Jump to content

Ballistics - How Pgi Went Wrong Balancing Direct Fire Weapons


408 replies to this topic

#121 BrockSamsonFW

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 75 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 10:11 PM

View PostRoland, on 31 October 2013 - 08:16 PM, said:

But it's SIXTEEN tons of weapons. Not even including ammo.
It's 260% of the tonnage. Of course it's a more capable loadout.

How could it possibly be balanced if it weren't more capable?

I'm making fun of the comparison, because you seem to think that there is something wrong with 16 tons of weapons being more powerful than 6 tons of weapons.


If doing 90 damage before shutting down and getting killed is OK than I guess 1 ton of ammo is enough for two AC5 as well. That's 15 volleys and 150 damage before you run out of ammo and die! Sure it takes up 283% of the weight, but I guess that's the price you pay for more damage, more range, pinpoint targeting, camera shake, and no beams of light that lead every enemy back to your position.

Get real man. 90 points of damage with 6 ML is going to kill exactly nobody. You're never going to get all that damage on a single component unless the ***** is standing there for 10 seconds and letting you do it. Against a real opponent you're going to have that damage spread out across at least 2 and more likely 3 or 4 components and if it's a light mech you're not even going to hit for the entire duration to begin with. The only person dying from 90 damage and an overheat is the person firing it.

If we're going to make a comparison let's make it an even one. here is a Hunchback 4P with 5 ML and 21 DHS. It can burst 6.25DPS for more than 40 seconds and caps at 4.44 DPS. It has an alpha of 25 and can do it every 4 seconds. The 1 second beam duration requires that you aim at a single point on a moving and twisting target if you want to do all your damage to a single location. As it turns out the weapons and heatsinks require 16 tons, the same as 2 AC5 without ammo. It also takes 38 critical slots. http://mwo.smurfy-ne...85d31b6086f642a

Now consider a dual AC5 setup. You will do an even 6.67 DPS until you run out of ammo. Your alpha is only 10 points but you do it every 1.5 seconds. If you are at long range you need to lead the target but you only need to have your aim for an instant and you will do full damage to a single component. You also have more than twice the optimal range and over 3 times the maximum range. The target will get camera shake and smoke effects and there is no obvious tracer to lead other enemies back to your position. The weapons take 16 tons and if you take 6 tons of ammo you'll have 180 rounds (90 vollets of 2) which should last for most matches. That brings the total weight up to 22 tons. We're a full 6 tons heavier than the lasers. However, you only need 14 critical slots for the entire setup. There is no need for any external heatsinks so you have 24 critical slots to work with. On the 50 ton Hunchback you can take Endosteel to gain 2.5 tons at the loss of 14 critical slots. Now we're only 3.5 tons heavier and still have 10 critical slots to work with.

So what do you end up with? The ballistic mech is only 2.5 tons heavier yet it's far more effective. The range alone means that the laser mech can be killed before it's even able to cause any damage at all. If they do get close enough to damage they need to hold their beams on you for an entire second to do their full damage. If you are moving and twisting it will be literally impossible for them to hit a single component and their damage will be spread across 2-4 different areas of your mech. Even if you are standing still the camera shake and hit effects will make it difficult or impossible to isolate your components at any meaningful range.

If they somehow got within short range than the laser mech is probably critical in the CT or ST already. The ballistic mech most likely has a moderate but not severe amount of damage to their entire upper torso and one or both arms. With pinpoint fire it will only take 2-4 volleys at most to finish off the laser mech. The laser mech will need at least twice as much time to bring a component down from half health and even if they could manage that given all the movement, twisting, and camera shake, they will be dead long before there is enough time to do it.

It's simply no contest. This is all on 50 ton mechs that favor energy weapons as well. As you move up in mech tonnage the balance shifts overwhelmingly in favor of ballistics. The relative weight of the ballistic weapons becomes easier to manage and as long as the hardpoints are available you can simply add more weapons and you will increase the effectiveness of your loadout by an equal amount. At the same time, a heavier mech provides no exrta critical slots for more heatsinks so the laser user is essentially capped at the same heat dissipation regardless of which mech they choose. The only thing you can do to increase your damage is to take larger lasers for a bigger alpha strike but then the ghost heat system punishes you for doing that and it cripples your DPS to a fraction of what it should be. You end up stuck at a plateau of both alpha and DPS and there is nothing you can do about it. That's one of the main reasons why mechs like the Awesome 8Q are completely useless. It's a big slow easy target with the firepower and dps of a mech that has half it's tonnage.

If you don't see the problem with this there is nothing more that I can explain. All I can suggest is that you make an energy-only mech and see how well you do with it.

Edited by BrockSamsonFW, 31 October 2013 - 10:20 PM.


#122 MustrumRidcully

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 10,644 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 12:02 AM

View PostRoland, on 31 October 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

That's exactly my point.

You are ignoring the huge advantages that lasers have currently, by virtue of being hitscan weapons.
You want to remove one of the chief advantages that ballistics currently have, but leave in place their deficiency in terms of accuracy. That doesn't work.

I disagree. It can work. There are always many factors involving weapon balance, if the dual drawback is too much, you can dial up something else.
But that might not be necessary, because ballistics might currently have an advantage over energy weapons that isn't limited to their "single-point" damage aspect. They also have a big benefit in terms of heat management. Laser weapons currently can compete at close distances (medium laser range) or short time frames (good for snipers).

Without trying thnigs out, we will simply not know, unless some genius manages to create mathematical models for this that fit reality. (The heat part of the equation is possible with the data we have as players, but you'd need a lot of statistical data from the servers to figure out stuff about precision/accuracy differences between the different weapons)

Also, one factor to consider is the duration or number of pulses we talk about here. If ballistics typically had salvo durations of 0.25 to 0.5 seconds, then they still had an advantage over lasers here.

#123 Voidcrafter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 718 posts
  • LocationBulgaria

Posted 01 November 2013 - 12:22 AM

That's the reason the PPCs even in their current... completely scrappy... state are still good weapon - they deliver their whole damage to a single torso location.
That's making the ballistic weapons so scary and forces people to "whine" about it.
People I completely disagree with too btw - for a very simple reason:
PLAY WITH IT FOR LONG ENOUGH BEFORE POSTING BULL**** okay?
The same scrap happened with the PPCs - I loved the weapon, I still do but it's just rendered useless for what I'm using it(NOT poptarting.) - the poptarts are still ok with it. Hell - the boats seems to be kinda still ok with it.
I am not. And you know why?
Cause I'm a friggin reasonable player that don't go on insane boating/poptarting {Scrap} just cause the most winning strategy is to make some situational sniper build with tons of armor. Oh right... "situational" is not exactly the right word for HGNs and Victors out there too, but anyways.
Cause I find challenge and fun in building "BALANCED" builds.
Can you call, for example, 3xPPC 3xMed Laser AWS-9M boating? Unbalanced? Scary? If you do have this wish think about the surviability and the intimidating appearance the mech itself has, remind yourself if there's a AWS in the massacre what's your targeting priorities and etc.
Oh... and compare it to those 4+ PPC builds during the PPC hell, because of which the weapon is in it current "adjusted" state.
2xUAC5s 4xMed Lasers CTF-3D - I can hardly count how many games I broke 1000 damage with this build and killed more than 4 people. Now it doesn't work "because UAC5 were overpowered". If you saw a such thing few months back would you consider it that of a danger? But yet again - then came the JM6 AC boats...
Oh and don't even get me started on the SRMS - yea, there were scraping bugged, but if you cut the Splatcats and cross your heart - can't you admit that the medium mechs were quite useful back then just because of the weapon? --> Zobmie Cent, Hunchie 4SP - both of them - tons of games that I had more than 600 damage and tons of kills. Now when you see something like that on the field you laugh, cause they lack the DPS(exactly - Damage Per Second - the lack the burst, the punch to be able to kill something quickly rather than scratch it's paint for ~30 secs before get obliterated) and the punch of the SRMs.
Now I mostly run AC20 4xMed Lasers CTF-3D and still 80+% of the time I'm wrecking havoc.
Is it cause my build is overpowered? No? What about THE SINGLE SCRAPPING ballistic weapon I got? Is it overpowered too? Or the medium lasers?
Ooh now I see the problem actually... you know what's overpowered?
Skill is.
People are boating and poptarting Ballistics now - I see it as an issue - but, for me at least, this has NOTHING to do with the skill.
You know how I know?
I made few days back a poptart. A silly one at that - since I just can't fight my habit of putting some defensive weapons and go on poptarting madness until something comes to brawl me and I start feeling naked - 2 PPCs. That's that.
Since that day, everytime I read something like "OOH poptarting IS SKILL!!!" I'm starting to really wish hit someone in the face.
Same goes for boating - valiable until something hugs you or consider you as serious danger and kee range from you(Boom jagger's case scenario).
So with simple stuff like 2 PPCs TDR9-SE with JJs I had no problem at all doing ~400 damage(in the really bad games) before I even get a single component's armor yellow. I had no problem hitting a moving target that's 700m away from the air - the shake is actually a joke, since it's active while only you ascend.
You know what's the funny thing? This easy mode is making the quite unfair for people who don't wanna go that way.
Oh yea "HIDE BEHIND SOMETHING! FIND COVER! FLANK!" and scrap - yea right... Sadly I got both the brains and the aim to get to a position that puts in danger only my foes - and funny thing - most of the poptarts do you know?
It's a common knowledge that going easy mode doesn't mean you're ***** or lacking brain - ordinary is just having common sense and logical thinking - since this is the shortest way toward victory.
What all this has to do with "your" topic OP?
Well think about it - is it the weapon itself the problem, or is it the options for using it the real issue?
Imagine poptarting without ballistics for example - now I see how people take UAC5s just for that(since taking 2 of them as a main source of damage is 80/20 suicide.) - they double tap it and you got an long range AC20 with a spread across your components armor. Or AC10. Or AC20 instead of those + 2xPPCs + the lack of chance to get a good hit on them while they're in the air.
Boating - 3+ AC2/10/5. Boom Jaggers(2xAC20).
Mediums with JJs using 2xAC5/3xAC2/mix of them(yea shadowhawks I mean you.).
Is it the problem with the weapon itself or with the options pepole have for using it?
Cause what you, and by "you" I mean the starters of that sorta topics, sugesting would eventually hit players like me who don't wanna join this fair.
And, as you clearly see from the way I'm writing this down, it's kinda starting to ******* me off you know?
Or maybe some people are trying to comphensate for their lack of skill and balls and thus going easy mode? Or is it the fact that even though they're VERY skilled they still enjoy the most effective way to crush the others, ending with much more kills/damage/whatever?
I don't really care actually.
But you should..

#124 Galenit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,198 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 01 November 2013 - 04:01 AM

View PostKhobai, on 31 October 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

But nobody runs heat neutral builds because its stupid. Its much smarter to ride the heatcurve because it gives you a tremendous amount of free heat that you can tap into. So your comparison isnt accurate. When doing comparisons like that it makes far more sense to aim for 50% heat neutral, because thats closer to what people actually run.

Also it should be noted that not everyone fires their weapons constantly. Some people hide in cover, pop out, fire, then retreat back into cover and cool down. This is one of the reasons why PPCs are one of the best weapons even though the on-paper comparisons indicate otherwise.


Does a hunchback with mls (seems matching for our ac20/4ml comparsion) really aims for only 50% heat neutral?

If you want to compare ppcs, we should do it with an ac10 and not with the ac20,
but we were talking about ac20 and 4 mls ....

View PostVoidcrafter, on 01 November 2013 - 12:22 AM, said:

Now I mostly run AC20 4xMed Lasers CTF-3D and still 80+% of the time I'm wrecking havoc.

Would it be as good as now and would you still use the ac20 if it has only 270/540 range with a chance of 50% for ammo explosion?

Edited by Galenit, 01 November 2013 - 04:08 AM.


#125 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 01 November 2013 - 04:24 AM

View Poststjobe, on 31 October 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

You are conflating the real world with the imaginary BattleTech Universe again.

If you want to argue that MGs aren't pin-point accurate and shouldn't be, let me point you to the Autocannon fluff which describes them as firing "streams of bullets", and 10-100 round "bursts". That's not pin-point either, and defeats your argument nicely.

There's no two ways about it; either both ACs and MGs are pin-point accurate, or neither.

Since you don't seem to want ACs to have spread, I fully expect you to do the intellectually honest thing and support the removal of the MG cone of fire as well.

Technically I am not. As it is in MW:O an AC fires a single shell that delivers X damage. X being the ACs size 2, 5, 10, 20 each shell does this. In MW:O a Machine Gun bullet does 0.1 Damage per bullet with infinite fire. With a max total damage f 200 points of damage if every bullet hits. All the standard ACs cap at 150 damage except the AC20 which caps at 140 (counts by 20s *SHRUG*)

A MG is pretty much fine as I see it.

My MG damage is proportionally close to my Small Laser damage

MG- 10:53 minutes of fire 92 points of damage (38% accuracy) 8.3 damage per minute
SL- 7:40 Minutes of fire 77 damage (84% accuracy) almost 11 damage per minute
SSRM2- 71 minutes of fire 758 damage (71% accuracy) 9.5 damage per minute.

Heck if I was as accurate with my MGs as I am with missiles and Lasers I'd have around 16 damage per minute! How powerful would a Piranha (20 ton Mech) be with 3 times the MG I used?

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 01 November 2013 - 05:03 AM.


#126 Stelar 7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 315 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:04 AM

View PostBrockSamsonFW, on 31 October 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

If we're going to make a comparison let's make it an even one....

Yes lets do that.

View PostBrockSamsonFW, on 31 October 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

Now consider a dual AC5 setup. You will do an even 6.67 DPS until you run out of ammo. Your alpha is only 10 points but you do it every 1.5 seconds. If you are at long range you need to lead the target but you only need to have your aim for an instant and you will do full damage to a single component. You also have more than twice the optimal range and over 3 times the maximum range....


Wait, I thought this was an even comparison. Why aren't we mentioning the damage spread and exposure of having to line up a shot every 1.5 seconds, can the hunchback get in and out of cover that quick? Why aren't we mentioning the difficulty of hitting the same box on a moving target at range?

View PostBrockSamsonFW, on 31 October 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

So what do you end up with? The ballistic mech is only 2.5 tons heavier yet it's far more effective. The range alone means that the laser mech can be killed before it's even able to cause any damage at all. If they do get close enough to damage they need to hold their beams on you for an entire second to do their full damage. If you are moving and twisting it will be literally impossible for them to hit a single component and their damage will be spread across 2-4 different areas of your mech. Even if you are standing still the camera shake and hit effects will make it difficult or impossible to isolate your components at any meaningful range.


Why is it on your even comparison only the drawbacks of the laser mech get counted? If I can't hold my beams for a whole second, how am I supposed to get another 10pt shot with the ac's on that segment?


View PostBrockSamsonFW, on 31 October 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

It's simply no contest. This is all on 50 ton mechs that favor energy weapons as well. As you move up in mech tonnage the balance shifts overwhelmingly in favor of ballistics. The relative weight of the ballistic weapons becomes easier to manage and as long as the hardpoints are available you can simply add more weapons and you will increase the effectiveness of your loadout by an equal amount. At the same time, a heavier mech provides no exrta critical slots for more heatsinks so the laser user is essentially capped at the same heat dissipation regardless of which mech they choose. The only thing you can do to increase your damage is to take larger lasers for a bigger alpha strike but then the ghost heat system punishes you for doing that and it cripples your DPS to a fraction of what it should be. You end up stuck at a plateau of both alpha and DPS and there is nothing you can do about it. That's one of the main reasons why mechs like the Awesome 8Q are completely useless. It's a big slow easy target with the firepower and dps of a mech that has half it's tonnage.

If you don't see the problem with this there is nothing more that I can explain. All I can suggest is that you make an energy-only mech and see how well you do with it.


Thing is, I like mixed builds. Energy only, ballistics only. Both suffer from the best and worst of energy and ballistic weapons. However most builds aren't all ballistics, or all energy. Most builds are mixed. Energy vs Ballistics is a false dichotomy.

#127 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:11 AM

View PostStelar 7, on 01 November 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

Thing is, I like mixed builds. Energy only, ballistics only. Both suffer from the best and worst of energy and ballistic weapons. However most builds aren't all ballistics, or all energy. Most builds are mixed. Energy vs Ballistics is a false dichotomy.
his will only hold true till mechs like the Black Knight, Galahad, Bane get into the game.

#128 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:17 AM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

his will only hold true till mechs like the Black Knight, Galahad, Bane get into the game.

Or the Swayback, Jenner F, Spiders 5D and 5V, Death's Knell, Locust 3M, Cicadas 2A and 2B, Blackjacks 1S and 3, Awesome 8Q, and probably the upcoming Jester Catapult hero.

#129 Stelar 7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 315 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:20 AM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

his will only hold true till mechs like the Black Knight, Galahad, Bane get into the game.


I'd forgotten about the Kraken We have some specialist mechs now. You can already choose to go all beam, or all ac or all missile. When you do that you don't get to complain about the drawbacks of the weapon you choose any more than someone rocking AC20 and Mlas gets to whine about getting hit at range.

#130 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:22 AM

You are correct sir. But Swayback is the name given any Hunchback that removes the AC20 for a different load out.

#131 meteorol

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,848 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:24 AM

Why won't we just all stop comparing a turn based TT game in which you roll dices for totally random hits to a real time mechshooter with pinpoint accuracy?

Yes there are balance issues with the weapons. No, we can't solve them by throwing around TT numbers.

#132 FerrolupisXIII

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Caladbolg
  • Caladbolg
  • 502 posts
  • LocationCatapult Cockpit

Posted 01 November 2013 - 02:04 PM

View PostRoland, on 31 October 2013 - 08:16 PM, said:

But it's SIXTEEN tons of weapons. Not even including ammo.
It's 260% of the tonnage. Of course it's a more capable loadout.

How could it possibly be balanced if it weren't more capable?

I'm making fun of the comparison, because you seem to think that there is something wrong with 16 tons of weapons being more powerful than 6 tons of weapons.


You're making fun of your own comparison?
there is nothing wrong with 16 tons of weapons being better than 6 tons of weapons, there is something wrong when those 16 tons of weapons are better in almost every meaningful way.

even if we add ammo for your ballistics and heat sinks to try and make my lasers more viable, to the point that the total load weighs the same, your AC's still win most of the time. because you can easily have enough ammo to last all game, while i can NEVER have enough heat sinks to be able to use my mediums for a significant engagement.

so, the only thing you've pushed as an argument (weapons weight and size) is really just invalid. 4 Large Lasers are even worse in comparison, PPC's have some hope but still run face first into the proverbial wall called HEAT.

should energy weapons only be fit as backups to the AC master weapons? because that is the feeling i am getting from every one of your posts.

#133 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 02:47 PM

Better idea.

Cut all beam durations by about 50%. Pulse to 0.33 seconds, lasers to 0.5. Hell, make pulse lasers 0.25.

This still spreads - a bit - when people turn but keeps them viable vs PPCs and ballistics. Suddenly those LLs and MLs look reasonable vs the AC10 and the pulse offers you a short range PPC with excellent accuracy. Given that a LPL isn't much good beyond 300m that extra accuracy isn't that serious, the PPC still keeps a significant range advantage and thus its non-hitscan accuracy is viable.

#134 AC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,161 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 03:06 PM

I think a lot of ppl missed the point in the OP. The point isn't that TT should be ported to MWO, or that things need to fire every 10s, or that TT is awesome. The point I took away is that this is simple statistics. You need to compare to something and since this game is loosely based on Battletech TT, that is what he compared it to. It is obvious in the comparison that the firing rates for ballistics is too high. IMO the firing rates for all weapons are too high, but that is beside the point.

The takeaway is that PGI need to cut the firing speeds of the ballistics by about 20-25% to balance them with energy weapons.

#135 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 01 November 2013 - 03:36 PM

I carry 3 UAC/5s for when my 2 medium lasers run too hot.

#136 Otto Cannon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 2,689 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 01 November 2013 - 04:16 PM

Meh. So much arguing.

Ballistics are good.
Energy are good.
Missiles are just ok.

The best builds seem to me to be mixed ballistic and energy, with missiles if forced by hardpoints. I don't think any weapon is game-bendingly overpowered right now. There's variety in pugs and high Elo seems to be AC20 with 2PPCs as you'd expect where people have really good aiming skills, like railgun users in Quake multiplayer.

Let's put the nerfstick aside and maybe just get out the tweaking tweezers for pulse lasers instead.

#137 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 04:54 PM

View PostFerrolupisXIII, on 01 November 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

there is nothing wrong with 16 tons of weapons being better than 6 tons of weapons, there is something wrong when those 16 tons of weapons are better in almost every meaningful way.

16 tons of weapons should be better than 6 tons of weapons, in every conceivable way except one.
The way that they are inferior, IS THAT THEY WEIGH 16 TONS INSTEAD OF 6.

In every other way, the heavy loadout is supposed to be better.

#138 BrockSamsonFW

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 75 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 05:35 PM

View PostStelar 7, on 01 November 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

Wait, I thought this was an even comparison. Why aren't we mentioning the damage spread and exposure of having to line up a shot every 1.5 seconds, can the hunchback get in and out of cover that quick? Why aren't we mentioning the difficulty of hitting the same box on a moving target at range?

Why is it on your even comparison only the drawbacks of the laser mech get counted? If I can't hold my beams for a whole second, how am I supposed to get another 10pt shot with the ac's on that segment?


Thing is, I like mixed builds. Energy only, ballistics only. Both suffer from the best and worst of energy and ballistic weapons. However most builds aren't all ballistics, or all energy. Most builds are mixed. Energy vs Ballistics is a false dichotomy.


This is a valid argument, but in my experience it's not so simple. You are correct that you aren't going to hide in 1.5 seconds and that all mechs, as a whole, are equally vulnerable. I think the difference is how the two mechs can maneuver and twist during the fight.

With the AC5 you need to aim at the target every 1.5 seconds but you don't have to hold that aim for any length of time. You can maneuver and twist as much as you like and this can make it very difficult or even impossible to sustain fire on a single location on your mech. The only requirement is that every 1.5 seconds you sweep your aim across your target and time your shot correctly.

The laser mech on the other hand must stop their twisting and aim at you for the entire duration of their beam. By itself this wouldn't be a problem but because ghost heat cripples you for firing too many heavy energy weapons at once you end up having to split your fire into 2 or even 3 volleys. This turns your 1 second beam duration and several seconds of cooldown (when you can twist and turn) into 1.5 to 2.5 seconds of beam duration with little or no cooldown at all. You end up having to stay aimed at the target indefinitely.

Now the fight is one mech that is twisting and turning to make itself a difficult target vs another mech that is almost exclusively aimed in a single direction and an easy kill. Combine the effects of camera shake and the per-location DPS ends up being nowhere close to each other. The damage to the mechs as a whole won't be too different but the damage that counts, the damage that kills mechs, is nowhere close to being equal.

While a mixed build will in general perform well, a full ballistic mech will almost always perform a little better while a full energy mech will almost always perform significantly worse. This results in many mechs being completely unplayable because their hardpoints are too energy-biased.


Having said all that, I don't think they should reduce the burn time on lasers. Lasers and AC should act and play differently and the burn time of lasers creates a good difference between them. It's just the fact that the ACs have so many other benefits with no meaningful drawbacks that makes them so much better. I'd rather see a change like slowing down the projectile speed for ballistics (and PPC) to make them more difficult to use, or significantly increase the frequency but reducing the damage of ammo explosions. This way AC can still be different and "better" but they would be more difficult or risky to use in excess.

#139 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 05:52 PM

Quote

With the AC5 you need to aim at the target every 1.5 seconds but you don't have to hold that aim for any length of time. You can maneuver and twist as much as you like and this can make it very difficult or even impossible to sustain fire on a single location on your mech. The only requirement is that every 1.5 seconds you sweep your aim across your target and time your shot correctly.

The laser mech on the other hand must stop their twisting and aim at you for the entire duration of their beam. By itself this wouldn't be a problem but because ghost heat cripples you for firing too many heavy energy weapons at once you end up having to split your fire into 2 or even 3 volleys. This turns your 1 second beam duration and several seconds of cooldown (when you can twist and turn) into 1.5 to 2.5 seconds of beam duration with little or no cooldown at all. You end up having to stay aimed at the target indefinitely.

I urge you to actually try playing with the various weapons, and see how your theories here play out.

The suggestion that an AC5 mech doesn't have to keep looking at his target is silly. The idea that "you only need to look at him every 1.5 seconds" means that you are effectively always looking at him if you want to actually maximize the DPS that you claim is so advantageous. You aren't spazzing out and looking away every fraction of a second only to look back and take a perfect snap shot and then look away again.

Torso twisting is certainly a critical aspect of mechwarrior, but it tends to lend itself best to high alpha builds... and AC5's are not really a high alpha weapon.

The argument you are presenting here actually applies more to heavy caliber point damage weapons, like AC20's, gauss, PPC's, etc.

Quote

While a mixed build will in general perform well, a full ballistic mech will almost always perform a little better

This is clearly false.

#140 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 07:59 PM

View PostRoland, on 01 November 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

I urge you to actually try playing with the various weapons, and see how your theories here play out.

The suggestion that an AC5 mech doesn't have to keep looking at his target is silly. The idea that "you only need to look at him every 1.5 seconds" means that you are effectively always looking at him if you want to actually maximize the DPS that you claim is so advantageous. You aren't spazzing out and looking away every fraction of a second only to look back and take a perfect snap shot and then look away again.

Torso twisting is certainly a critical aspect of mechwarrior, but it tends to lend itself best to high alpha builds... and AC5's are not really a high alpha weapon.

The argument you are presenting here actually applies more to heavy caliber point damage weapons, like AC20's, gauss, PPC's, etc.


This is clearly false.


Mixed energy/ballistics builds are absolutely superior. 2PPCs and a pair of AC5/UAC5s is the peak build at the moment. It's on anything that can mount it. Best mix of pinpoint alpha at range for poptart/hill hump and ammo conservation.





21 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 21 guests, 0 anonymous users