24 replies to this topic

[RedDevil]

Since AMS has been coming back into fashion (finally), I've been wondering about an old rumour that stated something along the lines of "triple AMS doesn't work better than double AMS, because the third and second AMS target the same incoming missile."

Anyone know if this is true, or how it could be tested?

On another noted, AMS overdrive and range. I can see AMS Range doing something by adding 24m to the engagement envelope, but does a 10% rate of fire increase actually do anything more than consume ammo faster?

Testing seems like it would be really hard to do because of the cluster fire of IS LRMS, and the random hit locations....

What do you think?

Edited by RedDevil, 28 March 2016 - 04:34 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

RedDevil, on 28 March 2016 - 04:32 PM, said:

Since AMS has been coming back into fashion (finally), I've been wondering about an old rumour that stated something along the lines of "triple AMS doesn't work better than double AMS, because the third and second AMS target the same incoming missile."

Anyone know if this is true, or how it could be tested?

On another noted, AMS overdrive and range. I can see AMS Range doing something by adding 24m to the engagement envelope, but does a 10% rate of fire increase actually do anything more than consume ammo faster?

Testing seems like it would be really hard to do because of the cluster fire of IS LRMS, and the random hit locations....

What do you think?

AS far as I know, it's not a given they track the same missile, but at the same time, I really doubt PGI took the time to code in filters to keep them from engaging the same missiles, either. And I do know, that 3xAMS is very placebo, and certainly doesn't swat down 3x the missiles.

Interesting experiment would be to (in a private lobby) take a 3x AMS KFX and one without, but park 3 mechs with single AMS around it, and see if there's any differences in the missile hits. Also, by taking KFX with single and double AMS.

[Fox With A Shotgun]

I can say that triple AMS does help out a lot more than single or double AMS. As for AMS overdrive, I haven't got that module, so I can't say for certain.

All the AMS systems do target the same missile. But this isn't a problem, because each missile has 10 hitpoints, and a single AMS round does 1 damage to the missile. You might get a bit of inefficiency on the fourth round of AMS shots per missile (3 x 4 = 12, 12 > 10) but this is negligible.

As a rule of thumb, however, triple AMS is not triple the AMS coverage. A single AMS without overdrive or range will completely cancel out a single C-LRM5, but will not cancel out a C-LRM10 completely. In playing a triple AMS kitfox, I've observed that 4x C-LRM5 will have about two-thirds of its missiles shot down by triple AMS. IS LRMs are much harder to observe, mainly because they always end up looking like a single wall of missiles anyway.

Edited by Fox With A Shotgun, 28 March 2016 - 04:42 PM.

[Tristan Winter]

Seems to me that testing would be very easy to do, but you'd need a bunch of different ways to measure the results and it would be quite time-consuming.

• Fire X amount of LRMs over Y amount of time
  
• Measure % health drop
  
• Measure components destroyed / stripped
  
• Measure torso and side torsos destroyed / stripped
  
• Measure AMS ammo spent
  
• Test with 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 60 LRMs, both IS and Clans
  
• Test when targeted mech has 1,2 or 3 AMS
  
• Test when a friendly mech within 100 meters has 1,2 or 3 AMS

You could get a sense of the difference between no AMS and 1 AMS, or the difference between 1 AMS within 100 meters and 6 AMS within 100 meters, depending on how many LRMs are being fired. But it would probably take days to do this, with several people involved.

I use double and triple AMS with the extra modules and quirks for mechs that have those. I feel like it makes a big difference. But if I was playing competitively, I don't think I would bring AMS unless I was in an organized group where I know I would be fighting alongside 3-4 other guys who also have double and triple AMS.

They really need to buff AMS, in my opinion. Not just against LRMs, but also against SSRMs, SRMs and NARC. If I'm bringing 3 AMS, I want to be NARC-proof.

[Rocket2Uranus]

No. AMS barely does anything. Unless your whole team has AMS, expect 2-3 AMS to do nothing against a barrage of LRMs.

[Sader325]

Rocket2Uranus, on 28 March 2016 - 05:02 PM, said:

No. AMS barely does anything. Unless your whole team has AMS, expect 2-3 AMS to do nothing against a barrage of LRMs.

Oxide 1440 Missiles 4 LRM 5 Chain Fire no artemis
Fired from 700 M away, nova in front of Direwolf
1145 - Dire Wolf Dead 4 missed volleys
980 - Dire dead 8 missed volleys 1 ams
420 - Dire Dead 4 misses 2 ams
0 missiles dire lives 3 ams


Archer 2340 9 LRM 5+A group fired in 3's @ 500ms spread.
Fired from 700 M away, nova in front of Direwolf
2145 left over no AMS Dire Dead
2070 left 1 AMS Dire Dead
1980 Left 2 AMS Dire Dead
1785 Left 3 AMS Dire Dead

[SeaLabCaptn]

I think this isn't the first time this has been asked today: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__5105733

I also think it's time for science! Stormy, get in here and make me a smoothie!

[ColdPsyker1]

Sader325, on 28 March 2016 - 05:27 PM, said:

Oxide 1440 Missiles 4 LRM 5 Chain Fire no artemis
Fired from 700 M away, nova in front of Direwolf
1145 - Dire Wolf Dead 4 missed volleys
980 - Dire dead 8 missed volleys 1 ams
420 - Dire Dead 4 misses 2 ams
0 missiles dire lives 3 ams


Archer 2340 9 LRM 5+A group fired in 3's @ 500ms spread.
Fired from 700 M away, nova in front of Direwolf
2145 left over no AMS Dire Dead
2070 left 1 AMS Dire Dead
1980 Left 2 AMS Dire Dead
1785 Left 3 AMS Dire Dead

Thanks for those stats! Do you happen to remember if the Nova had AMS range/AMS Overdrive?

SeaLabCaptn, on 28 March 2016 - 05:56 PM, said:

I also think it's time for science! Stormy, get in here and make me a smoothie!

Gonna go poke those LRM's with my smart stick until it does stuff.

[BigBenn]

It would be really cool to have PGI comment on the formula for how the AMS works. As in a ball park % range. Clan vs IS in both giving and receiving (Clan missiles vs IS AMS, and IS missiles vs Clan AMS, etc). Is there a difference in effectiveness between S-SRM and LRM?

Otherwise... unless the AMS systems are tested in some manner, with controls, then everything is hear-say and gut feelings.

One thing for sure is that a LRM 5 chain firing pain in the *** Archer/Mad Dog/Catapult/etc is almost nullified if the targeted mech is covered by multiple AMS (on targeted mech or covered by close allied mech). That is fun to watch the missiles get shot out of the air. brrrrp-"poof" , brrrrrp "poof", brrrrrp "poof".

[RedDevil]

Sader325, on 28 March 2016 - 05:27 PM, said:

Oxide 1440 Missiles 4 LRM 5 Chain Fire no artemis
Fired from 700 M away, nova in front of Direwolf
1145 - Dire Wolf Dead 4 missed volleys
980 - Dire dead 8 missed volleys 1 ams
420 - Dire Dead 4 misses 2 ams
0 missiles dire lives 3 ams


Archer 2340 9 LRM 5+A group fired in 3's @ 500ms spread.
Fired from 700 M away, nova in front of Direwolf
2145 left over no AMS Dire Dead
2070 left 1 AMS Dire Dead
1980 Left 2 AMS Dire Dead
1785 Left 3 AMS Dire Dead

Are the numbers on the left the amount of ammo remaining? If so, then it does seem to be showing some affect.

Looking just at the Archer numbers:
0 AMS as the benchmark needing 195 LRMs to kill.
1 AMS needs 75 more LRMs
2 AMS needs 165 more LRMs
3 AMS needs 360 more LRMs.

That's actually a really big jump from 1 AMS to 3 if this is consistent over multiple tests.

[Cyborne Elemental]

I ran triple AMS on my nova, half the time I couldn't even tell it was firing even though there was a wall of missles going overhead.. I kept looking down at my ammo counter to see, dunno what was happening.

[Fox With A Shotgun]

RedDevil, on 28 March 2016 - 07:21 PM, said:

Are the numbers on the left the amount of ammo remaining? If so, then it does seem to be showing some affect.

Looking just at the Archer numbers:
0 AMS as the benchmark needing 195 LRMs to kill.
1 AMS needs 75 more LRMs
2 AMS needs 165 more LRMs
3 AMS needs 360 more LRMs.

That's actually a really big jump from 1 AMS to 3 if this is consistent over multiple tests.

This is consistent, and is not a big surprise as the missiles required to kill a mech vs missiles shot down has a hyperbolic relationship.

Consider the following:

Let's assume that it takes a flat 200 LRMs to kill a mech. Each wave is 20 missiles. Round up any fractions because you can't fire a partial wave.

You have 0 AMS, 0 missiles shot down per wave. You need to fire 10 waves to kill it. 200 missiles fired.
You have 1 AMS, 5 missiles shot down per wave. You need to fire 13.33 waves to kill it. 280 missiles fired.
You have 2 AMS. 10 missiles shot down per wave. You need to fire 20 waves to kill it. 400 missiles fired.
You have 3 AMS. 15 missiles shot down per wave. You need to fire 40 waves to kill it. 800 missiles fired.
You have 4 AMS. 20 missiles shot down per wave. You need to fire...infinity waves to never even scratch the paint.

The defensive value of AMS tends to infinity as you cancel out the missile waves. It's one of those things which become significantly stronger in large numbers.

[Corrado]

i love the 3AMS nova too. built with 5xCERMPL or 6xCERSPL, 4tons of ams ammo. when you stick with another 2 or 3ams mech, you can troll LRMs and laugh at em in godmode.

[Moomtazz]

Mister D, on 28 March 2016 - 07:32 PM, said:

I ran triple AMS on my nova, half the time I couldn't even tell it was firing even though there was a wall of missles going overhead.. I kept looking down at my ammo counter to see, dunno what was happening.

Ive been running a BK with 2AMS the last couple of days and I've noticed the AMS sound is often lost in the mix.

[Kroete]

Rocket2Uranus, on 28 March 2016 - 05:02 PM, said:

No. AMS barely does anything. Unless your whole team has AMS, expect 2-3 AMS to do nothing against a barrage of LRMs.

10-15 points less damage from each barrage is nothing?
Why do people think that ams should negate lrms?

[cazidin]

Why do we even HAVE an AMS module? Can anyone tell me why this is a thing that exists when we don't have an AC/2 cooldown module?

[Almond Brown]

cazidin, on 29 March 2016 - 07:33 AM, said:

Why do we even HAVE an AMS module? Can anyone tell me why this is a thing that exists when we don't have an AC/2 cooldown module?

Perhaps the reason is in the Maths.
AC2 CD base .72s.
Cooldown L5 is 12%. Thus .72 - 12% = .0864s.
Thus, do you really think that an extra .09s (rounded) will make a difference in the long run or is "Panty Bunching" worthy type material?

Edited by Almond Brown, 29 March 2016 - 08:06 AM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Almond Brown, on 29 March 2016 - 08:05 AM, said:

Perhaps the reason is in the Maths.
AC2 CD base .72s.
Cooldown L5 is 12%. Thus .72 - 12% = .0864s.
Thus, do you really think that an extra .09s (rounded) will make a difference in the long run or is "Panty Bunching" worthy type material?

Are you seriously sugesting that a 12.5% increase in DPS for a sustained-fire weapon is meaningless? I have to break the news to you, I guess, but people don't use AC/2s to peek-and-poke one volley at a time. That 0.09 seconds multiplied by every shot fired sums to a significant increase in damage applied to target. Anyone with a brain can understand that, and the sad thing is that so many people on these forums echo the junk you just suggested like MetaSheep.

[cazidin]

Almond Brown, on 29 March 2016 - 08:05 AM, said:

Perhaps the reason is in the Maths.
AC2 CD base .72s.
Cooldown L5 is 12%. Thus .72 - 12% = .0864s.
Thus, do you really think that an extra .09s (rounded) will make a difference in the long run or is "Panty Bunching" worthy type material?

I think you missed my point. Why do we have or even need a 10% ROF quirk for an auxiliary piece of equipment that very few pilots equip anymore? If you want to buff its ROF, then just buff its ROF.

Prosperity Park, on 29 March 2016 - 08:18 AM, said:

Are you seriously sugesting that a 12.5% increase in DPS for a sustained-fire weapon is meaningless? I have to break the news to you, I guess, but people don't use AC/2s to peek-and-poke one volley at a time. That 0.09 seconds multiplied by every shot fired sums to a significant increase in damage applied to target. Anyone with a brain can understand that, and the sad thing is that so many people on these forums echo the junk you just suggested like MetaSheep.

MetaSheep? Can I use that?

[Roadkill]

cazidin, on 29 March 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

I think you missed my point. Why do we have or even need a 10% ROF quirk for an auxiliary piece of equipment that very few pilots equip anymore? If you want to buff its ROF, then just buff its ROF.

Are you talking about AMS or the AC/2?

The answer is the same in either case. PGI just chose to give us one but not the other. Because reasons.