258 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Loaded dice or not statistically 3.4 is the average total on 2d6. The funny thing about this is in the SPC class I took the instructor bought 2d6 at a local party store the night before. When our class finished our rolls we had an average of 3.6... which made him confused, he'd done this dozens of times and 3.4 was always the average. Then a student noticed 2 & 3 was missing from one die, it was replaced with an extra 4 & 5!

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 March 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:

Loaded dice or not statistically 3.4 is the average total on 2d6. The funny thing about this is in the SPC class I took the instructor bought 2d6 at a local party store the night before. When our class finished our rolls we had an average of 3.6... which made him confused, he'd done this dozens of times and 3.4 was always the average. Then a student noticed 2 & 3 was missing from one die, it was replaced with an extra 4 & 5!

How did your instructor lose 0.1 from the average?

3.5 is the average of two dice, not 3.4 (http://puccini.che.p...CHE2101/l12.pdf, top and middle of page 2)

Edited by stjobe, 11 March 2014 - 10:09 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 11 March 2014 - 09:59 AM, said:

What's so far true is that no autocannon ever described in lore has been a single-shot weapon, although the rules do allow for them to exist - but the situation which we have in MWO, where every single AC is single-shot is very, very, very far from lore. There's literally hundreds of autocannons described, and not even one has been described as anything other than burst- or continuous-fire.

What we have in MW:O is 4 different AC20s. Which one do you like best Jobe?

stjobe, on 11 March 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

How did your instructor lose 0.1 from the average?

3.5 is the average of two dice, not 3.4 (http://puccini.che.p...CHE2101/l12.pdf, top and middle of page 2)

stjobe, on 11 March 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

How did your instructor lose 0.1 from the average?

3.5 is the average of two dice, not 3.4 (http://puccini.che.p...CHE2101/l12.pdf, top and middle of page 2)

Better question is how did your professor gain 0.1 using a formula over raw data physically collected multiple times?

[Abivard]

Almond Brown, on 11 March 2014 - 09:52 AM, said:

Funny thing is though, for those who do and can use the elaborated and magical Gauss Rifle(s), they still do 15 (30) damage and at very nice ranges.

What you say has a truth to it, but there are so many unique drawbacks to the Gauss, PGI went to some very extreme lengths to do this. Instead of addressing the cause, which was pinpoint Direct Damage.

As has been mentioned, to take a gauss you almost always have to take an XL engine.

Because Gauss ammo did not explode, they made the Gauss Rifle explode for a potent amount of damage, it did this by magic. You see, when the Gauss takes a hit and is destroyed, the Capacitors "Magically" charge up to full charge instantaneously as opposed to when YOU try to fire them and they require a charge up time.

They also Lowered the weapons health to a absurdly low number.

They Introduced a charge-up delay to fire it. The Weapon can only hold the charge for a brief instant before it will suddenly and 'MAGICALLY Lose it's CHARGE'.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 March 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

What we have in MW:O is 4 different AC20s. Which one do you like best Jobe?

I don't have a favourite; my stats tell me that I've used AC/2s more than any other variant, and UAC/5s the least. The AC/5, AC/10, and AC/20 are roughly even in time equipped.

Joseph Mallan, on 11 March 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

Better question is how did your professor gain 0.1 using a formula over raw data physically collected multiple times?

The math is correct for perfect dice (and infinite empirical series), your series of rolls used imperfect dice (and was finite). Easy

[Abivard]

stjobe, on 11 March 2014 - 09:59 AM, said:

Yes, but not really because of that.

Autocannons are anything from about 30mm bore to 200mm bore; they also have widely differing rates of fire - some as low as a few rounds per burst, some as high as 100 rounds per burst.

It's a complex ecosystem of weapons, but what they all have in common is how much weight they throw down-range:
AC/20 throws 200 kg per BT turn (5 shots per ton, 1 shot per turn)
AC/10 throws 100 kg per BT turn
AC/5 throws 50 kg per BT turn
AC/2 throws 22.2 kg per BT turn down-range.

How those 200 kgs are distributed; which calibre, what firing rate, what burst-size, cassette size, whether it's continuous-fire or burst-fire, is up to the manufacturer.

How much damage 200 kgs of autocannon projectiles does is up to PGI.

What's so far true is that no autocannon ever described in lore has been a single-shot weapon, although the rules do allow for them to exist - but the situation which we have in MWO, where every single AC is single-shot is very, very, very far from lore. There's literally hundreds of autocannons described, and not even one has been described as anything other than burst- or continuous-fire.

Umm you do realize that in MWO all AC's are continuous fire, hold down the trigger and they will fire continuously until you release that trigger or you run out of ammo.

IF you release the trigger before you run out of ammo and then pull the trigger again, you are now BURST firing the weapon.

The AC's number is bore diameter or weight of a single projectile, it definitely is not the combined weight of all projectiles it can fire in a 10 second period.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 11 March 2014 - 10:20 AM, said:

I don't have a favourite; my stats tell me that I've used AC/2s more than any other variant, and UAC/5s the least. The AC/5, AC/10, and AC/20 are roughly even in time equipped.


The math is correct for perfect dice (and infinite empirical series), your series of rolls used imperfect dice (and was finite). Easy

And my memory may be off due to it being 20 years ago as well.

(I really need a day off work dam it!)

Data on Ballistics use:
Weapon Matches Fired Hit Accuracy
GAUSS RIFLE 290 4,139 2,112 51.03%
AutoCannon/20 221 3,130 1,737 55.50%
AutoCannon /10 36 712 408 57.30%
ULTRA AC/5 5 452 139 30.75%
AutoCannon /5 111 5,495 2,130 38.76%
AutoCannon /2 4 712 356 50.00%

I am best with an AC10!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 March 2014 - 10:38 AM.

[Abivard]

By your argument, a .22 cal mini gun is equal to a 24 pounder cannon muzzle loader, and would be named and classified as such.

[xXBagheeraXx]

Abivard, on 09 March 2014 - 03:03 PM, said:

Perhaps you should read before commenting... POPTART?
I careless if you poptart or not, it is totally moot.

The problem is DD, which none of your suggestions will do a single thing against. Your rant doesn't even belong in this thread, it belongs in a poptart thread.

Those who exploit will rarely admit they are doing it or that it even exists. You are only fooling yourselves by pretending that there is no problem or exploitation of DD in MWO

Just because the the present ultimate exploit is AC5's paired with PPC's does not mean that only that combo needs adjustment. NO! It means that Direct Damage weapons are very OP in the present form MWO has.

There is no reason to not take DD weapons if you have an ability to do so. That is a sure sign of how powerful something is.

Changing armor affects all weapons, the reason PGI doubled armor values in the first place is because weapon's damages, RoF and range were drastically increased.
But of course no thought was really giving to the matter, Which is the main problem of PGI and most forum posters, they gave no thought for what they do. That is a simple fact easily deduced by anyone who can and will think about the matter at hand.

We have TWO choices, adjust Direct Damage weapons by the damage done per shot, or ditch the DD fire-mode.

This post is about how to KEEP DD in the game while balancing DD with the other weapon damage types!

If you wish to post about removing Direct Damage, whether by altering the weapons into dots or some other thing, post elsewhere.

Convergence is a different matter as well, the fact the the synergy of DD and Convergence is overwhelming has nothing to do with this topic, Convergence acts as a synergy with all weapons!

The problem is that DD weapons hit one armor location with their full damage, when group fired, all the group is aimed at one spot, depending on distance to target and projectile speeds all group fire will hit one 'armor location' or Hit-Box with full damage. No amount of torso twisting or gyrations will do a thing to stop that, unless the difference in projectile speeds have caused some of the projectiles to have lagged, at which point one or more projectiles MAY hit different Hitbox, BUT! It will still do full damage to that one hitbox.

One, or two or three or however many DD weapons you may mount, does not really change the fact that the DD weapons deliver 100% of damage rating to one hitbox ALWAYS! This point can not be stressed enough it seems.

In relation to other weapon damage types they were supposed to be roughly equal too in damage output, they put far more damage out then they should be.

The attempt to overcome logic by appealing to the emotions with the cry of 'I have just one, why are you punishing me' is not valid, you are not being punished and even the single DD weapon you have is still OP to any other comparable single weapon system of a different weapon damage type.

As for your DPM DD build, what happens if you meet a DoT based, or missile based DPM build that has the same DPM as you? If pilot skills are equal, the DD build will almost always win. even if that NoN DD build has twice the armor or even more!

I have no problem using AC's and hitting where I want, same with PPC's or any other weapon in this game. I know what they can do.

So let me get this straight...

You are complaining in a game where the ability to kill is dependent on accuractly targeting a small location with pinpoint damage is being ruled by mechs (and weapon systems) that can do that very thing? And mechs that are dpm based and have to "stare" at thier opponent lose to said mechs?

You must be some special kind of stupid....

My dpm battle masters have no problem handling front loaded opponents, know why? Because i dont let him pull back into cover to reload/cool off after the alpha. Most of those high alpha builds with few exceptions are extremely hot running....hell my highest alpha atlas sits at a nice balmy 1.1 heat effeciency....I alpha twice, and hump a hill while i cool off....but can basically two shot most mechs if i hit the same section twice, or one shot anything with red armor or any kind of open internals. My penance for that? In a running fight, i can only fire my ac20 and srms...Yeah, you are right high, frontloaded damage is win in this game, if applied correctly, but the fix isnt to freaking NERF the weapons they are using ffs. People like you are why i no longer use gauss rifles much, all the QQing instead of trying to change your tactics has ruined quite a few weapons systems already, and i do NOT want them screwing with my autocannons if you please. So if you die to that atlas that you let alpha you with 3 or 4 ppcs several times, yeah, you deserve to die. not go to the forums and whine about high alpha builds ruining the game....have you TRIED running an alpha boat? Its rather frustrating getting circled by some jerk with a bunch of acs knocking you around, and God help you if you miss or overheat and he's still fresh.

Edited by xXBagheeraXx, 11 March 2014 - 10:55 AM.

[stjobe]

Abivard, on 11 March 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

Umm you do realize that in MWO all AC's are continuous fire, hold down the trigger and they will fire continuously until you release that trigger or you run out of ammo.

IF you release the trigger before you run out of ammo and then pull the trigger again, you are now BURST firing the weapon.

So you're saying all our weapons in MWO are continuous-fire? They all behave the way you describe, and I think calling that burst-fire is more than a little bit of a stretch.

Abivard, on 11 March 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

The AC's number is bore diameter or weight of a single projectile, it definitely is not the combined weight of all projectiles it can fire in a 10 second period.

That's just plain wrong. Bore diameter is variable across ACs, and so is projectile weight.

Since I don't feel like typing everything out again, read this post for a scan of the Tech Manual page on autocannons and this post for quotes from Era Report 3025 (added bonus: You'll see me conceding that single-shot ACs are permissible by the rules!)

[xXBagheeraXx]

stjobe, on 11 March 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

So you're saying all our weapons in MWO are continuous-fire? They all behave the way you describe, and I think calling that burst-fire is more than a little bit of a stretch.


That's just plain wrong. Bore diameter is variable across ACs, and so is projectile weight.

Since I don't feel like typing everything out again, read this post for a scan of the Tech Manual page on autocannons and this post for quotes from Era Report 3025 (added bonus: You'll see me conceding that single-shot ACs are permissible by the rules!)

The ac number is simply the freaking damage...some ac10s were listed as firing like a group of several shots, some only fire 1 or two rounds...

there were like...10? different models of the ac20? xD each of them different calibres from like 120mm to about 200+mm with different numbers of shots fired.

[Voivode]

PPCs aren't in a bad place on their own. They have plenty of positive (range, pinpoint damage, no ammo) with a strong negative (heat per shot, ghost heat) that doesn't really need any adjusting. ERPPCs could stand to drop to 13 or 14 heat per shot but that's another discussion. It is autocannons that are out of whack with other weapons.

Here are my thoughts. Just nail two birds with one stone. The flamer is weak right now. Autocannons require ammo.
Fire + ammo= ?
Exactly. Give flamers a damn near 100% crit chance on ammo to cook off those rounds when the armor is gone.

Take it a step further. If a mech passes 100% heat, hitting that mech with a flamer has a small % chance of causing a through armor ammo explosion. Once the mechs heat drops below 100%, the chance of through armor ammo crit drops to 0% again. The idea makes logical sense, and BT was always punishing to poor heat management.

In that way we help the flamer out by giving it a niche and we also increase the risk that autocannons represent. Risk vs Reward is changed, giving the dual UAC5/AC5 + dual PPC build a nice big Achilles heel.

[Fut]

Abivard, on 11 March 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

Yes, because it is an Auto Cannon, 20 centimeter bore.

The MG damage has changed more than once, as has all the missiles. laser damage has also been toyed with via beam duration and ticks. In fact, the only class of weapons that has been immune to damage adjustment are the Direct Damage weapons AC's,PPC's and Gauss, with Gauss of course they went to elaborate and magical means to make it less usable.

Thanks for multiple replies on this one...

Guess I was just fooled by the fact that:
AC2 = 2 dmg
AC5 = 5 dmg
AC10 = 10 dmg
AC20 = 20 dmg

[Joseph Mallan]

Abivard, on 11 March 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

Umm you do realize that in MWO all AC's are continuous fire, hold down the trigger and they will fire continuously until you release that trigger or you run out of ammo.

IF you release the trigger before you run out of ammo and then pull the trigger again, you are now BURST firing the weapon.

The AC's number is bore diameter or weight of a single projectile, it definitely is not the combined weight of all projectiles it can fire in a 10 second period.

Burst fire does not work like that... r at least it didn't. The M-16 I remember has singe and 3 rnd burst selections. On a pull of the trigger you fired one or 3 bullets. Continuous fire was removed from the M-16 cause Continuous fire wasted ammo.

[xXBagheeraXx]

Voivode, on 11 March 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

PPCs aren't in a bad place on their own. They have plenty of positive (range, pinpoint damage, no ammo) with a strong negative (heat per shot, ghost heat) that doesn't really need any adjusting. ERPPCs could stand to drop to 13 or 14 heat per shot but that's another discussion. It is autocannons that are out of whack with other weapons.

Here are my thoughts. Just nail two birds with one stone. The flamer is weak right now. Autocannons require ammo.
Fire + ammo= ?
Exactly. Give flamers a damn near 100% crit chance on ammo to cook off those rounds when the armor is gone.

Take it a step further. If a mech passes 100% heat, hitting that mech with a flamer has a small % chance of causing a through armor ammo explosion. Once the mechs heat drops below 100%, the chance of through armor ammo crit drops to 0% again. The idea makes logical sense, and BT was always punishing to poor heat management.

In that way we help the flamer out by giving it a niche and we also increase the risk that autocannons represent. Risk vs Reward is changed, giving the dual UAC5/AC5 + dual PPC build a nice big Achilles heel.

HELL NO to the flamer idea....do you realize how many carron feeder/troll flamer mechs would run around mid to late game trolling around with these? That would break the game more than ECM did when it was first introduced...no no 1000 times no!

[stjobe]

Fut, on 11 March 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

Thanks for multiple replies on this one...

Guess I was just fooled by the fact that:
AC2 = 2 dmg
AC5 = 5 dmg
AC10 = 10 dmg
AC20 = 20 dmg

Here's where it gets freaky (TT numbers):

AC/2 = 45 shots per ton (22.2 kg per shot)
AC/5 = 20 shots per ton (50 kg per shot)
AC/10 = 10 shots per ton (100 kg per shot)
AC/20 = 5 shots per ton (200 kg per shot)

So while the AC number could well be "damage per turn", it could just as easily be interpreted as "kgs of projectiles fired per second" (which roughly also is the lore definition as per Era Report 3025, page 89).

[Voivode]

xXBagheeraXx, on 11 March 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

HELL NO to the flamer idea....do you realize how many carron feeder/troll flamer mechs would run around mid to late game trolling around with these? That would break the game more than ECM did when it was first introduced...no no 1000 times no!

It would give C.A.S.E. a reason to be used....

[xXBagheeraXx]

Voivode, on 11 March 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

It would give C.A.S.E. a reason to be used....

I case all my torso ammuniton, However, there isnt a way to separate ammo crits from regular crits...so you get

OH HEY that slightly damaged victor side toros is open...im going to run up to him in my 150kph flamer loaded jenner and lightly graze him with my flamers.....then run away laughing at the easy engine crit...

or entire 4 mans full of flamer lights....those are bad enough NOW just with the blinding/overheating effect...100% crit chance? no thanks.


yeah..NO no thank you....

[Abivard]

stjobe, on 11 March 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

So you're saying all our weapons in MWO are continuous-fire? They all behave the way you describe, and I think calling that burst-fire is more than a little bit of a stretch.


That's just plain wrong. Bore diameter is variable across ACs, and so is projectile weight.

Since I don't feel like typing everything out again, read this post for a scan of the Tech Manual page on autocannons and this post for quotes from Era Report 3025 (added bonus: You'll see me conceding that single-shot ACs are permissible by the rules!)

You do not understand what burst fire or continuous fire is then.

All AC'20s will be of comparable calibers and weights, an AC20 IS CERTAINLY not comparable to an AC2.
You are reading an article from someone who has not a clue to what they are talking about and then misinterpreting what was said.

And not a single bit of it is even relevant to this thread!

[Voivode]

xXBagheeraXx, on 11 March 2014 - 11:10 AM, said:

I case all my torso ammuniton, However, there isnt a way to separate ammo crits from regular crits...so you get

OH HEY that slightly damaged victor side toros is open...im going to run up to him in my 150kph flamer loaded jenner and lightly graze him with my flamers.....then run away laughing at the easy engine crit...

or entire 4 mans full of flamer lights....those are bad enough NOW just with the blinding/overheating effect...100% crit chance? no thanks.


yeah..NO no thank you....

100% crit against ammo only. Hell, give it a 0% crit chance against non-ammo internals.