31 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

so what if IS got their MML(3068)
it would be comparable to Clans ATM but for IS,

MML
MML3/MML5/MML7/MML9
(Multi Missile Launcher) fires Guided Missile at Varying Ranges,
the launchers carry less missiles but their missiles that Behave 2 different ways,
in MWO they would fire Close range like a Lockon SRM, & LRMs at Range,
-
Weapon,...Damage,...Heat,...Spread,...Velocity,...Cool-down,...Range(2/1),...Tons,...Crit*,
MML3,..........6-3...........2..........3.0..........200............4.30..........0-270-900......1.5........2...
MML5,.........10-5..........3..........3.0..........200............4.30..........0-270-900......3.0........3...
MML7,.........14-7..........4..........3.5..........200............4.30..........0-270-900......4.5........4...
MML9,.........18-9..........5..........3.5..........200............4.30..........0-270-900......6.0........5...
(as ATMs they would do Flat Damage but with a Step, and would have no Min Range)
(0-270=2Dam/Missile)(271-320=2-1Dam/Missile)(321-900=1Dam/Missile)

personally i think they would fill a Roll as a in-between missile for iS,
much like ATMs are for Clan, as such ive given them ATM Spread, @MRM Cooldowns,
i would also say they should fire like ATMs more level and strait forward,
but all in a Volley much like normal IS LRMs,


Weapon Comparisons,
-
MML5 vs SRM6,
Weapon,...Damage,...Heat,...Spread,...Velocity,...Cool-down,...Range(2/1),...Tons,...Crit*,
MML5,.........10-5..........3..........3.0..........200............4.30..........0-270-900......3.0........3...
SRM6,.........12.9..........4..........4.5..........400............4.00..............0-270.........3.0........2...
the SRM has double the Velocity, but its also abit hotter and has more spread,
(remember this is SRM6 without Artemis, adding it reduces Spread to 2.92)
-
MML9 vs LRM10,
Weapon,...Damage,...Heat,...Spread,...Velocity,...Cool-down,...Range(2/1),...Tons,...Crit*,
MML9,.........18-9..........5..........3.5..........200............4.30..........0-270-900......6.0........5...
LRM10,.........10...........4..........4.2..........160............3.70............180-900........5.0........2...
the LRM takes up much less Crits, but has less Velocity, more Spread & a Min Range,
(remember this is LRM10 without Artemis, adding it reduces Spread to 2.73)

personally i see both SRMs and LRMs still having a place with MMLs,
as both have their Own Advantages over MMLs in the case of Crits, or no Lockon,

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks

[LordNothing]

this is one of those reasons why we need ammo switching.

[Brain Cancer]

Another example of a weapon system ruined by the incapacity to properly swap fire modes.

[El Bandito]

Well, as long as it doesn't obsolete any previous weapons and is within timeline...

[evilauthor]

El Bandito, on 23 August 2017 - 05:13 PM, said:

Well, as long as it doesn't obsolete any previous weapons and is within timeline...

They don't. MMLs as implemented in the tabletop game are actually heavier on a per-tube basis than pure SRMs and LRMs launchers. The MML's advantage comes in for mechs that like to carry both LRMs and SRMs in the same loadout. An MML-5 at 3 tons is heavier than an individual LRM-5 and an individual SRM-4 and weighs the same as an SRM-6, buuuut, is lighter than a combination of LRM-5 and SRM-4 (4 tons).

Of course, in MWO, we have the additional wrinkle of weapon type specific hard points. SRMs, top out at 6 tubes. MMLs top out at 9. I can certainly see some players deciding to eat the weight penalty (1 MML-9 weighs as much as 2 SRM-6s) just to get a 9 SRM volley (18 damage!) from a single missile hard point.

As for ammo switching, if PGI is really not going to implement manual ammo switching, there's always automatic ammo switching which MMLs would be perfect for. Locked on to a target more than 180 meters away? Fire LRMs. No lock or the lock on target is inside 180 meters? Fire SRMs (that still behave like regular SRMs, no Streak behavior even if you do have a lock). Unless you're out of ammo for one or the other of course, then the MML fires whatever kind of missile you have left.

I decided that selecting ammo based on the targeting reticle range finder is a bad idea because you often need to lead your target to hit it with SRMs, which means your target is going to be way closer than whatever your reticle is aiming at the moment. You don't want to fire LRMs by accident when you wanted to fire SRMs after all.

[Andi Nagasia]

evilauthor, on 23 August 2017 - 05:43 PM, said:

As for ammo switching, if PGI is really not going to implement manual ammo switching, there's always automatic ammo switching which MMLs would be perfect for. Locked on to a target more than 180 meters away? Fire LRMs. No lock or the lock on target is inside 180 meters? Fire SRMs (that still behave like regular SRMs, no Streak behavior even if you do have a lock). Unless you're out of ammo for one or the other of course, then the MML fires whatever kind of missile you have left.

I decided that selecting ammo based on the targeting reticle range finder is a bad idea because you often need to lead your target to hit it with SRMs, which means your target is going to be way closer than whatever your reticle is aiming at the moment. You don't want to fire LRMs by accident when you wanted to fire SRMs after all.

i think as posted above, that they should and would work like ATMs,
SRMs in TT and Lore are lockon homing weapons,
in MWO their Dumbfire(all thinks considered Dumbfire SRMs in TT do 3 Dam/Missile not 2)

which is why i feel they should work like IS ATMs,
have the same Missile Arc as ATMs(mostly firing straight, unless aimed up or down)
have the same Spread(which like ATMs is between Artemis and non-Artemis Launchers)
have Volley fire like IS-LRMs(this is to give them better Accuracy as compared to C-ATMs)

i feel this would make MMLs an option for players wanting to play Missiles,
but dont want to have the disadvantages of a Min Range, or high Arc,

[Smites]

If they work, basically, like ATM? These would be a good weapon.

[Khobai]

MML cant work the way they should without ammo switching

and nothing should work like ATMs currently work, because the way they work in game is not at all in the spirit of the weapon

PGI completely missed the boat with ATMs. They need to fix ATMs not make more crappy weapons like ATMs.

Edited by Khobai, 23 August 2017 - 06:22 PM.

[evilauthor]

Khobai, on 23 August 2017 - 06:18 PM, said:

MML cant work the way they should without ammo switching

It's why I suggested automatic ammo switching depending on targeting conditions. It avoids PGI needing to develop a manual ammo switching function, and the conditions for whether to use LRMs or SRMs are fairly simple and what most players would do manually anyway.

Contrast what ammo switching would do for other weapons where there's alot more tactical ambiguity and judgement calling needed in deciding which ammo type is best for which situation. Or in the case of LB-X ACs, how no one would use cluster if solid shot were available.

With LRMs and SRMs at least, there are clear situations where one is superior over the other. Or at the very least, my ammo selection system defaults to using LRMs in situations where LRMs can be used.. And if the player disagrees, there's a number of methods he can use to force SRMs over LRMs, like not using R key, or just not carrying LRM ammo.

And I can't think of any scenario where you'd want to force LRMs over using SRMs. Why would you use LRMs with no lock or inside their minimum range?

[LordNothing]

Khobai, on 23 August 2017 - 06:18 PM, said:

MML cant work the way they should without ammo switching

and nothing should work like ATMs currently work, because the way they work in game is not at all in the spirit of the weapon

PGI completely missed the boat with ATMs. They need to fix ATMs not make more crappy weapons like ATMs.

the mml is just the is version of atm.

[qS Sachiel]

Plz don't give IS ATM's

[Valhallan]

If we are going into jihad tech, i would MUCH rather have the Plasma Rifle than MML's . I would also love void-sigs and LAMS (the heretical kind) .

[Cassa Nova]

Instead of Ammo switching each MML would act as two weapons, one the SRMs the other LRMS. Then you could put them into two firing groups and when one is triggered its "twin" also goes on cool down. Try to cheese the system and fire them in the same group and the weapon jams for a short period of time. Ammo can either be shared or separate depending how complex PGI wants to get.

Then assuming this worked the formula could be ported over to LBXs finally giving them purpose.

[Alex Morgaine]

Mml, HAG/silver bullet, Light/proto Mech acs, and ap/magshot would be wonderful additions

[Admiral-Dan]

Andi Nagasia, on 23 August 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

so what if IS got their MML(3068)

3068 is a very nice year, in this year clans got their Hyper-Assault Gauss Rifle.
http://www.sarna.net..._Gauss_Rifle_20
I have no problems of IS getting 3068 tech if clans get 3068 tech too.

Andi Nagasia, on 23 August 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

(as ATMs they would do Flat Damage but with a Step, and would have no Min Range)
(0-270=2Dam/Missile)(271-320=2-1Dam/Missile)(321-900=1Dam/Missile)

Of course then PGI need to remove the none BT lore min Range of ATM.

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

Then assuming this worked the formula could be ported over to LBXs finally giving them purpose.

Which got nixed before thanks to MWO's coding having a maximum number of weapons per robot (16, I think?).

If that did exist, ATM's would basically have three fire options, allowing them to negate "hybrid" mode entirely but also making ammo extremely tight.

[Jun Watarase]

We cant even balance star league level tech and people want more and more weapons. Its like asking for even worse balance.

[Andi Nagasia]

Jun Watarase, on 24 August 2017 - 11:17 AM, said:

We cant even balance star league level tech and people want more and more weapons. Its like asking for even worse balance.

not really, our weapons are close to balance, yes their are some that still need love,
but if a game never released content unless all other content was perfect then no game would ever release new content,

personally i feel MMLs could add a new flavor to mwo,
and much like ATMs offer something new to a persons play style,

[evilauthor]

Brain Cancer, on 24 August 2017 - 10:36 AM, said:

Which got nixed before thanks to MWO's coding having a maximum number of weapons per robot (16, I think?).

Wait, what? I get that mechs would have a max limit to the number of weapons they can carry, but why such a low number in this day and age?

[Andi Nagasia]

evilauthor, on 02 September 2017 - 09:42 AM, said:

Brain Cancer, on 24 August 2017 - 10:36 AM, said:

Which got nixed before thanks to MWO's coding having a maximum number of weapons per robot (16, I think?).

Wait, what? I get that mechs would have a max limit to the number of weapons they can carry, but why such a low number in this day and age?

well actually that 16 is from TT i believe,
even MW3 had a 16 weapon limit, so its not a MWO thing but i Lore/TT thing i believe,