677 replies to this topic

[o0cipher0o]

I can't understand why PGI doesn't get rid of the min range to see how things play out. Heck, it's a public TEST server, let's test this thing out! At worst , we will back here agreeing that some form of min range or damage reduction. But at least we'll have had our test with non min range.


(and damn, there really is no one from the balance team, or someone for them, answering to ANYTHING in this subforum?)

[Damnedtroll]

Enable different ammo types for ATM = problem solved

and enable it for LBX !!!!

[Skanderborg]

Remove the minimum range , decrease max range to less than LRMs.

SRMs and SSRMs are lighter and more ammo efficient , the trade for heavier ATM's is versatility , removing the versatility negates the purpose of the weapon.

Edited by Skanderborg, 02 July 2017 - 05:54 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Damnedtroll, on 02 July 2017 - 05:15 AM, said:

Enable different ammo types for ATM = problem solved

and enable it for LBX !!!!

Basically, they can't, due to how weapons and ammo are implemented in the game. That's why Clans have "regular" autocannons, they were placeholders in the attempt to get lbx/regular ammo switching. Short form problem:. Weapons don't shoot ammo, mechanically speaking. Weapons just shoot based on their own stats, and decrease your ammo count. Ammo has no stats or properties of its own.

So the way PGI would have to do it is to switch weapons at run time, not ammo, (again, hence the presence of Clan AC's) but that just didn't work out.


TLDR: we'll never have ammo switching on this engine. Just not going to happen.

MustrumRidcully, on 02 July 2017 - 01:02 AM, said:

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.

You can never choose between ATM's and MRM's.

[Rusharn]

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.

This discriminates against the inherently slower and less maneuverable clan mechs Like the Marauder IIC-B, Supernova's, and Kodiak. Unlike LRM's, you must close with your target to be effective. While an LRM can be effective out to 800m+ on maps like Polar Highlands, the reduction in damage to 1 point per missile and the low ammo per tone make firing the ATM at 540m+ a very inefficient use of ammo. Firing the ATM at 270M+ is still an inefficient use of ammo, but the damage performance is close to an LRM launcher of comparable size. Only at less than 270m is the ATM going to perform somewhat efficiently compared to an LRM launcher, but still performs less efficiently than an SRM when accounting for weight per ton of ammo and weight of launchers.

Where the ATM should shine is on mechs with few missile hard points, with high available tonnage, such as the Maurader IIC-B, Linebacker, and Shadowcat

However the 120m deadzone means slower and less maneuverable mechs will not be able to maintain distance, especially since the engine desync has almost universally set Clan mechs maneuverability lower than their IS counter parts in the same weight class. With the deadzone, ATM usage is restricted to fast maneuverable mechs, such as the Arctic Cheetah, Shadowcat, and to a certain degree the Linebacker. But a Kit Fox is not maneuverable enough to keep at range, and an Adder is not fast enough. In fact with their locked engines most clan omni mechs do not have the option of attaining the speed necessary to stay at range with an ATM, especially with the availability of the IS light engine. Even the Linebacker while it can keep its distance on most heavies and assaults had zero chance at keeping fast IS lights and mediums at 120m+ range. Only in the Shadowcat, have I been able to keep at range with almost all mechs and be able to fire at my target, because of it's combination of speed, MASC, Jumpjets and the large range of torso twist.

Even if the 120m minimum rage was removed when fast mechs get in close the ATM is like a sidewinder ATAM missile, you have to still fight for lock and then wait to fire when the enemy mech it traveling at the right angle otherwise you'll missile with most, if not all of your missiles because of the LRM style tracking, stream firing pattern and slow velocity, which creates a type of minimum range already. A hard minimum range is redundant. If the weapon is to see any use out side a few specialty mechs then the Minimum range has to go, other wise, it is not suitable for general use.

Edited by Rusharn, 02 July 2017 - 06:08 AM.

[Damnedtroll]

At least the ATM let you shoot at long range until you get in the sweet spot.

SRM is nothing, nothing, getting lurmed, nothing, half dead, nothing, alpha strike with a lot of damage but sometimes you cannot do it before getting mauled bad...

Presently an ATM is more or less a SRM with a LRM build in backup weapon that make you able to shot in all situation.

[davoodoo]

Damnedtroll, on 02 July 2017 - 06:36 AM, said:

Presently an ATM is more or less a SRM with a LRM build in backup weapon that make you able to shot in all situation.

Presently atm12 is 3 srm6 strapped together with lrm 10 and for some bizarre reason having less ammo per ton than either on top of having minimal range.

Huzzah.
Missile combining worst characteristic of other 3 missile weapons isnt versatile, its crap.
Even if we took off slow missile speed and min range, it would still be equivalent to lrm20 or 2 ssrm6 at medium range and still inferior to srm6's at short range. Both srm and lrm however can also pack artemis to get better spread.

Edited by davoodoo, 02 July 2017 - 06:49 AM.

[Damnedtroll]

davoodoo, on 02 July 2017 - 06:42 AM, said:

Presently atm12 is 3 srm6 strapped together with lrm 10 and for some bizarre reason having less ammo per ton than either on top of having minimal range.

Huzzah.
Missile combining worst characteristic of other 3 missile weapons isnt versatile, its crap.

That's the problem with a jack of all trades... at least we don't have thunderbolt 20 missile that can be shot with ams and have 3 ammo per ton to debate on...

[Rusharn]

Damnedtroll, on 02 July 2017 - 06:36 AM, said:

At least the ATM let you shoot at long range until you get in the sweet spot.

SRM is nothing, nothing, getting lurmed, nothing, half dead, nothing, alpha strike with a lot of damage but sometimes you cannot do it before getting mauled bad...

Presently an ATM is more or less a SRM with a LRM build in backup weapon that make you able to shot in all situation.

That is not entirely true, if you start firing at max range, assuming you can hit the target, you are draining out your very limited ammo supply for a much lower damage attack than a comparable LRM. Out to 540m you have a comparable damage potential per attack of an LRM, but again the low ammo per ton make this an inefficient use of ammo. Also the tracking of the ATM is always like an LRM so you don't get the full splat effect like you do with an SRM. I think the ATM is more like a sawed off LRM. I am wondering if they come with hobo style duct tape pistol grips

[davoodoo]

Damnedtroll, on 02 July 2017 - 06:50 AM, said:

That's the problem with a jack of all trades... at least we don't have thunderbolt 20 missile that can be shot with ams and have 3 ammo per ton to debate on...

Like i said in edit, you could remove min range and increase speed and it still would be inferior to lrm and srm.

[Damnedtroll]

Rusharn, on 02 July 2017 - 06:50 AM, said:

That is not entirely true, if you start firing at max range, assuming you can hit the target, you are draining out your very limited ammo supply for a much lower damage attack than a comparable LRM. Out to 540m you have a comparable damage potential per attack of an LRM, but again the low ammo per ton make this an inefficient use of ammo. Also the tracking of the ATM is always like an LRM so you don't get the full splat effect like you do with an SRM. I think the ATM is more like a sawed off LRM. I am wondering if they come with hobo style duct tape pistol grips

i don't say they are good... i just say that if you boat them like a lot of people do with srm or any weapons... you can at least do something at long range. It's a trade off but it's always the choice of the pilot to gamble if he can close the range or not before getting mauled in the lurm fest.

davoodoo, on 02 July 2017 - 06:54 AM, said:

Like i said in edit, you could remove min range and increase speed and it still would be inferior to lrm and srm.

Yeah , cutting it at 60m and improve speed would be good. If they don't want it to be OP, just make the missile accelerate slowly to insane speed so LR can be near lrm and short range near srm.

[Scout Derek]

Jep Jorgensson, on 02 July 2017 - 12:30 AM, said:

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.

Here's the issue; we don't have multiple ammo types, we're using one, and currently, it's more than likely the standard ammo, just read the description of the ATM 9's standard ammo;

Quote

The standard ammo deals two points per missile, like a short-range missile, but has a longer range, albeit with a minimum due to the multi-stage nature of the missiles.

and now let's read the extended range ammo for it;

Quote

The Extended Range ammo has a correspondingly longer range, with the same multi-stage missile's minimum range, though it deals only one point of damage per missile.

and now let's read the HE ammo for it;

Quote

The High Explosive version has a much shorter range since it trades the booster for increased power. This removes the minimum range and allows the missile to deal three points of damage.

Since the ATMs deal 9-36 damage, that's extended range missiles ammunition that we're imitating here in MWO. extanded range missiles HAVE a min range.

IF you give them no min range that's stupid, unless you're planning on taking a chance at having reduced damage, then I'd say yes, go right ahead, but if there's no drop-off damage then you can say no to your OP missiles that do consistent damage at all ranges.

[Scout Derek]

Rusharn, on 02 July 2017 - 06:02 AM, said:

This discriminates against the inherently slower and less maneuverable clan mechs Like the Marauder IIC-B, Supernova's, and Kodiak. Unlike LRM's, you must close with your target to be effective. While an LRM can be effective out to 800m+ on maps like Polar Highlands, the reduction in damage to 1 point per missile and the low ammo per tone make firing the ATM at 540m+ a very inefficient use of ammo. Firing the ATM at 270M+ is still an inefficient use of ammo, but the damage performance is close to an LRM launcher of comparable size. Only at less than 270m is the ATM going to perform somewhat efficiently compared to an LRM launcher, but still performs less efficiently than an SRM when accounting for weight per ton of ammo and weight of launchers.

Where the ATM should shine is on mechs with few missile hard points, with high available tonnage, such as the Maurader IIC-B, Linebacker, and Shadowcat

However the 120m deadzone means slower and less maneuverable mechs will not be able to maintain distance, especially since the engine desync has almost universally set Clan mechs maneuverability lower than their IS counter parts in the same weight class. With the deadzone, ATM usage is restricted to fast maneuverable mechs, such as the Arctic Cheetah, Shadowcat, and to a certain degree the Linebacker. But a Kit Fox is not maneuverable enough to keep at range, and an Adder is not fast enough. In fact with their locked engines most clan omni mechs do not have the option of attaining the speed necessary to stay at range with an ATM, especially with the availability of the IS light engine. Even the Linebacker while it can keep its distance on most heavies and assaults had zero chance at keeping fast IS lights and mediums at 120m+ range. Only in the Shadowcat, have I been able to keep at range with almost all mechs and be able to fire at my target, because of it's combination of speed, MASC, Jumpjets and the large range of torso twist.

Even if the 120m minimum rage was removed when fast mechs get in close the ATM is like a sidewinder ATAM missile, you have to still fight for lock and then wait to fire when the enemy mech it traveling at the right angle otherwise you'll missile with most, if not all of your missiles because of the LRM style tracking, stream firing pattern and slow velocity, which creates a type of minimum range already. A hard minimum range is redundant. If the weapon is to see any use out side a few specialty mechs then the Minimum range has to go, other wise, it is not suitable for general use.

I'm just going to say this;

if you take SOLELY missiles for your mech, I'm sorry, but there's something mentally wrong there if you take just missiles.

Missiles shouldn't be your primary weapon in combat, or your only one. Take lasers, take ballistics, but if you just take ATMs/LRMs alone, you're going to be a hinderance, as you can only do one thing, and not two.


Let's say I take a Timberwolf LRM boat. If I take just LRMs, that's dumb, isn't it? I can't defend myself at all with LRMs if someone gets close, so I take a Medium laser or 3 to try and defend myself..




The issue I'm seeing is that you're trying to say that Slower mechs will get cucked because they can't move fast. That's not a issue at all, the issue is if you take missiles alone to the fight. You're trying to make it so that Missile boats that take ATMs have no limit at all, and that's not fair to the other mechs/weapons.

Edited by Scout Derek, 02 July 2017 - 10:02 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Did a whole ton of test matches with AngrySpartan last night (early this morning really) testing ATM vs SRM and LRM builds in the same mech at various ranges.

He came to a conclusion I really agree with; ramping damage from 0-240m, up to a max of about 2.7/missile, then ramp down to 810m. Also increase the health of ATMs to SRM levels so they're not super vulnerable to AMS and they need a speed increase.

In the 120-300m range with a Mad Dog v Mad dog both SRMs or LRMs the ATMs utterly destroyed either of the others. Utterly. In one match ATM vs LRMs the ATM mech did 599 damage to the LRM mech, not just killing it but all but vaporizing it.

Same with Orions. The Scorch v Scorch, LRM and SRMs vs ATMs was really shocking. WIth the tonnage to take 2xLB10X and 4xATM9s the Scorch was an incredible mech for ATMs.

However out past 400m the metric really started to shift in favor of LRMs, also the ability to use indirect fire and NARC gave LRMs a big edge at range, that's the only time the ATM mech lost.

Against SRMs it was a bit tougher because we did the test in the context of '120m minimum range for ATMs ain't gonna work and needs to change' so we tried to keep beyond 120m for most matches. Though, to be fair, the Orion match we did no holds barred and the ATM Orion won (with 2 CERML and 1UAC10) because 1 partial hit and 2 clean hits with ~81 pts of missile damage while the SRM Orion closed was enough to make it easy to finish with the UAC and Cermls inside 120m.

Anyone want to drop some 1 v 1 test matches just say so. Happy to do it. I'll play them as they're designed (to work in concert with direct fire) vs LRMs or SRMs. Point blank SRMs are better and more heat/weight efficient so long as ATMs dont get 3 damage at point blank too; at over 400m LRMs are a better choice. 120-400m though, solid mid to close range loadouts, ATMs are just insane.

[AngrySpartan]

MischiefSC, on 02 July 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

Did a whole ton of test matches with AngrySpartan last night (early this morning really) testing ATM vs SRM and LRM builds in the same mech at various ranges.

He came to a conclusion I really agree with; ramping damage from 0-240m, up to a max of about 2.7/missile, then ramp down to 810m. Also increase the health of ATMs to SRM levels so they're not super vulnerable to AMS and they need a speed increase.

In the 120-300m range with a Mad Dog v Mad dog both SRMs or LRMs the ATMs utterly destroyed either of the others. Utterly. In one match ATM vs LRMs the ATM mech did 599 damage to the LRM mech, not just killing it but all but vaporizing it.

Same with Orions. The Scorch v Scorch, LRM and SRMs vs ATMs was really shocking. WIth the tonnage to take 2xLB10X and 4xATM9s the Scorch was an incredible mech for ATMs.

However out past 400m the metric really started to shift in favor of LRMs, also the ability to use indirect fire and NARC gave LRMs a big edge at range, that's the only time the ATM mech lost.

Against SRMs it was a bit tougher because we did the test in the context of '120m minimum range for ATMs ain't gonna work and needs to change' so we tried to keep beyond 120m for most matches. Though, to be fair, the Orion match we did no holds barred and the ATM Orion won (with 2 CERML and 1UAC10) because 1 partial hit and 2 clean hits with ~81 pts of missile damage while the SRM Orion closed was enough to make it easy to finish with the UAC and Cermls inside 120m.

Anyone want to drop some 1 v 1 test matches just say so. Happy to do it. I'll play them as they're designed (to work in concert with direct fire) vs LRMs or SRMs. Point blank SRMs are better and more heat/weight efficient so long as ATMs dont get 3 damage at point blank too; at over 400m LRMs are a better choice. 120-400m though, solid mid to close range loadouts, ATMs are just insane.

In fact I've just posted some records in a separate topic, since they will be lost here in the same argument over and over again.
Link here. Scorch v Scorch record has some artifacts on it so I had to drop it, but the rest is there.

I would repharase what Mischief get from our conversation: ATM damage has to be scaled down in some way to open up opportunities to balance the weapon.

I was thinking about ramping damage DOWN form 2,5 to 2 on shorter distance, e.g. from 2,5 at 0 to 2 at 180 meters. That way making ATMs inferior in damage to SRMs, and only after 180 making ATMs doing their native lore damage. But again, most of my thoughts are in a separate topic.

Edited by AngrySpartan, 02 July 2017 - 11:35 AM.

[NiuqOteen]

My limited use of them vs no AMS , almost never fired em past 500m.
Ammo per ton felt way too low
Heat was a real issue even with chain fire. ( unsure if caused by being forced to take more ammo and using less HS than normal)

I see can sort of understand why they are trying this minimum range stuff. Streak Missiles are not in a great spot in the game right now. But if you take AMS out of consideration with no min range, would Streaks become obsolete?
With no Min range would the 3 damage at point blank outclass Srm' ? perhaps.


Would this help make them more usable?
No minimum but clan lrm ramp up?
lowering the short range damage to 2.5 per and smoothing out the falloff range so say 700 meters would be 1 damage?
120-180 per ton of ammo ?
Much higher velocity ?

Unsure how fix em up to be at least on par and situationallly better than lrm's.

Ammo per ton was always a problem, felt like i needed two tons of ammo per 3 tubes.


Try bumping the Ammo per ton up First.

[Jep Jorgensson]

Scout Derek, on 02 July 2017 - 09:57 AM, said:

Here's the issue; we don't have multiple ammo types, we're using one, and currently, it's more than likely the standard ammo, just read the description of the ATM 9's standard ammo;



and now let's read the extended range ammo for it;



and now let's read the HE ammo for it;




Since the ATMs deal 9-36 damage, that's extended range missiles ammunition that we're imitating here in MWO. extanded range missiles HAVE a min range.

IF you give them no min range that's stupid, unless you're planning on taking a chance at having reduced damage, then I'd say yes, go right ahead, but if there's no drop-off damage then you can say no to your OP missiles that do consistent damage at all ranges.

Since you are invoking the Lore, the Standard and ER do have min ranges, yes. They also do 2 and 1 points of damage within their ranges as well. However, these ATM's do not do 2 or 1 points of damage at 270 meters and below, they do 3. Only HE rounds do 3 points of damage and has ZERO MIN RANGE. Whats more, they are supposed to be a LOS only weapon. Now, given all these and other facts regarding ATM's, do you honestly think that these will EVER have any chance at becoming meta? Does anyone think that?

And since I am now in a Lore mood, here is some more Lore for you. Now, for those of you that do not know the Lore, these are the actual max ranges in the Lore:

ATM - 810 meters

LRM - 630 meters

Gauss - 660 meters

ER PPC - 690 meters

So ATM's are supposed to out-range gauss that just barely out-ranges LRM's and even ERPPC's. Meaning that if anything, since most other weapon ranges were doubled for them, ATM should perhaps get its three ranges doubled as well. I doubt it will happen (they did shortchange LRM's after all), but what is good for one is good for all.

I realize that PGI made some changes from the Lore (like doubling most of the weapon ranges), but even so, to buff some weapons while you nerf others is a travesty and upsets the balance that had been already achieved in the Lore! It is top-down picking winners and losers and that is not right! Equality for all!

That is the Lore. That is where this and many other games came from. If a Battletech game strays from or even denies the Lore, then how can it still be Battletech? It cannot. Only an abomination that clams to be.

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 02 July 2017 - 12:19 PM.

[davoodoo]

NiuqOteen, on 02 July 2017 - 11:29 AM, said:

Would this help make them more usable?
No minimum but clan lrm ramp up?
lowering the short range damage to 2.5 per and smoothing out the falloff range so say 700 meters would be 1 damage?
120-180 per ton of ammo ?
Much higher velocity ?

Imo?
300 projectile speed
very shallow or outright flat trajectory
no min range
90 ammo per ton.

If nothing else itll make them nice competition to mrms.

Edited by davoodoo, 02 July 2017 - 01:43 PM.

[1tq]

Any tempt to make ATM an multy purpouse weapon "all-in-one" without multi-ammo mechanic are doomed to fail.
ATM are allready was in MW4:merc (mech tex mod) and MW:LL and in both games it was separeted in more than 1 type of weapon (only Standart and Extendet for MW4:merc and HE/ST/ER for MW:LL). And its was both ok and in balance. So itn a good idea to make same for MWO. Or (if its to much for clans with useless heavy lasers,ha-ha-ha) make only ST ATM version for MWO. Clan will be ok without HE ATM and ER ATM, but they need an conterpart for IS MRM (for me MRM are good allready),Cause of PGI cant do a "multi-ammo"it will be or OP or useless, but allways hard to use.
Also make ATM an ~200%hp (to make ams/lams same effect against atm and other missile)

My version of atm:

HE ATM vs C-SRM:
c-srm2/4/6 have:
4/2.66/2 dps/t, 2/2.66/3 dps, 2/2.66/3 dph

So make HE ATM a ~1.7dps/t, ~2.5 dph(same for all atm), 3dmg/missile, 270m max range, no min range, constant damage at range(same for all atm), can fire without lock(all atm), ~250m velocity(all atm),direct fire(like ssrm/srm),~180-220 dmg/t ammo(all atm).It makes:he atm are guiaded but litle worse than srm(ssrm are prety useless now>buff to be in midle of he atm and c-srm).

ST ATM (IS MRM is the only curent conterpart)
Make st atm a ~1.5dps/t, 2dmg/missile, 120m min range(same inc damage like c-lrm), ~450m max range,"flat" or direct trajectory.MRM are better for close range but for 350-450m range ST ATM have better ranged accuracy.

ER ATM vs C-LRM
c-lrm5/10/15/20 have:
1.4/1/1/0.87 dps/t ,2.08/2.5/3/3.33 dph ,180m min range, 900m max range, 160m velocity, 1 dmg/missile.
Make er atm 0.9/1 dps/t, 120m min range(same like st atm), ~810m max range, same to lrm spread.
er atm have better velocity but you must face enemy to avoid terrain hit,c-lrm slower but can do inderect fire.

In this case ATM will be beter than PTS version of ATM by PGI, close to lore(not main thing,mwo are real time shoter, not step based strategy), inline of balance(srm/he atm for close range, st atm for mid range, er atm/lrm for far distance).
And again:clan need good and not op/useless conterpart to is mrm. Curent atm is NOT good conterpart ,very hard to use and to easy to countered by ams/lams and brawling.

P.S. my english are very bad.

[Rusharn]

NiuqOteen, on 02 July 2017 - 11:29 AM, said:

My limited use of them vs no AMS , almost never fired em past 500m.
Ammo per ton felt way too low
Heat was a real issue even with chain fire. ( unsure if caused by being forced to take more ammo and using less HS than normal)

I see can sort of understand why they are trying this minimum range stuff. Streak Missiles are not in a great spot in the game right now. But if you take AMS out of consideration with no min range, would Streaks become obsolete?
With no Min range would the 3 damage at point blank outclass Srm' ? perhaps.


Would this help make them more usable?
No minimum but clan lrm ramp up?
lowering the short range damage to 2.5 per and smoothing out the falloff range so say 700 meters would be 1 damage?
120-180 per ton of ammo ?
Much higher velocity ?

Unsure how fix em up to be at least on par and situationallly better than lrm's.

Ammo per ton was always a problem, felt like i needed two tons of ammo per 3 tubes.


Try bumping the Ammo per ton up First.

tl;dr: The testing and video's provided provide little to no solid information as the methodology used was lacking. Further testing is needed for acurate numbers and outcomes to determine the best course of action for the weapon system. (No offesnes indended)

The long verson:

Watching your videos there as several flaws within the methodology of the testing that was undertaken:

1st: All mechs matches were heavy vs heavy or Assault verses Assault moving at similar (slowish) speeds. This does not address the weakness of slower mechs verses faster mechs or ATM's having issues tracking faster mechs.

Solution: Try slower mechs verses faster mechs (IE Mad Dog verses Jenner IIC) and fast mech verse fast mechs (Line backer verse linebacker, Shadow cat verse shadow cat, Jenner IIC verses Jenner IIC)

2nd: Mad Dog LRM build was under powered. You took an 2 x lrm 20s, verses 4 x ATM 6's. That LRM build is the weakest build that could have been taken as LRM's have the longest duration and longest cool down of all LRM launchers.

Solution: Retest with more optimal Mad Dog LRM build. My personal Mad Dog mounts 4 x lrm 5, and 2 lrm 15's for a total of 60lrms. Other LRM builds that should be tested would be 6 x lrm5's, for the faster rate of fire. 5 lrm x 10's, for more missile good spread fast rate of fire, 6 x lrm 10s, 4 x lrm 15's. All with Artemis. These would produce either higher rates of fire than the presented LRM build and with the increased rack modules still allows for mounting either 4 x er small, or 4 x er med lasers.

3rd: Fight through overheating as ATM's heat is one of the balancing factors. In the roughneck verse Mad Dog fight, the roughneck paused its attacks to wait for the Mad Dog to cool down. Given the state of the Mad Dog, the roughneck could have volleyed one to two free shots into the Mad Dog which would have been devastating especially give how fragile ATM launchers are.

Solution: The high heat of ATM's is one of the balancing factors of the weapon system. If it is difficult to manage the heat on ATM's this needs to be shown in the tests.

4th: In Several of the tests the target mechs purposefully stayed in the "sweet spot". This creates an unrealistic situation playing only to the ATM's Strength. Notice that even when trying to stay in the "Sweet Spot" the rough neck often approaches and crosses the 120m mark. Also the SRM verse ATM information is noticeably lacking, we do not know the condition of the ATM Mad Dog, and without video we cannot judge the skill of the SRM player as SRM's are very much a skill weapon.

Solution: SRM's vs ATM's needs more testing, including trying to breach the "sweet spot." Notations of ranges and mech speeds should also be included to determine how easy it is to get inside the dead zone. Also tests should be made to see how easy it is to hit targets under the 120m and determine where velocity and tracking dead zones occur from low velocity and LRM tracking.

5th: I noticed no AMS or LAMS was involved in testing. This currently is one of the biggest weaknesses of the ATM's and needs to be tested.

Solution: Test with mechs that have ams and missiles. Such mechs would be Hunchback IIC-B, Shadowcat, Summoner, Linebacker, Supernova-A


6th: Ammo sustainability was not tested. The high damage low ammo for the ATM's is great in a duel, but no tests were made on how long an ATM mech can keep up that type of damage.

Solution: Not sure on this one, maybe some wave tests with one ATM trying to target and destory one mech after the other who tries nothing by dodging and troso twisting.


7th: ATM's were not tested against other brawling or snipping builds. While whether or not ATM's will make SRM's or LRM's obsolite is one of the questions, testing how a ATM holds up against the other weapon systems was not tested.

Solution: Test ATM builds against the current meta and see how they perform.


More detailed testing is needed to be under taken to get a solid assesment. I would like to see someone perform more tests with more game likely situations to provide more accurate information as to the actual in game effectiveness of the ATM's. Hopefully my wife and I will have a chance to do a large amount of testing today or tomorrow and get more acturate numbers and results.