54 replies to this topic

[Corvus Antaka]

The need to hit harder, OR SSRMS need to hit less hard. I prefer ssrms getting a dmg nurf.

[blinkin]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 04 June 2013 - 10:18 PM, said:

The need to hit harder, OR SSRMS need to hit less hard. I prefer ssrms getting a dmg nurf.

i think tweaking the damage numbers on streaks won't help. i was fine when they were 2.5 per missile, BUT they need some sort of effort to be associated with aiming them.

[Phlyk]

The grouping is fantastic, but they do need a bit of extra damage. They don't have enough punch to be a reliable brawling weapon yet.

[blinkin]

Phlyk, on 04 June 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

The grouping is fantastic, but they do need a bit of extra damage. They don't have enough punch to be a reliable brawling weapon yet.

i am seeing this a lot. seems like for once i generally agree with the other forum goers on the subject. i feel kind of dirty now. QUICKLY! SOMEONE SAY SOMETHING ABOUT REPAIR AND REARM SO I CAN ARGUE WITH EVERYONE AGAIN!

[aniviron]

Pretty much what everyone else in the thread has said: it's nice to actually hit things with them (sometimes even half a payload or more at 200m, 74% of their intended range!) but you would find yourself running out of ammo before taking down mechs made of paper mâché‎. It boggles my mind that LRMs are now beginning to approach the same amount of damage per missile that SRMs have and everyone seems to be okay with this.

In essence, while SRMs are still really bad, at least they are not unplayably bad like last patch. Just don't make them an important part of your loadout.

lockwoodx, on 04 June 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

I wouldn't call SRMs "bad" but you now need to use them as they were intended, an explosive punch that causes criticals after your glowsticks eat through the armor. I've noticed a HUGE difference between spamming SRMs, and using SRMs as a "follow up". SSRMs tho are garbage unless you boat them.

No. No, no, no, no, no, and no. We already have the machine gun, flamer, and LB 10 as crit seekers. Not only are they all hideously bad at that job, they are the three worst weapons in the game right now, period. The reason SRMs were good at getting crits in BT was because the crit system was different there than it is in MWO. In this game, they do not have the crit bonuses that the three above-mentioned weapons get because they are NOT meant to crit-seek; they are meant to do damage to mechs, just like every other gun in this game.

[aniviron]

Just did some testing in the testing grounds. The damage is off, as expected. But I am finding the new grouping very odd. SRM2 is accurate enough at 270m that I can reliably headshot targets without them taking almost any damage to other components. This will never happen in a real game, of course, but it is interesting to note.

Also of interest is that SRM4 is still pretty wild and 6 is downright crazy. It is a good time to be an AWS-9M pilot, and have all your shots coming out in groupings of two.

[blinkin]

aniviron, on 04 June 2013 - 11:41 PM, said:

Just did some testing in the testing grounds. The damage is off, as expected. But I am finding the new grouping very odd. SRM2 is accurate enough at 270m that I can reliably headshot targets without them taking almost any damage to other components. This will never happen in a real game, of course, but it is interesting to note.

Also of interest is that SRM4 is still pretty wild and 6 is downright crazy. It is a good time to be an AWS-9M pilot, and have all your shots coming out in groupings of two.

as long as i can remember that has always been true. it even worked off and on for LRM. one of the main things that made my hunchback 4SP with 2x LRM20 so deadly was how tight the cluster of missiles was when it came out in groups of 6. it seems missile flights have gone back to the way they were before. the clusters from my hunchback are incredibly tight again, but it doesn't matter much because they do crap damage.

[Scandinavian Jawbreaker]

But with the new flight pattern Artemis is obsolete and not worth having. That is what's bugging me. I want it to have an advantage.

So SRM should spread wide, like sawed off shotgun. ASRM should have tight flight pattern to be more aimable at higher (>100m) distances.

[Kazma]

I tried my Centurion again yesterday, 3xSRM 6 with Artemis and without. Since I have just equipped artemis because that patch made SRM's useless, I really like the spread without Artemis now.
but with SRM6+Artemis you can pin point attack with SRM's now at max range, I'm not sure if this is supposed to be like that.
Damage still needs a small buff, thats for sure.

__

Overall I'd say that the spread should be the same as before, I haven't had problems with it. Only damage needs a buff

Edited by Kazma, 05 June 2013 - 12:02 AM.

[YueFei]

I'm quite happy with the Artemis SRM6 flight pattern. It will pin-point strike where I aim it. Basically for 8 tons of weaponry (2xASRM6) and 2 tons of ammunition, I can deliver 18 points of damage onto a single location, without having to hug the target. HSR has also done wonders for my hit rate with these things.

[Demos]

I used a CAT-A1 with 32 SRMw/A. Spread was good, peppered mechs up to 250m with a reasonable hit ratio.
Damage could be upped a bit, maybe 1.75 in a first step, 2.0 as an optional final value.

[Lefteye Falconeer]

While I am really worried at the possibility of streak boats to become super annoying again if they boosted SRM damage, I have to say that the new spread and behaviour is great but damage could use a very small buff. Even more so if you consider that AMS takes out SRMs too, so if you are brawling with an AMS equipped mech, your brawling damage sinks even more.

Edited by Lefteye, 05 June 2013 - 01:56 AM.

[FiveDigits]

I think it's quite funny how after months of back and forth tweaking we might end up at TT values for LRMs (1.0) and SRMs (2.0) damage.

[Voidcrafter]

450+ shots, paired with 2xMed Lasers and just a bit than 400 damage...
For the record - I got a quite accurate and precise aim with them.
How are they?
With one word:
Bad
But babysteps - yea - I can understand why they haven't buffed the damage...
YET.

If they deciede to not do it at all... well... that I will fail to understand.

[Zaptruder]

Buff to 2.3 per missle.

SSRM lock on points to be spread to legs and arms as well.

[SmoothCriminal]

Zaptruder, on 05 June 2013 - 02:50 AM, said:

Buff to 2.3 per missle.

SSRM lock on points to be spread to legs and arms as well.

Zaptruder, on 05 June 2013 - 02:50 AM, said:

Buff to 2.3 per missle.

SSRM lock on points to be spread to legs and arms as well.

This, but I'd be happy with incremental increases to LRM/SRM patch by patch, so we can find the balanced damage.

2.3, with the current issues of splash damage, seems too high.

[Kazma]

SmoothCriminal, on 05 June 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

Zaptruder, on 05 June 2013 - 02:50 AM, said:

Buff to 2.3 per missle.

SSRM lock on points to be spread to legs and arms as well.

This, but I'd be happy with incremental increases to LRM/SRM patch by patch, so we can find the balanced damage.

2.3, with the current issues of splash damage, seems too high.

*agree*
2.3 damage could be way too much, better try 2.0 first
and SSRM damage spread on all parts would make them too weak

[Thragen]

Kazma, on 05 June 2013 - 04:11 AM, said:

*agree*
2.3 damage could be way too much, better try 2.0 first
and SSRM damage spread on all parts would make them too weak

I agree as well. Let's try 2.0 first.

[armyof1]

Kazma, on 05 June 2013 - 04:11 AM, said:

*agree*
2.3 damage could be way too much, better try 2.0 first
and SSRM damage spread on all parts would make them too weak

Yep I want to see 2.0 damage, and also if (notice I said if, not when) the devs will get the SSRMs to finally target random parts of the mech they should of course also get a damage buff. The reason they should not get more damage now is due to the CT-chasing nature of the weapon.

[Kaldor]

armyof1, on 04 June 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

They're easier to hit with just like all other weapons after HSR and has a better grouping with artemis than the two weeks before, but overall still feels a bit weak at 1.5 damage per missile. At 2.0 damage a missile I think we'd finally hit a good balance for SRMS, I just hope it won't take months for the devs to get there.

El Bandito, on 04 June 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

Spread is perfect now, the damage is kinda meh. Overall I love the direction of change.

QFT. Patterns for Artemis and non-Artemis are pretty good. Love not having delay on firing as well.

lockwoodx, on 04 June 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

I wouldn't call SRMs "bad" but you now need to use them as they were intended, an explosive punch that causes criticals after your glowsticks eat through the armor. I've noticed a HUGE difference between spamming SRMs, and using SRMs as a "follow up". SSRMs tho are garbage unless you boat them.

Please, not another crit seeker weapon as someone else stated. I dont want missiles to be a damage to a single point weapon, but I should be able to at least take a big chunk of armor off one location if Im lucky or skillful enough.

FiveDigits, on 05 June 2013 - 02:07 AM, said:

I think it's quite funny how after months of back and forth tweaking we might end up at TT values for LRMs (1.0) and SRMs (2.0) damage.

True dat! We are pretty close.

Overall, excellent change for missiles. You can reliably hit with them now. Flight path is pretty damn good.
Damage is kinda of meh across the board. I would like to test all missiles at these values:
1.2 for LRMs
1.6 for SSRMs
2.0 for SRMs

Make this change, maybe buff SSRM to 1.8 and SRMs to 2.4. I think the ideal damage for those is somewhere between those two numbers. They need to be careful with guided munitions such as LRMs and SSRMs. It easy to just get a lock and dump missiles. Its harder to aim. SSRMs are a game changer in a light v light fight. Just look at a Jenner D v F. The D with SSRMs will almost always win providing the skill levels of pilots are equal. LRMs are a different animal, but I feel they are getting really close with them.