36 replies to this topic

[Snowbluff]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2017 - 11:58 AM, said:

why would it be 2 dmg per component? LRMS, even streaks, do 1 dmg per missile.

A SLRM 15 would hit 7 components for 2 each on average when using the current streak targeting, no? 2 LRMs are component. :0

The stream LRMs are a balancing factor for the reduced weight of the cLRM. Since the cSLRM would probably just be better in almost every way to is LRM, it should probably stay that way.

Edited by Snowbluff, 12 February 2017 - 12:05 PM.

[cazidin]

Streak LRMs seem a bit redundant with SSRMs, right? The longer range would be nice, but niche.

And can we trust PGI to competently introduce ATMs?

[Bishop Steiner]

Snowbluff, on 12 February 2017 - 12:04 PM, said:

A SLRM 15 would hit 7 components for 2 each on average when using the current streak targeting, no? 2 LRMs are component. :0

The stream LRMs are a balancing factor for the reduced weight of the cLRM. Since the cSLRM would probably just be better in almost every way to is LRM, it should probably stay that way.

I don't see how they would be "better in every way".

LRMs already lock. The difference is LRMs have spread. But without indirect fire, SLRMs already lose a huge facet of what CAN make LRMs situational strong... indirect fire on NARCs, UAVs and TAGs. Simply put, in direct fire situations, LRMs are already behind the curve on everything else. But more to the point... the range of a SLRM would in reality be less in most cases than a std LRM... because it can ONLY be used direct fire.

So even then, the "Streak" feature is easily negated thanks to about a million counters, the simplest being terrain and buildings. (the same way a good Light Mech can rub off Streak SRMs now)

Whether they will make them true to the SSRM mechanic or not, is a big question mark. The only "definite" improvement we can likely bank on is a scaling minimum Range...which is useful, but not really that big.

As noted, the best way to approach them (IMO) is in my post above.

[Nightshade24]

razenWing, on 12 February 2017 - 10:53 AM, said:

I don't know about the actual lore, but so far, the logic behind "streak" in ALL the Mechwarrior video games (2, 3, 4, Mechassault 1, 2) is simply that regular SRMs are dumb-fire rockets. "Streaks" just give SRMs tracking ability.

"Streaks" is not synonymous with 100% accurate high maneuverable missiles. Again, this is purely video game logic, the lore might give them unique meaning, but I'm sticking purely to video games.

With that said, LRMs can track as of now. Thus, a "streak" LRM is just redundant.
-snip-
My conclusion, you don't need streak LRMs. You just need PGI to fix LRMs, and they will function like they are SLRMs.

And LRMs are stupid.

But that's usually a problem with the game engine and capabilities for having streaks just be lock on SRM's... And every game dealt in a time period without anything more then just SRM's, MRM's, and LRM's.

Streak SRM's are more then just lock on SRM's, they have a 100% hit rate and they do not fire if you can't get reliable hits (ie if you have SSRm's in your arms and it's also behind a rock it would hold fire using lore reasons). But anyway, let's talk how it relates to an SLRM...

1) No arcing, goes straight to target (hopefully also higher velocity).
2) Fire-and-forget. No need to have continuous lock.

This makes the SLRM superior in every scenario where you have to shoot at enemies with direct line of sight. For instance you can use streak LRM's in caves or tunnels or under the thing on Crimson strait OR you can shoot at enemies that are hiding under that. So things that is 'cover' to conventional LRM's isn't to an SLRM, in exchange it can't hit targets hiding behind obstacles and such.

Regardless if you think 'just fixing LRM's is better then band aid fix SLRM's" there's still the fact that SLRM's are new tech that behaves nearly completely differently and has the strong advantage of being able to fire-and-forget.

Considering the IS misiles options right now is SRM, (soon MRM), and LRM's... Meanwhile the other weapon groups we've got AC 2-20, Gauss rifles, UAC's, LBX's, machine guns, and potential addition of HVAC, LAC, and RAC's...

Missiles lack variety. SLRM's would be a welcomed addition. Won't replace normal LRM's due to lack of indirect fire. But can hit targets on a more horizontal plane as well as fire and forget.

Valhallan, on 12 February 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

for years we haven't gotten switchable lbx-ammo and most have given up on ever seeing it, so no you clanners don't want to see atm's you won't wanna see the mangled no switch results .

cazidin, on 12 February 2017 - 03:36 PM, said:

Streak LRMs seem a bit redundant with SSRMs, right? The longer range would be nice, but niche.

And can we trust PGI to competently introduce ATMs?

SLRM 20 = 20 damage up to 1000m range
SSRM 6 = 12 damage up to 270 range...

That extra range isn't quite redundant or niche.. would be like comparing an AC 20 with a Gauss Rifle but even then the range difference is greater here.


Anywho, we got LBX's in game without ammo switching, so what's the problem with ATM's without ammo switching?
Do what they did for clan lbx and just add each ammo type as a separate weapon... such as...
HE ATM's, Standard ATM's, ER ATM's. Boom, fix!...

My only problem is ballance.... ATM 12 is a lock on weapon that can do up to 36 damage with HE ammo... two ATM 12's would be able to do 72 damage.... 3 could do 108... but only up to 400m range...

I think PGI if they'll add the HE ammo will just make it do 1-2 damage per missile and give it splash but even then since it's a missile and the natural spread it'll just damage everything with the CT being damaged the most since shots to the LT and RT also transfer to the CT.


However we forget that PGI is also making MW5 as well as having plans to change up or upgrade our current game engine or to replace it (probably replace it with the same one for MW5). As well as plans on the side burner done during tea breaks on things such as melee, quad mechs, etc... considering how eager PGI is to jump to the 3060's despite the mechs like Bane, Reaper, Battlecobra, Howler, Kingfisher, Marauder II, etc that could've at least delayed us for a next year or so...

Something tells me that PGI at least has someone that can do something with weapons rather then just having reskined LRM's and lasers.

[RestosIII]

Nightshade24, on 12 February 2017 - 04:05 PM, said:

Anywho, we got LBX's in game without ammo switching, so what's the problem with ATM's without ammo switching?
Do what they did for clan lbx and just add each ammo type as a separate weapon... such as...
HE ATM's, Standard ATM's, ER ATM's. Boom, fix!...

Please no. The entire point of ATMs is their flexibility. Going with a system like that just makes them an inferior SRM or LRM.

[FupDup]

RestosIII, on 12 February 2017 - 04:06 PM, said:

Please no. The entire point of ATMs is their flexibility. Going with a system like that just makes them an inferior SRM or LRM.

Well, the HE ATMs would still have a use because of their damage per hardpoint ratio (HE ATM12 does 36, no other Clan missile can rival that).

That's about it though.

[Nightshade24]

RestosIII, on 12 February 2017 - 04:06 PM, said:

Please no. The entire point of ATMs is their flexibility. Going with a system like that just makes them an inferior SRM or LRM.

"Inferior to LRM's or SRM's."


HE ATM 12 = 36 damage
Standard ATM 12 = 24 damage
ER ATM 12 = 12 damage.... at far longer ranges then SRM's and 100% guided.
HE ATM 6 = 18 damage
Standard ATM 6 = 12 damage
HE ATM 3 = 9 damage
Standard ATM 3 = 6 damage
SSRM 6 = 12 damage.


ATM 6:
3.5 tones,
3 crit slots,
4 heat.

ATM 3
1.5 Tonnes
2 crit slot
2 heat.

SSRM 6:
3 to 4.5 (Clan / IS)
Critical Slots: 2.
4 heat (same heat).


Overall... ATM's nearly completely replace SSRM's... extremely higher range... more accurate targeting system... longer range... potentially faster velocity...

Only downfalls of ATM's versus an SSRM is low number of missiles means AMS will be a nightmare...
And that ATM's are not fire and forget and SSRM's are better at taking out light mechs as even though they spread like crazy- they at least always hit the mech unlike LRM's.


Compared to LRM's?....

LRM 20 = 20 damage
ATM 12 with HE = 36
ATM 12 with Standard = 24
ATM 12 with ER = 12

LRM 20 only does better then the ER ammo, but it also has less range then the ER ammo by like 200-400m range.

LRM's advantage would be being far more AMS resistant and lighter especially if you do not use Artemis.


I welcome the addition of ATM's, I just fear that they are going to be OP as hell... The HE ammo for ATM's gives it an EXTREME damage per tonne ratio. Like, if you slap 4 ATM 12 HE's on a supernova (36 x 4 = 144 damage) you can annihilate any mech after 1 salvo chain fired or alpha striked... PGI has to put a lot of work to prevent ATM's from being OP and may simply not add the HE ammo and only have it as standard and ER which are still strong in their own right of having extreme range OR good damage with slightly less range then LRM's.

FupDup, on 12 February 2017 - 04:10 PM, said:

Well, the HE ATMs would still have a use because of their damage per hardpoint ratio (HE ATM12 does 36, no other Clan missile can rival that).

That's about it though.

well ER ATM's have a max range over 1000m being the only weapon in MW: O that can deal it's full damage above that. Another thing to consider.

[RestosIII]

Nightshade24, on 12 February 2017 - 04:48 PM, said:

-snip-

You're completely forgetting the atrocious ammo-per-ton issue, for one, and the fact that STD and ER both have minimum ranges as well.

And don't talk about ranges of 1,000 meters with a missile system and claim you're ever going to be doing damage at that range like it's a boon. No-one is going to stand out in the open and let missiles hit them at that range, especially when it involves a LoS lock like ATMs will.

[ProfessorD]

Snowbluff, on 12 February 2017 - 09:05 AM, said:

Okay, Streak LRMs as new tech for Clans is sounding likely.
...

Where have you heard this? Is Paul or Russ tweeting about them?

Snowbluff, on 12 February 2017 - 09:05 AM, said:

...

Now, what i know about these:
- Doubled the weight (Same as IS launchers)
- No Indirect fire (ZELLBRIGEN)
- Doesn't miss (or is very unlikely, I've never seen an SSRM miss)

...

So I propose that the SLRM doesn't target components, but rather spreads like a normal LRM, but much great accuracy in terms of actual hit. All shots will land within the profile of the mech. The missiles will make little course corrections, curving inward and nicking the outside if they would somehow miss. The shots will cluster towards the torso, but not perfectly. I do expect the velocity to be higher as well.

Man, I hope the cooldown doesn't increase...

...
I don't ind [sic] the extra weight or the direct firing.
...
the velocity is increase
...

I like this proposal. There's probably no way this weapon could replace Gauss and PPCs in high-level competitive play, but it could be loads of fun elsewhere.

[FupDup]

Nightshade24, on 12 February 2017 - 04:48 PM, said:

well ER ATM's have a max range over 1000m being the only weapon in MW: O that can deal it's full damage above that. Another thing to consider.

Given that LRMs don't even work well past 600m, I wouldn't bet on a missile weapon in MWO being good at ranges even longer than that.

HE ATMs have a lot of potential and STD ATMs are iffy. ER ATMs will probably stink.

[Gentleman Reaper]

If I can change the homing missile systems:

Streak SRM: Simply get current LRM targeting (semi-active, can miss fast targets).

LRMs: Requires LoS, fire and forget, drastically higher velocity, drastically lower tracking (discouraged to fire at targets moving sideways. Can lock on to Narc, maybe

Semi-active LRM: Like reworked LRM with stronger tracking and better spread, except requires TAG or Narc lock and can be indirect fired.

Streak LRM: Almost exactly like current LRMs, but can't be indirect fired, faster missiles, but not as fast as reworked LRMs.

[Nightshade24]

RestosIII, on 12 February 2017 - 04:59 PM, said:

You're completely forgetting the atrocious ammo-per-ton issue, for one, and the fact that STD and ER both have minimum ranges as well.

And don't talk about ranges of 1,000 meters with a missile system and claim you're ever going to be doing damage at that range like it's a boon. No-one is going to stand out in the open and let missiles hit them at that range, especially when it involves a LoS lock like ATMs will.

Welp 1000m+ combat does occur often on FP/ CW (due to lack of cover) and on maps like Tourmaline, Alpine Peaks, Polar HIghlands, etc... You know the same maps where you see someone, hit someone with your uber quirked moduled gauss rifle of extreme range and you hit someone on the other side of the map and you do not even get more then 1 damage?

Those kind of situations.

Also the Ammo-per-ton issue isn't an issue, most weapons in MW: O haave their ammo inflated because we got double the armour then lore...

AC 2 ammo in TT: 45
AC 2 ammo in MW: O: 75 (66.67% increase)

AC 5 ammo in TT: 20
AC 5 ammo in MW:O: 30 (50% increase)

AC 10 ammo in TT: 10
AC 10 ammo in MW:O: 20 (100% increase)

AC 20 ammo in TT: 5 per tonne
AC 20 ammo in MW: O: 7 per tonne (40% increase)

Gauss Rifle ammo in TT: 8
Gauss Rifle ammo in MW:O: 10 (25% increase)

MG ammo in TT: 200 per tonne
MG ammo in MW: O: 2,000 per tonne (1000% increase!!!)

SRM ammo in TT: 100
SRM ammo in MW:O: 100 (0% increase)

LRM ammo in TT: 120 per tonne
LRM ammo in MW: O: 180 per tonne (50% increase)


Alright... see the trend?

Overall, the trend is that there is an increase in ammo. Excluding MG's and SRM's as outliars, the average is approximately 55.28% increase in ammo from TT. For simplicity stake let's make it 50% like LRM's...

ATM ammo in TT: 60
ATM estimatte ammo in MW: O: 90 (50% increase).

Alright, 90 rounds is enough with HE ammo to deal the potential total damage of
270 damage with HE per Tonne of ammo.
180 damage with STD per Tonne of ammo.
90 Damage with ER per Tonne of ammo.

90 rounds (1 tonne of ammo) is enough to fire a single...
ATM 12 a total of 7 and a half volleys
ATM 9 a total of 10 volleys
ATM 6 a total of 15 volleys
ATM 3 a total of 30 volleys

in comparison LRM's is...

180 rounds (1 tonne of ammo) is enough to fire a single...
LRM 20 a total of 9 volleys
LRM 15 a total of 12 volleys
LRM 10 a total of 18 volley
LRM 5 a total of 36 volleys

The total damage of LRM's per tonne of ammo (assuming all hit) is 180 damage... equal to that of Standard ammo for ATM's, less then HE, and more then ER.

ATM's are slightly behind LRM's, But the damage remains the same with standard while greater with HE. I do not see ATM's being THAT low on ammo especially when compaired with SRM's... and it could be a useful ballancing mechanic due to how 'OP' ATM's feel right now and it'll be quite hurtful in FP, since CLans are the only faction in MW: O with 3 AMS on the same mech and potentially LAMS soon... while IS only got a max of 2... AMS is the direct counter to ATM's.

FupDup, on 12 February 2017 - 05:17 PM, said:

-clip-

HE ATMs have a lot of potential and STD ATMs are iffy. ER ATMs will probably stink.

To each their own. There are people who think gauss rifle is completely useless or ER lasers or ER PPC's because AC 20's, Pulse lasers (and soon heavy) exist. While others love Gauss/ LRM's/ ER lasers/ PPC's.

[Rhent]

Probably Not, on 12 February 2017 - 09:21 AM, said:

How, though?

Unlocked Fire Mode =
-LBX like behavior w/ no locks.
-Can be toggled on or off
-No benefit from TAG, NARC or Artemis

Locked Fire Mode
-Existing behavior.

[Snowbluff]

RestosIII, on 12 February 2017 - 04:06 PM, said:

Please no. The entire point of ATMs is their flexibility. Going with a system like that just makes them an inferior SRM or LRM.

BUt weren't they already an inferior LRM in TT? As I understand it, cLRM didn't have any kind of minimum range.

[Nightshade24]

Snowbluff, on 12 February 2017 - 07:42 PM, said:

BUt weren't they already an inferior LRM in TT? As I understand it, cLRM didn't have any kind of minimum range.

Yes and No.

In TT if we pretend ammo switching wasn't a thing...

HE ATM = no min range, extreme damage per tonne. a Single ATM 12 could wreck a mech that isn't an assault in just 1 fire
Standard ATM = min range, still does more damage then LRM's
ER ATM = larger min range, but larger max range too, Can kill enemy mechs well outside of their max range since LRM's cap out at 1000 and most other weapons require accuracy rolls and even then even the light gauss struggles to reach just as far.

Take ammo switching into account? Switch ammo to standard or HE when they get close and let them suffer...

ATM's virtually nearly wiped Clan LRM's off the face of the earth, nearly every new Clan mech had ATM's or later on Streak LRM's. Only some mechs specifically used LRM's which still has a few advantages but it's like how in TT ER lasers replaced standards: Sure the ER's are hotter and stuff and that's an advantage to standards. But it was still considered a straight upgrade. MW: O instead tries to sidegrade and due to being first person and not TT there are already many things alone that make ATM's "weaker" but also "better..."