Rifle analogs of the ACs?

Double the range at half the RoF? IE a Rifle/2 wold take two seconds to reload, but have twice the range of a AC/2?

I don't remember which sarna page referenced them, but I'm pretty sure "rifles" were considered prim tech...

Not needed? OP? Silly idea?

I just figured on maps like Alpine and Tourmaline having those huge ranges to do... well virtually nothing but stare at the opposing team approaching and deal like 0.5 damage with a AC/5 for 2 mins of firing...

The Gauss rifle? Yeaaaah... I got nothing... maybe a long(er) rifle version?


Thoughts?

PS
Yess yess, I know the difference between a "rifled" cannon and a smooth-bore cannon...

This is just a brief idea I have had flooting around in my head lately.

GECM seems a bit too overbearing currently.

When compared to BAP, GECM seems to be having a much larger influence in the battle and in addition to completely negating BAP.

Both are 1.5t and 2 slots.

GECM is limited to 4 varaints.

I propose that GECM be brought down to BAPs level of battlefield influence (minor benefits for one person or within a 180 degree area) in addition, the GECM variant restriction is lifted

The nerfed effects of GECM are:

Decrease range to be targeted by 40%-25%
Increase time for targeting information to be revealed such as health/weapons status by 25%
Missile locking times increased by 25%

Now for the new system to be introduced.

When a mech has BAP or GECM attached to it 3 other equipment become available to then be equiped onto the mech.

I call these Electronic Superiority Rigs, or ESRs for short.
There are 3 different types of ESRs.

Detection ESR - DESR

Jamming ESR - JESR

Canceling ESR - CESR

Basically, these overide the effects of the prequiste BAP/GECM while giving a substantially larger affect that is similar to BAP and GECM.


Detection ESR
DESR causes the mech that equips the rig, to act like a giant radar dish. Somewhat similiar to the E3 sentry AWACS.

The primarily feature of DESR is that a sensor pulse is generated every X number of seconds. If an enemy mech is within the range of the sensor pulse, that enemy is pinged on the team's battlegrid. The ping starts to fade out until the next sensor pulse finds the the enemy mech again and its updates the location.

The secondary feature of DESR is that enemy mechs within the LoS and targeting range (800m) of the DESR carrier become "soft targeted" so that anybody can target them. Basically, the hollow triangles appear above the enemy mechs that are being "soft targeted" by the DESR.

However, in additon to space and weight the ESRs cost, whether they be the same as a BAP/ECM or slightly heavier and/or larger, a performance penalty is applied to the mech.

I was deciding whether it should be a heat disipation penalty or a movement speed penalty. However the DESR's sensor pulse will only be active unless toggled AND the mech is moving no more than half its top speed. This pretty much makes the DESR carrier less likely to be found at the frontlines and is slightly more vulnerable in general combat.

Thats all I have right now, I will update later what JESR and CESR can do.

In the meantime... Any thoughts? Criticism? Witism? Too many abilities? Too costly for the ESR carrier?

Warning, the following is a large badly formated wall'o'text and contains WoT references.

You have been warned.

Following in the same vain as my only other serious topic I have made on the forums;
http://mwomercs.com/...320#entry490320

I'm wondering about the planned state of grouping in MWO, and how it relates to the random battle grouping in World of Tanks.

A little background on grouping in WoT, basic grouping in WoT for random battle queing (random game mode, random 15v15 teams, random map) is 2 people, 3 if the group leader has a premium account.

Thats 3 people max per group in a Random Battle of 15v15. The other normal grouping system is Tank Companies, where the Company Leader can pick out his team from the pool of players that enter his lobby.

Now, at one point the Devs of WoT wanted to extend the group size to 5, but they quickly decided against that because it would give the 5 man group "too much power" in any given Random Battle.

I was under the impression from the Dev Blogs that MWO was going to have a Random Battle que like WoT but with a max premade group of 4 (lance) in a 12v12 battle.

What is WoT Syndrome? Its the general idea that the random PUG player in any given Random Battle in WoT is a brain dead monkey (usually the clanless ones)

Depending who you ask, WoT Syndrome is either an Elitist or Formite POV, and most Random Battles end with players on the losing team screaming "noob team", "my team are all terrible pugs" etc in all chat.

Soo you can imagine what might happend if you cap the group size in the Random Battles, but I wonder if unlimited group size is a lesser evil when they encounter ramdom pugs.

Thoughts? Opinions? Explainations that probably read better and get the point across many times better than I can?

------------------------------------------------

Personally, I wish for the 4 player group cap, because make no mistake war is coming, with all its glory, and all its horror.

I don't play in WoT Random Battles anymore mainly because I'm afraid of having really bad pug teams...

On the flip side I'm afraid that I will lose interest in playing MWO Random Battles if the premade random battle group is not limited.

Because as I see it, random pug teams are like some armed backwater militia while full premade groups are crack house units... with the condition that both sides have equal numbers this ends up as... well you get the (bloody) picture.

*large wall of text*

*red rext*



*ramblings*

*not-so-subtle references to other forumites/players*

*more red text*

-----

This is... were all the cool kids from WoT hang out...

http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/06/27/froze … s-new-map/

You know, I was just cruising along PCGAMER's newsite when I decided to read the comments in that particular MWO article I linked up there, and then I found a disturbing trend that has been creeping up in other various gaming forums and what not...

That suddenly XP and IGC (ingame currency) boosts are considered "pay2win" ...

keimosabe says:
03:44pm June 28 2012
AWESOME! Cannot wait to get back into my mech and... oh wait, it's "pay to win"
http://mwomercs.com/founders
never mind....

This is the comment chain in question. I find that since most games are correcting past F2P practices of "selling power", people complaining about any and all P2W aspects are shifting their focus on boosts... I find this a rather disturbing trend...

I know that in some game economies IGC boosts might actually be borderline P2W but in MWO in particular... its not like that at all... the IGC boost on the mechs in question is only 25%, comparing that to WoT's premium tanks, its quite smaller (though the two game's economies are somewhat different...)

What do yall think of this?