36 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Graugger, on 27 April 2014 - 12:09 PM, said:

Actually I'm one of those dakka dakka mech pilots but I'm sick and tired about people complaining about EVERYTHING.. OMG ACs are OP, OMG ECM is OP, OMG Gauss is OP, OMG Large Lasers are OP, OMG engine weights are OP, OMG Artillery is OP, OMG 4 man lances are OP.

I'm saying nerf the ACs and EVERYTHING else just to show these fools how boring the game will be. But they wouldn't like it if everything was nerfed, they only want the stuff that counters them nerfed... cursed trolls every single blasted one of them. Can't play a game without complaining then wonder why new content is so slow to be introduced.

Reading the content of the complaining determines whether or not their point is valid. Outright complaining is worthless. Constructive complaining is. Not all whines are created equal.

Quote

PGI should cancel community warfare cause of this complaining crap and make it clear that until people stop complaining about every aspect of the game nothing new is going to be introduced because people will just complain about it.

Don't give PGI the excuse, because they'll run with it if given the opportunity.

[Bront]

Graugger, on 27 April 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

Of course you would love it if nothing could touch your gauss mech as it snipes out side torsos at 1500+ meters. You people just want to make the game so that you can do what you want without having to worry about immediate retaliation. I hope ACs get nerfed into the ground to the point they're just a waste to put on a mech. At least then there won't be any complaints about them then... actually I take that back there will be because they'll still be in the game.

Um, I hate the current gauss mechanic, and rarely use them. With the mechanic, the gun going all 'splody, and the ammo/weight, I think it's fine.

My issue with balistic ranges are that they're HUGE compared to energy weapons, and removing the 3X range on all ACs would help counter that. If you're going to remove it on the Gauss as well, fine, but I'm willing to try it on all the ACs and not the Guass first and see how it goes. If it proves to be a problem, then off with the Gauss's range as well.

The AC20 shouldn't be effective at 600m, let alone doing more damage than an AC5.

Currently, the AC20 does more damage than an AC10 up until around 540 meters (and yes, the max normal damage range of an AC10 is 450). The AC10 is pretty close to the AC5 around the end of the AC5's range, but it's not perfect (and the AC5 got a range boost). Turn the 3X dropoff into a 2X dropoff like energy weapons, and you don't have that happening nearly as much, and align the ACs more with how they generally function (AC2 and 5 are longer range, AC10 is mid-range, and AC20 is a up close brawling weapon).

To compare your LPL and AC10, the LPL generates twice as much heat, but doesn't need ammo, and the AC10 does pinpoint front loaded damage. The AC10 is mostly fine where it is, it simply is underpowered compared to the AC5 (much better range and projectile speed) and AC20 (Comperable range for as much or more damage).

Chill, not everyone making a suggestion wants their preferred builds to be OP, just competitively balanced.

[Graugger]

Bront, on 27 April 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

My issue with balistic ranges are that they're HUGE compared to energy weapons, and removing the 3X range on all ACs would help counter that. If you're going to remove it on the Gauss as well, fine, but I'm willing to try it on all the ACs and not the Guass first and see how it goes. If it proves to be a problem, then off with the Gauss's range as well.

The AC20 shouldn't be effective at 600m, let alone doing more damage than an AC5.

Currently, the AC20 does more damage than an AC10 up until around 540 meters (and yes, the max normal damage range of an AC10 is 450). The AC10 is pretty close to the AC5 around the end of the AC5's range, but it's not perfect (and the AC5 got a range boost). Turn the 3X dropoff into a 2X dropoff like energy weapons, and you don't have that happening nearly as much, and align the ACs more with how they generally function (AC2 and 5 are longer range, AC10 is mid-range, and AC20 is a up close brawling weapon).

Ballistic mounts are nowhere near as common as energy mounts so why should they be equal. Should LRMs be direct fire only like lasers then?

Another solution to the damage drop off is to make it % damage based and not a linear drop off. Like every 5% range over the optimal distance the round loses 10% of its current damage capacity (not its maximum). IE AC/10 drop off would be
450m - 10 DMG
470m - 9 DMG
490m - 8.1 DMG
510m - 7.29 DMG
530m - 6.56 DMG
550m - 5.90 DMG
570m - 5.31DMG
590m - 4.78 DMG
610m - 4.30 DMG
630m - 3.87 DMG
650m - 3.48 DMG
and so on.

Also figure on how much slower the projectiles are, yes an AC/20 might do the same damage as an AC/10 at its optimal range but the projectile speed means you'd probably miss with that AC/20 shell which you also have fewer of... And velocity was more of an issue in this respect before they nerfed the AC/10s flight speed which used to be faster than what the AC/5 is now.

Edited by Graugger, 27 April 2014 - 12:36 PM.

[Bront]

Graugger, on 27 April 2014 - 12:30 PM, said:

[size=4]Ballistic mounts are nowhere near as common as energy mounts so why should they be equal. Should LRMs be direct fire only like lasers then?

Because game balance?

The idea is to make the weapons ultimately "different but generally equal". It won't be 100% perfect, but right now ACs generally are king of the battle field. AC2s got hit pretty hard, but there's a few easy fixes (not the least of which is to remove ghost heat), but bringing the other ACs in line with them would make some sense.

Graugger, on 27 April 2014 - 12:30 PM, said:

[size=4]

Another solution to the damage drop off is to make it % damage based and not a linear drop off. Like every 5% range over the optimal distance the round loses 10% of its current damage capacity (not its maximum). IE AC/10 drop off would be 10 - 9 - 8.1 - 7.29 - 6.561 and so on.

probably too complex for most people. Also has a flattening out of damage, meaning you're still doing damage with an AC10 at 2000 meters, even if it's not much.

[LoneMaverick]

Bront, on 27 April 2014 - 11:10 AM, said:

Sure there is. Same DPS. The extra 2 tons reduces your range a bit, but gives you a better heat profile and more pinpoint damage.

Honestly, they need to reduce all non-gauss balistic ranges to 2X vs 3x. Don't make the AC2 the odd weapon out. You'll reduce the super long range sniper file outside of the Gauss, which is limited already to be a sniper weapon in PGI's eyes.

Definitely agree they need to drop all ballistics to 2x, been saying it makes no sense that they've been 3x for a looong time.

I just feel that heat/sec should scale based on AC size, the AC2 having a significantly higher heat gen than the ac5 seems silly to me.

[Asmudius Heng]

I am usually pretty critical of balance and PGI .... but I have not felt that ACs have been the thing killing me over and over.

The AC2s ... yea i have been caught out by a serious dakka mech before but not very often.

In my personal experience Inhave not had an issue with ACs that much thoguh I do recognize the AC5 is a bit of a beast when boated ... but the AC2 nerf.... i dont get it personally. I cannot remmeber the last time i felt like rage quitting over AC2s

I am just a bit perplexed at the whole argument as I never used them much anyway but from what i see the AC2 is not only efficient in its crit slots being very small ... not light, just small which doesnt really matter with light mechs who have plenty of free space ... but helps on heavier ones who do not have the speed to keep within the weapons better ranges now .


I guess the stats will speak for themself ... not that we have access to them

[Navy Sixes]

Asmudius Heng, on 27 April 2014 - 07:55 PM, said:

The AC2s ... yea i have been caught out by a serious dakka mech before but not very often.

Well, it probably won't happen anymore. And if it does, you can just walk backward a hundred meters. I'm sure you'll be out of range by then.

Asmudius Heng, on 27 April 2014 - 07:55 PM, said:

...i dont get it personally. I cannot remmeber the last time i felt like rage quitting over AC2s

This is pretty much where I'm coming from. People I dropped with used to give me hell for bringing 2xAC2s... "Why aren't you using AC5s + PPC?" You know the noise one hears. I agree that ballistics may have some balancing issues, but taking away the AC2s range? How's that solving anything? People aren't complaining about AC2s... well, no one worth listening to, anyway. People are complaining about 2xAC20 Jagerbombs and AC5s grouped with PPCs.

<Sigh> There's nothing to be done about it, I'm afraid. The AC2, as far as I can see from playing it of late, is pretty finished as an option for a medium mech's ballistic. It belongs to the big mechs that can boat enough of them to make them work as an intermediate range weapon, the odd Jag/Banshee build, now.

Damn shame, really.

[Graugger]

Seeing as lasers have greater range the more damage they do and by canon the ballistics were opposite I guess people want to screw whatever canon is left. So if a large laser has longer range than a medium laser why don't they give the AC/20 greater range than the AC/10? I mean you guys keep comparing ballistics to energy weapons so.... you complain they have greater range than lasers so why not make them more like lasers... Let me guess you don't like that idea... alright then why not make all the ballistics have a range of 350 meters so you shut your clumsy mouth, or that range too far?

[Daekar]

Graugger, on 28 April 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

Seeing as lasers have greater range the more damage they do and by canon the ballistics were opposite I guess people want to screw whatever canon is left. So if a large laser has longer range than a medium laser why don't they give the AC/20 greater range than the AC/10? I mean you guys keep comparing ballistics to energy weapons so.... you complain they have greater range than lasers so why not make them more like lasers... Let me guess you don't like that idea... alright then why not make all the ballistics have a range of 350 meters so you shut your clumsy mouth, or that range too far?

3/10
Your passionate bitterness and resentment shine through the lack of punctuation and coherent sentences. For this you are bumped up from the 1/10 you would normally have received.

It's all scrap, of course - but it's emotionally-charged scrap, at any rate.

[Graugger]

Meh.. I try.

[Josef Nader]

The Blackjack and the AC/2 go together like bread and butter. The Blackjack is too slow and too flimsy to make good use out of an AC/20 and putting an XL engine in it takes an already slow, flimsy mech and fills it with explodium.

Slow standard and a pair of AC/2s? Slow speed doesn't matter, you're faster than the assaults, so you can keep up. Jump jets are super useful for getting an angle. Profile of the Blackjack makes it impossible to hit at AC/2 range.

Frankly, I love the AC/2 Blackjack.

[Mechteric]

Before Ghost Heat, dual AC2 shot in stagger fire were pretty amazing at suppression, despite not doing much damage. No macro was even needed!

[Iskareot]

lol My most effective mech I have is the champion AC20 mech, I do avg 500 damage a drop with a decent team. Have had a few 1000 damage games with it. Honestly it is a wicked little mech but yeah NEVER stand still and never take on anything head on. a Light maybe...

[AlmightyAeng]

FupDup, on 26 April 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

It makes for a very rapid BJ, if you know what I mean.

Not as hot as it used to be, though. Even with with multiple sources.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 29 April 2014 - 06:00 AM.

[Navy Sixes]

Iskareot, on 29 April 2014 - 05:57 AM, said:

Honestly it is a wicked little mech but yeah NEVER stand still and never take on anything head on. a Light maybe...

My favorite "Buy me a beer and I'll tell you a tale" bragging story is the time I went toe to toe with a fresh Dragon Slayer in my Pair 'O Deuces BJ-1 and won. Our team was already down and scattered, so honestly I was just looking for a chance to die with some dignity. The Vic had an energy heavy build; we were at Theta on Terra Therma. So they were shut-down city and I was able to distribute a lot of their laser damage by twisting while I worked away at their side torso. Fortune favors the bold, and by sheer luck, when my 2xAC2s finally overheated it was at the very same moment he blew off my side torso. So when I shutdown he thought I was dead and started to wander off. When I zapped him in the back with my one remaining small laser and he turned, I pumped the last of my AC2 ammo into his red ST and blew that XL. I was quickly dispatched by the Vic's teammates and we lost that match, but it was a glorious moment.

[Josef Nader]

Tycho von Gagern, on 29 April 2014 - 05:23 PM, said:

My favorite "Buy me a beer and I'll tell you a tale" bragging story is the time I went toe to toe with a fresh Dragon Slayer in my Pair 'O Deuces BJ-1 and won. Our team was already down and scattered, so honestly I was just looking for a chance to die with some dignity. The Vic had an energy heavy build; we were at Theta on Terra Therma. So they were shut-down city and I was able to distribute a lot of their laser damage by twisting while I worked away at their side torso. Fortune favors the bold, and by sheer luck, when my 2xAC2s finally overheated it was at the very same moment he blew off my side torso. So when I shutdown he thought I was dead and started to wander off. When I zapped him in the back with my one remaining small laser and he turned, I pumped the last of my AC2 ammo into his red ST and blew that XL. I was quickly dispatched by the Vic's teammates and we lost that match, but it was a glorious moment.

I remember a time on Frozen City where we were getting flanked by an enemy heavy/assault lance through the caves. My team wasn't paying attention to our scout's panicked warnings, and I got there just in time to watch the Jenner eat an AC20 to the rear and explode.

The rest of my team was still futzing with the hill, so it ended up me and my BJ-1 (stock weapons, stock engine, DHS/Endo/Ferro for ammo and heat sinks) to try and hold the gap.

tl;dr between manuvering, jump jets, firing angles, and hit and run, I managed to survive long enough to put all 5 tons of ammo into the enemy and mangle their armor badly enough that by the time my allies noticed all the assaults pushing into their rear, my teammates were able to deal with them.

I exploded hilariously, of course, but I topped out damage for my team and it just felt satisfying to have stalled what could have been a game-ending flank.

[Navy Sixes]

Graugger, on 28 April 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

Seeing as lasers have greater range the more damage they do and by canon the ballistics were opposite I guess people want to screw whatever canon is left. So if a large laser has longer range than a medium laser why don't they give the AC/20 greater range than the AC/10? I mean you guys keep comparing ballistics to energy weapons so.... you complain they have greater range than lasers so why not make them more like lasers... Let me guess you don't like that idea... alright then why not make all the ballistics have a range of 350 meters so you shut your clumsy mouth, or that range too far?

Daekar, on 28 April 2014 - 09:19 PM, said:

3/10
Your passionate bitterness and resentment shine through the lack of punctuation and coherent sentences.

Right? It's like "What if James Joyce played MWO and couldn't beat a ballistic-build?"