Constructive Feedback On Srms & Ssrms
#1
Posted 20 September 2016 - 02:24 PM
So I tested it in both the live and test servers.
On the live server, I was able to consistently fire all 5 SSRM6s six times before overheating, and when I did overheat, I did not take any internal damage.
On the test server, on the second shot, I overheated and took "orange" internal damage.
This is very concerning, as SSRMs are very difficult weapon to master. You not only have to get a lock, you must maintain that lock, or even worse, re-establish a lock, add to that that the damage is spread all over the target, and on top of all of that, only a certain percentage of missiles actually hit their target (in my test cases I was firing streaks at non-moving targets, and even then terrain got in the way and reduced the number of actual missiles impacting their target).
So we have the basic Hunchback IIC & Stormcrow "squirrel hunter" designs that are intended to hunt smaller tonnage mechs (you can fire off SSRMs at a KDK all day and that SOB wont go down because of the way the damage is spread). So in order to be a successful SSRM build, the pilot must maintain target lock on really fast targets, sometimes with ECMs, most times with Radar Deprive, and anyone that plays mechwarrior knows this is not an easy feat...
When considering DPS on SSRMs, we need to consider not only cool down time, but also lock speed as well as re-lock speed, and the number of missiles that actually reach their target (and do not impact on buildings, the ground, your allies, etc.) In the new ED system, I don't think this has been considered. We've reduced the number of shots you can safely make from 5 to 1, AND insured you take damage if you do take a second consecutive shot. I do realize that 5 SSRM6s do 60 damage, but again, this damage spread out and you rarely hit with all 30 missiles. All things considered we have seriously nerfed these two builds.
I was thinking if you added a module slot to the Stormcrow (Stormcrow has a possible 3 modules, Hunchback IIC has 4) so besides Radar Deprive + SSRM Range + SSRM Cooldown you could take Adv. Decay or 360 Target Retention, it might balance this out, but then do we consider these two mechs with vast array of Omnipod Configurations OP?
I'm not sure what the fix is, but i would love feedback or your consideration to this obvious issue.
This got me concerned with my Catapults so I tested those.
Same basic results; with the Live Server, my 6 x SRM6 Cat was able to fire 4 consecutive shots (of 77.4 damage) before overheating causing yellow internal damage, and on the test server on the second consecutive shot I overheated and again took yellow internal damage.
Some would argue that SSRMs are easier than SRMs to master, as with SRMs you must lead the target, and again, take into consideration the number of missiles that actually impact your target (even with a dead center cursor on a non-moving target at longer distances I could see my SRMs impacting the terrain behind the target - I had to be mere meters away before I was guaranteed full damage).
In either case, reducing the number of consecutive "safe" shots from 3 to 1 seems a little much.
Please take some time, while working out the kinks to UACs and Pulse Lasers to look into SSRMs and SRMs.
#2
Posted 20 September 2016 - 02:45 PM
50Calibur, on 20 September 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:
This is very concerning, as SSRMs are very difficult weapon to master.
...
Streaks have arguably one of the lowest skill floors in the game if not the lowest.
The lock-on mechanic in its current form is a lot easier than aiming a direct-fire weapon because you don't have to actually point at a specific hitbox. You can point ANYWHERE on the target mech to get a lock or maintain a lock. You can even remove your reticule from the target without loosing the lock.
Here is a picture to visualize it:
To recap, here are the two general ways that MWO weapons work:
A. Weapons that have to be aimed at a single, specific hitbox.
B. Weapons that can be aimed anywhere in a very large radius around the target mech's body.
And you're arguing that Weapon Type B is the hardest to use. The best response I can give to that assertion is "lolno."
#3
Posted 20 September 2016 - 02:49 PM
#4
Posted 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM
Fup, do me an awesome favor and stop perpetuating it? It's crushingly misleading and makes everyone think that severe nerfs to LRM/SSRM lock-on capability, absent any/all corresponding fixes to flight path, lock speed, bone targeting, or anything else, is something that'd make MWO a better game.
Snapfire weapons have to aim directly at the target...for one bare, singular instant for most Sphere gear. Lasers have to hold on target, but also get to deal partial damage right away. Missiles are the only weapon in the game where you have to stare at a target for several seconds only to deal a bunch of, effectively, back-loaded damage.
Unless you're totes legit on board with drastically shortening missile lock-on times, accelerating missile flight speeds, and/or turning missiles into fire-and-forget weapons - pick at least two - then kindly stop trying to convince people that making effective use of the slowest, most finicky, most easily countered, and by far least used or useful weapon type in the game is somehow "EZ Mode", and thus needs more savage, unjustified and uncompensated nerfs.
Edited by 1453 R, 20 September 2016 - 02:57 PM.
#5
Posted 20 September 2016 - 03:03 PM
Besides, you focused on one part of my post, and ignored the rest. I could care less about your opinions of streaks overall (you should have posted that opinion to Feedback, not here under Energy Draw).
Back to the OP; Do you have an opinion on how nerfed my tests proved to be to SRMs and SSRMs on the Energy Draw system? Or better yet, a possible solution? Or are you just trolling around hoping someone will listen to your opinion of streaks?
Edited by 50Calibur, 20 September 2016 - 03:04 PM.
#6
Posted 20 September 2016 - 03:15 PM
feeWAIVER, on 20 September 2016 - 02:49 PM, said:
feeWAIVER, You must Pilot Lights :-)
Light mechs take out Heavy & Assault, SSRMs Boats take out lights, Heavy and Assault take out SSRM boats.
Its all rock-paper-scissors...
Actually, it would be Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock because of all the different layers :-)
Edited by 50Calibur, 20 September 2016 - 03:22 PM.
#7
Posted 20 September 2016 - 03:21 PM
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
Fup, do me an awesome favor and stop perpetuating it? It's crushingly misleading and makes everyone think that severe nerfs to LRM/SSRM lock-on capability, absent any/all corresponding fixes to flight path, lock speed, bone targeting, or anything else, is something that'd make MWO a better game.
You're assuming that other aspects of the weapons wouldn't be adjusted. That's silly, because such a mechanic change would shake things up a lot and would thus likely require an examination of the XML attributes (especially for Streaks).
Admittedly it's hard to figure out which exact adjustments should be made without knowing the exact way that lock-ons were altered.
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
Artemis speeds that up, and Streaks don't have to pay any tonnage or slots for it. At that point it's a pretty quick lock.
Regardless, the part of them that is "easy" is the fact that you have a much larger target to aim at. I think that this forum has already established that a smaller target is a harder target and a larger target is an easier target, right?
For a normal weapon, the target is only a single hitbox. For the current lock-on mechanic, the target is every hitbox on the entire body. The foot, the head, the left pinky finger, everything. The game doesn't care where you aim with these kinds of weapons.
If I point my laser at a target's left torso, that has a completely different impact on battle than if I point at the right leg or the center torso. It could mean the difference between getting a kill or getting killed. But what happens if I point my Streaks at my opponent's head instead of the left arm? Absolutely nothing different happens. It all depends on the whims of RNGesus.
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
I'm totes on board with those things. Even things like cooldown, heat, range, etc. as well. Having a consistent baseline for how effective your weapon is (computer-guided missiles are not consistent) makes it a lot easier to figure out the stats that surround it.
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
You keep thinking that this is a nerf, but in the long run it would be more of a boon than a bane. For Streaks in particular, the common complaint that defenders use is that they aren't so good against fatties. Being able to actually control the hitbox you hit (rather than the computer deciding where you hit) fixes that pretty quickly.
On that note, I thought you were of the camp that liked being able to choose where your weapons hit, rather than not being able to choose? (Referencing convergence discussions). The current missile lock-on mechanic is more contradictory to that idea than you might think.
The current Streak mechanic is surprisingly close to TT's random hit locations except for the fact that TT had a random chance of the shots missing (whereas MWO Streaks only miss because of terrain or weird firing angles).
---
Ultimately, I'm getting the impression that you think the current lock-on mechanic makes these weapons useful and worthwhile. You think that these weapons depend on it for dear life. But then you also have that quote up above about the various weaknesses that the weapons have, which is an admittance that the lock-on mechanic is not saving them. Some of those drawbacks are probably there because of the autoaim system.
You think that you're a champion for the effectiveness of Lurms and SSRMs, but in reality it's the the current lock-on mechanic that is the greatest obstacle to your goal.
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
Fup, do me an awesome favor and stop perpetuating it? It's crushingly misleading and makes everyone think that severe nerfs to LRM/SSRM lock-on capability, absent any/all corresponding fixes to flight path, lock speed, bone targeting, or anything else, is something that'd make MWO a better game.
You're assuming that other aspects of the weapons wouldn't be adjusted. That's silly, because such a mechanic change would shake things up a lot and would thus likely require an examination of the XML attributes (especially for Streaks).
Admittedly it's hard to figure out which exact adjustments should be made without knowing the exact way that lock-ons were altered.
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
Artemis speeds that up, and Streaks don't have to pay any tonnage or slots for it. At that point it's a pretty quick lock.
Regardless, the part of them that is "easy" is the fact that you have a much larger target to aim at. I think that this forum has already established that a smaller target is a harder target and a larger target is an easier target, right?
For a normal weapon, the target is only a single hitbox. For the current lock-on mechanic, the target is every hitbox on the entire body. The foot, the head, the left pinky finger, everything. The game doesn't care where you aim with these kinds of weapons.
If I point my laser at a target's left torso, that has a completely different impact on battle than if I point at the right leg or the center torso. It could mean the difference between getting a kill or getting killed. But what happens if I point my Streaks at my opponent's head instead of the left arm? Absolutely nothing different happens. It all depends on the whims of RNGesus.
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
I'm totes on board with those things. Even things like cooldown, heat, range, etc. as well. Having a consistent baseline for how effective your weapon is (computer-guided missiles are not consistent) makes it a lot easier to figure out the stats that surround it.
1453 R, on 20 September 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:
You keep thinking that this is a nerf, but in the long run it would be more of a boon than a bane. For Streaks in particular, the common complaint that defenders use is that they aren't so good against fatties. Being able to actually control the hitbox you hit (rather than the computer deciding where you hit) fixes that pretty quickly.
On that note, I thought you were of the camp that liked being able to choose where your weapons hit, rather than not being able to choose? (Referencing convergence discussions). The current missile lock-on mechanic is more contradictory to that idea than you might think.
The current Streak mechanic is surprisingly close to TT's random hit locations except for the fact that TT had a random chance of the shots missing (whereas MWO Streaks only miss because of terrain or weird firing angles).
---
Ultimately, I'm getting the impression that you think the current lock-on mechanic makes these weapons useful and worthwhile. You think that these weapons depend on it for dear life. But then you also have that quote up above about the various weaknesses that the weapons have, which is an admittance that the lock-on mechanic is not saving them. Some of those drawbacks are probably there because of the autoaim system.
You think that you're a champion for the effectiveness of Lurms and SSRMs, but in reality it's the the current lock-on mechanic that is the greatest obstacle to your goal.
50Calibur, on 20 September 2016 - 03:15 PM, said:
1453, You must Pilot Lights :-)
Light mechs take out Heavys & Assaults, SSRMs take out lights and Mediums, Heavys and Assaults take out SSRM boats, Its all rock-paper-scissors...
Actually, it would be Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock because of all the different layers :-)
Lights only counter bad assaults who get isolated from their team and don't know the proper defensive techniques against lights.
Heavies are sure as hell not countered by lights ever because heavies have the agility to easy keep up.
#8
Posted 20 September 2016 - 03:27 PM
The OP is regarding the ED System and its effect on SRMs and SSRMs.
I did a lot of testing and believe we have a overlooked this aspect of the new system and it should be addressed.
Your opinion of Streak missiles (in this context) is really not relevant here.
#9
Posted 20 September 2016 - 03:59 PM
FupDup, on 20 September 2016 - 03:21 PM, said:
The current Streak mechanic is surprisingly close to TT's random hit locations except for the fact that TT had a random chance of the shots missing (whereas MWO Streaks only miss because of terrain or weird firing angles).
---
Ultimately, I'm getting the impression that you think the current lock-on mechanic makes these weapons useful and worthwhile. You think that these weapons depend on it for dear life. But then you also have that quote up above about the various weaknesses that the weapons have, which is an admittance that the lock-on mechanic is not saving them. Some of those drawbacks are probably there because of the autoaim system.
You think that you're a champion for the effectiveness of Lurms and SSRMs, but in reality it's the the current lock-on mechanic that is the greatest obstacle to your goal.
Don't get me wrong. I'd be all over trying faster, snappier, more directed and effective missiles with a reduced lock-on area. You want to do your Little Red Box chart up there up with missiles that move faster, lock faster, don't require twist-destroying "hold Lock" functionality, and basically redux the whole damn weapon? Do the four-pack where your red inforgraphic is how locks work, but all three of my stipulations above are in, too?
Sign me up, bruh! I'd adore trying LRM machines with those mechanics in place! That'd be a g'damned blast, I'd PTS the hell out of it if my godforsaken arms cooperated for more than half a frickin' hour.
But your nasty little infographic doesn't say any of that. All it says, and all it perpetuates, is the "Lock-on missiles need enormous lock-on nerfs!", and then trusts the forum userbase to know that crappy weapons which receive gargantuan reliability nerfs in terms of lock capability would then be due for a serious rework in terms of complementary mechanics in order to raise both the skill ceiling and the overall weapon effectiveness.
Exqueeze me, Fup. What have we learned about assuming the forum userbase at large is capable of anything like rational thought?
#10
Posted 20 September 2016 - 04:38 PM
50Calibur, on 20 September 2016 - 03:03 PM, said:
That doesn't make them a hard weapon to master and saying "you don't target specific hit boxes" just reinforces that point.
It really lowers your credibility quite a bit if you're complaining only because your skillcrow got nerfed.
feeWAIVER, on 20 September 2016 - 02:49 PM, said:
An already garbage weapon needs a nerf? You have the wrong idea if you want to see more nerfs to SSRMs; what they need is to be reworked completely.
#11
Posted 20 September 2016 - 04:38 PM
50Calibur, on 20 September 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:
So I tested it in both the live and test servers.
On the live server, I was able to consistently fire all 5 SSRM6s six times before overheating, and when I did overheat, I did not take any internal damage.
On the test server, on the second shot, I overheated and took "orange" internal damage.
This is very concerning, as SSRMs are very difficult weapon to master. You not only have to get a lock, you must maintain that lock, or even worse, re-establish a lock, add to that that the damage is spread all over the target, and on top of all of that, only a certain percentage of missiles actually hit their target (in my test cases I was firing streaks at non-moving targets, and even then terrain got in the way and reduced the number of actual missiles impacting their target).
So we have the basic Hunchback IIC & Stormcrow "squirrel hunter" designs that are intended to hunt smaller tonnage mechs (you can fire off SSRMs at a KDK all day and that SOB wont go down because of the way the damage is spread). So in order to be a successful SSRM build, the pilot must maintain target lock on really fast targets, sometimes with ECMs, most times with Radar Deprive, and anyone that plays mechwarrior knows this is not an easy feat...
When considering DPS on SSRMs, we need to consider not only cool down time, but also lock speed as well as re-lock speed, and the number of missiles that actually reach their target (and do not impact on buildings, the ground, your allies, etc.) In the new ED system, I don't think this has been considered. We've reduced the number of shots you can safely make from 5 to 1, AND insured you take damage if you do take a second consecutive shot. I do realize that 5 SSRM6s do 60 damage, but again, this damage spread out and you rarely hit with all 30 missiles. All things considered we have seriously nerfed these two builds.
I was thinking if you added a module slot to the Stormcrow (Stormcrow has a possible 3 modules, Hunchback IIC has 4) so besides Radar Deprive + SSRM Range + SSRM Cooldown you could take Adv. Decay or 360 Target Retention, it might balance this out, but then do we consider these two mechs with vast array of Omnipod Configurations OP?
I'm not sure what the fix is, but i would love feedback or your consideration to this obvious issue.
This got me concerned with my Catapults so I tested those.
Same basic results; with the Live Server, my 6 x SRM6 Cat was able to fire 4 consecutive shots (of 77.4 damage) before overheating causing yellow internal damage, and on the test server on the second consecutive shot I overheated and again took yellow internal damage.
Some would argue that SSRMs are easier than SRMs to master, as with SRMs you must lead the target, and again, take into consideration the number of missiles that actually impact your target (even with a dead center cursor on a non-moving target at longer distances I could see my SRMs impacting the terrain behind the target - I had to be mere meters away before I was guaranteed full damage).
In either case, reducing the number of consecutive "safe" shots from 3 to 1 seems a little much.
Please take some time, while working out the kinks to UACs and Pulse Lasers to look into SSRMs and SRMs.
FupDup, on 20 September 2016 - 02:45 PM, said:
Streaks have arguably one of the lowest skill floors in the game if not the lowest.
The lock-on mechanic in its current form is a lot easier than aiming a direct-fire weapon because you don't have to actually point at a specific hitbox. You can point ANYWHERE on the target mech to get a lock or maintain a lock. You can even remove your reticule from the target without loosing the lock.
Here is a picture to visualize it:
To recap, here are the two general ways that MWO weapons work:
A. Weapons that have to be aimed at a single, specific hitbox.
B. Weapons that can be aimed anywhere in a very large radius around the target mech's body.
And you're arguing that Weapon Type B is the hardest to use. The best response I can give to that assertion is "lolno."
Sorry dude, no. Mastering streaks? LOL, ROLF, LMAO. Ive come across a lot of streakers in scouting and we made them rethink their builds. If there is something wrong with streaks then its that IS has just ssrm2s and clans have ssrm6s. Light hunting is the word. nothing more nothing less.
#12
Posted 20 September 2016 - 05:29 PM
50Calibur, on 20 September 2016 - 03:15 PM, said:
feeWAIVER, You must Pilot Lights :-)
Light mechs take out Heavy & Assault, SSRMs Boats take out lights, Heavy and Assault take out SSRM boats.
Its all rock-paper-scissors...
Actually, it would be Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock because of all the different layers :-)
No, I pilot no less than 2 streakdogs in my drop deck because they are ezmode.
72 pt alpha missiles with longer range than SRMS, and doesn't even require aiming.
Lock target, turn a corner, alpha and twist out.
Repeat.
KMDD's all day.
With the added bonus of gibbing any lights that get within 400 meters of you.
Believe me, I will welcome a nerf.
Edited by feeWAIVER, 20 September 2016 - 05:47 PM.
#13
Posted 20 September 2016 - 05:51 PM
50Calibur, on 20 September 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:
Now I have seen everything!
I can die in peace now.
#14
Posted 20 September 2016 - 05:54 PM
I understand why the OP doesn't want his Streak Crow nerfed. Scout matches might actually be balanced 50/50 win/loss instead of the c. 60-70% tilt now.
Too bad I'm generally against the idea of Ghost Heat of any kind whether it is same weapon boating or capped alpha. There are a dozen parameters that could be adjusted to accomplish the goals which are not fully defined by "alpha":
reduce alpha'ing
reduce alpha repeat rates
reduce pin point effects
reduce damage over distance
in order to
increase TTK
Edited by BearFlag, 20 September 2016 - 05:56 PM.
#15
Posted 21 September 2016 - 02:54 PM
If you do the math, its easy to see my point using 3 x IS AC20s vrs 5 x Clan SSRM6s:
In the current system:
The AC20 does 5 damage per second, does 3.33 Heat per point of damage
The SSRM6 does 2 damage per second, does 3 heat per point of damage
Heat per point of damage is pretty close.
If we go with 3 x AC20s & 5 x SSRM6s for an "effective" 60 Damage we get:
The 3 x AC20s do 15 damage per second for 52,71 tons (for 25 shots)
The 5 x SSRM6s do 10 damage per second for 22.5 tons (for 25 shots)
BUT, this does NOT take into account the lock time, just cool down. If we say, a 2.5 second lock (with Artemis), this reduces the DPS of the SSRMs to 1.41 - I'm not asking for opinions here, just asking that we consider lock time when comparing DPS (and we'll take my point about needing to consider the number of missiles that impact the target out of the conversation, because you're not guaranteed to hit with every projectile).- so with lock time the SSRMs will do 7.05 DPS for 22.5 tons (for 25 shots) & the AC20s do 15 DPS for 52,71 tons (for 25 shots) so the ratio is really good, a little less than 1/2 the damage for a little less than 1/2 the weight...
The difference is made up for in the fact that SSRMs spread the damage as opposed to the preferred pinpoint damage.
All things considered, in the current system, these weapon are pretty close, and preference is really a matter of play style and intent.
But In Energy Draw, we don't consider heat, we basically consider damage. If we go with the same 3 x AC20s & 5 x SSRM6s, In an Alpha Strike we cause the same amount of ED.
Yet, if we fire 1 AC20, then 1 second pause, then 1 AC20, then 1 second, then 1 AC20, etc. we are doing minimal ED with a DPS of 10 (a 33% reduction of DPS)
The SSRMs, on the other hand, if you fire one, wait a second, fire one, wait a second, etc. (because if you fire two at a time you are penalized for exceeding the ED threshold by 4 points) you end up with a 4.44 DPS (a 38% reduction).
AND THIS IS ONLY IF YOU MAINTAIN THE TARGET LOCK THE ENTIRE TIME, SSRMs WILL NOT FIRE IF THE LOCK IS NOT MAINTAINED AND YOU MUST REESTABLISH THE LOCK REDUCING THE DPS EVEN FURTHER.
All arguments aside on whether or not SSRMs are low-skill, have bad mechanics, or whatever aside, I was simply pointing out that ED adversely effects SSRMs and SRMs more than it does other weapon systems especially when you consider you MUST maintain a lock the ENTIRE time to maintain the DPS.
I might have not been clear in my OP, but I was simply hoping that the Developers would consider this and possibly look into the stats of these SRM Weapon Systems and make sure they are not overlooking something during the ED Test.
#16
Posted 21 September 2016 - 07:19 PM
By comparing the AC20, you seem to be arguing that a 55 ton medium ~should~ do as much damage as 100 ton, triple AC20 King Crab. Your own numbers show the Streaker does more damage per second per ton than 42 tons worth of AC. You lament the negatives of streaks, but mention none on the AC20 - like the fact that the slow projectile often misses in the heat of battle. Should the 20 get special consideration too? The nature of this ED system is to encourage chain firing. Like it, don't like it, doesn't matter. That's what they're doing. Pump out more than 30 dmg in a half second window, get penalized. It's dumb, it's Ghost Heat 2.0. But that's what they're testing.
As for the SSRM 6 and probably 4, nerf is coming. Just a question of when and how. SSRM 6 has earned the reputation among IS solos as the Long Tom of Scout mode. They stop answering Call to Arms and, if they do come, leave disgusted. Before writing this I checked the Scout queue - zeros across the board. Not one. And I don't blame them - I blame balance. Mostly, I blame PGI for not promptly and competently addressing matters of balance in this game. You would think that things that drive players AWAY would be of paramount importance. But they've been "balancing" for the two years I've been here.
I appreciate that they're trying something with ED. I just wish they'd be more systematic and use more math to get there.
#17
Posted 22 September 2016 - 06:19 AM
#18
Posted 22 September 2016 - 07:22 AM
I think you should be able to do this but they need to add in some counters for lights. You should be able to out turn(Dodge) them at full speed 250m out. Right now they're almost fire and forget direct hit.
IS ssrm2 is a POS . even 9 of these on a archer is junk . They need some type of buff.
Maybe is2 and clan2 should be able to hit the CT of mechs more often?
Edited by Monkey Lover, 22 September 2016 - 07:25 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users