9 replies to this topic

[Stargoat]

I've been thinking about the current Streak SRM mechanic, balance issues regarding it, and how it compares to how Streaks worked in the tabletop. The current model seems broken even for the SSRM2, so how could it possibly be balanced for higher missile counts of Clan tech?

The original intention of Streaks, in TT, was to reduce heat and ammunition consumption on lost hits. The current operation obviously doesn't do this, as it's more of a guaranteed hit on all missiles if you get the lock.

My alternate solution, is instead of the LRM-style lock-on mechanic, what if the streaks 'simulated' the flight path of a dumb-fired SRM salvo (in a situation where it's assumed the target has not changed direction or speed), decides which missiles actually hit (and where), and only fires those - but they are guaranteed to hit, and all launchers must recycle.

This brings it back in line with how Streaks functioned canonically, makes streaks a more-skilful weapon to use, and will keep the larger streak variants roughly balanced (at least with SRMS) - as a dumb-fired salvo is unlikely to get all hits, especially in one location.

[Caleb Brightmore]

Stargoat, on 28 May 2013 - 01:47 AM, said:

I've been thinking about the current Streak SRM mechanic, balance issues regarding it, and how it compares to how Streaks worked in the tabletop. The current model seems broken even for the SSRM2, so how could it possibly be balanced for higher missile counts of Clan tech?

The original intention of Streaks, in TT, was to reduce heat and ammunition consumption on lost hits. The current operation obviously doesn't do this, as it's more of a guaranteed hit on all missiles if you get the lock.

My alternate solution, is instead of the LRM-style lock-on mechanic, what if the streaks 'simulated' the flight path of a dumb-fired SRM salvo (in a situation where it's assumed the target has not changed direction or speed), decides which missiles actually hit (and where), and only fires those - but they are guaranteed to hit, and all launchers must recycle.

This brings it back in line with how Streaks functioned canonically, makes streaks a more-skilful weapon to use, and will keep the larger streak variants roughly balanced (at least with SRMS) - as a dumb-fired salvo is unlikely to get all hits, especially in one location.

If it only fires those then ammo dependency becomes an issue there is no penalty for a dumb fire miss because the ammo is never spent.

Also what about a rvn that only has one ssrm thats ony two shots so it hampers them a bit but then again if you are dumb firing you are in clench mode most likely so...

i dont know too many variables to calculate but perhaps if you put the ppc inside of 90m TT rule as a balance to it.

In other words you use a variant of the RULE from ppc's this has ZERO effect on MWO PPC's

So that if you dumb fire then instead of not firing it would explode in the tube if hit or you have to clear that tube or a hit there will detonate the unspent rocket.

I don't know that may have made no sense but it's what I thought of first.

Edited by Caleb Brightmore, 28 May 2013 - 01:58 AM.

[El Bandito]

Stargoat, on 28 May 2013 - 01:47 AM, said:

I've been thinking about the current Streak SRM mechanic, balance issues regarding it, and how it compares to how Streaks worked in the tabletop. The current model seems broken even for the SSRM2, so how could it possibly be balanced for higher missile counts of Clan tech? The original intention of Streaks, in TT, was to reduce heat and ammunition consumption on lost hits. The current operation obviously doesn't do this, as it's more of a guaranteed hit on all missiles if you get the lock. My alternate solution, is instead of the LRM-style lock-on mechanic, what if the streaks 'simulated' the flight path of a dumb-fired SRM salvo (in a situation where it's assumed the target has not changed direction or speed), decides which missiles actually hit (and where), and only fires those - but they are guaranteed to hit, and all launchers must recycle. This brings it back in line with how Streaks functioned canonically, makes streaks a more-skilful weapon to use, and will keep the larger streak variants roughly balanced (at least with SRMS) - as a dumb-fired salvo is unlikely to get all hits, especially in one location.

Interesting way to put it. I don't mind the extra skill to use. However, the mechanic is pretty complex and I don't know if PGI wants anything to do with it.

Also, Clan tech (SSRM4, SSRM6) is a strawman. We have no word from PGI as to the exact date of Clan tech release. It could well be a year from now. Kinda unfair to heavily modify SSRM2 just because SSRM4 and 6 will be "someday" in the future.

[Caleb Brightmore]

El Bandito, on 28 May 2013 - 02:05 AM, said:

Interesting way to put it. I don't mind the extra skill to use. However, the mechanic is pretty complex and I don't know if PGI wants anything to do with it.

Also, Clan tech (SSRM4, SSRM6) is a strawman. We have no word from PGI as to the exact date of Clan tech release. It could well be a year from now. Kinda unfair to heavily modify SSRM2 just because SSRM4 and 6 will be "someday" in the future.

ugh yep and then Clans will say it's unfair because all those missles that dont fire keep blowing me up when they shoot back thus negating my tech advantage. lol

hmmmmmmm you may be on to something sirs!

[Stargoat]

El Bandito, on 28 May 2013 - 02:05 AM, said:

Interesting way to put it. I don't mind the extra skill to use. However, the mechanic is pretty complex and I don't know if PGI wants anything to do with it.

Also, Clan tech (SSRM4, SSRM6) is a strawman. We have no word from PGI as to the exact date of Clan tech release. It could well be a year from now. Kinda unfair to heavily modify SSRM2 just because SSRM4 and 6 will be "someday" in the future.

Oh, I don't expect this model to actually be adopted. I think the main downside would be it could be quite difficult to 'learn' how to use streaks in that fashion; if you miss, you get no visual feedback; how much by, how can it be corrected? Perhaps if it 'ghosted' the missiles before firing those that hit.

Also, I don't think you know what a strawman argument is. What you're looking for is an incomplete comparison. And I disagree; the changes I proposed are to directly counter perceived faults in the operation of streaks, with the assumption that such a system would naturally balance Clan streaks; at least more than a direct port of the current streak system would.

Edited by Stargoat, 28 May 2013 - 02:35 AM.

[OneEyed Jack]

The problem with the idea is that you can't say for sure which missiles will and won't hit when flight time and target movement are involved. It becomes even more complicated when you add the 0.5 sec delay from missile bay doors. No, Streaks are supposed to be guided, that's what it means that they need to acquire a lock.

I think the only realistic way it could be changed to a direct-fire mechanism and maintain their identity would be to remove the maintainable lock (LRM-style lock) and give them their own painting laser. Give the laser a short duration and a cool-down. Whether the cool-down be the same as, and/or shared with, the launcher is arguable. Hit an enemy with the painting laser and the missiles fire, with the same basic flight characteristics they have now. I don't think there could be any serious complaints about them always hitting if they required hitting with the painting laser.

Or you just tie it to the targeting reticle and don't bother with the laser. However, using the laser could differentiate between torso- and arm-mounted launchers.

[El Bandito]

OneEyed Jack, on 28 May 2013 - 02:36 AM, said:

The problem with the idea is that you can't say for sure which missiles will and won't hit when flight time and target movement are involved. It becomes even more complicated when you add the 0.5 sec delay from missile bay doors. No, Streaks are supposed to be guided, that's what it means that they need to acquire a lock. I think the only realistic way it could be changed to a direct-fire mechanism and maintain their identity would be to remove the maintainable lock (LRM-style lock) and give them their own painting laser. Give the laser a short duration and a cool-down. Whether the cool-down be the same as, and/or shared with, the launcher is arguable. Hit an enemy with the painting laser and the missiles fire, with the same basic flight characteristics they have now. I don't think there could be any serious complaints about them always hitting if they required hitting with the painting laser. Or you just tie it to the targeting reticle and don't bother with the laser. However, using the laser could differentiate between torso- and arm-mounted launchers.

I don't agree with the laser cool down if it is different from the SSRM itself. It should be the same or, there should be no cooldown--like TAG.

[OneEyed Jack]

El Bandito, on 28 May 2013 - 02:39 AM, said:

I don't agree with the laser cool down if it is different from the SSRM itself. It should be the same or, there should be no cooldown--like TAG.

If you didn't have a cooldown on the laser, it would just be held down the same as now. The idea is to break up the sustained lock and have each shot be a completely separate event tied to aim.

[Thundercles]

Just make SSRMS cycle longer between shots than SRMs. Prepping guidance packages for rapid target acquisition or some such.

[Cyke]

Predicting trajectories and firing dumbfire missiles only when an intercept path is successful sounds good in paper, but in reality if the target changes directions or accelerates, it will throw aim off. They'd be useless compared to normal SRMs.

Using direct aim with the reticle is not a new suggestion.. several people have brought it up before, including me. Here was my personal take on it:

Cyke said:

Maybe Streaks shouldn't have a "hold, achieve confirmed lock-on, fire" mechanic, but instead should have a bit of a "risk" involved.

- You must point at an enemy 'Mech with your torso/arm crosshair, and click fire
- If you're on-target, the Streaks immediately fire with full tracking, almost a sure hit
- If you're off-target, the Streaks do not fire (thus no ammo consumed or heat generated), but need to go through their full 3.5 second cooldown cycle.


Unlike current lock-on, you can't "pre-guarantee" a hit before firing. There's also a big risk of "wasting" a cooldown cycle, thus adding the risk of a "miss" (though the miss uses up no ammo).

Also, you may notice that in this idea, the skill used is basically about the same as firing a laser. Sure, you don't need to continue tracking the target for 1.0 seconds like a laser, but on the other hand, you can't target a hit location (the Streaks will randomly hit different body parts on the enemy).

Probably a dumb idea. (basically sort of based on how they work in TT). Just throwing it out there.


The TT "hit" or "miss" roll result is translated into the realtime MWO skill of "crosshair on target" or "crosshair not on target" at the moment the player presses the fire button.
This is completely consistent with the (well-accepted) manner in which a TT hit or miss for a laser is translated into realtime MWO.

There is the additional benefit of future-proofing Streak SRM design for the coming of the Clans.. since larger Streak missle packs (4 and 6) can be balanced with a longer recycle time (as is already common practice), this also effectively increases the time cost of a "miss".

If it's still too easy to use, I've seen another post make a very good suggestion (I can't find the post and unfortunately I forget his name) that raises the difficulty further:

In addition to the above quote, instead of just clicking fire when the reticle is on target, you need to keep the reticle on the target while holding down the fire button for about half a second. If you're successful, you get a full homing shot. If your reticle goes off target during this lock attempt, the launcher goes into cooldown cycle.

This is actually a great way to balance bigger Streak missile launchers. The bigger the launcher, the longer you have to aim at the target while holding down the fire button.
For example, SSRM2 could require 0.5 seconds hold-on-target, SSRM4 1.0 seconds and SSRM6 requiring 1.5 seconds.
Failing a "lock attempt" results in the penalty of causing the weapon to cycle, which is longer for bigger launchers (which further helps weapon balance).

Edited by Cyke, 29 May 2013 - 08:39 AM.