5 replies to this topic

[Abaddun]

I have a few suggestions that I would like to contribute to the mechwarrior online community covering a range of topics that I believe need to be addressed. I am by no means demanding these alterations, merely provoking a debate regarding the specific issue. Please note that I am not a table top veteran, so many of my suggestions may not be in line with lore or table top rules. Also note that I enjoy writing extend pieces of literature with unnecessary passages, please forgive me for the word wall.

1. Covering the tonnage gap between the MG and auto cannons
2. Viability of flamers
3. Improving the effectiveness of mediums
4. Viability of the stalker 4N


Covering the tonnage gap between the MG and auto cannons:

As I was browsing sarna I encountered niche of ballistic weapons called rifles, and after browsing their statline for the tabletop, I was struck by the notion that these weapons were perfect for covering the ballistic gap, however reading on though the description I noted that such weapons are incapable of damaging battlemech armour and are therefore not viable. Further research led me to realise that the BAR(I have a rough idea of what this means) will result in a reduction of damage to the point where the rifle inflicts no damage at all. Now, I would expect the rifle in question to be a enlarged version of a rifled cannon that would commonly be mounted upon main battle tanks(like the challenger II), which seems a little off when I compare the weapon to the auto cannon (which I expect to be smoothbore) as both weapons of a similar scale, bore width and propellant strength should achieve similar results. However another topic in this forum made the suggestion that the quality of the munitions was of such low standards that the round will be insufficient to penetrate the armour plating(which strikes me as a little odd as low velocity, high mass rounds like the AC20 inflict damage via the impact rather then penetration). Now finally, on to the suggestion, suppose the quality of the munitions used in the rifle were to be improved, delivering sufficient penetrating power to breech battlemech armour, the rifles would be the ideal option for lighter ballistic loadouts in light mechs or the Jaegermech DD while at the same time keep autocannons viable for heavier mechs that wish to take them.
I propose the introduction of rifles as a lightweight, high damage, high heat, high range, low firerate, low DPS and low ammo per ton, for example:

Light rifle
Damage:3
Heat:2
Range:750-2250(working off smurfy’s mechlab and I suspect the range of the AC2 may be a typo)
Recycle time:2 seconds
DPS:1.5
Tons:3
Ammo per ton:30


Medium rifle
Damage: 6
Heat:5
Range:650-1800
Recycle time: 4.8seconds
DPS:1.25
Tons:5
Ammo per ton:15

Heavy rifle
Damage:9
Heat:8
Range:600-1500
Recycle time: 9seconds
DPS:1
Tons:7
Ammo per ton:15



Viability of the flamer

I understand why PGI is reluctant to increase the effectiveness of the flamers , the prospect of being stunlocked by mass flamers and having ammunition cook off inside the mech is not pleasant, and there would be uproar amongst the community if this was running uncontrollably rampant. From this I would suggest a few alterations to the structure of the flamer that can be mixed and matched to achieve the best possible balance.

Increasing the damage per second to 0.12 per second(over 0.08, a 50% increase) to each mech section caught in the flamers cone.

Increasing the width and height of the flamers area of effect cone, resulting in more mech sections caught in the blast, for example if all sections caught in the blast to the front the damage will total 0.64 damage per second(0.08*8 with damage to the head included)

Removal of the cone of effect and replace it with a continuous stream that is emitted in a parabolic arc of a range of up to 120 metres.

Apply a tick of DOT up to a maximum of 10 ticks per mech part that each lasts for 4 seconds and inflicts 0.08 damage per second

Reduce heat generated and include ammo(still keeping it a energy weapon) to compensate.
Reduce heat inflicted and apply damage that bypasses armour completely and damages internals directly in addition to damaging armour, however with no chance to crit and at a lower damage then the initial damage to the armour.

Improving effectiveness of mediums.

Many heavy mechs are able to reach the level of speed possessed by most mediums without sacrificing much in the way of armament or armour but medium mechs wishing to attain the speeds of light mechs must make vast sacrifices in such commodities, up to the point where they are even more lightly armed then mechs like the jenner. As, to the best of my knowledge, acceleration is dependent on engine size and specific mech quirks, acceleration for medium mechs is still rather low for their role as guerrilla combatants and brawling mechs. I would suggest a general class increase to turning speed and acceleration/deceleration which would allow greater control over the mech in close, urban environments and promote jinking to avoid hostile fire.

Viability of the stalker 4N

There is no counter argument to the statement “the stalker 4N is a inferior stalker variant in comparison to all other stalker variants” I myself have used this mech, and while I have no issue with the mech as I made no use of the missile hard points(4 large lasers), it is clear that other stalker variants can perform this build to a better degree(stalker 3F) and also have the option to add variety by completely altering the mechs fighting style. I do not feel that there is any way to increase the validity of the mech without seriously hindering the traits of other mechs. If I increase max engine size or energy hardpoints, the awesome will suffer as energy boating and high velocity assault mechs is mainly reserved for the awesome. Adding ECM capability is possible, but it contests with the atlas DDC as the ECM assault mech of favour(and if ECM were to be added, why not use the stalker 3Fb over the 4N). you could add innate quirks to put the 4N on par with other Stalkers but the 3F will still be superior unless the quirks make a highly noticeable difference. I would suggest a innate quirk increasing the heat dissipation effectiveness of heat sinks but we already suffer from PPC stalkers. Further suggestions welcome to kick start my mind.

I hope you have enjoyed my spew of thoughts.
Thankyou for your time.

[aniviron]

A speed increase to mediums would be nice, but it would not save them. As it stands, right now mediums are too large and too lightly armored; because PPCs and high damage ballistics are the order of the day, it takes between one and two shots to core and almost kill a medium in most assaults. The amount of speed you would have to add to make a target as big as a medium difficult to hit would land them in the same speed bracket as lights, which then obsoletes the entire light class.

I haven't personally played the 4N, but most chassis have at least one dud variant that is just flat out inferior to all the rest; not only does it duplicate the capabilities of another variant, it does it with fewer hardpoints. The jr7-k is a perfect example; identical to the jr7-d, but with one less missile hardpoint. As far as the 4N vs awesomes go, you must be mistaken if you think awesomes are fast. The 9M and pretty baby are, but the other variants are all stuck with a 300 engine cap, meaning stalkers are already as fast or faster than every awesome except the 9m anyway.

[Iqfish]

Good Ideas.

PGI officially announced that Mech Mortars are in development, and they are supposed to close the Gap.

I cant talk about the 4N, I dont pilot Stalkers.

The Ideas on the Flamer are great, no they are awesome! I'd love to see them viable, like in other MW-Titles

The Idea of Mediums is good, but needs some more deeply thinking. You cant just increase every Medium chassis, that wouldn't be enough I think. I mastered both Hunchback and Cicada and I have to say that you are RIGHT, that Heavys are the better Mediums. Don't nerf heavies, make Mediums better, and lights to (but not too much!)

To PGI-People:
We will be getting the Public Test Servers in the next 30 days I guess. Please, for the love of my Hunchies, play around with numbers and stuff on the Test Servers. It can't be that hard to just improve some numbers.


Thanks for the post, OP

[Gaan Cathal]

Or, or, you could bring the MG up to par with where it should be from both a balance and TT-veracity perspective. For once the two actually agree on something, so it gets made into a paint chipper.

[General Taskeen]

Rifles do -3 Damage to Armor FYI. Better off suggesting Light AC/2's and Light AC/5's that actually do their listed damage against armor. Heck even the MG did the same damage as an AC/2, so let's start there.

Edited by General Taskeen, 08 June 2013 - 06:53 PM.

[Deathlike]

The only buff I can think that can be applied to the 4N w/o making it magically OP is adding a missile hardpoint in the CT. I'm not sure how many tubes it can hold (maybe 6 to 10) that should compensate for the lost missile hardpoint that used to be in the arm...

Edit:
Outside of that, making the 4N have the same/similar properties/quirks to the 3F is probably the only other alternative.

Edited by Deathlike, 08 June 2013 - 08:13 PM.