377 replies to this topic

[Anastasius Foht]

Lmao try to play with not less than 80 radar derp and u feel the difference, too many people copying streamer builds (2 back armor fafnirs/no sensor tree assaults etc).

[Xeno Phalcon]

Id say bump the ammo count for AMS and give AMS a greater damage profile against missiles that are targeting the mech its mounted on, and drop the LAMS heat by a crapton.

Also ATMs have been doing quite a bit of the dirty work of late iv noticed maybe the wrong missiles getting the bad end of the rep stick?

Edited by Xeno Phalcon, 28 June 2018 - 08:23 PM.

[Tesunie]

Wil McCullough, on 28 June 2018 - 07:51 PM, said:

My stats tell the opposite story.

My lurmdogs are at sub 1.0 wlr and kdr but my direct damage mechs are all positive. Highest wlr is 2.4 in my madiic and highest kdr is 3.5 in my arctic cheetah.

Anecdotal evidence us anecdotal though.

As I did say... at least in relation to me. I am not everyone else, and I seem to have a different experience on how things seem to work. As such, I seem to get more from my LRMs than other weapons.

I do want to ask, as you say your highest and lowest W/L, how many matches for those mechs and where their builds consistent for most of those matches? There was a reason I posted the mech stats I did. Each of those builds have remained rather constant for most of their career (if not their whole career), and had (preferably but not always) over 100 matches in them. (I could even post every single one of their builds, as they really haven't changed in all those matches, or if they did only just slightly.)

Also, I tend to find K/D to be... inaccurate of a gauge. I know some people love it and stuff, but I can't begin to say how many times I've soloed someone down to red internals near death, only to have a teammate swoop in and secure the kill instead of me doing it (sometimes literally as my weapons are hitting the target). I don't get upset by it, as this is a team game and a down enemy helps the whole team out... but I feel it leaves K/D as a rather unreliable statistic to follow. (But, like all statistical data, it can provide a piece of the puzzle and be useful, so I don't ignore it either.)


My data point was only to show that LRMs can have a positive effect on W/L, depending upon how they are used, maybe even by "who" uses them...

[Wil McCullough]

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 08:30 PM, said:

As I did say... at least in relation to me. I am not everyone else, and I seem to have a different experience on how things seem to work. As such, I seem to get more from my LRMs than other weapons.

I do want to ask, as you say your highest and lowest W/L, how many matches for those mechs and where their builds consistent for most of those matches? There was a reason I posted the mech stats I did. Each of those builds have remained rather constant for most of their career (if not their whole career), and had (preferably but not always) over 100 matches in them. (I could even post every single one of their builds, as they really haven't changed in all those matches, or if they did only just slightly.)

Also, I tend to find K/D to be... inaccurate of a gauge. I know some people love it and stuff, but I can't begin to say how many times I've soloed someone down to red internals near death, only to have a teammate swoop in and secure the kill instead of me doing it (sometimes literally as my weapons are hitting the target). I don't get upset by it, as this is a team game and a down enemy helps the whole team out... but I feel it leaves K/D as a rather unreliable statistic to follow. (But, like all statistical data, it can provide a piece of the puzzle and be useful, so I don't ignore it either.)


My data point was only to show that LRMs can have a positive effect on W/L, depending upon how they are used, maybe even by "who" uses them...

Hmm my madiic stats may be off because of small sample size (34 games). The ach howevet has quite a lot more games under its belt and has remained fairly consistent in loadout (6x spl / 6× ersl)

I would argue that PILOTS have an effect on wlr a lot more than weapon systems. Especially if deployed in a team that knows how to maximize their usage and paired with an opponent that allows that maximization.

For a real life example, in the last nba finals, the cavs allowed durant to take his fadeaway paint shots. That shot is the lurms. If you see stats, you'll see that durant scores a lot from that. But the cavs allow him to take that shot all the time because its worse when they don't. Because if they defend against it, durant's other teammates (direct fire) will be allowed to take their own shots which are more effective.

[Lykaon]

S O L A I S, on 28 June 2018 - 01:25 PM, said:

Many things could have occurred in the match you describe yet you attribute it to high skill lurming.

I don't buy it.

In CW it is not uncommon to see skilled players using lurms properly and with support. On a couple of maps it is almost viable. However if the other guys are similarly skilled, the team with direct fire usually wins. That is a constant the has been around this game for the years I have been playing it.

As far as better players not being familiar with lrm counters? That's nonsense. Lurms are everywhere, and a skilled player could not be called a skilled player if he was dying to lurms all the time under any circumstance.

What happened was my team waited until the enemy had pressed forward into our pre designated killbox and had no good options. By creating a situation where we exploited the typical player actions on a specific map we had created a highly effective trap that was well timed and triggered.

By the time the Opfor realized it was a LURM fest they were exposed and cut off from cover because they got greedy chasing the bait that put them into the kill box to begin with.

The skill was using area knowledge of the map matched with typical player responses to typical situations and then faking the expected scenario to bait a trap and then waiting for the right time to spring the trap.

That and anticipating likely responses to the trap (that being why I was babysitting the LURMs with a dedicated brawler to handle any light mechs that flanked to counter)

The mode was skirmish the map was Tourmaline and you all know what happened because the enemy team did what most players do on that map D6 to D5 flank push to flank our forces while our team "fled" the push into E6 basin. The enemy got greedy as they thought we were in a full route and chased with abandon.

Once the bulk of the enemy assaults were in E5 outside of cover the spotter struck from E4 to NARC priority targets (ECM) while the LURM team (brawler + 2 LURM boats) were in F5 behind the rise of the dropship wreck sight.

Any other questions?


P.S. I'm not sure if you are aware of this but the use of quotation marks can be used to emphasize sarcasm.

Like that guy is so "smart" it hurts to think about it.

Or those players are super "skilled"

Edited by Lykaon, 28 June 2018 - 10:03 PM.

[Eisenhorne]

Lykaon, on 28 June 2018 - 09:53 PM, said:

What happened was my team waited until the enemy had pressed forward into our pre designated killbox and had no good options. By creating a situation where we exploited the typical player actions on a specific map we had created a highly effective trap that was well timed and triggered.

By the time the Opfor realized it was a LURM fest they were exposed and cut off from cover because they got greedy chasing the bait that put them into the kill box to begin with.

The skill was using area knowledge of the map matched with typical player responses to typical situations and then faking the expected scenario to bait a trap and then waiting for the right time to spring the trap.

That and anticipating likely responses to the trap (that being why I was babysitting the LURMs with a dedicated brawler to handle any light mechs that flanked to counter)

The mode was skirmish the map was Tourmaline and you all know what happened because the enemy team did what most players do on that map D6 to D5 flank push to flank our forces while our team "fled" the push into E6 basin. The enemy got greedy as they thought we were in a full route and chased with abandon.

Once the bulk of the enemy assaults were in E5 outside of cover the spotter struck from E4 to NARC priority targets (ECM) while the LURM team (brawler + 2 LURM boats) were in F5 behind the rise of the dropship wreck sight.

Any other questions?


P.S. I'm not sure if you are aware of this but the use of quotation marks can be used to emphasize sarcasm.

Like that guy is so "smart" it hurts to think about it.

Or those players are super "skilled"

So.... you won because the other team was terrible and ran out into the open. LRM's are very good against bad players, or in coordinated efforts on certain maps like Polar, Alpine, Boreal, or Caustic.

[Yosharian]

Xeno Phalcon, on 28 June 2018 - 08:19 PM, said:

Id say bump the ammo count for AMS and give AMS a greater damage profile against missiles that are targeting the mech its mounted on, and drop the LAMS heat by a crapton.

Also ATMs have been doing quite a bit of the dirty work of late iv noticed maybe the wrong missiles getting the bad end of the rep stick?

ATMs can be quite effective some of the time, I have a short-range ATM/SPL Huntsman with ~450 average damage which isn't bad for a medium.

They're similar to LRMs in that you come up against a brick wall when you hit a block of ECM/AMS mechs that move together. That's why you bring backup weapons instead of relying entirely on the ATMs.

Regardless, LRMs are pure ****, ATMs can be reasonably effective some of the time, but are still not that good because they are countered pretty hard by AMS/ECM.

It is fun nailing people with ATM volleys in the sweet spot though.

[Eisenhorne]

Anastasius Foht, on 28 June 2018 - 08:14 PM, said:

Lmao try to play with not less than 80 radar derp and u feel the difference, too many people copying streamer builds (2 back armor fafnirs/no sensor tree assaults etc).

Sensor tree is useless for assaults (for most mechs really), radar dep is a waste of points on them. 2 back armor is all you need, do you really think having an extra 5-6 armor back there will save you if you're getting alpha'd in the butt by a backstabber?

[Yosharian]

Eisenhorne, on 28 June 2018 - 10:18 PM, said:

Sensor tree is useless for assaults (for most mechs really), radar dep is a waste of points on them. 2 back armor is all you need, do you really think having an extra 5-6 armor back there will save you if you're getting alpha'd in the butt by a backstabber?

I think his point is that people copy the builds but they don't play the same as the people they're copying the builds from.

This could be due to a skill difference between the two players (copier and copied), a different skill environment (what works in Tier 1 is not necessarily what works in Tier 5) or a difference in playstyle.

I run with full Radar Deprivation on every mech, personally, and I don't consider it a waste of points, for various reasons.

> do you really think having an extra 5-6 armor back there will save you if you're getting alpha'd in the butt by a backstabber?

Yes, it can.

Edited by Yosharian, 28 June 2018 - 10:33 PM.

[Eisenhorne]

Yosharian, you're a light / medium player it looks like... so yea, radar dep might actually be worth something to you. I'm a mostly assault player, so radar dep is pretty pointless, because we aren't fast enough to dodge LRM's by breaking LOS normally anyway, it's best to just position yourself so you have cover from them. And yes, an extra 5-6 back armor may help vs a light mech, but if you position yourself well as an assault and are in the middle of your team like you should be, it's a minimal risk to being backstabbed. I much more frequently die to being shot through the front than the back, so I'll maximize my front armor then to prevent the more common cause of death.

I know most people copy builds and don't play them as they're intended, but I'd argue they're better off copying good builds for their class and then trying to learn how to play it better, instead of taking sub-optimal builds and trying to make them work.

[Yosharian]

Eisenhorne, on 28 June 2018 - 10:40 PM, said:

Yosharian, you're a light / medium player it looks like... so yea, radar dep might actually be worth something to you. I'm a mostly assault player, so radar dep is pretty pointless, because we aren't fast enough to dodge LRM's by breaking LOS normally anyway, it's best to just position yourself so you have cover from them. And yes, an extra 5-6 back armor may help vs a light mech, but if you position yourself well as an assault and are in the middle of your team like you should be, it's a minimal risk to being backstabbed. I much more frequently die to being shot through the front than the back, so I'll maximize my front armor then to prevent the more common cause of death.

I know most people copy builds and don't play them as they're intended, but I'd argue they're better off copying good builds for their class and then trying to learn how to play it better, instead of taking sub-optimal builds and trying to make them work.

I run them in all my mechs, I have plenty of assaults and heavies, I don't play them as often but I do play them from time to time and Radar Deprivation allows me to move out of the path of incoming LRMs quite easily. Yes cover is the primary concern but sometimes if you don't have full RD you get hit by tracking missiles anyway, and if you end up in this situation guess how much value you're getting from those weapon nodes... nothing, because you can't expose yourself.

Again a lot of this comes down to playstyle, I favour taking my opponents apart from long/medium range most of the time, which is why I gain a lot from being able to poke from cover effectively without getting slammed by tracking LRMs every time.

It's not just RD itself, you also get access to toys like seismic, ECM, sensor bonuses, advanced zoom, which can be useful as well.

All I'm saying is that the skill tree isn't a one-size-fits-all, there are different ways to build your tree up (not as many as there should be, but still), so blanket statements like 'Radar Deprivation is never worth it' aren't too helpful IMO.

> I'd argue they're better off copying good builds for their class and then trying to learn how to play it better, instead of taking sub-optimal builds and trying to make them work.

I disagree entirely. People should figure out what works for them. That's part of learning how the game works. I have an entirely different tree setup to most people, and it works for me because I prioritise what I want from my mech.

This isn't me defending potato builds, both my mech and skilltree builds work for me and I frequently do top damage in my games.

Edited by Yosharian, 28 June 2018 - 10:53 PM.

[Anastasius Foht]

Eisenhorne, on 28 June 2018 - 10:18 PM, said:

Sensor tree is useless for assaults (for most mechs really), radar dep is a waste of points on them. 2 back armor is all you need, do you really think having an extra 5-6 armor back there will save you if you're getting alpha'd in the butt by a backstabber?

One example - target retention, when you play as slow assault and scouts start eating you, if you have it - any ally lurmer can support you and scare-off that pesky mouse. If you don't - you lost lock on target a moment after he run to your back and you die alone spamming "help" with chat wheel but noone even see what mech you fight with. Im no trying to convince people to do my way, im ok when i can hit a guy on another side of hill 2-3 seconds longer with LURM's after i lost visual contact. Keep up the good work! About armour - i can count times i get killed in assault from backstabbing and times i survive and kill mouse, its around 1 to 25/30. Not less than 9ct and 8side torso armor for assault keep me alive for loooong time.

[vonJerg]

Back armor is there to save you from friendlies

[Wil McCullough]

Anastasius Foht, on 29 June 2018 - 01:17 AM, said:

One example - target retention, when you play as slow assault and scouts start eating you, if you have it - any ally lurmer can support you and scare-off that pesky mouse. If you don't - you lost lock on target a moment after he run to your back and you die alone spamming "help" with chat wheel but noone even see what mech you fight with. Im no trying to convince people to do my way, im ok when i can hit a guy on another side of hill 2-3 seconds longer with LURM's after i lost visual contact. Keep up the good work! About armour - i can count times i get killed in assault from backstabbing and times i survive and kill mouse, its around 1 to 25/30. Not less than 9ct and 8side torso armor for assault keep me alive for loooong time.

??

How long are you talking about? Your stats show you die two out of every three matches and have 240 ms. That's like an average of 200-250 damage a game?

Methinks you're misremembering a lot of stuff.

Edit:
Just a fyi, assaults range from 50-62 ct structure. This goes up with defensive skills. That extra 6 armor doesn't help against a backstabbing light that has already made it into range to eff your back up. You're overloading your back armor especially since you claim you die more to everything else than backstabbing lights.

The extrafluous back armor seems a bit hysterical to me.

Edited by Wil McCullough, 29 June 2018 - 02:15 AM.

[Anastasius Foht]

Wil McCullough, on 29 June 2018 - 01:53 AM, said:

??

How long are you talking about? Your stats show you die two out of every three matches and have 240 ms. That's like an average of 200-250 damage a game?

Methinks you're misremembering a lot of stuff.

Edit:
Just a fyi, assaults range from 50-62 ct structure. This goes up with defensive skills. That extra 6 armor doesn't help against a backstabbing light that has already made it into range to eff your back up. You're overloading your back armor especially since you claim you die more to everything else than backstabbing lights.

The extrafluous back armor seems a bit hysterical to me.

I not gonna discuss my matchscore, last events and new non-meta mechs (not Deathstrike) i lvlup hurt that number a lot. I hit Tier 2 today when i mastering my Archer btw, also 250 matchscore its around 330-350 dmg not 250. Just fyi, structure means nothing against machinegun scouts, cuz they CRIT it a lot, compared to initial armor defence layer, it gives you around 1-2 sec to react before u start losing torso mounted items. Second after you armor gone you start receiving real wounds, not before. I survived in many matches only cuz my back armor, red back but still alive.

[Wil McCullough]

Anastasius Foht, on 29 June 2018 - 02:44 AM, said:

I not gonna discuss my matchscore, last events and new non-meta mechs (not Deathstrike) i lvlup hurt that number a lot. I hit Tier 2 today when i mastering my Archer btw, also 250 matchscore its around 330-350 dmg not 250. Just fyi, structure means nothing against machinegun scouts, cuz they CRIT it a lot, compared to initial armor defence layer, it gives you around 1-2 sec to react before u start losing torso mounted items. Second after you armor gone you start receiving real wounds, not before. I survived in many matches only cuz my back armor, red back but still alive.

Fair enough re: stats.

I still think 10 back armor is really overloading though. I did an experiment before, which was to up armor on the busted component that caused the death, every time i died. E.g. if i got back cored, i'd drop one point af armor on the front ct and up one point of armor on rear ct. I ended up with REALLY front loaded armor. Like no different from the 2 back armor meta builds kinda front loaded. Even on fat ungainly assaults like the madiic, i was running 5 or less.

[Verilligo]

Wil McCullough, on 29 June 2018 - 05:04 AM, said:

Fair enough re: stats.

I still think 10 back armor is really overloading though. I did an experiment before, which was to up armor on the busted component that caused the death, every time i died. E.g. if i got back cored, i'd drop one point af armor on the front ct and up one point of armor on rear ct. I ended up with REALLY front loaded armor. Like no different from the 2 back armor meta builds kinda front loaded. Even on fat ungainly assaults like the madiic, i was running 5 or less.

Similar experience here. I typically run 6 back armor on assaults, 4 on heavies and some lights, and as little as 2 on some mediums and most lights. The higher back armor on the extreme lights is mostly useful for enduring Arty/Airstrike damage because you have such little structure that a bad luck double-hit can instantly kill. Ever since they reduced the length of the bombing path on airstrikes, though, it hasn't been nearly as worrisome.

[Tesunie]

Eisenhorne, on 28 June 2018 - 10:15 PM, said:

So.... you won because the other team was terrible and ran out into the open. LRM's are very good against bad players, or in coordinated efforts on certain maps like Polar, Alpine, Boreal, or Caustic.

I can recall one match that happened recently. I had cover from the perceived enemy positions, a place that I could jump shoot at them.

All was going good, until a single mech propped themselves up on one of the crystal spires up high in Tourmaline. He wasn't much of a threat, but his target lock very much was. Right after he positioned up there, some enemy LRM user I didn't know from an angle I wasn't expected stripped all my armor off, and eventually was the cause of my death (even though they didn't kill me). I had to run for some time (and jump to try and dodge some of the missiles), till I could relocate to get cover from the new source of damage.

Had the LRM user been where I expected, I would have been fine. But, sometimes it's not about "bad position" more so than it is "you didn't expect it". Most forms of cover is not "omni-direction", as in it doesn't protect you from all angles.

Eisenhorne, on 28 June 2018 - 10:18 PM, said:

Sensor tree is useless for assaults (for most mechs really), radar dep is a waste of points on them. 2 back armor is all you need, do you really think having an extra 5-6 armor back there will save you if you're getting alpha'd in the butt by a backstabber?

Personally, I like assigning 6 points of armor on most of my mechs (with survival tree, that tends to bump up to seven points). Rear armor tends to (try) to help prevent death from friendly fire, as much as give me a bit of warning if an enemy mech is behind me and let me react before I start losing equipment. Can't recall how many times, even with 7 points of back armor, I get hit by an ally in the back. Won't say how many times that's been my death, when allies bring me down to orange internals.

I'll also comment, if you feel you can get away with no armor on the back, I'm not going to stop you.

Wil McCullough, on 29 June 2018 - 01:53 AM, said:

How long are you talking about? Your stats show you die two out of every three matches and have 240 ms. That's like an average of 200-250 damage a game?

Match score is not a good indicator of damage dealt per match. I've dealt 150ish damage, yet had a match score of 300+ several times. The key was that I was in a light mech, stayed near my team (protected light) and had dual AMS. Match score is not derived solely from damage, but many other actions contribute to it. In reverse, I've had matches where I did 400+ damage, but didn't even get 200 match score...


Also, I find leader boards to be flawed when it comes to player skill portrayal. Depending upon how the leader board data is being used, it often doesn't consider people changing their mechs or playing different play styles.

I only present this because people will bring up my different seasonal leader board results when I talk about LRMs. They seem to presume I play nothing but LRMs, which isn't true. I also know that your leader board (and W/L) can and does change depending upon whom you are teamed up with. For example, I use to have a reasonable leader board a few seasons ago, until I started playing with a bunch of new players (who where T5). Sure, I out performed them every match, but it had a solid impact on my overall performance still.

Basically, statistical data only shows so much of the story. (Though I do love statistics and number crunching.) Also, data doesn't show "fun".

(Rambling, so I'm going to stop here.)

[Humpday]

The Blood God, on 26 June 2018 - 03:35 PM, said:

the game just isn't fun to play because of it and everything it brings

How about don't go running out in the open...ever?
Though, I will admit...theres a lot of LRMs right now, event farming probably which is pretty sad. People are so bad that they have to fall back to LRMing to just get 100match score?

Anyway, I fully plan on taking out my Hex-LRM15 NovaCat for some giggles. LRMs are pretty entertaining to play from time to time due to people like you...who like to get caught out.

Edited by Humpday, 29 June 2018 - 07:19 AM.

[Dragonporn]

I will never stop wondering why threads about lurms grow so fast... Do they really piss that many people off?