129 replies to this topic

[General Taskeen]

Royalewithcheese, on 07 August 2013 - 04:51 PM, said:

Naw man, as you can see from the picture Rambo ran a lot of ammo on his build. He even took off some torso armor to fit on more.

That's only 1 ton of ammo though with double armor on the enemy. He sacrificed torso armor for the hidden PPC's.

[Joseph Mallan]

and his Man-Pack SRM!

[FupDup]

General Taskeen, on 07 August 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

That's only 1 ton of ammo though with double armor on the enemy. He sacrificed torso armor for the hidden PPC's.

He also has a Long Tom Artillery in his lower CT.

[Deathlike]

FupDup, on 07 August 2013 - 05:21 PM, said:

We'll just give him a BattleValue of 9001 over 9000. Should balance things out.

Fixed for you.

[General Taskeen]

Joseph Mallan, on 07 August 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

Simple fix reduce armor t 150%. Problem solved.

That doesn't help either actually considering several Mechs are improperly scaled or have really bad hitbox designs. Reduce it to x1.5 armor and those mechs die fastest than better hitboxed Mechs.

[ZippySpeedMonkey]

Design a better, more rounded mech that *GASP* has a mix of both energy and ammo based weaponry.....

None of my mechs are solely dependant on ammo, for the very thing you complain about, I usually run out of ammo,hence include a laser of 2....

[Trauglodyte]

Dymdr, on 07 August 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

I honestly don't understand you "everything is fine" guys. What, will someone get hurt if we get more ammo? Will it ruin your day?

As I see it, those who want more ammo will be definitely happier, while those who think its already enough wont lose anything. Or even benefit from it by getting an extra spare ton for armor.

I'll tell you why everyone says that "it is fine as it is" - because the game isn't you and 7 other players versus 12 opponents. Yes, they added 4 people to the opposing side but you got an additional 4 people too. So, the ammo needed to dispatch the enemy hasn't really changed. If anything, what it did was force player to either A) conserve ammo so that they can B ) take better shots or C) build/design mechs with varying loadouts instead of focusing on 1-2 weapons that are all ammo based. Battletech was built around balanced weapon loads; balanced not just around different ranges but also different weapon loads for the same ranges. As a player, you now have to decide if you want to take a chance on firing a shot at max effective range (or further) or holding off and waiting until they get closer. If that is going to be your play style, then before you load into a match, you need to decide if your current weapon load will get it done or if you should drop some weight on your primary weaponry to add ammo or add in additional energy weapons that will compliment your primary guns while offering a crutch should you run low/out of ammo. Its why I run a PPC on my dual UAC5 Jager - 5 tons of ammo goes pretty quick like. Now, I can drop that PPC down to a Large Laser and add 2 additional tons of ammo but there is a trade off to that decision. The game is all about choices and PGI shouldn't bend on this because some players can't adjust accordingly.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 07 August 2013 - 05:47 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

General Taskeen, on 07 August 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

That doesn't help either actually considering several Mechs are improperly scaled or have really bad hitbox designs. Reduce it to x1.5 armor and those mechs die fastest than better hitboxed Mechs.

Sorry I left off the /Sacasm from that post.

I don't see the problem of having to put more ammo on my Mech if I need it. Part of the "thinking" this game needs is how to best balance each load out. I also don't care for the, "I am running out of ammo cause there are more people to kill, gimme more!" request. Balance your weapons better and you won't need more ammo. *shrug*

[Screech]

LRMs actually are the ones that got it worst, 4 extra AMS in a match will nom nom your shots.

But once again its not so much an issue of balistics/LRM being off, just that PPC are now better in 12v12. Don't complain when their usage is increased, if that is even possible at this point.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Well, if ammo was boosted, I figure that SRMs need the biggest boost from the original.

And if we were to double from TT values than we could have something like this:

• Weapon - - TT - MWO - 2x AMMO
  
• AC/2 - - - - - - 45 - 75 - 90 (+15 shots)
  
• AC/5 - - - - - - 20 - 30 - 40 (+10 shots)
  
• UAC5 - - - - - 20 - 25 - 30 (+ 5 shots) or 40 (+10 shots)
  
• AC/10 - - - - - 10 - 15 - 20 (+ 5 shots)
  
• LB 10-X AC - 10 - 15 - 20 (+ 5 shots)
  
• Gauss - - - - - 08 - 10 - 16 (+ 6 shots)
  
• AC/20 - - - - - 05 - - 7 - 10 (+ 3 shots)

• Weapon - - - - - - - - TT - MWO - 2x AMMO
  
• LRM-5 - - - 24 (x 5) = 120 - 180 - 240 (+60 missiles)
  
• LRM-10 - 12 (x 10) = 120 - 180 - 240 (+60 missiles)
  
• LRM-15 - - 8 (x 15) = 120 - 180 - 240 (+60 missiles)
  
• LRM-20 - - 6 (x 20) = 120 - 180 - 240 (+60 missiles)

• Weapon - - - - - - - TT - MWO - 2x AMMO
  
• SRM-2 - - 50 (x 2) = 100 - 100 - 200
  
• SRM-4 - - 25 (x 4) = 100 - 100 - 200
  
• SRM-6 - - 15 (x 6) = _90 - 100 - 180
  
• SSRM-2 - 50 (x 2) = 100 - 100 - 200

So Ballistic Ammo could be doubled from TT values.

LRMs could add 60 missiles per ton also, but what about SRMs?

Going by TT values, SRMs have the same number of missiles per ton in MWO than the original (except SRM-6s).
If doubled from it's MWO value, we could have 200 per ton, which could help out lights and mediums.


TT Stats from here: http://www.sarna.net...Equipment_Lists

Edit: Used wrong value, I think. Counted damage not number of missiles per salvo on a single SRM, so adjusted values.

Edited by Praetor Shepard, 07 August 2013 - 07:29 PM.

[hellcatq]

Just make everyshot count. If I use all my ammo, my dmg count is generally the highest on my team or near it. I see lots of people in pugs packing way too many weapons- idk maybe for a blast away an hope to hit mentality or an alpha hope I get lucky shot. Lots of times I do more dmg with less weapons than with more.

[Odin]

28 shots for my AC20 on any map is sufficient. AC's are not for spamming them all over the place.
Aim, mind their effective ranges. In fact, larger maps and 12vs12 gives you reason to adopt your tactic to "longer" matches.

I see no big issue here.



Odin

[Angel of Annihilation]

skalapunk, on 07 August 2013 - 02:10 PM, said:

Obviously, ammo goes a lot distance with 12 enemies to kill. Does anyone else feel like slightly more ammo per ton would be a step in the right direction?

Nope, no need. Why? Because even though there are now 12 enemies to kill, there are now also 12 friends to do the killing. Also I am finding that with all this firepower flinging itself around, most mechs are dying faster than before.

Additionally, I didn't increase my ammo counts and so far I have not run out of ammo any faster in the 12 vs 12s than I did in 8 vs 8s.

[Theodor Kling]

Loving missiles I have energy weapons as backup,if at all..andammo is not realy a problem in 12vs12. So far I ran out of ammo once, while batteling the last Atlas of the enemy in my Centurion. Since I had shot off his gauss at that point we were both down to lasers, and it ended in a timeout tie. If a full length match where I got about 1.2k XP ( without bonus,obviously, was a tie after all) is needed to make me run out of ammo that is fine with me

[Elizander]

The current builds that we have are balanced for fighting 8 enemies. Adding another ton is almost out of the question. I do feel that ammo needs a slight bump upwards in order to be useful throughout a full 12v12 match.

It does not need to be a 50% increase to match the 50% increase in enemies, but a slight increase would be nice.

I suppose this is more for Autocannons, especially the AC/5 and AC/10.

Edited by Elizander, 08 August 2013 - 02:05 AM.

[SirSlaughter]

Ammo are ok in my opinion. You are not supposed to kill 12 mechs all by yourself. You have to kill 4 more mechs, that's true, but you have 4 more teammates.

[Ralgas]

Elizander, on 08 August 2013 - 02:02 AM, said:

The current builds that we have are balanced for fighting 8 enemies. Adding another ton is almost out of the question. I do feel that ammo needs a slight bump upwards in order to be useful throughout a full 12v12 match.

It does not need to be a 50% increase to match the 50% increase in enemies, but a slight increase would be nice.

I suppose this is more for Autocannons, especially the AC/5 and AC/10.

i have no probs running a 3x ac/5 mura, have had to drop engine for ammo, but speed isn't as important in heavies now.

Edit: btw that crams in 900+ potential dmg + 3 med las.....

Edited by Ralgas, 08 August 2013 - 02:34 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Ammo are ok in my opinion. You are not supposed to kill 12 mechs all by yourself. You have to kill 4 more mechs, that's true, but you have 4 more teammates.

PUG teammates are almost entirely useless. I hate them lol. I would rather just have Solaris and do 1v1 because then I only have myself to blame for losing. There is NOTHING worse than killing 4-5 enemy mechs yourself than seeing your ******** teammates lose the game anyway.

Half the time theyre crowding me so I cant move, or theyre shooting me in the back. The other half the time theyre running in front of me stealing my kills or blocking my shots because they dont know how to set up a proper concave firing line. Almost all of them do less than 200 damage. Usually 3-4 of them dont even break 100 damage. I pretty much always have to carry the entire team.

At least in 8v8 its possible to kill 8 mechs, and Ive done it. But in 12v12, its pretty much impossible to kill 12 mechs by yourself. Since youre not going to be killing 12 mechs by yourself anyway, I really dont see the problem with an ammo increase.

Edited by Khobai, 08 August 2013 - 03:18 AM.

[Thariel]

Khobai, on 07 August 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:

My mech doesnt have any spare tonnage. So problem isnt solved.

You know what does solve the problem though? Using ERPPCs instead.

sad but true

Tezcatli, on 07 August 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

Ballistics are already heavier, take up more slots, need to lead shots, and have to deal with more slots and tonnage taken up by ammo. I'm inclined to see a buff to ammo.

you forgot one thing, ballistics even got the heat problem.

so you trade weapons with a little ehat problem (energy) for weapons with weight, slots, ammo AND heat problems (ballistics). fair deal i think

[El Bandito]

PGI should finally double ammo for doubling armor in the fist place.

ZippySpeedMonkey, on 07 August 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

Design a better, more rounded mech that *GASP* has a mix of both energy and ammo based weaponry..... None of my mechs are solely dependant on ammo, for the very thing you complain about, I usually run out of ammo,hence include a laser of 2....

A1...