60 replies to this topic

[Thuzel]

Theodor Kling, on 15 August 2013 - 09:06 PM, said:

I think they ignored it because in their "min range= no dmg" world it does not make sense for ballistic weapons to have a min range. Like a few people already said: Bare for the PPC it was originally a to hit modifier for long range weapons..explained by targeting system problem, and reasonable for balance.

The Gauss having a minimum makes just as much sense as the PPC having a minimum.

All of the minimums were to-hit modifiers, PPC, LRM, and Gauss alike. They were all enacted to balance long-range weapons and to provide workable tactics against mechs that over-specialized in long-range weapons. There is no reason to keep the minimum on the PPC and not on ballistics since they're both in the same class and have the same range characteristics. PGI simply had no idea what it was doing in regards to balance, and as a result we've spent a lot of time re-visiting what should be very straightforward balance issues.

Of all the things they needed to change in order to convert TT to a workable FPS, these changes made absolutely no sense. This game would be much better balanced if PGI had consistently used the minimum effects and values on the original weapons.