76 replies to this topic

[Snowbluff]

How will this be balanced? If you go 180 missiles like LRMs, that's like 540 damage per ton up close. If you go 100 like SRMs, thats 300 up close. Both of these figures are well above the 200/ton mark.

Are we looking at 60 ammo per ton, then? That's 180 up close, 120 sounds fine for midrange but only 60 at max range.

[Mcgral18]

Probably closer to 80-100 missiles

There's no guarantee that it will deal 3 dam up close. It might even start at 2 until 500M sort of thing.

150ish damage at mid range might be a safe guess. Less than the other missile systems, but in line with Dakka.

[RestosIII]

I just know that if it's below 60, I'll scream.

[Andi Nagasia]

i hope it will be at least 120-140,
having 100 will be ok for the lower 3Damage range, but then no one will use them past 300m,
i think having their ammo between SRMs(100) & LRMs(180) would be best(140Ammo/Ton)

[Cementi]

It will be around 60 +. In TT there is 60 missiles per ton of ammo with the exception of ATM 9's which does not work out so it has 63.

Since LRM's were bumped from 120 to 180 I expect ATM's to get a similar treatment. More than 60 less than 90 as they are significantly better than LRM's they might not get a 50% ammo increase.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I think ATMs will be fielded as if they are SRMs, with the ability to defend yourself at range. So their ammo count will likely be on par with the damage/ton of SRMs or even a little less to balance the utility they offer... Otherwise, nobody would use SRMs...

Edited by Prosperity Park, 16 March 2017 - 09:10 AM.

[Cementi]

Andi Nagasia, on 16 March 2017 - 09:05 AM, said:

i hope it will be at least 120-140,
having 100 will be ok for the lower 3Damage range, but then no one will use them past 300m,
i think having their ammo between SRMs(100) & LRMs(180) would be best(140Ammo/Ton)

Except you are forgetting about their versatility. You will have to pay something for that and I think that is going to be smaller ammo counts. Put the ammo counts that high and no one will use SRM's and LRM's. Heck if they are half as good as I am expecting them to be I wont be bothering with SRM's or LRM's.

[Andi Nagasia]

they could do it by Speed, have 140Ammo,
100Velocity but increases Velocity as it flys,

so going by my ATM Stats,
Range (350(3Dam) / 700(2Dam) / 1050(1Dam) as a base)
Velocity.....200..............400..................600...
perhaps that would work, if not and ammo is less than 100/ton then people will only use it for short range,
at that point why even have all 3 ammo types merged into 1 Damage Profile based on range,

Cementi, on 16 March 2017 - 09:10 AM, said:

Except you are forgetting about their versatility. You will have to pay something for that and I think that is going to be smaller ammo counts. Put the ammo counts that high and no one will use SRM's and LRM's. Heck if they are half as good as I am expecting them to be I wont be bothering with SRM's or LRM's.

then base it on the middle grade Ammo 2Damage or 100Ammo per ton, much like SRMs,
if their damage is any less than that no one will use them over their min Range,

[Pariah Devalis]

Tabletop values put it at 60 rounds per ton. However, both the damage potential relative to other missile systems and the salvos per ton for a basic launcher are terrible if PGI sticks to that. For comparison sake, here are the values if you compare to other missile systems:

LRM

• LRM has 180 missiles per ton
  
• One ton of LRM ammo has 198 damage potential
  
• LRM5 can fire 36 times on one ton of ammo

C-SRM

• SRM has 100 missiles per ton
  
• One ton of SRM ammo has 200 damage potential
  
• SRM2 can fire 50 times on one ton of ammo

IS-SRM

• SRM has 100 missiles per ton
  
• One ton of SRM ammo has 215 damage potential
  
• SRM2 can fire 50 times on one ton of ammo

ATM (If 60 rounds per ton)

• 60 missiles per ton
  
• 180 damage potential but only if everything is fired at close range
  
• 60 damage potential if everything is fired at long range
  
• ATM3 can only get 20 salvos off per ton of ammo

Other values to test would be:






ATM (If 75 rounds per ton)

• 75 missiles per ton
  
• 225 damage potential but only if everything is fired at close range
  
• 75 damage potential if everything is fired at long range
  
• ATM3 can get 25 salvos off per ton of ammo

ATM (If 90 rounds per ton)

• 90 missiles per ton
  
• 270 damage potential but only if everything is fired at close range
  
• 90 damage potential if everything is fired at long range
  
• ATM3 can get 30 salvos off per ton of ammo

Honestly, at that point, I am not sure I would go any higher than that.






The problem with 60/ton is that it becomes exorbitantly expensive in both crits and tonnage to adequately ammo up ATM past ATM6, if you intend to use the weapon as a primary offensive system. Assuming you'd want at least 20 shots available per gun, and probably closer to 25, that makes it 1 ton per ATM3, 2 tons per ATM6, 3 tons per ATM9, and 4 tons per ATM12.

While 12 basically cannot be easily boated, there are several mechs that can fit in 4x ATM9. Each ATM9 is 5 tons and 4 crits, so 20 tons and 16 crits. To get the base 20 salvos off, you are required 12 tons and 12 more crits worth of ammo, for a total of 32 tons and 28 crits, just to use the ATM9 array as a primary weapon system. Excluding heat sinks, or any sort of backup weapon system. Even then, at only 20 salvos, you'd be struggling to make it through a game with any ammo left.

I know what the popular responses are, "that you are paying for flexibility." Except it isn't, ton for ton and crit for crit, more efficient damage than SRM in a brawl or LRM at long range, as is. On top of that, you are already paying for that flexibility in that the weapon systems themselves are heavier and bulkier than the alternatives. Just because it has Artemis integrated into it does not mean you are forced to compare it to A-LRM or A-SRM, as that remains an option to select for those other weapon systems, but forced on the ATM.

At 60/ton, there would be no reason to use the ATM for long range, as the ammo is too scarce to waste on 1-damage shots. It would be extremely poor use of your ammunition, and defeat the entire purpose of a multi-tool missile launcher if it was just not worth the waste of ammo to utilize it across all range brackets. Especially, as in MWO, armor values are doubled.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 16 March 2017 - 09:25 AM.

[Cementi]

If people do not want to use them at the other ranges that is their choice.

It can't have the same ammo per ton as SRM's as no one would use them then. Still think that might happen as the tube counts are bigger than SRM's can field. This game is all about the alpha.

I know alot of people point out damage per ton for ammo. And its not a bad idea. Using SRM's as a baseline then LRM's should go up to 200 and ATM's would be about 66 or 67 then.

The only real way to get what you want would be them to code ammo switching and since LB's still cannot do that it will not happen.

So I would expect ATM's to be in the 60 to 70 rounds per ton. Anymore than that and they become straight upgrades over SRM's and LRM's which they are allready in danger of doing.

Right forgot LRM's do not actually do 1 damage.

[MechaBattler]

I'm leaning toward Cementi's guess. Probably 90.

Seems to me like ATMs would obsolete everything without some downsides. Frankly I'm jealous as an IS player.

[Andi Nagasia]

i still think they should be based off SRMs @100Ammo/Ton(200Dam/Ton)
baseing it off the middle ground of the middle missile, lets look at this like this,

SSRM6 = 3-4.5Tons & 2Dam/Missile @ 270Range(100Ammo/Ton(200Dam/Ton)
ATM6 = 3.5Tons & 3Dam/Missile @ 270Range(assuming 30m/Hex) OR 360Range(assuming 40m/Hex)
ATM6 = 3.5Tons & 2Dam/Missile @ 540Range(assuming 30m/Hex) OR 720Range(assuming 40m/Hex)
ATM6 = 3.5Tons & 1Dam/Missile @ 810Range(assuming 30m/Hex) OR 1080Range(assuming 40m/Hex)
LRM10 = 3.5Tons & 1Dam/Missile @ 1000Range(180Ammo/Ton(180Dam/Ton)

i feel it would be better if ATM have 100Ammo/Ton, and use Velocity and Spread to Balance it,
(if the Missiles are going 160(LRMSpeed) it will be hard to hit Light/Medium targets with all your Missiles (LRM spread)

[WarHippy]

MechaBattler, on 16 March 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

I'm leaning toward Cementi's guess. Probably 90.

Seems to me like ATMs would obsolete everything without some downsides. Frankly I'm jealous as an IS player.

I'm assuming ATMs will be guided lock on type weapons like LRMs, and if that is the case they will not replace SRMs as they are point and click weapons. SRMs will remain the better brawling weapon even with less damage than ATMs.

120 per ton seems reasonable to me.

Edited by WarHippy, 16 March 2017 - 09:34 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

Andi Nagasia, on 16 March 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

i still think they should be based off SRMs @100Ammo/Ton(200Dam/Ton)
baseing it off the middle ground of the middle missile, lets look at this like this,

SSRM6 = 3-4.5Tons & 2Dam/Missile @ 270Range(100Ammo/Ton(200Dam/Ton)
ATM6 = 3.5Tons & 3Dam/Missile @ 270Range(assuming 30m/Hex) OR 360Range(assuming 40m/Hex)
ATM6 = 3.5Tons & 2Dam/Missile @ 540Range(assuming 30m/Hex) OR 720Range(assuming 40m/Hex)
ATM6 = 3.5Tons & 1Dam/Missile @ 810Range(assuming 30m/Hex) OR 1080Range(assuming 40m/Hex)
LRM10 = 3.5Tons & 1Dam/Missile @ 1000Range(180Ammo/Ton(180Dam/Ton)

i feel it would be better if ATM have 100Ammo/Ton, and use Velocity and Spread to Balance it,
(if the Missiles are going 160(LRMSpeed) it will be hard to hit Light/Medium targets with all your Missiles (LRM spread)

I'd cut it back to 90 instead of 100, just for even ammo consumption.

[Koniving]

Snowbluff, on 16 March 2017 - 08:41 AM, said:

How will this be balanced? If you go 180 missiles like LRMs, that's like 540 damage per ton up close. If you go 100 like SRMs, thats 300 up close. Both of these figures are well above the 200/ton mark.

Are we looking at 60 ammo per ton, then? That's 180 up close, 120 sounds fine for midrange but only 60 at max range.

Stock is 60 per ton.
PGI kept stock for SRMs at 100.
PGI changed stock for LRMs from 120 to 180.

I think PGI might shoot for 80.
Though if PGI ramped down LRMs back to 120 per ton, perhaps they could improve LRM quality and effectiveness to be less of a throwaway and something more likely to hit.

[Andi Nagasia]

MechaBattler, on 16 March 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

I'm leaning toward Cementi's guess. Probably 90.

Seems to me like ATMs would obsolete everything without some downsides. Frankly I'm jealous as an IS player.

Trade? ill give you 600ATMs 200 of each Type, in return i want 600NewPPCs 200LPPC 200SNPPC & 200HPPC,
our friends at Diamond Shark will handle the transaction, @RestosIII do you have the Paperwork ready?

[cazidin]

Expect 1-1.5x TT values.

[Pariah Devalis]

WarHippy, on 16 March 2017 - 09:33 AM, said:

I'm assuming ATMs will be guided lock on type weapons like LRMs, and if that is the case they will not replace SRMs as they are point and click weapons. SRMs will remain the better brawling weapon even with less damage than ATMs.

120 per ton seems reasonable to me.

I'm actually curious. Will it function like dumbfired SRM but with Artemis clustering? That would be extremely difficult to use at long range, but absolutely lethal up close. Will it function like SSRM, and randomly going to mech bones, and, as a result, spreading absolutely everywhere on targets you fire upon? That would kinda suck, honestly, and also mean the missiles cannot be blind fired on an unlocked target. Will they function like LRMs (though with a flatter trajectory)? Out of the options, I actually prefer this one, as with Artemis, they will attempt to seek center mass when you have LOS on the target.

However, I think 90/ton ammo is a sweet spot. I'd be concerned about eroding its sacrifices for flexibility if we went to 105 or 120 rounds per ton.

[MechaBattler]

Andi Nagasia, if only we had an actual player driven economy. That would be sooo good. But sooo effed by balance changes. Still it would be fun to buy and sell gear.

[WarHippy]

Pariah Devalis, on 16 March 2017 - 09:42 AM, said:

I'm actually curious. Will it function like dumbfired SRM but with Artemis clustering? That would be extremely difficult to use at long range, but absolutely lethal up close. Will it function like SSRM, and randomly going to mech bones, and, as a result, spreading absolutely everywhere on targets you fire upon? That would kinda suck, honestly, and also mean the missiles cannot be blind fired on an unlocked target. Will they function like LRMs (though with a flatter trajectory)? Out of the options, I actually prefer this one, as with Artemis, they will attempt to seek center mass when you have LOS on the target.

However, I think 90/ton ammo is a sweet spot. I'd be concerned about eroding its sacrifices for flexibility if we went to 105 or 120 rounds per ton.

Yeah, the question on how they work is certainly going to be the biggest factor. Like you said if they work like SRMs they will be hard to use at range, but 90 per ton would probably be sufficient given how lethal they would be at shorter ranges. However, I don't see that happening. If they go the SSRM route I will be very disappointed. I hope they go with more of a LRM mechanic on them, but I fear 90 per ton would be a little too limiting depending on the circumstances.