677 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

MischiefSC, on 01 July 2017 - 04:45 PM, said:

No no imum but damage falloff inside 120m, faster speed, higher health.

I could get behind that. Even if I feel the easiest solution is only no minimum, I could easily see this as a half way agreement. Covers everything I think people wanted. Removes the hard minimum range, faster velocity, and more resistance to AMS from increase health and velocity. A good solid middle ground and addresses the fear of ATMs taking over the role of (S)SRMs.

[Andi Nagasia]

Tesunie, on 01 July 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

Someone else earlier in this thread (I believe) was complaining that LAMS against ATM/LRM tests had the triple LAMS Nova shutting down constantly (or against LRMs it did).

Edit: As a note, AMS effectiveness does depend upon the position in relation to the path of the missiles. If they are the target, it is less effective. If the missile path is going clean over the mech, than it will take out even more missiles. Just as a note and something many people don't consider.

yup, well as i said vs Volley fire(giving LasAMS time to cool inbetween shots) it was slow to over heat,
when stream fire or with allot of missiles around my Nova got really hot much much quicker,

now if you shut down due to LasAMS, and dont shut off your LasAMS, when turning back on,
you can end up quicky shutting off again, as unlike stealth armor LasAMS doesnt deactivate when over heating,
so in this case it can lead to heat stun locking if the LasAMS player isnt paying attention,

[Deathpig]

Andi Nagasia, on 01 July 2017 - 04:52 PM, said:

yup, well as i said vs Volley fire(giving LasAMS time to cool inbetween shots) it was slow to over heat,
when stream fire or with allot of missiles around my Nova got really hot much much quicker,

now if you shut down due to LasAMS, and dont shut off your LasAMS, when turning back on,
you can end up quicky shutting off again, as unlike stealth armor LasAMS doesnt deactivate when over heating,
so in this case it can lead to heat stun locking if the LasAMS player isnt paying attention,

If LAMS becomes popular, every build will have an LRM-5 on it just to cause overheat.

[Tesunie]

Deathpig, on 01 July 2017 - 05:00 PM, said:

If LAMS becomes popular, every build will have an LRM-5 on it just to cause overheat.

I'd be tempted to do that...

[Andi Nagasia]

Deathpig, on 01 July 2017 - 05:00 PM, said:

If LAMS becomes popular, every build will have an LRM-5 on it just to cause overheat.

if LasAMS becomes Popular and everyone only takes one it will take a LOT of Missiles to over heat a group,
1 LasAMS wont really over heat you, and if 6mechs take 1 then its a powerful Anti Missile Shield,

[Rusharn]

For the IS the LAMS is 1.5 tones, and while that does protect you from LRM's and ATM's, is it something everyone would carry? Even with the increase in Lrm's being fielded because of the Skill Tree, a lot of people still don't field AMS, though I think player tier may have something to do with that.

[Jep Jorgensson]

Tesunie, on 01 July 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

You can also always delete your vote and have no vote till you've tested it more... But that is your choice. Just saying as an FYI.



Someone else earlier in this thread (I believe) was complaining that LAMS against ATM/LRM tests had the triple LAMS Nova shutting down constantly (or against LRMs it did).

Edit: As a note, AMS effectiveness does depend upon the position in relation to the path of the missiles. If they are the target, it is less effective. If the missile path is going clean over the mech, than it will take out even more missiles. Just as a note and something many people don't consider.

That was me. I compared my Mad Dog with 2xLRM 20's to another with 2x ATM 12's against a 3x LAMS Nova as he walked from side-to-side like the ducks in a shooting gallery. With LRM's, he overheated shut down around 50% armor, never fired his weapon once. With ATM's, I was the one that shut down, twice! Even then, he still had 60-70% armor. It was within their sweet spot, so the most logical conclusion is that it was easier to shoot down an ATM 24 than a LRM 40 (apparently, the only math PGI can do is adding up all the money they are making off of us poor peasants). Who knew?

MischiefSC, on 01 July 2017 - 04:45 PM, said:

No no imum but damage falloff inside 120m, faster speed, higher health.

At long range, an ATM 12 will do (at the most) 12 points of damage. So if we decrease it up close, then how about we increase it far out? That sounds fair and balanced.

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 01 July 2017 - 06:10 PM.

[Rusharn]

Jep Jorgensson, on 01 July 2017 - 06:01 PM, said:

At long range, an ATM 12 will do (at the most) 12 points of damage. So if we decrease it up close, then how about we increase it far out? That sounds fair and balanced.

Yeah I like this idea.

[MischiefSC]

Jep Jorgensson, on 01 July 2017 - 06:01 PM, said:

That was me. I compared my Mad Dog with 2xLRM 20's to another with 2x ATM 12's against a 3x LAMS Nova as he walked from side-to-side like the ducks in a shooting gallery. With LRM's, he overheated shut down around 50% armor, never fired his weapon once. With ATM's, I was the one that shut down, twice! Even then, he still had 60-70% armor. It was within their sweet spot, so the most logical conclusion is that it was easier to shoot down an ATM 24 than a LRM 40 (apparently, the only math PGI can do is adding up all the money they are making off of us poor peasants). Who knew?



At long range, an ATM 12 will do (at the most) 12 points of damage. So if we decrease it up close, then how about we increase it far out? That sounds fair and balanced.

So it works better than LRMs? It already does good damage at mid-range. Reduce long range to 810m as Khobai suggested elsewhere which means the damage fall-off from 270m still gives you 1.5/missile out to 540m. That keeps them powerful and effective within any real mid-range use, especially with a speed boost.

Fair and balanced is keeping it in the middle between LRMs and SRMs plus giving it a specific niche (fast, flat flight path with tracking like LRMs, which is vastly superior to streaks, would do that). Given the truly outrageous damage levels it can give out in its optimal range that's not a bad thing.

Think of it like the 2xLB20X on the Scorch. LB20X isn't a great weapon - but in a face-hump it's cold running and stupidly destructive. It's got a specific niche where it dominates. That's what you want for ATMs, and a unique one. Used in support of direct fire weapons at mid range the ability to comfortably stack 81 pts of damage from 120m to 270, then declining down to still 40 pts at 540m (without the range boost from skill tree even) is a brutally effective weapon.

[Duvanor]

Jep Jorgensson, on 01 July 2017 - 06:01 PM, said:

At long range, an ATM 12 will do (at the most) 12 points of damage. So if we decrease it up close, then how about we increase it far out? That sounds fair and balanced.

I disagree. ATM is a multi purpose weapon. If we increase the effective range it will eventually replace LRMs as long range support weapon. It has to add something to the game, not replace something. LRMs have to stay better as support weapon and SRMs have to stay better, at least in key aspects, at short range.

The ATMs advantage is its ability to soften targets up at long distances during a push or while defending against a push and then pack a punch in close combat.

I agree with MischiefSC here. More tweaking is necessary. At the moment I would suggest more health per missile and maybe a speed of 200. It probably would not hurt to remove minimum range on the PTS not as final stat but to see how it plays out. At the moment many of us just agree to disagree and we have several theories what would happen if minimum range was removed. It is a testserver, so why not test it and see what happens? And after that another run with 120m soft minimum range and decreasing damage.

Edited by Duvanor, 01 July 2017 - 07:48 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

If we increase the effective range it will eventually replace LRMs as long range support weapon

not if it has a flatter trajectory and cant indirect fire

in tabletop ATMs cant indirect fire at all.

Quote

SRMs have to stay better, at least in key aspects, at short range.

uh ATMs, even with no min range, are in no danger of making SRMs obsolete.

look at the weight and cooldown difference between SRMs and ATMs.

Three SRM6s do 36 damage which is the same as an ATM12 at 3 damage per missile

the three SRM6s are only 4.5 tons and 4.0 cooldown vs the ATM12 which is 7 tons and 5.0 cooldown

ATMs with no min range are in no danger of competing with SRMs... SRMs still have a significantly higher dps and less weight for that dps. its completely irrational for ATMs to have a min range.



So heres the changes Id like to see:

1) flatter trajectory and 810m max range so LRMs are still better at indirect fire and long range
2) no min range at all because its not needed
3) health per missile increased from 1 -> 1.5 so AMS doesnt chew through the low missile count of ATMs
4) ammo per ton increased from 72->90

Edited by Khobai, 01 July 2017 - 08:40 PM.

[Duvanor]

Khobai, on 01 July 2017 - 08:31 PM, said:

not if it has a flatter trajectory and cant indirect fire

in tabletop ATMs cant indirect fire at all.



uh ATMs even with no min range are in no danger of making SRMs obsolete.

look at the crazy *** weight difference between SRMs and ATMs.

Three SRM6s do 36 damage which is the same as an ATM12 at 3 damage per missile

but the three SRM6s are only 4.5 tons and 4.0 cooldown vs the ATM12 is 7 tons and 5.0 cooldown

ATMs with no min range are in no danger of competing with SRMs... its totally irrational for ATMs to have a min range IMO.

I agree with your last statement. But if ATMs get more projectile speed and health per missile that may change a lot. And I think those tweaks are more important than getting rid of minimum range.

[Khobai]

Quote

And I think those tweaks are more important than getting rid of minimum range.

id much rather have no min range than anything else.

ATMs having a min range defeats the entire purpose of the weapon system which is to be useful at both short and long range.

[Brain Cancer]

There's a lot for what would fix LRMs that would do well for ATMs.

Direct fire missiles need a still flatter arc (if not a straight-horizontal one, honestly!) and higher velocity.

Velocity = ranged accuracy. A 160 velocity missile has no business traveling 1100m, as all that encourages derpy players to do is attempt to spam them uselessly at range. It's bad enough for LRMs as it is. Cut the range to the TT standard 810m, increase velocity to at least 200 if not 240. MRMs dumbfire at a blistering -400- velocity by comparison, and even taking guidance into account that's a launcher that's supposed to reasonably hit things at 450 meters...yet ATMs are expected to hit things at over twice that range with less than half the velocity. Even if you cut ATM's to 810m (and you should), they're still grossly underspeedy. Bring the angle of fire down even further, as it currently is quite capable of indirect fire despite it's supposed incapacity to do so. These things should be launching flat (much like dumbfired LRMs should) and thus be required to go for their own locks almost without fail.

Swap the deadzone to damage reduction, and give them a 3/2/1 damage rangeband of 270/540/810m. They'll get a slightly better damage rating at range than TT, but also get the reduced damage at very close range to go with it and considering it's a "hybrid" ammo type of the three ATM ammo options, I'm OK with this.

Consider tweaking missile health, but higher velocity will also act as effectively improving ATM survival time a bit as they'll take less damage on the way in. As it stands, we have 'Mechs that can snuff out 35 CLRMs before they reach the target, and an ATM is basically a CLRM in speed and health....but far heavier in tonnage per tube. 36 ATM's are 28 tons of weapon that can be neutralized by 1.5, and should not be disproportionately shot down by AMS as they are now. Tweak velocity first, then depending on how this alters AMS damage, tweak missile health.

[Scout Derek]

Tesunie, on 01 July 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

You can also always delete your vote and have no vote till you've tested it more... But that is your choice. Just saying as an FYI.



Someone else earlier in this thread (I believe) was complaining that LAMS against ATM/LRM tests had the triple LAMS Nova shutting down constantly (or against LRMs it did).

Edit: As a note, AMS effectiveness does depend upon the position in relation to the path of the missiles. If they are the target, it is less effective. If the missile path is going clean over the mech, than it will take out even more missiles. Just as a note and something many people don't consider.

I've tested them and tested against them. ATMs are still relatively weak against AMS, which is a good con of it.

120M is already borderline good for its min range, and the fact of how much damage they put out the closer they are to an opponent.


I'm sorry but if you can't keep 120M away from an enemy you don't deserve to use ATMs lol.

And then the fact people keep firing them under min range.... they're not lrms. they don't have any dropoff damage.

[Jep Jorgensson]

MischiefSC, on 01 July 2017 - 07:45 PM, said:

So it works better than LRMs? It already does good damage at mid-range. Reduce long range to 810m as Khobai suggested elsewhere which means the damage fall-off from 270m still gives you 1.5/missile out to 540m. That keeps them powerful and effective within any real mid-range use, especially with a speed boost.

Fair and balanced is keeping it in the middle between LRMs and SRMs plus giving it a specific niche (fast, flat flight path with tracking like LRMs, which is vastly superior to streaks, would do that). Given the truly outrageous damage levels it can give out in its optimal range that's not a bad thing.

Think of it like the 2xLB20X on the Scorch. LB20X isn't a great weapon - but in a face-hump it's cold running and stupidly destructive. It's got a specific niche where it dominates. That's what you want for ATMs, and a unique one. Used in support of direct fire weapons at mid range the ability to comfortably stack 81 pts of damage from 120m to 270, then declining down to still 40 pts at 540m (without the range boost from skill tree even) is a brutally effective weapon.

Is English your second language? That is not what I said. ATM's proved to be vastly inferior to LRM's and SRM's.

1. Since ATM's fire fewer rounds but only as tough as LRM rounds, they are weaker against AMS and the same spread as LRM's despite their fewer rounds.

2. They have a lot less ammo per ton.

3. They are hotter then LRM's and SRM's and hotter than they are supposed to be in the Lore (Sarna.net said the ATM 12 is supposed to generate 8 while here they generate 9).

4. They travel at 180 vs SRM's 400 (so less than half the speed) and cannot be aimed at a particular body part. Even without the min range, they will never outperform SRM's in their own range on top of having only half the missile toughness.

5. So what if they can reach far out beyond any missile range? At long range, an ATM 12 can do at most 12 points of damage (assuming they do not have a single AMS, of course).

What ATM's should be, is the Jack-of-all-trades missile system. Able to seriously put the hurt on at close range but really able to reach out and touch someone at extreme range (though not very hard). The added fact that it is supposed to be a LOS only weapon on top of all its other drawbacks will prevent it from ever becoming meta. The DPS is not strong with this one and everybody should know it by now.

Scout Derek, on 02 July 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

I've tested them and tested against them. ATMs are still relatively weak against AMS, which is a good con of it.

120M is already borderline good for its min range, and the fact of how much damage they put out the closer they are to an opponent.


I'm sorry but if you can't keep 120M away from an enemy you don't deserve to use ATMs lol.

And then the fact people keep firing them under min range.... they're not lrms. they don't have any dropoff damage.

Uselessness is not a good con.

Any min range is bad for them.

Try outrunning a locust in an ATM boat sometime then.

The min range has to go. These are supposed to be missiles we can brawl with.

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 02 July 2017 - 12:37 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Khobai, on 01 July 2017 - 08:45 PM, said:

id much rather have no min range than anything else.

ATMs having a min range defeats the entire purpose of the weapon system which is to be useful at both short and long range.

I am kinda worried that they will also suck if anyone is using AMS if they don't increase missile health, but you're right that their "flavor" is that they are useful at all ranges - and the minimum range eliminates that flavor completely. If they don't have that, you will probably be better off with specialist missiles (LRM or SRM... maybe even MRMs?) at all times.

[The Basilisk]

No since the MWO ATM has nothing to do with Battletech ATM and give non of their advantages like build in Artemis.

Remember the primary feature of atms is the ability to switch to the situation apropriate ammo
i.e.
-- fastburning shortrange with 270m max and no min range @ 3dmg per missile
-- normal twostage with 450m max 4 min and 2dmg per missile
-- longrange with improved booster with 810m max 4min and 1dmg per missile

Except the tonnage and a staggered dmg reduction the MWO ATMs have nothing incommon with the TT atms.

Edited by The Basilisk, 02 July 2017 - 01:31 AM.

[Vlad Striker]

Let's accept the coding of ATM algorithm based on LRM pattern is failed.

[Khobai]

Quote

I'm sorry but if you can't keep 120M away from an enemy you don't deserve to use ATMs lol.

except I would argue ATMs are meant to be used under 120m.

And if you want a long range missile system where you have to stay away from the enemy thats what LRMs are for.

Quote

Let's accept the coding of ATM algorithm based on LRM pattern is failed.

Only because of the asinine insistence to give them a min range they shouldnt have.

ATMs are supposed to be a versatile missile system thats viable at ALL range bands. That means they should be viable under 120m. They should be viable over 120m. And it they should still be viable upto 810m

The important balance point is that ATMs arnt better than SRMs or LRMs inside their respective range bands. SRMs and LRMs are specialized weapons that should dominate their respective range bands. While ATMs trade specialization for versatility, they should be viable at all range bands, but not stronger than a specialized weapon.

Edited by Khobai, 02 July 2017 - 03:17 AM.