677 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

• Heaviness is offset by having better damage-to-heat ratio, we've been over this. For 9 heat, an ATM12 can give you 36 damage per salvo. While 3 ASRM6 give you 36 damage for 12 heat. That translates to ~3.6 more DHS needed to counter the extra heat (if firing on the ATM12's cooldown rather than the faster rate, in which case it needs more DHS to actually get a better sustained DPS). That sort of thing is important because it plays into the tonnage needed to use it effectively and can actually counter the lower damage per ton (not that it is as severe as people make it out to be given that at 3 damage, 72 missiles per ton translates to 216 damage per ton).
  
• You can only fit 1 ASRM in the CT, so let's stop acting like that is a huge deal, especially given how few mechs have CT missile hardpoints to concern themselves with in the first place.

So let's quit with some of these misleading numbers since some of this crap you are saying is the same stuff people said about how "bad" Clan laser vomit was compared to IS laser vomit.

So what if ATM12 is much more heat-efficient? Doing all those streams, the 3x SRM6A is much more damage efficient, and at the same time would work better? So what if Er lasers have better range? pulse lasers have shorter duration and damage out. You know what else plays on to things? Roles? Give and take to things.

Even if you need extra 3.6 DHS, the thing is that you don't have to. You can leave it hot, and just work from there. ATMs, you really need a mech with lots of tonnage for ammo and the weapon alone.

Hows about you actually look on other things? That also affects availability. Tonnage is a resource in building your mech.

Unless you could fit 4 ATM12s on a kitfox still with meaningful armor and ammo, i don't know how you could put a spin on this.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

Sure, but this is specifically about missiles because they all compete for the same hardpoint. I never said this was specifically an SRM problem.

But if SRMs are obscure right now, how are they going to be picked more, by just putting another weapon system worse at close range?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

• MRMs are bad because of they have much worse spread and too slow of a velocity.
  
• Heavy Lasers still serve no purpose outside of a select few mechs (SCat and **** Lynx).
  
• RACs are meh because of how limited of a time you can fire, UACs are just better right now.

And ATMs are heavy, low ammo/ton, bulky too.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

Honestly I'd go with 2.5/2/1.5 so they are more useful at the more extreme ranges while low enough that they still serve a purpose at short range. Also wouldn't hurt to increase ammo per ton since the max damage per ton is lowered. That and fixing the missile health.

Yeah, sure like that. Honestly 3 damage up close sounds neat, but really right now direct translation is just bad.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

Where did I ever say I wanted to screw over ATMs? All I'm saying is they shouldn't be released with min range and 3 damage per missile at short range.

I never said that you wanted to screw over ATMs. They are screwed. That was a comment with PGI's work.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

No, it is meant to do damage at any range, but it isn't meant to "work" at every range, it is meant as a push weapon as would any weapon that is meant to be "flexible". It's the exact same as any bracket build, to get the best of both worlds, chances are good you are going to push with it except when you are going against brawl teams (in which case you play the range game for as long as you can).

Yes right okay. "do damage".

To be fair though, SRMs aint working over 270m. So context clues here, that's what i meant.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 06 July 2017 - 05:11 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

So what if ATM12 is much more heat-efficient? Doing all those streams, the 3x SRM6A is much more damage efficient, and at the same time would work better? So what if Er lasers have better range? pulse lasers have shorter duration and damage out. You know what else plays on to things? Roles? Give and take to things.

The stream is shorter than the cSPL duration of yore, let's not over-exaggerate the stream part (it takes 0.55 seconds for a stream of 12 to be shot). So I still stand by my statement.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

Even if you need extra 3.6 DHS, the thing is that you don't have to. You can leave it hot, and just work from there.

No, you really can't because as I said before, brawlers need the ability to sustain.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

ATMs, you really need a mech with lots of tonnage for ammo and the weapon alone.

Hows about you actually look on other things? That also affects availability. Tonnage is a resource in building your mech.

Unless you could fit 4 ATM12s on a kitfox still with meaningful armor and ammo, i don't know how you could put a spin on this.

Now, I'll give you this for lights, SRMs are probably better. Once you go to mediums though, ATMs can begin to look nice because a lot of them have plenty of tonnage to play with. Let's not over-exaggerate again either, the Kit Fox wouldn't need 4 ATM12s to match SRM damage either. 2 ATM9s = 54 damage compared to 4 ASRM6 = 48 damage and both are the same tonnage, but you probably wouldn't need that extra heat efficiency and would probably want the cooldown but the point is, you can match damage pretty easily with ATMs and like the Kit Fox, come out ahead heat efficiency wise.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

But if SRMs are obscure right now, how are they going to be picked more, by just putting another weapon system worse at close range?

I'd much rather they all be bad and then get a universal buff than one be power creeped and wait for the others to be buffed up to it.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

And ATMs are heavy, low ammo/ton, bulky too.

Which I went over all of these complaints above and dismiss them as ill-informed.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

The stream is shorter than the cSPL duration of yore, let's not over-exaggerate the stream part (it takes 0.55 seconds for a stream of 12 to be shot). So I still stand by my statement.

And the time it took you to direct the stream, and get a lock, the guy already fragged you in the face.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

No, you really can't because as I said before, brawlers need the ability to sustain.

Yes, really. Cause there are other roles that SRMs could build. Like strikers perhaps? Hit and run stuffs. Jenners and commandos are really REALLY REALLY ******* annoying because of those. But as it stands, it actually works.

Brawlers, yes you need tonnage you can get. But again, the stream and lock thing won't cut things out for the ATMs. Sometimes its worth getting the hot weapon if it means you can down enemies faster and much more efficiently. There's a reason why 12 ERSL Nova was popular on Tukayyid scouting AFAIK, despite being hot. 4x SRM6A just does 16 heat, when 12 ERSL does a cumulative 36 heat.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

Now, I'll give you this for lights, SRMs are probably better. Once you go to mediums though, ATMs can begin to look nice because a lot of them have plenty of tonnage to play with.

True enough.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

Let's not over-exaggerate again either, the Kit Fox wouldn't need 4 ATM12s to match SRM damage either. 2 ATM9s = 54 damage compared to 4 ASRM6 = 48 damage and both are the same tonnage, but you probably wouldn't need that extra heat efficiency and would probably want the cooldown but the point is, you can match damage pretty easily with ATMs and like the Kit Fox, come out ahead heat efficiency wise.

And then you realize that you also don't have to use Artemis therefore more weight. Lights can maneuver better and much closer. Hell, lights are usually low priority targets while on a push. Jesus that's how i survive in an urbie cause if there's a heavier mech with me, chances are they shoot the ally.

Although Kitfox however, commonly people take ECM there, and they can only fit so much on a small amount of crit space for arms.

Off topic though. I hope Kit-Fox get ear missiles. Can i get your vote? https://mwomercs.com...s-j-and-p-poll/

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

I'd much rather they all be bad and then get a universal buff than one be power creeped and wait for the others to be buffed up to it.

Unfortunately due to PGI, we're probably not gonna get that.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 06:09 PM, said:

Which I went over all of these complaints above and dismiss them as ill-informed.

And what you're the sole authority to dismiss them?

They are valid, because mech building is one big puzzle. Different pieces fit builds and roles differently, with desired outcome of performance. Whether you like it or not, those factors are limiting.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

And the time it took you to direct the stream, and get a lock, the guy already fragged you in the face.

All you need is the lock, and keep in mind like with streaks, arms can be used to torso twist and keep locks on targets. If streaks can function in a brawl appropriately then these would be really no different.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

And then you realize that you also don't have to use Artemis therefore more weight. Lights can maneuver better and much closer. Hell, lights are usually low priority targets while on a push. Jesus that's how i survive in an urbie cause if there's a heavier mech with me, chances are they shoot the ally.

The Kit Fox can't afford to not have Artemis, not to mention it has the tonnage to mount it. SRM2s are the only thing that you can really afford to not have artemis on ever since the SRM4 spread nerf.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

Yes, really. Cause there are other roles that SRMs could build. Like strikers perhaps? Hit and run stuffs. Jenners and commandos are really REALLY REALLY ******* annoying because of those. But as it stands, it actually works.

You mean Locusts, Commandos, and Javelins and none of them are strikers. They are all about focusing on a specific target until they begin to focus on you and then you switch targets if they aren't really hurt enough. They don't do drivebys because none of them do enough damage to justify that, the laser boat lights are actually more like strikers because they can't do the DPS that the SRM2 Locust/Javelin can.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

There's a reason why 12 ERSL Nova was popular on Tukayyid scouting AFAIK, despite being hot. 4x SRM6A just does 16 heat, when 12 ERSL does a cumulative 36 heat.

The reason the 12 ERSL Nova was popular is because people didn't understand the power of the 10 SPL Nova back then which had around what, 7 DPS which is insane for a laser boat to have. It also had burst damage of 60 which is equivalent to 5 ASRM6. That meant it had the best of both worlds, and thus why cSPLs got nerfed.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

Unfortunately due to PGI, we're probably not gonna get that.

Unfortunately due to PGI we're not going to get anything good so that is irrelevant.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

They are valid, because mech building is one big puzzle.

And it isn't very hard to solve some of those puzzles if you play enough.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 06 July 2017 - 08:22 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

All you need is the lock, and keep in mind like with streaks, arms can be used to torso twist and keep locks on targets. If streaks can function in a brawl appropriately then these would be really no different.

Function? Yes. Best? No.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

The Kit Fox can't afford to not have Artemis, not to mention it has the tonnage to mount it. SRM2s are the only thing that you can really afford to not have artemis on ever since the SRM4 spread nerf.

Yes you can. But yes you also do a lot worse, runs hotter, and you need to get even a lot closer. But at that sentiment, even though we're getting near worse damage spread like ATMs, we do so at a lighter package, but with more ammo and heat-sinks, even backup weapons otherwise. Adjust tactics, and better manage the heat too. 2x ATM9 with 4x ERSL only has 2t of ammo without shaving so much armor other than the head, 4x SRM6 has 4t ammo and room for 2 more heatsinks.

4x SRM6 + 4x ERSL
2x ATM9 [2t Ammo] + 4x ERSL

It's not optimal, but bottom line is that, you can. Just as you can put a Gauss Rifle in an Urbanmech.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

You mean Locusts, Commandos, and Javelins and none of them are strikers. They are all about focusing on a specific target until they begin to focus on you and then you switch targets if they aren't really hurt enough. They don't do drivebys because none of them do enough damage to justify that, the laser boat lights are actually more like strikers because they can't do the DPS that the SRM2 Locust/Javelin can.

No, I mean actual hit-and-run setup, can also be done on other mechs like linebackers. Also yes, Jenners are capable of striker builds. Like Oxide, or just the plain Jenner-IIC. Quite frankly i enjoyed 2x SRM6 + 4x ERSL on the arctic cheetah.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

The reason the 12 ERSL Nova was popular is because people didn't understand the power of the 10 SPL Nova back then which had around what, 7 DPS which is insane for a laser boat to have. It also had burst damage of 60 which is equivalent to 5 ASRM6. That meant it had the best of both worlds, and thus why cSPLs got nerfed.

Still the 12 ERSL worked regardless, they did something right.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

And it isn't very hard to solve some of those puzzles if you play enough.

It's still part of it whether you like it or not.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 06 July 2017 - 09:07 PM.

[Jep Jorgensson]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 03:12 PM, said:

• Scouting is a special snowflake and probably an even smaller percentage of play than comp is.
  
• You are comparing to ages ago before even the skill tree shifted things (isn't that even before the Huntsman?).
  
• Stormcrows were not really good mechs at that the time, people using them instead of Novas or Ice Ferrets for brawling should've felt bad.
  
• SRMs are still good for scouting because it is easy to force the brawl and is pretty much the only environment in which SRMs drumpf ATMs. That said, if you weren't boating cSPLs back then, you were doing it wrong.

1. ???

2. What does the skill tree have to do with pilot skill?

3. And yet the IS'ers have been crying about the Stormcrow ever since phase 3 hit saying that they were leaving the game and would not return until after PGI took our Stormcrows away from scouting and after phase 4 hit, they finally got their wish. So if the Stormcrow was not that good to begin with, then why did the IS'ers cry so much about them and why did PGI take them away?

4. Why is that? Scouting maps are just like all the other maps. So what makes them different?

[Y E O N N E]

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

4. Why is that? Scouting maps are just like all the other maps. So what makes them different?

It's not the maps, it's the size of the force. You cannot, as a team, put out enough effective damage to stop the enemy before he gets close.

[The6thMessenger]

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

1. ???

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

4. Why is that? Scouting maps are just like all the other maps. So what makes them different?

He meant, it's not a valid place to compare, as it does not represent the entire game, nor best and average circumstances. 4v4 inevitably ends in a brawl, while 12v12 which is mostly what Invasion or QP is.

If your point is about brawling 4v4 would be valid, provided local to brawling points. But if it compasses the game as a whole, that is a pretty narrow area.

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

2. What does the skill tree have to do with pilot skill?

Because skill tree did changed a lot of things. Things we can do now, that we can't do before.

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

3. And yet the IS'ers have been crying about the Stormcrow ever since phase 3 hit saying that they were leaving the game and would not return until after PGI took our Stormcrows away from scouting and after phase 4 hit, they finally got their wish. So if the Stormcrow was not that good to begin with, then why did the IS'ers cry so much about them and why did PGI take them away?

Good point. Also because being 55 tonners, that meant they could bring more payload -- and because it's clantech it's far lighter which meant even MOAR. Ever heard of the "Streakcrow" before? Bane of lights that one. Add more armor to the equation too.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 06 July 2017 - 09:28 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

Function? Yes. Best? No.

Certainly not the best, but the question is whether the loss in effectiveness is significant, and honestly, it isn't considering some of the things you gain.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

Yes you can. But yes you also do a lot worse, and you need to get even a lot closer. But at that sentiment, even though we're getting near worse damage spread like ATMs, we do so at a lighter package, but with more ammo and heat-sinks, even backup weapons otherwise.

More heat sinks is pretty much countered by running extra weapons (which would be lasers) thus ruining your any DPS advantage you might've had. Considering it is also a really slow light mech, making you have to get even closer to a target definitely hurts its effectiveness.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

No, I mean actual hit-and-run setup, can also be done on other mechs like linebackers. Also yes, Jenners are capable of striker builds. Like Oxide, or just the plain Jenner-IIC. Quite frankly i enjoyed 2x SRM6 + 4x ERSL on the arctic cheetah.

Oxide is pretty bad currently because it relies on post nerf SRM4s and has horrid mobility (the laser lights can deal with it better because they have better effective range). That Cheetah is also bad, 7 ERSL or 4 MPLs are probably still the best option.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

Still the 12 ERSL worked regardless, they did something right.

Yes, but the point is both of those builds had much near the same DPS as a typical SRM boat without some of the disadvantages (like knife fighting range).

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

2. What does the skill tree have to do with pilot skill?

It has nothing to do with pilot skill, it has everything to do with balance cirucmstances and why comparing different metas is dumb.

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

3. And yet the IS'ers have been crying about the Stormcrow ever since phase 3 hit saying that they were leaving the game and would not return until after PGI took our Stormcrows away from scouting and after phase 4 hit, they finally got their wish. So if the Stormcrow was not that good to begin with, then why did the IS'ers cry so much about them and why did PGI take them away?

For the same reason people complaining for months about laser vomit despite laser vomit having died for several months. The majority of the players don't understand the meta nor do they understand the game at a decent depth. For the same reason people have complained about LRMs for ages despite them never really being a serious contender in comp (except for our recent MRBC match against D5 XD).

Jep Jorgensson, on 06 July 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

4. Why is that? Scouting maps are just like all the other maps. So what makes them different?

Yeonne answered this appropriately.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 06 July 2017 - 09:17 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

Certainly not the best, but the question is whether the loss in effectiveness is significant, and honestly, it isn't considering some of the things you gain.

Because many things you gain are irrelevant in the context of short-ranged combat, unless we're getting OUTSIDE of SRM's reach. Which lets face it, the high point of ATM is range that despite short-range superiority of SRMs, ATMs just have the upper-hand of not needing to deal with close range. Heat efficiency? Nothing heat management, coolshot, and extra DHS can solve, as opposed of trading worse damage-out behavior.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

More heat sinks is pretty much countered by running extra weapons (which would be lasers) thus ruining your any DPS advantage you might've had. Considering it is also a really slow light mech, making you have to get even closer to a target definitely hurts its effectiveness.

DPS? Yes. Closer you are to an enemy makes you more vulnerable? Also yes.

What about sustainability and staying power. 2 tons of ATM ammo at 2x ATM9 yields max 432 damage without counting critical hits, and only using it under 270m -- hows about under 540m for mid-range or above it for long range. SRMs at 4t of ammo can reach 860 damage. Yes both damage are really spread, probably even equally. But lasers and srms that can do 860 damage? That's 12v12.

And what, haven't you ever flanked, and hit-and-ran before?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

Oxide is pretty bad currently because it relies on post nerf SRM4s and has horrid mobility (the laser lights can deal with it better because they have better effective range). That Cheetah is also bad, 7 ERSL or 4 MPLs are probably still the best option.

Pretty much many other lasers are better option for SRMs, cause they out range it. But doesn't mean they couldn't be done. Nevertheless SRMs would still excel on those fringe roles vs ATMs.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 July 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

Yes, but the point is both of those builds had much near the same DPS as a typical SRM boat without some of the disadvantages (like knife fighting range).

Hmm, ERSL has 200m optimal range, 360m max range, that means 12 ERSL does 33.75 damage at 270m. VS 51.6 damage of 4x SRM6A.

But if you meant you can still deal 33 damage at around 271m-360m, also that 51.6 damage is spread, well yeah i'll give you that.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 06 July 2017 - 10:36 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

Because many things you gain are irrelevant in the context of short-ranged combat, unless we're getting OUTSIDE of SRM's reach. Which lets face it, the high point of ATM is range that despite short-range superiority of SRMs, ATMs just have the upper-hand of not needing to deal with close range. Heat efficiency? Nothing heat management, coolshot, and extra DHS can solve, as opposed of trading worse damage-out behavior.

Actually, the DHS needed to make the SRM mech as heat efficient as an ATM boat ends up eating more tonnage AND space than the ATM launcher. Why do you think the ATM mech can't make use of coolshots either? They are still hot, just not as hot as SRMs......seriously, stop relying on exaggerations and actually do the math yourself.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

What about sustainability and staying power. 2 tons of ATM ammo at 2x ATM9 yields max 432 damage without counting critical hits, and only using it under 270m -- hows about under 540m for mid-range or above it for long range. SRMs at 4t of ammo can reach 860 damage. Yes both damage are really spread, probably even equally. But lasers and srms that can do 860 damage? That's 12v12.

An ATM9 is the same tonnage as 2 ASRM6, so you should have 4 tons of ammo depending on whether you want to bother with JJs or not. KFX-PRIME

12 v 12 also doesn't magically increase ammo needed either. If it does, it isn't by much, because guess what, the enemy isn't alone in having 4 more people and the more people on the field the less carrying you will see.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

And what, haven't you ever flanked, and hit-and-ran before?

Yes, and you don't get close to do it, that's a pretty key thing for doing flanks in lights especially is to always keep some distance so that you can get away safely. If you are walking to within 100m of a mech, more often than not, you are committed at that point which means trying to run only gets you shot in the rear. That's why SRMs are pretty much jokes for "hit-and-run" mechs because they don't have the range to actually do that.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

Pretty much many other lasers are better option for SRMs, cause they out range it. But doesn't mean they couldn't be done. Nevertheless SRMs would still excel on those fringe roles vs ATMs.

Again, fringe roles isn't good enough lest we have all but one missile system be fringe use.

The6thMessenger, on 06 July 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

Hmm, ERSL has 200m optimal range, 360m max range, that means 12 ERSL does 33.75 damage at 270m. VS 51.6 damage of 4x SRM6A.

That's if you hit with all those missiles at 270. One of these weapons is hitscan, one of these is a 400m/s projectile with inherent spread....if you can't tell why the ERSL does more efficient damage at 270m then I don't know what to tell you, I guess us comp players have no idea what we are talking about .

[Rusharn]

tl;dr: I think the fear of the ATM's being a express track to the higher tiers with a low skill level is one of the main concerns that I think is underpinning the conversation. However with a minimum range the ATM's will only encourage the bad habits that LRM's teach players. While lock on weapons do not train pilots to torso twist or precision aiming, maintaining a high damage while removing the minimum range will provide a weapon system that will encourage and reward players for being aggressive, pushing, and sharing armor. I would rather have a weapon that encourages some positive style of play.

The long version:

As I am reading the arguments in this thread, multiple stances seem to me to be based around the ATM weapon system acting consistently over all mech over all situations. Like all missile weapons, the ATM's are inconsistent in their performance. This is generally why Lasers and large PPFLD builds are preferred as their performance is more consistent and predictable in most conditions, as well as can be directly improved with personal skill and tactics. All lock on missile systems have a cap as to how much personal skill can effect their performance. This is why you generally do not see LRM's at higher levels of play and if you do, the pilots have to work harder than more conventional or meta builds to out put the same damage and kills.

The conversation also seems to be focused on the high damage of the ATM's, however high damage does not necessarily translate into kills or victories. I have a huntsman that had a 92 point alpha strike (pre laser nerf) with SRM's that I used both in scouting and QP. Is it not the Alpha damage that makes it deadly and one of the mechs that I have the best kill / death ratio in. It is the aggressive nature of the build and the precision damage. Cycling my SRM's in two batteries, I can keep the pressure up on an enemy with powerful blows from alternating SRM's volleys which I can aim to the weak points of my enemy. Once the armor weaken or gives out in a certain location, I use the surgical damage of my lasers to finish the component. Tactical movement, aggression, precision aiming, and good piloting is what makes the build shine.

It is also something that I could not duplicate with the ATM's. The ATM's lack the precision you can get with SRM's + Artemis and thus good marksmen will find the weapon lacking. The ATM's are rife with weakness that inhibit high level skills from being employed with the weapon system. The lock on times require long face times and discourage torso twisting, precision aiming, strike and fade, and poking skills. Striving for the 3 damage bracket discourages proper placement and combat timing exasperated by how small the optimal bracket is.

Even if you play to all the strengths of the weapon, the ATM's still have to overcome the hard counter of AMS which at this moment in time is highly effective against the system. With stealth armor in the mix, lock on weapons face even more dubious question of effectiveness, even with the extra expenditure of an Active Probe.

My impression is that there is fear that the ATM's could become a low skill entry into the higher tiers of play. There also seems to be an underlying concerned that ATM's may be effective beyond where LRM's can currently reach in the tier system and higher skilled level of play. I am personally concerned that the weapon system may also teach bad habits to newer players that will not serve them well in higher tiers of play, especially if the weapon system proves too effective at lower play as to advance newer players too quickly through the tiers.

I am of mixed feelings on the matter. I personally would like to see a missile weapon be more competitive at higher levels if only to see more dynamic matches and to have a wider range of concerns at high level play when it comes to mech design. As it is, I don't think I have seen a single competitive build with AMS, and even if ATM's had their minimum range reduced to 90m or even zero I doubt any competitive build would take AMS. The weakness of the ATM's locking and tracking verses fast moving targets, the requirement of closing to the optimum range of 270m, and the lack of being able to employ the skills necessary to survive against highly skilled marksmen with low burn time laser or PPFLD builds does not lend the weapon well to competitive and high level play.

At best the weapon might have a roll in faction warfare and casual quick play. With the current minimum range I could only see Shadowcats, Linebackers, and Stormcrows able to use the weapon to any good effect. They might be a preferred auxiliary choice for assault or slow heavy Battlemechs with few missile hard points as any omni mech can swap out low count missile points if they wish.

Ultimately PGI as well as the community needs to decide what they want out of the missile system. I personally would like a weapon system that would teach newer players to be more aggressive, encourage them to push, share armor and apply pressure. To this end I would like the weapon system to have it's minimum range removed while retaining all of its current stats. This would encourage users of ATM's to close and push forward with their teams without of fear of the point blank dead zone. Should the minimum range remain, then the ATM's, like LRM's, will train only bad habits, encouraging players to hold back when the team needs to apply pressure, to fall back when pressure is being applied to them, and be reluctant to share armor.

[Khobai]

Well fortunately stats on weapons are malleable and can be adjusted. A simple fix for SRMs having too short of a range compared to lasers would be to increase SRM range to 360m and also increase their velocity accordingly.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 07 July 2017 - 09:01 AM, said:

increase SRM range to 360m and also increase their velocity accordingly.

You don't have to increase their range since they typically aren't very usable at its current max range anyway.

[Khobai]

Quote

You don't have to increase their range since they typically aren't very usable at its current max range anyway.

So increase the damage too. Also increase the crit damage bonus from the high explosive skill in the skill tree.

Increasing the range and damage on SRMs would make them a credible threat again.

Like I said weapon stats are entirely malleable. You can easily change them into something more useful. The only thing I wouldnt touch is the spread, because missiles should have a spread to differentiate them from other types of weapons.

Then ATMs can stay at 3 damage with no min range too. Because the buffed SRMs will be undeniably better at short range.

Edited by Khobai, 07 July 2017 - 09:30 AM.

[MischiefSC]

So a vote for straight missile powercreep.

Everyone here wants no minimum range on ATMs - just that some want it at 3pts, which would make ATMs a direct upgrade form SRMs and a significant firepower creep in the game and others want it under 2 pts a missile, which would still make it effective and viable but not a direct replacement for SRMs and still keep them reasonably balanced with other weapons in game.

It's not about a concern of low skill players getting 'higher tier'. That's now how skill works. When you power creep it just means that everyone stops using un-creeped stuff and uses creeped stuff, TTK drops and the list of really viable weapons and setups narrows significantly and game balance is screwed until blanket nerfs show up.

[Khobai]

Quote

So a vote for straight missile powercreep.

its not really powercreep since missile weapons were never really at the top of the list for meta weapons

making missiles stronger is not going to make the best metamechs better

[Deathpig]

MischiefSC, on 07 July 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

So a vote for straight missile powercreep.

Everyone here wants no minimum range on ATMs - just that some want it at 3pts, which would make ATMs a direct upgrade form SRMs and a significant firepower creep in the game and others want it under 2 pts a missile, which would still make it effective and viable but not a direct replacement for SRMs and still keep them reasonably balanced with other weapons in game.

It's not about a concern of low skill players getting 'higher tier'. That's now how skill works. When you power creep it just means that everyone stops using un-creeped stuff and uses creeped stuff, TTK drops and the list of really viable weapons and setups narrows significantly and game balance is screwed until blanket nerfs show up.

So like... the entire IS large laser family?

[Khobai]

Quote

Everyone here wants no minimum range on ATMs - just that some want it at 3pts, which would make ATMs a direct upgrade form SRMs

Well thats why I only see two options really, depending on whether you think SRMs need a buff or not.

Option #1) Buff SRMs (see above), get rid of ATM min range, leave ATMs at 3 damage. Since SRMS are buffed theyre still better than ATMs at short range.

Option #2) Dont buff SRMs, get rid of ATM min range, lower ATM damage to 2.5. SRMs and ATMs will both probably be on the weak side.

Edited by Khobai, 07 July 2017 - 01:24 PM.