63 replies to this topic

[MeiSooHaityu]

stjobe, on 27 November 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

Since when did Flamers do through-armour damage?


Please be advised that lasers have a beam duration and their damage is applied evenly during that duration; if you hit with 1/5th of a laser beam, you do 1/5th the damage (and 1/5th crit damage).

Now 1/5th may be better than 0 but it's a lot less than 1.

Flamers did damage through armor in closed beta. You could heat up a mech past 100% and watch the internals change color even though the armor took no damage. I assumed they still could (technically), but since they had been nerfed so baddly since closed beta, I don't know if they do anymore. Maybe internal ammo explosions were causing the internal damage and not the Flamer itself, but that still the armor wasn't taking direct damage. Still, I pretty sure the heat was damaging internals.


I understand beam duration. Your right, a fraction of damage is better than nothing. If 1/5th the duration of a beam hits the RH torso, you still did 2 points damage to the RH torso. with 4MLasers, it would be 4 points. Normally you can hit a section a little more accuratly to do more damage than 1/5th durration. If internals are red (and sometimes even orange), that is all it takes sometimes.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 27 November 2013 - 09:18 AM.

[stjobe]

MeiSooHaityu, on 27 November 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

Flamers did damage through armor in closed beta. You could heat up a mech past 100% and watch the internals change color even though the armor took no damage. I assumed they still could (technically), but since they had been nerfed so baddly since closed beta, I don't know if they do anymore. Maybe internal ammo explosions were causing the internal damage and not the Flamer itself, but that still the armor wasn't taking direct damage. Still, I pretty sure the heat was damaging internals.

AFAIK Flamers don't heat a 'mech past 90%.

MeiSooHaityu, on 27 November 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

I understand beam duration. Your right, a fraction of damage is better than nothing. If 1/5th the duration of a beam hits the RH torso, you still did 2 points damage to the RH torso. with 4MLasers, it would be 4 points. Normally you can hit a section a little more accuratly to do more damage than 1/5th durration. If internals are red (and sometimes even orange), that is all it takes sometimes.

Fair enough, although I think if you can hit the section that accurately, another shot from your main guns would in most cases kill it quicker.

[FupDup]

On the topic of Flamers, I heard from a little birdie (not referring to Lowtax) that they currently only add +0.2 heat per second to the target...this means that you would need 11 Flamers to actually create net heat on a mech which has 10 truedubs.

[Almond Brown]

stjobe, on 27 November 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

stuff

Fair enough, although I think if you can hit the section that accurately, another shot from your main guns would in most cases kill it quicker.

And given the weapons involved, the AC10 reloads quicker than the ML's.

P.S. To the point at hand. A double blast with the 10's and then you "could" get 4 shots at the open RH torso critical space using each MLaser, one at a time and thus increasing your chances substantially.

[Lykaon]

loupgaroupoilu, on 27 November 2013 - 03:55 AM, said:

Or take a stalker, put 4 ERlarge lasers and 24 DHS and then aim for the shoulders of highlanders. But yeah... 24 DHS... for a meh overall dps.

This build is an excellent support platform if used correctly.You will need access to cover and have a screening force to prevent yourself from being jumped up close by multiple enemies.

It works better in 4 man teams than solo where your "team" will not likely be of any use as bird dogs or for screening you.

In 12 mans the poptart meta is brutal on ground bound long chassis like stalkers and the quad ER lrg lasers is annoying enough to poptarts that you will get a priority ticket to the scrap heap.So if used in 12 mans bring more than 1 and have ECM handy.

My suggestion for the specific build you posted is drop the engine to a 300 from a 310 and increase the leg armor.

While cover will be employed a fast striker like a Jenner will saw a leg off with only 30 armor on it in three passes and you can not always avoid the occational open country walk about while under fire.Trade the tiny bit of speed and agility for leg armor in my opinion.

The BAP is also an option to replace but I use one on my Stalker for the quick read on the crit data so I know where the soft spots are on my targets.

[Tahribator]

The thing is, any buffs to the energy weapons will also benefit ballistics builds, since they have great synergy with lasers/missiles because of low heat.

There are some fundamentally broken things with the weapons/mechlab that needs to be tackled first.

[Lupus Aurelius]

Tahribator, on 28 November 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

The thing is, any buffs to the energy weapons will also benefit ballistics builds, since they have great synergy with lasers/missiles because of low heat.

There are some fundamentally broken things with the weapons/mechlab that needs to be tackled first.

But right now, non ballistic mechs that can only mount energy/missile are at a extreme disadvantage. The current heat system precludes an energy mech from having sustainability of fire, and with heat dissipation ported from TT,excepting external DHS, which are less than BT at 1.4 heat/10sec instead of 2.0 heat/10 sec.

Even though the heat reservoir is increased from TT, the heat dissipation of DHS external to the engine has been severely nerfed at 1.4 heat/10 sec. In addition, the dissipation rate has remained the same for SHS and engine DHS,0 .1 and 0.2 heat respectively. So an engine with 10 internal DHS has a heat rating of 50, but it is only shedding 2 heat per sec. Compensating with 10 engine external DHS, which is 10 tons and 30 criticals, will only increase the dissipation to 3.4 heat per second.

Energy weapons firing speeds average 3.14 sec, or 3.19 faster than BT, with average damage of 6.67, and an average heat of 6.34, vs ballistics which firing speeds average at 2.36sec, or 4.24 times faster than BT, with average damage of 8.39, and an average heat of 2.14 .

[Felicitatem Parco]

The problem isn't really the strength of the Heatsinks, but rather the picking-and-choosing of what TT rules to carry into MW:O.

Since heat dissipation is still based on the 10-second interval, then energy weapons are "balanced" to be used continuously ONLY if you intend on using them, on average, once every 10 seconds. However, since ballistic weapons are not very limited by heat, they can successfully be used much more frequently than once/10 seconds. Therefore, energy weapons are designed specifically to be used once or twice prior to disengagement from combat, whereas ballistics can be used constantly until the enemy is either dead or chooses to disengage (or you choose to disengage).

Ballistic weapons let you take advantage of the increased firing rates given to all weapons in MW:O, but energy weapons are still restricted to abide by the slow heat dissipation of an environment where they are only supposed to be used once every 10 seconds. That's why ballistics are better than energy weapons in MW:O.

[Burke IV]

Karl Streiger, on 27 November 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

THIS

When you mix direct fire weapons with LRMs you need TAG - that is reducing your ability to hurt your enemy.
AS7-K
And in the end you have a Mech - that is not able to beat LRM Boats - because two AMS won't stop enough missiles when 60 or more missiles fall down at you every 4-5 seconds.
You can not stop the Brawler to get close - nor are you able to win a sniper duell

Gauss and LRM20 were a great combination in Closed Beta - but it is complete useless now. and the AS7-K is one of the least useable Atlas

Its cause you cant have everything and i dont think anybody would really be happy if you could. I looked at your atlas and tinkered with it, it comes with the disclaimer that its a forum mech and not anything i have ever run, but what do you think of AS7-K Its even got a ppc

[Zvanya]

Prosperity Park, on 28 November 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

The problem isn't really the strength of the Heatsinks, but rather the picking-and-choosing of what TT rules to carry into MW:O.

Since heat dissipation is still based on the 10-second interval, then energy weapons are "balanced" to be used continuously ONLY if you intend on using them, on average, once every 10 seconds. However, since ballistic weapons are not very limited by heat, they can successfully be used much more frequently than once/10 seconds. Therefore, energy weapons are designed specifically to be used once or twice prior to disengagement from combat, whereas ballistics can be used constantly until the enemy is either dead or chooses to disengage (or you choose to disengage).

Ballistic weapons let you take advantage of the increased firing rates given to all weapons in MW:O, but energy weapons are still restricted to abide by the slow heat dissipation of an environment where they are only supposed to be used once every 10 seconds. That's why ballistics are better than energy weapons in MW:O.

That's an exellent analysis.

[Captain Stiffy]

As time goes on the devs limit the weapons that I will use. It's not that I am angry about it or anything they just nerf things into uselessness compared to what remains.

LB10-X
ER LL
ML
ER PPC
LRM 15
SSRM 2
AMS

That's it. Anything else is a waste.

Edit: "NO AC/20!?!?" ... it would be on this list if hit detection worked.

Edited by Captain Stiffy, 28 November 2013 - 08:50 AM.

[Captain Stiffy]

Zvanya, on 28 November 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

That's an exellent analysis.

It's a good analysis - the underlying problem though I think is not "picking and choosing" but that there is a whole other underlying schema being used to create the game that doesn't directly have anything at all to do with battletech. Perhaps they are 'picking and choosing' which features will fit their completely non-cannon system, but they do appear to have something in mind - it's just not in any way cannon.

It's like this kid:


All he knows is that he likes turtles. The dev's only know that they like battletech - their actual agenda has nothing to do with us.

[Almond Brown]

Zvanya, on 28 November 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

That's an exellent analysis.

And the solution, based on said analysis is easy. Double the Ballistic weapons Cool downs. But the Tears would be such that the water pumps of the Hoover Dam itself could not keep pace with the flow. Players who like their Dakka, really like their Dakka a lot. So, it is likely to ever happen.

Or they could leave GH in and reduce the Heat levels on Energy weapons, but as noted that just help the Ballistic users add them back into their arsenals. So that is out as well

Edited by Almond Brown, 28 November 2013 - 09:10 AM.

[stjobe]

Almond Brown, on 28 November 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

And the solution, based on said analysis is easy.

1. Increase dissipation to give energy weapons more breathing room in this insane heat system of ours.
2. Rework ballistics to burst-fire to reduce their "all damage to one location" advantage over all other weapon systems.
3. Redesign the PPC to a beam weapon like it should be (and not the faux-ballistic it currently is).

With that done, re-evaluate TTL and if it's still too low, either rework convergence or introduce a cone of fire.

[Lightfoot]

Lightfoot, on 28 November 2013 - 09:36 AM, said:

So the point is MWO just has some broken mechanics, Battletech mechanics. And the way to fix it is not by adding more nerfs, but by removing the current nerfs that MWO has placed on top of normal Battletech functionality. Ghost Heat, DHS 1.4, Gauss Rifle desync.

Then halve the damage of all weapons to compensate for the nearly 2x Recharge MWO uses. Then MWO would run fairly close to Battletech and you would get Mechs using loadouts based on the Map Enviornment. And that, adds this third layer to MechWarrior gameplay strategy that MWO players have never experienced due to the oppressive heat nerfs.

So ACs don't need a targetted nerf, MWO just needs to remove DHS 1.4 and Ghost Heat nerfs and then lower the overall damage weapons do across the board. That would get MWO back to working like Battletech/MechWarrior instead of GunWarrior.

And no, I do not have a favored weapon or loadout. I can easily adapt to any balance MWO uses, but as a Beta Tester I have to tell PGI they are missing out on the full spectrum of gameplay strategy that MechWarrior normally offers.

I just posted this in the AC OP thread, but here is your answer.

The core reason is of course that Battletech has all the weapons balanced with some inherent weaknesses and strengths, but that they are all equally damaging under normal enviornmental effects. 23C or 70F.

Ballistic's weaknesses are weight and usually size and their strength is they are very cool usually.

Energy's weakness is Heat, (normally offset by extra Heatsinks) and it's strengths are it is light and small.

PGI's method of balancing damage in MWO has been to just increase the heat burden on mechs to curtail firing. That seems the natural way to go, but it unbalances the aforementioned core principles Battletech uses to balance the Mechs and Weapons and thus it only affects Energy weapons and so the problems you have noted.

[Captain Stiffy]

They should balance the game so that you can fire approximately 2 weapons every 11 seconds. Then it would be more like cannon - but wait! - no btech game has EVER been like that unless it also has HEXES lawl.

[Sandpit]

I'm glad someone finally got the nerve to post on this

[Almond Brown]

stjobe, on 28 November 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

1. Increase dissipation to give energy weapons more breathing room in this insane heat system of ours.
2. Rework ballistics to burst-fire to reduce their "all damage to one location" advantage over all other weapon systems.
3. Redesign the PPC to a beam weapon like it should be (and not the faux-ballistic it currently is).

With that done, re-evaluate TTL and if it's still too low, either rework convergence or introduce a cone of fire.

Increased dissipation helps ALL weapons systems and as such is a wash. You know those Ballistic users that didn't add that extra Energy weapon? They will now and still have their Ballistics.

If 2. is done, then 1. is not a requirement anymore. Burst fire then fixes the main issue of Pin-Point damage, which is the apparent real drawback to Energy, aside from the current GH curbing its DPS spreadsheet values.

for 3. if 1. or 2. were done, the PPC as the sole 10pt direct pin point weapon, due to its weight, Heat and DHS needs to run would be ok as is.

After writing that, I think I just had a deja vu moment... lol

Edited by Almond Brown, 28 November 2013 - 11:31 AM.

[MountainCopper]

Kin3ticX, on 26 November 2013 - 10:18 PM, said:

current meta is to sandwich AC's and PPCs together, usually on a JJ platform.

some common combos:
PPC,PPC,UAC,UAC
PPC,PPC,AC5,AC5
PPC,PPC,A20
PPC,PPC,AC10

The main idea being to have a 30 or 40pt alpha + jump jets.

Mechs without JJ capability but also have high mounted hardpoints like the Jager or the Stalker also make good ac dakka and laser boats. They can at least hill hump well.

Mix builds having no jump jets with, lasers, srms, and LRMs known as "traditional" or "bracket builds" will work more and more poorly as you climb the ELO ladder.

Think Tribes with Jetpacks or Quake with rocket jumping.

As for ACs being really good, they just compliment PPCs really well because you avoid ghost heat mixing them.

These are exactly the builds which make me angry every time I see them...
These stupid, overpowered single-shot builds in conjunction with JJs. Appear for 5 seconds, deal massive damage on one single point and then disappear again. This has yet to be addressed and has to disappear quickly.

Heat penalties didn't solve the problem of high alphas onto one single area, as people simple shifted over from multiple ERPPC/Gauss to the builds mentioned above. And double AC20 builds are still very common despite the big heat penalty they put onto the weapon.

I wish they would change all weapons which deal their damage in 1 single shot to have a chance to miss if not fired alone, or at least to not hit the same component. Convergence...

Edited by GoldenFleece, 28 November 2013 - 11:54 AM.

[stjobe]

Almond Brown, on 28 November 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

Increased dissipation helps ALL weapons systems and as such is a wash. You know those Ballistic users that didn't add that extra Energy weapon? They will now and still have their Ballistics.

The difference would be that all-energy loadouts would become more viable; yes, ballistics would also run cooler - but they already do. It would diminish the difference and as such provide a much needed energy alternative to the all-ballistic game we currently have.

Almond Brown, on 28 November 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

If 2. is done, then 1. is not a requirement anymore. Burst fire then fixes the main issue of Pin-Point damage, which is the apparent real drawback to Energy, aside from the current GH curbing its DPS spreadsheet values.

I believe that 1. is still needed; the disparity between ballistics and energy heat efficiency is too large even if ballistics got spread from being burst-fire.

Almond Brown, on 28 November 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

for 3. if 1. or 2. were done, the PPC as the sole 10pt direct pin point weapon, due to its weight, Heat and DHS needs to run would be ok as is.

The Gauss Rifle would be the weapon I'd want to see as the sole pin-point weapon. It is a one-slug weapon in lore, whereas the PPC is a beam weapon in lore.

Almond Brown, on 28 November 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

After writing that, I think I just had a deja vu moment... lol

Nothing new under the sun