57 replies to this topic

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Crazy Horse 3059, on 11 December 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

Praetor,

Sort of like a sliding scale of weapons based of mech weight? Almost like how JJ work?

It's related to what Koniving posted for burst fire AC's, lower damage, higher rate of fire just different numbers from brainstorming. Then ammo and heat are adjusted as needed.

[Crazy Horse 3059]

Darklord, on 11 December 2013 - 06:32 AM, said:

So your team gets wiped because of the "bad" builds by other players and you want to nerf them.
Did you even think you lost because of bad communications to other players or bad tactics by your team or even the other team was better.
If players want to change the game for the better instead of asking for nerfs all the time why don't they ask for better communication options?
Because screaming in the chat window is not a good way to get players to work together.

Again, you seem to have missed the point of this thread. I play on a team and we communicate just fine. This is NOT a nerf ac20 thread.

Praetor Shepard, on 11 December 2013 - 06:35 AM, said:

It's related to what Koniving posted for burst fire AC's, lower damage, higher rate of fire just different numbers from brainstorming. Then ammo and heat are adjusted as needed.

I see what your talkng about now. Makes perfect sense. I like the idea.

[Myke Pantera]

Draxist, on 09 December 2013 - 07:20 PM, said:

besides, teamwork is OP....that still needs a nerf

I totally agree on that, lol (ironic)

But to the main issue, i never played dual AC20 but I'm all against too many restrictions. If i'm feeling like playing AC20 at some point, i wonna be able to do it. Their size/ammo restrictions are nerf enough for me. As has been stated earlier dual AC20 only works on Jäger anyway. You could squeeze them on a CPLT-K2 but since you can't use an XL engine you will struggle to get into range and the CPLT has a quite limited torse movement so on some Maps you'll struggle to even get your crosshair over an enemy. And Gauss isn't that good enough to be overpowered when dual wielded imo.

[PropagandaWar]

LORD TSARKON, on 10 December 2013 - 10:54 PM, said:

This would fix a lot of that pin point damage.....

I would also argue that PPCs.. Particle Projection Canon? Should not be pinpoint... reduce the heat a little bit but it should not be precise...

Heats fine. See the leak of the Madcat yesterday? Yeah that means PPC = 15 damage 15 heat. This is what we will be dealing with in the near future.

You know whats bad. It's not the AC20's damage its not feeling stuff a lot of times. Especially from the bigger weapons. Your stuff will just be gone, out of nowhere. You go to fire weapons and Bam. They are gone.

[HammerSwarm]

People are always trying to solve problems which don't exist. The solution isn't to make the very canon builds illegal it's to solve the tactic.

[Curccu]

Crazy Horse 3059, on 11 December 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

Thank you for that wonderfully constructive and insightful post. Its post like these that really promote progress.

Crazy Horse 3059, on 11 December 2013 - 06:40 AM, said:

Again, you seem to have missed the point of this thread. I play on a team and we communicate just fine. This is NOT a nerf ac20 thread.

Then you could edit your 1st post to not be "nerf AC20/gauss" thread and maybe I could also give more constructive and insightful replies than I did.

I do like progress but how this thread started... nothing to do with progress.

[Joseph Mallan]

Crazy Horse 3059, on 10 December 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

I don't think that PGI could stand behind the "we care about cannon" arguement at all IMHO. They do what they see fit, as they should since it is their game, but when players (both paying and nonpaying) tell that what we as a collective would like to see they simply brush it off. I also don't think that they need to NERF anything if they were to do this change. The gauss/ac20 would still be just as deadly but it would help push players thing about the larger picture and build a more well-rounded and team oriented mech. I do not suggest changing damage to anything atm. To me damage values seem to be in a decent place for the time being.

I don't think I can get behind PGI constantly making good builds wimpy cause players don' wanna die. Dual AC20 and Dual Gauss builds are a thing in this universe. Players need to suck it up and face the thunder. LRMs were once the perfect counter to GaussPults or SplatCats, But we couldn't have nice toys or play well with others so we had them taken away by the parents.

I am sorry for my tone but I am getting sick of how weak this game is getting. Soon we will be forced to use foul language and "Your Momma' joke to hurt one another.

[Crazy Horse 3059]

Myke Pantera, on 11 December 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

I totally agree on that, lol (ironic)

But to the main issue, i never played dual AC20 but I'm all against too many restrictions. If i'm feeling like playing AC20 at some point, i wonna be able to do it. Their size/ammo restrictions are nerf enough for me. As has been stated earlier dual AC20 only works on Jäger anyway. You could squeeze them on a CPLT-K2 but since you can't use an XL engine you will struggle to get into range and the CPLT has a quite limited torse movement so on some Maps you'll struggle to even get your crosshair over an enemy. And Gauss isn't that good enough to be overpowered when dual wielded imo.

It still can be done, today in one match I ran into a 2x Gauss Cat and an ac40 jager. They didn't last long but they still put down a few mechs. Good for them.

HammerSwarm, on 11 December 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

People are always trying to solve problems which don't exist. The solution isn't to make the very canon builds illegal it's to solve the tactic.

Curccu, on 11 December 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

Then you could edit your 1st post to not be "nerf AC20/gauss" thread and maybe I could also give more constructive and insightful replies than I did.

I do like progress but how this thread started... nothing to do with progress.

I am not advocating reducing damage/range/size/ammo for the AC20 or Gauss. My idea is simply to make Gauss/ac20 a "one per" item. It will, imo, make players more open to creating new designs. Please explain or show me in what way I am saying to nerf ac20 or gauss rifles.

AC40 jagers, while doing a lot of damage and managing to take down 2 or 3 mechs in a good match are really a hindernace for the rest of the team. I have watched too many matches come down to watching one of these mechs be the last man standing and if they werent one trick ponies the match (potentially) could not have been lost.

Joseph Mallan, on 11 December 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

I don't think I can get behind PGI constantly making good builds wimpy cause players don' wanna die. Dual AC20 and Dual Gauss builds are a thing in this universe. Players need to suck it up and face the thunder. LRMs were once the perfect counter to GaussPults or SplatCats, But we couldn't have nice toys or play well with others so we had them taken away by the parents.

I am sorry for my tone but I am getting sick of how weak this game is getting. Soon we will be forced to use foul language and "Your Momma' joke to hurt one another.

Yes, there are cannon mechs that have 2 ac20 or gauss rifles. Yes these ac40 jagers and 2x gauss cats are here and more than likely to stay. Perhaps I am being a little thick headed but I do not see how limiting a mech to use only one ac20 as part of its armament is in any way a limitation.

[Curccu]

Crazy Horse 3059, on 11 December 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

I am not advocating reducing damage/range/size/ammo for the AC20 or Gauss. My idea is simply to make Gauss/ac20 a "one per" item. It will, imo, make players more open to creating new designs. Please explain or show me in what way I am saying to nerf ac20 or gauss rifles.

If I can have two or even three gauss rifles and two AC20s now. With your idea I could only have one. How is that not nerf?
+ gauss mechanics takes that much effort to use it with great efficiency that 1 kinda isn't worth trouble...
(and I'm one of those that like new GR)

[Sandpit]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 December 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

I don't think I can get behind PGI constantly making good builds wimpy cause players don' wanna die. Dual AC20 and Dual Gauss builds are a thing in this universe. Players need to suck it up and face the thunder. LRMs were once the perfect counter to GaussPults or SplatCats, But we couldn't have nice toys or play well with others so we had them taken away by the parents.

I am sorry for my tone but I am getting sick of how weak this game is getting. Soon we will be forced to use foul language and "Your Momma' joke to hurt one another.

you ****ing ***! yo mama is so ****ing **** **** *** she ****ing **** when she ****s

[Lightfoot]

The problem is that MWO has the damage meter too high or armor too low. All the previous MechWarrior games had no balance issues with allowing 2-3 AC20 class weapons on mechs. I used to take a 35 ton Wolfhound and beat a friend of mine in a 95 ton Hauptmann that carried 3 LB-20X guns.

So the real balance should have been allowing 2xAC20's or Gauss on any Mech with the hardpoints and giving them the armor to shrug off the first few hits.

MWO instead disallowed 2xAC20 on any mech over 65 tons and curled up inside two ridiculous heat nerfs and now finds itself in the embarassing situation of having no support for a Clan Invasion they promised to be able to support. The Clans make that 2xAC20 rig look lame, so like I have been saying for the past 18 months, MWO's Mechs are too weak to damage and can not support a Battletech based mech game.

The answer has always been more armor, not nerfing damage. Damage per weapon loadout has always been very low for a MechWarrior game, but it's effect has been ridiculously out of bounds. Goodbye Clan Invasion.

Edited by Lightfoot, 11 December 2013 - 08:09 PM.

[Myke Pantera]

Crazy Horse 3059, on 11 December 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

I am not advocating reducing damage/range/size/ammo for the AC20 or Gauss. My idea is simply to make Gauss/ac20 a "one per" item. It will, imo, make players more open to creating new designs. Please explain or show me in what way I am saying to nerf ac20 or gauss rifles.

The "one per item" suggestion obviously isn't nerfing the weapons themselves, but it limits our "build options".

I think the real problem with these builds is that they are being favoured by the current meta-game. As long as the only thing we can play is basically a team deathmatch without respawn, you best build your mech to deal more damage quicker then the opposition, so that you get a positive kill/death ratio which helps the team and obviously your ego. And AC40 Jägers excel at that. Ofc other meta-builds focus more on assists and scouting assists, but with these your are more dependent on your team compared to when you focus solely on your kill/death ratio.

Further there are quite a lot of mechs which leave their factories with dual Gauss already:
http://www.sarna.net...us_(BattleMech)
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Pillager
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Devastator
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Nightstar
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Gunslinger
this one even with 3
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_Hawk


Although a clan mech but also AC40 exists out of the box
http://www.sarna.net...i/Hunchback_IIC
And if dual Gauss and AC20 is a problem, why not limit LRM20 to "one per items" as well? They have about the same dps with lower hps and you don't even need to get yourself into trouble to be able to fire them. Sure there are more ways to counter LRMs than AC20 but they have some undeniable advantages over AC20s as well. So lets make sure these 2 fellows will never see the light of day
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Viking
http://www.sarna.net...er_(BattleMech)


So while i agree with you that there is a problem in the current meta-game, i don't wonna see AC40 or dual Gauss removed from the game entirely.

Edited by Myke Pantera, 12 December 2013 - 03:52 AM.

[Crazy Horse 3059]

Curccu, on 11 December 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

If I can have two or even three gauss rifles and two AC20s now. With your idea I could only have one. How is that not nerf?
+ gauss mechanics takes that much effort to use it with great efficiency that 1 kinda isn't worth trouble...
(and I'm one of those that like new GR)

I suppose by that arguement that this could be considered a nerf, but I still personally do not consider it to be a nerf. The weapon itself was left alone, and just limited so that players are (basically) forced to creat more rounded builds. Like I said this was just my idea on a problem that I perceive (the problem of one trick pony builds that arent all that usefull to the team) to exist. Now they differ from a LRM support mech where all they are there to do is dump LRMs. These builds in question are just looking for max pinpointed damage. Seeing as how this is a team based and oriented game that players should be thinking of the bigger picture instead of their own stats. At least that is how I play the game as does the rest of my team.

Lightfoot, on 11 December 2013 - 08:06 PM, said:

The problem is that MWO has the damage meter too high or armor too low. All the previous MechWarrior games had no balance issues with allowing 2-3 AC20 class weapons on mechs. I used to take a 35 ton Wolfhound and beat a friend of mine in a 95 ton Hauptmann that carried 3 LB-20X guns.

So the real balance should have been allowing 2xAC20's or Gauss on any Mech with the hardpoints and giving them the armor to shrug off the first few hits.

MWO instead disallowed 2xAC20 on any mech over 65 tons and curled up inside two ridiculous heat nerfs and now finds itself in the embarassing situation of having no support for a Clan Invasion they promised to be able to support. The Clans make that 2xAC20 rig look lame, so like I have been saying for the past 18 months, MWO's Mechs are too weak to damage and can not support a Battletech based mech game.

The answer has always been more armor, not nerfing damage. Damage per weapon loadout has always been very low for a MechWarrior game, but it's effect has been ridiculously out of bounds. Goodbye Clan Invasion.

I don't see them implementing the Clans at all for quite some time.

[Crazy Horse 3059]

Myke Pantera, on 12 December 2013 - 03:52 AM, said:

The "one per item" suggestion obviously isn't nerfing the weapons themselves, but it limits our "build options".

I think the real problem with these builds is that they are being favoured by the current meta-game. As long as the only thing we can play is basically a team deathmatch without respawn, you best build your mech to deal more damage quicker then the opposition, so that you get a positive kill/death ratio which helps the team and obviously your ego. And AC40 Jägers excel at that. Ofc other meta-builds focus more on assists and scouting assists, but with these your are more dependent on your team compared to when you focus solely on your kill/death ratio.

Further there are quite a lot of mechs which leave their factories with dual Gauss already:
http://www.sarna.net...us_(BattleMech)
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Pillager
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Devastator
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Nightstar
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Gunslinger
this one even with 3
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_Hawk


Although a clan mech but also AC40 exists out of the box
http://www.sarna.net...i/Hunchback_IIC
And if dual Gauss and AC20 is a problem, why not limit LRM20 to "one per items" as well? They have about the same dps with lower hps and you don't even need to get yourself into trouble to be able to fire them. Sure there are more ways to counter LRMs than AC20 but they have some undeniable advantages over AC20s as well. So lets make sure these 2 fellows will never see the light of day
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Viking
http://www.sarna.net...er_(BattleMech)


So while i agree with you that there is a problem in the current meta-game, i don't wonna see AC40 or dual Gauss removed from the game entirely.

I see where your coming from and understand your reasoning. While there are cannon mechs in that have multiple ac20 or gauss, if these are implemented in the game they will just be "abused" (in my mind) like the jagers are now. I see your point about the LRMs as well, but those are more spread out than the 20 so I don't feel like those are the problem. LRMs used to be like that, but they have since fixed them. I like how the LRMs are now and I don't think that the are overpowered by themselves. WIth mulitple mechs with lrms then yeah they can be an issue but I have never been afraid of an LRM boat, nor am I afraid of a AC40 jager or gausscat. K/D ratio isnt worth spit, so I really dislike that arguement. You can not gauge the ability of a player based on k/d alone.

[Myke Pantera]

Crazy Horse 3059, on 12 December 2013 - 05:01 AM, said:

K/D ratio isnt worth spit, so I really dislike that arguement. You can not gauge the ability of a player based on k/d alone.

Totally agree. Still i fear this is hugely important for quite a chunk of the community. But than again we are still waiting for something meaningful we can fight for (call for CW), so...

[Red Jenny]

Reading this (again) I have the fealing we will be sitting discussing this yet again the very moment they implement Ultra AC 20s or rotary AC5s. It is just pointless. Any decent player will agree that they rather not have one on their team. Yet in public matchmaking you practically agree by the terms of service to run next to psydo op spam and alpha strike builds and players that would rather suicide than work as a team.

The loadout is alread limited by the tonnage of the mech. Just to get the mindset straight. There are 2 Mechs in the game that could fit dual Gauss or dual AC20. The first is the catapult (K2) which has to fit in the sidetorsos. Making it practically impossible to fit an xl engine as far as AC20s are conserned. Which makes it a either a 30 shot decently slow or a 50 shot 20 kph mech.

Same goes for the JMs. Either be slow or be a xl engine no armor variant with no range.

Also AMS are not limited to 1 per mech. There are just very few mechs that come with 2 AMS hardpoints.

Just to compare: 4 AC2 Cataphracts of Jägers are way scarier. They put out consistent dps (infact equal or more to the AC40s) with the same if not less heat, shaking your crosshair up with every shot. And they have range.

Edited by T3PeS, 12 December 2013 - 07:07 AM.

[Crazy Horse 3059]

Myke Pantera, on 12 December 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

Totally agree. Still i fear this is hugely important for quite a chunk of the community. But than again we are still waiting for something meaningful we can fight for (call for CW), so...

Unfortunately there is nothing that we can do for those types of players that are solely looking for a high k/d spread. Apparently a high K/D spread is directly proportional to a players skill. I must have missed that memo.

T3PeS, on 12 December 2013 - 06:31 AM, said:

Reading this (again) I have the fealing we will be sitting discussing this yet again the very moment they implement Ultra AC 20s or rotary AC5s. It is just pointless. Any decent player will agree that they rather not have one on their team. Yet in public matchmaking you practically agree by the terms of service to run next to psydo op spam and alpha strike builds and players that would rather suicide than work as a team.

The loadout is alread limited by the tonnage of the mech. Just to get the mindset straight. There are 2 Mechs in the game that could fit dual Gauss or dual AC20. The first is the catapult (K2) which has to fit in the sidetorsos. Making it practically impossible to fit an xl engine as far as AC20s are conserned. Which makes it a either a 30 shot decently slow or a 50 shot 20 kph mech.

Same goes for the JMs. Either be slow or be a xl engine no armor variant with no range.

Also AMS are not limited to 1 per mech. There are just very few mechs that come with 2 AMS hardpoints.

Just to compare: 4 AC2 Cataphracts of Jägers are way scarier. They put out consistent dps (infact equal or more to the AC40s) with the same if not less heat, shaking your crosshair up with every shot. And they have range.

You are probably right about RAC/5 and UAC20 which is disappointing. Yes there are only two chassis that can run the ac40/gauss builds. Again, you are correct in that AMS isnt an across the board "one per" since there are mechs that can fit two AMS systems but for the majority they are, so that is why I used them as an example. 4/6x AC2 phracts and jagers are more of an annoyance to me. They shake the snot out of my screen but the damage is paltry imo. If they landed all 4 ac2 on the same spot it will take at least 4+ volleys before they become an issue (I pilot lights for the majority so getting 4 AC8 shots on me is hard unless im legged). If a pilot silly enough to stand there and not alter their actions to take them out then that is their fault.

[Thunder Lips Express]

Proper weapon convergence would be preferable Imo, as has been stated by others smarter then myself