116 replies to this topic

[SaJeel]

OK, not gonna try to explain something that someone else has done so well, so if you want to get a basic gist of designing skill to power in video games check out Extra Credits: Balancing For Skill.
The autocannons are high damage dealing weapons, 3 acs putting a player at about 9 dps, this damage is pintpoint and near instant, the skill needed is low, easy stuff for any decent fps player and effective at range. Now when you compare that to the other types of weapons, energy weapons require a much greater skill to use, you have to maintain you crosshair on the target and mitigate heat much more than an autocannon. LRMS are a lowskill weapon, much easier than ACs, but they are also much less powerful. They can easily be countered by ECM or blocking them using terrain(which is more of an issue given they're indirect nature), and require a team to work together, something im sure you all know often doesn't happen. Srms... yea lets not get me started on the problems I see with srms >.<, thats a whole other post.
Ac's have some of the highest Power, and require the least skill, and this needs to change

[Asmudius Heng]

Tend to agree somewhat.

But you do pay a premium in tonnage and exploitable ammo too which is not skill based but is a risk reward situation.

Having to lead your shots does take some skill to put those shells on the target you want as well, but the benefit of course is that whe they hit they apply all that damage to a location.

People have mentioned making them burst weapons which would be similar to lasers in that they would spread damage more and require skill to hold them on target but this would then make the appeal of them of having full damage on a single location moot and make them closer to lasers perhaps promoting PPCs or gauss rifles ... Though gauss has a skill mechanic on it now.

What makes ACs unique is that single damage punch and its 3x range ... Those are not bad things to keep but if we do not have burst firing I am not sure what additional skill mechanic we can apply. Though if it was a burst it would make the gauss a more interesting choice as the only pinpoint slammer along with PPCs which at least have a heat and range limiter.

That being said I am not sure its a huge issue but I am not playing high end competition at the moment so I don't know if AC abuse is a real thing.

[Noesis]

+1

However I would say that all weapons in some way require skill to use most effectively and for differing situations and this shouldn't reflect that ballistics are "low" skilled as a result.

But I would agree that due to the beam effects of lasers requiring a sustained aiming over time with a tick effect for best damage to any given location this requires more skill to use them as effectively and certainly not as convincing as ballistics when looking at applied pinpoint delivery. It also means more face time due to having to hold a beam.

So maybe other weapons need "more relative" skill to make best use of as a result since overall the delivery of ballistics weapons appear to be more effective when comparing applied values.

I made a thread recently "Ballistics Bettering Beams" that makes this comparison but cannot quote it as a link since cross referencing threads is not considered helpful.

Edited by Noesis, 12 December 2013 - 05:34 PM.

[verybad]

*shrugs* I find Energy pretty easy to use so long as your'e properly HS;d.

As for skill, that's kind of a poor use of terms, as there are plenty of highly skilled players using AC and vice versa re Energy.

I don't see a huge difference in power levels at this point IMO.

[Mcchuggernaut]

I have been saying for ages now that autocannons need a range nerf. You shouldn't be able to beat PPCs and gauss rifles with them, because the role of those weapons is to be dominant at range and not good up close. But you easily can. Cockpit shake makes returning fire from long range very difficult when you are hit by autocannons, and their smoke obscures your vision even more. Add to that autocannons having a greater DPS, low heat, and no minimum range or problems when used up close, and you have a real mess. The only things limiting them are weight and ammo, and that is way less drawbacks than benefits. Why do you see so many people using them? Cut their range, and they should balance out.

[Lyoto Machida]

Asmudius Heng, on 12 December 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Tend to agree somewhat.

But you do pay a premium in tonnage and exploitable ammo too which is not skill based but is a risk reward situation.

Having to lead your shots does take some skill to put those shells on the target you want as well, but the benefit of course is that whe they hit they apply all that damage to a location.

People have mentioned making them burst weapons which would be similar to lasers in that they would spread damage more and require skill to hold them on target but this would then make the appeal of them of having full damage on a single location moot and make them closer to lasers perhaps promoting PPCs or gauss rifles ... Though gauss has a skill mechanic on it now.

What makes ACs unique is that single damage punch and its 3x range ... Those are not bad things to keep but if we do not have burst firing I am not sure what additional skill mechanic we can apply. Though if it was a burst it would make the gauss a more interesting choice as the only pinpoint slammer along with PPCs which at least have a heat and range limiter.

That being said I am not sure its a huge issue but I am not playing high end competition at the moment so I don't know if AC abuse is a real thing.

Lol at ammo explosions as being a deterrent to bringing ACs...how often do you really see ammo explosions?

I NEVER run CASE and rarely die to ammo explosions (ie: maybe once a month).

[Henry Morgan]

Lyoto Machida, on 12 December 2013 - 05:30 PM, said:

Lol at ammo explosions as being a deterrent to bringing ACs...how often do you really see ammo explosions?

I NEVER run CASE and rarely die to ammo explosions (ie: maybe once a month).

I think I see members on the team run out of ammo more frequently than ammo explosions.

[Ghogiel]

I think buffing the chance for ammo to crit by 5-10% would make a noticeable difference. Legging a 733c might actually be worth it compared to trying to core or RT it while he's twisting all over the place.

[akpavker]

Mcchuggernaut, on 12 December 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

I have been saying for ages now that autocannons need a range nerf.

there should be no more nerfing in this game!!!!! im all ready growing board of MWO due to multiple nerfs (after launch) and lack of content if the nerfs keep pooring in ill be likely to say screw it and go play something else. honestly if AC's are so powerful then buff the other farken weapons and be done with all this BS. im so sick of this game having "fun stuff" nerfed because some **** that cant play the game dies and then runs to the forums and cry's!! it needs to stop!!!

[aniviron]

Asmudius Heng, on 12 December 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

But you do pay a premium in tonnage and exploitable ammo too which is not skill based but is a risk reward situation.

I see this getting said a lot, but it's just really not a risk right now. The first ton goes in the head, where you're going to die anyway if you lose it, and the head has so little internal hp that it's going to get blown off long before the ammo bin is critted. The next four tons go in the legs- again, pretty marginal risk. If you lose a leg, you're pretty much done for anyway, and let's be honest- except when fighting lights (who can't carry ballistics, really) nobody aims for the legs, it just takes far longer to kill. So there you have five free, safe tons, which is going to be enough for the vast majority of builds out there.

To add icing onto the "don't worry about ammo explosions" cake, ammo bins only have a 10% chance of exploding when shot critically anyway, which again, makes it not worth going for your opponent's ammo. Why go for something that gives you a 10% chance of crippling or killing (assuming that the ammo hasn't been shot already) when you can just shoot the CT for a 100% kill chance.

Ghogiel, on 12 December 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

I think buffing the chance for ammo to crit by 5-10% would make a noticeable difference. Legging a 733c might actually be worth it compared to trying to core or RT it while he's twisting all over the place.

I'm very much inclined to agree, but I think there's an even better suggestion- vastly increase the ammo explosion chance to 50 or 66%, but vastly decrease the amount of damage done when the ammo explodes. Even if you double the explosion chance to 20% like the top end of your suggestion, it's still only a one in five chance of really doing any damage, again making the assumption the ammo hasn't been spent. Increasing that too much higher and suddenly it becomes too good though- at about one in three you'd probably see ballistic mechs always legged, since two tons of ammo gives a better than even chance of instant death for removing a leg.

Clearly the explosion chance has to go up if you want players to actually be able to use a munitions-based mech's weaknesses against it, but by the same token, it's too big of a downside to carry ammo if it becomes a death sentence. The answer is to have ammo deal a significantly reduced amount of damage when it is blown up, say 1/4 or something of that nature. Given that most ammo packs are balanced to deal roughly the same amount of damage per ton, it should be fairly easy to calculate an amount that would cripple without killing, i.e. by speeding up leg destruction and dealing internal damage to the side without destroying the side.

[Xiang]

I would prefer to see ACs set the way they are in the books, as cassettes of ammo with shell casings flying off the cannons as they are expended.

So an AC2 would be s single shot (maybe 2), but an AC5 would be 2-3 shots, an AC10 = 5 shots and an AC 20 = 10 shots. This would mean that you would have to track your target the whole time your shot was firing. Then the cassette would be ejected and a new one loaded (reload time) before you can fire again.

This would make it interesting...

Xiang

[D04S02B04]

I think rather than nerfing the ACs, I like to see buffs to normal lasers, SRMs and deciding what Pulse Lasers are supposed to do.

Ghogiel, on 12 December 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

I think buffing the chance for ammo to crit by 5-10% would make a noticeable difference. Legging a 733c might actually be worth it compared to trying to core or RT it while he's twisting all over the place.

aniviron, on 12 December 2013 - 06:59 PM, said:

... stuff about ammo explosions ...

Increasing the possibility of ammo explosion is a great idea.

My Heavy and Medium mechs (that has ballistic hard points) often use AC with an XL engine and stores the ammo in Torso because the chance of ammo explosion is really low while the risk of being legged can impair performance seriously (ammo explosion or loss of large amounts of ammo).

This will create an incentive to actually use CASE provided CASE is modified to function as per TT rules. If R&R comes back in, it will become even more important.

EDIT: Back on Topic...

AC weapons have very selective use. At the higher levels, you don't see non-stop AC (like AC2, AC5, UAC5) fire nearly as much but more of PPC usage. Constantly having to "look at" an opponent is death. Even the UAC5 build on HGN-733C requires skill to balance torso twist and dealing pin point damage.

FURTHER EDIT: After I watched your video (cause I re-read your post again and I assumed the video meant something else before I watched it)...

If you look at the AC, it fills this role very well. High power for lower skill.

If you look at a lot of players on this forum, they are exactly what the video describe... using lower skill high power strategies that takes less effort to pull off.

Edited by D04S02B04, 12 December 2013 - 07:35 PM.

[OneEyed Jack]

D04S02B04, on 12 December 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

This will create an incentive to actually use CASE provided CASE is modified to function as per TT rules. If R&R comes back in, it will become even more important.

CASE is one of the few things that works exactly how it does in TT. You're probably used to Clan CASE, which is free in free, taking no crits or tonnage and applies to limbs. Inner Sphere CASE is only allowed in the torsos. All case only prevents ammo explosion damage transfer to other locations, never preventing damage to the location of the explosion or to the location of the CASE (i.e.: ammo expl. in arm can still take out the side torso with CASE, but can't transfer to the center).

Quote

Introduced: 2476 (Terran Hegemony)
Extinct: 2840 (Inner Sphere)
Recovered: 3036 (Draconis Combine)

One of the oldest examples of so-called “lost” technologies, CASE (as we know it today) actually predates the Star League by nearly a hundred years. Indeed, its earliest progenitors can be traced back even farther. Developed as a damage-control technology in the event of catastrophic internal explosions, CASE—then as now—became an intrinsic part of the armor system on BattleMechs, Combat Vehicles and fighters, intended to save crews and machines for later salvage. When heat or damage triggers an ammunition explosion in a CASE-protected location, specially designed blow-away panels direct the force of the explosion outward, through the rear of the machine. Though any remaining internal structure in the effected section is typically damaged in these blasts, CASE has spared many a machine that once would have been fully consumed by an internal explosion.

Originally kept tightly controlled by the Terran Hegemony (along with many of their vital technologies), CASE has proliferated among armorers across the Inner Sphere since its recovery, and even has been adapted for non-military equipment (as a guard against the eff ects of freak fuel tank explosions and the like). The Clans, of course, have also retained this technology, but have refi ned it so well that theirs is completely seamless and weightless by Inner Sphere standards. Nevertheless, even Clan CASE remains incompatible with the compact architecture of ProtoMech designs, where even a redirected internal explosion would have catastrophic effects on the machines and their pilots.

Tech Rating: Inner Sphere and Clan
Unit Restrictions: ProtoMechs, Small Craft and DropShips may not carry CASE.
Game Rules: CASE systems are automatic, and are considered active even if the unit is shut down or its pilot/crew is rendered incapable of acting in combat.
Construction Rules: For Inner Sphere BattleMechs and IndustrialMechs, CASE must be allocated to Torso locations only. Inner Sphere Combat and Support Vehicles with CASE automatically place this equipment in the Body location at a cost of 1 equipment slot. Aircraft and aerospace fighters with CASE place this equipment in their fuselage as well, at no cost in weapon slots. Units built using Clan technology (except for ProtoMechs) are presumed to incorporate CASE automatically in all locations that store ammunition or explosive equipment (such as Gauss rifles). OmniMechs, OmniVehicles and Support OmniVehicles designed without CASE in their base chassis may add it to later configurations as a pod.

[Nryrony]

We don't need skill rewards, we need weapon balance and this can be achived by adjusting weapon range and heatsink efficency.

[Joseph Mallan]

SaJeel, on 12 December 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

OK, not gonna try to explain something that someone else has done so well, so if you want to get a basic gist of designing skill to power in video games check out Extra Credits: Balancing For Skill.
The autocannons are high damage dealing weapons, 3 acs putting a player at about 9 dps, this damage is pintpoint and near instant, the skill needed is low, easy stuff for any decent fps player and effective at range. Now when you compare that to the other types of weapons, energy weapons require a much greater skill to use, you have to maintain you crosshair on the target and mitigate heat much more than an autocannon. LRMS are a lowskill weapon, much easier than ACs, but they are also much less powerful. They can easily be countered by ECM or blocking them using terrain(which is more of an issue given they're indirect nature), and require a team to work together, something im sure you all know often doesn't happen. Srms... yea lets not get me started on the problems I see with srms >.<, thats a whole other post.
Ac's have some of the highest Power, and require the least skill, and this needs to change

How much skill does one need to have to kill with ballistic weapons in general? I ask cause as a former paid professional mass murderer, Shoot a ballistic weapon was point and click long before FpS were a game mechanic.

I am one who wants my enemy dead quickly. Long time having the axium drilled in that the longer your enemy is alive the greater the chance I will not be.

We have Scatter damage (missiles), DpS Weapons (Lasers), and front loaded damage (Ballistics). Leave this mix alone. Fix Convergence, but stop trying to make this game all DpS.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I don't know.

I suppose A/C weapons (due to instant pin-point damage) are good at applying damage to an area, but it is an "all or nothing" weapon. If you miss, you apply no damage.

Tripple A/C2s are actually a bit difficult to use. I do get good damage with them, but they are hard to maintain RoF on a target and have each shot hit. It is easier for me in a lighter mech (Shad or Hunch), but 3 in a Victor arm is almost impossible for me to use properly.

An energy weapon (well lasers anyway) will apply damage spread out over the entire duration. Even if you miss, you can sweep the beam back on target and apply SOME damage.

Seems to me like energy weapons are easier to use, but A/C weapons (projectile weapons really) reward better aim. Really, it sounds opposite of the point the OP is making.

[OneEyed Jack]

MeiSooHaityu, on 13 December 2013 - 04:22 AM, said:

Seems to me like energy weapons are easier to use, but A/C weapons (projectile weapons really) reward better aim. Really, it sounds opposite of the point the OP is making.

Beams do reward steadier aim, as opposed to reflexive, twitch-y aim.

[Livewyr]

akpavker, on 12 December 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

there should be no more nerfing in this game!!!!! im all ready growing board of MWO due to multiple nerfs (after launch) and lack of content if the nerfs keep pooring in ill be likely to say screw it and go play something else. honestly if AC's are so powerful then buff the other farken weapons and be done with all this BS. im so sick of this game having "fun stuff" nerfed because some **** that cant play the game dies and then runs to the forums and cry's!! it needs to stop!!!

Yeah, buff alllll duh weapons... that way.. when I turn the corner at the wrong time.. I'm insta-dead!


(Remind me of SC's ghost "SniperZ" UMS map..)

You must consider the balance between armor and weapons in a game that *isn't* supposed to be CoD HC mode.

Edited by Livewyr, 13 December 2013 - 05:05 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Please, whatever you do to nerf Auto-Cannons, let it not be a rash increase in ammo explosions. Ammo explosions are fundamentally random effects that neither attacker nor defender have control over.

The only type of ammo explosion change I could accept:
o Probability 90 % or higher
o Damage down to 10-20 damage per ammo bin (regardless of the type of ammo, scaled by percentage of ammo still left)

That way ammo explosions are a "stable" risk. Real-Existing, but no random mysterious death from half a ton of MG ammo ripping apart your mech.

---

Lowering AC max range to energy weapon standards sounds like a sensible change to me. I don't know if that will make a big difference in practice.

The fundamental problems are:
o heat system
o Convergence + Group Fire with single projectile damage weapons

Change on that front is not in sight. Probably too fundamental a change would be required for PGI to be capable (or at least willing) of implementing it.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 13 December 2013 - 05:12 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Livewyr, on 13 December 2013 - 05:05 AM, said:

Yeah, buff alllll duh weapons... that way.. when I turn the corner at the wrong time.. I'm insta-dead!


(Remind me of SC's ghost "SniperZ" UMS map..)

You must consider the balance between armor and weapons in a game that *isn't* supposed to be CoD HC mode.

If I turn the corner and run into 4-6 enemy players I should be dead in about zero point Chit below rock level seconds!
Make a mistake pay for it!