69 replies to this topic

[Bendak]

Gremlich Johns, on 25 May 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

Wait until the Clans bring in SLRMs, then you'll have it.....

This. Also didn't the old SSRM tracking target the joints at the torso not the center(looking at the OP diagram).

Renthrak, on 25 May 2013 - 09:30 AM, said:

Congratulations, you failed to understand the post and brought up technology that won't exist for another 7 years.

What part of the word "wait" was hard to understand from that post. Failure to read, blinded by your argument.. dirp.

[Aym]

El Bandito, on 24 July 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

How the hell is it easy-mode when your missiles are not even going to hit to part you targeted? Did you even try out the SSRMs post nerf?

Wow, a Jager with exposed side torso, too bad your SSRMs are only aiming at his arms and legs. Uncontrollable RNG is totally cool!

People like you made PGI destroy yet another weapon.

If you want your missiles to hit the part you're aiming at, take SRMs. If you want to lock on and never miss, take SSRMs. That's the trade off, I don't see what your problem is with this...

Edited by Aym, 24 July 2013 - 06:19 AM.

[Zyllos]

Most likely CLRMs with no minimum range will act like slow SRMs, following a predetermined flight path, until they reach approximately 180m, which then they will begin to home like normal LRMs.

Either way, I do agree that SSRMs, now with the new targeting, will need to be brought back to 2.0 damage. The difference between a SRM/2 and SSRM/2 is the SRM/2 is lighter and more concentrated/aimable in damage while the SSRM/2 is 50% heavier and has a high rate of hit but is 100% uncontrollable and can be blocked by GECM (technically this also needs to be changed, AECM should only be doing this).

Doing this type of spread to LRMs will bring them inline. A few or small launchers as support weapons are good for getting damage to a mech for the weight and doing it indirectly but is vulnerable to AMS. Many and large launchers as main weapons are good for wrecking mechs who are caught in the open or by TAG/NARC (if they ever fix the issues with GECM, TAG, and NARC), able to provide high damage indirectly, and a single or two AMS does not effectively stop them but weight makes the launchers inefficient.

Between the setups, their distribution of damage is 100% equal. Just because your using smaller launchers or smaller tubes does not make the LRMs more likely to hit the torso sections. The number of tubes is also an effective limiter for getting pass AMS, meaning mechs that do not have large number of tubes will deligate LRMs as support and those with large launchers will utilize them as main weapons.

Just because you equip an LRM/20 in your Centurion doesn't mean it will allow the Centurion to provide main fire support. It just means the player is relying heavily on support weapons before engaging where as the Trebuchet with 2x LRM/15s will provide quick fire support, firing all LRMs in one complete salvo, which is able to minimize AMS exposure. But in both situations, their damage is spread across areas on the mech, the Centurion shooting a salvo of 2 swarms (5 LRMs), pausing 0.5s, then shooting another salvo of 2 swarms where the Trebuchet shoots one single salvo of 6 swarms.

I think this is the way forward for balancing LRMs against themselves. Once this is implemented, other EW/IW equipment will need to be balanced accordingly and direct fire weapons will need to provide some randomness to balance their systems with others. Once this happens, you will begin to see mechs lasting longer, with critical hits being important because everytime you get a shot onto that open spot, it's a chance of destroying an important piece of equipment. It will also make it such that if you do not destroy a vital piece of equipment, having to just destroy the whole section will provide precious time for a mech to return fire on to you.

This overall idea feeds into itself, making the game much more enjoyable.

Aym, on 24 July 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

If you want your missiles to hit the part you're aiming at, take SRMs. If you want to lock on and never miss, take SSRMs. That's the trade off, I don't see what your problem is with this...

Don't forget you pay a bit of extra weight and exposure to not being able to lockon for getting that almost guaranteed hit.

Edited by Zyllos, 24 July 2013 - 06:24 AM.

[Kaldor]

El Bandito, on 24 July 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

How the hell is it easy-mode when your missiles are not even going to hit to part you targeted? Did you even try out the SSRMs post nerf?

Wow, a Jager with exposed side torso, too bad your SSRMs are only aiming at his arms and legs. Uncontrollable RNG is totally cool!

People like you made PGI destroy yet another weapon.

Side torso exposed, use a direct fire weapon you have to aim. You might want to consider running a pair of SRM6's on your cheesebuild A1 to give you that ability and the plus side is that you will see alot more damage as you actually have a knockout punch for times when you actually might have to aim or kill something other than a medium or light. Pure SSRM builds are a novelty at best right now and should remain as such.

Actually the weighting is:

LA 15
RA 15
LL 15
RL 15
LT 12
RT 12
CT 16

So you actually have a 40% chance to hit a torso section. 12% for either side torso, and 16% for center. Math is hard m'kay.

And no, I have not run SSRMs since about 2 weeks before the nerf and never as a primary weapon, just as a backup weapon. I also find that they make me lazy as a player because I dont actually have to do anything except for get the target half-a_s lined up for a lock, and them hit a button. I also primarily brawl in mediums, heavies, and assaults with ACs and SRMs, so I actually have to aim my shots.

The other problem with SSRMs is that clan versions are coming. When we see SSRM6's having an easymode lock on and fire weapon that has the equal damage of a weapon you to aim and lead is not good. Setting the precedent now by keeping the damage lower than direct fire weapons like SRMs that require some skill, is only a good thing. The reason I say LRMs take a little more skill is simply because they require more situational awareness and some level of teamwork to truly make them effective, but even a noob can load a pair of LRM15s on his mech and go launch missiles at 800m and maybe get a kill or 2 and a few hundred damage.

No, people like me encourage PGI to remove stupid easymode crap and balance the game around a team combined arms strategy. No one thing should be greater than the other, everything should have a counter and every mech should have a role. I think what you want to play is CoD with mechs.

[Zyllos]

Kaldor, on 24 July 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

Side torso exposed, use a direct fire weapon you have to aim. You might want to consider running a pair of SRM6's on your cheesebuild A1 to give you that ability and the plus side is that you will see alot more damage as you actually have a knockout punch for times when you actually might have to aim or kill something other than a medium or light. Pure SSRM builds are a novelty at best right now and should remain as such.

Actually the weighting is:

LA 15
RA 15
LL 15
RL 15
LT 12
RT 12
CT 16

So you actually have a 40% chance to hit a torso section. 12% for either side torso, and 16% for center. Math is hard m'kay.

And no, I have not run SSRMs since about 2 weeks before the nerf and never as a primary weapon, just as a backup weapon. I also find that they make me lazy as a player because I dont actually have to do anything except for get the target half-a_s lined up for a lock, and them hit a button. I also primarily brawl in mediums, heavies, and assaults with ACs and SRMs, so I actually have to aim my shots.

The other problem with SSRMs is that clan versions are coming. When we see SSRM6's having an easymode lock on and fire weapon that has the equal damage of a weapon you to aim and lead is not good. Setting the precedent now by keeping the damage lower than direct fire weapons like SRMs that require some skill, is only a good thing. The reason I say LRMs take a little more skill is simply because they require more situational awareness and some level of teamwork to truly make them effective, but even a noob can load a pair of LRM15s on his mech and go launch missiles at 800m and maybe get a kill or 2 and a few hundred damage.

No, people like me encourage PGI to remove stupid easymode crap and balance the game around a team combined arms strategy. No one thing should be greater than the other, everything should have a counter and every mech should have a role. I think what you want to play is CoD with mechs.

See, I disagree. Your paying more than just "ease of hit", you lose all ability to concentrate damage. While concentrated damage might not be an issue if your firing 12 SSRMs at a Light, those 12 SSRMs against a Medium or heavier is not going to be effective enough. For the same weight, you could equip more SRM launchers and concentrate damage against heavier, slower mechs but lose the ability to effectively hit smaller mechs well and can miss a lot.

So, in my opinion, I think SSRMs need to be brought back to 2.0 damage. But I am fine with waiting on SSRM/4s and SSRM/6s with this lower damage to make sure, but I think they should be brought back inline with SRMs.

[Kaldor]

Aym, on 24 July 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

If you want your missiles to hit the part you're aiming at, take SRMs. If you want to lock on and never miss, take SSRMs. That's the trade off, I don't see what your problem is with this...

No Aym, he wants his cake and dangit, he wants to eat it too.

From his standpoint he thinks his SSRMs should be able to hit where ever he wants them to. But he doesnt think he should have to aim anything, just lock and fire. And dangit, they should be able to do jsut as much damage out to 270m as an SRM that you actually have to aim and lead targets on and is roughly only effective out to 150m unless you catch someone completely standing still and even then the spread is so large you hit the entire mech.

[Aym]

Zyllos, on 24 July 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

Either way, I do agree that SSRMs, now with the new targeting, will need to be brought back to 2.0 damage. The difference between a SRM/2 and SSRM/2 is the SRM/2 is lighter and more concentrated/aimable in damage while the SSRM/2 is 50% heavier and has a high rate of hit but is 100% uncontrollable and can be blocked by GECM (technically this also needs to be changed, AECM should only be doing this).




Don't forget you pay a bit of extra weight and exposure to not being able to lockon for getting that almost guaranteed hit.

I didn't forget it, but when you say "50%" I suspect you're intentionally using as big of a number as possible to inflate the difference. Many of us would say .5 tons, which is a VERY small number in terms of weapons. Even your "50%" is misleading because it doesn't account for the Ammo that someone would have to take, and totally ignores Artemis if it's on the mech. So I'm absolutely NOT forgetting about the .5 tons of difference, but I believe that is a fair price difference for the lock on effect, even with the less damage per missile and targeting random locations on the enemy mech. Now, if you want to make Artemis add a ton to your Streaks, I'd be happy to talk about that adding more chance to hit CT assuming you keep LOS the entire time, and I'll even throw in TAG And Narc doing the same for your streaks if we're makin them function that way ;-)

But seriously I agree Lurms should target sections, maybe in chunks of 5, and that maybe 40-50% should hit that location, maybe 20% hit an adjacent location, and the rest miss, and these percentages can be improved by Art+LOS, Tag and/or Narc. I'll even go a step further and say those percentages should be lowered by the speed of the target, as the missiles have a harder time hitting a moving target so that a LRM 80 doesn't one-shot every light/medium mech.

[Kaldor]

Zyllos, on 24 July 2013 - 06:40 AM, said:

See, I disagree. Your paying more than just "ease of hit", you lose all ability to concentrate damage. While concentrated damage might not be an issue if your firing 12 SSRMs at a Light, those 12 SSRMs against a Medium or heavier is not going to be effective enough. For the same weight, you could equip more SRM launchers and concentrate damage against heavier, slower mechs but lose the ability to effectively hit smaller mechs well and can miss a lot.

So, in my opinion, I think SSRMs need to be brought back to 2.0 damage. But I am fine with waiting on SSRM/4s and SSRM/6s with this lower damage to make sure, but I think they should be brought back inline with SRMs.

This is where we disagree. I think SRMs that you have to manually aim, lead and are pretty worthless beyond 150m on a moving target should have potential to have better damage over a weapon a weapon that you just need to get a lock with and fire, the computer does the rest and they are effective to a full 270m because they chase the target for a hit barring a piece of terrain getting in the way or the rare chance they miss because the target is moving fast at a hard angle.

The reason you are losing the ability to concentrate damage is because you are letting the computer do the work for you and you are only firing 2 missiles per launcher. When the SSRM4s and 6s get here, it will be game changing, as you are firing double or triple the amount of missiles per volley. Weapons that require some level of skill need to have a reward over those with less skill. In this case, it has to be the damage. This is not tabletop where you roll dice to see where your missiles hit.

I do agree with you wholeheartedly that they need to test SRM4s and 6s at 1.5 before they boost the damage on them. Its alot easier to buff something than nerf it. Players like buffs!

I for one am waiting for Clan SRMs. A Clan ASRM6 at 2.5 ton. Yeah, Ill take that.

Edited by Kaldor, 24 July 2013 - 07:12 AM.

[El Bandito]

Kaldor, on 24 July 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

Side torso exposed, use a direct fire weapon you have to aim. You might want to consider running a pair of SRM6's on your cheesebuild A1 to give you that ability and the plus side is that you will see alot more damage as you actually have a knockout punch for times when you actually might have to aim or kill something other than a medium or light.

This show you just how far from the reality your mind is. There is no incentive to bring in SSRMs at all on an A1. Current SSRM2 damage is pretty much on par with SRM 0.3, thanks to the new mechanic. If I want to bring a pair of SRM6s, I might as well bring SRM2s to complement them on my A1.

SSRM4 and SSRM6 will also be garbage once they arrive, if the current damage and tracking % stays. Don't need to be a game dev to see that.

[Lightfoot]

@ OP

That's Artemis.

It centers missiles more compactly and shortens the flight path. As far as I know Artemis LRMs still just hit randomly though. So, if you don't want your Center Torso hit, turn your mech's best armored side into the missile path to absorb the damage. Or you could step behind something if available. Artemis requires Line-of-Sight (LoS) to work.

Indirectly fired LRMs don't gain the Artemis buff and pepper the area of the target Mech. If you had them lock onto the "bones" of the target mech it would cause much greater damage, like 20xSSRM2's for a 2xLRM20 mech.

Anyway, you are asking them to buff LRMs incredibly to turn them into default SSRM-style tracking. Most Assaults would implode on the third or fourth salvo.

I think the OP wanted to nerf LRMs.

Edited by Lightfoot, 24 July 2013 - 10:07 AM.

[Kaldor]

El Bandito, on 24 July 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

This show you just how far from the reality your mind is. There is no incentive to bring in SSRMs at all on an A1. Current SSRM2 damage is pretty much on par with SRM 0.3, thanks to the new mechanic. If I want to bring a pair of SRM6s, I might as well bring SRM2s to complement them on my A1.

SSRM4 and SSRM6 will also be garbage once they arrive, if the current damage and tracking % stays. Don't need to be a game dev to see that.

You bet man. Im way out in left field not paying attention to anything. Keep believing the crap your shoveling.

Balance for Skill - go look it up on Youtube

[Corvus Antaka]

one big issue is that LRMS and SSRMs cannot be avoided in the open when a lock is on you, they turn much to fast if locked/tracking. mechs with jets or fast turning nimble lights still need slightly better options to dodge lrms by jumping in the last minute.

[Renthrak]

blinkin, on 23 July 2013 - 11:41 PM, said:

i had missed the part where you suggest that missiles operate in groups of 5 before. i really like that part, although it would get a little weird with my LRM hunchback 4SP since it fires in volleys of 6. would that then operate as a group of 5 and then a single missile that just does it's own thing?

I'll use a single LRM10 with a 6 tube launcher for an example. Firing, it launches 6 missiles and then 4 missiles. 5 of the first 6 would track to a single location, while 1 from the first swarm and all 4 from the second would seek another location. That is what I would like to see ideally.

That preserves the 5-missile-per-location damage model. It would probably be more vulnerable to AMS compared to launching all 10 in one swarm, but that won't always be an issue. Eventually, all 'Mechs will have alternate artwork for the missile tubes, so the tubes match the launcher. In the mean time, it will serve as a disadvantage for 'Mechs that aren't designed to carry large LRM launchers stock.

Tolkien, on 23 July 2013 - 11:50 PM, said:

If this missile spreading/targeting is implemented though I would hope that the LRM flight paths will be improved again. I say this as both a user and a target of LRMs, as the locks are still fast to break via terrain, and if the target is paying attention they can still spin their body to spread the damage.

It would make a little more sense for LRMs to maintain lock as long as the missiles themselves have line-of-sight on the target, but that would probably require more server processing, and might not be viable.

As far as turning to reduce damage, that would remain a valid tactic with the SSRM location seeking. If you want to protect your 'Mech's center torso, turn. Some of the missiles seeking the torso will probably impact the arm instead.

El Bandito, on 24 July 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

People like you made PGI destroy yet another weapon.

Please don't engage in a flame war in a thread that isn't really about SSRMs in the first place. Your opinion is as valid as any other on the matter, but this isn't the place to debate it.

Bendak, on 24 July 2013 - 05:51 AM, said:

This. Also didn't the old SSRM tracking target the joints at the torso not the center(looking at the OP diagram).

The old SSRM tracking did indeed seek joints rather than bones on the model, though the Center Torso was still hit very often. This has since been fixed.

Bendak, on 24 July 2013 - 05:51 AM, said:

What part of the word "wait" was hard to understand from that post. Failure to read, blinded by your argument.. dirp.

If MWO continues at the current pace, Clan Streak LRMs will hit live servers around the year 2020. If you still think that waiting until this happens to address the problems with LRM targeting is a viable option, I really don't have anything for you. Also, it's 'derp', with an 'e'.

[blinkin]

Renthrak, on 24 July 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

I'll use a single LRM10 with a 6 tube launcher for an example. Firing, it launches 6 missiles and then 4 missiles. 5 of the first 6 would track to a single location, while 1 from the first swarm and all 4 from the second would seek another location. That is what I would like to see ideally.

That preserves the 5-missile-per-location damage model. It would probably be more vulnerable to AMS compared to launching all 10 in one swarm, but that won't always be an issue. Eventually, all 'Mechs will have alternate artwork for the missile tubes, so the tubes match the launcher. In the mean time, it will serve as a disadvantage for 'Mechs that aren't designed to carry large LRM launchers stock.

i have heard that they only intend to scale the number of tubes down and what they have currently (for the ones that haven't been changed yet) will remain as their max volley size. i like my 4SP and specifically chose it for the way it launches missiles. i don't like the idea of it suddenly having a 20 slot missile rack on each shoulder.

[Renthrak]

Lightfoot, on 24 July 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

If you had them lock onto the "bones" of the target mech it would cause much greater damage, like 20xSSRM2's for a 2xLRM20 mech.

SSRMs don't have missile spread. The missile hits at the exact center of the aim point. LRMs, on the other hand, currently track to the center of mass and hit in a spread around that aim point, like this:



The size is probably not exact, but you get the idea. Looking at it like this, it's clear why the Center Torso takes so much damage. The entire center of the spread area would damage the CT, while only the thin left and right edges would damage the RT or LT.

If you keep the size of the spread the same, but move the aim point to the bone in the arm for example, it looks like this:

If the missiles strike in exactly the same locations as before, several would miss the arm entirely. Apply this to other locations as well, and the results should be similar. A swarm centered on the RT would mostly hit the RT, but may also lightly damage the CT and the RA, even without splash damage.

This should actually reduce the killing power of LRMs in general, while making them more capable of inflicting damage to sections other than the CT consistently. With Artemis narrowing the spread, more missiles would hit the targeted location.

The current LRM spread is small enough that the vast majority of missiles in a swarm will hit the torso of the target 'Mech, with few if any missing entirely. With Artemis, none miss at all, and most hit the CT.

I suppose it could be considered a 'nerf', but I really see it as simply changing the operation of the weapon slightly. Not necessarily worse, just different.

[Renthrak]

blinkin, on 24 July 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

i have heard that they only intend to scale the number of tubes down and what they have currently (for the ones that haven't been changed yet) will remain as their max volley size. i like my 4SP and specifically chose it for the way it launches missiles. i don't like the idea of it suddenly having a 20 slot missile rack on each shoulder.

Oh, if that's the case, then it's fine.

The server will have to spawn missiles one at a time, that's the way the code works. As long as the first 5 use the same tracking, then the next 5, etc. it shouldn't matter how many tubes are used. It should still work as intended.

[tigermaster]

i've voted yes but there should be an item in the pilot lab that increases chances to hit the center torso, i mean, something that will bring ssrm and lrm to something in between from how ssrm and lrm are now.

[PenitentTangent]

What exactly is the point of Artemis, Tag, Narc, etc. if this new hit location system is introduced.

If you fire 20 missiles and they split up to 4 flights, The flights tighten up enough that they will most likely all hit their targeted location, regardless of the spread size because flights of 5 missiles has a very tight pattern. I'm not against the idea, but I just don't get how a flight of five missiles could miss an arm on a Catapult, with or without Artemis tightening it up.

[ShinVector]

Renthrak, on 22 May 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

UPDATE July 22nd: Streak location tracking has been fixed, so it is properly seeking limbs rather than joints. This seems to be a good time to revive this idea, as LRMs seem good on damage, but are still focusing a vast majority of damage on the center torso. Naturally, this makes the size of the center torso directly proportional to the lethality of LRMs. Stalker, Atlas, Dragon, pretty much anything with a large torso is still being rapidly cored. SO, once again, I propose having LRMs use the SSRM limb tracking sydtem, preferably with groups of 5 LRMs tracking to a single location. Recent spread issues has caused smaller LRM launchers to be more powerful, but SSRM location seeking would prevent this from becoming an issue.

While I was watching the new LRMs in flight, I had an idea.

With the most recent patch, TAG, NARC, and Artemis tighten the LRM spread size. Consequently, even without the splash damage issue, the vast majority of the missiles in a volley will strike the same armor location (usually the CT). This is, of course, a bit of a problem. There's plenty of threads on that subject already, and the devs have a flight arc and splash damage fix incoming to help. It seems to me that even with those issues corrected, the spread tightening could still cause problems. However, having more LRMs in a volley hit the target is a perfectly reasonable benefit for systems that assist missile targeting, so I would be reluctant to discard it.

Those of us that have been in MWO's Beta for a while will likely be feeling a bit of deja-vu at this point. We had almost the exact issue with Streak SRMs earlier. Making all of the SSRMs hit resulted in massive damage to the CT. So SSRM tracking was adjusted to target various locations on the 'Mech to reduce the problem. With splash damage, the problem persisted to some degree, but splash damage is already slated to be fixed.


With all of this in mind, I think that it would be beneficial to make use of solutions that we have already come up with rather than reinvent the wheel. Thus, I propose that we apply the SSRM location targeting to LRMs. The result of this, I believe, would allow reductions in LRM spread to cause more missiles to strike the target, while still spreading the damage over the 'Mech. I think it also might look rather impressive, which is an added benefit.

The top two are the current LRM spread, the bottom two are my suggested change.

EDIT: It seems like removing or severely reducing the radius of splash damage would be important.

Also, having LRMs pick targets in groups of 5 (5 of the missiles hit the same location) would allow smaller LRM launchers to retain effectiveness.

I had a similar suggestions but differ on how NARC and TAG should be used to refocus damage on specific mech compartments.

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

Quote

Now that PGI has proven that they can indeed fix SSRM tracking. Kudos there.

Only a few issues should be still pending:
Normalisation of the SSRM damage back to 2.0.
Fix hit registration problems.
Completely eliminate splash damage if it is still there.

--

Hopefully the tracking that SSRM has will be implemented to LRMs as well.
PGI you tried to spread out damage in the past with those silly splash damage bubbles.
You can see now spreading the damage now to the 7 parts work way more better.


People are going to complain about missile damage being spread out but what if you gave people a mechanic to focus the damage back in with NARC and possibly TAG, using dynamic tracking.

NARC
Basically what can happen is that when you fire of a NARC and it hit the enemy mechs left arm. All tracking goes 100% left arm for as long the NARC is there or whichever of the 7 parts it lands on. Of course if mech is narced in the left and right arm it will be split 50%/50%. Yes, in the right scenario it could be instant death but it will be a risk to come in to NARC people.

TAG
Something similar to what NARC can do.
TAGging a particular part for 1 sec will result in +10% shift tracking will go to that part up to 100% for the painted area. However once removed the decay rate could be 1 or 2 secs before tracking normalises.

Affected weapons ?
LRMs, SSRMs, SRMs

LRMS and SSRMS they already guided so, it will be as above.

SRMs ?
Possible what can happen is when SRM at a NARCed target, maybe at a range of 90m 50% of them would home into the narced component.

Just a suggestion to make certain systems (NARC,TAG) more relevant to combat and create different roles for mech that do not want to fight directly.

[Renthrak]

tigermaster, on 24 July 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

i've voted yes but there should be an item in the pilot lab that increases chances to hit the center torso, i mean, something that will bring ssrm and lrm to something in between from how ssrm and lrm are now.

PenitentTangent, on 24 July 2013 - 06:34 PM, said:

I'm not against the idea, but I just don't get how a flight of five missiles could miss an arm on a Catapult, with or without Artemis tightening it up.

ShinVector, on 24 July 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

I had a similar suggestions but differ on how NARC and TAG should be used to refocus damage on specific mech compartments.

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

That's a good point, and a perfect example of why I don't use poll-only threads. I'm not the only one with ideas.

With the benefits it provides, I would be fine with Artemis not affecting location targeting percentages at all. That being said, I could certainly see Artemis weighting the torso components slightly higher. Maybe by 2-5% per section?

For TAG to attract missiles to the armor location that it's pointed at would likely be too difficult for the server to keep track of, so TAG could also increase the torso hit percentage by a small amount, another 2-5% or so.

NARC, since it is already keeping track of where it hit the target, should be able to increase the hit percentage for the location that it hits. That would make NARC truly useful, allowing someone with a NARC to focus LRM damage on a particular location. I would suggest a 10-20% increase for the hit location with a NARC beacon, so that it is really obvious.

Something like this:

Normal:
Left Arm
15
Right Arm
15
Left Leg
15
Right Leg
15
Left Torso
12
Right Torso
12
Center Torso
16
TOTAL
100

Artemis or TAG:
Left Arm
13
Right Arm
13
Left Leg
13
Right Leg
13
Left Torso
15
Right Torso
15
Center Torso
18
TOTAL
100

Artemis and TAG:
Left Arm
11
Right Arm
11
Left Leg
11
Right Leg
11
Left Torso
17
Right Torso
17
Center Torso
22
TOTAL
100

NARC on Right Torso:
Left Arm
12
Right Arm
12
Left Leg
12
Right Leg
12
Left Torso
9
Right Torso
30
Center Torso
13
TOTAL
100

Edited by Renthrak, 24 July 2013 - 09:14 PM.