230 replies to this topic

[R Valentine]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:18 AM, said:

or be one step in reversing some of the TTK creep.

Huh? An SRM 4 nerf won't touch TTK. 4 x ASRM 6s is still a one shot wrecking ball and still my go to, only now my two builds that used SRM 4s to soften things up for other guns won't be viable, more engaging alternatives. Now all SRM mechs are ASRM 6 mechs.

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:18 AM, said:

and 1 SRM4 is 2 tons, where as 1 SRM6 is 3, with Artemis, it's 4. So yes, the SRM6 IS bigger and heavier than the SRM4. But hey, why keep apples to apples?


and why essentially no one listens to you at all. But hey, why change?

Oh please, you only compare apples that don't actually exist in game. No one takes 1 SRM 4 or 1 SRM 6, hence why I matched them up in numbers that actually matter. But you already knew that, didn't you champ? Hence why you're attempting to pick at technicalities that don't actually construct an argument.

[Bishop Steiner]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 07:29 AM, said:

And the fourth launcher is in the head, so you can only run three with Artemis.

still no takers for the "Make SRM2s Great Again" campaign? How about SSRM2s?

(And seriously, how the frik is PGI going to make IS SSRM4s and SSRM6s remotely worth taking if they continue the same random all over the **** place mechanics?)

[Bud Crue]

What the heck do I do with a Quickdraw 4H, 4G and Victors.
SRM4A fits and is not hindered (as much) by the broken tube counts, while providing a decent rate of fire at the cost of alpha. 6s+A either don't fit (CT mount in the Quickies) or you get staggered fire with regular 6s.

So, yet another nerf to my Quickdraws and an effective nerf to what is one of the worst assaults in the game (even with the extra armor it got in December the Vic is still pretty bad). Yippie?

[Gas Guzzler]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:27 AM, said:

Mostly lots of heatsinks. Those er PPCs in the arms get hot. (OHMAHGURD!!!! Mixed weapons and ranges too! What is this blasphemy!!)

General rule for me, and I have to assume PGI? When Comps thinks it "fine" it probably needs to be dialed back 5% because generally, it's only "perfect" for you guys when it's the clear cut meta choice. (oh damn, he went there!)

You can run whatever you want, but using a non-optimal build to say that non Artemis SRM4s need to be nerfed is kinda.... wrong?

Brawl Timbers are typically quad ASRM6s with cSPLs or I've seen some squeeze an LB20 and quad ASRM4s or ASRM6s, I can't remember.

And SRM4s are "fine" for lights and mechs like the Assassin, because they trade off artemis for running speed/agility, which happens to be more important for low-armor mechs, that's all it is.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 21 March 2017 - 07:42 AM.

[Skoll]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 21 March 2017 - 08:19 AM.
insult, unconstructive, reply-chain removed

[Deathlike]

This nerf is surely a symptom of "we can't have nice things".

Sometimes you wonder this nerf is to make SRM2s look good, but considering it's like IS SSRM2s (useless compared to CSSRM4s/CSSRM6s)... this is what we get.

Obviously Lights and other tonnage limited mechs can't have access to SRM4s that aren't dependent on Artemis. That would be too OP or something.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Deathlike, on 21 March 2017 - 07:33 AM, said:

Sometimes you wonder this nerf is to make SRM2s look good

If they really wanted SRM2s to look good, they would lower the heat profile on them significantly. Which now that I think about it, they really should've brought down the heat on SRM4s with this nerf as a small bit of compensation (since I worry this may have been an overnerf).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 21 March 2017 - 07:36 AM.

[mogs01gt]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:27 AM, said:

Cents aren't "meta" anymore though, apparently (or so I've been told) so that is "irrelevant".

With the way the game is going, its harder and harder to run mechs like Cents and other IS meds that do not have ECM or high mounts.

[Skoll]

Deathlike, on 21 March 2017 - 07:33 AM, said:

This nerf is surely a symptom of "we can't have nice things".

Sometimes you wonder this nerf is to make SRM2s look good, but considering it's like IS SSRM2s (useless compared to CSSRM4s/CSSRM6s)... this is what we get.

Obviously Lights and other tonnage limited mechs can't have access to SRM4s that aren't dependent on Artemis. That would be too OP or something.

Certain mechs can rapid fire SSRM 2s with negligible heat and they're VERY fun in groups. I imagine the only thing that saves those particular gimmick builds is the disdain the playerbase at large has for them.

[Gas Guzzler]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:34 AM, said:

[Redacted]

[Redacted] more just the fact that it removes variety... yet again. That SRM4-LB10 SHD-2D2 didn't need to be nerfed relative to the Griffin, but it got it. The Oxide didn't need to be nerfed relative to the ACH/Locust, but it got it. The Assassin didn't need to be nerfed relative to the Viper, but it got it. Who cares about build variety right? As long as weapons are being nerfed, its all good!

Edited by draiocht, 21 March 2017 - 08:54 AM.
Quote Clean-Up, reference

[Bishop Steiner]

Gas Guzzler, on 21 March 2017 - 07:40 AM, said:

[Redacted] more just the fact that it removes variety... yet again. That SRM4-LB10 SHD-2D2 didn't need to be nerfed relative to the Griffin, but it got it. The Oxide didn't need to be nerfed relative to the ACH/Locust, but it got it. The Assassin didn't need to be nerfed relative to the Viper, but it got it. Who cares about build variety right? As long as weapons are being nerfed, its all good!

What ever floats your boat. My point was made in my first 1-2 posts, and I am still waiting for actual numbers to disprove it. I'll happily admit to being wrong at that point. I certainly didn't ask for SRM4s to be nerfed, I simply don't find it the end of days.

But I do think the patch notes summed it up pretty well:
"SRM Design Notes: When it came to SRM balance within the weapon line, the SRM 4 has always stood out as being 'just a bit better' than the alternatives, provided you had the slots. With better spread and DPS when combined with Artemis, the SRM 4 had always produced mass-concentrated firepower on single components at superior DPS, with vastly superior spread, at only a minor heat cost."

Though perhaps, in fairness, reducing the effectiveness of Artemis itself may have been more optimal? (or at least making artemis weight scale per launcher as it's damn near criminal to use on CLRM5s, SRM2s, etc), but then at a tone per launcher, it might not be worth it. Fun fun.

Edited by draiocht, 21 March 2017 - 08:55 AM.
Quote Clean-Up

[R Valentine]

Bud Crue, on 21 March 2017 - 07:31 AM, said:

What the heck do I do with a Quickdraw 4H, 4G and Victors.
SRM4A fits and is not hindered (as much) by the broken tube counts, while providing a decent rate of fire at the cost of alpha. 6s+A either don't fit (CT mount in the Quickies) or you get staggered fire with regular 6s.

So, yet another nerf to my Quickdraws and an effective nerf to what is one of the worst assaults in the game (even with the extra armor it got in December the Vic is still pretty bad). Yippie?

I used SRM 4s on my Mad Dog backed up with an LB20-X to break up the stale ASRM 6 or S-SRM 6 spam builds, but PGI seems to determined to make us take ASRM 6s and like it. It doesn't change a whole lot, and on the level the ASRM 6 is MDD simpler and better, but a lot less engaging than SRM 4 + LB20-X.

[TercieI]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:31 AM, said:

still no takers for the "Make SRM2s Great Again" campaign? How about SSRM2s?

(And seriously, how the frik is PGI going to make IS SSRM4s and SSRM6s remotely worth taking if they continue the same random all over the **** place mechanics?)

I've been pondering 2s this morning actually and I just got no idea. Naked 6s seem fixable (currently always the wrong choice vs same weight and size A4s), but 2s I got no idea.

And, admitted light pilot bias, screw streaks.

[Gas Guzzler]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:42 AM, said:

What ever floats your boat. My point was made in my first 1-2 posts, and I am still waiting for actual numbers to disprove it. I'll happily admit to being wrong at that point. I certainly didn't ask for SRM4s to be nerfed, I simply don't find it the end of days.

Without data, its easy to see in the forum of mech to mech balance. When two things are relatively even, and one of them gets nerfed, its bad for balance. When one mech is better than another, and the one that is worse gets a nerf, its bad for balance.

Those are simple ways to look at it without data. Regarding the data, I'm pretty sure that aSRM6 spread is a bit tighter, but will need some confirmation.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

I've been pondering 2s this morning actually and I just got no idea. Naked 6s seem fixable (currently always the wrong choice vs same weight and size A4s), but 2s I got no idea.

Well it would certainly help if their heat-damage ratio were similar to SRM6s. Just look at how much lower heat helped AC2s.

Going from 2 heat per trigger pull to 1.333 would be pretty huge. That and maybe lowering their cooldown a little bit more would also help.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 21 March 2017 - 07:50 AM.

[Amsro]

The only reason I run any non Artemis builds is slots.

Only on mechs with multiple single missile slots (head or 2 ct)

Golden Boy would be one of those mechs for example.

Not really bothered by the change overall.

[DrxAbstract]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 March 2017 - 07:18 AM, said:

or be one step in reversing some of the TTK creep.

Not all nerfs result in a net reduction of power creep, especially when it encourages a shift toward builds that possess even lower TTK figures than those receiving the nerf when it affects builds/variants/weapons that aren't even close pushing the boundary of 'acceptable' TTK as players are discouraged from operating increasingly less effective Mechs.

My CPLT-A1 will barely feel it, and admittedly neither will my Jenners, given skill tree speccing recovers the majority of the lost spread... However, this change is a reduction in chassis viability that unfavorably leans toward Lights/Mediums more than other weight classes, so I'm not particularly thrilled that PGI is, once again, making changes that push Lights/Mediums even further down the totem pole regardless of the severity of those changes; Death by a thousand paper cuts is death none the less, but hardly an enjoyable experience and an appropriate analogy for the status of MWO's lighter-tonned elements.

[Amsro]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

I've been pondering 2s this morning actually and I just got no idea. Naked 6s seem fixable (currently always the wrong choice vs same weight and size A4s), but 2s I got no idea.

And, admitted light pilot bias, screw streaks.

Maybe non artemis 2's 4's and 6's could have longer range? 340 meters? Just a random number and idea. Thoughts?

And streaks can be dealt with once SSRM4 and SSRM6 are patched in.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gas Guzzler, on 21 March 2017 - 07:45 AM, said:

Without data, its easy to see in the forum of mech to mech balance. When two things are relatively even, and one of them gets nerfed, its bad for balance. When one mech is better than another, and the one that is worse gets a nerf, its bad for balance.

Those are simple ways to look at it without data. Regarding the data, I'm pretty sure that aSRM6 spread is a bit tighter, but will need some confirmation.

without data, it's also relatively easy, even for competitive tier players, to have confirmation bias run rampant, too. That's why I prefer raw data, when available.

And then compare the totality of variables, RoF, Heat, Spread, etc, along with comparative tonnage and crits, number of hardpoints (which the last, number of hardpoints, is probably one of the biggest difficulties to measure, since what is "fine" with say...4 hardpoints, can be OP as hell, with oh...8-9, even with the lovely GH ... since so many builds are indeed built around dumping alphas and running, instead of sustainability of fire).

*shrugs* Call me old fashioned.

[R Valentine]

TercieI, on 21 March 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

I've been pondering 2s this morning actually and I just got no idea. Naked 6s seem fixable (currently always the wrong choice vs same weight and size A4s), but 2s I got no idea.

And, admitted light pilot bias, screw streaks.

WTH are you guys even talking about "make SRM-2s great"? You'd first have to start with "make SRM-2s exist". I don't even see them on my mechlab right now. As far as I'm concerned, SRMs start at 4, soon to be 6 with the new nerfs.