258 replies to this topic

[Pygar]

Here's another way to look at it guys: If they water down one kind of weapon system or playstyle, then everybody is just going to gravitate to whatever works instead....

...so what is it that you really want? Targeting reticles that have nothing to do with where your guns are going to actually shoot? Direct fire weapons nerfed to the point where people might as well just take missile boats all the time? Mechs that can only mount one of any given weapon system so your weapons list looks like a swiss army knife's blade selection? Weapons that require Tony Hawk Skating type key combinations in order to fire? Slowed down gameplay that makes you feel like you are "surviving" even if you are being really dumb and walking right out in the open where everybody can shoot you?

I think they should leave weapons alone from where they are at now, and un-nerf Gauss Rifles.

Edited by Pygar, 13 March 2014 - 01:36 PM.

[Jaguar Prime]

Unlike most of you guys, I like the way pinpoint damage is currently implemented. I survive just fine in matches.

The DOT mechanic added to lasers was a welcomed change from MW4. Some of you seem to forget that in the last game they were front loaded insta hit weapons. So I have to ask, why would you want a similar mechanic on a weapon that requires you to lead your target? I can see you guys asking for this if ballistics and ppc's were insta hit but they are not. It's like you guys have forgotten that you have to lead your target with ppc's and ballistiics. (Unless you are brawling at point blank range.)

Next I have to ask is from what gameplay perspective are you guys coming from? Have you guys thought about how COF or the multi shot mechanic some are suggesting would effect long range play? (everyone doesn't like brawling) I have enough issues hitting a moving target at range with a lead time weapon without having to deal with a cone of fire or some multishot mechanic that maybe one round might land.

I am starting to believe that this discussion is biased to the concerns of close range player (brawlers) and ignoring the possible effects it may have on range play.

[Mcgral18]

Jaguar Prime, on 13 March 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

Unlike most of you guys, I like the way pinpoint damage is currently implemented. I survive just fine in matches.

The DOT mechanic added to lasers was a welcomed change from MW4. Some of you seem to forget that in the last game they were front loaded insta hit weapons. So I have to ask, why would you want a similar mechanic on a weapon that requires you to lead your target? I can see you guys asking for this if ballistics and ppc's were insta hit but they are not. It's like you guys have forgotten that you have to lead your target with ppc's and ballistiics. (Unless you are brawling at point blank range.)

Next I have to ask is from what gameplay perspective are you guys coming from? Have you guys thought about how COF or the multi shot mechanic some are suggesting would effect long range play? (everyone doesn't like brawling) I have enough issues hitting a moving target at range with a lead time weapon without having to deal with a cone of fire or some multishot mechanic that maybe one round might land.

I am starting to believe that this discussion is biased to the concerns of close range player (brawlers) and ignoring the possible effects it may have on range play.

Gauss is still used plenty in pairs and with PPCs, making ACs hit 2 or 3 components instead of a single won't make people stop using them. It will simply make them have some sort of balance when compared to every other weapon system.

Sure, convergence would be much nicer, but we can't have that because the engine can't seem to handle it, while also maintaining hit detection.

As for brawling...ACs are best at it, not SRMs. ACs which in TT had min range, are better than SRMs in a brawl because you can focus ALL the damage in a single component, without any way to mitigate that FLD. Unlike every other weapon system.

[Cimarb]

Jaguar Prime, on 13 March 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

Unlike most of you guys, I like the way pinpoint damage is currently implemented. I survive just fine in matches.

The DOT mechanic added to lasers was a welcomed change from MW4. Some of you seem to forget that in the last game they were front loaded insta hit weapons. So I have to ask, why would you want a similar mechanic on a weapon that requires you to lead your target? I can see you guys asking for this if ballistics and ppc's were insta hit but they are not. It's like you guys have forgotten that you have to lead your target with ppc's and ballistiics. (Unless you are brawling at point blank range.)

Next I have to ask is from what gameplay perspective are you guys coming from? Have you guys thought about how COF or the multi shot mechanic some are suggesting would effect long range play? (everyone doesn't like brawling) I have enough issues hitting a moving target at range with a lead time weapon without having to deal with a cone of fire or some multishot mechanic that maybe one round might land.

I am starting to believe that this discussion is biased to the concerns of close range player (brawlers) and ignoring the possible effects it may have on range play.

I play LRM boats, snipers and brawlers, so I am looking at this from all sides. I also like the hard-hitting Gauss as well as think that ACs should be burst fire.

You seem to forget that ALL weapons in TT were front-loaded, though LRMs were clustered in groups of five. Lasers delivered damage exactly the same way as ballistics AND LRM5s, even.

[Jaguar Prime]

Cimarb, on 13 March 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

You seem to forget that ALL weapons in TT were front-loaded, though LRMs were clustered in groups of five. Lasers delivered damage exactly the same way as ballistics AND LRM5s, even.

No, I didn't forget but thats tabletop with dice rolls.

Now again, how would travel time weapons be addressed when dealing with COF or burst fire weapons? As a sniper you know you have to lead a target by bit with travel time weapons to actually hit a moving target from 500m+. Everyone doesnt stand still for you to hit them.

[Cimarb]

Jaguar Prime, on 13 March 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

No, I didn't forget but thats tabletop with dice rolls.

Now again, how would travel time weapons be addressed when dealing with COF or burst fire weapons? As a sniper you know you have to lead a target by bit with travel time weapons to actually hit a moving target from 500m+. Everyone doesnt stand still for you to hit them.

Cone of Fire, by most people that have presented that option, is only to address firing multiple weapons in a group. For instance, firing two AC20s together or a bunch of lasers (which is sometimes referred to as a system drain, not really cone, but same end affect). It would just be a slight increase in the distance between the shots, even at long distances. Leading times don't really change, though, as it doesn't affect individual shots.

There is also where Cone of Fire could technically be an inaccuracy of the crosshairs, but I don't think that would be a good idea or technically as feasible.

My point about tabletop, though, is you have to either use the rules for all weapons (make them ALL front-loaded), or change them all to how they SHOULD be done, I.e. Missiles spread, lasers are a beam, and ACs are burst.

[Gyrok]

Damage needs to be spread out, that is the issue with pinpoint single shot damage. TT values for damage get spread frequently...but they made this game about pin point exact damage. If a PPC had a cone of damage at range similar to a MG, it would totally negate them from the Meta...

But, PGI does not want to do that...

[Relic1701]

A lot of the problems stem from peoples obsession with mounting multiples of the same weapon. Individually, weapon balance is in a fairly good place, but when you start mounting multiples of the same weapon type, things start to go a bit crazy.

Canonically, few mechs mounted 2 or more PPC's, and off the top of my head I can only think of one or two than mounted 2 or more AC5's. No mech short of an assault mounted twin AC20's (or should be allowed to (the HBK IIc doesn't count as it was considered a death sentence to be assigned one)), and twin Gauss was all but unheard of.

If more diverse builds were more effective (either through heat penalties, HP restriction etc), the whole front loaded damage would become less of an issue.

As a community, we could all make a 'gentlemen's/ladies' agreement not to run meta/cheese builds, but we all know that would never happen.

[Gyrok]

Jaguar Prime, on 13 March 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

Unlike most of you guys, I like the way pinpoint damage is currently implemented. I survive just fine in matches.

The DOT mechanic added to lasers was a welcomed change from MW4. Some of you seem to forget that in the last game they were front loaded insta hit weapons. So I have to ask, why would you want a similar mechanic on a weapon that requires you to lead your target? I can see you guys asking for this if ballistics and ppc's were insta hit but they are not. It's like you guys have forgotten that you have to lead your target with ppc's and ballistiics. (Unless you are brawling at point blank range.)

Next I have to ask is from what gameplay perspective are you guys coming from? Have you guys thought about how COF or the multi shot mechanic some are suggesting would effect long range play? (everyone doesn't like brawling) I have enough issues hitting a moving target at range with a lead time weapon without having to deal with a cone of fire or some multishot mechanic that maybe one round might land.

I am starting to believe that this discussion is biased to the concerns of close range player (brawlers) and ignoring the possible effects it may have on range play.

The issue is that close range play has been all but eliminated for quite some time...

By catering to the "sniper" fest they are taking out good game play styles for many that would otherwise use a different play style. I invite you to drop in a match as a single PUG, and watch events unfold...even terrible players sit back at 800m+ trying to "snipe" you will see Raven's with 3xML trying to shoot people at 900m wondering why they do no damage. Additionally, you will see people trying to jump snipe with weapons that are DOT, and you will also see players trying to shoot lights from 600m+ with AC10/AC20 and their rounds land closer to Jimmy Hoffa than they do the light mech.

That is the sad state of this game. New players need to be able to brawl to learn to grasp the mechanics, and they do not get that when experienced players are telling them to run meta jump sniping mechs...they think they need to sit back and play the "die a horrible death trying to jump snipe while hill humping and landing on top of the hill" game...

It is really bad...

FYI I like to play ranged builds, but Gauss needs no further nerfing...PPCs on the other hand...yes...I would even be fine with ghost heat going away if they had a cone that got as big as 50% damage was direct hit to aimed point and 50% was spread within X radius.

[verybad]

Willard Phule, on 08 March 2014 - 08:19 AM, said:

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.

Well are you trying to simulate TT Battletech, or are your trying to simulate a fight between mechs that TT simulates and balances using dice?

If you made people miss like they do in TT, nobody would play this game.

[Aaron45]

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.

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)

Convergence is definetely the Problem. Its the only way to balance these alpha dmg and poptart issues. (dual ac20; ppc ac; even lazer)

I remember this has been suggested maybe 100 times but pgi doesnt have the nuts or the talent to reduce the convergence.

My suggestion would be this:

A torso mounted weapon should take like 5 secs to be sync converegenced with arm mounted weapons. Both arm weapons should be synced to each other like in 2 secs.

Either way i could live with the op suggestion.

All these nerfs and complicated heat scala just didnt help or ruined some weapons, or couldnt solve other weapon combination issues.

Edited by Aaron45, 13 March 2014 - 04:17 PM.

[Jaguar Prime]

Gyrok, on 13 March 2014 - 03:33 PM, said:

The issue is that close range play has been all but eliminated for quite some time...

By catering to the "sniper" fest they are taking out good game play styles for many that would otherwise use a different play style. I invite you to drop in a match as a single PUG, and watch events unfold...even terrible players sit back at 800m+ trying to "snipe" you will see Raven's with 3xML trying to shoot people at 900m wondering why they do no damage. Additionally, you will see people trying to jump snipe with weapons that are DOT, and you will also see players trying to shoot lights from 600m+ with AC10/AC20 and their rounds land closer to Jimmy Hoffa than they do the light mech.

That is the sad state of this game. New players need to be able to brawl to learn to grasp the mechanics, and they do not get that when experienced players are telling them to run meta jump sniping mechs...they think they need to sit back and play the "die a horrible death trying to jump snipe while hill humping and landing on top of the hill" game...

It is really bad...

FYI I like to play ranged builds, but Gauss needs no further nerfing...PPCs on the other hand...yes...I would even be fine with ghost heat going away if they had a cone that got as big as 50% damage was direct hit to aimed point and 50% was spread within X radius.

I disagree. All "sniper" fest's devolve into brawls. So no, brawling is definitely still in play.

As for the rest of your post. I currently pug almost exclusively. Bads will be bad and new players don't know any better. So the things you described are expected. New players should only be able to play new players for the first 50 matches. That will solve some of the problem with them learning game mechanics. Not changing the game mechanics to aid new players.

Something to think about.

The max pinpoint alpha from 500m-660m (considered long range by some) on a laterally moving target traveling at least 55kph (without incurring ghost heat) is 30points of damage. After 660m it only decreases. The different Projectile travel speeds of AC's, PPC's and Gauss make the chances of hitting the same panel with any combination of these that would exceed 30points of damage on a laterally moving target very unlikely. The farther out, the more unlikely. (Of course there will be that one guy who stands still out in the open trying to line up a shot.. He deserves to take a full pinpoint alpha.)

So, with this in mind. Pinpoint damage only becomes a concern at close range. The closer the target, the less effect different travel times have on the ability to place you alpha into one location.

I had assumed that this was common knowledge to the informed forum poster but it seems that most do not know this or are willfully ignoring it.

[wanderer]

Quote

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

For 20 tons, let's put two AC/5's and 4 tons of ammo on a 'Mech. And two ER LL's on the other with 10 heat sinks.

Twin ER LL's are 3.6 DPS, 85% heat efficient. In actuality, the effective DPS is lower thanks to damage spread.

Twin AC/5's are 6.67 DPS, can't overheat (143%), and effective DPS is far closer to maximum because there's no damage spread whatsoever. Even if you missed half your shots, you'd still have DPS equal to someone who was by a miracle of guided tracking-beam laser hax hitting on-location, say, 90% of the time. Can you tell me you can put a laser on a single location for 90% of the time, assuming it isn't someone not moving an inch?

Your opinion shrinks from the relentless light of the facts, sir.

[Joseph Mallan]

Willard Phule, on 13 March 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

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.

Well if you put all your eggs in one basket you deserve what you get. Unless you know others have your back. Our GaussPults and Streakcats knew I had their backs in my 100T Archer. So long as we were within 1,000M.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 14 March 2014 - 03:23 AM.

[Cimarb]

Joseph Mallan, on 14 March 2014 - 03:23 AM, said:

Well if you put all your eggs in one basket you deserve what you get. Unless you know others have your back. Our GaussPults and Streakcats knew I had their backs in my 100T Archer. So long as we were within 1,000M.

As a solo-only player, I don't expect any such support, but a GaussJager does quite well as long as I ignore bait-spiders. I haven't tried a GaussPult, just because I can't fathom a Catapult without jump jets....it's just...unnatural...

Edit.... Why does spellchecker keep trying to insert Pukt instead of Pult?...

Edited by Cimarb, 14 March 2014 - 05:59 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

If you do good solo you really should try TS with a few other players. Once you get in tune you'll be surprised how the game gets better.

[Why Run]

Top 10 for dumbest arguments ever made, but I'm guessing ya'll are light mech pilots who want complete invincibility. Good luck - if they took some of this advice there would be about 12 players left after a week.

[Cimarb]

Joseph Mallan, on 14 March 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

If you do good solo you really should try TS with a few other players. Once you get in tune you'll be surprised how the game gets better.

I would, but I am an addict. I have a wonderful wife and three kids that don't complain about me playing, as long as it isn't bothering them (me yelling and talking to invisible people) or taking up large chunks of time without break (raiding in other games, or sync-dropping in MWO where people are waiting on me).

I'll take a happy wife and relatively unlimited PUG matches over a good group drop any day, lol. Priorities man, priorities!

[Joseph Mallan]

Cimarb, on 14 March 2014 - 07:32 AM, said:

I would, but I am an addict. I have a wonderful wife and three kids that don't complain about me playing, as long as it isn't bothering them (me yelling and talking to invisible people) or taking up large chunks of time without break (raiding in other games, or sync-dropping in MWO where people are waiting on me).

I'll take a happy wife and relatively unlimited PUG matches over a good group drop any day, lol. Priorities man, priorities!

Sounds like you have the home life I do. You ARE making a very wise choice.