Should ATM missile damage be revised?

[Colt Ward]

So Advanced Tactical Missiles do damage like LRMs . . . cool!  They fire 3, 6, 9 and 12 missiles . . . with the missiles doing 1 dmg (like LRMs), 2 dmg (like SRMs), and 3 dmg depending on type.  But . . .

By grouping the damage in 5s like LRMs you have damage split from the Std and HE rounds- say you hit with 4 of the 6 HE missiles from your ATM6 for a total of 8 damage.  With a clustering of 5 and 3 . . . which means that third missile is splitting damage between two locations that can be on opposite side of the mech, like left arm and right leg.  Same deal for the HE rounds, which basically means every 2nd missile that hits is splitting its damage between locations.

Should ER behave like LRMs and Std/HE behave like SRMs?

Anyone else regularly forget on the table top to apply the integral Artemis IV bonus on the table?

[Sabelkatten]

I'd have ATM missiles always hit in groups of 3. So HE clusters are 9 damage, standard 6 and ER 3. Makes them a little more different. :)

[Sartris]

I've always played HE as 3pt SRM hits because it's how god intended it. I'd be fine with ER acting like LRMs and Standard like SRMs

[Daryk]

Another option would be to assume the heavier missiles use sub-munitions, so the damage stays in five point groups...

[Colt Ward]

Another option would be to assume the heavier missiles use sub-munitions, so the damage stays in five point groups...

So 1 sub hits the left arm while the other two hit the right leg?  Still does not pass.

[Daryk]

It depends on how far out the sub-munitions separate...  Far enough and the one arm/opposite leg scenario is perfectly plausible.

[Sartris]

why is the status quo worth defending?

[Daryk]

Why is it not?  Colt expressed concern with the 5 point grouping thing, and I'm simply offering a way to head canon it.

[Sartris]

a headcanon of a bad rule is like paint over a gash in the drywall. it doesn't explain why the rule should be kept.

hitting with 3 HE atm rounds with them treated as SRMs turn them in to legitimately terrifying crit seekers. under the current system, the same hit is like a wet fart of a 7 on an LRM 10

 

[Daryk]

Do the clans really need even more "terrifying" weapons?

[Sartris]

considering it and heavy lasers are the first real new weapons since the turn of the 31st century, yes. by 3067, the IS has gotten plenty of toys to be competitive. 

[Daryk]

To each their own... I think the multi-function nature of ATMs is enough of a convenience, and that avoiding even more complexity is a good thing.

[Colt Ward]

Because different damage patterns for MMLs based on ammo is ok, but not for ATMs?

[Daryk]

That just sounds like (rather blunt) game balancing to me.  Why give the clans yet another "more/better" version of an IS system?

[Colt Ward]

Because they came up with the system first, that nature of the description of the system/ammo, and that each missile does a different amount of damage  where splitting into 5 point groups is not intuitive for ammo that mimics SRMs.

The only 'advantage' they would have over the IS is the MML rack size caps out at 9 which means 9 different locations if all hit.  If the ATM9 all hit with Std ammo then you would have 4 locations.  HE ammo gets you 6 if all hit.  Oh, and since iATMs did not make it to the IS . . . they just get damage, no specials like the MML either.

[Daryk]

Seems TPTB didn't intend ATMs to be crit seekers, deliberately or otherwise.  If you want them to be, the rules you propose seem entirely reasonable.

[Retry]

To each their own... I think the multi-function nature of ATMs is enough of a convenience, and that avoiding even more complexity is a good thing.

ATMs aren't multi-function, not more so than the typical clan missile anyways.  They function as SRM+ and a slightly longer-ranged but even weaker LRM.  So basically its useful functions is "deal damage far away" and "deal more damage up close";  The middle ground is basically obsolete by its other 2 ammo types and LRMs themselves, whereas SRMs and LRMs have a plethora of useful missile-loading options, many of which aren't related to direct combat, and could actually be considered multi-role.

iATMs could be argued as multi-function due to those magnetic and inferno warheads as options, but its options are still limited relative to both standard, more common missile launchers.

[Sartris]

nah. every other named munition has discrete characteristics. it isn't a 'mode' if you have to actively choose the ammunition. let them behave differently.

To each their own... I think the multi-function nature of ATMs is enough of a convenience, and that avoiding even more complexity is a good thing.

we have seven types of inarc ammo but this is where we draw the line on complexity?

[Daryk]

Just looking at this thread in the light of the others that are trying to reduce complexity.  iNarcs are ridiculously complex, but in the rules as written.

[Sartris]

Defending the rules as written isn’t an applicable approach in a sub forum dedicated to changing the rules. From a game mechanics perspective, atms are the odd duck. Why should they act differently than all other ammo types?

[Daryk]

I think it was because TPTB were trying to keep them simple for whatever reason.  Clearly, different people designed ATMs and the iNARC.

[Maingunnery]

What about 6 point groups?

[Sartris]

I

I think it was because TPTB were trying to keep them simple for whatever reason.  Clearly, different people designed ATMs and the iNARC.

And those people aren’t in charge of the IP anymore. Rules can be changed (see ams) it’s not the book of genesis.

What about 6 point groups?

Not a substantial change, imo. Most ER hits are going to be a single group anyway outside of a high roll on the atm 9 or 8+ on the 12. It makes the most sense for standard because groups of six work better than five.  HE I’d rather have as a super crit seeker otherwise just take an ER medium.

[HobbesHurlbut]

So 1 sub hits the left arm while the other two hit the right leg?  Still does not pass.

LBX cluser rounds can do that. Why not missiles?

[Hellraiser]

All Artillery hits in 5 point groups,  why not ATMs?

I do agree that the 6 point grouping would leave you a better, "My HE/Std didn't split", feel, but really, anything that cuts down on the need for the dice box of death is a good thing.

Medium Lasers are basically fine crit seekers, not everything needs to be 1-2 point groups. 

We already have the pain of the LB20X in the game, do we really need an ATM-12 to hit 12 different locations slowing the game down?

And really, if an ATM12 hits for 36 damage your getting 7 locations out of it. 

Taking it down to an ATM-9 on a 7 roll gives you .... 21-24 damage IIRC?   That is 5 chances to hit either way.  Is that really THAT much worse than 7-8 instead?

And the 5 point groupings when stacked actually function as 10 point hole punchers too.   You don't get that when you break it down into 2-3 point groups really.

While I agree it isn't the most well thought out damage grouping, I do like the simplicity of it in matching LRM/Artillery damage groupings.

[Sartris]

All Artillery hits in 5 point groups,  why not ATMs?

discrete ammo does what it wants in virtually every other case.

Medium Lasers are basically fine crit seekers, not everything needs to be 1-2 point groups. 

short range missiles should be crit seekers. a 150% damage super srm is far more useful.

We already have the pain of the LB20X in the game, do we really need an ATM-12 to hit 12 different locations slowing the game down?

And really, if an ATM12 hits for 36 damage your getting 7 locations out of it. 

i balance these issues against real game conditions. the ATM-12 is far more rare than the LB-20. Also you're pushing to the improbable end of rolling. also, yes, 5 extra crit seeking rolls *is* a big deal.

Taking it down to an ATM-9 on a 7 roll gives you .... 21-24 damage IIRC?   That is 5 chances to hit either way.  Is that really THAT much worse than 7-8 instead?

yes. if crits are slightly worse than coin flips, each two crits chances i force yields another crit, which besides headcaps are the most vital to swinging a game in my favor. 10-20 extra chances over the course of even a short game is a BIG deal.

And the 5 point groupings when stacked actually function as 10 point hole punchers too.   You don't get that when you break it down into 2-3 point groups really.

i don't want it to do that.


i'll be done with this thread now. i've literally run out of words to further expound on my position