140 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

You guys realize he is trolling, right? Trolling a troll... this forum is really full of self righteous d-bags...

#sad #trump #bigly

[Jackal Noble]

End of the night last night, I read this thread I decided screw it I'm gonna take the one with the four missile hard points (also the one that has one energy or with 20% Cooldown down and some useless mg quirk.) Suffice to say I have been playing every roughneck var but this one lol. Anyways , took it out with lrm 10 + A X4 and 3 machine guns and 9-10 tons of ammo - first match landed on Polar and incursion, thank god cuz otherwise I don't think it would have worked.
Managed 747 dmg 2 kill, 3 kmdd.

Never again lol.

[Jackal Noble]

Also don't worry what people say let your freak flag fly however you want, this is a vgame after all. Relying on quirks too heavily to control your builds is metatastic.

[Ruar]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 08:00 AM, said:

And how do you do it by chassis? I have over 300 mechs and play all of them. Not fully mastered. Not using meta builds. Yet look at the leaderboards for newly released mechs and most of the time you will find me on them.

Because this game really isn't that hard and I have to look for ways to make it fun.

Yet people seem to think there is only one way to play. That if you are not running the optimal setup you are "hurting the team". No, being bad is what hurts the team. And because PSR is a XP bar tier covers up a lot of bad players. Yet people are saying they want them on their team because they are running an optimal build instead of my LRM KNT18 with a 1,53 W/L and 2.27 K/D. Really?

If you want to run the same chassis 5000 times be my guest. I will respect that as long as you respect my LRM Atlas. Especially if it outscores you in a match we are in.

You go to your profile stats, make a picture of that mech, and then post that picture showing what you do in that mech. Not as easy as the leaderboard but more relevant.

This game is easy and hard all at the same time. It rewards small mistakes with massive damage/death while having a tendency for certain designs/builds better able to avoid small mistakes. The fact you say the game isn't that hard makes me think you truly don't understand all the nuances. Hell, I know I don't understand all the nuances and I find the game still challenging in my favorite mechs let alone switching over to something like lights or assaults which are so much harder to play right.

There is more than one way to play, but at the same time you shouldn't be setting yourself up for failure. Why has the fullback mostly faded from professional and college football? Because the defenses are faster and better able to react to an extra blocker. Which has led most teams to not using a fullback except in special circumstances or formations. The same applies to LRMs. They are not an every down, every team kind of build. There are mechs that do well bring LRMs to the fight, that are designed around using that weapon system. However, the Roughneck is not one of those mechs. You are shoehorning in a weapon system that runs counter to the build design of that mech. It would be like loading up a Trebuchet with AC/5s and medium lasers and calling it a brawler.

I consistently play mech builds that are not optimal. In fact if something is meta then I tend to avoid it because I hate running cookie cutter builds. I saw TheBeefs video about the AC/20 + SRM roughneck and I refuse to put an AC/20 on mine after. Granted I put in an AC/20 on the first day and it doesn't suit me, but I still hate running meta builds simply because they are meta. However, there is a big difference between not running the meta and running a bad build. My three LL Enforcer is not meta but it's a very good build for how I play. My Assassin builds are close to meta but it tweak them how I see fit to match my style a bit more.

You can run a non meta build, but realize that doesn't mean gimping the mech by putting LRMs and MGs on a heavy mech designed for brawling. Don't build an Atlas around LRMs.

The problem I'm seeing is you don't understand what LRMs are for or how to play them. Which is something I probably can't change your mind about at this point since you don't seem interested in understanding why it's bad to use LRMs in such a manner. Telling you to ignore the match score when you are sitting back in a heavily armored mech that is designed to be up front but you've managed to pervert into some kind of stand off support build that does some damage but would be so much more effective on the front lines is just going to go in one eye and out the other.

Yeah, you can build a mech that way but your not doing your team any favors.

So don't be upset and whine on the forums when your team calls you out on your crappy build. You're the one who insists on running the fullback when it's third and 27, don't be surprised when the fans hate you for it.

Edited by Ruar, 23 April 2017 - 08:38 AM.

[Akala Tanara]

Now I don't HATE LRMs. They have their place, and in fact I will often be happy to take along 1-2 racks of LRMs, usually a single LRM15 at most and 1-2 tons of ammo tops. The reason I hate LRMs is because of LRMboats, fools that take pure LRMs, and LRM-supports like TAG and NARC on an assault mech, and to some extent on heavy/medium mechs, mostly because they're so freaking annoying and IS LRMs are purely useless once you get within 180m range. My average across all 10 seasons is 201.6, nothing impressive but according to you this allows me to criticize. :3 Certainly nothing to brag about though. I really should stick to assault mechs lol.. do love my king crab, and get too suicidal in my locust but so fun! (When I don't instantly die)

Anyway, personally I would say swap it to something more along the lines of a mix of SRM4 (or 6 with or without art), and medium pulse lasers. I quite like that style myself, or keep a LRM or two and focus on energy weapons for your main output rather than pure-LRMs. Like I said, LRMs are not bad, annoying as hell but not bad. They have a purpose but pure LRMs = lonely hated dead scrap of a mech hiding in the back that could be tanking hits for the smaller squishier stompers.

[MischiefSC]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 08:00 AM, said:

And how do you do it by chassis? I have over 300 mechs and play all of them. Not fully mastered. Not using meta builds. Yet look at the leaderboards for newly released mechs and most of the time you will find me on them.

Because this game really isn't that hard and I have to look for ways to make it fun.

Yet people seem to think there is only one way to play. That if you are not running the optimal setup you are "hurting the team". No, being bad is what hurts the team. And because PSR is a XP bar tier covers up a lot of bad players. Yet people are saying they want them on their team because they are running an optimal build instead of my LRM KNT18 with a 1,53 W/L and 2.27 K/D. Really?

If you want to run the same chassis 5000 times be my guest. I will respect that as long as you respect my LRM Atlas. Especially if it outscores you in a match we are in.

Did you see where I told you it's a game and play how you want?

LRMs are inferior to direct fire weapons. IS LLs are inferior to IS LPLs IS SPLs are inferior to Clan SPLs. None of that is some sort of opinion, it's just how the weapons work.

That LRMs promote people hiding and lurming from the back and taking LRM assaults just makes a bad situation worse.

Given how bad most people are in mediums, a decent pilot in a LRM Kentaro isn't a bad thing. Way more useful than the 3 MG, 2xlrm15 Cent I saw last night.

I play FW almost exclusively. Almost nothing I run is "metamechs" approved. My Night Gyr is 2 Lpls, 3xUAc2 because even long range trade drops turn into pushes with KCom and you don't want to play bumper cars with a BLR 2C with a 9 DPS ppc/Gauss loadout. Only exception ever was the 5lpl BLR 2C and when we go IS again that's being replaced by my All Roughneck Roughsex All The Time deck, cuz Roughneck.

You'll contribute better in direct fire. Especially new/bad players because they'll learn the skills that make them good players (positioning, teamwork, rolling damage, accuracy, where to shoot what mech, etc). Play what you want - have fun. Observing that LRMs are inferior to direct fire isn't some moral judgement it's an observation of the math involved and what mettle survives in the crucible of more competitive gameplay. Fun is still fun though and people should have fun. It's a game.

[Akala Tanara]

Funny thing for me the few times I tried to convert any of my mechs I currently own into heavy LRM-focused play, they end up on maps that just PUNISH you if you have LRMs at all much less pure-LRM focus. Crimson Strait for example... and that switch was so I could annoy some people back for once, because I get tired of being LRMspammed to death, but instead of getting some revenge, I instantly regret it because I end up on maps where I can barely use them effectively at all lol. And by LRM focused I mean, lots of LRMs but lots of lasers as backup so I'm not totally gimped in close range, and typically stay with the team. I only have one LRMboat, my Loyalty Blackjack, because I didn't like how it felt as SRMs after trying that.. lol.

[Zergling]

Across all Seasons in the QP Leaderboard, I've averaged 307 Match Score in heavies, and even reached 450 in one Season (with over 50 battles played that Season).
So yeah, I think I can criticise someone that is only averaging 145 match score in heavies in Season 10.

LRM Roughnecks are bad, mmkay?

Edited by Zergling, 23 April 2017 - 09:57 AM.

[MischiefSC]

I would criticize the build. Less so the player.

If you're going to go Roughsex, mid to brawl is where it shines. If you're going to LRM, go big tubes and head tag + Artemis, play close to reduce travel time and focus big mechs first. That splatter damage is more useful against big targets. Long body mechs like Stalker, King Crab, Crab, EBJ, TBR even more so.

Peek with head tag.

[Mister Blastman]

Ted Wayz, on 22 April 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

When you get a higher match score than me.

Which many of you haven't been doing.

So maybe focus on your own builds and find another boogeyman to blame the loss on?

Oh, Ted, not much to brag about there, cupcake:


If I were your teammate, I'd be pissed off, too.

[Deathlike]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

On average, but in matches where we have dropped together?

Hmmm, where is Deathlike?

What?

You were next to useless in the drop we were in. You died last (or near the last few), but contribute meh-worthy scores. I was in a Pirate's Bane. Mind you, your score is your score (it was average/OK), but as far as I was concerned, you didn't contribute anything of consequence.

[Yellonet]

Deathlike, on 23 April 2017 - 10:56 AM, said:

What?

You were next to useless in the drop we were in. You died last (or near the last few), but contribute meh-worthy scores. I was in a Pirate's Bane. Mind you, your score is your score (it was average/OK), but as far as I was concerned, you didn't contribute anything of consequence.

To be fair, isn't matchscore supposed to be just that, a measure of ones contribution?

[Deathlike]

Yellonet, on 23 April 2017 - 12:07 PM, said:

To be fair, isn't matchscore supposed to be just that, a measure of ones contribution?

It's like saying UAV spotting is worth X amount of contribution. Same could be said for the new AMS bonus. Score inflation is still score inflation.

Edited by Deathlike, 23 April 2017 - 12:21 PM.

[Ruar]

Yellonet, on 23 April 2017 - 12:07 PM, said:

To be fair, isn't matchscore supposed to be just that, a measure of ones contribution?

Kind of, but it doesn't measure enough factors.

How does the assault who anchored the push but had to stop shooting in order to avoid overheating get their contribution credited?

What about the medium who put pressure on the left flank causing three mechs to peel off and chase him down which resulted in a mismatch at the central point of attack get credit?

How about the SRM boat that was getting in behind mechs and finishing them off in two volleys with low damage dealt compared to the assault LRM who fired 1500 missiles, did 500 damage across 5 mechs with no KMDD, no kills, only a few component destruction's, and ended up with higher match score because of it?

The match score just doesn't account for all of the actions which contribute to a win. All it really does is provide a reflection of damage dealt which to some people means they did good if they did a bunch of damage. The truth is doing focused damage on key targets at key times is what really helps win a match. Doing damage is better than not doing damage, but random damage scattered across whichever mech is exposed long enough to shoot is no where near as effective as focusing on key areas and components of a mech while sharing armor and pushing on key terrain.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Wraith 1, on 22 April 2017 - 08:36 PM, said:

Okay.





Criticism: it has LRMs on it.

Yeah, Ted should have said "you can complain when you are winning more than me" because he's winning more than you are.

[Lykaon]

Ted Wayz, on 22 April 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

When you get a higher match score than me.

Which many of you haven't been doing.

So maybe focus on your own builds and find another boogeyman to blame the loss on?

For starters, I am not one of those staunch anti Lurmers. I understand that when applied properly LRMs can be an asset.

Now that that is out of the way I have some recommendations.

one, the roughneck is not a well designed LRM platform. It lacks appropriate quirks and in my opinion it lacks enough or the right kind of hardpoints to excel as an LRM platform. (1C has enough missile hardpoints but lacks secondary energy for TAG the others just lack sufficent missile hardpoints to meet the performances of other options that can fit 5+ LRM5s)

two, I always recommend avoiding the use of a chassis that is essentially a front line brawler for what is essentially a supporting role. This basically robs your team of what they expect to have (a Roughneck on the front lines) and gives them what many players don't even understand well (an LRM support platform).

three, Medium mechs are in general a better option for support platforms.The number of players who will pitch a fit over a Kintaro or Hunchback 4J Lurming is much much lower than the number of players who loose their <redacted> when they see an LRM Atlas. There is no expectation that a medium mech will be holding the line or leading the charge.No reasonable player expects a 50-55 ton mech with an XL engine to be volenteering as primary target for the enemy to shoot at.

There are other benefits to medium LRM platforms as well. Mediums are not generally on the top 3 to kill list for the enemy so you take less focus fire,Medium mechs are faster and can be deployed where they will be the most use far more easily than a slower heavier mech.And the heavily quirked LRM mediums will frequently OUT PERFORM assault mechs with more LRMs tubes simply by the merits of hyper quirking and the ability to shoot more effectivley from the added speed and agility of being lighter.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Whoever says the Roughneck is not a good LRM Mech needs to reevaluate the usefulness of Head-Mounted TAG and 3 high LRM mounts.

[stillnight]

Ted Wayz, on 22 April 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

When you get a higher match score than me.

Which many of you haven't been doing.

So maybe focus on your own builds and find another boogeyman to blame the loss on?

Okay, first off you're using a RoughNeck okay? That isn't meant to use LRMs at all it has no quirks towards it on top of that it's a fantastic brawler and when I mean fantastic I mean slotting two AC/10 on that ***** with 3 tons of ammo and nuclear-powered beams of death kind of fantastic. You're wasting a great brawler because "Hey guys I want to be part of the LRM train too" so people have a absolute right to blame the loss on you because you're wasting a great brawler on a mediocre weapon system.

It's like you're literally trying to put 2 LRM/20s on a HBK-4SP when it's meant to have SRM's and MLs.

[C E Dwyer]

Prosperity Park, on 23 April 2017 - 12:39 PM, said:

Whoever says the Roughneck is not a good LRM Mech needs to reevaluate the usefulness of Head-Mounted TAG and 3 high LRM mounts.

I completely agree, but when someone makes a post like this, you just have to aim at the offered target.

It can run a build like the Hunchback-4J and has extra space for ammo, DHS and back up weapons.

Thing is, if it's not the Mech it must be the pilot

[Ruar]

Prosperity Park, on 23 April 2017 - 12:39 PM, said:

Whoever says the Roughneck is not a good LRM Mech needs to reevaluate the usefulness of Head-Mounted TAG and 3 high LRM mounts.

Whoever thinks high mounted hardpoints + TAG makes a mech a good LRM boat needs to reevaluate their understanding of armor, armor quirks, and potential for brawling being >>> the ability to throw some LRMs downrange.