65 replies to this topic

[Curccu]

MischiefSC, on 05 September 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

Spoiler

<br></p><p>Polar Highlands is not a flat, featureless plane.</p><p><br></p><p>I can close to 180m while exposing myself only briefly, not enough for you to do any significant damage. Then I'll kill you with 0 effort.<br></p><p><br></p><p>Beyond that you're letting us play 4 v 3 against your teammates. We have 350 armor/mech, so 1400 armor in that fight. We have alphas that do about 45 damage alpha (average of 40-50 pts) to selected locations each exchange. 4 of us, that's 180 damage/exchange.</p><p><br></p><p>Your teammates only have 1050 armor in that fight because the guy with LRMs is off hiding and shooting from cover.</p><p><br></p><p>Your teammates are doing 135 damage (45x3) + your scattered, inaccurate LRM damage to wherever it hits.</p><p><br></p><p>So in the first exchange we will absolutely kill 1 of them. Now it's 180 damage vs 90 damage + 1 inaccurate splattering of LRMs.</p><p><br></p><p>Do you see how that works?</p><p><br></p><p>LRMs are not artillery support. They do not kill tons of enemies with every salvo, they don't obliterate targets and everything close by every time they fire, which makes them useful as a support weapon.</p><p><br></p><p><strong>LRMs do about the same damage (or less) per ton devoted to them but do it inaccurately compared to every other weapon. </strong></p><p><br></p><p>The only thing LRMs do well is let you shoot while hiding. So you're doing less useful damage and less accurately, but in return you get to force your teammates to fight with 1 less mechs worth of armor to soak up enemy return fire.</p><p><br></p><p>LRMs are always bad. Always. Every situation, every map, every mode. They are inherently inferior as a choice to direct fire. Always, no exceptions. There is no 'except when'.</p><p><br></p><p>The only time LRMs are viable is when the player has physical disabilities that leave them unable to aim accurately or they're playing on a potato that has such terrible sub-30 fps that they literally can't effectively aim. In that instance LRMs may be their most viable choice because they literally can't use direct fire.</p><p><br></p><p>The problem isn't that LRMs are bad for scouting. It's that scouting is only 4 v 4, so each player is a more critical piece of their teams performance and so it highlights how absolutely always 100% terrible LRMs are compared to direct fire.</p><p><br></p><p>There is no map, no situation, no reason

Well have to disargree, I think myself as pretty decent player as is WDMC.
LRMs to appropriate amount has been tested in Polar at Scouting mode, Solo queue, Group queue and even MRBC succesfully. it requires good team coordinaation and map knowledge but it can be effective more effective than directfire.

[MischiefSC]

Curccu, on 05 September 2017 - 11:21 AM, said:

Well have to disargree, I think myself as pretty decent player as is WDMC.
LRMs to appropriate amount has been tested in Polar at Scouting mode, Solo queue, Group queue and even MRBC succesfully. it requires good team coordinaation and map knowledge but it can be effective more effective than directfire.

Not arguing that WDMC is a good team. However anyone you beat with LRMs you could have beaten more easily with direct fire. I can put up good match scores with LRMs too; when things play out my way. I can always put up good match scores with direct fire. LRMs are only useful if the other team makes the mistakes you need them to make.

Good coordination and map knowledge is also useful with direct fire.

Again, ton for ton, direct fire does as much damage or more and in a focused location than LRMs. The only thing that LRMs do is let you shoot at people (less effectively) who are not in cover, who are not near cover, who are not close to you, do not have AMS/ECM available and who have not already pushed you or your teammates. Because even if you're playing a 'keep away' strategy with 1 or 2 narcers/spotters and scattered LRM boats if the other team is any good at shooting and kills your spotters, you're now boned.

Direct fire always works. Cover always works. LRMs only work when someone isn't using the other two very well - in which case you could beat them even more easily with direct fire.

[L1f3H4ck]

MischiefSC, on 05 September 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

Polar Highlands is not a flat, featureless plane.

I can close to 180m while exposing myself only briefly, not enough for you to do any significant damage. Then I'll kill you with 0 effort.

Beyond that you're letting us play 4 v 3 against your teammates. We have 350 armor/mech, so 1400 armor in that fight. We have alphas that do about 45 damage alpha (average of 40-50 pts) to selected locations each exchange. 4 of us, that's 180 damage/exchange.

Your teammates only have 1050 armor in that fight because the guy with LRMs is off hiding and shooting from cover.

Your teammates are doing 135 damage (45x3) + your scattered, inaccurate LRM damage to wherever it hits.

So in the first exchange we will absolutely kill 1 of them. Now it's 180 damage vs 90 damage + 1 inaccurate splattering of LRMs.

Do you see how that works?

LRMs are not artillery support. They do not kill tons of enemies with every salvo, they don't obliterate targets and everything close by every time they fire, which makes them useful as a support weapon.

LRMs do about the same damage (or less) per ton devoted to them but do it inaccurately compared to every other weapon.

The only thing LRMs do well is let you shoot while hiding. So you're doing less useful damage and less accurately, but in return you get to force your teammates to fight with 1 less mechs worth of armor to soak up enemy return fire.

LRMs are always bad. Always. Every situation, every map, every mode. They are inherently inferior as a choice to direct fire. Always, no exceptions. There is no 'except when'.

The only time LRMs are viable is when the player has physical disabilities that leave them unable to aim accurately or they're playing on a potato that has such terrible sub-30 fps that they literally can't effectively aim. In that instance LRMs may be their most viable choice because they literally can't use direct fire.

The problem isn't that LRMs are bad for scouting. It's that scouting is only 4 v 4, so each player is a more critical piece of their teams performance and so it highlights how absolutely always 100% terrible LRMs are compared to direct fire.

There is no map, no situation, no reason

You're just bad at using them then. Everything you said about them just shows that you don't understand them at all.

[Pariah Devalis]

Fuerchtenichts, on 05 September 2017 - 04:51 AM, said:

Skill = luck becoming a habit.

In this case it seems it was just an XL engine blown off because of a lack of rear shoulder armor combined with mech build rule #3 "Don't bring LRMs to a brawl!"

Hey, now. Educated guess, considering his payload!

MischiefSC, on 05 September 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

The only time LRMs are viable is when the player has physical disabilities that leave them unable to aim accurately or they're playing on a potato that has such terrible sub-30 fps that they literally can't effectively aim. In that instance LRMs may be their most viable choice because they literally can't use direct fire.

Hell, Streaks are a far better option, if aiming is impossible for physical reasons. Still bulky. Still lock on. No minimum range, though, and still hit hard.

Davegt27, on 05 September 2017 - 09:27 AM, said:

your right 50% less

thanks

edit:
my new shadowcat I got it up to 68 alpha lol

Not after you consider the Artemis Tax. Artemis is fairly optional for IS mechs, but is damned near a requirement for Clan ones. As a result, you're paying the same tonnage for SRM4, and only saving half a ton with SRM6. However, the IS SRM doing 2.15 damage per missile vs the Clan's 2.00 damage per missile somewhat compensates for that.

Also, I can only assume making those ERSLas beefier lasers comes at the expense of heat. Sustainability in a knife fight is important. You have two enemies in a brawl: Your enemy and your heat gauge.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 05 September 2017 - 01:48 PM.

[Leone]

Here, Here!

I may hafta quote you on that last one.

~Leone.

[TWIAFU]

HallowOne, on 04 September 2017 - 07:46 PM, said:

I'm sick of calling targets and then everyone on your team hears it as do your own thing.

Wait, you mean when you call "Bravo! Bushwacker, weak LT, XL Check!" that's not code for overheat mid-combat, run after a squirrel some 1k meters away and complain about someone not locking targets?

??

[TWIAFU]

Daidachi, on 04 September 2017 - 09:19 PM, said:

4 x Bushwhacker P1.

GG EZ

SRM6x4 Assassin Scout Lance.

[Jun Watarase]

Scouting is about brawling? I thought it was about running fast mechs with ECM and hiding to avoid the enemies since you dont need to fight at all to win.

[Curccu]

Jun Watarase, on 05 September 2017 - 11:15 PM, said:

Scouting is about brawling? I thought it was about running fast mechs with ECM and hiding to avoid the enemies since you dont need to fight at all to win.

Kinda hate that part, 4x Pirates bane with stealth armor, just collecting beacons... not sure how to stop them, while not crippling yourself against anything else that might actually want to fight you.

IMO escaping the battlefield should not be possible if enemy mech is in the DZ... or EZ actually.

[TWIAFU]

Jun Watarase, on 05 September 2017 - 11:15 PM, said:

Scouting is about brawling? I thought it was about running fast mechs with ECM and hiding to avoid the enemies since you dont need to fight at all to win.

I only see the Clans doing that after endless loss after loss. They just give up on combat and try to get Intel. Might work for a drop or two until we see what they are doing and stop them from it.

But then, the IS Scout pugs are so bad, any advancement made is quickly lost....

[Aramuside]

The Basilisk, on 05 September 2017 - 04:21 AM, said:

Every thing you said may be clear as daylight for those:

-- playing MWO for some time and having learned the weapons mechanics and care enough about the game to give a F..k
-- playing on a computer that gives you enough performance to actually care to even try brawling
-- playing MWO and beeing able to target fast and accurat enough to be worth sh.. in a brawl
-- having the money and nerves to bother with equiping a mech for scout and scout only

...and a myriad other reasons..so stop complaining and realize that the problem is the mode and the (completely stupid unbattletech like) game mechanics that force you to drive a certain loadouts, invalidating all other loadouts that would otherwise at least not completely worthless.

Don't get me wrong, I do not scond the "spezial I want to do it myway snowflakes".
Its just that your rant becomes pretty pointless when taking into account that the same guys not beeing able or interested or knowledgeable enough to successfully play PUG SCOUT are effin PUGs.

So if you are so pro to have the builds, knowledge and skills to play FP Scout correctly why the f..k are you puging ????
The first and foremost rule of ALL FP MODES IS YOU SHALL NOT PUG OR BE DAMNED TO GET NAPS IN YOUR TEAM AND GET SHAFTED.

That was vaguely English,

[MischiefSC]

Ravenous Starling, on 05 September 2017 - 01:35 PM, said:

You're just bad at using them then. Everything you said about them just shows that you don't understand them at all.

You mean that LRMs can't be targeted to a location like direct fire, do the same or less damage/ton, are slower and less reliable and easier to counter?

Going to put this one up again - please shoe me a top tier team playing a top tier team with LRMs. In fact I'll happily take the time to put a team of the best direct fire players who want to do it for a lark and you do the best you can to put an LRM team together and we'll play on Polar even.

Because LRMs are good at farming bads. If you can't farm bads and have to play against good players they get crushed.

Because this has been tested and proven repeatedly for years.

[Alexandra Hekmatyar]

Daidachi, on 04 September 2017 - 09:19 PM, said:

4 x Bushwhacker P1.

GG EZ

[Iron Buccaneer]

Worst build I saw was a Raven with one machine gun, one medium laser, one lrm 5, and a tag. I'm pretty sure it had a stock standard engine in it as well.

[Pariah Devalis]

And someone was tweeting to the devs that the Clans have too many scouting advantages. GFDI....

IS can carry similar effective payloads on similarly durable chassis (if not moreso with quirks). They have more PPFLD options, some of which we cannot match. For example AC20. Their SRM cluster tighter naturally (nearly as much as a Clan SRM with Artemis), and do 0.15 damage extra per missile fired. Your lasers are cooler and discharge in a shorter space of time providing easier component focusing. Clan mechs run hotter, meaning Clan mechs are impacted by flamers far more than IS mechs. Ranges of engagement are about equal. The IS has 5 tons of mech over the Clans, per mech, for a minimal 20 ton advantage over the enemy team.

There are also IS tactics that the Clans cannot actually effectively counter without putting themselves in extreme risk of literally any other sort of enemy composition, such as stacked ECM locusts dropship diving.

Side note: would love to be able to shoot down the enemy dropship to deny dropship dive teams from zero-conflict victories.

This is one of the reasons we want IS players to get their heads out of their asses and into the game. Bringing the wrong tools and getting pounded doesn't mean the enemy is OP. It means you brought the wrong tools. You brought a sniper rifle to a knife fight. You used a hammer when you needed a wrench.

You pulled on the door handle that clearly read "push."

Just because you think you are a special snowflake or because you get your butt beaten due to your poor decisions doesn't mean the rest of us should be punished for it.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 06 September 2017 - 10:21 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Really isn't a counter to smoke diving stealth armor locust.

[Pariah Devalis]

Actually, a serious suggestion. I made this thread for the Clan pilots out there, but if someone who knows IS scouting would do the same for the IS, that would be great.

[L1f3H4ck]

MischiefSC, on 06 September 2017 - 07:53 AM, said:

You mean that LRMs can't be targeted to a location like direct fire, do the same or less damage/ton, are slower and less reliable and easier to counter?

Going to put this one up again - please shoe me a top tier team playing a top tier team with LRMs. In fact I'll happily take the time to put a team of the best direct fire players who want to do it for a lark and you do the best you can to put an LRM team together and we'll play on Polar even.

Because LRMs are good at farming bads. If you can't farm bads and have to play against good players they get crushed. 7

Because this has been tested and proven repeatedly for years.

More proof you don't get it. You don't do LRM teams, you bring one boat, maybe two at most. And you think Polar is the best map for LRMs, lol.

[Curccu]

MischiefSC, on 06 September 2017 - 07:53 AM, said:

Going to put this one up again - please shoe me a top tier team playing a top tier team with LRMs. In fact I'll happily take the time to put a team of the best direct fire players who want to do it for a lark and you do the best you can to put an LRM team together and we'll play on Polar even.

Again. We, WDMC have used LRMs in Polar against other MRBC EU A-Division team and won.

[MischiefSC]

Ravenous Starling, on 06 September 2017 - 11:08 AM, said:

More proof you don't get it. You don't do LRM teams, you bring one boat, maybe two at most. And you think Polar is the best map for LRMs, lol.

So I'm going to assume that you know better about how LRMs work than all the best players in the game, for the sake of argument. Because, to clarify, the overall contempt people have for LRMs is driven by the most competitive facets of the game and literally all the top performing people in the game have tested and reaffirmed this same data.

So make a team, with however many mechs with LRMs you want, however you want to do it. Then pick the map. I'm get a team of people using direct fire. Then we can do a match or best out of 3 or whatever you want.

Because without exception, universally, the already established math on why LRMs are inferior has been tested and proven. So why don't you actually do what nobody else has done and actually show LRMs are as good or better than direct fire.