64 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 September 2013 - 07:22 AM, said:

Sorry Fup, but its been that way for lasers for 30+ years. Everyone that wants small lasers to be more are on an island.

And for the Missile example, an SRM6 averages 3 Missiles (6 damage) while an LRM 10 averages...6 Missiles (same damage) on TT.

We will just have to disagree.

Aren't you bored of things being the same for 30+ years? In all seriousness, I've always thought the point of Mechwarrior was to put a new spin on the franchise. Mechwarrior continuing the same old traditions doesn't serve much of a purpose, because there's already TT Battletech to offer that gameplay.

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 23 September 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

Aren't you bored of things being the same for 30+ years? In all seriousness, I've always thought the point of Mechwarrior was to put a new spin on the franchise. Mechwarrior continuing the same old traditions doesn't serve much of a purpose, because there's already TT Battletech to offer that gameplay.

I played the same game for the better part of 30 years... Should answer your question The point of MechWarrior was to put a real time spin on the TT game. The duration of what a combat turn should be adjusted so that one shot of my weapons+heat dissipation work properly (5 seconds or probably less). Other than that It should feel like TT cause that is the Universe it is trying to emulate.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 23 September 2013 - 07:43 AM.

[FupDup]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 September 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

I played the same game for the better part of 30 years... Should answer your question The point of MechWarrior was to put a real time spin on the TT game. The duration of what a combat turn should be adjusted so that one shot of my weapons+heat dissipation work properly (5 seconds or probably less). Other than that It should feel like TT cause that is the Universe it is trying to emulate.

In terms of the "feel" of the universe, the things that usually come to my mind when thinking of Battletech include things like multiple hit locations, highly modular customization/construction, characters/history/story/fluff, and mechs feeling like walking talks instead of "giant infantry" like Gundams or other Anime.

Things like Small Lasers being bad and Commandos being unfairly taxed of critical slots for their base 10 heatsinks...those don't make Battletech what it is and don't contribute to the "feeling" of the universe. That's just nitpicking.

Edited by FupDup, 23 September 2013 - 07:57 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 23 September 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

In terms of the "feel" of the universe, the things that usually come to my mind when thinking of Battletech include things like multiple hit locations, highly modular customization/construction, characters/history/story/fluff, and mechs feeling like walking talks instead of "giant infantry" like Gundams or other Anime.

Things like Small Lasers being bad and Commandos being unfairly taxed of critical slots for their base 10 heatsinks...those don't make Battletech what it is and don't contribute to the "feeling" of the universe. That's just nitpicking.

Again I will disagree. I have always played this game as a giant Infantryman... maybe cause I was a grunt when I was introduced. Small lasers were always bad (except when boated!) if you disagree, try using a Charger. If you are not a fan of the limits on Light Mech's crit spaces you would have hated my table. I used the crit limitations found in MaxTech. Commandos had even less space for sinks!

[FupDup]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 September 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

Again I will disagree. I have always played this game as a giant Infantryman... maybe cause I was a grunt when I was introduced. Small lasers were always bad (except when boated!) if you disagree, try using a Charger.

Infantry was probably a bad word to use due to the connotation it has with vets...but you get the idea. They looked and moved like supersized humans. Part of what I like most about MW/BT is that mechs here are a lot clunkier-built and don't have the flexibility of a ballerina.


^^It's a giant human.


^^It's a tank on legs and a very hot, sexy piece of mech.


Also, I'm not denying that SL were bad in TT. All I'm saying is that I'd prefer them to not continue being bad in this iteration of MW.

Joseph Mallan, on 23 September 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

If you are not a fan of the limits on Light Mech's crit spaces you would have hated my table. I used the crit limitations found in MaxTech. Commandos had even less space for sinks!

Now that's just cruel.

Edited by FupDup, 23 September 2013 - 08:15 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 23 September 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

Infantry was probably a bad word to use due to the connotation it has with vets...but you get the idea. They looked and moved like supersized humans. Part of what I like most about MW/BT is that mechs here are a lot clunkier-built and don't have the flexibility of a ballerina.


^^It's a giant human.


^^It's a tank on legs and a very hot, sexy piece of mech.


Also, I'm not denying that SL were bad in TT. All I'm saying is that I'd prefer them to not continue being bad in this iteration of MW.



Now that's just cruel.

Don't look at them as being bad, but look at them as what they are... small weapons in a BFG game.

It is a good way to limit the size of a weapon you could put on smaller frames.

Fixed that image problem in your comparison.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 23 September 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[FupDup]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 September 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

Don't look at them as being bad, but look at them as what they are... small weapons in a BFG game.

Stuff like LRM5, AP Gauss, and ML are small weapons in a BFG game but they have their own respective uses.

Joseph Mallan, on 23 September 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

It is a good way to limit the size of a weapon you could put on smaller frames.

Tonnage doesn't provide that limit by itself? Seems like you just hate lights.

Joseph Mallan, on 23 September 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

Fixed that image problem in our comparison.

I've never been much of a fan of the generic humanoid designs.

Time for more art by Alex Iglesias:

Edited by FupDup, 23 September 2013 - 08:28 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 23 September 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

Time for more art by Alex Iglesias:

What is that Gorgeous beast!

So a 35 ton vehicle have the same amount of space for weapons as a 100 ton vehicle? I would think not.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 23 September 2013 - 08:42 AM.

[Deathlike]

Let me just put it this way... SL and SPL are generally non-threats to me vs ML and MPL for that matter. The only mechs that make them remotely usable are fast/light mechs that can bridge the gap to firing range.

The only alternative use for SL and SPL is for filler weaponry for 2 PPC/ERPPC setups where you need low tonnage backup weapons to be fielded (PPCs especially, because they dish 0 damage under 90m).

So, technically the weapons themselves are in a niche of a niche... which doesn't really give them much overall utility. There's very little reason to field them outside of those two situations.

[DocBach]

Deathlike, on 23 September 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:

So, technically the weapons themselves are in a niche of a niche... which doesn't really give them much overall utility. There's very little reason to field them outside of those two situations.

is this necessarily a problem? Why should anything else want to carry a small weapon as a mainstay?

[Alistair Winter]

FupDup, on 23 September 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

In terms of the "feel" of the universe, the things that usually come to my mind when thinking of Battletech include things like multiple hit locations, highly modular customization/construction, characters/history/story/fluff, and mechs feeling like walking talks instead of "giant infantry" like Gundams or other Anime.

I definitely agree with that. As someone with military training as a tank gunner, I definitely feel that Mechwarrior - and particularly MWO - is extremely similar to tank warfare. And making the game more similar to tank warfare, rather than more similar to, say, Rainbow 6, would only be a huge improvement. Oh, what I would do to this game if I had enough money to buy PGI...

Deathlike, on 23 September 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:

Let me just put it this way... SL and SPL are generally non-threats to me vs ML and MPL for that matter. The only mechs that make them remotely usable are fast/light mechs that can bridge the gap to firing range.
The only alternative use for SL and SPL is for filler weaponry for 2 PPC/ERPPC setups where you need low tonnage backup weapons to be fielded (PPCs especially, because they dish 0 damage under 90m).
So, technically the weapons themselves are in a niche of a niche... which doesn't really give them much overall utility. There's very little reason to field them outside of those two situations.

I agree, and I think a question that too many people are ignoring is: "What negative consequences would we see after doubling the range of small lasers?"

I think 80% of heavy and assault mechs would still go with medium lasers, because they have a limited amount of hardpoints. A Victor with only 2 energy hardpoints isn't going to waste space on 2 small lasers, for example. As far as I can tell, this suggestion would only add depth to the gameplay, it wouldn't replace any current standard builds with a new standard build, it would lead to many new and interesting builds and more variety.

I'm really not seeing the downside here. Maybe triple range would be too much, but... meh. The only ones who would take advantage would be light and medium mechs, who are already at a considerable disadvantage when matched with heavy and assault mechs.

[MustrumRidcully]

DocBach, on 23 September 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

is this necessarily a problem? Why should anything else want to carry a small weapon as a mainstay?

Well, there are two components to it:
Can it not be used as a mainstay because people just can't fit enough of the weapons due to hard point limitations?
That might be okay, at least if it still serves a purpose when you use it as part of an "ensemble" of weapons.

Can it not be used as a mainstay because even with all energy hard points in the world, you wouldn't be competitive?
Then it's not okay, just plain overpowered.

I think the SLs might be leaning further to the first case, so the question is - do they work in an ensemble? I have my doubts. If you equip 2 MLs and 2 SLs, is that as good or effective to use as a build with 3 MLs?

[Deathlike]

DocBach, on 23 September 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

is this necessarily a problem? Why should anything else want to carry a small weapon as a mainstay?

Should I even reference how people didn't want the MG buffed AT ALL? It didn't even have a role or a niche. It needs to be an option when you have the slots, but meds are automatically a better choice than a small laser under most circumstances. The primary reason why I don't even bother with small lasers is because there's WAY too many better options.

Here's a list of weapons that the SL are competing against in its range bracket:
Flamers (worth a chuckle)
SPL (same boat as SL)
Medium Lasers (which does a better job overall for its range and tonnage)
MPL (max range is equal to this weapon's optimal range)
MG (not entirely comparable tonnagewise because of the ammo requirements and its required 100% uptime to maximize DPS)
AC20 (unfair, but under the most skilled hands, you are going to lose)
SRM (erratic under HSR/current netcode)
SSRM (mindlessly effective)

The SL arguably has less utility than the MG (which is a far cry from months of no buffs for the MG) when you can fit a med laser. There's just a host of other weapons that are more useful than the SL (despite the requirements), and that's a sad commentary of the state of small lasers.

Alistair Winter, on 23 September 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

I agree, and I think a question that too many people are ignoring is: "What negative consequences would we see after doubling the range of small lasers?"

I think 80% of heavy and assault mechs would still go with medium lasers, because they have a limited amount of hardpoints. A Victor with only 2 energy hardpoints isn't going to waste space on 2 small lasers, for example. As far as I can tell, this suggestion would only add depth to the gameplay, it wouldn't replace any current standard builds with a new standard build, it would lead to many new and interesting builds and more variety.

I'm really not seeing the downside here. Maybe triple range would be too much, but... meh. The only ones who would take advantage would be light and medium mechs, who are already at a considerable disadvantage when matched with heavy and assault mechs.

I'm not asking for doubling the range... 50% more range is all that it really needs (at a minimum). This is pretty reasonable in the grand scheme of things.

Edited by Deathlike, 23 September 2013 - 11:04 AM.

[DocBach]

MustrumRidcully, on 23 September 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

I think the SLs might be leaning further to the first case, so the question is - do they work in an ensemble? I have my doubts. If you equip 2 MLs and 2 SLs, is that as good or effective to use as a build with 3 MLs?

The dual small lasers might have less range, but they do more damage for the same heat, and its duration is shorter so it does more concentrated damage. And they recharge quicker than a single medium laser.

If you get in close and you want to need to stay on target for less time, 2 small lasers is a good alternative to a medium if you've got the slots for them. ie you are a small light 'Mech that doesn't have much tonnage for anything else. Small lasers have a place.

Edited by DocBach, 23 September 2013 - 11:09 AM.

[Livewyr]

Small laser and small pulse lasers are tertiary defense weapons... when you having *nothing else* or when your heat is too high to shoot a main weapon...

They're not main weapons (except perhaps for lights who cannot reasonably mount real main weapons)

[Alistair Winter]

Livewyr, on 23 September 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

Small laser and small pulse lasers are tertiary defense weapons... when you having *nothing else* or when your heat is too high to shoot a main weapon...
They're not main weapons (except perhaps for lights who cannot reasonably mount real main weapons)

Because...?

Anyway, right now they're not even tertiary weapons, so the point is rather moot. Mechs have so few energy hardpoints that no one has room for backup weapons, and even if they did, the tonnage would be better spent elsewhere (e.g. moar heatsinks!)

[Deathlike]

I have personally found no utility in using small lasers or small pulse lasers even as the backup weapons as they are described to be.

My options for energy heavy mechs:
Add another med laser
Add another DHS
Add another ton of ammo (assuming an energy/ballistic combo)
Add another JJ (assuming it is not a Highlander or heavier)
Upgrade engine
Find .5 tons from armor to do any of the above

All of these options exclude the small laser... because it's not worth the tonnage to invest in 1 or 2 small lasers instead of adding in 1 DHS or 1 med laser. It's just that simple to me.

[Cybertek]

Sure just what we want a bunch of Jenners or Spider running around with extended ranged SL or SPL. People...If you haven't got the idea that a Light is suppose to use the terrain to hide and avoid fire, or do quick short range strikes than maybe you should play something else. I personally take all Small Lasers off my mechs. The damage isn't worth putting one in a larger mech. Especially when they can carry mediums and so much more.

Alistair Winter, on 22 September 2013 - 02:34 PM, said:

At best, perhaps it would finally make a few medium mechs as dangerous as heavy and assault mechs.

Medium mechs are not suppose to be as dangerous as heavy or assault mechs.

I only typically use the Cataput for my LRM Boat, I only put on 2 Med Lasers, needed room for a larger engine. I only try to use my Lasers in two cases 1. Ran out of the 1620 missiles. 2. I am being pestered by a Jenner and can't get a way. LRM boats live by their team and die by their team. If I get on a team that can press the line forward I usually do good. If the enemy flanks us or my team runs the other direction I die. If someone can get close to you, you are all ready dead.

[DocBach]

Alistair Winter, on 23 September 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

Because...?

Anyway, right now they're not even tertiary weapons, so the point is rather moot. Mechs have so few energy hardpoints that no one has room for backup weapons, and even if they did, the tonnage would be better spent elsewhere (e.g. moar heatsinks!)

two small lasers have more utility for small hit and run strikers that get in close - they do more damage and deal their damage quicker so you have to hold them on target shorter so you can peel off an evade.

[Alistair Winter]

DocBach, on 23 September 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

two small lasers have more utility for small hit and run strikers that get in close - they do more damage and deal their damage quicker so you have to hold them on target shorter so you can peel off an evade.

A rational explanation that conventiently ignores a lot of arguments that have already been made. I shan't repeat them.