161 replies to this topic

[focuspark]

ManDaisy is right. With lag fixed, SSRM do not need 100% hit, and without 100% hit ECM can be scaled back. Everything gets balanced.

[ManDaisy]

How so? My point was that is lagshield is gone streak 100% hit should be removed.

[Theobald Hauser]

Everybody already play with 100% Streaks. Without lagshield, they'll still 100% hit. Nothing better.

You two are just plainly wrong.

In fact I can't even understand what, in this simple statement, YOU are not understanding.

[ManDaisy]

And you sir have a brick where a brain should be.

[Theobald Hauser]

You have no logical point about nerfing streaks. Brick or not.

[Strum Wealh]

ManDaisy, on 25 January 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

I state I have disproved your board game theory of streaks 100% hit, and have disproved the necessity of it in MWO.

I hereby challenge anyone to a debate on WHY streaks should continue to hit 100%.

Well, they should maintain a 100% hit rate because that is, in fact, a correct and literal translation of the BattleTech gameplay rules and background setting.

Specifically:

• "A player attempting to lock a Streak missile on target must make a standard to-hit roll during the Weapon Attack Phase as if he were firing a standard SRM. If successful, the player immediately fires his Streak SRM at the locked-on target. All Streak missiles automatically hit (no roll on the Cluster Hits Table is required), and the player rolls as normal to determine the hit locations. If the roll fails, the player does not achieve a lock and so does not fire the SRMs or build up any heat." (Total Warfare, pg. 138)
  
• "...while a Streak SRM launcher applies the damage from each missile to a separate location, it does not apply its damage using the Cluster Hits Table; if the to-hit roll succeeds, all the missiles strike the target." (Total Warfare, pg. 116)
  
• "Developed as a means of conserving ammunition, the Streak system literally refuses to fire unless all of the launcher’s tubes simultaneously achieve a “hard lock” on their target." (TechManual, pg. 230)

In other words: under normal operating conditions, using the Streak system has exactly two outcomes:

• the launcher achieves the necessary "hard lock" (in TT terms: the to-hit roll succeeds) and all missiles fire (expending ammo and generating heat in the process), in which case they are guaranteed to strike the target somewhere (in TT terms, the player does not need to consult the Cluster Hits Table to determine if the missiles hit, but they still need to consult the Hit Location Table to see where each of the missiles hit)
  
• the launcher fails to achieve the necessary "hard lock" (in TT terms: the to-hit roll fails), in which case none of the missiles fire (with no ammo expended and no heat generated)

Additionally: "The player must roll for a targeting lock each turn, even if he achieved a lock in the previous turn. The player must make a separate to-hit roll for each individual Streak system being fired." (Total Warfare, pg. 138)

That Streak SRM launchers will fire when and only when they have a solid lock is one of the core characteristics that differentiates them from standard SRM launchers.
That Streak SRM launchers are guaranteed to have all of their missiles strike the target somewhere is also one of the core characteristics that differentiates them from standard SRM launchers.
That each individual Streak Launcher must reacquire a targeting lock (without which it cannot and will not fire at all) after each and every firing is another of the core characteristics that differentiates them from standard SRM launchers (and one that has yet to be implemented in MWO, but is growing in popularity with regard to suggestions).

The tradeoff is that Streak missile launchers can never be dumb-fired or used to make "off-the-hip" snap shots (except when malfunctioning due the the presence of an Angel ECM Suite), and the ability of a Guardian ECM Suite to use the Streak system's abilities against it (based on the how ECM systems in general interfere with enemy sensors and their ability to provide the 'Mech with the ability to designate a given object as a targetable opponent) only compounds the Streak launchers' inflexibility (relative to standard SRM launchers).

In essence, Streak launchers trade situational flexibility (specifically, "fire-on-demand, anytime" capability), weight, the ability to use alternate munitions (which we know from AtD-10 and AtD-17 to be planned for eventual implementation), and the ability to benefit from enhanced targeting systems (e.g. Artemis, Narc) for an increase in efficiency (ratio of "rounds that hit" versus "rounds fired") and an increase in "effective firepower" (damage dealt in any given salvo) versus standard SRM launchers.
That Streak launchers always have all of their missiles strike the target when fired is not only one of their core characteristics, but that is ostensibly the key to their relatively-high efficiency and effective firepower.
Therefore, the Streak launchers' "100% accuracy" should not be removed - adjusted perhaps, but not removed.

[focuspark]

So what you're saying is that to completely implement TT rules SSRM need to be changed in the two following ways:

1] lock needs to be reestablish after missile launch
2] missiles should strike a random section of the target (side facing you of course - should head be excluded?)

Do I have that right?

[Strum Wealh]

focuspark, on 25 January 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

So what you're saying is that to completely implement TT rules SSRM need to be changed in the two following ways:

1] lock needs to be reestablish after missile launch
2] missiles should strike a random section of the target (side facing you of course - should head be excluded?)

Do I have that right?

Well, Paul had stated (back in November, actually) that the Devs are already looking at and working on the second point.

Quote

On the SSRM direct front, another fix has gone in where the SSRMs will now use arm and leg joints as viable lock-on targets. This spreads damage out more. I'll be working with David B on testing to see if the current implementation of SSRMs along with the reduced cockpit shake and smoke reduction will be enough of a nerf to help counter the SSRM effectiveness without having to directly hit damage/cooldown/heat etc.

Eventually expanding that to "random section of the target, on the side(s) facing the launcher" would, IMO, be the ideal and logical conclusion of Paul and Dave's work on the matter.

The first point seems to be gaining traction in a number of threads in the Suggestons section.

The argument in in each case is to, as Paul himself put it, "help counter the SSRM effectiveness without having to directly hit damage/cooldown/heat etc", and to do so in a way that is straightforward as well as consistent with the BattleTech rules and background.

[focuspark]

Strum Wealh, on 25 January 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

Well, Paul had stated (back in November, actually) that the Devs are already looking at and working on the second point.
Eventually expanding that to "random section of the target, on the side(s) facing the launcher" would, IMO, be the ideal and logical conclusion of Paul and Dave's work on the matter.

The first point seems to be gaining traction in a number of threads in the Suggestons section.

The argument in in each case is to, as Paul himself put it, "help counter the SSRM effectiveness without having to directly hit damage/cooldown/heat etc", and to do so in a way that is straightforward as well as consistent with the BattleTech rules and background.

What are feelings on how easy it is to get and keep a lock. For example: so long as my ally can see them I can lock from safety behind a building/hill then peek out and fire. And since I don't need to actually keep reticle that perfect on them to keep the lock, it's an easy feat. This was the major complaint about the famed Streak-CAT.

Also, how do you feel about ECM completely shutting down SSRM? Assuming the above two changes (loss of lock on and randomized damage locations) how, if at all, do you think ECM should impact SSRM?

[CancR]

I'm going to keep beating this point instill it sinks in to some one, some where.

Streaks should always hit
Streaks should only deal 2 damage a missile
Streaks should have a longer cool down time
Streaks should have a longer lock on time
Streaks shouldn't be able to get a lock till after they fully cool down

[blinkin]

CancR, on 25 January 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

I'm going to keep beating this point instill it sinks in to some one, some where.

Streaks should always hit
Streaks should only deal 2 damage a missile
Streaks should have a longer cool down time
Streaks should have a longer lock on time
Streaks shouldn't be able to get a lock till after they fully cool down

those aren't points they are suggestions. points rely on some sort of factual or logical basis. suggestions rely on opinion or educated guesses.

and as far as the ongoing conversation: streaks already hit random torso sections. they have for a while. the last time they focused solely on center torso was back in closed beta. back then they were severely broken. catapult A1 ruled the field unchallenged because they could put 30 points of damage on CT EVERY TIME.

center torso does tend to be hit more because on most mechs it is much larger or sticks out more than side torsos. i have always had an srm catapult since the early days of closed beta. i get cored far less by streaks now than i ever did in closed beta.

Edited by blinkin, 25 January 2013 - 02:50 PM.

[CancR]

That is how streaks should work in MWO and how they have in past MW games, so it is fact.

[Theobald Hauser]

No.
"Should" and "past games", we don't care about.
And it's a fact.

[Sasuga]

Solis Obscuri, on 23 January 2013 - 09:03 PM, said:

The point of Streaks is that if they can achieve lock, they have 100% hit rate (as opposed to ordinary SRMs or LRMs, which may or may not hit at all and have variable cluster grouping.)

However, the ease of getting/maintaining lock with SSRMs, their ability to concentrate damage in the torso, and their damage output... these are things that can be tweaked. And at least two of which ought to be.

Yes, just because Streaks will all hit a target doesn't mean they should all hit the same location. I think even in the table top you still rolled to see where each streak missile hit (its been a long time and I'm too lazy right now to look it up).

Also, I think AMS still has a chance to shoot them down.

As far as light mechs all carrying ECM, it certainly is something to consider. One shouldn't be relying on LAG to stay alive, that's just lame actually.

[CancR]

Right. So we should listen to you because you wont make any points about stats and how well they work you will just shout and keep shouting as long as you think people are listen. Good thing you told us how rational you are.

[blinkin]

CancR, on 25 January 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

That is how streaks should work in MWO and how they have in past MW games, so it is fact.

http://dictionary.re...com/browse/fact

fact
[fakt]
1.
something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
2.
something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.
3.
a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
4.
something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
5.
Law. . Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law.

sorry about the mess before had some issues with copy paste.

you are using the word "should" which by definition precludes something being fact. "should" indicates that something has not been tested and that any information after "should" is purely theoretical.

it may have worked that way in the past, but it has not been tested in this environment. so your post still falls firmly in the realm of opinion.

also you have absolutely no grounds to talk down to Sasuga. you did the exact same thing only you were less honest about it.

Edited by blinkin, 25 January 2013 - 05:14 PM.

[Theobald Hauser]

Nothing more to say there, Blinkin.
And the debate is over. Well, until Focuspark, CancR or ManDaisy miraculously tell us about a rational fact that makes Streaks better when the lagshield is gone.

By the way, people should read some dev stuff before posting "suggestions", imperious orders or reality-bending opinions or whatever they should be called.
Streaks aren't targeting CT anymore, and will even spread more in the future.
Re-targeting will maybe be, but it's not really important and won't change a lot of things. i've even tried to loose intentionaly the lock between shots today, and it didn't bother me at all.

Edited by Amarius, 25 January 2013 - 05:55 PM.

[TDR3D]

A little late for replying, but holy sh*t Mandaisy knows what he's talking about. Nice to see someone else on these forums with a logical thought-pattern.

[Drawfire]

Nice, so the 'nerf' I was thinking would be appropriate, SSRMS hitting random body parts, was in the original game. Yep, they just need to implement it.

[Theobald Hauser]

It already is. You people sometimes read the threads you're replying to ?