446 replies to this topic

[IraqiWalker]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Fk Angel ECM, we don't even have Blazer Cannon and now you remembered an Angel ECM suite. That is just troll, dude.

No, that's being consistent, and using common sense. Guardian shouldn't act like, and stronger than Angel Suite. Guardian is Guardian. If you are having difficulty grasping that simple concept, I don't know what to tell you.

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Fk U 2 Josh. Cause, we currently have only Guardian ECM. We even got old rusty King Crap only in January next year for C-B's. So what you guys are talking about?! What rules? TT bullcrap which is moving straight opposite direction from Arcade MWO? No way... you must be off-your-box. Both, you Josh and Iraqi.

Untill we get at least 70% of mechs on TRO3050, 100% of IS/CL weapons and at lest 60% of equipment that Guardian ECM must work like Angel ECM. And don't ya dare...

I noticed you're really peeved by the whole King Crab being added now, instead of earlier. That's not actually a valid complaint.

Not to mention that not having some equipment in the game, shouldn't allow us to break it so you're happy. This is Battletech, not Battletech Eboneezer edition. Also, there's a difference between taking rules from TT, and taking MECHANICS.

Why on earth should we have 100% of the 3050 mechs? Some of them were not just awful, but redundant. Don't get me wrong. I'm not against having more mechs. I just think that adding redundant mechs right now is a waste of effort better spent doing other things, or adding other mechs.

Also, stop with the insults, that's just childish, and dilutes the argument.

[Ph30nix]

my 2 cents is
Why would any council have to be a long term or permanent group?
this is what you can do + or - some steps

first do a poll preferably from IN GAME!!!! we would want highest participation
plan b is to do the poll on website

from these polls take take 3-4 people who voted for each option (options can be specific or general)(# subject to change)
so if you have 4 options you would pick 12-16 people with 3-4 of each choice option being represented
If any option is completely ignored (say of the 4 choices 1 of them has barely 5% then it is removed and ignored)
recommend always including an "other" option this would be for players who dont like any above but have
an alternative

then for that issue those 12-16 people(plus representation for other) would be your player council
each council group (from the options) would get their own forum section
players who voted on the options would then use those forums to discuss things with the player council people

then after say a week of the player council communicating with forum goers then any discussion between devs and players council would commence.

could possibly use another forum section that ONLY dev's and the player council can post to but anyone can read the communications.

again no idea is complete and this is a work in progress that is open for discussion. Any of the selected player council can be removed or replaced if they are either not active enough, are trolling or otherwise being detrimental to the discussion.

[EboneezeeR]

Joseph Mallan, on 16 September 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

100% of the weapons are not yet available at this point in time. I agree on the TRO3050 desire! As for Blazer Cannons... Strap 2 large into one location and you have it! With BETTER damage!

As for Blazer... difference, is 1 tonn, damage will stay same as double LL's fired.
Primetively cause... damage provided by lazer is totaly depending on lazers core. Dual fusing the two Large Lazer cores on one axis will double the damage. What damage LL got in MWO? 9 points against 7 heat. So, calculating... and weeee got.... 18 damage against 14 heat. 18(!) pinpoint damage with burn time 1.0 second. Josh... you might be don't understand. IS fans just want that beast mounted on their mechs... yesterday!

[Roland]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 08:50 AM, said:

As for Blazer... difference, is 1 tonn, damage will stay same as double LL's fired.
Primetively cause... damage provided by lazer is totaly depending on lazers core. Dual fusing the two Large Lazer cores on one axis will double the damage. What damage LL got in MWO? 9 points against 7 heat. So, calculating... and weeee got.... 18 damage against 14 heat. 18(!) pinpoint damage with burn time 1.0 second. Josh... you might be don't understand. IS fans just want that beast mounted on their mechs... yesterday!

What language is this?

[Gorgo7]

Well, I think that a council would be a disaster waiting to happen.
What remuneration will they receive to keep them honest, productive and not be a parrot of PGI?

What you guys are asking for is a pipe dream.

Votes? Sure. Whatever.

[IraqiWalker]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 08:50 AM, said:

As for Blazer... difference, is 1 tonn, damage will stay same as double LL's fired.
Primetively cause... damage provided by lazer is totaly depending on lazers core. Dual fusing the two Large Lazer cores on one axis will double the damage. What damage LL got in MWO? 9 points against 7 heat. So, calculating... and weeee got.... 18 damage against 14 heat. 18(!) pinpoint damage with burn time 1.0 second. Josh... you might be don't understand. IS fans just want that beast mounted on their mechs... yesterday!

Which is better than the blazer still. Blazer is 12 damage for 16 heat. Paying the extra slot for better performance all around seems like a better choice to me. Unless you have a mech with only ONE energy hardpoint.


EDIT: To be specific. Other than a few lights, 2 SHD variants, CDA-3C, and 1 Wolverine. Every other mech either has 0 energy hardpoints, or 2+

Edited by IraqiWalker, 16 September 2014 - 09:02 AM.

[Mystere]

Fut, on 16 September 2014 - 03:39 AM, said:

Their purpose is to weed through all of the ECM suggestions, find the most viable, clean them up a bit and show PGI what the community has come up with.

And by find, do you mean "council decides" or "players vote" on what is most viable?

[EboneezeeR]

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

No, that's being consistent, and using common sense. Guardian shouldn't act like, and stronger than Angel Suite. Guardian is Guardian. If you are having difficulty grasping that simple concept, I don't know what to tell you.


I noticed you're really peeved by the whole King Crab being added now, instead of earlier. That's not actually a valid complaint.

Not to mention that not having some equipment in the game, shouldn't allow us to break it so you're happy. This is Battletech, not Battletech Eboneezer edition. Also, there's a difference between taking rules from TT, and taking MECHANICS.

The Angel ECM suite should be twice powerful that current ECM. Simple.

Actually EboneezeeR's BTech is MWO and we need to act in that "Eboneezerz Battletech Game" borders and rules. We have no choice and actually we don't want that choice much. Crying about current ECM is like a Koniving's whine threads about IS AutoCannons. Besides that guy don't even know the difference between C-AC's and IS AC's... sigh.
Yes I agree some mechs are just need to be thrown off-the cliff cause they are ugly. But, we got a lot of nice, beautiful mechs like King Crab, Pillager, Devastator. And what we got? Only poor rusty Crab!? In January!? That is a rip-off... especially to Founders and etc.
Yrs PLG till TRO3050 got only 2 models 1N and 3Z. And like I say before, DEV's just can release another model with a time scale MWO are moving. Like when we hits TRO3058 they'll release some new weapons and 4Z model, same as some Higlander and etc., mechs models. That is not a problem. Problem is ignorance by some forum oldf4gs who telling that they want game to progress/success but when it comes to real deal they just pop in the bushes and start to whine about... whatever.

That is just poor... That kind of community is just poor. None Council such community deserves.

[EboneezeeR]

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

Which is better than the blazer still. Blazer is 12 damage for 16 heat. Paying the extra slot for better performance all around seems like a better choice to me. Unless you have a mech with only ONE energy hardpoint.

12 dmg/16 heat is a valuse from Tactical Operations. Besides, they are wrong, cause by the Lore should be 16 dmg/18 heat... cause:
- Damage comes from LL core, not from lazer mount itself. Dual fused cores double the damage value and double the heat value.

Did you learn at school at all? Did you know how lazer works? I hope... you do if not open Wiki than.
The thing is KGC-000 got only 2 likely 3 E mounts and lots of free tonnage. I'm about to such builds like 2xAC20 + 2xBlazer.
Blazer got weight of 9 tonns, one tonn scraped for a single mount, and take 4 hardpoints.

Edited by EboneezeeR, 16 September 2014 - 09:11 AM.

[Mystere]

Geist Null, on 16 September 2014 - 04:44 AM, said:

the majority of the player base electorate doesn't understand how game development economics works, and most don't understand online game balance for combat financial matters and theres even the special few multitudes who don't even seem capable of using math in their day to day lives. I don't want to see mwo players such people voting for changes. no thank you on having a council representing us.

Fixed that for you.

[Joseph Mallan]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 08:50 AM, said:

As for Blazer... difference, is 1 tonn, damage will stay same as double LL's fired.
Primetively cause... damage provided by lazer is totaly depending on lazers core. Dual fusing the two Large Lazer cores on one axis will double the damage. What damage LL got in MWO? 9 points against 7 heat. So, calculating... and weeee got.... 18 damage against 14 heat. 18(!) pinpoint damage with burn time 1.0 second. Josh... you might be don't understand. IS fans just want that beast mounted on their mechs... yesterday!

Oh no sir if you want the weapon you should have it as is. At least at first. To test it out at TT strength.

Whats TT Large Laser do 8 damage 8 Heat, Blazer is 16 Heat for 12 Damage, You want the weapon you need to play it as is first.

Ebony, maybe you don't understand, I am an IS fan, I have no desire to have that on my Mech. K? ThxBye!

[Joseph Mallan]

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Also, stop with the insults, that's just childish, and dilutes the argument.

Wait! He's been trying to insult me? I thought it was just a reading comprehension issue.

Ebony. Take a minute. Check my Email adress and see if you can insult someone who can play with names (real names) like that.

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

12 dmg/16 heat is a valuse from Tactical Operations. Besides, they are wrong, cause by the Lore should be 16 dmg/18 heat... cause:
- Damage comes from LL core, not from lazer mount itself. Dual fused cores double the damage value and double the heat value.

Did you learn at school at all? Did you know how lazer works? I hope... you do if not open Wiki than.
The thing is KGC-000 got only 2 likely 3 E mounts and lots of free tonnage. I'm about to such builds like 2xAC20 + 2xBlazer.
Blazer got weight of 9 tonns, one tonn scraped for a single mount, and take 4 hardpoints.

Lore does not dictate rules. Ask the CBT line director about that, He'll tell ya.

[Mystere]

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

The magic 180 meter invisibility bubble? The fact that there is literally no counter to a double stack of ECM other than another double stack of ECM, or BAPs. Both only working at less than 180 meters. These are problems that have plagued the system since day 1.

My still unmodified Mark 1 eyeballs still seem to do the trick.

[EboneezeeR]

Joseph Mallan, on 16 September 2014 - 09:17 AM, said:

Oh no sir if you want the weapon you should have it as is. At least at first. To test it out at TT strength.

Whats TT Large Laser do 8 damage 8 Heat, Blazer is 16 Heat for 12 Damage, You want the weapon you need to play it as is first.

Ebony, maybe you don't understand, I am an IS fan, I have no desire to have that on my Mech. K? ThxBye!

You want to speculate on Lore, here we go... baby. Than...
ERLL will got - 8 damage
CERLL will got - 9 damage with same 1,5 sec., burn time
LPL will got - 9 damage
C-LPL got 10 damage...

I can continue to infinity.


Beside you are wrong, Binary Lazer Cannon is based not on serial Large Laser core, but on prototype LL's core which gots 9 heat against 8 damage.

Edited by EboneezeeR, 16 September 2014 - 09:35 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 09:32 AM, said:

You want to speculate on Lore, here we go... baby. Than...
ERLL will got - 8 damage
CERLL will got - 9 damage with same 1,5 sec., burn time
LPL will got - 9 damage
C-LPL got 10 damage...

I can continue to infinity.

All those weapons have had their stats changed in MW:O
ERLL=9 Damage 8 Heat
CERLL=11 Damage 10 Heat
CLPL is 11.6 damage 9 Heat
IS LPL is10.6 Damage 8 Heat

So until you know the changes made to MW:O from TT game rules, you should maybe take a lil time to check the stats.

Quote

Beside you are wrong, Binary Lazer Cannon is based not on serial Large Laser core, but on prototype LL's core which gots 9 heat against 8 damage.

See that isn't what the rules say. The rules state 16 Heat for 12 Damage with a long range of 15 Hex.

Lore is not the game mechanics. Never has been never will be.

None of which has any impact on the selection of a council/committee/coven for helping to fix some gaffs in this game.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 16 September 2014 - 09:46 AM.

[Fut]

Roland, on 16 September 2014 - 08:39 AM, said:

Honestly folks, just let it go.
There'll be some vote on some council, and then they'll present an idea and you'll get to vote on it.

If you don't like the plan, you can vote against it. It's as simple as that.

And if they present a plan, and get more than 80% of the players to vote for it... then that means it represents the will of the playerbase. And if that disagrees with you, then that's kind of too bad, because it means you're in the minority.

This!!!!
There is absolutely no harm in letting this "council" come to be. Let's move forward with the game as a community instead of sitting around arguing over whether or not this will work out. Honestly, there's only one way to know for sure, and that's to try it out at least once - whether that's ECM changes, LRM changes, or something else. Let's group up and make this work.

[NextGame]

Fut, on 16 September 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

There is absolutely no harm in letting this "council" come to be.

Edited by NextGame, 16 September 2014 - 10:13 PM.

[EboneezeeR]

Joseph Mallan, on 16 September 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

All those weapons have had their stats changed in MW:O
ERLL=9 Damage 8 Heat
CERLL=11 Damage 10 Heat
CLPL is 11.6 damage 9 Heat
IS LPL is10.6 Damage 8 Heat

So until you know the changes made to MW:O from TT game rules, you should maybe take a lil time to check the stats.

See that isn't what the rules say. The rules state 16 Heat for 12 Damage with a long range of 15 Hex.

That what I'm talking about, To adopt Blazer we need to get values according the game values. LL single core in MWO provides 9 damage against 7 heat. That means that with a (-) anti-bonus 4 heat points on BLC heat we got such values:
- Damage 16
- Heat 20

Now Blazer is adopted to Lore description and game values.

Can you convert how much in metres will be 15 hexes to find BLC maximum range and calculate effective range?

Edited by EboneezeeR, 16 September 2014 - 10:27 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

That what I'm talking about, To adopt Blazer we need to get values according the game values. LL single core in MWO provides 9 damage against 7 heat. That means that with a (-) anti-bonus 4 heat points on BLC heat we got such values:
- Damage 16
- Heat 20

Now Blazer is adopted to Lore description and game values.

Can you convert how much in metres will be 15 hexes to find BLC maximum range and calculate effective range?

Yes the Game Value for the Blazer is 16 Heat and 12 damage. So we would start there and adapt accordingly. Most Weapons have started at TT true, and was adjusted from there. And 15 Hexs is Large Laser range so that would likely match a IS Large. Presently there is not a need for for this weapon, and it is not the topic of this thread. I would gladly discuss it in a new thread though.

[EboneezeeR]

Joseph Mallan, on 16 September 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

Yes the Game Value for the Blazer is 16 Heat and 12 damage. So we would start there and adapt accordingly. Most Weapons have started at TT true, and was adjusted from there. And 15 Hexs is Large Laser range so that would likely match a IS Large. Presently there is not a need for for this weapon, and it is not the topic of this thread. I would gladly discuss it in a new thread though.

So, what we got...

A BLC techspects:
- 9 tons
- 4 slots
- 400-440m effective range
- 900m max range
- 16 damage (due stock dual-fused LL cores without +1 bonus to each core, fair enough)
- 20 heat (due +4 heat bonus via compact mount of 2 LL cores and simultaneous fire both core on one axis)
- 1+ mount ghost heat penalty (mount and fire 2xBLC will hit the heat spike around 50)
- overal battle value is 1.8

Dual mount of 2xLL:
- 2x5 tons
- 2x2 critical slots
- 400-440m effective range
- 900m max range
- 2x9 damage
- 2x7 heat
- 2+ mount ghost heat penalty
- overal battle value 2+

Overal: Blazer can be used in dual mount in situation when mech lacks an E slots and can be more effective by damage than 3xLL mount, but less (+19 points) effective by heat. Blazer more efective when it comes to pinpoint damage, but less effective overal. Must be in MWO for crazy hot builds and when is lack of E slots to mount enough enegry weapons.

Josh do you agree with that?

Edited by EboneezeeR, 16 September 2014 - 11:01 AM.