422 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Jiang Wei, on 02 June 2017 - 01:11 PM, said:

Well then it wouldnt matter would it. The complaint is then even more invalid.

This depends upon what the complaint/debate/argument was about.

If it's "the fastest and easiest route to victory", than most times playing a game like Skirmish tends to be the "go to" method of winning. However, this can fail and is often not the only way (unless it's Skirmish game mode, then it is the only way).

If you have a team willing to balance objectives and killing, than playing to the objectives can be rewarding and can change a "pure skirmish" play style and create a win where one may not have been possible otherwise or a win when one was already going to happen via kill.

As most people are "here to shoot giant stompy robots", people tend to get upset greatly when the fighting isn't what won the match, but some "arbitrary objective" (I use this term lightly). Some people honestly get bent right out of shape when they have a few light mechs on their base in assault and they lose the match because they decided to go play skirmish in an assault match. (Or when one team caps a few points (three) in conquest, and the other team went pure skirmish mode and capped none of the points, and then loses via resource gathering, sometimes with almost no kills or only a few the other team fed them to slow them down as the counter ticked off.)


It's kinda like someone who hides in a corner and shuts down. In skirmish, it's kinda a rude thing to do (unless you are planning an ambush or something, I'll give that). When the objective is kill the enemy team and only that, than it's just a waste most times. However, in game modes where there is an alternative manner to win, let them hide all they want. They would still be losing anyway...

(This is the problem when entering into a conversation only half way... I think I missed the opening context...)

I_AM_ZUUL, on 02 June 2017 - 07:29 PM, said:

In your Group play that could happen... I am not talking about that though am I? I am talking about Solo queue...

AKA: Comp play =/= Solo/Casual play

I've been saying that for some time, but then people keep reverting back to "but the comp players..." or "in comp play..."

[Lorcryst NySell]

Revis Volek, on 02 June 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

<wall of text snipped>

I never said that I was good, I'm quite aware of my level of skill.

But where did you get those "points" ? I only see a bar going up or down ... and after taking carefull measurements in screenshots, pixel by pixel, I've constated that you can indeed lose more than a single pixel on a bad loss ...

But that might be observer error.

Now, instead of berating me because I'm a bad player, would you mind teaching me how to get better ?

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Tesunie, on 02 June 2017 - 07:37 PM, said:

AKA: Comp play =/= Solo/Casual play

I've been saying that for some time, but then people keep reverting back to "but the comp players..." or "in comp play..."

That is cause those people have NO actual knowledge of the game & only have rote learning about the very specific aspect that they have been told the "answers" for the very defined purpose the Unit needs them to be able to preform. These are not conclusions they have reach themselves or having any understanding of the fundamental principles that lead to those answers, which is why they try to apply the only "answer" they know to all applications.

[Wil McCullough]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 02 June 2017 - 10:48 AM, said:

Anything cGauss/cERPPC requires being carried... being unable to & unwilling to push a position during the mid-game makes them responsible for the majority of defeats they are involved in by hiding instead of using their weight where it is needed, during victories their hiding in the back means that the Team had to win the mid-game without their weight pushing the position thereby making all the damage they do during the latter part of the mid-game and then the end game clean up once the game has already been won a total irrelevance. So in Defeat they do 800 meaningless damage hiding in the back & in victory they do +600 of the 800 damage when it is again irrelevant because the match has already been won. They are the very definition of being Carried just as much as the terribad who does sub 200 damage hitting walls all game... both contribute to the victory an equal amount.

i have to say...

the mental gymnastics involved here is impressive.

i think trump needs to hire you for his spin campaign. it's utter **** right now.

[Vxheous]

Lorcryst NySell, on 02 June 2017 - 09:22 PM, said:

I never said that I was good, I'm quite aware of my level of skill.

But where did you get those "points" ? I only see a bar going up or down ... and after taking carefull measurements in screenshots, pixel by pixel, I've constated that you can indeed lose more than a single pixel on a bad loss ...

But that might be observer error.

Now, instead of berating me because I'm a bad player, would you mind teaching me how to get better ?

I'm willing to teach you how to get better, add me in game.

Actually, i'll PM you

Edited by Vxheous Kerensky, 02 June 2017 - 10:22 PM.

[Tesunie]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 02 June 2017 - 09:24 PM, said:

That is cause those people have NO actual knowledge of the game & only have rote learning about the very specific aspect that they have been told the "answers" for the very defined purpose the Unit needs them to be able to preform. These are not conclusions they have reach themselves or having any understanding of the fundamental principles that lead to those answers, which is why they try to apply the only "answer" they know to all applications.

I wouldn't be saying it that far...

The comp groups (and their followers) do have some points. But they tend to not think so much of "outside the box" with their tactics, and their level of play is different from the normal level of play seen everywhere else in the game.

I listen to the comp players. They present great min-max advice. However, I also will test their advice against my own results. Where and when they differ, I will use what works for me in my normal average level of play. If I'm ever in comp play I will probably do things more their way (such as dropping LRMs). However, outside that level of play, just about anything can go, depending upon how one uses it.


In this example, I use LRMs differently from nearly everyone else I've seen so far (though I know I'm not alone). I use them on the front lines, within a mixed build, and often within line of sight, with my own locks. I use LRMs to combat the "twist and shield a side" tactic, because spread counters side shielding to some extent. I also tend to utilize JJs a lot as of late. The thing with LRMs is, they don't care about reticle or weapon shake caused by jumping. So I use them as I am jumping (as well as my lasers when I have that moment between jumping, falling and cushioning my landing).

As I tell people, it's all in how you use what you bring far more than what you actually bring. (Though a good build does help.) You can use almost any weapon, depending upon your tactics, pilots skill set and intention. For exmapleI use LRMs as more of a mid ranged bombardment weapon, to make holes or to exploit damaged components, which my lasers can either exploit with their accuracy or even create. (Sorry if I am rambling here a bit. It's late and well past my bed time... again...)

[Steve Pryde]

Jiang Wei, on 02 June 2017 - 02:41 PM, said:

I know how good players make LRM's useful

I know it! Don't use them!

And Again, u have no benefits from indirect fire when someone else needs to lock targets for you. UAVs can be shoot down easily.

Edited by Steve Pryde, 02 June 2017 - 11:19 PM.

[OrmsbyGore]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 02 June 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

Actually the teams win by taking Superior positions on the map (or the enemy is terrible enough to take Inferior positions on purpose), so AGAIN when +500 damage of their +800 damage total is done after the Match HAS ALREADY BEEN WON because CGL (Combat Group Loss) has already set in... that is the very definition of Being Carried. I would say that on average at least 60% of the time Matches are played are in the macro sense wasted time, once Chess players see the end then they tip their King, here we are required to go through all the moves until it over but it is still essentially wasted time since the end game has already been laid out. I understand that you have no real understanding of the game I am actually talking about since you think that cGauss/cERPPC is good in Solo, it means you have no real experience with Battletech and the experience that MWO has given you is a gross caricature of that. Solo plays a lot more like an actual Battletech game unlike Group/Comp which bears absolutely zero resemblance to it... so I will not correct you about the perverse version of Battletech you play & you do not try to talk things that you do not understand in the slightest.

I don't know if you've ever played against some of the game's more skilled players, but but when 4-6 guys using ppc/gauss poptarting to maximize their damage on your crucial components while minimizing your ability to return fire, you may develop a new appreciation for ppfld. Having said that, yes, I personally hate it when I'm in a brawler setup and the rest of my team's assaults are erLL/PPC snipers or LRM boats, unless they are moving up close to the front lines and sharing armor, in which case I don't really care.

[H Seldon]

I never boat LRMs, I tend to use mixed builds. LRMs tend to be useful in the beginning just to mess things up and later in the game when people are more careless. In between I'm using other weapons and staying with the group. I pilot assaults 99% of the time.

[Eternal Hunter]

Lol, haven't logged in\ played for quite some time, and i see the LRM thing is still "on"

[Cyborne Elemental]

If every mech capable, carried a single LRM-5, I guarantee that even in comp play, it would make a significant difference.

When you have the ability to reach out and deal 5 dmg per mech and support at long range with little or no effort, as long as locks can be sustained to land that damage, it adds up fast.

[zortesh]

The Trojan Titan, on 03 June 2017 - 05:04 AM, said:

If every mech capable, carried a single LRM-5, I guarantee that even in comp play, it would make a significant difference.

When you have the ability to reach out and deal 5 dmg per mech and support at long range with little or no effort, as long as locks can be sustained to land that damage, it adds up fast.

HahahahaHAHAHAhahahahahHAHAHAhahahahahaHHAHAHAhahahahahahHAHAHAhahahahahHAHAHAHahahaha.

more seriously.... too easy to hard-counter, too easy to avoid.

[MischiefSC]

Tesunie, on 02 June 2017 - 10:33 PM, said:

I wouldn't be saying it that far...

The comp groups (and their followers) do have some points. But they tend to not think so much of &quot;outside the box&quot; with their tactics, and their level of play is different from the normal level of play seen everywhere else in the game.

I hear this said a lot and it flat out isn't true.

Competitive play, both in context of real comp teams and even just teams that work hard at winning are constantly looking for new strategies, tactics and approaches. This consists of private matches and hours of theory crafting. Building decks and playing those new strats in live matches. Sometimes it works, sometimes not.

If there was any way to squeeze value out of LRMs then good players would do it. LRMs fail due to spread vs precise damage, time to target and the counters available. Because getting someone to move into cover is not as useful as killing them. Plus the guy in cover can still peek out, shoot, pull back in. Taking 20 pts of spread LRM damage to deliver a 60pt alpha to a single location is a great trade to make.

The meta for comp play has changed constantly. Poke, push, gauss/ppc, laservomit, SRM rush, it's a big bag of tricks. If LRMs worked as well they would get used.

They don't. They're good for spud farming in pug queue. People want to use them for that, great. It's pug queue, it's for derping. Saying they're actually useful but all the people who are better at the game "just don't get it" is incredibly disingenuous.

Edited by MischiefSC, 03 June 2017 - 06:42 AM.

[MischiefSC]

The Trojan Titan, on 03 June 2017 - 05:04 AM, said:

If every mech capable, carried a single LRM-5, I guarantee that even in comp play, it would make a significant difference.

When you have the ability to reach out and deal 5 dmg per mech and support at long range with little or no effort, as long as locks can be sustained to land that damage, it adds up fast.

Will make you the same challenge I make everyone who makes this argument -

go do it. Go ahead. Get all the leet LRM players together and go dominate comp play. Waiting to see it. Show all those scrubs the true power of LRMs. Dominate Div A, win the MWO WC. Because currently all that's ever happened is bad to mediocre players trying to say that LRMs are as good as direct fire but it's never been shown.

[Xiphias]

The Trojan Titan, on 03 June 2017 - 05:04 AM, said:

If every mech capable, carried a single LRM-5, I guarantee that even in comp play, it would make a significant difference.

When you have the ability to reach out and deal 5 dmg per mech and support at long range with little or no effort, as long as locks can be sustained to land that damage, it adds up fast.

This is the part that you don't understand. Sustaining locks is dangerous. Do you have your lights do it? They'll get oneshotted against Gauss+PPC if they maintain line of sight for sustained periods of time. Do you have single mech do it? It will get focused down. Do you have your whole team stand in the open? What happens when the enemy team cycles out?

Holding locks against a coordinated team that can aim straight is dangerous and difficult. Comp players are good at breaking locks and good at punishing spotters.

If we're forcing teams to take LRMs why not force them to take other weapon systems too? Small lasers? Clan non ultra autocannons? Clan streak 2s? Forcing players to take a weapon system isn't going to magically help balance that weapon. The flaws of LRMs are already known, it's just a question to if/how to fix them.

I agree that taking an LRM-5 would make a significant difference in comp play. Every mech would be wasting 2.5 tons on it and people would play mechs without missile hardpoints to avoid having to take a LRM-5. Alternatively, drop without any LRM 5 ammo and then pick up an AMS and a half ton of ammo. Eight LRM-5s aren't going to punch through eight AMS.

[Galenit]

Xiphias, on 01 June 2017 - 05:55 AM, said:

LRMs used in serious comp play: 0

That's the only proof of the lack of effectiveness you need.

Is it a proof, if its based on less then 20% of the playerbase?
Does it even matter, if this proof only counts for a gamestyle that dont matter for more then 80% of the playerbase?

[Cyborne Elemental]

1 lrm-5 costs 2 tons (1+1/2 if you use minimal ammo) in a clan mech,
1 lrm-5 costs 3 tons (2+1/2 if you use minimal ammo) in a IS mech.

If you're murderballing, you can focus 55 damage at any given time on top of any other damage coming in.
If that means nothing. sure. keep laughing.

Nobody in comp play uses ams, only ECM, its either min/max Gauss PPC or Laser vomit, every single ton is dedicated to firepower spam or armor.
And nobody will ever expect it either.

1 ACH or Locust with BAP/CAP or dare I say NARC, could turn the tide of just about any battle, given that much support.

Don't confuse the clusterfk in public play with what is possible in group or comp play with eachother.
Think about it.

Edited by The Trojan Titan, 03 June 2017 - 09:19 AM.

[Wil McCullough]

The Trojan Titan, on 03 June 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

And nobody will ever expect it either.

Don't confuse the clusterfk in public play with what is possible in group or comp play with eachother.
Think about it.

nobody expects a person to wear his pants on his head either. that doesn't mean wearing pants on your head makes you a fashion starter. it just makes you look weird.

as for the clusterfk comment, you're bang on the money. unfortunately it works against your argument because lurms ONLY work in the clusterfk environment that is pub play.

[OrmsbyGore]

The Trojan Titan, on 03 June 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

1 lrm-5 costs 2 tons (1+1/2 if you use minimal ammo) in a clan mech,
1 lrm-5 costs 3 tons (2+1/2 if you use minimal ammo) in a IS mech.

If you're murderballing, you can focus 55 damage at any given time on top of any other damage coming in.
If that means nothing. sure. keep laughing.

Nobody in comp play uses ams, only ECM, its either min/max Gauss PPC or Laser vomit, every single ton is dedicated to firepower spam or armor.
And nobody will ever expect it either.

1 ACH or Locust with BAP/CAP or dare I say NARC, could turn the tide of just about any battle, given that much support.

Don't confuse the clusterfk in public play with what is possible in group or comp play with eachother.
Think about it.

I don't understand what you're getting at. Surely you're not implying that LRM-5s deal 55 damage? or that it is focused? Or that you are the first person to think of teaming a NARC light with LRM carriers?

[Ted Wayz]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 02 June 2017 - 09:24 PM, said:

That is cause those people have NO actual knowledge of the game & only have rote learning about the very specific aspect that they have been told the "answers" for the very defined purpose the Unit needs them to be able to preform. These are not conclusions they have reach themselves or having any understanding of the fundamental principles that lead to those answers, which is why they try to apply the only "answer" they know to all applications.

Oh, kind of like when you try and talk about lurms.

Got it.