216 replies to this topic

[Varent]

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 March 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

Okay, first off, hitting legs are not in any way difficult. You aim for the thighs, because they don't move much at all. It's simple

Secondly, torso twisting does ****-all to mitigate PPC and AC5 damage. All the patient player has to do is wait until you twist back to return fire, or just shoot at your pelvis and legs. Surat.



AC2s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers
AC5s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers
Ultra AC5s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers
AC10s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers (minus the smalls and small pulses)
AC20s have better damage/heat ratios than lasers, and better cooldown than the larges
Gauss Rifles have practically no heat, but suffer from higher cooldown
PPCs and ERPPCs I'll give you.



Damage numbers don't reflect effectiveness of damage you're doing. You can deal 48 damage destroying a Centurion's shield arm. You can do 614 damage stripping every point of Armor on an Atlas. Are you actually accomplishing anything with that damage though? No, you are not.

Pinpoint front-loaded weapons like autocannons and PPCs are superior because any damage they do is guaranteed to deal all of its damage to just one component, and thus increase the chances of that component being destroyed. Twisting will not spread damage from two group-fired PPCs between multiple components. The best twisting can do is present a less useful component (shield arms) to the enemy to prevent useful components from taking damage, but all the enemy has to do is shoot your legs or wait until you present your useful components again to return fire.

I suppose they might also spread damage when the enemy is firing multiple weapon types with different projectile travel speeds, but the individual weapons are still going to do full damage to whatever it is they hit.



Also, try to avoid attacking another player's skill when making your arguments. Winning a category on the first PGI tournament definitely requires an above-average level of skill. Also an entire weekend to blow on playing a video game.

1) lol clanner (amused) Most of the time you will not get that many straight hits on a leg, but if you can consistently always hit one leg perfectly no matter what id love to see a pic or vid of that. You basically see highlight videos of top end players always hitting one component perfectly. Id love to see your highlights good sir? 2) you left srms completely out of your equations. 3) high end ac 20-10 are heat intensive and take abit to reload, srm/streak/medium laser are less heat intensive. Also ppc don't do didly at 90 meters. Its why so many of us were pushing for the JJ change, it makes it so those ppc boats don't have utter mobility anymore and allows you to bring the fight to them.

Master Maniac, on 05 March 2014 - 09:24 PM, said:

You don't even know what you're blathering about. It's pretty sad to watch.

"You think that one type of damage be superior to another, without any real disadvantage?" - Blathering.

"Not the instant convergence on weapons" - Bee Ess. There is no "instant convergence." Convergence always takes at least a split second in the best of situations with the fastest of engines, and even then it is imperfect because projectiles are actually launched from a weapon origin, which can be blocked/thrown off by terrain or moving objects.

" which exploit an armor system?" - Pure garbage. Weapons do damage, measured in points. Puh-leeze.

"No, I'm not the one with a pathetic argument" - Yes you are.

"PGI will never be able to balance this, we get ghost heat." - And I could still wreck your PPC/AC/whatever mech with my med-laser Blackjack. Guaranteed.

mcgral actually is a decent fellow. He just was using a bad argument and arguing the wrong thing because hes upset with the meta. no reason to flame him buddy.

[Master Maniac]

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 March 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

Okay, first off, hitting legs are not in any way difficult. You aim for the thighs, because they don't move much at all. It's simple

Secondly, torso twisting does ****-all to mitigate PPC and AC5 damage. All the patient player has to do is wait until you twist back to return fire, or just shoot at your pelvis and legs. Surat.



AC2s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers
AC5s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers
Ultra AC5s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers
AC10s have better heat and cooldown rates than lasers (minus the smalls and small pulses)
AC20s have better damage/heat ratios than lasers, and better cooldown than the larges
Gauss Rifles have practically no heat, but suffer from higher cooldown
PPCs and ERPPCs I'll give you.



Damage numbers don't reflect the effectiveness of damage you're doing. You can deal 48 damage destroying a Centurion's shield arm. You can do 614 damage stripping every point of Armor on an Atlas. Are you actually accomplishing anything with that damage though? No, you are not. Also, I've seen screenshots of people having high scores in Locusts. Does that mean Locusts are good? No! Locusts are terrible!

Pinpoint front-loaded weapons like autocannons and PPCs are superior because any damage they do is guaranteed to deal all of its damage to just one component, and thus increase the chances of that component being destroyed. Twisting will not spread damage from two group-fired PPCs between multiple components. The best twisting can do is present a less useful component (shield arms) to the enemy to prevent useful components from taking damage, but all the enemy has to do is shoot your legs or wait until you present your useful components again to return fire.

I suppose they might also spread damage when the enemy is firing multiple weapon types with different projectile travel speeds, but the individual weapons are still going to do full damage to whatever it is they hit.



Also, try to avoid attacking another player's skill when making your arguments. Winning a category on the first PGI tournament definitely requires an above-average level of skill. Also an entire weekend to blow on playing a video game.

lol, yeah, "damage numbers don't matter!" until, of course, the guy who says that gets good damage. Then it's "kills don't matter, damage does!"

Practically, nothing matters and personal achievement doesn't exist. And if you're using anything but medium lasers and LRMs, you are hitting an easy button yadda yadda yadda.

That's alright. Keep crying, gentlemen. I'll just keep winning.

[Koniving]

No Remorse, on 04 March 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

If PGI could have stayed focus on developing the game like adding features instead of over balancing the hell out of it, we might have actually had a great game right now. But we got what we got, take it or leave it, I suggest the latter. This as much PGI's fault as it is the "Whiners Club" of course, this also led the the rise of the dreaded "PGI Defenders"

I suppose, had PGI taken tabletop a little more literally, we'd have significantly less trouble.
30 threshold. Weapons fire in 10 second cycles.
AC/20 might fire fairly often, but it does 20 damage within 10 seconds. So if it fired once every 2 seconds, it'd do a total 4 damage per shot at 1.2 heat per shot (6 heat in 10 seconds; though Tabletop's 7 heat would make more sense in which case 1.4 heat per shot).
If a PPC fired once every 5 seconds, then 5 damage per shot, making 10 damage in 10 seconds (and thusly 10 heat in 10 seconds).
An AC/5 doing 5 damage in ten seconds, if it shoots 5 times, then 1 damage per shot, a total of 1 heat in 10 seconds so 0.2 heat per shot.
AC/2, Flamer, and MG, all deal 2 damage in 10 seconds. The AC/2 would do it in significantly fewer shots for more damage per shot than the MG. But in 10 seconds, you'd get 2 damage regardless.

Double armor? Unnecessary. Super fast mechs? Unnecessary. Pinpoint issues? Non-existent. Gauss Rifles fire once every 5 seconds for 7.5 damage (the most damage in a single shot).

But, well, then all this balancing crap wouldn't really be necessary and we'd have had a lot more focus on developing the game.

Though seriously the one tabletop rule that did need to be thrown out is armor equality. A Hunchback stock is superior to a Shadowhawk stock in terms of armor. Significantly superior. A Thunderbolt and a Dragon nearly rival a Stalker (and are superior to Victors in armor). In the long run, the game would be significantly more dynamic with both role warfare and mech diversity. There'd truly be reasons to choose smaller mechs in weight classes when their armor is better than heavier ones.

In some cases, you'd then choose a mech for its speed. Maybe it's weapons. Or because of it's armor. Maybe the combination of speed and firepower? Armor and speed? Of course, the real reason to choose a Cataphract 4X or a Raven 4X is pretty clear, the combination of superior armor and sheer firepower. Sure the Cataphract 3D is can jump or the Raven 3-L has ECM and run a lot faster, but the 3D has the weakest armor of the Cataphracts (aside from 1X) and the Raven 3-L is only slightly above two Jenners, but significantly inferior to the 2X and 4X Ravens in armor.

In fact, the Raven 2X and the Shadowhawk 2D2 start with identical armor. The Locust, Jenner D, Commandos, and two of the Cicadas all begin with identical armor. Of them, the Jenner D is barely faster than the Commando, but slower than both the Locust and the Cicada.

So what if max armor was based off of stock variants + a specific, level amount for all mechs?
The Urbanmech would have a chance when pit in the same match as a rival Spider.
What if engines only went a set number of ratings above their stock?
Cicadas would properly be faster than Jenners, and the slower Ravens (whose armor is vastly superior) would be able to brawl.

The Shadowhawk would fulfill its role as a 55 ton recon, spotter and fire support for a heavy lance. The Wolverine as the 55 tonner with the most armor of all medium mechs currently available, would be able to serve its role as a brawler, leader of charges, and medium lance commander. The Griffin, whose variants are superior to Shadowhawks in armor, would certainly be more of a looker in the eyes of many. The Kintaros, whose armor is even better than that of the Griffin though not quite that of the Wolverine, will serve their proper role as hit and run brawlers.

The Hunchback line will be superior to 2 out of 3 Shadowhawks in armor (the one Shadowhawk that they are not superior to in armor happens to have the least overall firepower capability of all the Shadowhawks). Overall they are the best 50 ton medium in armor with a single exception, the Centurion AL (the least favorite Centurion, the hottest Centurion, is the most armored one).

Blackjacks have the same armor as most Centurions, making up for their slow speed with it and firepower.

In the long and short of things, the game would be very different. No AC/40 Jagers to deal with -- the paper thin armor of lore would see these mechs as ranged fire support. Their immense firepower vital to the team to the point that they need protection. ....Wait, that implies teamwork.

So balance, role warfare, and teamwork?

Well damn...

[Varent]

Master Maniac, on 05 March 2014 - 09:33 PM, said:

lol, yeah, "damage numbers don't matter!" until, of course, the guy who says that gets good damage. Then it's "kills don't matter, damage does!"

Practically, nothing matters and personal achievement doesn't exist. And if you're using anything but medium lasers and LRMs, you are hitting an easy button yadda yadda yadda.

That's alright. Keep crying, gentlemen. I'll just keep winning.

uh... that.... isn't a very good argument either...

Koniving, on 05 March 2014 - 09:34 PM, said:

I suppose, had PGI taken tabletop a little more literally, we'd have significantly less trouble.
30 threshold. Weapons fire in 10 second cycles.
AC/20 might fire fairly often, but it does 20 damage within 10 seconds. So if it fired once every 2 seconds, it'd do a total 4 damage per shot at 1.2 heat per shot (6 heat in 10 seconds; though Tabletop's 7 heat would make more sense in which case 1.4 heat per shot).
If a PPC fired once every 5 seconds, then 5 damage per shot, making 10 damage in 10 seconds (and thusly 10 heat in 10 seconds).
An AC/5 doing 5 damage in ten seconds, if it shoots 5 times, then 1 damage per shot, a total of 1 heat in 10 seconds so 0.2 heat per shot.
AC/2, Flamer, and MG, all deal 2 damage in 10 seconds. The AC/2 would do it in significantly fewer shots for more damage per shot than the MG. But in 10 seconds, you'd get 2 damage regardless.

Double armor? Unnecessary. Super fast mechs? Unnecessary. Pinpoint issues? Non-existent. Gauss Rifles fire once every 5 seconds for 7.5 damage (the most damage in a single shot).

But, well, then all this balancing crap wouldn't really be necessary and we'd have had a lot more focus on developing the game.

Though seriously the one tabletop rule that did need to be thrown out is armor equality. A Hunchback stock is superior to a Shadowhawk stock in terms of armor. Significantly superior. A Thunderbolt and a Dragon nearly rival a Stalker (and are superior to Victors in armor). In the long run, the game would be significantly more dynamic with both role warfare and mech diversity. There'd truly be reasons to choose smaller mechs in weight classes when their armor is better than heavier ones.

In some cases, you'd then choose a mech for its speed. Maybe it's weapons. Or because of it's armor. Maybe the combination of speed and firepower? Armor and speed? Of course, the real reason to choose a Cataphract 4X or a Raven 4X is pretty clear, the combination of superior armor and sheer firepower. Sure the Cataphract 3D is can jump or the Raven 3-L has ECM and run a lot faster, but the 3D has the weakest armor of the Cataphracts (aside from 1X) and the Raven 3-L is only slightly above two Jenners, but significantly inferior to the 2X and 4X Ravens in armor.

In fact, the Raven 2X and the Shadowhawk 2D2 start with identical armor. The Locust, Jenner D, Commandos, and two of the Cicadas all begin with identical armor. Of them, the Jenner D is barely faster than the Commando, but slower than both the Locust and the Cicada.

So what if max armor was based off of stock variants + a specific, level amount for all mechs?
The Urbanmech would have a chance when pit in the same match as a rival Spider.
What if engines only went a set number of ratings above their stock?
Cicadas would properly be faster than Jenners, and the slower Ravens (whose armor is vastly superior) would be able to brawl.

The Shadowhawk would fulfill its role as a 55 ton recon, spotter and fire support for a heavy lance. The Wolverine as the 55 tonner with the most armor of all medium mechs currently available, would be able to serve its role as a brawler, leader of charges, and medium lance commander. The Griffin, whose variants are superior to Shadowhawks in armor, would certainly be more of a looker in the eyes of many. The Kintaros, whose armor is even better than that of the Griffin though not quite that of the Wolverine, will serve their proper role as hit and run brawlers.

The Hunchback line will be superior to 2 out of 3 Shadowhawks in armor (the one Shadowhawk that they are not superior to in armor happens to have the least overall firepower capability of all the Shadowhawks). Overall they are the best 50 ton medium in armor with a single exception, the Centurion AL (the least favorite Centurion, the hottest Centurion, is the most armored one).

Blackjacks have the same armor as most Centurions, making up for their slow speed with it and firepower.

In the long and short of things, the game would be very different. No AC/40 Jagers to deal with -- the paper thin armor of lore would see these mechs as ranged fire support. Their immense firepower vital to the team to the point that they need protection. ....Wait, that implies teamwork.

So balance, role warfare, and teamwork?

Well damn...

what your describing wouldn't really be a fun game dude... that would be incredibly slow and laborious and fairly slow paced and... ya it would be battle tech that's great. but that wouldn't cut it in a modern shooting world... at all. If I wanted to play battle tech I could pull out the board game and play battle tech. When they made the new title a multiplayer online shooter they were seeking to renovate the title into a common modern day fps. They weren't seeking a throwback.

[Mcgral18]

Master Maniac, on 05 March 2014 - 09:24 PM, said:

You don't even know what you're blathering about. It's pretty sad to watch.

"You think that one type of damage be superior to another, without any real disadvantage?" - Blathering. No, FLD is superior to CoF from MG, SRM, the randomness from Streaks and LRMs and the burn time or lasers.

"Not the instant convergence on weapons" - Bee Ess. There is no "instant convergence." Convergence always takes at least a split second in the best of situations with the fastest of engines, and even then it is imperfect because projectiles are actually launched from a weapon origin, which can be blocked/thrown off by terrain or moving objects. Yet again, false. It used to take a fraction of a second, but that ruined HSR apparently. It's instant as it is, and that 30% faster elite bonus does nothing.

" which exploit an armor system?" - Pure garbage. Weapons do damage, measured in points. Puh-leeze. TT had random dice rolls, and targetting computers that costed tonnage. We get 100% accurate tonnage free TCs, and while some weapons do have methods to spread damage, FLD do not. Gauss has charge and PPCs have heat.

"No, I'm not the one with a pathetic argument" - Yes you are. Only using your own words against you. Ad Hominem is a poor source for arguments.

"PGI will never be able to balance this, we get ghost heat." - And I could still wreck your PPC/AC/whatever mech with my med-laser Blackjack. Guaranteed. I`d gladly pit my BJ or SDH against your 1X, Meds are the funnest way to play

Bolded the responses. Please be more mature from now on.

[DocBach]

You understand that your statement that MechWarrior has always been first and foremost a first person video game is incorrect?

It's actually based off of the 1988 pen and paper roleplaying game for the Battletech universe.

It's used the mechanics from the board game, and some things get screwed up in translation... the armor and location systems were based around a random dice mechanic; here, we can pick exactly where we want to shoot and put rounds on target. This gives certain weapon systems a distinctive advantage over others and lessens the time to kill and survival of 'Mechs.

Certain weapons, like lasers received changes to do damage over time to make up for the fact that pilots can aim all of their weapons at one point which broke the random system. Others, like the PPC and AC didn't, which is why they've been at the top of the food chain since hit registration was fixed.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Varent, on 05 March 2014 - 09:28 PM, said:

1) lol clanner (amused) Most of the time you will not get that many straight hits on a leg, but if you can consistently always hit one leg perfectly no matter what id love to see a pic or vid of that. You basically see highlight videos of top end players always hitting one component perfectly. Id love to see your highlights good sir? 2) you left srms completely out of your equations. 3) high end ac 20-10 are heat intensive and take abit to reload, srm/streak/medium laser are less heat intensive. Also ppc don't do didly at 90 meters. Its why so many of us were pushing for the JJ change, it makes it so those ppc boats don't have utter mobility anymore and allows you to bring the fight to them.

1) I don't give a shit about clans. I just used it because he did, and he managed to spell it wrong.
2) SRMs aren't pinpoint, have extremely limited range, and are currently pretty unreliable in terms of hit reg. Streaks always hit, but they require constant facetime to maintain lock and can't be aimed at all.
3) AC20s and AC10s both give you 10 damage for every 3 heat you build. They're more heat efficient than any energy weapon in the game, and only the LRM20 is more heat efficient (3.66... damage/heat). I'll give you the PPC minimum range, but it's not tremendously difficult to maintain 90 meter distance if you stick with your team.

[Master Maniac]

DocBach, on 05 March 2014 - 09:41 PM, said:

You understand that your statement that MechWarrior has always been first and foremost a first person video game is incorrect?

It's actually based off of the 1988 pen and paper roleplaying game for the Battletech universe.

It's used the mechanics from the board game, and some things get screwed up in translation... the armor and location systems were based around a random dice mechanic; here, we can pick exactly where we want to shoot and put rounds on target. This gives certain weapon systems a distinctive advantage over others and lessens the time to kill and survival of 'Mechs.

Certain weapons, like lasers received changes to do damage over time to make up for the fact that pilots can aim all of their weapons at one point which broke the random system. Others, like the PPC and AC didn't, which is why they've been at the top of the food chain since hit registration was fixed.

MECHWARRIOR is not BATTLETECH. It is BASED on Battletech, but it is a FPS offshoot of the Battletech universe. So YES, it was ALWAYS AN FPS.

I'm also getting flack for "insulting their skill," when people who prefer gauss rifles were just slapped as "refusing to give up (our) win button." So let me put on my little kid voice when I vindicate myself with "they started it."

Edited by Master Maniac, 05 March 2014 - 09:48 PM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Master Maniac, on 05 March 2014 - 09:33 PM, said:

lol, yeah, "damage numbers don't matter!" until, of course, the guy who says that gets good damage. Then it's "kills don't matter, damage does!"

Practically, nothing matters and personal achievement doesn't exist. And if you're using anything but medium lasers and LRMs, you are hitting an easy button yadda yadda yadda.

That's alright. Keep crying, gentlemen. I'll just keep winning.

Okay, hotshot. Post your stats, if you think so highly of yourself. Put 'em on the table.

[Mcgral18]

Varent, on 05 March 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

He took it a little overboard. But your argument is fairly weak mcgral. AC and ppc are strong at ranges. When a lot of weapons have spread and when heat issues don't matter as much. At closer ranges these weapons aren't as strong as you think they are. That said they will still, ALWAYS spread damage. As long as you are playing against an opponent that knows how to torso twist. Its a fact. No one id denying ac and ppc are strong at range. They are. They also however just took a significant kick to the nuts with the recent nerf. Wich was a good thing. Its a pity they haven't fully fixed srm yet or you would probly be seeing a lot different meta out there. That said ive already been seeing a lot more brawls going on using all types of different weaponary and even srm, though not to the degree it would be if they were fixed.

PPCs I`ll give you as weak up close, and SRMs will be them hands down, assuming hit reg is at least 70%.

ACs though, I`d have to give the edge. Altough tonnage for tonnage, SRMs certainly pack a punch, but just cant keep up with heat to damage of the ACs.

[Varent]

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 March 2014 - 09:42 PM, said:

1) I don't give a shit about clans. I just used it because he did, and he managed to spell it wrong.
2) SRMs aren't pinpoint, have extremely limited range, and are currently pretty unreliable in terms of hit reg. Streaks always hit, but they require constant facetime to maintain lock and can't be aimed at all.
3) AC20s and AC10s both give you 10 damage for every 3 heat you build. They're more heat efficient than any energy weapon in the game, and only the LRM20 is more heat efficient (3.66... damage/heat). I'll give you the PPC minimum range, but it's not tremendously difficult to maintain 90 meter distance if you stick with your team.

1) it just amused me because I like messing with clanners (excuse my indulgence) 2) Still at close ranges srm are king (hit reg aside) pound for pound ton for ton heat for heat damage for damage. And the spread is not very much with artemis. I consistently land 95% of my missles in one hit box section and ill stand by those numbers. Wich is why I personally have been so excited by the recent JJ change since it lets me close to brawling range now *dances* 3) They are not more heat efficient or more damage intensive then srm. Period. The team issue does come into play however yes. But that can be argued both ways so it isn't an effective argument.

Master Maniac, on 05 March 2014 - 09:44 PM, said:

MECHWARRIOR is not BATTLETECH. It is BASED on Battletech, but it is a FPS offshoot of the Battletech universe. So YES, it was ALWAYS AN FPS.

I'm also getting flack for "insulting their skill," when people who prefer gauss rifles were just slapped as "refusing to give up (our) win button." So let me put on my little kid voice when I vindicate myself with "they started it."

Yes and no. It was actually first a sim then a shooter. And at one point a top down, its been a lot of things. On a lot of levels. That said in this incarnation its a shooter and should be treated as such.

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 March 2014 - 09:44 PM, said:

Okay, hotshot. Post your stats, if you think so highly of yourself. Put 'em on the table.

don't feed the trolls

[Deathlike]

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 March 2014 - 09:44 PM, said:

Okay, hotshot. Post your stats, if you think so highly of yourself. Put 'em on the table.

TREBUCHET TBT-5J 172 98 73 1.34 187 85 2.20 55,307 115,844 16:43:07

Oh, you mean the other guy...

[Varent]

Mcgral18, on 05 March 2014 - 09:45 PM, said:

PPCs I`ll give you as weak up close, and SRMs will be them hands down, assuming hit reg is at least 70%.

ACs though, I`d have to give the edge. Altough tonnage for tonnage, SRMs certainly pack a punch, but just cant keep up with heat to damage of the ACs.

srm are cooler..... I will totally give you range. I wont argue about that. But that is also why I have said that it comes down to the engagement type. If your at range yes totally ac have advantage. When your brawling srm do. Wich leads into more arguments about quasi role war fare and making weapons strong in rolls as upposed to trying to balance everything perfectly (a losing battle)

Deathlike, on 05 March 2014 - 09:51 PM, said:

TREBUCHET TBT-5J 172 98 73 1.34 187 85 2.20 55,307 115,844 16:43:07

Oh, you mean the other guy...

Don't feed the trolls >.<

[DocBach]

Master Maniac, on 05 March 2014 - 09:44 PM, said:

MECHWARRIOR is not BATTLETECH. It is BASED on Battletech, but it is a FPS offshoot of the Battletech universe. So YES, it was ALWAYS AN FPS.

No, MechWarrior was originally the pen and paper roleplaying game based in the Battletech universe. It was a couple years later before it became a first person shooter.

Either way, just about every stat in this game comes from Battletech, regardless if you believe or understand it.

The problem is, some things, like being able to aim every weapon in a group at a single location was something they added, and that's caused a huge imbalance in weapons balance.

[Mazzyplz]

AC > SRM even up close every time

[Master Maniac]

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 March 2014 - 09:44 PM, said:

Okay, hotshot. Post your stats, if you think so highly of yourself. Put 'em on the table.

Sure.
MechWarrior Credits 541 Kills / Death 5,104 / 3,483 C-Bills 1,387,648 Experience Points 3,457,282 Wins / Losses 2,480 / 2,415 Kill / Death Ratio 1.47 Accumulative C-Bills Per Match 89,061.61 Avg. XP Per Match 706.29

[Kaeb Odellas]

Varent, on 05 March 2014 - 09:49 PM, said:

1) it just amused me because I like messing with clanners (excuse my indulgence) 2) Still at close ranges srm are king (hit reg aside) pound for pound ton for ton heat for heat damage for damage. And the spread is not very much with artemis. I consistently land 95% of my missles in one hit box section and ill stand by those numbers. Wich is why I personally have been so excited by the recent JJ change since it lets me close to brawling range now *dances* 3) They are not more heat efficient or more damage intensive then srm. Period. The team issue does come into play however yes. But that can be argued both ways so it isn't an effective argument.

I'm pulling my numbers from Smurfy's. AC10s and AC20s are 3.333 points of damage per point of heat, while SRMs are 3.0 at best with SRM6es

SRMs are definitely lighter and more compact, but autocannons have much, much better range and that all-important pinpoint factor. Your only chance at landing all SRMs on one component is if you're just facehugging a guy, but that's not a particularly great tactic itself.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 05 March 2014 - 09:58 PM.

[Koniving]

Varent, on 05 March 2014 - 09:37 PM, said:

what your describing wouldn't really be a fun game dude... that would be incredibly slow and laborious and fairly slow paced and... ya it would be battle tech that's great. but that wouldn't cut it in a modern shooting world... at all. If I wanted to play battle tech I could pull out the board game and play battle tech. When they made the new title a multiplayer online shooter they were seeking to renovate the title into a common modern day fps. They weren't seeking a throwback.

Actually, they were seeking to create a simulation. What the founders paid for was that game. The Atlases had the armor of current Hunchbacks, so deaths would still have been reasonably fast. 20 seconds to kill an Atlas, sometimes longer.

It was a game where when actuators took damage, aim was thrown off when the arm actuators took a hit. Mechs would yaw left or right due to a damaged leg actuator. Ammo, weapons, heatsinks, all began to burn and take damage at 80% heat. Vision would blur. Atlases had glowing eyes. Night vision was black and white. Heat truly mattered. Weapons were frequently fired in chain fire for good reason. Battles was a combination of positioning, scouting, staging, and lots of brawling (the main thing everyone wants is brawling). When an Atlas would rush a Hunchback and use its fist to topple that damn thing over.

That was the game we started with, the fun thing we really wanted. Where the presence of a single Atlas on the field could turn the entire tides of the battle. Where the very sight of one instilled fear and panic. Where you could have the time to call for help.

Where the battles were like these...


Atlas, PUNCH!


Yes, my god some things might be slow, but that's just part of the reality.


Combat would be a lot more like this. Registration would be considerably better (less firepower at once, more spacing between shots).


That's what we wanted.

AC/2s as I mentioned before might be a bit more like this, though admittedly less damage per shot. After all they are 1 heat, and 2 damage in 10 seconds. A Shadowhawk 2D2 for a comparison, would have 104 total armor stock.
The Cataphract 3D would have 176 armor stock.


Things would still die reasonably fast, but nothing would be dead 'instantly'.

Edited by Koniving, 05 March 2014 - 10:06 PM.

[Varent]

Mazzyplz, on 05 March 2014 - 09:52 PM, said:

AC > SRM even up close every time

Numbers disagree good sir.

[Koniving]

DocBach, on 05 March 2014 - 09:52 PM, said:

Throttle stick right hand. Joystick left hand. O_O What is this!?

...Can you imagine trying to pilot the mech like that?

Oh and while I'm at it... Notice the cluster-duck of shells ejecting behind that rifleman?

Even ~back then~ autocannons were fully automatic and/or burst fire weapons. Tabletop just never took it into account because too many variants meant too many rules to memorize and too many dice rolls to do.

Edited by Koniving, 05 March 2014 - 10:01 PM.