OpCentar, on 16 April 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:
The only AC that needs a buff is the AC/10. Buffing AC/2s would make them horribly overpowered in 4xAC/2 builds, similar goes for AC/5s and I fear what a Ilya with 3xUAC/5s could do to any mech if it didn't jam so often.
Your AC buffs would enable ACs to rule the field in any head to head encounter. Nothing could withstand that kind of DPS.
Pulse lasers are fine with the exception of small pulse lasers. Nobody uses them anymore so they may need some love.
Medium lasers also fine.
Small lasers could be buffed.
Nah. 4xAC2 builds would still be risky to run - you need to be out in the open to do the damage, it generates tremendous heat, and it chews through ammo and spreads damage all over a mech.
A 25% damage boost would bring it from the level of "that looks like fun" to "that actually hurts"... in line with gauss and AC20 builds.
Similarly, UAC5 Ilyas should really be the primary build of that mech; but since the meta-change to community behaviour have taken a back seat. Maybe a 20% jam rate; something to reincentivize the use of UAC5. Or maybe the simple meta game change to more brawling action will be sufficient, just like the simple meta change to long range sniping has created a resurgence of gauss rifle use.
AC5s could still stand to have a small refire rate buff... If 1.3 is excessive, try 1.5.
Pulse lasers are not fine; they're heavier, hotter, minimally faster to fire and damningly much shorter range. Increasing their DPS while maintaining range and heat re-emphasizes the idea of DPS viability against alpha viability, while still having significant draw backs that don't cause them to become flavour of the month.
Ultimately, if you're to err in favour of brawling of sniping - you'd want it to be brawling, because that's what gives Mechwarrior its unique sense and flavour. A visceral toe to toe dance of heavy machines lashing out with massive fire power, rending limb from metal limb, until a single victor emerges gloriously victorious from the raging fire and smoke of a tenaciously fought battle.
It's a great adrenaline rush, and it's what fun - much more so for a much larger proportion of the player base then a jumping, edging and sniping that we find true to the current metagame.
I mean... the outcry against 3rd person is in large part, an outcry against this kind of pop and shoot gameplay that unimpeded 3rd person view will heavily contribute towards. So why would you exclude the benefits of having 3rd person, only to retain quite unintentionally through meta-game balance considerable portions of the negative aspects of having 3rd person view?
7
