258 replies to this topic

[Abivard]

The situation:
AC's and PPC's, both can do pinpoint direct damage.
Mounting more than one enables convergence factor, this acts as a multiplier.
They have very long ranges.

No need to rehash all the views and counter views, you all should understand the basic background of this problem, and it is indeed a problem.

I have hesitated to even suggest this to now, but.......

Is it time to revisit the damage that is done per shot by these weapons?

I fear that the only real workable solution at this point is to lower their damage per shot.
The RoF increase PGI saw fit to give them along with the realities of Real time FPS has given them a synergy that is far beyond the spirit of the weapon.

A 20% ? reduction in damage per shot of all AC's, PPC's and ERPPC's is perhaps the best way to do this with out throwing something else way out of whack.

The Time To Kill (TKK) is increased ONLY for these weapons.

Once one variation from canon is allowed (Mechlabs making IS mechs essentially OMNI mechs Ghost-Heat, to PGI's version of ECM) The excuse that 'we can't do that, it violates canon' argument flies right out the window!

This also should only take a few minutes of actual 'coding' to adjust damage values.

So.... what are the reasons NOT to do it like this anyways? (BESIDES it is not canon)

[Martis Gradivus]

What about the player who mounts just one of these weapons? In your desire to correct an imbalance (and I do believe that this needs addressing at some point), you will be directly affecting builds who mount but one of these weapons, such as the 1 ERPPC CDA or RVN or the 1 AC/10 CN9.

The danger is that broad sweeping changes must look at the whole picture before implementation or suggestion.

[Varent]

http://mwomercs.com/...-to-burst-fire/ Lots of good options there. A better option is to allow for both and to introduce weapon manufacture times. Skim towards the end

[Abivard]

Martis Gradivus, on 07 March 2014 - 10:54 PM, said:

What about the player who mounts just one of these weapons? In your desire to correct an imbalance (and I do believe that this needs addressing at some point), you will be directly affecting builds who mount but one of these weapons, such as the 1 ERPPC CDA or RVN or the 1 AC/10 CN9.

The danger is that broad sweeping changes must look at the whole picture before implementation or suggestion.

Indeed, even a single weapon mount is also a problem, when multi mounts are present it compounds the situation further true, but There is no "punishment", that is hyperbole. The case could then be made that by taking any weapon besides the AC.PPC is a punishment! ergo Missile mounts are a punishment...silly sounding now, yes?

[Mcgral18]

Martis Gradivus, on 07 March 2014 - 10:54 PM, said:

What about the player who mounts just one of these weapons? In your desire to correct an imbalance (and I do believe that this needs addressing at some point), you will be directly affecting builds who mount but one of these weapons, such as the 1 ERPPC CDA or RVN or the 1 AC/10 CN9.

The danger is that broad sweeping changes must look at the whole picture before implementation or suggestion.

Even one of these weapons is doing too much damage. Example for an AC10, it's supposed to do 10 damage over 10 seconds. It fires for 10 damage every 2.5 seconds, so 40 damage in a TT turn, or a AC20 equivalent with TT because of doubled armor. An AC20 was feared in TT, yet our AC10 is one of the least used ballistics.

For comparison, our AC20 is actually a AC70, since it fires a full 3 times, then a half recycle. Not the 40 damage it should be doing (doubled armor, doubled damage for equivalent)
But decreasing damage would be a pretty easy fix. A simple fix for FLD but keeping the same DPS would just be to cut the damage and heat in half, and double the ammo and refire. Same damage, but spread out in smaller FLD chunks. Of course I would prefer a rework of the system, but the above is a very simple thing to implement.

Edited by Mcgral18, 08 March 2014 - 07:25 PM.

[Abivard]

Varent, on 07 March 2014 - 11:00 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...-to-burst-fire/ Lots of good options there. A better option is to allow for both and to introduce weapon manufacture times. Skim towards the end

Many require rather elaborate mechanics as well as suggesting something entirely different, which is to change to 'Burst fire' as opposed to PinPoint Direct Damage. (PPDD from now on).

Please post corrections to PPDD as it is working now, not removal of PPDD from the game on this thread.

Thank you.

edited for spelling.

Edited by Abivard, 07 March 2014 - 11:11 PM.

[Varent]

Abivard, on 07 March 2014 - 11:08 PM, said:

Many require rather elaborate mechanics as well as suggesting something entirely different, which is to change to 'Burst fire' as opposed to PinPoint Direct Damage. (PPDD from now on).

Please post corrections to PPDD as it is working now, not removal of PPDD from the game on this thread.

Thank you.

edited for spelling.

As I said, skim towards the end. We are working on a system that gives both.

[Willard Phule]

You know what gets me about the whole convergence thing....it's the comparison between TT and MW:O.

In MW:O, you can have a dual Gauss or Dual AC20 hit the same location, every single time. In BT, the odds of that are extremely thin...it requires an elite pilot (like Kai Allard Liao) and a clan targeting computer (so you can make a "called shot"). Even then, the target number is prohibitive.

[Bobzilla]

Instead of changing weapons, change how armour takes a hit.
Armour spreads some damage to adjacent areas, if those areas have armour.
If the initial area hit has no armour it does not spread.

This still rewards accuracy and pinpoint damage, but somewhat prolongs the affectiveness.

[East Indy]

Abivard, on 07 March 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

Is it time to revisit the damage that is done per shot by these weapons?

No, because any per-weapon change punishes players who aren't stacking.

There's one instant fix: make all ACs add to the PPC heat scale penalty, add penalty for 4 AC/5s. Riot-causing and mind-rending, I know, but it does the job.

All other (and better) solutions require additional development time.

[Khobai]

Quote

There's one instant fix: make all ACs add to the PPC heat scale penalty, add penalty for 4 AC/5s. Riot-causing and mind-rending, I know, but it does the job.

then everyone would go back to dual gauss. this endless cycle of nerfing weapons accomplishes nothing. players will always gravitate towards the combination of weapons that does the most pinpoint damage because pinpoint damage is a fundamentally broken game mechanic.

[GreyGriffin]

Since convergence is off the table for technical reasons, the issues with boats versus single guns could be resolved by three dirty words.

"cone of fire."

If X damage to 1 location is acceptable, but X*2 damage is unacceptable, but X/2 damage is too low, the only solution is to spread the damage around, right? But if, by the same token, you don't want to reduce the impact and tactics of high burst weapons like the AC 20 and PPC, you just can't let them hammer the same spot, repeatedly, in groups, you have to semi-randomize the point of impact.

[Khobai]

cone of fire is not the only way to spread damage though.

you can spread damage on the other end too, when it hits the target. If a PPC hits someone in the CT it could do 6 damage to the CT and 2 damage to each side torso.

So you still get to aim where your weapons go, but part of the damage is "bled" to adjacent locations in a completely non-random way.

[Dark Horse X]

Abivard, on 07 March 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

The situation:
AC's and PPC's, both can do pinpoint direct damage.
Mounting more than one enables convergence factor, this acts as a multiplier.
They have very long ranges.

No need to rehash all the views and counter views, you all should understand the basic background of this problem, and it is indeed a problem.

Hmmmmmm, let's see: You want to nerf ballistics & ppc's for what reason? Their range is too long? They do pinpoint damage? They compliment each other well?

Really? That is your argument?

Do you think the infantryman of WWII cried for a nerf of Stuka's, that their dive bombing and strafing was OP? How far would that have gone? Wah, Wah, Wah.......get over it.

This is mechwarrior, not Joust.

[East Indy]

Khobai, on 08 March 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:

then everyone would go back to dual gauss.

That's the nature of customizable PvP. Power-gamers always "go" to something. Always.

But if their alternative is only modestly more effective, leaving them to be constantly re-evaluating, however, it means better balance and more socially acceptable choices.

Dual Gauss would actually fit that category. The charge-time Gauss itself requires a level of skill beyond many players, especially in mixed armaments. Very few 'Mechs can even mount a pair, and only at significant cost — a limit that will be strictly enforced with weight-class matching. In-game? There's a loadout with big downsides.

Remember, I'm not saying an extension of heat scale is the best, or even great. But it's expedient.

Edited by East Indy, 08 March 2014 - 10:45 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

That's the nature of customizable PvP. Power-gamers always "go" to something. Always.

do powergamers choose rock, paper, or scissors?

if the game is balanced it doesnt matter what option powergamers choose because all options are equal.

Simply put, powergaming is a consequence of imperfect game balance.

Edited by Khobai, 08 March 2014 - 10:50 AM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Khobai, on 08 March 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:

"players will always gravitate towards the combination of weapons that does the most pinpoint damage because pinpoint damage is a fundamentally broken game mechanic."

Pin-point damage is the best way to play MW:O. Remember the Penny Arcade promo poster? It said you should do pinpoint damage, and not try to spread damage. This game is based on compartmentalization of Mech subsections -> this game is designed to reward pinpoint damage over all other attack schemes.

We have to consider that in these discussions... MW:O is designed specifically to encourage pinpoint damage.

[Khobai]

Quote

We have to consider that in these discussions... MW:O is designed specifically to encourage pinpoint damage.

then why did they have to add ghost heat?

[cSand]

Vlad Dragu, on 08 March 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

Hmmmmmm, let's see: You want to nerf ballistics & ppc's for what reason? Their range is too long? They do pinpoint damage? They compliment each other well?

Really? That is your argument?

Do you think the infantryman of WWII cried for a nerf of Stuka's, that their dive bombing and strafing was OP? How far would that have gone? Wah, Wah, Wah.......get over it.

This is mechwarrior, not Joust.

Word.

Don't like AC's pinpoint damage? Let's be honest, PPC and AC20 aren't exactly hard to dodge if you're keeping a reasonable distance and keeping on the move

Roll that torso kids, take it on the arm and don't try to fist fight a dual AC20 jager.

Also, I was always under the impression that PPCs damage did spread a little? Or was that just in the old days?

Edited by cSand, 08 March 2014 - 10:56 AM.

[stkxie]

ppc's do have minimum range of 90 meters... good luck making it that close thou...