677 replies to this topic

[ImperialKnight]

just make ATM damage a curve like C-LRMs, the mechanic is already there. 0-270m, damage ramps up to max damage like c-LRMs. 270-500m full damage, 500-1000m damage drop off. that way it performs worse than SRMs in SRMs' optimal range, making it a more mid-range weapon, filling in the gap between SRMs, and LRMs

[MischiefSC]

120m min range, weak vs AMS. They're just a lol spud farming weapon and further discussion is irrelevant. I'm astounded at how much content was created that's largely irrelevant to the game save as visual flavor text and a trap for new/bad players.

LFE is literally the only thing in this whole content update that's going to significantly impact what's taken by good players. A few situations where different PPCs or Gauss may show up but they'll be edge cases. IS UACs will see some use.

What an incredible waste of time and energy. RACs, IS ERs, MRMs, ATMs, most the gauss/PPCs, IS LBX, light FF, Rockets, heavy lasers, all that is lower end of mediocre - at best. If it had never have been created it would have a minimal impact on the game.

This whole update has generated, at least for every single player I've talked to, little but disappointment.

[Tesunie]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2017 - 07:15 AM, said:

LFE is literally the only thing in this whole content update that's going to significantly impact what's taken by good players
...

.....IS ERs,... PPCs, ...light FF...

LFE is going to give IS assaults a whole new life, as well as many heavies and a few mediums. That certainly is going to be impactful.

The new ER lasers for IS may play a bit more of a part than I think you expect. More range for what appears to be very minimal drawbacks (slight extra heat and duration)... I think they will be useful for mechs begging for some light weapons that can hit a little farther away.

The Lt PPC and the Heavy PPC may very well see some use. I know I intend to use Lt PPCs a bit, provided that the hit reg on them works in live compared to the PTS (you lost hits if you shot them after just about any weapon hit the target too soon). The HPPC will be good because, apparently unlike the PTS, they now will deal a full 15 points of damage to a single location. That may come in handy, considering how meta tends to favor (currently) high PPFLD weapons...

And Light FF will be useful to get a little more tonnage on mechs that have limited crit slots still open. My Crab benefited from it on the PTS, as it had enough slots for LFF but not enough for full FF. So I think this will also find use, particularly for assaults (limited), heavies and some medium mechs. Most light and mediums will probably still take FF, but it will have it's use.

As far as everything else, I'll wait to see how it behaves in live, but I'm inclined to agree as a preliminary at the moment. Most of the new weapons are going to probably find very limited use...


Edit: As for Rockets, I can see them being abused. As in... people making pure rocket builds (was being done on the PTS), have a single shot, and then be useless the rest of the match. I have grave concerns on this weapon in live matches... In PTS, it's funny to do and doesn't have much of an impact. In live... People are going to be MAD (maybe MAD IIC?) when they find teammates going in with a pure rocket build...

Edited by Tesunie, 15 July 2017 - 12:50 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Nothing any of those do can't be done as good or better by existing loadouts. In fact the UAC10 will replace a lot of that. With gauss/ppc GH most the light PPC builds are dead. Plus the light PPC is just a heavy PPFLD medium laser anyway, with worse DPS.

You'll see a rush of people playing with new toys and getting destroyed, then going back to what works. You'll never see MRMs outside of QP playing around, same with most the new tech.

LFE will help more than a few builds. The rest? Uac10s, yes. The rest? Maybe so.e stealth armor.

[Widowmaker1981]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2017 - 02:03 PM, said:

Nothing any of those do can't be done as good or better by existing loadouts. In fact the UAC10 will replace a lot of that. With gauss/ppc GH most the light PPC builds are dead. Plus the light PPC is just a heavy PPFLD medium laser anyway, with worse DPS.

You'll see a rush of people playing with new toys and getting destroyed, then going back to what works. You'll never see MRMs outside of QP playing around, same with most the new tech.

LFE will help more than a few builds. The rest? Uac10s, yes. The rest? Maybe so.e stealth armor.

HPPCs will definitely see use on some mechs - dual HPPC grasshopper poptart (with dual ERSL for hardpoint raising) will be a thing for sure.

RAC5s maybe on a bushwacker. Cant think of another mech id use them on (because PGI... they dont need ghost heat)

SNPPCs i see being used in places too, for something that wants PPFLD brawl punch (maybe combined with AC20)

HMGs will see use, especially in a months time on clan side, with both the MLX and the ACH getting a crapload of B hardpoints.

LFEs of course.

Really just the IS LBX range, Heavy and Light gauss, ATMs, RAC2s are completely useless. Lots of edge case stuff though.

[MischiefSC]

Dual hppc hopper will get smashed by existing laservomit hopper, cuz LPLs at 0.66 with quirks to about 0.5 burn duration will be far more durable and sustainable.

I'll take uac10 Bushie vs your RAC Bushie all day every day. Or uac5 Bushie. 1 v 1 you pick the map.

MLs and LPLs will out perform PPCs in a brawl. I get the fun feel of the punch and twist but the heat sustainability and DPS sustainability will carry the fight better. It's why the AC20 isn't much of a brawler but 3 lpl 3-5mls are standard fare from pugs to FW to comp. PPCs that only work inside lpl range are going to get pushed and they are going to lose the brawl.

HMGs will see use, clan ones especially.

The rest is largely trash.

[Tesunie]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

Dual hppc hopper will get smashed by existing laservomit hopper, cuz LPLs at 0.66 with quirks to about 0.5 burn duration will be far more durable and sustainable.

1 v 1 you pick the map.

In a "hop sniping contest", lasers have their faults over a PPFLD weapon like the PPC (any kind). If they are aiming to specifically jump snipe, then the HPPC may have a place, as that would be 30 PPFLD per shot, compared to the beam duration and possible spread of LPL... It would be dependent upon the factors of the match. There is a reason my Crab 27SL has PPCs on it instead of LPLs, so I can pop and shoot, instead of pop, try to hover a bit, and then fall down. All down to the role intended.


You seem very much into 1v1 challenges... You've stated this challenge to many people you may even slightly disagree with you. All this will show is differences in skill levels as well as possible differences in weapon mechanics. Though, I can't blame you for wanting to 1v1 other players... It can be rather fun.

[Jep Jorgensson]

Tesunie, on 12 July 2017 - 06:48 PM, said:

Did anyone do any tests with SRMs, ATMs and LRMs vs AMS? At different ranges? That could have been another aspect for consideration as far as balancing the missiles. Would ATMs out perform SRMs at closer ranges still if AMS was involved? How about with LRMs vs ATMs with AMS involved? How does that alter the balance of the weapons?

I did with one of my guys.

Test #1: 2x LRM 20 Mad Dog vs 3x LAMS Nova.

Result: With only my missiles firing, he eventually shutdown from overheating with about 50% damage to his armor.

Test #2: ATM 24 Mad Dog vs 3x LAMS Nova (within the ATM's 3 damage sweet spot).

Result: By the time I eventually got him down to 60-70% armor, I had shutdown from overheating, twice!

Conclusion: Between the two, LRM's are clearly superior in almost every way for the following reasons:

1. LRM's run cooler.

2. They have more ammo per ton meaning more damage potential per ton of ammo.

3. They deal the same or more damage at most ranges.

4. Harder to crit.

5. Proper indirect-firing.

6. More missiles per salvo and so better vs AMS.

7. They cycle quicker.

ATM's are basically a cheap, watered down knock-off of LRM's and are actually weaker than they are supposed to be in the Lore with no practical use. PGI bones the Clans yet again. Simple as that.

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 15 July 2017 - 05:14 PM.

[MischiefSC]

I'll gleefully drop vs LRM mech on a mech with ATMs on it after the patch.

While the minimum range kills ATMs as a real competitive/reliable weapon system the speed buff is very significant. I really appreciate that it got that buff and it happened because Chris actually looked at missile health - which means he was really looking at the details.

Pick a heavy/assault mech, I'll build it with ATMs (in a mixed loadout). You build it using LRMs however you want. LRMs are trash and indirect fire is a flaw and a crutch, not a perk.

Want to go 2 out of 3? Maybe bet a mech pack? While ATMs are flawed they're better than LRMs by far.

[Tesunie]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2017 - 05:52 PM, said:

I'll gleefully drop vs LRM mech on a mech with ATMs on it after the patch.

While the minimum range kills ATMs as a real competitive/reliable weapon system the speed buff is very significant. I really appreciate that it got that buff and it happened because Chris actually looked at missile health - which means he was really looking at the details.

Pick a heavy/assault mech, I'll build it with ATMs (in a mixed loadout). You build it using LRMs however you want. LRMs are trash and indirect fire is a flaw and a crutch, not a perk.

Want to go 2 out of 3? Maybe bet a mech pack? While ATMs are flawed they're better than LRMs by far.

You realize people are commenting on their previous experience with ATMs, not how it is live yet because we haven't played it. The recent changes may have helped the weapon, but even as you said, "the minimum range kills ATMs as a real competitive/reliable weapon syste", and aren't you about balancing weapons based upon competitive game play? The fall off damage between ranges may be a saving grace for the ATMs, or it may not be enough and LRMs may be a slightly better choice for most situations. It's hard to say right now. All I can say is, last time I tested the ATMs on the PTS, LRMs appeared to be a better choice for more situations/ranges, especially against AMS. I shall await for it to be in the game and try it there as well, and then form a new opinion based upon results there.

For the record, I consider it of poor choice to try and tempt someone into a 1v1 with real currency (mech pack). Even then, a 1v1 may not be indicative of the weapon itself, and may be more related to skill differences. Maybe it's just me though...

[The6thMessenger]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2017 - 05:52 PM, said:

I'll gleefully drop vs LRM mech on a mech with ATMs on it after the patch.

Never mind the LRMs. I'm still waiting for you to prove me that ATMs can be a brawling weapon, better than SRMs too.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 16 July 2017 - 12:35 AM.

[MischiefSC]

The6thMessenger, on 16 July 2017 - 12:34 AM, said:

Never mind the LRMs. I'm still waiting for you to prove me that ATMs can be a brawling weapon, better than SRMs too.

Pick a heavy/assault, you take SRMs, I'll take ATMs. Orion, even MDD, don't matter. I would agree on lights, mediums, maybe the Linebacker SRMs are a better choice due to weight and mechs speed. High speed to force a fast brawl, stick and move, with ATMs having a min range. Without a min range ATMs would still be better.

After the patch drops I'll prove you wrong ATMs to SRMs. Even with min range they'll wreck an ATM build pretty hard. Want to stick at 120m so they better emulate no min range? Wouldn't even be a fight.

[Wintersdark]

Khobai, on 10 July 2017 - 02:05 PM, said:

No the bonus was being applied twice. Because it was already built-in to the profile of ATMs but then you could take artemis and get double the effect. The spread is definitely going to be wider when the patch goes live.

"Artemis upgrade no longer improperly applies a bonus to MRM's, ATM's, and Rocket Launchers."

https://mwomercs.com...r-3pm-29jun2017

No, you're wrong here.

Chris talked about this on Twitter. Chris recommended using Artemis to test the desired stats of ATM's.

[Wintersdark]

Gotta see how the velocity increase helps ATM's vs. AMS. On the PTS, AMS made ATM's utterly worthless.

Live, if ATM's seem even remotely good, you'll see MANY more players equipping AMS. If that happens, a 1v1 test vs. an AMS mech is irrelevant when you can have 4-6 enemy AMS firing at your ATM's.

Right now, AMS is kinda worthless because LRM's are rarely a threat, and SRM's are usually fired fast and close. It doesn't do much for you.

But once there's MRM's and ATM's on the field as well, there will be much more incentive to run AMS.

We don't 1v1 often in regular battles, so your ATM's will be passing through multiple AMS bubbles.

There's a very strong probability that adding more missiles is going to render all missiles worthless =/

[MischiefSC]

Wintersdark, on 16 July 2017 - 08:35 AM, said:

Gotta see how the velocity increase helps ATM's vs. AMS. On the PTS, AMS made ATM's utterly worthless.

Live, if ATM's seem even remotely good, you'll see MANY more players equipping AMS. If that happens, a 1v1 test vs. an AMS mech is irrelevant when you can have 4-6 enemy AMS firing at your ATM's.

Right now, AMS is kinda worthless because LRM's are rarely a threat, and SRM's are usually fired fast and close. It doesn't do much for you.

But once there's MRM's and ATM's on the field as well, there will be much more incentive to run AMS.

We don't 1v1 often in regular battles, so your ATM's will be passing through multiple AMS bubbles.

There's a very strong probability that adding more missiles is going to render all missiles worthless =/

400 m/s is more than 2x the speed on the pts. More to the point it's only about 0.4 seconds of AMS exposure. Having done a ton of tests on AND I can say it's not predictable. 3xAMS would kill 1 - 7 SRMs at 270m. Random, each time, no movement. So 1 AMS would only kill 1-3 ATM missiles.

It's significant and I find myself comfortable with Chris' balance decisions so far. I think a lot of the new tech needs buffed but I hope that will happen in time. The ATM speed buff is a good, significant thing. I think the PPC Gauss GH link was ballsy and over-due.

I'm going to give the new tech an honest open minded try and try to give useful feedback and not just ***** because things are new. I was very critical of the Skill Tree on the PTS but the live version has been great.

Going to give it an honest go.

[Wintersdark]

MischiefSC, on 16 July 2017 - 10:00 AM, said:

400 m/s is more than 2x the speed on the pts. More to the point it's only about 0.4 seconds of AMS exposure. Having done a ton of tests on AND I can say it's not predictable. 3xAMS would kill 1 - 7 SRMs at 270m. Random, each time, no movement. So 1 AMS would only kill 1-3 ATM missiles.

It's significant and I find myself comfortable with Chris' balance decisions so far. I think a lot of the new tech needs buffed but I hope that will happen in time. The ATM speed buff is a good, significant thing. I think the PPC Gauss GH link was ballsy and over-due.

I'm going to give the new tech an honest open minded try and try to give useful feedback and not just ***** because things are new. I was very critical of the Skill Tree on the PTS but the live version has been great.

Going to give it an honest go.

That's largely my position on it too.

I know people are really mad about the G/PPC ghost heat change,but I have to agree with his reasoning: we can't have good PPC's when they pair so well with Gauss. They're not OP on live, but we've definitely seen what happens when PPC's dont suck - Gauss+PPC builds become rampant. It's so damn nice to see PPC's getting actual velocity again. Finally the is ERPPC won't be utter trash.

He buffed the sketchy heavy lasers, too, and they may be usable now. Dunno if it was enough,but it's a good move.

ATM's though... It'll be hard to predict their performance outside of 12v12. And even then, AMS is such a wild card. Will have to wait and see.

Most of the new tech seems to have started deliberately weak. I can't disagree with the approach (people are happier seeing their new toys get buffed, vs launching with OP new equipment then nerfing the heck out of it(... So if he sticks with it, it may end up pretty good.

Of course, sticking with iterative balancing is hardly something PGI is known for, but I'm willing to give Chris a chance.

The upside is, the established bar for performance as balance overlord is really low =/

[The6thMessenger]

MischiefSC, on 16 July 2017 - 06:13 AM, said:

Pick a heavy/assault, you take SRMs, I'll take ATMs. Orion, even MDD, don't matter. I would agree on lights, mediums, maybe the Linebacker SRMs are a better choice due to weight and mechs speed. High speed to force a fast brawl, stick and move, with ATMs having a min range. Without a min range ATMs would still be better.

Timberwolf S, our loadout is http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b49656449508d9e, but replace the 4x SRM6A with 2x ATM9.

Skills are:

MischiefSC, on 16 July 2017 - 06:13 AM, said:

After the patch drops I'll prove you wrong ATMs to SRMs. Even with min range they'll wreck an ATM build pretty hard. Want to stick at 120m so they better emulate no min range? Wouldn't even be a fight.

Oh please, roughneck vs mad dog. Remember that?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 16 July 2017 - 02:58 PM.

[Tesunie]

The6thMessenger, on 16 July 2017 - 12:34 AM, said:

Never mind the LRMs. I'm still waiting for you to prove me that ATMs can be a brawling weapon, better than SRMs too.

Right now, there was no way we could or can test ATMs vs SRMs accurately as brawling weapons. As long as ATMs have that minimum range, they can't honestly be compared to SRMs and we can't test their possible viability/OPness within close combat conditions. If you want a fair test "as though ATMs where brawling", then SRM mechs have to sit outside 120m. If you want "a true test", then SRMs need to close in more, which negates ATMs completely... So we can't prove or disprove if ATMs have that potential or not...

[The6thMessenger]

Tesunie, on 16 July 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

Right now, there was no way we could or can test ATMs vs SRMs accurately as brawling weapons. As long as ATMs have that minimum range, they can't honestly be compared to SRMs and we can't test their possible viability/OPness within close combat conditions. If you want a fair test "as though ATMs where brawling", then SRM mechs have to sit outside 120m. If you want "a true test", then SRMs need to close in more, which negates ATMs completely... So we can't prove or disprove if ATMs have that potential or not...

We could just stay 150m between one another. Since we're supposed to maximize durability, we don't move around but we just torso twist in place.

SRMs with artemis are quite reliable.

[Tesunie]

The6thMessenger, on 16 July 2017 - 03:07 PM, said:

We could just stay 150m between one another. Since we're supposed to maximize durability, we don't move around but we just torso twist in place.

SRMs with artemis are quite reliable.

SRMs are more potent the closer they are. Even then, SRMs are also better at taking legs off, rather than torsos. (For some reason, they register damage better.)

Standing still at 150m away from each other hurts SRMs, and it doesn't provide comparison information on how easy it may be to hit a moving target that may be up close as well as tactics each player may have to them...


This is like challenging an LRM boat into a 1v1 engagement. LRMs may still be able to perform, but some of their strength is the ability to work off teammate locks. So, by placing them without a team, you instantly remove a section of the weapon that could be used. It wouldn't really give you true reliable information about how a weapon would work in a live team environment.