34 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

so Narc is Support Equipment that Fills a Missile Slot,
and Tag is Support Equipment that Fills a Energy Slot,
so should AMS be a Support Equipment that Fills a Ballistic Slot?


From AMS Description,
a Rapid Fire Ballistics Weapons that Tracks and Shoots down Missiles,


so should we be able to Stuff a MG(or other Ballistic) into an AMS Slot?

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks

[Mcgral18]

6 MG Nova and 7MG Cute Fox sound fun, but truthfully you're better off ignoring MG slots entirely.
On the other hand, AC40 Atlas...is irrelevant with the Crab around.


Might be a monstrosity that can be created if all Ballistics could fit into AMS, but I can't think of one right now.

[pwnface]

What about fitting AMS into any ballistic slot? It'd be interesting to see mechs running 6 AMS and basically be walking anti-missile platforms.

[El Bandito]

pwnface, on 21 October 2015 - 04:03 PM, said:

What about fitting AMS into any ballistic slot? It'd be interesting to see mechs running 6 AMS and basically be walking anti-missile platforms.

Even less reason to equip LRMs? No thanks. 3 AMS Kitfox is annoying enough, now we gotta deal with 7 AMS Arrows?

Edited by El Bandito, 21 October 2015 - 05:35 PM.

[CDLord HHGD]

IDK, I see your point but as Mcgral18 alluded to, it could get messy real quick.... I prefer the system we have now honestly.

[Revis Volek]

Andi Nagasia, on 21 October 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

so Narc is Support Equipment that Fills a Missile Slot,
and Tag is Support Equipment that Fills a Energy Slot,
so should AMS be a Support Equipment that Fills a Ballistic Slot?


From AMS Description,
a Rapid Fire Ballistics Weapons that Tracks and Shoots down Missiles,


so should we be able to Stuff a MG(or other Ballistic) into an AMS Slot?

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks

But bringing this up i do wish that NARC at least didnt steal a Missile hardpoint...same with Tag. But then each mech would need a NARC or TAG hardpoint if they are able to carry one. Cutting out options is bad tho IMO. The only upside to it is my RVN keeps a missile hardpoint but im sure doesn't have to tonnage to even do anything with it.

[Mazzyplz]

Andi Nagasia, on 21 October 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

so Narc is Support Equipment that Fills a Missile Slot,
and Tag is Support Equipment that Fills a Energy Slot,
so should AMS be a Support Equipment that Fills a Ballistic Slot?


From AMS Description,
a Rapid Fire Ballistics Weapons that Tracks and Shoots down Missiles,


so should we be able to Stuff a MG(or other Ballistic) into an AMS Slot?

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks

i always thought you should be able to shoot your ams at a mech instead for machinegun damage.

but actually put ballistics on it doesn't sound right and it might break things.

creates too many concerns; not much point to it. imo

[mike29tw]

The location of the hardpoints would severely limit the effectiveness of AMS if it were to fit in a ballistic hadrpoint.

[YaKillinMeSmalls]

I kinda like the idea of being able to tell a Streakcrow to stuff it from a BJ-A or Shadowcat-P.

[Bishop Steiner]

Andi Nagasia, on 21 October 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

so Narc is Support Equipment that Fills a Missile Slot,
and Tag is Support Equipment that Fills a Energy Slot,
so should AMS be a Support Equipment that Fills a Ballistic Slot?


From AMS Description,
a Rapid Fire Ballistics Weapons that Tracks and Shoots down Missiles,


so should we be able to Stuff a MG(or other Ballistic) into an AMS Slot?

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks

I'd rather all mechs had a single "support" Hardpoint, that takes, TAG, AMS, BAP, ECM (for those that can use it) etc.

[sycocys]

7 AMS Arrows - i.e. lets see you get a single missile through with your 6 lrm5 MadDog.

[Mycrus]

Anything for teh lulz... dooo eet!

[El Bandito]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2015 - 06:40 PM, said:

I'd rather all mechs had a single "support" Hardpoint, that takes, TAG, AMS, BAP, ECM (for those that can use it) etc.

Might as well delete AMS then. Most will not pick AMS on that slot over TAG/BAP/NARC/ECM/TC, unless PGI rewards players with C-BIlls per missiles shot down.

[Funkin Disher]

I support the idea of a universal equipment hardpoint (MASC, TAG, ECM, BAP, AMS, TC).

Then we can work on balancing them and the mechs that use them (Raven, Kit Fox, etc)

[Bishop Steiner]

El Bandito, on 21 October 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

Might as well delete AMS then. Most will not pick AMS on that slot over TAG/BAP/NARC/ECM/TC, unless PGI rewards players with C-BIlls per missiles shot down.

or Missiles are fixed and are seen more often. After all, you still won't see ECM unless it's a special ECM mech. You scarcely see AMS now.

[PurpleNinja]

6 AMS King Crab?

[El Bandito]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 October 2015 - 07:28 PM, said:

or Missiles are fixed and are seen more often. After all, you still won't see ECM unless it's a special ECM mech. You scarcely see AMS now.

Are you crazy? We can't have a functional LRM that actually prompts people to equip AMS, without half the GD's front page filled with "LRMs OP!", "Delete LRMs!" "Lurmapocalypse/Lurmageddon", and in game chat filled with "cowardly lurmer", "no-skill noob", "learn to fight with real weapons" etc... Functional LRMs and the community never get along.

[Aethon]

El Bandito, on 21 October 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

Might as well delete AMS then. Most will not pick AMS on that slot over TAG/BAP/NARC/ECM/TC, unless PGI rewards players with C-BIlls per missiles shot down.

I definitely agree, rewards for bringing AMS would be nice...although I really do not like the OP's idea.

[Deathlike]

I'm deferring to "No Andi No".

I do question though why AMS has to have a hardpoint though or rather specifically why it MUST be slotted in a particular section.

I don't have a problem limiting the # of AMS... but actually forcing it to be in a particular section increases the vulnerability of a mech build.

For instance, the Atlas has ALL of its missile hardpoints AND AMS on that side of the mech (on the left arm). Removing the left torso side removes AMS outright (outside of the K variant) and when you actually consider where AMS is on other variants (Hellbringer-Prime's head, Banshee's CT), it makes less sense to force the restrictions as such.

It's not like AMS is used in great force or that LRMs are good (or in need of another indirect nerf), but it's one of those things that never seemed to get an extended discussion.

[wanderer]

Funny thing is, in Battletech AMS does count as a ballistic weapon (with a range of 30m) being usable as an ad-hoc machine-gun under Tactical Operations rules. (The laser AMS is similar in that regard.)

I'd have no problem with what often ends up a useless hardpoint for lights given a new option. We have triple-AMS capable chassis as it is, and it's not like people whine and moan about them "killing" (hah!) LRMs.