466 replies to this topic

[Variant1]

Deathlike, on 16 April 2018 - 06:53 PM, said:

Yes, they are so great, that comp play uses them regularly, like in the MWOWC finals!

...

[/sarcasm]

You know, if you keep defending them to the death like that, I'm sure you'll absolutely love obtaining the "most likely target to die" award.

Comps did use them back then known as lrmagdeon, which was so bad that most people left and the lrms got nerfed. They can still be used, but wouldnt be fun in comps since the whole match would be dudes sitin at back dirnking a mug of coffe while rakin in ridiculous dmg. Its also not very honerable to use them in comps.

Lykaon, on 17 April 2018 - 12:00 AM, said:

So if the LRM + spotter team is exceptionally clever and your targets are exceptionally stupid?

Sure LRMs can "win" on Mining Collective but your targets need to imbiciles.

No a good spoter/lrm can defeat a smart direct firers. Again position and use of map. The direct fire will get destroyed plain and simple.


also why are we comparing 2v2? the game is 12v12 which makes lrms way more effecive. As for solaris lrms wont be effective due to solaris focus on brawl oriented small maps

Edited by Variant1, 17 April 2018 - 02:38 PM.

[ANOM O MECH]

Variant1, on 17 April 2018 - 02:34 PM, said:

Comps did use them back then known as lrmagdeon, which was so bad that most people left and the lrms got nerfed. They can still be used, but wouldnt be fun in comps since the whole match would be dudes sitin at back dirnking a mug of coffe while rakin in ridiculous dmg. Its also not very honerable to use them in comps.

No a good spoter/lrm can defeat a smart direct firers. Again position and use of map. The direct fire will get destroyed plain and simple.


also why are we comparing 2v2? the game is 12v12 which makes lrms way more effecive. As for solaris lrms wont be effective due to solaris focus on brawl oriented small maps

What are you going on about?

You must be trolling as it is hard to believe anyone would actually believe in any way shape or form that lrms are better than direct fire.

Lrm's are bad. It's that simple.

They are not used in comp because they are bad and there is nothing about honour that enters the picture.

The video of what happens to folks bringing lurms to comp has been posted so many times it isn't even funny anymore...

[Jay Leon Hart]

Variant1, on 17 April 2018 - 02:34 PM, said:

also why are we comparing 2v2?

You said;

Quote

Lrms are good at softening targets, and they can shoot with imputy without return fire

I just pointed out that requires at least 1 other player.

So 1v1, they're even worse, as they lose their single advantage.

Feel free to set up a 12v12 match, the last attempt was a failure because not enough people wanted to play the LRM side.

[Variant1]

tker 669, on 17 April 2018 - 02:53 PM, said:

What are you going on about?

You must be trolling as it is hard to believe anyone would actually believe in any way shape or form that lrms are better than direct fire.

Lrm's are bad. It's that simple.

They are not used in comp because they are bad and there is nothing about honour that enters the picture.

The video of what happens to folks bringing lurms to comp has been posted so many times it isn't even funny anymore...

trolling? got nothing smart to say so throw bait instead, okay ill bite. Lrms are okay, its that simple. As long as that indirect fire stays on a lock on mechanic its not going to be as strong as direct fire.

Jay Leon Hart, on 17 April 2018 - 02:57 PM, said:

You said;

I just pointed out that requires at least 1 other player.

So 1v1, they're even worse, as they lose their single advantage.

Feel free to set up a 12v12 match, the last attempt was a failure because not enough people wanted to play the LRM side.

Yeah but in a team game locks are given, even then its best to to be with the teamates to cover for weaknesses, thats why they are so effective in lower tiers. In higher play its much harder to do since the enemies will be more knowing about lrms strengths/weaknesses, that means the player using lrms will need to be more agressive or switch up the aproach

[ANOM O MECH]

Variant1, on 17 April 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

trolling? got nothing smart to say so throw bait instead, okay ill bite. Lrms are okay, its that simple. As long as that indirect fire stays on a lock on mechanic its not going to be as strong as direct fire.

Look, lrms are not ok. They are bad. Laughably so.

This isn't a debate or even serious topic.

I pretty much stick to CW and lurms lose matches especially for those that bring them to every map no matter what.

As far as having something smart it is hard when you going the way you are especially since it appears you do not have a very good grasp of the game.

[Burke IV]

Lurmers rejoice, i may have found a way to reinvigorate my old huntsman build. Its far from perfect and is still mildly ammo shy, but it might be able to get enough missiles flying to get the job done

Behold

Cheers smurfy!

[Burke IV]

Im also liking this tbh. Both builds are extremly weak at direct fire, this one has a little more ammo security. Just incase 7 LRM lanchers upsets anybody

Edited by Burke IV, 17 April 2018 - 04:42 PM.

[Variant1]

tker 669, on 17 April 2018 - 04:01 PM, said:

Look, lrms are not ok. They are bad. Laughably so.

This isn't a debate or even serious topic.

I pretty much stick to CW and lurms lose matches especially for those that bring them to every map no matter what.

As far as having something smart it is hard when you going the way you are especially since it appears you do not have a very good grasp of the game.

You guys just want you op lrms back, take off the rose tinted goggles. I will happily hop on the buff lrm train if they remove the indirect fire which is the main complaint of the weapon. Remove its indirect fire and we can buff it to be competitive with other direct fire weapons. Either that or keep the indirect fire and it will continue to be "bad". To each there own

[Burke IV]

Spoiler

Quote

Design Notes: After reviewing the net effects of a series of other changes that affected lockon weapons, we feel confident in providing LRM's with some much needed QoL velocity increases to their profile to make them more effective at longer ranges. With this said, we are still razor focused on the impact of such a change, and while over the long run we want to see an increase the usability of this weapon at higher levels of play, we cannot ignore the possible ramifications of a change such as this at lower levels of play. We are moving ahead with a raw buff for now, provided we feel that the previous changes to lock on weapons have given us some clearance to push forward some much needed velocity changes. But should this change swing the dial in a negative direction for lower tier players, we have a number of options under consideration that will allow us to dial the weapon back in a future patch should we feel that this buff pass swings it too far into a problematic area for lower tiered players.

So i have read this and thought, if i went and made an alt account and took it into tier5 and tormented noobs with my LRMs... I would raise up in tier. If LRMs are so hideously over powered at low tiers they would consistantly hand out wins and those players that used them would rise up the tiers. This would take them away from the poor tier 5 noobs who cant cope with LRMs wouldnt it? It would have all balanced itself out in the end if things had just been left alone.

I was thinking to myself that as LRM5s cant actually kill anything now, they are an ideal torment weapon for tier5 noobs Some poor soul in an assult mech who cant even see whos hitting him thru the explosions and it goes on... and on... But this argument of protecting the noobs just doesnt quite seem right to me. Anything is a torment when you are new, being gauss sniped for example is severely unfair and liable to make people rage quit due to being completely impossible to defend against or strike back.

I think LRMs were pretty well balanced just before the tree, they were just slightly weak but still usable. I dont rate the chances of ever getting that balance back very highly tbh.

Edited to fix my spelling

Edited by Burke IV, 18 April 2018 - 04:22 AM.

[VeeOt Dragon]

as an ex-Army Artilleryman I love indirect fire. yes LRMs in MWO have a lot of counters but if you play right and work with your team they can be very effective. this latest patch improved LRMs without making them overpowered. the slight increase in speed making it so that AMS is slightly less effective and enemy mechs have to react faster to avoid them.

one thing about LRMs that I find most people in these arguments forget is that damage isn't the only thing LRMs are good for. one thing you can do is use them to scout. fire off a single launcher where you think the enemy might be and If they have AMS they give themselves away. also they are effective in keeping the enemies' heads down. with a pair of LRM mechs working together (as well as a spotter or team working together) you can even slow or stop an enemy push by making a few targets get to cover instead of advancing (this is in addition to the rest of the team taking shots as they present themselves). as for AMS nothing makes me laugh more than when an enemy with laser AMS overheats from the added heat buildup. got a light making a nuisance of itself well its likely in the open enough to hit it with a volley or two making it think twice.

in the end LRMs have the same problem that any support oriented build has, if your team isn't working together you wont do well. are LRMs the heavy hitter that gauss or Laser vomit is... no but they have a place and a usage. this isn't CoD its a whole different animal. if you want all direct fire go play something else.

one note though is NEVER have nothing but LRMs, always have some kind of backup for when the enemy gets in close or you run out of ammo. also targeting computers and Active Probes are a must for any LRM mech. just because a weapon isn't meta doesn't mean its worthless. hell I would love to see a Stock QP mode and watch all the meta-try-hards cry because their mechs aren't preforming the way they want (I play some stock build private lobbies with a youtuber now and again and they are a blast because of the variety of builds).

in the end to many people forget that games are about having fun. one of the things I enjoy about MWO is the possibility for variety in mech builds and how those builds work together in TEAM play. note I said team, various mechs have differing roles not every mech is supposed to be a DPS powerhouse. sadly in the end you see very little variety in mech builds.

Side Note-- i'm a mid tier 4 player and proud Pug. I play to have fun not to be the best and stomp on everyone else. I actually have the most fun when a match ends in a 12-11 win or lose (of course I want to win but a close loss is still fun). hell even a loss or win where the winning team loses all their mechs but wins because they played the objective better. close games are fun because everyone on both teams has a chance to do something.

[Burke IV]

Things that should have been.

[Lykaon]

Variant1, on 17 April 2018 - 02:34 PM, said:

No a good spoter/lrm can defeat a smart direct firers. Again position and use of map. The direct fire will get destroyed plain and simple.

Here is the problem with this idea.

The spotter is essentially using a direct fire method of some sort or the means of spotting is vulnerable to being countered with direct fire.

Example A TAG: spotter is vulnerable to counter fire because TAG is a direct fire weapon.

Example B LOS targeting: spoter has direct LoS and is supplying a friendly lock to the LRM carrier. The Spotter is once again in direct LoS thus vulnerable to counter fire.

Example C Spotter launches a UAV from safe cover: UAV is vulnerable to direct fire and shot down.

Example D Spotter Deploying NARC: Probably the "safest" method since one could use a stick and run method to minimize exposure but, NARCs (in particular I.S. NARC) require a relatively close proximity to stick on target. This does expose the spotter to counter fire and the NARCs are vulnerable to AMS and ECM disruption.


And then we have another issue. What keeps the enemy from simply closing on the LRM carrier? It's not going to be speed of the LRM carrier because any significant amount of LRM damage is going to deployed from a larger chassis. And if that chassis is maximizing it's speed it is probably in full route and has stopped firing.

It will also not be focused damage because LRMs siply don't do focused damage. A potential target can charge from cover point to cover point and soak damage between cover points quite easily. a few torso twists or a deadside build and that LRM target is now a point blank aggressor.

A fairly common speed for heavy class battlemechs/Omnimechs is 81 kph. Now without doing any precice math but some quick estimates that 81 kph mech can move about 25 meters per second. At a distance of about 600m from a firing LRM carrier that mech has about 3 seconds of free movement before the missiles land.

So a "good" direct fire opponent would manuver to a position that would force a direct confrontation and eliminate or at least mitigate the opertunities for a spotter to spot them and present the LRM launching mech with insurmountable hard cover so even if spotted LRMs simply can not hit them. Due to the super slow speed of LRMs and with 190 mps velocity a target at around 600m has 3 seconds to evade it's a no brainer to poke and dash against the LRMs.

Now worst case scenario for the LRMs is a fast ECM chassis like an Arctic cheetah. I would estimate an Arctic Cheetah has around 40 meters per second of movement. It also has an ECM that significantly increases LRM lock times.

QUick estimate on this sort of confrontation. LRM carrier is spotted first (because of highly visable missile plumes) Arctic cheetah manages to close to within 400m unseen (pretty easily done on any map even the much maligned Polar Highlands)

The Cheetah now is within a 10 second charge of it's target.

The cheetah breaks cover and will probably get a few seconds of free movement before being noticed by an LRM carrier focused on another target. So let's give the Cheetah 100m of movement.

The LRM carrier now sees the Cheetah and switches targets and repossitions to fire upon it. Let's give the cheetah 1 second of move for this 140m covered by the cheetah now.

LRM carrier attempts to lock with ECM delay this takes about 2 seconds the cheetah has now covered 220 m At that range the LRMs take about a second to land so the Cheetah is now at 260m traveled out of 400m or in the minimum range of the LRMs 180m min.

in this easily accomplished scenario the LRM carrier may have gotten a partial salvo to land on target before the aggressor gets within the LRM minimum range, MAYBE. And we all know an Arctic Cheetah can take a single LRM barrage even from and LRM 80 salvo so a partial hit is cake to soak.

I will admit this scenario does not work as well against mobile LRM platforms that remain in the midst of their teams but, if that LRM carrier is at all vulnerable to attack it's not difficult to blitz it with a fast skirmisher.

[darqsyde]

Are LRMs good? Yes, in certain situations.
Are LRMs bad? Yes, in certain situations.

Mostly though, it's not LRMs that are good/bad...it's the pure boating-stand back/still mentallity that makes or breaks the "LURM GUD/BAD" argument.

I have a handful of dedicated LRM "Boats", and I have fun with them, sometimes having excellent matches, sometimes having my poop pushed in, but those results have little to do with LRMs in particular, and more to do with the quality of play on one or both teams.

So, I suppose I'm saying, don't "Boat" LRMs, don't forget backup weapons, and don't assume you'll have somebody spotting.

And, for reference, here is one of my favourites.

https://mwo.smurfy-n...0d733ba8de20231

[JRcam4643]

On another more serious not here is my opinion on the Solaris situation.

[ANOM O MECH]

JRcam4643, on 19 April 2018 - 01:45 PM, said:

On another more serious not here is my opinion on the Solaris situation.

So... you are basically jumping from thread to thread spamming this video?

[Deathlike]

Variant1, on 17 April 2018 - 02:34 PM, said:

Comps did use them back then known as lrmagdeon, which was so bad that most people left and the lrms got nerfed. They can still be used, but wouldnt be fun in comps since the whole match would be dudes sitin at back dirnking a mug of coffe while rakin in ridiculous dmg. Its also not very honerable to use them in comps.

You have proof?

Seriously, you have as much proof as PGI being good UI/UX design (especially in the early UI 2.0 era), endless circle of loading, map design (Alpine), gamemode design (Escort, with the occasionally hopeless Atlas), and so many other things.

[Variant1]

if ecm can get a nicname than lrms is aimbot wallhack. I unfortunently could not find the 2 vids i was looking for but found others that suit well to demonstrate. It was ridiculous it wasnt fun it was just a snooze fest sitting back and destroying enemy teams 24/7. To be honest pgi was very kind with its nerfs to lrms.






and last but not least "cover" back then was reliable as shrodingers cat. Skip to 2:01 showing lrms literaly going through cover, this was not rare it hapened often. And old forest had pretty crap cover from lrms now that i remember playing that map, new forest is better with cover.

oh and this is still relevant. Premade won a match with lrm on their team. So the whole"lrm on their team is useless" is hogwash

[Evil Elmo]

JRcam4643, on 03 December 2017 - 11:05 AM, said:

LRMs have always been pretty good for me and I'm convinced they could be for anybody. A lot of people like to hate on them and claim they are no good but really it's more cause they are afraid of LRMs. I'm satisfied this video proves they are good.

I didn't know Jack Nicholson played MWO. Anyway, you are mostly right. LRMs aren't as bad as people think, although they do have problems. They're very usable though. They're best if you direct fire them from medium range with stacked artemis and TAG. Here's one of my games in my LRM archer.

Edited by Plaid Ninja, 01 May 2018 - 08:49 AM.

[Vellron2005]

I have to say that as of this last patch, with the LRM velocity buf, I find LRMs to be even more useful..

More of my missiles are hitting, as they are harder to dodge..

[Samantha Rbnsn1990]

LRMs are fantastic. I take them not to attack the enemy, but to make my teammates rage on me when they spectate and see what I'm running.