180 replies to this topic

[Almond Brown]

Thorqemada, on 10 April 2014 - 04:39 AM, said:

The AC2 has a super long range and a super fast firing rate (4 DPS) - better than the AC5.

If you could calculate a number for DPS of an AC2 at 1000m what do you think it might be.

The AC2 does 1 damage @1000m if it hits. (might be my maths is bad though)

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 08:15 AM, said:

Perhaps PGI can get all forward thinking and create a new Ballistic weapon called the AC15. That would be the same as that AC20 that misses with 1 of its 4 x 5 points slugs.. lol

I Gauss that could work!

[Bishop Steiner]

Mcgral18, on 04 April 2014 - 09:48 PM, said:

The difference is, ammo was increased from TT, while heat dissipation was nerfed hard, 1.4 per external DHS and 3x fire rates.

The OP isn't a good option either, but it would certainly make the game play differently.

14 shots for my Wang, with only 2 CT energy points to back it up? Wow, that would be different. Not a good different, but different. I think I'll pass.

How about instead we increase the cooldowns slightly. Have to be careful as the ac10 is on the verge of obsolescence thanks to le last idiotic nerf, but ac5s and 2s are far too fast cycling anyhow.

[Prezimonto]

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 08:07 AM, said:

Make it 4HP and C.A.S.E. reduces that % chance to 25 and a deal is struck. )

I'll take it. CASE should be honestly useful. I don't mind if that translates into a much lower explosion rate as well as minimizing damage transfer for ammo in torso's protected by CASE.

4hp... 3hp.... somewhere in there is probably just fine... about the rate at which the Gauss is destroyed.

And while we're on that topic. The Gauss rifle should have a 100% explosion chance if it's being charged or holding a charge when it's destroyed, and a 0% chance to explode when it's destroyed if it's at rest. This would re-emphasize that it's a long range weapon, and not for brawling

Edited by Prezimonto, 10 April 2014 - 08:39 AM.

[Maggiman]

Why not
1) Buffing Energy Weapons(In whatever way) or
2) Nerfing the damage per shot on acs? (Just stop calling them ACx and go back to the old small/medium/heavy/superheavy. Maxes more sense with the different cooldowns anyway).

Oh jeah and make them burstfire please! Its so fluffy and would probably solve some problems

..stupid smileys, sry.

Edited by Maggiman, 10 April 2014 - 08:40 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Ultimatum X, on 10 April 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

The nearest comparison to AC 5s is actually the Large Laser, not the Medium Laser (I know you weren't the one to bring the ML into the comparison).

This is by weight, which is really the better way to compare weapon systems imo - as weight is one of the primary limiting factors for what you can load on a build.

So 1 AC 5 + 2 Tons Ammo for 10 tons, vs. 2x LLAS for 10 tons with only the heatsinks that come in your engine.

Listing the pros of each config.

2x LLAS
1) Higher Maximum DPS
2) 18 point alpha vs. 5 point alpha (more than 3x the Alpha potential)
3) Hitscan
4) Time to overheat = 60s


1x AC 5 + 2 Tons Ammo
1) Superior Range (nearly 50%)
2) Superior Maximum Range (Nearly double)
3) FLD
4) Time to Overheat = never



1 AC 5 vs. 2x ER LLAS

1) The range gap closes (similar optimal range, both do the same damage to around 1050m, with the AC pulling ahead beyond that)
2) ERLLAS has Higher Maximum DPS
3) ER LLAS has 18 point alpha vs. 5 point alpha
4) Hitscan
5) Time to Overheat: 35s, so the AC 5 has supremely better sustainable fire

That's a much better, and a much closer comparison.

3x the Alpha potential (18) means that even if you only get the 2x LLAS onto your target location for 0.3s - you still did 5.4 damage (which is as much as the AC 5).

A point of import for a new player just starting out. The AC5 build will cost 1.5 million C-Bills less as both the LL and erLL builds, with a 250 engine, will need DHS's to be even quasi battlefield worthy. A hot map will leave you crying for those DHS's as well.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 April 2014 - 06:52 AM, said:

Ok. I get it.
In one second an AC20 can also do 0 damage where the 3xAC2 will do some damage as it is streaming damage more than an AC20.


I can afford an AC10 in two hours of play I average 60K a match 8 matches in 2 hours... AC10.

Ahhh, lest we forget another 24K (min.), per Match for ammo replacement costs.

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

Ahhh, lest we forget another 24K (min.), per Match for ammo replacement costs.

Even on my worst match I can afford that! Makin' war ain't cheap. And I don't fear payin' the piper!

Bishop Steiner, on 10 April 2014 - 08:36 AM, said:

14 shots for my Wang, with only 2 CT energy points to back it up? Wow, that would be different. Not a good different, but different. I think I'll pass.

How about instead we increase the cooldowns slightly. Have to be careful as the ac10 is on the verge of obsolescence thanks to le last idiotic nerf, but ac5s and 2s are far too fast cycling anyhow.

I don't know Bishop, My Battlemaster got a lot better adding a AC10 to the PPC. A don't think a 20 point ranged Alpha is to much from a 85 ton Mech.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 April 2014 - 08:36 AM, said:

How about instead we increase the cooldowns slightly. Have to be careful as the ac10 is on the verge of obsolescence thanks to le last idiotic nerf, but ac5s and 2s are far too fast cycling anyhow.

I dunno about that.

Remember, the AC/5 was widely considered to be a joke before its cooldown was reduced to 1.5 (I believe the old value was 1.7 or 1.9). The only reason people are using the weapon so often right now is because they can be duct-taped together with PPCs so well.

The AC/2 doesn't have enough burst damage per mouse click to be an effective "sniper" type weapon at long range, so having a high RoF at least lets it be a decent suppression/psychological warfare weapon.

[Almond Brown]

Ultimatum X, on 10 April 2014 - 08:00 AM, said:

The LL is not the counterpart to the AC 10.

The AC 10 costs 12 tons + AMMO

The LLAS costs 5 tons.

2x LLAS with 10+4 Heatsinks (10 Engine & 4 External) weighs the same as 1x AC 10 and 2 Tons of Ammo.

2x LLAS 10+4 Heatsinks does more DPS, higher Alpha but is less less sustainable (3 minutes & 10s to overheat).

2x LLAS has an alpha potential of 18 vs. the Alpha potential of an AC 10 which is 10.

1x AC 10 with 2 Tons of ammo gets you 30 shots, or 300 damage potential. Make it count.
2x LLAS never runs out of ammo, feel free to spray and pray as needed.

When you stop comparing weapons by the initial damage they deal (alpha) and begin comparing them by their tonnage - they are actually better balanced then most players seem to realize.

When the AC10 makes the Heat Penalty Group list, then we can talk. You state this tidbit as if it were an after thought:

Quote

higher Alpha but is less sustainable

Alpha is the game currently. Damage done is the Prime goal. If the LL user cannot sustain it like the AC10 user can, then the LL users loses. It matters not how many DHS's he loaded. That should not really be considered acceptable and is likely why Ballistics (+PPC) rules the Meta.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 April 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

Heck I'd be happy with 1HP 100% volatile an CASE... What can I say its what I am used to.

CASE is good to allow a player to lose the ammo and not destroy themselves in the process. No need for a double whammy for players who take up space on their Mechs to prevent just such a catastrophe is all.

P.S. There we go. ALL ammo is CASED and weighs 1.5 tons and can only be placed in the side torsos. 15% chance to crit out.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 April 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

I Gauss that could work!

Sorry Joe, would need to nerf the Range on that.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 April 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

Even on my worst match I can afford that! Makin' war ain't cheap. And I don't fear payin' the piper!
stuff

Ahhh! Spoken like the old grizzled veteran we have come to know and...

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

CASE is good to allow a player to lose the ammo and not destroy themselves in the process. No need for a double whammy for players who take up space on their Mechs to prevent just such a catastrophe is all.

P.S. There we go. ALL ammo is CASED and weighs 1.5 tons and can only be placed in the side torsos. 15% chance to crit out.

Yeah but since the only penalty for ammo explosion is that match is over for me... Whats the need for it???

[cSand]

lol

all these guys trying to put restrictions and caps on what people can do cause they can't win


Why not try removing the cap from your skills?


BAM

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

Ahhh! Spoken like the old grizzled veteran we have come to know and...

\
You know the line!

[Ultimax]

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

A point of import for a new player just starting out. The AC5 build will cost 1.5 million C-Bills less as both the LL and erLL builds, with a 250 engine, will need DHS's to be even quasi battlefield worthy. A hot map will leave you crying for those DHS's as well.

Not everything can be fair.

We are discussing damage mechanics, the economic cost in cbills for weapons and mechs should probably remain out of it.

Especially as if you are selective you can aquire a lot of gear, XL engines and even stock DHS upgrades on some select chassis.

Also, a new player in a trial mech needs spend nothing, needs not even perform well and when they are done they will probably have around 8 to 10 million in cbills from their Cadet bonus to spend.


Spend them wisely.

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

When the AC10 makes the Heat Penalty Group list, then we can talk. You state this tidbit as if it were an after thought:

The AC 10 being on the heat penalty group list is somewhat irrelevant at the moment.

Considering there are only a very small number of mechs that can even realistically get 2 onto one single build.

Besides, you are deflecting.

Damage output compared to tonnage, ton for ton, 2x LLAS or 2x ER LLAS compare favorably to 1 AC 10.

I'm willing to listen, but I've laid out the math to support my statement - you'll need to do so as well if you think you can refute it.

Almond Brown, on 10 April 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

Alpha is the game currently. Damage done is the Prime goal. If the LL user cannot sustain it like the AC10 user can, then the LL users loses. It matters not how many DHS's he loaded. That should not really be considered acceptable and is likely why Ballistics (+PPC) rules the Meta.

3 minutes and 10s to overheat is a very, very long time.

How often do you just get to sit there for 3 straight minutes endlessly firing on people with no pause?


That damage is sustainable for periods of 3 minutes at a time.


IMO it is completely acceptable that you can fire the LLAS for:

> 3 full minutes
> With a higher alpha
> Do more DPS
> Hitscan weapon with no projectile speed


So which part of that do you not think is fair for 2x LLAS vs. 1x AC 10?

It looks extremely good for those LLs imo. That's why they are one of the weapons I like to use.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 10 April 2014 - 09:22 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

cSand, on 10 April 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

lol

all these guys trying to put restrictions and caps on what people can do cause they can't win


Why not try removing the cap from your skills?


BAM

QFT

[cSand]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 April 2014 - 09:14 AM, said:

QFT

I always think that means "quit f**kin talking"

At first I'm like, aw , then I'm like, oh ya, that QFT

[Joseph Mallan]

cSand, on 10 April 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

I always think that means "quit f**kin talking"

At first I'm like, aw , then I'm like, oh ya, that QFT

So did I!
...
...
...
I finally had to look it up cause I thought it was rude!