68 replies to this topic

[InspectorG]

151st Light Horse Regiment, on 31 August 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

I've done nothing but moan and cry and whine about LRMs since forever.

So i decided to join the revolution.

Spent some big c-bills on getting a stalker, loaded it up with LRM40+Artemis and 1400+ missiles. Stuck on some lasers just in case.

It's a bad round if i do less than 500 dmg now. Anything 650+ is average. I'm getting loads more kills with hardly any effort. Unless i'm on a terrible team, i just sit behind a hill or something and lob these beauties over and over while i stroke my neckbeard.

Tbh, i hardly have to move, and most of the damage im taking is from overheats.

Still, it's not perfect, it struggles if it gets swarmed but i've just unlocked the elite tree of skills too which make things even easier.

I don't think i'll go back to energy or ballistics again.

Warning though:
As your elo gets better, expect to be backstabbed-until-you-die-from-it by a Jenner/FS/Locust/Spider.

Enjoy the underhive while you can.

[PocketAces]

Quote

[color=#959595]I don't boat lrm I only ever run single lrm5 or 10 to compliment other weapons, people who use ping as an excuse for spam are cop outs. [/color]

Tell that to the Stalker I destroyed, after I hit with double AC/20 on a red torso, which gave it time to turn then destroy me, then blew up ah-ha, yep.Can you say delayed hit reg?

[Lightfoot]

@OP

You have not mastered LRMs until you use them as a secondary weapon system. They work best to just softened things up. If you rely on them to do everything you won't be able to do anything if your team starts to fall.

I sense however that you really made your post as a "I hate Missiles" post, and using LRMs like you say you do is rather dull, so try taking maybe LRM30 and LLAS maybe? Or the spit-wad PPCs.

[OznerpaG]

Lightfoot, on 01 September 2014 - 07:02 AM, said:

I sense however that you really made your post as a "I hate Missiles" post, and using LRMs like you say you do is rather dull, so try taking maybe LRM30 and LLAS maybe? Or the spit-wad PPCs.

what a coincidence - my 1000 games of playing LRMs have boiled down to my ultimate LRM mech



basing the effectiveness of any weapon by how much damage it does in a match is WRONG - big numbers don't make any weapon effective, it only strokes your own ego. LRM mechs are for assisting your teammates by providing artillery support, and the true mark of an effective and contributing LRM player is their win/loss, not kills or damage

Edited by JagdFlanker, 01 September 2014 - 07:31 AM.

[Wolfways]

Iskareot, on 01 September 2014 - 04:54 AM, said:

I DO NOT EVEN HAVE TO SEE THE ENEMY

So? This is a team game where teams are supposed to help each other. Would you take LRM's in a 1-on-1 match? No, because the other mech would core you before you got to fire a few salvos.
All weapons do not have to work the same way.

[Wolfways]

Hamm3r, on 01 September 2014 - 06:16 AM, said:

Way back when I used to run a Cat-A1 with 6 LRM-5s and LOADS of ammo on chain fire. You could lay down a constant stream of LRMs down as long as you could maintain a lock. The way that LRMs are now I think is a bit OP and people know it. When you get three stream of 50+ missiles coming at you as soon as you move, that's a bit nuts IMO. If they can boat LRMs then I want heat spike from boating Lasers/ACs gone.

All launchers except LRM5 have ghost heat.

[Lightfoot]

JagdFlanker, on 01 September 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:

what a coincidence - my 1000 games of playing LRMs have boiled down to my ultimate LRM mech



basing the effectiveness of any weapon by how much damage it does in a match is WRONG - big numbers don't make any weapon effective, it only strokes your own ego. LRM mechs are for assisting your teammates by providing artillery support, and the true mark of an effective and contributing LRM player is their win/loss, not kills or damage

Too much ammo, drop some and add a second laser. You have to think lean and mean. My Protector went 32 wins and 12 losses with LRM25 and PPCs in PUGs. That's where it's stats are now because I switched to different mechs. So yes, you get much more fun from a split LRM loadout.

Edited by Lightfoot, 01 September 2014 - 01:46 PM.

[Wolfways]

Tbh i don't really care anymore if they nerf indirect-fire. It's obvious by now that there are many players who either can't or won't learn to avoid LRM's, and it really won't affect higher ELO players too much imo.
What does bother me is that players are asking for an LRM nerf in general, when LRM's need a substantial buff (which i know will never happen) to be a viable direct-fire weapon. But then, i don't like to use indirect-fire anyway.

In the transition from TT PGI nerfed the hell out of LRM's, slightly nerfed lasers (not including the bad heat system), left the other spread damage weapons pretty much the same, and buffed the crap out of AC's (other than needing to carry loads of ammo which affects all ammo-based weapons). How they can say the weapons are balanced is a mystery to me

[Jon Gotham]

Belorion, on 31 August 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

ymmv...

I do not often die from LRM fire. If you are up against a team that knows what they are doing LRM efficiency goes way down. In the pug world? Maybe. I don't really care, but for teams LRMs are an uncertain bet.

Agreed, it either works brutally well or meh. Depends on how much ecm trollstacking other team do. Though if you have good spotters and enough lrms....you'll only need a few seconds window to obliterate an enemy. My unit has run lrm mechs quite successfully in the group queue-even vs ecm trollstackers.
But the meh, is still brutal. lrm 210 on one enemy mech? GG.