97 replies to this topic

[Galenit]

Lykaon, on 11 November 2014 - 11:29 PM, said:

Fix the ECM and information warfare and we will have a better picture on where and how LRMs fit into the bigger picture.

ECM just gives 50% increased data outread and lockontime and increases the missile spread by 50%
(based after the "numbers of launchers" modification (see later about more launchers) !).
It reduces the enemy radar range by 50%.
The effect has a bubble but it does not prevent locks and is no stealth.


LRMs all have the same spreadcircle (around 10m or like the biggest mech),
If you have more launchers the spreadcircle and lockontime increases by each launcher for all launchers.

Tag reduces lockontime and spread.

Artemis reduces lockontime and spread

NARC reduces lockontime and spread

BAP cancels the ecm effect.


What will this do:

Bigger launchers are better then smaller,
boating gives more spread and less damage.
Launching mass launchers indirect will splatter an area.
Using tag and artemis at los without enemy ecm will make them nearly pinpoint.
ECM is no magicbox, but gives utility and some missilecounters without being a hardcounter

Edited by Galenit, 12 November 2014 - 02:11 AM.

[Kilo 40]

Vaderman, on 12 November 2014 - 12:08 AM, said:

It's not an assumption, since I move the same way to avoid LRMs.

Because you use up fewer missiles to soak up the maximum amount of AMS, allowing larger numbers of your teammates LRMs to get through.

I placed in the top 15 of one of the leaderboads recently, so I wouldn't call me unskilled if that's the implication. I'm not really sure how much of an accomplishment it was but I do well enough. You're welcome to test your theory if we meet.

If on the other hand you're saying your fellow LRM advocates are unskilled I can't comment one way or another.

Adding more AMS ammo does nothing to fix the problem of shooting through geo, though toggle comes to mind.

Obviously you're right about everything and are unable to concede on anything, so I think this conversation has run its course.

[King Arthur IV]

i boat em and im proud of it! (BAP)

why do i do it?

well sometimes after a long day of using my brain at work i am mentally exhausted. when i get home to play and relax, i basically want to be lazy and not use an ounce of brain juice; so i play lrms. i call it LAZY Lrming.

its fun and i like it, you can not change what i like with reason; its like a faith.

[Joseph Mallan]

Zelthar the mecha wizard, on 11 November 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

Now, I'm got going to go on a long winded rant about "OMFG, PGI! LRMS ARE SOOOOOOOO [enter curse word(s) here] OP!!!!!111!!!11!!1111!". Though, I COULD if I wanted too but, I'm not sure is the character limit would allow me to post everything I wanted to say.


I'm just looking to ask some of you fine(possibly good looking) people who have boated LRMs exactly what the appeal of such a play style is? Personally, I can count on one hand the amount times I've used LRMs.

I assume it's because it's a safe and easy way to make C-bills.

The Appeal to me in the day was a Lawman got eyes on a GaussPult, StreakPult, PPCStalker etc. I got to add +40 damage ever 4 seconds he was engaging said OP build. We killed lots of OP Mechs, Fire Support is a force multiplier. And is a boon to any normal mix on the field.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 12 November 2014 - 05:05 AM.

[Macksheen]

• I like the line above that said something like LRM boating is good against bad players and bad against good players. I'd expand on that and say that like a few other things in the game against moderate or good players it can be very feast or famine ... a mass of LRMs on lucky map draw with some supporting NARC guys against a team with much less LRMs and little/no ECM cover is a feast. A mass of LRMs against a team with decent ECM cover, good pin point damage and blocking terrain is famine. It's a gamble / risk.
  
• I tend to not boat LRMs. I do on some occasions use LRMs, but how I use them is a bit different than others maybe.
  
• I prefer to run things that may have LRMs, but as a secondary (say a warhawk with a mess of LPLs and then some LRMs in the launchers). This allows me to have a much larger engagement zone on the map; though when I do this it's either as supressing fire (I don't expect tons of kills) or as something I use optimally while I'm also shooting (say 500m out).
  
• When I run LRMs as primary, I tend to be a skirmisher - good example may be a Timber Wolf with a TAG, 2xLRM launchers ... and 6 ML. I'm likely to kill just as many things with the ML, and have decent mobility. Similarly, maybe a Treb or a Griffin with 20-30 tubes and 4 or 5 ML - possibly a TAG. This is a moving, skirmishing, playing to the outside.
  
• Clan LRMs are different, and much kinder towards a skirmishing mindset if you think of them as slow arcing tracer fire.
  
• Skirmishing with LRMs (clan and IS) is something I find far more ... predictable ... than boating. By mostly firing when I have LOS or when I can bring my own TAG to bear I get a different % of hits out of my ammo and am not reliant on being lucky in the match up. I'm also less likely to be in trouble if someone rushes my face, since I'm likely to be carrying a mess of lasers and/or be fairly mobile.
  
• That said, with the quirks I'm tempted to rebuild some of my mechs into boats (my AWS-8R is configured as an SRM+A boat, but LRM15s look optimal).
  
• You do see LRMs in events, as far often they over-weight assists of 1 or 2 points of damage - so I think people play them more simply because the math makes sense.

[Macksheen]

Going to reply to these directly, because I think these ASSUME a style of LRM play that I certainly don't do - the slow, lob-lots-from-the-back boats.

Compare and contrast someone in a TBR (fairly mobile jumper) or Trebuchet (5J say) versus someone in an all LRM stalker. I can't speak to the recent rash of LRM AS7s I've seen, including the non-ECM D-DCs, so we'll leave them out.

Vaderman, on 11 November 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

LRM's severely restrict your movement options. This is a fact. This does not enhance gameplay where most matches have predictable avenues of approach. There is one category of LRM cover, and another category of cover for every other weapon in the game.

A boater is standing in the back and praying ... fire ... fire ... fire.

The more mobile platform is shooting when he's got LoS or nearly so - perhaps firing his LRMs over the back of the DWF in front of him laying down ballistics. Cover is less relevant (except some places like the platform on Crimson, under HPG) as generally you're shooting at something you can also see. Incidentally, HPG underside is high enough for low-arc LRMs to be useful - and I surprise people with this from time to time who are shocked they can be killed by a combination of LRMs and lasers under there.

Anyway, your remarks are assuming some sort of non-moving cow-LRM-boat. Assumptions and all that.

Quote

I haven't had enough time playing lately to test out the doubled AMS rates, but running 2 or 3 AMS (kfx luv) can easily deplete your ammo very fast under sustained LRM fire.

I run LRMs from time to time. I've removed AMS from just about every mech I have, including all but one of my Kit Foxes. It's useful in the solo queue, but not as useful as all that. If I'm within 500M or so and LOS, AMS isn't going to stop much and I need to hit cover or get in the launcher's face.

Plus, many people who are running LRMs are, in fact, boating them ... and those are the easiest to avoid.

Quote

As an LRM user yourself I'm sure you understand it's a common tactic to burn through enemy AMS with chain fired LRM5's.

Echoing the other response to this. No, if I'm running LRMs and I see AMS launching but I still can get damage on the target then chain fire is the last thing I do.

Burning AMS is what you let the boats who have their cows loaded with 2000+ missiles do.

If I'm running LRMs in the solo queue, I consider AMS and LRM bloats on my team to be like courtship before an actual relationship. The infatuation may burn out quickly, with the AMS or LRM spam being expended or it may last a long time - but eventually you get to the real personal interactions of trying to put hot metal through someone else's cockpit.


Bloating LRMs is far less risky in the solo queue, as you can expect a moderately disorganized response. It hurts my mindset though if I ever want to bring them into the group queue, so I tend to avoid the bloating and instead stick to the skirmishing which translates equally well regardless of weapon types (direct, indirect, etc.)

Edited by Macksheen, 12 November 2014 - 06:24 AM.

[mogs01gt]

Zelthar the mecha wizard, on 11 November 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

Now, I'm got going to go on a long winded rant about "OMFG, PGI! LRMS ARE SOOOOOOOO [enter curse word(s) here] OP!!!!!111!!!11!!1111!". Though, I COULD if I wanted too but, I'm not sure is the character limit would allow me to post everything I wanted to say.I'm just looking to ask some of you fine(possibly good looking) people who have boated LRMs exactly what the appeal of such a play style is? Personally, I can count on one hand the amount times I've used LRMs.
I assume it's because it's a safe and easy way to make C-bills.

You mean to tell me that some players may like a different style of mech than you!??!??!! OMG what a revelation!!!!..It's simple, I play mechs that are visually appealing to me, if its a missle based mech, so be it. Besides, it's simply too risky to go SRM boat in matches since PP FLD damage is OP.

[Marcus Tanner]

I play with LRMs because I only have a terrible little netbook to play on, giving me 14 fps on a good day.

I use LRMs to aim for me, making the game playable where otherwise it would not be playable at all. It's either LRMs or don't play the game at all. I'm not going to spend $500-1000 on a PC to play exactly one video game.

[Joseph Mallan]

Marcus Tanner, on 12 November 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

I play with LRMs because I only have a terrible little netbook to play on, giving me 14 fps on a good day.

I use LRMs to aim for me, making the game playable where otherwise it would not be playable at all. It's either LRMs or don't play the game at all. I'm not going to spend $500-1000 on a PC to play exactly one video game.

That is indeed a pay to play choice for a free to play game in my eyes.

[Moomtazz]

Marcus Tanner, on 12 November 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

I play with LRMs because I only have a terrible little netbook to play on, giving me 14 fps on a good day.

I use LRMs to aim for me, making the game playable where otherwise it would not be playable at all. It's either LRMs or don't play the game at all. I'm not going to spend $500-1000 on a PC to play exactly one video game.

This is the type of LRM user I can respect.

[Joseph Mallan]

Moomtazz, on 12 November 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

This is the type of LRM user I can respect.

For me it's him. and a Fire Support that actually helps his team mates by firing on LOCKED enemies. Don't care where he's doing it from as long as he is raining on the enemy we have eyes on.

[Mcgral18]

Warglbargl, on 11 November 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

Why do all these people think Artemis + BAP work to reduce missile lock time on targets without direct LOS?

Seriously

Artemis only works when YOU can see your target, and BAP doesn't speed missile lock time at all, ever.

Pretty sure Artemis decreases lock time whether you have LoS or not. Reduced spread is LoS only.

Not sure where that BAP rumour came from. It clearly states target data.

[Siegegun]

The OP seems to have some strange misconceptions on LRM mechs being some waddling 60kph mech that just stands 900 meters away in the back, my lrm mechs tend to be rather quick. My Kintaros move 91kph, and the real name of the game when being a LRM support is positioning, positioning, positioning, then some repositioning. I rarely stand still even when giving fire support from a semi static position.

*edited to reflect my reading mistake, and attempt to nullify false info.

Edited by Siegegun, 12 November 2014 - 11:32 AM.

[Kalimaster]

As a player who uses LRM's, it is the visual appeal of sending out these missiles that many players like. It has nothing to do with damage. If a LRM 20 missile pack would score a hit with every missile every time, more people would play them. I fit an AC 20 into a Mech and pop, 20 points of damage. Not so with LRM's.

I've never taken out a rival with a headshot form LRM's. The appeal for LRM's is in part due to the visual effect, not to mention that some players never like to stick their heads up in battle and you have to force them out into the open for your lasers to work. If they are worried about LRM's they are more likely to do something stupid and you can make a kill. Period!

[990Dreams]

LRM boats aren't that good or hard to fight. Honestly I don't understand the fuss.

[Mcgral18]

Siegegun, on 12 November 2014 - 10:39 AM, said:

BAP decreases lock time by 25%. It even says it on one of the loading screens as a "tip". It is also in different MWO wikis. I have had BAP on my Kintaros for EXACTLY that reason for over a year now. Imagine my pleasure when the range got increased so I can engage ecm mechs now in the ranges I actually prefer to use LRM fire support... 200-400 meters.

Target info is completely different to Target Lock.

[Siegegun]

oops you are right, for some reason I misread that.

Edited by Siegegun, 12 November 2014 - 10:59 AM.

[Mcgral18]

Siegegun, on 12 November 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

oops you are right, for some reason I misread that.

Well, I suppose not completely different. Lock is the red spinning circle, while info is the weapon loadout and paperdoll.

[Siegegun]

Both are helpful. I have also been taking BAP for the increase in sensor range. Advanced sensor range plus BAP range increase is nice too. Thanks for the correction by the way. Bad information is bad.

Also I seem to have forgotten to answer the OP.

Why do I take out LRM boats? To support my team. A lot of the people I play with prefer brawlers and skirmishers for play style. While I love playing that way as well, I like to give them fire support from the rear of the lance, as well as using them to suppress snipers and other LRM boats. I like the fact I can add some firepower at distance if I am out of position, or a friendly lance starts getting taken apart, I can possibly help them from far away. Also if I am standing in a square capturing, again I can help the team from there possibly. You cannot do any of that with a srm brawler build.

[Satan n stuff]

Vaderman, on 11 November 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

LRM's severely restrict your movement options. This is a fact. This does not enhance gameplay where most matches have predictable avenues of approach. There is one category of LRM cover, and another category of cover for every other weapon in the game.

I haven't had enough time playing lately to test out the doubled AMS rates, but running 2 or 3 AMS (kfx luv) can easily deplete your ammo very fast under sustained LRM fire. As an LRM user yourself I'm sure you understand it's a common tactic to burn through enemy AMS with chain fired LRM5's.

The last statement is obviously exaggerated but they're probably just frustrated.

One ton of AMS ammo counters several tons of LRM ammo and your LRM launchers are going to be much heavier than the enemy AMS, so as an LRM user I suggest never ever doing this. Fire through AMS or don't fire, but don't try to waste their ammo because you'll only waste yours.

Siegegun, on 12 November 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

oops you are right, for some reason I misread that.

Unfortunately a few people probably saw ( or will see ) your previous post and didn't ( or won't ) stick around for the whole story, and so the spread of misinformation continues.
It's ridiculously hard to stamp out false rumors once they start to spread, especially when the stubborn few who won't ever admit they're wrong start believing them.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 12 November 2014 - 11:30 AM.