677 replies to this topic

[Ruar]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 09:39 AM, said:

Nope.

Viable at all ranges is not the same thing as specialized at medium range.

So less damage than SRMs in close and less damage than LRMs at range is considered viable?

[Khobai]

Quote

So less damage than SRMs in close and less damage than LRMs at range is considered viable?

Its the flexibility of being both short and long range in one weapon system that makes it viable. The min range just has to be removed and the damage has to be tweaked to the right amount.

An ATM12 is basically like getting both an x3 SRM6 and x1 LRM15 combined into a single tonnage discounted package. If you were to take those weapons separately it would cost you more tonnage. But by taking the ATM12 you save the tonnage of taking them separately.

That tonnage savings over having to take SRMs/LRMs separately is the major strength of ATMs. It gives you the flexibility of having both types of launchers for less tonnage than taking both types of launchers.

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 09:51 AM.

[FireStoat]

I just finished some more testing with the weapon system as we are probably nearing the close of the PTS, looking at the calendar. If they are released like this I will continue to use A+SRM 6 on my clan mechs as I enjoy brawling. I can aim for a limb, side, or center mid section and expect to do nearly my full damage there, the weapon synchs up very well with the LBX-20, and the missile count per ton as well as velocity are superb. The range is about 290 meters (w/ skill tree) which is comfortable for me to know on an instinctual level now as I close with the enemy.

I will still use A+LRMs during busy game days at prime time hours in mixed build layouts like say, on a Timber Wolf because no one wants to support a push or brawl during those times and player trust in each other on a random drop is very low. A+LRM's do very good damage (for sandblasting), have a superb missile count per ton, and can compliment a fight held at a range of 500+ meters using my own locks as well as having indirect capability as I vector my movement forward to assist a fight out of LOS. It's not my preferred weapon but in certain situations (as mentioned above) it's a worthy option.

ATM's leave me sad. I'm trying really hard to appreciate that damage of 3 per missile at the 120-270 range, but it's just not working. If I try to use them like A+SRM's, I have to deal with the minimum range issue on top of the missiles spreading to other parts of the mech, rather than the spot I'm aiming for. The 3 / missile is great until you could be having the 2.15 grouped into that damaged side torso you NEED to pop off.

If I try to use ATM's like an LRM I'm back to 2 damage per missile which is okay for the range I prefer to fight at using that tactic (500 - 600 meters)... until I consider that say, an ATM 6 is doing 12 damage instead of 15 for a LRM 15 of comparable weight. They have comparable velocities, heat, but the LRM's have far more damage per ton of ammo, can Indirect Fire, and have less of a problem versus a single anti missile system.

I guess you could read all of that and say "You're creating a playstyle for each missile type, and aren't considering creating a new playstyle for this new weapon" and you know... you're absolutely right. It's just in its current format, I'm not SEEING the reward for creating a new playstyle for the 120-270 weapon range game. It's not happening.

[Ruar]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 09:44 AM, said:

Its the flexibility of being both short and long range in one weapon system that makes it viable. The min range just has to be removed and the damage has to be tweaked to the right amount.

I provided an example of a system that is tactically flexible and doesn't impact SRM or LRM areas of focus. You didn't seem to like it because it showed ATMs would naturally slot into a medium range weapon.

[Khobai]

Quote

I provided an example of a system that is tactically flexible and doesn't impact SRM or LRM areas of focus. You didn't seem to like it because it showed ATMs would naturally slot into a medium range weapon.

Because you made ATMs way too weak at short range.

1.5 damage is a joke. ATMs need to do a minimum of 2.5 just to be viable at short range. And thats with no min range whatsoever.

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 09:53 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 09:52 AM, said:

Because you made ATMs way too weak at short range.

1.5 damage is a joke. ATMs need to do a minimum of 2.5 just to be viable at short range. And thats with no min range whatsoever.

So let's test it. I already tested it with AngrySpartan, will happily test it with you. ATM vs SRM builds on heavies/assaults. You need 1, maybe 2 hits while closing to all but cripple a mech. Add to that better than SRM damage at point blank and your SRMs are a joke.

The ATM build Orion is almost 40 more damage than the SRM build. If I've got even the same damage as SRMs up close I'd be an idiot to trade down.

[Ruar]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 09:52 AM, said:

Because you made ATMs way too weak at short range.

1.5 damage is a joke. ATMs need to do a minimum of 2.5 just to be viable at short range. And thats with no min range whatsoever.

How much damage do SRMs do per missile?

[Khobai]

Quote

Add to that better than SRM damage at point blank and your SRMs are a joke.

As ive repeatedly said, the damage on ATMs can be tweaked. It is not set in stone at 3.

But 1.5 is absurdly low. I think around 2.5 would be fine. That still gives SRMs a considerable edge in damage.

Quote

How much damage do SRMs do per missile?

2

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 10:16 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Ruar, on 05 July 2017 - 10:14 AM, said:

How much damage do SRMs do per missile?

Clan SRMs do 2 damage per missile, but its more focused damage, doesn't require locks, and is a MUCH lighter weapon system. You can't compare damage numbers like that.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 05 July 2017 - 10:17 AM, said:

Clan SRMs do 2 damage per missile, but its more focused damage, doesn't require locks, and is a MUCH lighter weapon system.

Don't forget they are also less efficient heat wise, which is why comparing tonnage numbers is a bit funky. Heavies and assaults benefit a lot more from ATMs due to their better heat-to-damage ratio and the fact they can do damage on the close/push. 9 heat for 36 damage vs 4 for 12, that extra efficiency does matter.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 July 2017 - 10:19 AM.

[Ruar]

Gas Guzzler, on 05 July 2017 - 10:17 AM, said:

Clan SRMs do 2 damage per missile, but its more focused damage, doesn't require locks, and is a MUCH lighter weapon system. You can't compare damage numbers like that.

But I can compare those numbers. Being lighter is fine for some mechs, but doesn't matter at all for others. If I only have 4 hardpoints to work with but I have 35tons of weapon space do I honestly care if something is lighter?

ATMs don't require a lock, they just work better with a lock. They can be fired the exact same way as SRMs they just don't travel as fast or have as tight of a spread. However I'm certain the ATM spread is going to change for live.

So in the end the biggest balancing factor is the damage with ammo per ton being the second biggest decision point. If ATMs can do SRM damage at SRM range, plus hit out to 800-900 meters, why would I ever take an SRM?

[Andi Nagasia]

MischiefSC, on 05 July 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

So let's test it. I already tested it with AngrySpartan, will happily test it with you. ATM vs SRM builds on heavies/assaults. You need 1, maybe 2 hits while closing to all but cripple a mech. Add to that better than SRM damage at point blank and your SRMs are a joke.

The ATM build Orion is almost 40 more damage than the SRM build. If I've got even the same damage as SRMs up close I'd be an idiot to trade down.

well the Tests were good, watched them all, but i dont think they were fully conclusive(Stats vs Stats),
for instance the 2LRM20+A(12Tons) vs 4ATM6(14Tons) although the LRM20+A win in the Spread when in LOS,
as the second Video Shows that with Constant LOS the reduced Spread(i think LRM20+A has 3.38Spread)

i would like to have seen a 2LRM20(no A)(10Tons 5.2 Spread) vs 2ATM9(10Tons 5.2 Spread)
just to see Tonnage to Tonnage, and Spread to Spread, how the fight would go,

would also like to see a 6SRM6(no A)(9Tons) vs 6ATM3(9Tons) would be awesome to see,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 05 July 2017 - 10:26 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Don't forget they are also less efficient heat wise, which is why comparing tonnage numbers is a bit funky. Heavies and assaults benefit a lot more from ATMs due to their better heat-to-damage ratio and the fact they can do damage on the close/push. 9 heat for 36 damage vs 4 for 12, that extra efficiency does matter.

Thats kindve misleading though. Because you can aim SRMs exactly where you want them to go. Being able to aim SRMs at a small area of your choosing is far more efficient than ATMs hitting random locations with a bias towards hitting legs.

Quote

If ATMs can do SRM damage at SRM range, plus hit out to 800-900 meters, why would I ever take an SRM?

Well ATMs obviously shouldnt do SRM damage. Which is why I suggested lowering ATM damage to 2.5 damage if the ATM min range is removed.

That would give SRMs a clear damage advantage on top of the fact SRMs can be aimed at specific locations. There would be no question about SRMs being more lethal under 270m then.

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 10:31 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Andi Nagasia, on 05 July 2017 - 10:24 AM, said:

i would like to have seen a 2LRM20(no A)(10Tons 5.2 Spread) vs 2ATM9(10Tons 5.2 Spread)
just to see Tonnage to Tonnage, and Spread to Spread, how the fight would go,

would also like to see a 6SRM6(no A)(9Tons) vs 6ATM3(9Tons) would be awesome to see,

Again, these are somewhat false comparison because that extra tonnage does afford you some things you can't get otherwise.

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 10:26 AM, said:

Thats kindve misleading though. Because you an aim SRMs exactly where you want them to go. Being able to aim SRMs at a small area of your choosing is far more efficient than ATMs hitting random locations with a bias towards hitting legs.

What's misleading is you saying they hit random locations. Streaks hit random locations, ATMs aim for centermass just like LRMs which means their concentration depends all on the mech hitboxes. They also have better range because guided missiles are better at 300m or so than most missile mechs with 400m/s SRMs so the whole "aiming exactly where you want them to go" is misleading as well (since accounting for velocity of a mech can make that problematic at any decent range). There is a reason cSPLs before they were nerfed into oblivion eclipsed SRMs at brawling, and it has to do with not having to account for the same things SRMs have to account for (which means longer effective range).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 July 2017 - 10:34 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

Don't forget they are also less efficient heat wise, which is why comparing tonnage numbers is a bit funky. Heavies and assaults benefit a lot more from ATMs due to their better heat-to-damage ratio and the fact they can do damage on the close/push. 9 heat for 36 damage vs 4 for 12, that extra efficiency does matter.

but comparing likes, each i feel has its place,
4SRM6(6Tons, 48Damage @ 16Heat) vs 4ATM3(6Tons, 36Damage @ 10Heat)
so its very much a Trade off closer Range and having to Lead a Target, vs Homing less Damage but less Heat,

[Khobai]

Quote

What's misleading is you saying they hit random locations. Streaks hit random locations, ATMs aim for centermass just like LRMs which means their concentration depends all on the mech hitboxes.

no it depends a lot on the spread and angle they fire at too. and the geometry of the mech and direction the mech is facing when they hit. for all intents and purposes it is random. although the lower trajectory of atms tends to make them hit legs a lot more than lrms do. also PGI has said theres a bug on the PTS right now where ATMs have a tighter spread than they should, so their actual spread is going to be wider.

the point is I can guarantee all my SRMs hit a mech's general torso area. You cant make that same guarantee with ATMs.

ATMs may generate less heat than SRMs, but the damage is not as efficiently placed. That is a fact. That is one of the significant advantages SRMs have over ATMs.

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 10:37 AM.

[Duvanor]

Ruar, on 05 July 2017 - 09:48 AM, said:

I provided an example of a system that is tactically flexible and doesn't impact SRM or LRM areas of focus. You didn't seem to like it because it showed ATMs would naturally slot into a medium range weapon.

So you say ATM 12 would be better than LRM 20 + A at medium range? Let's see:

ATM 12: 7 tons/ 5 slots/ 9 heat/ 24 dmg/ 144 dmg per ton ammo/cooldown 5 sec.
cLRM20+A: 6 tons/ 5 slots/ 20 dmg/ 180 dmg per ton ammo/ cooldown 4.6 sec

ATMs are more prone to AMS and their flight path is not exactly an advantage. Someone said, missile speed does not actually take the arc into account. So LRMs hit as fast as ATM despite flying an arc and being the better weapon for indirect fire.

ATM on the other hand streams not as bad as LRMs and seems to aim for CT and legs which maybe focuses damage better.

If I want missiles to fight medium range only, I will take LRMs.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

Don't forget they are also less efficient heat wise, which is why comparing tonnage numbers is a bit funky. Heavies and assaults benefit a lot more from ATMs due to their better heat-to-damage ratio and the fact they can do damage on the close/push. 9 heat for 36 damage vs 4 for 12, that extra efficiency does matter.

True. On the other hand ATMs are a single launcher with not too much health. If you lose that launcher i will hurt more than losing one SRM to a crit.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 10:33 AM, said:

the point is I can guarantee all my SRMs hit a mech's general torso area. You cant make that same guarantee with ATMs.

You can't guarantee that for all SRM ranges and all SRM mechs though. Sorry but this claim needs a serious asterisk beside it.

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 10:33 AM, said:

ATMs may generate less heat than SRMs, but the damage is not as efficiently placed. That is a fact.

Neither are SRMs, that is a fact.

Duvanor, on 05 July 2017 - 10:34 AM, said:

True. On the other hand ATMs are a single launcher with not too much health. If you lose that launcher i will hurt more than losing one SRM to a crit.

This is a joke of a concern. You can easily lose Gauss Rifles, that doesn't stop them from being a strong weapon.

The danger here is that SRMs would have the micro laser problem, having the edge at 120-0m isn't really a significant advantage for all but the most niche mechs. That's a problem.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 July 2017 - 10:39 AM.

[MischiefSC]

I'll happily test SRM loaded mechs vs ATM loaded mechs on the PTS with anyone. We can test them at 120-270m or just open 1 v1 duel at any/all range. I recommend Orion SRM loadout vs Orion with ATMs.

That ATM setup on the Orion is about an 80 pt hit. "But it spreads!" Yes, but it hits like 4 LB20x. Maybe a bit better due to locking. It's more than 2x the damage of the SRM loadout on the same mech. Locking is a perk - you are going to get the bulk of the damage on target every trigger pull and at 80 pts each time it's a huge blast of damage. 80 kph is about 23 m/s, s 4 seconds is about 100m. So you're going to get your 2 hits in prime damage range on most targets, so they're starting the brawl a good 100-180 damage down. If you can't exploit that I don't know what to tell someone.

ATMs new a base of 1 damage at point blank and scaling up with a max of like 2.5 or 2.7.

Someone wants to take, say, a splat Orion vs an ATM Orion I'll happily test it.

Again, it's like saying a mech that can take 4xlb20x, 1xuac10 and 2cermls is balanced because the LBs are pretty hot and the damage isn't focused. Doesn't matter, it's so much damage it just deletes stuff.

[Andi Nagasia]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 10:31 AM, said:

Again, these are somewhat false comparison because that extra tonnage does afford you some things you can't get otherwise.

but we cant say LRM20 vs ATM12 is a Fair Comparison, where LRM20 vs ATM9 is,
in a similar sense anyone can clearly say that a Gauss is better than a AC10 if you Ignore the Tonnage Differences,
im just saying we need to look at them with Like Tonnages, and Spreads, not to do this is abit disingenuous,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 05 July 2017 - 10:38 AM.