82 replies to this topic

[Jman5]

El Bandito, on 09 September 2015 - 02:26 PM, said:

Now do the same against an Atlas.

I'll save him the time. I did it myself

4x LRM 5: 39.3
2x LRM 10: 59.3
1x LRM 20: 1:31.38

This was in a Warhawk B

Later tonight, I'll blow cbills and test whether or not artemis is actually working in testing ground.

Edited by Jman5, 09 September 2015 - 02:44 PM.

[Torric]

You have to do each single test at least 50 times without changing parameters, before you actually can call it "science" and are able to statistically test the results for significance... jsut sayin

[Jman5]

Torric, on 09 September 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

You have to do each single test at least 50 times without changing parameters, before you actually can call it "science" and are able to statistically test the results for significance... jsut sayin

Looks like we found ourselves a volunteer!

[MischiefSC]

I'm game for private match test tonight.

Not a bad thing to test stuff.

[Chaotee]

My experience is totally anecdotal, but your (short) experiment does seem to validate it. I have a SHD-2H with 4 LRM 5's & a SHD-5M with a single LRM 20 mounted. The 2H is one of my most "killy" mechs while the 5M has my worst K/d ratio, and I constantly feel as though I'm running out of ammo on it too soon- which would make sense if it was requiring more shots to bring down a target. There are a lot of other variables, including the 5M having an XL engine to make up for the 20's weight, which in turn makes it significantly more fragile and cuts it's play time down, so I can never say for certain, but even if it stayed on the field longer, I don't think it'd match the DPS of my 2H.

The main advantages to bringing a LRM 20 it seems are that it can put a lot of damage on the target in one shot-- if the shot hits--and the 'clumping' of the volley would make it more effective against AMS defense, but the rate of fire and spread do seem to make it sub par for the cost.

Edited by Chaote, 09 September 2015 - 04:03 PM.

[wanderer]

Multiple LRM 5's will inevitably kill faster than a 10 or a 20 simply because they get more missiles in the air, faster.

They also cluster better, as larger launchers "waste" hits thanks to damage spread.

Fun experiment: Use one of the 'Mechs with insufficient tubes for the launcher and see how many shots it takes to kill vs. something that can spit out the entire launch at once. A Cataphract-2X has a different hit pattern than a Catapult if you fit both with a pair of LRM15's.

[Lyoto Machida]

Unless someone can prove me wrong, there is currently no reason to ever take an LRM 20 in this game.

[Tlords]

There is no reason ever to take an LRM20 over LRM5s, 10s, or 15s. Even with it only taking up one slot, the 15 kills faster and is more weight efficient.

[1453 R]

People. Why are you arguing that the LRM-20 is somehow not unacceptably awful?

The advantage to multiple smaller launchers should be refire rate and greater resistance to being critical'd, not damage spread. I see no reason at all why the larger launchers shouldn't have just as tight a grouping as the bottom-end stuff. Missiles are currently kinda rotten in this game and need to be gigaboated to even halfway work. Tighten spreads down and you can get missiles to work without gigaboating, since the gigaboating is almost strictly to compensate for ridiculous spread values that waste half your munitions.

One ton of missiles fired out of an LRM-20 should be just as dangerous as the same ton of missiles fired out of four LRM-5s. Currently, it's less than half as dangerous. That's horse manure. Make it not be horse manure, and you can suddenly start seeing a lot more use from 'Mechs with singleton missile hardpoints that are currently mostly wastes of space.

[jss78]

So I guess the take-home is that if you have the hardpoints to spare, it always makes sense to bring many small launchers.

I'm running a PNT-8Z "lurmisher", which literally has only two loadout options, either 2xLRM5 or 1xLRM10. The balance is pretty drastically in favour of 2xLRM5: same crit space, 20 % reduction in weight, 13.3 % faster cool-down, and tighter missile clusters reduce kill time even further.

It's counter-intuitive to me that two small ones "should" be better than one big one, so I guess this does suggest a balance issue.

Edited by jss78, 09 September 2015 - 06:37 PM.

[Jman5]

Lyoto Machida, on 09 September 2015 - 05:30 PM, said:

Unless someone can prove me wrong, there is currently no reason to ever take an LRM 20 in this game.

I just spent some time testing various combination with and without artemis. As far as I can tell, a single LRM 15 kills just as quickly as 1 LRM 20. So unless you have some special LRM 20 quirks, I can't see the benefit of wasting tonnage on the 20.

The only untested variables in my mind are the impact of TAG and NARC on the LRM 20 Artemis kill time.

Edited by Jman5, 09 September 2015 - 06:30 PM.

[Lyoto Machida]

Jman5, on 09 September 2015 - 06:29 PM, said:

I just spent some time testing various combination with and without artemis. As far as I can tell, a single LRM 15 kills just as quickly as 1 LRM 20. So unless you have some special LRM 20 quirks, I can't see the benefit of wasting tonnage on the 20.

The only untested variables in my mind are the impact of TAG and NARC on the LRM 20 Artemis kill time.

Yeah...the funny part is I'm leveling a Highlander currently and I did a 20 and 3 10s, just for the max tube count. 3 extra tons with the 15 is nice though.

[Juodas Varnas]

I've been suggesting "normalizing" (using this word, because we all know how much Paul likes to "normalize" things) the spread and cooldowns of different sized LRM launchers for a long time.
There's absolutely no f*cking reason why 2 smaller launchers should outperform 1 bigger launcher in every possible f*cking way, for the same crit, tonnage cost.

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 09 September 2015 - 09:02 PM.

[Madcap72]

LRM5's strength is that it can chain fire like a beast, and you can stagger out that and alpha striking to avoid ghost heat.

That's how I defeat AMZ constantly, by chain firing to get the ams aimed down reducing it's lead on incoming, then a few alphas.

I run a Catapult A1 with 5 LRM5's and even on hot maps can chainfire for a LONG time before over heating.

Also, hit detection registers LRM's a lot better IMHO. I've read it might be due to the same hitreg issues SRM's face.

[ChewBaka]

No. Just no.

A pair of LRMs isn't uncommon on many mechs. However, a multiple LRM loadout is uncommon and even rare, and often requires that the mech sacrifice direct fire weapons as a means of defence.

The last thing this game needs is a LRM15 that is as effective as 3 LRM5s. Once you include Artemis, the trio of LRM5s use more slots and have more tonnage PLUS they the mech has less direct fire slots to utilize. Therefore, the smaller LRM5 does need to be better in some way.

Consider the Catapult C1 vs A1. How would the A1 even still be relevant if the C1's LRM15 is as effective as the 6xLRM5 on the A1? Remember that the C1 has 4 Medium Lasers for close defence. The A1 has no other weapon slots.

[William Mountbank]

Maybe each LRM5 launcher should have it's load aim for a different component on the target mech. That way the larger launchers still suffer from spread, and LRM5s would no longer be the CT seekers they currently are.

[Navid A1]

Large IS LRMs need a boost in general.

However, you need to take one other thing into account. You can not compare 4xLRM5 with 1xLRM20 on every mech. 4xLRM5 requires 4 M hardpoints. Its investing more hardpoint space for 4 separate missile guidance and reload systems, vs investing less space and bringing a couple of backup SRMs.

[Lykaon]

VirtualRiot, on 09 September 2015 - 01:02 PM, said:

Question:
Which set of LRMs is the most effective? Four LRM 5, 2 LRM 10, 1 LRM 20.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypothesis:
Since all sets of LRMs launch 20 missiles, they should be similarly effective by salvo size (ex. 1 salvo of 4 LRM 5 should be as effective as 1 salvo of 1 LRM 20). They will be dis-similar in time to kill as LRM 5 has shorter cooldown.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experiment:
Tested the various combinations on a GRF-2N on Frozen city against the same target @210m. All tests were preformed with Artemis IV FCS. All variables were equal apart from the LRMs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Results:
4x LRM 5: Target destroyed in 14 seconds using 5 volleys.
2x LRM 10: Target destroyed in 20 seconds using 6 volleys
1x LRM 20: Target destroyed in 49 seconds using 11 volleys.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion:
4x LRM 5 displayed ~350% faster kill time vs 1x LRM 20 and 143% faster kill time vs 2x LRM 10.
4x LRM 5 used 2.2 times less ammo to kill that target vs 1x LRM 20 and 1.2 times vs 2x LRM 10.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Thoughts:
LRM 10 and 20 spread should be reduced to have a similar salvo kill time versus LRM 5.

four missile hardpoints or one missile hardpoint this is deciding factor.Not all mechs that can carry LRMs have 4 missile hardpoints for 4 LRM 5s.

Also Artemis has impact on choice.

four LRM5s with artemis is 8 crit slots and 12 tons

One LRM 20 with artemis is 6 crit slots and 11 tons.

Functionality is four LRM5s is essentially a primary weapon loadout consuming 4 hardpoints 12 tons and 8 crits (exluding ammo) This set up works best on faster moving missile support chassis like KTO 18 Kintaros.

The LRM 20 is either a suplimental support weapon (like on a stock AS7 D) or used in two or more launchers for a barrage platform.

Also, QUIRKS!

Take those two LRM10s and put them on a Hunchback 4J and see how fast that Atlas will melt.

[crashlogic]

but compare 4 lrm5's to 3 lrm 15's...
Oh and compare the impact with AMS going, or even better with three mechs together with AMS. And:
Its the slots that matter. In a Jenner Oxide with all those missile ports, lrm 5's might make sense, but in anything heavier you are eating up slots. Maybe in an maddog 6lrm 5;s would be better than two lrm 15's. But three lrm 16's are still, I think better overall.

[Naduk]

You must now test 4x LRM5 vs 4x LRM20
And compare kill times and ratios