258 replies to this topic

[Willard Phule]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 March 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

And thats the smallest Nuke.

I won't argue canon on the Cannons... They are out there, they get used. Deal with it.!

And I don't remember if they were or weren't Clan any more Phule!

I seem to remember reading somewhere it was 1/2/3 for IS and 3/6/9 for Clan...but we never used them anyway. RAC5 was as high as we went...and event then, it's still an ammo hog. That's why I use them on VTOL escorts. They fly in, do their thing, go Winchester then beat feet out. The Toads come along, drop out "air assault" style on the target and then the toad haulers beat feet out as well. Them birds are expensive.

[Joseph Mallan]

Willard Phule, on 12 March 2014 - 05:41 AM, said:

I seem to remember reading somewhere it was 1/2/3 for IS and 3/6/9 for Clan...but we never used them anyway. RAC5 was as high as we went...and event then, it's still an ammo hog. That's why I use them on VTOL escorts. They fly in, do their thing, go Winchester then beat feet out. The Toads come along, drop out "air assault" style on the target and then the toad haulers beat feet out as well. Them birds are expensive.

Ammo hog indeed... 1 full burp and you unloaded over one ton of RAC20 ammo! But Oh the devastation!

[Tombstoner]

Abivard, on 11 March 2014 - 10:32 AM, said:

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.

only if the .22 rounds are moving close to the speed of light. Round size is one part of the equation, velocity the other.

force = 1/2 mass x velocity^2

so yes a .22 round can do the same damage as a 200 mm, since muzzle velocity in to my knowledge not spoken of at all in lore or listed anywhere in the.game.

Modern kinetic energy weapons are moving to small light wight extremely high velocities to get more penetrating power then 18 inch shells.

[Willard Phule]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 March 2014 - 05:43 AM, said:

Ammo hog indeed... 1 full burp and you unloaded over one ton of RAC20 ammo! But Oh the devastation!

If you hit. If you don't, you wasted a ton of ammo. Literally. But, you know, it'd almost be better to use an artillery piece for direct fire....Long Tom, Thumper, Sniper...they all have direct fire rules. And better range....they've got standoff.

Tombstoner, on 12 March 2014 - 05:57 AM, said:

only if the .22 rounds are moving close to the speed of light. Round size is one part of the equation, velocity the other.

force = 1/2 mass x velocity^2

so yes a .22 round can do the same damage as a 200 mm, since muzzle velocity in to my knowledge not spoken of at all in lore or listed anywhere in the.game.

Modern kinetic energy weapons are moving to small light wight extremely high velocities to get more penetrating power then 18 inch shells.

That's true. It's one of the reasons our military has changed over to the MACS system with regard to artillery charges. Not only does it replace the clunky white bag/ green bag system, it's more efficient. Nothing quite like watching a 155mm howitzer do a direct fire on an old tank with a 5 Hotel. Nothing left but basketball sized pieces all over the place.

Edited by Willard Phule, 12 March 2014 - 06:04 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Willard Phule, on 12 March 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

If you hit. If you don't, you wasted a ton of ammo. Literally.

Spectacular misses are almost as fun as Spectacular hits though Phule!

[Slepnir]

Have we really learned nothing gentlemen-ghost heat, poptarts, gauss charge, DHS only being 1.4, etc...these are all symptoms of errors PGI SHOULD have learned from MW4. this all could have been avoided if they realised the reasons why MW4 had both a hard point and a hardpoint SPACE restriction. IS mechs are built in factories that build them according to a specific design. the mechs are literally built around the weapons they are meant to carry. no weapon larger than the original space could fit in the weapon slot because it would require a complete re-build of the mechs frame and housings. If they had done it right the mechs would still be customizable but not universal(OMNI) level customization and it would force people to use (GASP) more intelligent builds and skill. mechs like the awesome, BJ3, catapult K2 would truly shine since they alone could carry PPC/ERPPCs because they would be the ones with enough internal space locations for the weapons. This simple fix would make the game far more dynamic with role warfare and force players to be a bit more diverse in mech design. instead of running the devs crazy trying to counter all the things being abused by the players with the unfettered build system the company has moved forward with.

[Tombstoner]

Slepnir, on 12 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Have we really learned nothing gentlemen-ghost heat, poptarts, gauss charge, DHS only being 1.4, etc...these are all symptoms of errors PGI SHOULD have learned from MW4. this all could have been avoided if they realised the reasons why MW4 had both a hard point and a hardpoint SPACE restriction. IS mechs are built in factories that build them according to a specific design. the mechs are literally built around the weapons they are meant to carry. no weapon larger than the original space could fit in the weapon slot because it would require a complete re-build of the mechs frame and housings.
If they had done it right the mechs would still be customizable but not universal(OMNI) level customization and it would force people to use (GASP) more intelligent builds and skill. mechs like the awesome, BJ3, catapult K2 would truly shine since they alone could carry PPC/ERPPCs because they would be the ones with enough internal space locations for the weapons. This simple fix would make the game far more dynamic with role warfare and force players to be a bit more diverse in mech design. instead of running the devs crazy trying to counter all the things being abused by the players with the unfettered build system the company has moved forward with.

This is excellent justification for stock only game play. Players could then have the option of playing in the unlimited league where we have what we have now. However customization is part of the selling point of the game. Again the game is suffering from a form of multiple personality disorder. is it a TT simulation, FPS, First person view RTS. Then add in CW and the conquest of the IS for unification. no one will be happy.

The game might have been better off just making 3025 happen with what was advertised for the founders package. Fewer weapons to balance with no technology creep. Then once the games ready add in starleague tech eventually the clans. That way a player owned and controlled units can fight for planetary control and eventually unify the IS.

The possibility of AI or scripted NPC combat to simulate the clan invasion would have made a nice expansion event.

[Varent]

Slepnir, on 12 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Have we really learned nothing gentlemen-ghost heat, poptarts, gauss charge, DHS only being 1.4, etc...these are all symptoms of errors PGI SHOULD have learned from MW4. this all could have been avoided if they realised the reasons why MW4 had both a hard point and a hardpoint SPACE restriction. IS mechs are built in factories that build them according to a specific design. the mechs are literally built around the weapons they are meant to carry. no weapon larger than the original space could fit in the weapon slot because it would require a complete re-build of the mechs frame and housings. If they had done it right the mechs would still be customizable but not universal(OMNI) level customization and it would force people to use (GASP) more intelligent builds and skill. mechs like the awesome, BJ3, catapult K2 would truly shine since they alone could carry PPC/ERPPCs because they would be the ones with enough internal space locations for the weapons. This simple fix would make the game far more dynamic with role warfare and force players to be a bit more diverse in mech design. instead of running the devs crazy trying to counter all the things being abused by the players with the unfettered build system the company has moved forward with.

could be interesting. Dont know if they could impliment it at this point though without breaking a few things or having serious issues.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 11 March 2014 - 08:17 PM, said:

I must say, after actually being in game why are people so set on more changes still. I mean...... seeing and feeling the thrust of new JJ... and seeing how innefectual and slow they are... (Heavy somewhat of an exception though still sluggish) Im not seeing how people are still arguing over this. I maybe see... 2-3 Jump snipers in a game... at least traditional ones. I am seeing more medium ones... wich is a good thing and a nice trade off. Im seeing TONS of lrms and a lot of people playing brawlers, wich was the point. The meta is slowly and very surely shifting. Im seeing tons of people using srm (even with hit detection as well).

The jump jet changes were very much needed, as the system was obviously broken if you could get as much vertical from one jump jet as you could from five, but that doesn't mean there isn't still room for improvements with them, and especially with weapons. Adding more variety, based upon manufacturer, is always going to improve the game, as it allows people to play the way they want instead of the way they feel they have to in order to succeed.

Slepnir, on 12 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Have we really learned nothing gentlemen-ghost heat, poptarts, gauss charge, DHS only being 1.4, etc...these are all symptoms of errors PGI SHOULD have learned from MW4. this all could have been avoided if they realised the reasons why MW4 had both a hard point and a hardpoint SPACE restriction. IS mechs are built in factories that build them according to a specific design. the mechs are literally built around the weapons they are meant to carry. no weapon larger than the original space could fit in the weapon slot because it would require a complete re-build of the mechs frame and housings. If they had done it right the mechs would still be customizable but not universal(OMNI) level customization and it would force people to use (GASP) more intelligent builds and skill. mechs like the awesome, BJ3, catapult K2 would truly shine since they alone could carry PPC/ERPPCs because they would be the ones with enough internal space locations for the weapons. This simple fix would make the game far more dynamic with role warfare and force players to be a bit more diverse in mech design. instead of running the devs crazy trying to counter all the things being abused by the players with the unfettered build system the company has moved forward with.

There are canon mechs of almost every weight that mount PPCs. Even 20-ton mechs, such as the Stinger and Wasp, have canon variants that carry a light PPC.

More restrictive does NOT equal more intelligent. I'm not even a fan of hardpoints, personally, as you have a certain amount of weight and space available and not being able to mount something in a particular spot because of an arbitrary "we don't want you to put it there" is silly. I realize the importance of it, but it's still arbitrary and silly, just like ghost heat is.

Instead, I really think the size should be fixed regardless of chassis. Want to mount that huge AC20 on your locust? FINE, but you are going to have a HUGE bullseye strapped to your side to do so!

[Pygar]

I want my pre-nerf Gauss rifles back.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 12 March 2014 - 11:26 AM, said:

The jump jet changes were very much needed, as the system was obviously broken if you could get as much vertical from one jump jet as you could from five, but that doesn't mean there isn't still room for improvements with them, and especially with weapons. Adding more variety, based upon manufacturer, is always going to improve the game, as it allows people to play the way they want instead of the way they feel they have to in order to succeed.

my main criticism is the JJ size for victors. It really needs to be the same as the highlander IMO.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 12 March 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

my main criticism is the JJ size for victors. It really needs to be the same as the highlander IMO.

I can't remember the specifics here at work, but it's a percentage of the mechs tonnage and they probably just fall on different sides of a rounding issue. I don't disagree with you, but I'm willing to bet that's what happened.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 12 March 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:

I can't remember the specifics here at work, but it's a percentage of the mechs tonnage and they probably just fall on different sides of a rounding issue. I don't disagree with you, but I'm willing to bet that's what happened.

Probly. Doesnt make it any less crappy.

(personal opinion)

[Relic1701]

Not reading 10 pages of this just to find this out, but has anyone toyed with the idea of what a static 30 point heat cap would be like.

It doesn't effect the any weapon singularly, but you start mounting multiples and you really start to notice the problems. Would this promote a more heat efficient design philosophy and a move to doing damage over time rather than front loaded pinpoint damage?

[FactorlanP]

Relic1701, on 12 March 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

Not reading 10 pages of this just to find this out, but has anyone toyed with the idea of what a static 30 point heat cap would be like.

It doesn't effect the any weapon singularly, but you start mounting multiples and you really start to notice the problems. Would this promote a more heat efficient design philosophy and a move to doing damage over time rather than front loaded pinpoint damage?

I don't think that that has been discussed in this thread, but there certainly is a pretty good argument to switch to a lower heat cap and a high heat dissipation system.

That said, even in such a system, front loaded pin point convergence damage will continue to reign supreme. So, while a low heat cap system would nicely address other problems (in my opinion), I don't think it would solve this one.

[Relic1701]

Well, it's a quick fix, if the other systems currently in play stay as they are (ghost heat, 1.4 "doubles" etc), they only have to change 1 number.

Until something, anything is tried, we will not know....

Edited by Relic1701, 12 March 2014 - 01:25 PM.

[FactorlanP]

Relic1701, on 12 March 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:

Well, it's a quick fix, if the other systems currently in play stay as they are (ghost heat, 1.4 "doubles" etc), they only have to change 1 number.

Until something, anything is tried, we will not know....

Sure, I'm open to trying all kinds of stuff.

It's really a shame that they don't take advantage of the Test Server to see how some basic numbers tweaks would play out.

[IceCase88]

All these demands for weapons balance and nerfing pinpoint lead to one thing. Randomly assigned hits like the current SSRM mechanic and like it was in TT. Be careful what you QQ about if you do not want that to happen. I do not have a problem with that.

[Relic1701]

The pinpoint damage is killing the game for me personally, as it takes very little skill to just 'point & click', even with max armour on an Atlas, they go down in very short order.

Anything that takes the time to kill of mechs down, is a good thing, be it limited hardpoints, heat cap reduction, cone of fire, set convergence....any of these would achieve it in some fashion or another.

[stjobe]

IceCase88, on 12 March 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

All these demands for weapons balance and nerfing pinpoint lead to one thing. Randomly assigned hits like the current SSRM mechanic and like it was in TT. Be careful what you QQ about if you do not want that to happen. I do not have a problem with that.

I don't think anyone really wants to nerf pin-point accuracy; what most people seem to want toned down is the efficiency of the combination of
1. pin-point accuracy,
2. perfect convergence of multiple weapons onto that pin-point, and
3. instant delivery of all those multiple weapons' damage to that pin-point.

In fact, most people seem to prefer if weapons stay pin-point accurate, and damage done is spread out by some non-random mechanic - like e.g. burst-fire, beam duration, missile spread, or something else.

Spreading damage out in beams, bursts, or missile flights simulates random hit locations by a non-random mechanic; under perfect conditions - close range, stationary firer and target, sunny skies, and a fair breeze - you can still put all your damage in one location.

The problem with how ACs and PPCs work in the current system is that they also allow you to put all your damage in one location at extreme ranges, on moving targets, while moving at top speed yourself.

No other weapons can do this, and that's why some of us would like to see ACs changed to a burst mechanic (and PPC to beam duration or splash damage) - just to put them on equal footing with the other weapon systems.

If doing so means we'd have to further tweak their other characteristics, like damage, heat, range, etc, then so be it; that is a minor balancing issue. These weapons being superior through their damage dealing mechanic is a major balance issue.

Edited by stjobe, 12 March 2014 - 01:59 PM.