46 replies to this topic

[SpartanFiredog317]

Imagine a MWO in which PPCs take 5 critical spaces... PPC meta goes away, but the weapon remains extremely viable and potent.... no arcane calculus needed, simply allow the weapon to be what it is a CANNON aka big n huge.... those things on the K2 and Awesome look like they should take up more than 1/3 of mech arm.

[FupDup]

The neckbeards are coming for you. You dared to defile the sacred cow that is TT crit space stats!



...But really, there are other (better) ways to go about doing this; such as buffing brawling weapons and/or upping the heat of the [ER]PPC.

[SpartanFiredog317]

FupDup, on 02 July 2013 - 09:43 PM, said:

The neckbeards are coming for you. You dared to defile the sacred cow that is TT crit space stats! ...But really, there are other (better) ways to go about doing this; such as buffing brawling weapons and/or upping the heat of the [ER]PPC.

..... Buffing SRMS/SSRM damage should be done anyway, as well as some love for Pulse lasers, especially the Large kind.

I do not think arcane calculus of 0.1 here 1.3495673 there and .00342152*X divided by the square root of the answer of life is the most effecient way to balance a game...... Think about the beautiful simplicity of just upping the crit space requirements by 2.... It punishes boats by reducing the number that can fit in arm components, taking away heatsink space (effectively lowering heat efficiency), but leaves the weapon in full functioning order for the more rounded builds.

Edited by SpartanFiredog317, 02 July 2013 - 09:54 PM.

[KharnZor]

FupDup, on 02 July 2013 - 09:43 PM, said:

The neckbeards are coming for you. You dared to defile the sacred cow that is TT crit space stats!



...But really, there are other (better) ways to go about doing this; such as buffing brawling weapons and/or upping the heat of the [ER]PPC.

I dont really think buffing brawler weapons or upping the heat of ppc's is the solution.
Putting a limit on the slots that a given weapon system can occupy might do the trick.
ie. You have 3 energy hardpoints in one location and in those 3 hardpoints you can have any number of single slot weapons (such as medium lasers etc). 2 slot weapons like large lasers would be limited to 2 hardpoints and 3 slot weapons would only be able to take up a single hardpoint.

[Dephylr]

5 crit spaces for 1 ppc would be pointless as you could still do a 4ppc stalker and that is the major culprit of boating. If anything, it would hurt any other mech who wants to use 1 or 2 and has limited space.

[MustrumRidcully]

SpartanFiredog317, on 02 July 2013 - 09:41 PM, said:

Imagine a MWO in which PPCs take 5 critical spaces... PPC meta goes away, but the weapon remains extremely viable and potent.... no arcane calculus needed, simply allow the weapon to be what it is a CANNON aka big n huge.... those things on the K2 and Awesome look like they should take up more than 1/3 of mech arm.

A Stalker's arm has 10 free crit slots, if Iam not mistaken. You might be able to force him to use 2 DHS less then he usually uses, that's it.

And you run into trouble with all kind of future mechs.


Here's another idea:

The single shot damage of all weapons is limited to twice their crit slot number. Beyond that, you can adjust the recycle rate to give them DPS worth their tonnage, but that's it.

If you want to maintain the current DPS and HPS figures (If you significantly lower the single shot damage of guns, I suggest raising their DPS or lowering the HPS a bit, since losing that alpha advantage is a drawback.)

That would put the PPC at 6 damage (and 4 heat) per shot, approximately every 2 seconds.
Gauss Rifle: 14 damage every 3.73 seconds.
AC/10: 14 damage every 3.5 seconds
AC/20: Unchanged.

(Just think about how much more useful the AC/10 would be if it had a higher alpha damage....)

[Sug]

Next!

[mike29tw]

MustrumRidcully, on 02 July 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

A Stalker's arm has 10 free crit slots, if Iam not mistaken. You might be able to force him to use 2 DHS less then he usually uses, that's it.

And you run into trouble with all kind of future mechs.


Here's another idea:

The single shot damage of all weapons is limited to twice their crit slot number. Beyond that, you can adjust the recycle rate to give them DPS worth their tonnage, but that's it.

If you want to maintain the current DPS and HPS figures (If you significantly lower the single shot damage of guns, I suggest raising their DPS or lowering the HPS a bit, since losing that alpha advantage is a drawback.)

That would put the PPC at 6 damage (and 4 heat) per shot, approximately every 2 seconds.
Gauss Rifle: 14 damage every 3.73 seconds.
AC/10: 14 damage every 3.5 seconds
AC/20: Unchanged.

(Just think about how much more useful the AC/10 would be if it had a higher alpha damage....)

So basically, nerf PPC, buff AC10.

It's simple. I like it. Better than the convoluted changes everyone's spouting for sure.

*edit - but then again, you'll probably have a bunch of CBT fanatics yelling at you that PPCs are supposed to fire slow and hit hard.

Edited by mike29tw, 02 July 2013 - 10:47 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

mike29tw, on 02 July 2013 - 10:43 PM, said:

So basically, nerf PPC, buff AC10.

It's simple. I like it. Better than the convoluted changes everyone's spouting for sure.

*edit - but then again, you'll probably have a bunch of CBT fanatics yelling at you that PPCs are supposed to fire slow and hit hard.

I actually more expect a bunch of CBT fanatics, PGI devs and newbies yelling at me that the weapon is AC/10 and it should logically deal 10 damage per shot.

Left Lucy has the right idea on this - just rename these frigging ballistics. There is no real logical reason in the game universe where you don't know about damage numbers to call a weapon that by lore can have different calibres and rate of fire called AC/10. Just call it "heavy auto-cannon". It's 12 tons, that's heavy, and all its variations, regardless of calibre and ROF, are that weight. Mech classes are defiend by their weight...

[Sug]

MustrumRidcully, on 02 July 2013 - 10:59 PM, said:

I actually more expect a bunch of CBT fanatics, PGI devs and newbies yelling at me that the weapon is AC/10 and it should logically deal 10 damage per shot.

No one has issues with the LRM5.5, LRM11, LRM16.5 or the LRM22...

[SJ SCP Wolf]

KharnZor, on 02 July 2013 - 09:56 PM, said:

I dont really think buffing brawler weapons or upping the heat of ppc's is the solution.
Putting a limit on the slots that a given weapon system can occupy might do the trick.
ie. You have 3 energy hardpoints in one location and in those 3 hardpoints you can have any number of single slot weapons (such as medium lasers etc). 2 slot weapons like large lasers would be limited to 2 hardpoints and 3 slot weapons would only be able to take up a single hardpoint.

You basically just summed up MWLL's pod space build rules. With creative pods usage, weapon classes, hard points and criticals you can solve boating.

The video is old but you might enjoy it.

[Jonny Taco]

Sug, on 02 July 2013 - 11:30 PM, said:

No one has issues with the LRM5.5, LRM11, LRM16.5 or the LRM22...

It's true!

Diverging from TT values is the solution to SP many of this games issues.

[Lykaon]

lartfor, on 03 July 2013 - 03:00 AM, said:

It's true!

Diverging from TT values is the solution to SP many of this games issues.

Yet we have a pitfall that is the current use of Stock mechs as trial mechs and as default configurations for mechs we purchase.

Mucking around with critical slot values would also mean needing to address stock mech configurations or replacing trial designs with new designs that conform to this new hardpoint system.This sounds like a great deal of work with a huge potential for messing with the game as it is currently implimented.

I agree that in many ways we need to diverge away from the CBT "Bible" and create a system that actually works.

However...

If we do away with everything from CBT then why bother calling it Mechwarrior? it's free to use your own title it cost money to license Battletech and Mechwarrior.
Essentially some things must remain from CBT in order for the game to function as currently designed and unfortunatley crit space of items and tonnage of those items are two of them.

A far simpler solution would be to restrict hardpoints by having each and every hardpoint conform to the following rules.

1: one hardpoint may hold one weapon.

2: A hardpoint is designated by what class of weapon it may equip. ie. Energy,Missile,Ballistic or Omni

3: Each hardpoint has a maximum size in critical spaces that a weapon fitted may have.(only new mechanic in this proposal)

So if you don't want 6 PPC Stalkers or even 4 PPC Stalkers or what ever do not allow a Stalker to have six energy hardpoints with 3 crit slots each!

Maybe have a Stalker with two energy hardpoints with three crit slots,two more with two crit slots and finally have two energy hardpoints with only one crit slot.

So you can have 2 PPCs,2 Large lasers and 2 medium lasers

Or,4 large lasers and 2 mediums

Or, 6 medium lasers

But you can not have more than two PPCs because only two energy hardpoints have 3 critical slots.

But what about "legal" boats like Clan Warhawks (Massakari) or Hunchback 4Ps and Awesomes?

Quirks! balance these boats with chassis specific quirks.

This way mechs are addressed on a case by case basis and not by using a broad all encompassing mechanic that may negativley impact unintended chassis.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

SpartanFiredog317, on 02 July 2013 - 09:41 PM, said:

Imagine a MWO in which PPCs take 5 critical spaces... PPC meta goes away, but the weapon remains extremely viable and potent.... no arcane calculus needed, simply allow the weapon to be what it is a CANNON aka big n huge.... those things on the K2 and Awesome look like they should take up more than 1/3 of mech arm.

*rubs the bridge of my nose*

What you want OP, is "sized hardpoints" not "Crit Space" Crit space is what we ALREADY have in the game... critical space, the location of critical spots that can be filled.

Sized Hardpoints on the otherhand, limit what can be placed on a chassis in a more proper way.

[MaddMaxx]

So, rewrite the BattleTech rulebook because the current "PPC" can be "boated"? wowzers.

P.S. What happens when said "PPC's" get brought under control? What weapon goes on the QQ list next?

Edited by MaddMaxx, 03 July 2013 - 08:10 AM.

[Jestun]

Boating is not an issue. Boating specific weapons is.

If the solution punishes people who are not using OP builds then it has failed and caused more problems.

[Braggart]

MaddMaxx, on 03 July 2013 - 08:09 AM, said:

So, rewrite the BattleTech rulebook because the current "PPC" can be "boated"? wowzers.

P.S. What happens when said "PPC's" get brought under control? What weapon goes on the QQ list next?

Lemme know when you can take 6 ppcs on a mech in tabletop and have them all hit the same spot on a mech...................

The battletech rule book was designed around a turn based game, and the TT was also not balanced by mechs, but by battle value.

It is impossible to balance a competitive online real time game, based on a strategic battle value turn based game.

Deviation is a must.

[MaddMaxx]

Jestun, on 03 July 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

Boating is not an issue. Boating specific weapons is.

snip

I ran that phrase through the "Inter-Galactic Translation" matrix. It came up empty.

Heat and Stacking penalties, when married together (Soon^tm) will allow a more flexible system to correct weapon specific issues.

There will always be "Boats". We hope there will always be "Weapons". (unless the uneducated few get their way) Thus there will always be "Boated Weapons".

If need be, when the systems are in place, we can fix them one at a time if necessary, rather tan butcher the whole mess all at once.

[Jestun]

MaddMaxx, on 03 July 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

I ran that phrase through the "Inter-Galactic Translation" matrix. It came up empty.

Try setting it to English, it's quite simple.

Specific boat builds are OP. Boats as a whole are not.

If you punish boats as a whole you punish non-OP builds. Balance changes are not supposed to be nerfing weak builds...

Edited by Jestun, 03 July 2013 - 08:18 AM.

[R3DSKULL]

God im so tired of the whining about alpha boats, people always complain about some stupid new idea to fix ppc they are fine. i wonder how many of the complainers actually drive proper ppc boats? They overheat super fast they are ultra slow and yeah they got great alpha but thats it. They are a specific role type just like something with 2 ac/20s, my jager mech can put a hurting just as easy but no overheat. The fact is PPC boats are not this OP monster everyone complains they just want to stand out in the open and brawl and not get torn apart and thats idiotic. IF you see a stalker with ppcs get close if you cant dont come at him long range head on, or get him to miss twice he will overheat and now with new patch take damage. And ill say this its a nightmare to drive with the new movement system. Its a great boat for alpha and sniping and thats it. Otherwise they are fine. stick cannon and shut all the complainers up already. if they want an arcade game with 3rd person view and balanced perfectly fair even warfare go play hawken.