31 replies to this topic

[ShadowDrake05]

focuspark, on 25 March 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

quoted for truth

Your sig is pretty accurate too heh. I've never played the TT game. I've played all the Microsoft MW series, I've played MPBT Solaris and MPBT: 3025. There's things I've liked about all of them (3025 being my favorite). I see people trying to apply the tabletop rules here and cringe a little.

Sure maybe TT numbers will be a good start but this isn't a turn based game. This is a real time first person shooter (I can feel the hate already for saying that). Player skill and aim plays a huge role which can't be matched to a dice roll per se.

But that's besides the point. I'm not going to bother to rant, just wanted to say I'd bet we're on the same page.

[sC4r]

ShadowDrake05, on 25 March 2013 - 02:45 PM, said:

AC/2 is better than PPCs? LOL

There's a big issue which no one has directly brought up: Front-loading damage.

Go ahead and duel someone who has 2 ERPPCs while you have 4 AC/2s. I'll tell you who is going to win every time - the guy with ERPPCs. Pop over the hill, do full damage, go back down and wait.

Yes AC/2 may have more DPS but you need to be aiming and hitting the target constantly to make that happen. In a game where you can pop up and hide at will this is a no-contest issue. And gauss takes more slots and has limited ammo. Try an extended brawl. PPCs don't quit - your gauss will run out very rapidly.

You really sound like you've just used PPCs and not gauss all that much.

pretty much agree on this
except with the fact that you dont run out of gauss ammo if you arent completely blind
got my challenge of 3 tons of ammo for gauss in atlas... i think i depleted the ammo only twice the rest of time either enemy was dead or i lost gauss... and when i had gausspracht... never ever happened to me that i depleted 70 shells in match without leaving 8 smoldering wrecs around in the field

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

Wow...and here I am thinking that PPCs are currently very good. Still my fav weapon by a long shot.

[ShadowDrake05]

sC4r, on 25 March 2013 - 03:08 PM, said:

pretty much agree on this
except with the fact that you dont run out of gauss ammo if you arent completely blind
got my challenge of 3 tons of ammo for gauss in atlas... i think i depleted the ammo only twice the rest of time either enemy was dead or i lost gauss... and when i had gausspracht... never ever happened to me that i depleted 70 shells in match without leaving 8 smoldering wrecs around in the field

Possibly. I no doubt have some learning to do. I've tried a 2x gauss CTF-4X but didn't like it as much as the 2x UAC5 2x AC5.

Or near as much as my current 2x ERPPC 2x UAC5 (edit: Muromets) build. Sweet baby jesus it's a million times better at all ranges.

Though 800+ damage matches with 4x AC/2 was fun - ammo limited. The AC5 build was ammo limited to around 850 damage as well. I never did well enough with the gauss build to get the hang of it. That was the time of overpowered LRMs.

Edited by ShadowDrake05, 25 March 2013 - 03:15 PM.

[jakucha]

PPC is not mean to match AC20. It's a different weapon, like others have said, much bigger range, no ammo, much less weight, defeats ECM, and so on.

Edited by jakucha, 25 March 2013 - 03:45 PM.

[MasterErrant]

the thing that needs to be done to the PPC is to make it a zero time of flight weapon when you strok the trigger you arns you mech are connected by the beam...there should be no leading and no duration just a flash. particle beams travel at close to lightspeed. and asers do!

they also gave lasers and ppcs a beam duration which actually makes them a clustering weapon it is common to only do fractional damage with them I've scored a one point hit with ppcs

[Gabriel Amarell]

If u don't want to read it all the last 3 paragraphs are my assessment of the state of PPC's vs / AC-10 (which I consider competing weapons) but the numbers I am using wont make sense unless u read the rest.

How I handled heat sinks.
(assume that the engine heat sinks are 0 weight and 0 slots, and that there are 9, an additional 7 outside the engine so 16 total / 21 slots = 1.31 slots per heat sink. 16 heat sinks / 8 tons (7 outside the engine, + 1 in the engine slot) = .5 tons / heat sink, in engine = .2 HPS, outside = .14 HPS so 8 * .20 + 8 + .14 / 16 = .17 HPS per heat sink)

summary, double heat sinks: weight .5 tons, slots 1.3, heat dissipation .17 HPS (this is not exact, but its close enough for my purposes)

AC-10: 10 dmg, 2.5 second recycle, DPS 4.0, 12 tons, 7 crits, 3 heat, 1.2 HPS, 1100 ft/sec
+ 7 heat sink, + 2 tons ammo = 17.5 tons, 18.1 crits, 0 heat,

PPC: 10 dmg, 3.0 second recycle, DPS 3.33, 7 tons, 3 crits, 8 heat, 2.67 HPS, 2000 ft/sec
+ 16 heat sinks, = 15 tons, 23.4 crits, 0 heat

1.2 PPC's = the DPS of 1 AC-10 so multiply the PPC numbers by 1.2

PPC: 10 dmg, 3.0 second recycle, DPS 4.0, 7 tons, 3.6 crits, 9.6 heat, 3.20 HPS, 2000 ft/sec
+ 18 heat sinks, = 16.5 tons, 27.5 crits, 0 heat

OK, so what moron would go for heat neutrality? The answer is no one is that stupid obviously but I did it this way to prove a point.

PPC (heat neutral) weighs 6% less but takes up 50% more crits. SO, what does it mean. Interpret it how you will, to me it means PPC's are crit hogs due to excessive heat inefficiency when compared with ballistics. Is infinite shots worth 50% more crits... I would argue its not maybe 25% more crits but not 50%.

SO whats the solution. well, to start with I would lower the heat of the PPC's by 1 heat per shot (from 8 to 7) then I would make their minimum range say 50 (or maybe even 30) instead of 90, I would also extend their max range to 600 (from 540) and I would see how they look after those changes.

The changes cant just be to the PPC though, currently when a 6 PPC Stalker alpha's at 90% heat he just overheats and 4 seconds later hes up again. What should happen is that 6 PPC stalker should just blow up, going beyond 150% max heat SHOULD COOK YOU. Second thing is if you go to 149% heat u should be shut down until your mechs heat system catches up. so lets say u go 40 heat above redline 40 / .17 * 16 = 14 seconds.

14 second shutdowns and bowing up your mech with a 6 PPC alpha at 90% heat would put a stop to the PPC madness in a big hurry, the artifical cap on shutdown time and not allowing people to blow themselves up with heat (unless they over ride) is whats causing the problem, not the PPC's.

Edited by Gabriel Amarell, 27 March 2013 - 07:49 AM.

[matG]

Do PPCs do splash damage? played lots of games where ive had high damage but its not all been applied to just the hit location.

[sC4r]

matG, on 27 March 2013 - 07:03 AM, said:

Do PPCs do splash damage? played lots of games where ive had high damage but its not all been applied to just the hit location.

i would say they dont (99,9% sure here) but IF they do the splash radius is very very small...

MasterErrant, on 26 March 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

the thing that needs to be done to the PPC is to make it a zero time of flight weapon when you strok the trigger you arns you mech are connected by the beam...there should be no leading and no duration just a flash. particle beams travel at close to lightspeed. and asers do!

they also gave lasers and ppcs a beam duration which actually makes them a clustering weapon it is common to only do fractional damage with them I've scored a one point hit with ppcs

well realistically you would be about right... though i believe its possible to fire the particles at slower speed -> it takes time for particle accelerator to kick those particles to speed of light so maybe ppc just kicks them to 2000m/s

but ppc in previous games were always projectiles, and if they were instant hit like lasers hell who would use laser O.o
from game balance point it would be OP as hell

Edited by sC4r, 27 March 2013 - 07:43 AM.

[Luminarium]

Brown Hornet, on 25 March 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

Wow...and here I am thinking that PPCs are currently very good. Still my fav weapon by a long shot.

You aren't PPC are better than ballistics atm.

They compete directly with gauss and with uac5/ac10 to some extend and they do a better job at long range engagement. If you factor in the weight and size of heatsink compared to the weapon weight and ammo weight - the PPC are still more efficient and more durable than the Gauss.

They also have a better rate of fire than gauss, they have better projectile speed, and counter ecm. Sure they generate a lot of heat - but chain fire and knowing when to shoot negates that issue.

This holds true when you consider putting these weapons on a mech that supports both like the K2. You can put 2 Gauss and a ppc/erppc on it with around 50 tons of ammo, or you can put 4x ppc or 2x ppc 2x erppc. 4x ppc > 2x Gauss.

There is a reason why there are very few gaussapults around. Even the 3d pop tart is more successful with 2x ppc 1x gauss rather than 2x gauss build.

Sure the new jags run around with all sorts of ballistics on them - but it's only because it's a new mech - and not a very good one at that.

Take the jagboom build. You can put 2xac20 and xl engine into one. But why would you want to... it has a gigantic torso hit box that will get you cored in seconds. On the other hand not putting an XL on it makes it a heavy slow mech that has 5 tons less than cat to play with.

The only thing that the jag has going for it is the arms location - which is useful for gauss or even ac10 hull down long- mid range shooting. Then again you can get a K2 put xl 300 in it, 18 dhc 2ppc 2erppc and outperform any jag by a mile.

The same argument stays true when you compare ppc / erppc to ac10. I like what the ac10 does i really do, but when you factor in it's weight - you can do better with other weapons.

PPC still has a better range, much faster travel time, similar dps, and again - it counters ecm. I don't think ppc and ac10 compete for the same spot as ac10 is better in the under 200m range while ppc works better at 300+

Ballistics need to be lighter to be more useful. Ammo needs to be lighter. PGI changed some of the table top rules and kept others intact (I am for the changes, they were necessary but - this is going to be a very difficult thing to balance.)

Edited by Luminarium, 27 March 2013 - 11:27 AM.

[MasterErrant]

there are two factors not in most peoples argumants

! PPcs leave a visible trail that points at your mech
@ all energy weapons have been nerfed so that they are in effect clustering weapons the "Duratuions" makes all lasers work like pulse lasers and ppc do the same.

[UberFubarius]

One thing I would say about ballistic: Their ammo count needs a boost.
In TT, they holds about 100 damage per ton.
In MWO, its about 150 damage per ton. With double armor, that's about 75 damage per ton equivalent in TT.
That's not all, in MWO, all weapon has a boost in DPS (I think its about 3, in general).
So, I would argue that ballistic weapons should have their ammo/ton doubled (and perhaps with an option to load half-ton only).