Krasnopesky, on 24 March 2021 - 06:31 AM, said:
2x ATM 12 deals 72 damage in optimum range. Do you think it is fair that it has so much damage potential and in the current game that damage potential is very accurate? I do not think so, but I am genuine in asking for your opinion and reasoning.
So far you have been very critical to our suggested changes and you provide reasoning, which is excellent, but do you have any suggestions or solutions we could look into?
As I said in a previous reply to another person, we at The Cauldron do not want to nerf LRMs and ATMs, but rather make their use more consistent. Currently we find they either perform too well, or not well enough, often depending on the amount of AMS on the opposing team as you identified. Finding a balance where LRMs perform more consistently in being able to deal damage and AMS can help protect you from LRMs and ATMs at the same time is not an easy task when both systems can be boated in various amounts between teams.
ATMs have received a 20% missile health buff by the way, that is by no means minuscule (not that I am saying it solves the above issue, but hopefully it is a step in the right direction).
2x ATM12 dealing 72 damage in optimum range, even with TAG on the target they possess the same spread as clan SRM6's with artemis. The tonnage cost of an ATM12 launcher is nearly equal to those 3x SRM6s with the artemis upgrade. After all, the weapon system is designed with integrated artemis IV. The spread value of ATM's within direct sight reflects this, as it is the same as a clan SRM6 with artemis. But to make up for this, they have a longer 5 second cooldown.
A clan mech is also paying similar tonnage prices as 3x SRM6's with artemis when they equip an ATM12. While they get the homing ability from lock on, they also have the drawback of the 120 meter minimum range. That 150m (190m with full 15% range quirk) space where they are able to deal optimum damage without the missiles bouncing off is a precarious position, as it puts said mech with the ATM's into optimum weapons range of most heavy weapons in return. And a mech that mostly invests its weapons tonnage into ATM launchers is still highly vulnerable to being rushed down and rendered unable to do anything against an opponent within its minimum range.
A 20% health increase, which according to your stat notes equated to 0.2 to 0.3 health per missile, isn't going to do much when there are a pair, a trio or a quadruple number of AMS' either near or on the way to your target. The ATMs are still getting shredded.
A solution: Do not do anything until you have the whole picture. Mobility of your target is a considerable factor in achieving and maintaining locks. Against something really nimble, say a Vulcan, Flea, Phoenix Hawk or Uziel bouncing in and out of cover the process of achieving a lock is reset to zero every time the center mass is obscured. If the goal is to improve mech mobility further, the ability to achieve a lock against nimble opponents, particularly if they have 60-100% radar deprivation, will be that much more difficult.
Yes, ATM launchers, particularly when brought en masse deal large amounts of damage to the center mass area. Depending on the particular target mechs geometry this is often either the legs or the torsos. However, in that same optimum range, several other weapon systems also deal similar damage but are also able to put it out faster in order to start moving back into cover. Such as MRMs, SRMs, PPCs, ACs, Heavy Gauss and the like. With the damage and duration changes being proposed, even lasers look like they will have a much easier time trading favorably against ATMs.
The desire to "make the use of LRMs & ATMs more consistent" would require greater number of mechanicals changes and then a review of the weapons stats before any greater change in consistency can be achieved. It would require changing how fast locks are achieved, how much you have to track your target, and how fast missiles fly so that you aren't stuck staring square on at a target letting them wail on you as your slowest projectiles in the entire game make their way to the target. How badly they're diminished by passive nearby AMS' fields, will your lock disappear because an opposing team mech with ECM happened to pass within equipment effective range of your locked target, the effectiveness of radar deprivation in interrupting locks. It would also require a mechanical change to AMS, such as making its defensive capability only apply to your own mech, or switching modes between a strong self defensive capability, or a mode where it functions like it does now and attempts to intercept any non-friendly missile within range, but less effective so that multiple AMS' do not quite so easily negate an ATM or LRM mechs primary arsenal.
As it stands, an LRM mech firing indirect missiles as 900 meters gives the target a bit over 4 seconds time (even with velocity skills) to break the lock or get into cover. The talk about them being "oppressive" when massed is quite frankly no different from getting pummeled into dust by a lance of autocannon2 mechs, or ERPPC poptarts that you can't effectively return fire to. Someone, or something, has to provide that lock.
The one change I would suggest in order to lessen their effectiveness in groups is a change to NARC. Change NARC mechanics to have the NARC beacon drop from the affected target after they receive a certain amount of damage. That way, the player hit by a NARC projectile will not be left sitting there for 45 second or a minute and a half just eating missile fire until their death. Having the threshold be something like 120 damage would allow even a solo player with a NARC equipped to compliment their LRMs to achieve a few guaranteed locked volleys before losing tracking and having to re-expose in order to reapply a NARC beacon.
But outside of their synergy with NARC, LRMs are genuinely not that dangerous. It is already difficult enough to obtain and maintain locks against the tools provided to break them.
Edited by Runecarver, 24 March 2021 - 07:42 AM.
11
