136 replies to this topic

[Diablobo]

Why do all the different sized MRM and ATM launchers have the same cooldown? If they are going to have smaller SRM and LRM launchers cooldown faster than the larger ones, then shouldn't the same be true for the MRMs and ATMs? It makes no sense to have their cooldowns all be the same while the other missile types give an added benefit for running smaller launchers.

I suppose that they do it so they won't be too overpowered, but it defies all logic to have two different cooldown rules for basically the same loading system. At least with the energy and ballistic departures from the canon, they have a decent amount of logical consistency. Now they have completely given up even that. They need to either make all SRM and LRM cooldown times the same, or give the new missiles different cooldowns.

[FupDup]

The reason PGI normalized the Civil War missiles is because people kept complaining about how existing LRMs had different cooldowns and spread (OMG LRM5 IS SO OP STRONGEST LRM LAUNCHER GUISE!!!1!) to try to encourage people to not always mount the biggest salvo possible and to also allow mechs with a small tube count to be somewhat decent instead of completely useless.

I think that the ATMs and MRMs should be un-normalized instead of normalizing LRMs even further (the 5/10 and 15/20 already have the same spread) or starting to normalize SRMs.

Edited by FupDup, 24 February 2018 - 04:37 PM.

[El Bandito]

Inconsistency, thy name is PGI.

[Diablobo]

While I do agree that MRMs are a little on the OP side, ATMs are highly skill based weapons that usually end up being crappy LRMs in the hands of those who don't know how to use them. We should be rewarded for the investment in skill training we have to make in order to use them, and having the same cooldown for an ATM 3 as an ATM 12 is ridiculous. They could even narrow the ranges if they become a problem, but as it is there is hardly any reason to pick an ATM 3. AMS makes most 6 launchers into a 3 anyway, so what's the point?

Edited by Diablobo, 24 February 2018 - 05:07 PM.

[Angus McFife VI]

Diablobo, on 24 February 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

While I do agree that MRMs are a little on the OP side, ATMs are highly skill based weapons

Hahahahahaahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahahahahaha

Locking on takes skill but leading a target with very slow, high spread missiles does not! LOL.

[Bombast]

Diablobo, on 24 February 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

While I do agree that MRMs are a little on the OP side...

MRMs are fun, but in what universe are they Overpowered?

[Brain Cancer]

Funny thing: All SRMs and LRMs in tabletop have the same cooldown, too.

(Yes, that means the Solaris rules, where rate of fire actually matters.)

It's one thing that honestly should be normalized over all launchers of a given missile type.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

Bombast, on 24 February 2018 - 05:18 PM, said:

MRMs are fun, but in what universe are they Overpowered?

Somebody got badtouched by a MRMageddon assault...

[Seranov]

Diablobo, on 24 February 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

While I do agree that MRMs are a little on the OP side, ATMs are highly skill based weapons that usually end up being crappy LRMs in the hands of those who don't know how to use them. We should be rewarded for the investment in skill training we have to make in order to use them, and having the same cooldown for an ATM 3 as an ATM 12 is ridiculous. They could even narrow the ranges if they become a problem, but as it is there is hardly any reason to pick an ATM 3. AMS makes most 6 launchers into a 3 anyway, so what's the point?

"Amazing. Everything you just said was wrong."

[Diablobo]

Seranov, on 24 February 2018 - 05:56 PM, said:

"Amazing. Everything you just said was wrong."

Are the quotes around your statement for any particular reason, or do you just add them to be even more snarky?

Maybe you could explain how I am wrong. I must admit I haven't played them very much, since I just started playing in the last two weeks after not playing for about two years. Tell me where I'm wrong, please.

Edited by Diablobo, 24 February 2018 - 07:23 PM.

[Bombast]

Diablobo, on 24 February 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:

Are the quotes around your statement for any particular reason, or do you just add them to be even more snarky?

It's a movie quote.

Quote

Maybe you could explain how I am wrong. I must admit I haven't played them very much, since I just started playing in the last two weeks after not playing for about two years. Tell me where I'm wrong, please.

Ok

Diablobo, on 24 February 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

While I do agree that MRMs are a little on the OP side, ATMs are highly skill based weapons that usually end up being crappy LRMs in the hands of those who don't know how to use them.

Generally, MRMs are not considered OP at all. While they boast technically impressive alphas, spread, stream fire, velocity and magical hitreg rob them of a lot of their damage in actual practice.

ATMs aren't considered OP for the most part either, but they're viewed as a lot scarier. While AMS and terrain keep them from being top tier weapons, lock on makes them generally accurate under nominal circumstances and getting hit by perfect alphas is probably the most unpleasant thing in the game after Machine Gun massages.

Quote

We should be rewarded for the investment in skill training we have to make in order to use them, and having the same cooldown for an ATM 3 as an ATM 12 is ridiculous. They could even narrow the ranges if they become a problem, but as it is there is hardly any reason to pick an ATM 3. AMS makes most 6 launchers into a 3 anyway, so what's the point?

This is just kind of meaningless. Skill has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand, and switching ATMs to the LRM 'cooldown system' only changes how people equip them, not how they perform. So whats the point?

[Khobai]

makes sense to have all weapons of the same type have the same cooldown.

it lets you mix and match different size launchers and still have them sync up for cooldowns

[Alexandra Hekmatyar]

Bombast, on 24 February 2018 - 05:18 PM, said:

MRMs are fun, but in what universe are they Overpowered?

Prolly the planet Utrecht their cloning program went haywire there.

[Bohxim]

Diablobo, on 24 February 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:

Are the quotes around your statement for any particular reason, or do you just add them to be even more snarky?

Maybe you could explain how I am wrong. I must admit I haven't played them very much, since I just started playing in the last two weeks after not playing for about two years. Tell me where I'm wrong, please.

1 example : in u play scouting, having the option to get a lock then hide back down a small hill and let 2 ATM12 fly over to get a 72 homing onto a med from relative safety is just nasty. When u have 3 to 4 of them running double atm 12, they looking at 200-280 dmg onto 1 mech within the first salvo. On the other hand, trying mrm against faster mechs and it just spreads/misses so much.

Then when u reverse the situation in qp, the heavier Is mechs can carry larger and more mrm, basically sandpapering with a twister. But against slow mechs its so painful.

[Nema Nabojiv]

FupDup, on 24 February 2018 - 04:35 PM, said:

I think that the ATMs and MRMs should be un-normalized instead of normalizing LRMs even further (the 5/10 and 15/20 already have the same spread) or starting to normalize SRMs.

If by that you mean nerfing 9/12 and 30/40 launchers, thats probably a bad idea because they're fine and there is no reason for that.

Increasing decreasing cooldown on smaller launchers would be ok I guess. Though I doubt it will make small ATMs useful due to AMS vulnerability.

Edited by Nema Nabojiv, 25 February 2018 - 02:04 PM.

[Leone]

Classically the lower tube count launchers had lower cooldowns.

~Leone

[Brain Cancer]

Leone, on 25 February 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

Classically the lower tube count launchers had lower cooldowns.

~Leone

In tabletop, they all had the same (2 or 1 for LRM and SRM respectively) cooldown times regardless of launcher size.

[Diablobo]

Bohxim, on 24 February 2018 - 08:53 PM, said:

1 example : in u play scouting, having the option to get a lock then hide back down a small hill and let 2 ATM12 fly over to get a 72 homing onto a med from relative safety is just nasty. When u have 3 to 4 of them running double atm 12, they looking at 200-280 dmg onto 1 mech within the first salvo. On the other hand, trying mrm against faster mechs and it just spreads/misses so much.

Then when u reverse the situation in qp, the heavier Is mechs can carry larger and more mrm, basically sandpapering with a twister. But against slow mechs its so painful.

If you are in a position to get blasted by a couple of ATMs without any chance of return fire, then you deserve to get punished for your piloting mistake. If you charge an enemy formation, there is very little to stop a zerg rush, especially in FP. One or two mechs might go down, but the rest are coming through to wreck your position. There need to be area denial weapons and that encourages maneuver, not charges.

Edited by Diablobo, 25 February 2018 - 01:38 PM.

[Diablobo]

Nema Nabojiv, on 25 February 2018 - 09:44 AM, said:

Increasing cooldown on smaller launchers would be ok I guess. Though I doubt it will make small ATMs useful due to AMS vulnerability.

We need the exact opposite. The smaller launchers need more reason for their existence. Isn't the reason we give the smaller SRM and LRM launchers faster cooldowns so that smaller mechs can have decent DPS? An ATM 3 falls off a cliff in DPS numbers compared to a 12, and the same goes for the MRMs.

Edited by Diablobo, 25 February 2018 - 02:00 PM.

[Nema Nabojiv]

Diablobo, on 25 February 2018 - 01:56 PM, said:

We need the exact opposite. The smaller launchers need more reason for their existence. Isn't the reason we give the smaller SRM and LRM launchers faster cooldowns so that smaller mechs can have decent DPS? An ATM 3 falls off a cliff in DPS numbers compared to a 12, and the same goes for the MRMs.

Oh SHI. I sometimes cant into english. I meant make them shoot fasta of course.