197 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Gaan Cathal, on 28 June 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

Fixed that for you. Currently the Stalker is the best mech at boating 4 PPCs. Stop it doing so, and you'll see a preponderance of quad-PPC AS7-RS all of a sudden and the Stalker, lacking the ability to load a convincing arsenal will go extinct. At the moment either a Stalker or an -RS can pull the quad-PPC thing. After this 'fix' only the RS would out of the two. That's a reduction in diversity. People won't use mechs an update makes **** because they think they look pretty. They'll just get mothballed.

actually, the Atlas couldn't either. There are some that could use TWO PPC, like the AS7-K, but none that could use 3-6.

The PPC boat would be the Awesome, which has it's own weaknesses, so you have a trade off for your Alpha, whereas the Stalker and Atlas currently do not.

And if not being able to boat PPCs means the chassis will go extinct, and such, there are bigger issues. If a person cannot play a support Stalker with 2 ER PPC and an LRM 40-50, especially when he no longer has to worry about being insta cored by another 6 PPC Stalker, then either the player, or the game are broken beyond viability to begin with.

And the Atlas might actually start seeing use as th front line Brawler the chassis was designed to be. And ALL the Atlas Chassis will still get use, the DD-C for it's ECM and Missiles, the -D and RS for their versatile brawling nature and toughness and the -K for fire support, mounting PPCs and Gauss.

When you see one build concept, aka "BOAT PPCS and add a gauss if you can", that is the issue, that is the lack of variety. I'm actually a little surprised you do not see that, but to each their own perspective.

[Marauder3D]

What is funny, or sad, depending on your point of view, is I see two major themes in this thread that were debated ad nauseam before beta even started, then again in closed beta, and they are still relevant now. Those themes are: 1) unlimited customization and 2) convergence.

Some folks say that unlimited customization is why they play mechwarrior. They'll leave MWO without it. The thing is, unlimited customization is what has brought us to the current meta (put as many PPCs as possible on a chassis and alpha until you overheat, coolshot, repeat). Now why isn't that a problem with PPCs you say? PPCs are the symptom. Unlimited customization is the disease. If we fix PPC's, then what? Go back to everyone packing LRM's like one point in early beta? Remember the LRM's that came straight down on your head everytime?

Customization needs to have a little more structure. I'll admit to being a fan of the tabletop--but I realize a straight translation doesn't always work best. Battlemechs are customizable, but without a hardpoint system in addition to the current crit system, people will boat things out of proportion. 6 PPCs, 4 LRM 15s, whatever, boating to the maximum extent of the system. I hear the statement "people will always boat" as a defense of boating. Ok, then lets just make it a little more tricky to boat. Stalkers can have 2 PPCs, 4 lasers, and some missles instead of just 6 PPCs.

Lastly, by fixing point 1) customization, you by default address point 2) convergence. Convergence is a problem when you have identical or nearly identical (gauss and ppc at 250 meters) weapons. It is not so much a problem if you only have some lasers, some ppcs, some missles, and some ballistics because the mechlab wouldn't allow you to boat one weapon type to the exclusion of all others. I think putting in hardpoints tightens down customization and helps (not fixes totally) convergence in one fell swoop. Hardpoints will also make multiple chassis of the same weight class far less redundant.

For the people who might be turned off by such a concept, I can't help but think that they would still play the game because there is still a mechlab. Mechs can still be tinkered with and there will still be optimal competetive builds. They just won't be so boaty.

[Bishop Steiner]

Antagonist, on 29 June 2013 - 04:18 AM, said:

The thing about energy weapons is that compared to both ballistics and missile weapons, they really don't qualify as large. Let's face it, three crits aren't really that big when there's 7 crit gauss rifles, 10 crit AC/20s and 5 crit LRM20s around.

That's not even taking into account the 2 crit CERPPC, which is probably going to unbalance the whole game with clan spec DHS.

To be honest, I would've preferred for DHS to retain their 2 HPS dissipation at the cost of them only marginally raising total heat capacity (0.5 heat cap gain per SHS and DHS, off the top of my head). In essence, that would mean you could chainfire 3-4 PPCs, having to stay out of cover while slowly gaining heat, contrary to how it is right now: Poke your head out, alpha, retreat while overriding shutdown (if even that), cool down and start anew.

One would have to see how smaller energy weapons fare with that heat setup, but at least for massed ML boats, it'd probably mean they'd have to hit-and-run lest they shut down surrounded by aggravated hostiles looking for red reticules.

It's pretty obvious that each weapon class is large or small in comparison with others in its SAME class.

Compared to a Gauss Rifle, the Large Laser might not seem large. But compares to a small or medium laser? It takes up twice as many criticals, and 5-10 times the mass. THAT, my friend is large. THe PPC? 3 times the crits and 7-14 times the mass.

Compared to a car motor, a motorcyle engine is not terribly large. BUt in most cases, you can't squeeze a 1600cc V-twin where a 125cc single piston went.

[Bishop Steiner]

Eric darkstar Marr, on 29 June 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

Bishop me and you normally agree on a lot this is one that I can not agree with you on. Since the dawn of empty build your own mech sheets and the other lore around there was never a true weapon size restriction. Now I do not mind how this game has done hard points as it limits what you can have.

The problem is a fundamental game flaw, I still to do this day believe we should have a heat scale more in line with the TT however I could hear all the players cry out at once because of randomness.

I have 1 troll mech right now a 6 ppc stk and that mech sucks hard. So to those having issues with Boat PPC builds please up your game skill and move out of the crap bracket. You will only see them sometimes then like when I drop my stk for fun.
I drop in a medium and I see like 3-5 in a game. So the root of the problem is not the boat itself but the ELO you are at.

Though for funs my clan has been known to troll all day in 732 triple ppc guass.I still prefer LLs over PPCs.

Eric darkstar Marr, on 29 June 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

Bishop me and you normally agree on a lot this is one that I can not agree with you on. Since the dawn of empty build your own mech sheets and the other lore around there was never a true weapon size restriction. Now I do not mind how this game has done hard points as it limits what you can have.

The problem is a fundamental game flaw, I still to do this day believe we should have a heat scale more in line with the TT however I could hear all the players cry out at once because of randomness.

I have 1 troll mech right now a 6 ppc stk and that mech sucks hard. So to those having issues with Boat PPC builds please up your game skill and move out of the crap bracket. You will only see them sometimes then like when I drop my stk for fun.
I drop in a medium and I see like 3-5 in a game. So the root of the problem is not the boat itself but the ELO you are at.

Though for funs my clan has been known to troll all day in 732 triple ppc guass.I still prefer LLs over PPCs.

between 8 man and PUGing I have played in all ends of the pool, my friend. In the kiddie pool is 6PPC Stalkers and Jagerbombs. In the Deep End, is 4 PPC/ER PPC Stalkers, DD-Cs, Phract-3Ds and HGNs, almost ALL revolving around PPCs and Gauss.

And to use the Deep End as an example, when is the last time you saw a good AWS in 8man? or a near stock K2? Or mechs not Metaraping the PPC/Gauss snipefest?

The fact that in "competitive" play most chassis and weapon combos are already obsolete speaks to the problem.

[WonderSparks]

I came up with my own weapon-size system for a little project I'm working on (I make wannabe video game projects a lot). Small, Medium, Large, and ExtraLarge (for stuff like Heavy Gauss, Arrow IV, and the likes). No matter which way it's implemented though it would certainly help keep 'Mechs from being crammed with things they were not physically designed to carry (like an AC/20 Raven, cripes; the barrel doesn't even change to indicate it's now an Autocannon)

[Bishop Steiner]

Marauder3D, on 29 June 2013 - 05:45 AM, said:

What is funny, or sad, depending on your point of view, is I see two major themes in this thread that were debated ad nauseam before beta even started, then again in closed beta, and they are still relevant now. Those themes are: 1) unlimited customization and 2) convergence.

Some folks say that unlimited customization is why they play mechwarrior. They'll leave MWO without it. The thing is, unlimited customization is what has brought us to the current meta (put as many PPCs as possible on a chassis and alpha until you overheat, coolshot, repeat). Now why isn't that a problem with PPCs you say? PPCs are the symptom. Unlimited customization is the disease. If we fix PPC's, then what? Go back to everyone packing LRM's like one point in early beta? Remember the LRM's that came straight down on your head everytime?

Customization needs to have a little more structure. I'll admit to being a fan of the tabletop--but I realize a straight translation doesn't always work best. Battlemechs are customizable, but without a hardpoint system in addition to the current crit system, people will boat things out of proportion. 6 PPCs, 4 LRM 15s, whatever, boating to the maximum extent of the system. I hear the statement "people will always boat" as a defense of boating. Ok, then lets just make it a little more tricky to boat. Stalkers can have 2 PPCs, 4 lasers, and some missles instead of just 6 PPCs.

Lastly, by fixing point 1) customization, you by default address point 2) convergence. Convergence is a problem when you have identical or nearly identical (gauss and ppc at 250 meters) weapons. It is not so much a problem if you only have some lasers, some ppcs, some missles, and some ballistics because the mechlab wouldn't allow you to boat one weapon type to the exclusion of all others. I think putting in hardpoints tightens down customization and helps (not fixes totally) convergence in one fell swoop. Hardpoints will also make multiple chassis of the same weight class far less redundant.

For the people who might be turned off by such a concept, I can't help but think that they would still play the game because there is still a mechlab. Mechs can still be tinkered with and there will still be optimal competetive builds. They just won't be so boaty.

It's also sadly ironic that for all the talk about "unlimited customization is what will keeps things from being obsolete" that not only has that already proven false here (the Meta is Snipe, with PPC if possible), but in MW2-3 (and in the broken Mektek Omnis for Mektek4) it has always proven true. Both 3 and 4 became online Poptart Warrior games. Before the JJ nerf (oh the QQ) this game awas the same. Now it's STILL all about sniping, which means if it doesn't maximize that ability it is already obsolete, and probably half the chassis currently are because they can't be made to boat.

Doubly ironic is that most of the people I se against limitations (though not all, so keep yer pants on!) are either the ones committing the Metarape, or the new guys who are gettings metaraped!

"Unlimited" always becomes "Darwinian" with all units boiling down to what is the "most optimal". If All units were more diverse, and boating not really viable (at least not to this degree) this will be minimized. (though sadly, some chassis are just not gonna be great, period.. LCT-1V? I'm happy for my ReSeens, but it ain't gonna be all that without some serious tweaks (like being tiny. What has kept the Jenner viable for good pilots in the ECM world of lights? the fact that most lights simply cannpot carry the weapon payload. the Spider trades firepower for ridiculous mobility. The Raven has ECM and good guns, but is nowhere near as mobile. The COmmando can troll Streaks and carry an ECM. The Jenner can negate a single ECM with a BAP and bring big guns for it's weight AND the xtra mobility of JJs.

Thus all 4, even if not all their variants, remain viable.

In heavies and Assaults, the mobilty is not as big an issue, and their is little ECM. so what has the most PPC, better hardpoint location wins the lottery. And Mediums, on the whole lose in most brackets, period.

[Eric darkstar Marr]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2013 - 05:54 AM, said:

between 8 man and PUGing I have played in all ends of the pool, my friend. In the kiddie pool is 6PPC Stalkers and Jagerbombs. In the Deep End, is 4 PPC/ER PPC Stalkers, DD-Cs, Phract-3Ds and HGNs, almost ALL revolving around PPCs and Gauss.

And to use the Deep End as an example, when is the last time you saw a good AWS in 8man? or a near stock K2? Or mechs not Metaraping the PPC/Gauss snipefest?

The fact that in "competitive" play most chassis and weapon combos are already obsolete speaks to the problem.

Well to answer the deep end question I will have to say last night I ran a PB we had a good ole 3L a Jenner D and a 3d which had guass but no PPCs. Very few of us run cheese (save those special times when we want 4 minute matches). I have a 6 MG dual LPL jager for funs its quite lethal. I think one of the big issues is the lack of teams as in solid teams the common lone wolf will play however and have no structure so you get the random derps of cheese. For the most part we drop in 4s and just annihilate the other team while our pugs don't listen and get themselves killed.

The only mech I had that was made fun of all the time while still consistently hitting at least 200 damage a round was a urbanspider that would ride atop an atlas because I could. Will there be 7 PPC Battlemaster? YES! Is there an easy way to fix there current meta? Not really though the higher end players and Twitch users could stop build and tromping cheese all day and move to different builds which will have a trickle down. Slowly changing the current meta. The again we have the incline change coming and that should help a bit, won't solve everything but will help.

[Gaan Cathal]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

actually, the Atlas couldn't either. There are some that could use TWO PPC, like the AS7-K, but none that could use 3-6.

The PPC boat would be the Awesome, which has it's own weaknesses, so you have a trade off for your Alpha, whereas the Stalker and Atlas currently do not.

I'm basing my assumption that the -RS would be able to use four PPCs on the fact that it has two energy hardpoints in each arm, corresponding to a (single) large laser in stock loadout. Ergo if the arm hardpoints are 'large' sized then it can run four PPCs.

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

When you see one build concept, aka "BOAT PPCS and add a gauss if you can", that is the issue, that is the lack of variety. I'm actually a little surprised you do not see that, but to each their own perspective.

Oh don't get me wrong, I do see that as a problem. I'm just not convinced this is the right solution.

WonderSparks, on 29 June 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

No matter which way it's implemented though it would certainly help keep 'Mechs from being crammed with things they were not physically designed to carry (like an AC/20 Raven, cripes; the barrel doesn't even change to indicate it's now an Autocannon)

The deformable barrels were introduced with the Jaeger. They're getting gradually back-filled on the older mechs, but that's why you'll notice the Ravens, Hunchbacks and Centurions don't have gun barrels reflecting what they load.

On the other hand, there's no real reason I can see why you couldn't slap an AC/20 on a Raven. There are light mechs that carry both guass rifles and AC/20s as stock, and there's no indication in the details on mech customisation that mechwarriors who heavily customise their rides are required or even inclined to stick to the stock chassis' 'role' or ordinance (for example whenever people start rolling out lines about how the Catapult is exclusively a ranged fire support mech I roll out the Butterbee, which completely fails to respect that preconception).

[Ialdabaoth]

Gaan Cathal, on 29 June 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

[/size]

I'm basing my assumption that the -RS would be able to use four PPCs on the fact that it has two energy hardpoints in each arm, corresponding to a (single) large laser in stock loadout. Ergo if the arm hardpoints are 'large' sized then it can run four PPCs.

Well, in the system I proposed, only the first hard point on each arm would be Large, because that's the one the PPC is in. The "spare" hard point on each arm would be Medium. So the Atlas would be able to mount 2 PPC, not 4.

Quote

On the other hand, there's no real reason I can see why you couldn't slap an AC/20 on a Raven. There are light mechs that carry both guass rifles and AC/20s as stock, and there's no indication in the details on mech customisation that mechwarriors who heavily customise their rides are required or even inclined to stick to the stock chassis' 'role' or ordinance (for example whenever people start rolling out lines about how the Catapult is exclusively a ranged fire support mech I roll out the Butterbee, which completely fails to respect that preconception).

Light 'mechs that cary AC/20's or Gauss Rifles are usually explicitly designed around that chassis. A Raven carrying an AC/20 is... not intended in canon.

For those who really, really want "unlimited customization" it might be interesting to allow the unlocking of larger hard points as an elite Efficiency.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gaan Cathal, on 29 June 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

[/size]

I'm basing my assumption that the -RS would be able to use four PPCs on the fact that it has two energy hardpoints in each arm, corresponding to a (single) large laser in stock loadout. Ergo if the arm hardpoints are 'large' sized then it can run four PPCs.

Naw, the 4 slots are not used for those larges. So the slots that have the large NOW would be large, but the "extra" freebie slots would always be considered smalls. SO they could still pack 2 large or 2 PPC, but the second set would be mediums or medium pulses.

[Bishop Steiner]

Eric darkstar Marr, on 29 June 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

Well to answer the deep end question I will have to say last night I ran a PB we had a good ole 3L a Jenner D and a 3d which had guass but no PPCs. Very few of us run cheese (save those special times when we want 4 minute matches). I have a 6 MG dual LPL jager for funs its quite lethal. I think one of the big issues is the lack of teams as in solid teams the common lone wolf will play however and have no structure so you get the random derps of cheese. For the most part we drop in 4s and just annihilate the other team while our pugs don't listen and get themselves killed.

The only mech I had that was made fun of all the time while still consistently hitting at least 200 damage a round was a urbanspider that would ride atop an atlas because I could. Will there be 7 PPC Battlemaster? YES! Is there an easy way to fix there current meta? Not really though the higher end players and Twitch users could stop build and tromping cheese all day and move to different builds which will have a trickle down. Slowly changing the current meta. The again we have the incline change coming and that should help a bit, won't solve everything but will help.

have to point out, ELO is pointless in 4man/PUG matches, as it is simply taking the average ELO of your whole team and trying to match it to another. So you MIGHT have another quality 4 man on the otherside.... or 4 average players. The only time and place ELO is remotely trackable, is in 8 man. Where if you drop with 8 high ELO guys, you will be matched with such (and even then if your ELOs are a grab bag, so are theirs)

In 4man/PUG there might be equal guys on the other team, but it is not like it guarantees you will face off with your opposite number, or that you or he haven't already fought and killed a lot of guys previously and been damaged.

TBH, ELO is a pointless system for team games.

And it would be nice for the "leaders" to set the example, but unfortunately, the way most of the "Elites" on here got that status is by metaraping the system. Ever notice how certain prominent clans of loudmouth chest beaters proved to be mouth breathers without Poptarting EZmode and gone away? (Or how certain teams still hack the system.....) MW:Os stats and scoring system have always been too easy to game, because they track the wrong things (damage being the worst example of who is best..... If I am beyond good and head shot 5 mechs..... I could have under 200 damage.. and been the best guy on the field... but the noob who spammed LRMs all match out of an LRM60 gets 1200 damage and the most matchpoints, even if he had no kills and no skill.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gaan Cathal, on 29 June 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

[/size]
(for example whenever people start rolling out lines about how the Catapult is exclusively a ranged fire support mech I roll out the Butterbee, which completely fails to respect that preconception).

I'd point out it was still a Missile boat, the Butterbee didn't swap out the LRMs for a pair of AC20s or such. Large Missile Hardpoints got swapped for Large Missile Hardpoints. Different style, simlar DNA, as opposed to those ones we see with a SSRM in each arm and ER PPC in the torso, where a medium was.

[Gaan Cathal]

Ialdabaoth, on 29 June 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

Well, in the system I proposed, only the first hard point on each arm would be Large, because that's the one the PPC is in. The "spare" hard point on each arm would be Medium. So the Atlas would be able to mount 2 PPC, not 4.

There's a logic to that, although given that some mechs were given extra hardpoints to prevent them just being worse than other variants, you might need to be careful with that.

I'm also of the opinion that if massed alpha-damage is a problem, which it is, it doesn't matter if the mech doing it canonically carries PPCs or not. If you can get 4 PPCs or 3 PPCs+1Gauss on any mech, the problem rears it's head again. The problem with PPC alpha at the moment isn't that it's Stalkers doing it. It's that it's 40 pinpoint alpha.

Ialdabaoth, on 29 June 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

Light 'mechs that cary AC/20's or Gauss Rifles are usually explicitly designed around that chassis. A Raven carrying an AC/20 is... not intended in canon.

It's not? The mech modification information I can find says absolutely nothing about there being any restriction on what ballistics a custom RVN-4X could mount. Hell, MW:O is more restrictive there, since canonically my (a: rich and b: stupid) mechwarrior could slap that AC/20 on a -2X.

There's even a noted custom Jenner that swaps an SRM-4 for an LRM-15, which is a large order of increase in terms of volume/weight. Another one ends up sporting Light PPCs which - at two crit slots - would be 'large' and therefore incompatible under this system.

Ialdabaoth, on 29 June 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

For those who really, really want "unlimited customization" it might be interesting to allow the unlocking of larger hard points as an elite Efficiency.

If you did limit hardpoints this would be effectively self-defeating. From a balance perspective you have to assume every mech on the field is fully exp-ed up. This is why you need Speed Tweak to get to canon speeds.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gaan Cathal, on 29 June 2013 - 06:56 AM, said:

There's even a noted custom Jenner that swaps an SRM-4 for an LRM-15, which is a large order of increase in terms of volume/weight. Another one ends up sporting Light PPCs which - at two crit slots - would be 'large' and therefore incompatible under this system.

actually, my system would allow for the Jenner to have Light PPCs, or regular. Almost all jenners have 4-6 energy hard points, 2-3 per arm. As noted previously, in such a case a large weapon could be used, but it would use TWO hard points. (which means somethings, like a K2 swapping Gauss for it's MGs, would still not be possible. Oh the shame. Buy a frikkin Cataphract if you want dual gauss)

what it couldn't do would be use FOUR PPC of any stripe. Which is as it should be (and of course, tonnage wise doesn't work on a Jenner anyhow)

[Eric darkstar Marr]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2013 - 06:47 AM, said:

have to point out, ELO is pointless in 4man/PUG matches, as it is simply taking the average ELO of your whole team and trying to match it to another. So you MIGHT have another quality 4 man on the otherside.... or 4 average players. The only time and place ELO is remotely trackable, is in 8 man. Where if you drop with 8 high ELO guys, you will be matched with such (and even then if your ELOs are a grab bag, so are theirs)

In 4man/PUG there might be equal guys on the other team, but it is not like it guarantees you will face off with your opposite number, or that you or he haven't already fought and killed a lot of guys previously and been damaged.

TBH, ELO is a pointless system for team games.

And it would be nice for the "leaders" to set the example, but unfortunately, the way most of the "Elites" on here got that status is by metaraping the system. Ever notice how certain prominent clans of loudmouth chest beaters proved to be mouth breathers without Poptarting EZmode and gone away? (Or how certain teams still hack the system.....) MW:Os stats and scoring system have always been too easy to game, because they track the wrong things (damage being the worst example of who is best..... If I am beyond good and head shot 5 mechs..... I could have under 200 damage.. and been the best guy on the field... but the noob who spammed LRMs all match out of an LRM60 gets 1200 damage and the most matchpoints, even if he had no kills and no skill.

Well at least they will be adding ladders in and yes damage means **** been running my new treb c all morning and its a viscous light killer my damage is around 300 but I get the kiils in. I guess it comes down to having some faith there will be a balance of some sort and I still say lets see how well incline works, sad we may see the spider ruling the field with its lone ER PPC. I know we get cocky in my clan for sure however most all of us try different things overall when doing 4 mans in 8 mans we try and stay with competitive builds but not everyone runs cheese nor is it mandatory.

[Gaan Cathal]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2013 - 07:07 AM, said:

actually, my system would allow for the Jenner to have Light PPCs, or regular. Almost all jenners have 4-6 energy hard points, 2-3 per arm. As noted previously, in such a case a large weapon could be used, but it would use TWO hard points. (which means somethings, like a K2 swapping Gauss for it's MGs, would still not be possible. Oh the shame. Buy a frikkin Cataphract if you want dual gauss)

what it couldn't do would be use FOUR PPC of any stripe. Which is as it should be (and of course, tonnage wise doesn't work on a Jenner anyhow)

Mk.

So you're basically saying you can have a maximum of X (3 in the case of the JR7-F) weapons in this arm, with a maximum of Y slots (again, 3 in the case of the JR7-F) used between them. So the JR7-F could use 6 ML/MPL or 2 LL/LPL+2ML/MPL or 2PPC/ERPPC.

Assuming I'm right there, to carry 4 PPCs you'd need four sets of 'three energy crit' chunks. Battlemaster could get to three PPC, since it starts with one, and then could potentially convert each set of 3 ML into a PPC. Then it just depends if it can slap a Gauss in the MG arm.

That's a point, how does this system deal with ballistics? Their crit requirements are a: bigger and b: more varied so what looks like it'll work perfectly well for energy weapons would be a great deal more clumsy for ballistics. Dragons don't need their ability to mount a Gauss in their AC2/(U)AC5 arms removed.

[Bishop Steiner]

Eric darkstar Marr, on 29 June 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Well at least they will be adding ladders in and yes damage means **** been running my new treb c all morning and its a viscous light killer my damage is around 300 but I get the kiils in. I guess it comes down to having some faith there will be a balance of some sort and I still say lets see how well incline works, sad we may see the spider ruling the field with its lone ER PPC. I know we get cocky in my clan for sure however most all of us try different things overall when doing 4 mans in 8 mans we try and stay with competitive builds but not everyone runs cheese nor is it mandatory.

just one of the reasons I actually like you guys......

(there being a hnadful of units I actual respect, and an even smaller number I will drop with.... not because I think I am "too good", as I realize I am middle of the pack, but I can't handle d-bag epeen teams, nor tbh, teams like the BWC with ridiculously regimented rules to play a game.)

If you see another BWC guy on the other team you have to pull back, and not engage, or if the other team has a BWC 4 man, essentially power down? That's griefing kids. Not to mention kinda stupid. I don't consider the guys I hang with most (HARDcorps) to be the edge of the spear or anything (good guys and often better than people realize though... just refuse to Cap and run cheese, which is OK by me) but if we drop and there are other HARD guys on the ther team...we feel obligated to kill each other.

It's a game, if I want the military, I'd be in BDUs. Not to mention fighting yourself sharpens the spear.

Gaan Cathal, on 29 June 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

Mk.

So you're basically saying you can have a maximum of X (3 in the case of the JR7-F) weapons in this arm, with a maximum of Y slots (again, 3 in the case of the JR7-F) used between them. So the JR7-F could use 6 ML/MPL or 2 LL/LPL+2ML/MPL or 2PPC/ERPPC.

Assuming I'm right there, to carry 4 PPCs you'd need four sets of 'three energy crit' chunks. Battlemaster could get to three PPC, since it starts with one, and then could potentially convert each set of 3 ML into a PPC. Then it just depends if it can slap a Gauss in the MG arm.

That's a point, how does this system deal with ballistics? Their crit requirements are a: bigger and b: more varied so what looks like it'll work perfectly well for energy weapons would be a great deal more clumsy for ballistics. Dragons don't need their ability to mount a Gauss in their AC2/(U)AC5 arms removed.

sorta (if I read you right)

basically... if the mech had 3 energy hardpoints in one spot, it could trade 2 tome 1 Large hard point. So now the BLR would potentially have 3 small hardpoints, or 1 Large (for 2 small) and 1 small. So could pack a PPC or large laser per torso, or a LPL and MPL, for example, or 3 Mediums/MPL.

So let's use the Dragon 1-C. 3 Ballistic points. It could run 3 MG (smalls) AC/2 or a mix of those and AC/UAC5s.

or it could convert 2 of those slots into 1 Large and mount an AC10/LB-X or Gauss and still have 1 small ballistic left.

Now some, like the 1-N, would be more limited. I could only mount the UAC5 or smaller. But that is also what helps truly separate the differing models of the same chassis. Because it can't mount the Gauss, now 1N and 5N are probably going to mount bigger engines, or Standards, or such, and be faster, whereas the 1C is going to be the heavier hitter.

Conversely, I would be inclined to say you can trade a Large in for 2 small, also, so a Cat CI with 1 LRM15 per arm, for it's current 1 Large could swap for let's say 2 SRM4 (I might even consider SRM6s as small if the damage stays as pathetic as currently).

So maybe I didn't think it to the full and break it down as clear in my OP, but essentially all slots would be built to some degree off the Small slots. And they would be (within limits) exchangeable. 2 Small become 1 large, 1 large can become 2 small.

So perhaps the "base" HBK-4G would have hardpoints like this:
H- 1 Small Energy
RT- 1 Large Ballistic(Large can be "downgraded to 2 small) , 1 Small Ballistic
RA/LA 1 Small Energy each.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 29 June 2013 - 07:29 AM.

[Bagheera]

Raso, on 28 June 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

At best we see PPC Sniper Warriors Online move into different parts of the battlefields. At worst we see far more AC40 JAgers running around. Either way I don't see this fixing Alpha Warriors Online but only time will tell.

I mostly agree on the impact it will have on the alpha builds. I am more interested on the mobility advantages it will give back to lights, faster mediums, and anything with a decent compliment of JJs.

[Hammish]

Fix Sniperwarrior Online? This mech can realistically do it better than any other in terms of high alpha with a gauss + 5 PPC build. It doesn't even cripple the mech especially badly in any given area but heat dissipation.. and even then, it's not horrible.

Want to try it? Go to Smurfy's and start with a Stalker. Toss in endo, 5 PPCs a 255 XL and one extra DHS. Strip each leg down just over a ton, I believe. You will be left with 17 tons and 13 critical spaces. Given the extra actuators in the Battlemaster, you'd actually be left with 17t/9c.. which is just enough for a Gauss + 2t of ammo. The final build would be gauss in arm, 3 PPC + XL in one torso, 2 PPC + DHS + XL in the other side, ammo where you want it, the rest as the ES crits.

Grats, you now have a 65-point alpha with one gun that can pop off shots non-stop if needed for practically no heat. I don't know if size limits on hardpoints is the solution or not, but this is a clear example of the fact that something's gotta change. It's not even that slow (3/5 tabletop speeds, or about the default of an Awesome or Atlas stock) with close to max armor. The only downside is the XL.

Edited by Hammish, 29 June 2013 - 08:40 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Hammish, on 29 June 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

Fix Sniperwarrior Online? This mech can realistically do it better than any other in terms of high alpha with a gauss + 5 PPC build. It doesn't even cripple the mech especially badly in any given area but heat dissipation.. and even then, it's not horrible.

Want to try it? Go to Smurfy's and start with a Stalker. Toss in endo, 5 PPCs a 255 XL and one extra DHS. Strip each leg down just over a ton, I believe. You will be left with 17 tons and 13 critical spaces. Given the extra actuators in the Battlemaster, you'd actually be left with 17t/9c.. which is just enough for a Gauss + 2t of ammo. The final build would be gauss in arm, 3 PPC + XL in one torso, 2 PPC + DHS + XL in the other side, ammo where you want it, the rest as the ES crits.

Grats, you now have a 65-point alpha with one gun that can pop off shots non-stop if needed for practically no heat. I don't know if size limits on hardpoints is the solution or not, but this is a clear example of the fact that something's gotta change. It's not even that slow (3/5 tabletop speeds, or about the default of an Awesome or Atlas stock) with close to max armor. The only downside is the XL.

which, looking at those torsos, IS a large downside...... assuming you are ALSO driving a SniperWarrior^tm approved PPC boat and able to hit it back at 1500 ,meters with pinpoint accuracy.