241 replies to this topic

[Arnetheus]

MrMadguy, on 18 January 2024 - 10:41 AM, said:

For now LRMs are only way to counter poptart sniper meta.

Cease with the misinformation. Some people might read it and take it seriously.

Quote

And not to be dead within first minute of match due to ST-oneshot from 1k meters.

Wait, what? Are you implying builds other than lurmboats have problems dealing with snipers?

Quote

Further speed nerf and arc height nerf = no ability to hit targets behind obstacles. Poptarts would be even safer then.

They already are, always were, in a face to face confrontation.
You are supposed to flank them, to flush them out, with the help of lights. But that's too big-brained for the quickplay teamplay.

Quote

Zero weapon diversity in this game. Shouldn't we rename this game into GaussERPPCWarrior Online then?

No. Because the most reliable/universal builds for quickplay are mid-range.
Brawling is also pretty good nowdays, too bad it relies on team not being clueless for some covering fire.

Quote

You know. Sometimes I encounter matches, where whole enemy team has radar derps, so my team has 0 missile locks for whole match

If you're dropping solo with builds having no narc or JJs, that's your choice.

Quote

You should understand one thing. This game is already unplayable.

Is it? Weird.
Played for a bit yesterday and it worked fine.

Quote

I play it during events only. And just because LRMs allow me to deal enough damage to complete these events.

So, you're a one-trick pony, who's upset about their only weapon of choice being rebalanced (not even strictly nerfed).
Well, tough life, try diversifying your gameplay a bit. It usually leads to better long-term enjoyment.

[kalashnikity]

Bassault, on 17 January 2024 - 10:03 PM, said:

Getting a lock only requires a loose hovering over a target, it does not require precision or skill compared to projectiles or keeping a laser burn steady on a component. You see, when you get better at the game, you don't shoot at the general direction of a mech but you actually have to hit the same component multiple times in a row.

I believe you are entirely incorrect, good sir.

Bassault, on 17 January 2024 - 10:03 PM, said:

Getting a lock only requires a loose hovering over a target, it does not require precision or skill compared to projectiles or keeping a laser burn steady on a component. You see, when you get better at the game, you don't shoot at the general direction of a mech but you actually have to hit the same component multiple times in a row.

I believe you are entirely incorrect, good sir.

[kalashnikity]

Meep Meep, on 18 January 2024 - 04:25 AM, said:

Since the lockon changes a while back you have to be a little bit more precise than generally hovering but yeah its not hard at all. You have to be much closer to the center of the box now, though after the lock has been made you can flip the crosshair wherever you want as long as you put it back on the target box before the target delay timer ends and reset it.

It's easy to keep a lock after you finally manage to get one. ^

It's that getting a lock that's the hard part, with the snipers poking in and out of hard cover it can be nearly impossible, by the time you get a lock they are already behind cover when the missiles finally get there.

It's not like missiles were ruining everyone's day.

I was ok with famine, famine, feast, famine famine, feast. I'd estimate bout 1/5th of my games I carry any kinds of missiles, why? It is exceedingly hard to do well consistently with them. If I decide to carry them it's because I feel like chalenging myself, not because I can't aim.

Frankly aiming lasers is a joke, and leading targets with projectiles isn't that hard.
.
.
.
.

Can someone show me anybody (before this latest nerf) that got past T3 playing missiles only?

Edited by kalashnikity, 23 January 2024 - 08:21 PM.

[kalashnikity]

torsie, on 18 January 2024 - 05:56 AM, said:

I am bad player but from what I tried playing LRM missiles, I have to aim much more than with normal guns.
This is from view of rookie player compared to good players who comment here.

With my normal guns I just see someone, I aim at them, push button to do damage and then one of us goes to hide again.
1000+ range and ECM or stealth armour no problems, all I have to see is a little bit of arm from behind corner and I can shoot.


With rockets you have look around all the time, waiting for red squares, then you need to instantly look at it and hold your aim perfectly in center.
Yes it doesnt have to be perfectly on middle, I know, but that lock can sometimes behave little silly, especially if you or your target is moving and I think mech size or shape has definitely something to do with that, this is just conspiracy from me but when I was practicing in testing grounds it definitely feels like some mechs get locked while aiming at the same place in the red square on other mech doesnt work.

This is already twice as much work for me compared to normal guns, and its not even the end!

When you finally get a lock, now you can shoot, compare this to normal where you can just shoot as soon as you see something.
During this whole time you have to aim again "perfectly". And its not same aiming like with laser, your laser will still do damage just into different part, but with missiles right when you lose lock for even moment they just collapse to ground doing no damage.

Now there is tons of other problems that dont exist with other guns. Your missiles randomly deciding they want to hit wall right in front of you, instead of going above. If you want to shoot around corner, you need move your cursor away from your target, but also not away because you lose lock.

Imagine shooting AC/something on moving target. You need to aim in front of them, but if you take your aim away, you suddenly cant shoot your gun. This sounds very silly, yet its expected from LRM.

Then you have situations like ECM or stealth armour, ECM and stealth armour should either be removed from the game or made available to everyone .
Only gun that is disabled by these are missiles, I dont need red square to shoot lasers.
You have person poking around corner or behind hill, you use your laser TAG to spot them, but to get lock on you need to aim at the center, but center is behind hill, so you aim your TAG at ground, but if you aim your TAG at ground, you cant target them.
This was so frustrating, and that is still just getting lock, thats only 1/3 of actually hitting someone with missiles.

Before you say just bring PPC/NARC/TAG which other weapon needs you to bring another weapon just to be usable.
I have fancy mech I build but cant use it most of the time because I cant fit TAG on it and have to sacrifice one missiles slot, which could be even 15+ damage to bring narc and some lowly 10 rockets for it.

If only solution is standing in the open so I cant hit walls or trees, 500 meters from my targets, doing all my locks myself, then it completely defeats the point of LRM.
I can just choose one of dozen other weapons that do their work better.


I once asked question in game about LRMs and someone told me to just learn how to aim and play proper weapons.
While I was sitting there, sweating, head so close to my notebook I was breathing on my screen, shaking and my hand cramped and hurting from swinging my mouse around whole match.
Only to shoot 2000 missiles and doing 100 damage.
No LRMs are absolutely not zero effort auto aim weapons.

It's almost like the people saying that are simply trying to force us to believe that by saying it over and over again.

I know that statement it objectively and demonstrably false.

I guess that tactic works on the weak minded.

If anything is "easy to play" it is blue lasers. Just wave your hand back and forth any time the enemy pokes out, no need to worry about tactics or positioning, or struggling to get a lock, or how to get closer, if you can see it you can easily hit it.

Edited by kalashnikity, 23 January 2024 - 08:34 PM.

[kalashnikity]

kalashnikity, on 14 January 2024 - 10:48 AM, said:

Now we are even importing from the old thread too. Good.

Let the gaslighting continue...



"herp derp" generally losing lock also means they are behind hard cover, and LRMS won't be able to hit them anyways.

That "buff" is meaningless compared to velocity loss, which gives them even more time to get behind even more cover.

I'm going to make it my goal to pull off a 1000+ dmg LRM game even after the nerf, just to prove they need to nerf them again.

Start it, I got 2 games last month in one night in my Mean Baby.

I rarely play LRMs, since you can't do well with them routinely.

I also did 3 games in about 24 hours about 6 months ago in my archer.

But I routinely get over 1000DMG and do consistently well in my Awesome 8Q 6xSNPPC. I don't see anyone complaining that SNPPC are broken eventhough I rarely get less than 500dmg.

[Besh]

kalashnikity, on 23 January 2024 - 08:26 PM, said:

It's almost like the people saying that are simply trying to force us to believe that by saying it over and over again. I know that statement it objectively and demonstrably false. I guess that tactic works on the weak minded. If anything is "easy to play" it is blue lasers. Just wave your hand back and forth any time the enemy pokes out, no need to worry about tactics or positioning, or struggling to get a lock, or how to get closer, if you can see it you can easily hit it.

The entire conversation about "skill vs noskill" as exercised on these Forums for abt. 10 years now is essentially heavily biassed, often perpetrated by flawed arguments, and in essence only serves to favour certain playstyles . Point in case being LRMs vs highAlpha LazorVom, LRMs being portrayed as the ultimate "noskill" weapon 'cos "no aim", while ofc. a 70point LazorVom Alpha with some sustain a much easier way to deliver high amount of dmg . Point and click on sight, *boom* effect (damage) . Repeat [x] seconds later .

But, as you know, and I know, and has been happening as long as the conversation exists here, pointing this out will earn someone a good amount of flak, and there is a neverending supply of GishGallops perfectly showcasing Brandolini's law posts waiting to be unleashed at any given moment .

Edited by Besh, 24 January 2024 - 07:55 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Besh, on 24 January 2024 - 02:50 AM, said:

The entire conversation about "skill vs noskill" as exercised on these Forums for abt. 10 years now is essentially heavily biassed, often perpetrated by flawed arguments, and in essence only serves to favour certain playstyles . Point in case being LRMs vs highAlpha LazorVom, LRMs being portrayed as the ultimate "noskill" weapon 'cos "no aim", while ofc. a 70point LazorVom Alpha with some sustain a much easier way to deliver high amount of dmg . Point and click on sight, *boom* effect (damage) . Repeat [x] seconds later .

The only bias is those who defend LRMs as requiring more skill than direct fire. Some people assume that the more difficult something is, the more skill that's required and that's a false correlation. The problem with lock-ons in general is that skill can't overcome things like travel time, hard counters, and or long lock times. Yes, long lock times do require more skill than short lock times, but the amount of skill required to make that happen is still pretty minimal because like I've said repeatedly, you have one large hitbox to deal with. The time is just an artificial difficulty, the actual act doesn't require that much skill and the user's impact into reducing that lock time or maintaining that lock during that time is not really something the user has much control over (you have some but not much, not for 2s+). Positioning is a requirement to play this game, regardless of whatever weapons you are using so that argument falls flat as well, LRMs are not unique (they are unique in that you can abuse cover a lot more).

How much it spreads, inability to aim sections, etc again, aren't something you can really overcome with skill so using those as arguments for why they take more skill is just misdirection as well.

You want a lock-on system that requires skill like direct fire to use, we had a Mechwarrior with that 2 decades ago. TOW missiles would also require a lot more skill as well.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 24 January 2024 - 08:41 AM.

[Vonbach]

Anyone that says LRMs takes no skill doesn't play them much. Lrm's take a lot of skill and effort to get any results at all. If I some quick damage I have bunch of long range ER laser or Large laser ER medium builds that I can rack up damage without a whole lot of effort.

Edited by Vonbach, 24 January 2024 - 08:47 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Vonbach, on 24 January 2024 - 09:58 AM, said:

Yeah nice try. Play a long range trade build and a LRM build for a bit and see what mech takes more skill and effort.

The long range trade build does, because again:

Quicksilver Aberration, on 24 January 2024 - 08:39 AM, said:

Some people assume that the more difficult something is, the more skill that's required and that's a false correlation.

Difficulty or ability to do damage with LRMs has little to do with skill and is more impacted by how many hard counters are in play and how well the enemy can use cover. In other words there is little player skill can do to overcome the deficiencies of the weapon, it lacks a lot of player agency compared to yes, even hit scan lasers.



Also, if long range laser builds are really low skill bar, why can I ignore most of them because they are typically awful in PUGs and end up doing 200-300 worth of scratch damage?

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 24 January 2024 - 10:03 AM.

[Besh]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 24 January 2024 - 08:39 AM, said:

The only bias is those who defend LRMs as requiring more skill than direct fire. Some people assume that the more difficult something is, the more skill that's required and that's a false correlation. The problem with lock-ons in general is that skill can't overcome things like travel time, hard counters, and or long lock times. Yes, long lock times do require more skill than short lock times, but the amount of skill required to make that happen is still pretty minimal because like I've said repeatedly, you have one large hitbox to deal with. The time is just an artificial difficulty, the actual act doesn't require that much skill and the user's impact into reducing that lock time or maintaining that lock during that time is not really something the user has much control over (you have some but not much, not for 2s+). Positioning is a requirement to play this game, regardless of whatever weapons you are using so that argument falls flat as well, LRMs are not unique (they are unique in that you can abuse cover a lot more).

How much it spreads, inability to aim sections, etc again, aren't something you can really overcome with skill so using those as arguments for why they take more skill is just misdirection as well.

You want a lock-on system that requires skill like direct fire to use, we had a Mechwarrior with that 2 decades ago. TOW missiles would also require a lot more skill as well.

The whole notion of someone being able to play around the hardcounters, having the timing down etc. having nothing to do with skill is a nice example of a biassed opinion . Your reasoning is circular .

[Bassault]

Vonbach, on 24 January 2024 - 09:58 AM, said:

Yeah nice try. Play a long range trade build and a LRM build for a bit and see what mech takes more skill and effort. Long range laser builds are the real low skill bar.

The LRMs you don't even have to aim or move around. That alone makes it easier to play than anything else in the game.

[feeWAIVER]

Y'all are arguing about skill in MWO, "the thinking mans shooter", a game populated by middle aged men and retired truck drivers.
Get real.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Besh, on 24 January 2024 - 10:23 AM, said:

Your reasoning is circular .

How so? The whole point of a hard counter is that you can't overcome it with skill (or at least it has minimal impact).

Edit: Ripped this from good ole Urban Dictionary, but the definition of hard vs soft counters is typically along these lines:

Quote

In a soft counter, the strategy being countered can still be victorious through skill or luck. There is no chance of this when a hard counter is used.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 24 January 2024 - 10:40 AM.

[Vonbach]

Bassault, on 24 January 2024 - 10:25 AM, said:

The LRMs you don't even have to aim or move around. That alone makes it easier to play than anything else in the game.

Really? Try playing a LRM build and standing in one spot all game like a sniper. See what happens.
Oh and make snipers line up their shots for ten seconds or so before they can get a shot off.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Vonbach, on 24 January 2024 - 10:35 AM, said:

Really? Try playing a LRM build and standing in one spot all game like a sniper. See what happens.
Oh and make snipers line up their shots for ten seconds or so before they can get a shot off.

Why are you trying to play them the same way, they are not equivalent weapons. If anything ATMs/LRMs are a lot like dakka, they like to punish mechs caught in open sightlines. ERLL mechs are poke mechs, you can punish mechs in open sightlines sure, but you aren't doing as much damage as the other two.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 24 January 2024 - 10:38 AM.

[Vonbach]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 24 January 2024 - 10:37 AM, said:

Why are you trying to play them the same way, they are not equivalent weapons. If anything ATMs/LRMs are a lot like dakka, they like to punish mechs caught in open sightlines. ERLL mechs are poke mechs, you can punish mechs in open sightlines sure, but you aren't doing as much damage as the other two.

Lawl ok. I have an ER LL mech I sometimes use and I fry things with it. Its easy to play.

[Besh]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 24 January 2024 - 10:37 AM, said:

Why are you trying to play them the same way, they are not equivalent weapons. If anything ATMs/LRMs are a lot like dakka, they like to punish mechs caught in open sightlines. ERLL mechs are poke mechs, you can punish mechs in open sightlines sure, but you aren't doing as much damage as the other two.

Funny thing is, ignoring firing window (and in relation to damage) is another part of the bias saying "LRMs = noskill" .

[torsie]

I dont want to get into whole argument too much, I feel like people are arguing here just because they like to arguing.

My personal opinion is that you cant make LRM "good" for everyone, without having probably having to remake whole game or just make entirely new game .

But.

Isnt that it?

I mean if you take any other weapon, stand on hill and when you see someone click, you will do damage. Try doing that with LRM and you will do somewhere between no and very little damage in comparison.
That person you talk about doing 200 damage with lasers would do 20 damage using LRM.

I think word "skill" is not fitting here, saying LRM needs more skill sounds like you need to be good, it should be something more like "effort" or "knowledge".

Just simple getting LRM mech working is trouble on its own. You need lots of LRM to even start being useful, you need lots of heavy and explosive ammo (this is problem shared with autocannons), you need bring some backup weapon, you need to bring something to counter ECM.

I like saying from this game "matches are lost in mechlab" (its my second favourite, right after "its always shadowcat" ).
And yes copying build from some website doesnt require "skill" and person who makes good builds maybe doesnt know how to play the game properly.
But you need to put at least some work into it.

LRM does have advantages because of the way it works, but that doesnt mean it takes less work than other weapons.
This game likes damage done very much, most people wont care your target is good at turning around, your laser still did its damage.

I think if headshots were easy most people still wouldnt do them, because killing someone by doing 20 damage wouldnt give you green arrows.

[Bassault]

Vonbach, on 24 January 2024 - 10:35 AM, said:

Really? Try playing a LRM build and standing in one spot all game like a sniper. See what happens.
Oh and make snipers line up their shots for ten seconds or so before they can get a shot off.

Having to line up your shot for 10 seconds (it's a lot less time than that to lock on btw) doesn't take any skill at all. The circle is huge, and you don't need to keep your aim steady or anything. Even as the target is moving you'd have to be completely unfamiliar to how a mouse works to not be able to hold a lock. Once you get in range and have locks, you can definitely stand still for a very long time in an LRM boat and deal significant damage. So imagine a sniper, but he doesn't have to aim and he doesn't have to get shot back and he doesn't have to worry about sightlines.

Don't forget what quicksilver has said already, and also remember that effectiveness does not mean something is easier to use. LRMs take no effort or mechanical and positioning skill to use, so they are of course overall, a little weaker than using direct fire weapons if you are capable of aiming with direct fire weapons, and that's how it should be because no game should reward players for having little or no skill.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Vonbach, on 24 January 2024 - 10:54 AM, said:

Lawl ok. I have an ER LL mech I sometimes use and I fry things with it. Its easy to play.

-------The Point------>

You

With that said, when people say "I do well" the definition of what "well" means varies greatly so it's a pretty meaningless statement. Especially if you are just farming and not actually contributing to your team (people who play ERLL mechs like Gauss Stealth Thanny's are not contributing all that they should be).

Yes it is hit-scan so the skill floor is low, but the ceiling is decently high because well, there is a big difference between spreading your laser across 3 components and solely hitting the CT, even I can't do the latter and even some of the best traders spread some of their damage.

Besh, on 24 January 2024 - 11:02 AM, said:

Funny thing is, ignoring firing window (and in relation to damage) is another part of the bias saying "LRMs = noskill" .

Funny thing is, that firing window for LRMs were extended to ridiculousness to hard counter LRMs, to a point that you aren't really meant to really acquire locks with any sort of consistency (thus the whole hard counter thing). This is why the Cauldron is taking the approach of slowly unwinding some of these hard counters.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 24 January 2024 - 11:28 AM.