damage and flight paths too.

The devs have said it has not been updated and damage in it is wrong, all testing shows in game and testing grounds are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

YES there are in game bugs, they have NO relation to bugs in testing grounds.

[Arcturious]

Had a weird one last night. Was spectating a friend at the end of a match. We had two guys left. One was out in the water at Firedt Colony, harassing their last three ranged mechs. One of the enemy was a Stalker with Red CT and Red ST's, its percent was in the 30's.

He was armed with 2x LRM 15's and the last of his ammo, about 250 shots.

The Stalker was out in the open in the water, trying to finish off our other guy.

My mate shot all 250 ish LRM at this stalker and it didn't die. It was flashing, taking the odd hit etc but just wouldn't go down. It eventually killed our other guy, then the rest of their team reached my mates position near the River and finished him off.

Everyone in chat was wondering what the hell was going on that the LRM's just couldn't hit this practically stationary and almost dead stalker. Was very weird.

Other than that though, LRM seem to be much better. They still hit CT a lot, you will get high kills but low damage. A single LRM10 is still very underpowered though, so they need more work. They shouldn't be balanced for boating - it should be worth taking just one 10 or 15 as well. At the moment you need at least 3+ launchers to be viable.

[Fate 6]

I have to say the numbers look about right. At this point it's a matter of fixing the CT targetting (which might mean some sort of splash damage coming back) and then possibly upping the damage numbers by .1 or so per missile. I think they do pretty much the right amount of total damage, or a bit under. Remember, it's a support weapon. Not to mean it shouldn't have kill potential (if it didn't nobody would be afraid of LRMs and then they would not be a good support weapon), but it shouldn't be coring people quickly like it has in the past.

This change to clustering can be said of SRMs as well, and I actually though PGI went the wrong way with the tighter SRM grouping because they really just need more damage, the grouping is not an issue on the mechs that use them correctly.

Edited by Fate 6, 06 June 2013 - 04:14 PM.

[Bobdolemite]

Bump for new data ALRM 4 x 20

[Ningyo]

Ok updated my post with next 30 matches (total of 50 since June 4th patch).

I think I will leave it at that, it gives enough to draw many conclusions, and I would need to do 10000+ matches to reach statistical relevance on most other issues.

I believe in next few days I will probably write a guide to effective use of LRMs and how to avoid taking damage from them. I will most likely link it from here, but put it in the training grounds guides and strategies section. Just in case you are interested.

[Ningyo]

Said I would link my guide from this when I wrote it, so here you go.

http://mwomercs.com/...-avoiding-lrms/

Its my complete guide to using and avoiding LRMS

Feel free to suggest anything I missed, or correct me if I got something wrong.

[Sybreed]

Fate 6, on 06 June 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

I have to say the numbers look about right. At this point it's a matter of fixing the CT targetting (which might mean some sort of splash damage coming back) and then possibly upping the damage numbers by .1 or so per missile. I think they do pretty much the right amount of total damage, or a bit under. Remember, it's a support weapon. Not to mean it shouldn't have kill potential (if it didn't nobody would be afraid of LRMs and then they would not be a good support weapon), but it shouldn't be coring people quickly like it has in the past.

This change to clustering can be said of SRMs as well, and I actually though PGI went the wrong way with the tighter SRM grouping because they really just need more damage, the grouping is not an issue on the mechs that use them correctly.

yet, I don't think it's normal for a LRM boat like the Stalker to do as little as 120 dmg in a lot of matches (as shown in some of his scores) even for a support weapon. It would be a support weapon if it could soften up the armor of different targets, but right now, if you shoot at someone not moving towards you, you'll do very little damage and it looks very bugged.

[Umbra8]

Fate 6, on 06 June 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

I have to say the numbers look about right. At this point it's a matter of fixing the CT targetting (which might mean some sort of splash damage coming back) and then possibly upping the damage numbers by .1 or so per missile. I think they do pretty much the right amount of total damage, or a bit under. Remember, it's a support weapon. Not to mean it shouldn't have kill potential (if it didn't nobody would be afraid of LRMs and then they would not be a good support weapon), but it shouldn't be coring people quickly like it has in the past.

A word about 'support' weapons. Support weapons traditionally do very high damage, more so than more common conventional weapons. A mortar is a support weapon. A machine gun emplacement is a support weapon. They are support weapons not because they are weak but because they are strong, but come with drawbacks that make them easy to circumvent if your intelligence is good. A machine gun emplacement will wreck you if you walk into it, but once you know it's there you can flank or just avoid it, and while mortars can be devastating they can be inaccurate, require set up and a secure location. Support weapons end up not doing damage so much as behaving like area denial weapons because their damage potential is so high. They tend to have drawbacks or expenses and lack the flexibility of more common weapons like assault rifles. The reason there are so may ways to circumvent LRM's is that they are meant to fill the area denial role, and unless you are prepared you should be wrecked by them in short order. To do this they need to do high damage, but there also have to be options to easily circumvent them (AMS, ECM, cover, travel time, minimum range etc).

Calling LRM's a support weapon is an argument for higher damage, not lower.

[Nightcrept]

Umbra8, on 09 June 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

A word about 'support' weapons. Support weapons traditionally do very high damage, more so than more common conventional weapons. A mortar is a support weapon. A machine gun emplacement is a support weapon. They are support weapons not because they are weak but because they are strong, but come with drawbacks that make them easy to circumvent if your intelligence is good. A machine gun emplacement will wreck you if you walk into it, but once you know it's there you can flank or just avoid it, and while mortars can be devastating they can be inaccurate, require set up and a secure location. Support weapons end up not doing damage so much as behaving like area denial weapons because their damage potential is so high. They tend to have drawbacks or expenses and lack the flexibility of more common weapons like assault rifles. The reason there are so may ways to circumvent LRM's is that they are meant to fill the area denial role, and unless you are prepared you should be wrecked by them in short order. To do this they need to do high damage, but there also have to be options to easily circumvent them (AMS, ECM, cover, travel time, minimum range etc).

Calling LRM's a support weapon is an argument for higher damage, not lower.

Quoted for absolute truth and understanding.