MisterFiveSeven, on 17 July 2013 - 03:44 AM, said:
I hate starting threads in the middle of a QQ hurricane, but here goes; please try to stay on topic and be intelligent (a long shot but I figured I'd try ).
1. AC40 nerf does not change the fact that AC20 and Gauss are the only ballistics worth taking (haha ninja ac2 nerf :/) on certain builds.
But it makes sense that some builds work better than others. other wise we would only need one of each class of Mechs.
Quote
2. PPC nerf does not change the fact that PPC's are the most effective energy weapon in the game, at any range against almost any target (if the hitreg was better it'd be every target).
Part of this is because it is the most powerful Energy weapon, More so for the ER PPC which has no min ran penalty. Heat needed to be left at TT levels or gasp maybe made even more intense.
Quote
3. Ssrm2's have been worthless in every implementation of mechwarrior other than MWO. They can now go back to hanging out with MG's and flamers.
This would be because SSRM2s didn't do the kind of damage needed to be a desired weapon. In MWO... Well we were guided to Boating them thanks to the hard point system.
Quote
4. Forcing people to chain fire high damage per shot weapons (PPC, gauss, ac20) exacerbates the problems that duration weapons had before, because you are getting encouraged to torso twist like a ninny.
And missiles don't forget missiles. Even with all that is against using them missiles do up front damage also.
.
MisterFiveSeven, on 17 July 2013 - 03:44 AM, said:
I hate starting threads in the middle of a QQ hurricane, but here goes; please try to stay on topic and be intelligent (a long shot but I figured I'd try ).
1. AC40 nerf does not change the fact that AC20 and Gauss are the only ballistics worth taking (haha ninja ac2 nerf :/) on certain builds.
2. PPC nerf does not change the fact that PPC's are the most effective energy weapon in the game, at any range against almost any target (if the hitreg was better it'd be every target).
3. Ssrm2's have been worthless in every implementation of mechwarrior other than MWO. They can now go back to hanging out with MG's and flamers.
4. Forcing people to chain fire high damage per shot weapons (PPC, gauss, ac20) exacerbates the problems that duration weapons had before, because you are getting encouraged to torso twist like a ninny.
Yes, the game seems slower (good), and yes, damage seems to spread out more (even better), but arbitrary band-**** don't fix the problem. It's like saying you cured world hunger by killing all the hungry people; it does nothing to address the fact that there are balance issues that make certain weapons STILL no brainers. There are fundamental weapon strength balancing issues that needs fix (and yeah convergence, blah blah).
I have seen no suggestion that this heat scale is temporary. I have seen no ideas, plans, or even hints that, from a balance standpoint, THE FACT THAT BOATING WASN'T THE PROBLEM, JUST A SYMPTOM is understood at the developer level. They've said they'll be balancing the heat scale and it is in no way final, but have they said anything about particular weapon balance? They buffed SRM's to 2.0 (YAY), but how many programmer man hours does it take to change erppc heat to 13 and see what happens? But people seem happy with this fix, so maybe I should just line up with everyone else and pretend that I did have lots of trouble eating an ac40 jagers side torso...
Yes, heat scale BAD, Heat Affects Table, BETTER:
At 20% heat you lose 10% kph
At 35% you lose 10% more kph AND your targeting reticule started to jitter, +/- x% to weapon convergence point.
At 55% you lost 10% more kph, targeting reticule jittered more, AND some weapons just failed to fire, +/- x% more to weapon convergence point.
At 75% you lost 10% more kph, targeting reticule jittered like crazy, +/- x% more to weapon convergence point, the HUD fades in and out, AND some weapons randomly failed to fire, +x% chance for ammo cook off if heat is maintained above 75% for y number of seconds
Suddenly you have to start thinking more about how often you are firing and what's going on around you...
Dimento Graven, on 09 August 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:
Yes, heat scale BAD, Heat Affects Table, BETTER:
At 20% heat you lose 10% kph
At 35% you lose 10% more kph AND your targeting reticule started to jitter, +/- x% to weapon convergence point.
At 55% you lost 10% more kph, targeting reticule jittered more, AND some weapons just failed to fire, +/- x% more to weapon convergence point.
At 75% you lost 10% more kph, targeting reticule jittered like crazy, +/- x% more to weapon convergence point, the HUD fades in and out, AND some weapons randomly failed to fire, +x% chance for ammo cook off if heat is maintained above 75% for y number of seconds
Suddenly you have to start thinking more about how often you are firing and what's going on around you...
I really am thinking from a lot of well articulated posts (hat-tip to Koniving and others) that the capacity really is the problem, with convergence a far more distant second.
No there was no burst fire in MW3. All Autocannons fired once every two seconds (UACs were once every second). So the AC/20 fired once every two seconds and it did full damage every time it hit. However it only got 5 ammo per ton so it did horrendous damage but that damage was capped by ammo limitations.
Armor was also only doubled in MW3, much like MWO. So you can imagine how fast an AC/20 firing every 2 seconds would kill a mech in MW3. What kept it balanced was actually the fact MW3 had 90s netcode and every single weapon would miss 99% of the time except for lasers. Which is why everyone used ERLLs for direct fire.
LRMs were also used on some maps for indirect fire and were actually a lot better than they are in MWO because you could point your mech at the angle you wanted your missiles to come out of your mech from so they didnt fly into the ground half the time. I wish that feature was in MWO.
But yeah the shoddy netcode in MW3, which was the worst netcode of ANY mechwarrior game, is the only reason its generally considered the most balanced of all the mechwarrior games lol.
The sound effects and animation were that of bursts (as I recall the AC/10 in my arm jerked the arm 3 times), even if the actual bullets may not have been (which is very possible due to limitations at the time).
ER PPC, AC, UAC sounds in that order.
Honestly burst fire weapons in MWO of this style would greatly benefit us. I designed some here based on lore that I found for AC/20s. Feedback is keep the Devastator (single shot AC/20) instead of remove it, but change its dps to 4/sec, which means a 5 second delay before it fires again. The common argument is that would make the multi-shot versions viable.
But back on what was said: I will have to take your word on the netcode, I can't find anyone to play against online these days, and back then I had dial-up so it wasn't possible for me. I am going by the common belief, as in any time someone praises the balance of a mechwarrior game, MW3 is the only one anyone ever says was close to balanced.
You are right, though, in both MW3 and MW4, the ER LLs were the bane of everyone's existence.
To make it worse, MWO's heat for a PPC was the same as it is for 2 medium lasers. Thus ML went out of fashion mainly because you fired 2 ML at the same rate as 1 PPC, had only 270 meters of range, had to hold it on target, did identical damage, and generally died while using them.
If you really, truly look at MWO's weapon recycle times and their 'duration' or beam times...
AC/20, ML, PPC, ER PPC Gauss Rifle, all have identical firing times. Fire, wait 4 seconds, fire, wait 4 seconds. Interesting, isn't it?
Those need to be diversified a bit more. ML needs just one less heat per laser and faster firing rate. If we had Tabletop and/or MW3's heat capacity, with 4 of MWO's medium lasers at MWO's 4 heat per laser... One strike of 4 medium lasers would bring us to 53.33% heat in Zero Degrees Celsius (Alpine is the closest map) regardless of how many heatsinks we have, and those heatsinks would change how fast we cool. Fun fact: 2 regular PPCs at 8 heat each would also bring us up to 53.33%, boating problem solved. Pinpoint issues alleviated for now.
3
MisterFiveSeven, on 17 July 2013 - 03:44 AM, said:
).
