388 replies to this topic

[Damocles69]

DPS ACs (2s and 5s) are not a problem. Top level is the same as it has been since ever (2ppc + 1 large bore AC poptarts). All the ghost heat and Gauss nerfs have done is knock 5-10 points off the pop tart alpha coming at your face. Ac boats don't have enough time to stare at their target to deliver Thier DPS at top levels.

Poptats > ac boats

OP you are wrong. This is why your ELO should be at a certain level before you are allowed to post on the fourms

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 07 November 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

Yeah... I know, Ben a long time coming hasn't it!

So long in fact it appears the question of "why did they Nerf the **** out of Lasers" aka GH has been forgotten. Anyone remember when 3 LL's was the death's Knell?

Don't get me wrong. They still are but now just for the guy firing them.

[Fate 6]

Ghost Badger, on 07 November 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

What DaZur said, QFT.

The way I see it, the Energy vs. Ballistics argument being represented is missing a key component.

Energy weapons, even with necessary heatsinks, weigh less than ballistics. That's a bonus. They do not require leading, bonus. However, you have to be able to KEEP THEM ON TARGET to reap the rewards of these no-ammo, low-weight weapons (Medium lasers, I'm lookin' at you).

Ballistics, though heavy, have an ammo cap (and everyone knows to bring enough, meaning you sacrifice an addition 4-5 ton's AFTER the weapon so you can keep firing). You also have to LEAD your targets when they're in motion. However, they give you the advantage of slightly greater range, faster recycle, and fast, front-loaded damage. You can fire them off, and turn away.

Now, to my eye, the set of advantages and disadvantages, though DIFFERENT for each weapon class, are balanced (I'm not gonna get into missiles, that's another ballgame).

Based on the way these weapons FUNCTION, players who have an easier time maintaining a target in their sights will get more bang for their buck out of energy weapons. Those we can't, well, there are ballistics. But for the edge in getting the damage downrange, there ARE drawbacks.

Maybe the reason we are seeing more ballistics isn't because they're OP, but because they're just easier to use for a lot of players. I would also posit that this is why most of my builds boat mediums with mid-sized AC's as support...I find BOTH incredibly useful and damaging, and so a combination gets me the best results.

If this was always the only issue we would have seen ballistics before. The problem is all the other weapons got nerfed a bit too much. Energy weapons are too hard to sustain right now, and part of it is simply the maps we get forced onto (TERRAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!). SRMs run hot too, but they're trash anyway.

I like ballistics, they're almost perfect, they just need a bit less ammo/ton and range tweaks would be nice (AC5 range can be unbuffed a bit).

I still think SRMs need serious work before we can consider rebalancing energy and ballistic weapons. They've been bad for a while, and everything has turned to sniping as a result. Imagine if we had battles of ballistic vs energy vs missile boats (and of course the in-between mechs like the Orion, Victor, w/e). There's a bit of imbalance in chassis that can take a lot of everything (damn you PGI), but there's no reason to take some weapons right now and that needs to change, not nerfing ACs.

[Almond Brown]

As to less "range" for the Ballistics? Well that is likely a double edged sword really. Given players rarely run out now, and let's guess that for the longer ranged units, some 15% of the max range shots MISS. If these Mechs are forced to close to closer ranges in order to even apply any damage, assuming fall off works the same way, that MISS chance is reduced and maybe considerably. So do we trade range for MISS chance decreases? Would one be actually better than the other?

Another, of a Trillion different things "they could test" I suppose. See ya in 3245.

[Fate 6]

Galenit, on 07 November 2013 - 05:29 AM, said:

To much range:
3x range makes ballistics better then most other weapons.
Reduce it to 2x like energy and it would match better,
letting only the gauss, ac2, erppc, erll and lrm do noticeable damage around 1000m.

To much ammo:
2x armor, but not 8 random hit locations, you need only 1/4 of the shoots to core a mech based on tt.
Reduce ammo to 1x tt values in a first step, then based on observation reduce it to maybe 1/2.

To less risk in taking ammo:
Armor destroyed, random hit chance occurs, random component where the crit hits in that location, then only 10% chance for explosion is no risk. If it would be a risk, case would be seen more often ...
Increase ammo-explosion chance (for all ammo, not only ballistics) in a first step to 35%, maybe tweek it after observation.

High rof and dps:
Thats what the ballistics are for in mechwarrior, heavy burst damage if you need it, but not the whole fight.
With the above changes the ballistics should stay at the dps they have now.

I agree with all your points, and the ammo crit chance is a huge thing I forgot about until now. CASE is a joke because ammo rarely explodes and most of the time it's in places that rarely get hit as well (legs and head rofl, imagine those ammo feeds...). Increase explosion chance and limit ammo to locations that are much riskier (and make more sense).

Almond Brown, on 07 November 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

As to less "range" for the Ballistics? Well that is likely a double edged sword really. Given players rarely run out now, and let's guess that for the longer ranged units, some 15% of the max range shots MISS. If these Mechs are forced to close to closer ranges in order to even apply any damage, assuming fall off works the same way, that MISS chance is reduced and maybe considerably. So do we trade range for MISS chance decreases? Would one be actually better than the other?

Another, of a Trillion different things "they could test" I suppose. See ya in 3245.

Reduction in range means that we will have more ammo to shoot at close range, but the abundance of ammo we have now won't be so abusable. We practically have unlimited ammo with the correct planning and building, limiting it to closer ranges will only mean that maybe people will remember Medium Lasers exist as an alternative to 30 more AC5 rounds

Edited by Fate 6, 07 November 2013 - 09:39 AM.

[-Muta-]

The Justicar, on 06 November 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

It is not an opinion. It is a fact. Ballistics are WAY more powerful than energy based weapons. The proof is in the math. The following post's calculations don't even factor in instant damage vs. beam duration, which would even further skew results in favor of AC's.

See:
http://mwomercs.com/...t-fire-weapons/

I never run out of ammo with energy

[MustrumRidcully]

Almond Brown, on 07 November 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

As to less "range" for the Ballistics? Well that is likely a double edged sword really. Given players rarely run out now, and let's guess that for the longer ranged units, some 15% of the max range shots MISS. If these Mechs are forced to close to closer ranges in order to even apply any damage, assuming fall off works the same way, that MISS chance is reduced and maybe considerably. So do we trade range for MISS chance decreases? Would one be actually better than the other?

Another, of a Trillion different things "they could test" I suppose. See ya in 3245.

That seems to presume that for some reason ballistic weapon users stop shooting when they get closer to their enemies?

Lowering the max range of balllistics means you start firing later with them, which gives lasers less time they couldn't retaliate effectively.

[darkchylde]

Mutaroc, on 07 November 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

I never run out of ammo with energy

I don't go crazy and alphastrike every mech that I see with my ballistics. Oh wait, I do and still haven't run out of ammo yet. but on my mechs that have nothing but energy slots and 0 ballistics - I can't mimic this due to inferior DHS, ghost heat, and the loss of heatsinks in battle. What's even funnier is that I've had my ammo critted and not only does my mech keep on going the ammo loss barely affects the lethality of the mech. It's not at all difficult to carry enough ammo to get the job done but also to mimize the impact of an ammo explosion.

[Ryche]

Damocles69, on 07 November 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

DPS ACs (2s and 5s) are not a problem. Top level is the same as it has been since ever (2ppc + 1 large bore AC poptarts). All the ghost heat and Gauss nerfs have done is knock 5-10 points off the pop tart alpha coming at your face. Ac boats don't have enough time to stare at their target to deliver Thier DPS at top levels.

Poptats > ac boats

OP you are wrong. This is why your ELO should be at a certain level before you are allowed to post on the fourms

Since you can't know my ELO your personal attack misses.
ACs currently are heavier than other weapons except LRMS, require more crit slots except for LRMS, are not affected by ECM unlike LRMs, require virtually no heatsinks, and have triple range instead of double like energy or single for missiles.
Ballistics in general if you can afford to get them in the mech are the prime weapon for any mech excepting lights.

People complain about AC 2s being super heat intensive, but only since they fire 6-8 times for every ML shot... yeah super hot...

Ballistics are currently the best type of weapon system in the game. AC 20/40 mechs are ambush type mechs, AC 5s and ultra AC 5s and AC 2s are sniper weapons with massive dps and an added bonus of screen shake because triple range and super fast refire is not enough. AC 10s are middle between the AC 20 and sniper weapons but still fire fast and have low heat.

Poptarts are still around but if you are dying to them that is more a player skill issue as they aren't that scary to me anymore. This may be due to the prevalence of them in the meta as I dont see lots of them but I do see lots of AC wielding mechs that dominate the battle field and when I get to watch them are not good shots but still somehow manage to rack up lots of DPS and ridge hump like mad.

Really its that ridge humping and poptarting is bad for the game. Moving from cover to cover and shooting is fine because at lest its moving the battle front but having the whole team sitting on ridges and sniping at each other is just as boring for AC warrior online as it was with PPC/Gauss warrior online.

[Sandpit]

darkchylde, on 07 November 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

I don't go crazy and alphastrike every mech that I see with my ballistics. Oh wait, I do and still haven't run out of ammo yet. but on my mechs that have nothing but energy slots and 0 ballistics - I can't mimic this due to inferior DHS, ghost heat, and the loss of heatsinks in battle. What's even funnier is that I've had my ammo critted and not only does my mech keep on going the ammo loss barely affects the lethality of the mech. It's not at all difficult to carry enough ammo to get the job done but also to mimize the impact of an ammo explosion.

Never mind that an LL generates 7 heat as opposed to 3 from an AC10. It's one of the trade-offs for energy versus ballistics. You carry enough ammo, that's great. You're still sacrificing slots and weight to carry that extra ammo where an energy build can sacrifice that same weight and slot space to carry heatsinks.

Trade-off

Once again people like to show one small sliver of a trade-off because out of context it will show a favorable comparison for their opinion on a matter

[Sandpit]

Ryche, on 07 November 2013 - 02:41 PM, said:

Since you can't know my ELO your personal attack misses.
ACs currently are heavier than other weapons except LRMS, require more crit slots except for LRMS, are not affected by ECM unlike LRMs, require virtually no heatsinks, and have triple range instead of double like energy or single for missiles.
Ballistics in general if you can afford to get them in the mech are the prime weapon for any mech excepting lights.

People complain about AC 2s being super heat intensive, but only since they fire 6-8 times for every ML shot... yeah super hot...

Ballistics are currently the best type of weapon system in the game. AC 20/40 mechs are ambush type mechs, AC 5s and ultra AC 5s and AC 2s are sniper weapons with massive dps and an added bonus of screen shake because triple range and super fast refire is not enough. AC 10s are middle between the AC 20 and sniper weapons but still fire fast and have low heat.

Poptarts are still around but if you are dying to them that is more a player skill issue as they aren't that scary to me anymore. This may be due to the prevalence of them in the meta as I dont see lots of them but I do see lots of AC wielding mechs that dominate the battle field and when I get to watch them are not good shots but still somehow manage to rack up lots of DPS and ridge hump like mad.

Really its that ridge humping and poptarting is bad for the game. Moving from cover to cover and shooting is fine because at lest its moving the battle front but having the whole team sitting on ridges and sniping at each other is just as boring for AC warrior online as it was with PPC/Gauss warrior online.

sigh

Once again never mind that an AC2 firing 6 times having to account for bullet drop, leading, and again the other typical trade-offs for ballistics. If you're going to show a comparison show it all. Don't slant it to support your opinion. There are trade-offs. They really help equal things out. My weapon and play style are in much more capable hands when I'M using it than when you're using it. You're weapon and play style are in much more capable hands when YOU"RE using it as opposed to me. Just because YOU can't effectively use something doesn't mean I can't.

No amount of mathematical equation changes that. Feel free to peruse my earlier posts in this very thread to show why it doesn't when you take into account the entire big picture of trade-offs as opposed to focusing on one single element of the trade-offs

[darkchylde]

Sandpit, on 07 November 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

Never mind that an LL generates 7 heat as opposed to 3 from an AC10. It's one of the trade-offs for energy versus ballistics. You carry enough ammo, that's great. You're still sacrificing slots and weight to carry that extra ammo where an energy build can sacrifice that same weight and slot space to carry heatsinks.

Trade-off

Once again people like to show one small sliver of a trade-off because out of context it will show a favorable comparison for their opinion on a matter

There is no trade-off - because DHS are inferior, and energy weapons are penalized far greater by ghost heat then ballistics are. So the sacrifices made by a player utilizing an energy platform are far, far greater then a ballistic platform and less rewarding. People will continue to field mechs that use 3-4 UAC5's, 4xAC5's, 3xAC2's, 2xAC20 - simply because they can alpha them with little to no regard to the current heat system that is in place and utterly shred whatever mech is on the other end of their targeting reticule. Something needs to be done to bring mechs that rely entirely on energy hardpoints to be effective in the current meta of ACWarrior Online.

[Sandpit]

darkchylde, on 07 November 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

There is no trade-off - because DHS are inferior, and energy weapons are penalized far greater by ghost heat then ballistics are. So the sacrifices made by a player utilizing an energy platform are far, far greater then a ballistic platform and less rewarding. People will continue to field mechs that use 3-4 UAC5's, 4xAC5's, 3xAC2's, 2xAC20 - simply because they can alpha them with little to no regard to the current heat system that is in place and utterly shred whatever mech is on the other end of their targeting reticule. Something needs to be done to bring mechs that rely entirely on energy hardpoints to be effective in the current meta of ACWarrior Online.

riiiiiight

So again, the fact that I can field 4-5 LLs on my mechs and do just fine means nothing.....

That's exactly what I'm getting at. That's YOUR opinion. Just because you can't use it as effectively as I can doesn't make it "worse" As a matter of fact I JUST dropped in a game with my 5LL mech and got 4 kills and did almost 700 damage but hey, that's my opinion on the matter. The field is level. If you want to use your AC's and deal with the trade-offs that those entail go for it.

If you want to save space and tonnage then run energy
If you want to run lower heat and more pin point damage sacrifice the slots and weight and add ammo

You literally have a player sitting right here telling you that they can use energy boats just fine and do great in game with them, you just don't want to admit that someone else can do just fine and be competitive in spite of your opinion on the matter. If I can do it then every other pilot has the same mechanics to do it with.

[Galenit]

Joseph Mallan, on 07 November 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

As I said the average combination of 2d6 is 6.3. So I have a 44% chance of hitting any of the three torso. And what I shoot on TT I don nee 10 rolls to get the job done.

I have asked how many rolls to hit the center torso 10 times, not how many rolls to hit the center or right- or lefttorso.
Its the second time that you talk about more then the center torso and dont answer the question.

But lets take it, 10 shoots spread over 3 locations, we have skillbased pinpointdamage, you need only 10/3 shoots to hit 3 times the center only then.
20/3.3x2=12 shells per ton is what a ac5 should have to match other weapons and compensate for 2x armor.
A little more then the 1/2 tt value, but less then the 1x tt 20 shells i suggested to test ...

Almond Brown, on 07 November 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

So do we trade range for MISS chance decreases? Would one be actually better than the other?

Another, of a Trillion different things "they could test" I suppose. See ya in 3245.

To some degree, if you have only 20 or 12 shells a ton for your ac5, you would only use it when the shot counts. Thats what i meant with ballistics are for heavy burst damage at mid to low ranges.

If you want to do damage at 1000m after 2x ballistic range you have the following weapons left:
Gauss/ERPPC for pinpoin sniping
AC2/ERLL for long range dot
LRM for spray and hope that no mountain jumps in the way.

The AC20 would be the pinpoint counterpart to srm and pulselasers.

The rest of the ac-line would be inline with ll, ml, (missiles to some degree) usefull in the and low ranges midranges but with higher dps, rof and low heat paying for it with low ammo and a little higher explosion chance for ammo.

This way we have 3 range buckets and different weapons with different uses in each of it.

Chooses make games interesting, not taking the all purpose item everyone takes, thats boring.

Edited by Galenit, 07 November 2013 - 06:19 PM.

[darkchylde]

Sandpit, on 07 November 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

riiiiiight

So again, the fact that I can field 4-5 LLs on my mechs and do just fine means nothing.....

That's exactly what I'm getting at. That's YOUR opinion. Just because you can't use it as effectively as I can doesn't make it "worse" As a matter of fact I JUST dropped in a game with my 5LL mech and got 4 kills and did almost 700 damage but hey, that's my opinion on the matter. The field is level. If you want to use your AC's and deal with the trade-offs that those entail go for it.

If you want to save space and tonnage then run energy
If you want to run lower heat and more pin point damage sacrifice the slots and weight and add ammo

You literally have a player sitting right here telling you that they can use energy boats just fine and do great in game with them, you just don't want to admit that someone else can do just fine and be competitive in spite of your opinion on the matter. If I can do it then every other pilot has the same mechanics to do it with.

And this is your opinion which does not dispute the facts. Ballistics > Energy. And only 700 dmg, WoW, I'm breaking 1k with ballistics mechs . Also, let me know how those pulse lasers and ER's are treating you. And for the record, I am making no trade offs running a ballistic mech. Superior Range and Firepower with little to no regard to heat which allows me to alphastrike to my hearts content.

Edited by darkchylde, 07 November 2013 - 06:04 PM.

[Sandpit]

darkchylde, on 07 November 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

And this is your opinion which does not dispute the facts. Ballistics > Energy. And only 700 dmg, WoW, I'm breaking 1k with ballistics mechs . Also, let me know how those pulse lasers and ER's are treating you. And for the record, I am making no trade offs running a ballistic mech. Superior Range and Firepower with little to no regard to heat which allows me to alphastrike to my hearts content.

and your'e definitely entitled to your opinion

once again never mind the weight and crits you give up in comparison to using an energy weapon of comparable damage and range. you do just what everyone else does. You use a select piece of information instead of giving the whole data set. I've given it a couple of times in this thread. You and those who want their buffs to energy weapons or removal of ghost heat just choose to ignore it.

[darkchylde]

Sandpit, on 07 November 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

and your'e definitely entitled to your opinion

once again never mind the weight and crits you give up in comparison to using an energy weapon of comparable damage and range. you do just what everyone else does. You use a select piece of information instead of giving the whole data set. I've given it a couple of times in this thread. You and those who want their buffs to energy weapons or removal of ghost heat just choose to ignore it.

Your making an assumption - I don't field any mechs that are energy heavy because they are inferior. I field ballistic mechs because they are superior. Unlike you though, I want a balanced game so that people playing Thunderbolts, Awesomes, and the other energy heavy mechs have a fair chance vs the current meta of ACWarrior Online. I want to see mechs using ER Lasers, ER-PPC's, and medium pulses and be successful doing so.

[Sandpit]

darkchylde, on 07 November 2013 - 07:02 PM, said:

Your making an assumption - I don't field any mechs that are energy heavy because they are inferior. I field ballistic mechs because they are superior. Unlike you though, I want a balanced game so that people playing Thunderbolts, Awesomes, and the other energy heavy mechs have a fair chance vs the current meta of ACWarrior Online. I want to see mechs using ER Lasers, ER-PPC's, and medium pulses and be successful doing so.

Again, that's your opinion. There's the issue I have. In your opinion they're superior. I feel differently for the myriad of reasons I've already stated. I feel we already have the balance you're looking for

[darkchylde]

Sandpit, on 07 November 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

Again, that's your opinion. There's the issue I have. In your opinion they're superior. I feel differently for the myriad of reasons I've already stated. I feel we already have the balance you're looking for

Again, this is based by facts and data that show that ballistics are superior and is also seen by the choices of mechs that people pilot, along with the weapon loadouts.

Edited by darkchylde, 07 November 2013 - 07:32 PM.

[Sandpit]

darkchylde, on 07 November 2013 - 07:27 PM, said:

Again, this is based by facts and data that show that ballistics are superior and is also seen by the choices of mechs that people pilot, along with the weapon loadouts.

Again, this is opinion based on data that shows ballistics have trade-offs with energy weapons such as weight and crit slots and is also seen by the choices of mechs that people pilot, along with weapon loadouts

See how this works? It's opinion based on factual evidence.

If everything you said was factual (including your opinion on loadouts and such) we would never see anything but ballistic weapons. Because it's not factual we see a variety of weapons and loadouts from all weapon classes.