57 replies to this topic

[Lightfoot]

By pure Battletech balance, MWO's Ballistics have always been about 2x OP. Just because they pretty much skate past all the heat nerfs that limit the firing of Energy and Missiles and thereby enjoy a recharge rate that is 2x what Battletech says they should get.

It's really bad though now. I was using one ERPPC with some ACs and 11 DHS and it overheated the mech on the fourth shot. I have to tell you that is over-nerfing and a side-stepping of normal MechWarrior gameplay.






.

Edited by Lightfoot, 18 September 2013 - 01:21 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Veranova, on 18 September 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

The first two points I agree were moot and irelevent.
However I'm arguing that this build isn't a viable one due to its limited ammo, so it's not a great proof of concept that you can fit a Standard in there.

I would note, that because of the lack of ammo endurance, ans speed to engage/disengage, I have generally never found standard engine Jagermechs notably more durable than one with an XL. Yes, I do lose my XL, and thus die, with them, but in general not til after I have laid 3 enemy mechs to rest. Mind you, with less overall insta-alpha from the poptarts, it might be even more durable now. (Half my deaths came from getting mt CT disintegrated in one volley in the previous meta, anyhow).

If one is going to design the mech as an ambush/flanker, it needs the speed to take advantage of that, and TBH, "durability" is secondary to that.

[Royalewithcheese]

Lightfoot, on 18 September 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

By pure Battletech balance, MWO's Ballistics have always been about 2x OP. Just because they pretty much skate past all the heat nerfs that limit the firing of Energy and Missiles and thereby enjoy a recharge rate that is 2x what Battletech says they should get.

OTOH I can't turn someone's cockpit into pink mist if I land a lucky shot with my AC/20.

[Wolfways]

Please stop saying ballistics are balanced due to ammo explosions. In BT there were "through armour crits" that could explode your ammo. This mechanic has been removed in MWO.
If you get an ammo explosion in MWO you were probably going to lose that section at any moment anyway, and if the explosion seriously affects your mech then you put the ammo in a dangerous place, which is your fault.

Also, don't say "ballistics are heavier than lasers". If you believe that try running lasers without cramming as many DHS as possible into your mech.

Ballistics do massive damage (up to 20x for the AC2) than they did in BT while lasers do on average 3x as much damage as in TT, and for some reason PGI gave ballistics triple range, unlike lasers which got double range.
I once asked why ballistics do so much damage and PGI's response was "Because they are more expensive to run due to R&R", which is gone and probably never coming back.

Ballistics need a nerf.

[Primez]

I really don't see ballstics owning the meta right now. Especially since they nerfed UAC5/s to the ground. Like other people brought out in this thread and there are many trade offs to using ballstic.

1. Ammo - You factor in the extra amount of tons you have to put on your mech for ammo which then is giving you limited choices. There is also the chance of running out of ammo, making you useless. Because of ammo it really limits the how strong ballstics can be.

2. Gauss easy to explode

3. AC/40 builds generates massive heat lucky to get 4 to 6 shots before overheating. If the enemies knows what your running your dead basically. Very high risk, high reward.

4.There still is travel time for ballstics so they are harder to aim.

If your having trouble agaisnt someone in a AC/40 build it's more then likely he is running in a group and has people there to cover and soften people for him. AC/40 is extremely squishy, I would more likely blame matchmaking and throwing in pugs then this be OP. The coordinated team will win more.

Instead of nerfing everything into the ground, PGI should be taking a look at weapons that are under used and trying to buff them to where they have a use. I'm looking at you large pulse lasers!!! Not to mention always trying to improve matchmaking to make it easier for pugs that have to either roll with a group or fight agaisnt a group.

Edited by Primez, 19 September 2013 - 09:29 AM.

[Wolfways]

Primez, on 18 September 2013 - 09:33 PM, said:

1. Ammo - You factor in the extra amount of tons you have to put on your mech for ammo which then is giving you limited choices. There is also the chance of running out of ammo, making you useless. Because of ammo it really limits the how strong ballstics can be.

Ammo weighs 1ton and uses 1 crit slot.
Lasers need DHS which weigh 1ton and use 3 crit slots. Who is more limited?
And running out of ammo has nothing to do with the strength of the weapon, but the carelesness of the player who tries to cram too much into a mech.

Quote

3. AC/40 builds generates massive heat lucky to get 4 to 6 shots before overheating. If the enemies knows what your running your dead basically. Very high risk, high reward.

Energy weapons generate a lot more heat than ballistics.

Quote

4.There still is travel time for ballastics so they are harder to aim.

That's a matter of opinion. I personally don't find leading a target any more difficult than keeping a laser on the target.

[Royalewithcheese]

Wolfways, on 18 September 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Ammo weighs 1ton and uses 1 crit slot.
Lasers need DHS which weigh 1ton and use 3 crit slots. Who is more limited?

Engines don't come with 14 tons of AC/20 ammo, but they do come with 10 2.0 DHS (effective ~14 tons of DHS).

Edited by Royalewithcheese, 18 September 2013 - 10:04 PM.

[Wolfways]

Royalewithcheese, on 18 September 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

Engines don't come with 14 tons of AC/20 ammo, but they do come with 10 2.0 DHS (effective ~14 tons of DHS).

And ballistics get the same benefit from it as lasers do.

[Solis Obscuri]

Veranova, on 18 September 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:

Does anyone else feel that Ballistics are kinda the new cheese build?

I'm not saying they're massively OP.
But AC40 Jaegers are a force you don't want to contend with, within 400 metres.
UAC5's were the new meta for a while there, and now that's going to shift to AC2's which are arguably worse to have as a meta, because of their longer range and faster fire rate.
Energy weapons on the other hand are as usable as ever, but don't have the advantage of scaring the hell out of anyone getting hit by them.

This I feel is the major advantage Ballistics get. The fact they cause enemy mechs to shake, and often obscure their vision too. It breaks moral and makes aiming difficult.
Obviously a great tactical advantage, however these weapons can sustain a higher DPS than lasers on top of this, and ammo limitations don't seem too much of an issue as half your team is dead by the time ballistic builds run out and switch to secondaries..

What does everyone think?

• AC/2s have bunged-up heat issues still:

• Missile cause more rock than autocannons on average, making chain-fired Streaks and LRMs a bit better in that regard
  
• SRMs are once again very effective in-close, giving a reasonable alternative and counter to dual-AC/20s at a lower weight penalty, and with lesser heat penalties when group-fired
  
• The only real asset the ballistics have is the ability to fire at a sustained rate without overheating, and an above-average capacity (depending on caliber) to focus damage in one spot.

On a per-weapon basis I'd say that ballistics outclass energy weapon, and perhaps some missile systems, but they do so at a very stiff weight penalty. I don't think ballistics are really OP at the moment.

[Royalewithcheese]

Wolfways, on 18 September 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

And ballistics get the same benefit from it as lasers do.

Well, yes and no. The point is that you can run lasers off engine DHS, and you can't run ammo weapons off engine DHS. One of the advantages of energy weapons is that they have a very low barrier to entry until you start boating them, in which case they're still very solid.

[Bishop Steiner]

Wolfways, on 18 September 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

And ballistics get the same benefit from it as lasers do.

except lasers don't weigh more than twice as much for damage output, and require that you add MORE tonnage to them for ammo.

[Wolfways]

Royalewithcheese, on 18 September 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

Well, yes and no. The point is that you can run lasers off engine DHS, and you can't run ammo weapons off engine DHS. One of the advantages of energy weapons is that they have a very low barrier to entry until you start boating them, in which case they're still very solid.

Boating lasers? How do you boat something that melts your mech if you fire just a few?
I'd rather take four ballistics and enough ammo to last a match than four lasers and cram in enough DHS to barely make them worth using.

[GRiPSViGiL]

I prefer Energy weps myself. I just do not like carrying ammo. I make mine viable through tactics and skill though.

[Wolfways]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 September 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

except lasers don't weigh more than twice as much for damage output, and require that you add MORE tonnage to them for ammo.

Ballistics do a hell of a lot more damage, low heat, and have a huge range.
It doesn't matter if you need ammo or DHS when in both cases you fill your mechs weight/rcrit space.

GRiPSViGiL, on 18 September 2013 - 11:20 PM, said:

I prefer Energy weps myself. I just do not like carrying ammo. I make mine viable through tactics and skill though.

Can you explain why you don't like carrying ammo please?

[GRiPSViGiL]

Wolfways, on 18 September 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

Can you explain why you don't like carrying ammo please?

It usually limits the engine size if your gonna cut weight to carry ammo. Most if not all of my builds are constructed on mobility so stacking 5+ tons of ammo usually doesn't play.

I have found love in the AC2 though I must say. I can't believe how effective my Firebrand is with 2 AC2's and 4 ML.

Edited by GRiPSViGiL, 19 September 2013 - 01:22 AM.

[Blue Hymn]

So, reading this thread so far, I've come to a few conclusions about the general feel for ballistics within the community.

• Ballistics have the highest DPS ability out of all the other weapons, making them a great asset in terms of firepower for brawling, sniping, or up close and personal combat.
  
• Ballistics (with ammo included) weigh a lot, but doesn't need to worry much about heat compared to lasers.
  
• Map selections now usually favor hot areas for some godforsaken reason, which ballistics usually dominate compared to energy weapons or missiles.
  
• Ballistics only encounter trouble in the mid-match of the game, when ammo starts to run low. However, with 12v12, people are unlikely to run out of ammo with their teammates assisting each other.
  
• Concentrated fire with ballistics can bring down an enemy mech retardedly fast. Example: Two phracts, each with dual UAC5, firing at an atlas can shred most of its armor off within a few seconds.

Ergo, the use of weapons in the community could probably be viewed like this in terms of choice:


Ballistics > Energy > Missiles

With energy weapons being backup in most cases, or SRMS, depending on the build.

Because Ballistics can provide such a high DPS without much limitation - other than weight and ammo, depending on the weapon - more people field it because it stacks with other allied ballistics, and is ridiculously devastating in concentrated fire. I recall being shredded to pieces by two mechs by ac5s and another mech with uac5s in just a few seconds of turning the corner. I was in an Awesome with full armor during that match, and I got cored halfway while the map did little to help with my heat dissipation.

Sad times.

Edited by Blue Hymn, 19 September 2013 - 01:15 AM.

[Escef]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 September 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

I think they need to swap damage scale between SRM (2.0) and the SSRM (2.5) as SRMs do not get "auto-hit". This will become more obvious with Clan SSRM racks.

I'm not certain on this one, as SSRMs go for the midsections of hit locations, you can't aim them. I've seen plenty of times, especially up close, where the spread on normal SRMs is close enough to at least nail only torso locations. Not to mention, if there's any kind of ECM about Beagle is almost a requirement. 3 SSRM2 and a Beagle is 6 tons, not counting ammo, enough 12 tubes of normal SRMs, 15 damage max vs 24. Even if one forgoes the Beagle, it only squeezes in another 5 damage, and that's provided you have the hardpoints for a 4th rack.

I'd do testing with larger racks before reaching any kind of conclusion, but my initial evaluation is that it shouldn't be an issue.

[Mike Oakenwall - the khadoran]

Well i think Large pulse lasers need a buff, really want to use them but its just not a good investment.

I tink AC is in a good spot right now, all types have a role.

Edited by deanon, 19 September 2013 - 02:12 AM.

[Wolfways]

GRiPSViGiL, on 18 September 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:

It usually limits the engine size if your gonna cut weight to carry ammo. Most if not all of my builds are constructed on mobility so stacking 5+ tons of ammo usually doesn't play.

I have found love in the AC2 though I must say. I can't believe how effective my Firebrand is with 2 AC2's and 4 ML.

I see, but can't the same argument be said for any equipment you put in your mech?
I usually play heavy mechs though and speed is a minor consideration for me. I equip what i want and then fit an engine. Then i consider whether the mech is too slow and i need to exchange/remove something.

[Primez]

Oh I also forgot that with ammo there is always the chance of explosions. Wolfways, you can boat lasers it's usually effective on assault mechs that have the slots and tonnage for DHS and energy weapons. Blue Hymm, if your in an awesome and face check the corner into 3 heavy mechs I would expect to be melted quickly aswell regardless of what loadouts they had.

I think ballstics are relatively balanced right now maybe some minor minor buffs such as the ghost heat on ac2s. Ballstics are in a good spot right now because they can be used with any wieght class of mech and be used effectively boating wise or non boating.

I find though that energy weapons do seem to be lacking and need a buff. My personally view is instead of trying to nerf everything to the ground. Look at what needs to be buffed. Granted sometimes nerfing is required, in this case I don't believe so.