653 replies to this topic

[Fractis Zero]

LRMs in their current state are not a good weapon compared to direct fire. They spread damage and you can't aim them at specific components. There are far too many ways to counter LRMs. ECM and radar depravation can nearly neutralize LRMs. Beyond that you will more likely hit buildings and terrain then your target.

Suppression is a poor argument. Shooting someone will either suppress your target with direct fire weapons will either make them move into cover or you will kill them.

LRMs force you to stare down your target, so you have less chance to tank damage from opposing fire making you an easy target.

Coordinated top tier groups do not use LRMs unless they are trolling. This is due to the fact if they come across another top tier group that has direct fire weapons, they will lose.

Asking for locks from teammates means that your team mate has to stare down a target. As you move up in tiers targeting an opponent for more then the time it takes to get a single alpha off is a recipe to get cored. So, if you are a LRM pilot that complains about no one holding locks it's because your team mate isn't exposing himself to the other team so he will live longer.

[MovinTarget]

Again, if the teammate is willing to be a spotter, if you don't drop solo and sit in the back waiting for people to risk their armor just so you can reap the rewards. By all means, lurm away, but it is still not efficient.

The major advantage of lrms is the fact that if you team has the presence of mind to focus a single target, you don't have to crowd each other to get a shot in.

To me, it boils down to this question. If your team will be comprised of 12 individuals with no guarantee of cooperation (b/c there is none), would you rather everybody was in direct fire weapons or indirect fire?

An extreme example? Yes, it underscores the reality when solo dropping.

Now for the counter question: of the above two teams, which would you rather face?

(Btw, you can equip radar dep and ecm if you are having a hard time figuring out the answer)

[akhv]

Bringing LRMs to FP isn't a problem, it's a symptom.

Everyone is trying to be more effective and maximize output. True, experienced player is more deadly in a direct fire build. New player's life expectancy in such a build is about several seconds. So he brings an LRM build to get chance to do at least some damage instead of dying instantly. It makes sense actually.

The problem is no matchmaking in FP. Where a 12-man premade meets a PUG team consisting of a couple of good players, a lance of average ones and half of team of inexperienced players. In a situation like this it really doesn't matter if those inexperienced guys use LRM or direct fire builds.

Edited by akhv, 14 May 2016 - 09:53 AM.

[Valar13]

Dee Eight, on 13 May 2016 - 08:27 PM, said:

And that there is a stunning example of a prima donna attitude that leads to the long wait queue times outside of CW events like are going on right now, because the majority of players can do without such attitudes harshing their mellow.

Like, I get that PSR isn't the best measure of pilot skill, but folks were literally *just* talking about T4/5 players defending LRMs like they know better than people who've either played longer or played better...Case in point.

Dee Eight, on 14 May 2016 - 06:05 AM, said:

So what you're saying then...is how YOU have fun, is more important than how I have fun ? Mob rules and all that crap ?

Yes, the fun of 11 other people is more important than your individual need to have fun sucking at the game. That's what you wanted someone to say...right? What a prima donna.

Edited by Valar13, 14 May 2016 - 10:11 AM.

[Hagen von Tronje]

You are a real sunshine, Valar.
I think, you know not much about Pilot skill....and why is that?
Guys like you rule out 95% of the game (the Chassis, the weapons, variation of armament etc.)
Yes, you handle 5% of the game real good....a 5% master.
What about the rest? Nothing! Handling 5%...ahh, i give you 10%, i am in a good mood, is far from anything that could be called skill.
And yes, i am Tier 5 and i do not play FW because i didn`t like to be reduced to 5%.
There is no fun in ignoring 95% of the game.

[MovinTarget]

Everybody chill out. Just consider that FW games have real implications. If you don't care about defending or attacking and making gains for your faction, accept that the people who care will be annoyed if you have a nonchalant attitude.

If you want to make money, you will make it faster in QP. If you grinding faction/merc points, you don't make much if you lose, so do what it takes to win. Be a team player, join a unit, bring sensible loadouts... increase the probability of winning.

[MovinTarget]

Hagen von Tronje, on 14 May 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

You are a real sunshine, Valar.
I think, you know not much about Pilot skill....and why is that?
Guys like you rule out 95% of the game (the Chassis, the weapons, variation of armament etc.)
Yes, you handle 5% of the game real good....a 5% master.
What about the rest? Nothing! Handling 5%...ahh, i give you 10%, i am in a good mood, is far from anything that could be called skill.
And yes, i am Tier 5 and i do not play FW because i didn`t like to be reduced to 5%.
There is no fun in ignoring 95% of the game.

I am not sure how inviting people to avoid bringing lrms in suboptimal situations constitutes jettisoning 95% of the game.

I realize this is a touchy subject for many players and some players simply don't have the fps or ping to use things like PPCs and gauss. For those that use only lrms in FW (for all i know none of the posters in this thread are doing this), they are the ones that are limiting their success and potentially impacting their teams negatively.

If we had a rash of players using only gauss jagers we'd be saying the same thing. All weapon systems have faults which why i never said specifically use only lasers or anything like that. I said use direct fire which is basically everything except lrms and streaks, unless you are in a situation conducive to their usage. So we are advocating for players using *more* than what you are insinuating.

Edited by MovinTarget, 14 May 2016 - 12:43 PM.

[pattonesque]

Tronword Furey, on 09 May 2016 - 01:50 AM, said:

Go back to LRM school. Oh yes, I forgot, Clan Wolf has freebirth instructors guiding pups from the moment they drop out of the canister. You are in no position to win, please turn in your Warrior status card to the nearest Smoke Jaguar you meet (preferably a Tech).

Any rebuttal to this advice should be transferred to a paper hard copy. After your thoughts are populated on the blank form, immediately fold it up and keep it in your pocket, where it can plague no one further.

- Oathmaster Tronword Furey
Star Captain, Solahma Crusaders

Osulf, on 10 May 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

In my experience LRMs aren't just about damage they also help to supress enemy mechs. If it forces them to hid in cover, it helps cover an advance and hopefully causing less damage to your mech in the advance. LRMs can change enemy behaviour and plans.

Also LRMs are team friendly. If you have a fellow team player being attacked by an enemy some distance away you can try and supress the enemy to help them out and then do the same for another friendly mech shortly after rather than having to run around the map so much to achieve this.

The only time I have been in an invasion PUG were it was 12 kills to 0 after the first wave was in a team of several LRM users and the enemy were hit hard by the LRM.

Do people just see LRMs in terms of damage, and ignore the benefits of support (which hopefully goes alongside damage from the LRMS) e.g. suppression role (discuss)?

TheLuc, on 10 May 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

the real issue is not the LRMs, its the boating, having one LRM launcher can be practical like any other weapon.

Jzaltheral, on 14 May 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

I'll bring as many damned LRMs as I like, and if you don't like it, feel free to ignore me raining death down on our enemies.

LRMs have a place in both Quick Play and Faction Play, but it requires the pilot to be able to use them effectively. Your mech can hold an LRM 80? That's awesome - did you remember to bring a weapon to use when you run out of ammo? Because you will. Are you standing off all by yourself where you will be cut off and die to that pair of light mechs skirting around the main fight? Don't do that.

As a person who generally plays CW as IS, I just want to say that you should all follow these dudes' advice to the letter

we are completely unable to handle clan LRMs en masse. I live in fear of the day you guys figure this out

in fact you should definitely bring 12 pure LRM boats

I would even experiment with non-traditional LRM builds. Might I suggest adding them to a Dire Wolf? Think about how much ammo you can carry!

[Rejarial Galatan]

ChaoticUrlond, on 01 May 2016 - 10:29 AM, said:

LRMs are not effective against any target no matter how much damage you say you can do against an enemy. SRMS or Streaks please.

you are insane. here is why:
1. If a player has access to a weapon and they choose to use it, that is acceptable. PGI gives us options, they are valid.
2. YOU are not paying for other players to play, therefore you have 0 right to demand or otherwise tell another player what they can and cannot use. That would be like me, an Assault mech pilot telling YOU a <for sake of argument> a light pilot that your choice of using an IIC Jenner is bad, and you cant use it, you must use the Cheetah instead, and on top of that, only CSPLs. No. Every player is entitled to use what ever the hell they want that suits them.
3. As someone else on page 1 says: LRMs especially CLAN LRMS are far far more effective than any SRM or SSRM could ever hope to be.

[MovinTarget]

We don't have aright to tell anyone not to use lrms, we can only recommend they not do so without premptive coordination to maximize effectiveness and then ask then to have the cajones to not hide in the back.

The plea is that those that don't realize this consider changing their strategy.

Those that want to boat inefficient weapons and not focus on winning but just racking up damage... you've made up your minds and this thread is not for you.

[Valar13]

Hagen von Tronje, on 14 May 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

You are a real sunshine, Valar.
I think, you know not much about Pilot skill....and why is that?
Guys like you rule out 95% of the game (the Chassis, the weapons, variation of armament etc.)
Yes, you handle 5% of the game real good....a 5% master.
What about the rest? Nothing! Handling 5%...ahh, i give you 10%, i am in a good mood, is far from anything that could be called skill.
And yes, i am Tier 5 and i do not play FW because i didn`t like to be reduced to 5%.
There is no fun in ignoring 95% of the game.

1v1 me sometime and tell me I don't understand the finer points of MWO.

But I'm not here for a pissing contest, just to point out that an obviously inexperienced player was arguing with an experienced one over weapon systems that those of us who've played longer against harder foes understand are less viable.

[Valar13]

Rejarial Galatan, on 14 May 2016 - 01:18 PM, said:

you are insane. here is why:
1. If a player has access to a weapon and they choose to use it, that is acceptable. PGI gives us options, they are valid.
2. YOU are not paying for other players to play, therefore you have 0 right to demand or otherwise tell another player what they can and cannot use. That would be like me, an Assault mech pilot telling YOU a <for sake of argument> a light pilot that your choice of using an IIC Jenner is bad, and you cant use it, you must use the Cheetah instead, and on top of that, only CSPLs. No. Every player is entitled to use what ever the hell they want that suits them.
3. As someone else on page 1 says: LRMs especially CLAN LRMS are far far more effective than any SRM or SSRM could ever hope to be.

The only thing CLRMs are uniquely good at over other missile systems is producing cockpit shake. A competent player can still aim through this as they realize it doesn't affect the bearing of your weapons. If they were on target before the LRMs they're on target after.

Also, I may not be paying for anyone else to play but I am putting in considerable amounts of my own time in drops that I mostly win, and it *is* annoying to see the pug team dropping in front of you constantly picking up all the fights and LOSING them, while you instead get the ghost drops.

Edited by Valar13, 14 May 2016 - 02:11 PM.

[Valar13]

Rejarial Galatan, on 14 May 2016 - 01:18 PM, said:

using an IIC Jenner is bad, and you cant use it, you must use the Cheetah instead, and on top of that, only C

But that's demonstrably wrong. I can offer you empirical reasons why a IIC is situationally better than an ACH. There's never a situation where a LRM-15 is better than a LPL.

pattonesque, on 14 May 2016 - 01:06 PM, said:

As a person who generally plays CW as IS, I just want to say that you should all follow these dudes' advice to the letter

we are completely unable to handle clan LRMs en masse. I live in fear of the day you guys figure this out

in fact you should definitely bring 12 pure LRM boats

I would even experiment with non-traditional LRM builds. Might I suggest adding them to a Dire Wolf? Think about how much ammo you can carry!

Wait, this guy is right. Clanners, please start boating as many LRMs as you can from here on out. Thanks!

[Perigard Z]

"I think, you know not much about Pilot skill....and why is that?
.
.
.

And yes, i am Tier 5"




I love the interwebs so much. Golden

Seriously though you can't make people be decent at games. And they are allowed to have fun their way even if it ruins everyone else's and they are too blind to see it or just plain don't care. This is a big problem in any team game unfortunately.

Edited by Perigard Z, 14 May 2016 - 02:24 PM.

[Valar13]

Perigard Z, on 14 May 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

"I think, you know not much about Pilot skill....and why is that?
.
.
.

And yes, i am Tier 5"




I love the interwebs so much. Golden

Seriously though you can't make people be decent at games. And they are allowed to have fun their way even if it ruins everyone else's and they are too blind to see it or just plain don't care. This is a big problem in any team game unfortunately.

Honestly, I think he was saying that I believe only Tier 1 Mechs with Lazorz are viable. This is absolutely untrue. For one, AC/5s and UACs are great weapon systems, especially on hot maps. Gauss is great in the right situation. Some Mechs are statistically and empirically worse than others. These are simple facts.

[SCHLIMMER BESTIMMER XXX]

ChaoticUrlond, on 01 May 2016 - 10:29 AM, said:

LRMs are not effective against any target no matter how much damage you say you can do against an enemy. SRMS or Streaks please.

Never tell me what weapons to use or not to use.Do you wanna know whats strange?I never hear people say "DONT USE MG THEY ARE USELESS!" or "NEVER USE LBx10 DONT DO IT YOU ******!".
Because people dont make lrm´s bad because they so ineffective, in reality its the opposite.
They hate lrm´s cause they have horrible memorys about them, like getting constantly hit.Rekt with every second that follows,
without a chance to get away.The hate raises more and more while the armor dissapear unstopable.
Dear LRM players, they try to make you feel bad about yourself using that weapon.Thats their last desperate try to defend
themselves from shamefull death and unlimited anger about the clunking sound of hitting missles.

I WOUDNT CARE,
NOW EVEN MORE
LET IT RAIN!!!!!

[grendeldog]

In a coordinated group lurm spam can be devastating!

Actually, I played as Steiner against an 11-man from Bear if I remember correctly. They fielded basically 5 or 6 mechs per each drop using LRM 15 and 20s plus a couple of mechs with LRM 5s.

So for example they would have had on each drop an HGN-IIC-B with LRM 80, 2 WHK with 45 LRM tubes each, two SHC with 40 LRMs each, two MDD with 6 LRM 5s on chainfire, and 2 TBRs with moderate LRMs plus some lasers. Then they had some lights with TAG and also fitted many of their lurm boats with TAG besides a smattering of ERML and ERLL. There may have been a few of those lights that would NARC too.

By having both assaults and mediums in the LRM 15/20 spam role they could ensure that each drop the folks in the heavier mechs could trade down in tonnage to their mediums and vice versa, ensuring a steady rain throughout the match that never perceptibly dropped in intensity.

I have never been on a team that was so thoroughly dominated in my life - not even when I played against -MS- during the first Tukayyid.

It was simply impossible to make any headway because the cockpit shake was constant. We couldn't aim. That's no exaggeration either - their spotters were MLX and ACH that could jump up onto high mountains and ridges to spot for them so we would get pummeled due to TAG and NARC bonuses even behind cover.

I ended up with three of our eight kills but my point is that if you have a coordinated team that so chooses, running with a lurm-based strategy can be shockingly effective, especially clanners because of their steady rain instead of chunks of one-shot missile clouds.

[jadef1]

Yeah Lrms aren't the best choice ! But I still see a lot of people dying from them even without narc

[Rejarial Galatan]

Hey valar unless I missed something (entirely possible) cheetah has omni pods Jenner does not, so cheetah has better config options.

I can think of a situation where missiles are better. When I am at critical damage but still have lock on you, lobbing missiles over barriers = better than a direct fire laser of any size or type. Just because you fail to see all options does not make you right. Nor does ignoring the fact that some situations regardless of how unlikely must be accounted for before saying something is or isn't viable.

And now to whomever said something about only focusing on damage and not actual kills was bad, you are 100% WRONG. Long range supporting fire is a vital asset regardless of what you think. I have spent many a game both here and other shooters BF3/4 to be blunt using support fire tactics over going for KDA or KMDD. On BF3/4 I specialized in using the M240B for suppressive fire and guess what, it made a difference 9.9 times out of 10. Softening up a mech so another faster mech can get the kill is just as valid as brawling it out. It is NOT ALWAYS about kills.

[MovinTarget]

Get off the cheetah/jenner tangent it was goven as an example and has no real bearing to the op.

Also i think people were taking it out of context.

Again, lrms can be set up if you team is arranged to maximize their usage. The point made to never bring them may be false, but the point to bring them without coordinating with your team may effectively diminish your viability.

Additionally, lrms are not able to kill damaged mechs as fast as pinpoint direct fire. This is a fact since you have little gaurantee of actually hitting the open components when you really need to. They also diminish in effectiveness once the enemy is less than 180 meters away. If they don't rush you, you're fine, but if the do and your backup weapons are only a few ML... you are screwed.

Until, someone counters the argument that your goal is to take mechs off the field (i.e. kill them) as fast as possible, i fail to see how solo dropping lrms would be more effective than using direct fire. Suppression may help for a little while, but until they are dead they are a threat.

So outside of a 8-12 man coordinated great planning lurmaggedon, i assert that there are more effective ways to kill the enemy than lrms or streaks for that matter.

And i would like to point out that killing enemy mechs gives much higher rewards than doing damage so killing is profitable.