624 replies to this topic

[Cimarb]

Void Angel, on 13 May 2014 - 06:59 PM, said:

I personally would like all autocannons to fire burst, except the Gauss Rifle. That would help a lot of the pinpoint damage issues and bring time-to-kill down a little bit.

100% agree (see the link in my sig). I'm hoping this Clan implementation is a trial run for the change across the board, but only time will tell.

[Grimmrog]

Void Angel, on 13 May 2014 - 07:46 PM, said:

That's how the flavor text described them - but they'd also put their damage all on one location, as per the tabletop rules. It's just one more example of how tabletop (or the flavor text and novels) aren't sound guideposts for this game.

Do lasers in tabletop spread their damage?

[Cimarb]

Grimmrog, on 14 May 2014 - 05:35 AM, said:

Do lasers in tabletop spread their damage?

No more than any other direct fire weapon, so no.

The only direct-fire weapon in TT that could spread its single-turn damage was the autocannon, under special rules that allowed you to damage several adjacent mechs with a penalty to hit.

The only weapons that "spread" their damage to different parts of the same mech, though, were missiles (LRMs and SRMs did damage the same way). They rolled to hit just like any other weapon, but then rolled again to see how many missiles hit and that number was divided into 5-damage clusters (plus whatever was left over, so an LRM20 that had 16 hit would do 5+5+5+1) before damage location was rolled for each individual cluster.

Every other weapon did 100% of its damage to a single random hit location. The random hit location is a simplified way of spreading the damage over the course of a battle, not necessarily that the pilots or targeting equipment was just bad. Same as the movement rules - it's not like mechs only moved for five seconds every ten (a full turn) and stood still the other five.

[IraqiWalker]

Cimarb, on 14 May 2014 - 06:19 AM, said:

it's not like mechs only moved for five seconds every ten (a full turn) and stood still the other five.

Anyone else thinking Red Light, Green Light with 24 AC20 Jagers would be hilarious to watch?

[Cimarb]

IraqiWalker, on 14 May 2014 - 06:34 AM, said:

Anyone else thinking Red Light, Green Light with 24 AC20 Jagers would be hilarious to watch?

LOL, but think of the epic dodgeball fight at the end!

[Furiel]

Cimarb, on 14 May 2014 - 06:19 AM, said:

No more than any other direct fire weapon, so no.

The only direct-fire weapon in TT that could spread its single-turn damage was the autocannon, under special rules that allowed you to damage several adjacent mechs with a penalty to hit.

The only weapons that "spread" their damage to different parts of the same mech, though, were missiles (LRMs and SRMs did damage the same way). They rolled to hit just like any other weapon, but then rolled again to see how many missiles hit and that number was divided into 5-damage clusters (plus whatever was left over, so an LRM20 that had 16 hit would do 5+5+5+1) before damage location was rolled for each individual cluster.

Every other weapon did 100% of its damage to a single random hit location. The random hit location is a simplified way of spreading the damage over the course of a battle, not necessarily that the pilots or targeting equipment was just bad. Same as the movement rules - it's not like mechs only moved for five seconds every ten (a full turn) and stood still the other five.

Not quite true, the LB-10X spread damage in a single shot at a single mech. IIRC is was 5 hit location rolls at 2 damage each, but it might have been 10 and 1, it's been a while.

[Cimarb]

Furiel, on 14 May 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

Not quite true, the LB-10X spread damage in a single shot at a single mech. IIRC is was 5 hit location rolls at 2 damage each, but it might have been 10 and 1, it's been a while.

Ah, I think you may be right - I'm also not sure about SRMs and will have to look that up, as it may have been in smaller clusters of damage too (?).
I have all the books at home, but it has been a very long time since I actively played or read them too...

[Tiamat of the Sea]

SRMs use single-missile 'clusters' (2 points of damage each).

LRMs use 5-missile clusters (5 damage or fraction thereof each).

LB-X autocannon use one-fragment clusters (1 damage each).

Streak SRMs use one-missile clusters, and if the rack hits, all missiles hit (2 damage each).

MRMs use 5-missile clusters (5 damage or fraction thereof each).

UACs use one-projectile clusters (AC rating damage each).

RACs use one-projectile clusters (AC rating damage each).

When a 'clustering' weapon hits, locations are rolled for each cluster, so it's possible for a 7-LRM spread to deal 5 damage to one leg and 2 damage to the opposite arm, for example.

If this were going to be reflected in the same fashion in MWO, every weapon, clustering or not, that successfully hit a 'mech would act like a Streak missile currently does, and pick a random 'bone' to hit, with most spreading weapons losing some 'clusters' and LRMs and MRMs batching up into groups of five missiles.

....I play tabletop on a weekly basis.

[Void Angel]

Grimmrog, on 14 May 2014 - 05:35 AM, said:

Do lasers in tabletop spread their damage?

No, SRMs, LRMs, and LB-X series autocannons all rolled on a "number of hits" table and then scattered out the damage in various increments (5 for LRMS; 2 for SRMs; 1 for LB-X ACs.) The ultra autocannons allocated two hits at full damage, but rolled on the SRM 2 table for number of hits.

The important concept to remember in all this is that A: the Tabletop rulebook is not, cannot, and will never be an authoritative reference for "how MWO should be," because B: this game is a dramatically different in format from tabletop - it is a different kind of game. In tabletop, both the raw firepower of the AC/20 and the extreme range of the AC/2 were balanced out (in theory anyway) by various dice-rolling mechanics. If you moved up to 2/3rds speed, you had a penalty to hit; more if you moved faster; or if you jumped - you also had a penalty to hit based on how fast the enemy moved, how much of him you could see, whether or not he was in a heavy or light forest space, and if he jumped that turn. Not to mention penalties for running hot, and piloting skill rolls to avoid falling down in certain situations. These design factors do not (and should not) translate directly into this game format - for example, no one sane wants to play a first-person shooter where you mouse-click on a target and the computer rolls a random number to see if you hit, and where.

Since we are playing a shooter, we want to aim our guns by our own selves, which leaves a bit of a problem: called shots. Called shots are a routine practice in MWO - if you're not doing it, you're doing it wrong. So the massive strike of weapons like the PPC, Gauss Rifle, and AC/20 are difficult to handle - particularly when paired with each other - since they're no longer kind of randomly landing on some part of the enemy 'Mech. MWO compensated (largely successfully) by doubling the armor values from tabletop, but the ability to place massive pinpoint damage at long ranges still led to the current metagame. PGI's measures to curb the meta without invalidating the weapon systems and tactics used have yielded some results, but AC burst-damage still tends to be a very frustrating mechanic at times, because the dominance of pinpoint-damage weapons discourages other play styles and builds.

Edit: fixed an error.
Edit: Maybe two.

Edited by Void Angel, 14 May 2014 - 02:22 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Void Angel, on 14 May 2014 - 09:35 AM, said:

An intelligent analysis.

This also.

[Void Angel]

Aww, thanks!

[ReXspec]

I wholeheartedly agree with you, OP.

My main is an Atlas. I have two that I've lovingly dubbed "Reacher" and another close range variant I've dubbed "Brawler."

Both are optimized to their maximum potential in firepower.

Here are are the specs to both:

Reacher - 3x Streaks, 1x Large Pulse Laser, 1x Gauss, 1x AC/5, 1x ER PPC, ECM, STD 300 Engine, 1x AMS

And I exchange the Pulse Laser for an ER Large Laser (depending on how I feel that day).

"Reacher's" max firepower: 55.6

Brawler - 1x LRM 20, 2x Streaks, 1x AC/20, 1x Machine Gun, 1x Medium Laser, 1x Large Pulse Laser, ECM, STD 310 Engine, 1x AMS.

"Brawler's" max firepower: 72.6

Knowing that the Atlas is capable of this kind of firepower and seeing such an awesome Chassis get castrated by equipping just ONE weapon system as it's main weapon system is truly depressing.

[Void Angel]

I wouldn't bother with the Machine Gun for the brawler - pull that and the mismatched Medium Laser (it's not too useful by itself) out and use the tonnage for a bigger engine. An Atlas can use all the mobility it can afford.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Void Angel, on 14 May 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

An Atlas can use all the mobility it can afford.

Mmm - but it takes a lot of tonnage to increase that mobility, and ballistics are heavy!

Speed, Firepower, or Backup weapons.... might be part of why the Missile Atlas has been so popular.

[Void Angel]

Fortunately, you have the tonnage to spare, in most cases. My D-DC fast brawler setup has an AC/20 and three SRM6s - the last time I ran dry on Ammo, It Went Down Like This. That's the only D-DC that I want more ammo for. The LB-10X shotgun stack Atlas has a bit more Ammo than I actually want, but space forced me to set it up that way - and the engines for both those builds are a 250 and a 325, respectively. Having a bigger engine helps you put those autocannons on target against fast movers. Whenever pilots report dancing around an Atlas in their lights, I laugh to myself and smile.

No, the reason that LRM boats of all kinds have been gaining popularity even before the NARCpocalypse is that engagement ranges were staying open for ungodly amounts of time, because the majority of the team were snipers - due to the vicious cycle I think I described in another thread. Lemme hunt it up... Oh yeah, This One. I'll spoiler-copy it if you're interested. Basically game mechanics set up a positive feedback loop of operant conditioning that pushes players away from brawling and toward long-range weapons.

Spoiler

Void Angel, on 14 May 2014 - 10:25 AM, said:

I think they might need that, as well, but I'm not totally sold on it. Large lasers feel ok to me. What we really need is to tone down long-range firepower, because it's leading to a positive feedback loop:

• punishment for exposing yourself - especially if you screwed up - is immediate. You take damage, you lose pieces of your 'mech, and maybe die. This leads players to value cover over maneuver.
  
• rewards for closing in with short-range weapons are deferred, and rely on teammates. You really can't shoot back with short-range weapons, and if it's just you and maybe a couple-three of your teammates, you're going to get smashed, and probably not even make a positive trade in damage.
  
• Meanwhile your long-range 'mechs are rewarded instantly when they shoot someone at range, and the ability to use those guns while staying in or near cover makes them take less damage. Then they see the brawlers either hanging around waiting for the end-game - or dying in a pyre of shame - and learn to associate a push with "ramboing" and foolishness.
  
• This makes them less likely to support a brawl unless their team has a clear advantage in the match, and provides the final factor in the loop.

So when brawlers try to do their job; they are often defeated by long-ranged, pinpoint-meta opponents; this leads players to conclude that assaulting a position with brawlers is a bad idea unless you already have the advantage, and makes them less likely to support the brawlers; brawlers are discouraged from engaging the enemy until after one team gains enough of an advantage to feel safe pushing with their long-range 'mechs, making them less likely to support even other brawlers until that end-phase is reached; the circle is now complete - return to start of paragraph.

This is why "well, you should just have teammates with you when you brawl" isn't an informed argument - brawlers will very often be outnumbered by their meta-wielding foes, and will also have taken significant pinpoint damage just getting inside 90 meters. Sure, there's places where you can approach a position under cover - but by the same token there are always kill zones between those covered areas. And the enemy can jump above or climb over cover to beat on you from range as you approach.

Edited by Void Angel, 14 May 2014 - 09:43 PM.

[ReXspec]

Void Angel, on 14 May 2014 - 09:43 PM, said:

Fortunately, you have the tonnage to spare, in most cases. My D-DC fast brawler setup has an AC/20 and three SRM6s - the last time I ran dry on Ammo, It Went Down Like This. That's the only D-DC that I want more ammo for. The LB-10X shotgun stack Atlas has a bit more Ammo than I actually want, but space forced me to set it up that way - and the engines for both those builds are a 250 and a 325, respectively. Having a bigger engine helps you put those autocannons on target against fast movers. Whenever pilots report dancing around an Atlas in their lights, I laugh to myself and smile.

No, the reason that LRM boats of all kinds have been gaining popularity even before the NARCpocalypse is that engagement ranges were staying open for ungodly amounts of time, because the majority of the team were snipers - due to the vicious cycle I think I described in another thread. Lemme hunt it up... Oh yeah, This One. I'll spoiler-copy it if you're interested. Basically game mechanics set up a positive feedback loop of operant conditioning that pushes players away from brawling and toward long-range weapons.

Spoiler

A bigger engine in an Atlas doesn't help as much as you may think...

Here is an excerpt from my own guide:

"The Atlas (AS7-D)

'A 'Mech as powerful as possible, as impenetrable as possible, and as ugly and foreboding as conceivable, so that fear itself will be our ally.' -- Aleksandr Kerensky

The Atlas. Rightfully called, "The Death's Head," this ugly assault 'mech is easily the most recognizable and feared of all the 'mechs in the Inner Sphere's arsenal. The 'mech has the highest armor rating in the game and is capable of arming itself with a dizzying array of ballistic, energy, and missile weaponry. One variant even is capable of arming itself with ECM, which allows the Atlas pilot to cover his lance or team with an anti-missile umbrella that also consists of AMS (if he chooses to equip it). If a pilot chooses the Atlas, he must recognize that, regardless of the load-out he takes, he will be the center of combat and will give any who see him pause. An Atlas works the most effectively when it is fully armed and armored--speed is NOT your ally in this 'mech. A few kilometers here and there can help better manuever your Atlas, but the ability to coordinate with your team, position your 'mech, and direct your firepower will allow you be the most effective in this assault 'mech. My current record of damage dealt in this 'mech is 1,256 damage... if you choose the Atlas, awesome. Don't castrate that damage potential by under-arming your Atlas and remember that by choosing to pilot an Atlas, you ARE your team's shield, frontline, and heavy firepower."

As the guide stated, a few kilometers here and there can help maneuver the Atlas easier, but speed is not the primary selling point of the Atlas chassis.

[ReXspec]

Void Angel, on 14 May 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

I wouldn't bother with the Machine Gun for the brawler - pull that and the mismatched Medium Laser (it's not too useful by itself) out and use the tonnage for a bigger engine. An Atlas can use all the mobility it can afford.

The machinegun is supplemented by the AC/20 (since they have similar ranges). Think of the machinegun as gasoline and a flame to an open wound for wounded 'mechs. It is surprisingly effective at close ranges where the AC/20 can do most of it's work.

As for the medium laser, again, the medium laser is a "kicker" weapon; a supplemental weapon to the Large Pulse Laser on it's left fist. Much like the Machinegun is for the AC/20 only the medium laser won't ignite ammo: It will just strip the perfect amount of armor off for me to rip my opponents guts out.

Edited by ReXspec, 14 May 2014 - 11:50 PM.

[Tahribator]

ReXspec, on 14 May 2014 - 11:42 PM, said:

A bigger engine in an Atlas doesn't help as much as you may think...

As the guide stated, a few kilometers here and there can help maneuver the Atlas easier, but speed is not the primary selling point of the Atlas chassis.

A bigger engine definitely helps if you're brawler fit(as you should be). A STD300 Atlas has horrible torso responsiveness for a brawler(torso twist, pitch speeds and turning radius) which are crucial for spreading damage in close combat. Yes, the speed only goes up only a few KPH but having that extra responsiveness and mobility makes all the difference in close combat. I consider STD340 a bare minimum for full brawler fit Atlases.

Edited by Tahribator, 14 May 2014 - 11:53 PM.

[ReXspec]

Tahribator, on 14 May 2014 - 11:52 PM, said:

A bigger engine definitely helps if you're brawler fit(as you should be). A STD300 Atlas has horrible torso responsiveness for a brawler(torso twist, pitch speeds and turning radius) which are crucial for spreading damage in close combat. Yes, the speed only goes up only a few KPH but having that extra responsiveness and mobility makes all the difference in close combat. I consider STD340 a bare minimum for full brawler fit Atlases.

In terms of positioning, I agree. But as you stated yourself, the maneuverability gain is minimal and really only makes a difference in fine-tuning aim or, again, positioning.

However, if you are putting something as big as a 340 STD engine into it, you are gaining only a few KPH while severely curtailing your firepower potential. As for torso responsiveness, I also respectfully disagree. I find that gaining the tweaks from 'mech levels optimally compensate for the Atlas' slow torso twist or turns.

[Void Angel]

ReXspec, on 14 May 2014 - 11:42 PM, said:

A bigger engine in an Atlas doesn't help as much as you may think...

As the guide stated, a few kilometers here and there can help maneuver the Atlas easier, but speed is not the primary selling point of the Atlas chassis.

Positioning is not the reason you want all the speed you can afford without sacrificing firepower - bigger engines give you faster torso twist speeds, which is always better because it enhances the firepower and toughness that the Atlas provides. Even if you don't need the extra aim against other big, slow-moving targets, it's still useful against fast-movers - such as the Firestarter - and faster torso twist speed means better damage spreading.

While the cost of an Engine is certainly not linear, the benefit from increasing engine rating is. Therefore, it's best if you add weapons until you hit a certain heat threshold, add enough ammunition to sustain combat, and then buy the biggest engine you can afford. Because of the Atlas' limited hardpoints, I find that most of my builds are naturally heat limited, which lets me put a large engine into it naturally.

Finally, while the extra few kph may only make a second or two's difference in combat positioning, there are certain emergent effects that arise from the Atlas being behind the group instead of at the front. For example, players will be aware that the toughest 'mech on their team is behind, not in front of them, which can make a huge difference in a game environment that already encourages an overabundance of... caution.

My analysis of the above build, however, was that the 1.5 tons of weight to support one machine gun would have been better used just about anywhere else, particularly on an Atlas brawler, and that the medium laser is rather mismatched. At 270 v. 350 effective range, the weapons aren't really in the same range category, making the pair inefficient. More importantly, getting the most out of that machine gun requires that you do the Care Bear Stare at your target, leaving your side torsos open to specific targeting.

Edited by Void Angel, 15 May 2014 - 10:14 AM.