424 replies to this topic

[Khan Hallis]

Mystere, on 07 January 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:

Hold a second because now I am really confused!

On one side, we have casuals accusing PGI of catering only to the "elites". On another side, we have the "elites" accusing PGI of listening to the "skill less rabble" instead of listening to them. And finally we have another side accusing PGI of listening only to the "silent majority".

JUST WHO THE FRACK IS PGI ACTUALLY LISTENING TO!

I never said PGI was listening to anyone. I said they are having their strings pulled. Like puppets.

[wanderer]

DONTOR, on 07 January 2014 - 02:27 PM, said:

LBX weighs 1 ton less, takes up 1 less slot, does 2 less heat, WILL hit your target, destroys lights, and the spread is effective up to 300M, everypellet will hit larger mechs at 500M.

Y'know, I've heard this since pre-open beta. It wasn't true then, and it isn't true now. An LB-X is effective at one range- stuck up the target's nose. It doesn't kill lights, because even a light 'Mech can easily weather a shotgun blast that if it matched the Battletech version would do MORE damage than the MWO version (as LRMs got a damage buff but LB-X pellets did not, only bonus damage to internals). A pair of SRM 6's is more effective for a third less weight, and at the range the SRM isn't effective, the LB-10X is a pathetic dink-gun.

Concentrated damage (or a lot of splash) kills lights. LB-X shots do neither.

Quote

Flamers cause heat, got a range buff, and Ive actually managed killls with them. Not to mention the blinding effect.

We're talking the second-least effective point-blank weapon next to the machinegun here. Do we need another training grounds video showing someone hosing a target down with flamer fire until they shut down while the target isn't even showing breached back armor?

Quote

AC2s are incredibly effective in the right hands (not just a troll cannon by any means)

Of the three, the only weapon that's been useful in recent times, and ghost heat played hob with even that unless you macro in the delay. Whee.

Edited by wanderer, 07 January 2014 - 04:37 PM.

[Mystere]

Mister Blastman, on 07 January 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

650 meters a second id 1454.01 miles an hour. I wouldn't call that slow but it isn't super fast, either. 5.56 mm ammo @ 55 grains goes 3240 feet per second, or 2209 miles an hour.

Now, for MWO... Say the AC/20 shell is similar to a 125 mm smoothbore shell... then it'd weigh at least 7 kg ... but probably more. If it is travelling at 650 m/s then...

F = M * A

or

7 * 650 = 4550 Newtons or Joules...

to put that in perspective, your average AK-47 puts out 2179 Joules of energy from the muzzle into the round.

Sooooo our badass AC/20 is slightly more than twice as powerful.

Yeah.

Ahem!

That 650 m/s is velocity (i.e. speed) and not acceleration. Also, newtons (i.e. unit of force) and joules (i.e. unit of energy) are not the same.

Also, what you should probably be measuring is kinetic energy. And given your numbers, that value is 1,478,750 joules. Of course, I leave the correct equation for you to figure out.

Artgathan, on 07 January 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

Shouldn't an Ac/20 round weigh 1 ton / 7 rounds = 0.143 tons (143 kg)?

That would give it 92,950 joules

And you're including the weight of the casing(?) and propellant(?).

Edited by Mystere, 07 January 2014 - 05:32 PM.

[Rhent]

FupDup, on 07 January 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:

The LB 10-X does not do its job well. Critical hits are not very significiant most of the time, and the raw damage is spread out on the target unless it's fired at very very close range. The 1 ton and 1 slot gained compared to the AC/10 is simply not worth the loss of pinpoint damage potential and the massive "effective" range reduction (due to spread).




The AC/2 is kind of a "meh" troll cannon. It has its uses but can't quite stand up to "the meta" weapons.

The Flamer does not perform well in its niche at all. It only heats up the target to 90% heat, but the shooter can still reach 100% or higher with them. It also requires constant firing on the target, and takes several moments for the exponential heat up effect to "wind up" for it to actually do anything. All in all, it is a horrible weapon.

A single flamer aimed at an assault brawler's head while its being circled by a bunch of lights can make it difficult to target. Using the flamer for damage or heat generation is a complete waste, but its the best weapon in the game for blinding.

[KharnZor]

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

as opposed to putting your ideas into a central location? without derailing the topic, trolling, putting on tinfoil hats, etc.

Like I dunno....

http://mwomercs.com/...s/page__st__820

Sandpit. Shhh.
To put my post into proper english it would be worded as this: People are failing to understand PGI's thinking behind these changes and would like to know why.
Don't tell people not to do things that you yourself are often guilty of.

[Voidsinger]

11 pages, and one person touched on my views.

A/C nerfing has only 3 options: Recharge, Heat, round speed.

They can't really tinker with the first 2. However, given every mech and its dog was mounting AC/20s, something had to be done.

So, PGI did what it always does. Nerf the heck out of the weapon. And seeing as how they'd already crushed the Gauss, they had to put lipstick on that pig.

This is why the AC/10 nerf occurred. Nothing to do with the AC/10 itself, but rather when the Gauss was nerfed, everybody tended to slot in AC/20s (where they could), or the handy dandy lighter, crit similar, higher DPS for a little heat AC/10. All those single ballistic arms and torsos which couldn't hold a dual AC/5 got the AC/10.

The nerfs are about making the heavy ballistics similar value. I doubt they'll work because the Gauss is a nightmare.

[Deathlike]

Voidsinger, on 07 January 2014 - 05:34 PM, said:

This is why the AC/10 nerf occurred. Nothing to do with the AC/10 itself, but rather when the Gauss was nerfed, everybody tended to slot in AC/20s (where they could), or the handy dandy lighter, crit similar, higher DPS for a little heat AC/10. All those single ballistic arms and torsos which couldn't hold a dual AC/5 got the AC/10.

You can still do 2 AC5s TBH, regardless of the actuator issue.

[War Beast]

I saw a really simple suggestion on the forums here at one point that would fix these funky tweaks they keep trying to do to the weapons:

- Each weapon has a power requirement / draw.
- Engines could produce as an example 100 power / second.
- An ac20 for example would draw 60 power/second to fire.
- Hence you can no longer fire 2 ac20's at the same time.
- PPC's could have 50 power / second to fire. So at the most you could only fire 2 ppc's and no other weapon at the same time.

The dev's would then have a mechanic, which is fairly simple that we dont have to manipulate in some way on our end, that gives them near absolute control of how many of what types of weapons can be fired at the same time.

Right now they are trying hard to "warp" the current set of mechanics to nerf and adjust the weapons. And its just not necessary to make the current mechanics more convoluted. Just add in one more layer of control and then they can lock this thing down good for balance. Granted the range change isnt a big deal, but ghost heat, and gauss firing changes are. And werent necessary.

[Voidsinger]

Deathlike, on 07 January 2014 - 05:55 PM, said:

You can still do 2 AC5s TBH, regardless of the actuator issue.

Depends on the mech. You only have one Ballistic slot, your choices drop. Where you have 2, go dual AC/5.

[Mister Blastman]

Zensei, on 07 January 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

This is being way overthought.

It is not a matter of being overthought. It is a matter of the game balance being broken beyond belief that has lead to stale, stagnant, boring, repetitive gameplay.

Come to my Elo and after about a week of it you'll think the same, too.

[Khobai]

Quote

A/C nerfing has only 3 options: Recharge, Heat, round speed.

Disagree. Gauss is proof of that. The change to the Gauss was neither recharge, heat, or projectile speed. They completely changed the firing mechanics of the Gauss. If they can do that for Gauss they can do it for Autocannons too, and make them burst fire.

Autocannons should have a magazine which stores 4-10 rounds. Once all the rounds in the magazine are fired, the autocannon should go on cooldown while the magazine reloads.

So instead of doing 20 damage all at once, the AC/20 would have a 4-round magazine, and each round would do 5 damage. There would be about a 0.25s firing delay between each round, and once all four rounds are fired there would be a cooldown period of about 3s until the magazine is fully reloaded again. So the overall dps would remain the same, but the damage would be split up into smaller increments. This change would increase the skill cap on the AC/20 by making it harder to land all 20 damage in one location.

Edited by Khobai, 07 January 2014 - 09:51 PM.

[Roland]

Khobai, on 07 January 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

Disagree. Gauss is proof of that. The change to the Gauss was neither recharge, heat, or projectile speed. They completely changed the firing mechanics of the Gauss. If they can do that for Gauss they can do it for Autocannons too, and make them burst fire.

Autocannons should have a magazine which stores 4-10 rounds. Once all the rounds in the magazine are fired, the autocannon should go on cooldown while the magazine reloads.

So instead of doing 20 damage all at once, the AC/20 would have a 4-round magazine, and each round would do 5 damage. There would be about a 0.25s firing delay between each round, and once all four rounds are fired there would be a cooldown period of about 3s until the magazine is fully reloaded again. So the overall dps would remain the same, but the damage would be split up into smaller increments. This change would increase the skill cap on the AC/20 by making it harder to land all 20 damage in one location.

You're talking about effectively making AC's do DOT like lasers.... only in kind of chunks, making them even harder to use.

So they're the really heavy, huge, lasers that require you to lead the target.

If you make such a change, then everyone will just switch to lasers... because you have effectively eliminated the chief advantage of the AC's. Lasers will then just be better than them.

[Mister Blastman]

Roland, on 07 January 2014 - 10:08 PM, said:

You're talking about effectively making AC's do DOT like lasers.... only in kind of chunks, making them even harder to use.

So they're the really heavy, huge, lasers that require you to lead the target.

If you make such a change, then everyone will just switch to lasers... because you have effectively eliminated the chief advantage of the AC's. Lasers will then just be better than them.

And then brawling will come to life again. Problem solved. Happy times to be had by all.

I'm exaggerating. PPCs need to spread damage too for that to happen.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 07 January 2014 - 10:20 PM.

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 07 January 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

Disagree. Gauss is proof of that. The change to the Gauss was neither recharge, heat, or projectile speed. They completely changed the firing mechanics of the Gauss. If they can do that for Gauss they can do it for Autocannons too, and make them burst fire.

Autocannons should have a magazine which stores 4-10 rounds. Once all the rounds in the magazine are fired, the autocannon should go on cooldown while the magazine reloads.

So instead of doing 20 damage all at once, the AC/20 would have a 4-round magazine, and each round would do 5 damage. There would be about a 0.25s firing delay between each round, and once all four rounds are fired there would be a cooldown period of about 3s until the magazine is fully reloaded again. So the overall dps would remain the same, but the damage would be split up into smaller increments. This change would increase the skill cap on the AC/20 by making it harder to land all 20 damage in one location.

Roland, on 07 January 2014 - 10:08 PM, said:

You're talking about effectively making AC's do DOT like lasers.... only in kind of chunks, making them even harder to use.

So they're the really heavy, huge, lasers that require you to lead the target.

If you make such a change, then everyone will just switch to lasers... because you have effectively eliminated the chief advantage of the AC's. Lasers will then just be better than them.

Mister Blastman, on 07 January 2014 - 10:14 PM, said:

And then brawling will come to life again. Problem solved. Happy times to be had by all.

If we wanted to reduce the pinpoint power of ACs but not make them into "giant lasers," we can just increase the rate of fire and divide both the damage and heat (increase ammo accordingly, probably cut down screen shake as well). I.e. reduce AC/20 cooldown to 2 seconds, damage to 10, heat to 3, and increase ammo per ton to 14. Same damage and heat ratios, just spread out over time more (this would apply to the other ACs as well).

If our heat system was a bit more sane, the low heat of ACs would be advantage enough (particularly with a capacity set fairly low [but dissipation cranked up way higher to keep energy useful]). And they still have a DPS advantage (which only matters in close quarters most of the time, but still) plus screen shake.

[Varent]

Still loving this change. actually been in game a few times now, the AC20 is now actually dodgeable. Quite enjoying it. Makes it a brawling weapon again and not a jump sniping weapon 'as much' anymore.

[Deathlike]

Voidsinger, on 07 January 2014 - 06:00 PM, said:

Depends on the mech. You only have one Ballistic slot, your choices drop. Where you have 2, go dual AC/5.

I was kinda specific to the 2 ballistic arms though... whatever.

[MustrumRidcully]

FupDup, on 07 January 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

Just like how they were able to *clearly* show increased player retention only like a few weeks after 3PV was added.

If your player retention is usually less than 2 weeks, it would be easy to show.

[MustrumRidcully]

Trauglodyte, on 07 January 2014 - 02:11 PM, said:

The irony, though, is that we came back full circle on the PPC and ER PPC in regards to heat and cool down (they changed velocity from the old 900 back in Beta).

I have to recheck the definition of irony here whether this is really irony.

But if your balancing attempts run in circles, maybe you're adjusting the wrong stuff?

Mystere, on 07 January 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:

Hold a second because now I am really confused!

On one side, we have casuals accusing PGI of catering only to the "elites". On another side, we have the "elites" accusing PGI of listening to the "skill less rabble" instead of listening to them. And finally we have another side accusing PGI of listening only to the "silent majority".

JUST WHO THE FRACK IS PGI ACTUALLY LISTENING TO?

Silent Majority is obviously true, since it's the only ones whose opinion neither the elites or the anti-elites know.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 07 January 2014 - 11:27 PM.

[smokefield]

Quote

You realize they nerfed the hell out of the AC20 and AC10 in preparation for the UAC20 and UAC10, right?

the only real reason they nerfed them. and they will nerf more weapons in the close future. just keep an eye on them...

[MustrumRidcully]

smokefield, on 07 January 2014 - 11:25 PM, said:

the only real reason they nerfed them. and they will nerf more weapons in the close future. just keep an eye on them...

What kind of absurd logic is that? Why do they need to nerf the AC/20 for the UAC/20? Did PGI nerf the AC/5 because the UAC/5 was OP? No, they nerfed the UAC/5.