73 replies to this topic

[Angel of Annihilation]

theta123, on 11 July 2013 - 06:54 AM, said:

Here i have my Victor. Armed with 2 LL, an AC/20 and 3 streaks. Build with consideration for medium-short range, great mobility and versatility.


Quad PPC stalker=oh really? do you mind if i fire 2 meta shots in less then 7 seconds and CT you?


This is why i hate this game..This guy came at me from only 180 meters yet still owned me in 2 shots...in such short time


So NO

I say one huge NO to all quad PPC builds...just NO

Can't do it unless you have reduced your armor substancially.

My Victors CT sports 82 armor external then unless you get a lucky crit, you need to go through all the structure points in the CT, probably about 120 worth of damage.

Also at 180m you combined alpha exceeds his. AC/20 = 20 pts, 2 LL = 18 points, 3 Streaks 9 points. That means you could have outputted 47 points of damage to his 40 points of damage. Stalker is only 85 tons so at best he has maybe 10 more armor in the CT than you do. Basically you could have, perhaps should have won that fight.

If you had been at 500m you might have a gripe.

[LeShadow]

Skyfaller, on 11 July 2013 - 07:04 AM, said:

However, you are far more likely to run into a almost deep red CT mech that you swipe 4 times with LL and he dont die..and he kills you.. vs you popping one shot into that CT and he's gone.

Actually, with the current hit detection, I've found lasers to be much more reliable in that situation. If only half the damage needs to hit that zone, you can fire, check and correct your aim to whatever the server thinks is right - just in time to bring the target down.

With "swipe" I didn't mean "slash it across all his torsos", I meant "point in roughly the right direction, fire, then try to pinpoint a zone".

Granted, you can just chain-fire PPC for almost the same effect...

Skyfaller, on 11 July 2013 - 07:04 AM, said:

The 'it takes half a second to keep laser on target' not being 'hard' is such a lie. You don't understand the difference between a single 10 dmg impact and keeping a laser on a very small target area when your mech is moving, his mech is moving and both are twisting torso and legs.

Most of the time there is something you can reliably aim at. Crotch, legs, large torso sections, pick whatever stands out. Also, in my experience, it takes most players at least a second to land a well-aimed shot, from the time the CT becomes visible to the point it's fully twisted away again. Laser users usually fire a wee bit earlier since they can make minute corrections later, so that's usually long enough to get at least 90% of the beam on target.

I should add that, while the beam is active, I avoid leg-twisting since the view tends to 'jump' in rather large increments, but not turning for a second is not a big deal. It's not like anyone would miss a Stalker because it's so nimble

Granted, ballistic style point-and-click is definitely easier - maybe that's why the PPC stalker is so infamous - but as slow as the Stalker is you can usually hill-hump just as well with LL.

[Sephlock]

LeShadow, on 11 July 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

Most of the time there is something you can reliably aim at. Crotch, legs, large torso sections, pick whatever stands out.

Wait, are we Mechwarriors or pickup artists?

[DarkDevilDancer]

We cant be both...well damn.

[Joseph Mallan]

Viktor Drake, on 10 July 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

Keep in mind, I got over 1700 matches played so aiming isn't an issue. I am not some nub off the boat that doesn't have a clue how to hold aim and I learned on lasers which require even more percision in aiming to be successful with.

I'm sorry, I am not trying to be insulting, Honest... I have over 1,700 Losses! LOL I just am tickled Vic, I know what you are saying though.

Sephlock, on 11 July 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

Wait, are we Mechwarriors or pickup artists?

Hey Babe, Can I buy you a PPC?

[Angel of Annihilation]

LeShadow, on 11 July 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

Actually, with the current hit detection, I've found lasers to be much more reliable in that situation. If only half the damage needs to hit that zone, you can fire, check and correct your aim to whatever the server thinks is right - just in time to bring the target down.

With "swipe" I didn't mean "slash it across all his torsos", I meant "point in roughly the right direction, fire, then try to pinpoint a zone".

Granted, you can just chain-fire PPC for almost the same effect...



Most of the time there is something you can reliably aim at. Crotch, legs, large torso sections, pick whatever stands out. Also, in my experience, it takes most players at least a second to land a well-aimed shot, from the time the CT becomes visible to the point it's fully twisted away again. Laser users usually fire a wee bit earlier since they can make minute corrections later, so that's usually long enough to get at least 90% of the beam on target.

I should add that, while the beam is active, I avoid leg-twisting since the view tends to 'jump' in rather large increments, but not turning for a second is not a big deal. It's not like anyone would miss a Stalker because it's so nimble

Granted, ballistic style point-and-click is definitely easier - maybe that's why the PPC stalker is so infamous - but as slow as the Stalker is you can usually hill-hump just as well with LL.

This is my experience with lasers as well.

Honestly all the theory suggests that PPCs SHOULD be better but all the practice has told me LLs really perform better in most situations.

[Bloody Moon]

Viktor Drake, on 11 July 2013 - 07:57 PM, said:

This is my experience with lasers as well.

Honestly all the theory suggests that PPCs SHOULD be better but all the practice has told me LLs really perform better in most situations.

I love how you ignore that you were called out on the mistakes in your assumptions and simply continue to echo them over and over again.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Bloody Moon, on 12 July 2013 - 09:13 AM, said:

I love how you ignore that you were called out on the mistakes in your assumptions and simply continue to echo them over and over again.

Yes I made some mistakes, probably because I got the MWO numbers confused with the TT numbers, but that doesn't change the fact that LLs have always performed better for me on the mechs I have equiped them on.

It is not ignoring anything, nor is it an assumption. That is why I said, theory suggests the PPCs should be better but in PRACTICE, i.e. my personal usage of both weapons, the LLs always perform better. It isn't a massive difference but it is definately enough to be seen.

[One Medic Army]

If LLs are performing better, than at least one of the following is true:
Your aim is good with Large Lasers and the enemy isn't twisting to spread damage.
Your aim is bad with PPCs, but with LargeLasers you can sweep the stream onto the enemy to at least get partial damage.
The enemy is charging you and forcing you to overheat.

Larges do run cooler than PPCs and thus deal more damage during extended engagements, however they require both constant aim on the part of the firer and the target to be presenting the area of interest for the full second of beam time.

If you can hit consistently with PPCs and the opponents are such that they're allowing you to retreat behind cover while cooling down (I.E. the opponents are not pushing) and/or they're twisting to spread laser damage then the PPC is superior.

Edited by One Medic Army, 12 July 2013 - 03:26 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

One Medic Army, on 12 July 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

If LLs are performing better, than at least one of the following is true:
Your aim is good with Large Lasers and the enemy isn't twisting to spread damage.
Your aim is bad with PPCs, but with LargeLasers you can sweep the stream onto the enemy to at least get partial damage.
The enemy is charging you and forcing you to overheat.

Larges do run cooler than PPCs and thus deal more damage during extended engagements, however they require both constant aim on the part of the firer and the target to be presenting the area of interest for the full second of beam time.

If you can hit consistently with PPCs and the opponents are such that they're allowing you to retreat behind cover while cooling down (I.E. the opponents are not pushing) and/or they're twisting to spread laser damage then the PPC is superior.

Honestly I guess anything is possible in those regards. I don't seem to be missing all that much with PPCs but maybe I am missing my intended aim points more than I think.

Also I have to honestly admit, I have always found it rather easy to keep my pointer resting exactly where I want it on the enemy mech. I really don't find it difficult at all to keep my beam concentrated for a full second on whatever part I am aiming at most of time. Perhaps I am just much better at using lasers then the average person or at least substancially better with them than PPCs. Perspective is funny that way. We all have one and they are all different.

[Hyperlynx]

Large lasers are easier to use. You can correct your aim and still damage the target. PPCs are all-or-nothing, either you hit or you miss. You also don't have to lead your targets with a laser. When I equip lasers they take far less concentration to use correctly, whereas I have to concentrate hard and make every shot count with PPCs.

PPCs take more practise and are more unforgiving than lasers, but you get better results out of them when you master them. They have better range, and as I said above the ability to deliver your damage in one quick blast and then defend yourself (either by twisting your arms in the way, or by getting into cover) is an absolutely overwhelming advantage over lasers. Large lasers are wonderful weapons, but if you put in the practise to learn to use PPCs you will absolutely get better results from them.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Hyperlynx, on 13 July 2013 - 03:27 AM, said:

Large lasers are easier to use. You can correct your aim and still damage the target. PPCs are all-or-nothing, either you hit or you miss. You also don't have to lead your targets with a laser. When I equip lasers they take far less concentration to use correctly, whereas I have to concentrate hard and make every shot count with PPCs.

PPCs take more practise and are more unforgiving than lasers, but you get better results out of them when you master them. They have better range, and as I said above the ability to deliver your damage in one quick blast and then defend yourself (either by twisting your arms in the way, or by getting into cover) is an absolutely overwhelming advantage over lasers. Large lasers are wonderful weapons, but if you put in the practise to learn to use PPCs you will absolutely get better results from them.

I am not sure about LLs taking less concentration to use than PPCs. I think it requires a whole lot of concentration to keep them focused on a single section of an enemy mech at 500m and even more if your in a circling battle at 150m. However your right, you don't have to lead the target and where ever the crosshair is pointed is where the beam is going to hit.

Also like I said, I don't feel I miss more than normal with the PPCs and usually feel pretty comfortable with them. When I was testing the Stalker I didn't seem to miss much but still felt the LLs were better mostly because I felt I could more easily insure pintpoint accuracy with them.

Still since there is no way to really be certain that I am just not a million times better with LLs than PPCs, I had to admit that it could be a factor in my personal results.

[Hyperlynx]

When I say easier to use, I mean it's easier to get any results at all with them. If you partially miss and partially hit, you do partial damage. There's no "partially miss" with a PPC, and there's no opportunity to correct your aim until the next shot.

[TungstenWall]

Lets just say they are the reason I use STD engines in my Commandos.