524 replies to this topic

[Davers]

Reitrix, on 14 June 2014 - 05:57 AM, said:

I cant see how. It just spreads the damage little more. Clan 'Mechs don't magically have more armor than IS counterparts. The only thing is hurts is the poptart 2xPPC+2xAC5 meta. And that is kind of a good thing.

We really should have IS Burst Fire their AC's, with slightly less shots required to achieve max damage. That way IS has the advantage of short burn lasers and ACs, but the Clans have the advantage of range and weight.

When the IS has 100 ton mechs with 4 UAC/10s we can go back to this argument.

[Livewyr]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 June 2014 - 09:18 AM, said:

Ultimately true, though my feelings are only involved as toward my desire to play what I envision with all DoT mechanics. I have yet to see that done well, IMO.

My posts about the nature of mechanics themselves are based purely on my play and observation over the last 2 years, not any adherence to a particular style of weapon, since I tend to run counter meta, anyhow. My prefered mechs are a Griffin with all of 1 PPC, and spread/DoT weapons backing it, and a Summoner with a UAC/10, 2 Mediums and a LRM launcher.

So it's not like i am trying to protect my play style. What I am trying to protect, is the variety of the game. One of the big selling points to me, since inception, was the differing damage mechanics, which gave a great variety of feel and immersion to the game.

I'm a lore guy, but in general single shot ACs are not lore (with 2 possible noted exceptions, Cauldron Born and Demolisher). But I put that on hold because the differences in FLD, Pinpoint, Hitscan, DoT weapons give MWO a very different feel from virtually every other game I have played.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I cannot envision everything going to variations of DoT and maintaining that, whereas I can very easily see ways to tweak FLD into line with the other weapons, and maintain the feel. And that "feel" has been one of the few things to get rave reviews in MWO since it's beginning.

I understand the desire for variation, and I want to maintain it- (with shorter bursts and faster bullets for the same damage)

But I don't want to do that at the expense of game-play. (PPFLD has made the game stale, IMO, and made it less desirable to run mediums and lights. (Personal Anecdote, I run YLW, SHD, and Wolverines, because I'm attached to the style of fighting that mediums lend themselves to.) That is separate from the prudence of running a PPFLD heavy or assault. With the current live server, in any sort of play that counts, (competitive, CWs) and when I want to succeed, I run a PPFLD30 mech. The scalpel effect that provides is formidable against heavies/assaults, and devastating against mediums/lights.

[Davers]

Livewyr, on 14 June 2014 - 06:57 AM, said:

I just read the TRO on the hunchie, doesn't say anything about a "Single Blow."

I don't remember having to divide my AC/20 hits into multiple locations in TT. But I do remember the rule books saying that the fluff fiction pieces don't change the actual game mechanics.

[Bishop Steiner]

SgtMagor, on 14 June 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

I would like to keep the IS tech separate from the Clan please don't tweak the weapons to make them like Clan tech.. when I pilot a Clan or IS mech I really want them to be different in every way possible.

THIS.

A huge part of what made the PTS feel special is that the Clans felt different. Make them all the same, and after the new car smell wears off..... I fear it will fall back to the overwhelming dullness of the last year.

To me it's like the difference between the NASCAR of yesteryear, when they were actually, tripped down representations of the actual brands, and NASCAR today, where it's all generic stuff essentially different in the name on the fiberglass shell.

NASCAR of the 60s and 70s was exciting, to see what Ford, Dodge and GM would throw at each other. NASCAR now? Sorry to those fans of it, but it's a bad joke, IMO.

Davers, on 14 June 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

When the IS has 100 ton mechs with 4 UAC/10s we can go back to this argument.

of note, the quad LB-10X "annihilator" Direwolf was a dismal failure.

[Livewyr]

SgtMagor, on 14 June 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

I would like to keep the IS tech separate from the Clan please don't tweak the weapons to make them like Clan tech.. when I pilot a Clan or IS mech I really want them to be different in every way possible.

The problem with the game currently overall, is that "IS tech."

IS games, in the live server, which I refuse to touch after playing the PTS, generally boil down to bringing a heavy or assault with PPFLD and being a decent shot. Bringing a non-sniping medium mech is not prudent.

[Bishop Steiner]

Livewyr, on 14 June 2014 - 09:32 AM, said:

The problem with the game currently overall, is that "IS tech."

IS games, in the live server, which I refuse to touch after playing the PTS, generally boil down to bringing a heavy or assault with PPFLD and being a decent shot. Bringing a non-sniping medium mech is not prudent.

so before we throw the baby out with the bathwater, can we try IDk, tweaking what we have, first? And if that doesn't work, then go to the adoption agency?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 14 June 2014 - 09:34 AM.

[Livewyr]

Davers, on 14 June 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

I don't remember having to divide my AC/20 hits into multiple locations in TT. But I do remember the rule books saying that the fluff fiction pieces don't change the actual game mechanics.

In TT you did not divide AC shots into different sections.

In TT your target was not actively moving. (The simulation of "movement" was an all or nothing penalty, IIRC)

Bishop Steiner, on 14 June 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

so before we throw the baby out with the bathwater, can we try IDk, tweaking what we have, first? And if that doesn't work, then go to the adoption agency?

I'm interested in how you want to deal with that. (I am all ears.)

The one proposed earlier: "Slowing the RoF of FLD Weapons" would effectively nuke IS ACs in all the wrong ways. They would get crushed in open engagements with much faster firing UACs, but still eviscerate medium mechs in a single shot.

[Mcgral18]

Livewyr, on 14 June 2014 - 06:01 AM, said:

I'm not in favor of giving them extra damage, lest they become AC24s... Projectile speed (and therefore accuracy), I think, would be a suitable trade-off.

Seeing as we have a 14 ton AC60/30/40 (depending on your choice of math), that argument is long gone. It already does 150% damage.

JohanssenJr, on 14 June 2014 - 08:15 AM, said:

I have a question for everyone here. Who ACTUALLY put in time in IS mechs against the clans? My bet is very few of you.

3Ds worked just fine against them. A lancemate was using 2PPC 2AC5 for the duration of the test, since he didn't have any Clan mechs and generally won most engagements, because he could focus his damage while the Clans didn't have that option, short of 2 builds?

My Dual gauss 3D worked well, and the lasers didn't have an issue with their "short" 1 second burns. But I have to say, I much prefered playing a Kit Fox with whatever build. It was a lot funner, and with most loadouts I didn't get instagibbed, until the Dragon Slayers came out. Those are still top of the pile for a reason.

Edited by Mcgral18, 17 June 2014 - 07:12 AM.

[verybad]

Lets go further than just making the IS weapons the same, lets make ALL weapons the same!

From now on, all weapons should build up ghost heat, even if firing just one, all weapons should jam (yes, lasers and PPCs can jam now), all weapons should be vulnerable to AMS (including AMS). All weapons should have a range of 180 meters, but they shouldn't cause damage within 180 meters. Also they can't fire unless you have a lock.

Seriously, WTF do people want to reduce variety in this game, it's not got enough, why make all stuff act the same way? Of course it (the OPs idea)would hurt the IS, IS meta is point fire, Clan meta is DPS, it's not hard to read the effing manual here.

Edited by verybad, 14 June 2014 - 09:42 AM.

[Livewyr]

Mcgral18, on 14 June 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

Seeing as we have a 14 ton AC60/30/40 (depending on your choice of math), that argument is long gone. It already does 150% damage.

In making a DPS comparison to TT, yes it is.
In making a shot for shot comparison, no it is not.

verybad, on 14 June 2014 - 09:41 AM, said:

Lets go further than just making the IS weapons the same, lets make ALL weapons the same!

From now on, all weapons should build up ghost heat, even if firing just one, all weapons should jam (yes, lasers and PPCs can jam now), all weapons should be vulnerable to AMS (including AMS). All weapons should have a range of 180 meters, but they shouldn't cause damage within 180 meters. Also they can't fire unless you have a lock.

Seriously, WTF do people want to reduce variety in this game, it's not got enough, why make all stuff act the same way? Of course it (the OPs idea)would hurt the IS, IS meta is point fire, Clan meta is DPS, it's not hard to read the effing manual here.

Annnnnnd.. You're done.

(Clearly you didn't read beyond the first two or three posts.)

Edited by Livewyr, 14 June 2014 - 09:43 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Livewyr, on 14 June 2014 - 09:37 AM, said:

In TT you did not divide AC shots into different sections.

In TT your target was not actively moving. (The simulation of "movement" was an all or nothing penalty, IIRC)



I'm interested in how you want to deal with that. (I am all ears.)

The one proposed earlier: "Slowing the RoF of FLD Weapons" would effectively nuke IS ACs in all the wrong ways. They would get crushed in open engagements with much faster firing UACs, but still eviscerate medium mechs in a single shot.

so they would have situational superiority, and in other areas be less effective? Not seeing the issue.

also, kicking PPCs and AC20s to 5 second cooldowns vs 3 and 4 respectively, the AC10 to 3.5 cooldown and the ac5 to 2 second, I hardly see as nuking them to useless, especially since many of those same weapon had similarly long cooldowns in previous titles, and were effective precisely because when they did land a blow, it was with a gigantic gfrikking sledgehammer.

PPC/ER PPC- 5 seconds
AC20- 5 Seconds
Gauss- unchanged due to charge mechanic
AC10- 3.5 second
LB-10X - Unchanged, faster RoF partly offsets lack of PP damage.
AC5/UAC5- 2 or 2.25 seconds
AC2 - Unchanged as unneeded after recent nerfs


Don't see how any of those changes "nuke" them, but it certainly swings the DPS balance to helping make IS DoT weapons more desirable, especially with their light tonnage.

Also, I would not be against the UAC5 being changed to burst fire, as an eventual hedge to IS UACs being introduced.

Had I seen a single, solitary Meta-Premade actually dominate any match over those 12 hours, I might be more concerned... But I didn't, and these were people running non-optimized Clan Mech builds against them.

Livewyr, on 14 June 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Annnnnnd.. You're done.

(Clearly you didn't read beyond the first two or three posts.)

perhaps not, but it's not a totally unreasonable conclusion that the constant yammer for nerfing will eventually lead us there. Hyperbole has been thrown at me quite a bit in this thread, though, so maybe I am just not against seeing "counter-battery fire".

[falknir]

Lykaon, on 14 June 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

Ironicly many people have been requesting I.S. ACs be given this burst fire mechanics for well over a year (honestly I recall the topic being put forward 2 years ago but with less popularity).This is something that should have been done then because it's an effective mechanic to fix the issues these weapons have.

And if it had been done then we wouldn't even have this disagreement about uniqueness.Honestly Uniqueness?

CLan AC is a big gun that shoots bullets.
I.S. AC is a big gun that shoots bullets.

How unique can it be?

Yep, this was a proposed solution since CBT to resolve the high-alpha focused balance that was foreseen as a major issue. It is surprising that it took many being shocked into this change with a PBT of Clans years later for it to become more popular and brought back into the spotlight. It is in the lore of Battletech, do not see an issue introducing it to IS mechs as well.

[verybad]

Livewyr, on 14 June 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

In making a DPS comparison to TT, yes it is.
In making a shot for shot comparison, no it is not.



Annnnnnd.. You're done.

(Clearly you didn't read beyond the first two or three posts.)

Clearly you think your'e on to something brilliant and that anyone that doesn't agree with you hasn't read your manifesto because otherwise they would agree with the utter genius.

You're not.

The IS's single advantage in point fire isn't high enough to need a nerf, making them burst is a nerf unless you make them the same in every way as clan. They have lower ranges, weigh more, and take more crits.

So what is your point in nerfing them? Just to make them fight the same way, but not as well?

Edited by verybad, 14 June 2014 - 09:59 AM.

[Livewyr]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 June 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

so they would have situational superiority, and in other areas be less effective? Not seeing the issue.

also, kicking PPCs and AC20s to 5 second cooldowns vs 3 and 4 respectively, the AC10 to 3.5 cooldown and the ac5 to 2 second, I hardly see as nuking them to useless, especially since many of those same weapon had similarly long cooldowns in previous titles, and were effective precisely because when they did land a blow, it was with a gigantic gfrikking sledgehammer.

PPC/ER PPC- 5 seconds
AC20- 5 Seconds
Gauss- unchanged due to charge mechanic
AC10- 3.5 second
LB-10X - Unchanged, faster RoF partly offsets lack of PP damage.
AC5/UAC5- 2 or 2.25 seconds
AC2 - Unchanged as unneeded after recent nerfs


Don't see how any of those changes "nuke" them, but it certainly swings the DPS balance to helping make IS DoT weapons more desirable, especially with their light tonnage.

Also, I would not be against the UAC5 being changed to burst fire, as an eventual hedge to IS UACs being introduced.

Had I seen a single, solitary Meta-Premade actually dominate any match over those 12 hours, I might be more concerned... But I didn't, and these were people running non-optimized Clan Mech builds against them.

Situational superiority wouldn't be a problem, if the situational superiority didn't fall into 2 stale categories:
Pop-Tarts. (The epitome of stale, both in MWO and real life.)
Light armor slaughtering. The rapid shortening of the match career of a mech weighing less than 65 tons.

Situational inferiority would be in:
Actually "fighting." (Exchanging fire with another mech.)

That would further reduce the DPS of IS ACs in the face of already doubled potential DPS of C-UACs.

They would get slaughtered in face-to-face engagements, and outperform in the engagement styles that have staled the live game as it is.

(And I did see a VTR/CTF premade slaughtering mechs whole-sale. Steel Jag 4man. Unfortunately for them, most of the rest of their team was sub-par and most died with less than 100 damage. They lost, but that was a result of being overrun when the rest of their team, including clan mechs, crumpled like tinfoil.)

verybad, on 14 June 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

Clearly you think your'e on to something brilliant and that anyone that doesn't agree with you hasn't read your manifesto because otherwise they would agree with the utter genius.

You're not.

The IS's single advantage in point fire isn't high enough to need a nerf, making them burst is a nerf unless you make them the same in every way as clan. They have lower ranges, weigh more, and take more crits.

So what is your point in nerfing them? Just to make them fight the same way, but not as well?

Actually ****ing read the thread so you know what's going on before running your keyboard. I've already hashed out several issues with someone who actually reads.

[wanderer]

Ngamok, on 14 June 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

As long as my 4G can carry:

The primary weapon on the Hunchback is a Tomodzuru Autocannon Mount Type 20 which can strip one and a quarter tons of armor off an enemy 'Mech in a single blow.

http://www.sarna.net...n_Mount_Type_20

I've said this before:

Canonically, the Tomodzuru fires...a burst of shells. Five, in it's case. Like 99.999% of all AC's short of naval caliber, it fires multiple shells in a single pull of the trigger.

Clan 'Mechs should fire longer bursts, but IS ones should still be firing multiple shells per trigger pull. MWO has been wrong since day 1- and pinpoint,FLD wrecks the damage model.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

My dream for IS ACs is for them to do 4-round bursts with a 0.10s delay between shells (total burst time of 0.30s).

cUACs and cACs would do a 6-round burst with 0.12s between shots (for a total burst time of 0.60s).

This would give IS ACs more damage for each individual shell, as well as tighter burst grouping (half the burst time). That gives them an edge in damage concentration, to help compensate for the Clan edge in raw firepower based on weight and space, while also mitigating somewhat the current problematic IS pinpoint FLD volley fire.

In a similar vein, cERPPCs should do 7.5 damage on impact, and 3.75 damage to two adjacent locations, while IS PPCs and ERPPCs should do 5 damage on impact and 2.5 damage to two adjacent locations. In all cases that would be half damage on impact and half damage arcing to two other locations.

[Pezzer]

Nope. We need variety. I don't want to see every AC working the same way. It gets boring.

Nope.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Livewyr, on 14 June 2014 - 09:22 AM, said:

 

"It also considered an 'autocannon' as the user does not have to manually cycle the weapon."

 

You have to pull the trigger for each round. That's a cycle. (Not in the same vain as the bolt action version, but it is still a cycle.)

 

The 240B was used in Bursts (to maximize cover effect/damage and to extend the longevity of the barrel and ammunition.) Trust me, that was my other Crew-serve.

 

Autocannon = 240B

Gauss Rifle = M82

 

The user of a Gauss Rifle is having to "manually" engage a cycling step, charging the weapon, before it can be fired.

 

The M82 is still an autoloading weapon. Whether it fires a single round every trigger pull or continues cycling as long as the trigger is engaged. The user just needs to pull the trigger.

 

What if we changed the M82 to an 1170 firing slugs? It's also a big gun, it also auto loads, it's also relatively short ranged.

 

A non autoloading cannon would be the M109s I used to crew.

 

Autocannon does not mean "overgrown machine gun." It means the weapon cycles itself.

 

 

 

But back to the main topic, who here actually used IS mechs on the PTS? I rotated every match between my clan mechs and IS mechs. The only saving grace were my standard engine AC brawlers where I could snap shoot then twist to mitigate the absurd UAC spam from Dire Wolves, my faster SRM bombers that hit and run, and the lights (which died quick to SSRM6 spam).

 

But let's talk about IS AC boats. How many run standard engines? The Banshee and the KC20. The rest are all ultra squishy XLs. The ballistic boat banshee and KC20 are slow as pond water.

 

Thursday was fun. I had a blast. But it was a terrible metric of guessing IS vs Clan balance unless the players put up a decent amount of time in their IS mechs. And judging by the lack of a presence by IS mechs, of usually only me in one, most of the ideas about balance are pure conjecture by people not having a clue and just knee jerking

[Livewyr]

Bishop, let me ask you this question:

In a comparison of:

3 Shells doing 6.33 damage a piece, fired every .1 seconds for a total time of .3 seconds- and 5 Shells doing 4 damage a piece, fired every .25 seconds for a total time of 1.25 seconds:


Who has the advantage?

[wanderer]

Davers, on 14 June 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

I don't remember having to divide my AC/20 hits into multiple locations in TT. But I do remember the rule books saying that the fluff fiction pieces don't change the actual game mechanics.

In TT, damage was spread by randomizing hit locations.

MWO has nothing but aimed shots by comparison. Since we can't spread damage via randomized hits, it has to happen by some other means (spread, arcing damage like PPCs, "shotguns" like LB-X or LRM/SRM salvos) or anything that puts all it's punch into one spot instantly has a large advantage over what doesn't.