40 replies to this topic

[Karl Streiger]

drifter bob, on 04 May 2017 - 12:50 AM, said:

could we do this for lbx?

because of fasanomics the IS AC10 can be removed in the same moment.

but i really would like this stuff for LRMs. either indirect or direct fire.
in the first option you are the supporter you are supposed to be - NARC and TAG is needed and the spotter get the dammage and you get a "thx" (opposite to now)

the other grant you some improved direct fire option - that trade pinpoint damage for more total damage and a lighter weight weapon

[Pariah Devalis]

I am not particularly happy about the idea of a minimum range, but if there is to be one it shouldn't be beyond, say, 90 meters.

The reason why is that in a dedicated brawling role, SRMs will beat out ATMs every day of the week out of shear aimability, and tonnage to damage ratio - plus, depending on how PGI scales the ammo/ton, the damage per ton of ammo might be worse as well. In a dedicated long range role, LRMs will beat out ATMs, both due to damage per ton, lack of indirect fire, and how horribly inefficient they are with damage per ton of ammo at long range. Mid range will make them solid weapons, however, as will the flexibility of not being totally screwed on a map that favors one specific range bracket more than any others.

However, they're designed to be flexible. To be usable over multiple ranges. Effectively, in table top, most mechs that came with ATM standard had at least three tons of ammo per launcher so they could freely toggle the ammo type for any given range. In essence, the damage scaled based on the range to target, which is what PGI is doing. Except sidestepping the ammo switching problem. Hell, I think the most ammo starved ATM mechs still had two ammo types per launcher equipped, specifically to maintain that flexibility, albeit in a more limited capacity.

There is no good reason to limit ATM's capabilities by forcing the player to select one, and only one, ammo type. That actually flies in the face of the very purpose of ATMs. That purpose being a multi-range capable missile launcher system that can function at multiple ranges in the same battle. Locking ammo types denies this capability entirely.

You're basically looking for a solution to a non-existent problem.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 04 May 2017 - 05:48 AM.

[CK16]

Can't say I agree with this, point of ATM is flexibility. MW4 Mektek did it wrong and just please we don't want thay single , ncher type locked :/

I like the damage fall off idea and implementation.

[Snowbluff]

Since they might have a minimum range and ramp down, they can ignore the 3 damage as far as ammo is concerned. Maybe 100 missile/ton?

[Pariah Devalis]

Snowbluff, on 04 May 2017 - 05:38 AM, said:

Since they might have a minimum range and ramp down, they can ignore the 3 damage as far as ammo is concerned. Maybe 100 missile/ton?

Possible. I'd prefer 90 or 120, though, so it is divisible by 3 and syncs with the ATM3 launcher easier. Still, though. I don't think a minimum range is necessary with it just due to how bulky the suckers are.

[Khobai]

Quote

I am not particularly happy about the idea of a minimum range, but if there is to be one it shouldn't be beyond, say, 90 meters.

they should have no min range at all or theyll basically be useless.

a much better way to limit ATMs so theyre not as good as SRMs at close range is to give them a longer cooldown.

[Mcgral18]

Khobai, on 04 May 2017 - 08:52 AM, said:

they should have no min range at all or theyll basically be useless.

a much better way to limit ATMs so theyre not as good as SRMs at close range is to give them a longer cooldown.

And Stream fire, to require facetime

[Khobai]

Quote

And Stream fire, to require facetime

dont think thats necessary with the lower missile count

[Zigmund Freud]

Andi Nagasia, on 03 May 2017 - 09:17 PM, said:

but this will also lead to much more Diversity with ATMs which isnt intended with it in Lore,
this also makes it hard to balance, as how do you make 3 damage less powerful at short range,
wail also making 1damage at long range viable, this is the problem making it all 1 ammo type makes,

Imagine it as like you are having 3 types on ammo in your mech, and depending on how far you are aming, the launcher automatically throw in the right type of ammo.

[1453 R]

Are they really keeping that awful 120m min range from tabletop that made no god damn sense when LR-GODDAMN-Ms can hot load out of Clan launchers?

Sadness...

EDIT: Also, Andi? your idea is bad and you should feel bad. No making ATMs into crappy versions of existing launchers!

Edited by 1453 R, 04 May 2017 - 01:44 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

im just worried that it will get nerfed initially, which will hurt the system more so than other weapon Systems,
1) its a Missile weapon(many dont care to ever see Missile weapons becoming Viable)
2) its a Clan Weapon(Many feel Clan OP and any weapon with the C before it has to be Nerfed)
3) its amazing in some instances(so it shouldnt be buffed as to make it better in those instances)

[Khobai]

And Ive already explained what needs to happen for ATMs to not suck...

1) ECM stealth and super stealth bubble needs to be completely removed (only stealth armor should grant stealth, and stealth armor should be available to both IS and Clan)

2) no min range, instead balance ATMs around longer cooldowns so they dont outdps SRMs

3) increased health per missile so they dont get chewed up by AMS

[Andi Nagasia]

@Khobai
i would agree with the 2nd-3rd,
but for the first i think thats more of we need a rework of the ECM&Targeting Mechanics,

PGI said in their live Stream that with New Weapons all old weapons would get a face lift,
this in both how they look(Models) as well as how they Sound(Audio) which would be great,
im hoping PGI does a Targeting / Missile / ECM / LOS rework soon after New Tech,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 04 May 2017 - 02:50 PM.

[Khobai]

we need complete 100% removal of ECM stealth and stealth bubble or ATMs will be dead on arrival.

Quote

PGI said in their live Stream that with New Weapons all old weapons would get a face lift,
this in both how they look(Models) as well as how they Sound(Audio) which would be great,

Except it sounds like theyre doing nothing about ECM stealth and instead just making stealth armor a super form of ECM stealth. Thats unacceptable.

I have to think if there were plans to radically change ECM we wouldve heard about it by now too. So it sounds like PGI is just continuing to ignore the ECM elephant in the room like they always have.

Edited by Khobai, 04 May 2017 - 02:51 PM.

[Tincan Nightmare]

Zigmund Freud, on 04 May 2017 - 01:28 PM, said:

Imagine it as like you are having 3 types on ammo in your mech, and depending on how far you are aming, the launcher automatically throw in the right type of ammo.

I like this idea, Carry the different types of ammo, and the ATM fires which one based on the targets range. 270 or less it fires an HE round, 270 to 550 it fires a standard round, and 550 plus it shoots an extended range round. If a target is at 270 or less and no HE ammo is carried (or is out) it then fires standard (but maybe with a minimum range) if available or ER if that is all it has. Since it's a lock on weapon, it will always have the targets range, so this could work. Even more, you could tailor how you want the system to work by which ammo you choose to stock (like going all HE to brawl, or carrying nothing but ER to harass with).

What's better is that they could also use the same mechanic on the MML launchers for the IS down the road, since their sole reason to exist is ammo swapping.

Also, since ATM has a higher tonnage cost per tube count then LRM's, maybe the could make them fire all at once like IS LRM's instead of the current stream fire of Clan LRM's.

[The6thMessenger]

They shouldn't add minimum range on the ATMs. I get that Standard and Extended range has it, but not HE rounds, and combining round functionality into a single type of ammunition, i thought that was the point.

[Zigmund Freud]

Khobai, on 04 May 2017 - 02:44 PM, said:

3) increased health per missile so they dont get chewed up by AMS

Don't think so, AMS are not that effective now, and you don't see them too often. I'm not sure, but in top tier tryhard units they probably never use any AMS at all.

[Khobai]

Quote

Don't think so, AMS are not that effective now, and you don't see them too often. I'm not sure, but in top tier tryhard units they probably never use any AMS at all.

huh? AMS completely shreds LRM5s and LRM10s. And ATMs are in the 3-12 missile range.

top tier units dont use AMS because no one uses LRMs in top tier play. Its got nothing to do with AMS being bad and more to do with the fact its not needed because LRMs simply arnt used. Because ECM hard counters missiles so effectively.

Edited by Khobai, 05 May 2017 - 12:44 AM.

[Willard Phule]

Nobody seems to realize that that any form of swappable ammo is an impossibility. We're STILL waiting for slug ammo for LBX so they can get rid of that ridiculous "Clan AC" placeholder.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

I just hope the damages aren't so starkly different. 3 damage at short range gives them strong potential to be better than SRMs (depending on how they track/lock) while 1 damage at LRM range makes them pretty worthless outside of that. It would probably be better if they maxed out at 2.5 per missile and did 1.5 damage at extended range. Provided they don't add stupid min range to this for whatever stupid reason.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 May 2017 - 07:29 AM.