198 replies to this topic

[LastPaladin]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 30 May 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

DPS is still irrellevant. The problem is one minute puts it way outside the realm of other weapons in the game.

As I said, if it were truly irrelevant, then you wouldn't be objecting so much. It must be relevant if you insist that it needs to be in line with other weapons used by other playstyles.

[Mcgral18]

LastPaladin, on 30 May 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

As I said, if it were truly irrelevant, then you wouldn't be objecting so much. It must be relevant if you insist that it needs to be in line with other weapons used by other playstyles.

It's not the DPS that needs to get inline, it's the FLD.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

LastPaladin, on 30 May 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

As I said, if it were truly irrelevant, then you wouldn't be objecting so much. It must be relevant if you insist that it needs to be in line with other weapons used by other playstyles.

Where did I EVER say I cared about DPS?

Please show me that post.

I've repeatedly said DPS is a stupid measurement for MW:O.

There are basically four types of weapon in MW:O.

FLD (AC/Gauss/PPC), DOT (Lasers), Spread (LBX/SRMs) and Guided Spread (LRMs). Flamers and MGs are kind of in their own category as utility weapons.

One of these is king, due to using the armor and hitbox system from TT. Because unlike TT, we have perfect convergence with no random dice rolls. So you can put your FLD damage all into the CT of a mech fairly easily.

I've never once said "Damn, you know if we can equalize the DPS of AC with Lasers, we'll be in great shape".

What I have said is "Maybe ACs should burst to bring them in line with Lasers". Note this has nothing to do with curbing their DPS, it has to do with SPREADING the damage.

Almost all of the concepts to fix this game include figuring out a way to spread damage.

To reiterate, DPS as a measurement really has no place in the style of combat MW:O has.

And that doesn't even bring in the fact that games where DPS matters, tend to be games where the enemy has a set amount of hitpoints. As in a single bar of hitpoints.

That is definitely not the case in MW:O,

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 30 May 2014 - 10:13 AM.

[Graugger]

Burst fire AC 20 with 270m optimal range and 540 max versus 2 10 dmg Large pulse with 350 optimal and 700 max....
6 heat vs 16... I think I'd take the large pulse since infinite ammo and the tons used for ammo can be used for heat sinks/ larger engine.

As such I think I'm going to switch all my main ballistic mechs to ER PPCs / pulse lasers since I can outrange any ballistic threat now, except for gauss.

Or I'll just sell my ballistic mechs (Jagers / Banshee 3E)

Edited by Graugger, 30 May 2014 - 11:08 AM.

[Cimarb]

Graugger, on 30 May 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

Burst fire AC 20 with 270m optimal range and 540 max versus 2 10 dmg Large pulse with 350 optimal and 700 max....
6 heat vs 16... I think I'd take the large pulse since infinite ammo and the tons used for ammo can be used for heat sinks/ larger engine.

As such I think I'm going to switch all my main ballistic mechs to ER PPCs / pulse lasers since I can outrange any ballistic threat now, except for gauss.

Or I'll just sell my ballistic mechs (Jagers / Banshee 3E)

That you would have the choice to do that is a positive, even though your tone says you think otherwise.

YOU may choose the hotter, slightly longer range pulse lasers, but for others, they would still prefer the cooler, slightly shorter range ballistics. THAT is a balance. Pros and cons, your choice and mine.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Graugger, on 30 May 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

Burst fire AC 20 with 270m optimal range and 540 max versus 2 10 dmg Large pulse with 350 optimal and 700 max....
6 heat vs 16... I think I'd take the large pulse since infinite ammo and the tons used for ammo can be used for heat sinks/ larger engine.

As such I think I'm going to switch all my main ballistic mechs to ER PPCs / pulse lasers since I can outrange any ballistic threat now, except for gauss.

Or I'll just sell my ballistic mechs (Jagers / Banshee 3E)

I'm confused...are you saying that as in hypothetically if the AC/20 was a burst fire weapon?

Because there is no change currently in the works to make it burst. It's still a single shell.

[R Razor]

LastPaladin, on 30 May 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

I think it's hilarious that you assume someone who doesn't agree with you 100% must be a "meta boy". You have no idea what mechs I pilot, do you?



Because, if it is truly irrelevant, then a one minute cooldown is just as realistic as a five second, or ten second cooldown. The fact that you think one minute is not realistic shows that, despite what you say, DPS is not irrelevant for snipers.

I played at least 2 matches that you were in yesterday, 1 on my team and 1 on the enemy team, you had PPC / AC in both.......what else should I assume? No wait, let me guess, that was just a fluke and you usually run non-meta. Riiigghhtt.

[Cimarb]

R Razor, on 30 May 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

I played at least 2 matches that you were in yesterday, 1 on my team and 1 on the enemy team, you had PPC / AC in both.......what else should I assume? No wait, let me guess, that was just a fluke and you usually run non-meta. Riiigghhtt.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter. "Meta" has just became a term to mean "better than me", thrown around whenever people are unhappy.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Cimarb, on 30 May 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

Ultimately, it doesn't matter. "Meta" has just became a term to mean "better than me", thrown around whenever people are unhappy.

No, meta means the same thing it has always meant.

And currently meta in this game is FLD Pinpoint damage. And then there are variations on how FLD Pinpoint damaged is delivered, for instance Poptarting, Hill Humping, etc.

Thus, R Razor is correct, LastPaladin was using meta in 2 games and just got caught looking stupid.

Anyone who uses meta for anything else in the game currently, is using it wrong. And thus they are wrong.

Hopefully PGI accidentally breaks SRMs with the next upgrade, making them overpowered, so the meta shifts away from FLD Pinpoint, even if it might only last for two weeks.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 30 May 2014 - 11:55 AM.

[East Indy]

Cimarb, on 30 May 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

"Meta" has just became a term to mean "better than me", thrown around whenever people are unhappy.

If you treat all player concerns the same, sure.

Combinations of two weapons (out of 20+) best used with half a dozen 'Mechs (out of almost 30) for a tactic more like CoD than BattleTech? That's a problem.

[Cimarb]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 30 May 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

No, meta means the same thing it has always meant.

And currently meta in this game is FLD Pinpoint damage. And then there are variations on how FLD Pinpoint damaged is delivered, for instance Poptarting, Hill Humping, etc.

Thus, R Razor is correct, LastPaladin was using meta in 2 games and just got caught looking stupid.

Anyone who uses meta for anything else in the game currently, is using it wrong. And thus they are wrong.

Hopefully PGI accidentally breaks SRMs with the next upgrade, making them overpowered, so the meta shifts away from FLD Pinpoint, even if it might only last for two weeks.

I agree with you on what "meta" should actually mean, but it is thrown around by people for way more than just that narrow definition. That was my point - sorry if I didn't communicate that well.

[Wolfways]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 30 May 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

So please stop extolling DPS as a measuremeant, when it really has no basis in the reality of playing this game.

Can't really agree with that. If you're in brawling range, or just get an enemy in front of you away from cover, high dps is a huge advantage. My JM6-S with stock weapons just shreds mechs that can't quickly break LOS. It is easily my highest damaging mech that is easiest to get kills with (all my mechs have stock weapons).

[R Razor]

Cimarb, on 30 May 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

Ultimately, it doesn't matter. "Meta" has just became a term to mean "better than me", thrown around whenever people are unhappy.

I'd put my stats in my Raven up against any non-meta out there, I'm not the best by any means and there are plenty of folks better than me out there, but there are plenty worse out there as well.....and if I run any of my metawhore mechs consistently my stats go up dramatically. It isn't worth it to me as it dumbs the game down far more than I like. Same reason I don't run mass LRM mechs......I like to have fun whether it's a win or a loss. Too many people here in this game that only find fun in min-max setups and that is the crowd PGI likes and supports currently.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Wolfways, on 30 May 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

Can't really agree with that. If you're in brawling range, or just get an enemy in front of you away from cover, high dps is a huge advantage. My JM6-S with stock weapons just shreds mechs that can't quickly break LOS. It is easily my highest damaging mech that is easiest to get kills with (all my mechs have stock weapons).

Once again, DPS isn't really what you are after though. You could do 100 DPS and put it all into a mechs arm, and not really accomplish anything.

DPS matters when you have a pool of shared hitpoints.

You are using FLD weapons (AC2 and AC5) and hopefully putting that damage into the CT of someone, in that situation it's once again about FLD, pinpoint and burst potential.

It's one of the reason the LBX10 sucks, sure it might have good damage per second, but it's spread all over the damn place. Which makes it suck.

It's why DPS is a bad measurement to use in this game.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 30 May 2014 - 12:40 PM.

[Cimarb]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 30 May 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

Once again, DPS isn't really what you are after though. You could do 100 DPS and put it all into a mechs arm, and not really accomplish anything.

DPS matters when you have a pool of shared hitpoints.

You are using FLD weapons (AC2 and AC5) and hopefully putting that damage into the CT of someone, in that situation it's once again about FLD, pinpoint and burst potential.

It's one of the reason the LBX10 sucks, sure it might have good damage per second, but it's spread all over the damn place. Which makes it suck.

It's why DPS is a bad measurement to use in this game.

I generally agree with you, but when you start saying an AC2 is FLD you do the term a disservice. I would say that an AC5 (5 damage per hit) is about as low as can be termed FLD.

DPS does matter for some builds, but high-DPS spread damage is always trumped by equivalent pinpoint/FLD. Try to kill an Atlas with an LRM boat compared to a Gauss Jäger (both solo, of course). You will do roughly twice as much damage with the LRM boat in that process, but the Gauss will win the race every time.

[Wolfways]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 30 May 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

Once again, DPS isn't really what you are after though. You could do 100 DPS and put it all into a mechs arm, and not really accomplish anything.

DPS matters when you have a pool of shared hitpoints.

You are using FLD weapons (AC2 and AC5) and hopefully putting that damage into the CT of someone, in that situation it's once again about FLD, pinpoint and burst potential.

It's one of the reason the LBX10 sucks, sure it might have good damage per second, but it's spread all over the damn place. Which makes it suck.

It's why DPS is a bad measurement to use in this game.

Ah okay, i see your point. I wasn't considering spread damage weapons. My bad

[Cimarb]

Wolfways, on 30 May 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

Ah okay, i see your point. I wasn't considering spread damage weapons. My bad

I don't think AC2s qualify as FLD, personally. Pinpoint, yes, but at only 2 damage per hit, that really isn't any more front-loaded than an SRM missile or LPL "tick".

[Strum Wealh]

Cimarb, on 30 May 2014 - 12:57 PM, said:

I don't think AC2s qualify as FLD, personally. Pinpoint, yes, but at only 2 damage per hit, that really isn't any more front-loaded than an SRM missile or LPL "tick".

It is a front-loaded damage weapon, though; the AC/2 only deals 2 units of damage per salvo, and its current single-shell implementation allows it to deal all of that damage instantaneously to a target with each successful hit.
Separately, the AC/2 is also a pinpoint damage weapon, in that all of the damage for any given salvo is applied to a single location selected by the player (via aiming).

By contrast, the LB 10-X cluster round is also a front-loaded damage weapon; each submunition will deal all of its damage instantaneously to a target with each successful hit.
However, the LB-X isn't a pinpoint-damage weapon (as the salvo's total damage will be spread across the target as a function of range and random distribution of submunitions within the cone-of-spread).

Also by contrast, the lasers are pinpoint damage weapons (in that all of the damage for any given salvo can be applied to a single location selected by the player (via aiming)), but they are not front-loaded damage weapons (as it takes a not-insignificant amount of time in order to push out the series of "ticks" that make up each salvo's total damage potential, rather than delivering all of the salvo's damage to the target instantly with the first "tick").

[Cimarb]

Strum Wealh, on 30 May 2014 - 01:14 PM, said:

It is a front-loaded damage weapon, though; the AC/2 only deals 2 units of damage per salvo, and its current single-shell implementation allows it to deal all of that damage instantaneously to a target with each successful hit.
Separately, the AC/2 is also a pinpoint damage weapon, in that all of the damage for any given salvo is applied to a single location selected by the player (via aiming).

By contrast, the LB 10-X cluster round is also a front-loaded damage weapon; each submunition will deal all of its damage instantaneously to a target with each successful hit.
However, the LB-X isn't a pinpoint-damage weapon (as the salvo's total damage will be spread across the target as a function of range and random distribution of submunitions within the cone-of-spread).

Also by contrast, the lasers are pinpoint damage weapons (in that all of the damage for any given salvo can be applied to a single location selected by the player (via aiming)), but they are not front-loaded damage weapons (as it takes a not-insignificant amount of time in order to push out the series of "ticks" that make up each salvo's total damage potential, rather than delivering all of the salvo's damage to the target instantly with the first "tick").

Very true. By definition, an AC2 is a pinpoint FLD weapon. I still think it lowers the value of the argument by including it, though. When talking about how bad FLD is for the game, you wouldn't use the example of the machine gun, which is by definition FLD, just like you wouldn't use the LBX or SRMs/LRMs. It's a matter of semantics, obviously. I just don't want to send the wrong message that 2-damage hits are what is "overpowered".

[IraqiWalker]

I think a lot of people are arguing over the semantics of Damage Over Time and Damage Per Second.