258 replies to this topic

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 07:05 AM, said:

An AC2 should not be doing the same amount of DPS as an AC20, but I think we agree on that. An AC2 should do roughly a tenth of the damage, but to roughly three times the distance.

You are confusing cone of fire for random, apparently. A cone of fire is what you are describing, but rolling dice to determine where a particular shot hits is random - to stick with your example, it would be like shooting your rifle at the same target with your eyes closed the whole time. Random doesn't belong here in any way, shape or form. Cone of fire would be acceptable, though.

DPS is a horrible stat to marry to a weapons performance. Sorry felt I needed to chime in there.

Oh and weapons should express roles and allow diversity, not necesarily be balanced against one another.

Just somet thoughts.

Continue.

[Fut]

TehSBGX, on 13 March 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

Burst fire for ACs and beam duraion for PPCs seem to be the best option OP. While not everone would like the change, it still seems like a very reasonable comprimise.

Although I like that ACs have direct damage, I'd be willing to test Burst Fire out for them.
Never know, it may well be the fix we're looking for.

However, I think I prefer Splash Damage for PPCs over Beam Duration.

[Pygar]

Pygar, on 12 March 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

I want my pre-nerf Gauss rifles back.

Totally not kidding, these are all the same complaints from several months ago when they nerfed Gauss guns... now it sounds like the only thing people have learned is that the other direct fire weapons are pretty good too.

Edited by Pygar, 13 March 2014 - 09:45 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

he only complaint I have with the Gauss nerf is that people still want to call it a Sniper weapon... Snipers don't delay fire once the trigger is pulled.

As a explaination for the minimum range... it is perfect.

[Cimarb]

Fut, on 13 March 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Or we can be reasonable for a change...
I don't think anybody has ever suggested that the Cone of Fire be so overly ridiculous as to allow something like this to happen.

It's more like if you're clipping along at 85km/h and you fire your AC20 at somebody's CT, it might end up hitting the RT instead.
To me, that's perfectly reasonable, and will make the game feel more realistic despite the slight random factor that the CoF introduces.

This is technically already the case, as anyone that has fired a flight-time weapon while moving can attest to. There are a lot of variables already in play to determine how accurate the shot is, but I wouldn't be opposed to a cone of fire that was dependent on how many weapons (and how big they are) were fired near the same time.

Fut, on 13 March 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

Although I like that ACs have direct damage, I'd be willing to test Burst Fire out for them.
Never know, it may well be the fix we're looking for.

However, I think I prefer Splash Damage for PPCs over Beam Duration.

There are several ways to handle PPC damage to give them a bit of flavor, such as a lightning affect (some front-loaded, rest random arcing to multiple areas) or a small cone of plasma "shells" like an LBX, but the closest to canon is actually an ion stream. An ion stream would have a charge up feature, where you basically line up the shot with a tag-like beam, then when you release the trigger it fires a short (0.2-0.5) duration beam of ion particles along that tag beam.

Joseph Mallan, on 13 March 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

The only complaint I have with the Gauss nerf is that people still want to call it a Sniper weapon... Snipers don't delay fire once the trigger is pulled.

As a explaination for the minimum range... it is perfect.

Technically, all military training teaches you to slowly pull the trigger, and a sniper rifle is the most extreme version of this. It should be timed while you are at the end of your exhale to prevent you from inadvertently holding your breath while lining up the shot. Having the delay is actually very much in line with how a sniper fires, IMO. Brawling with it takes some practice, but it is very doable - you are just giving up the main advantage over an AC20 at that point, though, which is range.

[Joseph Mallan]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

Technically, all military training teaches you to slowly pull the trigger, and a sniper rifle is the most extreme version of this. It should be timed while you are at the end of your exhale to prevent you from inadvertently holding your breath while lining up the shot. Having the delay is actually very much in line with how a sniper fires, IMO. Brawling with it takes some practice, but it is very doable - you are just giving up the main advantage over an AC20 at that point, though, which is range.

And I am doing this at my end of the mouse, I don't need the game to simulate what I have been doing already... And yes, you could probably brawl with a Gauss... if you are more patient than I am.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

Technically, all military training teaches you to slowly pull the trigger, and a sniper rifle is the most extreme version of this. It should be timed while you are at the end of your exhale to prevent you from inadvertently holding your breath while lining up the shot. Having the delay is actually very much in line with how a sniper fires, IMO. Brawling with it takes some practice, but it is very doable - you are just giving up the main advantage over an AC20 at that point, though, which is range.

The sniper rifle reference to gause is somewhat accurate but that said there are alot of things that have a wind up. Maybe its just because I play alot of fantasy esque games but when I think of the gause I think of a bow, pulling back to gain the power before letting it go.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 13 March 2014 - 11:05 AM, said:

The sniper rifle reference to gause is somewhat accurate but that said there are alot of things that have a wind up. Maybe its just because I play alot of fantasy esque games but when I think of the gause I think of a bow, pulling back to gain the power before letting it go.

Yeah, it completely ruined how I used to use a Gauss, and I don't think I will ever use one in a mixed-loadout, but when paired they are a ton of fun and I really like the feel of them now - definitely a unique play style.

[Willard Phule]

Joseph Mallan, on 13 March 2014 - 10:47 AM, said:

And I am doing this at my end of the mouse, I don't need the game to simulate what I have been doing already... And yes, you could probably brawl with a Gauss... if you are more patient than I am.

Yeah....about that.

I've been playing my medium squirrel hunters a lot lately....and it used to be I was afraid of that dual gauss Jager....until I realized the only way to pull it off is with an XL engine. So...get close, run circles around him, beat him with SSRMs until he gets so embarrassed that he just stands still and takes it. Works every time.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

Yeah, it completely ruined how I used to use a Gauss, and I don't think I will ever use one in a mixed-loadout, but when paired they are a ton of fun and I really like the feel of them now - definitely a unique play style.

not fond myself. But to each their own. Sadly I don't have many other solutions myself except heat or a longer cd.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 13 March 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

not fond myself. But to each their own. Sadly I don't have many other solutions myself except heat or a longer cd.

I honestly think it gives a very unique feel to them and hope they do more of this kind of "flavor" in the future.

[Pygar]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

I honestly think it gives a very unique feel to them and hope they do more of this kind of "flavor" in the future.

Nah. I ran 2x Gauss Jager b4 the nerf, after the nerf I just run 2x UAC5s instead. There's nothing wrong with direct fire weapons right now, no point in fixing them... and they should un-"fix" the gauss guns.

[Cimarb]

Pygar, on 13 March 2014 - 12:49 PM, said:

Nah. I ran 2x Gauss Jager b4 the nerf, after the nerf I just run 2x UAC5s instead. There's nothing wrong with direct fire weapons right now, no point in fixing them... and they should un-"fix" the gauss guns.

You are welcome to your opinion, but there IS something wrong with several of the ballistic weapons as well as the PPCs. Gauss was fixed with the charge mechanic, IMO, but the ACs need normalized to each other and some sort of burst-fire versions added as well as a beam/spread fix done to PPCs.

[Mcgral18]

Pygar, on 13 March 2014 - 12:49 PM, said:

Nah. I ran 2x Gauss Jager b4 the nerf, after the nerf I just run 2x UAC5s instead. There's nothing wrong with direct fire weapons right now, no point in fixing them... and they should un-"fix" the gauss guns.

Nothing wrong with a superior method of applying damage, with no way to spread damage? Alrighty.

As for the gauss, it works just fine. Pairs very nicely with a PPC or two for even more FLD. My MetaHawk uses it to decent effect.

[Pygar]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 12:55 PM, said:

You are welcome to your opinion, but there IS something wrong with several of the ballistic weapons as well as the PPCs. Gauss was fixed with the charge mechanic, IMO, but the ACs need normalized to each other and some sort of burst-fire versions added as well as a beam/spread fix done to PPCs.

Why? They seem to work fine for me.

And why spreading? Missiles spread...fire missiles if you want to spread your damage.

Edited by Pygar, 13 March 2014 - 12:59 PM.

[Cimarb]

Pygar, on 13 March 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

Why? They seem to work fine for me.

And why spreading? Missiles spread...fire missiles if you want to spread your damage.

Why? Because they work too well - that is exactly the problem.

Edit: also, there are different ways to spread damage. You can spread through duration (lasers, pulses and flamer), random bone targeting (SSRMs), or cone (LRM/SRM, MG and LBX)

Edited by Cimarb, 13 March 2014 - 01:06 PM.

[Pygar]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

Why? Because they work too well - that is exactly the problem.

That's a matter of opinion, and I don't agree.

[Dawnstealer]

As others have pointed out: it's convergence. Decouple convergence, especially over range, and the problem goes away. If the PPCs hit the ST and the AC5s hit the CT or opposite torso (or miss entirely because of a lack of convergence), then the whole poptart thing becomes less viable.

I would give the option of two things: 1) if you hold the crosshairs on the target, the longer you do it, the better the convergence (as the computer zeroes in); 2) if you have a Clan targeting computer, this convergence time is sped up considerably.

[Mcgral18]

Pygar, on 13 March 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

Why? They seem to work fine for me.

And why spreading? Missiles spread...fire missiles if you want to spread your damage.

ALL weapon systems aside from ACs and PPCs have a built in spread system...that's not balance. That's broken balance.

And it's very much a factor in why dakka is the go to choice. It's both easier to use effectively, and the optimal way to core.

[Cimarb]

Dawnstealer, on 13 March 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

As others have pointed out: it's convergence. Decouple convergence, especially over range, and the problem goes away. If the PPCs hit the ST and the AC5s hit the CT or opposite torso (or miss entirely because of a lack of convergence), then the whole poptart thing becomes less viable.

I would give the option of two things: 1) if you hold the crosshairs on the target, the longer you do it, the better the convergence (as the computer zeroes in); 2) if you have a Clan targeting computer, this convergence time is sped up considerably.

Cryengine supposedly can't handle convergence like that.

That also wouldn't solve the issue, as FLD would still be considerably better than all other forms of damage delivery. Either all weapons would have to be changed back to FLD (per tabletop) or they should all be some form of spread damage. FLD can be retained if we add in variations of each weapon, though, with the FLD versions doing a decent amount less DPS than the spread-damage versions to balance them.