384 replies to this topic

[Sergeant Random]

Yes, LRMs are undervalued. Meta bandwagons and popularity contests can be balamed. Of course LRMs are situational... As all weapons are.

Take this situation: 5 vs 5 mechs in a narrow valley. Blue has 5 direct fire mechs, Red has 3 and 2 LRM support. Blue risks shooting through each other but Red's 2 LRM support can indirect fire over their teammates. Who has more situational firepower here?

[Bishop Steiner]

Sergeant Random, on 29 May 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:

Yes, LRMs are undervalued. Meta bandwagons and popularity contests can be balamed. Of course LRMs are situational... As all weapons are.

Take this situation: 5 vs 5 mechs in a narrow valley. Blue has 5 direct fire mechs, Red has 3 and 2 LRM support. Blue risks shooting through each other but Red's 2 LRM support can indirect fire over their teammates. Who has more situational firepower here?

Why the 5 Direct fire of course. They're so skilled their beams bend around their teammates.......
(wonder why my back armor always seemed to get toasted when I play with self proclaimed High Elo players........)

[Kilo 40]

FupDup, on 29 May 2015 - 04:07 PM, said:

Lasers do have a relatively low skill floor, but they do at least require some degree of aiming. Lock-ons just require a large red box, and you can point anywhere in that box without having a different effect.

LRMs require aiming as well if you ever want to hit anything. you have to be very aware the terrain and what angles your LRMs are going. and while you have that lock, you have to keep moving and adjusting that angle to keep hitting your target.

[Khobai]

I still maintain that certain weapons need range nerfs (gauss, clan lasers, etc...) and brawling needs to make a comeback. The x2/x3 max range on weapons needs to be reeled in because its allowing weapons to do damage well beyond their battletech ranges... which screws up weapon balance immensely.

brawling would help resurrect LRMs as well since brawling and LRMs complement eachother (brawlers counter ECM with BAP and hold locks for LRM users)

One of the two main reasons why LRMs are in their current state is because brawling has largely gone to the wayside. The other reason is of course ECM being more prolific than ever.

Edited by Khobai, 29 May 2015 - 08:04 PM.

[Kilo 40]

Khobai, on 29 May 2015 - 07:59 PM, said:

brawling would help resurrect LRMs as well since brawling and LRMs complement eachother

they do. unfortunately then you get those "OMG! KILL STEAL!" types.

[Khobai]

Quote

they do. unfortunately then you get those "OMG! KILL STEAL!" types.

well thats another idiotic thing in the game...

everyone who damages a mech should get fractional credit for the kill based on the damage done.

if you do 10% of the damage you get .1 kills. if you do 90% of the damage you get .9 kills.

no more kill stealing.

Edited by Khobai, 29 May 2015 - 08:05 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Kilo 40, on 29 May 2015 - 07:58 PM, said:

LRMs require aiming as well if you ever want to hit anything. you have to be very aware the terrain and what angles your LRMs are going. and while you have that lock, you have to keep moving and adjusting that angle to keep hitting your target.

shhhhh! Stop pulling out facts and logic on people! It's unfair and OP! Why, aiming LRMs is so easy I'm sure they have to be the highest accuracy rate on everyone stats....right?


RIGHT?

[Light-Speed]

I feel like this is what is going on right now:


Someone insults lrm boats in general when actually attacks low skill floor of lrm boats/the skilless lrm boats --> someone who knows good lrm boats defends them;
maybe attacking the laser/ballistic noobs as counterattack --> good or decent laser/ballistic pilots show up and start defending their play style which they felt was degraded unfairly;
insults the noob lrm boats again and generalising that all lrm boats are like that--->
vicious cycle goes on and intensifies.

Also IMO ignorance probably played into a lot of this. yes, I am calling you ignorant. If you are not ignorant about anything, then you are omniscient, which is probably impossible but then I don't know if there is someone omniscient.

1) don't judge the skill ceiling of a weapon by looking at the masses that don't know how to play it well.
a. are you sure YOU figured out the best way how to play it?
b. it is also hard to tell what are they doing without watching exactly what they are doing and learning/figuring out their reasons for doing so and how it is in fact needs skill
c. overall accuracy rates based on player base that consists of a lot of people that doesn't know how to use it does get dragged down quite a bit, yes?
d. never seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exists... I bet there was once a time when you didn't know what ravens are either.
e. basically, I feel like a lot of the people insulting the weapons that other people's play styles involve don't actually know how to play it well. MWO does suck in the way: they don't tell you about a lot of the stuff
2) assessing the tactical situation and positioning yourself are pretty much different skill trees can add on to a person's skill level separately from the skill requirement of the weapon, though they are linked. MWO is NOT just a point and shoot adventure (though some do play it that way and generalize that everyone does it the same way. however, by that line of reasoning, you can say that real combat is a point and shoot adventure as well...)
3) personal comment: all of you come back with over 1000 dmg in a light multiple times and I'll call you really skilled (positioning to catch the enemy unawares, tactical assessment so you know when where and how to go in in a short amount of time, memorizing the map, aiming and holding a laser if you have one while going in high speed/turning around a enemy mech, torso twisting, dodging, anticipating)(not sure if that's all, but that's about it).

p.s. sorry if my 1)2)3) seemed rude but I thought it made the points clearer and easier to read.

Edited by Nightingale27, 29 May 2015 - 08:40 PM.

[CocoaJin]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 May 2015 - 05:10 PM, said:

a point I thought I touched on in my OP.

Neither Laser nor LRMs require much of any skill, when just spammed, as the masses do. But to use either, in a truly effective manner, does take skill. Yet only the laser crowd is recognized as possessing such, when I would contest that it's easier in most cases to control your laser damage than LRMs.

You did, I was just highlighting the difference in skillful grenadier LRMing and the typically despised, unskilled, inexperienced and mis-guided LRM-wannabe field artillery guys.

[xWiredx]

Ragtag soldier, on 29 May 2015 - 06:34 PM, said:

that's a copout though. lasers are literally point and click, while LRMs can be evaded by all sorts of tools that the targeted player doesn't even need to be using themselves. lasers are objectively easier to reliably hit with wimply because there's less things that can go wrong.

For those of you not paying attention, let me enlighten you:

This game, like all other first person shooter games, is a simple point and click interface. That's it. Maybe you have to wait after pointing for a target to lock before you click. Maybe you have to wait until you're X meters away from a target that comes out of cover before you click. Maybe you have to time your click. Maybe you have to lead your click because of lag. You're still just pointing and clicking. The better you time your clicks, and the more accurate your pointing, the more successful you'll be with your weapons.

Obviously staying in cover to avoid others pointing and clicking at you also comes into play, but again, they're just pointing and clicking like you are. It's a cat and mouse game of out-pointing and out-clicking your opponents.

[Serpieri]

Point Click Damage Delivered - can't get any easier than that

[Bishop Steiner]

Serpieri, on 29 May 2015 - 08:39 PM, said:

Point Click Damage Delivered - can't get any easier than that

oh, you mean hitscan weapons, I agree.

[Sergeant Random]

Sergeant Random, on 29 May 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:

Take this situation: 5 vs 5 mechs in a narrow valley. Blue has 5 direct fire mechs, Red has 3 and 2 LRM support. Blue risks shooting through each other but Red's 2 LRM support can indirect fire over their teammates. Who has more situational firepower here?

Bishop Steiner, on 29 May 2015 - 07:52 PM, said:

Why the 5 Direct fire of course. They're so skilled their beams bend around their teammates.......
(wonder why my back armor always seemed to get toasted when I play with self proclaimed High Elo players........)

LRMs reduce the minimum area you need for an attack formation. You don't all need to stand side by side. ECM can be countered by Active Probe or a well timed UAV. (An attack formation can take down 2 to 3 mechs within the UAV time limit.)

Useless? No. Situational? Yes. Powerful? Yes, for people who know how to use them.

Still though, good luck herding pugs.

Edit: (Even then it is sort of exciting to feel out the situation in a PUG game. It feels like gambling - sometimes the stars align and the conditions for a Blue win materialize)

Edited by Sergeant Random, 29 May 2015 - 08:52 PM.

[Kilo 40]

Serpieri, on 29 May 2015 - 08:39 PM, said:

Point Click Damage Delivered - can't get any easier than that

what weapon in the game does that NOT describe?

[Knight Magus]

I would say the direct fire weapons are the easiest to use, followed by damage over time, and lrms are on the bottom.

[Serpieri]

Kilo 40, on 29 May 2015 - 08:48 PM, said:

what weapon in the game does that NOT describe?

That's the Point.

[Thunder Child]

CocoaJin, on 29 May 2015 - 08:33 PM, said:

You did, I was just highlighting the difference in skillful grenadier LRMing and the typically despised, unskilled, inexperienced and mis-guided LRM-wannabe field artillery guys.

The problem is, Field Artillery should also be a viable role. Otherwise, what will the Arrow IV and Longtom (if we ever get them) be classed as..... Unless we get no minimum Range on the Arrow, in which case it becomes the SRM 25.

The real issue is that the Field Artillery players lock themselves into a corner, because Indirect Lurms cannot work without a lock. Hence the need to turn them into a Grenade Launcher style mechanic, to add "skill" back into the mix.

[NovaFury]

Laserboat here, hold locks please.

That said I enjoy lasers, they feel properly sci-fi and come in a wide variety of neons. Personally I am a fan of the blue lasers that wub, and find it unfair that my favorite color of laser is saddled with the strictest fitting requirements.

Also mourn my WVR-6K as the blue laser arm does not wub anymore. I fear it may soon become yellow.

Edited by NovaFury, 29 May 2015 - 09:15 PM.

[Tapdancing Kerensky]

Don't mind me, I'll be in the 5x LRM 10 mech with no TAG, NARC or secondary weapons screaming about people not providing me targets on a map with tons of tall buildings to provide cover.

After all why should I stick my nose out from cover? Someone might bruise my delicate complexion!

[Bishop Steiner]

Thunder Child, on 29 May 2015 - 09:04 PM, said:

The problem is, Field Artillery should also be a viable role. Otherwise, what will the Arrow IV and Longtom (if we ever get them) be classed as..... Unless we get no minimum Range on the Arrow, in which case it becomes the SRM 25.

The real issue is that the Field Artillery players lock themselves into a corner, because Indirect Lurms cannot work without a lock. Hence the need to turn them into a Grenade Launcher style mechanic, to add "skill" back into the mix.

I hope arrows have a massive blast radius. SO some face hugger using it gets a nice backblast for their troubles.

But you better believe I'll have an Arrow IV packing RVN-3L in my Hanger, lol.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 29 May 2015 - 09:18 PM.