255 replies to this topic

[DrxAbstract]

Pjwned, on 08 July 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

The options that you presented for that build are terrible and when pressed on it you defended it as an improvement but now you're not defending it any longer.

There you go again, not recognizing the difference between things. I do believe that build was better with the LFE. What I refuted was your claim that I was making suggestions as to what people should use, rather than simply listing potential directions in which such a build could go in, as well as clarifying to you it was not my 'suggested' build nor that I cared what people used. That you're still confused by that and still think I'm just contradicting myself is beyond baffling, and my patience, at this point. If you don't get it now you never will and there's no point continuing to try any further.

Pjwned, on 08 July 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

Considering it takes 1-2 shots to kill most mechs, especially with those extra lasers, even when they do take survival nodes...

I didn't say that it takes only 1-2 shots to kill even the biggest, toughest mech (from the front, presumably) but I am saying now that yeah actually most mechs will die in 1-2 shots from an AS7-S, especially when you aim for the legs in a lot of cases.

And this is where I will definitely disagree with you - In my experience only Lights and Mediums, with well-placed shots at point-blank, will die in 1-2 hits. Any Heavy/Assault, even if they rarely torso twist, will take upwards of 4-5 Alphas - That's 1/4th your ammo per Mech under ideal circumstances and you're definitely overheating at that point, which is why my design philosophy for the AS7-S has always held ammo and heat sinks of more import than maintaining the 4xASRM6 with a STD350 mantra.

Pjwned, on 08 July 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

We also had a skill tree where it's pretty easy to boost your ammo by a decent amount without using extra tonnage or slots, as I pointed out earlier and which you summarily dismissed.

I did not dismiss it. If you recall correctly, I said it's more worthwhile to use those skill points to get things you couldn't otherwise obtain and to utilize different aspects of the Mech Lab to fit more ammo, such as using a smaller engine. Keep in mind I was using two different AS7-S for QP and FP, and the QP version had a STD310 well before the Engine Decoupling and Skill Tree came about. Unfortunately I stripped all my builds of weapons/equipment/modules before The Great Sundering that was PGI's launching of the Skill Tree and module 'reimbursement', so my exact AS7-S builds are gone, but were similar to this:

AS7-S QP
AS7-S FP

Pjwned, on 08 July 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

It's been hard to tell at times when a lot of your responses have been simply dismissing my points and saying your way is superior instead.

Dismissing is quite a bit different from addressing them and then watching you breeze right by them, or misunderstand the intent of my words, resulting in having to address the same thing repeatedly, at which point I no longer bother to acknowledge them anymore because I've already responded to it, typically more than once and in more than one way in hopes you'll get it that time around.

[Zergling]

Khobai, on 08 July 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

But if ATMs cant be better than SRMs/Streaks at short range

And cant be better than LRMs at medium range

Then what role are ATMs supposed to have exactly? that makes no sense.

You are literally saying ATMs are setup for failure no matter what.

They are a jack-of-all-trades (or rather, jack-of-all-ranges) weapon. They'll be less efficient at either short or long range than SRMs or LRMs, but unlike those weapons they are capable of being used at either range.


Eg, this is how the ATMs compare in TT Battletech:

Clan SRM6 + 1 ton of ammo is 2.5 tons, and averages 8 damage (4 missiles hitting) per shot, so that is 3.2 damage per ton.
ATM12 + 3 tons of HE ammo is 10.0 tons, and averages 30 damage (10 missiles hitting) per shot, so that is 3.0 damage per ton.

Clan LRM20 + 2 tons of ammo is 7.0 tons, and averages 12 damage (12 missiles hitting) per shot, so that is 1.71 damage per ton.
ATM12 + 3 tons of ER ammo is 10.0 tons, and averages 10 damage (10 misisles hitting) per shot, so that is 1.00 damage per ton.

Basically, the ATM trades efficiency at specific ranges for flexibility. Sure it can't be as effective as comparable tonnage in LRMs at long range, but it will be more effective than LRMs at shorter ranges.
Same for ATM vs SRMs; less effective than at short range, but capable of shooting at much longer ranges than SRMs.

ATMs in TT are however, more efficient than using a mixture of both SRMs and LRMs (ditto for the Inner Sphere MMLs).


Side note: I wish ATMs were balanced like they were in TT. I'd be quite willing to trade a bit of short range damage (compared to SRMs) for the ability to do damage beyond 270 meters.
Unfortunately, MWO has much more factors to consider when it comes to balance than TT does.

Edited by Zergling, 08 July 2017 - 07:42 PM.

[Weeny Machine]

Lances107, on 08 July 2017 - 01:56 PM, said:

I am just going to say it. The tech is bad all around on both sides of the fence accept for a few key items on the IS side. The stealth armor needs to be redone. I just do not see anyway around, the current set up not being abused. Especially with seismic so far down the skill tree. Rotary cannon alone, I do not see it as a threat, however patched in with a couple ultras could prove devastating. On the other hand the IS does not get the space/tonage we get on the clans side. So It may just end up as a dud. The rockets, I have not seen them in action, so its hard to judge where they are at in the scheme of things. This being said I am hearing they hit like a ton a bricks. If this is true than, either turn there damage in wide spread, or unnerf the clan srms. Really the only three areas I saw as a major problem. The rest of it will be fun to screw around with but I dont really see it making its way onto faction warfare or the elitist comp side of things.

I tried the rotary at the beginning of the PTS and I was totally underwhelmed because it hit like a wet noodle. Was it changed during the PTS?

[Pjwned]

DrxAbstract, on 08 July 2017 - 07:19 PM, said:

There you go again, not recognizing the difference between things. I do believe that build was better with the LFE. What I refuted was your claim that I was making suggestions as to what people should use, rather than simply listing potential directions in which such a build could go in, as well as clarifying to you it was not my 'suggested' build nor that I cared what people used. That you're still confused by that and still think I'm just contradicting myself is beyond baffling, and my patience, at this point. If you don't get it now you never will and there's no point continuing to try any further.

The problem is that you're not making a meaningful distinction with "your build" or "your options" (or whatever the hell you want to say that was) while weaseling out of explaining how you actually improved anything despite valid scrutiny and flat out ignoring reality (of engine damage penalties), and you feel the need to constantly re-clarify while entirely missing the point.

Quote

And this is where I will definitely disagree with you - In my experience only Lights and Mediums, with well-placed shots at point-blank, will die in 1-2 hits. Any Heavy/Assault, even if they rarely torso twist, will take upwards of 4-5 Alphas - That's 1/4th your ammo per Mech under ideal circumstances and you're definitely overheating at that point, which is why my design philosophy for the AS7-S has always held ammo and heat sinks of more import than maintaining the 4xASRM6 with a STD350 mantra.

If you say so...

Quote

I did not dismiss it. If you recall correctly, I said it's more worthwhile to use those skill points to get things you couldn't otherwise obtain and to utilize different aspects of the Mech Lab to fit more ammo, such as using a smaller engine.

I find it exceedingly hard to believe that you're better off intentionally avoiding the ammo capacity nodes in favor of more range/cooldown/heat nodes--all of which are along the way to those ammo nodes, by the way--with a build that exclusively uses ammo weapons, or even a build with a couple of backup lasers, particularly when those nodes only get better with the more ammo you carry; I also find it hard to believe that you couldn't spare a few skill points from another skill tree in the case that you took all of those nodes and the ammo capacity nodes.

Quote

Keep in mind I was using two different AS7-S for QP and FP, and the QP version had a STD310 well before the Engine Decoupling and Skill Tree came about. Unfortunately I stripped all my builds of weapons/equipment/modules before The Great Sundering that was PGI's launching of the Skill Tree and module 'reimbursement', so my exact AS7-S builds are gone, but were similar to this:

AS7-S QP
AS7-S FP

I thought I was exaggerating when I suggested that you think brawling lasts for 10 minutes straight, but those builds suggest to me that you do actually think that, which might explain your reaction when I brought it up sarcastically.

Quote

Dismissing is quite a bit different from addressing them and then watching you breeze right by them, or misunderstand the intent of my words, resulting in having to address the same thing repeatedly, at which point I no longer bother to acknowledge them anymore because I've already responded to it, typically more than once and in more than one way in hopes you'll get it that time around.

You mean just like you when you gave those "options" then? I don't know of a better (or even satisfactory) way to describe your "options" (or to explain how much of a hypocrite you are) without you going on another disingenuous rant so I'll just leave it at that.

I'm done, don't expect another response, so you can get your last word in if you want.

Edited by Pjwned, 09 July 2017 - 12:06 AM.

[Lances107]

Bush Hopper, on 08 July 2017 - 10:50 PM, said:

I tried the rotary at the beginning of the PTS and I was totally underwhelmed because it hit like a wet noodle. Was it changed during the PTS?

As far as I know no, I had watched a video of the B33f using them. The statement was could be useful if you held down the trigger with the rotary going along with a couple of ultras. Come to rethink that thought , that would be incorrect, too much face time for that. You cant really buff the damage either with the ability to swing rounds like that. The stealth, and the rockets concern me. The Massive, dont know why, debate over the atms is folly. Simply put I cant think of a single weapon that would line up with those. The last video I watched on those in pts, showed spread damage, with a lock on time, and a very small window of opportunity for optimal damage. They might as well bring stealth armor and rockets in line with everything else. It keeps the balance of the game and we get a truck load of useless weapons. Better then putting stealth out there, and rockets as is to lop side the entire balance of the game.

[MischiefSC]

Khobai, on 08 July 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

But if ATMs cant be better than SRMs/Streaks at short range

And cant be better than LRMs at medium range

Then what role are ATMs supposed to have exactly? that makes no sense.

You are literally saying ATMs are setup for failure no matter what.

No, stronger at mid range and usable at both.

That's what makes them a cool concept. You can force a brawl and kite at long range, holding the mid range bubble is hard and less intuitive.

The point is that ATMs should out perform SRMs from120m on and crush LRMs inside 300m. However inside 120m SRMs should be better (if they can safely get that close) and 400m+ and indirect fire should be at a disadvantage vs LRMs.

That's why I want ATMs to ramp damage to peak at 270m or so and a max of 810 - that way the damage peaks further out than if you have it over 1k. They're bollocks at 600m+ anyway.

[Andi Nagasia]

Zergling, on 07 July 2017 - 10:23 PM, said:

Andi Nagasia, on 07 July 2017 - 09:46 PM, said:

how so, i just used only TT Stats,

ATM Standard Ammo is 120-450m Range @ 2Damage per Missile,
Lore wise it does have Artemis IV built in so that Justifies the Spread,
and TT and Lore really doesnt State the Velocity so im going with 240,

just assume the HE and ER Ammo is on back Order?

It would have a niche, and it certainly could be better than what was in the PTS... it would just disappointing it wouldn't be the flexible weapon it should be.

True, but lets face it we arnt going to be using ATMs past 450, because of their Damage & Ammo/Ton,
at least if they were based off the Standard ATM Ammo, the Ammo/Ton could go up to match SRMs if not slightly more,

[Khobai]

Quote

The point is that ATMs should out perform SRMs from120m on and crush LRMs inside 300m

What youre describing already exists. Theyre called lasers. And they dont come with any of the baggage of ATMs.

Again im still not seeing what makes ATMs unique or why I would ever want to use them.

Why would anyone who wants to use missiles ever take ATMs instead of just taking LRMs and Lasers? Because that specialized combo of weapons is way better than ATMs at all ranges. Yes ATMs are more heat efficient but they also come with numerous disadvantages that more straightforward weapons like lasers dont have to deal with. So id rather just pay the extra heat for something thats more consistent and reliable.

Lasers are better than SRMs. If ATMs are worse than SRMs then ATMs dont compete with lasers. Which means ATMs need to be competing more with Lasers than anything else, since Lasers are what people mostly use at short range. The days of people using SRMs are pretty much over, theyre not good weapons anymore. And I pretty much never see Streaks anymore outside 4v4 scout mode.

Saying ATMs have to be worse than SRMs at short range is literally setting them up for failure. Because in reality SRMs need a buff, they need too be better at short range themselves.

Quote

True, but lets face it we arnt going to be using ATMs past 450, because of their Damage & Ammo/Ton,

Well the ammo per ton needs to be increased from 72-90. Of all the problems ATMs have, ammo shortage should not be one of them. The missile health needs to be increased too so AMS doesnt wreck them. That would increase their viability at longer ranges.

Also ATMs need to hit very hard at short and medium range or theres no reason to use them over Lasers+LRMs.

And if the HML in particular is buffed into a usable weapon itll be a decent hard hitting option for LRM boats because it does a crazy 10 damage for only 1 ton. But they need to reduce its cooldown time and lower its heat.

Edited by Khobai, 09 July 2017 - 10:35 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Lasers are better because hitscan and a poke weapon. I'm hoping I don't need to explain the difference in how missiles play vs lasers, not to mention the whole E hardpoint vs M.

I get that what you want is New Clan SRMs that you can use with a lock at any range. SRMs still get used constantly outside of comp and for good reason - they're solid, hard hitting weapons at close range. They've been strong in comp at various points, even recently, just that at the moment there's better options and comp play tends to favor poke.

I'll play ATMs as is vs SRMs. When they come out you take an SRM Orion, I'll take an ATM one. If I hit you 2x before you get inside 120m it's over. If there's no minimum range and ATMs do more damage up close than SRMs then SRMs are in all functional ways inferior to ATMs. SRMs need a clear damage advantage at point blank or you've actually made them worthless for real and badly ****** IS/Clan balance because ATMs will be stupidly OP, even without the health boost they need because at point blank AND won't save you vs a 120 pt alpha. Accuracy is less or an issue when 1 or 2 hits will cripple any heavy/assault and delete a light and most mediums.

However, again, not expecting PGI to just remove the min range and leave high damage or just make them 800m locking SRMs.

They do need health boost and some sort of min range damage though or they suddenly become trash overall.

Situationally worthless = functionally worthless.

[Khobai]

Quote

SRMs need a clear damage advantage at point blank or you've actually made them worthless for real and badly ******

Except SRMs already are worthless and badly ******. They need a hefty buff. That was my point.

SRMs were already on their knees when they nerfed the SRM4, and nerfing the SRM4 pretty much rendered them obsolete compared to lasers.

SRMs need a complete overhaul as a weapon system. And as flawed as they are, they should absolutely not be used as a baseline for ATMs.

Quote

If I hit you 2x before you get inside 120m it's over.

Hows that any different from getting hit twice with 2x Gauss/x2 PPC. Or getting hit twice with laser vomit?

if you alpha someone twice with any decent combination of weapon its pretty much over.

And those other combinations of weapons dont have to worry about 120m min range, holding locks, ECM, or getting shot down by AMS.

I have to say im not horribly impressed with ATMs. I wasnt impressed with them on PTS. And other peoples' hypothetical embodiments of what ATMs should be dont really impress me either. I just get the feeling that people are resigned to them being bad... because its what theyve come to expect from missile weapons.

Edited by Khobai, 09 July 2017 - 10:59 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Khobai, on 09 July 2017 - 10:40 AM, said:

Except SRMs already are worthless and badly ******. They need a hefty buff. That was my point.

Wat?

SRMs are a great brawling weapon - heavily boated smalls are just better. If you remove the top 5 Clan laserboat mechs from the equation much of what's left across most weight classes is SRM heavy. Splat vs precision is a close balance and it's why unless you're SJR/Emp/short list players/teams who don't miss shots and mismanage high heat your best brawl options are SRMs. Splatclops, splat Huntsman, splat Linebacker are all brutal mechs. SRMs are very solid. A couple of mechs that can boat 12 energy hardpoints making huge piles of small lasers viable doesn't change that.

SRMs are for dedicated brawling and in that role they're one of the best choices. That forcing a brawl is less reliable than picking at long/mid range in comp doesn't change that. ATMs replacing SRMs isn't needed. It also wouldn't change how comp plays.

[Khobai]

Quote

Splat vs precision is a close balance and it's why unless you're SJR/Emp/short list players/teams who don't miss shots and mismanage high heat your best brawl options are SRMs.

No your best brawl option is lasers. SRMs are too short range to compete with lasers builds. And theyre not that good at hit-and-run or poking because of how close you have to get to the target. It makes it very difficult to escape without getting killed.

SRMs simply are not effective weapons anymore in my experience.

Quote

SRMs are for dedicated brawling and in that role they're one of the best choices.

Theyre okay if youre just going to run a facehugging assault like an Atlas. Because once its commited to a fight it doesnt really have the option to run away. But thats also largely due to the Atlas' hardpoints and the fact its forced to use missiles to do any half decent damage. It doesnt have the choice to not use SRMs.

But for any mech that relies on mobility theyre just not good weapons.

Edited by Khobai, 09 July 2017 - 11:16 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Khobai, on 09 July 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

No your best brawl option is lasers. SRMs are too short range to compete with lasers builds. And theyre not that good at hit-and-run or poking because of how close you have to get to the target. It makes it very difficult to escape without getting killed.

SRMs simply are not effective weapons anymore in my experience.

You should go watch some MRBC matches, because you are out of your league.

[Khobai]

Quote

You should go watch some MRBC matches, because you are out of your league.

Why? MRBC is the absolute last thing anyone should watch if they want accurate data on MWO's meta.

Because it has its own set of rules that skew the meta. 8v8 forced composition vs 12v12 unforced composition is a huge difference for example. It makes brawling weapons significantly better because theres less mechs (and lighter mechs) in the fireline to keep brawlers suppressed. That makes it much easier for brawlers to close distance without getting obliterated and it makes it much easier for lights to conduct hit-and-run attacks in general.

Of course SRMs are going to perform better in an environment where theres less overall mechs and teams with lighter tonnage. But the reality is MWO is not 8v8. Its 12v12. And in 12v12 SRMs are not very good.

I would very much like for quickplay to go back to 8v8 though because I feel 8v8 has a much better balance between brawling and sniping. 12v12 should be for factionplay gamemodes only. Going back to 8v8 is another possible way to fix SRMs.

Edited by Khobai, 09 July 2017 - 11:37 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Khobai, on 09 July 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

Why? MRBC is the absolute last thing anyone should watch if they want accurate data on MWO's meta.

Because it has its own set of rules that skew the meta. 8v8 forced composition vs 12v12 unforced composition is a huge difference for example. It makes brawling weapons significantly better because theres less mechs (and lighter mechs) in the fireline to keep brawlers suppressed. That makes it much easier for brawlers to close distance without getting obliterated and it makes it much easier for lights to conduct hit-and-run attacks in general.

Of course SRMs are going to perform better in an environment where theres less overall mechs and teams with lighter tonnage. But the reality is MWO is not 8v8. Its 12v12. And in 12v12 SRMs are not very good.

I would very much like for quickplay to go back to 8v8 though because I feel 8v8 has a much better balance between brawling and sniping. 12v12 should be for factionplay gamemodes only. Going back to 8v8 is another possible way to fix SRMs.

Oh the rules skew the meta alright, but not in the direction you are thinking. If it weren't for the 8-player teams and limit of 1 duplicate chassis, you'd probably see a lot more Orion IICs and Summoners and such with SRMs with a few 'Mechs doing overwatch duty using lasers or ballistics, and that's assuming brawl doesn't get shut down completely by power positioning.

Laser brawling is the domain of only a few specific 'Mechs (GAR, EXE, NVA, SCR) and, of those, only two are really preferred, only one gets duped with any consistency, and none of them can do any appreciable damage from outside of SRM range.

[MischiefSC]

Khobai, on 09 July 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

No your best brawl option is lasers. SRMs are too short range to compete with lasers builds. And theyre not that good at hit-and-run or poking because of how close you have to get to the target. It makes it very difficult to escape without getting killed.

SRMs simply are not effective weapons anymore in my experience.



Theyre okay if youre just going to run a facehugging assault like an Atlas. Because once its commited to a fight it doesnt really have the option to run away. But thats also largely due to the Atlas' hardpoints and the fact its forced to use missiles to do any half decent damage. It doesnt have the choice to not use SRMs.

But for any mech that relies on mobility theyre just not good weapons.

Linebacker, Huntsman, Griffin, Shads, Hunchies, Bushies, pretty much every light/medium hit and run brawler that's not the Nova/Fridge would disagree with you.

The best brawler being 8+ CSPLs (now cersml) because they are so hugely damage to heat efficient and hitscan accurate and great DPS.

You round a corner at 90m with a laservomit hunchie/whatever and you're boating SRMs, if he's smart he'll try to duck out and get range so you don't destroy him.

If he's any good.

[Zergling]

SRMs are definitely NOT a bad weapon. Even in Solo QP, they are one of my favourite and most effective weapon systems.

The thing thta annoys me the most with them is their lack of range, not their lack of firepower. If I could trade some firepower (say, 10-25%) for the flexbility of shooting at medium and long ranges too, I'd go for it in an instant, which is why I was looking forward to ATMs.

Sadly, PGI made ATMs an 'easy to use / noob tube' weapon like Streak SRMs and LRMs, so they'll have to be balanced against those weapons instead of the unguided SRMs, which means for players of any sort of decent skill level, they won't be a useful weapon system.

Edited by Zergling, 09 July 2017 - 01:50 PM.

[FireStoat]

SRM's are an excellent mix of damage, heat, weight, and instant fire / fast velocity for brawling. If you pick a very durable mech like say, a Linebacker, being able to twist and roll damage and only spend a split second for firing boated missiles makes you far, FAR more dangerous than going lasers. Laser boat Linebackers trying to brawl are doing it hideously wrong.

I'm not putting down lasers for other situations they're good for, even the Small variety of lasers. I just find it to be complete comedy for someone to make a sweeping statement that SRM's are not as good as X weapon in all situations.

[LT. HARDCASE]

I've seen a lot of people here, on HPG, and Youtube underestimating how devastating ATMs are going to be, in 12v12 scenarios.

[Khobai]

Quote

. I just find it to be complete comedy for someone to make a sweeping statement that SRM's are not as good as X weapon in all situations.

Except I never said SRMs were bad in "all situations"? I find it to be a complete comedy when people fully distort and exaggerate what I say.

What I said was that lasers are better for hit-and-run because of their superior range. And that I would rather take lasers over SRMs on mechs that favor mobility. Because I can poke and hit-and-run much more effectively and its easier to disengage if I have to. Where SRMs require you to get closer and force you to commit more to a fight.

Not only that but I even gave a specific example where SRMs are still fine.

And I said SRMs are much better in 8v8 forced composition than 12v12. 8v8 is far less punishing for brawlers because its easier to get into brawling range because theres less concentrated firepower. Its also easier to hit-and-run with SRMs with less mechs on the enemy team.

And I certainly have no issues with SRMs in 4v4 scout mode. I use them on my huntsman. Its only 12v12 I find them to be bad. But I find most short range only weapons to be worse in 12v12 since long range trading is a huge part of winning 12v12 matches.

Quote

I've seen a lot of people here, on HPG, and Youtube underestimating how devastating ATMs are going to be, in 12v12 scenarios.

I dont think so. 12v12 is going to make it harder to get into the effective range of ATMs. In 4v4 it was easy simply because neither team had enough concentrated firepower to stop eachother from getting into brawling range.

Its the same reason I feel SRMs are worse in 12v12 than 8v8/4v4.

I mean I can take x2 Gauss and x2 PPC and do like 50 PPFLD from 700m away.

But if I have to get within 300m to use ATMs, get and hold a lock, and make sure they arnt chewed up by AMS, all while staying 120m away from the target, im just not seeing why I would ever put myself through that aggravation... just to do less damage than SRMs?

If I really wanna run missiles and have an effective short range backup im just gonna use LRMs and Lasers.

Edited by Khobai, 09 July 2017 - 02:27 PM.