458 replies to this topic

[JohnnyWayne]

With these changes PGI just could undo all the restrictions made to omni mechs, make them customizeable like IS mechs and they sure as hell would be balanced. This is a double nerf making them worse than IS mechs.

[Fastwind]

Khan Warlock Kell, on 08 June 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

I'm not going to comment one way or the other on the weapon changes for the clan weapons yet. Lets get the mechs and weapons in game and see how they function and give the devs time to get some data and the fixes they are working on in game, and then they can start to balance the weapons using real figures rather than just assumed values.


Don't cry about spilled milk until, its actually on the floor. Give the devs a chance to do the right thing.

I might not agree with what the devs have to say. But lately they have been communicating with us in a much better way. Lets applaud them for that.

Would you spill the milk if i cry?Certainly not.
So you don't need to clean it.

[ScarecrowES]

Cavendish, on 08 June 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

It arcs to nearby locations, its a charge, why would it not be able to hit something physicaly connected to the area that you hit? Think of it as massive electric field that arcs to the next location, bringing the charged particles to it since the PPC tech is particles directed by a electromagnetic field /shrug, It sure beats losing 17%+ of your damage due to lazy design.

Edit ScarcrowES beat me to it.

Sorry

[Cavendish]

While I agree to a point Kell, We should (and are) happy about the new levels of communication PGI has shown lately.

When it comes to get data and fixes, why have they not simply recruited 3-5 top 12 man teams and let them play on a beta server? If that had been done during the dev process they would have had a much better position at release and would have known if something was viable or totaly useless. It feels a bit like panic-last minute-slap on systems that will be alpha tested by paying customers in about a week.

Now as you say, we simply do not know if these systems will be "the best things to come out of PGI evah!" or a disaster but to me it seems PGI is doing as much theorycrafting as people in this thread are right now.

[Cimarb]

Vassago Rain, on 07 June 2014 - 11:31 PM, said:

You're setting yourself up for more disappointment.

If that is the case, then so be it, but based on the burst-fire ACs and splash PPCs, which I have been hoping (and lobbying) for - see my sig - I am fine with waiting and really think these changes are tests to see if they work and can be made across the board eventually.

Bishop Steiner, on 08 June 2014 - 04:35 AM, said:

not really getting the point of the Clan "AC" as a placeholder.

If one wants and LB, use it. But since the clan "LB-X" and clan ultra are the same mass, and the cln ultra and ac will use the same firing mechanic, it seems largely pointless to mount a clan "standard" ac? (after all, you don't have to double tap the UAC)

Heck, the UACs even use less crits.

The AC version of the LBX does not allow double-taps like the CUAC does.

[Cest7]

So you're gimping gauss boating, understandable.
Can we change the recycle to 3.25s yet?

[J0anna]

Sprouticus, on 08 June 2014 - 11:22 AM, said:

Wow, ....

I cannot decide if you are simpleminded or just a fool. These weapon changes were suppose to "balance" clan mechs. In case it is the former, I will try to explain this down to your level:

This is not balance.

Had the person trying to balance the game actually played it in competition, he might have understood this. Personally I am happy with the way PGI is implementing clan UAC's and ERPPC's, but without touching freebirth weapons, the game becomes extremely unbalanced. Leaving one side able execute pinpoint damage, while the other side cannot is in no way, shape, or form game balance. It is a shame the two of you are too obtuse to see this. What's really bad is he gets paid to see this. He had 6 months to balance this release for this game, and has failed. How long are you going to keep paying for this level of incompetence PGI?

[Mcgral18]

Moenrg, on 08 June 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

I cannot decide if you are simpleminded or just a fool. These weapon changes were suppose to "balance" clan mechs. In case it is the former, I will try to explain this down to your level:

This is not balance.

Had the person trying to balance the game actually played it in competition, he might have understood this. Personally I am happy with the way PGI is implementing clan UAC's and ERPPC's, but without touching freebirth weapons, the game becomes extremely unbalanced. Leaving one side able execute pinpoint damage, while the other side cannot is in no way, shape, or form game balance. It is a shame the two of you are too obtuse to see this. What's really bad is he gets paid to see this. He had 6 months to balance this release for this game, and has failed. How long are you going to keep paying for this level of incompetence PGI?

Well, you can't say that yet. The Clan mechs will be able to carry much more outright firepower than the IS mechs.

We'll see in just over a week. I imagine lasers won't be terrible, and the nova can carry lots of those. Plus machine guns.

[ScarecrowES]

Khan Warlock Kell, on 08 June 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

I'm not going to comment one way or the other on the weapon changes for the clan weapons yet. Lets get the mechs and weapons in game and see how they function and give the devs time to get some data and the fixes they are working on in game, and then they can start to balance the weapons using real figures rather than just assumed values.


Don't cry about spilled milk until, its actually on the floor. Give the devs a chance to do the right thing.

I might not agree with what the devs have to say. But lately they have been communicating with us in a much better way. Lets applaud them for that.

I actually agree with what you're saying. PGI, despite what we're seeing, may be able to pull off a level of balance in an overall clan build that is simply not seen in a sum of it's parts.

However, I think we can safely look at most aspects of clan mech design, system, and weapon balancings from a purely statistical standpoint as being entirely predictive of in-game results through experience with the current stable of IS mechs, systems, and weapons.

For instance... the PPC. You rarely see the IS ERPPC on the battlefield, and if you do, it's rarely seen on a single mech in quantities over 1. The reason for this is the 50% increase in heat over a standard PPC. Even if that came with a corresponding 50% increase in damage or range, or some combination of the two, it would not be enough to justify the amount of heat it comes with. Perhaps this made sense in the tabletop world, where an IS PPC could strip 2/3 of a ton of armor from a target (that would be 20 points of damage equivelant in MWO). 2 PPC shots would take out the side torso armor of most mechs up to 70 tons. With the ranges ERPPCs are able to engage at, being able to take out the side torso of an enemy heavy mech in one volley of 2 PPCs beyond a range that enemy can hit you at probably justifies the additional heat. In the MWO world, it really doesn't, and thus the very minor plusses of the IS ERPPC make it a poor choice for no greater reason than the massive amount of heat.

Compared to an ER Large Laser, which has only 57% of the heat of an ERPPC, and 85% of a standard PPC, with no minimum range and the same damage... PPCs in general come up short, but the ER more so. In fact, IS ERPPCs are fairly laughable as is. In reality, as long as you've got the hard points to handle it, for the same damage output, you'd be better of just taking 1 ERLL and one (ER) ML and save yourself a massive deal of heat management.

No, for the clan ERPPC to be viable as the only available clan PPC, this weapon ultimately has to be either left alone per TT, or modded for MWO and then buffed. As some have suggested, a balancing compromise can exist if you leave TT values alone, but add a charging feature to the clan ERPPC, basically making it a high heat energy "gauss rifle." Making a PPC with all the bad points of the IS ERPPC, but few of the practical good points of the TT clan ERPPC is just going to ensure this gets swapped out for a more viable weapon right away.

[KILLBANDS]

I suggest having clan ppcs deal 12 damage pinpoint and then having 1.5 x 2 disperse across other parts

reason being just to make the hit on what you want to hit superior to non clan ppcs

this also helps justify the heat a bit better

[Vassago Rain]

Mcgral18, on 08 June 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

Well, you can't say that yet. The Clan mechs will be able to carry much more outright firepower than the IS mechs.

We'll see in just over a week. I imagine lasers won't be terrible, and the nova can carry lots of those. Plus machine guns.

Enjoy your immense ghost heat on likely 6 default heat ER mediums.

>machineguns listed as a pro.

Are you serious?

[FupDup]

Vassago Rain, on 08 June 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

Enjoy your immense ghost heat on likely 6 default heat ER mediums.

>machineguns listed as a pro.

Are you serious?

I'd expect heat for the CERML to be less than 6. After all, it does more damage than the regular ISML, so why would it have the same limit? I'm expecting ~4 to be the max alpha, based on its damage (7 x 4 = 28, compared to 30 damage for 6 ISML).

[Valdemaar]

Overall I approve of these ideas. My only complaint is that I wish IS weapons worked with the same principles. Namely AC burst fire and PPC splash.

[Ryoken]

Limiting Gauss Rifle Charge to 2 max: good and reasonable to avoid 45/60 Pinpoint

C-ER-PPC getting splash damage: good - finally introducing splash to PPC, but I kind of dislike the 2.5 damage points getting lost when only 1 adjacent location is available.

C-UAC and C-LBX(slug) becoming burst fire weapons: good - finally also introducing a correct implementation of autocannons that also takes away the pinpoint damage.

C-LRM minimum range: bad it could not come in time - but we can wait those 2 weeks

But I got 4 concerns:

1) ER-PPCs both Clan and IS need some help as they are nearly unusable with 1.4DHS. As mentioned before we allready got a situation with IS-ER-PPCs, which are way to hot to field more than one, even if you stuff your mech with DHS. So ER-PPC heat/1.4DHS need some tuning!

2) PPC splash damage should not get lost but distributed equally to the available adjecent locations except head.
1 adjecent location = 5 splash transfer
2 adjecent locations = 2x 2.5 splash transfer
3 adjecent locations = 3x 1.7 splash transfer
and so on...

3) Splash damage should be implemented for all PPC weapons in the future.

4) Burst fire AND recoil should be implemented for all AC weapons in the future.

Edited by Ryoken, 08 June 2014 - 01:31 PM.

[J0anna]

Mcgral18, on 08 June 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

Well, you can't say that yet. The Clan mechs will be able to carry much more outright firepower than the IS mechs.

We'll see in just over a week. I imagine lasers won't be terrible, and the nova can carry lots of those. Plus machine guns.

Actually we don't need to "see" anything. Do you play in competitive 12-mans? The ability to deal pinpoint damage is everything. Leaving one side able to execute pinpoint damage while the other can only spread damage simply means the other side will lose far more often than not.

And in case you are unaware, the cataphract 3D can easily mount 2xPPC's and 2xAC5's (30 pinpoint alpha) at 70 tons. Can the Summoner (also 70 tons)? The answer you are looking for is No, not if it wants to have any armor at all. Do you somehow think people will stop using pinpoint damage when facing Clan mechs? The only use I can see for most clan mechs at the current time is trolling matches - dropping w/an omnimech on your team is almost as bad as being saddled w/trial mechs.....

[Mcgral18]

Vassago Rain, on 08 June 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

Enjoy your immense ghost heat on likely 6 default heat ER mediums.

>machineguns listed as a pro.

Are you serious?

I think you mean 4 ERMLs, 8 ERSLs and 4 MGs. Along with 20 DHS, or 19 and a TC.

So, 66 alpha damage which can be done 3 times without heat management, plus the 0 heat MGs for whatever components that 100 damage opened up.

Damned right those MGs are a plus. Have you forgotten why low heat weapons are in demand? Only 1 ton for 4 MGs.

[Shredhead]

[ScarecrowES]

Vassago Rain, on 08 June 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

Enjoy your immense ghost heat on likely 6 default heat ER mediums.

>machineguns listed as a pro.

Are you serious?

I do find that arguement laughable as well. It's not like clan omnimechs get a higher heat table to deal with all the extra heat their weapons would likely generate for balancing purposes in MWO. Hell, firing 6 standard IS MLs at once is more than a lot of mechs can handle. You're not getting more than 3 alphas of that on any IS mech without pushing into overheat. The Nova is rocking 12, sure, which seams like an awful lot of firepower until you realise that in a 50-ton mech you likely can only fire half of those, and not at full rate, if you expect to not sit in shutdown after every volley. Strictly speaking, given the specs, you may not even be able to chain-fire all those MLs and get through all 12 before you overheat. That's really not an advantage.

Of course, in tabletop, 6MLs would have done enough damage to strip 2 tons of armor from a mech... which is the equivelant of 60pts of damage in MWO. That's an Atlas side torso. One volley each of the left and right arms on a Nova would have been enough to core out an Atlas through the CT with plenty of heat to spare.

Following modified tabletop construction rules without actually following tabletop gameplay mechanics is not a path to "balance."

Expect most players to drop 2/3 of that "firepower" for more heatsinks - if we're even allowed to do that. The omnimech construction rules are a little vague about how you can add or remove heat sinks.

Edited by ScarecrowES, 08 June 2014 - 01:49 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Moenrg, on 08 June 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

Actually we don't need to "see" anything. Do you play in competitive 12-mans? The ability to deal pinpoint damage is everything. Leaving one side able to execute pinpoint damage while the other can only spread damage simply means the other side will lose far more often than not.

And in case you are unaware, the cataphract 3D can easily mount 2xPPC's and 2xAC5's (30 pinpoint alpha) at 70 tons. Can the Summoner (also 70 tons)? The answer you are looking for is No, not if it wants to have any armor at all. Do you somehow think people will stop using pinpoint damage when facing Clan mechs? The only use I can see for most clan mechs at the current time is trolling matches - dropping w/an omnimech on your team is almost as bad as being saddled w/trial mechs.....

Nope, but I imagine overwhelming firepower will beat precise firepwer, when it gets close.

We will see. The WubShee certainly beats meta when it gets close, and my proposed Nova is actually more powerful than it, along with a low heat alternative.


But a team of meta will probably win. Hence why teamwork is OP.

[Bishop Steiner]

Cimarb, on 08 June 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

If that is the case, then so be it, but based on the burst-fire ACs and splash PPCs, which I have been hoping (and lobbying) for - see my sig - I am fine with waiting and really think these changes are tests to see if they work and can be made across the board eventually.


The AC version of the LBX does not allow double-taps like the CUAC does.

Cimarb, on 08 June 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

If that is the case, then so be it, but based on the burst-fire ACs and splash PPCs, which I have been hoping (and lobbying) for - see my sig - I am fine with waiting and really think these changes are tests to see if they work and can be made across the board eventually.


The AC version of the LBX does not allow double-taps like the CUAC does.

um, that is sort of the point of my post Cim.

It's just like ac5 vs UAC in IS, you don't HAVE to double tap. The difference is for the Clans, you also aren't paying a 1 ton weight tax for the ability because if the "AC" is a stand in option for the "LB-X", it will weigh exactly the same as the "UAC".

And the UAC will have one less crit, and give you the option of the double tap. There is literally no good reason to equip a Clan "Standard" AC in place of the UAC, since they will also be burst fire. So if you are equipping an LB, and don't want the shotty, why would you mount an AC in place of a UAC for the same weight and more crits,less options?

It's a dumb idea, period. Even as a placeholder because as described, only a fool would mount it in place of the UAC.

Hence it's pointless idea.