180 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

One thing I'd like to point out as well. There's a huge difference in size and weight for JJs in lights and JJs in assaults. 2 tons doesn't sound like much but 3 of those eats up 6 tons real quick.

[0rca]

It looks OP talks about "jump-sniping", not poptarting, if I understand both terms correctly. Imo, it makes the game ugly, half of the teams are using JJ for this ******** mechanic. Second part of the problem - is jump-tanking, with 100+ ping its really hard to aim at particular components of a flying mech. When hit those mechs perform an ugly "knee-jerk" move, making hits even harder.

Isn't use of JJ requires pilot to concentrate on balacnce? Kinda weird to see huge assault mech shooting ac20, getting hit by ac20 and gauss - all of these while in-flight! Imo, shooting or being shot in-flight should cause mech to fall down and take some time to get up (hope to see this when collisions get reintroduced).

Just ask yourself, is this the way you want to play, when 7 out of 15 are ctf-3d, higlanders and victors, all doing same ugly move again and again.

[Marmon Rzohr]

I never really saw poptarts dissapear
And they aren't really that OP (for PUG-ing mortals like myself, at least).


However I think JJs might need a look at, because of a design point...
(NOT A NERF)

There's something to say of having things that are (almost) a straight upgrade, but limited to a select number of mechs. A single jump jet is the best possible use of one ton on any mech. Look at the cenutrion for instance. It's brilliant. If you could, would you put JJs on it ? I would

Having this in mind, it might be (IMHO) a good idea to implement one of two things:
1) Make using JJs a tradeoff. Something that will offer players alternatives to consider. Like "Hmmm... will I put JJs on my mech or toss them out so i have better <insert something>" or "Will I use my 3D, which has JJs or <insert mech w/o JJs but with similar hardpoints etc> because it offers <insert something>"


2) Give any mech the ability to put JJs on, just like any mech can run DHS. (I don't really like this one, because I'm a long time BT fan and it would just make everyone put JJs on everything)

WHY ?!?!
- well tradeoffs give a game more depth by giving players more equally viable choices to consider. Which in turn makes the metagame more varied and the PvP more fun.

Cheers

Edited by Marmon Rzohr, 24 November 2013 - 06:57 AM.

[Roosterfish]

JJ's already have trade offs built in, they cost tonnage and crit space.

If you give any mech the ability to run JJ then they need to give every mech the ability to run dual AMS and ECM.

These things are what make certain mechs special and give the game flavor.

Me, I don't want the tofu burger MWO I want the full flavor from a real cow burger MWO.

[Mystere]

As I wrote in that other JJ/Poptart QQ thread:

Mystere, on 24 November 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

Here's some food for thought ...

Let us imagine that a highly-coordinated team (named the A-Team, of course ) appears on the MWO scene with the following attributes:

• Team always deploys a weight-balanced roster of 3xLights + 3xMediums + 3xHeavies + 3xAssaults, all fully mastered.
  
• Team coordinates via Teamspeak.
  
• All are armed with nothing but ERLLs.
  
• All have one artillery module.
  
• All have one air strike module.
  
• No member of the team uses any of those so-called "OMFG! They're so OP!" jump jets.

Now, let us assume said team ROFLSTOMPs anybody and everybody they encounter, including those previously invincible 12-Higlander poptart teams.




In addition, and as a consequence, every try-hard "monkey see, monkey do" team out there copies them exactly and starts to ROFLSTOMP everybody else not employing those exact same tactics.

What do we do? Do we leave the A-Team alone and just hail them as Mechwarrior Gods? Or do we:

• nerf ERLLs
  
• create a separate pug-only queue
  
• create a separate non 12-man team queue
  
• ban Teamspeak
  
• ban teamwork
  
• ban the team's tactics
  
• ban the team from playing MWO

OMFG!!! The above list looks almost like every other "I was killed by XXX, please nerf XXX" thread that ever existed in these forums.







OMFG!!! OMFG!!! OMFG!!!

[KharnZor]

Mystere, on 24 November 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

As I wrote in that other JJ/Poptart QQ thread:

I was expecting a monologue at the end

[Marmon Rzohr]

Roosterfish, on 24 November 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

JJ's already have trade offs built in, they cost tonnage and crit space.

If you give any mech the ability to run JJ then they need to give every mech the ability to run dual AMS and ECM.

These things are what make certain mechs special and give the game flavor.

Me, I don't want the tofu burger MWO I want the full flavor from a real cow burger MWO.

The idea that every mech JJ ability was just an example to illustrate the idea, i don't think that should be done (and clearly stated so).

And 1 crit slot + 0.5/1/1.5 ton(s) for the stuff JJs give isn't really a trade off. It's like saying DHS have the trade off of taking 3 crit spaces insead of one. That is true, but in practice they are just better in every situation.

[Imawuss]

If you can't handle/counter poptarts you are very very bad. If you think they are OP well you sir need to give up your gamer card.

How to counter:
1. Flank their cover (crazy you might actually have to use positioning)
can't figure that out?
2. Find cover yourself, wait for them to pop up, fire, move back into cover and evade their shot. (crazy shooting first, you can actually evade their shot easier that way!) You can also talk to your team and focus fire when they pop up! crazy!
Too dumb for that?
3. Have missile boat lite them up with well missiles
Don't have a missile boat or a scout?
4. Communicate with team and make a organized push (poptarts have high alpha low sustain, force them into your fight style. Coordinate with your team, insanity in a multiplayer team based game i know.)
Can't coordinate with players in multiplayer game?
5. Complain on forums that X is OP because you don't know how to do Y.

Honestly people complaining about this are horrible players, poptarting is a stupid tactic that gets you killed more than you kill. It's affective only against people that don't realize they can actually move their mech, or line up shots before they need to take them.

[Roughneck45]

Imawuss, on 24 November 2013 - 07:38 PM, said:

poptarting is a stupid tactic that gets you killed more than you kill.

hahahahaha

While I don't think it is OP, this is just a flat out lie.

[topgun505]

Can you put a min range on a gauss? Yes you could. The gauss can be a sabot weapon just like current tank rounds of today (the difference being the gauss is solid metal instead of an explosive round).

The sabot encases the metal penetrator for a short distance after it leaves the barrel before it finally peels away. Before the sabot discards, if the target is hit inside that minimum range it will take damage due to the kinetic force involved but nowhere near the full damage amount.

And, fyi, there IS a min range on gauss rifles in TT.

Just sayin

Bishop Steiner, on 21 November 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

and how pray tell do you add a minimum range to a hypersonic non explosive projectile?

And LOL about the PPC.

[Karl Streiger]

Imawuss, on 24 November 2013 - 07:38 PM, said:

How to counter:
1. Flank their cover (crazy you might actually have to use positioning)
can't figure that out?
2. Find cover yourself, wait for them to pop up, fire, move back into cover and evade their shot. (crazy shooting first, you can actually evade their shot easier that way!) You can also talk to your team and focus fire when they pop up! crazy!
Too dumb for that?
3. Have missile boat lite them up with well missiles
Don't have a missile boat or a scout?
4. Communicate with team and make a organized push (poptarts have high alpha low sustain, force them into your fight style. Coordinate with your team, insanity in a multiplayer team based game i know.)
Can't coordinate with players in multiplayer game?
5. Complain on forums that X is OP because you don't know how to do Y.

OK - you could have spared a lot of words -> simple wrote the words:
Use Teamspeak - play in premade teams.
Because communication - in PUGs are you serious?

You can not flank the enemy position not with those other guys that cover behind the ridge and pop for them selfes.
When you choose to take the long route - you split your forces - without coordination you invite defeat.
But hey you hardly can coordinate in PuGs - i have tried - and it worked once - until they invited ECM.

Oh missiles work indeed with a dedicated LRM boat with target delay - and a not so perfect position of the poptarter below 1000m

Edited by Karl Streiger, 25 November 2013 - 07:07 AM.

[Haji1096]

Thread summary:

people taking advantage of the meta + teamwork = OP

LRMS should be the counter to pop tarts, but they are hot garbage. And likely always will be.

Unless PGI changes convergence, which they have stated they won't, direct fire instant damage weapons will always be king.
Limiting exposure to the enemy is important no matter what state convergence is in.

EVERYBODY POP TART.

[Bishop Steiner]

topgun505, on 25 November 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:

Can you put a min range on a gauss? Yes you could. The gauss can be a sabot weapon just like current tank rounds of today (the difference being the gauss is solid metal instead of an explosive round).

The sabot encases the metal penetrator for a short distance after it leaves the barrel before it finally peels away. Before the sabot discards, if the target is hit inside that minimum range it will take damage due to the kinetic force involved but nowhere near the full damage amount.

And, fyi, there IS a min range on gauss rifles in TT.

Just sayin

so, the guass projectile will increase it's velocity AFTER leaving the barrel? The sabot is a given on a gauss, but the gauss is still a solid projectile, kinetic kill. All that would happen at short range is the target would peel the sabot off, when hit.

[topgun505]

No. But the kinetic energy isn't benefiting from the shaped penetrator ... the target is getting slammed with the sabot form with the weight of the slug behind it. It will still result in damage, but you will get far more penetration/damage once the penetrator round is exposed.

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

so, the guass projectile will increase it's velocity AFTER leaving the barrel? The sabot is a given on a gauss, but the gauss is still a solid projectile, kinetic kill. All that would happen at short range is the target would peel the sabot off, when hit.

[Bishop Steiner]

topgun505, on 25 November 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

No. But the kinetic energy isn't benefiting from the shaped penetrator ... the target is getting slammed with the sabot form with the weight of the slug behind it. It will still result in damage, but you will get far more penetration/damage once the penetrator round is exposed.

you do realize the moment of impact will cause the sabot to peel off even more surely than wind drag, yes? There is no locking mechanism that keeps it attached. There is a slim chance, depending on hit angle and stuff the sabot could not cleanly detach, but it would be small.short of the enemy unit being so close that the sabot is still partially in the barrel, your supposition makes no sense.

[Joseph Mallan]

topgun505, on 25 November 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

No. But the kinetic energy isn't benefiting from the shaped penetrator ... the target is getting slammed with the sabot form with the weight of the slug behind it. It will still result in damage, but you will get far more penetration/damage once the penetrator round is exposed.

can you point to the casing on this RainGun Slug please?

[Karl Streiger]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

so, the guass projectile will increase it's velocity AFTER leaving the barrel? The sabot is a given on a gauss, but the gauss is still a solid projectile, kinetic kill. All that would happen at short range is the target would peel the sabot off, when hit.

Offtopic:
Hm - let me think about it:
Its a coil gun - that means it needs a ferro magnetic material for acceleration -> often used a solid nickel iron ball.
From any "theory" crafting point of view a ball is not perfect in case of aerodynamic and it will port its kinetic energy on a big areal.
A rod of depleted uranium or tungsten carbide - will transfer its kinetic energy on a much smaller areal. More likely the kinetic penetration would be increased. Of course a ferro magnetic material for the discarding sabot is needed.

Joseph Mallan, on 25 November 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

can you point to the casing on this RainGun Slug please?

A rail gun is a different concept - the ferro magnetic material is the rail - the projectile it self don't need to be ferro magnetic - you can even accelerate a cat or a rock if you like

Edited by Karl Streiger, 25 November 2013 - 08:21 AM.

[Vodrin Thales]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 November 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

and how pray tell do you add a minimum range to a hypersonic non explosive projectile?

And LOL about the PPC.

The gauss in table top was described to accelerate it's projectile all the way to the target on a projected magnetic beam/rail. It was stated that the projectile was moving too slow to damage mech armor at ranges under 60 m.

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

so, the guass projectile will increase it's velocity AFTER leaving the barrel?

That's exactly how it was described in some of the TT fluff.

[Joseph Mallan]

Vodrin Thales, on 25 November 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

The gauss in table top was described to accelerate it's projectile all the way to the target on a projected magnetic beam/rail. It was stated that the projectile was moving too slow to damage mech armor at ranges under 60 m.



That's exactly how it was described in some of the TT fluff.

Can a projectile get faster after its ballistic charge has spent itself? I'm not a physics major so I just don't see how a projectile will get faster the longer it travels.

[Bishop Steiner]

Karl Streiger, on 25 November 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Offtopic:
Hm - let me think about it:
Its a coil gun - that means it needs a ferro magnetic material for acceleration -> often used a solid nickel iron ball.
From any "theory" crafting point of view a ball is not perfect in case of aerodynamic and it will port its kinetic energy on a big areal.
A rod of depleted uranium or tungsten carbide - will transfer its kinetic energy on a much smaller areal. More likely the kinetic penetration would be increased. Of course a ferro magnetic material for the discarding sabot is needed.

you also a choice a higher sectional density with a penetrator rod, which enhances penetration, which is why long skinny projectiles replaced balls long ago.

Which is why the navy uses a sabot for it's rail gun (btw, Gauss rifle is used interchangeably in Battletech, do likely to writer ignorance for both Coil and Rail guns. Rail gun being the much more efficient kinetic kill engine. They are often described as coil guns in operation, yet the first actually mentioned was the "Von Ryan RailGun" on the YLW. Go figure) Sabots are held to the round by the shell casing in the case of propellant rounds, the feed and barrel mechanism in the case of a solid shot weapon like a rail gun. Wind drag essentially disengages the sabot upon the moment of exit from the barrel, but the sabot off course continues in a rather more rainbow trajectory due to momentum, but appears to travel with the round for a short distance, even though it is already disengaged.

Hence the only reason a sabot would stay attached, even at short range, and minimize penetration, is a defect causing some form of mechanical lock. I load and use sabot rounds pretty much all the time. Greeat way, for instance to turn a 30-06 into a varmint gun.

Vodrin Thales, on 25 November 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

The gauss in table top was described to accelerate it's projectile all the way to the target on a projected magnetic beam/rail. It was stated that the projectile was moving too slow to damage mech armor at ranges under 60 m.



That's exactly how it was described in some of the TT fluff.

care to post the fluff? Because "projecting magic magnetic rails all the way to the target" makes no sense whatsoever. And having played the game since before they introduced the gauss, I seriously don't recall that wording.

Also, in TT, under the minimum range it still did full damage, but had a penalty to hit. Only LRMs had no damage under their minimum range.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 25 November 2013 - 08:30 AM.