479 replies to this topic

[Varent]

Noesis, on 14 January 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

Which for a logical premise if you agree that a Medium can be taken out in 2-3 hits kind of makes it difficult to get to that 90m weakness range and maintain it. Especially if the guy has similar friends all nicely blobbed and working together.

Anyone for a game of Medium dominoes? Ok .... I'll set them up you snipe them down.

+1 on rearranging Medium sizing to afford better capabilities of even finding this 90m bubble.

actually its to support my concept of why the way jj and sniping weapons in there current implimentation are the problem. Its not as hard as you think if you can avoid the initial brunt.

[Drunk Canuck]

Monky, on 13 January 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

Contrary to OP's point, time to kill can still come down. Nerfing AC's in comparison to buffing lasers accomplishes this and also puts weapons on the same level.

Well, realistically if they wanted to balance AC's, they should just limit their damage to their maximum ranges. Want to make the AC20 the brawling weapon? Have it do zero damage outside 270 meters, force people to brawl with it. The AC10 is a short to mid range brawling AC to be used around 500 meters or less, the AC5 is mid to long range and not intended for close range, neither is the AC2, make them more effective at their ideal ranges and have them do less damage at closer ranges and no damage outside their maximum ranges.

[Varent]

Drunk Canuck, on 14 January 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

Well, realistically if they wanted to balance AC's, they should just limit their damage to their maximum ranges. Want to make the AC20 the brawling weapon? Have it do zero damage outside 270 meters, force people to brawl with it. The AC10 is a short to mid range brawling AC to be used around 500 meters or less, the AC5 is mid to long range and not intended for close range, neither is the AC2, make them more effective at their ideal ranges and have them do less damage at closer ranges and no damage outside their maximum ranges.

Actually the ac2 was intended for longer ranges, though agree that the ac5 is mid to long. That said I agree the ac20 should be closer range as well as the ac10. Though I disagree on the 2 and 5.

That said there is starting to be hit reg issues with the ac20 now that they slowed the speed Not sure how decreasing the range will further effect that. Also they made it triple length to take into account bullet drop I guess. *shrug* Wich makes sense from a realisim standpoint.

[Gyrok]

MLs are the most effective weapon per ton in mwo. Period. They honestly need to generate more heat.

LLs weigh 5T do 9 damage to 450m

5 MLs weigh 5T and do 25 damage to 270m

Ac20 weighs 14T and does 20 dmg to 270m

14 MLs weigh 14T and do 70 damage to 270m

Shut up about buffing MLs already, lights are OP as it is.

[Varent]

Gyrok, on 14 January 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

MLs are the most effective weapon per ton in mwo. Period. They honestly need to generate more heat.

LLs weigh 5T do 9 damage to 450m

5 MLs weigh 5T and do 25 damage to 270m

Ac20 weighs 14T and does 20 dmg to 270m

14 MLs weigh 14T and do 70 damage to 270m

Shut up about buffing MLs already, lights are OP as it is.

thats a really bad comparison. Not that I am on the medium laser buff wagon. In fact I feel medium lasers are fine. But that simply is a very very bad example.

That said, its not about the damage. Its about how different weapons apply damage, and how different weapons have different uses in different situations.

I will say one thing though...

Gyrok, on 14 January 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

LLs weigh 5T do 9 damage to 450m

5 MLs weigh 5T and do 25 damage to 270m

This.

you can play with the numbers heat sink wise however you want. Large lasers really need some love. Badly. Either triple the range on them like AC, or shorten the beam duration... or something. Pretty much across the board, Er and Pulse as well.

[Mister Blastman]

Gyrok, on 14 January 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

MLs are the most effective weapon per ton in mwo. Period. They honestly need to generate more heat.

LLs weigh 5T do 9 damage to 450m

5 MLs weigh 5T and do 25 damage to 270m

Ac20 weighs 14T and does 20 dmg to 270m

14 MLs weigh 14T and do 70 damage to 270m

Shut up about buffing MLs already, lights are OP as it is.

Umm. No. No no. No. No no no no no no no no no. No.

MLs were already nerfed by 1 pt of heat back in closed beta because of hunchback laserboats. Many of us told PGI that they were doing it wrong. Mechwarrior 3 nerfed Mediums by 1 pt of heat (but also had long range weapons that were too hot) so short range dominated the meta. Raising mediums heat in MW 3 was the worst decision ever made. Mechwarrior 4 nerfed Mediums hard... and we all know how bad that meta was. It was long range terror.

So what does PGI do? They nerf mediums and now we have the awful balance we see now. No. They do not need a further nerf.

The REAL problem is convergence. It has been and always will be.

If anything, medium lasers could use a buff and have their heat dropped by one point.

[Khobai]

Quote

MLs are the most effective weapon per ton in mwo. Period. They honestly need to generate more heat.

And yet the most popular metabuild doesnt even use them.

Personally I would argue that if MLs arnt the best weapon, then MWO has Battletech weapon balance all wrong... MLs are supposed to be the baseline weapon that all other weapons are compared against... and theyre just not.

[FupDup]

Gyrok, on 14 January 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

MLs are the most effective weapon per ton in mwo. Period. They honestly need to generate more heat.

LLs weigh 5T do 9 damage to 450m

5 MLs weigh 5T and do 25 damage to 270m

Ac20 weighs 14T and does 20 dmg to 270m

14 MLs weigh 14T and do 70 damage to 270m

Shut up about buffing MLs already, lights are OP as it is.

There are a few factors you are leaving out of the equation:

1. ML damage is spread out over 1 second, whereas the AC/20 is pinpoint.

2. ML generate 4 heat each, so your 14 ML example would create a staggering 56 base heat. If we count ghost heat, you would melt the entire map and every player in it if you tried to fire all of them at the same time. The AC/20 is 6 heat each and I forgot how much for AC/40.

3. The AC/20 can reach out to 810 meters (actually trying to hit people out that far is a bad idea, but you do have the ability to do it). ML only go out to 540 meters.

4. Due to beam duration, the ML requires more exposure time. The AC/20 is much better at peek-and-shoot tactics.

5. Spamming ML requires more hardpoints than a single AC/20 does. No mech in the game has 14 hardpoints, and there probably never will be a mech with that many.

6. Lights are not overpowered in any way, shape, or form.

7. All of the DHS you'll need for spamming ML will require more critical slots than an AC/20 (but spread out across various sections most of the time) and a decent amount of tonnage (although reaching 14 tons of DHS is virtually impossible due to critical slot limitations).


Note that I'm not necessarily asking for an ML buff (although I certainly wouldn't mind one), I'm just pointing out some important factors that you left out of your examples.

Edited by FupDup, 14 January 2014 - 02:08 PM.

[Varent]

Khobai, on 14 January 2014 - 02:01 PM, said:

And yet the most popular metabuild doesnt even use them.

Personally I would argue that if MLs arnt the best weapon, then MWO has Battletech weapon balance all wrong... MLs are supposed to be the baseline weapon that all other weapons are compared against... and theyre just not.

They are the most used weapon in MWO across the boards actually. Simply because they can be placed easily onto every mech very simply. Also while they are not used on the favored meta builds they are very heasily used on the light mechs that support those builds. That said take away the most popular builds and they are splashed in mechs across the board.

I would argue they are neither the baseline nor the best. They just simply are. And they do there job quite well.

[Lykaon]

Joseph Mallan, on 14 January 2014 - 10:31 AM, said:

A 15 point hit on TT didn't need to be aimed at specific locations to ruin almost all Lights and many Medium Mechs day. So you can save that argument. Take a stock Jenner and let a single Gauss or AC20 round bump it... watch the location disappear! Hit it in an arm with an AC20 and it will give you a side torso structure crit roll! Hit a CT with one AC20 and it ends the run of that Jenner. So hitting it with multiple weapons... specially heavy weapons was not a necessity.

HMRandom dice roller
3,4,7,4,8 two hits in the Right arm

6,10,8,5,6 two hits in the Right torso

8,8,2,5,4 Two hits left torso and a possible crit Center torso!

Stock? who pilots a stock armored mech in MWo?

Table top rules a 35 ton mechs have...

Head: 3 internal 9 armor = decapitated if hit with one AC20 (just like every other mech)

C,Torso: 11 internal 22 armor = 2 hits to kill with an AC20

R/L Torso: 8 internal 16 armor = 2 hits to destroy the torso

R/L Arm: 6 internal 12 armor = 1 hit to destroy an arm

R/L Leg: 8 internal 16 armor = 2 hits to destroy a leg.

Factoring in the mechanics for random hit locations a fully armored light mech will take between 4-6 direct Ac20 hits to kill it on average.

Now factoring in table top to hit rolls and penalties the number of AC20 shots fired to allow between 4-6 to connect is in the ballpark of 12-18 shots fired (most table top games run 8-10 turns and an AC20 is fired but once a turn, so light mechs have a very good chance at surviving AC20s in a table top game that is)

Once the reality of the table top mechanics are taken into account light mechs don't seem that fragile after all.

[Lykaon]

Gyrok, on 14 January 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

MLs are the most effective weapon per ton in mwo. Period. They honestly need to generate more heat.

LLs weigh 5T do 9 damage to 450m

5 MLs weigh 5T and do 25 damage to 270m

Ac20 weighs 14T and does 20 dmg to 270m

14 MLs weigh 14T and do 70 damage to 270m

Shut up about buffing MLs already, lights are OP as it is.

Find me a mech with 14 energy hardpoints enough critical space to handle the 56 heat (probably somewhere near 150 tons of heatsinks) and has the magical ability to ignore ghost heat for 8 medium lasers and you may have a point.

A realistic compareson is 6 mediums lasers Actually let me crunch some numbers.

Hunchbacks (one a 4P the other a 4G) both have 250 std engines and max armor

4p Hunch with 6x medium lasers 20 DHS has 4.27 DPS and 57% cooling efficency

4g Hunch with 1 sml laser 1 AC20 4 tons ammo 10 DHS has 5.46 DPS and 91% cooling efficency.

The reality of what can be built is very different from the point you were trying to make.

[Joseph Mallan]

Lykaon, on 14 January 2014 - 10:20 PM, said:

Find me a mech with 14 energy hardpoints enough critical space to handle the 56 heat (probably somewhere near 150 tons of heatsinks) and has the magical ability to ignore ghost heat for 8 medium lasers and you may have a point.

A realistic compareson is 6 mediums lasers Actually let me crunch some numbers.

Hunchbacks (one a 4P the other a 4G) both have 250 std engines and max armor

4p Hunch with 6x medium lasers 20 DHS has 4.27 DPS and 57% cooling efficency

4g Hunch with 1 sml laser 1 AC20 4 tons ammo 10 DHS has 5.46 DPS and 91% cooling efficency.

The reality of what can be built is very different from the point you were trying to make.

BUT the AC20 is an all or nothing weapon. I might miss 2 outta 6 shots. That will lower the DpS considerably! Where the lasers may lose some damage but can still put the beam on the target for SOME damage. 80% accuracy with lasers and 67% with the AC20 here. Lasers fr putting damage on target more consistently v heavy hammer that is less sure.

[Khobai]

Quote

BUT the AC20 is an all or nothing weapon. I might miss 2 outta 6 shots.

Weapons are only as inaccurate as the player's aim. I've played perfect games with my AC/20 Jager where 100% of my shots hit. I've also played games where I can't hit the broadside of a barn.

And every pinpoint weapon is an all or nothing weapon. PPCs are the same way. Theyre still outright better than lasers though. Being able to do precise, pinpoint, upfront damage is way better than doing accurate, imprecise, damage-over-time.

The way MWO is designed the fastest way to kill mechs is to keep hitting them in the same spot over and over for as much damage as possible. Autocannons and PPCs do that the best. They do it so well in fact that they need to be nerfed. Since most players seem to agree that TTK is too low, nerfing AC/PPCs makes more sense than buffing lasers, since that will increase the TTK.

Edited by Khobai, 15 January 2014 - 08:34 AM.

[Cimarb]

Khobai, on 14 January 2014 - 10:22 AM, said:

They are if they keep hitting the same spot on a mech over and over. If the 30 damage spread out more it would be perfectly acceptable. Think of damage spreading as a way of emulating random hit locations in MWO without the randomness of dice rolls.

They should also increase internal structure so critical hits actually matter. Right now locations get destroyed before the ramifications of crits get fully realized. The combination of damage spreading and an internal structure increase would increase TTK back to where it needs to be.

I'm not a fan of buffing internal structure necessarily, but the consequences of getting hit in the internal structure definitely needs increased and if it was, I would not have a problem with buffing internal. I should be worried about not being able to move my arm to get a shot off, not have my arm there and fully functional one second and gone the next.

Sandpit, on 14 January 2014 - 11:10 AM, said:

Ok so since the title suggests lasers are not "competitive"

I played for a few hours yesterday evening and night.

I played a few dozen matches
I was averaging over 500 damage easy in most games with multiple kills and assists in a 5LL Stalker
This was hot maps, cold map, maps with cover, maps with less cover, maps with hills, maps with thrills
This was against ballistics, meta humpers, poptarters, AC40s, and everything in between.

I've actually had a few "doubters" able to drop with me over the past few days. They see my end of round score and stop doubting.

Lasers are in a good spot. ACs could use range reduced a bit and that's about all I can see that really needs to be adjusted between the two now.

I am glad you can do good with your preferred weapon system - great! That has little to no bearing on whether that system is "in a good spot" or not, though.

All other things being equal, the larger the FLD value, the more optimal the weapon is currently. If range, heat, ammo, crits, etc were all equal, the damage delivery would determine what weapon was used. Take two Large Lasers, one standard, and one that did 100% of its damage instantly. That FLD LL would be dramatically better than the standard one simply because it delivered all of its damage to one hitbox. Go down to a small laser, and the difference is much less noticeable, but it is still there.

Joseph Mallan, on 15 January 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

BUT the AC20 is an all or nothing weapon. I might miss 2 outta 6 shots. That will lower the DpS considerably! Where the lasers may lose some damage but can still put the beam on the target for SOME damage. 80% accuracy with lasers and 67% with the AC20 here. Lasers fr putting damage on target more consistently v heavy hammer that is less sure.

But your 80% accuracy with lasers means little, because you could only be doing a single tick of damage with that "hit", so you are only doing 1 point of damage 87% of the time, while you are doing 20 points of damage 60% of the time. Huge difference there, not even considering the spread of damage even if you are doing more than 1 point of damage with the lasers.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 15 January 2014 - 08:24 AM, said:

Weapons are only as inaccurate as the player's aim. I've played perfect games with my AC/20 Jager where 100% of my shots hit. I've also played games where I can't hit the broadside of a barn.

And every pinpoint weapon is an all or nothing weapon. PPCs are the same way. Theyre still outright better than lasers though. Being able to do precise, pinpoint, upfront damage is way better than doing accurate, imprecise, damage-over-time.

The way MWO is designed the fastest way to kill mechs is to keep hitting them in the same spot over and over for as much damage as possible. Autocannons and PPCs do that the best. They do it so well in fact that they need to be nerfed. Since most players seem to agree that TTK is too low, nerfing AC/PPCs makes more sense than buffing lasers, since that will increase the TTK.

Thats what I said Kho. I might miss 2 outta 6 shots! I won't argue with your assessment of damage Kho, I just happen to enjoy doing that up front damage. I would be fine if it was a but less convergent, but I love my BFH, and you will have a fight for your life taking it away from me!

Cimarb, on 15 January 2014 - 08:40 AM, said:

But your 80% accuracy with lasers means little, because you could only be doing a single tick of damage with that "hit", so you are only doing 1 point of damage 87% of the time, while you are doing 20 points of damage 60% of the time. Huge difference there, not even considering the spread of damage even if you are doing more than 1 point of damage with the lasers.

True but I am doing about 60-80 percent damage with them and I am happy with that. I could use to practice a bit more with 'em But that's just my point, one mans POS is another mans good choice.

[Khobai]

Quote

I'm not a fan of buffing internal structure necessarily, but the consequences of getting hit in the internal structure definitely needs increased

They should buff internal structure but also completely redo the whole crit system. Giving items hitpoints never made any sense. It just made crit weapons like the LB10X actually really bad at getting crits. While armor punching weapons like the PPC and AC/10 are the best crit weapons. In battletech, once an item gets critted, its destroyed... theres no hitpoints.

Quote

Thats what I said Kho. I might miss 2 outta 6 shots! I won't argue with your assessment of damage Kho, I just happen to enjoy doing that up front damage. I would be fine if it was a but less convergent, but I love my BFH, and you will have a fight for your life taking it away from me!

I dont want to take it away, I just want to spread damage around a bit, like MWO socialism.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 15 January 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

They should buff internal structure but also completely redo the whole crit system. Giving items hitpoints never made any sense. It just made crit weapons like the LB10X actually really bad at getting crits. While armor punching weapons like the PPC and AC/10 are the best crit weapons. In battletech, once an item gets critted, its destroyed... theres no hitpoints.



I dont want to take it away, I just want to spread damage around a bit, like MWO socialism.

Not me. I want my Mjolinar to compliment my Twinkle and Icing Death!

My Nodachi

&

My Sword of the Apocalypse!

I play big or not at all gentlemen!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 15 January 2014 - 08:56 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Not me. I want my Mjolinar to compliment my Twinkle and Icing Death!

Sounds like my planned Daishi-B.

Even with the armor/engine restrictions, a Daishi-B can have four CUAC/10s. If CUAC/10s work like UAC/5s then a Daishi-B can do ~160 pinpoint damage every 5 seconds at a range of 540m.

I cant wait to see how PGI is going to nerf clan weapons... my guess is theyll end up using hello kitty bubble guns.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 15 January 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

Sounds like my planned Daishi-B.

Even with the armor/engine restrictions, a Daishi-B can have four CUAC/10s. If CUAC/10s work like UAC/5s then a Daishi-B can do ~160 pinpoint damage every 5 seconds at a range of 540m.

I cant wait to see how PGI is going to nerf clan weapons... my guess is theyll end up using hello kitty bubble guns.

I wouldn't use that build cause I am not one to put all m eggs in one basket. Not that it is a bad idea, it's just not my style.

[Khobai]

Quote

I wouldn't use that build cause I am not one to put all m eggs in one basket. Not that it is a bad idea, it's just not my style.

Theyre not all in one basket, theres one UAC in each torso and one UAC in each arm. So it would have some weird convergence, but its basically like fusing two UAC/5 Ilyas into a single mech, then doping it with steroids, and having it smoke crystal meth.

The point is, if pinpoint damage is too strong now, imagine how its going to be when clan tech is added. PGI is going to have to completely nerf clan tech into the ground unless they come up with a way to fix their poor convergence mechanics.