219 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Khobai, on 18 April 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

Blame the game not the players. Meta builds are the inevitable result of extremely poor weapon balance.

unlike most people on here, i'm not blaming anything. i'm laughing at the sheep that lap up the nonsense while i consistently beat the meta without stooping to it. but by all means, keep believing the hype.

[Mcgral18]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 April 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

unlike most people on here, i'm not blaming anything. i'm laughing at the sheep that lap up the nonsense while i consistently beat the meta without stooping to it. but by all means, keep believing the hype.

Bad players who use meta are still bad players. Weapons still deal damage, but application of that damage does make a difference.

A decent example is pulse lasers. I've built a banshee with 7 MPLs and a LPL. That is a potential alpha of 52.6 damage in .6 seconds at 200M. Mounted with a 400XL and 23 DHS, it's a pretty bad build. But it can kill things quickly in a brawl, with over 100 damage in under 4 seconds.

Of course, the heat system being what it is stops it dead after the second alpha. But if you get within 90M of a meta mech, it will die.

Now, it can survive 3 meta alphas before having an open side torso so it can normally close the distance at 75 KMh, but they normally travel in packs. As such, it's far from an optimal build. Hot, fragile, not fast when gauged with other mechs.

Edited by Mcgral18, 18 April 2014 - 09:45 PM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 April 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

"Meta is for scrubs who follow cookie cutter builds. Meta isn't the best because so many players I've killed use it with my super awesome not meta builds " -Paraphrase of Bishop's comment

Khobai, on 18 April 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

Blame the game not the players. Meta builds are the inevitable result of extremely poor weapon balance.

This and...

Mcgral18, on 18 April 2014 - 09:01 PM, said:

And weapon mechanics.

This


The sheep will follow trends of the more skilled players and attempt to emulate their play style.

Granted they are still just sheep, but in more effective loadouts.

Remember, the game and game's mechanics determine optimal builds and player "Meta"

You can take off your tinfoil hat there bishop. There is no "SUPER ELITE META COUNCIL" to determine <Arbitrary Mech Build> is the meta. Its discovered after knowing the ins and outs of how the game works and then applying that knowledge to in game scenarios.

Until PGI fundamentally changes heat scale, missiles, convergence, etc. -> "PPC+Ac5" meta will always be superior because that is the state of the game.

Its literally that simple. State of the game determines meta. Not Elite players who want to play a certain way.

ffs...

Edited by mwhighlander, 18 April 2014 - 10:59 PM.

[Wolfways]

I found the best way to deal with the meta is to ignore it. In fact using PPC's screws them in a brawl and i often find it easier to kill them than it is to kill mechs with varied loadouts.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Wolfways, on 18 April 2014 - 11:20 PM, said:

I found the best way to deal with the meta is to ignore it. In fact using PPC's screws them in a brawl and i often find it easier to kill them than it is to kill mechs with varied loadouts.

If you see a jump sniper solo and you're in a fast moving mech, just face hug it...

[Wolfways]

mwhighlander, on 18 April 2014 - 11:22 PM, said:

If you see a jump sniper solo and you're in a fast moving mech, just face hug it...

Solo? Pfft. I don't consider it fair unless there's at least two of them

[OneEyed Jack]

Sable, on 18 April 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:

I didn't change any of my mechs with ac2s. They are actually more efficient now. The slight decrese in cooldown has had the effect of slowing heat generation noticeably. Not all weapons are made for maximum dps. AC2s (being the lowest caliber autocannon) are still good at what they have always been good at, supressing fire and making people panic from a constant ballistic barrage. I hate having to say this every time a weapon change happens but dangit learn to adapt already. Not every change is a personal attack on you.

Let's see...

• Same Tonnage
  
• Same Crit
  
• Same Ammo/Ton
  
• Same Heat
  
• Same Damage
  
• Slower RoF
  
• Less Range

Methinks someone needs to look up the definition of "efficient"..... and "more".

(Super Secret Play Hint: You can reduce heat generation by taking your finger off the freaking fire button once in awhile)

[Iqfish]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 April 2014 - 10:47 AM, said:

Let's see..... Two tons lighter, faster projectile and only 1 crit...... yup useless! How date they not be BETTER then ac5s anymore!

(See others can get silly and melodramatic too)

Common Sense!

GG Bishop!

I can't stand these "Boohoo they >nerfed< my precious, unbalanced weapon"-posts anymore

[Yellow Kat]

Meh. I havn't noticed a difference in my Dual AC2s after the change, but that not heating up like a roman candle dose help.

[Charons Little Helper]

Yellow Kat, on 19 April 2014 - 04:04 AM, said:

Meh. I havn't noticed a difference in my Dual AC2s after the change, but that not heating up like a roman candle dose help.

Only because they're firing less.

[Foxfire]

OneEyed Jack, on 19 April 2014 - 03:23 AM, said:

Let's see...

• Same Tonnage
  
• Same Crit
  
• Same Ammo/Ton
  
• Same Heat
  
• Same Damage
  
• Slower RoF
  
• Less Range

Methinks someone needs to look up the definition of "efficient"..... and "more".

(Super Secret Play Hint: You can reduce heat generation by taking your finger off the freaking fire button once in awhile)

I have no dog in this fight, as I don't use AC/2's and was never really bothered by them..

But.. while the heat is the same per shot, you are shooting slower.. which does make them more heat efficient and allows for more shots down range before having to take a heat break.

Now I shall slink back into the shadows.

[Soulscour]

I really don't care about the current heat or the range nerf. Its the dps nerf that pisses me off. The whole point of running quad ac2 was so I could pump out as much damage as quickly as possible so I could blow a shoulder off or core a mech relatively close range and then cool off afterwards which was perfectly feasible in its previous state. Can't do that anymore. Now they out dps me while I run twice as hot as them. If anyone says the new rate of fire has helped them manage their heat better, then they have worse aim and need a slower rate of fire to compensate for their lack of skill, or they don't know when to take their finger off the damn trigger. Yes I have removed the 4ac2 off my banshee and now run meta 2PPC + 3AC BS. You asked for it pgi.

[OneEyed Jack]

Foxfire, on 19 April 2014 - 04:31 AM, said:

I have no dog in this fight, as I don't use AC/2's and was never really bothered by them..

But.. while the heat is the same per shot, you are shooting slower.. which does make them more heat efficient and allows for more shots down range before having to take a heat break.

Now I shall slink back into the shadows.

You can also, I dunno, maybe just shoot slower? Maybe tap the keys instead of holding them down? The argument that they're "more efficient" is just as much nonsense as Gauss charge "saving ammo". It's called fire discipline. Changing the RoF doesn't actually improve heat efficiency at all, since it still produces the exact same result per point of heat. To increase efficiency, it would have to increase the effectiveness relative to heat generated.

As for myself, I'm not defending AC2s, in particular. But my original reply was about his ridiculous assertion of improved efficiency, not about my opinion on the nerf, itself. I don't think there's a single justifiable reason for it, and the range nerf is simply asinine, but my only problems with the nerfs are as it ties into the general nerfing of everything. I am truly baffled, though, as to why they chose to single out the weapon that is the worst possible weapon to do pinpoint damage (barring missiles), when pinpoint damage is the largest game play issue and barrier to balance that this game has.

Edited by OneEyed Jack, 19 April 2014 - 05:04 AM.

[Foxfire]

OneEyed Jack, on 19 April 2014 - 04:55 AM, said:

You can also, I dunno, maybe just shoot slower? Maybe tap the keys instead of holding them down? The argument that they're "more efficient" is just as much nonsense as Gauss charge "saving ammo". It's called fire discipline.

As for myself, I'm not defending AC2s, in particular. I don't think there's a single justifiable reason for it, and the range nerf is simply asinine, but my only problems with the nerfs are as it ties into the general nerfing of everything. I am truly baffled, though, as to why they chose to single out the weapon that is the worst possible weapon to do pinpoint damage (barring missiles), when pinpoint damage is the largest game play issue and barrier to balance that this game has.

There are a lot of different things that can be done for heat management.

My only point is that, from a purely logical perspective, the argument that they are now more efficient isn't wrong. That is in no way commenting on anything but the functionality of the weapon itself, dispassionately removed from any and all piloting skill considerations.

[OneEyed Jack]

Foxfire, on 19 April 2014 - 05:02 AM, said:

There are a lot of different things that can be done for heat management.

My only point is that, from a purely logical perspective, the argument that they are now more efficient isn't wrong. That is in no way commenting on anything but the functionality of the weapon itself, dispassionately removed from any and all piloting skill considerations.

efficiency (ĭ-fĭsh'ən-sē)
The ratio of the energy delivered (or work done) by a machine to the energy needed (or work required) in operating the machine.

Unless the ratio of effect:heat changes, then there is no change to heat efficiency, for better or worse. That is dispassionate fact, and what I was pointing out. As is, the efficiency is actually worse, due to the loss of range, as range is part of the effect generated. And no, saving ammo and heat by not taking ridiculously long shots just for the hell of it is not a valid argument for increased heat or ammo efficiency.

[Foxfire]

OneEyed Jack, on 19 April 2014 - 05:25 AM, said:

efficiency (ĭ-fĭsh'ən-sē)
The ratio of the energy delivered (or work done) by a machine to the energy needed (or work required) in operating the machine.

Unless the ratio of effect:heat changes, then there is no change to heat efficiency, for better or worse. That is dispassionate fact, and what I was pointing out. As is, the efficiency is actually worse, due to the loss of range, as range is part of the effect generated. And no, saving ammo and heat by not taking ridiculously long shots just for the hell of it is not a valid argument for increased heat or ammo efficiency.

The impact is in heat generation over time. You generate less heat over a period of time because you are taking less shots. Over a 10 second time period, this change gives you an additional 4.36 heat per AC/2 back in comparison with the previous RoF.

So you are right, in that per shot heat efficiency has had no change but taken over a period of time, you generate less heat.. which matters for overall heat efficiency when you start accounting for other weapon systems and heat sinks.

Edited by Foxfire, 19 April 2014 - 07:27 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

What AC2 I use I've left on the only thing that surprised me over this nerf of lighter autocanons was the fact the Ac5 is left out ranging the AC2 that has left me scratching my head as the AC2 should out range the ac5 which means I think they were over generous with the ac5.

However as I mentioned in another post, the ac5 is capable of carrying more charge which gives ballistic's their range, some huff duff which i'm not dragging out, which is ratio of charge and weight.

Caliber, which isn't the size of shell but barrel length based on bore size is what makes a shell more accurate, doesn't effect range, and metal quality which will help make a gun, cope with the explosions in it, prevents barrel rupture, and wear before replacement.

So from a engineering point of view it does make sense, kinda, as I all ways thought of the ac values as an abstract and not shell size which makes what I said invalid, but then ac20 would have a recoil so heavy to move the shell the distance is does the mech would end up on its arse every shot, if the damage is pure shell size so make what you will of it.

Having said that I find the nerf makes the ac2 shoot better and work better with the other weapons systems so I guess the only people that are going to be unhappy with this nerf are those that like to hide at the back, and expect the rest of the team to do the fighting, while they ninja kill

[Charons Little Helper]

Foxfire, on 19 April 2014 - 04:31 AM, said:

But.. while the heat is the same per shot, you are shooting slower.. which does make them more heat efficient and allows for more shots down range before having to take a heat break.

It doesn't make them more heat efficient - it makes them use less heat.

If they lowered to cooldown to one shot every 5 seconds they'd use even less heat.

The figure to watch is the heat to damage ratio. The AC2 is at 0.5 - far higher than any other ballistic. (AC5/LB10 are at 0.2, AC10/AC20 are at 0.3, and Gauss is 0.067) It's only a bit better than energy weapons (most are 0.75 - 1.0 - though there are a couple outliers) and a tie for the worst non-energy (with the SRM2),

Realistically - their heat should be dropped to 0.5, giving them a heat to damage ratio of 0.25. With their solid dps for their tonnage/crit space, they'd actually have a role then as close range suppression & brawler DPS for mechs that can put 2-3 on an arm (so they can still torso twist a bit). The damage would still be spread around - so not great - but not horrible.

[Mystere]

mwhighlander, on 18 April 2014 - 10:57 PM, said:

The sheep will follow trends of the more skilled players and attempt to emulate their play style.

Granted they are still just sheep, but in more effective loadouts.

Sheep are always led to slaughter. And lamb chops grilled by Turks are fantastic.

[C E Dwyer]

mwhighlander, on 18 April 2014 - 10:57 PM, said:

Its literally that simple. State of the game determines meta. Not Elite players who want to play a certain way.

paraphrased muchley.

Indeed, and I think this nerf goes someway to balancing the game to make multi weapon set ups slightly more viable, even on a brawler map dps is still going to be generally more powerful than alpha strikes, but it does go someway to bring back brawling into the game, I do think the ac5 needs a range nerf (max not effective) hides.

This does go someway to lower the distance of engagement, and makes lrms a little more useful (not much) without them being super fast, but every little helps

Mystere, on 19 April 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

Sheep are always led to slaughter. And lamb chops grilled by Turks are fantastic.

Maybe the chops but the kebabs have been found to contain other cheaper meats and no lamb at all in some cases, after investigation by the foods standards council