146 replies to this topic

[Roadkill]

Variant1, on 24 December 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

Im sorry but i have to disagree with you on this one. Lrms can be effective on any player skill level.

No. No they can't. Go watch some high-level comp teams play each other. See any LRMs? No? That's because they're practically useless in high-level competitive play.

What Galenit wrote is pretty much it. LRMs are really only good if your target is bad, or at the very least worse than you are.

A skilled LRM user can make them useful at higher levels of play, but that doesn't mean that they can be useful at any level of play. They're pretty OP in the steering wheel underhive, but useless at the highest levels of play. LRMs are easy to learn but difficult to master; more so than any other weapon, I think.

The reason that people hate LRMs is that they're at least as dependent (if not more dependent) on the skill of the target as they are on the skill of the firer. So when you get assploded by LRMs, it means you're a bad. And for a lot of people, that conflicts with their superiority complex.

[Barantor]

topgun505, on 24 December 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

To the folks posting builds. The post was regarding people who's frame rates plunged into the toilet WHEN BEING HIT by LRMs (specifically, constant LRM5 streams). It was not meant in regards to running the game in general. When smoke/particle effects are coded so badly that it borks your computer when your screen is filled with those effects ... that's what the post was referring to.

Which must mean you have a core2duo or not a lot of RAM since TK and I play on "ancient" core2quads and it is fine for us.

I've been hit by lots at once and my framerate dips a bit (as it should) but doesn't plummet like some folks with newer machines seem to have. Maybe time to turn settings down.

[bobF]

I'm not offended by your post, but highly amused. This thread was basically created to affirm that people using the easiest weapon system in the game (and the easiest mechanics in FPS in general, self-guided bullets) somehow are still displaying some showcase of skill. That's what I'm pointing out here, and finding amusing.

I'll say this though: if you're using lurms as dumb fire weapons, on purpose, THAT takes some skill right there. Aiming slow projectiles that fire in an arc? I guess you might earn today's PvP gold star. Everyone else that thinks finding your own targets is somehow a great feat? Just lol.

Oh, making ANY weapon effective in fps pvp takes skill? Well, I'm happy we altered the argument again, even lurmers can be included in that broad, general statement. Making your dedicated lurm boat into some kind of super hard mode, high-skill-ceiling'd display of uberness, however, is just a tad incorrect.

[Barantor]

Roadkill, on 24 December 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

No. No they can't. Go watch some high-level comp teams play each other. See any LRMs? No? That's because they're practically useless in high-level competitive play.

What Galenit wrote is pretty much it. LRMs are really only good if your target is bad, or at the very least worse than you are.

A skilled LRM user can make them useful at higher levels of play, but that doesn't mean that they can be useful at any level of play. They're pretty OP in the steering wheel underhive, but useless at the highest levels of play. LRMs are easy to learn but difficult to master; more so than any other weapon, I think.

The reason that people hate LRMs is that they're at least as dependent (if not more dependent) on the skill of the target as they are on the skill of the firer. So when you get assploded by LRMs, it means you're a bad. And for a lot of people, that conflicts with their superiority complex.

It's the same reason you don't see LBX used at comp levels, it spreads damage and isn't as efficient as putting those 10 points of damage in one already weakened section to blow it out.

You can be bad at whatever, admitting you are not skilled is the first step in becoming better at something.

The grindstone should never stop turning when sharpening your blade.

[DaZur]

Roadkill, on 24 December 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

The reason that people hate LRMs is that they're at least as dependent (if not more dependent) on the skill of the target as they are on the skill of the firer. So when you get assploded by LRMs, it means you're a bad. And for a lot of people, that conflicts with their superiority complex.

Amen.

That said... Even the best player has found themselves narc'd and in the worst position possible.

[AlphaToaster]

I've been having a decent time in CW using a Doge pack with builds like these:

MDD-A
MDD-A

The deck is 4 Doges (I call it my Doge Pack). I'll mix/match, 2 of each, or 3 of the lrm5 and 1 with the srms. The one with SRM's is great for gate crashing after the lrms are used up.

There's enough energy weapons for me to contribute to the push or take out a generator if I'm left alone with it. I have a tag in case I have to get a lock on an ECM mech. I make a lot of effort to stay up near the front and help take shots with my armor, and help push enemy mechs off their positions.

It is super easy if I have an aggressive team pushing already. Then I can stay right behind the front wave and pin point the other teams support mechs.

However, if I have a passive team it's hell. I can only absorb so much damage before I'm at risk of getting taken out. The biggest sadness comes from trying to get a push going, only to see the team backup or just stand there after I've moved up to apply pressure and try to create momentum. In these cases the mech isn't the frontline brawler that's going to turn the tide of the match. With a passive team, there isn't really a mech that is going to do that anyway, if the team refuses to backup that mech and push with him.

Edited by AlphaToaster, 24 December 2014 - 11:57 AM.

[Variant1]

Roadkill, on 24 December 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

No. No they can't. Go watch some high-level comp teams play each other. See any LRMs? No? That's because they're practically useless in high-level competitive play.

What Galenit wrote is pretty much it. LRMs are really only good if your target is bad, or at the very least worse than you are.

A skilled LRM user can make them useful at higher levels of play, but that doesn't mean that they can be useful at any level of play. They're pretty OP in the steering wheel underhive, but useless at the highest levels of play. LRMs are easy to learn but difficult to master; more so than any other weapon, I think.

The reason that people hate LRMs is that they're at least as dependent (if not more dependent) on the skill of the target as they are on the skill of the firer. So when you get assploded by LRMs, it means you're a bad. And for a lot of people, that conflicts with their superiority complex.

The reason why its not used in tournament or competitive play is probably because they think its cheap and boring because if we were to see lrms used in tournaments it would be boring watching some one sit on their ass and hit mouse 1. They would be very op in competitive play because most maps have curved terrain which lrm can zoom over not to mention its insane screen shake and spammy nature of small launchers. lrms only good if your target is bad? You've just insulted everyone even the skilled, if lrms always guaranteed to not hit then NO ONE would use them, but nope they are still widely used therefore good against any skill level. People dont hate it because of skill they hate getting slammed over and over from the ridiculous amount of screen shake and spam which is enabled by that arc. Had lrms indirect fire required tag/narc and no blinding screenshake then there would be a lot less frustration for those players.

[Barantor]

bobF, on 24 December 2014 - 11:44 AM, said:

I'm not offended by your post, but highly amused. This thread was basically created to affirm that people using the easiest weapon system in the game (and the easiest mechanics in FPS in general, self-guided bullets) somehow are still displaying some showcase of skill. That's what I'm pointing out here, and finding amusing.

I'll say this though: if you're using lurms as dumb fire weapons, on purpose, THAT takes some skill right there. Aiming slow projectiles that fire in an arc? I guess you might earn today's PvP gold star. Everyone else that thinks finding your own targets is somehow a great feat? Just lol.

Oh, making ANY weapon effective in fps pvp takes skill? Well, I'm happy we altered the argument again, even lurmers can be included in that broad, general statement. Making your dedicated lurm boat into some kind of super hard mode, high-skill-ceiling'd display of uberness, however, is just a tad incorrect.

Never said they were the pinnacle of greatness, you elevated it to that in your mind.

It isn't like hitting a section on the move with an AC or especially a hit scan laser is hard either, especially close.

Lots of it goes back to the whole 'honorable combat' where you have to trade lance blows on horseback though. I'd rather be an archer that lets my team kill an opponent I've already weakened for them.

LRMs are like poison, weakening things for a pug team that could be subpar.

Artillery in World of Tanks gets the same rap, and comp teams there don't use it either, but a good arty can turn a subpar pug team into a winning pug team.

Also it isn't about 'finding your own targets' being some great feat, but what a skilled pilot will do that whereas an unskilled one leveling his stalker will hang out at max range and be the last one to die, most likely to some lights that he can't hit.

Some mechs were just meant to carry lrms, screw me for trying to get the most out of them though right?

[Shae Starfyre]

This is another pointless thread.

Everything is situational; no one is right and no one is wrong. There is absolutely no point to this discussion AT ALL!

I am so fed up with the trite on these forums.

[bobF]

Not screw you. Please bring more lurms to the gate defense, I won't mind at all. It's just that they are in fact noob weapons.

Let's embrace their nubbery, just like every other time one pulls out the noob toob to get some kills. We shouldn't ignore reality, though.

[Variant1]

Barantor, on 24 December 2014 - 11:52 AM, said:

Lots of it goes back to the whole 'honorable combat' where you have to trade lance blows on horseback though. I'd rather be an archer that lets my team kill an opponent I've already weakened for them.

LRMs are like poison, weakening things for a pug team that could be subpar.

Artillery in World of Tanks gets the same rap, and comp teams there don't use it either, but a good arty can turn a subpar pug team into a winning pug team.

Also it isn't about 'finding your own targets' being some great feat, but what a skilled pilot will do that whereas an unskilled one leveling his stalker will hang out at max range and be the last one to die, most likely to some lights that he can't hit.

Some mechs were just meant to carry lrms, screw me for trying to get the most out of them though right?

In table top sure it would make sense for lrms to work that way but mechwarrior from a shooter perspective is more fun brawling and probably meant for it to be that way.
True lrms are meant for softening up targets but its not just for support some brawlers could use this weapon before getting up close. Also true that some mechs are dedicated to fire support but wouldn't it make more sense for them to work like in mw4?

OMG no world of tanks is garbage im sorry. Its artillery is brokenly overpowered. You literally get an orbital satellite view and its insanely cheap nothing like lrms in mechwarrior that have an arc but you dont get to see the whole battlefield. They may be both long range but the reason arty gets a rap is because it is both frustrating to play as and to get killed by, the reload for arty is arse the COF is arse as far as it goes but its dmg is ridiculous and its a camper play style the very thing the devs wanted to stop ironically.

edit: indirect fire would probably be better off as npc support

Edited by Variant1, 24 December 2014 - 12:21 PM.

[cranect]

Hmm I entered hoping for an amusing argument on the "OP" LRMs... I was pleasantly surprised to see people agreeing that outside of lower teir pug matches where people know how to deal with lrms they take a lot of awareness. Now I only read half the first page so hopefully the beginning sets a trend for the whole topic which I might read later. I don't use lrms a lot just because regardless of what I am running I have a strong urge to charge.... It worked well in the trebs though

[DaZur]

bobF, on 24 December 2014 - 12:00 PM, said:

Not screw you. Please bring more lurms to the gate defense, I won't mind at all. It's just that they are in fact noob weapons.

Let's embrace their nubbery, just like every other time one pulls out the noob toob to get some kills. We shouldn't ignore reality, though.

Clearly you have a bug up your ass and are trolling...

There has not been one response in this discussion to infer they are a "high-skill" weapon. Actually to the contrary, most all are inferring they are situation support weapons.

To that point... there is a big difference between a player sitting in the back spamming LRMs at distant Doritos blips trying to pad damage and the LRM player that actually hunts down a target of opportunity and maximizes his tactical positioning and ancillary tools (Narc & TAG) to actually "kill" targets...

There's skill involved... Just not what you consider "skill".

Edited by DaZur, 24 December 2014 - 12:25 PM.

[Podex]

They can be noob weapons, but they are never a sure thing. I have one LRM boat, but I don't just sit back and wait for others to do my job for me. I'll follow directly behind the main force, assisting engaged brawlers with their target. The way that I figure, it's hard to shoot an enemy while your cockpit is shaking all over the place, so that's what I do -- I rattle cockpits and let the bigger boys get the glory. It's called support for a reason.

I love brawling, but I also know how vital the support role is.

[Telmasa]

LRM skill as opposed to mounting derp stuff like mass MPL, mas UAC/5s, mass gauss, mass ERPPCs, mas AC/20s, mass LPL, mass laser barf, mass SRMs...........


Yeah, totally a noob weapon in comparison.


Personally, they've struck a good balance where things are now - except for one thing: screen shake is still off the flipping wall; being hit by a single stream of chain fired LRM5s still feels like you're being swarmed by hundreds of missiles at once.

Much as I'm sure they want to give players a reason to invest in gyros (never going to happen because of radar deprivation though), the screen shake is still too much.

Edited by Telmasa, 24 December 2014 - 12:35 PM.

[Roadkill]

bobF, on 24 December 2014 - 12:00 PM, said:

It's just that they are in fact noob weapons.

It really depends on what you mean. Seriously.

Noob weapons? How about lasers? How much skill does it really take to point and shoot? If you can see it, you can hit it! Virtually guaranteed! Far more guaranteed than actually hitting anything with an LRM, in fact.

Oh, but it takes skill to do all your damage to one location? Sure, but LRMs can't do that so the comparison is invalid. LRMs always spread damage, and you're required to get and hold lock while they're in flight. Is that hard? No, not really, but it does mean you're exposed to return fire the entire time unlike lasers that let you twist to hide your torsos.

And while we're talking about twisting and hiding, how about FLD weapons? They always do all of their damage to a single location! How easy is that? Fire and forget, baby, and it all hits the same location while I'm twisting and turning to hide my own damaged locations.

LRM haters focus on the lock-on aspect of the weapon, but always conveniently ignore the many down sides. A lock isn't all that great when that "guaranteed hit" only does ~40% damage. I'm 80-90% accurate with all those "skill" weapons, and I'm not that great of a shot. Sounds like the "skill" weapons are the real noob weapons to me.

That noob Stalker that's firing LRMs over a hill at targets he can't even see isn't a noob because he's using LRMs. He's a noob because he's a bad player. He wouldn't be any less of a noob in a Misery firing PPCs and AC/20s.

Here's where I'll agree with you, though. LRMs are noob weapons in the sense that they're among the easiest weapons to learn to get you to that "minimally competent" state where you're actually contributing something to your team. They're easy for noobs to pick up and learn quickly.

They are not, however, easy to master. The label falls apart at any level beyond minimally competent.

[Father Tork]

bobF, on 24 December 2014 - 11:44 AM, said:

This thread was basically created to affirm that people using the easiest weapon system in the game (and the easiest mechanics in FPS in general, self-guided bullets) somehow are still displaying some showcase of skill.

Honestly this thread was created to showcase that just because someone uses LRMs, doesn't mean they're a total noob. As I mentioned, I play a lot of mechs fairly well (by no means top tier), but sometimes It's nice to play a different role.

[Roadkill]

Telmasa, on 24 December 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

Personally, they've struck a good balance where things are now - except for one thing: screen shake is still off the flipping wall; being hit by a single stream of chain fired LRM5s still feels like you're being swarmed by hundreds of missiles at once.

Agreed. They need to nerf missile impulse big time. I'd like to see them increase laser impulse while they're at it.

[Shatterpoint]

Perhaps not no-skill but certainly minimum skill, you can farm the damage and kills on a trial lrm "boat" too easily. With some very basic knowledge you cripple the whole enemy team and grind a match to the most boring halt possible.

*LRMs don't tend to go through cover (except when huge amounts of frequent lag and/or the large amounts of broken map cover are present).
*LRMs have travel time greater than lasers/AC and the SRMs you usually fire at much closer range.
*You need to keep that lock to be effective (if your team are 10% competent or greater then you get easy kills and damage assuming you know the map enough to gauge that your target isn't sat behind a cliff face or some non broken cover. These great features are yours at no risk with that mildly competent team to keep things busy away from you).
*LRMs are hot, decide whether you're going to perma-chain fire fewer missiles or fire in huge clusters and wait while you cool down.

Gratz, you can now ezmode your way through pretty much every match.
Granted you'll have much more effective ezmode if you buy your own mech and adjust the amount of LRMs to ammo you're carrying.

[STEF_]

Hi all!
Due to christmas parties, I didn't notice this thread before, sorry.

I've already written around here my opinion, but it seems good to repeat

LRM is a terribad weapon right now: there is a lot of possible manner to avoid death by lurms: COVER, radar depr., ecm radius, AMS.
Who qqs lrm boat, is that one who needs to l2p.
Lrm are good or bad depending on target skill.... that's why it can be good in puglandia (my personal goldmine).
I don't like this: I want my weapons to be effective upon MY OWN skills.
Then LRM is annoying: they block enemy brawlers, but if they are smart enough they don't receive dmg, or can rush close range that poor lrm boat.
A thing to make lrm better: moar lrm speed. Now lrm is just too slow.

That said, lrm boat requires skills. Undestanding the better position, don't staying isolated, knowing the maps, knowing that's going on, seeing who is the weak mech at distance/whois a good target and who isn't, knowing how to dumb fire, knowing how to scare enemies so to prevent close range action.... I like to run lrm boat too. But... really I would like more lrm speed to be effective, because for the tonnage lrm requires for building a boat, I can really build a much more effective gauss/ppc build.


that said.... HAPPY CHRISTMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAS!!!!