474 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Victor Morson, on 06 January 2014 - 07:00 PM, said:

It's not so much playing my way or no way, but with LRMs, there is a very specific set of things you need to do to get productive results out of them, which is why this thread got created in the first place.

Most weapon systems don't have this kind of a guide because they are so much easier. I can tell people "The AC/5 is a good gun, check it out." I might even be able to write a tiny guide on how to manage your UAC/5 fire, but ultimately, it's "Get this gun, slap in some ammo, go have fun."

LRMs don't work that way. LRMs without all their supporting factors are horrible, horrible weapons. They're so bad, in fact, that this has lead to them being entirely discounted as even usable in serious games.

I think they've still got some life, and an interesting, niche in them, but unless you are absolutely optimizing them, they're really bad.

Again, it's a very unique situation and I didn't write the rules on them (if I had, a lot would be different, but that's another story)... but I am here to try to help new players understand how to make them effective.

EDIT: This is also why I facepalm every time a newbie writes a "LRMs are easy mode, nerf please lol" thread. It's the most ludicrously complicated gun in the whole game, bar none.

And this is the problem. There are many ways to play LRMs. Your guide is good for only a very specific way of playing with them. Actually, for a brand new player to LRMs, I wouldn't even recommended half the commandments to them. My reason? They are probably not going to be familiar with the tactics and playstyles needed to preform with just LRMs on their mech.
Ex: They will shoot within the 180m minimum range (among other things).

Now, for a more advanced users guide on trying to maximize the effects and damage of LRMs into a role of a skirmisher, this guide is very helpful, but this isn't the easiest thing for a "newbie" to do. They normally don't have the skills or experience to preform the same way you do, making most of this guide helpful, but actually more detrimental. There is a reason many of us have debated other points about LRM usage that would probably be easier to newer players to grasp. (You guide presumes one has figured out enough to stay near your team, learned the layout of maps, know when to retreat and when to stand their ground, how to dodge...)

Victor Morson, on 06 January 2014 - 07:54 PM, said:

Helping with builds & talking logically = venom. LOL.

Bashing everyone who disagrees with you in the slightest = venom.
Sounds about right.

1453 R, on 07 January 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

The Commandments, ironically enough given the name, aren't necessarily hard-and-fast, GOTTA FOLLOW rules for making LRMs work. They are, however, a pretty fantastic New User Guide for getting people to stop trying to cram sixty LRM tubes in a Stalker and think they're creating the Left Hand of God.

Some more experienced players who know their 'Mechs, their playstyles, and their goals can diverge from the Commandments and still be successful, sure - but listing every niggling niche build that can get away with not following the original rules detracts from the intent of the original guide, and is also what the rest of the discussion thread is for, anyways.

Victor and I don't generally get along - he thinks I'm a useless scrub who would best serve MWO by shutting my scrub mouth, leaving the forums altogether, and letting the good players give good feedback, and I think he's a towering jackass - but in this instance he more or less took the words right out of my mouth. Lurmishing is the best way to Get Work Done with LRM launchers, and this is a pretty solid new user's guide to lurmishing. The more people we can convince to run 30 Artemis tubes on a Treb or Shadow Hawk as opposed to 60 bukkake tubes on a Stalker, the better off we'll all be. Except the people getting blown up by LRM platforms that actually know what they're doing and score solid kills.

Most of us are not disputing the effectiveness of this guide nor how well the advice can work. All we did was point out a few exceptions to his guide that are still good advice. I agree with much of his guide, but I can not agree with all of it and I can't agree that it is the only way for one to play with LRMs (something he has been telling us for most of this thread).

LRMs has so many facets and options that there is no one right way to play them. Many of us could post a ton of builds that run well but counter to the advise here, but most of us either haven't or we have only posted one or two examples.

I normally advise one not to boat just LRMs, as it provides many weaknesses. However, that doesn't mean that I am saying one can not. Victor has told me repetitively that if you don't boat them, you are just a bad player. I'm a "I recommend" things as advice, Victor "demands and decrees" that it has to be his way or it is wrong. It's not his advice many of us are having problems with, it's how he is presenting his advice, and the attitude that he uses.

[1453 R]

Victor’s a jerk. The only thing he hates worse than newbies is casuals; the only thing he hates worse than casuals is puggers; the only thing he hates worse than puggers is scrubs. Only way to earn the man’s respect is to be one of those guys playing in a tightly-regimented, strictly organized, ten-hours-a-week-or-you’re-out-NO-EXCUSES second job of a Competitive Unit. And to be good at doing so. He has told me to my face that if I care about this game at all I should shut the frog up, get the frog out, and uninstall.

Problem is, in this instance that doesn’t make him wrong.

Believe me, I understand taking umbrage at the man’s tone and wording, but this is still the best guide I’ve seen insofar as teaching people how to make effective use of LRMs. Anyone who believes that their 80-LRM Stalker, which is entirely dependent on teammates’ locks and indirect fire, is an effective use of an assault ‘Mech is smoking the good stuff. How often has a 35-ton Jenner clawed an 85-ton Stalker to pieces simply because the Stalker thought that four medium lasers was sufficient for it to defend itself perfectly well against anything that ranged inside its launchers’ minimums? Hell, it doesn’t even need to be a Jenner. How often have you seen a Hunchback, or a Centurion, or even things like Dragons or Quickdraws do the same simply because the Stalker is such a fat, lumbering monstrosity that it can’t even keep its defensive lasers on target?

Here’s a hint: when a Locust is a serious threat to your Stalker’s existence, you need to re-evaluate your life choices.

Even beyond simple matters of survival, the LRM fire from such a beast isn’t effective. An indirect fire platform loses lock, and often close to half a ton’s worth of in-flight missiles, at least half the time it fires. Half the rest of the time, its salvoes hit a wall/cliff/ridgeline/blimp that the thing was too behind its own wall/cliff/ridgeline/blimp to see was between its launchers and its target. Of the remaining one-quarter of theoretically on-target salvoes, half of those ‘hit’ the ground around the target rather than the target itself, and the rest scattershot their damage across each and every component the target has.

The only reason these LRM bloatboats see the sort of damage numbers they do is because they carry something like fifteen tons’ worth of LRM ammunition and spend the entire match vomiting salvoes at absolutely everything they possibly can. They never hit properly, but they put out so infernally many warheads that they end up scoring 700 damage worth of flesh wounds and two kills’ worth of lucky killsteals and think they’ve made a major contribution to the game.

Certainly, these players are dictating the behavior of the enemy…but flipside of that is that certain enemy behavior pretty much nullifies the effect of the player in question. If proper utilization of cover and overlapping AMS windows can more or less remove your BattleMech from the fight, then congrats – you have just dictated to the enemy that he/she is free to ignore you completely until such time as mopping up is required. Awesome. You can dictate that to me any time you like, mang.

A faster LRM ‘Mech with more accurate launchers is able to force the issue and find firing lines against the enemy regardless of where they park themselves. A medium ‘Mech can’t carry fifteen tons of LRM ammo, but you know what? It doesn’t need to. The four or five tons it can find the room for are more than enough given the fact that its salvoes are more concentrated and fired from much better angles and positions. Virtually all of my Trebuchet’s missiles hit home against its target’s torso, and if more than three warheads out of thirty in a shot I fire properly hit the ground, I’d be surprised. The only reason to indirect fire, ever, is because the target’s about to go down and you want credit for an assist against it.

That’s what Victor’s trying to get across here. The Commandments tell players how to make their LRM launchers more accurate and ammunition-efficient, and how to get those launchers into a position to leverage that accuracy and efficiency against the enemy. Is this really any different than telling a sniper in a conventional FPS how to position himself effectively and gain the greatest accuracy out of his choice of weapon?

[Victor Morson]

Tesunie, on 07 January 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

Bashing everyone who disagrees with you in the slightest = venom.
Sounds about right.

Arguing logic in the face of incorrect information is not venom.

Tesunie, on 07 January 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

LRMs has so many facets and options that there is no one right way to play them.

Unless you have BAP, Artemis + TAG, you will never be able to justify their weight or crit space. That's the bottom line.

1453 R, on 07 January 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

Victor’s a jerk. The only thing he hates worse than newbies is casuals; the only thing he hates worse than casuals is puggers; the only thing he hates worse than puggers is scrubs. Only way to earn the man’s respect is to be one of those guys playing in a tightly-regimented, strictly organized, ten-hours-a-week-or-you’re-out-NO-EXCUSES second job of a Competitive Unit. And to be good at doing so. He has told me to my face that if I care about this game at all I should shut the frog up, get the frog out, and uninstall.

First: That's entirely untrue. I don't hate newbies. I wouldn't spend so much time helping newbies if I hated newbies. I don't even hate casuals or puggers. You got me with scrubs, though; the whole reason I'm arguing with people here is that I am telling newbies good advice, and they want me to tell them bad advice because it's their idea of fun. So yeah. That's a no go with me no matter the topic. i.e. I fully encourage people to look at and ignore everything I've written, but not tell new people things like "You should totally check out my Awesome missile boat, it doesn't have Artemis but it rocks." Because that just spreads misinformation.

Second: I've never told you to uninstall, to my knowledge. I never even tell anyone that, unless they are being particularly obnoxious. i.e. the guy who was saying how he could do awesome in a Locust build.. that couldn't even exist in the game..

Third: I have plenty of respect for semi-casual players that don't invest tons of hours in. So much respect that I will continue to argue with people giving these folks terrible advice that's not based on effectiveness or the game, but some odd view of what they wish it were; I swear I think a sizable number of players think if they, say, use the MG enough it won't be terrible anymore.

Edited by Victor Morson, 08 January 2014 - 02:38 AM.

[sneeking]

well iv taken some of your advice ( but not all of it ) and mixed it with (my idea of fun ) lulz...

the result ( slightly more ammo efficient joke build )

it's ok vic, I know ya don't hate me

[Victor Morson]

Hoaggie, on 07 January 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

I'm really glad I saw this post, because I've been hearing these "commandments" quoted around and was throughly irate. If players follow these "commandments" they take away half the advantages of LRMs. (That is, being able to do damage without LOS and outside the max range of all but a few weapons)

It's cool to see that you are trying to help, and it's really great that you are making the game easier for people like me, but you are making the game harder for people that don't know what they are doing who try to do what you are telling them.

You can still indirect fire LRMs; in fact I address the idea of "retagging" at some point in the thread. Where you indirect fire, then halfway through the arc get LOS to TAG, then repeat the process (so that the missiles tighten before impact).

But indirect should be a secondary bonus you shouldn't commit much ammo too, compared to highly accurate TAG guided missiles.

Hoaggie, on 07 January 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

If I put out 700 damage across multiple targets they are going to feel the pain. So maybe I didn't get 700 damage worth of kills, and the damage was spread out, but I contributed to my team by dishing out enough damage that the rest of the team was able to put one in the W column. I don't even remember the amount of assists I got, but it's not all about getting kills, it's about your team.

But with a proper LRM setup, you can also do 700 damage and all of it will be on-target, high-value damage, rather than scattered "chipped paint everywhere" damage. It's a huge difference.

Hoaggie, on 07 January 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

If I take my LRM boat, (the one that breaks all these "commandments") and get no kills but I get a large number of assists, high damage numbers, component destruction, and my team wins, that is a success. When you are constantly bing hit by LRM 15s any time you step out in the open, from some guy you cant even see, who is out of range of most of your weapons, it impacts the way you play.

Again, while it's great you did some damage and made an impact, you could have made far more of an impact if you were operating as suggested. Speed is the one element of the list that you can get away without sometimes in pugging environments, but that's it, really.

Hoaggie, on 07 January 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

It doesnt matter what mech you drive, as long as you influence the way the other team plays, you force them to react. If they react to you, you are dictating their response. If you dictate their response, you dictate the outcome of the game.

It does matter though, because a Shadow Hawk will, say, influence a match more than a Hunchback every single time if driven by pilots of equal skill.

Hoaggie, on 07 January 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

What is the "competitive community"? This is a PVP game with no public rankings, how can you compete? How can you really know who is better?

There's several user created leagues with some pretty cut-throat competition. Youtube Run Hot or Die, Marik Civil War, etc.

[sneeking]

you talk about effective influence on match outcome, if I do between 450 to 500 plus regularly with peaks in the 800 range for damage and are getting between three to 5 kills and 7 assists ( sometimes its totaly pear shaped though but more good than bad ) you can't realy say my idea of fun is unsustainable can you ?

so at this point in my learning curve my bad advice for lrming is run 2xlrm20 artemus ( thats only 2t extra as opposed to a 6rack ) take beagle if you like ( dump it if you think more jj's will suit you ) run an xl ( at least 300 ) you want endo but ferro costs too many crits with that so standards the go, now just pack amo any place it fits and be aggressive dont hang back ( move about get your own locks and support the front liners ) watch the mini map stay near the pointy end of the stick and use fire restraint ( don't be that boat making rocket rainbows across the whole field of play ) nice tight clusters one volly at a time always re assess before sending another and move after sending three ( don't still be there )

makes no sense yes ?

I propose a new 1st commandment " never say you have them expecting any help "

Edited by sneeking, 08 January 2014 - 05:19 AM.

[ranger233]

I liked the guide as a way for new players to get started with LRM's. I don't agree with everything he said but the new player needs a place to get started . I am running an atlas ddc with 3 LRM 15's and 2 ER large lasers. I average about 2 kills per match and around 500 to 800 damage. some times I get wiped pretty quick by being stupid . Being in a large assault mech has its good and bad side. Good side is you can take a lot more damage and still stay effective while covering your team which allows them to get more kills quicker. I can snipe with my ERL's or protect myself somewhat from the ankle bitters but you still need backup.The bad side is you are slow moving and can not get to cover as quickly. I am still fine tuning this setup but have in proved my effectiveness 100 %. You may laugh but this works for me. I am running target decay, advanced zoom,and the faster lock on modules

[1453 R]

Victor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 02:35 AM, said:

Second: I've never told you to uninstall, to my knowledge. I never even tell anyone that, unless they are being particularly obnoxious. i.e. the guy who was saying how he could do awesome in a Locust build.. that couldn't even exist in the game..

Heh...was during the immediate aftermath of the first Community Town Hall. I did not like the direction the lucky few who actually got to speak were deciding to go with their proposal, and I was particularly vociferous against an idea you rather liked, wherein PGI appointed specific reps from competitive leagues/units to offer game feedback - and, in turn, hoped Piranha would pretty much ignore feedback from everyone else about everything. I told you where to shove it, and you told me where I could take myself.

Friendships that last forever, eh Victor?

Anyways. As I tried to point out to you back then, not everyone who doesn't play in RHoD or whatever is a complete brainless boob. The only part of this guide I hadn't figured out myself was how much TAG helped, and that mostly because LRM machines are already so hard up for backup gear I never wanted to sacrifice a beam slot for it. Some of us poor, useless casuals down in Pugland are able to think for ourselves, man.

That said...folks, realize that this is mostly a guide for those who can't. It should be obvious that skilled and experienced players with a dozens 'Mechs to their name and hundreds of hours in the game can afford to experiment a little and disregard some of the rules. Players with a dozen hours in the game who're thinking of building their first or second 'Mech? Well, they haven't yet figured out when and where ye can get away with rule-breaking. For those players, these rules are a pretty great resource.

[sneeking]

just go breaking rules or make new ones from the start,,, costs no money to get the law on your tail ( thats cheap entertainment )

time consuming though

[1453 R]

HERE'S SOME EXAMPLES:

Good: KTO-GB "iMissiles"
This particular Golden Boy makes the best of a very awkward Hero 'Mech by turning itself into an above-average fire support platform. Trading one ALRM-15 for three ALRM-5 makes it harder to disarm the 'mech, and also allows it to rapidly chainfire LRM-5 attacks against targets without AMS cover, for increased DPS and psychological effect ("Oh my GOD stop shooting missiles at me already!!"). It pays two extra tons over two ALRM-15 for this privilege, but the Golden Boy is one of very few 'Mechs that can actually do this with a reasonable chance of success/any form of backup weaponry at all. I actually think the GB is somewhat underestimate as an ALRM support fire medium, and am surprisingly tempted to pick one up after doing this.

Bad: KTO-GB - "I LIEK MISSULS"

This particular crime against robots tries to cram every single missile tube it possibly can into a Golden Boy in an attempt to saturate enemy missile defenses and vomit up Big Missile Storms, at the expense of pretty much everything else. It is slow, and even with six tons of ammo it'll run itself down quickly. Moreover, its missiles are incredibly inaccurate, wasting half of any given salvo on the ground around its target's feet. I really can't think of any place where one can use an LRM-20 where an LRM-15 wouldn't be a better choice.

Also Bad: KTO-GB - "Plan B Time!"
This Golden Boy goes the opposite direction. Largest possible engine (for a Golden Boy, anyways), mated with "efficient, naturally accurate!" LRM-5s in great quantity. The theoretical pilot also includes a pair of large lasers in order to allow his Golden Boy to serve as a gunfighter as well as a missile trooper, figuring that if his LRMs are being blocked via AMS or ECM or what-have-you, he can still fight with his large lasers and get work done.

Problem with this is that Plan B is both a half-hindend missile platform and a half-hindend gunfighter. Two large lasers alone are an armament one does on a light 'Mech, if that, while five LRM-5 throws a somewhat paltry 25 total missiles in one salvo. Without TAG and Artemis, the launchers take much longer to lock on, slowing the rate at which one can switch targets in a fight or take advantage of a weakened enemy, and are also liable to hit whatever they feel like rather than the enemy's torso. They certainly are more naturally accurate than an LRM-20...but you know what? That isn't really saying much.

NEXT SET:

Good: BLR-1S "Bring the Thunder"
This Battlemaster is just about the only assault-class missile platform I ever want to see on my side of the field. Two ALRM-15 provide a dense, concentrated punch to break AMS systems, while two ALRM-5 provide high-DPS chainfire against unprotected targets and help add extra emphasis to the larger salvos. The machine carries only three medium lasers as backup weaponry, which is not great, but it does carry its own AMS to help shield it in missile duels, as well as a Beagle system to brush off ECM trolls. I used a 385XL rather than a 400XL in my design primarily because I have a 385XL (and because I don't usually see the extra 3-odd kph as worth the four and a half tons' investment), and because that's still enough to get the Battlemaster moving at 80 klicks. Not quite the ninety or so I'd like, but close enough.

REALLY Bad: BLR-1S "ALL the things!"
A fantastic design for people trying to troll their own team. The machine carries a multitude of different weapon systems in an attempt to cover all the bases and much like the Plan B Kintaro before it, thusly fails to really cover any of them. its sole ERPPC doesn't let it do much in the way of sniping and does not replace TAG or a Beagle probe as anti-ECM countermeasures, and the paired medium lasers and SRM-6 launchers are just enough close-range armament to make the pilot think he can win gunfights with a brawling Atlas or strike Victor he'z hit (Really, PGI? Really? Examine your cuss filters already!) with some long-range fire. Spoilers: no dice there, me boyo. The LRM-15 launchers are almost an afterthought, really - this sort of 'Mech needs to pick one plan and stick with it.

EVEN WORSE: BLR-1S "Maek it rayne!!1!"

Really, guys. Really. This scrap does not work. Even beyond extremely significant Ghost Heat problems, this 'Mech is so incredibly vulnerable to damn-near-everything that I cannot even begin to describe it. The pilot of such a horrific monstrosity as this believes that planting seventy missiles in one* salvo on an enemy will not only cripple it with a single blow, but also terrify its pilot and make them easy prey for his teammates. He will yell "LRM SPRT LOCK TRGTS" at the beginning of a match and then blame you when he fails to deliver on the unending stream of unstoppable death his tremendous array of missile launchers promises.

Problem is, he shuts down after two salvos at absolute best due to incredible ghost heat issues, and even if he can put seventy missiles in the air in one-and-a-half salvos, a good thirty of those will hit scrap nobody cares about. The ground around the target, the walls behind him (or in front of him), his arms and legs, his empty left torso, whatever. The 'Make It Rain' strategy is an incredible waste of ammunition that only seems to work because the MIR 'Mech brings such a mind-boggling surfeit of the stuff that if this game still had R&R, he'd go in the red after every match before he got to the Repair part. Really. In what world is bringing ten tons of ammunition for anything not an incredible waste of space and tonnage?


***This message brought to you by a man who just played a match with a MIR Stalker on his team who blamed the guy in the Trebuchet, trying to push forward and find locks and maybe break his team out of a REALLY terrible position in Alpine, for being a bad spotter and not giving him the locks he needed to wreck the entire enemy team. Damn you, Stalker Pilot Guy. Damn you to the deepest flames of Gehenna.

Edited by 1453 R, 08 January 2014 - 08:39 AM.

[Tesunie]

Victor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 02:35 AM, said:

Arguing logic in the face of incorrect information is not venom.



Unless you have BAP, Artemis + TAG, you will never be able to justify their weight or crit space. That's the bottom line.



Third: I have plenty of respect for semi-casual players that don't invest tons of hours in. So much respect that I will continue to argue with people giving these folks terrible advice that's not based on effectiveness or the game, but some odd view of what they wish it were; I swear I think a sizable number of players think if they, say, use the MG enough it won't be terrible anymore.

Saying that any other option, strategy or concept is "illogical" and "incorrect" offhand, and then saying how "ineffective" we are despite our own hours and hours of LRM use, IS venom. You don't even listen to us. We provide other suggestions with other reasons and other tactical situations. You say how bad they are compared to your "perfection" that it is just silly. You haven't even considered other roles or concepts for LRMs from any of us, even when we present other tactics and options. (Then you also blame us when the thread gets moved into the proper section of Guides and Strategies because we "derailed" the guide...)


And this is the statement we all disagree with, "Unless you have BAP, Artemis + TAG, you will never be able to justify their weight or crit space. That's the bottom line". We agree that BAP, Artemis and TAG are all very helpful, but LRMs can in fact be very effective without them, depending upon how you wish to use them. What we disagree with is this "to justify their weight or crit space. That's the bottom line". Such finality. Such "It is my way or you are wrong".

I wont go back into the many uses of LRMs on this, but I have had great success with a few small launchers as a secondary weapon to provide some light weight range weapons, and the bulk of my weapons being more direct fire weapons.
The concept is:
- You put on 5-15 LRMs with 1-3 tons of ammo.
- When you are at long range, you launch the missiles, indirect or not. You preform this action as you approach your target, causing some damage when normally you would not be able to. This also lets you support allies whom are outside of your line of sight.
- When you use your LRMs, a warning will go off, making the enemy either seek cover, or get hit. The warning does not mention how many LRMs are incoming. This can force people behind cover.
- I have even used those couple of LRMs as scouts sometimes when no contacts could be found with the enemy. Shoot the LRMs up in a random direction and wait to see if AMS shoots at them. This can be a helpful tool to locating AMS equipped units.
- Then, once I have started to engage a unit, if I can keep the target outside of 200m, I can use the LRMs as well as my other weapons, or just shoot my LRMs if I need to cool off, as LRMs do run rather cool overall.
- I can use LRMs in small amounts to kill targets that are trying to run away, and run outside of my direct fire weapons range or sight.

Then again, I can also represent the reason to carry backup weapons. I could bring up my Hunchback 4SP, with 2x 15LRMs and 4 med lasers, and how well it's preformed with the combination effect between the two systems. I could mention how LRMs equipped on a mech can help a pilot determine when and where they wish to engage the enemy. I could also go more in dept of how one can use LRMs to confuse the enemy by putting "blood in the water" to lure enemy fast mechs to the "LRM boat", only to find a devastating weapons array waiting for them (if not a teammate or two) that carries far more than just LRMs.

LRMs are actually, when not boated, fairly light systems for their range. Take a couple LRM5s or a single LRM10 and 2 tons of ammo and it will weight less than any ballistic (current meta) with range, and equal the AC2 and 1 ton ammo for weight. They can be good on some builds to take a few LRMs if there is spare weight or if range is being more of a problem, to help counter some of the issues with range/heat. An LRM10 launcher weigh as much as a LL, with no ammo. Add in 2 tons ammo and it's like a large laser with 2 heat sinks. Can make for a lighter long range weapon that can help with your heat management.

I could go on, but I'm not trying to write a guide here, but just trying to make a point. There are other concepts and strategies that can work just as well as yours can, and we can do so without concepts of boating. Of course, you will just dismiss this all as "the ravings of a lunatic who doesn't know what he's talking about" anyway so...


"I have plenty of respect for semi-casual players". Really? I don't feel any of this "respect". Respect would be debating with me on the individual points of each strategy and their strengths and weaknesses. Respect wouldn't have you just "dismissing" any other tactic that doesn't align with yours because it "doesn't have Tag/Artemis/BAP". You have shown most of us posters here who don't agree (mostly with your "this way or it's wrong" attitude) nothing but disrespect. We have disagreed with some points, but we do agree you bring a lot of good points to the table as well. Most of what we are saying is that this guide is not the only way to run LRMs, but it is a way to use them, and it doesn't look like a bad way either.

1453 R, on 08 January 2014 - 06:26 AM, said:

That said...folks, realize that this is mostly a guide for those who can't. It should be obvious that skilled and experienced players with a dozens 'Mechs to their name and hundreds of hours in the game can afford to experiment a little and disregard some of the rules. Players with a dozen hours in the game who're thinking of building their first or second 'Mech? Well, they haven't yet figured out when and where ye can get away with rule-breaking. For those players, these rules are a pretty great resource.

I'm just worried about the lack of backup weapons on an LRM "boat". The guide has a lot of good points but I feel that most new players are going to have problems because of the needed experience to know when to push, when to fall back, when to fire indirect, when to... (I'm sure you get what I mean.) I'm just worried that the finer points that make this strategy work will be lost upon one who doesn't have the experience to pull it off.

Basically, it might work well for Victor, but that doesn't mean that this style of LRM use will work for everyone else. No mater how effective it might be for him. There is a lot of tiny nuances that one needs to know to really make full use of this style of LRM use, and that is more of what I am worried about, which is why for new players I typically suggest a few different things instead. That is not to say that this guide doesn't have some helpful tips.

[Hoaggie]

Victor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 02:45 AM, said:

But with a proper LRM setup, you can also do 700 damage and all of it will be on-target, high-value damage, rather than scattered "chipped paint everywhere" damage. It's a huge difference.

I like your great use of mumbojumbo here, like that damage didn't really happen to any of those mechs. Without Artemus or tag you have a greater chance of hitting legs when the target is on the move in any direction but towards you, and that's what matters, because legs have lower armor and a larger area. You call it "scattered" I call it reconnaissance by fire that allows allies to select the most viable target component to disable or disarm a mech in order to gain an advantage. It's a huge difference.

Victor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 02:45 AM, said:

It does matter though, because a Shadow Hawk will, say, influence a match more than a Hunchback every single time if driven by pilots of equal skill.

No, just no. This is extremely misleading, something I can see you excel at.

If you drive them the same way and expect them to fill the same role, then one will alway be clearly better. I regularly take down jump-jetting pop-tart Shadow Hawks in my HBK-4G(f)

It does not take a pilot of equal skill, it takes a warrior of higher skill in the Hunchback; it doesnt matter what other mechs, if any, he is good at driving, if he is driving a Hunchback.

Victor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 02:45 AM, said:

There's several user created leagues with some pretty cut-throat competition. Youtube Run Hot or Die, Marik Civil War, etc.

Yes, I am also able to access youtube, it's great how the internet works in that reguard, right? I'm not really that impressed. I've played with and against some of the teams, they are really nothing spectacular.

[Victor Morson]

Just to clear it up, there's quite a few PUGs that are quite skilled at the game, and quite experienced. The point being made at that time I think was that the competitive units should be the ones talked to about game balance, because it benefits everyone, and even if there are VERY experienced excellent PUG players, you'll also get tons of white noise from that segment of the player base.

I still hold to this. In fact I would be very, very happy to put the entire game balancing feedback in the hands of Mercenary's Star, since it has 4 of the 10 best units in the game right now. They understand the game extremely well and being a collection of units, can offer different perspectives.

1453 R, on 08 January 2014 - 06:26 AM, said:

Heh...was during the immediate aftermath of the first Community Town Hall. I did not like the direction the lucky few who actually got to speak were deciding to go with their proposal, and I was particularly vociferous against an idea you rather liked, wherein PGI appointed specific reps from competitive leagues/units to offer game feedback

I'm sure some heated things were said, that was the first full forum riot ever at that point. I apologize if it got that over the top, though.

1453 R, on 08 January 2014 - 06:26 AM, said:

- and, in turn, hoped Piranha would pretty much ignore feedback from everyone else about everything. I told you where to shove it, and you told me where I could take myself.

Be careful what you ask for though, because PGI isn't listening to competitive players OR casual players, now. heh

[Victor Morson]

Hoaggie, on 08 January 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

I like your great use of mumbojumbo here, like that damage didn't really happen to any of those mechs. Without Artemus or tag you have a greater chance of hitting legs when the target is on the move in any direction but towards you, and that's what matters, because legs have lower armor and a larger area. You call it "scattered" I call it reconnaissance by fire that allows allies to select the most viable target component to disable or disarm a mech in order to gain an advantage. It's a huge difference.

That's not what happens. Say you fire 4 launchers at a static, barely moving Atlas with and without Artemis + TAG:

Without:
LRM/5: Hits the CT and side torso with a few.
LRM/10: Hits the CT and side torsos with a few.
LRM/15: Almost even spread of CT/side torso hits.
LRM/20: Missiles hit a radius around the CT, some hit dirt.

With:
LRM/5: Every missile hits CT
LRM/10: Every missile hits CT
LRM/15: Most missiles hit CT, some scatter to sides
LRM/20: Most missiles hit CT, some scatter to sides


You're just as likely to hit the leg on a running high-speed 'mech with TAG+Artemis as without; the difference is about 80% of your missiles will slam into that leg, instead of about 15%.

Hoaggie, on 08 January 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

No, just no. This is extremely misleading, something I can see you excel at.

If you drive them the same way and expect them to fill the same role, then one will alway be clearly better. I regularly take down jump-jetting pop-tart Shadow Hawks in my HBK-4G(f)

The Shadow Hawk can fill the same role from most Hunchbacks; the 4P not withstanding. And it does them all better than the Hunchback, including having a far better AC/20 / ER PPC Mount.

Hoaggie, on 08 January 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

It does not take a pilot of equal skill, it takes a warrior of higher skill in the Hunchback; it doesnt matter what other mechs, if any, he is good at driving, if he is driving a Hunchback.

The point is when you encounter a pilot of equal skill, the Shadow Hawk will always beat the Hunchback, all things being equal, thus making the Hunchback a handicap. This handicap is amplified ten fold when thrown into a team of twelve.

Hoaggie, on 08 January 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

Yes, I am also able to access youtube, it's great how the internet works in that reguard, right? I'm not really that impressed. I've played with and against some of the teams, they are really nothing spectacular.

If you think Sword of Kentares is nothing spectacular, I welcome you to challenge them to a 12-0 funeral.

[Wildstreak]

Good for most but there are exceptions.
Tell these to the poor Locust 3S Pilots.
Was there one added to prevent people firing less than 180m or more than 1000m?

[Victor Morson]

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

Saying that any other option, strategy or concept is "illogical" and "incorrect" offhand, and then saying how "ineffective" we are despite our own hours and hours of LRM use, IS venom. You don't even listen to us. We provide other suggestions with other reasons and other tactical situations.

You say how bad they are compared to your "perfection" that it is just silly. You haven't even considered other roles or concepts for LRMs from any of us, even when we present other tactics and options. (Then you also blame us when the thread gets moved into the proper section of Guides and Strategies because we "derailed" the guide...)

Just as you can't argue the world is flat once it's been discovered to be round, there is no rational argument that can justify taking an LRM with Artemis + TAG, as the weapon becomes wasted weight and crit space, nothing more, without these enhancements.

Because all of the roles and ideas suggested flat out do not work. Assault LRMs for example can be effective but is also immediately counterable; as stated, anyone driving a skirmisher will obliterate a Highlander running LRMs without even taking serious damage.

It's very one sided and newbies need a resource that both educates them on how it operates, and shoots down misinformation. There's a lot of that.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

And this is the statement we all disagree with, "Unless you have BAP, Artemis + TAG, you will never be able to justify their weight or crit space. That's the bottom line". We agree that BAP, Artemis and TAG are all very helpful, but LRMs can in fact be very effective without them, depending upon how you wish to use them. What we disagree with is this "to justify their weight or crit space. That's the bottom line". Such finality. Such "It is my way or you are wrong".

This is indisputable truth. If you pay 22 tons for weapons and don't go the extra few tons to make them worth it, you're handicapping yourself horribly. There's just no getting around it.

Do I care if you handicap yourself? Absolutely not. Why am I arguing it then? Simple: Again, I want to shoot down misinformation for new players interested in using LRMs.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

I wont go back into the many uses of LRMs on this, but I have had great success with a few small launchers as a secondary weapon to provide some light weight range weapons, and the bulk of my weapons being more direct fire weapons.
The concept is:

Bolded parts mine:

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

- You put on 5-15 LRMs with 1-3 tons of ammo.
* .5 tons will break through AMS total, if that. A waste.
- When you are at long range, you launch the missiles, indirect or not. You preform this action as you approach your target, causing some damage when normally you would not be able to. This also lets you support allies whom are outside of your line of sight.
* I never said don't fire indirect while moving into direct. I even cover "post-launch TAG'ing" as viable. The point is you always try to get visual, even if you fire indirect when you do not have it.
- When you use your LRMs, a warning will go off, making the enemy either seek cover, or get hit. The warning does not mention how many LRMs are incoming. This can force people behind cover.
* Common suggestion. Once a player has even minor experience they will simply ID it as a weak launcher and not take cover any longer. You're paying several tons for a mind game that will only fool the newest of players.
- I have even used those couple of LRMs as scouts sometimes when no contacts could be found with the enemy. Shoot the LRMs up in a random direction and wait to see if AMS shoots at them. This can be a helpful tool to locating AMS equipped units.
* Of dubious usefulness, but you can do this with any LRM 'mech. Is it worth several tons JUST for this purpose? No, not really.
- Then, once I have started to engage a unit, if I can keep the target outside of 200m, I can use the LRMs as well as my other weapons, or just shoot my LRMs if I need to cool off, as LRMs do run rather cool overall.
* Firing those light indirect weapons will keep you from cooling off, preventing your overall LRM DPS, again crippling a VERY heavy gun.
- I can use LRMs in small amounts to kill targets that are trying to run away, and run outside of my direct fire weapons range or sight.
* Even better to do it in a 'mech with proper LRMs, and far more likely to work.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

Then again, I can also represent the reason to carry backup weapons. I could bring up my Hunchback 4SP, with 2x 15LRMs and 4 med lasers, and how well it's preformed with the combination effect between the two systems. I could mention how LRMs equipped on a mech can help a pilot determine when and where they wish to engage the enemy. I could also go more in dept of how one can use LRMs to confuse the enemy by putting "blood in the water" to lure enemy fast mechs to the "LRM boat", only to find a devastating weapons array waiting for them (if not a teammate or two) that carries far more than just LRMs.

You just totally started an argument about backup weapons (4 mediums) that takes 4 tons of ammo away from your 50 tonner's LRMs, which means they will turn into a paper weight 480 missiles sooner which was bad.. but then moved on to using your teammates to support you? Which is precisely what you should do with a skirmisher.

4 medium lasers isn't going to win you close range fights.
4 tons of LRM ammo is several dead 'mechs.

I stand by my assessment.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

LRMs are actually, when not boated, fairly light systems for their range. Take a couple LRM5s or a single LRM10 and 2 tons of ammo and it will weight less than any ballistic (current meta) with range, and equal the AC2 and 1 ton ammo for weight.

It will also die to an AMS that happens to wander past before it even gets out of the launcher, so yeah.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

They can be good on some builds to take a few LRMs if there is spare weight or if range is being more of a problem, to help counter some of the issues with range/heat. An LRM10 launcher weigh as much as a LL, with no ammo. Add in 2 tons ammo and it's like a large laser with 2 heat sinks. Can make for a lighter long range weapon that can help with your heat management.

The Large Laser = Drops in, works with all weapons.

The LRM = Drops in, countered by ECM without BAP, countered by ECM at range without TAG, slow locks without augments, bad lock holding time without modules, ran run out of ammo (unlike LL), nobody adds 2 DHS per Large Laser anyway.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

I could go on, but I'm not trying to write a guide here, but just trying to make a point. There are other concepts and strategies that can work just as well as yours can, and we can do so without concepts of boating. Of course, you will just dismiss this all as "the ravings of a lunatic who doesn't know what he's talking about" anyway so...

I'm dismissing your ideas as bad because they are objectively bad and can clearly be demonstrated as such. Because they have worked for you in games you've been ignored, you think they do work.. when they against mid-level play and up, they don't.

Again, I'm not telling you how to run your 'mech, but I am dispelling misinformation for new people reading this.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

"I have plenty of respect for semi-casual players". Really? I don't feel any of this "respect". Respect would be debating with me on the individual points of each strategy and their strengths and weaknesses. Respect wouldn't have you just "dismissing" any other tactic that doesn't align with yours because it "doesn't have Tag/Artemis/BAP". You have shown most of us posters here who don't agree (mostly with your "this way or it's wrong" attitude) nothing but disrespect. We have disagreed with some points, but we do agree you bring a lot of good points to the table as well. Most of what we are saying is that this guide is not the only way to run LRMs, but it is a way to use them, and it doesn't look like a bad way either.

I respect casual players, but I am here to tell newbies how to get the absolute most bang for their buck. Which is not your way. It's a simple fact that it's better to greatly optimize the weapons you have than make a 'mech that kind of sucks at two entirely different things.

Tesunie, on 08 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

Basically, it might work well for Victor, but that doesn't mean that this style of LRM use will work for everyone else. No mater how effective it might be for him. There is a lot of tiny nuances that one needs to know to really make full use of this style of LRM use, and that is more of what I am worried about, which is why for new players I typically suggest a few different things instead. That is not to say that this guide doesn't have some helpful tips.

This has little to do with personal style. The gun, without it's tight focusing of the TAG+Artemis, is like a crappy LBX with a ton of drawbacks that handicap it in dozens of situations.

With TAG+Artemis, it's more on par with the Gauss Rifle in terms of usefulness, delivering massive damage to single locations.

This has nothing to do with me, or my tastes, it has to do with pure functionality which is as described.

[VtV Pilot RAID]

Yep, most of that is doable. there are some exceptions based purely on tonnage capabilities.

RAID

[Hoaggie]

Victor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 09:23 PM, said:

That's not what happens. Say you fire 4 launchers at a static, barely moving Atlas with and without Artemis + TAG:

Without:
LRM/5: Hits the CT and side torso with a few.
LRM/10: Hits the CT and side torsos with a few.
LRM/15: Almost even spread of CT/side torso hits.
LRM/20: Missiles hit a radius around the CT, some hit dirt.

With:
LRM/5: Every missile hits CT
LRM/10: Every missile hits CT
LRM/15: Most missiles hit CT, some scatter to sides
LRM/20: Most missiles hit CT, some scatter to sides


You're just as likely to hit the leg on a running high-speed 'mech with TAG+Artemis as without; the difference is about 80% of your missiles will slam into that leg, instead of about 15%.



The Shadow Hawk can fill the same role from most Hunchbacks; the 4P not withstanding. And it does them all better than the Hunchback, including having a far better AC/20 / ER PPC Mount.



The point is when you encounter a pilot of equal skill, the Shadow Hawk will always beat the Hunchback, all things being equal, thus making the Hunchback a handicap. This handicap is amplified ten fold when thrown into a team of twelve.



If you think Sword of Kentares is nothing spectacular, I welcome you to challenge them to a 12-0 funeral.

The numbers you've put up are not what I've seen. Are you even playing the same game as the rest of us?

[Kjudoon]

Shar Wolf, on 06 January 2014 - 07:44 PM, said:

Still ignoring you Vic - so don't expect a response to whatever venom you vomit this time.

Soooo... VM:DR?

[Kaijin]

All of Victors commandments I agree with save two. 88kph and BAP. To be sure, the first gives the LRM mech more wiggle room, but I'd rather have a short-range weapon or three. The second is a luxury. I stay close to my team and TAG any little ECM interlopers that come near, almost always assuring their focused-fire demise.

Two albeit cherry-picked examples of mechs that break the speed and BAP commandments:



For rank beginners though, faster is better. A beginner I am not: