Jump to content

Lrm's


46 replies to this topic

#21 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 22 November 2014 - 01:31 PM

View PostThe Bagel, on 22 November 2014 - 12:44 PM, said:

Very effective in PUG matches, not so much in team play where ECM rules the day and coordinated rushing of LRM boats can happen to take them out quick. Nuff said

Very effective in low Elo pug matches, Bagel. It's an important distinction, and as I said, leads directly to:

If you want LRM's to be less effective when used against you, all you need to do is accept that it's because of your error and as such is in your capacity to fix.

People resist that, because they hate to admit that they're doing something wrong.

#22 Benjamin Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 367 posts
  • LocationIn my Spider 5D, killing all your Dire Wolves.

Posted 22 November 2014 - 01:43 PM

View PostKay Wolf, on 22 November 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

Okay, this whole thing is just bass-ackwards thinking, completely wrong. Going above and beyond what Wintersdark has said, much to his credit and my gratitude,

1) LRMs are MORE highly skill-based than any other weapon in the game, because you're sticking beyond your 180 meters and, typically, much further than that. If I can start lobbing LRMs at 1100 meters, with buffs, you better believe I will, because it will soon be the bloody stinkin' stupid lights coming to kill me. So, while I'm moving around with my team, I'm actually using them as shields against other incoming fire, and waiting for the worms. It's not my level of skill, or lack thereof, that keeps bad guys away from my position, it's going to happen, no matter what, and I'm not a brawler. Believe you-me, I've tried to become a brawler, to very limited success.

2) When I start throwing LRMs, they are only semi-guided, and I have to keep my reticule on target the entire flight of missiles, I cannot simply switch to another 'Mech, lock and fire. If I am unable to keep my reticule on the target I'm trying to hit -if they move behind cover for long enough, have Radar Deprivation, come under ECM protection, and/or shut down for a few seconds to clear me off, I can't hold that lock- my LRMs go to the last location I was firing into, not into the 'Mech I was aiming at. This can be a fairly maddening experience; it's really maddening when NARC is negated because of Radar Derp.

3) The ONLY item, from the four I just listed, that I have ANY control over whatsoever, is terrain. If a bad guy is locked for Incoming Missiles -which you actually get a warning about, because you DON'T get that warning with ANY other weapon system inbound, which is unfair to LRM boat drivers, actually- and steps behind most cover, that reduces the number of missiles that hit, on top of their own, and any friendly AMS in the area, especially since the AMS range has now been tripled from what it's supposed to be. There are two things I can do about this... I can lock a new bad guy and try to help out where I may, OR I can change positions to continue hitting the target I was working on. This latter one is not just a few degrees off my present station, but up to several hundred meters in one direction or another, which invariably puts me in-line with other opposition 'Mechs.

4) When you try to tell me that LRMs are not skill-based at all, I have to laugh at you, because if you think laser's or ballistic's are skill-based, you're smoking crack. You are looking at your opponent, you don't have to clear obstacles on BOTH ends of the missile's path to-hit, you just point-and-click. So, when Wintersdark tells you that you have DIFFERENT skills, that's precisely what he means... you get on-target, look at them, point-and-click, and that's ALL you do. The use of LRMs requires DIFFERENT skills than you, but it requires far more skill than you have obviously dealt with.

When I'm using my LRMs, I am not in the game with a kill-based mentality, because for me LRMs are about suppressive fire. If one of my compatriots in the drop NARCs an opponent and calls them out, I'm right on them, but most of the time I will find an opponent, wait the fifteen seconds it takes to get through the amazing ECM bubble they have over them -which means fifteen seconds of waiting to die- and then work on putting them behind cover, so my guys can advance more closely and beat the snot out of the bad guys.

LRMs are not only as viable a weapon as any other in the game, but they are the ultimate teamwork weapon. Those who fail to get and/or maintain locks are making a request for their own doom. If I can help you, the brawler or sniper, on the field trying to get to an opposing 'Mech and splash them, to do so, then I've done my job. However, I need you to lock your target, stop the stupidity of rolling your torso to spread damage around, keep the lock, and communicate with me, I will help you splash that zero. Alternately, if you, or one of your PUG compatriots are not working to keep a lock so I CAN help you, then you guys are hiding and not doing your jobs. It's up to you... trust and help your LRM boat drivers, and they will help you, or don't and die on the field.

These were numbers from my own direct experience over two years of playing this game -I took a year off.

It's the same thing with LRMs. If I am moving, I have a smaller chance to hit due to the physics of the game, and a greater chance at breaking my lock, due to elevation changes, sudden drops, etc., which sees the LRMs hitting where I lost my lock, not the 'Mech I was aiming at. IF I'm sitting still for too long, I'm dead. If there is too much ECM on the enemy team, or ECM around me, or both, that I am unable to negate, for whatever reason, I lose locks, and my missiles go where the lock was lost, not to the 'Mech I was aiming at. All weapons have their pro's and con's, but I also have to worry about intervening terrain if I'm not seeing my target directly. Oh, and Artemis on my missiles doesn't work unless I have direct LOS to my target, so no bonuses there much of the time. I have to make sure I clear up and over any obstacle I'm firing at and, more often than not, I do not know if my missiles are exploding against the environment or a 'Mech, especially if others are firing at that same 'Mech, unless the paper doll is changing colors. That's yet another skill, knowing when to fire and when not to fire, and trying to discern whether friends are firing at the same target, or not.

No, and no. In the first place, LRMs are only semi-guided; that means I have to stay in place and keep my reticule in the target box for the full-length of flight of the missiles. As long as I'm a long way away from any opposition, that's fine and it works; however, if not, I'm a sitting duck, a dead 'Mech, and there's NOTHING I can do about that. Second, do you know how hard it is, when I have no NARC or TAG on my team and we're playing with a group of PUGs, to get someone to do NARC'ing, TAG'ing or spotting of any kind from anyone not affiliated with my friend's and I; it's friggin' impossible and, more often than not, I end up dying with over half my missile payload still in the bay because of the lack of coordination. I know the only nights I'm going to have a good combat night in are the ones where there are six or more of us in TeamSpeak and working together; my people are AWESOME!!! Without them, I'm pretty useless. Third, and most important, it doesn't matter if there's a UAV up or not... I still have to get locks, and I still have to get through ECM not covered by the UAV bubble. The UAV might see a lot of the bad guys, and relay it to me, but if an ECM 'Mech is outside of the signal denial effects range, I still have to use between 8 and 15 seconds to lock onto them and, by then, the UAV is down. UAVs have a very limited effectiveness involving LRMs.

Ah, the trajectory change argument... LRMs can only change a few degrees per second. If I lose a lock to a 'Mech I'm aiming at, my LRMs continue in a straight line from that point, to impact where the target WAS, not against the target itself. If I re-establish my lock before they arrive, however, my LRMs may still miss, especially if the target is a Light 'Mech moving quickly, and my LRMs land harmlessly, anyway.

Look, it's a dog fight out there, much like you can see in World War II dog fighting videos, and there's not much that can be done about it. LRMs are designed more to be a suppression tool rather than a killing weapon. Have I killed my fair share of 'Mechs with LRMs? Yes and no... no, because if I were actually playing in tabletop, around 60% of my LRMs would hit as opposed to the 25 - 30% I get in this game, but yes because I've had some really good pure kills with my boats. Have I had my fair share of assists in this game? Damn skippy, and I intend to continue doing so, and it's the reason why assists are worth more in C-Bills and experience than straight kills; as it should be. Do I have fun running my LRM boats, even with all of the things that can negate the crap out of hitting ANYTHING with LRMs? Yes, I do. Why? Because I have to figure out how and where the enemy are going, what enemy is best to hit, rapidly decide where my buddies who need my assistance are, and do something to help them out. It is a NICE bonus when I get kills. I got four in my second game played last night, with my KTO-18 Angry Typewriter, one of which was a pure kill of my own; I should drink when I play more often, hehe. It's not been NECESSARY for me to get kills in-game for a long time, now, and when I gave up the notion of getting kills, that's when I started getting more kills. Nice, huh?

So, the moral of the story is this... you cannot shoot through rocks or buildings, so you have to keep moving to keep on targets and keep from getting killed as much as possible, so LRM boat drivers are more highly skilled than direct-fire weenies. Every time I hear direct-fire weenies, who take a 25% of actual damage point-for-missile hit, scream and yell about LRMs, I have to giggle, and then I have to work harder to piss them off even more. Stop complaining about missiles, they're semi-guided but much weaker than a direct hit from a laser or ballistic weapon, which do full damage much of the time, and learn to play.


This has to be satire. Have you tried running a light or a gauss sniper lately? Everything you talked about (cover, reduced effectiveness while moving, etc.) also applies to direct fire weapons. To be truly effective with direct fire weapons means hitting SPECIFIC PANELS repeatedly, not just the mech in general, which requires practice and skill. Lasers are hitscan? No, they aren't, if you have any idea what you're doing. If you're SWEEPING your lasers across your enemey, you're accomplishing next to nothing. Lasers need to be held on a specific panel, repeatedly, to truly be considered effective. You cannot tell me that a Mechwarrior who uses LRMs has more skill than one who is truly effective as a light pilot (I'm quite good myself, but I'll refer you to Atkinson and Coburn of House of Lords and Grayfox of SJR who are as good, likely better than I am) or one who has truly mastered the art of gauss sniping (again, I'm pretty damn good there). Most of the skill involved in LRMs is the people who are out getting locks for you.

Quote

my people are AWESOME!!! Without them, I'm pretty useless.
Exactly. See the above statement.

If I had time I would sit and dissect your post in far more detail, detailing exactly how any other pilot in any other chassis deals with the same issue and quite a few more as well, but I simply don't. I refuse to run LRMs because I can go out with a Kintaro-18 LRM boat and wrack up 5+ kills, 800+ damage without thinking about it, without ever directly viewing an enemy, without being at much of any risk of return fire except other LRMs.

#23 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 22 November 2014 - 02:00 PM

View PostBenjamin Davion, on 22 November 2014 - 01:43 PM, said:


This has to be satire. Have you tried running a light or a gauss sniper lately? Everything you talked about (cover, reduced effectiveness while moving, etc.) also applies to direct fire weapons. To be truly effective with direct fire weapons means hitting SPECIFIC PANELS repeatedly, not just the mech in general, which requires practice and skill. Lasers are hitscan? No, they aren't, if you have any idea what you're doing. If you're SWEEPING your lasers across your enemey, you're accomplishing next to nothing. Lasers need to be held on a specific panel, repeatedly, to truly be considered effective. You cannot tell me that a Mechwarrior who uses LRMs has more skill than one who is truly effective as a light pilot (I'm quite good myself, but I'll refer you to Atkinson and Coburn of House of Lords and Grayfox of SJR who are as good, likely better than I am) or one who has truly mastered the art of gauss sniping (again, I'm pretty damn good there). Most of the skill involved in LRMs is the people who are out getting locks for you.

The point isn't that the LRM user is more skilled; it's just a different skill set. Hitting someone with a laser is trivial, and splashing that laser all over their mech is exactly as effective as best-case scenario LRM use: you're spreading damage all over the place.

Unlike those lasers, though, you're also losing damage to things totally outside your control: enemy ECM use, AMS, etc.

Yes, both have to contend with cover, except for one thing. The direct fire weapons have 100% certainty of a full hit if you have a straight line of fire. LRM's don't have that - even with direct LOS, you need clearance high enough for them to arc (so ineffective inside/underneath obstructions), and as such you need to learn how high they will arc at given ranges.

You KNOW if your Gauss Rifle will hit or not when you pull the trigger. You do not know if your LRM's will, because so many things happen between the trigger pull and impact with missiles travelling at 160m/s as opposed to a Gauss Rifle slug on a perfectly flat tragectory at 2000m/s.

You KNOW your Gauss Rifle slug will impact a single component for 15 damage (less at extreme range, obviously), and inside LRM ranges (1km) your slug will impact in .5s. This means leading your target is trivial: Gauss Rifles are, really, point and click weapons. There's some skill to using them, and lots to using them well (delivering all the damage to a single component) ... But we're not talking about "using them well", just landing damage.

The LRM's? You can only go so far. There's a definite cap. They will ALWAYS spread damage. They will ALWAYS miss a lot. They will ALWAYS lose damage to AMS if present, potentially a LOT of damage, if there are multiple AMS mechs around.

And unlike a Gauss Rifle - or laser, or autocannon, etc - they can be virtually completely negated by 1.5t of equipment.

Quote

If I had time I would sit and dissect your post in far more detail, detailing exactly how any other pilot in any other chassis deals with the same issue and quite a few more as well, but I simply don't. I refuse to run LRMs because I can go out with a Kintaro-18 LRM boat and wrack up 5+ kills, 800+ damage without thinking about it, without ever directly viewing an enemy, without being at much of any risk of return fire except other LRMs.

So, you're saying that your opponents are bad. Fair enough. Because that's only working vs. really bad opposition. I sure wish my pug matches where against your opponents.

And without being at risk of return fire? For someone to fire LRM's at you, someone virtually has to be able to fire at you with other weapons too. Someone has to see you to target you, short of UAV's (consumable, limited use, easily destroyed) or NARC (obvious limitations as well).




Look, I'm not saying LRM's require more skill. But they DO require skill, if you want to accomplish anything worthwhile against opponents who can stop licking their cockpit window long enough to fight back. An LRM15 does at max 15 damage in 1km, in very ideal circumstances. A single enemy AMS drops that to 10 damage. Breaking lock (go radar derp!) during the missile's ~5-6 second flight time drops it to zero. Having ECM nearby pushes lock times to ridiculous lengths, if they can be obtained at all.

Your gauss rifle puts 15 damage where you click. Period. If you can see them, it's pretty much impossible for them to avoid taking those 15 damage somewhere.

#24 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 22 November 2014 - 03:03 PM

Ben, I agree with Wintersdark, but I want it to be understood that what I'm about to say is not meant to reflect on him, at all.

Now that I've had some real time to analyze it, LRM boating effectively does require greater skill than point-and-clickers possess. Even if the skills are separate sets, as Wintersdark has explained very ably, I might add, it still takes more to get LRMs downrange and on-target than it does for all other weapon types in the game. There are so many more variables to consider than aim-and-shoot, it's ridiculous. For our greater skill, we get far less return.

So, understand this, Wintersdark is right in everything he says, but I go one step beyond that with LRM skills.

#25 MadLibrarian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 334 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationYou Essay

Posted 22 November 2014 - 03:37 PM

There is a reason that new players gravitate toward LRMs.
There is a reason that people of varying skill levels bring their LRM boats out during challenges.
Why might that be? Another insult from the 'tryhards'?

How about some game theory? People are more or less going to be rational and do what they think will be best for them. For a large number of people, this means LRMs a lot of the time. Is this because they are lazy, skill-less, or stupid? Noooooope.

If people are using LRMs, it is because they think they are easier or more effective. That is enough to unbalance the game, regardless of their mathematical efficiency. They are the easy mode for this game, which is not a bad thing in itself.

Just like with other changes, like buffs, nerfs, and new mechs, people will test it. The effect of doubling BAP's range is noticeable, but not so game breaking. When you start giving out rewards for challenges and not factoring in that many people will use the easiest method to obtain it, the game is transformed until rectified.

Whatever they do to balance the game, I'd like to see it move toward LRMs being secondary weapons, like how a lot of stock builds are setup. To me, LRMs are there to provide suppression, fire support when you're distant, and hitting mechs you're engaging with primary weapons as they retreat out of your line of sight.

Edited by MadLibrarian, 22 November 2014 - 03:48 PM.


#26 Adamma

    Rookie

  • The 1 Percent
  • 3 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 03:42 PM

LRM's are just fine the way they are. I play the same game these whiners do and I don't have this problem.

#27 Outlaw

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 321 posts
  • LocationThe Land of Hope and Glory

Posted 22 November 2014 - 04:59 PM

Biggest issue is the challenge, I am not going to say that LRMs require no skill, what I am going to say is that LRMs allow you the biggest reward for the least amount of risk. Because of this many players are going to gravitate towards that weapon especially when the challenge requires you to survive to the end of the match, after all it is the only weapon currently in game that allows you to engage targets without exposing yourself, whether or not it is effective is moot.

To the OP: if you are truly frustrated with the current LRM spam, wait until the challenge ends, as more than likely the use of LRM boats will decrease. The only real way to counter LRM spam is to have a team willing to put pressure on the enemy and get close to them, otherwise yes the LRMs are going to win.

#28 Prussian Havoc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Galaxy Commander III
  • Galaxy Commander III
  • 1,066 posts
  • LocationShenandoah, PA

Posted 22 November 2014 - 06:24 PM

View PostMaddone, on 21 November 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

Thanks for making LRMs so OP now with the BAP buff . Game has become a hide from LRM game now good job.

The game has always required a solid individual and team strategy to minimize damage from the other teams's use of LRMs... it isn't anything new.

Yes, the BAP buff effected LRM usage... but so did having two new ECM Mechs released this week. The ECM Locust and ECM Mist Lynx will proliferate the use of Inner Sphere and Clan bubbles of radar deflection.

Measure.

Counter-Measure.

...I just can't wait for a Anti-ECM / Anti-Active-Probe munition for my LRMs! Sure it might be only 4 missiles per ton, but catch a DDC in the open and launch this specialty munition and BANG! Insta-Crit to the external portion of the ECM or BAP rendering it useless. I'd pay MC for a reload of that munition/expendable!

#29 Mechi Messer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 102 posts

Posted 23 November 2014 - 02:35 AM

The problem I have with this discussion is as follows:
We talk about different games without noticing it I think.
1. Pug
2. Team vs Team

Game 1: LRMs are at least viable if not very good weapons. As a rule of thumb, pugging is seldom coordinated. Very few give intel via chat. That means the best tactics against LRM boats isn't used propperly: Charge and focus down, wolfpack them with lights.
IF some players communicate well there is not much hassle I think. IF you don't communicate but the enemy does (lrmboats + spotter) the shithawks will fly plenty. Everyone knows the matches for Example on caustic. ECM Spotter + LRMs and you are dead before you even see an enemy.
And Here I disagree with Wintersdark. LTP does not apply neccesarily in this situation. At least not individually because you can be a tactical genius and the god of aim himself. Without teameffort and communication you are effed in the A. There is not much you can do (alone). It can be your own fault when you are lurmed to bits but often it is lack of communication in pugs. That makes Lurms annoying while pugging.
Don't get me wrong, I think the state of lrms is ok right now but Madlibrarian has a point when he mentions the increase of lrm-use in challenges especially solo-challenges. They are very effective in these circumstances and don't require that much skill (IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES). I did 11th in a victor with a few lrms (yeah I'm a bit ashamed of that...). I started too late with my awsome lrmboat but the few matches I played were quite promising and I have no "lrm-skill" whatsoever.

Game 2:
In Team vs Team with all the ts-intel and coordination LRMs become much less effective I guess. I don't play in fixed teams but logic says: Agree with Wintersdark!
You just can't compare these two different "games". Crying about lrms in pugs can be justified and due to personal experience LRM-boating in pugs is kind of easymode.
In Competitive team vs team LRMs are tough to use propperly though.

#30 Shatterpoint

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 358 posts

Posted 23 November 2014 - 05:09 AM

View PostKay Wolf, on 21 November 2014 - 05:32 PM, said:

If there's abundant ECM


I remember seeing friendly ECM one time this weekend, ONE TIME...and that was Raven, solo on the other side of the map nowhere near any enemy mechs doing absolutely nothing useful.

LRMs are the single biggest killer of fun in this game, their only role is to troll other people. It's not like they even balance the LRM boats across both teams..one side always rains down 1000s of missiles while the other side has 2-3 LRM5s spread across 12 mechs.

#31 Prussian Havoc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Galaxy Commander III
  • Galaxy Commander III
  • 1,066 posts
  • LocationShenandoah, PA

Posted 23 November 2014 - 08:35 AM

View PostShatterpoint, on 23 November 2014 - 05:09 AM, said:


I remember seeing friendly ECM one time this weekend, ONE TIME...and that was Raven, solo on the other side of the map nowhere near any enemy mechs doing absolutely nothing useful.

LRMs are the single biggest killer of fun in this game, their only role is to troll other people. It's not like they even balance the LRM boats across both teams..one side always rains down 1000s of missiles while the other side has 2-3 LRM5s spread across 12 mechs.


And plenty of times a team of Brawlers will break through and slaughter the offending LRM Boats.

The primary variables are a random draw of map and which herd of PUGs manages best to "March to the Sound of the Guns."

Defeating LRMs ain't Rocket Science, fellas!




...err, well... I guess it kind of is the Science of Rockets after all, trajectories, cover of sufficient height given the distance from the Enemy Launcher, etc...

#32 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 23 November 2014 - 09:02 AM

View PostShatterpoint, on 23 November 2014 - 05:09 AM, said:

I remember seeing friendly ECM one time this weekend, ONE TIME
I think my guys and I saw ECM, between a single 'Mech up to several, quite a few times thus far this weekend. Yes, there have been quite a few instances of single ECM 'Mechs, but when you have a Raven 3L and twin D-DC's running around, it's nearly impossible to do anything.

Quote

LRMs are the single biggest killer of fun in this game, their only role is to troll other people. It's not like they even balance the LRM boats across both teams..one side always rains down 1000s of missiles while the other side has 2-3 LRM5s spread across 12 mechs.
Your opinion is dually noted, and summarily ignored as patently false and just as ridiculous as me saying "all Autocannons are for trolls with personal size issues".

It's funny to me that I continue to read about LRMs being switched to as a result of the present challenge, because they're an excellent troll weapon, when it's exceptionally hard to get a kill with LRMs, unless you're one particular guy I know who happens to get like hundreds of thousands of points out of his LRMs every single drop, even from a Hunchback 4J, hehe. Anyway, LRM spam as a result of this challenge? Despite how true it might be, it's pretty laughable, because Mechi Messer is correct that LRMs are hard to use effectively.

#33 Benjamin Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 367 posts
  • LocationIn my Spider 5D, killing all your Dire Wolves.

Posted 23 November 2014 - 09:32 AM

View PostKay Wolf, on 23 November 2014 - 09:02 AM, said:

I think my guys and I saw ECM, between a single 'Mech up to several, quite a few times thus far this weekend. Yes, there have been quite a few instances of single ECM 'Mechs, but when you have a Raven 3L and twin D-DC's running around, it's nearly impossible to do anything.

Your opinion is dually noted, and summarily ignored as patently false and just as ridiculous as me saying "all Autocannons are for trolls with personal size issues".

It's funny to me that I continue to read about LRMs being switched to as a result of the present challenge, because they're an excellent troll weapon, when it's exceptionally hard to get a kill with LRMs, unless you're one particular guy I know who happens to get like hundreds of thousands of points out of his LRMs every single drop, even from a Hunchback 4J, hehe. Anyway, LRM spam as a result of this challenge? Despite how true it might be, it's pretty laughable, because Mechi Messer is correct that LRMs are hard to use effectively.


The key statement here was made earlier: LRMs provide the greatest possible return for the least amount of risk, which is exactly why it's being used for the challenge in abundance. The fact that your ally on this discussion previously claimed it's 'trivial' to lead with Gauss rifles leads me to believe neither of you have ANY idea what you're talking about and have probably never fired a gauss rifle in your lives. LRMs are a minimal skill/maximum return weapon and there's no getting around that.

#34 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 23 November 2014 - 10:11 AM

View PostBenjamin Davion, on 23 November 2014 - 09:32 AM, said:


The key statement here was made earlier: LRMs provide the greatest possible return for the least amount of risk, which is exactly why it's being used for the challenge in abundance. The fact that your ally on this discussion previously claimed it's 'trivial' to lead with Gauss rifles leads me to believe neither of you have ANY idea what you're talking about and have probably never fired a gauss rifle in your lives. LRMs are a minimal skill/maximum return weapon and there's no getting around that.
A gauss rifle slug travels at 2000m/s. At 1km, it takes .5s to impact a target. Most mechs don't move enough in .5s to cause a shot to miss.

Sure, hitting a laterally moving spider at 1km is hard... But it is with LRM's too.

"Leads you to believe I've never fired a Gauss Rifle"? I've over 15,000 Gauss shots fired since they started keeping stats (and many more before that). I know exactly how the weapon works.

The gauss rifle is the easiest Ballistic to hit with simply by having such a high projectile speed it's nearly hitscan.

#35 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 23 November 2014 - 10:25 AM

As to risk and reward, yes, LRMs provide a minimal amount of effectiveness at zero immediate risk. That's technically the greatest reward at the zero risk level, but only because other weapons require (minimally) more risk for much more effectiveness.



#36 Benjamin Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 367 posts
  • LocationIn my Spider 5D, killing all your Dire Wolves.

Posted 23 November 2014 - 10:45 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 23 November 2014 - 10:11 AM, said:

A gauss rifle slug travels at 2000m/s. At 1km, it takes .5s to impact a target. Most mechs don't move enough in .5s to cause a shot to miss.

Sure, hitting a laterally moving spider at 1km is hard... But it is with LRM's too.

"Leads you to believe I've never fired a Gauss Rifle"? I've over 15,000 Gauss shots fired since they started keeping stats (and many more before that). I know exactly how the weapon works.

The gauss rifle is the easiest Ballistic to hit with simply by having such a high projectile speed it's nearly hitscan.



Using a gauss sniper effectively and not just firing at the shape of a mech and hoping for a hit requires calculating a enormous number of factors in a split second of time. You have to factor in: your movement speed and angle, your enemy's movement speed and angle, including jumping and/or falling through the air, the effect on both of the slope mechanic and terrain features, the physical location of the enemy, your elevation and the elevation of the enemy, the speed of the gauss round+ the distance to the target and therefore the time from firing the shot to arriving on target, which panel to target, the direction and speed of the enemy's torso twist or if targetting legs which will be presenting at the time the round reaches the target, when and where the enemy will emerge from cover, when you will emerge from cover, and the time you have before return fire hits you. ALL of this must be factored in in within the space of .75 seconds for charge time.

If you really think getting a target lock and lobbing missiles is somehow more complex and skill based than THAT, there's no help for you.

Over and out.

#37 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 23 November 2014 - 11:01 AM

View PostBenjamin Davion, on 23 November 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:



Using a gauss sniper effectively and not just firing at the shape of a mech and hoping for a hit requires calculating a enormous number of factors in a split second of time. You have to factor in: your movement speed and angle, your enemy's movement speed and angle, including jumping and/or falling through the air, the effect on both of the slope mechanic and terrain features, the physical location of the enemy, your elevation and the elevation of the enemy, the speed of the gauss round+ the distance to the target and therefore the time from firing the shot to arriving on target, which panel to target, the direction and speed of the enemy's torso twist or if targetting legs which will be presenting at the time the round reaches the target, when and where the enemy will emerge from cover, when you will emerge from cover, and the time you have before return fire hits you. ALL of this must be factored in in within the space of .75 seconds for charge time.

If you really think getting a target lock and lobbing missiles is somehow more complex and skill based than THAT, there's no help for you.

Over and out.

What a load of crap.

I've run gauss snipers thousands of times. Thousands. You need to consider ONLY target movement.

This is because:
1) In MWO, projectile trajectory is not modified by the firer's movement. If you're moving at 172KPH at 0 degrees, and fire a shot aimed perpendicularly to your movement at 90 degrees, that shot will fire directly out at 90 degrees, and impact at the same point along your movement as when it was fired.

2) Gauss slugs have no bullet drop

All you have to do to get a hit is point the damn thing and release your mouse button when the reticule is over the target. That's how you hit with a gauss rifle. It doesn't matter if you're falling, firing up a hill, or anything of the sort. You can sometimes have to lead a little bit, or a fair bit if your target is moving very rapidly, but much less than any other ballistic. And, yeah, you have to make sure there's a clear path from your weapon to the target, as you do with any other weapon (LRM's included), because firing at dirt makes you look like an idiot.

The gauss rifle is, if anything, the "Noob Ballistic", the easiest to use version despite the silly charge mechanic.

Now, hitting say a right torso at 1200m is not easy. But that's not part of the discussion at all. We're talking about minimal effectiveness, here: just landing damage on your target - which is all LRM's can ever do.

It's flat out easier to do that with a gauss rifle than a LRM launcher. Basically, if you have clear LOS to your target, you can hit it with a gauss rifle. Even with clear LOS to a target, that doesn't apply with LRM's. There's a reason everyone's LRM accuracy is abysmally low compared to every other weapon.

Getting a lock and pushing the fire button? That's trivial. But that'll only hit bad players. If you're in Low-Elo land, then that's great and LRM's are brutal weapons of destruction, and I'm happy for you. But, as has been my point from the very beginning, once you're not playing in the kiddy pool anymore, LRM's are nowhere near as effective and take a lot more skill to get reasonable effectiveness out of... and as you improve, and thus as your opponents improve, the skill required for minimal effectiveness keeps growing. Very quickly, it becomes much easier to just pack lasers which simply *hit*, where your opponents' skill is limited to spreading damage but incapable of negating it.

If LRM's appear to be OP weapons to a player, it's because that player is bad. That's it.

#38 Ironwithin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 2,613 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 November 2014 - 11:29 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 23 November 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

...
If LRM's appear to be OP weapons to a player, it's because that player is bad. That's it.


So true.

If you die to LRMs, it's your fault.

#39 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 23 November 2014 - 12:23 PM

Benjamin Davion, you're full of ****. I will respond to no more of your sheer ignorance.

#40 ollo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 1,035 posts

Posted 23 November 2014 - 01:28 PM

View PostBenjamin Davion, on 22 November 2014 - 01:43 PM, said:

This has to be satire. Have you tried running a light or a gauss sniper lately? Everything you talked about (cover, reduced effectiveness while moving, etc.) also applies to direct fire weapons. To be truly effective with direct fire weapons means hitting SPECIFIC PANELS repeatedly, not just the mech in general, which requires practice and skill. Lasers are hitscan? No, they aren't, if you have any idea what you're doing. If you're SWEEPING your lasers across your enemey, you're accomplishing next to nothing. Lasers need to be held on a specific panel, repeatedly, to truly be considered effective.


...which means in conclusion that LRMs are a no-skill weapon in the sense of no godly amount of skill will ever make them effective. Or did someone discover lately how to aim them for a specific component? So why the QQ? Case closed.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users