26 replies to this topic

[xRatas]

Aim64C, on 21 July 2013 - 11:16 PM, said:

Plenty already do. Most laser systems have a warm-up period. Dumb-release bombs (a direct attack munition) are somewhat similar - computers in the aircraft detect when the aircraft is "zero G" and release the bomb onto a designated target (very accurate, though it restricts maneuvering against anti-aircraft fire).

Weapons like the 5-inch gun aren't necessarily supposed to hit with their first shot - the radar tracks the projectile and compensates before firing the next shot. In the world of ship-to-ship combat, the 5" gun is "direct fire."

Even then - these weapon systems aren't built to address all threats.

Which is exactly why a charge mechanic would balance out PPCs. Autocannons remain the reactionary damage dealer and 'brawling weapon' alongside SRMs. Lasers are reactionary - but light and fieldable. PPCs are more of a support weapon in the direct fire role - they can deal heavy damage against the heavier targets, but the lighter and more nimble targets are going to be able to mitigate the weapon system.

None of those are manually aimed direct fire though? Any situation, where it is likely that you need to fire quickly because
a ) enemy is shooting back at you and
b ) enemy does not stay long out of cover

you would really want a gun that fires instantly when you pull the trigger, wouldn't you?

I admit I'm not that educated in latest military inventions, I did my military service about 20 years ago (branch being direct fire antitank, might affect my preferences : ). But as far as I think I know, lasers are used against aircraft (which can not hide behind cover easily), big guns are rather fired indirectly if there is risk of getting shot back, and bombs are traditionally dropped by instant when you pull the lever, now it is just left to computer to decide when to pull it so pilots don't have to calculate speed, altitude and stuff like that midair.

This, ofcourse, is rather offtopic already, but anyway, I'd hate to have a gun that does not fire when I want it to fire. And being long time PPC fan, I'd rather not see them turned to that.

edit: But I agree on the logic in balancing. It would make sense. Still, I'd much prefer fire happening instantly, but stream being not point loaded, so it would spread a bit if you didn't get a good line on target.

Edited by xRatas, 21 July 2013 - 11:39 PM.

[Aim64C]

xRatas, on 21 July 2013 - 11:30 PM, said:

None of those are manually aimed direct fire though? Any situation, where it is likely that you need to fire quickly because
a ) enemy is shooting back at you and
b ) enemy does not stay long out of cover

you would really want a gun that fires instantly when you pull the trigger, wouldn't you?

Compared to battletech - most of these systems are stupendously low-energy.

Current generation laser systems have a warm-up period before each firing (chemical lasers can't be 100% ready to burn at a milliseconds' notice because you'll burn up the reactants - solid-state laser diodes have to be warmed up or the sudden forcing of high-energy through them will cause microscopic differences in heat and shear the silicon) - yet they are still able to be brought online in time scales that allow them to take down incoming artillery shells.

Quote

I admit I'm not that educated in latest military inventions, I did my military service about 20 years ago (branch being direct fire antitank, might affect my preferences : ). But as far as I think I know, lasers are used against aircraft (which can not hide behind cover easily), big guns are rather fired indirectly if there is risk of getting shot back, and bombs are traditionally dropped by instant when you pull the lever, now it is just left to computer to decide when to pull it so pilots don't have to calculate speed, altitude and stuff like that midair.

There's variances on a theme.

Even 20 years ago, the M-1 used laser range finding and computed a firing solution based on velocities and other things (I know that, at some points in time, someone had to actually feed the computer velocity estimates and other data that were not yet integrated from the sensors directly into the ballistics computer). The only 'real' "point and shoot" scenario is when you're at a technical point-blank where no ballistic compensation is necessary.

Quote

This, ofcourse, is rather offtopic already, but anyway, I'd hate to have a gun that does not fire when I want it to fire. And being long time PPC fan, I'd rather not see them turned to that.

It's the difference between aiming a shot and a reflex or 'snap' shot.

Lasers are excellent for snapshots - firing into a silhouette and raking through a general area. Autocannons are pretty good for the same thing, but have far more stopping power and have considerably more short-term staying power.

PPCs would be more like your marksman role. He's lining up and taking aim to deliver very hard hitting, even crippling blows. He isn't really supposed to be in the thick of things, at least, ideally.

Quote

edit: But I agree on the logic in balancing. It would make sense. Still, I'd much prefer fire happening instantly, but stream being not point loaded, so it would spread a bit if you didn't get a good line on target.

That would be a great mechanic for the Hyper Assault Gauss series of weapons.

That's another part of the challenge of designing this game (and something I think PGI didn't put as much thought into as they should have)... there's a lot of additional weapons that would be very interesting to put into a real-time shooter environment. While many of them, in TableTop, function very similar to each other - there are descriptions of their behavior that allow those tiny differences in descriptions to play out very well under a real time environment with a very diverse field of weapons to choose from.

Which is why I think we're going to be a bit perplexed in a few years when we're looking at wanting to implement a wide range of the "new" weapons but not really have much of a clue how to do so without doing some serious revision to existing weapons.

Take the SRM versus the Rocket versus the Streak SRM. Along the same lines - the LRM versus the Streak LRM.

In TableTop - the mechanics are clear and great. Translating those mechanics to anything resembling MechWarrior is a bit difficult. Other games have tried it in the past - but they really fell short in my estimation.

I'm drifting a bit off-topic, though.

I'm trying to consider stuff way down the road, too, so that we can not have to back up and re-do things a couple years from now.

[DoubleEdged]

This is all a very interesting discussion on the mechanics of the PPC, and making it a viable weapon of use, but we have veered away from suggestions to transition the current one to that of a our realized dream.

So back on topic,

It seems to be in agreement that a charge time would be logical, but a long drawn out one would make the weapon useless. What if the charge/delay time was the same as the that on LRMs with doors closed? Also, it could have a pre-charge mode, but make the wrapon as vulnerable as a gauss rifle?

[Lightfoot]

MWO Pulse Lasers are very weak, that's not the PPC's fault for being by the book correct.

You should only need 2 LPLAS. 3 should be nearly impossible heat-wise. 2 LPLAS should pulse out much more DPS damage than 2 PPCs and be that much hotter as well.

MWO is very much Gunwarrior. Mechs that can't carry a Ballistic weapon had better be under 50 tons. The PPC is the one working energy weapon other than MLAS and MPLAS. Just saying this because you wouldn't like MWO without the PPCs, even if you don't use them at the moment.

People look at the various weapon types and see Energy weapons are light, so that must be unfair. However the people who created MechWarrior and Battletech didn't intend for you to use only Ballistics or only Energy. They intended for you to use Ballistics, Energy, and Missiles together and trade off their weaknesses to create a more efficient Mech. Thus, Ballistics are Cool, but very Heavy, and Energy is Light, but very Hot. Mix carefully and you can take your Mech much further than a player who does not.

The biggest problem to balance damage in MWO is the double recharge on the big weapons and PGI's inability to see that heat dissapation equals recharge for Energy weapons. Instead they just dump one heat nerf after another onto the game, turning MWO into GunWarrior. I know they do this to prevent boating, but the way you prevent boating is by causing serious damage and destruction to the Mech if it overheats. If you do that, suddenly, no one boats Energy anymore. Instead we just keep chasing the effects of problems and not the problems.

So you want to Balance MWO tonight? Get rid of the double recharge and make players wait 7 or 8 seconds for their big guns to recycle.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sybreed, on 21 July 2013 - 10:33 PM, said:

the other problem is that the limited number of slots make boating the biggest guns almost obligatory. The fact that you have to choose between a small laser and a PPC makes the whole weapon balance issue trivial as it's broken at its core.

there is a choice between a Small Laser and a PPC? I thought that was a no brainer.

[Tezcatli]

I would say buff Large Pulse Lasers. They're too heavy or too hot for what you get. One of those two factors needs to go down. Or lower each by a small factor

[DoubleEdged]

I guess buffing LPLs could work to bring an alternative, if anything, have PLs fire more frequently for better DPS? Their range is already quite limited to begin with, so this could make them more viable brawling weapons.