82 replies to this topic

[Lily from animove]

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.

No, dude now, because when they do so i just slap 4 lrm 20 on my mdd and kill in 3.5 seconds.

Edited by Lily from animove, 10 September 2015 - 01:47 AM.

[Vellron2005]

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.

I don't know if anyone allready mentioned this, but you should test all the LRM combinations you mentioned agains AMS effectivness..

[Satan n stuff]

Barantor, on 09 September 2015 - 01:35 PM, said:

How many mechs can carry more than one and be able to fire the full set of missiles in one volley?

Stalker, Mauler, Atlas, Awesome, King Crab, Highlander, Battlemaster, Zeus, Victor, Orion, Catapult, Thunderbolt, Jagermech, Timberwolf, Summoner, Hellbringer, Ebon Jaguar, Mad Dog, Gargoyle, Warhawk, Dire Wolf and there's probably a few I missed.

[Yokaiko]

Vellron2005, on 10 September 2015 - 02:00 AM, said:

I don't know if anyone allready mentioned this, but you should test all the LRM combinations you mentioned agains AMS effectivness..

That is going to vary by clan and IS, I'll tell you now dual quirked AMS + Modules basically erases dual C/LEM15

[MechWarrior5152251]

LRM5s have always been the best LRMs... I never use any of the other launchers, though I have not tried Artemis.

[Juodas Varnas]

MechWarrior5152251, on 10 September 2015 - 03:49 AM, said:

LRM5s have always been the best LRMs... I never use any of the other launchers, though I have not tried Artemis.

And don't. Artemis on LRM5s is rarely worth the tonnage, slot investment, because non-artemis LRM5s already have a tighter spread than Artemis LRM10+ (which is like... the dumbest thing ever)

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 10 September 2015 - 03:56 AM.

[Alek Ituin]

Bilbo, on 09 September 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

Do you want to see lurmageddon. That is how you get lurmageddon.

Lurmaggedon was when they went straight up, went hypersonic across the map, and came stright back down. Oh, and they had splash damage that would insta-pop your entire Mech because of reasons.

THAT was Lurmaggedon.

[LordNothing]

its generally better to take arrays of light/medium weapons than their bigger cousins. that way you can exploit their faster cooldowns, smaller tonnage, lower heat, and in case of ammo weapons, more room for ammo.

[Alek Ituin]

LordNothing, on 10 September 2015 - 04:04 AM, said:

its generally better to take arrays of light/medium weapons than their bigger cousins. that way you can exploit their faster cooldowns, smaller tonnage, lower heat, and in case of ammo weapons, more room for ammo.

Untrue for Ballistic weapons. It's actually better to just stick with larger guns instead of stacking smaller guns.

If you've got the tonnage, you generally get higher DPS and range... at the cost of increased heat, ammo expenditure, and damage spreading.

[Kotzi]

Dunno what kind of enemys you have, but mine always tend to break LOS or kill UAV when beeing spotted. So you barely have 2 Salvos. Thus i prefer having the most tubes for that moments. LRM5 only work when you have lock for ages. Might work when your enemy rather runs than fight.

[SgtMagor]

Lrm10 always seemed to work better for me, provide enough punch, good recycle rate, and tonnage.

[Soldier91]

Charlie Pohr, on 09 September 2015 - 11:50 PM, said:

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.

I run two 15's on my C1, and usually one 20 on my A1 both Artemis. They're about honestly about equal.
Funny thread though part of why I was going to get a few kintaros was running multiple smaller lrm's on one because ROF is what tends to get me the best results with LRM's usually can't do that though with most mechs because I run into tonnage problems and one big launcher is better than a bunch of heavier small ones. Is it the trebchute that has a high quirked lrm10 ROF bonus like 40% or something those things are like buzzsaws with a single LRM.

Edited by Soldier91, 10 September 2015 - 06:30 AM.

[0bsidion]

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.

This isn't really surprising. LRM 5s have the least amount of spread and the fastest fire cycling time. I still think LRM 10s are one of the better options when hardpoints are limited, though. AMS will pretty much nullify anything less than 2 LRM 5s when present, so 10s have a better shot at delivering damage.

[Bilbo]

Alek Ituin, on 10 September 2015 - 04:01 AM, said:

Lurmaggedon was when they went straight up, went hypersonic across the map, and came stright back down. Oh, and they had splash damage that would insta-pop your entire Mech because of reasons.

THAT was Lurmaggedon.

There has been more than one. If they were to do what the OP suggests there will be another.

[FrontGuard]

There is no logical or physical reason for this finding.
It is a Flaw in the game!
20 missiles of the same size should do the same damage to a nonmoving target no matter what launcher was used.

This is a classic example of what happens to Logical thought when the powers that be listen to much to the QQ crowd.

[Bilbo]

FrontGuard, on 10 September 2015 - 08:05 AM, said:

There is no logical or physical reason for this finding.
It is a Flaw in the game!
20 missiles of the same size should do the same damage to a nonmoving target no matter what launcher was used.

This is a classic example of what happens to Logical thought when the powers that be listen to much to the QQ crowd.

He didn't list damage. He only tested time to kill.

[Hotthedd]

You could reduce the spread of the larger weapons if you also had LRMs launch in a volley of 5 missiles per....

[Lyoto Machida]

Lykaon, on 10 September 2015 - 12:56 AM, said:

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.

People actually take Artemis on 5s? Always seemed like a waste of tonnage to me, especially since most sane people don't take a single LRM5 (except to draw out AMS locations, suppress and whatnot). I get the faster lock time reasoning but 4 tons for 4 5s could be better diverted to ammo.

[Alek Ituin]

Bilbo, on 10 September 2015 - 07:34 AM, said:

There has been more than one. If they were to do what the OP suggests there will be another.

That was essentially both of them.

What OP suggests would make missiles viable, not start another Lurmaggedon. God forbid more than 1/3rd of the total weapons in the game are competitive/useful.

[Bilbo]

Alek Ituin, on 10 September 2015 - 08:58 AM, said:

That was essentially both of them.

What OP suggests would make missiles viable, not start another Lurmaggedon. God forbid more than 1/3rd of the total weapons in the game are competitive/useful.

If you make a single lrm20 as "useful" as 4 lrm5, it will be well beyond useful in multiples.