99 replies to this topic

[InspectorG]

justcallme A S H, on 24 March 2018 - 04:06 AM, said:

I haven't had AMS on a mech in... A long time.

It's called using cover. Rarely died to LRMs, suffered from them or even been hurt by teams using them.

AMS = 10 tons armor?

Comp players equip them all the time, right?

[InspectorG]

AMS is a waste.

Press W, hit the Lurmers hard enough to make them break locks.

Broken lock = no Lurms

Why do people need such defensive measures vs the weapon with the most tonnage-free hard counters?

[Dragonporn]

AMS isn't a waste, but as many people have pointed out - it is quite situational thing (like many other things in MWO, in fact). I install it only if I have spare tonnage, when I don't have to sacrifice my firepower or armor too much for it, and favor it either on very slow Assaults/Heavies, or Lights built for support and escort. In other mech types you can have ECM, find friendly ECM bubble, take cover and shut down for a moment or simply dodge. Not like every single match there are tons of missiles flying anyway, so...

[Khobai]

Quote

But remember why we got the missile warning in the first place. <smh>

but missile warnings dont stop T4-T5 players from getting hit with LRMs anyway

bad players are gonna get hit no matter what

so why not just make it so you only get missile warnings if you have AMS equipped. then theres more of a reason for good players to use AMS.

Quote

AMS = 10 tons armor?

Thats ridiculous. I might buy 2.5 tons. But not 10 tons.

10 tons wrongly assumes that all your AMS ammo is going to shoot down missiles that would otherwise damage someone on your team.

being optimistic, maybe 25% of your AMS shots actually prevent damage. The other 75% of the time AMS shoots at missiles that arnt going to hit anyone or it shoots into rocks/buildings and you have to turn the thing off to not waste more ammo. LOL.

Edited by Khobai, 24 March 2018 - 04:00 PM.

[PocketYoda]

Depends on the mech and the enemy.

[Brain Cancer]

Vonbach, on 24 March 2018 - 12:53 PM, said:

Better to have and not need then need and not have.

Which is why people generally mount extra armor, heatsinks, etc.

Because you always have those armor points against INCOMING MISSILES, but your AMS really sucks when it's INCOMING LASERS.

[Fleeb the Mad]

AMS is more handy these days in the face of ATMs and streaks, in which usually the firing mech has line of sight at relatively short range and the lock isn't going to be broken before the missiles arrive.

It doesn't offer any semblance of full protection, but it does always prevent some damage. Particularly useful in assault mechs that can't peek well. In smaller machines it becomes a bigger proportion of the payload and increasingly harder to justify.

I wouldn't ever call AMS useless. Defeating long range LRM spam is easy, but cover is not a miraculous solution for a Huntsman that has a line of sight on you at 300m.

[Dogstar]

Khobai, on 24 March 2018 - 03:53 PM, said:

being optimistic, maybe 25% of your AMS shots actually prevent damage. The other 75% of the time AMS shoots at missiles that arnt going to hit anyone or it shoots into rocks/buildings and you have to turn the thing off to not waste more ammo. LOL.

This is the sort of thing I was asking for, rather then the deluge of 'I fit it'/'I don't fit it', because if you assume 25% effectiveness then it's easy to see that rather than AMS being worth 10 tons of armour it's more like 2.5 tons.

What are people's opinions on how _effective_ AMS is on average? 5% 10% 25% 50%???

Edited by Dogstar, 25 March 2018 - 12:36 AM.

[El Bandito]

Dogstar, on 25 March 2018 - 12:35 AM, said:

This is the sort of thing I was asking for, rather then the deluge of 'I fit it'/'I don't fit it', because if you assume 25% effectiveness then it's easy to see that rather than AMS being worth 10 tons of armour it's more like 2.5 tons.

What are people's opinions on how _effective_ AMS is on average? 5% 10% 25% 50%???

Lets just say that I never once regretted bringing AMS on my mech, instead of an extra DHS. In contrast there were plenty of times I regretted not bringing AMS on my mech.

Edited by El Bandito, 25 March 2018 - 02:28 AM.

[Sjorpha]

So I see the argument that LRM/ATM are so easy to avoid anyways that you don't need AMS, and yes that's true but it misses a cruical point I think.

A good player would not take AMS because ha can't otherwise avoid them with cover, breaking locks etc, he would take AMS in order to facilitate a more aggressive playstyle where he can literally ignore a couple LRM mechs while pushing or holding a line, and that can be very powerful since forcing a mech into cover definitely isn't nothing from a tactical standpoint.

There are some situations where I'll want AMS, not because I couldn't use cover but because I'd rather stay exposed and keep my DPS and pressure maxed out than spend precious time behind cover.

So this means that IMO the argument "just use cover instead" and the like is a bit of a fallacy. I still don't think AMS is worth it that often, but the reason for that is mainly that you randomly don't face enough missiles making it a gamble with valuable tonnage, not that it's not good when you do face missiles because it definitely is.

[El Bandito]

Sjorpha, on 25 March 2018 - 02:48 AM, said:

A good player would not take AMS because ha can't otherwise avoid them with cover, breaking locks etc, he would take AMS in order to facilitate a more aggressive playstyle where he can literally ignore a couple LRM mechs while pushing or holding a line, and that can be very powerful since forcing a mech into cover definitely isn't nothing from a tactical standpoint.

AMS is also good for protecting your less than good meatshields (teammates) who are not in cover. Longer they survive, more damage you can do.

[ThreeStooges]

Ams is just one of the 40 counters to lrms. Remember that thread that counted them all?

[Tier5 Kerensky]

I use AMS on many mechs, it's not heavy or slot hungry. Never found a mech with enough cooling for LAMS, except 4 MG Locust.

[El Bandito]

Teer Kerensky, on 25 March 2018 - 08:20 AM, said:

I use AMS on many mechs, it's not heavy or slot hungry. Never found a mech with enough cooling for LAMS, except 4 MG Locust.

You can add Piranha to the list.

[Nightbird]

Not worth it once you learn how to avoid missiles. May be a few maps like polar and alpine that are exceptions, but only if you get narced.

[Dogstar]

So I tried a triple AMS Nova with 3 tons of ammo and used it all up in a match earlier today - so it's definitely useful
But in another match I was too adventurous and got lurmed to bits - so it's not all powerful

Results so far? 50/50

[Krivvan]

Dogstar, on 25 March 2018 - 09:35 AM, said:

So I tried a triple AMS Nova with 3 tons of ammo and used it all up in a match earlier today - so it's definitely useful

Using up ammo doesn't mean it's useful. Only if the ammo was used to shoot missiles that were actually going to hit anything, which is rarely the case.

Edited by Krivvan, 25 March 2018 - 09:52 AM.

[Dogstar]

Krivvan, on 25 March 2018 - 09:52 AM, said:

Using up ammo doesn't mean it's useful. Only if the ammo was used to shoot missiles that were actually going to hit anything, which is rarely the case.

Oh so you were in the match and watching me the whole time? If I said it was useful in that match then it was, I wasn't making a blanket statement

[Krivvan]

Dogstar, on 25 March 2018 - 09:54 AM, said:

Oh so you were in the match and watching me the whole time? If I said it was useful in that match then it was

It means you thought it was useful. But the point was that you were implying that the ammo being used up was a reliable metric of it being useful or not, which isn't the case. You can use up all 3 tons of ammo without destroying a single missile that wasn't already going to miss. It depends on how well the rest of your team was playing though.

Edited by Krivvan, 25 March 2018 - 11:06 AM.

[Jman5]

If you're not on a comp team or playing in a comp match, I think AMS is worth bringing.

Copying what the comp teams do in this regard is a mistake because they exist in an environment that is different than the common man's world.

First off, In competitive leagues you're not seeing lock-on missiles with any frequency so AMS is a waste of tonnage there.

Secondly these people that are defining the meta are more likely than not playing for some all star comp team. You look at their WLR and it's absurdly high season after season. When you win that much, you're not competing against the opponent, you're competing against your teammates to get as much damage in as you can before you slaughter them. On these teams, defense is a distant secondary concern most games. The few games where they do face a decent opponent, they're not bringing weapons AMS can work against because they're comp teams themselves.

Third, these comp guys are just brutally good. They've been playing at a high level for so long they are much better at avoiding locks than anyone else. I think it's a mistake to expect average players to be as good at avoiding LRMs/ATMs/SSRMs as they are. I do not believe denying them AMS will bridge that skill gap.

In the world of your typical player in the solo queue, or on a casual group, you will fight many more missile-based builds and get much more use out of that AMS.

For just 1-1.5 tons I think it's one of the best investments you can make. Not just because I take less damage, but my dopey teammates who don't get under cover in time get a little relief when I'm nearby. I make a habit of looking at my AMS numbers at the end of the game and it's pretty common for me to take out 100-300 missiles. Even if a good chunk of those were heading for dirt, all I need is for a fraction of those missiles to have otherwise hit to make it as good as 1-1.5 tons of armor.

Edited by Jman5, 25 March 2018 - 07:25 PM.