168 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Dam good post Nick. We do see eye to eye on some topics.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 January 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

Dam good post Nick. We do see eye to eye on some topics.

I'm just trolling you a bit. I know we aren't polar opposites.

In the end it's PGI who is unfortunately the enemy at the moment.

[Joseph Mallan]

Abivard, on 22 January 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

Why do ballistics have no recoil?
They do shake when they hit, even these tiny little ac2 slugs shake my 100 ton mech when they hit, silly as it sounds I know.

I would bet most of you would drop a 12 ga shotgun if you tried to shoot it off hand, or maybe end up giving yourself a black eye or bloody lip. Now try doing it with one in each hand, on full auto and see where them rounds go. Hurt yourself? probably, hit anything you were trying to?

It is doubtful you did hit, maybe that very first shot came somewhat close but you know it is just as likely that you lost track of your target during that little exercise and will now need to reacquire it.

But things work differently in this magical world of MWO, only the target of fire is affected, the shooter is immune to physics and the target has enhanced affects from a spatial anomaly that distorts time and space around any target. or so PGI leads us to believe.

This I could agree with, but the weapons we are firing are mounted to a vehicle, and have recoil compensation as far as I understand. Now I am not against adding recoil, but there is fluff on this... somewhere.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 22 January 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

I'm just trolling you a bit. I know we aren't polar opposites.

In the end it's PGI who is unfortunately the enemy at the moment.

You picked a bad time for testing my calm! My wife has been very sick and we spent to many hours in an ER Monday!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 January 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:

You picked a bad time for testing my calm! My wife has been very sick and we spent to many hours in an ER Monday!

Well I'm sorry to hear that. I hope she gets better, I'll chill out, I'm not a monster.

[Fuggles]

Rework DHS to be linear regardless of location. Maybe 1.7 everywhere.

-Levels the playing field for lights that can't equip a 250 due to engine caps
-makes makes the meta ppc/balistic combo less efficient
-makes larger energy builds actually possible without being cockblocked by heat (builds with 20+ DHS such as BM, AWS, STK)
-makes ballistics actually have to consider heat while firing since ammo, range, spreading damage, etc certainly aren't.

[Joseph Mallan]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 22 January 2014 - 08:52 AM, said:

Well I'm sorry to hear that. I hope she gets better, I'll chill out, I'm not a monster.

Never thought you were.
I come from a Italian/Slavic household and was born a Irish Pollock... You have a lot to learn.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 22 January 2014 - 09:04 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 January 2014 - 05:11 AM, said:

SAW round 5.56mm... AC20 rounds Up to 203mm. There is a huge difference in the size and weight of rounds in the example.

BIG difference

Except that an AC20 isn't always a field artillery piece.

Here's the quote from Sarna:

Quote

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


Different manufacturers and models of autocannons have different calibers (25mm-203mm) and rates of fire. Due to this, autocannons are grouped into generic "classes" of autocannons with common damage ratings, with Autocannon/20s doing massive damage while having very short range.
An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round" while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower, and causing higher damage per shell. Despite their differences, both are classified as Autocannon/20s due to their damage output.

What I'm suggesting is that for balance reasons we have ACs that work more like the Crusher Super Heavy and not the Chemjet.

I would love, freaking LOVE to have the option to buy and mount each of those separately with different advantages and disadvantages but that's so far out of the scope of my actual expectations there's no point getting to far into it.

Right now, for balance purposes, I think we'd get further with a small DOT effect for ACs and especially PPCs to broaden the depth and viability of weapons in the game. I'm not in favor of shortening laser duration because that exacerbates the pop-and-shoot meta. MW:O should not play like Mass Effect, hiding behind cover, using 3PV to target then popping up and shooting before crouching back before anyone can shoot at you.

[Joseph Mallan]

I have no interest in a Crusher over the ChemJet. I am a ChemJet gamer If you want a Crusher use an AC2! Cause that is exactly how our AC2 is working right now!

AC2 2 damage every 0.52 seconds or 4 damage in 1:04 seconds that's 20 damage in 5:20 seconds. AC20 throws 20 damage every 4 seconds. You want a Crusher AC20... you already have it!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 22 January 2014 - 11:21 AM.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

Falso, on 18 January 2014 - 02:42 AM, said:

I'm wondering what is going to happen to change MWO back to role warfare, variety of weapons use and viability.

There used to be more reasons to play something else, but frankly, until we have PPC's brought under control, why bring anything else?

The perfect storm of "stumbling blocks" of nearly unclimbable slopes (even with JJ's end up being hung-up on nearly every map by invisible barriers) and pin-point damage capability given to nearly any and all mechs Via PPC's has made for a very bland game experience.

If PPC's continue to be pin-point ballistic weapons that can be on nearly every mech, especially with paired with AC/5's, what is the point in using anything else?

With the ability to combine UAC/5's with PPC's on the HGN-733c, SHD-X and even 2x PPC's 40 ton cicadas, game play continues to be very one dimensional.

Six months ago things were much worse, and I like that there has been some limiting to the ability of 6 PPC stalkers to climb every high point and snipe with no real answer other than to boat PPC's too, but now it's gone just as far the other way.

You haven't stopped or limited the reward for using PPC's, and at the higher Elo's you are very lucky to ever see LRM's etc, etc.

The Gauss Rifle received a nerf to prevent syncing with PPC's and heat was adjusted, however, it doesn't take long for people to realize what weapons work, and what don't.

Now the latest adjustments have slowed the AC/20 and AC/10, I'm sure this was to discourage syncing the weaoons with the PPC too effectively, however, why hasn't the PPC (the real culprit) been more adjusted?

Gauss has an interesting feel for it, and because of the "charge cycle" has effectively retired it's self unless you have a build with 2 of them.

As I remember over the last year, the major concerns with balance always involves PPC's. but instead, it seems other than some very minor tweaks to heat and recharge time, the PPC is left as the clear winner in the Min Max game, and something else is nerfed.

Why the AC/10 which never gets used by 90% of the veteran players, and the AC/20 who is one of the few viable answers to the PPC meta now gets a nerf.

Why not do something to the common denominator here, The PPC's.

Add a charge time cycle on PPC's much like a a gauss rifle, and don't have it be a pin-point damage (one stop shopper).

No reason that an energy energy weapon made up of several energy particles shouldn't spread a bit (slight shot-gun efffect) instead of transferring all damage to ONE point.
There should be a "beam time" much like with lasers (maybe just 0.5 or .25sec long to prevent this from continuing to be PPC warrior.)

I think the best balance for this is to make the PPC's hotter again, and charge up like the Gauss before firing, and then you will see more variety in 12-man drops. The fragility of the Gauss has limited it's use considerably, why it also got such a heavy penalty for use IDK.

Do this, and you might see Brawlers come back in force.

I like a variety weapons.

Please give us something more than 2 - 3 mech variants with PPC's & (U)AC/5's

Thanks!

thank you i agree entirely.. the problem is PINPOINT. the problem is that ghost heat was added to curb the "6ppc monsters" but like the US government instead of fixing a problem.... they made more problems and never fixed the original problem.

the ac40 ppc masters? they just moved over and took PPC's instead of ER's and dropped 2 PPCS for autocannons, to effectively still possess a AC40+ pinpoint mech.

the problem is pinpoint it is what is ruining this game by making ALL OTHER WEAPONS obsolete. ghost heat exacerbated it but the problem lies soley with the fact that ALL ac's are pinpoint while only SOME energy weapons are pinpoint.

if they gave PPCs splash instead of pinpoint all we would see is autocannons, if they took away autocannons pinpoint and dropped ghost heat and gave PPC's splash damage, we would see pilots use every weapon again because now they are viable.

THE PROBLEM IS PINPOINT.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Well might as well delete this thread. Paul has thrown us his quarterly bone and we are getting a NARC fix. WOO. He'll be back in hibernation for 3 months now.

[MischiefSC]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 January 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

I have no interest in a Crusher over the ChemJet. I am a ChemJet gamer If you want a Crusher use an AC2! Cause that is exactly how our AC2 is working right now!

AC2 2 damage every 0.52 seconds or 4 damage in 1:04 seconds that's 20 damage in 5:20 seconds. AC20 throws 20 damage every 4 seconds. You want a Crusher AC20... you already have it!

An AC2 doesn't do 20 points over 0.4 seconds - which is what a Crusher is and what I'm proposing. It's alright that you don't agree but don't try and equate wanting 20 points over 0.4 seconds with 20 points over 4 seconds.

It's still *almost* pinpoint, just wiggly enough to soften (but not neuter) the snapshot/poptart/hillhumper meta.

[JohnnyWayne]

Yay, LRM buffs. Oh wait.. Don't like lrms... No brainer weapon for the baddies.... Great...

It still won't change the Jumpjet / AC meta and ******* will still point on the PPC and blame it... Great... -.-

[Ryoken]

MischiefSC, on 22 January 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

Except that an AC20 isn't always a field artillery piece.

Here's the quote from Sarna:

Quote

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


Different manufacturers and models of autocannons have different calibers (25mm-203mm) and rates of fire. Due to this, autocannons are grouped into generic "classes" of autocannons with common damage ratings, with Autocannon/20s doing massive damage while having very short range.
An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round" while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower, and causing higher damage per shell. Despite their differences, both are classified as Autocannon/20s due to their damage output.

What I'm suggesting is that for balance reasons we have ACs that work more like the Crusher Super Heavy and not the Chemjet.

I would love, freaking LOVE to have the option to buy and mount each of those separately with different advantages and disadvantages but that's so far out of the scope of my actual expectations there's no point getting to far into it.

Right now, for balance purposes, I think we'd get further with a small DOT effect for ACs and especially PPCs to broaden the depth and viability of weapons in the game. I'm not in favor of shortening laser duration because that exacerbates the pop-and-shoot meta. MW:O should not play like Mass Effect, hiding behind cover, using 3PV to target then popping up and shooting before crouching back before anyone can shoot at you.

I also would love to see Autocannons firing a short burst of multiple shells per "round"
For Example:
AC20: 9 shells in 0,9 seconds
AC10: 6 shells in 0,6 seconds
AC5: 3 shells in 0,3 seconds
AC2: 2 shells in 0,2 seconds
Substract respective burst duration from reload duration!
(Do not make the Gauss Rifle mistake again.)

Then just add splash damage to PPCs, like an energy particle bubbles that collapses onto the hit mechs armor:
For Example:
7 Damage to hit location + 3 Damage split evenly on not previously destroyed adjecent hit locations

Would really like to see how this would play on a test server! PGI do you hear me?

Edited by Ryoken, 22 January 2014 - 02:08 PM.

[Ryoken]

Abivard, on 22 January 2014 - 08:23 AM, said:

The best way to do this is by increasing the viability of other weapons by improvements, not nerfing the top one down.

I am unaware of any game that has succeeded in weapons balance by nerfing from the top.

Well if you only balance by improving weapons then you will end up with fast killed mechs in the end.

Therefore you need both nerfing and buffing to achieve the desired gaming experience.

For example I would disagree to improve all other weapon systems till they match autocannons as those kill mechs fast enough allready.

[topgun505]

We can die FASTER??

I have been ONE SHOTTED on a number of occasions. Can't die much faster than that.

I'm not against lowering the heat cap but that doesn't solve the AC issue at all and in fact makes it WORSE since that will seriously detract from laser weapons (and PPCs).

[YueFei]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 January 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

Dam good post Nick. We do see eye to eye on some topics.

I agree.

You don't balance weapons by making them all equal. You balance them by giving them niches in which they excel, and situations in which they are at a disadvantage or just plain suck. Then the tactics that evolve around a weapon are about getting yourself into the situation that takes advantage of your weapon's strengths, and avoids its weaknesses.

And really, none of the individual weapons are overpowered. No one complains about the Hunchback with 1 AC/20. Nobody complains about the Catapult-K2 with 2 PPCs. Making all weapons DoT, or burst-fire, or splash, etc., is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You wanna make AC/20 burst-fire? So now the Hunchback has to stare his foes in the face while splattering damage all over them instead of delivering precision strikes and ducking back to cover?

The issue isn't any particular individual weapon. It's the way an entire stack of weaponry all combines into a single pixel. Therefore, the heavy and assault mechs which can afford to put multiple heavy-hitting pin-point damage weapons, piloted by dead-eye marksmen, are the deadliest things on the field.

Which, in and of itself, isn't necessarily a bad thing. The key to good balance is that any particular tactic has a weakness to another tactic. It's not about making all tactics equally good. It's about saying Tactic A defeats Tactic B, but Tactic B can defeat Tactic C, and Tactic C beats Tactic A. That's all ya need. You can have more than 3, but that's the minimal set necessary.

If we have that, then there is no such thing as a dominant meta. For example, let's say the game is designed so that snipers beat brawlers, all the time. That's OK. There's no need to balance sniping vs brawling. It's not about Yin vs Yang. All you need is a 3rd tactic, such as indirect fire. LRMs + artillery + air strikes, and spotters. You can design the game so that indirect LRM fire defeats snipers. Then make it so that Brawlers defeat LRM boats.

Now there's no single dominant tactic or build. Now it's about how a team coordinates itself to create favorable match-ups while avoiding the unfavorable ones.

[Vanguard319]

Mellifluer, on 21 January 2014 - 10:20 PM, said:

ya in TT all weapons were pinpoint once the actual location was determained by the die roll, a LL did all 8 damage to THAT spot, a PPC did all 10 damage to 1 spot. even LRMS did all their damage (once rolls determained how many hit) to 1 spot.

so when we translate it into MWO...... PPC,AC's and guass... only pinpoint weapons period. all the others do damage over time or spread the damage over the target.

the only solution i see is to either make ALL weapons perfectly pinpoint or to make ALL weapons have splash or in some way spread the damage around.

really it is BS that a LL does 2 damage over 4 parts of a mech vs a ppc doing 10 to 1 spot.

that is the real problem period, that only a small amount of weapons even do pinpoint.

the only solution is to remove pinpoint entirely, PPCs should do splash damage, autocannons SHOULD be a burst weapon that spreads the damage around. the Guass should be the ONLY pinpoint weapon at all period.

I've never had any issue with scoring high damage/kills with lasers, but then again, I don't "spray and pray" like a noob either. If you want to do real damage with lasers, you need to hold them on the intended target. I see no reason to change that, just because people can't bother to aim or follow through with their shot.

[Turist0AT]

God, not this again. PPC are good because they are the heviest and the hottest energy weapon. What did you expect. Same with Balistics, you pay a heavy price to pack and use them. offcourse they are good. Go play other games if it bothers you that mutch. I dont think you even know what you are talking about.

In my games i see varied loadouts all the time!

ppl like you will ruin the game for us, by nerfing the {Scrap} out of everything. So that the only viable thing will become boating ML.

Edited by Turist0AT, 25 January 2014 - 03:25 AM.

[D A T A]

PPC is ok and ERPPC needs 14 heat, not 15

gauss bigger range and shorter reload

lasers, group by 3 and not 2

[wanderer]

YueFei, on 25 January 2014 - 12:51 AM, said:

And really, none of the individual weapons are overpowered. No one complains about the Hunchback with 1 AC/20. Nobody complains about the Catapult-K2 with 2 PPCs. Making all weapons DoT, or burst-fire, or splash, etc., is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You wanna make AC/20 burst-fire? So now the Hunchback has to stare his foes in the face while splattering damage all over them instead of delivering precision strikes and ducking back to cover?

Everyone else does, while your Hunchback can snap-shot and cover. Now, if we DO make AC's burst fire we get to also make those bursts shorter or longer based on chassis- just like missiles deliver in different ways based on tube count.

So your Hunchback, built to deliver high-caliber shells (Ie, built to handle a 20) fires off a short, .4 second duration with it's 20 at the target and then turns away. (for the record, that's a tighter "burn" than a small pulse laser). 4 tics of 5-5-5-5 instead of one instant, perfect 20 to a single spot.

The Blackjack you strapped a 20 on delivers that as a .6 duration, longer burst with it's smaller-caliber mount (which is the same "burn time" as a medium or large pulse), a 10 the same way, a 2 or 5 at .4 duration. It fires off it's AC/2 as .5-.5-.5-.5.

That's all it really takes, just enough spread to not put the full damage in a single point on a single target. You can still snap shot. You can still even poptart- it'll just mean that not all the damage goes to one hitbox every single time.

I mean, I've got a frickin' triple-AC/2 'Phract. That thing delivers damage at range like a chainsaw compared to, say, multiple ER LL's- because it's frontloaded and concentrated in a way only ballistic and PPC damage is in this game. And that's not even anything special in terms of dakka.

Concentrated damage defeats a 'Mech better than any other method, therefore weapons that deliver it quickly and precisely are the optimum for use.

Quote

The issue isn't any particular individual weapon. It's the way an entire stack of weaponry all combines into a single pixel. Therefore, the heavy and assault mechs which can afford to put multiple heavy-hitting pin-point damage weapons, piloted by dead-eye marksmen, are the deadliest things on the field.

Yep. And every time a weapon has proven effective at doing so, it's been changed. It started with ML-packing Hunchbacks, moved into the sniper-y Gaussapult, and now it's 'Mechs racking multiple ballistic/PPC mounts. Unless you want random cone-of-fire or convergance mechanics, which basically take a dump on marksmanship...any weapon that does what you mention above -has- to be altered in it's mechanics in some form, at least slightly- or it dominates.