3 replies to this topic

[Voidsinger]

Right now, SRMs and Streaks are the only ammunition based weapon that has not seen an increase in the amount of rounds/ton of ammunition.

Ballistics generally received a boost of 150% (AC/20 140%, AC/2 166%), generally having 70-75% of the damage potential per ton of ammo on tabletop.

LRMs received a 150% boost in ammunition, and a ton of ammunition. They are at a whopping 135% of damage potential compared to tabletop.

Right now, SRMs received no ammunition boost, and are at 62.5% of potential damage per ton of ammunition.

To me this seems patently unfair, and unbalanced, since a 'simple' SRM is now more expensive than a semi-guided LRM.

I don't ask for a huge boost. Rather I ask that SRMs receive the boost to the same level enjoyed by most ballistics. 75% of damage potential against armour in tabletop equivalence.

This amounts to 120 missiles per ton.

This also has the side effect of being divisable by 2,4,6,8,10 and 12, which makes for an easy calculation of number of shots/ton.

With the introduction and restrictions on ECM, many light mechs are required to switch from Streaks to SRMs to be viable. Don't cripple those who cannot gain the advantages of their own ECM, especially in the Scouting role any further by reducing their endurance below viability.

[DeadlyNerd]

So let me get this straight. You want an ammo boost just cause NOW there's a system that may or may not be loaded up on your mech? Damn, what are people going to pull out of their behind for a reason to buff something these days.

I wont even bother explaining why LRM and SRM ammo should stay the way it is cause if you haven't understood the difference between SRM, LRM and specially SSRM use then you wont understand it anyway.

[focuspark]

To be fair, each ton of ammo should do X amount of damage. Example: 75 rounds of AC/2 does 150 damage. If AC/2 does more damage, the number of rounds available in a ton of ammo should decrease. Since SRMs do 2.5 damage each a ton of ammo should contain 60 rounds. Today it contains 100 - which is good.

AC/2 - 2 dmg - 75 ammo = 150 damage / ton
AC/5 - 5 dmg - 30 ammo = 150 damage / ton
Gauss - 15 damage - 10 ammo = 150 damage / ton
etc...

LRM and SRM should be balanced by being forced to fix this mold.

[Voidsinger]

focuspark, on 04 December 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

To be fair, each ton of ammo should do X amount of damage. Example: 75 rounds of AC/2 does 150 damage. If AC/2 does more damage, the number of rounds available in a ton of ammo should decrease. Since SRMs do 2.5 damage each a ton of ammo should contain 60 rounds. Today it contains 100 - which is good.

AC/2 - 2 dmg - 75 ammo = 150 damage / ton
AC/5 - 5 dmg - 30 ammo = 150 damage / ton
Gauss - 15 damage - 10 ammo = 150 damage / ton
etc...

LRM and SRM should be balanced by being forced to fix this mold.

Good luck getting LRM boaters to drop to 90 missiles/ton. They'd squeal at getting dropped back to the BT value of 120/ton.

I based it on what the boost in the number of rounds per ton that was done on tabletop, modified by the damage change PGI applied. So, it goes back to tabletop balance.

Now, I know a great many people have issues with ballistics (convergence), but just as many have issues with SRMs (spread).
Streaks, they might have a reason not to boost, however proportionailty in play, they should, and with the extra focus points to be targeted, should get the boost (only after the hits are more randomised). Especially as they cost double.

Why now?

Because to get any idea noticed, it needs to have some support. I've always felt SRMs in particular were gypped. With people putting SRMs on ionstead of Streaks, the loss of combat endurance is going to be highly noticeable. That amounts to more possible support for an idea like this.

I feel the idea is balanced. No cost adjustments are made.