184 replies to this topic

[Killer Kellaine]

Carl Vickers, on 20 April 2017 - 06:10 PM, said:

Cool, continue to get pwned then and keep using those lurms, I need more easy KMDD's.

BTW, non-competitive dedicated to having fun means, we dont want to get better at the game, too much effort involved.

LOL go for it

[Killer Kellaine]

MischiefSC, on 20 April 2017 - 07:04 PM, said:

Look, there's no desire to troll anyone here. Fun is fun and that's awesome - play and have fun.

However there's no debate about the viability of LRMs vs direct fire. It's not an opinion. It's not an open book or a question. Direct fire is flat out superior, hands down.

I never claimed that LRM's are better than direct fire. I simply said they have their place. This was not a discussion of which is better. But that both have their place in the scheme of things.

I rarely post on the forums for this reason.....


IT is filled with haters that hate for hates sake.

[Tesunie]

MischiefSC, on 20 April 2017 - 07:04 PM, said:

If someone doesn't care about winning that's fine. Play, have fun! That's why we're all here. However trying to say that taking LRMs is just as viable to winning/losing as direct fire is a false statement.

If that was really the case, than in theory my LRM based mechs should have a lower W/L ratio than direct fire, correct?

I have Huntsmen of every flavor, and basically all of them have over 100 matches on them, which should give a reasonable about of data. (I am going to exclude my Prime because it has two different builds on it, and I'm going to exclude the C, which has under 100 matches recorded in it.) (Note: Armor is not exact. Just did the "Max armor" feature on it.)
Huntsman A: Besides maybe 20 matches at the start (and it's now at 121 matches total), it has carried the linked build. Has a W/L of 1.20, a K/D of 0.91 and an average damage per match of 317. This equates to a 6.35 damage per ton per match.

Huntsman B: This Huntsmen spent the first portion of it's life with an UAC10 instead of an LBx10, as the UAC10 was nerfs shortly after I got the Huntsment. But, overall it didn't really seem to change performance at all. This build also scored me on the Huntsmen Leaderboard challenge, though I wasn't exactly "high up" on that list. It's got a W/L of 0.84, a K/D of 0.70 and an average damage per match of 276. This resulted in a 5.51 damage per match per ton.

Huntsman Pakhet: 100% of all of it's matches have been in this build. Has a W/L of 1.37, a K/D of 0.88 and an average damage score of 315. This is a damage per match per ton of 6.30.

Huntsmen P: Don't have the build saved on Smurfy yet, but it's a simple dual ERPPC build. I've only got 68 matches on it so far, but I'll post it anyway. It has a W/L of 0.97, a K/D of 0.74 and an average damage per match of 292. This means it's damage per match per ton is 5.8

So far for the Huntsmen, the LRM version seems to have typically higher W/L compared to my non-LRM versions, with the exception of my SRM version. I wish I could include my upgraded LRM Huntsmen's stats, but as I created that recently on the Prime(S), and it's stats are mixed in with the second Prime I own... I could only tell you their combined stats. And seen as one is LRMs, the other is a laser brawler... it would be rather inconclusive...



So, as far as your statement goes... I do believe, if used effectively and with skill, LRMs can in fact be useful to the team as well as can have an impact on your W/L rates. (These stats are also mixed between solo and group play, but I shall also state that the group did not specifically spot for me, if that matters any.)

I'll also comment that I still do not profess to be anything more than a casual average player. I'm not an ace, and I'm not near the top of the game. Just run of the mill average in my opinion. So, of course your millage may vary with other builds and weapons.

I'll make note, I stopped with just the Huntsmen, as that chassis has a lot of variety from one build to the next. If you want more additional stats from more varied mechs, just ask. We can see how my averages and with what builds seem to work better for me.

For the record, I'm not trying to say that LRMs are better than anything else, just that they can be useful and can do well if used effectively.

[Tesunie]

Kellaine, on 20 April 2017 - 07:16 PM, said:

I never claimed that LRM's are better than direct fire. I simply said they have their place. This was not a discussion of which is better. But that both have their place in the scheme of things.

I rarely post on the forums for this reason.....


IT is filled with haters that hate for hates sake.

Despite what I've responded back to Mischief here (and else where), I do want to give him credit where it is due. He is correct that Direct Weapons do have advantages over LRMs in many cases and as an average for users in the game. Though I disagree with LRMs be "bad" weapons, I won't deny that LRMs do have their weaknesses.

I still stand by my statement that it depends upon how you use it and the intended role you wish to fill. LRMs are a utility weapon, and as such they have lots of strengths, but also some really large weaknesses. They can provide some tactical flexibility to a mech, but if boated it can also leads to disastrous weaknesses that many people know how to exploit.

There is a reason I don't boat only LRMs...

[Killer Kellaine]

Tesunie, on 20 April 2017 - 07:44 PM, said:

Despite what I've responded back to Mischief here (and else where), I do want to give him credit where it is due. He is correct that Direct Weapons do have advantages over LRMs in many cases and as an average for users in the game. Though I disagree with LRMs be "bad" weapons, I won't deny that LRMs do have their weaknesses.

I still stand by my statement that it depends upon how you use it and the intended role you wish to fill. LRMs are a utility weapon, and as such they have lots of strengths, but also some really large weaknesses. They can provide some tactical flexibility to a mech, but if boated it can also leads to disastrous weaknesses that many people know how to exploit.

There is a reason I don't boat only LRMs...

I agree with you that BOATS do not work for LRM's they cannot defend themselves.

[MischiefSC]

Tesunie, on 20 April 2017 - 07:36 PM, said:

If that was really the case, than in theory my LRM based mechs should have a lower W/L ratio than direct fire, correct?

I have Huntsmen of every flavor, and basically all of them have over 100 matches on them, which should give a reasonable about of data. (I am going to exclude my Prime because it has two different builds on it, and I'm going to exclude the C, which has under 100 matches recorded in it.) (Note: Armor is not exact. Just did the "Max armor" feature on it.)
Huntsman A: Besides maybe 20 matches at the start (and it's now at 121 matches total), it has carried the linked build. Has a W/L of 1.20, a K/D of 0.91 and an average damage per match of 317. This equates to a 6.35 damage per ton per match.

Huntsman B: This Huntsmen spent the first portion of it's life with an UAC10 instead of an LBx10, as the UAC10 was nerfs shortly after I got the Huntsment. But, overall it didn't really seem to change performance at all. This build also scored me on the Huntsmen Leaderboard challenge, though I wasn't exactly "high up" on that list. It's got a W/L of 0.84, a K/D of 0.70 and an average damage per match of 276. This resulted in a 5.51 damage per match per ton.

Huntsman Pakhet: 100% of all of it's matches have been in this build. Has a W/L of 1.37, a K/D of 0.88 and an average damage score of 315. This is a damage per match per ton of 6.30.

Huntsmen P: Don't have the build saved on Smurfy yet, but it's a simple dual ERPPC build. I've only got 68 matches on it so far, but I'll post it anyway. It has a W/L of 0.97, a K/D of 0.74 and an average damage per match of 292. This means it's damage per match per ton is 5.8

So far for the Huntsmen, the LRM version seems to have typically higher W/L compared to my non-LRM versions, with the exception of my SRM version. I wish I could include my upgraded LRM Huntsmen's stats, but as I created that recently on the Prime(S), and it's stats are mixed in with the second Prime I own... I could only tell you their combined stats. And seen as one is LRMs, the other is a laser brawler... it would be rather inconclusive...



So, as far as your statement goes... I do believe, if used effectively and with skill, LRMs can in fact be useful to the team as well as can have an impact on your W/L rates. (These stats are also mixed between solo and group play, but I shall also state that the group did not specifically spot for me, if that matters any.)

I'll also comment that I still do not profess to be anything more than a casual average player. I'm not an ace, and I'm not near the top of the game. Just run of the mill average in my opinion. So, of course your millage may vary with other builds and weapons.

I'll make note, I stopped with just the Huntsmen, as that chassis has a lot of variety from one build to the next. If you want more additional stats from more varied mechs, just ask. We can see how my averages and with what builds seem to work better for me.

For the record, I'm not trying to say that LRMs are better than anything else, just that they can be useful and can do well if used effectively.

Anecdotal examples are full of contradictions; I have a W/L of 11.0 in my Zeus 6T - and 17 matches. Figure that one out. My Zeus 6S has 75 matches and a W/L of 1.83. My HBK 4SP has a W/L of 22 with 24 matches played. Again, riddle me that one. I suspect I had several 'draw' matches in the HBK and the Zeus. It happens; rarely but it happens. The stats on my Scorch are flat out stupid; 51 matches, 4.67 W/L, 2.31 KDR and an average of 555 damage/match. With LBX and Clan SRMs without Artemis. None of which are 'meta' as weapons (2xLB20x, 4xSRM6) but it's still at 6.53 damage/match/ton (I like that metric btw. I like it a lot, it's a good idea). None of those mechs were played with 'good' builds or loadouts.

However you and I each have our own habits, playstyles and approaches to playing the game. Our stats, even our biggest, best mined stats, are still going to suffer from anecdotal viarance. Plus pug queue is a complete **** show for trying to identify actual weapon balance and relative weapon/build performance. The Scorch, which is like the raised middle finger of God for me in Pug queue wouldn't do nearly as well in a competitive environment played consistently against good players.

You can do damage with LRMs, kill mechs and make a real pest of yourself. IS Small Lasers can kill mechs; so can MGs. Any and every weapon in the game can be used to kill robbits and with enough effort you can get performance out of them.

There is no real good 'utility' to LRMs however. The same effort and skill put in with a direct fire weapon will get better results. If there was a viable utility application for LRMs other than being good against bad players you'd see that utility put to work in competitive play - again, not saying competitive play is 'superior' in any moral or ethical way but simply an environment that both A) reduces variance between player skills by the most possible and B ) strongly motivates the pursuit and application of any/all advantages in builds and mechs.

Kellaine, on 20 April 2017 - 07:16 PM, said:

I never claimed that LRM's are better than direct fire. I simply said they have their place. This was not a discussion of which is better. But that both have their place in the scheme of things.

I rarely post on the forums for this reason.....


IT is filled with haters that hate for hates sake.

Haters that hate for hates sake.

Really?

We're playing pretend with big stompy robbits. There's no hate here. There's nothing really worth that level of investment emotionally. It's a game, it's being played for fun.

There's no 'hate' for LRMs any more than I have a 'hate' for IS small lasers vs Clan ER small lasers or Clan Gauss vs IS Gauss. There's no 'hate' there. One is simply better, flat out, than the other.

The only 'place' LRMs have is entertainment. That's okay; it's not bad, it's not somehow morally inferior to IS LPLs (arguably one of the best overall weapons in the game). If someone wants to take LRMs, okay. Play, have fun. Big stompy shooty robbits. I have a 2 LPL, 2xSRM6A, 6xMG King Crab I play sometimes for giggles. A TBR with 3xLRM5As, a single UAC10 and 2 CERMLs in pug queue. I've got all manner of builds I run for fun. My FW dropdeck certainly isn't full of mechs you'd see in MRBC and of the 130+ mechs in my mech bay not a single one of them, not one, is set up with PPCs+Gauss.

However it's perpetrating incorrect and misleading information to say that LRMs are a good idea to bring or that they're in any real functional way on par or viable in comparison to direct fire. They also have, demonstratively, a strong tendency to motivate players to bad behavior - hiding in the back, relying on other people for locks, etc. etc. Mixed LRMs + other weapons are, in their way, even worse because it's just sapping tonnage from being focused in a single viable direction.

It's fine to play for fun. Play what's fun; it's a game. I've said that a million times and I'll say it a million more. However reality is reality. LRMs are not an effective thing to take to FW unless you're just playing for fun and don't mind losing, especially to good teams or teams bringing direct fire.

LRMs can be fun to play. They're different. That's fun and fine. However like all weapons that are 'not as good' they only 'place' they have is being fun. That's okay - there's no moral component here. No right/wrong answer from a 'having fun' perspective. People trying to say that they have a 'strategic place' as though they're comparatively viable isn't true or correct though. They have a 'strategic place' in the same way any sub-par build has a strategic place. My AC20 Urbie has a 'strategic place'. That place is 'play when drunk'. That's okay, it's not bad. Not trying to beat anyone up here either - however this topic is one that has been (erroneously) argued for a long time. That just creates more confusion and sets people up to make mistakes and operate under incorrect info.

Edited by MischiefSC, 20 April 2017 - 10:09 PM.

[Kmieciu]

Ragnar Baron Leiningen, on 18 April 2017 - 01:12 PM, said:

You know what's more useful? A player that knows how to do direct damage and share armor. All the best LRM folks I know are usually very good at direct damage as well.

If you're on a front line sharing armor with your team you might as well take direct fire weapons, that deal more focused damage.

[Tesunie]

MischiefSC, on 20 April 2017 - 10:08 PM, said:

Anecdotal examples are full of contradictions; I have a W/L of 11.0 in my Zeus 6T - and 17 matches. Figure that one out. My Zeus 6S has 75 matches and a W/L of 1.83. My HBK 4SP has a W/L of 22 with 24 matches played. Again, riddle me that one. I suspect I had several 'draw' matches in the HBK and the Zeus. It happens; rarely but it happens. The stats on my Scorch are flat out stupid; 51 matches, 4.67 W/L, 2.31 KDR and an average of 555 damage/match. With LBX and Clan SRMs without Artemis. None of which are 'meta' as weapons (2xLB20x, 4xSRM6) but it's still at 6.53 damage/match/ton (I like that metric btw. I like it a lot, it's a good idea). None of those mechs were played with 'good' builds or loadouts.

However you and I each have our own habits, playstyles and approaches to playing the game. Our stats, even our biggest, best mined stats, are still going to suffer from anecdotal viarance. Plus pug queue is a complete **** show for trying to identify actual weapon balance and relative weapon/build performance. The Scorch, which is like the raised middle finger of God for me in Pug queue wouldn't do nearly as well in a competitive environment played consistently against good players.

You can do damage with LRMs, kill mechs and make a real pest of yourself. IS Small Lasers can kill mechs; so can MGs. Any and every weapon in the game can be used to kill robbits and with enough effort you can get performance out of them.

There is no real good 'utility' to LRMs however. The same effort and skill put in with a direct fire weapon will get better results. If there was a viable utility application for LRMs other than being good against bad players you'd see that utility put to work in competitive play - again, not saying competitive play is 'superior' in any moral or ethical way but simply an environment that both A) reduces variance between player skills by the most possible and B ) strongly motivates the pursuit and application of any/all advantages in builds and mechs.

I will say that, pulling stats is something I don't like to do, as it can often be misleading depending upon who looks at what and how everyone considered each point of data. But it can be interesting sometimes to look at.

As far as the Huntsmen I posted up, the A has 121 matches (with a W/L of 1.20), the B has 114 matches (W/L of 0.84), the Pakhet has 129 matches (W/L is 1.37) and the P has 68 matches (W/L of 0.97). Though it isn't in the thousands (I'm not that crazy), and I do know that "things can alter the stats", it's still kinda curious as to why the LRM version has the better W/L compared to most of my direct fire versions of the same mech.

Honestly, I see this pattern with my Novas with the highest W/L is on the LRM D(L) I have. (Yes, I put LRMs on a Nova... because reasons...) Linebackers are the same way. The A variant has the highest W/L out of the bunch, but I always felt that the Prime does better (but according to W/L, it doesn't). I see this as a continual trend among all my stats for W/L. Almost every time a mech has a "higher than the other variants", it is typically one that has LRMs on it... This leads me to believe (for myself at least) that LRMs can impact a team's chances of success, somehow.


As far as Damage per Ton per Match (DTM), I like to use that as an efficiency guide. a rating of 5 DTM seems to be considered "average" as far as goals for a mech seems to be. It's all about how efficiently you are using your tonnage. Like, for instance, a Locust that deals only 100 points of damage is, efficiency wise, doing the same work per ton as an Atlas that does 500 damage. For LRM mechs, I tend to expect a little higher DTM due to spread, but not much higher because of my play style that deals as much damage directly as I do with LRMs, so it isn't drastically higher for my case.

Of course, everyone has their own little chart on what they consider as "average", as well as how to determine that. I just always thought DTM ratings was a reasonable indicator, depending upon role of course. I would love to actually get either an Average Match Score and/or total match score for each specific variant/mech/chassis. I think it would be interesting to see which of my mechs has the best average match score, seen as that is another (and possibly better) indicator on how well a mech performs on the field... I also would love to be able to archive a specific chassis/variant on my own, so I can archive old stats when I've altered a build. Would let me gather and analyze data more efficiently, and let me see the results of mech build adjustments... (Seen as I'm now talking about a wish list here.)

[Tesunie]

Kmieciu, on 20 April 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

If you're on a front line sharing armor with your team you might as well take direct fire weapons, that deal more focused damage.

You can "share armor" without having to stand out in the open actually taking hits.

The concept of "sharing armor" is not necessarily to actually share armor (though that is the intent as needed), but to present another target the enemy has to worry about and draw some fire from.

I share armor all the time while I LRM, but I'm not standing still while doing so. I've come to kinda become a "poptart LRMer". Every time I jump, I get to use my lasers as I get a lock, then lob LRMs as I fall behind cover. After a while of doing this, the enemy starts to try and wait for my next pop-up (because I'm damaging them and probably annoying them as well with the alerts). This distraction, no matter how brief, can be the difference between the enemy waiting and trying to shoot me (which many only graze me and/or completely miss) and just laying into my allies as they continue to move to engage possibly crippling them or destroying them.

I also like to utilize every aspect of a weapon as much to my advantage as I can, including spread. I've often used the spread of LRMs to hit a component the opponent is trying to shield and protect. If it's reasonably damaged, I have a good chance the spread of my LRMs will still land hits there, destroying that component and possibly even the enemy with it. If nothing else, the alarms may force them into cover instead, especially if they are seeing that shielding isn't being wholly effective...

There are a lot of tricks LRMs can use. It's all in how you wish to play them. Most people wish to play them to their "only" conceived strength, which they think is indirect fire. This tends to be the extent people push LRMs to, and they don't tend to go very much farther. Other people see a weakness such as spread, but as I've mentioned above it can actually be a strength at times, as sometimes you don't want all your damage "on the CT only". Sometimes, you want to take that arm or side torso instead, and spread can do that even if that component is being protected. It's not necessarily out right killing power, but it can be something unexpected...

[General Solo]

LRM threads are like Zombies
You might think their dead!
But they always come BACK!!!!!!!!

Yeah the wheel turns, this topic is up again but that's no surprise. For every new player for whom MWO is a blank slate makes the same mistakes.

So we iz edumacating em.
No build is gonna save new one's from getting rekt by a skill mis match.

But about this lrm thing.
Weez just telling you new ones that direct fire weapons are more reliable deliverers of damage than LRM's in most situations.
Take what you want, but if you want to do better more often bring direct fire.

This assumes good health and aim.

[Kmieciu]

Tesunie, on 20 April 2017 - 10:50 PM, said:

You can "share armor" without having to stand out in the open actually taking hits.

I've been playing this game as long as you, maybe even longer (since June 19th 2012).
I know all about sharing armor.
I know the basic rule of winning a match: when your buddies are shooting, you should be shooting as well. (just like US police officers LOL) Even if you're a brawler or lost all your weapons you should also poke out of cover so that the enemy team cannot easily focus fire on your teammates.

But that's beside the point.

My point is, LRMs suck at direct fire. The reason is low projectile velocity. Only 160 m/s. That's 4 times slower than AC20, which is considered a potato canon.

The second reason is that the moment you lose lock, the LRMs stop tracking the target. This was actually introduced on 28.08.2012 and since then even the slowest assault mechs can dodge them with ease. And if that wasn't enough, there is the radar deprivation module that breaks locks even faster. I won't even mention ECM.

There is only one reason to ever run LRMs and that is if you play on a potato computer that barely manages 20 fps or with a ping greater than 250. I admit to running a LRM-Maddog* while traveling IRL. There was an event in MWO I desperately wanted to complete, and I only had an old utrabook with low-voltage processor and integrated Intel HD graphics card along with crappy mobile internet connection.

*Maddog-PRIME is the only mech in the game with a +20% missile velocity quirk and that is the most important thing for a LRM boat.

Edited by Kmieciu, 21 April 2017 - 12:08 AM.

[Tesunie]

Kmieciu, on 20 April 2017 - 11:55 PM, said:

My point is, LRMs suck at direct fire. The reason is low projectile velocity. Only 160 m/s. That's 4 times slower than AC20, which is considered a potato canon.

The second reason is that the moment you lose lock, the LRMs stop tracking the target. This was actually introduced 28.08.2012 and since then even the slowest assault mechs can dodge them with ease. And if that wasn't enough, there is the radar deprivation module that breaks locks even faster.

I wont argue the efficiency of direct fire vs LRMs. They each have their roles, and it depends upon what you want to do. Direct fire weapons do have their advantages, and I've never said LRMs where better (just to be clear). They are different though.

LRMs are most effective within 600m. Anything outside that is "anyone's guess if this will actually hit or not" territory. So, treat them as more mid ranged than long ranged (despite their name reference as LONG range missiles).

Yes, LRMs stop tracking once lock is lost (or your mech shuts down, fyi). However, you don't always need to have tracking all the way to target to still hit. Also, as mentioned above, if you are shooting within 600m (or closer), you most likely will either be able to keep your lock long enough to connect, or even when you lose your lock you still have a reasonable chance of missiles still hitting. I'll also mention here that sometimes, it's not about dealing damage (although that is optimal), but sometimes you just need to force them back into cover for a moment. (As a side note, they did try to increase velocity of LRMs once... People complained... they reduced it back down (but not as much as it was before).)

I will mention as well that, though it does still help, walking perpendicular to the LRM path no longer can dodge almost to all the missiles, like the older days. Back them, I recall assault mechs side stepping LRMs... Not so much now, especially if shot within 600m. At least not from what I observe.

As far as Radar Deprivation, if the opponent is of the same "skill bracket", than they should be able to mount Adv. Target Decay. It's not a perfect counter, but it does help.


My concern isn't with Radar Dep or slow travel speeds (though they are issues). I'm more concerned about ECM. It does a little... too much against LRMs... But that may be a topic for another... topic? Suffice to say, it's an issue, but dealable now that it's been altered a little. Still a little much at times...

(I'm not sure if I'm making sense anymore... I should be in bed... I drone when I'm too tired and sometimes ramble on. Am I rambling now? Yes. Yes I am. )

[KHAN ATTAKHAN]

So, alone in my Supernova doing 600 - 1100 per game, 3 kills per match average is not welcome, I've seen so called tier one brawlers get as low as 60 damage constantly in games because they don't have 3 -4 mechs to support them while they only come in fresh to steal a kill, "OH MY GOD my paint got scratched, YOU DIDN"T SUPPORT MEEEEEE, AAAARRRRRGGGGHHH, .
100 ton assault LRM boat getting highest damage in both teams
100 ton assault brawler getting what I leave
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Your hatred of LRM boats is because you keep getting killed or supressed by them not because they are ineffective, plain and simple, don't keep saying they have no place because your an easy target, if you can't stand the rain then get out of the storm and go play League Of Lunchbox.
My boat and i'm sailing home in it, g'bye

Edited by KHAN ATTAKHAN, 21 April 2017 - 12:40 AM.

[Kmieciu]

Tesunie, on 21 April 2017 - 12:15 AM, said:

it's not about dealing damage (although that is optimal), but sometimes you just need to force them back into cover for a moment. (As a side note, they did try to increase velocity of LRMs once... People complained... they reduced it back down (but not as much as it was before).

You don't have to shoot LRMs at me to force me back to cover. I willingly enter cover every time my weapons are on cooldown or when I don't have enough heat capacity for another alpha.

When I run a 2xGauss ERPPC Night Gyr, I sit in cover 5 seconds, then pop out to deliver 45 damage. Enemy LRMs can't do nothing to stop me from doing that. Even when I'm NARCed I just sit behind hard cover and fire every 5 seconds. Even if you brought LRM100 mech, 40 damage to a single component is more deadly than that.

Clan laser vomit is even more extreme: you spend 1.5 seconds outside of cover to deliver up to 68 points of damage (2xCLPL+6xERML), and then wait about 12 seconds behind cover while cooling down.

My most extreme example of LRM ineffectiveness was being the last man on my team vs 3 enemy LRM boats. I was piloting a IS Marauder (with XL I might add) armed with 3xLPL 2xMPL. What's even funnier, it was on Terra Therma, the hottest map there is.
I only had 400 meters of effective range but the LPLs on this mech have a 0.6 second burn duration. Before they could even target lock me, my laser burn was already over. And big XL really helps in stepping back into cover.

Edited by Kmieciu, 21 April 2017 - 01:40 AM.

[theUgly]

That is how you do it boaa !!

Those lil haters Pat Kell, Carl Vickers and MischiefSC
can't navigate around their own home without a GPS
let alone pilot a damn Mech ...

Keep utilizing them LRMs boyz!!

Just don't forget to torso twist a bit more
with those solid front lining Lrm mechs You have,
so we can get just a bit more damage our of You.

[Kmieciu]

theUgly, on 21 April 2017 - 01:45 AM, said:

Just don't forget to torso twist a bit more

Hard to torso twist when they're chain firing those clan LRMs for maximum target suppression!!

But don't worry: just aim for their side torsos for maximum damage farming. (if you crit the ST you get credited for destroying the arm as well).

[theUgly]

The moment,, at Polar Highlands...
you & your buddy in your lrm mechs ..
La devastating lrm duo !!!

Having fun ,, talking about women and liquor...
sitting in hole .. waiting for a locks

At that same moment .. when you look up ...
while 3 Battlemasters with their 5 LPLs
peeking over that lil hill.. at the same time ..
300 meters away from You .. staring at You
... You staring at the score ... 3 - 10

That moment... right before they melt You sh@t...
You & Your friend .. La duo ... waiting for locks
... having fun

[Killer Kellaine]

OZHomerOZ, on 20 April 2017 - 11:46 PM, said:

Take what you want, but if you want to do better more often bring direct fire.

This assumes good health and aim.

Funny, My best matches (most damage done) have been in LRM mech's, Granted I never run straight boats. My fav build for Inner Sphere is 4 LRM 15's and 2 ER Large on my Mauler 1R. I average 500+ dam and it is not abnormal to get over 1000 dam in this beast. Granted it is not a front line mech, it was not designed to be one. It is a support mech. When used at range (500-800 meters), it is very effective. Not just in the damage it does but also in the damage it prevents by keeping enemy mech pinned down at times and allowing/buying time for the rest of the unit to maneuver or move up to attack.

Strategically, They really can be effective if used incorrectly. But then so is every weapon. I train my Unit to defend against LRM's as well as Fight with them.

As far as how long I have played..... I have played MWO now for 3+ years now, but I have played Battletech in numerous forms since the summer of 1990. (not that that means much when it comes to this game)

[Killer Kellaine]

KHAN ATTAKHAN, on 21 April 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

So, alone in my Supernova doing 600 - 1100 per game, 3 kills per match average is not welcome, I've seen so called tier one brawlers get as low as 60 damage constantly in games because they don't have 3 -4 mechs to support them while they only come in fresh to steal a kill, "OH MY GOD my paint got scratched, YOU DIDN"T SUPPORT MEEEEEE, AAAARRRRRGGGGHHH, .
100 ton assault LRM boat getting highest damage in both teams
100 ton assault brawler getting what I leave
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Your hatred of LRM boats is because you keep getting killed or supressed by them not because they are ineffective, plain and simple, don't keep saying they have no place because your an easy target, if you can't stand the rain then get out of the storm and go play League Of Lunchbox.
My boat and i'm sailing home in it, g'bye

LOL

Thank you,

That brings up another point. I keep forgetting to make. If LRM's are so ineffective, then why do they do so much damage?

Your arguments look so feeble when compared to that.

LRM's are the mortal enemy of direct fire weapons because if you cant move from cover then you cant use your big guns................... Then you say. Oh I easily moved out of the way of them.... only had to run for cover and was not able to move from cover without getting nailed again by a weapon that you scream should be banned because it is ineffective. But in fact your arguments lend credence that LRM's may be the most powerful weapon on the field..... Hmmmmm. Could it be... lol

[Willard Phule]

My biggest issue with LRMs is how they've become the "lowest common denominator."

The whole "wait until you hear a beep, then fire and forget" thing has guaranteed that it is the default weapon system of people trying to figure out how to move, aim and fire at the same time. New players and people that prefer to fight from the safety of being in the rear, hopefully behind something.

It's not bad when it's just a portion of your team in a PUG, or if you've got dedicated spotters to actually put them to use. But when a majority, sometimes up to 80% of your team, relies on LRMs as it's primary damage dealing system...dude. This is why spawnfarming is a thing.

There are multiple vicious cycles involved with LRMs. ECM doesn't work the way it should, LRMs shouldn't be used primarily for indirect fire, blah blah blah.

Personally, I think they should just flatten out the trajectory and up the speed while shortening the time it takes to lock an ECM equipped mech. Makes cover more useful for those that don't use them, makes positioning more important for those that do. Kinda makes TAG more useful, too.

Edited by Willard Phule, 21 April 2017 - 07:44 AM.