119 replies to this topic

[LordSkyKnight]

Sandpit, on 04 March 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

again, just going to be a disagreement of opinions.
same as players who claim "meta is best" and such

That's the thing though, the "people" who claim that typically have math and results to back up their statements. You can say "oh difference of opinion" all you want, but in the end the weapon system is objectively worse than most other options right now, and as such could use a buff. Until then they'll continue to be a poor option if you're looking to give yourself the best chance of winning. Finding the strongest and weakest strategies or tools in any game is really not an "opinion" thing.

[Sader325]

Tyler Valentine, on 04 March 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

Sure are changing your tune now that everyone pointed out you sounded like an a55hat.

Not a good look Sader.

Excuse me?

[Bishop Steiner]

LordSkyKnight, on 04 March 2016 - 02:15 PM, said:

People lose their cool sometimes, especially when they're losing. And not all top tier players are angels.

I am, of course 0:)

True, and with Competitive people, probably more than most, because of competitive nature. Shame the concept of sportsmanship is dying in sports in general, and really never caught on in Esports, thanks to the cloak of anonymity.


IDK, makes me more glad I walked away from the more competitive side of gaming ages ago (not that I would be able to keep up anymore anyhow, lol). I have enough stuff IRL to get salty over. I kinda prefer to minimize it in my recreation.

Different strokes, and what not.

[Tyler Valentine]

Sader325, on 04 March 2016 - 02:35 PM, said:

Excuse me?

That was confusing?

[LordSkyKnight]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 March 2016 - 02:37 PM, said:

True, and with Competitive people, probably more than most, because of competitive nature. Shame the concept of sportsmanship is dying in sports in general, and really never caught on in Esports, thanks to the cloak of anonymity.

Agreed. It's part of the reason I like my current team so much, they're generally pleasant people to be around, and we try to be as sportsmanlike as possible. Don't get me wrong, tempers can still flair, especially when we're playing poorly, but we try not to take it out on anyone else.

But yeah I can't play a game without trying to optimize my play. I'm just not wired to play casual.

[Wintersdark]

LordSkyKnight, on 04 March 2016 - 02:26 PM, said:

That's the thing though, the "people" who claim that typically have math and results to back up their statements. You can say "oh difference of opinion" all you want, but in the end the weapon system is objectively worse than most other options right now, and as such could use a buff. Until then they'll continue to be a poor option if you're looking to give yourself the best chance of winning. Finding the strongest and weakest strategies or tools in any game is really not an "opinion" thing.

Perhaps, but dishing out the salt when you're losing to someone using said sub par weapons isn't exactly a sterling example of sportsmanship.

I don't think you'll find anyone in this thread arguing LRM's are fantastic weapons that couldn't use a buff.

But what there ARE is players arguing that - particularly in the solo queue, which this thread is about - LRM's are entirely a viable weapon system, if not the optimal one.

(please note the difference between viable and optimal)

That LRM's can be used successfully at higher level play is an improvement over where they've been for a long time. A focus on larger maps is definitely responsible for this, among other things. But yes, LRM's are still usually inferior.

But that doesn't mean they cannot be used effectively. Just that it's harder to use them effectively. Maybe something else would have been a "better" choice, but if you make what you have work, that's good enough for me.

[habu86]

LordSkyKnight, on 04 March 2016 - 02:26 PM, said:

Finding the strongest and weakest strategies or tools in any game is really not an "opinion" thing.

Yep and here's the thing. Ultimately, it's impossible to predict with 100% accuracy how each match is going to go. Is the MG Locust about to have the match of its career? Maybe the gal driving the dakka Dire took all the rolls she could tolerate for the night and is about to go Death Star on the red team. Will the god-tier comp player driving the laser vomit metamech get a little carried away, override early, and RNG headshot himself with heat damage in an otherwise untouched mech?

But, in the long run, meta loadouts will work better for more players than non-meta stuff and that's why, when playing to win, top comp teams will go with what they've identified as the meta for each map. "Trick plays" can work, but they're a gamble and most folks are inherently risk-averse so they'll go with whatever gives them the best chance to win.

When dropping solo queue however? Bring whatever your heart desires. You're supposed to be out having fun in big stompy robots. No one's gonna crown you king or queen of solo queue any time soon. Just understand how your odds of doing well change as a result.

Edited by habu86, 04 March 2016 - 02:53 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

LordSkyKnight, on 04 March 2016 - 02:42 PM, said:

Agreed. It's part of the reason I like my current team so much, they're generally pleasant people to be around, and we try to be as sportsmanlike as possible. Don't get me wrong, tempers can still flair, especially when we're playing poorly, but we try not to take it out on anyone else.

But yeah I can't play a game without trying to optimize my play. I'm just not wired to play casual.

Don't get me wrong, I like to optimize, but the lore and fluff matter to me, too.

Could you imagine playing a Star Wars game, and all the Jedi use blasters, because of the Meta instead of Lightsabers? It may be more "optimal" but it ceased being Star Wars.

I just try to do as well as I can, with my own physical limitations and gear issues, while trying to maintain SOME feel of immersion into the game franchise I have played for 30 years.

Warhammers without PPC arms, aren't warhammers, for instance. So if I intend to run vanilla vomit, why not use a chassis like the Hopper or BK that was built around that to begin with, etc?

It's why I prefer to see quirks that enhance the flavor of what role a mech traditionally was supposed to fill, and don't liek seeing things all tailored to one large androgynous meta...especially since metas shift.

I mean to me, why play a Mechwarrior game, if the Mechs in it resemble Mechwarrior Mechs in name only? I can play Titanfall or other stuff for generic mech shooter action.

Mind you, I'm not saying "my way is the right way", but it's what tempers my desire to optimize.

[Sader325]

Tyler Valentine, on 04 March 2016 - 02:38 PM, said:

That was confusing?

My "tune" has not changed, the way pugs use LRMS is ****. The only reason they can get away with it is because they're fighting equally bad people. Sticking non-artemis LRMS on your mech with one or two medium lasers and having marginal success every now and then does not a good weapon system make.

The only thing that video showcased was some bad mechs having a good game, that same exact setup would have failed miserably on almost any other map.

The problem is people who do this then end up on my team when we are somewhere like mining collective, HPG, Viridian bog, and any number of other maps.

The fact is this team got lucky once, in nearly all cases where this has happened it has ended in FAILURE for the team that is LRM heavy. What was amusing about this particular incident is that it for ONCE was succesfull and that is what made this instance unique and by extension extremely funny.

I argue for PROPER use of LRMs, as far as I'm concerned there is only two ways to use LRMs.

Option A. 3 LRM 5 with Artemis, fired together not chain fired will lead to the same damage output as most LRM 20,40, and 60 boats that do not run artemis.

Option B.The "All in" approach. This is where you take it to the extreme. 4x LRM 15 artemis. No tag. No narc. minimal armor. 3000+ missiles played aggressively at mid range.

I have 4 Mechs that are set up for option A. a TBR, MDD, EBJ, and a KGC.

I have 2 mechs that are set up for option B. TBR (3000 missiles) and MDD ( 2600 missiles).

Option A. makes you extremely effective on every map.

Option B. Is the brute force method, taking LRMS to the extreme to combat the fact that they are ineffective by making them impossible to ignore.

People who stick LRM 40 or 30 on there mech with a smattering of "backup" weapons are a complete waste of a mech as far as I'm concerned, most people do this and fail horribly when they do so. This game was the one time out of many, players like this finally had some success. Mostly because I was more interested in laughing and watching it happen instead of dealing with them properly mostly because i wasn't interested in Pug Commanding to win a solo queue match.

I care very little about winning or losing in solo queue, anyone who watches my stream can tell you this.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 March 2016 - 02:52 PM, said:

Warhammers without PPC arms, aren't warhammers, for instance.

No complaints about Griffins being SRM boats instead of being the Vindicator's more mobile big brother? I am disappoint

[LordSkyKnight]

Wintersdark, on 04 March 2016 - 02:48 PM, said:

Perhaps, but dishing out the salt when you're losing to someone using said sub par weapons isn't exactly a sterling example of sportsmanship.

I don't think you'll find anyone in this thread arguing LRM's are fantastic weapons that couldn't use a buff.

But what there ARE is players arguing that - particularly in the solo queue, which this thread is about - LRM's are entirely a viable weapon system, if not the optimal one.

(please note the difference between viable and optimal)

That LRM's can be used successfully at higher level play is an improvement over where they've been for a long time. A focus on larger maps is definitely responsible for this, among other things. But yes, LRM's are still usually inferior.

But that doesn't mean they cannot be used effectively. Just that it's harder to use them effectively. Maybe something else would have been a "better" choice, but if you make what you have work, that's good enough for me.

I'm not trying to defend him or excuse his salt, but people get upset when they lose. It just makes winning all the sweeter.

And yes, they're a viable way to damage an opponent. However, at the highest levels of play (which we're not talking about, i know), I'd argue that they are pretty close to nonviable, if you take viable to mean "capable of winning you the game." They're that badly outclassed. They need a buff badly, but PGI is as likely to overbuff it as make it playable at the highest level.

[LordSkyKnight]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 March 2016 - 02:52 PM, said:

Don't get me wrong, I like to optimize, but the lore and fluff matter to me, too.

Could you imagine playing a Star Wars game, and all the Jedi use blasters, because of the Meta instead of Lightsabers? It may be more "optimal" but it ceased being Star Wars.

I just try to do as well as I can, with my own physical limitations and gear issues, while trying to maintain SOME feel of immersion into the game franchise I have played for 30 years.

Warhammers without PPC arms, aren't warhammers, for instance. So if I intend to run vanilla vomit, why not use a chassis like the Hopper or BK that was built around that to begin with, etc?

It's why I prefer to see quirks that enhance the flavor of what role a mech traditionally was supposed to fill, and don't liek seeing things all tailored to one large androgynous meta...especially since metas shift.

I mean to me, why play a Mechwarrior game, if the Mechs in it resemble Mechwarrior Mechs in name only? I can play Titanfall or other stuff for generic mech shooter action.

Mind you, I'm not saying "my way is the right way", but it's what tempers my desire to optimize.

Hard to imagine a star wars game where lightsabers aren't stupid OP. But if they weren't I'd probably play a blaster wielding force user. Maybe that makes me a bad person. IDK. I just like to win.

Also I've never played a mechwarrior game before this one. I fell in love with this one partially because of the HUGE amount of build freedom there is. I love playing legomech, and I really dislike the idea of losing the fun of making the huge amount of different builds just for the sake of sticking to the rules of a tabletop game I've never played.

[Tyler Valentine]

Sader325, on 04 March 2016 - 02:52 PM, said:

My "tune" has not changed, the way pugs use LRMS is ****. The only reason they can get away with it is because they're fighting equally bad people. Sticking non-artemis LRMS on your mech with one or two medium lasers and having marginal success every now and then does not a good weapon system make.

The only thing that video showcased was some bad mechs having a good game, that same exact setup would have failed miserably on almost any other map.

The problem is people who do this then end up on my team when we are somewhere like mining collective, HPG, Viridian bog, and any number of other maps.

The fact is this team got lucky once, in nearly all cases where this has happened it has ended in FAILURE for the team that is LRM heavy. What was amusing about this particular incident is that it for ONCE was succesfull and that is what made this instance unique and by extension extremely funny.

I argue for PROPER use of LRMs, as far as I'm concerned there is only two ways to use LRMs.

Option A. 3 LRM 5 with Artemis, fired together not chain fired will lead to the same damage output as most LRM 20,40, and 60 boats that do not run artemis.

Option B.The "All in" approach. This is where you take it to the extreme. 4x LRM 15 artemis. No tag. No narc. minimal armor. 3000+ missiles played aggressively at mid range.

I have 4 Mechs that are set up for option A. a TBR, MDD, EBJ, and a KGC.

I have 2 mechs that are set up for option B. TBR (3000 missiles) and MDD ( 2600 missiles).

Option A. makes you extremely effective on every map.

Option B. Is the brute force method, taking LRMS to the extreme to combat the fact that they are ineffective by making them impossible to ignore.

People who stick LRM 40 or 30 on there mech with a smattering of "backup" weapons are a complete waste of a mech as far as I'm concerned, most people do this and fail horribly when they do so. This game was the one time out of many, players like this finally had some success. Mostly because I was more interested in laughing and watching it happen instead of dealing with them properly mostly because i wasn't interested in Pug Commanding to win a solo queue match.

I care very little about winning or losing in solo queue, anyone who watches my stream can tell you this.

I subscribe to your youtube page (1 of 16!) and watch your stream all the time. I really enjoy your content.

That said, you come across as almost unbelievably elitist and out of touch in this post.

You lost to a team that had a bunch of LRMs. It happens, more than once every 500 games, on maps other than PH and in all of the tiers, even 1.

Once many posters pointed that out, you started to say you had nothing against LRMs, even though prior posts, comments during your streams, and your OP would lead everyone to believe otherwise.

I'm sorry for the name calling but it's disappointing when a popular member of -MS-, a group that I respect and drop with whenever possible but gets a bad rap in the community, makes a post like this.

[Sader325]

Tyler Valentine, on 04 March 2016 - 03:03 PM, said:

I subscribe to your youtube page (1 of 16!) and watch your stream all the time. I really enjoy your content.

That said, you come across as almost unbelievably elitist and out of touch in this post.

You lost to a team that had a bunch of LRMs. It happens, more than once every 500 games, on maps other than PH and in all of the tiers, even 1.

Once many posters pointed that out, you started to say you had nothing against LRMs, even though prior posts, comments during your streams, and your OP would lead everyone to believe otherwise.

I'm sorry for the name calling but it's disappointing when a popular member of -MS-, a group that I respect and drop with whenever possible but gets a bad rap in the community, makes a post like this.

To which I say: Clearly you haven't been watching my stream very closely, because I have made my position on them abundantly clear.

When people play LRMs the way they do they make it extremely difficult to convince higher up members of MS that they have a place and can be used. The fact is I absolutely know LRM's have a place, and I've worked hard to prove it within my own unit: something that is incredibly difficult.

The problem is the fact that people use them so badly that fighting against the wave of resentment in my own unit is very difficult.

You see LRMs don't piss me off, people using them badly pisses me off, because all I'm seeing in that video is the type of gameplay that makes it incredibly difficult to convince people that there are good ways to use LRMs.

[Tyler Valentine]

Sader325, on 04 March 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

When people play LRMs the way they do...

This. This is called a generalization and it doesn't lend any weight to your argument. Everyone plays LRMs differently, some people are extremely good at it.

The guys in your video played their LRM 'mechs very well, I know, because they won. Saying they played poorly and they would have lost on another map is information you have no way of knowing (they may have used completely different tactics on a different map but knew this strategy would work on this map) and only stands to make you sound like a bad loser, a reputation a member of -MS- does not need.

[Sader325]

Tyler Valentine, on 04 March 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

This. This is called a generalization and it doesn't lend any weight to your argument. Everyone plays LRMs differently, some people are extremely good at it.

The guys in your video played their LRM 'mechs very well, I know, because they won. Saying they played poorly and they would have lost on another map is information you have no way of knowing (they may have used completely different tactics on a different map but knew this strategy would work on this map) and only stands to make you sound like a bad loser, a reputation a member of -MS- does not need.

How it information i have "no way of knowing?". I see the builds, I saw what they did, I saw how they played. I've got thousands of hours in this game, I'm sorry but I think I have the ability to make an educated guess as to how this team would have performed on any other map.

Once again, this has nothing to do with being a "bad loser" because i do not actually care whether I win or lose simply because my control over how a game is played is extremely limited.

I find it odd that you do not know this if you watch my stream anywhere near the amount you implied, because my mantra in regards to solo queue has been the same for months: 400.

There are 23 people in that match doing god knows whatever the hell they wan't, there is no carrying people in this game the only thing you can personally do is make sure you yourself carry your own weight. I have simplified that to a damage number, that number is 400.

Win, lose, loss, tie, dead, alive, assault, light, heavy whatever the hell else. The only number that matters to me is 400. The outcome of the match I could give a **** about, because the only thing I can control in my match is myself. Especially if I'm not willing to pug command at every opportunity (something I could do but would be just incredibly exhausting.)

[Xetelian]

People who got to tier 1 with missile boats will wreck face with their missile boats. Not only are they situational, feast or famine weapons they also have spread damage so you can twist and turn while running out of range.

While I think its unfortunate that most of your team died, it still took 9 minutes and doesn't present itself as a huge problem in solo queue

We've come a long way since LRMaggedon when all missiles hit the CT and head and did more damage per ton. We're in a much better place, and I'd even call it a good place.


I don't use LRMs, I was using laser vomit since back when Gauss/PPC was popular and jump sniping was a thing.

[wanderer]

Actually, eventually even the mediocre missile boaters will get to Tier 1.

There's nothing stopping anyone from that given the current PSR system. It's just a matter of playing enough games, as you near-inevitably gain more than you lose.

[Sjorpha]

Sader325, on 04 March 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

The problem is the fact that people use them so badly that fighting against the wave of resentment in my own unit is very difficult.

You see LRMs don't piss me off, people using them badly pisses me off, because all I'm seeing in that video is the type of gameplay that makes it incredibly difficult to convince people that there are good ways to use LRMs.

So your example of "people using them [LRMs] badly" is a video where your team is losing big to them?

No wonder people get confused about your position.

[Sader325]

Sjorpha, on 04 March 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

So your example of "people using them [LRMs] badly" is a video where your team is losing big to them?

No wonder people get confused about your position.

A game that could have been turned around had I been willing to take control of the situation.

I was not willing, because I didn't care, I was more interested in watching and laughing as my team was slaughtered.