7 replies to this topic

[Ghoulsby]

Perhaps I'm misremembering, but I thought it was common in older mechwarrior games and games of this genre that there was a general trade-off between one heavy weapon or multiple smaller weapons, however, it seems that unless I'm doing something wrong there really isn't any difference between dmg/weight ratios and dmg/slot ratios between weapon classes (this means that using multiple smaller weapons instead of a single heavy weapon is useless because you don't get more DPS for your slots or the tonnage, but you get the lower single hit and lower range of smaller weapons).

I guess my question is, why does my dragon have 4 ballistics or 4 energy weapon slots if there doesn't seem to be viable weapon options except guass or ppc? I am noob so maybe I just don't realize whats actually going on. Please help me understand!

Also, as a side question, is it ever viable to dump the armor off one arm and redistribute it to other parts with the idea that you'll always lose that arm but the rest where your weapons/components are located will survive longer?

Cheers and thanks for the help!

[LinkIcefang]

I'm pretty sure that the medium laser is the most efficient weapon in the game, right now. Gauss Rifles and PPCs are quite powerful, but they are by no means the only viable weapon in the game. U-AC 5s and lasers are still viable, as are SRMs. (LRMs are currently nerfed into oblivion).

To offer an example:
The PPC weighs 7 tonnes and takes up 3 critical slots, dealing 10 damage at long range.

For the same weight, you could place 3 medium lasers and 4 heatsinks (though this takes many more crit-slots), to deal 15 damage at medium range. The medium lasers also have faster cycle speed.

As for your second question: That really depends on what sort of play-style you favor. I personally do that with my Centurions (stripping the shield arm) so my other components have more armor.

[Koniving]

There's actually quite a few viable weapons. However because the patch just came out -- and with every patch comes the desire to test it -- you will see lots more gauss and PPCs at the moment. Eventually like the ECM, LRMs, etc., it will phase out.

But what Dragon has 4 ballistics? Thought the cap was 3.

The dumping armor idea has been around since closed beta. It does work. But in doing so you open a portal to your internals without going through your armor (shoot inside the shoulder of a missing arm to get direct damage to internal structure).

Many Dragons used to run twin Large Lasers or quad medium lasers and a ballistic such as an LB-10, or ditch the ballistics altogether. I'll try to refer Zero Vernias here, who is Zhizhu's Dragon expert. His skill with the dragon is unmatched in our group.

Check back later tonight.

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

Far as the tradeoff.. An example.. Hunchback 4G carries an AC-20 typically. One shot deals 20 damage instantly, but it has an ammo limitation and limits the size of engine too. The 4P on my build carries 7 SPL instead of the AC-20. I deal 21 damage, but I can fire it three times before the 4G can fire twice.

That's 63 damage in the time a single AC-20 can deal 40 damage.

Even better, I can chain-fire them to make a machine gun out of small pulse lasers, to constantly do tiny spurts of damage as I chase lights. Where the AC-20 may miss and waste his shot, I'll never stop hitting that enemy light. Plus I can run faster than the AC-20 Hunchback.

Edited by Koniving, 17 April 2013 - 12:06 PM.

[Roughneck45]

Ghoulsby, on 17 April 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

there doesn't seem to be viable weapon options except guass or ppc?

That's the problem right there.

The other weapons are viable, you just have to change your play style to accommodate them.

Missiles are bit weak right now, so brawlers in general are suffering now that the Mlas SRM combo isn't as effective as it should be, leading to more PPC and gauss boats.

[Ghoulsby]

Koniving, on 17 April 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

But what Dragon has 4 ballistics? Thought the cap was 3.

My bad, typo/memory error lol

[Sadistic Savior]

Ghoulsby, on 17 April 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

Perhaps I'm misremembering, but I thought it was common in older mechwarrior games and games of this genre that there was a general trade-off between one heavy weapon or multiple smaller weapons, however, it seems that unless I'm doing something wrong there really isn't any difference between dmg/weight ratios and dmg/slot ratios between weapon classes (this means that using multiple smaller weapons instead of a single heavy weapon is useless because you don't get more DPS for your slots or the tonnage, but you get the lower single hit and lower range of smaller weapons).

I guess my question is, why does my dragon have 4 ballistics or 4 energy weapon slots if there doesn't seem to be viable weapon options except guass or ppc? I am noob so maybe I just don't realize whats actually going on. Please help me understand!

Also, as a side question, is it ever viable to dump the armor off one arm and redistribute it to other parts with the idea that you'll always lose that arm but the rest where your weapons/components are located will survive longer?

Cheers and thanks for the help!

There are more variables than just DPS.

Large weapons are more likely to get you a kill, because they deliver all damage in one place at the same time. smaller weapons will spread it out.

Clusters of smaller weapons are more likely to get crits, because the chance for a crit is on a per-damage-instance basis...with a large weapon, there is only one instance of damage, so there is only one chance for a crit.

There is no real way to min/max like there is on other games. The best choice will depend on your play style and the options your chosen mech allows for. All weapons have drawbacks and advantages.

[Konril]

Ghoulsby, on 17 April 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

I guess my question is, why does my dragon have 4 ballistics or 4 energy weapon slots if there doesn't seem to be viable weapon options except guass or ppc? I am noob so maybe I just don't realize whats actually going on. Please help me understand!

Also, as a side question, is it ever viable to dump the armor off one arm and redistribute it to other parts with the idea that you'll always lose that arm but the rest where your weapons/components are located will survive longer?

Cheers and thanks for the help!

First, the actual original build rules don't feature hard points at all. If the game uses equipment swapping rules, then the only two real rules is that the player is limited to the original weight and space available, and it's up to the "designer of the Battlemech" to determine what can and can't actually be swapped. So you can read that as the Game Master has final say whether you can or can't do something.

The modification rules, and especially the hardpoint system, can be considered PGI's "house rules." From the look of it, each of the variants sold with the exact loadout featured in the official source material. The specific hard points were chosen first to match the original loadout of the variant, then a couple extra added to give players some extra customization room. Different hard point options on different variants.

Taking that Dragon for example, all 3 ballistic points on the 5N's arm simply aren't going to be used unless by AC/2s or machine guns. There simply isn't enough space in the arms. But that doesn't mean that 3 AC/2s are all that bad in a fight. But if you want to trade one or two of those ballistic points for more lasers or missiles, you have the option of buying and customizing a 1N or 1C instead of being stuck with just the 5N.

Does that make sense?

Regarding the second question about armor redistribution. The short answer is "yes, sometimes." It depends a lot on the actual shape of your mech. An arm will simply fall off if it gets shot off for any reason. So it is perfectly reasonable in most cases to lower the armor of this useless arm to reinforce the armor of a component with useful stuff inside. But don't go overboard. Even if the arm has nothing in it, or especially if the arm has nothing in it, it can still be torso-twisted toward enemy fire to act as a shield to soak up enemy fire. But this is where the shape of the mech comes in. Between the fat torso and shape of a Catapult's "ears", they tend to be no help at all defending your torso from the side. They're too high up and the torso is too fat. Although Dragons have proper articulated arms, the torso is still too fat so those arms don't tend to be much help defensively. The Jagermech has a relatively thin torso, but the arms are fixed straight out and high enough on the mech to leave most of the torso exposed from the side. Centurions and Atlases have trouble popping up over hills to snipe because the arm shape leaves the weapons hanging at waist level on the mech. However, these arms almost fully cover the torso they're attached to, so torso-twisting one arm to shield the mech can make these mechs much tougher than a lot of people might expect.

[zraven7]

Concerning your Dragon 3 ballistic question:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3d4f8df93108212

Ammo placement could be swapped around, it's a matter of preference, but it's a solid build. Good damage, decent speed, and some lasers for mitigating ammo loss and dealing with lights. Requires some heat management skills, but you need to learn those anyways.