87 replies to this topic

[Jestun]

I am, on 14 May 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

Im not that good, and yet I am dong fine with all of these weapon builds that have been declared ineffective.

A "not very good" player is in the ELO bracket with other players that are not very good.

Unfortunately it is harder to have a balance discussion with systems like ELO in as different people experience very different things.

Edited by Jestun, 16 May 2013 - 07:37 AM.

[I am]

Still don't think I am that good. I think I have broken into the upper mid ELO bracket though, as alot of the players taht end up beating me, are pretty well known as "great players."

Id say I am middle of the road, but due to my zelous effort to communicate with teams, and take all steps to win, I think I am getting into the upper ELO games. Definately feel like I am in over my head there. My definition of good is doing between 250 - 500 dmg per game, winning more than I lose, and only having a facepalm game every 10 to 15 matches. Thats about where I am at now, and it is alot better than when I first started. Now last month, or the one before when LRMs got that super buff I thought I was pro for 2 seconds, was getting close to 1000 per match, and broke 1300 once. Triple lrm15s ftw (hugs his DDC).

Anyways I agree with you on this, it is hard to weight player experiences considering ELO is hidden, but when I am vsing guys who win tournies, I think im out of the underhive.

Edited by I am, 16 May 2013 - 08:14 AM.

[jaakkomm]

Skill has nothing to with damage per game...

[Ngamok]

jaakkomm, on 16 May 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

Skill has nothing to with damage per game...

Yea, I got a clan mate who does pretty poor to average lots of the times but when he is in his DDC he gets lots of damage because his mech can alpha short range like a god.

[I am]

Ninjas are better than pirates. Pretty obvious. You'd still disagree. That dmg statement was a generalization, sometimes my capmando saves the day and does little to no damage. Argument went as follows..

Me: Most weapons are just fine, I see it when I play.

Trolls hoping to get weapons buffed for exploitation: You idea of fine is subjective.

Me: Well I do about this well. (X Y Z)

Trolls hoping to get weapons buffed for exploitation: XYZ is not a good measurement for fine.

Now were off topic, the point was weapons are by and large fine as is. Let's stay on topic ppl, and not distract the issue with metric squabbling.

Only thing I will agree with in terms of buff/nerf-ery, PPCs do too much damage under 80 meters, and the whole "6 PPC stalker is helpless up close" argument, is bunk.

Only two weapons truely need buffs. Flamers and MGs, but I'll let others argue about that.

[Keifomofutu]

I am, on 16 May 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:

Ninjas are better than pirates. Pretty obvious. You'd still disagree. That dmg statement was a generalization, sometimes my capmando saves the day and does little to no damage. Argument went as follows..

Me: Most weapons are just fine, I see it when I play.

Trolls hoping to get weapons buffed for exploitation: You idea of fine is subjective.

Me: Well I do about this well. (X Y Z)

Trolls hoping to get weapons buffed for exploitation: XYZ is not a good measurement for fine.

Now were off topic, the point was weapons are by and large fine as is. Let's stay on topic ppl, and not distract the issue with metric squabbling.

Only thing I will agree with in terms of buff/nerf-ery, PPCs do too much damage under 80 meters, and the whole "6 PPC stalker is helpless up close" argument, is bunk.

Only two weapons truely need buffs. Flamers and MGs, but I'll let others argue about that.

Synopsis:Someone told me something that wasn't true on the internet. I was very hurt by this.

[IceSerpent]

Keifomofutu, on 16 May 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

Synopsis:Someone told me something that wasn't true on the internet. I was very hurt by this.

A better synopsis: I lied, got called on it, and was very hurt by the whole experience.

[Ngamok]

I am, on 16 May 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:

Ninjas are better than pirates. Pretty obvious. You'd still disagree.

Pirates get all the booty.

Also:

http://www.wired.com...rates-vs-ninja/

Edited by Ngamok, 16 May 2013 - 10:40 AM.

[I am]

And the examples follow.  

Edited by I am, 16 May 2013 - 10:21 AM.

[NinetyProof]

I am, on 14 May 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

That I am doing well with the above weapon systems is not opinion, it is fact. I am seing it, I am doing it. It leads me to speculate that most, not all, but most of the named systems actually work just fine and the tears are unjustified.

The only fact is that you got lucky with either map, or n00b players.

That doesn't mean LRM's were not nerfed (which they were) or that LRM suffer from HSR (which they do) or that they are not hitting the parts of the mech that the dev's want them to ... all of those are *facts* based upon what the Developers have stated and were pretty much verify by the community.

You? Not Fact ... Developers? Fact, or as close as you can get.

More non-facts? sure ...

I ran an Stalker 5M for about a week just a couple of weeks ago. It had 2@LRM15, 3@LRM10, 4ML's + Tag. I could tell the difference between players that are "used" to LRM's and stay close to cover and most of my LRM's would miss ... vs the player that was clueless about LRM dodging and just eat them all day long.

Reality? LRM's have been a non-factor for soooo long now that many puggie players don't know how to cope with them at all ... ergo, under the right map / team, you can easily rack up 500-700 damage with a decent LRM boat. At the same time, you could also get less then 200 depending upon the players.

So ... there are the facts and the suppositions. Whether you, or any other forum posters *feels* differently, that is fine ... feelings are not facts and your free to feel whatever you want. Opinions? based upon feelings? fine ... represented at as facts? those are called *lies*.

[I am]

NinetyProof, on 16 May 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

The only fact is that you got lucky with either map, or n00b players.

That doesn't mean LRM's were not nerfed (which they were) or that LRM suffer from HSR (which they do) or that they are not hitting the parts of the mech that the dev's want them to ... all of those are *facts* based upon what the Developers have stated and were pretty much verify by the community.

You? Not Fact ... Developers? Fact, or as close as you can get.

More non-facts? sure ...

I ran an Stalker 5M for about a week just a couple of weeks ago. It had 2@LRM15, 3@LRM10, 4ML's + Tag. I could tell the difference between players that are "used" to LRM's and stay close to cover and most of my LRM's would miss ... vs the player that was clueless about LRM dodging and just eat them all day long.

Reality? LRM's have been a non-factor for soooo long now that many puggie players don't know how to cope with them at all ... ergo, under the right map / team, you can easily rack up 500-700 damage with a decent LRM boat. At the same time, you could also get less then 200 depending upon the players.

So ... there are the facts and the suppositions. Whether you, or any other forum posters *feels* differently, that is fine ... feelings are not facts and your free to feel whatever you want. Opinions? based upon feelings? fine ... represented at as facts? those are called *lies*.

Guy who likes running a stalker with LRM 60 (15+15+10+10+10) arguing LRMs need a buff, discounting those who point out they are a comparable weapon to other weapons in their present state.

Seems legit.

Edited by I am, 16 May 2013 - 10:37 AM.

[jeffsw6]

I am, on 16 May 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Guy who likes running a stalker with LRM 60 (15+15+10+10+10) arguing LRMs need a buff, discounting those who point out they are a comparable weapon to other weapons in their present state.

Seems legit.

My idea is to make LRM5-launched missiles travel faster than missiles launched by an LRM20, with incremental speed changes for LRM10 and LRM15. That would create the utility of having an LRM5 or LRM10 as a side-weapon you can use for harassing or suppressing, and make it "safe" to raise their damage because the really big launchers used by boaters would still be shooting slower, easily-dodged projectiles.

[I am]

Since auto aim weapons are so skill-less in comparison to aimed weapons, they should do less damage by comparison, shouldn't they?

[Kraven Kor]

Perception = Reality.

Most of what is posted here that you or I or anyone might disagree with, is opinion, perception; not fact.

Some just cling harder to their perceptions than others, and thus refuse to even consider any alternate theories or opinions.

[jeffsw6]

I am, on 16 May 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

Since auto aim weapons are so skill-less in comparison to aimed weapons, they should do less damage by comparison, shouldn't they?

LRMs are "auto-aim" but they are not skill-less. This is because of ECM, and players using cover effectively (largely due to PPCs, not missiles.) Go play ten or twenty matches in an LRM boat. You'll find that you have to work really hard, just like in any other mech, to be effective on your team. You have to tag your targets much of the time, get to medium-range to connect with the missiles, and move in and out of cover.

No one is going around with a 3L tagging targets for his team's LRM boat(s) anymore. Even if he was, the enemy mechs would be behind cover anyway; otherwise they would be dead from PPC fire.

[I am]

Jeff I hope you don't really believe that. I did play my LRM boat yesterday some, and the day before. My idea of LRM boat is 45 LRM ac20 and 2 ML.

Here you want to agree on something. Pound for pound ballistics are sub-par. That is before even considering the ammo limitations, and danger of ammo explosions. I don't really lump Gauss in with ballistics. It's unique nature, even with its liklihood to explode, gives it far more utility than it's AC cousins. I can get my weights worth, more-so, out of any other system over a ballistic build any day. Poor ac5's.

[bashpr0mpt]

I am, on 14 May 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

1. My LRM's? They're still totally OP. Loving their effectiveness, but got bored with LRM's last month and that is still the case. Who didnt really, it's all we were carrying.

You must be a miracle worker. I literally have about 10 slots of LRM ammo and deplete without getting more than 100-200 damage in a round as a missile boat. And that's with good targeting and not wasting ammo on un-open targets.

I don't know how you're doing damage, especially given LRM15-20's are the only way to get hits because AMS deals with each volley as each weapon launch and not the total volley (ie: you shoot six LRM5's for 30 missiles, the AMS can drop 8 or whatever with reasonable regularity, instead of it being 8 of 30 it's 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5. So it pretty much defeats 100% of your attack.

It's a horrible flaw, almost as bad as machine guns (I have a one armed Raven and have started to see many one armed Raven's because machine gun is all we can fit and it's not worth the weight, at all.)

I am, on 14 May 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

2. PPC minimum range? How did I one shot a jagermech today that was hardly hurt from about 20 meters, when all I was carrying was 4 PPC's. Not ERPPC's, just PPC's.

You got it in the head and it's armor value was too low to defeat it. That's the only way. Also I don't believe ERPPC's or ER anything do more damage, they merely have Extended Range hence ER.

I am, on 14 May 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

3. My SSRM's love your CT. Been proving that all day. Only time they dont hit CT, is when they *** something as they head for the CT.

Good. SSRM's are meant to be guaranteed hits. Although at 2 missiles that do like 1 damage each or something piddly you may as well bust out the machine gun, which we have already established isn't worth a pinch of crap.

I am, on 14 May 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

Side note. Commando's are OP.

Makes you think everything people complain about isn't true.

Commando's are rubbish. But again, we're just stating our opinions here without any reasoning, reference, or causative function, right? People complain because they are unhappy with the way the game is being developed mostly. Poor communication from developers and poor community affairs is one of the key elements, mixed with the fact that buyers remorse is extremely high, and everything seems to be some tenuous con to get more 'MC' out of us or rather more $$.

[I am]

bashpr0mpt, on 16 May 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

You must be a miracle worker. I literally have about 10 slots of LRM ammo and deplete without getting more than 100-200 damage in a round as a missile boat. And that's with good targeting and not wasting ammo on un-open targets.

I don't know how you're doing damage, especially given LRM15-20's are the only way to get hits because AMS deals with each volley as each weapon launch and not the total volley (ie: you shoot six LRM5's for 30 missiles, the AMS can drop 8 or whatever with reasonable regularity, instead of it being 8 of 30 it's 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5, 8 of 5. So it pretty much defeats 100% of your attack.

It's a horrible flaw, almost as bad as machine guns (I have a one armed Raven and have started to see many one armed Raven's because machine gun is all we can fit and it's not worth the weight, at all.)



You got it in the head and it's armor value was too low to defeat it. That's the only way. Also I don't believe ERPPC's or ER anything do more damage, they merely have Extended Range hence ER.



Good. SSRM's are meant to be guaranteed hits. Although at 2 missiles that do like 1 damage each or something piddly you may as well bust out the machine gun, which we have already established isn't worth a pinch of crap.



Commando's are rubbish. But again, we're just stating our opinions here without any reasoning, reference, or causative function, right? People complain because they are unhappy with the way the game is being developed mostly. Poor communication from developers and poor community affairs is one of the key elements, mixed with the fact that buyers remorse is extremely high, and everything seems to be some tenuous con to get more 'MC' out of us or rather more $$.

1. I dont think i am a miracle worker, I think your cursed if you cant do more than 200 dmg with 1000 missles.

2. Never said ERs do more, but they have no minimum range, hence the reference.

3. Did you just assert that streaks are no better than MGs? *Falls out of his chair*

Sidenote: Apparently you have never seen a good trollmando in action. But according to you, he might as well be carrying triple MGs since he can load 3 SSRM's.

Edited by I am, 16 May 2013 - 11:51 AM.

[jeffsw6]

bashpr0mpt, on 16 May 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

You must be a miracle worker. I literally have about 10 slots of LRM ammo and deplete without getting more than 100-200 damage in a round as a missile boat. And that's with good targeting and not wasting ammo on un-open targets.more $$.

TL;DR: You can waste 10 tons of AC/2 ammo by missing if you want, too. That doesn't mean the AC/2 is broken, it means you are wasting ammunition.

Your description, above, is not how games in my LRM boat go. I don't waste ammunition and I only carry 7 tons. If I use it all, chances are, I have carried my team and will be burning down some armor-less opponents with my MPLs until I die or win.

If I want to take a pot-shot at an enemy using LRMs I will fire one launcher, not all 4-5. That's how I conserve ammo. Suppressing enemies is important but it doesn't take 60 missiles hitting a rock to do it.

I am, on 16 May 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

Jeff I hope you don't really believe that. I did play my LRM boat yesterday some, and the day before. My idea of LRM boat is 45 LRM ac20 and 2 ML.

Which thing are you asking if I really believe?

I don't agree with your view that ballistics are sub-par "pound for pound." The highest heat/dmg ballistic, the AC/2, does 2 dmg/heat and has a very long range; and it does 4 DPS. That's better heat efficiency and DPS than any laser, better DPS than any missile pack, and the only missile launchers that are better dmg/heat (on paper) is SRM6, LRM15, and LRM20. I say "on paper" because we know AC/2 rounds are easier to aim than SRMs and have greater range; and LRMs have many counters.

The cost you pay for all the benefits of the AC/2, and other ballistics, is tonnage and limited ammunition.

I have an Excel spreadsheet including the weight of all weapons AND how much ammo for that weapon I feel I need to carry to use it effectively. For example, I figure AC/2 at 2 tons ammo each, UAC/5 at 2.5 tons each, based on my play-style. The spreadsheet has a DPS/Ton column which it calculates based on that. Ballistic weapons are generally lower than lasers in DPS/ton but better than missiles. However, they generate far less heat, meaning you can be effective in a brawl longer.

I believe there need to be more small ballistics, lighter than 6 tons; but I do not think that ballistics as a class are inferior to lasers (or missiles.) I form my opinion by playing a wide variety of mechs (admittedly, most of them are heavy and assault) and by using my spreadsheet. It's not like I am just basing my whole opinion on arithmetic without play-experience in mechs with guns.

So my 6 MC worth is, your statement is overly-broad and largely incorrect.

[Ngamok]

I saw jeffsw6 on Frozen City in his Atlas and was like, I need to kill him !! We traded blows but someone else got the kill. I was sad.