22 replies to this topic

[Ragedog4]

I play all kinds in this game and I think the Reduction should happen and understand why. However 200 is a HUGE stretch. However drop it between 180-120 and I would understand. Perhaps the 3-2-1 dmg would change too with that reduction.

The problem I find is the range between 200-1000 is hard to maintain for most players in the game. Sure some might be able to but for a lot it might be a challenge.

We could also say that dmg reduction could act like from 0-200 like clan LRMs where you dont get the full 3 dmg per missile until 200 range. That too would work.

Thoughts anyone?

[Top Leliel]

The whole point of the ATM is that it can take multiple missile types and switch range/damage effectiveness based on the distance of the target.

It shouldn't have a minimum range at all.

[Tombs Clawtooth]

It should honestly be a less ammo efficient, heavier, and hotter streak SRM with the ability to work out to almost as long of range as LRMs.

Does it make LRMs pointless? No, LRMs are indirect fire. Does it make SRMs and SSRMs pointless? No, they're more ammo efficient, smaller, and lighter.

It basically means that the ATMs would become the best option for a jack-of-all heavy or assault, but not as a primary weapon system. LRMs and SRMs would remain better suited for more dedicated primary weapons systems, and for lighter mechs.

[Duvanor]

In TT range profiles for the different missiles are
- short (3 dmg per missile) 90/180/270
- medium (2 dmg per missile) 150/300/450
- long (1 dmg per missile) 270/540/810
medium and long would have a minimum range of 120 meters and those 810 meters of long range ATM ammo would be more than LRMs get in TT. So they gave ATMs the effective range of the short range weapon and a maximum a bit over MWO LRMs and a minimum of MWO IS LRMs.

That would be totally fine if we were able to choose from three types of ammo like it is supposed to be. And like it is supposed to be for LB-X ACs. The point of the ATM is to be a flexible weapon.

Take a look at the stats. One ATM 12 comes at 7 tons. 2 more than a LRM 20. 9 heat, so 3 more than a LRM 20. And 72 missiles compared to 180 per ton of LRM ammo. I think we can agree that ATM will not beat LRMs at ranges of more than 450m and it has enough drawbacks to call it even between 270 and 450.

So they are better below 270 than you say? True, until range drops to 180 and they get worse again. As it stands now, ATM is better as LRM between 180 and 270 meters. Who takes a weapon to fight in a 90 meter bracket? Except flamers and MG, but those come at considerably less weight.

So... let's compare ATM to SRM.
One ATM 12: 7t/ 9 heat/ 5 criticals/ 5sec cooldown/ 216 dmg per ton ammo below 270m/ 36 dmg per salvo/ missile speed 160
or 3 SRM 6 + Artemis; 7,5t/ 12 heat/ 6 criticals/ 4sec cooldown/ 200dmg per ton ammo/ 36 dmg per salvo/ missile speed 400

that ATM 12 comes off a bit better than the 3 SRM 6, but I bet the SRMs are more accurate. Keep in mind that those ATM missiles may be guided, but have you ever tried to hit something with cLRMs in close combat?

So there are still a lot of drawbackes, even if minimum range gets removed.

[Pariah Devalis]

Duvanor, on 28 June 2017 - 06:14 PM, said:

In TT range profiles for the different missiles are
- short (3 dmg per missile) 90/180/270
- medium (2 dmg per missile) 150/300/450
- long (1 dmg per missile) 270/540/810
medium and long would have a minimum range of 120 meters and those 810 meters of long range ATM ammo would be more than LRMs get in TT. So they gave ATMs the effective range of the short range weapon and a maximum a bit over MWO LRMs and a minimum of MWO IS LRMs.

That would be totally fine if we were able to choose from three types of ammo like it is supposed to be. And like it is supposed to be for LB-X ACs. The point of the ATM is to be a flexible weapon.

Take a look at the stats. One ATM 12 comes at 7 tons. 2 more than a LRM 20. 9 heat, so 3 more than a LRM 20. And 72 missiles compared to 180 per ton of LRM ammo. I think we can agree that ATM will not beat LRMs at ranges of more than 450m and it has enough drawbacks to call it even between 270 and 450.

So they are better below 270 than you say? True, until range drops to 180 and they get worse again. As it stands now, ATM is better as LRM between 180 and 270 meters. Who takes a weapon to fight in a 90 meter bracket? Except flamers and MG, but those come at considerably less weight.

So... let's compare ATM to SRM.
One ATM 12: 7t/ 9 heat/ 5 criticals/ 5sec cooldown/ 216 dmg per ton ammo below 270m/ 36 dmg per salvo/ missile speed 160
or 3 SRM 6 + Artemis; 7,5t/ 12 heat/ 6 criticals/ 4sec cooldown/ 200dmg per ton ammo/ 36 dmg per salvo/ missile speed 400

that ATM 12 comes off a bit better than the 3 SRM 6, but I bet the SRMs are more accurate. Keep in mind that those ATM missiles may be guided, but have you ever tried to hit something with cLRMs in close combat?

So there are still a lot of drawbackes, even if minimum range gets removed.

Also, a note. You don't actually need to put Artemis on those SRM6. I mean, you do because Clan spread is horrible, but what I mean is you don't need to pay an Artemis tax. You could spend 6 tons on 4 SRM6 launchers, and burn fewer crits, fewer tons, have a better ammo per ton efficiency, and a higher damage output, at a higher rate of fire - though at higher heat. With faster missiles, too!

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 28 June 2017 - 06:19 PM.

[Duvanor]

I know, but I thought it would be good to have similar damage per salvo and the other stats seem to fit quite well for this comparison.

You could also take 4 ATM 3.
4 ATM 3: 6t/ 10 heat/ 8 criticals/ 4sec cooldown/ 216 dmg per ton ammo below 270m/ 36 dmg per salvo/ missile speed 160

But that depends on available slots and Ghost Heat. I don't know when it kicks in for ATM 3, but I expect them to heat up at something like 3 launchers. Has anybody tried this?

Edited by Duvanor, 28 June 2017 - 06:27 PM.

[50 50]

I thought the ATMs would have a damage graph that looked like steps and was not expecting a minimum range at all.

Man.... can't wait to bail out of work and check all this out.

[Duvanor]

They kinda did listen to the players when they did the new Skill Tree. So maybe there is hope for LPPC, LGauss and ATM. Everything else seems at least as expected to me. Maybe MRMs could use a slight spread reduction.

Edited by Duvanor, 28 June 2017 - 07:18 PM.

[Fyrwulf]

If they're doing 3-in-1, then min range needs to be dropped. ATM-HE has no minimum range. Also, ATM is meant to be a vastly superior choice to both SRMs and LRMs.

[Duvanor]

There should be no weapon that is superior to all other choices. We play PvP game after all and choice is good. But even without minimum range ATM is not better than LRM in long range combat and also not better than SRM in short range combat. And ATM missiles are more vulnerable to AMS than any other weapon. It would not be superior but more flexible with a lot of drawbacks.

[Snowbluff]

Duvanor, on 28 June 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

There should be no weapon that is superior to all other choices. We play PvP game after all and choice is good. But even without minimum range ATM is not better than LRM in long range combat and also not better than SRM in short range combat. And ATM missiles are more vulnerable to AMS than any other weapon. It would not be superior but more flexible with a lot of drawbacks.

No, they should be. Clan missiles suck. Unless the clan LRM (vulnerable to AMS, twisting, and cover compared to IS LRM) and clan SRM (spread is ridiculous) are buffed substantially, the ATM should be vastly superior to be considered a competent weapon system.

[Fyrwulf]

Duvanor, on 28 June 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

But even without minimum range ATM is not better than LRM in long range combat and also not better than SRM in short range combat.

Um... what? Are you even familiar with the tabletop stats?

[Durnaxe]

ATM's should not have a minimum range. That's really stupid imo. After some small testing ATM's move so slowly through the air that ONE laser AMS can shoot down quite a bit fairly easily.

[Duvanor]

Fyrwulf, on 28 June 2017 - 07:42 PM, said:

Um... what? Are you even familiar with the tabletop stats?

Yes, of course. But we got not three different types of ammo here and ECM and AMS will work well against ATMs. For an in depth explaination about the drawbacks of ATMs against LRM and SRM please read my earlier post. It is the 4th in this topic. If you find flaws in my reasoning please explain.

Edited by Duvanor, 29 June 2017 - 01:14 AM.

[Nomad One]

As it stands, ATMs on the public test have a 180 meter minimum range, not 200 meters.

This should be removed entirely so long as the weapons themselves have clan LRM spread, because every missile that MISSES its target is a humongous waste of ammunition and ensures the weapon will have no purpose in the game.

A single AMS will shut down an ATM3, neutralize an ATM6 at 300 meters or greater, halve an ATM9 at 300 meters or greater, and take out 25% of an ATM12s missiles at 300 meters or greater. When you combine a SINGLE AMS countering capability with the ludicrous spread, this can mean that the smaller ATMs won't even deal half their damage at short range. Especially against small targets against which their reduced tracking capability makes them highly inefficient.

So either remove minimum range entirely, or reduce it to 90 meters and reduce the spread on ATMs to the point that no missile will miss a stationary target or one moving directly at you. Because as it stands, ATMs are not even worth considering.

[Tyroki]

I don't really like playing as Clan mechs much, but 90 meters seems much more workable.

[Sir Helbrecht]

Well, let there be a minimum distance, but not 180 meters. It's just too much. 50-90, it would be just right. If the PGI can not make a change of ammunition.

And it would be good to increase the speed of the missiles. But not critical.

Edited by Sir Helbrecht, 29 June 2017 - 03:38 AM.

[DangerousOne]

PGI if you can't implement ability to change amunition during the battle, then just implement two types of ATM - short range "high explosive" without minimun range and the other one the long range with minimum range. How is it ADVANCED TACTICAL MISSILE if it's piece-o-mud useles nonsence in it's current state?!

And by the way the speed of a missile - 160. So max engine Locust can just outrun this missiles? Isn't that tremendously ridiculous?

Edited by DangerousOne, 29 June 2017 - 04:12 AM.

[Acehilator]

Minimum range needs to go, period. And even then the viability of ATMs would be highly debatable. Still very heavy, very hot, susceptible to AMS, and waist-high cover or one side of the mech behind cover negates 30-60% of the hits. For short range, SRMs are clearly superior (even with the somewhat bad spread on Clan launchers), and for long range LRMs are so much better that it is not even funny anymore (even with the stream fire of Clan LRMs).

[MustrumRidcully]

I would alter their flight trajectory so they are less suited for indirect fire, and lower or remove their minimum range.