248 replies to this topic

[Rushin Roulette]

Novakaine, on 02 March 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:

Really?
So what does it mean are there anything T2-5 comp players?

Im a comp player and T3. Ill also stay T3, purely because I dont play quickplay matches. I play CW and private lobby matches 99,99% of the time (where tier movement is not effected at all). There are of course tier 1 comp players, but that is not what defines what a competitive player at all.

What pwnface wrote is correct. Tiers have absolutely nothing to do with comp or not comp. Competitive (Comp) players just means that players are interested in playing directly against other competitive teams with pre-fixed rules and regulations. This is only directly possible through using private lobbies.

Please also dont confuse CW or group playing in CW as even remotely comp. They are just extended quickplay matches with respawn and other objectives.

A comp player is one who competes in restricted (usually player created) tournaments such as MBO, MRBC, RHOD or similar. Teams are also required to make video evidence of each match in case of any disputes.

Usually these comp matches are also planned days earlier to include loadouts (usually, but not always metamechs depending on strategy), team composition, movement and strategy. Strategies and game play are also rarely similar to any QP matches that happen on the same maps.

Anyone saying that group play or CW is comp is basically just BSing himself and everyone else. Comp players do play QP and CW and they play to win even there, but Im sure none of us would even consider calling that anywhere near the same level as a comp match. I just wanted to clarify this, so that this comp player crap can permanently stay out of the discussion.

[Malachy Karrde]

Rushin Roulette, on 03 March 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

Im a comp player and T3. Ill also stay T3, purely because I dont play quickplay matches. I play CW and private lobby matches 99,99% of the time (where tier movement is not effected at all). There are of course tier 1 comp players, but that is not what defines what a competitive player at all.

What pwnface wrote is correct. Tiers have absolutely nothing to do with comp or not comp. Competitive (Comp) players just means that players are interested in playing directly against other competitive teams with pre-fixed rules and regulations. This is only directly possible through using private lobbies.

Please also dont confuse CW or group playing in CW as even remotely comp. They are just extended quickplay matches with respawn and other objectives.

A comp player is one who competes in restricted (usually player created) tournaments such as MBO, MRBC, RHOD or similar. Teams are also required to make video evidence of each match in case of any disputes.

Usually these comp matches are also planned days earlier to include loadouts (usually, but not always metamechs depending on strategy), team composition, movement and strategy. Strategies and game play are also rarely similar to any QP matches that happen on the same maps.

Anyone saying that group play or CW is comp is basically just BSing himself and everyone else. Comp players do play QP and CW and they play to win even there, but Im sure none of us would even consider calling that anywhere near the same level as a comp match. I just wanted to clarify this, so that this comp player crap can permanently stay out of the discussion.

While I like what you say here for the most part...I do disagree with one thing. All play is competitive. Some people fool themselves into thinking they are more competitive than others. I'd say the people that drop in quick play or cw in random matches are probably better players than those that drop in tightly controlled matches. My reasoning behind this is that those who drop in the solo queue don't have an entire support team behind then and still can excel. And if you take one of those meta try hard players out of their tightly controlled environment and throw them to the wolves, they don't do any better, and usually unless they severely adapt their playstyle, they do a lot worse. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. I used to play like you do...so called competitvely. It was so cookie cutter and elitist that I got bored and angry and stopped unless I really wanted to stomp some try hard that annoyed me. I occasionally still play so called competitively, but ya know what? It feels good to carry your whole team and actually make a difference in a fight rather than follow some boring meta rule set and fight the same cookie cutter fight over and over again. When you control everyone's loadouts, the map, and therefore how the fight goes down, of course some things end up working better. In a free for all at any tier (tier means nothing by the way, I totally agree with you there. The ones who scream tier 1 the loudest are for the most part, pretty lame) following meta is not only stupid but you limit your options considerably. Oh you might get a kill or two, but when you don't have 12 guys following script, you will find yourself at a disadvantage. Meta try hard players simply don't have the ability to go off script and adapt to a constantly changing situation. When the only so called opposition is carrying the same weapons, using the same mechs, and doing the same things you are, it comes down to calculations and numbers, not personal skill. The only skill involved in "competitive" matches is the ability to follow a cookie cutter build and focus fire. Take any of those guys away from their tightly controlled environment and not a single one of them is better than a good solo queue player. And most are considerably worse in my experience.

Now to the guy who fought a so called comp match against an lrm team and won... congratulations? The nature of simulated combat is that there will always be winners and losers. For every example you can bring about meta being better, I can show you one where a lrm equipped team has stomped laser vomit try hards. They key to effective play is to have variety that knows how to work together. You don't want 11 lrm mech and a spotter, you want 2 or 3 and the rest brawlers. I've done that exact same match you touted with a balanced team against a meta team on LRM unfriendly maps and beat the snot out of the meta crew. In so called competitive play, he who gets the most fire focused first wins. You can do that with any weapon system or group of them in game. The key to winning with lrms is to get the other guy to expose himself and then pound the snot out of him as he approaches. Then have enough brawler mech to clean up the pieces. Lrm usage requires tactics instead of point and shoot.

I think what would be best for these forums and the game in general would be for the meta so called "competitive" crowd to stop trying to force their play down the throats of the majority of the community. If something works for you, fine use it. But shut the hell up about it when you end up in solo queue and on the forums and someone is doing it different than you. Awhile back The Atlas Overlord pretty much proved that lrms can be supremely effective on an atlas in tier 1. Back then people were saying that they were useless in tier 1, now I see tier 1 players carrying a rack or two. If you don't like it, don't use it. But stay out of other people's affairs.

Edited by Malachy Karrde, 03 March 2016 - 05:51 AM.

[TKSax]

Malachy Karrde, on 03 March 2016 - 05:36 AM, said:

While I like what you say here for the most part...I do disagree with one thing. All play is competitive. Some people fool themselves into thinking they are more competitive than others. I'd say the people that drop in quick play or cw in random matches are probably better players than those that drop in tightly controlled matches. My reasoning behind this is that those who drop in the solo queue don't have an entire support team behind then and still can excel. And if you take one of those meta try hard players out of their tightly controlled environment and throw them to the wolves, they don't do any better, and usually unless they severely adapt their playstyle, they do a lot worse. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. I used to play like you do...so called competitvely. It was so cookie cutter and elitist that I got bored and angry and stopped unless I really wanted to stomp some try hard that annoyed me. I occasionally still play so called competitively, but ya know what? It feels good to carry your whole team and actually make a difference in a fight rather than follow some boring meta rule set and fight the same cookie cutter fight over and over again. When you control everyone's loadouts, the map, and therefore how the fight goes down, of course some things end up working better. In a free for all at any tier (tier means nothing by the way, I totally agree with you there. The ones who scream tier 1 the loudest are for the most part, pretty lame) following meta is not only stupid but you limit your options considerably. Oh you might get a kill or two, but when you don't have 12 guys following script, you will find yourself at a disadvantage. Meta try hard players simply don't have the ability to go off script and adapt to a constantly changing situation. When the only so called opposition is carrying the same weapons, using the same mechs, and doing the same things you are, it comes down to calculations and numbers, not personal skill. The only skill involved in "competitive" matches is the ability to follow a cookie cutter build and focus fire. Take any of those guys away from their tightly controlled environment and not a single one of them is better than the a good solo queue player. And most are considerably worse in my experience.

He was defining what a Comp player was, that is some one plays in leagues. It does not mean the other modes are not competitive, but if all you do is play quick play group play and CW, you should not consider yourself a comp player. The rest of what you said is not even a good descriptive of the comp players I have played with. You must have not been around enough good comp players. Yes there are some that fit the description you mentioned, but those are the vast minority of comp players that I know.

[Malachy Karrde]

TKSax, on 03 March 2016 - 05:44 AM, said:

He was defining what a Comp player was, that is some one plays in leagues. It does not mean the other modes are not competitive, but if all you do is play quick play group play and CW, you should not consider yourself a comp player. The rest of what you said is not even a good descriptive of the comp players I have played with. You must have not been around enough good comp players. Yes there are some that fit the description you mentioned, but those are the vast minority of comp players that I know.

everyone has had different experiences. I've been playing for a long time, I've probably played with and against the majority of people here on these forums at one time or another, I've an inner sphere account too btw. My experiences may be different, I can only relay what I have directly experienced and that is all anyone can do. The meta try hard group left a bad taste in my mouth, the ones I was with and pretty much everyone we fought against fit the description I posted above. It got really boring. After about 5 months, I went back to the solo queue. Occasionally I pick up a team of really good solo players and hop back into the competitive scene and ya know what? We don't fare any worse than a complete meta team.

[Rushin Roulette]

Yup. I agree with you fully there. It takes a lot to adapt from league play to PUG play.

Tactics are different (no lets derp to the middle of the map and slug it out), loadouts are different (metamechs are not required for league play), want to bring LURMs into a league match? It has been done, but dont count on having much success past the first surprise effect or round. Loadouts are quite often tailor made depending on who your opponent is going to be and what you are planning on using as your tactics, so metamechs is pretty much useless in that setting (either that or it was those guys who probably made the 5 star meta build in the first place).

Another thing which you quite often see comp players doing that ends badly for them... announcing and leading pushes in PUG play. This is never a good idea, because PUGs being PUGs are quite often too scared to actually join a push adn just end up peeking, eating a small amount of damage and immediately reversing. Compl players will pull this push through, no matter what. In comp matches, a few seconds hesitation is enough to doom that entire round within the next 30 seconds . If a push is ordered, then every one will do just this, no questions asked and no arguments as to who goes first and "OMG, the enemy could shoot at me" whining.

I still say players who take the QP/CW games as comp are just BSing themselves.

Id compare it with team sports.

• You have your random games on a grass field where you have 4 shirts on the ground acting as goal posts during your lunch break (solo quick play)
  
• You have a game where friends come together to kick the ball around between 2 groups on a proper field (Group quick play)
  
• You have the opportunity to join a local football team during their training where you experience some tactics, while not being part of the team yourself (solo CW)
  
• You are part of the local football team and play against other local football teams (Group CW)
  
• You are part of a team competing in a country wide amateur league (competitive league play in MWO)
  
• Professional football player competing in leagues for money as a full time job (non-existent in MWO as far as I can tell, but these would be the big E-Sport names for games like FIFA, COD, SC etc. who can live by just their sponsor and prize winnings)

You can be competitive in the sense that you want to win individual random games. but in the end it is still random games against random opponents, no advanced planning, no really coordinated long term team wide strategy past the next summary or after death screen.

EDIT: That try hard group you keep on mentioning is probably not a really comp player to be honest. Most I know are really relaxed when it comes down to QP and CW. Yes they do want to win, but in the end most just do it to level mechs or to get Cbills for the next round of Private matches where we earn 0,00 Cbills every time and still pay fully for every consumable we use (hint hint PGI. maybe this could be changed ).

Those tryhards are quite honestly probably from the friends kicking around the ball or the tryouts for the lcal team variant from above, who read up and watch good games and automatically expect everyone to revere them as the next best thing since sliced bread and that they will be in professional Football(E-Sport) as soon as this is available for MWO. They may play good and consistently play well in QP/CW, but wihout a team to play with, a good team tactician and most importantly absolutely high level of discipline to follow leads or confidently order tactics, they will never even reach the local football team level.

Edited by Rushin Roulette, 03 March 2016 - 06:21 AM.

[GreenHell]

I think we should just post accuracy % stats instead and then average them once we get a decent number of people. I'll start by posting LRM's, and then some laser stats, and some ballistic stats too. I will be the first to admit, I do NOT have good aim.

Weapon - Accuracy %
LRM5 ----27.65% - 28.38% with art
LRM10---30.87% - 31.23% with art
LRM15---23.23% - 33.5% with art

MedLas--83.91%
LrgLas --82.97%
LrgPuls--82.53%

Ultra5 ---49.98%
Gauss --66.24%
AC/20 --61.82%

[Lily from animove]

Malachy Karrde, on 03 March 2016 - 05:36 AM, said:

While I like what you say here for the most part...I do disagree with one thing. All play is competitive. Some people fool themselves into thinking they are more competitive than others. I'd say the people that drop in quick play or cw in random matches are probably better players than those that drop in tightly controlled matches. My reasoning behind this is that those who drop in the solo queue don't have an entire support team behind then and still can excel. And if you take one of those meta try hard players out of their tightly controlled environment and throw them to the wolves, they don't do any better, and usually unless they severely adapt their playstyle, they do a lot worse. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. I used to play like you do...so called competitvely. It was so cookie cutter and elitist that I got bored and angry and stopped unless I really wanted to stomp some try hard that annoyed me. I occasionally still play so called competitively, but ya know what? It feels good to carry your whole team and actually make a difference in a fight rather than follow some boring meta rule set and fight the same cookie cutter fight over and over again. When you control everyone's loadouts, the map, and therefore how the fight goes down, of course some things end up working better. In a free for all at any tier (tier means nothing by the way, I totally agree with you there. The ones who scream tier 1 the loudest are for the most part, pretty lame) following meta is not only stupid but you limit your options considerably. Oh you might get a kill or two, but when you don't have 12 guys following script, you will find yourself at a disadvantage. Meta try hard players simply don't have the ability to go off script and adapt to a constantly changing situation. When the only so called opposition is carrying the same weapons, using the same mechs, and doing the same things you are, it comes down to calculations and numbers, not personal skill. The only skill involved in "competitive" matches is the ability to follow a cookie cutter build and focus fire. Take any of those guys away from their tightly controlled environment and not a single one of them is better than a good solo queue player. And most are considerably worse in my experience.

Now to the guy who fought a so called comp match against an lrm team and won... congratulations? The nature of simulated combat is that there will always be winners and losers. For every example you can bring about meta being better, I can show you one where a lrm equipped team has stomped laser vomit try hards. They key to effective play is to have variety that knows how to work together. You don't want 11 lrm mech and a spotter, you want 2 or 3 and the rest brawlers. I've done that exact same match you touted with a balanced team against a meta team on LRM unfriendly maps and beat the snot out of the meta crew. In so called competitive play, he who gets the most fire focused first wins. You can do that with any weapon system or group of them in game. The key to winning with lrms is to get the other guy to expose himself and then pound the snot out of him as he approaches. Then have enough brawler mech to clean up the pieces. Lrm usage requires tactics instead of point and shoot.

I think what would be best for these forums and the game in general would be for the meta so called "competitive" crowd to stop trying to force their play down the throats of the majority of the community. If something works for you, fine use it. But shut the hell up about it when you end up in solo queue and on the forums and someone is doing it different than you. Awhile back The Atlas Overlord pretty much proved that lrms can be supremely effective on an atlas in tier 1. Back then people were saying that they were useless in tier 1, now I see tier 1 players carrying a rack or two. If you don't like it, don't use it. But stay out of other people's affairs.

yeah of cours ebasically all is "competitiion" but that si nto what describes a competitive player.
A competitive palyer is oen that wants to win and tries to achieve the win by doing and using the best with what is available.
using bad loadouts on purpose or bringing bad loadouts becauseyou ahrdly know how the game works is not truly "competitive" as by what competitive gaming requires. It's just "kinda playing against each other"

[TKSax]

Malachy Karrde, on 03 March 2016 - 06:00 AM, said:

everyone has had different experiences. I've been playing for a long time, I've probably played with and against the majority of people here on these forums at one time or another, I've an inner sphere account too btw. My experiences may be different, I can only relay what I have directly experienced and that is all anyone can do. The meta try hard group left a bad taste in my mouth, the ones I was with and pretty much everyone we fought against fit the description I posted above. It got really boring. After about 5 months, I went back to the solo queue. Occasionally I pick up a team of really good solo players and hop back into the competitive scene and ya know what? We don't fare any worse than a complete meta team.

Picking up solo players and hopping back into the competitive scene in what way, did you play MRBC, Run Hot or Die Leagues? If not, you can't not say I hopped back into the "competitive" scene. There are hardly any of the Comp Scene players who post here on the forums at all so I would not judge the "Comp" player but the forums. You get a bunch of solo you know on Teamspeak form a group drop group que and you can do pretty well, but that is not the competitive scene. Sure it is competitive, but you are not even close to dealing with what a real competitive match is like in something like Marik Civil War, Run hot or Die or MRBC. I have only played a few and don't really consider myself a "Comp" player even if I do set out to every match, nothing gets my HeartRate and Excitement going like a true Competitive match, which 99% can only be found in player run league mentioned above.

[SQW]

GreenHell, on 03 March 2016 - 06:33 AM, said:

I think we should just post accuracy % stats instead and then average them once we get a decent number of people. I'll start by posting LRM's, and then some laser stats, and some ballistic stats too. I will be the first to admit, I do NOT have good aim.

Weapon - Accuracy %
LRM5 ----27.65% - 28.38% with art
LRM10---30.87% - 31.23% with art
LRM15---23.23% - 33.5% with art

Your accuracy figure is misleading since you are usually firing LRM at indirect targets for a chance hit. If you fire your lasers at a target that's blocked by the hill as often as you do with LRM, your laser accuracy would look a LOT worse to.

My HBK-4J runs 2 LRM10s with Artemis, a tag laser and 5 SLs. At 750m, if I can see you, my LRM accuracy is almost 100% which means I can pump out 20 dmg at you every 2 sec while being heat neutural. How many 50ton mechs can trade like this? Especially on a hot map.

[sycocys]

SQW, on 03 March 2016 - 07:06 AM, said:

Your accuracy figure is misleading since you are usually firing LRM at indirect targets for a chance hit. If you fire your lasers at a target that's blocked by the hill as often as you do with LRM, your laser accuracy would look a LOT worse to.

My HBK-4J runs 2 LRM10s with Artemis, a tag laser and 5 SLs. At 750m, if I can see you, my LRM accuracy is almost 100% which means I can pump out 20 dmg at you every 2 sec while being heat neutural. How many 50ton mechs can trade like this? Especially on a hot map.

My 4SP with 5 ML and 2 SRM4's can actually drop mechs because I can put that damage on location, and I'll be inside my 300m range before your first missiles hit.

Edited by sycocys, 03 March 2016 - 07:20 AM.

[pattonesque]

Zoid, on 02 March 2016 - 06:46 PM, said:

LRMs are a support weapon. I don't get all the hate. If used as a support weapon they are great. If used as a primary weapon they aren't. It's as simple as that.

You can either have a 'mech built with a rack or two to supplement your other guns or have a couple 'mechs on your team that are pure LRM boats. In a brawl, four brawlers with 2 LRM supports beats 6 brawlers most of the time.

uhhhhh

more likely what happens is that three wounded brawlers descend upon two fresh LRM 'mechs and destroy them

[SQW]

sycocys, on 03 March 2016 - 07:11 AM, said:

My 4SP with 5 ML and 2 SRM4's can actually drop mechs because I can put that damage on location, and I'll be inside my 300m range before your first missiles hit.

And just how often do you see a 50 ton mech charge into the enemy line to within 300m...and live?

In order for your build to work, you'll do your best not to expose yourself to long range fire. In order for mine to work, I'll be keeping my targets at 500-750m. If either us fail in those endeavors, we'd be dead regardless what weapons we use.

[InspectorG]

pattonesque, on 02 March 2016 - 06:13 PM, said:

LRMs are terrible at both stopping and supporting pushes

But, but, they have math!

[InspectorG]

pattonesque, on 03 March 2016 - 07:13 AM, said:

uhhhhh

more likely what happens is that three wounded brawlers descend upon two fresh LRM 'mechs and destroy them

Yeah and the LRM boats so graciously shared their armor up on the front and can focus down the damaged components of the remaining brawlers...yeah, sure, ok...

Sadly, 'support' in MWO is focused fire. Beams or dakka, SRMs up close. LRMs just have no place.

[mogs01gt]

GreenHell, on 03 March 2016 - 06:33 AM, said:

I think we should just post accuracy % stats instead and then average them once we get a decent number of people. I'll start by posting LRM's, and then some laser stats, and some ballistic stats too. I will be the first to admit, I do NOT have good aim.

Weapon - Accuracy %
LRM5 ----27.65% - 28.38% with art
LRM10---30.87% - 31.23% with art
LRM15---23.23% - 33.5% with art

MedLas--83.91%
LrgLas --82.97%
LrgPuls--82.53%

Ultra5 ---49.98%
Gauss --66.24%
AC/20 --61.82%

Step up your LRM game son!
LRM5 42%
LRM10 43%
LRM15 40%
CLRM10 52%
CLRM15 45%

lol my lasers are **** since I free fire at random and blind fire all the time

Ultra5 ---70%
Gauss --71%
AC/20 --72%

Edited by mogs01gt, 03 March 2016 - 08:38 AM.

[Meathook]

What's with all the fighting about LRMs? Looks like some need to grasp, that Quickplay is just Quickplay. No need to be hard on anyone. Now the "LRMs are terribad"-guys need to learn to form teams, stop playing with that one "LRMs are best"-guy and have fun without bitching at others for using LRMs. The "LRMs are best"-guys need to accept that there are people, that do not agree on your playstyle and don't want to team up with you. This is fine, each to his own. So either go Quickplay, or play with people that share your mindset/ don't mind having LRM-boats in their team. Stop trying to lecture others that "LRMs are best", this will just start raging from all directions.

[mogs01gt]

Meathook, on 03 March 2016 - 08:35 AM, said:

What's with all the fighting about LRMs? Looks like some need to grasp, that Quickplay is just Quickplay. No need to be hard on anyone. Now the "LRMs are terribad"-guys need to learn to form teams, stop playing with that one "LRMs are best"-guy and have fun without bitching at others for using LRMs. The "LRMs are best"-guys need to accept that there are people, that do not agree on your playstyle and don't want to team up with you. This is fine, each to his own. So either go Quickplay, or play with people that share your mindset/ don't mind having LRM-boats in their team. Stop trying to lecture others that "LRMs are best", this will just start raging from all directions.

Last time I checked, quickplay is directly linked to our PSR... So yeah its hard mode...

[Novakaine]

I consider myself a competitive player.
I always play to win.

[Malachy Karrde]

GreenHell, on 03 March 2016 - 06:33 AM, said:

I think we should just post accuracy % stats instead and then average them once we get a decent number of people. I'll start by posting LRM's, and then some laser stats, and some ballistic stats too. I will be the first to admit, I do NOT have good aim.

Weapon - Accuracy %
LRM5 ----27.65% - 28.38% with art
LRM10---30.87% - 31.23% with art
LRM15---23.23% - 33.5% with art

MedLas--83.91%
LrgLas --82.97%
LrgPuls--82.53%

Ultra5 ---49.98%
Gauss --66.24%
AC/20 --61.82%

I don't use artemis...for the tonnage it takes it doesn't provide enough of a boost to accuracy.

CLrm5: 66.2%
CLrm 10: 49.6%
CLrm 15: 39.1%
CLrm20: 33.7%

Uac 20: 49.3%
Uac 10: 59.4%
Uac 5: 76.7%

Cer small laser: 72.8%
Cer medium laser: 44.2%
Cer large laser: 49.1 %
Cmpls: 70.1%
Clpls: 59.0 %
Csmpls: 68.4%

I never really paid attention to these numbers before to be honest. These are the weapons I use most on my mechs. I can see my dire wolf has skewed them a bit because I use Lrm 10, small lasers, and Uac 5s on it and I play that the most.

Oddly enough my accuracy with lrms isn't much worse than directed fire weapons. These numers are based on 12,174 kills and 12,941 deaths to give you an idea of the scope of the data. I died a lot when I was a noob sue me lol.

I firmly believe the value and efficiency of a weapon is based on player skill. Every weapon has raw material, every player does not have the skill to use it. Like I said, everyone can come up with scenarios and others can counter them. I know what works for me, and I have experienced pretty much anything this game has to offer and all types of play. The navy seals of the comp teams are no more terrifying to face than the army rangers of the solo and cw queues. You win by taking down the enemy. How you do that is less important than doing it. If something works for you, use it until it doesnt. For me, I'm not going to cut off my nose to spite my face and leave the only indirect weapon in my arsenal home just because some forum snobs and fewer in game snobs don't like it. If it causes me to lose more than acceptable matches, I'll re evaluate. But for now and the last few months, having a few racks of lrms has definitely not hurt my kill count.

Edited by Malachy Karrde, 03 March 2016 - 09:59 AM.

[sycocys]

SQW, on 03 March 2016 - 07:55 AM, said:

And just how often do you see a 50 ton mech charge into the enemy line to within 300m...and live?

In order for your build to work, you'll do your best not to expose yourself to long range fire. In order for mine to work, I'll be keeping my targets at 500-750m. If either us fail in those endeavors, we'd be dead regardless what weapons we use.

Quite often. Brawling the enemy isn't as scary as the turtle ball would make you think it is.

But in the case of dealing with LRMs, 99% of the time they aren't with the team or near enough for it to matter once I push. Especially the guys that want to fire off from 750m, they aren't going to be anywhere close enough their team can save them, and even if they have 1-2 for support I'm already close enough that I can completely ignore the LRMs and deal with their friends first - min range makes your mech completely useless. XD