177 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 August 2013 - 08:28 PM, said:

problem is, IMO overll the weapons are mostly fine (aside form the LB-X and flamer). It's the boating that is the issue.

Boating in and of itself doesn't cause issues, and many mechs are built to be boats right out of the box anyways. In many cases it's actually perfectly balanced. For instance, somebody who tries to boat SRMs will end up being useless outside of 270m. An LRM boat is useless inside of 180m, has a very hard time against hillhumpers (can't maintain lock and therefore can't hit them), and are weakened by AMS. Laser boats spread their damage all over and you can twist around to reduce the damage to vital areas. They also need to expose themselves for ~1 second to fire the whole beam, giving enemies with fast reflexes enough time to shoot back a little bit. Those boats don't look so bad, because each of them have pretty clear ways to counter them if the boater puts all of his eggs in one basket.


The only boats that are really an issue are PPC or PPC + Gauss (dual Gauss heavies are relatively vulnerable, a weakness which dual Gauss assaults wouldn't have). It's because those weapons are effective in just about all situations, and because our high heat capacity (can alpha multiple times in a row, brawlers run just as hot as snipers because Paul doesn't like heat neutral mechs) + no heat penalties (slower movement, convergence reduction, etc for running too hot) make their higher heat not as much of a downside as it should be. The 90m min range on standard PPCs is generally much too small to make a different unless against really fast opponents, and ERPPCs don't have a min range at all (but are a bit hotter). They're just too versatile. It's okay to have jack-of-all-trades weapons like the ML and LL as long as they are also a master-of-none (ML and LL get beaten by specialist weapons so they're okay). When they become a master-of-everything, then it gets out of hand.

Edited by FupDup, 12 August 2013 - 08:44 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Quote

Boating in and of itself doesn't cause issues

You mean absent of any special mechancis that benefit boating, like convergence, I presume?

That is probably basically it. Boating in and on itself just makes you a specialist. Maybe being specialist is better than being a generalist, but that's the extent of it, and you can specialize without using a boat (for example, mixing PPCs and LLs would also lead to a specialize in a mid-to-long range combat mech, so specialization is not a unique benefit that you can only get via boating).

Convergence + Group Fire however creates a synergy in boating that neither generalist nor specialist with mixed weaponry can enjoy.

And if a particularly weapon is OP, then boating also multiples the advantage the weapon has compared to a mixed loadout (specialized or not). It doesn't always require boating - there could be more than 1 OP weapon - say, the PPC and the LL, then a mech mixing PPCs and LLs might be just a sOP as a mech using only PPCs and LLs, and they'd both be better than a mech mixing PPC and AC/10 or LL and AC/10 if the AC/10 isn't OP.

Personally, I don't want any more hard point limitations. I want only the mech model to adapt to the equipped weapons, and other than that, allow people to do what they like. I see a certain value in constraining mechs to s pecific roles and choices based on hard points, but I also see a certain value in not doing that, simply because some mechs look cool but might be forced into builds I don't enjoy.

[FupDup]

MustrumRidcully, on 13 August 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

You mean absent of any special mechanics that benefit boating, like convergence, I presume?

Everything benefits from convergence, not just boats. For instance, is a Commando with a few SRMs and a ML a boat? No, but convergence still lets him put more damage into a single spot. How about a Victor with a Gauss Rifle, 2 LL, and some SRMS? Also not a boat, but if he gets close enough he can also put a lot of damage into one spot (or just fire his projectiles and then quickly follow-up with lazors). Boats are certainly much more adept at taking advantage of convergence due to shared projectile speeds/cooldown times, but convergence is an issue with or without the presence of boating. This is a misconception that I see all too often; that outlawing boats gets rid of pinpoint damage with multiple weapons (boating just makes it easier).

MustrumRidcully, on 13 August 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Convergence + Group Fire however creates a synergy in boating that neither generalist nor specialist with mixed weaponry can enjoy.

Non-projectile energy weapons are all hitscan, so those can be mixed seamlessly (i.e. ML + LL). There's also the option of getting in really close, or shooting at a slow/big target (i.e. Atlas or Highlander). Lock-on missiles don't decide their hit locations based on where you aim, so those would mix with other weapons very well if they didn't have certain large weaknesses (LRMs being heavy and having min range, SSRMs having random hit locations).


And here's a little food for thought: You know that idea of removing group fire that you promote so much? It's not all that different from PGI's ghost heat if you think about it, especially when looking at the AC/20's penalty. I remember that you made a thread about how most folks wouldn't try to alpha (AKA group fire) at all with their AC/40 Jagers because of how crazy the penalty was and would just end up chain firing. From that, I'm going to guess that you probably didn't enjoy having group fire "removed" from that Jager build which you used. All I have to do to turn PGI's system into your system is to just link every single weapon, set the max alpha to 1, and ramp up the heat penalty. Think about it...

MustrumRidcully, on 13 August 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

And if a particularly weapon is OP, then boating also multiples the advantage the weapon has compared to a mixed loadout (specialized or not). It doesn't always require boating - there could be more than 1 OP weapon - say, the PPC and the LL, then a mech mixing PPCs and LLs might be just a sOP as a mech using only PPCs and LLs, and they'd both be better than a mech mixing PPC and AC/10 or LL and AC/10 if the AC/10 isn't OP.

Boating also multiplies the weaknesses of the weapon, which balances it out (putting all of your eggs in one basket, i.e. SRM boat is helpless against targets outside of 270m). The way you balance boating is to make sure each weapon has sufficient weaknesses compared to its strengths (risk should correlate to reward).

MustrumRidcully, on 13 August 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Personally, I don't want any more hard point limitations. I want only the mech model to adapt to the equipped weapons, and other than that, allow people to do what they like. I see a certain value in constraining mechs to s pecific roles and choices based on hard points, but I also see a certain value in not doing that, simply because some mechs look cool but might be forced into builds I don't enjoy.

My own proposed system (critical slots + hardpoints [hardpoints = total number of weapons you can shove in those slots] hybrid) would allow for a fairly wide variety of choices (such as being able to upgrade almost every weapon to larger than stock) while still providing for some role enforcement. For instance, I would allow for a K2 to switch his MGs for AC/5 if he wanted to (maybe not up to UAC/5 so that you have more reason to get Cataphracts/Jagers), he can switch his torso ML for LL/LPL, and the arms could upgrade to Binary Laser Cannons if we had those in-game.

Edited by FupDup, 13 August 2013 - 09:49 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 13 August 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

Everything benefits from convergence, not just boats. For instance, is a Commando with a few SRMs and a ML a boat? No, but convergence still lets him put more damage into a single spot. How about a Victor with a Gauss Rifle, 2 LL, and some SRMS? Also not a boat, but if he gets close enough he can also put a lot of damage into one spot (or just fire his projectiles and then quickly follow-up with lazors). Boats are certainly much more adept at taking advantage of convergence due to shared projectile speeds/cooldown times, but convergence is an issue with or without the presence of boating. This is a misconception that I see all too often; that outlawing boats gets rid of pinpoint damage with multiple weapons (boating just makes it easier).



Non-projectile energy weapons are all hitscan, so those can be mixed seamlessly (i.e. ML + LL). There's also the option of getting in really close, or shooting at a slow/big target (i.e. Atlas or Highlander). Lock-on missiles don't decide their hit locations based on where you aim, so those would mix with other weapons very well if they didn't have certain large weaknesses (LRMs being heavy and having min range, SSRMs having random hit locations).


And here's a little food for thought: You know that idea of removing group fire that you promote so much? It's not all that different from PGI's ghost heat if you think about it, especially when looking at the AC/20's penalty. I remember that you made a thread about how most folks wouldn't try to alpha (AKA group fire) at all with their AC/40 Jagers because of how crazy the penalty was and would just end up chain firing. From that, I'm going to guess that you probably didn't enjoy having group fire "removed" from that Jager build which you used. All I have to do to turn PGI's system into your system is to just link every single weapon, set the max alpha to 1, and ramp up the heat penalty. Think about it...



Boating also multiplies the weaknesses of the weapon, which balances it out (putting all of your eggs in one basket, i.e. SRM boat is helpless against targets outside of 270m). The way you balance boating is to make sure each weapon has sufficient weaknesses compared to its strengths (risk should correlate to reward).



My own proposed system (critical slots + hardpoints [hardpoints = total number of weapons you can shove in those slots] hybrid) would allow for a fairly wide variety of choices (such as being able to upgrade almost every weapon to larger than stock) while still providing for some role enforcement. For instance, I would allow for a K2 to switch his MGs for AC/5 if he wanted to (maybe not up to UAC/5 so that you have more reason to get Cataphracts/Jagers), he can switch his torso ML for LL/LPL, and the arms could upgrade to Binary Laser Cannons if we had those in-game.

eh.. are Binary Lasers REALLY an upgrade?

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

eh.. are Binary Lasers REALLY an upgrade?

By "upgrade" I just meant that they're larger than the stock weapon in the K2's arms (PPCs are 3 slots, Blazers are 4). And since the LL got buffed, and the Blazer uses LL cores, it would make sense for the Blazer to receive the same buffs (i.e. 14 damage and 14 heat instead of 12 damage and 16 heat like TT). There could also be things like a short beam duration and bumped up range.

I just want an excuse to say IMMA FIRIN' MAH BLAZOR!!! in-game.

Edited by FupDup, 13 August 2013 - 10:10 AM.

[Corbon Zackery]

Nothing like a good old fashion crab bake in the morning.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 13 August 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

Everything benefits from convergence, not just boats.

Yes, convergence makes everything better, that is a given. But why is it the only time convergence becomes a noticeable issue is on boats, particualrly the PPC/Gauss or ac2/UAC5 varieties?

No once cries about how OP my dual ac10 mechs are, or my HBK-4G with AC20, 2 MG and 2 Mediums. (despite those mechs representing the absolute most deadly builds I own, several boasting 1000 pt matches and score over 110, and scoring 6-800 with regularity)

Because the convergence in those instances doesn't allow people to essentially one shot someone, from across the map. Mind you I am NOT in favor of set vergence on any weapon, as the whole point of things like arm actuators, and the weight o the weapons is the gear needed to make corrections in movement. I am for the removal of INSTANT convergence, and have the vergence occcur like it did in CB, where rapid shift in aim points could take a second for the weapons to comp for, and you would often have crossing shots.

You mention the individual weapons, but when I look at each weapon individually, which one is OP? The Gauss gets anymore fragile, it'll break when you walk. Minimum rage on ballistics are idiotic.

THe PPC/ER PPC? Pretty stiff heat penalty for those, balanced by decent damage for weight.

But take ANY of them INDIVIDUALLY? Show me the single Gauss HBK or Centy that people run from. Or the Single PPC Dragon? Even the 2 PPC/ER PPC K2, while effective, is hardly game breaking.

But when you COMBINE a Gauss or 2, with 2-3 PPC/ER PPC? Or simply slap 4-6 PPC on a mech? Suddenly you have a perfect storm of events that allow for a ridiculous amount of instant damage in one location, from across the map.

The problem is not the weapons themselves, not the heat itself, not the hardpoints, themselves, or vergence. The Problem is the crossroads where all meet. So a variety of fixes in each area are need to truly address the problems, THEN if there are minor individual weapon imbalances (or egregious ones) they can be addressed without screwing the balance of everythign else in the process.

[Corbon Zackery]

Fresh from Alaska were the weather is warm and the head hit box is wide.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

Yes, convergence makes everything better, that is a given. But why is it the only time convergence becomes a noticeable issue is on boats, particualrly the PPC/Gauss or ac2/UAC5 varieties?

Because boats are, to reiterate, more adept at exploiting convergence than non-boats are due to not needing to deal with projectile speed and reload time differences. The PPC/Gauss varieties have very few valid counters other than fighting fire with fire, and AC/2 ones shake the crap out of the victim's screen and kill them slowly (dying slowly makes it more annoying and torturous for the victim than a quick-and-clean impersonal kill). I don't think I've seen any complaints about UAC/5 boats other than folks who don't like 3rd party macros (same applies to AC/2).

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

No once cries about how OP my dual ac10 mechs are, or my HBK-4G with AC20, 2 MG and 2 Mediums. (despite those mechs representing the absolute most deadly builds I own, several boasting 1000 pt matches and score over 110, and scoring 6-800 with regularity)

The AC/10 itself is a rather "meh" weapon (weighs too much for what it does, thanks again FASA), and medium mechs in general are fairly easy to kill (Hunchbacks get de-torso'd especially fast).

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

Because the convergence in those instances doesn't allow people to essentially one shot someone, from across the map. Mind you I am NOT in favor of set vergence on any weapon, as the whole point of things like arm actuators, and the weight o the weapons is the gear needed to make corrections in movement. I am for the removal of INSTANT convergence, and have the vergence occcur like it did in CB, where rapid shift in aim points could take a second for the weapons to comp for, and you would often have crossing shots.

And because dual AC/10 doesn't do enough damage to 1-shot anything outside of a Locust (assuming MWO's double armor).

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

You mention the individual weapons, but when I look at each weapon individually, which one is OP? The Gauss gets anymore fragile, it'll break when you walk. Minimum rage on ballistics are idiotic.

The fragility of the Gauss doesn't seem to do much of anything to discourage any of the Highlander, Cataphract, or other metarapers. And if the Gauss is really such a liability, why would you consider a dual-Gauss Victor variant to be metarape? After all, if one Gauss is a big bomb, then two Gauss makes an even bigger bomb.

Something to keep in mind that the hillhumping playstyle tends to reduce the likelihood of getting one's Gauss blown up, and by the time people get in close they're usually at low enough health to finish off quickly (the second point also applies to PPCs).


As for minimum range, I think we need to remember here that Battletech in general is idiotic. Why does shooting an Atlas's fist rip off his whole arm? Why does a STD400 engine take up half the space of an XL 100 while carrying up to four times as many heatsinks inside of it? Why are we driving giant robots when tanks are more efficient in nearly every way except for not looking as badass? Why does an AC/20 have less range than an AC/5? Why don't ER energy weapons deal more damage than standard ones? Why can we load ammo from our feet to our arms while running at over 100 KPH?

The way you achieve balance is by either making a weapon really good for one purpose and sucking at another (i.e. SRMs good up close but useless at range), or by making it average at everything and good at nothing (i.e. LL beaten by PPC at range and SRMs/Autocannons up close, but still very general purpose). You can't have a weapon that is good for every single possible niche or else you're going to see people metaraping the crap out of that weapon like what we see right now. I think that result is far more idiotic than defying a few laws of physics in a giant robot game that already takes a hot steaming dump all over Isaac Newton's face.

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

THe PPC/ER PPC? Pretty stiff heat penalty for those, balanced by decent damage for weight.

High heat isn't as much of an issue in MWO as it is in TT because of how heat works here. For one thing, MWO doesn't penalize you for hovering just under 100% threshold. Hell, most of the time when I overheat I don't even take internal damage at all. Another thing is that our dissipation is slow as balls, making it so low-heat per shot weapons actually run very hot themselves when in TT they would be heat neutral. This game's heat scale is designed to limit how often you can fire weapons, not the quantity of weapons you can fire at once (opposite of how a low-capacity, fast dissipation system would work). This game makes brawlers run almost as hot as PPC snipers.

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

But take ANY of them INDIVIDUALLY? Show me the single Gauss HBK or Centy that people run from. Or the Single PPC Dragon? Even the 2 PPC/ER PPC K2, while effective, is hardly game breaking.

When you compare a mech with one weapon to a mech with multiple weapons, then of course the mech with only 1 gun is generally going to not do so well unless the single gun is really really huge (or the multiple weapons are really small). If every single mech in the game was only allowed to use one weapon, then I can bet you dollars to donuts that the top-tier mechs would be single PPC, single Gauss, and single AC/20. Those weapons don't spread out their damage at all (as opposed to things like lasers) and don't require one to stay exposed for ~1 second (just shoot and run).

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

But when you COMBINE a Gauss or 2, with 2-3 PPC/ER PPC? Or simply slap 4-6 PPC on a mech? Suddenly you have a perfect storm of events that allow for a ridiculous amount of instant damage in one location, from across the map. any possible range.

I fixed the last three words there.

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

The problem is not the weapons themselves, not the heat itself, not the hardpoints, themselves, or vergence. The Problem is the crossroads where all meet. So a variety of fixes in each area are need to truly address the problems, THEN if there are minor individual weapon imbalances (or egregious ones) they can be addressed without screwing the balance of everythign else in the process.

So now you agree that boating isn't the issue? (Your list doesn't contain it ).

Edited by FupDup, 13 August 2013 - 12:15 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 13 August 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Because boats are, to reiterate, more adept at exploiting convergence than non-boats are due to not needing to deal with projectile speed and reload time differences. The PPC/Gauss varieties have very few valid counters other than fighting fire with fire, and AC/2 ones shake the crap out of the victim's screen and kill them slowly (dying slowly makes it more annoying and torturous for the victim than a quick-and-clean impersonal kill). I don't think I've seen any complaints about UAC/5 boats other than folks who don't like 3rd party macros (same applies to AC/2).




The AC/10 itself is a rather "meh" weapon (weighs too much for what it does, thanks again FASA), and medium mechs in general are fairly easy to kill (Hunchbacks get de-torso'd especially fast).




And because dual AC/10 doesn't do enough damage to 1-shot anything outside of a Locust (assuming MWO's double armor).




The fragility of the Gauss doesn't seem to do much of anything to discourage any of the Highlander, Cataphract, or other metarapers. And if the Gauss is really such a liability, why would you consider a dual-Gauss Victor variant to be metarape? After all, if one Gauss is a big bomb, then two Gauss makes an even bigger bomb.

Something to keep in mind that the hillhumping playstyle tends to reduce the likelihood of getting one's Gauss blown up, and by the time people get in close they're usually at low enough health to finish off quickly (the second point also applies to PPCs).


As for minimum range, I think we need to remember here that Battletech in general is idiotic. Why does shooting an Atlas's fist rip off his whole arm? Why does a STD400 engine take up half the space of an XL 100 while carrying up to four times as many heatsinks inside of it? Why are we driving giant robots when tanks are more efficient in nearly every way except for not looking as badass? Why does an AC/20 have less range than an AC/5? The way you achieve balance is by either making a weapon really good for one purpose and sucking at another (i.e. SRMs), or by making it average at everything and good at nothing (i.e. LL). You can't have a weapon that is good for every single possible niche or you're going to see people metaraping the crap out of that weapon. I think that result is far more idiotic than defying a few laws of physics in a giant robot game that already takes a hot steaming dump all over Isaac Newton.




High heat isn't as much of an issue in MWO as it is in TT because of how heat works here. For one thing, MWO doesn't penalize you for hovering just under 100% threshold. Hell, most of the time when I overheat I don't even take internal damage at all. Another thing is that our dissipation is slow as balls, making it so low-heat per shot weapons actually run very hot themselves when in TT they would be heat neutral. This game's heat scale is designed to limit how often you can fire weapons, not the quantity of weapons you can fire at once (opposite of how a low-capacity, fast dissipation system would work). This game makes brawlers run almost as hot as PPC snipers.




When you compare a mech with one weapon to a mech with multiple weapons, then of course the mech with only 1 gun is generally going to not do so well unless the single gun is really really huge (or the multiple weapons are really small). If every single mech in the game was only allowed to use one weapon, then I can bet you dollars to donuts that the top-tier mechs would be single PPC, single Gauss, and single AC/20. Those weapons don't spread out their damage at all (as opposed to things like lasers) and don't require one to stay exposed for ~1 second (just shoot and run).



I fixed the last three words there.




So now you agree that boating isn't the issue? (Your list doesn't contain it ).

considering that hardpoints is part of boating, one would assume them to go hand in hand currently.

Also, please, by all means keep dismissing the AC/10, By itself, yeas it is mediocre. In a pair? You start to see whre they really shine. Intentional or not, a dual ac/10 despite ammo and weight, proves a much better combo for damage and endurance than I find a pair of PPC. (THough in lighter units, PPC win since one simpyl cannot do the weight and ammo of 2 AC10 without too much sacrifice.). The much lower heat and migher RoF turns them into a veritable jackhammer, that I can easily and effectively snipe to nearly 1400 meters with (1350 I think) and KEEP doing it, no stop for almost the entire game.

Tonnage, crits, damage and range are PART of a picture. But not just heat, but repeat heat also is a huge factor (heat sinks dissipate 3 heat much faster and easier than 10/11) and RoF (2.5 second vs 4). If you want to see the ultimate example of broke, I can promise you that the 4 AC/20 of the Annihilator in this games mechanic would make people long for 4 PPC Stalkers and daul ac20 Jagers.

Your PPC is 2.5 dps for 2.25 hps, vs 4.0 dps for 1.2 hps., with an AC10 needsing 12 heat-sinks to achieve heat neutrality on nonstop fire vs 23 for a PPC.

I've got 3 mechs running dual ac/10 (Jager-DD, CPT-K2, CTF-ILYA) all of which are my best coring mechs, by a landslide. And All of those mechs have been built around the PPC also, and the AC/10, in pairs, simply smokes the PPC in pairs. PPCs cannot be cooled enough to sustain nonstop barrage fire, and larger ballistics are too bulky and ammo innefficient to be viable in pairs without taking a complete "All or Nothing" approach. Best part is never having to use Coolshot or get those annoying overheat messages. So by all means, keep preaching the gospel of the AC10s inferiority. It'll just make my day easier by helping people to continue to underestimate me.


(Speaking of the Gauss fragility, saying it is fine doesn't mean the boating meta in and of itself, is fine. Nice try to use on peripheral argument to attempt to obscure another. If the VTR had the actual proper hardpoints TO use it (the famous 1A or whatever the handle is, is supposed to be machine guns, in the LEGS, not Gauss in the Torso,) Great, but its the 2 Gauss or 3 with PPCs with insta convergence that is where the issues come in, aka, again, the entire picture, not trying to cherry pick, and think one can magically fix MWO with one mechanic fix. I don't find the Dual Gauss Jager or Catapult any special threat, mostly because they really CAN'T mount much else with them to abuts the Meta with. Min/Max or go home with those designs.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

considering that hardpoints is part of boating, one would assume them to go hand in hand currently.

There are, of course, a large number of mechs that are designed to be boats with their stock builds. Again, hardpoints don't get rid of boating; they just reinforce the role of each mech (boating is a role too) and give you a reason to buy more mechs than a few gunbags.

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

Also, please, by all means keep dismissing the AC/10, By itself, yeas it is mediocre. In a pair? You start to see whre they really shine. Intentional or not, a dual ac/10 despite ammo and weight, proves a much better combo for damage and endurance than I find a pair of PPC. (THough in lighter units, PPC win since one simpyl cannot do the weight and ammo of 2 AC10 without too much sacrifice.). The much lower heat and migher RoF turns them into a veritable jackhammer, that I can easily and effectively snipe to nearly 1400 meters with (1350 I think) and KEEP doing it, no stop for almost the entire game.

A single AC/20 has the same alpha-damage as dual AC/10, has higher DPS, and it saves you 10 tons (if you want longer range you're better off with a PPC than an AC/10). I don't have any spreadsheets handy here, but I'd imagine that the AC/10 (or two of them) doesn't do a whole lot of damage at ~1350 meters (seeing how damage starts to drop off past 450m)... At that range, you're ERPPC bait.

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

Tonnage, crits, damage and range are PART of a picture. But not just heat, but repeat heat also is a huge factor (heat sinks dissipate 3 heat much faster and easier than 10/11) and RoF (2.5 second vs 4). If you want to see the ultimate example of broke, I can promise you that the 4 AC/20 of the Annihilator in this games mechanic would make people long for 4 PPC Stalkers and daul ac20 Jagers.

Your PPC is 2.5 dps for 2.25 hps, vs 4.0 dps for 1.2 hps., with an AC10 needsing 12 heat-sinks to achieve heat neutrality on nonstop fire vs 23 for a PPC.

I've got 3 mechs running dual ac/10 (Jager-DD, CPT-K2, CTF-ILYA) all of which are my best coring mechs, by a landslide. And All of those mechs have been built around the PPC also, and the AC/10, in pairs, simply smokes the PPC in pairs. PPCs cannot be cooled enough to sustain nonstop barrage fire, and larger ballistics are too bulky and ammo innefficient to be viable in pairs without taking a complete "All or Nothing" approach. Best part is never having to use Coolshot or get those annoying overheat messages. So by all means, keep preaching the gospel of the AC10s inferiority. It'll just make my day easier by helping people to continue to underestimate me.

When humping behind a hidey hill, a PPC sniper isn't going to stay exposed long enough for your DPS advantage to take effect (it becomes a battle of damage per alpha instead) and they can dissipate heat while hiding in their hole. In closer battles, they don't have to keep firing constantly. This game isn't about firing constantly, because firing constantly is impossible on the majority of builds due to slow dissipation. It's generally about taking a quick snap-shot at a vital area and then twisting your torso to deflect damage from your own vital areas (and cooling down at the same time). You're also likely to have taken some damage by the time a brawl eventually breaks out, whereas the PPC'er is likely to still be fresh or close to fresh unless there are counter-snipers pecking away at him (in that case, teamwork obviously overcomes one individual opponent no matter what he's using).

Bishop Steiner, on 13 August 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

(Speaking of the Gauss fragility, saying it is fine doesn't mean the boating meta in and of itself, is fine. Nice try to use on peripheral argument to attempt to obscure another. If the VTR had the actual proper hardpoints TO use it (the famous 1A or whatever the handle is, is supposed to be machine guns, in the LEGS, not Gauss in the Torso,) Great, but its the 2 Gauss or 3 with PPCs with insta convergence that is where the issues come in, aka, again, the entire picture, not trying to cherry pick, and think one can magically fix MWO with one mechanic fix. I don't find the Dual Gauss Jager or Catapult any special threat, mostly because they really CAN'T mount much else with them to abuts the Meta with. Min/Max or go home with those designs.

The Devastator, Annihilator, King Crab, and Thunder Hawk would still be able to mount 2 (or more) Gauss under any hardpoint system so you're going to have to find an alternative solution to those mechs (hardpoints only solve the dual-Gauss Victor). The dual Gauss heavies we have now have to make too many sacrifices to reach the full potential of Gauss boating because of needing XL engines (or really small STD) and lacking armor. Assault mechs, on the other hand, have the tonnage and armor needed to handle Gauss boating.

Edited by FupDup, 13 August 2013 - 01:01 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

and yet, in all cases, my ac10 mech has owned the competition. I guess I just must be that good.

I might recommend actually TRYING something before you dismiss it. And the DPS advantage is real because I don't have to stay there guns blazing like a UAC or ac2 build. I can hump and hide too, and yet hit most mechs twice before they can reverse out of sight, or nail his friend if he is not a good shot anymore, something your precious PPCs cannot do. Also I don't have to pray that no one comes around the corner while my mech is cooling off.

*Shrugs* but by all means, continue to believe what you choose.

[Bishop Steiner]

THIS.

IS KING CRAB!


Many thanks to KIRIAGE~SAN for his work rendering and rigging my 2d concept sketch into 3d awesome!
(Would love to convince the OP to attach this to the OP)

[Iqfish]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 August 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

THIS.

IS KING CRAB!


Many thanks to KIRIAGE~SAN for his work rendering and rigging my 2d concept sketch into 3d awesome!
(Would love to convince the OP to attach this to the OP)

Wow thats simply astonishing. You surprise me everytime with your art. It would be very nice if Alex would use your concepts and renders for his king crab (if we get one).

[Bishop Steiner]

IqfishLP, on 14 August 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

Wow thats simply astonishing. You surprise me everytime with your art. It would be very nice if Alex would use your concepts and renders for his king crab (if we get one).

thanks, but it was Kiriage who brought it to life, and really is showing why I need to learn digital art skills. You just can't get the clean crisp lineart required these days with pencil and paper. Art skill wise, I am a dinosaur.

[Herodes]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 August 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

THIS.

IS KING CRAB!


Many thanks to KIRIAGE~SAN for his work rendering and rigging my 2d concept sketch into 3d awesome!
(Would love to convince the OP to attach this to the OP)

Now THAT is gorgeous. My hat is off ro you both.

And thanx for the tip with the dual AC10. Will have to try that.


EDIT: are there some bigger pictures of this available? Like for desktop wallpaper?

Edited by Herodes, 14 August 2013 - 12:42 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Herodes, on 14 August 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

Now THAT is gorgeous. My hat is off ro you both.

And thanx for the tip with the dual AC10. Will have to try that.


EDIT: are there some bigger pictures of this available? Like for desktop wallpaper?

Am hoping to get some from Kiriage soon. Will post when done.

[Psikez]

Bump due to crabs still not being in the game. Hear that PGI? I WILL THROW ALL THE MONEY AT YOU

[Herodes]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 August 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

Am hoping to get some from Kiriage soon. Will post when done.

Thanx !

And yes PGI ... there's a special treasure chest full of shiny gold coins set aside for the King Crab.

[Deedsie]

I vote yes, and let's bring the smaller 50 ton Crab in as well!