470 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Wouldn't make sense to have the ballistic hardpoint "operate inefficiently" if you wanted some form of sized hardpoints penalty?

For instance, perhaps the ballistic torso slots in the K2 would be OK for AC2s, but reduce the projectile speed by 15% for the AC5, and more for the AC10 (25%) and AC20 (50%) or something like that? You could do the same for damage (maybe affect the optimal/max distance formula) if that's necessary.

[Illya Ghost Bear]

SuckyJack, on 18 April 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

PPC Locust?

...........Locusts can carry PPCs?

First thing I see after 6 months is arty actually hurts ( a lot) LRMs are everywhere, and they made the K2 ugly? Has pGI done anything RIGHT since I been gone?

[SweetJackal]

Illyana Arkhipova, on 18 April 2014 - 05:36 PM, said:

...........Locusts can carry PPCs?

First thing I see after 6 months is arty actually hurts ( a lot) LRMs are everywhere, and they made the K2 ugly? Has pGI done anything RIGHT since I been gone?

I don't know if you can actually launch with it or have a build that would work with it but you can strip a locust and put in any weapon into it's hardpoints to see how it would look.

Edited by SuckyJack, 18 April 2014 - 06:09 PM.

[FireSlade]

SuckyJack, on 18 April 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

I don't know if you can actually launch with it or have a build that would work with it but you can strip a locust and put in any weapon into it's hardpoints to see how it would look.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...e037ed6935d6144

[FireSlade]

Okay, I was curious how 4 PPCs looked on a K2 so I mocked one up quick and noticed that the torso PPCs are smaller than the arm PPCs. Bishop your tiny nipple remark is so apt.



P.S. Do not mind the low res. I am only running this on an I5 Toshiba laptop with an Intel4000 video card (faster than a 2007 $3k Alienware desktop, go figure)

Edited by FireSlade, 18 April 2014 - 06:38 PM.

[FupDup]

Illyana Arkhipova, on 18 April 2014 - 05:36 PM, said:

...........Locusts can carry PPCs?

First thing I see after 6 months is arty actually hurts ( a lot) LRMs are everywhere, and they made the K2 ugly? Has pGI done anything RIGHT since I been gone?

SuckyJack, on 18 April 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

I don't know if you can actually launch with it or have a build that would work with it but you can strip a locust and put in any weapon into it's hardpoints to see how it would look.

The Littlest PPC Boat

[Cimarb]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 April 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

the stuff above this seemed like a slightly overly complicated way to achieve essentially the same idea as sized hard points.

that said, turning every weapon into DoT weapons is one of the worst, most boring balance methods out there. One of the few things PGI actually has gotten right is the need for differing damage delivery mechanisms. FLD does not HAVE to be OP.
That is why Ballistics and PPCs are so heavy, and the PPC is heat crippled. If they would ditch the tripled weapon ranges and such, and not put lasers in such a bad place due to heat, in comparison (and if srms worked, etc) they would be close to fine. Why would I remotely invest 12 tons into an ac10 if I can deliver the same essential damage with Large Laser or PPC, save a ton of tonnage (yes you need heat sinks, but most people run overheat specials already without that much consequence) and not have to carry ammo....or run the risk if running out?

We will have to disagree on this, as I don't want to argue with the person that is going to draw me a new Dire Wolf

See my signature if you do want to debate it, though!

[Bishop Steiner]

Cimarb, on 18 April 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:

We will have to disagree on this, as I don't want to argue with the person that is going to draw me a new Dire Wolf

See my signature if you do want to debate it, though!

nothing to debate, all weapons being the same mechanism is just boring. I don't wanna play Papercut Warrior Online, no thanks.

[Jin Ma]

FireSlade, on 18 April 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

Okay, I was curious how 4 PPCs looked on a K2 so I mocked one up quick and noticed that the torso PPCs are smaller than the arm PPCs. Bishop your tiny nipple remark is so apt.



P.S. Do not mind the low res. I am only running this on an I5 Toshiba laptop with an Intel4000 video card (faster than a 2007 $3k Alienware desktop, go figure)

the reason they ever made the arm ppcs small was to match the side torso PPCs on the catapult. like you are showing in this image.

wrong move. I would have prefered them be different sizes. (i mean who the hell runs a 4xppc catapult)

Edited by Jin Ma, 18 April 2014 - 09:32 PM.

[Marmon Rzohr]

Really, reverting to the old barrel design would be a good idea. They look better and still make it clear which weapon system is equipped.

I really can't see a reason why they wouldn't do it...

[Prezimonto]

I'll even add that the mechs that can and should carry cowling for a PPC should get a quirk that increase the HP of the PPC weapons.

Or perhaps better yet... maybe PPC's should go down to 3 or 5 hit points, UNLESS you have a mech that has armor cowling for the PPC... then bump it back up to 10hp's before it's destroyed.

[Bagheera]

Yup, this needs to happen.

[Malleus011]

I support this message. Of course.

[Jin Ma]

Prezimonto, on 19 April 2014 - 07:03 AM, said:

I'll even add that the mechs that can and should carry cowling for a PPC should get a quirk that increase the HP of the PPC weapons.

Or perhaps better yet... maybe PPC's should go down to 3 or 5 hit points, UNLESS you have a mech that has armor cowling for the PPC... then bump it back up to 10hp's before it's destroyed.

like missile bay doors? I wonder what will happen to the centurion's bay doors once they get to fixing it up for weapon customizations. Right now its got 6 tubes. And the doors are each attached to a single tube. Its really cool, but if they want to have expanded tubes based on customization, i don't see any way they could do it without removing the bay doors.

[Prezimonto]

Jin Ma, on 19 April 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

like missile bay doors? I wonder what will happen to the centurion's bay doors once they get to fixing it up for weapon customizations. Right now its got 6 tubes. And the doors are each attached to a single tube. Its really cool, but if they want to have expanded tubes based on customization, i don't see any way they could do it without removing the bay doors.

I'm suggesting something a little different, and less potent than damage reduction to the mech.

Every piece of equipment has hit points for determining how much critical damage it can take before being destroyed. I'm suggesting that PPC's should base have something like 3hit points (currently 10) and that if it's in a PPC mount that has armor cowling that should go up to 10 or 12 hit points.

[xX_Nero_Xx]

boy talk about upset i havent played in a long time cause still piussed about no lobby in game,sup steiner, just something fun about how much i enjoyed looking at my k2 now its like meh

[Bishop Steiner]

Jin Ma, on 18 April 2014 - 09:32 PM, said:

the reason they ever made the arm ppcs small was to match the side torso PPCs on the catapult. like you are showing in this image.

wrong move. I would have prefered them be different sizes. (i mean who the hell runs a 4xppc catapult)

better yet, why not make the torso PPCs larger? IMO it would look better.

[FireSlade]

Jin Ma, on 18 April 2014 - 09:32 PM, said:

the reason they ever made the arm ppcs small was to match the side torso PPCs on the catapult. like you are showing in this image.

wrong move. I would have prefered them be different sizes. (i mean who the hell runs a 4xppc catapult)

I could understand if they removed the extra layers of armor or made them smaller but the barrel and the lens are smaller too (hard to see, I know). What is probably the issue is someone in their art department thinks that scaled weapons looks better than 100% sized weapons so they come up with different art, scaling the size for every mech. To me that seems like a lot of extra, and hard work when they could have used 1 weapon model for each weapon then scaled/designed the cowling around the weapons to change for each mech. Less work and they can reuse a lot of shapes, their favorite thing to do.

Edited by FireSlade, 19 April 2014 - 12:33 PM.

[Deathlike]

Jin Ma, on 19 April 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

like missile bay doors? I wonder what will happen to the centurion's bay doors once they get to fixing it up for weapon customizations. Right now its got 6 tubes. And the doors are each attached to a single tube. Its really cool, but if they want to have expanded tubes based on customization, i don't see any way they could do it without removing the bay doors.

All Cents have 10 missile tubes (stock mech defines the tube-usage). It just happens that most Cent builds are usually designed for SRM brawling.

Edited by Deathlike, 19 April 2014 - 02:17 PM.

[aniviron]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 April 2014 - 08:10 PM, said:

nothing to debate, all weapons being the same mechanism is just boring. I don't wanna play Papercut Warrior Online, no thanks.

Gotta agree with this. I still support some form of penalty for cramming an AC20 into a machine gun slot, but I don't think that being able to precisely target your shots has to be a bad thing. It's just that right now ACs are the kings of range, damage per second, heat, AND precision targeting; they do nothing badly. Change one or two of the other things, and we're back in business. The AC5 nerf was a step in the right direction. (The AC2 nerf went a bit far I think.)