dario03, on 07 April 2021 - 01:19 PM, said:
You will still equip LRMs if you want to use missiles for range and ATMs if you want to hit like a truck. ATMs still do more damage up close and with much less spread.
>I do that even now - my missile rigs have ATMs and LRMs combined. My point was that I needed ATMs to maximize close range damage in a high-risk-high-reward scenario (as in going in close, enduring incoming hits while getting a lock if no spotter around/aiming for well-placed dumbfiring, shooting missiles and hoping they will do enough damage to either deter the opposing pilot for a few secs and/or disable a few of his components to give me an edge in exchange for the armor likely traded in advance) and nerfing close range ATM damage deteriorates the viability of this.
In many cases you don't have a second chance to shoot them, either because the opposing pilot is not an idiot and goes in CQB immediately, rendering ATMs ineffective or the damage/heat you sustained on the way prevents you from doing so.
In all fairness, I took my ATM18-LRM10 SCR as an example, heavier mechs would probably be able to endure such trades of damage better and for them, a dmg boost for higher ranges could be more beneficial, but that still won't invalidate my point on faster mechs with less armor will inevitably pull the short straw more often because of this - hence I suggested reducing ATM minimum range to make up for the lost damage. It IS lost damage, ATM wielders will still prefer to shoot from up close.
Quote
The extra damage on long range is to buff it at less than optimal usage. We don't expect anybody to shift to actively trying for long range with ATMs, however a buff to less than optimal usage is still a buff. So if somebody is out in a ATM supernova and isn't able to get close to the fight they will now do more damage when firing out of optimal. Its similar to firing a ballistic weapon outside of optimal, you use the same amount of ammo, generate the same amount of heat, you do less damage but yet it does make sense to do it at times.
>This makes very good sense, but seemingly biased towards slower, heavier mechs which have a harder time to close in on opposing machines. Lighter rigs, who actually have the speed to land <300 meter shots will face the issue I presented one paragraph earlier. Of course they could shoot missiles in advance from farther away, but they have to conserve ammo and not to reveal their position too early.
A Supernova sized mech has the free tonnage to wield twin heavy autocannons, most medium mechs don't, or even if they do, they would have to make a disproportional sacrifice to be able to. Not the best comparison, but twin AC/UAC 20 dakkas do similar damage to twin ATM9/12s.
My point is ATMs are one of the, if not THE most viable weps for smaller, more agile Clan rigs with 2-3 missile hardpoints to do massive alpha damage while having a fairly good balance on tonnage/heat/hardpoint requirements. The bottleneck here is ammo count, ATMs on longer ranges will be, more often than not, a waste due to the increased chance of encountering multiple AMS during their trajectory.
Quote
However the extra damage at range isn't the main buff they got to offset their close range damage nerf. The extra missile health that allows them to get a lot more missiles through is. Like the OP says, against 4ams at close range they will do about 67% more damage than before. The expectation is that more people will bring ams/lams but not a lot more 3-4ams mechs and not enough to cancel out that missile health change. So it should be a fairly large buff and shift to making it less feast or famine. Have to wait and see to be sure though.
>I was probably overreacting the entire topic in the first place and I admit I did not do the math on missile HP vs AMS dmg. I'm still concerned that a designated DPH weapon will be ruined into mediocracy and countered more often than ever before (AMS has non-exploding ballistic ammunition...really? Why would anyone be deterred to equip it?), but like you've said, time will tell. Plus respect to you Mr, for answering in such a collected manner, I've lost my temper a bit.
Edit: I believe your increased missile dmg vs AMS calculations are based on insane ATM tube counts like 4x12 or something. Most people don't do that. An entire weapon class should not be redesigned having unreal/uncommon setups in mind.
Edited by Aedryel, 08 April 2021 - 09:30 AM.
13
