1080 replies to this topic

[Varent]

kapusta11, on 30 December 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

If SRMs had no hit registration issues people would call them OP as it's 36 damage per 3xSRM6 launchers with a well placed shot. If lasers could fire as fast as ACs (on cooldown) people would whine about instant continuous no escape damage. You're asking to brake the only viable weapon in order balance it agains other broken ones.

lasers arent 'broken' they have there uses just like everything else. frankly I feel they are fine where they are. I do find it funny no one realizes just how strong srm are. Even with hit reg issues. When they fix those I can guarantee you will have plenty of people bitching.

[Cimarb]

Broad5ide, on 30 December 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

how about making the weapons that aren't as good better. like say making existing splash weapons work out to more than 100% listed damage when hitting multiple sections or making long duration weapons do exponentially more damage as their beam is held on one section(sort of a risk-reward mechanic). there are plenty of ways to balance besides "everyone uses X so nerf it". That just leads to a revolving door of 1 mechanic is best until all the weapons are so bad the game is unplayable.

I think this is a really good idea. Having lasers do incrementally more damage the longer they hit a single hitbox would be awesome and fit lore very well. It would have to be per-laser, as you would otherwise have pinpoint issues, but having a laser do 1x damage on the first "tick", then x2 damage on the second tick IF it was still hitting the same hitbox, then x3 on the third tick, etc, that would be a really cool way to buff them.

It wouldn't help the TTK issue, but it would bring them much more in line with ballistics.

Varent, on 30 December 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

sure, would you prefer sarna or bt novels? Guess they are one in the same really.

Varent, on 30 December 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

http://www.sarna.net...i/Autocannon/20

Description
The Autocannon is a direct-fire ballistic weapon, firing HEAP (High-Explosive Armor-Piercing) rounds at targets either singly or in bursts.

ill update it with some exerpts from the novels in a sec, have them on pdf, but will take abit =p

I have been waiting for an update with better examples, but they apparently aren't appearing. So, your on example is a phrase that says they can be fired "singly or in bursts"? You do know that I can pull the trigger on my Spiders machine gun and fire "singly" as well, right? I am 100% behind making all autocannons behave like machine guns, as they should, so I like your example.

Let me know when you find one that supports the huge, single shot howitzer rounds currently in the game. I am truly interested to see what you find, seriously.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 30 December 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

I think this is a really good idea. Having lasers do incrementally more damage the longer they hit a single hitbox would be awesome and fit lore very well. It would have to be per-laser, as you would otherwise have pinpoint issues, but having a laser do 1x damage on the first "tick", then x2 damage on the second tick IF it was still hitting the same hitbox, then x3 on the third tick, etc, that would be a really cool way to buff them.

It wouldn't help the TTK issue, but it would bring them much more in line with ballistics.


I have been waiting for an update with better examples, but they apparently aren't appearing. So, your on example is a phrase that says they can be fired "singly or in bursts"? You do know that I can pull the trigger on my Spiders machine gun and fire "singly" as well, right? I am 100% behind making all autocannons behave like machine guns, as they should, so I like your example.

Let me know when you find one that supports the huge, single shot howitzer rounds currently in the game. I am truly interested to see what you find, seriously.

you do realize there is 50+ bt novels out there and im litterally thumbing through them on pdf... and your especting results that quickly?

send me a message so I remember. my time is limited and im on a work computer atm =p Ill give you what ive found.

[Tombstoner]

Varent, on 30 December 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

you do realize there is 50+ bt novels out there and im litterally thumbing through them on pdf... and your especting results that quickly?

send me a message so I remember. my time is limited and im on a work computer atm =p Ill give you what ive found.

if your lookijng for large single ac-20 round vs multiple smaller ac-20 round bursts its right here....http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC-20

As for lasers doing more damage with longer time on target.. that unfairly hurts large slow targets like assaults way more then it would hurt lights. if how ever it scaled with target tonnage then glancing hit would be far more deadly to lights then they are now. not sure i like either out come.

[Varent]

Tombstoner, on 30 December 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

if your lookijng for large single ac-20 round vs multiple smaller ac-20 round bursts its right here....http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC-20

As for lasers doing more damage with longer time on target.. that unfairly hurts large slow targets like assaults way more then it would hurt lights. if how ever it scaled with target tonnage then glancing hit would be far more deadly to lights then they are now. not sure i like either out come.

He wont accept that because its single or burst =p

thanks for the post though.

[Lykaon]

Almond Brown, on 30 December 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

And what most here are proposing is that the Dev fix human nature by making all the weapons have the same range, do the same damage, weigh the same and need the same tonnage of ammo.

That is the ONLY fix and it is not really an option. When even only one factor is "better", and even "better" by the smallest of margins (1%), players will gravitate to it like flies to excrement. It is in their nature and obviously many simply cannot resist that nature.

Btw. You are right. The/any Game is in fact a laboratory of sorts and its Forums are the dictated notes of that laboratories test results. Just because the first 100 tries did not provide the result you thought you'd get, does not mean you should stop trying. Despite "human nature" of course.

I didn't read anyone suggesting that all weapons must be the same in all regards.So that is a trash counterpoint.

And as for "making all same" as the only option for balance this is blatant cop out.

We are not dealing with incriments of 1% or even 10% when comparing effectivness direct fire front loaded pinpoint damage is superior by leaps and bounds beyond all other competing damage mechanics.If we were even dealing with a discrepency of 20% I would be putting an approved stamp on the whole thing since a 20% variance is not insurmountable.if you adjust techniques and tactics.The current situation is that using ballistics and direct fire IS the tactic to achieve high performance with no close second.The next best are so below the capabilities of the front loaded pinpoint damage meta that they may as well not exist.

I agree that the idea of balancing weapons by making them all the same is a waste of time and produces a stale enviorment not worth playing in.

But,this is an alternative right?

Keep all ACs PPCs and LRMs medium or small lasers for "suplimental" weapons when he ammo is gone.
Now remove all chassis that do not incorperate a combination of ballistic and energy hardpoints or those that can't be fitted as LRM boats.Lastly add jumpjets and ECM to everything that is left.Call it balanced then.

Now all mechs are equally OP'd and we have elliminated all the wasted junk like medium mechs,pulse lasers,SRMs,Large lasers and ER large lasers NARCs and BAPs and anything that doesn't contribute to the pinpoint damage meta.

Devs need not be concerned with silly things like information warfare because ECM has removed a need for it to exist in any degree of complexity beyond use ECM.
The Devs will be free of having to create any meanigful role warefare because all mechs will be doing exactaly the same thing with the same weapon combos always.

Actually do nothing the players will gravitate to these mechs and weapons like flies to excrement and eventually we will have a nice and stale meta play enviorment that is also not worth playing.

[Lykaon]

Tombstoner, on 30 December 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

if your lookijng for large single ac-20 round vs multiple smaller ac-20 round bursts its right here....http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC-20

As for lasers doing more damage with longer time on target.. that unfairly hurts large slow targets like assaults way more then it would hurt lights. if how ever it scaled with target tonnage then glancing hit would be far more deadly to lights then they are now. not sure i like either out come.

Actually there is an advantage for having higher total damage applied over a longer time period when engaging fast and small targets.

You have a longer period of time to correct the beam's contact point.

Example: A spider cuts around a bend and you fire a normal large laser. Your initial shot is off target and you swing it up to make contact by the time you have made the adjustments to hit where you wanted nearly half of the damage was expended elsewhere on the target or a miss.With longer beam durations under these circumstances you lose less of the damage to undesired target areas.If .5 seconds is 50% of time on target for a normal laser what if that same .5 second was only 30% for the clan weapon? the standard laser would inflict half it's damage on the target while the clan laser with a longer duration would potentialy inflict two thirds of it's damage onto the target.

[Cimarb]

Tombstoner, on 30 December 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

if your lookijng for large single ac-20 round vs multiple smaller ac-20 round bursts its right here....http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC-20

As for lasers doing more damage with longer time on target.. that unfairly hurts large slow targets like assaults way more then it would hurt lights. if how ever it scaled with target tonnage then glancing hit would be far more deadly to lights then they are now. not sure i like either out come.

That is a good point about the time on target vs. lights that I hadn't thought of. I am looking at is as a bonus for accuracy, but I do see how a slow target would be easier to get the increased damage on. Hmmm...

Varent, on 30 December 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

you do realize there is 50+ bt novels out there and im litterally thumbing through them on pdf... and your especting results that quickly?

send me a message so I remember. my time is limited and im on a work computer atm =p Ill give you what ive found.

You are the one that offered, lol. I don't think you are going to find any examples, but I am definitely interested if you do!

[Gaan Cathal]

Sandpit, on 22 December 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

post does not equal new thread.

stop posting duplicate threads. please. seriously. It just clutters the front page and makes finding threads on different subjects harder and makes it even more confusing for new players trying to find stuff. There's a reason it's against the CoC

Telling other players they're breaking the CoC is against the CoC, fyi.

[Cimarb]

Gaan Cathal, on 30 December 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

Telling other players they're breaking the CoC is against the CoC, fyi.

So is telling someone that telling someone that they broke the CoC against the CoC as well? And if I am asking it as a question does me asking if telling someone that telling someone they broke the CoC still against the CoC?...

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 30 December 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

So is telling someone that telling someone that they broke the CoC against the CoC as well? And if I am asking it as a question does me asking if telling someone that telling someone they broke the CoC still against the CoC?...

*runs away screaming*

[Gaan Cathal]

Cimarb, on 30 December 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

So is telling someone that telling someone that they broke the CoC against the CoC as well? And if I am asking it as a question does me asking if telling someone that telling someone they broke the CoC still against the CoC?...

Yes, no and maybe.

Varent, on 30 December 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

*runs away screaming*

Running away screaming is against the CoC.

Quote

Self-Destruction
Any MechWarrior who willfully or repeatedly-

• Overheats their BattleMech to destruction; or
  
• Is removed from battle by leaving the battlefield boundaries;

Is guilty of BattleMech Desertion and shall be moderated.

[stjobe]

MustrumRidcully, on 30 December 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

From everything I've seen shared in statistics between players, the trend is the same (though many are better shots than me.) And it's not just AC/20 to ML, it is more general trend.
There are other factors influencing damage utilziation. For example, weapons with a faster rate of fire often perform worse than weapons with a slower rate of fire, probably because people have (or at least take) less time to take aim.

I posted my stats in another thread, so I may as well post them here as well:



Effective damage for ballistics is just shy of 50%, for energy it's about 5% lower - and I'm one of those pilots Varent was talking about earlier:

Varent, on 30 December 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

For example I know many light mech pilots who only pilot light mechs. There laser stats would be through the rough. Since they rarely if ever use balistic weapons they would be quite low.

I don't exclusively pilot lights with energy weapons, but you can see for yourself in the "matches" column what I prefer. 820 matches with medium lasers, 65 with AC/20.

[Gaan Cathal]

stjobe, on 30 December 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

I posted my stats in another thread, so I may as well post them here as well:

For what it's worth, the MG should really be in the 'lasers' column for the same reason PPCs are with ballistics.

[Roland]

Rhent, on 22 December 2013 - 12:33 PM, said:

All that has to be done to fix this broke game is to force AC and PPC's to do stream damage. The other solution is to force a charge up time like Gauss.

So you want to make them into lasers.. but they wouldn't be hitscan weapons like lasers.

So lasers would just become better in all ways.

Yeah, that sounds like an excellent plan, chief.

[Cimarb]

Here are mine from last week for comparison (I think I got your Eff calcs correct, at least... though the missile ones must need to be multiplied by the number of missiles, maybe?)

[mania3c]

Noesis, on 30 December 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

As opposed to someone who only pilots Boom Jaegers for instance and therefore skewing their stats in favour of Ballistics in a similar fashion?

However the relative effectiveness of the study also conveniently compares the relative values based on what has "hit". Which also happily demonstrates my point that maximum potential on hit isn't being achieved with lasers, far from it.

In my 1000's of games I have piloted a fair spectrum of platforms (light through to assault) with variable weapon use on those platforms.

The only flaw I see is with your ability to appreciate objective contribution. (Well that and spelling perhaps).

But you stay in denial if you like, I'm quietly confident that beam effects don't result in maximum potential of instantaneous damage to the hit box initially aimed at in all cases. Not simply because I presented information to demonstrate this but from actual observations in game and from an understanding of how MWO beam mechanics work.

maybe it's hard concept for people like you to grasp but again.. it doesn't matter what weapons you are using.. you can use laser weapons all day long..yet you can prove nothing..

I see..you have hard times to understand what objective data means.. You have also hard time to understand what testing environment means.. We both play same game my friend.. I know exactly what you want to prove and I know exactly what environment is out there.. As long as it will stay same, your table is ..as I said..useless in a big picture..

I am not saying you are wrong with your table, math and statistic..it is perfectly showing what is indeed happening in the game. No surprise here. What I am telling you that you and some other people here don't know how to use data properly and this may lead to false conclusion. I am not sure how better to say that.. but if you want continue with same fairy tale, go ahead.

In the end...you and people like you may be right.. ACs may be indeed overtuned..problem is..we can't prove it yet..not with current data we have and surely not with analysis you and some other people are trying to do.. We need different data for this..and I believe only PGI has that. Unless they will provide us these data, we are just guessing. or we could try organize light/medium matches.. and test it for ourselves ..but I don't see this happening anytime soon.

[Noesis]

mania3c, on 30 December 2013 - 10:28 PM, said:

BS

Real data, real conclusions, deal with it.

[anonymous161]

Hmm well er larg laser is fine and so are machine guns as I've had a few games lately where I get 120 match score 6 kills and 850 damage, and one where I got again 120 match score 8 kills and 750 damage...I'd say lasers can do quite well as long as you are able to continue to use them against them with ac 10 or 20 ya you will do great if you hit them everytime but once you run out you are done for typically. I'm great with my spider it's the only light mech I've done great in, it's pretty much why I have a good kdr pretty much, I rarely go a match without a kill or 2, only times I die is when ac40 hits me which I have to say is rather annoying lately how much they are spammed. At least I have to really work for the kill and expose myself to other mechs potentially but ac40's are wimps who just want the easy kill. I always laugh at them when I destroy them. I love rubbing it in.

[mania3c]

Noesis, on 30 December 2013 - 10:51 PM, said:

Real data, real conclusions, deal with it.

Whatever makes you happy.. I see I am just wasting time with your non-sense..I am just glad people like you are not making any decisions..

Edited by mania3c, 30 December 2013 - 11:14 PM.