219 replies to this topic

[WhineyThePoo]

Can we please take away these peoples print screen function? This thread is giving me brain cancer...

[OmniFail]

Xetelian, on 16 December 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:

1366 / 12 targets = 114 damage per each one.

Your 4 solo kills weren't on assaults unless you did 3 or 4 mechs worth of damage to them and then did less than 1 mechs worth to a few others.


High damage scores are nice to look at but you could have killed almost all the enemies with that.


Watch a guy with dual Gauss and PPC, especially back in the jump sniping days. You could Jump twice and do 100 damage to someone and for most mechs they'd be dead. People were clearing out entire lances by themselves and with today's Gauss/Vomit you can still watch people delete enemies at 500m.


I just put 3 LRM15s on a JM6 A
I went to tourmaline
I targeted the atlas at 187m

I alpha'd 10 times before it died.

45 x 10 is 450 missiles used to kill the CT of a mech that has 30 back armor. Just imagine if it had front loaded that armor, put 32 points into survival and twisted.

I hit everything, the legs, the arms, the sides and the head.

I'm sure I racked up 450 damage and got a solo kill though.

PGI specifically said that they nerfed artemis because it allowed LRM's to put to much damage on the CT. This is not because of the alpha strike but because how often LRM's are fired. It's not all about the alpha strike bro. Your girlfriend must hate you.

Anyway no matter what the weight. I killed a whole lance by myself and its still not good enough for you guys.

P.S. Check your math bro its 1366/7=195.12

Edited by OmniFail, 16 December 2017 - 01:42 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

I killed a whole lance by myself and its still not good enough for you guys.

nope. you need to kill two lances.

[OmniFail]

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 01:56 AM, said:

nope. you need to kill two lances.

But all my kills would be stolen from the low scoring direct fire guys that are carrying me anyway.

Edited by OmniFail, 16 December 2017 - 02:18 AM.

[Mystere]

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 02:17 AM, said:

But all my kills would be stolen from the low scoring direct fire guys that are carrying me anyway.

You just made my morning!

[Escef]

Xetelian, on 16 December 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:

1366 / 12 targets = 114 damage per each one.

That assumes all targets were damaged equally. In practical application, probably half of those targets absorbed 50 damage or less. The same thing as applies to direct fire weapons, most of the guys you shoot represent a snap-shot or harassing fire, the lion's share of the damage you deal is generally dealt to only 2 or 3 targets.

With the above example, if we assume that half of the targets only took 50 damage the remaining 6 received and average of...

(1366 - 6 x 50) / 6 = 177

Now, as direct fire weapons tend to be less sandblaster-ish, someone hitting all 12 enemies with 800 damage, assuming incidental targets took 35 damage...

(800 - 6 x 35) /6 = 98

Now, I've tried to use reasonable figures here. You can propose whatever tweaks to these figures you like.

LRMs are generally useful in solo queue QP at all tiers. Experienced players might know how to deal with LRMs, but they fail to actually implement that knowledge most of the time. (Especially as moving the group up through cover and making a concentrated push requires more coordination than one generally gets in the solo queue.) In group QP queue, a properly coordinated team that makes good use of LRM assets and has complimentary builds will wreck faces, but their LRM assets will become less and less useful as they face better opponents.

The advantage of the LRM, on both an individual and team level, is that it minimizes exposure to enemy fire while maintaining an offensive stance, and it functions as an area denial weapon. The disadvantages are the sandblaster nature of the damage, the amount of tonnage that needs to be invested into the system to make it viable, low velocity rounds, and it's target-dependent accuracy.

[MischiefSC]

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 12:34 AM, said:

Oh I see now. Now the problem is that regardless of the insane amount of damage I do. The kills are not mine, but are stolen.

Win 70% of your matches. If I did that with direct fire every match I would have a w/l of 20+.

If what you're doing was actually good you'd be winning all the time. It's that simple. We all have 1k+ games, that means nothing. On average are you carrying your team to wins, yes/no. Are you using your team as pug ar.or to pad your stats, yes/no. A 1k+ match is like a bellybutton. At this point I hope we're all old enough that nobody is surprised we've all got them.

There are LRM players with a 1.3-1.5 w/l. I can't argue with them, they're consistently helping carry. Could they do better with direct fire? Always, but at least I know they're pulling, not dragging or sitting on the sled saying "hold locks plz".

[DjPush]

People are missing the point of my original post. I never once said that LRMs are bad or that people shouldn't use them. What I said is that you need to know how to use the platform and the weopons PROPERLY. Standing in the back with a 100 ton assault typing "hold locks please" is not helping the team. If you haven't developed any intuition as to where you should position your mech to not only maintain your own locks but help the team distribute enemy damage, then you shouldn't be in an assault. Take a medium or heavy to learn how to properly use LRMs.

Until you learn how to use an assault mech, don't hurt the chances of winning for the other players by bringing one to a drop. Otherwise you are just another easy kill for the enemy and a giant sandbag for the rest of your team.

[OmniFail]

MischiefSC, on 16 December 2017 - 11:18 AM, said:

Win 70% of your matches. If I did that with direct fire every match I would have a w/l of 20+.

If what you're doing was actually good you'd be winning all the time. It's that simple. We all have 1k+ games, that means nothing. On average are you carrying your team to wins, yes/no. Are you using your team as pug ar.or to pad your stats, yes/no. A 1k+ match is like a bellybutton. At this point I hope we're all old enough that nobody is surprised we've all got them.

There are LRM players with a 1.3-1.5 w/l. I can't argue with them, they're consistently helping carry. Could they do better with direct fire? Always, but at least I know they're pulling, not dragging or sitting on the sled saying "hold locks plz".

Whatever bro. Killed a whole lance. Don't go thinking it dragged the whole team down. Because it didn't.

[KingCobra]

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wont

PLEASE NERF MACHINE GUNS AND LIGHTS BECOUSE THERE KILLING THIS GAME AND ARE WAY OP FOR THERE SIZE AND TONNAGE.

[OmniFail]

KingCobra, on 16 December 2017 - 11:33 AM, said:

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wont

PLEASE NERF MACHINE GUNS AND LIGHTS BECOUSE THERE KILLING THIS GAME AND ARE WAY OP FOR THERE SIZE AND TONNAGE.

No. A nerf to lights is a nerf to lurms.

[DjPush]

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 12:34 AM, said:

Oh I see now. Now the problem is that regardless of the insane amount of damage I do. The kills are not mine, but are stolen.

I could play this game. When I get home after work I will post a few. I have screen shots where I do far less damage with more kills than this.. What does that prove. Nothing really. You don't have to prove that LRMs work. We know they do. However, not everyone is good at using them. That was the original point to this thread. If you are not skilled enough to pilot an assault, get some more practice in with a heavy before you do something like throw a bunch LRMs on a Marauder IIC and camp the back field. The MADIIC is one of the toughest out there and should be in the front line wrecking face and taking hits. Not sitting in the back with the AC on reading Archie and Jughead comics occasionally checking to see if there is a lock for them to fire missiles at.

Edited by DjPush, 16 December 2017 - 11:49 AM.

[MischiefSC]

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

Whatever bro. Killed a whole lance. Don't go thinking it dragged the whole team down. Because it didn't.

As DJ said, one good match is nothing. Everyone has them. People in their trial matches break 1k sometimes. 4 kills? Oaky, you had a good game. If that was representative of how your gameplay actually went anything like consistently you'd win all the time.

You don't.

Just because this one time in band camp you had a good match doesn't mean anything.

[OmniFail]

MischiefSC, on 16 December 2017 - 11:46 AM, said:

As DJ said, one good match is nothing. Everyone has them. People in their trial matches break 1k sometimes. 4 kills? Oaky, you had a good game. If that was representative of how your gameplay actually went anything like consistently you'd win all the time.

You don't.

Just because this one time in band camp you had a good match doesn't mean anything.

Lol. So you think its just one good game. Bro I've launched more than 5 million lurms. I'm frighteningly good at what I do.

[Wolfways]

Customization: Building whatever you like on a mech (within limits).
Quick Play: A quick knockabout match for around 10 minutes.
Pugs: Random players in random mechs.

Why do you expect people to play the way you want?

[Brain Cancer]

MischiefSC, on 15 December 2017 - 06:24 PM, said:

It's not about 1.0 - it's about high damage and kills with a 1.0. That means you're farming damage and leeching kills but not in a way that wins matches.

What that really means is that if you've got people carrying you on the team you'll do alright and maybe even suppress the other teams ability to turn it around, which is where you get to the 1.0. However you're not contributing - you're a wash.

Which is okay. Skill is a curve and people tend to be on one end or the other and, again, it's a game.

However a 1 w/l is NOT 'doing good'. Especially with high damage/kills, it means you're just leeching. I'll take someone with an average 250 match score but 1.6 w/l over someone with a 1.0 w/l and 400 match score all day every day. The first guy is winning matches, consistently. I don't care how. The second guy clearly has a system for damage farming and using you as pug armor.

Leeching. Yeah.



That was my last match. This season it's a 1.25 W/L. My lifetime is 1.10. And I'll cheerfully say I have trash games, but when you're sitting there looking at teams that are lucky to have three people clear 200 damage on the loss...shrugs are had. You're in the top 6% of players this season. I'm a bit over 23%.

44% is where you start hitting your 1.0 W/L players. 1.1? 37.5%. 1.2? 29%. So yeah. In terms of W/L, that 1.0 guy is actually statistically better than average, and you're rapidly pushing up the odds of a decent player even with slightly higher W/L ratios....and that's using data from a set that includes group play, which utterly biases things at the top with killer units mowing down whatever's in their path, massively boosting their stats compared to even the most heinous lurmspammer. You don't get a 61-1 record in QP, nor do you walk away with a 6+ W/L ratio like the top guys pull. Bonus: There's a disturbing number of 10-games-played people in that high (2+) W/L ratio range, which throws off the average even further for lack of data. You're in the top 6%...and you're barely under 2.0 yourself, with a respectable number of games played (81).

Team play with a good team also really throws off your view of what's an average player in terms of stats, simply because reliable teamwork in and of itself will give you better results.

[OmniFail]

Wolfways, on 16 December 2017 - 11:58 AM, said:

Customization: Building whatever you like on a mech (within limits).
Quick Play: A quick knockabout match for around 10 minutes.
Pugs: Random players in random mechs.

Why do you expect people to play the way you want?

He's so sage like. His text is so illuminating I need sunglasses.

Brain Cancer, on 16 December 2017 - 11:58 AM, said:

Leeching. Yeah.



That was my last match. This season it's a 1.25 W/L. My lifetime is 1.10. And I'll cheerfully say I have trash games, but when you're sitting there looking at teams that are lucky to have three people clear 200 damage on the loss...shrugs are had. You're in the top 6% of players this season. I'm a bit over 23%.

44% is where you start hitting your 1.0 W/L players. 1.1? 37.5%. 1.2? 29%. So yeah. In terms of W/L, that 1.0 guy is actually statistically better than average, and you're rapidly pushing up the odds of a decent player even with slightly higher W/L ratios....and that's using data from a set that includes group play, which utterly biases things at the top with killer units mowing down whatever's in their path, massively boosting their stats compared to even the most heinous lurmspammer. You don't get a 61-1 record in QP, nor do you walk away with a 6+ W/L ratio like the top guys pull. Bonus: There's a disturbing number of 10-games-played people in that high (2+) W/L ratio range, which throws off the average even further for lack of data. You're in the top 6%...and you're barely under 2.0 yourself, with a respectable number of games played (81).

Team play with a good team also really throws off your view of what's an average player in terms of stats, simply because reliable teamwork in and of itself will give you better results.

I feel as if I have walked out of the desert.

Sick game bro. Kudos

[Khobai]

this is precisely why PGI needs to implement damage weighting

Depending how the mech dies, the game should apply a multiplier to your damage. So if you did a lot of leg damage, and the mech dies from being legged, any leg damage done to that mech should get a multiplier because it directly helped kill the mech. But if the mech dies from CT destruction, you wouldnt get a multiplier for leg damage, only for CT damage done to that mech. Good shot placement that directly results in kills should be rewarded.

that would stop damage farming and shut people up using LRMs when they realize half their damage is trash damage. doing 1000 damage with lrms is like 500 damage with real weapons at best.

1 trash damage to an arm that does nothing to help kill a mech should not be rewarded the same as 1 damage to the CT or legs that helps kill the mech. thats not rewarding good play habits.

and also headshots and backshots should get higher multipliers too, especially if they result in kills.

Edited by Khobai, 16 December 2017 - 12:30 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Brain Cancer, on 16 December 2017 - 11:58 AM, said:

Leeching. Yeah.



That was my last match. This season it's a 1.25 W/L. My lifetime is 1.10. And I'll cheerfully say I have trash games, but when you're sitting there looking at teams that are lucky to have three people clear 200 damage on the loss...shrugs are had. You're in the top 6% of players this season. I'm a bit over 23%.

44% is where you start hitting your 1.0 W/L players. 1.1? 37.5%. 1.2? 29%. So yeah. In terms of W/L, that 1.0 guy is actually statistically better than average, and you're rapidly pushing up the odds of a decent player even with slightly higher W/L ratios....and that's using data from a set that includes group play, which utterly biases things at the top with killer units mowing down whatever's in their path, massively boosting their stats compared to even the most heinous lurmspammer. You don't get a 61-1 record in QP, nor do you walk away with a 6+ W/L ratio like the top guys pull. Bonus: There's a disturbing number of 10-games-played people in that high (2+) W/L ratio range, which throws off the average even further for lack of data. You're in the top 6%...and you're barely under 2.0 yourself, with a respectable number of games played (81).

Team play with a good team also really throws off your view of what's an average player in terms of stats, simply because reliable teamwork in and of itself will give you better results.

The leaderboard for Jarlslist is amazing but it's score based to try and work around the w/l skewing that group queue has. It also adjusts your values based on weight class.However I've never said I was a great player. A bit over mediocre. The 0.8 average is badly skewed by the thousands of terribads and terribad alts who played 10+ games at a 0.5 or so and quit.

You're carrying. 1.5 is ideal - that's statistically offsetting all the 0.8s. 1.25 is still solid - it means on average you're 5% over break even. Especially for LRMs that's good enough, you're helping drive wins. That's not leeching, that's carrying. I've seen you olay, you were in, I think, TBR with LRMs and lasers? You were up front, playing and carrying. Was Grim and we won, you went down about 1/2 way through, we were rotating right and you were caught out.

You're not the guy who rarely hits 1.0 but posts some one off screenshots and says you're amzing.

[OmniFail]

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

this is precisely why PGI needs to implement damage weighting

damage should be weighted based on the location it hits (i.e. torso hits worth more than arm hits, head and back torso hits worth the most, etc...)

locations that contribute more to killing a mech should be worth more

that would stop damage farming and shut up people using LRMs when they realize half their damage is trash damage

If half of LRM damage wasn't trash you would be crying about how OP it was. Think about the 1000+ damage games being all CT damage. Also SRM's, MRM's, SSRM's, and LBX all suffer from what you call trash damage. Prove me wrong show me pictures do the math.