377 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

thievingmagpi, on 17 July 2018 - 04:51 PM, said:

Haven't you heard? Aiming is only reactionary.

Lining up my reticle with a target someone has provided and leaving it there, that's pure predictive skill baby.

Aiming is mostly reaction, partly prediction.

LRMs on the other hand are more prediction based than reaction based. Can your missiles get there in time? Is the predicted flight path clear of obstructions? Will the lock last long enough for the missiles to connect? All are predictive skills, rather than reaction skills.

Meanwhile, lasers you tend to line up and react to the targets movement and adjust to maintain the beam on your target, preferably on a specific component. There is some prediction going on, but most of it will be reaction while you are shooting.

Different degrees of prediction and reaction are involved. Neither one uses only one nor the other, but a blending of the two. Not everything is so black and white. There are always shades of grey. Different levels of attributes. Nothing is ever just completely one or the other.

Of course, what should I expect from someone talking about only one aspect of a weapon, getting a lock... and an indirect shared lock... you know... the least effective way to use the weapon (if used only in that manner)? Never consider the flight paths, nor the travel times, or... much of anything else.

[thievingmagpi]

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 05:16 PM, said:

Aiming is mostly reaction, partly prediction.

LRMs on the other hand are more prediction based than reaction based. Can your missiles get there in time? Is the predicted flight path clear of obstructions? Will the lock last long enough for the missiles to connect? All are predictive skills, rather than reaction skills.

Meanwhile, lasers you tend to line up and react to the targets movement and adjust to maintain the beam on your target, preferably on a specific component. There is some prediction going on, but most of it will be reaction while you are shooting.

Different degrees of prediction and reaction are involved. Neither one uses only one nor the other, but a blending of the two. Not everything is so black and white. There are always shades of grey. Different levels of attributes. Nothing is ever just completely one or the other.

Of course, what should I expect from someone talking about only one aspect of a weapon, getting a lock... and an indirect shared lock... you know... the least effective way to use the weapon (if used only in that manner)? Never consider the flight paths, nor the travel times, or... much of anything else.

LOL

lrms you just move a reticle and click a button.

it doesn't matter if a few bounce off the terrain because you've got enough ammo and heat efficiency for it to not matter. move target to box, (don't even need to see box) click away.

congratulations, you just got 1000 damage.

see your missiles hitting a mountain? okay, rotate to the left 3 degrees. you're good.

no target leading.

no target selection.

no careful alpha heat management.

no gauss and laser sychronizing.

no shoot- twist- shoot- fake- twist- shoot

no deadside rushing

get red, move reticle, 1000 damage.


you're sorely, sorely overestimating the "skill" that goes into using lrms. unless you're the kind of person that thinks wearing matching socks is a substantial achievement, the "tactical ability" of not launching all your ammunition into a mountainside is being massively exaggerated.

[Kubernetes]

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 05:16 PM, said:

Of course, what should I expect from someone talking about only one aspect of a weapon, getting a lock... and an indirect shared lock... you know... the least effective way to use the weapon (if used only in that manner)? Never consider the flight paths, nor the travel times, or... much of anything else.

Yeah, you're right, no one else here has EVER used LRMs, and anyone who has has NEVER figured out optimal practices for LRM use. The guys who have walked every inch of every map determining ranges and best positions couldn't possibly crack the complexity of LRM trajectories and speed. So much skill required, it's overwhelming!

[Tesunie]

Kubernetes, on 17 July 2018 - 05:29 PM, said:

Yeah, you're right, no one else here has EVER used LRMs, and anyone who has has NEVER figured out optimal practices for LRM use. The guys who have walked every inch of every map determining ranges and best positions couldn't possibly crack the complexity of LRM trajectories and speed. So much skill required, it's overwhelming!

I'm sorry. You can't see what I'm saying with those deaf eyes of yours. Come back when you actually read my posts. Okay? Because, none of that is what I've said.

[Tesunie]

thievingmagpi, on 17 July 2018 - 05:22 PM, said:

LOL

lrms you just move a reticle and click a button.

LOL

Direct fire weapons you just move a reticle and click a button.



Well. That was hard.


As for your specific points:
no target leading- No. It's the opposite. I have to predict, instead of lead. Will they be able to dodge the LRMs by getting into cover? Already mentioned this...

no target selection- You talking target prioritization, or component selection? Target prioritization is key to an LRMer, and the weapon pays for it's utility by having a lack of control on component selection (which is why I bring direct fire weapons with me).

no careful alpha heat management- You do know, if an LRM user shuts down from shooting, they lose their lock and that volley will most likely miss... Right? So... heat management is still very much a thing.

no gauss and laser sychronizing- Are you talking about using Gauss and Lasers? Or about mixing them with LRMs? Each actually can combine well with LRMs (lasers especially, Gauss becomes a matter of weight). Otherwise... we aren't talking about Gauss nor Lasers here...

no shoot- twist- shoot- fake- twist- shoot- Depends upon where the LRM mech is, and what it is doing. In direct fire combat? Sure. They should be twisting as well, especially if they didn't boat and took direct fire weapons...

no deadside rushing- Not every mech/role can do this. It's no fault of LRMs, though it is a strategy that doesn't work well with them either. Basically, you are talking about brawling. However, an LRM mech can shield a little bit by pressing Control (default) for free view, and if their mech has lower arms they can have their torso twisted in one direction, while the arms are swung to the side, permitting them to shield a bit and still get/hold locks and shoot. If they have arm mounted direct fire weapons with torso mounted LRMs/homing weapons, then they can commit even more to the fight...

get red, move reticle, 1000 damage- Man, I really want to know how people do this single shot 1000 damage...

[thievingmagpi]

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

LOL

Direct fire weapons you just move a reticle and click a button.

You must be able to see the target.

You must be able to lead the target.

You must maintain the range of different optimal ranges

You must manage your heat

You must avoid the enemy trading with you

You must actually hit the target and not just somewhere inside the very large box surrounding it

You must actually hit the target with weapons, arm or torso, and not simply dragging the reticule over

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

LOL

Well. That was hard.

Seems that way doesn't it?

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

As for your specific points:
no target leading- No. It's the opposite. I have to predict, instead of lead.

I guess you don't even know what that word means.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

Will they be able to dodge the LRMs by getting into cover? Already mentioned this...

Irrelevant.

You have the ammo, heat scale and cover for it to barely matter. When I decide to **** around with lrms I basically don't stop firing, don't even need to pay attention. Did my reticule turn red? Cool. If not, fire some more or change targets if I wish.

The "skill" of reading if a dude is in the basement of HPG and thus not a good LRM target is not a skill. It's tantamount to breathing.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

no target selection- You talking target prioritization, or component selection? Target prioritization is key to an LRMer, and the weapon pays for it's utility by having a lack of control on component selection (which is why I bring direct fire weapons with me).

It isn't. You don't actually have to acquire any targets yourself. It's a necessity for mechs who are actually shooting at enemies. It's just a "cool thing you can do if you want" for lrms.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

no careful alpha heat management- You do know, if an LRM user shuts down from shooting, they lose their lock and that volley will most likely miss... Right? So... heat management is still very much a thing.

As LRMS can successfully alpha for long periods of time, and avoid face time while doing so, your point is irrelevant.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

no gauss and laser sychronizing- Are you talking about using Gauss and Lasers?

Something which takes a modicum of skill

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

Or about mixing them with LRMs? Each actually can combine well with LRMs (lasers especially, Gauss becomes a matter of weight). Otherwise... we aren't talking about Gauss nor Lasers here...

We're talking about all weapons.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

no shoot- twist- shoot- fake- twist- shoot- Depends upon where the LRM mech is, and what it is doing. In direct fire combat? Sure. They should be twisting as well, especially if they didn't boat and took direct fire weapons...

Unlike every other weapon platform, they don't *need* to do this as they don't *need* to be in combat.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

no deadside rushing- Not every mech/role can do this.

It's just one more skill lrmers don't need.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

Basically, you are talking about brawling.

*high five*

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

However, an LRM mech can shield a little bit by pressing Control (default) for free view, and if their mech has lower arms they can have their torso twisted in one direction, while the arms are swung to the side, permitting them to shield a bit and still get/hold locks and shoot. If they have arm mounted direct fire weapons with torso mounted LRMs/homing weapons, then they can commit even more to the fight...

See above.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

get red, move reticle, 1000 damage- Man, I really want to know how people do this single shot 1000 damage...

for someone defending lrms, you must be *really bad* at lrms then.

[Yosharian]

I just wish there was an effective piece of equipment that you could fit onto a mech to make LRMs less powerful, if only such a thing existed, oh well, back to complaining about LRMs

[thievingmagpi]

Yosharian, on 17 July 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

I just wish there was an effective piece of equipment that you could fit onto a mech to make LRMs less powerful, if only such a thing existed, oh well, back to complaining about LRMs

oh if only there was an effective way to have your teammates fight the enemy, read the map, pay attention, not bring trash builds, be good and skilled and contribute to the team...

oh well, back to trying to tell assaults to not run out alone after cap points while click warriors hide behind mountains.

Edited by thievingmagpi, 17 July 2018 - 07:13 PM.

[Kubernetes]

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 06:11 PM, said:

I'm sorry. You can't see what I'm saying with those deaf eyes of yours. Come back when you actually read my posts. Okay? Because, none of that is what I've said.

Your assumption is that there's some sekrit LRMing skill of which we were not aware, some special proficiency that eludes us direct-fire folks... and I'm telling you you're wrong. Anyone highly proficient at this game with direct fire can master LRMs in a day. The skill ceiling is that low. You can literally do it with your foot.

[Tesunie]

thievingmagpi, on 17 July 2018 - 06:54 PM, said:

Nice paraphrasing there. Wonderful job there.

You say LRMs are place reticle on a target, push a button. Guess what you do with direct fire weapons? Place your reticule on a target and... push a button?

So far, still not seeing any 1000+ damage per button push. To exactly quote you:

Quote

lrms you just move a reticle and click a button.
...
congratulations, you just got 1000 damage.


get red, move reticle, 1000 damage.

If LRMs were so effective, as you say, then why isn't everyone using them? Why isn't everyone getting 1000+ damage matches?


I also don't understand why you bring up brawling, in an LRM discussion. To say they can't do it? Well, PPCs don't exactly brawl very well either. Neither do Gauss. Nor ERLLs... Shall we rail on them for not being good brawling weapons? Or maybe we should rail into SPLs for being ineffective at long range combat? While we are at this, why don't we compare the roles of ERSLs as a sniper weapon compared to ERLLs? Seems fair, right?

You hate LRMs. Got it. You have made your opinion very clear.

[Tesunie]

Kubernetes, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

Your assumption is that there's some sekrit LRMing skill of which we were not aware, some special proficiency that eludes us direct-fire folks... and I'm telling you you're wrong. Anyone highly proficient at this game with direct fire can master LRMs in a day. The skill ceiling is that low. You can literally do it with your foot.

Then... DO IT WITH YOUR FOOT. You present the dare... Gonna own up to it? If LRMs are so "easy mode", then why is it that they aren't used more often?

All I ever see from LRM haters is "They stand in the back and shoot LRMs into walls", or "they stand 900m away, never seeing combat". Guess what. Just because those are the typical way people use LRMs doesn't make it the best way. Far from it.

But, don't let me stop your hate. Go right on with it. I mean, I'm a big bad person saying LRMs do require skills to use effectively. Of course, everyone seems to read that as me saying "LRM are duh bestest", when it isn't at all even close to what I'm saying.

[Sorbic]

LordNothing, on 26 June 2018 - 08:10 PM, said:

or fight in the shade and save the tonnage.

Standing behind a wall isn't fighting. Esp for those who hide and wait for their mates to make moves and then act like they're a good player.

Personally I've been enjoying a renewed reason to bring out my KF. However it will quickly die back down after people have given them a good try.

[thievingmagpi]

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

So far, still not seeing any 1000+ damage per button push. To exactly quote you:

Play more games. EZ

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

If LRMs were so effective, as you say, then why isn't everyone using them? Why isn't everyone getting 1000+ damage matches?

A lot of people simply choose not to because it's a bad way to play. The same reason why I can't play more than 2 matches in a row with my PIR because I just feel bad after wiping out 1/2 of the enemy team with one hand. It's a joke. It's poorly balanced. It's not fun. You name it.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

I also don't understand why you bring up brawling, in an LRM discussion.

I'm not surprised.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

To say they can't do it? Well, PPCs don't exactly brawl very well either.

They require aiming.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

Neither do Gauss.

Requires aiming

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

Nor ERLLs...

Requires aiming.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

Shall we rail on them for not being good brawling weapons?

Why would I do that?

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

Or maybe we should rail into SPLs for being ineffective at long range combat?

Why would I do that?

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:22 PM, said:

While we are at this, why don't we compare the roles of ERSLs as a sniper weapon compared to ERLLs? Seems fair, right?

ERSLs aren't a sniper weapon, they do however require aiming, among other skills.

[Tesunie]

Sorbic, on 17 July 2018 - 07:35 PM, said:

Personally I've been enjoying a renewed reason to bring out my KF. However it will quickly die back down after people have given them a good try.

As it does with any changes to any weapon system in the game. When a change is made, there is always a run on that weapon as everyone wants to check it out.

thievingmagpi, on 17 July 2018 - 07:39 PM, said:

Play more games. EZ




A lot of people simply choose not to because it's a bad way to play. The same reason why I can't play more than 2 matches in a row with my PIR because I just feel bad after wiping out 1/2 of the enemy team with one hand. It's a joke. It's poorly balanced. It's not fun. You name it.




I'm not surprised.




They require aiming.




Requires aiming



Requires aiming.



Why would I do that?



Why would I do that?




ERSLs aren't a sniper weapon, they do however require aiming, among other skills.

Why indeed? But yet, you do it with LRMs, but not with other weapons.

Hum... kinda a one sided fellow ain't ya?

Oh yeah. You got stuck up on "homing" and "aiming" for anything else to apply. So of course you will set LRMs in every negative connotation possible. So of course you'll set LRMs into a brawling situation, but not PPCs. Of course you wont blame the ERSL or SPL for not being a sniper weapon, but it's completely the LRM fault for not working within 180m.

No double standards there. Yup. None at all.

[thievingmagpi]

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

So of course you will set LRMs in every negative connotation possible. So of course you'll set LRMs into a brawling situation, but not PPCs.

PPCs require aiming.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

Of course you wont blame the ERSL or SPL for not being a sniper weapon, but it's completely the LRM fault for not working within 180m.

ERSL and SPL require aiming.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

No double standards there. Yup. None at all.

Aiming good

Not aiming bad.

No double standard.

[Anastasius Foht]

Some people can't deal with fact that such (ez to use, noobish, no skill needed, whatever you call it) weapons as Lurms exist in MWO for reason. This reason is called balance.

[thievingmagpi]

Anastasius Foht, on 17 July 2018 - 07:51 PM, said:

Some people can't deal with fact that such (ez to use, noobish, no skill needed, whatever you call it) weapons as Lurms exist in MWO for reason. This reason is called balance.

Some people are under the impression that something is good just by the nature of it existing

[Lightfoot]

MWO has the worst LRMs of any MechWarrior game. Worst concept, worst balancing, Artemis doesn't even work right. MWO LRMs are now balanced to be for Assault mechs only. What a waste.

[Tesunie]

thievingmagpi, on 17 July 2018 - 07:45 PM, said:

PPCs require aiming.



ERSL and SPL require aiming.



Aiming good

Not aiming bad.

No double standard.

How about comparing LRMs to brawling weapons in a brawl?

Quote

Tes- Shall we rail on them for not being good brawling weapons?

Quote

Thiev- Why would I do that?

Quote

Tes- Or maybe we should rail into SPLs for being ineffective at long range combat?

Quote

Theiv- Why would I do that?

Quote

Tes- While we are at this, why don't we compare the roles of ERSLs as a sniper weapon compared to ERLLs? Seems fair, right?

Quote

Theiv- ERSLs aren't a sniper weapon, they do however require aiming, among other skills.

Seems like a double standard to me. Of course, with as much paraphrasing as you've done... I guess I could see why you didn't notice this before hand, as I have to dig back even farther.

Quote

Thiev- no gauss and laser sychronizing

Quote

Tes- Are you talking about using Gauss and Lasers? Or about mixing them with LRMs? Each actually can combine well with LRMs (lasers especially, Gauss becomes a matter of weight). Otherwise... we aren't talking about Gauss nor Lasers here...

Quote

Thiev- We're talking about all weapons.

Quote

Thiev- no deadside rushing.

Quote

Tes- Not every mech/role can do this. It's no fault of LRMs, though it is a strategy that doesn't work well with them either. Basically, you are talking about brawling. However, an LRM mech can shield a little bit by pressing Control (default) for free view, and if their mech has lower arms they can have their torso twisted in one direction, while the arms are swung to the side, permitting them to shield a bit and still get/hold locks and shoot. If they have arm mounted direct fire weapons with torso mounted LRMs/homing weapons, then they can commit even more to the fight...

Quote

Thiev- *high five*

Sooo... Double standard right there. You are willing to compare LRMs in a brawl against brawling weapons, but wont compare SLs to ERLLs in a long range sniping match... That is the very definition of a double standard. You will hold one thing to a standard, but not something else.

[thievingmagpi]

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 08:31 PM, said:

How about comparing LRMs to brawling weapons in a brawl?

you mean something which requires aiming, and something which does not?

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 08:31 PM, said:

Seems like a double standard to me.

I guess you don't know what that word means.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 08:31 PM, said:

Sooo... Double standard right there. You are willing to compare LRMs in a brawl against brawling weapons, but wont compare SLs to ERLLs in a long range sniping match...

Brawling, SLS, ERLLS all require aiming.

Try again.

Tesunie, on 17 July 2018 - 08:31 PM, said:

That is the very definition of a double standard. You will hold one thing to a standard, but not something else.

Again, you've shown you don't know what that word means.

Edited by thievingmagpi, 17 July 2018 - 08:40 PM.