377 replies to this topic

[Novakaine]

Kroete, on 02 July 2018 - 02:40 AM, said:

The are no good lrm players,
as example, i just put all my stat-points on my luck-attribute to get into the 96%.
Has nothing to do with my skill or abilitys!

Ooooh I can think of a few.

[Prototelis]

Anyone can post screenshots of a stellar game.

Look those players up, their average performance is not as good as you are implying.

[Tesunie]

Prototelis, on 02 July 2018 - 01:42 PM, said:

Anyone can post screenshots of a stellar game.

Look those players up, their average performance is not as good as you are implying.

"Looking" the players up on a leader board is not indicative of how well a player can use a specific build posted. For that, you'd want to look at that builds specific stats instead, something only the account holder has access to.

Otherwise, the leader board only shows you their averages over all their mechs played. For many people, we change mechs and builds as we play through a season. I know this season I've been using my new Sunspider build that has AC2s, as well as all the different mechs from the recent challenges. If I posted my LRM Huntsmen build, you can't specifically pull out that mech's performance from my Locust I've also played. Or from my new Victor I just bought while it was on sale for the challenge. Or my Annihilator. Etc.

[S O L A I S]

Lykaon, on 02 July 2018 - 12:58 AM, said:

Section one defining debate to draw attention away from your failure to post a sufficent argument to support your point = Strawman. You argument is in essence that since I didn't frame my use of "debate" within it's literal and formal deffinition then my point about everything else is invalid.

Section two: So to clearify you do not believe that the use of a strategy to maximize the performance of a given asset ( in this case LRMs) improves the performance of that asset (in this case LRMs) If this is your standing maybe you should prove this in a general sense since it is commonly accepted that my point is true,that if a given asset is strategicly supported the performance of that asset is improved.

For example: LRMs + NARC and TAG = more effective LRMs when all assets are leveraged correctly.

If this is false I would like you to prove it.

Section three: Personal attacks. I was only trying to figure out what could possibly be the leading cause of an obvious disconnect from logic.

Section four: just for fun...

here is a strategic word problem for you.

You have three qualities of troops each assigned to regiments of 100 men.

You have 100 inexperienced green recruits
You have 100 average quality troops
You have 100 elite veteran troops

Your enemy has the exact same arangment with 100 green troops 100 average troops and 100 veterans.

Your goal is to win this battle by assigning a regiment to fight each of the enemy regiments.

What gives you the best overall odds?

You are missing my point. I am not using strawman techniques at all. I am saying that you are not providing evidence to support your claims.

First you are saying high end players are not familiar with how to counter lurms. This is absurd. Lurms have been a part of every single players experience in this game. Good players such as comp guys, pay attention to quirks, changes, buffs, and many other things the average player may not. They encounter lurms undoubtedly unless they are in a private lobby. In all other modes in the game, good players run into other players using lurms and in various degrees of support and skill. There is no evidence that there exists this magical lurm free place that good players are securely isolated from lurm strats and the various counters.

Your second section. I absolutely believe that proper support makes lrm's vastly more effective. In certain situations and uses they can actually be effective. I even agree with the composition you originally listed in your example as being strong and well thought out. That effectiveness and where you and I seem to disagree, is that even in these circumstances, good players will more often than not will be able to counter these strategies. I believe this because of how many counters there are for the weapon, issues with how the weapon deals damage and how fast, as well as the argument that for them to be effective, the situation has to be optimal. Example, if you were running a lurm strat and got the wrong side of Crimson you are in trouble. Or if you play the game where I live CW, you are prepared to counter lurm strats.

As far as the personal attacks, it is laughably disingenuous to say you were doing that as some sort of honest assessment. For whatever reason you seem to have taken offense to my disagreeing with you. You also seem to be stuck on my insisting that your story without any evidence or supporting facts does not provide a convincing or compelling argument that you can with good tactics reliably beat good players with lurm strats. You further pointed out that your use of 'skilled' was in fact facetious, which seems to be counter productive to your assertion that you can beat skilled players with lurm strats.

"With that being said,LRMs are still not very good considering the amount of support needed by team mates to leverage their effectiveness. We would have been better off using a less "one trick pony" group build to remain flexible and individually more independent within the team."

Here we absolutely agree, and from what I gather you were a four man. So you may have not had a team that meshed well with your plan or even outright hostile to it. Personally I think it is better to try and work with what you get, but this supports my other argument that in your scenario it appears the stars were in your favour. It could also by how you describe your lances performance be explained by the enemy making a critical error not recognising your trap which is much those players fault or snafu as it was your preparation. Given that you don't think lurms are all that great, how consistent can you pull off this strat? Perhaps given the player base a lot. How often though will it work against players that are legitimately skilled at the game and think in the very terms of strategy and map control that you do?

Section four I am going to ignore for not being relevant to the discussion. I know that you are an experienced player and don't doubt from your language that you possess a decent grasp of the game. That is not under attack, or why I disagree with what you offer as proof or why I don't think you can say skilled players are unfamiliar with lurm counters.

[Prototelis]

Tesunie, on 02 July 2018 - 01:48 PM, said:

"Looking" the players up on a leader board is not indicative of how well a player can use a specific build posted. For that, you'd want to look at that builds specific stats instead, something only the account holder has access to.

Perhaps I should be more specific, I look up everyone that claims to be a badass. Why? Because I look at it as an opportunity to learn.

Look up everyone in this thread that claims they almost exclusively lrm boat. One of them is actually as aggressive as they claim to be, always on the front, and has the average match score to support that.

The rest have middling to bad stats, and I know from my matches with and against them that the higher the average score the more they hide.

And I'm not one of those people that runs straight into fire lines (most of the time lol) I question everyone that calls a push against even numbers. "Do you see an advantage, or are you impatient?"

Edit: I think its worth noting that few people will post their actual mech statistics, and that says alot when you're implying you are a badass.

Edited by Prototelis, 02 July 2018 - 01:57 PM.

[Jman5]

Does feel like there have been way more people playing with LRMs in the past couple weeks. Seems like almost every game half the team is LRMs, Streaks, or ATMs.

[Novakaine]

I play nine different musical instruments.
Which one am I good,bad or just plain average at, whose to say?
But there is always something to say about average but steady.
Me I'm just painfully average.

[Kubernetes]

LRM usage has definitely spiked as of late. Last night on Canyon an enemy team had 5 LRM assaults! It was neat to see all those missiles in the air, but once we figured it out a few of us ran back there and gutted them. I'm seriously considering adding AMS to more of my QP builds.

[Grus]

Kubernetes, on 02 July 2018 - 02:39 PM, said:

LRM usage has definitely spiked as of late. Last night on Canyon an enemy team had 5 LRM assaults! It was neat to see all those missiles in the air, but once we figured it out a few of us ran back there and gutted them. I'm seriously considering adding AMS to more of my QP builds.

It's a "easy" way to deal damage to get that 100 match score for the event... But it's also usefully for warring down large, slow, assaults with out exposing yourself to damage to be followed up by high alpha mech's.

[Tesunie]

Prototelis, on 02 July 2018 - 01:56 PM, said:

Perhaps I should be more specific, I look up everyone that claims to be a badass. Why? Because I look at it as an opportunity to learn.

Look up everyone in this thread that claims they almost exclusively lrm boat. One of them is actually as aggressive as they claim to be, always on the front, and has the average match score to support that.

The rest have middling to bad stats, and I know from my matches with and against them that the higher the average score the more they hide.

And I'm not one of those people that runs straight into fire lines (most of the time lol) I question everyone that calls a push against even numbers. "Do you see an advantage, or are you impatient?"

Edit: I think its worth noting that few people will post their actual mech statistics, and that says alot when you're implying you are a badass.

I'm just saying the leader boards overall failure when determining someone's claim about a specific build.

I personally, if asked, will present what stats I can about specific builds, when possible/applicable. There are some mechs who's stats are so contaminated with so many different build concepts that I could never give honest stats about a specific build.

I too try to question when someone calls for a push a little too early. But, if a push is called, I will try to be there. Far too often, a push is called and I go (because we do have the advantage), and then I die quick and find out I was the only one who moved forwards... >.>

Is it now a good thing to say that I've never claimed to be exclusively an LRM boat? I like LRMs, but I don't boat them. I also enjoy other weapons, so actually very few of my mechs (when compared to the number of mechs I own) actually have LRMs on them. Recently, I've been enthralled with my quad AC2 Sunspider and my LPL, four MPL Huntsmen. Even if I feel my LRM Huntsmen is better, it's still nice to change things up.

Jman5, on 02 July 2018 - 02:33 PM, said:

Does feel like there have been way more people playing with LRMs in the past couple weeks. Seems like almost every game half the team is LRMs, Streaks, or ATMs.

Events are happening. Whenever there are events involving damage or match score, LRMs almost always come up. So do ATMs and SSRMs, because it's typically easier to get inflated damage scores, which typically equals higher match scores. It's like seeing an ally damage farm an DCed player, instead of just quickly taking the head component and moving on... (not that I can blame them.)

[Nema Nabojiv]

Ammo got buffed and now its possible to make reasonable builds with 2 tons per LRM20.

Also, IS lurms are still bad for their weight to damage ratio, mainly because lots of unkillable quirkboats and survival tree.

[Vxheous]

LRMs are now viable with all the buffs they got recently. Two months ago, I owned 1 LRM boat (lrm 80 supernova to troll with). Now I have 6 lrm boats. Stupid easy to farm damage/matchscore with 230m/s+ missiles and 33% extra ammo

Edited by Vxheous, 02 July 2018 - 03:09 PM.

[Cloves]

In my defense, I have advocated LRMs on these forums (but not in this thread) and agressive play (I think it wins games), but try not to present myself as a skilled player. I would not have someone look up my stats and be surprised or feel deceived. In general I believe you can see a higher matchscore average for lrm players, with a lower k/d. That having been said, my big pink LRM boat artificially inflates all of my stats across the board, wins included. Being an assault, it survives the result of mistakes a little longer, allowing for my agressive play better than say, a locust. However, there have been games where I have used cover and others locks, I feel a jump jet medium or fast light are better when it comes to getting your own locks, the assaults are only better at the dps aspect.

[Yosharian]

Cloves, on 02 July 2018 - 05:46 PM, said:

In my defense, I have advocated LRMs on these forums (but not in this thread) and agressive play (I think it wins games), but try not to present myself as a skilled player. I would not have someone look up my stats and be surprised or feel deceived. In general I believe you can see a higher matchscore average for lrm players, with a lower k/d. That having been said, my big pink LRM boat artificially inflates all of my stats across the board, wins included. Being an assault, it survives the result of mistakes a little longer, allowing for my agressive play better than say, a locust. However, there have been games where I have used cover and others locks, I feel a jump jet medium or fast light are better when it comes to getting your own locks, the assaults are only better at the dps aspect.

Almost everything you said is 100% wrong.

• LRMs do not win games consistently/reliably. If you want to carry, bring anything other than LRM.
  
• Higher matchscore doesn't mean jack **** when you're splattering the enemy mech all over. Precise damage to critical locations on your target is what brings mechs down.
  
• Assaults don't survive mistakes longer at all. If you make a mistake in an Assault you are much more likely to get torn apart due to slow speed/agility. Whereas a Light can quickly get out of trouble. An Assault is probably the worst mech to play 'aggressively' in because you cannot easily reposition from bad situations. They're also larger targets, easier to hit, flank, surround.
  
• When I am in my Locust I can play incredibly aggressively without too much risk because speed allows you to get out of dangerous situations like nothing else.
  
• Why would a jump jet medium mech, or a light, need to get their own locks? Neither of these mech types deploy LRMs effectively (I mean, no mech does, really, but these mechs are the worst to bring LRMs on by far).
  
• Mentioning 'DPS' in the same conversation as 'LRMs' is a joke.

[Vellron2005]

Yosharian, on 02 July 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Almost everything you said is 100% wrong.

• LRMs do not win games consistently/reliably. If you want to carry, bring anything other than LRM.
  
• Higher matchscore doesn't mean jack **** when you're splattering the enemy mech all over. Precise damage to critical locations on your target is what brings mechs down.
  
• Assaults don't survive mistakes longer at all. If you make a mistake in an Assault you are much more likely to get torn apart due to slow speed/agility. Whereas a Light can quickly get out of trouble. An Assault is probably the worst mech to play 'aggressively' in because you cannot easily reposition from bad situations. They're also larger targets, easier to hit, flank, surround.
  
• When I am in my Locust I can play incredibly aggressively without too much risk because speed allows you to get out of dangerous situations like nothing else.
  
• Why would a jump jet medium mech, or a light, need to get their own locks? Neither of these mech types deploy LRMs effectively (I mean, no mech does, really, but these mechs are the worst to bring LRMs on by far).
  
• Mentioning 'DPS' in the same conversation as 'LRMs' is a joke.

- Nothing wins games consistently and reliably - except teamwork. I've carried my team in a LRM assault plenty of times.
- Higher matchscore means more cbills, tier increase and events done. In this game, it is hella important. MWO is not COD. Killing somebody in 1 shot is neither important, nor profitable. The game greatly rewards stripping every single hitpoint from a target. And it's fun too.
- I agree that assaults pay for their mistakes more gravely than lights. This is why "assaults should be brawlers" makes no sense to me. if you can get taken out by a light, weight classes have no merit, and that is why LRM assaults are ok.
- Lights are by far the most aggressive weight class. No other weight class can get in between multiple other mechs, and shrug off damage like it was nothing. Lagshield is awesome.
- I know plenty of mediums that are great LRM boats.. Arctic Wolf, Huncback IIC, Trebuche to name a few.. Also I've wreacked havoc in a LRM Myst Lynx back before it went ballistic.. Didn't do much damage, but was annoying as hell and fun. Also, Cougar and Adder are great LRM boats.
- By mentioning DPS with LRMs, I think it probably means the suppressive rainbow-like nature of LRMs.. which is great.

[Michelle Branch]

Yosharian, on 02 July 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Almost everything you said is 100% wrong. LRMs do not win games consistently/reliably. If you want to carry, bring anything other than LRM.

Tell that to Proton and his 12 man of LRMs and NARC. I didn't watch for very long, but it looked painful.
I'm not advocating the use of LRMs, and I still say it's really only reliable in a handful of situations to an individual pilot, but an entire team rocking it that can actually tie their shoes in the morning without drooling on themselves have proven that you can just boat these stage 4 cancer missiles and win more often than not.

Yosharian, on 02 July 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Higher matchscore doesn't mean jack **** when you're splattering the enemy mech all over. Precise damage to critical locations on your target is what brings mechs down.

So yes and no. A high matchscore does say you contributed a hell of a lot more compared to the guy that has a double digit. Remember that 250 is average and that's abysmal. You can still achieve a 300-400 match score without much effort with whatever you're rocking. To say that it doesn't mean anything is false though.

Yosharian, on 02 July 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Assaults don't survive mistakes longer at all. If you make a mistake in an Assault you are much more likely to get torn apart due to slow speed/agility. Whereas a Light can quickly get out of trouble. An Assault is probably the worst mech to play 'aggressively' in because you cannot easily reposition from bad situations. They're also larger targets, easier to hit, flank, surround. When I am in my Locust I can play incredibly aggressively without too much risk because speed allows you to get out of dangerous situations like nothing else.

So the key difference here is that while I may make a mistake or two in an assault, provided I didn't derp away from the team, I can tank a few hits, torso twisting is still a thing.
A locust on the other hand...One well placed shot. It's not like your speed means you're invincible or anything, too many derpy light pilots think that I'm somehow going to miss them if they run in one general direction. Here's a perfect example:

Yosharian, on 02 July 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Why would a jump jet medium mech, or a light, need to get their own locks? Neither of these mech types deploy LRMs effectively (I mean, no mech does, really, but these mechs are the worst to bring LRMs on by far).

This x100. There's no reason for a light of all things to take LRM's.

Yosharian, on 02 July 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Mentioning 'DPS' in the same conversation as 'LRMs' is a joke.

Mentioning accuracy with LRM's is a joke. LRM's do just that though, DPS, with a lot of spread, coupled with a spam of "Incoming Missile," screen shake, FPS lost and a lot of 2D explosions.

[Kroete]

Yosharian, on 02 July 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Almost everything you said is 100% wrong.

• LRMs do not win games consistently/reliably. If you want to carry, bring anything other than LRM.
  
• Higher matchscore doesn't mean jack **** when you're splattering the enemy mech all over. Precise damage to critical locations on your target is what brings mechs down.
  
• Assaults don't survive mistakes longer at all. If you make a mistake in an Assault you are much more likely to get torn apart due to slow speed/agility. Whereas a Light can quickly get out of trouble. An Assault is probably the worst mech to play 'aggressively' in because you cannot easily reposition from bad situations. They're also larger targets, easier to hit, flank, surround.
  
• When I am in my Locust I can play incredibly aggressively without too much risk because speed allows you to get out of dangerous situations like nothing else.
  
• Why would a jump jet medium mech, or a light, need to get their own locks? Neither of these mech types deploy LRMs effectively (I mean, no mech does, really, but these mechs are the worst to bring LRMs on by far).
  
• Mentioning 'DPS' in the same conversation as 'LRMs' is a joke.

1. Still have positive wl with my lrm-boats.
2. Mechs go down by damage, what damage dosnt matter for the engine who calculates it.
3. You can play assaults agressive, but its a small line between brave and dumb.
4. You can kill a light with a single alpha, dont now how many locust ran in the range of my crow and exploded.
5. Mediums and some lights were ok for lrms, but they lost some value for lrm because more ams = more tubes.
6. Do we have different definitions of dps?

LRMs are pure dps,
you cant kill most mechs with a single lrm100,
but you can kill every mech with lrms, if you give him a steady stream until it melts.


Some numbers:
RL 10-20 20-40 DPS (Singleshot)
RAC5 10.91 DPS (without counting for jams)
MRM40 8.42 DPS
RAC2 6.55DPS (without counting for jams)
MRM30 6.98 DPS
MRM20 5.65 DPS
Heavy Gauss has 5 DPS
AC20 Weapons have 5 DPS (without counting for jams)
ATM 12 4.8 DPS
LRM20 4.65 DPS
AC10 Weapons have 4.4 DPS (without counting for jams)
CLRM20 4.35 DPS

20 ballistic weapons doing less dps then a clrm20,
all (28) energyweapons doing less dps then a clrm20,
22 missiles weapons doing less dps then a clrm20.

Edited by Kroete, 03 July 2018 - 02:20 AM.

[Cloves]

Kroete, on 03 July 2018 - 02:08 AM, said:

1. Still have positive wl with my lrm-boats.
2. Mechs go down by damage, what damage dosnt matter for the engine who calculates it.
3. You can play assaults agressive, but its a small line between brave and dumb.
4. You can kill a light with a single alpha, dont now how many locust ran in the range of my crow and exploded.
5. Mediums and some lights were ok for lrms, but they lost some value for lrm because more ams = more tubes.
6. Do we have different definitions of dps?

LRMs are pure dps,
you cant kill most mechs with a single lrm100,
but you can kill every mech with lrms, if you give him a steady stream until it melts.


Some numbers:
RL 10-20 20-40 DPS (Singleshot)
RAC5 10.91 DPS (without counting for jams)
MRM40 8.42 DPS
RAC2 6.55DPS (without counting for jams)
MRM30 6.98 DPS
MRM20 5.65 DPS
Heavy Gauss has 5 DPS
AC20 Weapons have 5 DPS (without counting for jams)
ATM 12 4.8 DPS
LRM20 4.65 DPS
AC10 Weapons have 4.4 DPS (without counting for jams)
CLRM20 4.35 DPS

20 ballistic weapons doing less dps then a clrm20,
all (28) energyweapons doing less dps then a clrm20,
22 missiles weapons doing less dps then a clrm20.

A lrm boat can carry 4x calrm 20. For a dps of around 19 that is sustainable without being in direct line of sight the whole time. What they don’t have is focused alpha to a component. The dps aspect is why you see higher matchscores from lrm boats. It may not be as useful as the the damage from other sources, but it’s damage done over the match period. Hell I have seen drtydshsoap take out most of a team doing under 1k with lasers and gauss, that’s not the damage he does it’s the precision with which it’s applied. You can get 2k damage and still not have 6 kills with LRMs, because it’s just dps. Think of LRMs as DOT casters vs the gauss being a nuke caster.

[Vellron2005]

People really need to stop comparing LRMs to direct fire weapons.. They are like apples and oranges..

Also, stop expecting LRMs to kill things quickly, or to even kill things.. that is not what they are meant for..

When you have lots of kills with a LRM boat, means somebody else dropped the ball.

Best non-BT analogy for LRMs can be found in Dungeons & Dragons, where LRM boats would be fireball-casting wizards, while Gauss would be a longbow archer, a fast light would be a backstabbing rogue, and a laservomit brawler would be a sword&board fighter.

Anybody who's played D&D would know that each is needed in a well-rounded party.

(I omit clerics cose' there's not healing in MWO)

SO if you wanna:

1) kill people, take them down quick, and score major epeen for having many kills, play a brawler or long-range direct fire.

2) Help others take down targets quicker, control the battlefield, suppress enemy movements, print cbills, get high matchscores and high damage scores - play a LRM boat.

[Novakaine]

That should be a decal.
"This Mech Prints C-Bills."