109 replies to this topic

[Jep Jorgensson]

Zergling, on 21 July 2017 - 08:05 AM, said:

Reza Malin, on 21 July 2017 - 08:11 AM, said:

Well with the first ATM Mad Dog (that was within 300 meters), I was above him on the arch on Forest Colony and rained down indirect-fire on him that he was helpless against while what few rounds he was able to send my way were mostly chewed up by my LAMS. My LRM's however, there were just too many for him. As for the others, I rained on them from across the ravine on Frozen city at 800+ meters without receiving a single mark on my paint job. So again, ATM's are far too situational to be truly effective, especially with their minimum range.

As for my piloting skills...



Eat your hearts out boys!

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 21 July 2017 - 04:59 PM.

[Reza Malin]

Jep Jorgensson, on 21 July 2017 - 04:55 PM, said:

Well with the first ATM Mad Dog.......bla bla

Eat your hearts out boys!

Well. Where to start?

Firstly, sounds like you were playing noobs, but again its anecdotal so we will never really know. Wouldnt surprise me looking at your attitude here, if you were running with a unit killing PUGs, and then slapping yourself on the back because you went the next step of lowness, by doing it with LRMs.

Secondly, eat your heart out at what now? Your screenshot? Ok, lets break it down.

4000+ damage. Now if you were using direct fire then great, i would give you a bit of respect, despite your inaccurate posts.

But you weren't. You used 4 x Mad dog primes......like how bad must you be at the game to have to buy 4 of the same mech just to abuse the CT perks for a weapon system that all of the least skilled players in MWO use?

How is this a good advertisement for your piloting skills? Lol?

[Jep Jorgensson]

Firstly, a guy who refers to what someone says as "bla bla" has no standing to lecture others on their attitude.

Secondly, I never asked them what their tier ratings were.

Thirdly, for you to brush off my 4k+ damage so flippantly, you must get 5-6k+ damage in your matches. Mind if you show them to us?

Fourthly, remind me again, was it you or your buddy that said that Mad Dogs were mediocre and that LRM's were not that good again? I forgot.

Fifthly, I can buy whatever I want and the Mad Dog does not have any CT quirks which illustrates the fact that you do not know what you are talking about.

Lastly, how is demeaning the observations and accomplishments of another pilot a good advertisement for your own piloting skills? LOL!

[Zergling]

Jep Jorgensson, on 21 July 2017 - 04:55 PM, said:

Well with the first ATM Mad Dog (that was within 300 meters), I was above him on the arch on Forest Colony and rained down indirect-fire on him that he was helpless against while what few rounds he was able to send my way were mostly chewed up by my LAMS. My LRM's however, there were just too many for him. As for the others, I rained on them from across the ravine on Frozen city at 800+ meters without receiving a single mark on my paint job. So again, ATM's are far too situational to be truly effective, especially with their minimum range.

So you had AMS, while he didn't, and you had positional advantage, while he failed to take cover from your LRMs.

How exactly, is that an even fight?

Jep Jorgensson, on 21 July 2017 - 04:55 PM, said:

As for my piloting skills...



Eat your hearts out boys!

Nobody with any sort of clue points to the cherry-picked results of a single battle, or even multiple battles, as proof of performance.

Anyone can look at both your QP and FP leaderboard stats, and see you aren't any sort of good player, because your Wins/Losses ratios in both modes is well below 1.0. Your Kills/Battle ratio in QP is also far below 1.0, and below 2.0 in FP.

Those stats indicate a player that sits back and lobs LRMs from safety behind cover, without contributing anything meaningful to your teams, resulting in a dismal W/L ratio.

Which goes back to what I've been saying; you simply aren't a good enough player to be effective with a weapon system that is harder to use than LRMs (and your stats say you aren't effective with LRMs either, or else you'd have higher than 1.0 W/L).

Edited by Zergling, 22 July 2017 - 12:45 AM.

[Jep Jorgensson]

He still had both legs and therefore the option of re-positioning himself. I simply used the terrain to my advantage which is a good skill to have, despite you clearly not recognizing it (most likely because you are unfamiliar with the concept).

Now who is cherry picking?

Rank: 1969 Jep Jorgensson Wins: 138 Losses: 174 W/L Ratio: 0.79 Kills: 245 Deaths: 205 K/D Ratio: 1.20 Games Played: 315 Average Match Score: 323

I like to do a good amount pugging to find fresh recruits for our unit and a lot of training drops with our newbs (some of whom still use trial mechs) so that affects my W/L ratio (oh bloody well, personally). That said, both my K/D ratio and average match score are alright.

As for my FW scores, I just looked both of ours up.

Me: Loyalist Pilot Rank: 265 KMDD: 315 FP Games Played: 144 W: 66 L: 78 W/L Ratio: 0.85 Kills: 220 Deaths: 187 K/D Ratio: 1.18

You: Loyalist Pilot Rank: 6572 KMDD: 6 FP Games Played: 4 W: 2 L: 1 W/L Ratio: 2.00 Kills: 8 Deaths: 10 K/D Ratio: 0.80

Additionally (just for kicks), I did a little math as well.

KMDD per Battle:

Me: 2.19

You: 1.5

So it seems that not only have you not been trying very hard in FW, but the only thing you have on me is having a single win more than your losses. Quite the accomplishment, I must say. Seriously though, come back after you have dropped in 100+ battles and get into at least the Top 1,000 on the leaderboard.

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 22 July 2017 - 11:09 AM.

[Zergling]

EDIT: you know what? Forget it, there's no convincing someone suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome that they just might be less competent than they think they are.

So back to the topic: imo, ATMs are an effective weapon system; I've been running my Clan mechs with them since the patch, and been scoring quite well.
If others can't do the same, then the problem is with them, not the ATMs. If they can't accept that, then tough, 'cause I'm not gonna bother treating their whines with any sort of credibility.

Edited by Zergling, 22 July 2017 - 03:35 PM.

[Punk Oblivion]

I feel like ATM's are in the same spot as MRM's. A good utility weapon with the potential to do huge damage, but you can also just pepper someone with knicks and scratches with sup-optimal shots. Pick your shots well and you will succeed.

But having said that, ATM ammo count should be upped to 100. That puts it at 300 damage/ton for hitting all missiles in optimal range. So same as hitting with an entire ton of MRM ammo. (which would require near-point blank range) And damage will drop from there with less than optimal volleys.

Edited by Punk Oblivion, 22 July 2017 - 03:46 PM.

[Wildstreak]

Punk Oblivion, on 22 July 2017 - 03:45 PM, said:

I feel like ATM's are in the same spot as MRM's.

I don't.
I find MRMs more useful.
ATMs, I look at them and think, "Why would I ever use one?"
ATM3 is same weight as SRM6 without Artemis.
SRM6 needs no lock on.
Sure, ATM has greater range but waiting for that lock on can be annoying which is why I don't use Streaks.
Especially with not only ECM, now Stealth armor.
Anytime I look at building a Clan Mech with New Tech, I find myself skipping ATMs along with Heavy Lasers (tried Smalls, too hot though they alpha decent with ERMLs) and Micro Lasers (tried Pulses, the damage was laughable).
So far the only New Clan Tech I see myself considering would be MG types, maybe Light TAG.

[Clownwarlord]

Nimnul, on 18 July 2017 - 04:36 PM, said:

LBX20 \ HGauss too many slots. LBX20 that would be attractive should take 10 slots and 13 tons.

MRM \ RL Too much missile spread. Too heat and too mass. For an med distance, these weapons are absolutely useless.You can not imagine a worse weapon. MRM is a big disappointment.

LGauss is too big for a small damage.

Disagree, on the Heavy Gauss. Recently I have seen people coupling the Heavy Gauss and the Heavy PPC and doing well with backing up the combo with ER Mediums.

The LBX20 though is just like the clan version but yeah has more slots ... do you see many clan mechs using it anyway? No the reason mostly is the same too much a niche weapon as in low range and spreads.

MRM yeah you got missile spread because you now have greater range!!! RL yeah I do agree useless and needs fixed because still an issue with not all damage being accounted.

Light Gauss haven't really gotten in a mech to use it (can't play every mech and use every weapon all the time).

[ingramli]

RL is the epic junk, no doubt. Velocity of SRMs (400m/s), one-shot, plus having min range, even when u are about to overheat, it does no damage to the foe standing in front of u waiting for your shut down, it is a nice joke.

Edited by ingramli, 22 July 2017 - 06:32 PM.

[Koniving]

CapperDeluxe, on 18 July 2017 - 04:59 PM, said:

HGauss was pretty awesome when I tried it on test server. Throwing it on a Hunchback as replacement for an AC20 was pretty deadly.

Damage/range breakdown of Heavy Gauss (no quirks, no skill tree).
Meters = damage.
180 = 25
360 = 18.75
540 = 12.5
720 = 6.25
900 = 0.

Just think this might help enthusiasts and deal (slightly) with nay-sayers.

Edited by Koniving, 22 July 2017 - 06:35 PM.

[Punk Oblivion]

Wildstreak, on 22 July 2017 - 06:10 PM, said:

I don't. I find MRMs more useful. ATMs, I look at them and think, "Why would I ever use one?" ATM3 is same weight as SRM6 without Artemis. SRM6 needs no lock on. Sure, ATM has greater range but waiting for that lock on can be annoying which is why I don't use Streaks. Especially with not only ECM, now Stealth armor. Anytime I look at building a Clan Mech with New Tech, I find myself skipping ATMs along with Heavy Lasers (tried Smalls, too hot though they alpha decent with ERMLs) and Micro Lasers (tried Pulses, the damage was laughable). So far the only New Clan Tech I see myself considering would be MG types, maybe Light TAG.

Totally forgot that ATM's need a lock... Yeah, in that case ATM's need a lot more help than MRMs. Taking away minimum range would be a start.

Like I said earlier, I think a slight weight reduction for MRM's and they should be GTG I have actually been wrecking with them lately, now that I am getting used to the stream fire.

[Aim64C]

Zergling, on 22 July 2017 - 12:07 PM, said:

EDIT: you know what? Forget it, there's no convincing someone suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome that they just might be less competent than they think they are.

Welcome to my world. Though it pertains less to gaming and more to subjects of engineering, science comprehension, etc.

Quote

So back to the topic: imo, ATMs are an effective weapon system; I've been running my Clan mechs with them since the patch, and been scoring quite well.
If others can't do the same, then the problem is with them, not the ATMs. If they can't accept that, then tough, 'cause I'm not gonna bother treating their whines with any sort of credibility.

This is more or less responding to bravado with bravado.

The problem I have with ATMs is that they are a weapon system that is vastly less likely to win matches than other missile options. I'm not necessarily saying they can't be used well - but that the situations in which they can be used well compounded with the behaviors I typically encounter from players renders other weapons to be far more effective.

LRMs are useful because I can lock onto a target outside of LOS as I am maneuvering to ensure I can hit it - either using shared LOS or my own. I can hit targets as they withdraw from peeking or targets that a scout has identified behind the main line and I know is out in the open.

ATMs lose this key advantage while maintaining most of the disadvantages of missiles. Worse, still - their 3-damage/missile rating falls off just outside of where most LRM damage is done, giving them marginal per-launcher parity with LRMs... while having fewer missiles for AMS to intercept. The main reason to take ATMs would be the higher close-range damage. The problem is that most LRM damage is done around 400 meters for myself and players I consider to understand how to best use the weapon (not to say that we don't fire outside of that range - but that we're aiming to get right behind the brawling line, and for those of us in assaults - that we should be trying to give the enemy something else to shoot at... teamwork).

Since most of the damage is going to be around 24 per launcher, while the launchers weigh in 40% heavier with 1 more critical slots while dropping one of the key tactical advantages of indirect fire and increasing vulnerability to AMS coverage....

The ATM then has to be compared to the SRM, where it adopts a minimum range and does 18 damage (assuming Streak SRM-6 swapped for ATM-6) compared to 12 and weighs 3.5 tons compared to 3... but 3 critical slots as compared to 2. This would, at first, appear to be favorable - except that streaks tend to be used less than standard SRMs for the reason that standard SRMs come in at 1.5 tons for a 6 tube launcher and only take up one critical slot, while also having a better spread for hitting most 'mechs.

The ATM doesn't really do what Streaks do well - which is hitting the little shits, and doesn't really match the best against SRMs outside of a few chassis that can afford to pack on the extra tubes/hardpoint and deal with the critical spaces.

I would argue that, for most purposes, an LRM launcher outshines the ATM. While there are situations where it would certainly preferable to have an ATM - the LRM potentially allows you to avoid those situations, entirely or have already swung them in your favor. Likewise - the mechanics of the ATM make it unlikely to replace the SRM in any application - and the Streak SRM really seems to handle better.

While that is, in many ways, "working as intended" - Neither the LRM or SRM are supposed to be endangered by the ATM... the problem is that there really isn't a call for a role of the ATM without substantial overhaul to its mechanics to make it perform much better in its direct-fire capacity. However, it then threatens Streaks.

It's not that it can't be used, or that it can't be used well - it's that you are generally better served by the more purposed weapon systems that have specific advantages you can capitalize on. I can't shoot a laser around a corner or over a hill. I can do that with LRMs. Even SRMs come into conflict with ballistics and beam weaponry - pinpoint damage over splat. ATMs require me to do what lasers and ballistics do - but give me less return for my effort than LRMs used in much the same role.

I mean - I'll give ATMs their fun in the sun with a few of my builds to see how I can or can't make them work - but they were much more interesting/attractive weapons for tabletop than for MWO, that is for certain.

[Zergling]

Aim64C, on 22 July 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

LRMs are useful because I can lock onto a target outside of LOS as I am maneuvering to ensure I can hit it

ATMs can do the same, as can Streaks.

Aim64C, on 22 July 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

The main reason to take ATMs would be the higher close-range damage.

Correct.

Aim64C, on 22 July 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

Since most of the damage is going to be around 24 per launcher, while the launchers weigh in 40% heavier with 1 more critical slots while dropping one of the key tactical advantages of indirect fire and increasing vulnerability to AMS coverage....

I'm doing about 2.4 average damage per missile that hits with my ATMs. I have a much higher hit percentage than with LRMs too (probs because I'm not shooting indirect at targets that lose lock).

Lack of indirect fire due to flat arc is also an advantage; they can more easily hit targets at close range, even indoors or under ceilings.

AMS vulnerability is a problem, and I'm hoping PGI will buff the ATM missiles to 2 hit points per missile.

Aim64C, on 22 July 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

The ATM then has to be compared to the SRM, where it adopts a minimum range and does 18 damage (assuming Streak SRM-6 swapped for ATM-6) compared to 12 and weighs 3.5 tons compared to 3... but 3 critical slots as compared to 2. This would, at first, appear to be favorable - except that streaks tend to be used less than standard SRMs for the reason that standard SRMs come in at 1.5 tons for a 6 tube launcher and only take up one critical slot, while also having a better spread for hitting most 'mechs.

I agree that they are inferior to SRMs at close range, but they have the advantage of still being useful out to 500 meters (and sorta ok for harrassing enemys out to 1100 meters, if nothing else is available).

They do however, have the ability to pack more firepower into fewer hardpoints than SRMs.

Aim64C, on 22 July 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

While that is, in many ways, "working as intended" - Neither the LRM or SRM are supposed to be endangered by the ATM... the problem is that there really isn't a call for a role of the ATM without substantial overhaul to its mechanics to make it perform much better in its direct-fire capacity. However, it then threatens Streaks.

It's not that it can't be used, or that it can't be used well - it's that you are generally better served by the more purposed weapon systems that have specific advantages you can capitalize on. I can't shoot a laser around a corner or over a hill. I can do that with LRMs. Even SRMs come into conflict with ballistics and beam weaponry - pinpoint damage over splat. ATMs require me to do what lasers and ballistics do - but give me less return for my effort than LRMs used in much the same role.

I mean - I'll give ATMs their fun in the sun with a few of my builds to see how I can or can't make them work - but they were much more interesting/attractive weapons for tabletop than for MWO, that is for certain.

To be fair, I'm not actually opposed to a buff to ATMs, particularly in their mid/long range damage brackets.

I don't think removing their minimum range is a good idea, because their spread becomes very small at close range, which would result in them being incredibly overpowered at point blank range (eg, they'd do all their damage to CT).

[davoodoo]

Koniving, on 22 July 2017 - 06:34 PM, said:

Damage/range breakdown of Heavy Gauss (no quirks, no skill tree).
Meters = damage.
180 = 25
360 = 18.75
540 = 12.5
720 = 6.25
900 = 0.

Just think this might help enthusiasts and deal (slightly) with nay-sayers.

You know that ppl knew that since pts??

thats exactly the reason why hgauss was buried.

[Koniving]

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 02:10 AM, said:

You know that ppl knew that since pts??

thats exactly the reason why hgauss was buried.

Nobody ever told me that it was out to 5x "optimum range." Which is better than some of the hysteria (like it being worthless at 360 meters because 0 damage) I had been reading.

Still would have liked it to go out to 8x optimum range. It'd be just slightly worse than a Gauss Rifle at the GR's range, but somewhat past it the Heavy GR would still fair better before crapping out.

[davoodoo]

Koniving, on 23 July 2017 - 05:43 AM, said:

Nobody ever told me that it was out to 5x "optimum range." Which is better than some of the hysteria (like it being worthless at 360 meters because 0 damage) I had been reading.

Still would have liked it to go out to 8x optimum range. It'd be just slightly worse than a Gauss Rifle at the GR's range, but somewhat past it the Heavy GR would still fair better before crapping out.

5x optimum range is still 25% short of what it should have. Every other weapon with exception of missiles and snub got 2 times their long range as maximum range while snub and hgauss got 1.5 times long
Also yes it was known.

It is worthless at 360m as you have that thing called uac20 which does 26 dmg at that range or uac10 which does 20 dmg at that range, both weigh significantly less and lack hgauss drawbacks like horrible ammo/t, recoil shake, and weapon explosion.
Hell at 360m i would actually go with regular gauss already, sure itll be 3.75 dmg less but i saved 3 tons and 4 crits and another 3 tons and 3 crits on ammo and i can fire further than that + unlike hgauss i can actually crit pad it.

I seriously cant wait for improved heavy gauss rifle
22 dmg at 570m/1140m for 2 heat, 20 tons and 11 crits.

Edited by davoodoo, 23 July 2017 - 05:57 AM.

[AnarchyBurger]

Wil McCullough, on 20 July 2017 - 05:20 PM, said:

light machine gun.

Near med laser range with no heat.... it fine

[Karl the Plumber]

I just can't fit the HG into my playstyle. It seems OK, I'm just bad with timing the charge so I keep the AC20.

[davoodoo]

Ive seen 1 hgauss since patch came out while i see mrms, atms and rac in every match and heavy lasers at least few times a day, if that doesnt give you idea how useful it is then idk what else will...