Vellron2005, on 01 June 2017 - 11:38 PM, said:
I have to say, when I opened this topic, I specifically said it was meant for statistical data and not the love/hate LRM bile.. yet, again, this thread has devolved into love/hate LRM bile..
I read the first and last pages (sorry, didn't have time to real all 133 comments since I opened the topic, it kinda exploded), but the jist of it, once again, the bile and bitterness being spat at one-another about LRMs..
So please, would someone tell me if anybody posted ANY actual statistical data, as requested in my OP?
Did PGI react in any way? (wishful thinking, I know, but still.. a boy can dream)
Also, let me just quickly comment on the fact that top-level comp teams don't use LRMs..
Personally, I don't understand why they don't use LRMs, cose' I've seen very successful drops using JUST LRM boats, but hey, I'm not a comp player, so I'll give them that.
The fact that competitive play is devoid or LRMs does not mean that LRMs are an inherently bad system. It may mean that they are not suited to that particular play style. Just like you won't see high-end speakers in a formula 1 race car.. Comp play is simply different, with its own rules and and ways to play.. But then again, comp play is not an official game mode either, is it? I don't see QP, FP and CP, now do I?
This means that Comp play is something almost "3'rd party" and cannot be taken into account when discussing the average MWO experience that most of the community enjoys.
And this topic is about exactly that.
The AVERAGE player's experience, and the statistical data involving using LRMs.
Again I IMPLORE all of you to cut the bile and hate down to a minimum and provide some hard evidence that LRMs are this way or that way.
Saying "there's no LRMs in comp play", or "LRMs are the worst" or "LRMs are amazing" is not hard data pertinent to the average player's MWO experience .. its an opinion.
I doubt that PGI would actually provide any hard numbers regarding lrms, but even then, the numbers would be debated, because it is very difficult to separate raw damage from effective damage. Opinions regarding lrms are about all we have, and the only thing we can judge for the effectiveness of lrms are those that use them vs those that do not. The trend is that the better players in this game (with a few outliers) almost universally shun LRMs. (Better players being those that have higher K/D ratios, higher W/L ratios, and higher overall match scores, and this is across all modes of play, (solo, group, FW, comp.))
The reasoning behind why the good players in this game think LRMs are bad have been explained many times: Travel time of LRMs, spread damage of LRMs, the myriad of ways to counter LRMs (like cover, ECM, radar dep), and how LRMs rely on opponents making a mistake (bad positioning, or bad movement) instead of relying on the user to make the play happen. Yes, LRMs can punish bad opponents, yes, LRMs can dish out a lot of raw damage if given the chance, yes, on 1-2 maps + a dedicated light with Narc you can make it rain, but it is very situational.
Every other weapon system in the game can do the job of LRMs, with the exception of being able to shoot while in cover and hitting (maybe) someone else behind low cover. There's talk that LRMs are used for area/movement denial, but a mech specialized in ERLL, or Gauss/PPC can provide exact same denial from an overwatch position (you see this in FW and Comp play a lot, especially ERLL builds in long range FW maps). There's talk that screenshake from LRMs can disorient an opponent, and that's true, but Dakka builds can do it just as well, and spread less damage across the mech (think single lrm missile of 1 damage vs single dakka shells of anywhere between 2-20 damage). This leads to the my last point: LRMs have a really high TTK. It takes an LRM boat a long time to actually kill something, basically relying on someone else to get killing blow and/or closing in and doing the job themselves with direct fire backup lasers. When an enemy team is known to have a lot of LRM boats, an all out push is usually what breaks them, because while 2-3 mechs may get killed during the close, once the other 9 get within 200-300m, it's all over.
Now, PGI has buffed LRMs in the past, only to revert changes within a week because the weapon system walks a very fine line of being completely useless to being completely overpowered. This really just stems from the indirect lock and fire mechanic of LRMs: Make them too good and everyone uses them because you don't actually have to aim. Keep them the way they are now and they are pretty much useless in every situation but low tier solo play.
LMP, on 02 June 2017 - 08:37 AM, said:
I use LRMs on every assault mech I have and no one has ever said a word to me about it.
Most people won't say anything, or care what someone else uses on their mech. In the end, if you're happy with your mech build, then go and have fun with it. It's only when people start complaining about how LRMs are OP (they're not), or how they can't go up in tier, or other such things that the weaknesses of LRMs are pointed out. I mean, I don't care if someone else uses LRMs, or tries to use LRMs to kill me, I'm good enough to play around it and punish LRMs boats for bringing LRMs. If they still had fun launching missiles at me regardless of how many actually hit me, good on them.
Edited by Vxheous Kerensky, 02 June 2017 - 09:04 AM.
8
