230 replies to this topic

[R Valentine]

To deserve a nerf? As an IS pilot, I only use SRM 4 if I can fit at least 6 of them, and even then only if I'm taking another weapon as a finisher. The whole point of them is that they're just tight enough to not make Artemis mandatory, but not so tight as to be able to finish off a mech with SRM 4s alone. I'd almost always take 4 x ASRM 6 over 6 x SRM 4 if I could afford the weight, since 6 x ASRM 4 is way too heavy, but on some mechs that extra weight Artemis tags on to the SRM 6 pack gimps your ammo stores, hence the SRM 4 sans Artemis option. So which mechs were so OP with non-Artemis SRM 4s that caused it to get the nerf bat? Why take SRM 4 over SRM 6 + Artemis now? The spread nerf was pretty significant, so it's questionable if I can even get all missiles on target, let alone in the general area I point them at.

[TercieI]

It gave light mechs a non energy option.

Can't have effective light mechs.

[DrxAbstract]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 05:33 AM, said:

It gave light mechs a non energy option.

Can't have effective light mechs.

The Javelin isnt even out yet and it's getting SRMs nerfed.

[R Valentine]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 05:33 AM, said:

It gave light mechs a non energy option.

Can't have effective light mechs.

I just hate that the SRM 4 was the only decent Non-Artemis option, but now PGI wants to force everyone into taking Artemis no matter what SRM pack you take. Even the Clan SRM 4 was usable assuming you had another pin-point gun to hammer home the soft spots you created. The SRM 4 alone is horrible at finishing off enemies. Now it won't even be viable at all. May as well just only take SRM 6 + Artemis. The ASRM 4 is heavier per 12 and hotter, which makes it all but useless.

[Morggo]

I don't know, watching Sean's Assassin preview matches last night the 4xSRM4 still appeared to be plenty effective.

[TercieI]

DrxAbstract, on 21 March 2017 - 05:39 AM, said:

The Javelin isnt even out yet and it's getting SRMs nerfed.

Right? Or the Oxide so offended that months dead they feel the need to piss on its grave.

Kiran Yagami, on 21 March 2017 - 05:43 AM, said:

I just hate that the SRM 4 was the only decent Non-Artemis option, but now PGI wants to force everyone into taking Artemis no matter what SRM pack you take. Even the Clan SRM 4 was usable assuming you had another pin-point gun to hammer home the soft spots you created. The SRM 4 alone is horrible at finishing off enemies. Now it won't even be viable at all. May as well just only take SRM 6 + Artemis. The ASRM 4 is heavier per 12 and hotter, which makes it all but useless.

Pretty much this. The 4 was good, the A4 was better if you could afford it. That's how it should be, but instead they're making it more like the 6, which is useless and you have to upgrade to the A6 to be usable. SMH.

[R Valentine]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 05:47 AM, said:

Right? Or the Oxide so offended that months dead they feel the need to piss on its grave.



Pretty much this. The 4 was good, the A4 was better if you could afford it. That's how it should be, but instead they're making it more like the 6, which is useless and you have to upgrade to the A6 to be usable. SMH.

If light mechs with ASRM 4s were the problem, then why not just nerf ASRM 4? Leave the poor sans Artemis SRM 4 alone. Like I said, the spread wasn't tight enough to reliably finish off any enemy that wasn't only carrying a center torso. It was just good at softening up spots for your other guns. Now it's debatable if all your missiles will hit the target, and forget about clan.

[Bishop Steiner]

Kiran Yagami, on 21 March 2017 - 05:32 AM, said:

To deserve a nerf? As an IS pilot, I only use SRM 4 if I can fit at least 6 of them, and even then only if I'm taking another weapon as a finisher. The whole point of them is that they're just tight enough to not make Artemis mandatory, but not so tight as to be able to finish off a mech with SRM 4s alone. I'd almost always take 4 x ASRM 6 over 6 x SRM 4 if I could afford the weight, since 6 x ASRM 4 is way too heavy, but on some mechs that extra weight Artemis tags on to the SRM 6 pack gimps your ammo stores, hence the SRM 4 sans Artemis option. So which mechs were so OP with non-Artemis SRM 4s that caused it to get the nerf bat? Why take SRM 4 over SRM 6 + Artemis now? The spread nerf was pretty significant, so it's questionable if I can even get all missiles on target, let alone in the general area I point them at.

Think about what you just said, and there is your answer.....

"Why take an SRM4 over an SRM6+Artemis now"

OK....so why should I take a 2 ton, 1 crit, 3 second cooldown SRM rack over a 4 ton, 3 crit, 4 second cooldown one?

The fact that one is taking the half weight, quicker RoF Launcher over the other should say it all. I love the SRM4, because it (until today) grouped TAF, which always led me to ask "why take an aSRM6 instead of my SRM4" question, since the SRM4 put up less impressive damage stats, but focused better than the aSRM6 and thus killed things better.

The simple fact that the SRM4 was as, or potentially more effective that a Launcher twice it's mass, and 3x it's size, is exactly why it finally is getting nerfed. No "Lights can't have nice things". It's simple balance.

Ditto the LRM5.

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 05:47 AM, said:

you have to upgrade to the A6 to be usable. SMH.

Hyperbole much?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 21 March 2017 - 05:52 AM.

[TercieI]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 05:52 AM, said:

Think about what you just said, and there is your answer.....

"Why take an SRM4 over an SRM6+Artemis now"

OK....so why should I take a 2 ton, 1 crit, 3 second cooldown SRM rack over a 4 ton, 3 crit, 4 second cooldown one?

The fact that one is taking the half weight, quicker RoF Launcher over the other should say it all. I love the SRM4, because it (until today) grouped TAF, which always led me to ask "why take an aSRM6 instead of my SRM4" question, since the SRM4 put up less impressive damage stats, but focused better than the aSRM6 and thus killed things better.

The simple fact that the SRM4 was as or potentially more effective that a Launcher twice it's mass, and 3x it's size, is exactly why it finally is getting nerfed. No "Lights can't have nice things". It's simple balance.

Ditto the LRM5.


Hyperbole much?

But it's not like it was a dominant weapon, especially on bigger mechs. Probably a small buff to the 6s was called for instead (especially the hot garbage non-Artemis 6).

[Skoll]

Because PGI hates brawling and by extension hates fun, OP. Are you new here?

[Bishop Steiner]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 05:53 AM, said:

But it's not like it was a dominant weapon, especially on bigger mechs. Probably a small buff to the 6s was called for instead (especially the hot garbage non-Artemis 6).

buff buff, always buff, and soon things get out of hand. Would it have been the better option? Debatable, though certainly possible. Net result is they apparently want you to invest in Artemis on SRM4s also, instead of it being a "why"? which tbh, it currently is. Artemis has been a luxury on SRM4s for quite some time, and with Splat regaining some popularity, it's being addressed.

IMO it could have gone either way, for achieving the result, but I'd actually like to see a little less effectiveness, but that's across the board, not just SRMs. I definitely feel nerf was the correct direction to go on LRM5s, as boating LRM5s was quite literally the best way to LRM, by a large margin, which is outright stupid.

But it does lead back to the SRM4... the more you invest in a rack, the more effective it should be. There needs to be a gap between SRM4s and Artemis 6s, performance wise. The aSRM6 should be the most desirable rack, the SRM2, the least. MWO has long had it backwards, where you usually took the larger rack only if hardpoints were limited, or you really liked the gaudy, but less efficient damage numbers. The Smaller racks should always be choices of necessity based on tonnage constraints, not because it's actually better.

I should WANT to run 4x aSRM6 on my Orion VA, Huntsman, etc. Both mass SRM4s. (I love splat builds, and run them quite a lot, I should note).

Would I personally like aSRM6 to be even better? Yes..because I play SRMs a LOT, and so naturally want my preferred weapon to be really good. But do I want to see TTKs get reduced even more? No. No I don't. And so there is my conundrum. It might not be "best for me", but I am willing to bet it's the better option for "global balance".

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 21 March 2017 - 06:08 AM.

[R Valentine]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 05:52 AM, said:

Think about what you just said, and there is your answer.....

"Why take an SRM4 over an SRM6+Artemis now"

OK....so why should I take a 2 ton, 1 crit, 3 second cooldown SRM rack over a 4 ton, 3 crit, 4 second cooldown one?

The fact that one is taking the half weight, quicker RoF Launcher over the other should say it all. I love the SRM4, because it (until today) grouped TAF, which always led me to ask "why take an aSRM6 instead of my SRM4" question, since the SRM4 put up less impressive damage stats, but focused better than the aSRM6 and thus killed things better.

The simple fact that the SRM4 was as, or potentially more effective that a Launcher twice it's mass, and 3x it's size, is exactly why it finally is getting nerfed. No "Lights can't have nice things". It's simple balance.

Ditto the LRM5.

Yea sure, if you only take 1 SRM 4. But no one takes just 1 SRM pack. You take at least 3, and then only if you only have 3 missile hard points. I've never used less than 4 SRM packs, and at 4, the ASRM 6 is lighter and cooler than 6 x ASRM 4. That's 2 tons that could be ammo, and actually more like 4 tons because that's 2 heat sinks you don't have to take. SRM 4s are only better than SRM 6s without Artemis because the spread is tight enough to be usable, but not enough to reliably take out components. You still need another weapon to thread the needle. Now, there's almost no point in taking SRM 4s at all. As I just said, once you add Artemis SRM 6s are actually lighter.

[Bishop Steiner]

Kiran Yagami, on 21 March 2017 - 06:08 AM, said:

Yea sure, if you only take 1 SRM 4. But no one takes just 1 SRM pack. You take at least 3, and then only if you only have 3 missile hard points. I've never used less than 4 SRM packs, and at 4, the ASRM 6 is lighter and cooler than 6 x ASRM 4. That's 2 tons that could be ammo, and actually more like 4 tons because that's 2 heat sinks you don't have to take. SRM 4s are only better than SRM 6s without Artemis because the spread is tight enough to be usable, but not enough to reliably take out components. You still need another weapon to thread the needle. Now, there's almost no point in taking SRM 4s at all. As I just said, once you add Artemis SRM 6s are actually lighter.

So...OMG..they are trying reduce the amount of alpha damage out there.... END OF DAYS!

So basically.. you are saying... because... multiple hard points... SRM4s should be better than a launcher twice it's weight and 3x it's size? I've heard it said that before one posts something, they should say it aout loud several times, to see if it sounds ridiculous. You might want to try that.

"My SRM4 should be better than a missile rack twice it's mass, and 3x it's size, because I like to boat missiles".

[TercieI]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 06:06 AM, said:

buff buff, always buff, and soon things get out of hand. Would it have been the better option? Debatable, though certainly possible. Net result is they apparently want you to invest in Artemis on SRM4s also, instead of it being a "why"? which tbh, it currently is. Artemis has been a luxury on SRM4s for quite some time, and with Splat regaining some popularity, it's being addressed.

IMO it could have gone either way, for achieving the result, but I'd actually like to see a little less effectiveness, but that's across the board, not just SRMs. I definitely feel nerf was the correct direction to go on LRM5s, as boating LRM5s was quite literally the best way to LRM, by a large margin, which is outright stupid.

But it does lead back to the SRM4... the more you invest in a rack, the more effective it should be. There needs to be a gap between SRM4s and Artemis 6s, performance wise. The aSRM6 should be the most desirable rack, the SRM2, the least. MWO has long had it backwards, where you usually took the larger rack only if hardpoints were limited, or you really liked the gaudy, but less efficient damage numbers. The Smaller racks should always be choices of necessity based on tonnage constraints, not because it's actually better.

I should WANT to run 4x aSRM6 on my Orion VA, Huntsman, etc. Both mass SRM4s. (I love splat builds, and run them quite a lot, I should note).

Would I personally like aSRM6 to be even better? Yes..because I play SRMs a LOT, and so naturally want my preferred weapon to be really good. But do I want to see TTKs get reduced even more? No. No I don't. And so there is my conundrum. It might not be "best for me", but I am willing to bet it's the better option for "global balance".

SRMs are nowhere near out of hand, though. The simple fact is that the mechs that really use the SRM4 don't have the weight to use anything bigger. The ideal would be to have the SRM4 appeal to the small mechs that can use it, the ASRM4 enough of an improvement to be desirable (as now on the GRF-3M) and the 6 and A6 to be a debate on heavier mechs that can use them. Instead, they have (again) made it so the launcher that works on small mechs is just worse, hopefully not quite joining the Vanilla 6 in the unusable pile.

Edited by TercieI, 21 March 2017 - 06:14 AM.

[The Lighthouse]

SRM4 are mostly used by lights.

And we all know PGI probably still think light mechs are overpowered.

So here we are with another nerf to light mechs.

[Bishop Steiner]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 06:12 AM, said:

SRMs are nowhere near out of hand, though. The simple fact is that the mechs that really use the SRM4 don't have the weight to use anything bigger. The ideal would be to have the SRM4 appeal to the small mechs that can use it, the ASRM4 enough of an improvement to be desirable (as now on the GRF-3M) and the 6 and A6 to be a debate on heavier mechs that can use them. Instead, they have (again) made it so the launcher that works on small mechs is just worse, hopefully not quite joining the Vanilla 6 in the unusable pile.

And how to achieve this wonderland you post?

Do the effectiveness of SRMs scale based on the mass of the mech using it?

A debate for a heavy to choose aSRM6 over a std SRM4? REALLY? It should be no debate that a heavy would want the aSRM6.

The Lighthouse, on 21 March 2017 - 06:16 AM, said:

SRM4 are mostly used by lights.

And we all know PGI probably still think light mechs are overpowered.

So here we are with another nerf to light mechs.

Lolwut? Yeah guess those Hunstmans, Splatcrows and Griffinbombs are figments of my imagination then, ESPECIALLY in Scout mode.

[TercieI]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 06:19 AM, said:

A debate for a heavy to choose aSRM6 over a std SRM4? REALLY? It should be no debate that a heavy would want the aSRM6.

I completely agree, you're conflating me with another poster.

From where we are, if a change is needed, the 6 needs to improve and the A6 improve a touch less, I suppose. Honestly, I think they're all decent where they are. Good players uses A6s on their fat brawlers, A4s or A6s on mediums and 4s on lights and pseudo lights. Seems good to me, so why a nerf or buff at all?

[Skoll]

A Griffin using SRM 4s over ASRM 6s is a bad Griffin.

[R Valentine]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 06:12 AM, said:

So...OMG..they are trying reduce the amount of alpha damage out there.... END OF DAYS!

So basically.. you are saying... because... multiple hard points... SRM4s should be better than a launcher twice it's weight and 3x it's size? I've heard it said that before one posts something, they should say it aout loud several times, to see if it sounds ridiculous. You might want to try that.

"My SRM4 should be better than a missile rack twice it's mass, and 3x it's size, because I like to boat missiles".

You hear, but you don't listen. The SRM 4 is only better than the 6 without Artemis. With Artemis the 6 is hands down better. It's lighter and cooler, and I don't care at all about "the deeps" because SRMs are all about the alpha. It doesn't matter what your opinion on TTK is, nerfing SRM 4s doesn't really change that. It just makes SRM 4s unusable. I'll still just pack the ASRM 6's like I always have, only now the 2 mechs(yes, a whole 2) that I did use SRM 4s on I won't use them on anymore. I'll just use ASRM 6. The SRM 4 has no place.

3 x SRM 4 and 2 x SRM 6 weigh the same and do the same alpha, but SRM 4 groups are tighter. Disadvantage: 3 x SRM 4 generates more heat. That's a give and take, but still gives the SRM 4 a place.

Add on Artemis and now the ASRM 6 is tight enough that the only thing the ASRM 4 does is add more heat. Spread advantage has been neutralized. Not to mention 3 x ASRM 4 is also heavier. There's no contest here. ASRM 6 is straight better.

So if you destroy what made the SRM 4 better than the 6 without Artemis then the SRM 4 becomes obsolete altogether. A few extra "deeps" here and there won't save it. ASRM 6s are already better than ASRM 4s, so nothing's really changed there.

[The Lighthouse]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 06:19 AM, said:

Lolwut? Yeah guess those Hunstmans, Splatcrows and Griffinbombs are figments of my imagination then, ESPECIALLY in Scout mode.

Why do you use non-Artemis version of SRMs on medium mechs? As someone already said, you are doing something wrong if you do not use 4 ASRM6 on Griffin for example.

non-Artemis SRM4 are mostly used by light mechs due to weight restriction, not so much for medium mechs.


(PLUS: you can no longer bring Stormcrows to Scouting.)