384 replies to this topic

[IraqiWalker]

00ohDstruct, on 30 May 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:

With respect, knowing what "Face Time" is and how to counter longer burn times by "Rolling laser damage" by torso twisting might change your tune. But if your playstyle is to stand still, stare down a TW or SC and trade fire back and forth... then you will not notice much of a difference.

No, I know that. an extra 10th of a second is not really a big difference. Also, knowing the actual impact on the game, rather than the theory of it, helps a lot. Those "nerfs" have done nothing to curb the power of the T-Wolf, or the SCR. The only ones complaining about them, are the ones that really haven't learned how to pilot without a crutch.

[Nathan Foxbane]

Thunder Child, on 30 May 2015 - 06:36 PM, said:

I know that. You know that. But every wannabe Sniper that thinks they can ridge hump a low hill and be invulnerable believes it should not be possible.

Experience is a harsh teacher and reality a cruel mistress.

[Khobai]

Quote

LRMs have always been capable of indirect fire if there was a spotter. That particular ability should never be removed.

Agreed. However indirect LRMs were also pretty inaccurate in tabletop.

They got a +1 for being indirect. Plus they added the movement penalty of the spotter, so if a light mech running full speed was your spotter (as is the case in MWO), that was another +2. So it was a +3 penalty for indirect LRMs.

Indirect LRMs usually needed 11s or 12s to on 2d6 to hit.



But I definitely support the idea of nerfing or even outright removing ECM stealth and then reducing the accuracy of indirect LRMs so they dont always hit the target dead on.

Edited by Khobai, 30 May 2015 - 06:49 PM.

[the wr3ck]

Lrms are no skill you stand get lock shoot in air. Stoner is one to talk running around using pulse lasers and ac20

[Ragtag soldier]

the wr3ck, on 30 May 2015 - 06:59 PM, said:

Lrms are no skill you stand get lock shoot in air. Stoner is one to talk running around using pulse lasers and ac20

how many online translaters did you put that through? trying to parse that makes my teeth hurt.

[InspectorG]

"It places the reticle on the component or else it gets the hose again."

[Aresye]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 30 May 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

Interesting that you dont attribute that skill to the weapon where even if you aim right you still arent guaranteed a hit

Where "actual skill" is only applied to the weapon where if you aim correctly youre guaranteed a hit.

That seems off to me

Well, on one side, you have a weapon that's fully automatic. You get the luxury of only needing to keep a crosshair in a giant box for the price of not getting a guaranteed hit.

On the other side (the IS PPC Gut used), you have a completely manual weapon. You get the luxury of having a guaranteed hit for the price of having to manually lead targets, shooting a much smaller target area, and a high probability of a miss.

[Bishop Steiner]

Aresye Kerensky, on 30 May 2015 - 10:16 PM, said:

Well, on one side, you have a weapon that's fully automatic. You get the luxury of only needing to keep a crosshair in a giant box for the price of not getting a guaranteed hit.

overlooking the need to hold that crosshair on the big box several seconds to GET the lock first, then maintain it for up to 5 seconds more while they leisurely make their way to the target..if it doesn't duck into ECM, Cover, etc first...... yup, super easy....why they have such high accuracy rates.

Mind you, all this while being exposed to PP-FLD, Hitscan retaliation and such, if you actually want to be remotely EFFECTIVE with your LRMs.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 30 May 2015 - 10:29 PM.

[operatorZ]

MischiefSC, on 29 May 2015 - 06:13 PM, said:

LRMs are bad because they work by getting your teammates to take damage and get rekt so you can do damage at no risk. It's indirect fire that makes LRMs bad. You need teammates who are good for you to do well and enemies who are stupid for you to do well. There is a LOW skill ceiling with LRMs; you pick up a few basic skills, a bit of positioning and such but largely it's a fraction of the effort that, for example, rocking a consistent success with direct fire does.

LRMs work well because your team is good and the other team is bad. Your skill has a bit of an impact on that but not much. Direct fire (lasers or otherwise) are far more driven by the player skill.

That's the source of the rage. Sure there's some skill to use LRMs well. There is skill to making a frozen pizza vs making the whole thing from scratch. You still need to get it out of the plastic and on something that won't catch fire, then remember to take it out of the oven.

Similar concept. LRMs require and benefit from some skill. They certainly do. However, end of the day, indirect fire is a tool that rewards getting your teammates to go soak damage (often outnumbered, as you're not there) so you can do damage without taking return fire. That is entirely their benefit and 'advantage'. You can sacrifice teammates to avoid taking fire while doing scattered and imprecise damage.

That's why LRMs are bad.

This needs to be repeated...over and over..this is the truth.


And by the way ...nice troll post Bishop...what? Forums getting to dull for you? Must be because your not that stupid to compare LRM's with lasers...lol


At least I hope not.

[IraqiWalker]

TL;DR: Anyone who thinks LRMs are easy mode is delusional. If they were easy mode, they would be the meta. It's really that simple. In fact, Direct fire weapons are easy mode.

The meta is simply the easiest, most efficient way of delivering damage. If that was LRMs, they would be the meta. Until they are the meta, LRMs are the farthest thing from easy mode.

[operatorZ]

Tldr:

IT DOESNT MATTER IF LRMS ARE EASY OR HARD TO USE THEY ARE NOT EFFECTIVE AGAINST PEOPLE THAT KNOW HOW TO PLAY WHICH MAKES THEM NOOB WEAPONS. NOT BECAUSE YOU ARE A NOOB FOR USING THEM BUT BECUASE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO THEY ARE EFFECTIVE AGAINST ARE NOOBS.


that is all. Carry on.

[Bishop Steiner]

operatorZ, on 30 May 2015 - 10:40 PM, said:

Tldr:

IT DOESNT MATTER IF LRMS ARE EASY OR HARD TO USE THEY ARE NOT EFFECTIVE AGAINST PEOPLE THAT KNOW HOW TO PLAY WHICH MAKES THEM NOOB WEAPONS. NOT BECAUSE YOU ARE A NOOB FOR USING THEM BUT BECUASE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO THEY ARE EFFECTIVE AGAINST ARE NOOBS.


that is all. Carry on.

Nope, my Topic, we'll keep on keeping on, thanks very much though.

[operatorZ]

Bishop Steiner, on 30 May 2015 - 10:41 PM, said:

Nope, my Topic, we'll keep on keeping on, thanks very much though.

Nice troll post!!

[IraqiWalker]

operatorZ, on 30 May 2015 - 10:40 PM, said:

Tldr:

IT DOESNT MATTER IF LRMS ARE EASY OR HARD TO USE THEY ARE NOT EFFECTIVE AGAINST PEOPLE THAT KNOW HOW TO PLAY WHICH MAKES THEM NOOB WEAPONS. NOT BECAUSE YOU ARE A NOOB FOR USING THEM BUT BECUASE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO THEY ARE EFFECTIVE AGAINST ARE NOOBS.


that is all. Carry on.

Not to be pedantic very much, but your statement means they are NOT noob weapons. They are Anti-noob weapons.

[Bishop Steiner]

operatorZ, on 30 May 2015 - 10:41 PM, said:

Nice troll post!!

can't really troll your own topic. Figure it was as informative as your declaration, though.

[operatorZ]

IraqiWalker, on 30 May 2015 - 10:42 PM, said:

Not to be pedantic very much, but your statement means they are NOT noob weapons. They are Anti-noob weapons.

You are correct. I should have been more clear, "they are only used to affect against players who don't know how to play" and "people who use them extensively must play against people who are predominantly NEW to the game otherwise they would not use them, because they would lose extensively" I think that gets closer to what I meant.

[Weeny Machine]

operatorZ, on 30 May 2015 - 10:48 PM, said:

You are correct. I should have been more clear, "they are only used to affect against players who don't know how to play" and "people who use them extensively must play against people who are predominantly NEW to the game otherwise they would not use them, because they would lose extensively" I think that gets closer to what I meant.

Fire LRMs on a pro dude. What happens? He will scurry into cover. SURPRISE: Your LRMs just worked.

Too bad that people don't get that LRMs are a really fine supression weapon and no "lolalpha, lolalpha, dead" weapon. Plus they can be pretty deadly. However, with the ECM inflation I tend to agree that the weapon system is now really scrap

[Wintersdark]

operatorZ, on 30 May 2015 - 10:48 PM, said:

You are correct. I should have been more clear, "they are only used to affect against players who don't know how to play" and "people who use them extensively must play against people who are predominantly NEW to the game otherwise they would not use them, because they would lose extensively" I think that gets closer to what I meant.

This is not entirely true. As per the topic of the thread, LRM's can be used effectively against skilled players, but it's hard. Not worth the trouble is a perfectly valid argument there - other weapons are much easier to be effective with, but it's not impossible to be very successful with LRM's even at higher levels of play. It's just ridiculously difficult.

[Aresye]

Bishop Steiner, on 30 May 2015 - 10:29 PM, said:

overlooking the need to hold that crosshair on the big box several seconds to GET the lock first, then maintain it for up to 5 seconds more while they leisurely make their way to the target..if it doesn't duck into ECM, Cover, etc first...... yup, super easy....why they have such high accuracy rates.

Mind you, all this while being exposed to PP-FLD, Hitscan retaliation and such, if you actually want to be remotely EFFECTIVE with your LRMs.

Alright then. Completely remove the indirect fire element and buff the direct fire element to be rewarding. Problem solved,

Can't have your cake and eat it too. It's about risk vs reward. Most people's problems with LRMs aren't the direct fire, and yes, I'm saying if a player wants to stick behind cover and not have a care in the world other than keeping a crosshair in a box, they shouldn't have 100% effectiveness.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Bishop Steiner, on 30 May 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

I guess when you use a steering wheel ducking for cover is harder?

I understand,. when you have no real response, personal attacks! woo!

Wintersdark, on 30 May 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

in thousands of drops, I've died "legitimately"(that is, opposed to a random small volley that finished me off when I was already badly damaged and near death from other weapons) to LRM's only a handful of times. A couple dozen as most.

Isnt that the point of support weapons?

Eider, on 30 May 2015 - 11:30 AM, said:

Play any actual game other than forum warrior and you will see all you need.

Normal forum warrior, cant argue or provide proof, attack, attack, attack lol

So you cant. Good to know