466 replies to this topic

[JRcam4643]

MischiefSC, on 06 December 2017 - 10:04 AM, said:

I'm not going to look at your leaderboard stats but I can say that having had this discussion many times that nobody who's arguing that LRMs are good more than they're bad ever is winning much more the 50% of their matches, which is a 1.0.

It's not about stat shaming or you've got to be this 733t to talk about balance, it's about perception and accurate reporting. Confirmation bias is going to make you remember things that agree with your beliefs and forget those that don't. Backfire effect will make you immediately create excuses for why the actual recorded and demonstrated data beyond the occasional anecdote doesn't agree with your assumptions.

The brain lies. In fact your brain is less honest than most politicians. Even your memory lies - you never remember the actual event, you remember the last time you remembered it so your memory literally changes as you try to recall events.

LRMs are bad for a lot of reasons. They've been gone over repeatesly. Easily countered, slow, imprecise, teaches bad habits and prevents people from leading to be a useful team member. I promise you - It's not that everyone who's successful at the game "doesn't get it" or hates LRMs for their freedom or whatever. Its that the math has been done, the testing done exhaustively a billion times and the results confirmed ad nauseum.

If you enjoy them then play them. Its a game. However they are flat out inferior to direct fire. Even mediocre direct fire. LBX are better
Small Pulse is better. Play what you want but be honest about it.

I'll save you the trouble. I'm below 50%.
Tested by who though? A bunch of pro players? Thats not the experience many people play with. In group play and faction play,sometimes, that might be right. Most people don't have that many buddies to play with that are very good. You can call that an excuse but it's undeniable truth that to an extent you're slave to your teams ability. One player can't carry every battle no matter how meta you may think his load out is.

[sycocys]

Not sure exactly what the new armor levels are at across the board, but 400 damage used to be 2 kills and more than half on the next one for most of the people I played with and against unless they were strictly farming damage.

[JediPanther]

If lrms were 'good' you'd see them in comp play and in heavy use during mwo wc which they are not. You're more likely to see an is mech used than lrms in a mwo wc match. When you want/need to win ppfd and laser vomit is what you use.

[Wolfways]

The mech I get the best damage scores in by far is my JM6-S. AC5's and AC2's must be super op!

[Andi Nagasia]

its true someone can do good with them, but that doesnt mean they are a good weapon system,
the problems with LRMs are simply that they are extremely situational, and more often that not you wont do good,
the Video is nice and you do show how they could be used, but i doubt every match you play LRMs is like those,

also,

As this Topic can be considered a clone of another you created days ago so im Merging them,

remember, It is forbidden to spam or post repeatedly like content on the forums.

As per the Code of Conduct,.

Thank you for your Cooperation

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 06 December 2017 - 10:45 AM.

[Khobai]

JRcam4643, on 06 December 2017 - 10:37 AM, said:

I'll save you the trouble. I'm below 50%.
Tested by who though? A bunch of pro players? Thats not the experience many people play with. In group play and faction play,sometimes, that might be right. Most people don't have that many buddies to play with that are very good. You can call that an excuse but it's undeniable truth that to an extent you're slave to your teams ability. One player can't carry every battle no matter how meta you may think his load out is.

stats dont mean anything anyway.

matchmaker is virtually non existent in this game so stacking teams is very easy.

anyone can statpad/manipulate their stats by joining a top 1% deathstack and crushing other players game after game.

trying to stat shame others because they dont exploit the system is pretty juvenile and pathetic IMO. so dont pay attention to people who try to tell you your stats are bad. because the people getting good stats are literally just sealclubbing their way up the rankings.


LRMs are still bad though

But look how gud LBX IZ!!!1111111

Edited by Khobai, 06 December 2017 - 10:48 AM.

[JRcam4643]

Khobai, on 06 December 2017 - 10:27 AM, said:

6



HEY GUYZ LBX REAL GUD LOOK AT MY DAMAGES AND KILLZ!!!1111

You kinda prove my point actually. You did really good sure but aside from you how many people did worth a damn? On both teams combined there's only 6 people over 400 damage.

[sycocys]

In an evenly spread match (damage wise) - each person on your team should only need to do ~250 damage and secure 1 kill.

Less if your team legs lights/mediums instead of taking out Cts.

What I and others are getting at, is that high damage isn't an indicator of a good weapon system. Low damage + kills is what you are after.

Edited by sycocys, 06 December 2017 - 10:53 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

JRcam4643, on 06 December 2017 - 10:45 AM, said:

You kinda prove my point actually. You did really good sure but aside from you how many people did worth a damn? On both teams combined there's only 6 people over 400 damage.

There's a concept that can be odd to wrap your head around, but it exists in virtually every game you play. I call it collective damage pooling.

In any given match, the enemy team has only so much "health" it can lose before damage saturation and subsequent loss. Even if everyone took damage equally, only so much damage can be taken in any given match across a team. Regardless of how inefficient the damage is dolled out.

What you find is that if everyone generally does fairly equally, damage averages among the teammates hovers around 300-400 per person. Individually decent, but not spectacular. However, there is only so much damage that the team can share from the enemy pool.

If, however, you have two or three people who score low, but still manage to win, that damage has to go somewhere. It gets shifted to someone else who had to effectively carry the weight of those who failed to do their own share of the damage. Taking Khobai's game into account, four people did less than 200 damage. They won, though. So where did that damage that had to be done get distributed to?

Khobai, and two of his lancemates, absorbed that damage into their own. They carried for those on the team who could not manage even basic damage output.

As soon as you realize that there is only so much damage to "farm" in any given game, and watch the patterns for average teammate damage on a wide range of games, you start to understand this.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 06 December 2017 - 10:53 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

You kinda prove my point actually. You did really good sure but aside from you how many people did worth a damn? On both teams combined there's only 6 people over 400 damage.

My team actually did a fantastic job of backing me up that game. I couldnt have done that much damage if they werent sharing armor with me. the damage numbers dont really show that.

But LBX is still a substandard weapon.

Im not using that one game example to go around telling people LBX are actually good

so it disproves your point. one game isnt proof of anything.

Edited by Khobai, 06 December 2017 - 10:59 AM.

[sycocys]

Pariah Devalis, on 06 December 2017 - 10:52 AM, said:

What you find is that if everyone generally does fairly equally, damage averages among the teammates hovers around 300-400 per person.

Is the base armor up that much over the last year or so, or is that more of a solo queue type average? Last I played that was more than just goofing about with a joystick - good shooting (discluding headshots/legging) was still netting a kill ~150 damage on most mechs CT with some slight spread due to HSR.

[JRcam4643]

sycocys, on 06 December 2017 - 10:38 AM, said:

Not sure exactly what the new armor levels are at across the board, but 400 damage used to be 2 kills and more than half on the next one for most of the people I played with and against unless they were strictly farming damage.

Xavori, on 06 December 2017 - 10:33 AM, said:

I'm a big proponent of using LRM's to shape battles. I think used properly they can have significant impact on a match.

That said, no way does doing a lot of damage mean anything. I can easily put up 1k damage in any of the LRM boats I have (Tempest, Stalker 5M, Stormcrow cuz I'm insane like that). The damage numbers don't really mean anything except I get more c-bills and finish damage-based events quickly.

The thing that helps your team is killing the other guy as quickly as possible. LRM damage doesn't do that. LRM's help your teammates get quick efficient kills by pinning enemies in place, distracting them, opening components, and such, but the LRM's are just too random to be the key to team success.

So again, LRM's are great damage farmers. They can be a useful part of a team. But the total damage numbers they put up are fairly meaningless in the big picture.

Khobai, on 06 December 2017 - 09:38 AM, said:

400 aimed damage from direct fire weapons is way better than 600-700 damage with lrms

If you arnt cracking at least 1000 damage with lrms I would say dont even bother

Exard3k, on 06 December 2017 - 09:38 AM, said:

spliit lrm damage in half to get actual value into the numbers. 700/2= 350 -> nothing special.

When I'm running high precision loadout with 400 dmg, I find myself with better performance killing enemy mechs than with a mad dog and 700dmg. But that relies on your aiming skills...when you're spreading your lasers and ACs/Gauss like crazy, this doesn't apply. Just means you have to practise and not making LRMs "good".

LRMs == good/above average performance == I can't aim with other weapons properly.

Same with C-SRM/ATM/MRM. Damage numbers trick you, you shouldn't rely on these stats to much.

One thing that is really weird about the MWO community to me is that term 'wasted damage' somebody said. All components are important for something on mechs. Every little bit of damage done makes them weaker for when the direct fire boys do engage. "Wasted damage' is a myth. In the game that I played mostly before I discovered MWO it's the opposite. If you get a bunch of kills and not much damage some look down on you as a 'stat padder' who hid and waited for every one else to do the work then swooped in and took the kills.

[Pariah Devalis]

sycocys, on 06 December 2017 - 11:02 AM, said:

Is the base armor up that much over the last year or so, or is that more of a solo queue type average? Last I played that was more than just goofing about with a joystick - good shooting (discluding headshots/legging) was still netting a kill ~150 damage on most mechs CT with some slight spread due to HSR.

CT only shots, sure, about 150 average per kill. However, you do more than just lethal shots to targets. Lets say you get one kill at 150 damage. You also got four assists at 50 damage each - easy with one alpha from many medium and heavy mechs, nowadays. That's already 350 damage, and you only killed one target.

The addition of armor and structure quirks have increased the average by effectively increasing the health pool of teams, however.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 06 December 2017 - 11:04 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

One thing that is really weird about the MWO community to me is that term 'wasted damage' somebody said. All components are important for something on mechs. Every little bit of damage done makes them weaker for when the direct fire boys do engage. "Wasted damage' is a myth. In the game that I played mostly before I discovered MWO it's the opposite. If you get a bunch of kills and not much damage some look down on you as a 'stat padder' who hid and waited for every one else to do the work then swooped in and took the kills.

its not a myth

if you do 30 damage to each of an assault mech's legs

then the assault mech dies to its CT being shot out

all the damage done to the legs is trash damage that didnt help destroy the mech

any damage that doesnt contribute directly towards killing a mech is trash damage.

and thats in large part what lrms do: trash damage. about half the damage from LRMs is trash damage.

LBX do a lot of trash damage too (not as much as LRMs though). My annihilator probably did like 1/3rd trash damage and 2/3rd meaningful damage.

Edited by Khobai, 06 December 2017 - 11:13 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

Khobai, on 06 December 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

its not a myth

if you do 30 damage to each of an assault mech's legs

then the assault mech dies to its CT being shot out

all the damage done to the legs is trash damage that didnt help destroy the mech

Exactly. Alternatively, if the enemy mech is already legged, but you decide not to shoot his other leg off and instead try to bore through his CT, you just wasted the damage on a structurally sound part when you could have finished the enemy off a lot faster, at much lower risk to yourself, with less overall damage inflicted, by taking the other leg off, instead.

[Bombast]

JRcam4643, on 06 December 2017 - 11:02 AM, said:

One thing that is really weird about the MWO community to me is that term 'wasted damage' somebody said. All components are important for something on mechs. Every little bit of damage done makes them weaker for when the direct fire boys do engage. "Wasted damage' is a myth. In the game that I played mostly before I discovered MWO it's the opposite. If you get a bunch of kills and not much damage some look down on you as a 'stat padder' who hid and waited for every one else to do the work then swooped in and took the kills.

Wasted damage is not a myth - In fact, it's a strategy. The whole point behind 'dead siding' a mech is to get the enemy to waste time, ammo, and heat first shooting empty structure and armor that may as well be air, and then forcing them to shoot through destroyed components, literally shunting damage into the aether due to how damage-through-component transfer works.

I strongly suggest you play more MWO and read more into how the game works before making any more balance/meta/whatever-this-is statements.

Edited by Bombast, 06 December 2017 - 11:20 AM.

[sycocys]

Pariah Devalis, on 06 December 2017 - 11:04 AM, said:

CT only shots, sure, about 150 average per kill. However, you do more than just lethal shots to targets. Lets say you get one kill at 150 damage. You also got four assists at 50 damage each - easy with one alpha from many medium and heavy mechs, nowadays. That's already 350 damage, and you only killed one target.

The addition of armor and structure quirks have increased the average by effectively increasing the health pool of teams, however.

I didn't play much solo queue at all during my last run with the game, so there wasn't a whole lot of random fire. Usually lance vs a single ct. Kills were mostly accrued by whoever had the lucky ticks. I get what you are saying though and its probably about right for most of the looser play.

[JRcam4643]

Khobai, on 06 December 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

its not a myth

if you do 30 damage to each of an assault mech's legs

then the assault mech dies to its CT being shot out

all the damage done to the legs is trash damage that didnt help destroy the mech

any damage that doesnt contribute directly towards killing a mech is trash damage.

and thats in large part what lrms do: trash damage.

LBX do a lot of trash damage too (not as much as LRMs though). My annihilator probably did like 1/3rd trash damage and 2/3rd meaningful damage.

No it really is a myth. I can't predict where my team mates will shoot an enemy. The damage that I do could actually affect that decision of where they shoot. You can sit around after a battle and talk about trash damage if you want but there is no way of knowing what is trash until after the fact. It makes no sense to bring it up.

[sycocys]

You can easily predict where your team will shoot the enemy.

#1 - CT

#2 - Legs

You don't even need targeting info to know that, but if you do happen to hit R, you'll see exactly where they are and have been shooting because those parts will be stripped of armor.

There's only 2 ways to consistently kill a mech unless you are a very good cockpit shot - destroy the engine or destroy the legs. If you shoot there, you are shooting where your team is shooting and not wasting your damage on parts that don't need to be hit.

Edited by sycocys, 06 December 2017 - 11:24 AM.

[Ghogiel]