353 replies to this topic

[ramjb]

Mercules, on 19 September 2014 - 06:18 PM, said:

Or learning that to use LRMs well you don't just pump as much ammo onto the mech as you can, stand in one spot, hit "R" and hold down the fire button. I've got a Stormcrow using 2 LRM 20s that I took out tonight. I use the 4 C-ERMLs as much if not more than the LRMs but I tend to LRM from about 200-300m away at the point where my targets have issues avoiding them because at 500+ it is simple to avoid them. This is about the only mech I use with LRMs on it, and it works but I am certainly not sitting off in the distance spamming LRMs and hoping a few get through and damage a mech like some people seem to imply is the way you use LRMs.

fun but true story here. Today I took my SHK2D2 out for a ride. 4LRM5s with 900missiles, UAC5 with 90 rounds, twin MLAs. I was at the front almost all the time. Exception made of some huge team derps (you know, those that in 30 seconds you know are going to be brief as the teams are are already spread all over the map, the only ECM guy is running to snipe in his raven leaving the team uncovered, etc), I was doing 700-800 damage, with a top of almost 1000.

Lions' share of the damage was the LRMs, of course but the UAC was put to good use many times. Specially while hitting enemies under 4 LRM5s on chainfire on top of the UAC5, you guarantee whatever you're shooting at is going to either miss or not be anything close to precise if he tries to fire back. Killer build.

Edited by ramjb, 19 September 2014 - 06:38 PM.

[Fut]

Wolfways, on 19 September 2014 - 06:22 PM, said:

Imo though LRM boats are taking a big risk. With their lack of direct-fire weapons they become easy targets and can't defend themselves against brawlers and need the support of their team in return for their support with missiles. It's just a different playstyle.

This is the exact reason why I don't think LRM boats are a big problem. Any Brawler worth their salt should be able to nullify them quickly enough. They're a top priority target for me when I'm in CDAs.

[Kavoh]

Wolfways, on 19 September 2014 - 06:22 PM, said:

I personally don't like to use indirect-fire as it wastes so much ammo, but yes it's easier to use your teams locks. Not as efficient, but easier.
Imo though LRM boats are taking a big risk. With their lack of direct-fire weapons they become easy targets and can't defend themselves against brawlers and need the support of their team in return for their support with missiles. It's just a different playstyle.


Well...reducing the missile arc would make the game a lot easier. I'm not sure that's a good thing though tbh. I have suggested before that indirect-fire only be available on TAG/NARC/UAV, but tbh i don't care either way.

First, I appreciate the civil discussion about this, so no hard feelings at all no matter where the discussion goes.

And with that, I do agree. When I am able to (rarely) flank a group of pure LRM mechs in my Dire Wolf. Its a happy harvest. So without support is can be dangerous.
As for balance, well, yes its a delicate situation because one over tweak will make them completely irrelevant again like after the LRMs were nerfed during their OP time a long time ago.

[Wolfways]

Mercules, on 19 September 2014 - 06:18 PM, said:

Or learning that to use LRMs well you don't just pump as much ammo onto the mech as you can, stand in one spot, hit "R" and hold down the fire button. I've got a Stormcrow using 2 LRM 20s that I took out tonight. I use the 4 C-ERMLs as much if not more than the LRMs but I tend to LRM from about 200-300m away at the point where my targets have issues avoiding them because at 500+ it is simple to avoid them. This is about the only mech I use with LRMs on it, and it works but I am certainly not sitting off in the distance spamming LRMs and hoping a few get through and damage a mech like some people seem to imply is the way you use LRMs.

Yeah that too

[Moomtazz]

Mercules, on 19 September 2014 - 06:18 PM, said:

Or learning that to use LRMs well you don't just pump as much ammo onto the mech as you can, stand in one spot, hit "R" and hold down the fire button. I've got a Stormcrow using 2 LRM 20s that I took out tonight. I use the 4 C-ERMLs as much if not more than the LRMs but I tend to LRM from about 200-300m away at the point where my targets have issues avoiding them because at 500+ it is simple to avoid them. This is about the only mech I use with LRMs on it, and it works but I am certainly not sitting off in the distance spamming LRMs and hoping a few get through and damage a mech like some people seem to imply is the way you use LRMs.

Well I am not complaining about players like you. That type of LRM play is absolutely how they should be played. That is also line of sight firing. Players like you would not be hurt by an indirect fire nerf.

[ramjb]

Moomtazz, on 19 September 2014 - 06:38 PM, said:

Well I am not complaining about players like you. That type of LRM play is absolutely how they should be played. That is also line of sight firing. Players like you would not be hurt by an indirect fire nerf.

Which brings us to the point where our complaining comes from: Indirect fire is too accurate and too profitable in dmg/risk hence rewarding sit-back mashing button gameplay that requires little or no thinking nor actual skill. If you drive a LRM boat smartly you have the same right as anyone else to score 1000 dmg in a game. However, if you're just sitting back mashing the button at targets other players are achieving, you should not come close to the damage scores that are easily achievable atm.

It's also got a newbie magnet effect as, effectively, those weapons give huge rewards for little effort. A lot of new people will rather do that than trying to learn how to properly play the game (which involves, neccessarily, dying a lot) because dying with 50 damage done is frustrating while scoring 400 or 500 damage easily is not. That's why you see timberwolfs running LRM15+Artemis and nothing else but ammo. Or worse, LRM10s+artemis...and nothing else but ammo.

The weapon system is just too rewarding and allows for what I perceive as abuse. Indirect fire LRMs are too effective, and here is where people as myself are complaining. It shouldn't be that way. No weapon in this game should reward lazy no brain button mashing without tactical thinking. And LRMs in their current state usually do.

Edited by ramjb, 19 September 2014 - 06:44 PM.

[Mercules]

Moomtazz, on 19 September 2014 - 06:38 PM, said:

Well I am not complaining about players like you. That type of LRM play is absolutely how they should be played. That is also line of sight firing. Players like you would not be hurt by an indirect fire nerf.

You really need to stop jumping to conclusions. I would say less than half my LRM launches are LoS. I don't have Artemis because it wouldn't be worth the tonnage for the times I would use it. Instead I am just behind and off to the side of the main battle line. If one of our guys peeks I can often get a lock and get it launched in time it slips up over the ridge and drop right down on the targeted mech with very little flight time. If lights peek or someone tries to push then they get a full force of 40 LRMs and 4 C-ERMLs to the face.

I do get my own locks, but it is better to help out the brawlers on my team. It shakes the enemy and makes it hard for them to focus back on my teammate. I can also slip up unnoticed most of the time or lure someone into charging the "LRM Mech" and then use my lasers to good effect.

[Mercules]

ramjb, on 19 September 2014 - 06:43 PM, said:

It's also got a newbie magnet effect as, effectively, those weapons give huge rewards for little effort. A lot of new people will rather do that than trying to learn how to properly play the game (which involves, neccessarily, dying a lot) because dying with 50 damage done is frustrating while scoring 400 or 500 damage easily is not.

Unskilled LRMers can often find themselves dying with 50 damage because against good players they don't have targets due to ECM, they never hit anything, and then either all their teammates are gone or a Medium/Light gets up in their face and owns them. When they are pulling the big numbers it's because the opposing team was bad.

ramjb, on 19 September 2014 - 06:43 PM, said:

That's why you see timberwolfs running LRM15+Artemis and nothing else but ammo. Or worse, LRM10s+artemis...and nothing else but ammo.

I hate to tell you this, but Artemis does nothing for Indirect Fire. To utilize Artemis you have to be in direct LoS to your target.... you know the guys you are saying you don't complain about?

[Kaspirikay]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 September 2014 - 03:53 AM, said:

he is complaining about being the target of massed fire here. He is the target of at least 2 missile boats. So if he was being shot be 2-3 AC/PPC builds he would have died just as fast.

Crying about indirect fire is like crying cause the pitcher has a wicked Slider.

As a grenadier I could lob a 40 mm grenade over a wall to provide a warm welcome to enemy forces. You are playing a combat game, I want my combat weapons to act somewhat like actual weapons. I do support fixing things like clipping and phasing through cover, but if you haven't chosen the right cover, or the enemy has you pinged, you just need to die and deal with it, or find better cover fast.

Thats the thing, nobody likes noobtubers

[ramjb]

Mercules, on 19 September 2014 - 06:53 PM, said:

I hate to tell you this, but Artemis does nothing for Indirect Fire. To utilize Artemis you have to be in direct LoS to your target.... you know the guys you are saying you don't complain about?

you don't need to tell me, as I already know that. However is pretty obvious that those guys don't know it. Because they not only use a terrible build - they also stay back conducting indirect fire in which Artemis doesn't do anything. I mentioned those builds not because artemis, but because it points out at how clueless those guys are. And when clueless people are trying so hard to use LRMs, it's just a pointer that LRMs give them something other weapons don't. High scoring games. And doing nothing but button mashing.

[zortesh]

The effectiveness of lrms is inversely proportional to the skill of your target.
The skill requirement of lrms is proportional to your targets ability, lrms are much easier to use when your starting the game, they get harder as you progress, to the point that everyone is good enough to dodge lrms and sniping actully becomes much easier in comparison.

[Lynx7725]

You guys don't know what Artemis does for Indirect Fire? Heh. It does something very important.

[zortesh]

Lynx7725, on 19 September 2014 - 07:47 PM, said:

You guys don't know what Artemis does for Indirect Fire? Heh. It does something very important.

Faster locks, which is a moot point because if you needed that advantage it wasn't a good lock anyways.

I think artemis is worthless myself, becuase it doesent stack with narc, and if im lrming I bring my own narc luacher, and theres very few instances where artemis is more useful then 1 ton of ammo, or a medium laser, or a heatsink.

[Wolfways]

ramjb, on 19 September 2014 - 06:18 PM, said:

Indirect fire serious accuracy nerf unless on TAG'd/NARC'd targets, forcing the LRM boat to choose to stay in cover hitting much less, or to try to get LOS and thus show himself, but hit more.

I could get behind that.

Quote

Less ammo per ton of weapon (100 per ton sounds fine) to prevent lurmboating with 2400 missiles in store, thus emphasizing non-mashing fire and carefully choosing targets not to waste ammo.

This i can't agree with. PGI increased the ammo/ton when armour was doubled but didn't increase the original ammo/ton when converting from TT (a match representing a few minutes) to MWO (a match lasting up to 15 minutes). Ammo-based weapons already need far too much tonnage in ammo as it is.

Quote

And probably a restriction so missile hardpoints can't accept missile launchers bigger than the tubes they have. No more "I'll put this LRM20 in this 6 tube launcher and I'll get the same effect as ripple-fired LRM5s".

Well PGI are changing mechs so that the fitted weapon shows on the mech so the point is moot.

[Wolfways]

Fut, on 19 September 2014 - 06:27 PM, said:

This is the exact reason why I don't think LRM boats are a big problem. Any Brawler worth their salt should be able to nullify them quickly enough. They're a top priority target for me when I'm in CDAs.

Yeah that's one of the things i hate about playing my CPLT. If i stay back from my team i get a light or two jumping on me. If i stay with the team i seem to become public enemy #1 and instantly the main target

[Wolfways]

ramjb, on 19 September 2014 - 06:43 PM, said:

That's why you see timberwolfs running LRM15+Artemis and nothing else but ammo. Or worse, LRM10s+artemis...and nothing else but ammo.

There's another example of how players are having different games (I presume because of ELO). I see lots of TBR's, some with strange builds, but it is extremely rare for me to see a TBR with LRM's. They are usually replaced by SRM's if there's any missiles at all.

[ramjb]

I must have an absolute suckage ELO even while holding a positive K/D and W/L. Purchased the Highlander 733P, fitted it as LRM40 (LRM20+A,2xLRM10+A, 2xLL, TAG, 1800 missiles).

804 damage ,3 kills (loss) Crimson straits (E spawn)
452 damage , 1 kill (loss) Crimson Straits (W spawn, team saddle rushed and we all know how saddle rushes go in skirmish)
845 damage, 4 kills (win) Frozen city night. Achieved with one Awesome being disconnected for 95% of the game. Carried the team until I eventually was killed. At one point it was 1 very good Catapult K2 driver vs 3 of them, all of them extremely damaged (Guess why and who damaged them). Then the Awesome reconnected, rushed in and settled the deal.

Then again I do use TAG and I do use LOS and I do use Artemis (when is wise to pop up from cover, ofc), which also means that heat permitting I also sink some LLas shots in. As for wether Artemis is useful or not, I massacred an undamaged 2xLRM20 Stalker who was unscathed in an undamaged LRM boat duel, and he didn't even get to set any of my armor parts past yellow. Because it just happens that Artemis -DOES- stack with TAG. But I have no doubt that just staying behind cover and button mashing I'd have raked more than 500 damages in both +800 damage games.

so I guess that means I've just been playing against utter stinkers...yet I lost both first games and the last one came to the wire. they didn't look that bad from my end. Who knows, maybe they were having the game of their lifes just as I was raining doom on them...

or maybe LRMs are indeed quite easy to use.

Edited by ramjb, 19 September 2014 - 08:41 PM.

[topgun505]

However. In 3050 or earlier there were VERY few mechs that mounted more than around 40 LRMs worth of racks. And those that did, did not carry a crapton of ammo.

But here it isn't hard to run into a 2-4 man squad with a Raven Narc'r and 2-3 LURMboats with 50-70 each. The problem is, with how LRMs currently work, that is an immediate death sentence for anyone who is caught out in the open for more than just a couple seconds.

And on some maps that is just impossible to avoid. You get NARCd on Caustic or don't see that UAV within just a few seconds of it going up and you're dead. Period. I had a fully armored TW go from green to dead in less than 10 seconds. Ridiculous.

I don't want to see LRMs nerfed to uselessness. And I think a mech stacking 30 some LRMs is far from OP. But the amount that they are currently stacked (70+) is a force multiplier and is a part of the problem.

Joseph Mallan, on 17 September 2014 - 04:21 AM, said:

Problem, there are canon builds that have 2 LRM 20s, 2-3 LRM15s, Heck there is a clan Build with 8 CLRM 15s! You will be facing more missiles as the game progresses... or not as we are constructing those canon builds already... There is a 85 ton Mech that is a LRM70. We see a few of them in MW:O already. We cannot stop players from bring builds that can kill us because we don't wanna die.

Edited by topgun505, 19 September 2014 - 08:55 PM.

[Lynx7725]

zortesh, on 19 September 2014 - 07:54 PM, said:

Faster locks, which is a moot point because if you needed that advantage it wasn't a good lock anyways.

Shows what kind of LRM support you are doing.

Faster lock times means faster time to Ordnance release, and critically, faster time between target locks. It's important when responding to opportunity fire -- you can get more guided missiles in the air, especially now with cooldown modules.

It's also important when responding to rushes, where you can switch from target to target quickly. Since the damage per LRM is so low, it's more the disruption and shake factor that's important, and for that you don't need to keep dealing damage -- you need to confuse and disrupt. Ability to get off even partially guided rounds off quickly is very useful.

On top of that, for the times when you need to go direct, Artemis gives a nice bonus.

You can do ok without Artemis and in certain cases you don't need it. But it expands the options available to the LRM specialist, something that the LRM spam crowd and the LRM complainers won't know because they don't understand -- and don't bother to understand -- the breadth of options available and the decision making needed to properly service fire support calls.

[Lynx7725]

ramjb, on 19 September 2014 - 08:35 PM, said:

804 damage ,3 kills (loss) Crimson straits (E spawn)
452 damage , 1 kill (loss) Crimson Straits (W spawn, team saddle rushed and we all know how saddle rushes go in skirmish)
845 damage, 4 kills (win) Frozen city night. Achieved with one Awesome being disconnected for 95% of the game. Carried the team until I eventually was killed. At one point it was 1 very good Catapult K2 driver vs 3 of them, all of them extremely damaged (Guess why and who damaged them). Then the Awesome reconnected, rushed in and settled the deal.

Which bloody LRM spec give a toss about damage. I carry 1980 LRMs into combat, for a cap of 2178 damage. At current LRM accuracy level, I must do 650+ damage to be considered average. Kills doesn't matter, assists doesn't matter; if you are a LRM specialist helping the team to win is the only criteria that matters.

If you deal so much damage but still loses, then you aren't supporting the team properly.