Recurrent deep learning language models like the LSTM are often used to provide advanced cyber-defense for high-value assets. The underlying assumption for using LSTM networks for malware-detection is that the op-code sequence of malware could be treated as a (spoken) language representation. There are differences between any spoken-language (sequence of words/sentences) and the machine-language (sequence of op-codes). In this paper, we demonstrate that due to these inherent differences, an LSTM model with its default configuration as tuned for a spoken-language, may not work well to detect malware (using its op-code sequence) unless the network's essential hyper-parameters are tuned appropriately. In the process, we also determine the relative importance of all the different hyper-parameters of an LSTM network as applied to malware detection using their op-code sequence representations. We experimented with different configurations of LSTM networks, and altered hyper-parameters like the embedding-size, number of hidden layers, number of LSTM-units in a hidden layer, pruning/padding-length of the input-vector, activation-function, and batch-size. We discovered that owing to the enhanced complexity of the malware/machine-language, the performance of an LSTM network configured for an Intrusion Detection System, is very sensitive towards the number-of-hidden-layers, input sequence-length, and the choice of the activation-function. Also, for (spoken) language-modeling, the recurrent architectures by-far outperform their non-recurrent counterparts. Therefore, we also assess how sequential DL architectures like the LSTM compare against their non-sequential counterparts like the MLP-DNN for the purpose of malware-detection.