109 replies to this topic

[Zergling]

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 08:59 AM, said:

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...

I've seen a handful, but they have never done well.

Eg, most recent HGR use I saw was a dual HGR Annihilator, that was poke shooting my quad AC10 Annihilator from about 275 meters range.
It was a horribly uneven fight; each time he poked out to fire a pair of HGR shots, I'd hit him 2 or 3 times with all four AC10s before he got back into cover.
Hell, I wasn't even bothering to twist to take his shots to my side torsos or arms.

Edited by Zergling, 23 July 2017 - 09:25 AM.

[Jep Jorgensson]

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.

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.

The truth hurts, get used to it. Glad they finally diagnosed what was wrong with you though. Hope they can get you fixed soon.

In any event, I am going to let you off the hook since as a great man once said:

I never do verbal battle with others, since even if I win an argument I can’t change the other person’s way of thinking. –Sakamoto Ryoma, Imperialist Samurai (1836 – 1867)

Back to ATM's, if they got rid of the minimum range and made them a little cooler (as they are supposed to be according to sarna.net) along with increasing the missile health (since between firing only 60% of the missiles LRM's fire and their low flight arc which then potentially takes them through multiple AMS bubbles and thus making them doubly susceptible to their fire) and maybe increase the ammo per ton, then they could really be effective and actually worth the effort. Until then, I will stick with my tried and true weapons.

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 23 July 2017 - 08:49 PM.

[Aim64C]

Karl the Plumber, on 23 July 2017 - 07:40 AM, said:

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.

It's a weapon system that takes up a whole ******* torso and can't fit into the arms of anything with an actuator. It has a weird charge mechanic and with two of them at point-blank range, you can do 50 points of damage.

You basically have to build your 'mech around this thing, and there's no real point to it as its 'advantages' are seriously outweighed by its massive disadvantages.

It's no wonder it's not seen.

[Zergling]

Had an encounter with a LRM boating Archer the other day that showed the power of ATMs. While the Archer only fired at me once, the speed at which I was able to deliver damage to it demonstrated the firepower advantage of ATMs.

Basically, I spotted the Archer from seeing his LRMs in the air from about 1km away, and closed the distance with him while moving from cover to cover, shooting at him when I was in the open and had line of sight.

The first salvo I launched was at 600 meters / 1 damage per missile, and it missed.
Second salvo was at 500 meters / 2 damage per missile, hitting for approximately 72 damage done from the 4x ATM9.
Third salvo was just outside 3 damage per missile bracket, hitting for about 2.7 damage per missile, so 97 damage.
Fourth salvo was within 3 damage per missile bracket (and under LRM minimum range), so 108 damage.

That is a total of 276 damage done in 3 salvos; the two firings of my Heavy Mediums only did another 40 damage, and a teammate's LRMs finished the Archer off.


Here's the build I was using.
A comparable LRM build would be this: 4x LRM15 with Artemis.

If I'd been running the LRM15 build, I would have only been doing 60 damage per salvo, for a total of 180 damage, instead of the 276 damage I did with ATMs.
A LRM boat simply wouldn't have been able to drop the Archer as quickly.

At the same time, a brawler build on the Mad Cat Mk II would have been unable to deliver damage at 500 meters; it would have gotten off 2 salvos for 176 damage once in brawling range, in the time I fired 2 ATM salvos.
So because of the ability of ATMs to still do damage at longer than brawling ranges, they do have advantages over such a brawling build (although arguments can be made about concentrated damage for such brawling build).


Anyway, here's a video of the encounter:

Edited by Zergling, 23 July 2017 - 10:17 AM.

[davoodoo]

Zergling, on 23 July 2017 - 10:17 AM, said:

If I'd been running the LRM15 build, I would have only been doing 60 damage per salvo, for a total of 180 damage, instead of the 276 damage I did with ATMs.
A LRM boat simply wouldn't have been able to drop the Archer as quickly.

Heres your mistake

atm9 fires once every 5s while lrm15 once every 4.3s

so you fired 4 salvos from atm9 or 15s cd time
meanwhile lrm15 would fire 5 salvos pr 17.2s cd time for potential 300 dmg but since youve missed 240 dmg...

Though i have to say, these conditions dont favor lrm in any way. lets throw hit at first salvo from both, 300 dmg for lrms and 312 for atms, despite atms firing 2 salvos at 3dmg.

+ thank god that archer was ******* moron which got so far from the group and didnt close distance cause with 2 heavy medlas even locust would kill you.
Atms are very strong if you use them optimally with max posible salvos at 3 dmg bracket, but if you have no such luxury theyll lose to lrms theyll lose to srms and it will be a shitshow.

Edited by davoodoo, 23 July 2017 - 11:18 AM.

[Zergling]

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

Heres your mistake

atm9 fires once every 5s while lrm15 once every 4.3s

so you fired 4 salvos from atm9 or 15s cd time
meanwhile lrm15 would fire 5 salvos pr 17.2s cd time for potential 300 dmg but since youve missed 240 dmg...

Incorrect; I wasn't firing at maximum rate except for at the end when I was at close range, so the slower rate of fire of the ATMs didn't matter.
Even when I was firing as fast as I could, it was only for 2 salvos / 5 seconds, so if I'd been running LRMs I would not have had the time to get a 3rd salvo off (and at that range, LRMs are never gonna match the DPS out ATMs anyway).

Note that when there are limited shot opportunities like this scenario, per salvo damage matters more than raw DPS.

Further, the first salvo was missed, so only the last 3 really count, but it it had hit, it would have been 36 + 72 + 97 + 108 for the ATMs, 313 damage in total.
Four salvos of LRM60 would be 240 damage, so ATMs would still be superior.

Edited by Zergling, 23 July 2017 - 11:24 AM.

[davoodoo]

Zergling, on 23 July 2017 - 11:18 AM, said:

Incorrect; I wasn't firing at maximum rate except for at the end when I was at close range (and LRMs wouldn't have had the time to fire 3 salvos in the time I fired 2 either), so the slower rate of fire of the ATMs didn't matter.

When there are limited shot opportunities, per salvo damage matters more than raw DPS.


Further, the first salvo was missed, so only the last 3 count. In that 10 seconds, 4x LRM15 would only achieve 3 salvos for 180 damage.
Or if the LRM DPS was normalised to 10 seconds + the first salvo, 199.6 damage.

I used time to analyze video
you fired 5 salvos not 4, though half of last salvo never hit the target.
1st missed
2nd on approach
last 3 in the open

now, you could fit 1 more atm and 2more lrm salvos if you didnt hide behind first building when you werent even spotted, also you wouldnt miss.
You created limited shot opportunities, for which i cant blame you, if i was in lurmboat i would just circle around ensuring to keep los.
But i can blame you for playing into atm strength to claim atm superiority...

why normalise?? simulate.
0.00-30dmg
0;50-60dmg
4:30-90dmg
4:80-120dmg
9:10-150dmg
9:60-180dmg

0:00-48dmg
0:50-96dmg
5:00-144dmg
5:50-192dmg
10:00-240dmg
you dont need to normalise **** to show how perfectly they align at 10s...

and im not even gonna mention lvl of potato of that archer who could actually win against you if not for streak of stupid decisions.

Edited by davoodoo, 23 July 2017 - 11:39 AM.

[Zergling]

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 11:37 AM, said:

I used time to analyze video
you fired 5 salvos not 4, though half of last salvo never hit the target.

None of the last salvo hit. The Archer was already dead from the teammate shooting LRMs at it.

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 11:37 AM, said:

But i can blame you for playing into atm strength to claim atm superiority...

News at 11: playing to a weapon's strengths can make that weapon look good.

Also news at 11: people that don't know how to use a weapon, end up thinking that weapon is bad, when it just their own inability that is the problem, not the weapon.

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 11:37 AM, said:

and im not even gonna mention lvl of potato of that archer who could actually win against you if not for streak of stupid decisions.

By the time he could have closed the range to use his better short range weapons inside my ATM minimum range, he'd already taken so much damage that he still would have lost.

If he'd tried to maintain range when I broke cover and approached the final building, 4x ATM9 at 2 damage bracket would clearly beat 2x LRM15, so it would have required potato level mistakes on my part, for me to fail to beat that Archer.

If the Archer been another Mad Cat II with 4x ALRM15, it would have been a more even fight, but I still would have won, even if he hadn't ignored me after the second salvo.

[davoodoo]

Zergling, on 23 July 2017 - 12:03 PM, said:

None of the last salvo hit. The Archer was already dead from the teammate shooting LRMs at it.





News at 11: playing to a weapon's strengths can make that weapon look good.

Also news at 11: people that don't know how to use a weapon, end up thinking that weapon is bad, when it just their own inability that is the problem, not the weapon.





By the time he could have closed the range to use his better short range weapons inside my ATM minimum range, he'd already taken so much damage that he still would have lost.

If he'd tried to maintain range when I broke cover and approached the final building, 4x ATM9 at 2 damage bracket would clearly beat 2x LRM15, so it would have required potato level mistakes on my part, for me to fail to beat that Archer.

If the Archer been another Mad Cat II with 4x ALRM15, it would have been a more even fight, but I still would have won, even if he hadn't ignored me after the second salvo.

Then with slightly shorter cooldown you see where extra lurm salvo fit in...

Fake news at 11: playing to one weapon strengths to claim other weapon couldnt do the same is disingenious.

If niche is too small then its also bad, just look at hgauss, niche is 180m brawling, even if ac20 and uac20 didnt exist it would be outright bad.
Atm niche is 150m long, im glad it performs great in that small niche at least or there would be no reason ot use it.

He could close in, as soon as he seen you he should start closing in, you wouldnt outrun him or he could hide behind building and rush in when you got close, he would be at 120m before 2nd salvo from you, but instead he changed direction and fired on other targets completely ignoring your existence despite seeing you moving towards him
2 lrm15, 2 ssrm2, narc and 4 mplas with xl is just further evidence.

Now i wonder why you mention lrm15 as comparable.

i assume you run this
http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=582&l=9dc92cb9af8f048ca6f45b90b956ffcb6f250390
i would drop ammo and put more energy in arms but to each their own.
or even better drop to 350 and fit 4x atm12.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...cbdbc198ee1cf5e
this is what i would consider comparable...

Edited by davoodoo, 23 July 2017 - 12:40 PM.

[Zergling]

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 12:30 PM, said:

Fake news at 11: playing to one weapon strengths to claim other weapon couldnt do the same is disingenious.

I don't think there's anything disingenuous to say ATMs have superior DPS to LRMs at close range, do you?

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 12:30 PM, said:

If niche is too small then its also bad, just look at hgauss, niche is 180m brawling, even if ac20 and uac20 didnt exist it would be outright bad.

Atm niche is 150m long, im glad it performs great in that small niche at least or there would be no reason ot use it.

ATMs aren't anywhere near the badness of HGR.

I agree the niche is rather small, and I'd like to see ATM effectiveness improved at medium and long ranges, but I do find them to be effective within their niche.

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 12:30 PM, said:

He could close in, as soon as he seen you he should start closing in, you wouldnt outrun him or he could hide behind building and rush in when you got close, he would be at 120m before 2nd salvo from you, but instead he changed direction and fired on other targets completely ignoring your existence despite seeing you moving towards him

2 lrm15, 2 ssrm2, narc and 4 mplas with xl is just further evidence.

He was a stock Archer 5S build, which means a maximum speed of 64.8 kph.

My Mad Cat II-2 had a 375XL engine, so could backup at 45 kph; that is a speed difference of 19.8 kph, which is exactly 5.5 m/s.
In other words, he could only close 27.5 meters distance for every ATM salvo I could get off, provided I backed up when he started closing.

I was ready for such a closing tactic too; you can see that I took a wider turn around the last buildings to establish line of sight on the Archer early.
If I'd seen the Archer hugging the building, I would have widened the turn further to establish a safe distance, and started backing up if it tried to close.

It is unlikely the range would have been less than 250 meters by that point. It would have then taken the Archer 23.64 seconds to get under my ATM minimum range, sufficient time for me to fire 4 salvos, which would have totally wrecked the Archer.

davoodoo, on 23 July 2017 - 12:30 PM, said:

Now i wonder why you mention lrm15 as comparable.

i assume you run this

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=582&l=9dc92cb9af8f048ca6f45b90b956ffcb6f250390
i would drop ammo and put more energy in arms but to each their own.
or even better drop to 350 and fit 4x atm12.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...cbdbc198ee1cf5e
this is what i would consider comparable...

I already linked my build, but here it is again. I'm running the Mad Cat II-2 instead of the II-4 because I don't have the Reinforcement pack.

4x ATM9 = 20 tons
4x LRM15 with Artemis = 18 tons

LRMs are less ammo efficient than ATMs; I'm averaging a little over 2.4 damage per ATM hit, so that's 216 damage/ton, so 2160 potential damage for the 10 tons of ATM ammo I have in that build.
LRMs are 180 damage/ton, so 12 tons of LRM ammo gives 2160 potential damage.

4x LRM20 with Artemis would be more comparable to 4x ATM12, not 4x ATM9.