50 replies to this topic

[AntiCitizenJuan]

There's no need to change any ammo values that didnt need to be changed before.
People seem to think "oh there's more mechs, that must mean I'll need more ammo!"

Which is not the case. At all.

The fact that you have to fight 4 more mechs is offset by the fact that you have 4 more mechs on your team. The need for more ammunition is negated by the increased firepower on your side.

Ammo values are fine.

[ricardox]

BlueVisionWarrior Online, on 26 August 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:

I used to think we didn't need ammo because the 4 extra people would bring it for me, but I've since changed my mind (mostly because I'm actually playing with 12v12 now not just theory crafting). a 20% increase seems way to big, I'm thinking 5-10%, just a little more ammo would be nice. That or bump heat on laser weapons, because as it stands, there's no reason to take an ac10 over a ppc.

You might be right. I have no idea what the correct increase percentage is as 12vs12 is much too complex a situation.

Dawnstealer, on 26 August 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

This: always have laser backups.

pretty much what I meant by 12vs12 makes energy weapons more valuable. If you thought Ballistics and Missile were better than Energy before, then no need to add ammo per ton. If they were balanced before, Energy is now "better" than Ballistics.

Roughneck45, on 26 August 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

The 4 other mechs are the "ammo". You do not need more ammo than what they give you already.

People bring whatever amount of ammo they are comfortable with, if you think you need more then fit it in. I've been running 3 tons of gauss ammo since closed beta and there has never been a reason to bring more, other than what I said earlier.

The damage per ton you can bring is pretty spot on for balance

I think 25-27 is about right for gauss for 8v8 for most players.. and thus enough for 12v12, barely. (Hmm so maybe BlueVisionWarrior was right with his numbers.)

Viktor Drake, on 26 August 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

It is really pretty linear all the way around.

Just got through explaining why it's NOT linear. Very rarely is something that complex linear.

[Bhael Fire]

You don't need more ammo for the same reason why we don't need a nerf to c-bill rewards; it's broken logic to assume that because there's more targets that you'll be expected or even capable of killing more than your normal amount during a 1:1 even odds match.

Thus, if every one of your teammates pulls their own weight and contributes the same amount there's NO reason whatsoever to nerf rewards or buff ammo. If you used to get 2-3 kills in 8vs8, then you can expect to get 2-3 kills in 12vs12.

If you;re concerned about it, load up an extra ton or bring a laser or two.

[ricardox]

AntiCitizenJuan, on 26 August 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

The fact that you have to fight 4 more mechs is offset by the fact that you have 4 more mechs on your team. The need for more ammunition is negated by the increased firepower on your side.

That people thought like this is exactly why I made this particular topic. Go through the example I gave in my OP.

Bhael Fire, on 26 August 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

You don't need more ammo for the same reason why we don't need a nerf to c-bill rewards; it's broken logic to assume that because there's more targets that you'll be expected or even capable of killing more than your normal amount during a 1:1 even odds match.

Thus, if every one of your teammates pulls their own weight and contributes the same amount there's NO reason whatsoever to nerf rewards or buff ammo. If you used to get 2-3 kills in 8vs8, then you can expect to get 2-3 kills in 12vs12.

If you;re concerned about it, load up an extra ton or bring a laser or two.

It's not about performance, it's about weapon type balance.

[Kibble]

Ammo is fine. Control your fire. If you want more ammo remove something like a heat sink. If you also control your heat then there shouldnt be an issue.

If you remain cool and calm in a fight then your mech will stay cool. Don't panic and alpha all the time. Hotest mech I have is 1.16 and it's wonderful.

[DoktorVivi]

I just want to be able to take 1/2 ton of ammo. So many times I have 1/2 ton to do something with. I'd even be willing to round down on the amount that 1/2 ton represents.

[Bhael Fire]

ricardox, on 26 August 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

It's not about performance, it's about weapon type balance.

I'll not argue strongly with you about this issue, because I'm not going to say no to more ammo; I'm just saying I haven't noticed it being an issue at all because of the extra teammates to help fight the extra enemies....which is exactly why the c-bill nerf is such a noticeable issue...because it makes the same misguided assumptions.

[Profiteer]

This is a matter of perspective.

For the average (or less) player then ammo load-outs are probably fine. These players only get the odd kill per game and often die before they ever use up their ammo supply.

However, for the players with a high ELO that are routinely put in sides with inferior players to 'balance' teams, ammo is too low. ELO expects these players to do the bulk of the work, survive most games, score multiple kills and do 700+ damage.

As long as this system is in place I think it's only fair to increase ammo load-outs to cover the increased workload for high ELO players.

Bhael Fire, on 26 August 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

If you;re concerned about it, load up an extra ton or bring a laser or two.

Yeah because trying to finish off the remaining 4 enemy mechs with a couple of lasers is going to work out real well

Edited by Profiteer, 26 August 2013 - 01:55 PM.

[Lyoto Machida]

I haven't had any issue with running out of ammo in 12 mans and I carry the same amount as in 8s. Your results may vary.

[Bhael Fire]

Profiteer, on 26 August 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

Yeah because trying to finish off the remaining 4 enemy mechs with a couple of lasers is going to work out real well

You make sound like you're taking on all 12 enemy mechs by yourself and only have enough ammo for 8 kills. If that's the case, there's a much more serious issue going on than ammo loadouts.

Bandaid fixes like the one suggested in the OP are the root of the problem in this game; in other words, you don't bump up ammo just because Elo isn't working properly.

[Profiteer]

Bhael Fire, on 26 August 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

You make sound like you're taking on all 12 enemy mechs by yourself and only have enough ammo for 8 kills.

Without wanting to sound too arrogant, that's not far from the truth when pugging (which I very rarely do anymore since 12 v 12). Literally, if I don't manage at least 4, my team is almost certain to lose. They don't call it "ELO HELL' for nothing

Edited by Profiteer, 26 August 2013 - 02:42 PM.

[BlueVisionWarrior Online]

Bhael Fire, on 26 August 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

You don't need more ammo for the same reason why we don't need a nerf to c-bill rewards; it's broken logic to assume that because there's more targets that you'll be expected or even capable of killing more than your normal amount during a 1:1 even odds match.
<snip>

Oh man, so much this. They need to pick a direction and go with it, not this half and half bee-ess. If 8->12 justifies more ammo, then it justifies less rewards. If 8->12 doesn't need more ammo, then we don't need nerfed rewards. They go hand in hand as it's pretty much the same concept.

[East Indy]

In 12-versus-12, the only times I've felt short on ammunition have been while running a LRM-focused 'Mech — and that's just the feast-famine nature of that weapon system, for better or worse.

[DeadlyNerd]

Ammo amounts are fine, people just need to learn that extra tonnage should now go into ammo and not bigger weapons.

[Khobai]

Ballistic weapons are supposed to run out of ammo.

The problem is ballistic weapons are supposed to be better than energy weapons because theyre limited by ammo.

And currently the ERPPC is better than all of them.

[Snow Drift]

I think one thing that gets a bit overlooked is the fact that they doubled the armor, but not the damage. So the game was balanced in the table top version to give a reasonable amount of total damage per ton for an average game, so you wouldn't need like 50 tons of ammo for one match. They doubled the armor, so now you'd need twice as much ammo to have the same killing power per match. But they didn't double the ammo. They increased it some, but only by around 30% if I'm not mistaken. I never needed more than 3 tons of Gauss ammo per rifle in TT. Ever. 3 tons is the minimum for MWO, in my book. I run out at times.

Not a big deal for me. I adjust fire and add more ammo or aim better, but I think that's why people run out of ammo faster than they should with stock mechs.

Edited by Snow Drift, 26 August 2013 - 04:49 PM.

[ricardox]

Bhael Fire, on 26 August 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

You make sound like you're taking on all 12 enemy mechs by yourself and only have enough ammo for 8 kills. If that's the case, there's a much more serious issue going on than ammo loadouts.

Bandaid fixes like the one suggested in the OP are the root of the problem in this game; in other words, you don't bump up ammo just because Elo isn't working properly.

Err... Note that I make ZERO, again ZERO mention of ELO in the OP post. I assume all other factors to be complete equalities. I cannot emphasize enough that this is about weapon type balance, nothing more.

TBH, I thought it would be obvious math to everyone. AGAIN THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MATCHMAKER OR ELO.

BlueVisionWarrior Online, on 26 August 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

Oh man, so much this. They need to pick a direction and go with it, not this half and half bee-ess. If 8->12 justifies more ammo, then it justifies less rewards. If 8->12 doesn't need more ammo, then we don't need nerfed rewards. They go hand in hand as it's pretty much the same concept.

I think justification given for the reduction of cbill rewards is not the actual one. They should have just come right out and said "we think the rate of player progress (in terms of cbills) is too fast.". Would not have liked it, but would have respected the communication. BTW, I'm burning my premium time through this so I should have as much grievance as any.

Really though, I hoping other agendas dont work into this ammunition issue other than weapon type balance.

[Joseph Mallan]

In 178 matches in my D-C I have added 1 ton of SRM ammo. I did it last week cause I ran out of ammo twice in one week. Cost me one sink.

[Diablobo]

I only know of one player who would need more ammo because of the extra mechs to fight. It's not the OP, and it's not me. Unless you are consistently scoring over 1000 points with your normal load, you have plenty of ammo. Either learn to choose your shots better, or carry more ammo so you can spray blips at over 1000 meters like you might be doing.

[Zphyr]

No ammo increase and still do fine. As Viktor said, you may have more targets to shoot at but your own team also increased in the exact same size. In practice, you don't really use up more ammo unless you get to shoot from start to finish and be the last survivor.

"since everyone uses Gauss R anyway"? Don't assume that everyone use Gauss. Out of 15 mechs, only one of mine has it. Know plenty of people without a single one.