677 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

One has a homing lock, the other is dependent on player skill. How can you equate them to being equal?

I dont understand your question. Just because one weapon has a lower skill ceiling than another doesnt mean both players cant still be equal skill.

ATMs might be easier to master than SRMs but that doesnt mean both players cant be equally skilled at using both ATMs and SRMs.

Quote

Except you still can't use it like you used to be able to, the inability to do snapshots at any time is a pretty significant fact (you can't be constantly pre-charged). So actually the charge-up was a good change because it added limitations around Gauss.

Except, of all things, a sniper weapon should be able to snapshot. Snapshotting is kindve the whole point of being a sniper. Its a dumb limitation.

It defeats the purpose of gauss in the same way that min range defeats the purpose of ATMs.

I have always been against gauss chargeup and I feel there are far better ways to balance gauss. Especially now that we have heavy gauss, because chargeup makes that weapon pretty useless.

Quote

Snubnose PPC is a crappy PPC

no snubnose is awesome. losing the max range isnt a big deal because if your build was geared towards sniping youd be using erppcs instead. snubnose also weighs less than a normal ppc too. snubnose is one of the best new weapons for midrange/brawling builds.

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 11:47 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 11:37 AM, said:

no snubnose is awesome. losing the max range isnt a big deal because if your build was geared towards sniping youd be using erppcs instead.

PPCs are long range oriented (500-800), so yes, that is a big deal, especially since the LPL does the same damage, can shoot 3 at a time, has more range, does much less heat, etc. The ONLY advantage of the SNPPC is it is PPFLD, everything else about it is just worse than all competition enough so that you probably won't see it over existing options. I mean 5 MPLs does the 50% more damage for the heat compared to 2 SNPPCs, the duration is short enough that it really isn't a significant factor just like the old cSPLs (and you can get the duration skills to make it even shorter).

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 11:37 AM, said:

Except a sniper weapon should be able to snapshot. Its a dumb limitation.

Except it is still used as a sniper weapon despite that limitation, so it sounds like you just need to adjust what you think defines a "sniper" weapon.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 July 2017 - 11:44 AM.

[Ruar]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 11:37 AM, said:

I dont understand your question. Just because one weapon has a lower skill ceiling than another doesnt mean both players cant still be equal skill.

ATMs might be easier to master than SRMs but that doesnt mean both players cant be equally skilled at using both ATMs and SRMs.

My point was that you have been constantly saying SRMS are superior to ATMs because you can hit where you want on a target while ATMs scatter, but you also just admitted that SRMs require more skill to use.

You said you don't want to use player skill to balance but you just said higher skill is needed for SRMs compared to ATMs so you are using skill as a balance factor. An average ATM user and an average SRM user will result in the SRM user missing more than they would with an ATM.

So giving ATMs better damage than SRMs while at the same time having a lower skill requirement means there is even less reason to use SRMs. Maybe a really skilled user will prefer SRMs over ATMs, but the masses will just use ATMs because they perform better than SRMs and have higher damage.

Which circles all the way back around to SRMs have to have more damage than ATMs.

[Khobai]

Quote

You said you don't want to use player skill to balance but you just said higher skill is needed for SRMs compared to ATMs so you are using skill as a balance factor. An average ATM user and an average SRM user will result in the SRM user missing more than they would with an ATM.

What I said was weapons should not have a prohibitively high skill ceiling or too low of a skill ceiling.

And that if weapons required a minimum skill level they should only require an average skill level.

and FFS its not like SRMs are hard to learn how to use. SRMs still have a pretty average skill ceiling. The hardest part is learning how to lead targets with them, but thats something you pick up just by using them.

Youre seriously exaggerating the skill level required for SRMs. Anyone can learn how to use SRMs masterfully in probably a few weeks if they just practice with them and learn how to lead targets. Its not that hard.

Now MRMs on the other hand, theyre going to require a lot more skill to use than SRMs, because you have to not only lead the target at a greater distance but you have to keep the target lined up as the volleys stream out. MRMs are very much a weapon where the prohibitive skill ceiling is going to be detrimental to the weapon being used. They definitely need to make MRMs easier to use.

Quote

Except it is still used as a sniper weapon despite that limitation, so it sounds like you just need to adjust what you think defines a "sniper" weapon.

No I think id rather just keep complaining that chargeup is a terrible game mechanic and continue to ask that it be removed.

Just like I will keep insisting that ATM min range be removed.

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 12:12 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Ruar, on 05 July 2017 - 07:27 AM, said:

Imagine if there was no minimum range and I could run my 80KPH heavy to close range and start dealing out repeated 87pt alphas. Aiming at that range isn't a problem so I don't have to wait for a lock.

There's just no reason to remove the minimum range when ATMs are doing 3 damage per missile.

It would be totally fair, considering all the hoops your ebon jaguar got to by going near. But the question would be, would you brawl with 2x ATM12?

MischiefSC, on 05 July 2017 - 07:28 AM, said:

Except I did a ton of testing with AngrySpartan and absolutely

Except? Why would you even bother to use QK?

MischiefSC, on 05 July 2017 - 07:28 AM, said:

The point is that while SRMs are usually a boated weapon ATMs dominate when mixed with direct fire weapons for mid range. At about 80 pts a volley you only need 1 or 2 shots on a closing mech to make finishing them at point blank pretty easy.

Oh, so you don't think the brawler couldn't go cover to cover, or wait your missiles out? What, were you two just standing in the open?

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

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.

Oh please, the only reason we get SRMs with LRMs is so we don't get screwed by minimum range. ATM screws us via minimum range regardless. So it fails on that "flexibility".

Ruar, on 05 July 2017 - 10:52 AM, said:

Why wouldn't I mount 3x ATM6s on my three hardpoints though and get 45 points of damage?

Because SRM users would leg you and just go behind you, when ATMs have to suffer spreading all that damage all around. I leg people on Scouting like you wouldn't believe -- i'm a filthy clanner after all.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 05 July 2017 - 02:53 PM.

[MischiefSC]

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

It would be totally fair, considering all the hoops your ebon jaguar got to by going near. But the question would be, would you brawl with 2x ATM12?



Except? Why would you even bother to use QK?



Oh, so you don't think the brawler couldn't go cover to cover, or wait your missiles out? What, were you two just standing in the open?



Oh please, the only reason we get SRMs with LRMs is so we don't get screwed by minimum range. ATM screws us via minimum range regardless. So it fails on that "flexibility".

No, he tried to use cover, but are you saying cover is 100% effective and there's constant cover everywhere every 90m or less?

So friend me on the PTS and we'll test it, you pick the map.

[The6thMessenger]

MischiefSC, on 05 July 2017 - 02:53 PM, said:

No, he tried to use cover, but are you saying cover is 100% effective and there's constant cover everywhere every 90m or less?

So friend me on the PTS and we'll test it, you pick the map.

Hopefully there's still time, PTS is shutting down.

EDIT: Nope, dead.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

That's pretty false because SRMs even among good players have a limited range. Like I said, if SRMs are really that accurate we shouldn't have ever seen the cSPL become dominant in the first place.

I'm sorry, you keep bringing up C-SPLs, when we're talking about SRMs vs ATMs? Accurate as in it can isolate a component. Could you leg someone with ATMs by aiming?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 05 July 2017 - 03:12 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

I'm sorry, you keep bringing up C-SPLs, when we're talking about SRMs vs ATMs?

The point is that ability to hit your target matters. The reason I bring up cSPLs is because the reason they were used over SRMs is because the hitscan nature of them made two very important things a non-issue:

• Leading
  
• Convergence

While ATMs are a projectile, because they are guided, leading and convergence are automatically handled for you. This is important because these are limiting factors of projectiles in effectiveness at certain ranges and mechs. So while yes, you can aim at what component you want to hit with SRMs, that does not mean you will hit it or do enough effective damage because of the above.



For example, take the twin AC20 King Crab, because of the slow projectile that is the AC20 and the stupidly wide hardpoints the King Crab has, when leading most targets there is a good chance you will either miss with an AC20 or spread the shots between two components on any mech moving laterally in front of you at any decent range. SRMs are no different and the spread only makes it worse. People are using some of the mechs with the BEST convergence as a baseline for judging accuracy of SRMs when in fact these mechs are typically the exception. Hardpoint location clustering matters a lot for SRMs just like any other direct fire projectile (compared to lasers or guided missiles mind you). Outside of that, 400m/s is still slow for an unguided projectile, even at short range, and it is very limiting in their effective range except against spud mechs that don't move fast (provided you get close enough to hit them).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 July 2017 - 03:11 PM.

[MischiefSC]

If it goes love as is without the AMS and min range fixes it'll be a spud farming weapon and RACs will be the biggest waste of coding since Long Tom.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:09 PM, said:

The point is that ability to hit your target matters. The reason I bring up cSPLs is because the reason they were used over SRMs is because the hitscan nature of them made two very important things a non-issue:

• Leading
  
• Convergence

While ATMs are a projectile, because they are guided, leading and convergence are automatically handled for you. This is important because these are limiting factors of projectiles in effectiveness at certain ranges and mechs. So while yes, you can aim at what component you want to hit with SRMs, that does not mean you will hit it or do enough effective damage because of the above.



For example, take the twin AC20 King Crab, because of the slow projectile that is the AC20 and the stupidly wide hardpoints the King Crab has, when leading most targets there is a good chance you will either miss with an AC20 or spread the shots between two components on any mech moving laterally in front of you at any decent range. SRMs are no different and the spread only makes it worse. People are using some of the mechs with the BEST convergence as a baseline for judging accuracy of SRMs when in fact these mechs are typically the exception. Hardpoint location clustering matters a lot for SRMs just like any other direct fire projectile (compared to lasers or guided missiles mind you). Outside of that, 400m/s is still slow for an unguided projectile, even at short range, and it is very limiting in their effective range except against spud mechs that don't move fast (provided you get close enough to hit them).

This is even more powerful and relevant in that mid range space where you *might* land some of a 300m SRM shot but ATMs are going to smash the target like the fist of an angry god. I ran them a lot with UAC10 and 2 cermls on the Onion - it's hard to break the habit of wanting to lead with that weapon group but when you just forget about them and just hold down their fire button while using the UAC it was just this massive, constant wave of damage on target. The Orions ATM payload hit like the LBX/SRM Scorch - plus a UAC10 and 2 cermls. WHUMP! Then you finish off whatever it just opened up.

ATMs leg a lot too, which is extra funny because you can leg them and just back up to stay in optimal range.

[Khobai]

Quote

No, he tried to use cover, but are you saying cover is 100% effective and there's constant cover everywhere every 90m or less?

what about ams and ecm. I find it hard to believe you cant get into atm min range if youre using ams and ecm.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:09 PM, said:

The point is that ability to hit your target matters. The reason I bring up cSPLs is because the reason they were used over SRMs is because the hitscan nature of them made two very important things a non-issue:

• Leading
  
• Convergence

While ATMs are a projectile, because they are guided, leading and convergence are automatically handled for you. This is important because these are limiting factors of projectiles in effectiveness at certain ranges and mechs. So while yes, you can aim at what component you want to hit with SRMs, that does not mean you will hit it or do enough effective damage because of the above.

But the problem is the comparison between SRMs and ATMs, not SRMs vs SPLs. It's totally possible -- even hillarious -- to leg people on Scouting via SRMs, would you use ATMs to leg people on Scouting instead?

Isn't that an impossibility since ATMs go for the center? And then the behavior of the weapon system akin to LRM20, spreading all that damage around. Why wouldn't that be a factor, over an SRM that you could direct, and ruin someone's day with a decent aim?

But okay, I get that you're saying that SRMs are not as good as we make it up to be. But doesn't the argument that you can still aim with SRMs over ATMs stand? Doesn't SRMs better at isolating components over ATMs stand?

Were you saying that since C-SPL is better than SRMs at isolating components, therefore ATMs are better at SRMs at isolating components?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:09 PM, said:

People are using some of the mechs with the BEST convergence as a baseline for judging accuracy of SRMs when in fact these mechs are typically the exception. Hardpoint location clustering matters a lot for SRMs just like any other direct fire projectile (compared to lasers or guided missiles mind you). Outside of that, 400m/s is still slow for an unguided projectile, even at short range, and it is very limiting in their effective range except against spud mechs that don't move fast (provided you get close enough to hit them).

My main brawler mech is TBR and HBK-IIC-B, i assume you meant those exceptions.

Anyways that does sound hard for SRMs. And I admit i have never legged a locust with my SRM Hunchback IIC before. But again i have to ask, why C-SPL vs SRM, not ATM vs SRM?

Hard yes, but the thing is that, the entire roster of MWO isn't just lights and fast mediums, there are also slow mediums, heavies, and assaults.

SRMs have a chance, even if they are not as good as C-SPL, they still have a good chance, to leg someone via aiming at brawls. Could you see that happening with ATMs? What about (IS)XL check?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 05 July 2017 - 03:33 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:21 PM, said:

what about ams and ecm. I find it hard to believe you cant get into atm min range if youre using ams and ecm.

ECM is a minimal issue anymore cuz BAP, AMS we all agree makes ATMs irrelevant - even 1 AMS with overload makes the weapon system worthless. Any change to ATMs that doesn't involve a health buff makes them utterly and completely worthless, ergo not tested with AMS.

[Khobai]

Quote

ECM is a minimal issue anymore cuz BAP

except BAPs range is 120m which also happens to be the deadzone range for ATMs.

so I would say ECM is still an issue if youre using ATMs.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

But the problem is the comparison between SRMs and ATMs, not SRMs vs SPLs. It's totally possible -- even hillarious -- to leg people on Scouting via SRMs, would you use ATMs to leg people on Scouting instead?

Scouting is a special snowflake like MRBC drop 1 is, it is not a common drop type and is pretty much the exception because the average weight and team size all but ensure brawls.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

Isn't that an impossibilty since ATMs go for the center?

Just like LRMs, they have a habit of hitting legs on any moving target just due to the tracking code for guided missiles like that. Doesn't really matter though because legs aren't always the fastest way to deal with a mech (really depends on the shape, like the Jenners for example are easier to just destroy the torso).

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

My main brawler mech is TBR and HBK-IIC-B, i assume you meant those exceptions.

Both have solid convergence even though neither is taken anymore because both are pretty squishy for pushes/brawls. That said, the Timby's convergence still spreads a bit due to the ear spread and can't really focus shots like a GRF-3M or ASN-23 can. You are probably spreading near as much as ATMs at 270m.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

Anyways that does sound hard for SRMs. And I admit i have never legged a locust with my SRM Hunchback IIC before. But again i have to ask, why C-SPL vs SRM, not ATM vs SRM?

Because like cSPLs, ATMs don't have to deal with leading or convergence. Those two factors are pretty important when talking about efficacy at range.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

Hard yes, but the thing is that, the entire roster of MWO isn't just lights and fast mediums, there are also slow mediums, heavies, and assaults.

Sure, but the point is that the entire roster isn't just slow mechs which means SRM effective damage varies and not as ubiquitous as some make it out to be.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

SRMs have a chance, even if they are not as good as C-SPL, they still have a good chance, to leg someone via aiming at brawls. Could you see that happening with ATMs? What about (IS)XL check?

Why do you have to check anything? With enough damage volume you stop caring about that so long as it is decently concentrated (for example just doing torso damage or just leg damage). The original reason SRMs were useful wasn't because you could surgically place every shot, but that it could do enough damage that it didn't matter. That was the original reason they were used over cSPLs (and because the Nova was a bit more countered). Again, not everything is like the ASN-23 or GRF-3M.

[Wintersdark]

MischiefSC, on 05 July 2017 - 07:55 AM, said:

Except I'll likely blast 100+ damage on you with ATMs while you're closing. While testing SRM Mad Dog vs 4xatm6, 4xcerml Mad Dog at 120-270m the ATM Mad won by a mile. When I ran the ATM build in a 1 v 1 I did 599 damage. In a 1 v 1, because sometimes you partially miss or have to lead your target with SRMs and do 1/2 or less. Locking ATMs may lose a few missiles but are a good 75%+ damage delivered every time you pull the trigger.

I don't need a higher DPS if I can blow half of you off with 2 shots. I agree it needs to be functional inside 120m and it needs buffed vs AMS, plus a velocity boost. Also that SRMs would be better on lights. However I'll happily do the same tests vs SRMs (and LRMs) I did with Spartan again with you. Mix loadout, Orions a good example.

The ability to hurt you, badly, before you even close and the hit for over 100 damage/volley up close? That's not going to be balanced.

Did you try that when both mechs have AMS equipped? Because whatever people think of AMS right now, in a world with ATM's as they are, AMS is much more likely to be around.

Because a mech with AMS takes enormously less damage from ATM's.




Mind you, if PGI fixes ATM health/velocity, I'll happily stop kevatching about minimum range. But with both LRM health/velocity and minimum range, they're way too limited.

Edited by Wintersdark, 05 July 2017 - 03:46 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:38 PM, said:

except BAPs range is 120m which also happens to be the deadzone range for ATMs.

so I would say ECM is still an issue if youre using ATMs.

BAP also expands your sensor range though, which means you can get doritos on ECM mechs at a longer range. I can't remember what ECM's new range is for detection with max skills, but I'm pretty sure it is longer than it used to be which with the 20% extra range should provide adequate detection range.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 July 2017 - 03:44 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Had no issue locking mechs with ECM much further than 120m.

Wintersdark, on 05 July 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:

Did you try that when both mechs have AMS equipped? Because whatever people think of AMS right now, in a world with ATM's as they are, AMS is much more likely to be around.

Because a mech with AMS takes enormously less damagoue from ATM's.

AMS effectively turns ATMs off completely. As such if ATMs go as is vs AMS they are pointless and a trap for bads.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Scouting is a special snowflake like MRBC drop 1 is, it is not a common drop type and is pretty much the exception because the average weight and team size all but ensure brawls.

Oh okay, fair enough. But is it really impossible or really hard to leg people in an SRM brawler even at 12v12?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Just like LRMs, they have a habit of hitting legs on any moving target just due to the tracking code for guided missiles like that.

Habit? Yes, but spread all over? Yes also. The single volley nature of SRMs too have better damage out over ATM or LRM's stream fire, and being aimed mean you can direct more missiles on the way of a component.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Doesn't really matter though because legs aren't always the fastest way to deal with a mech (really depends on the shape, like the Jenners for example are easier to just destroy the torso).

Of course not, it just makes them easier to deal with. It's still a legitimate tactic, and is especially rewarding/annoying.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Both have solid convergence even though neither is taken anymore because both are pretty squishy for pushes/brawls. That said, the Timby's convergence still spreads a bit due to the ear spread and can't really focus shots like a GRF-3M or ASN-23 can. You are probably spreading near as much as ATMs at 270m.

The thing is that it still focuses shots, it can still concentrate much of it's payload. You can still isolate components. Hell, i also don't need a lock, i could just flick a shot at their face and back to cover/side-shield/torso twisting.

Probably? Why don't we get back to that when you have a definite answer.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Because like cSPLs, ATMs don't have to deal with leading or convergence. Those two factors are pretty important when talking about efficacy at range.

And what, is ATM supposed to be better without leading and convergence? You're not getting the similar accuracy that allows you to isolate a component like a laser does. So no, they don't count, they are not comparable.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Sure, but the point is that the entire roster isn't just slow mechs which means SRM effective damage varies and not as ubiquitous as some make it out to be.

Sure it varies. But it's still far far better at isolating a component, over ATMs. And that was the point.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Why do you have to check anything? With enough damage volume you stop caring about that so long as it is decently concentrated (for example just doing torso damage or just leg damage).

Oh i don't know, TTK? What about efficiency? What if you could kill someone with less effort than you should have applied?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

The original reason SRMs were useful wasn't because you could surgically place every shot, but that it could do enough damage that it didn't matter. That was the original reason they were used over cSPLs (and because the Nova was a bit more countered).

"Original"? If it's no longer true, why on earth does it even matter?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Again, not everything is like the ASN-23 or GRF-3M.

Yes, there are also other mechs that could use XL engines, there are also enemies that are better legged off for your team to win, or had a cluster of Gauss Rifles in a side torso that in needs of a certain weapon explosion. There's also could be an urbanmech that has a major ballistic weapon that can be easily neutered. etc. etc.

Blowing off parts of a mech to limit their effectiveness is a legitimate tactic. Don't you just disregard that.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 05 July 2017 - 04:08 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Oh okay, fair enough. But is it really impossible or really hard to leg people in an SRM brawler even at 12v12?

It isn't, BUT, SRMs still aren't really prime brawling weapons. Honestly in MRBC drop 1, the only SRM mechs are the lights and that is just because cSPLs got hammered and there is no small laser class that really fulfills that role. Mediums and some of the heavier lights on the other hand can make use of MPLs on both sides sufficiently.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Habit? Yes, but spread all over? Yes also. The single volley nature of SRMs too have better damage out over ATM or LRM's stream fire, and being aimed mean you can direct more missiles on the way of a component.

They spread, but it all depends on the hitboxes. For example the Night Gyr almost always dies through the legs when dealing with LRMs because of how huge they are and there isn't anything you can do to really protect them. Some mechs like the Whale or King Crab can't really use their arms to sponge and their torsos are large enough that they don't take any damage to the legs which means, all torso damage. So again, the spreading really isn't that terrible, not nearly as bad as some make it out to be (they are still far better than Streaks).

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Of course not, it just makes them easier to deal with. It's still a legitimate tactic, and is especially rewarding/annoying.

I never said it wasn't a legitimate, but the difference in hitboxes can make or break hitting legs. With cSPL boats, the level of accuracy made concentrating on legs easy. With the inherent spread of SRMs though, skinny legs means wasted damage potential that could've been used to hit the torso and potentially XL check something which is why during the SRM meta hitting torsos made more sense (especially against rear torsos). Terrain can also dictate which is better to focus on. The best thing to aim for really ends up being situational in the end and certain weapons do have their advantages with one or the other.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

The thing is that it still focuses shots, it can still concentrate much of it's payload. You can still isolate components.

Let me make this clear, you can aim for components, but unless you have a mech like the ASN-23 or GRF-3M, or are hugging their butt, you are not able to concentrate damage as much as you seem to think you are. A Splat Timby is not landing all 24 SRMs on a single component at 200m with any reliability on all except maybe a weird hitbox like the side of a Stalker or Mad IIC. So sure, you can aim at specific components, but you aren't landing as much concentrated damage as you seem to think unless you close a significant distance and that is important to understand. Very few mechs can pull off what the GRF-3M or ASN-23 can at 200m with SRMs.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

And what, is ATM supposed to be better without leading and convergence? You're not getting the similar accuracy that allows you to isolate a component like a laser does. So no, they don't count, they are not comparable.

You are getting better accuracy (that is shots landing) than an SRM at those ranges. Sure you don't have the precision that some SRM mechs do, but having reliable accuracy is more important than reliable precision even at 270m (to a point mind you).

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Sure it varies. But it's still far far better at isolating a component, over ATMs. And that was the point.

You over value the important of precision over accuracy at 200m+

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Oh i don't know, TTK? What about efficiency? What if you could kill someone with less effort than you should have applied?

Less effort applied would be ATMs because you can shoot missiles on the approach, because again, SRMs are not very accurate due to their slow velocity and convergence issues for most mechs. If I can maul my opponent before he can even use his weapons effectively, I've won. Sure precision is nice, but if I'm spitting out enough volume of damage then that doesn't matter as much (this is the reason streaks are so effective against lights).

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

"Original"? If it's no longer true, why on earth does it even matter?

The only reason it isn't as true is because there are effective enough laser boats that can deal enough effective damage to outweigh the volume of damage the SRMs spit out and because they can deal that damage at a farther range typically.

The6thMessenger, on 05 July 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Blowing off parts of a mech to limit their effectiveness is a legitimate tactic. Don't you just disregard that.

I never did, but missing those shots on harder to hit targets rather than simply going through the path of least resistance is also very important. It is all about which is easier to do.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 July 2017 - 04:50 PM.