43 replies to this topic

[CUTE PUPPY LUV]

o7 warriors,
Lurm mechs always have a bad rap for as long as I remember. Of course some of them are right such as:
- Lurm stays behind and not sharing armor.
- Lurm is noob. No skills.
- Lurm steals kills.

However, I think we often overlook the advantage of having a Lurm in the team:
- On Lurm friendly maps such as polar highland high chance the team will be beneficial.
- Lurm distracts enemies. Often they will commit 2-4 mech just to kill the Lurm. Freeing our team to attack more aggressively on those that don't chase the Lurm.
- Lurm creates chaos on enemy front line. Pilot getting Lurmed: "Sh*t!! Gotta run from here!". Breaking their formation.

So, IMHO, direct or indirectly Lurm has its merit to the team. Especially moderately fast Lurm mech that can keep up with the team movement. Delivering deadly missiles on enemies.

What do you think?

Edited by CUTE PUPPY LUV, 02 March 2019 - 06:18 PM.

[HammerMaster]

I think I'm tired of this discussion.
LRM are fine and are only shamed in MWO.
No other iteration of BattleTech or MechWarrior shamed a user OF ANY particular weapon.
And frankly the detractors can shove it in their exhaust port.

Edited by HammerMaster, 02 March 2019 - 06:21 PM.

[Maddermax]

Yeah, LRMs can also mean instant fire support to mechs that might otherwise be isolated. A skirmish in the outskirts ends quickly when one side gets LRMs incoming.

The thing is, one or maaaybe 2 LRM mechs are ok, but because teams are randomly constructed you can end up with 3-4 LRM mechs, and your team often collapses because you can’t hold the line well enough and get walked over, then the complaining about LRM begins. With that in mind, I rarely take LRM, on the basis that someone else probably will anyway, and that’ll do.

Coordinated teams of Narc/Lurmers are a different kettle of fish entirely, of course.

Edited by Maddermax, 02 March 2019 - 06:57 PM.

[CUTE PUPPY LUV]

I'm a potato of course. But i notice i win more often when I'm in my Lurm boat.

[Bombast]

HammerMaster, on 02 March 2019 - 06:20 PM, said:

No other iteration of BattleTech or MechWarrior shamed a user OF ANY particular weapon.

I'm pretty sure that Clantech, Gausswalling, and cERPPC mass-boating have all been shamed and/or bitched about at some point by the Battletech community.

[FupDup]

HammerMaster, on 02 March 2019 - 06:20 PM, said:

I think I'm tired of this discussion.
LRM are fine and are only shamed in MWO.
No other iteration of BattleTech or MechWarrior shamed a user OF ANY particular weapon.
And frankly the detractors can shove it in their exhaust port.

Well, that might be in part because:

1. MWO is the only MW game that is focused around online multiplayer. The others were just singleplayer games with optional multiplayer tacked on as a cherry on top. In this environment you'll be seeing more complaining about everything.

2. MWO has very particular mechanics on Lurms that make them way more annoying than Lurms in older games.

[HammerMaster]

Bombast, on 02 March 2019 - 07:20 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure that Clantech, Gausswalling, and cERPPC mass-boating have all been shamed and/or bitched about at some point by the Battletech community.

Not the extent we have now but InterNets is more prolific now too.

FupDup, on 02 March 2019 - 07:25 PM, said:

Well, that might be in part because:

1. MWO is the only MW game that is focused around online multiplayer. The others were just singleplayer games with optional multiplayer tacked on as a cherry on top. In this environment you'll be seeing more complaining about everything.

2. MWO has very particular mechanics on Lurms that make them way more annoying than Lurms in older games.

See above.

Or to sum it up.
Aholes.

Edited by HammerMaster, 02 March 2019 - 07:40 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Honestly, it's the competition -- or rather the competitive nature.

I don't want to name people, but the competitive "leet-aiming" is one of the factors why LRMs -- or at least homing weapons would be always shat on. I mean sure, okay, I agree, homing weapons shouldn't be as competitive as aimed weapons, else why would anyone pick it?

But so far I've only heard that justification for nerf after nerfs for the homing system, when in fact it's hardly competitive to aimed weapons already. That smaller lock-cone, though not that I can't manage it, they drive the homing weapons more and more like aimed weapons by the need to more precise, yet still homing weapons we gotta be "less competitive: than aimed weapons.

Now we got a system that's not exactly as easy as it was made to be, pumping that little for the difficulty of usage. It's too hard for a supposedly "easy weapon", yet for it's difficulty of use, it's still not competitive, which puts it at an awkward position.

You don't have to be as precise as lasers, sure, but tracking the target means have to stare the entire time, but instead of dealing damage instantly you have to wait for a cluster of missiles to actually hit which ends up longer than a laser-beam.

LRMs, being the worst on the bunch, makes it easy to pick on, it's the noob-tube that's doing even less cause it's not even easy to kill with.

People have to adapt for this, people left LRMs precisely because it's a poor weapon once you get an actual handle of the game. There's only so much PGI can do to compensate to the attitudes and disrespect to homing weapons (and quite frankly they have consistently shown that they can't do a lot -- until the PTS change that is).

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 March 2019 - 08:08 PM.

[FupDup]

The6thMessenger, on 02 March 2019 - 08:05 PM, said:

Honestly, it's the competition -- or rather the competitive nature.

I don't want to name people, but the competitive "leet-aiming" is one of the factors why LRMs -- or at least homing weapons would be always shat on. I mean sure, okay, I agree, homing weapons shouldn't be as competitive as aimed weapons, else why would anyone pick it?

But so far I've only heard that justification for nerf after nerfs for the homing system, when in fact it's hardly competitive to aimed weapons already. That smaller lock-cone, though not that I can't manage it, they drive the homing weapons more and more like aimed weapons by the need to more precise, yet still homing weapons we gotta be "less competitive: than aimed weapons.

Now we got a system that's not exactly as easy as it was made to be, pumping that little for the difficulty of usage. It's too hard for a supposedly "easy weapon", yet for it's difficulty of use, it's still not competitive, which puts it at an awkward position.

You don't have to be as precise as lasers, sure, but tracking the target means have to stare the entire time, but instead of dealing damage instantly you have to wait for a cluster of missiles to actually hit which ends up longer than a laser-beam.

LRMs, being the worst on the bunch, makes it easy to pick on, it's the noob-tube that's doing even less cause it's not even easy to kill with. There's only so much PGI can do to compensate to the attitudes and disrespect to homing weapons (and quite frankly they have consistently shown that they can't do a lot -- until the PTS change that is).

It would be nice to entirely rework the lock-on mechanic such that Lurms (and other missiles) would be guided by the player rather than the computer. Then this whole debate would be obsolete.

Not gonna happen tho.

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 02 March 2019 - 08:08 PM, said:

It would be nice to entirely rework the lock-on mechanic such that Lurms (and other missiles) would be guided by the player rather than the computer. Then this whole debate would be obsolete.

Not gonna happen tho.

I don't see the point of it though, it's homing, it's supposedly less input for people because the projectile finds it's way on it's own. A nudge to the direction of more aiming, and more skill involved, defeats the purpose. Lasers hit instantly, ACs hit faster; if you already have the skill of aiming, all you get from homing is a longer interval between impact and thereby damage.

I quite literally, might as well, use LBXs or any other DFed weapon, if i have tonnage to back it up, but so far high damage/tonnage is one of the niches of missile weapons.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 March 2019 - 08:19 PM.

[Oberst Wilhelm Klink]

CUTE PUPPY LUV, on 02 March 2019 - 06:17 PM, said:

The Advantage Of Lurm In The Team
[...]
What do you think?

You already answered:

CUTE PUPPY LUV, on 02 March 2019 - 06:17 PM, said:

- Lurm stays behind and not sharing armor.
- Lurm is noob. No skills.

CUTE PUPPY LUV, on 02 March 2019 - 07:09 PM, said:

But i notice i win more often when I'm in my Lurm boat.

It's an illusion. It's a self-protection mechanism of your brain to let you believe you're not doing anything wrong.
But it's an illusion.

Edited by Oberst Wilhelm Klink, 02 March 2019 - 08:21 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

The problem with LURMs is the way people build to use them. Generally speaking they go all in on them bringing absolutely nothing else to the table. They really need to be set up as a mixed build of LRMs supported by a fair amount of short range weapons, enough to either push the enemy back into LRM range or at least give you a decent chance of defending yourself if some one does get in under 180m. The mixed build also lets you function in the 2nd line where you can be sharing armor, helping to push a corner and/or get your own locks.

For example my Supernova A mounts 2xLRM20 w/Artemis, 2xSRM6 w/Artemis and 4xMPL. That gives me a 50 point short range alpha while still allowing for significant weight of LRMs to provide Indirect support. I can also pretty much guarantee you I am out damging LRM80 builds that sit way back lobbing LRMs at things they can't see. If more people built their LRM boats like this, they might actually find themselves winning more battles.

Edited by Angel of Annihilation, 02 March 2019 - 10:26 PM.

[Phoenix 72]

Heh. We just won a match 12:11 because our Lurm Stalker had 3 Small Lasers as a backup weapon and the last surviving enemy stealth light could not grind through his armour quickly enough. The Stalker was fairly ineffective before that moment of glory, though, since we fought on HPG.

And that's exactly the issue. There are a number of maps where LRMs do quite well and a number of matches they do really badly. Not their fault, if that's the map that came up. So I personally like to take Mechs and builds that are viable on any map. Because I really dislike the feast or famine gameplay. I would rather be consistent. If people are fine with feast and famine, that is their choice.

But I will definitely advocate what Angel said above. Bring backup weapons. See example above.

[Snowhawk]

In short words because my English is not the best:

Rockets can be a good addition to the team, some players simply have too much prejudice against this weapon….

Edited by Snowhawk, 03 March 2019 - 12:14 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Angel of Annihilation, on 02 March 2019 - 10:26 PM, said:

The problem with LURMs is the way people build to use them.

Generally speaking they go all in on them bringing absolutely nothing else to the table. They really need to be set up as a mixed build of LRMs supported by a fair amount of short range weapons, enough to either push the enemy back into LRM range or at least give you a decent chance of defending yourself if some one does get in under 180m. The mixed build also lets you function in the 2nd line where you can be sharing armor, helping to push a corner and/or get your own locks.

True. But i suppose, they're just compensating with poor LRM hit-rate, so they're simply overwhelming it with sheer numbers.

I do find Dakkas and LRMs mix quite beautifully together. Though my primary LRM build is actually 2x LRM20A + 5x ERML + LTAG, or 2x LRM20 + 6x ERML.

Angel of Annihilation, on 02 March 2019 - 10:26 PM, said:

example my Supernova A mounts 2xLRM20 w/Artemis, 2xSRM6 w/Artemis and 4xMPL. That gives me a 50 point short range alpha while still allowing for significant weight of LRMs to provide Indirect support. I can also pretty much guarantee you I am out damging LRM80 builds that sit way back lobbing LRMs at things they can't see. If more people built their LRM boats like this, they might actually find themselves winning more battles.

I won't say that your build outperforms or underperforms, cause I can't really compare the two. SNV to me always has been go-big, it's for boating, because it can't go fast in the first place. And in my experience, LRMs work well with mobile mechs, so honestly a slow assault is the last thing I'm going to suggest it with.

I would rather suggest something faster, like a Heavy for LRM builds. But if you do like LRMs and assault, I'd suggest a Mad-Cat for it.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 March 2019 - 12:27 AM.

[Prototelis]

The problem with lrms are that they disrupt the core gameplay loop.

Doesn't help that many of the people playing them choose to sandbag their team for higher numbers; only to turn around and brag about how much "work" they did.

[The6thMessenger]

Prototelis, on 03 March 2019 - 12:58 AM, said:

The problem with lrms are that they disrupt the core gameplay loop.

???

What? How?

Prototelis, on 03 March 2019 - 12:58 AM, said:

Doesn't help that many of the people playing them choose to sandbag their team for higher numbers; only to turn around and brag about how much "work" they did.

Lol. Now that's what I could relate.

[Burning2nd]

lrms are **** until your own the receiving end of a Cplt-a1(C) with the patch maker build



why do you think they made a module for screen shake?

[Appogee]

CUTE PUPPY LUV, on 02 March 2019 - 06:17 PM, said:

So, IMHO, direct or indirectly Lurm has its merit to the team. Especially moderately fast Lurm mech that can keep up with the team movement. Delivering deadly missiles on enemies.

Yes, LRMs can be 'useful' on some maps and in some circumstances.

But generally, not as useful as often as a high DPS/alpha direct fire Mech.

[Gagis]

In conclusion: Its acceptable to bring lurms on a Trebuchet or Mad Dog, since they are mobile harassers. Its not acceptable to being a lurm Supernova or a Stalker, since they are not mobile harassers. LRM boating with Awesomes and such only works in a coordinated group, so not in Quick Play.