35 replies to this topic

[Widowmaker1981]

Cementi, on 14 January 2017 - 11:01 PM, said:

Sorry to crush peoples hopes and dreams for ATM's but they cannot even get LBX weapons to have the option for slug and cluster ammo.

I will be very surprised if they put ATM's in.

Id think there is a 'hack' method to put ATMs in - have it so that when you equip a single ATM it has 3 weapons displayed in the UI, one for each ammo type. Then have them on linked cooldowns so if one is fired the other two go on cooldown. Then have each one use a different ammo type (or even the same ammo if you want to simplify it, since im pretty certain the weapons firing and damage profile is set by the weapon, not the ammo)

Arguably the reason they never did that for LBX is the problem of why ever use the AC10 afterwards, if the LBX can fire single slugs and be smaller and lighter.

[CK16]

Or how about range damage fall off for ATM's ....That is a very simple fix.

[Gentleman Reaper]

CK16, on 15 January 2017 - 09:23 AM, said:

Or how about range damage fall off for ATM's ....That is a very simple fix.

I think all ATMs need is to use the standard missile type, a mid ranged missile with the SRM's damage model and a minimum range. This would make ATMs the Clan equivalent of the MRM, and you still have SRMs and LRMs for short and long range. I don't know how I would feel with a variable damage model, I'm worried it might completely replace SRMs on most builds, especially if it can do SRM damage with no minimum range, that's why I think ATMs just firing their standard missile would be perfect.

[RestosIII]

Gentleman Reaper, on 15 January 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

I think all ATMs need is to use the standard missile type, a mid ranged missile with the SRM's damage model and a minimum range. This would make ATMs the Clan equivalent of the MRM, and you still have SRMs and LRMs for short and long range. I don't know how I would feel with a variable damage model, I'm worried it might completely replace SRMs on most builds, especially if it can do SRM damage with no minimum range, that's why I think ATMs just firing their standard missile would be perfect.

Ooof. I really wouldn't like it if ATMs were locked to the mid-range missile type. And you can't really call them the Clan equivalent of MRMs, considering they had a tracking system, and MRMs didn't.

[Bombast]

RestosIII, on 15 January 2017 - 10:21 AM, said:

Ooof. I really wouldn't like it if ATMs were locked to the mid-range missile type. And you can't really call them the Clan equivalent of MRMs, considering they had a tracking system, and MRMs didn't.

MRMs and ATMs are, in fact, the most dissimilar missile systems in the lore. ATMs were made to be high tech super launchers that would be used by highly competent warriors that could fire anything needed and obsolete every other missile system (It failed to do so, however).

MRMs were made to fire dirt cheap ammo with no regard to performance. Literally...

[MW Waldorf Statler]

thats a Fun...Rotarys and the Lag and Hitreg War and the End of a TTK over 1Minute by Focus fire from 8+ rotarys...Once Day, we have strong rules for this toys in MW4 mektek leagues...to many eleminated evry gamefun

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 15 January 2017 - 10:44 AM.

[Gentleman Reaper]

RestosIII, on 15 January 2017 - 10:21 AM, said:

Ooof. I really wouldn't like it if ATMs were locked to the mid-range missile type. And you can't really call them the Clan equivalent of MRMs, considering they had a tracking system, and MRMs didn't.

Well, the ER ammo works like an LRM, but nothing says that the Standard and HE missiles tracked like they did, they would be pretty much mid-range and 3 damage SRMs respectively for MWO, given that SRMs don't have tracking while they did have it to a limited extent in lore. The iATM had a streak system attached to all missile types though, although I heavily doubt we'll ever see that introduced since it was only used by The Society.

Bombast, on 15 January 2017 - 10:33 AM, said:

MRMs and ATMs are, in fact, the most dissimilar missile systems in the lore. ATMs were made to be high tech super launchers that would be used by highly competent warriors that could fire anything needed and obsolete every other missile system (It failed to do so, however).

MRMs were made to fire dirt cheap ammo with no regard to performance. Literally...

I'm aware of what they are, hell, LBXs are supposed to be superior versions of ACs, but the lack of ammo switching relegates them to the role that their most unique ammo grants them, which would be cluster ammo for LBXs, and my preposition of Standard missiles for ATMs, since they give the Clans a medium range missile option. Making the ATMs an all-range missile option would likely overlap with the SRM's and LRM's roles simultaneously to some degree, and that would make them very difficult to balance.

[Andi Nagasia]

CK16, on 15 January 2017 - 09:23 AM, said:

Or how about range damage fall off for ATM's ....That is a very simple fix.

personally i would rather have then separated into 3 Different Launchers,
i feel having damage fall off would lead to the system gaining all 3 ammo types at once and cause it to be too powerful,
having 3 different launchers would relegate people into choosing and sticking with a chosen Launcher, which im fine with,
rather have it be a good Missile system, but Split to 3 Launchers, then just have it be 1 and be nerfed into uselessness,

[RestosIII]

Andi Nagasia, on 15 January 2017 - 02:06 PM, said:

personally i would rather have then separated into 3 Different Launchers,
i feel having damage fall off would lead to the system gaining all 3 ammo types at once and cause it to be too powerful,
having 3 different launchers would relegate people into choosing and sticking with a chosen Launcher, which im fine with,
rather have it be a good Missile system, but Split to 3 Launchers, then just have it be 1 and be nerfed into uselessness,

Thing is, having it be multiple different launchers sort of ruins the whole point of ATMs being versatile. I just don't like it.

[CK16]

Andi Nagasia, on 15 January 2017 - 02:06 PM, said:

personally i would rather have then separated into 3 Different Launchers,
i feel having damage fall off would lead to the system gaining all 3 ammo types at once and cause it to be too powerful,
having 3 different launchers would relegate people into choosing and sticking with a chosen Launcher, which im fine with,
rather have it be a good Missile system, but Split to 3 Launchers, then just have it be 1 and be nerfed into uselessness,

Well the big balance factor to the ATM is they are large for Clan standards, they are a bit hefty...AND they only get 60 rounds per ton. For being so flexible they should suffer bad damage per ton. ALSO they should function like streaks in the fact they require locks to fire and long reloads. They should be versatile but suffer some draw backs.

[Snazzy Dragon]

I think why I am generally against it is because we have had a lot of omni pod based power creep lately and not a lot of power creep for IS-- the gap gets wider and wider.

I'll support it when we establish actual parity.

[Pariah Devalis]

CK16, on 15 January 2017 - 02:30 PM, said:

Well the big balance factor to the ATM is they are large for Clan standards, they are a bit hefty...AND they only get 60 rounds per ton. For being so flexible they should suffer bad damage per ton. ALSO they should function like streaks in the fact they require locks to fire and long reloads. They should be versatile but suffer some draw backs.

They would, even by virtue of their tonnage to damage ratio and crit suckage. ATM3 at 1.5 tons and 2 crits for 3/6/9 damage, maximum, vs an SRM4 at 1 crit 1 ton 8 damage or an LRM5 at 5.5 damage. It will never replace either SRM or LRM at their specific range bracket. It will, however, allow you to utilize the launcher across all range fields.

As such, it actually could use the buff of having a combined ammo type. Damage drop like ballistics, except exploding at max range so it cannot damage past 810 meter at all. Max of 3 damage at 150 or so meters, minimum of 1. The ammo per ton issue might stay, but it almost seems unnecessary given it will be subpar given more dedicated options for either long or close range combat.

The flexibility of it, however, needs to be the focus. Consolidated ammo types for it makes sense. There would be little sense in the weapon system otherwise.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 15 January 2017 - 04:10 PM.

[Gentleman Reaper]

RestosIII, on 15 January 2017 - 02:07 PM, said:

Thing is, having it be multiple different launchers sort of ruins the whole point of ATMs being versatile. I just don't like it.

What? The whole point of ATMs is being able to fire 3 different munitions, if it's possible (with the game engine) to have it appear as 3 different weapons with a tied cooldown, then I'm completely for it, I'm confused why you wouldn't be.

[Pariah Devalis]

Gentleman Reaper, on 15 January 2017 - 04:30 PM, said:

What? The whole point of ATMs is being able to fire 3 different munitions, if it's possible (with the game engine) to have it appear as 3 different weapons with a tied cooldown, then I'm completely for it, I'm confused why you wouldn't be.

The whole point of ATM was to have a tactically flexible missile system that could change mid fight to various range modes. Nothing more or less. That is to say, a weapon system that can shift based on the combat scenario it is dealing with. Combined ammo types to scaling damage basically allow you to avoid dealing with 3 different ammo types, avoids the seemingly stupid idea of three entirely different weapons with the same name given it was supposed to be one weapon that was able toswitch on the fly, and helps compensate somewhat for the atrocious ammo/ton issue of the system.

Especially since it isn't doing long range or close range as well as their respective dedicated counterpart missiles, regardless.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 15 January 2017 - 04:35 PM.

[Gentleman Reaper]

Pariah Devalis, on 15 January 2017 - 04:34 PM, said:

The whole point of ATM was to have a tactically flexible missile system that could change mid fight to various range modes. Nothing more or less. That is to say, a weapon system that can shift based on the combat scenario it is dealing with. Combined ammo types to scaling damage basically allow you to avoid dealing with 3 different ammo types, avoids the seemingly stupid idea of three entirely different weapons with the same name given it was supposed to be one weapon that was able toswitch on the fly, and helps compensate somewhat for the atrocious ammo/ton issue of the system.

Especially since it isn't doing long range or close range as well as their respective dedicated counterpart missiles, regardless.

But the problem with doing it this way is that you have one ammo type that's effective throughout the whole length of its flight-time. Going with multiple ammo types you have to dedicate the tonnage and space to get the most of the system, so it helps establish a balancing point for each individual ammo type. This is exactly like trying to balance isXLs by making them like cXLs, people perceive it as the easy way out when a lore-accurate option is present where the weapon is still viable.

Edited by Gentleman Reaper, 15 January 2017 - 05:22 PM.

[Pariah Devalis]

Gentleman Reaper, on 15 January 2017 - 04:56 PM, said:

But the problem with doing it this way is that you have one ammo type that's effective throughout the whole length of its flight-time. Going with multiple ammo types you have to dedicate the tonnage and space to get the most of the system, so it helps establish a balancing point for each individual ammo type. This is exactly like trying to balance isXLs by making them like cXLs, people perceive it as the easy way out when a lore-accurate option is present where the weapon is still viable.

Except that is needless balancing for things that don't need it. Compare the stats, in tonnage, crit slot usage, and raw damage, of LRM 5 and SRM4 to an ATM3. The ATM is already unfavorable, being twice the crit slots, 50% heavier, and dealing less damage (per ton) than either option in their respective areas of effect. Up and down the ATM scale, 3-12, that does not change. There is exactly zero reason to force an ammo restriction system there that doesn't need to be there. Literally the only place the ATM would be advantaged would be at an intermediate range bracket. At long range, LRMs outshine it. At brawl, SRMs one up it.

Keep it simple. Ammo slide works, and gets the gist of the entire concept behind ATMs being flexible all range missile delivery systems. Anything more is being complicated for the sake of being complicated and that is never a good idea.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 15 January 2017 - 06:12 PM.