408 replies to this topic

[krolmir]

@ Karl Streiger
So taking the time to attack me and calling me a troll, makes you less of one? Really?
Yes in world of tanks there are effects from being shot, but you die once all your hit points are gone. So one big hp pool, and regardless of where I shoot the tank it drains that hp pool until dead, am I correct? In MWO there are as many as 5 HP pools depending on the mechs build.They are the head, CT, legs, and side torsos when XL'd. Every pilot in this game can aim, every mech in this game has convergence; which is every pilots greatest asset and weakness. Either you exploit them well or die trying. I'm tired of seeing pointless rage directed at convergence, its not the enemy; the enemy is the ability to alpha, at the same location repeatedly. I have read Homeless Bills post, and I Agree with most of his posted ideas. I like your idea about altering convergence times, those are things that reward patient and skilled pilots. I've seen enough mindless rage against the convergence arguments that I posted an equally mindless rebuttal, so sue me I'm human.

Edited by krolmir, 14 November 2013 - 05:32 PM.

[krolmir]

Just to beat a dead horse this is a thread about balancing energy weapons versus ballistics, please keep it on topic.

[Karl Streiger]

krolmir, on 14 November 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

@ Karl Streiger
So taking the time to attack me and calling me a troll, makes you less of one? Really?
Yes in world of tanks there are effects from being shot, but you die once all your hit points are gone. So one big hp pool, and regardless of where I shoot the tank it drains that hp pool until dead, am I correct?

First apologize - but when ever some body tell some one else to play another game - all i see are red flags.
Oh I'm a troll that is for sure. Somedays less someday worse - and I'm feeding at all kinds of posters

Regarding WoT comparison MWO -> I don't see any difference but that shooting for the head or using Alpha Core Technology - can reduce the "HP" on the target. Its the same as aiming for weak spots in WoT - (in those 3months i played the game - i was mainly on a Hetzer)
The 10,5mm HE could devastate a target with one shot if hit right - or you need two or three rounds. Or you used the 7,5mm fast firing gun - causing reduced damage -> but you could soft kill that target.

The cone of fire in WoT - while random was still a good trade of and part of the choice of weapons
Penetration/Damage/Accuracy/RoF.
You hardly could say for every weapons wich one is supperior.

krolmir, on 14 November 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

Just to beat a dead horse this is a thread about balancing energy weapons versus ballistics, please keep it on topic.

the same has to be made for MWO:
RoF has to be decreased - hard.

The choice between 1 or 2 secs more delay is hardly a "important" choice. So in total i can say all weapons have the same RoF -> when engagements are short -> they have to be short because otherwise you die in seconds.

With for example 8sec for AC 20 reload
9 sec for ER-PPC
7 sec for PPC
5sec for AC 10
...
...
...
ROF will become more important.

Dispersion - or Cone: lets pretend all weapons become DoT weapons.
Long burst -> more dispersion
Short burst -> reduced dispersion
again - a choice is necessary

weight and heat are the other choices, instead of penetration.
Although i admit i really want to see a kind of damage threshhold system.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 15 November 2013 - 03:23 AM.

[Lupus Aurelius]

Karl Streiger, on 15 November 2013 - 03:17 AM, said:

the same has to be made for MWO:
RoF has to be decreased - hard.

The choice between 1 or 2 secs more delay is hardly a "important" choice. So in total i can say all weapons have the same RoF -> when engagements are short -> they have to be short because otherwise you die in seconds.

With for example 8sec for AC 20 reload
9 sec for ER-PPC
7 sec for PPC
5sec for AC 10
...
ROF will become more important.

Dispersion - or Cone: lets pretend all weapons become DoT weapons.
Long burst -> more dispersion
Short burst -> reduced dispersion
again - a choice is necessary

weight and heat are the other choices, instead of penetration.
Although i admit i really want to see a kind of damage threshhold system.

Agreed, either ROF has to be decreased, or heat dissipation rate increased. It still all boils down to partially porting damage and heat dissipation from BT, but drastically increasing ROF. Anything high heat is going to shut down fast, while the cooler ballistics will just keep on pumping.

[krolmir]

RoF and heat are the quick and dirty ways to balance ballistics. Decrease they rate of fire by 25-50%, increase heat by roughly similar amounts. However, I can already hear the QQ from ballistics abusers.

[XXXMAKERSXXXMARK]

Probably already been said but if auto cannons fired 2 rounds, 5 rounds, 10 rounds and 20 there would be no issue. I am pretty sure that is how it was when i was rolling dice like 25 years ago and in other mech-warrior games. Correct me if I am wrong. I love guns especially multi-barrel ones. So they should fire like multi-barrel guns.

[Karl Streiger]

XXXMAKERSXXXMARK, on 21 November 2013 - 11:11 PM, said:

Probably already been said but if auto cannons fired 2 rounds, 5 rounds, 10 rounds and 20 there would be no issue. I am pretty sure that is how it was when i was rolling dice like 25 years ago and in other mech-warrior games. Correct me if I am wrong. I love guns especially multi-barrel ones. So they should fire like multi-barrel guns.

Of course it would turn ACs into DoT weapons.
I don't want to make a guess how it will turn out:

All weapons but Gauss and PPCs are DoT weapons.

Gauss weapons has its charge timer
PPCs have minimum range
ERPPC extreme heat

If i would guess - Gauss or PPC would become the new FotM
Mabye with Macro Triggering 4 PPCs or similar

But if that may happens it should be obviously that its not the weapon itself that is unbalanced.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 22 November 2013 - 01:03 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Karl Streiger, on 22 November 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

Of course it would turn ACs into DoT weapons.
I don't want to make a guess how it will turn out:

All weapons but Gauss and PPCs are DoT weapons.

Gauss weapons has its charge timer
PPCs have minimum range
ERPPC extreme heat

If i would guess - Gauss or PPC would become the new FotM
Mabye with Macro Triggering 4 PPCs or similar

But if that may happens it should be obviously that its not the weapon itself that is unbalanced.

PPC should turn into beams. Gauss is an interesting topic, but there is no reason to say a burst-firing Gauss is implausible.

If PPCs and Gauss stay single shot damage projectiles, another thing to try: Forbid group-firing them, citing "high energy drain" as the reason why you can't. If you fire a Gauss or a PPC, all other Gauss and PPC (and maybe all other weapons) go on a 0.5 to 1.0 second cooldown. (Maybe Gauss forces a higher cooldown than PPC)
So you still have pinpoint precision with these weapons, but you can't benefit from converging multiples.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 22 November 2013 - 01:39 AM.

[Ziogualty]

I always thought they should change how laser works instead.

Let's take a LLas actually doing 10 damage.
I will change that this way:

Lasers do instantly 70% of their damage on contact with the target (in this case 7)
If a skilled player manage to keep the beam for all the duration it gets the remain 30% of the total damage plus a 10% bonus (in this case 4 for a total of 11 damage).

I say this for 2 reasons:
1) who use lasers risks more because it has to stay exposed for a longer time than ballistic.
2) Firing lasers reveal your position far more than ballistic, so it's a challenging weapon to use compared to others.

If it will work as i thought, laser is still somewhat rewarding even if used like a ballistic...less effective, but still viable.
More, if you are a skilled laser user, that bit of extra damage will give some respect to all laser weapons.

What do you think about it?

Edited by Attank, 22 November 2013 - 01:52 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Agreed, either ROF has to be decreased

Autocannons should fire in bursts instead of doing all their damage at once. That would spread damage around.

Quote

PPC should turn into beams

Definitely not. A PPC is not a beam. PPCs should however do splash damage instead of doing all their damage to one location.

[Karl Streiger]

Khobai, on 22 November 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

Definitely not. A PPC is not a beam. PPCs should however do splash damage instead of doing all their damage to one location.

That could be a discussion for another place -

Spoiler

because PPCs work in atmosphere and without configuration in space - they are neighter Neutral Partical Beams or Charged Particle Beams.
On the other hand - its possible to use Naval Lasers an Naval PPCs for Orbital Bombardement -> although I've read that IR Laser won't work well in space - and UV Lasers are mostly blocked by atmosphere:

But the splash damage has some merrit - afaik first MWO PPCs had those splash damage.

[Tolkien]

I think everyone here can agree that the battletech rules aren't even close to perfect on the tabletop, especially when customization is concerned. Clans are also purely power creep, so the folks at PGI more than have their work cut out for them figuring out how to keep the Clan stock mechs as valid builds while also balancing clan equipment that is generally smaller, lighter, harder hitting, and longer range for the same or slightly higher heat.

That said I'm actually more worried about how the clan invasion is going to integrate into CW without seriously reworking the invasion lanes. I'm sure this stuff was figured out months ago though, right?......


Back on topic though, Clan ballistics like the ultra 2 through 20 are going to be very interesting, since clan assaults could easily mount 2x ultra 20's. I wonder if ghost heat will eat them alive? Either way they could get a pretty mean stream of shells coming every second or so.

I have a suspicion that with clan weapons in general including ballistics they will have to do less damage than their inner sphere counterparts, even at equal ranges just to balance out the compact lightweight nature of clan tech.

Edited by Tolkien, 22 November 2013 - 04:15 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

krolmir, on 21 November 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

RoF and heat are the quick and dirty ways to balance ballistics. Decrease they rate of fire by 25-50%, increase heat by roughly similar amounts. However, I can already hear the QQ from ballistics abusers.

Ok What about us non Abusers???

I use ballistics, missiles an energy weapons in equal amounts. Ballistics are the knockout weapon of the game. Everyone keep talking about roles yet fail to understand the roles of our weapons. The Laser is a converging weapon (laser precision), Missiles are a sand blasting weapon, Ballistics the hammer

So
Lasers - Converge
Missiles - area of affect
Ballistics - Small Cone of Fire

That is how the weapons should work. Simple, elegant, structured.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 22 November 2013 - 04:46 AM.

[B1zmark]

stjobe, on 30 October 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

You can do a damn sight better job of it if you don't do it halfway, like PGI did.

No they didn't. They created an entirely new game using the IP of an old tabletop game. The fact they share a name does not make it a port. That's like arguing Wacraft 3 heroes versus World of Warcraft faction leaders... it's apples and oranges, except they are all called bananas.

[Karl Streiger]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 November 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

So
Lasers - Converge
Missiles - area of affect
Ballistics - Small Cone of Fire

That is how the weapons should work. Simple, elegant, structured.

And of course each weapon of each category should need a place were it work better as any other weapon in this group - regarding weight efficency.
For example:
SRM 6 for "Short Range One Shot and Done" and SRM 2 for Brawler and Harasser (hit him, hit him again, hit him again and again)
The Gauss should in any case be better as a AC 5 - two AC 5 should be equal to a single Gauss in some special terms but not always. The AC 20 should not be equal to the Gauss - at no range under no circumstances...both weapon should be more powerful as the other - at complete different circumstances.

For example - the roles for those stock Catapract should look this ways: in an perfect game - you would have different targeting and tracking allowing you somehow to get better accuracy or else at there specifc range.
Short-Mid Range Trooper
2X
Short & Long Range Trooper
1X
Long Range Sniper
4X
Mid Range Brawler
3D

[Strum Wealh]

Karl Streiger, on 22 November 2013 - 03:20 AM, said:

That could be a discussion for another place -

Spoiler

because PPCs work in atmosphere and without configuration in space - they are neighter Neutral Partical Beams or Charged Particle Beams.
On the other hand - its possible to use Naval Lasers an Naval PPCs for Orbital Bombardement -> although I've read that IR Laser won't work well in space - and UV Lasers are mostly blocked by atmosphere:

But the splash damage has some merrit - afaik first MWO PPCs had those splash damage.

The "blooming" effect (which would also affect lasers) that would normally render particle beam weapons ineffective within an atmosphere could be at least partially overcome through use of a laser-induced plasma channel (LIPC), as seen with electrolaser systems like those being tested by the US Army.

Since PPCs are described as firing "proton or ion bolts" (e.g. charged particles), the same principles and techniques for projecting such "bolts" along the LIPC as used for electrons (also charged particles) in real-world electrolasers should work, yes?

Khobai, on 22 November 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

Autocannons should fire in bursts instead of doing all their damage at once. That would spread damage around.

Agreed.

How I, personally, would have liked to have seen it done:

• Machine Guns: continuous-fire "bullet hose" effect with varying bullet-per-second counts varying depending on MG make/model (but identical DPS between MG makes/models)
  
• Standard Autocannons: multi-shell "burst fire" effect (3-10 shells per burst, depending on AC make/model) for all munition types with additional effects for special munitions, with manual user toggle for munition feed switching
  
• LB-X Autocannons: multi-shell "burst fire" effect (3-10 shells per burst, depending on AC make/model) for standard/"slug" munitions plus single-shell muzzle-exit-fragmentation "canister shot"/"shotgun shell" effect for cluster munitions, with manual user toggle for munition feed switching
  
• Ultra Autocannons: multi-shell "burst fire" effect (3-10 shells per burst, depending on AC make/model) with "standard ROF mode" (with 0% likelihood of jamming) plus "double-tap" two-burst "Ultra ROF mode" (with X% chance of jamming, such that X ≥ 2.8) & manual user toggle for ROF mode switching
  
• Standard Gauss Rifle: single-slug firing with automatic capacitor charging active by default, with manual user toggle for automatic/manual charging (to allow for discharging to prevent explosion when ammunition is depleted)

For the Standard ACs and slug-firing LB-Xs, the burst duration would be the same across weapon classes (e.g. a 4-shell AC/20 burst would be of the same duration as a 10-shell AC/20 burst, while a 6-shell AC/10 burst is of the same duration as a 3-shell LB-X slug burst, and so on).
For UACs, the burst duration would be one-half that of the same-class Standard ACs and LB-Xs (e.g. the burst duration of a UAC/5 would be one-half that of the Standard AC/5).

This, then, paves the way for the introduction of additional ballistic weapons (previously described here):

• Light/Medium/Heavy Rifles: single-shell firing mechanic; serves as lighter-but-weaker alternative to ACs
  
• Vehicular Grenade Launcher (VGL): single-munition firing mechanic; serves as an alternative to the MG
  
• Vehicular Flamer: identical firing mechanics to Standard Flamer, but uses stored ammunition rather than drawing from the Engine; serves as a ballistic alternative to the Standard Flamer & an alternative to the MG (and VGL)
  
• Silver Bullet Gauss Rifle: identical firing mechanic to LB-X cluster round (cannot fire Standard Gauss Rifle slugs), with manual user toggle for automatic/manual charging (to allow for discharging to prevent explosion when ammunition is depleted)

Spoiler

The VGL in BT is a single-shot weapon, so PGI would have to decide how much ammo per ton it would get and what its recycle time should be, assuming they decide to implement it in the first place.
IMO, the specs for a MWO VGL would be:
Grenade Launcher

• 0.5 tons
  
• 1 critical
  
• 0.38 damage/grenade, 1 grenade per shot
  
• 0.13 heat/shot
  
• 0.25 second recycle time
  
• weapon speed: 100 m/s
  
• 1000 shots per ton of ammo
  
• maximum range of 90 meters

The damage/shot and recycle time together give it a ~50% DPS increase over the MG (to ~1.50 DPS) & it has the same weapon speed as the MG, but it has a shorter maximum range (3x the TT max range) and it runs hotter than the MG (~0.50 HPS) and has 50% less ammo per ton than the MG (the proposed ammo per ton assumes a 1 kg (~2.2 lbs) anti-vehicle grenade) and it self-detonates at its maximum range (like missiles).
IMO, this is enough to make the VGL a viable alternative to the MG without becoming a replacement for the MG.

Then there are the Rifles, which serve as cheap alternatives to the ACs.

• Light Rifle: 3 tons, 1 critical, 3 damage/shot, 1 heat/shot, 18 shots per ton of ammo, range of 360 meters
  
• Medium Rifle: 5 tons, 2 criticals, 6 damage/shot, 2 heat/shot, 9 shots per ton of ammo, range of 450 meters
  
• Heavy Rifle: 8 tons, 3 criticals, 9 damage/shot, 4 heat/shot, 6 shots per ton of ammo, range of 540 meters

The Rifles technically exist at this point in the timeline (though, they are rare within the Inner Sphere due to being considered generally obsolete).

However, the canonical BT rules call for the Rifles to subtract 3 units from their damage/shot when used against anything that isn't infantry or civilian vehicles (which lowers the Rifles' damage to 0, 3, and 6, respectively), and they cannot make use of the ACs' special munitions.

IMO, PGI could change the damage reduction to a 50% reduction rather than going by number of damage points & give them the same recycle time as the same-step AC (with LR = AC/2, MR = AC/5, and HR = AC/10) & give them the same weapon speed as the reverse-step AC if they were to implement the Rifles. What it would look like then is:
Light Rifle

• 3 tons
  
• 1 critical
  
• 1.5 damage/shot
  
• 1 heat/shot
  
• 0.52 second recycle time
  
• weapon speed: 900 m/s
  
• 27 shots per ton of ammo
  
• optimal range of 360 meters
  
• maximum range of 1080 meters

Medium Rifle

• 5 tons
  
• 2 critical
  
• 3 damage/shot
  
• 2 heat/shot
  
• 1.50 second recycle time
  
• weapon speed: 1100 m/s
  
• 14 shots per ton of ammo
  
• optimal range of 450 meters
  
• maximum range of 1350 meters

Heavy Rifle

• 8 tons
  
• 3 critical
  
• 4.5 damage/shot
  
• 4 heat/shot
  
• 2.5 second recycle time
  
• weapon speed: 1300 m/s
  
• 9 shots per ton of ammo
  
• optimal range of 540 meters
  
• maximum range of 1620 meters

Thoughts?

[Joseph Mallan]

Karl Streiger, on 22 November 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

And of course each weapon of each category should need a place were it work better as any other weapon in this group - regarding weight efficency.
For example:
SRM 6 for "Short Range One Shot and Done" and SRM 2 for Brawler and Harasser (hit him, hit him again, hit him again and again)
The Gauss should in any case be better as a AC 5 - two AC 5 should be equal to a single Gauss in some special terms but not always. The AC 20 should not be equal to the Gauss - at no range under no circumstances...both weapon should be more powerful as the other - at complete different circumstances.

For example - the roles for those stock Catapract should look this ways: in an perfect game - you would have different targeting and tracking allowing you somehow to get better accuracy or else at there specifc range.
Short-Mid Range Trooper
2X
Short & Long Range Trooper
1X
Long Range Sniper
4X
Mid Range Brawler
3D

More thought out, I like where you are going!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 22 November 2013 - 05:38 AM.

[oldradagast]

Lupus Aurelius, on 20 November 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

Agreed, either ROF has to be decreased, or heat dissipation rate increased. It still all boils down to partially porting damage and heat dissipation from BT, but drastically increasing ROF. Anything high heat is going to shut down fast, while the cooler ballistics will just keep on pumping.

Yep.

really, heat dissipation needs to go up. That would allow more energy builds while keeping the game fun and fast moving. Overheating isn't any fun anyway and shouldn't be a punishment for wanting to use energy weapons. These days, the only competitive mechs are those with good ballistics (and jumpjets, ECM, or good hitboxes.)

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 November 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

Ok What about us non Abusers???

I use ballistics, missiles an energy weapons in equal amounts. Ballistics are the knockout weapon of the game. Everyone keep talking about roles yet fail to understand the roles of our weapons. The Laser is a converging weapon (laser precision), Missiles are a sand blasting weapon, Ballistics the hammer

So
Lasers - Converge
Missiles - area of affect
Ballistics - Small Cone of Fire

That is how the weapons should work. Simple, elegant, structured.

So
Lasers - Converge (with DoT effect) MWO = check.
Missiles - area of affect (clustered fire) MWO = check.
Ballistics - Small Cone of Fire (create a DoT based system) = no check, yet.

[Almond Brown]

Karl Streiger, on 22 November 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

And of course each weapon of each category should need a place were it work better as any other weapon in this group - regarding weight efficency.
For example:
SRM 6 for "Short Range One Shot and Done" and SRM 2 for Brawler and Harasser (hit him, hit him again, hit him again and again)
The Gauss should in any case be better as a AC 5 - two AC 5 should be equal to a single Gauss in some special terms but not always. The AC 20 should not be equal to the Gauss - at no range under no circumstances...both weapon should be more powerful as the other - at complete different circumstances.

For example - the roles for those stock Catapract should look this ways: in an perfect game - you would have different targeting and tracking allowing you somehow to get better accuracy or else at there specifc range.
Short-Mid Range Trooper
2X
Short & Long Range Trooper
1X
Long Range Sniper
4X
Mid Range Brawler
3D

Not a slight at your suggestion Karl but we need to stay grounded in the simple fact that all this stuff, all wonderfully fanciful and all, but it has to be code-able and then run well over the Inter-webs and on computers that may not be named after Seymour CRAY, right?

Edited by Almond Brown, 22 November 2013 - 07:20 AM.