524 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

RampancyTW, on 19 June 2014 - 09:40 PM, said:

Well, is that not sort of the point? Breaks up the damage vs. light mechs a bit without pilot compensation and requires a steady hand for the whole burst vs. slower mechs. Also makes it harder to poptart at range since there will be some height spread. Still maintains the "FLD" aspect of IS vs. Clan balance though.

It would not do it for the medium mechs, the ones that are going between 80-110 kph.. and that is where the problem lies.

[wanderer]

Ngamok, on 18 June 2014 - 05:41 AM, said:

Link please. Because everything I've seen, it's a single shot version, not a multiple shot.

Era Report 3052. Here's the relevant data.



The Ryoken (stats shown on pic) can take precisely one AC/20 shot before losing it's arm, and handily enough that AC/20 shot does just enough damage to penetrate. We also know that a single-shot AC/20 is a 300mm, 200kg round, while the Tomodzuru is a 180mm (ergo smaller than the 185mm ChemJet, which fires a 4-round burst instead.) autocannon- meaning it's firing a 4-5 round burst to deliver it's 200kg worth of ammo in a given shot.

No Battlemech mounts a 300mm gun, topping out around 203mm- which would be a 3-4 round burst for even the biggest 'Mech mounted autocannon available.

Edited by wanderer, 19 June 2014 - 10:48 PM.

[MischiefSC]

stjobe, on 19 June 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

I think we're on roughly the same page when it comes to the heat system.

I did make this thread about the problems with the MWO heat system, as well as this nice little chart (in this thread):



See something missing from the MWO scales? Yup, heat penalties. Major, major part of BattleTech (both the Universe and the board game) that's simply missing from MWO.

The above quoted post by the way has been proven by clinical trials to be 47% more effective than Ezyte at male enhancement simply by reading and understanding it. Yes, just thinking about proper heat scale from TT into MW:O will make your penis larger.

This has been a public service announcement.

[Bishop Steiner]

Livewyr, on 19 June 2014 - 09:38 PM, said:

Yeah... it's too bad I never compromised for having 1 round with a damage arc... we might have gotten somewhere.



My concern with a pure .1 is that it may not break up a damage concentration except \ the fastest mechs (130kph+).
(.1 is 1/6th the burn time for an IS MPL.)

oh you mean the idea that you immediately went on a rant at me after, about me being a hypocrite? Gosh, kinda makes it hard to discuss when the other person has labeled you persona non grata. Funny how that works.

[Rampancy]

Livewyr, on 19 June 2014 - 09:41 PM, said:

It would not do it for the medium mechs, the ones that are going between 80-110 kph.. and that is where the problem lies.

Uhhhh

Why not?

Seriously, if the entire point is to spread the damage around a component or two, a medium mech twisting to avoid fire and/or an attacker having to adjust his aim or twist away himself is going to spread a burst around a bit. Or simply having an unsteady hand. It doesn't take much.

[Livewyr]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2014 - 09:47 PM, said:

oh you mean the idea that you immediately went on a rant at me after, about me being a hypocrite? Gosh, kinda makes it hard to discuss when the other person has labeled you persona non grata. Funny how that works.

No, I went off on you after 2 pages of you ignoring it, other than to call it weird, and then continue to rail about burst fire and papercut warrior.. (after several pages of accusing me of ignoring your concerns and "suggestions.")

[Bishop Steiner]

Livewyr, on 19 June 2014 - 09:51 PM, said:

No, I went off on you after 2 pages of you ignoring it, other than to call it weird, and then continue to rail about burst fire and papercut warrior.. (after several pages of accusing me of ignoring your concerns and "suggestions.")

mmm.hmmmm.

I don't believe I ignored, it, and yes, it IS a weird idea. It "realistically" makes no sense. And I acknowledged neither does scaling damage on Clan LRMs. Since I had nothing to add to it, and since you made no attempts to pick the thread back up, but instead spent your time railing against anyone who dared to not embrace burst fire, and no one else, even in your camp seemed inclined to pick it up, what was there to be done with it?

You were too caught up in your crusade to add to it, everyone else was ignoring it, and I really had nothing to add to it. I suppose I could have tossed out half baked replies for the sake of doing so, except that is what they would have been, and as such, not worth adding. I prefer not to go off half cocked until after I have had time to work my mind around an idea.

I have been working the fld/DoT angles for months, which is why I am quick to comment on those, because the pros and cons, and flaws are largely self explanatory. Your Arcing shells, not so much. If it was such an important idea for you, perhaps you should have tried to carry your torch a little more. Since you didn't the implication is that it was not an idea you took seriously, either.

[Livewyr]

RampancyTW, on 19 June 2014 - 09:49 PM, said:

Uhhhh Why not? Seriously, if the entire point is to spread the damage around a component or two, a medium mech twisting to avoid fire and/or an attacker having to adjust his aim or twist away himself is going to spread a burst around a bit. Or simply having an unsteady hand. It doesn't take much.

Think about how long the MPL is, then divide it by 6.. and that is .1

Unless you are moving 115+, that is still going to catch you in the same component. (It might catch two if you are moving near perpendicular.)

[Rampancy]

Livewyr, on 19 June 2014 - 09:59 PM, said:

Think about how long the MPL is, then divide it by 6.. and that is .1

Unless you are moving 115+, that is still going to catch you in the same component. (It might catch two if you are moving near perpendicular.)

Depends on a lot of factors. Relative motion, AC caliber (projectile speed), ability of defender to maintain lead, engagement range, etc. Bursts will spread. Not a whole lot, but they don't need to spread a whole lot. With the SRM fix, mediums are in a decent place again from what I can tell.

[Bishop Steiner]

And back to ignoring it, and digging into the good fight.

Cheers!

[Livewyr]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2014 - 09:57 PM, said:

mmm.hmmmm.

I don't believe I ignored, it, and yes, it IS a weird idea. It "realistically" makes no sense. And I acknowledged neither does scaling damage on Clan LRMs. Since I had nothing to add to it, and since you made no attempts to pick the thread back up, but instead spent your time railing against anyone who dared to not embrace burst fire, and no one else, even in your camp seemed inclined to pick it up, what was there to be done with it?

You were too caught up in your crusade to add to it, everyone else was ignoring it, and I really had nothing to add to it. I suppose I could have tossed out half baked replies for the sake of doing so, except that is what they would have been, and as such, not worth adding. I prefer not to go off half cocked until after I have had time to work my mind around an idea.

I have been working the fld/DoT angles for months, which is why I am quick to comment on those, because the pros and cons, and flaws are largely self explanatory. Your Arcing shells, not so much. If it was such an important idea for you, perhaps you should have tried to carry your torch a little more. Since you didn't the implication is that it was not an idea you took seriously, either.

Well, I gathered up a list of my own posts (quoted since Page 10 where I adopted the alternative solution) and unfortunately it was too many for the forum.. "Number of quotes not matching.."

However, I did tally up the relavant quotes (not the ones that were unrelated, such as calling out people who did not actually read...)

Page 10: 2
Page 11: 1
Page 12: 1
Page 13: 2
Page 14: 1
Page 15: 3
Page 16: 1
Page 18: 2
<begin losing interest overall due to having to repeat myself over and over..>
Page 20: 1
<final F U to those who do not read what they comment on>
Page 24: 1 (Mentioned in post regarding Lore in mechanics.)

13 Posts in 14 pages.
Pick up the thread, carry the torch, take it seriously indeed...

(Nobody in '"my camp" supported your ideas whatsoever, that they stuck 100% to burst fire is not of my concern.)

You stuck to, and are still stuck to, 100% PPFLD mechanic, and are willing to make the ACs a nerfgun to do it.
Your suggestions:
RoF Nerf (Interesting logic: In the face of overwhelming clan potential DPS; reduce DPS of IS ACs.)
CoF nerf Stockrange+ (Also interesting logic: In the face of far greater clan ranges; add RNG to IS fall-off range.)
Ammo reduction (The perfect solution to a weapon weighing too much and taking up too much space by comparison; give it more baggage.)

My suggestions: Regardless of whether it is short-burst or Arc-ing damage.
RoF Buff
Projectile Speed Buff
---------------------------
EDIT: I think in order to live up to "the guy who just wants to nerf the IS" label that I have been granted, and go with your balancing.

Good night Bishop.

Edited by Livewyr, 19 June 2014 - 11:07 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Livewyr, on 19 June 2014 - 10:57 PM, said:

Well, I gathered up a list of my own posts (quoted since Page 10 where I adopted the alternative solution) and unfortunately it was too many for the forum.. "Number of quotes not matching.."

However, I did tally up the relavant quotes (not the ones that were unrelated, such as calling out people who did not actually read...)

Page 10: 2
Page 11: 1
Page 12: 1
Page 13: 2
Page 14: 1
Page 15: 3
Page 16: 1
Page 18: 2
<begin losing interest overall due to having to repeat myself over and over..>
Page 20: 1
<final F U to those who dare not read what they comment on>
Page 24: 1 (Mentioned in post regarding Lore in mechanics.)

13 Posts in 14 pages.
Pick up the thread, carry the torch, take it seriously indeed...

(Nobody in '"my camp" supported your ideas whatsoever, that they stuck 100% to burst fire is not of my concern.)

You stuck to, and are still stuck to, 100% PPFLD mechanic, and are willing to make the ACs a nerfgun to do it.
Your suggestions:
RoF Nerf (Interesting logic: In the face of overwhelming clan potential DPS; reduce DPS of IS ACs.)
CoF nerf Stockrange+ (Also interesting logic: In the face of far greater clan ranges; add RNG to IS fall-off range.)
Ammo reduction (The perfect solution to a weapon weighing too much and taking up too much space by comparison; give it more baggage.)

yup, that was revisiting your arc mechanic. Oh wait,,,, I thought that is what you wanted to discuss.

Obviously not. Duly noted.

Also your attempts to counter my ideas seem...myopic. You complain that FLD is too powerful, yet any ideas to compensate for that, SHORT of going to burst fire somehow adds too much baggage, ruins them because of Clan Range, DPS reduction ruins them..... if that is so, then to be blunt, FLD can't be that powerful, because you can't be all powerful and fragile as glass at the same time. (oh wait..you can, because that would be... a balancer....see the Gauss Rifle). Yet and still, if FLD is that powerful it shouldn't wither and die with a little baggage to carry.

Also with weapons the idea is called "balance" perhaps you have heard of it? You give and take.... a strong weapon might have a limited range to compensate for it. A fast firing weapon might do less damage. It's taking the sum total of multiple variables to compensate for the strengths that are the point of the weapons existence. Because none of them turn it into the only acceptable solution to your mind, DoT, they are not acceptable.

So either push your wonderful compromise, or stop pretending. Because from here, that is exactly what it looks like.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 19 June 2014 - 11:06 PM.

[Rampancy]

I mean I offered a fair compromise between FLD and spreading damage in the form of a very, very rapid burst and he essentially complained that medium mechs are still able to die to autocannons so it's not like he's even pretending anymore.

[Bishop Steiner]

Not quite ready to go that far, but close.

At some point what went from a debate, appears to have become someone jumping on their soapbox and whether or not he is willing to de-escalate or not, only he can say.

At the moment, he seems more interested in "winning the argument". Perhaps Livewyr, this is the place where you follow your own advice to me a dozen pages back (which I did follow) and step a way for a time.

[Cimarb]

RampancyTW, on 19 June 2014 - 11:07 PM, said:

I mean I offered a fair compromise between FLD and spreading damage in the form of a very, very rapid burst and he essentially complained that medium mechs are still able to die to autocannons so it's not like he's even pretending anymore.

Fair is subjective, because that burst is so rapid it may as well not even be a burst. Only in very extreme circumstances will the burst ever hit more than one section, making the dynamic pointless.

Anything within 0.1 seconds of something may as well be considered a singular item, unless there is some other form of dispersal, such as an LBX, SRM, or MG, which all spread in a cone as well.

Personally, I think the ACs should have a relatively small cone, like the MG but much smaller, and that would be enough to make the very short burst work. Until that CoF is implemented, though, anything 0.1 or smaller should be considered a single shell.

[Livewyr]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

yup, that was revisiting your arc mechanic. Oh wait,,,, I thought that is what you wanted to discuss.

Obviously not. Duly noted.

Gull dern, I only gave you 14 pages and at least 2 personal invitations..

Or did that momentarily escape you?

Soap Box, indeed.

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

Also your attempts to counter my ideas seem...myopic. You complain that FLD is too powerful, yet any ideas to compensate for that, SHORT of going to burst fire somehow adds too much baggage, ruins them because of Clan Range, DPS reduction ruins them..... if that is so, then to be blunt, FLD can't be that powerful, because you can't be all powerful and fragile as glass at the same time. (oh wait..you can, because that would be... a balancer....see the Gauss Rifle). Yet and still, if FLD is that powerful it shouldn't wither and die with a little baggage to carry.

This is where you are flat wrong and, I am guessing, why you have been wrong this entire time:
PPFLD is not "all powerful" to everyone, it is a minor threat to assaults and heavies (as they can take the hit, still have plenty of armor and react before being crippled), but it is the "all powerful" force when it comes to mediums. (That which does not have much armor and has most of it removed in the first shot, but does not have the speed to effectively evade such as lights do.)

PPFLD is annoying to assault mechs, it is an early match for mediums.

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

Also with weapons the idea is called "balance" perhaps you have heard of it? You give and take.... a strong weapon might have a limited range to compensate for it. A fast firing weapon might do less damage. It's taking the sum total of multiple variables to compensate for the strengths that are the point of the weapons existence. Because none of them turn it into the only acceptable solution to your mind, DoT, they are not acceptable.

A: I would just like to take a moment to point out this phrase "...the only acceptable solution to your mind, DoT,..." Now, class, what is logically wrong with this statement?

It is blatantly false!

Good Job, Billy.
-----------------------------------
B: They are not acceptable because PPFLD is not overly threatening to any assault mechs, so keeping PPFLD in return for making the weapon a nerfgun is unacceptable if you want the weapon to be useful.

Before your proposal (Status Quo): Medium mech match ender, annoyance to assaults.
After your proposal: Medium mech match ender, source of amusement to assaults.

Reducing the ammo, adding RNG beyond stock range, and reducing the RoF does not do anything about the 1-click devastation that mediums endure. (Reminder 70-100%+ of component armor removed in first shot.)
It does however make the weapon a joke in engagements with clan weapons.

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

So either push your wonderful compromise, or stop pretending. Because from here, that is exactly what it looks like.

A third invitation: Want to talk about it?

RampancyTW, on 19 June 2014 - 11:07 PM, said:

I mean I offered a fair compromise between FLD and spreading damage in the form of a very, very rapid burst and he essentially complained that medium mechs are still able to die to autocannons so it's not like he's even pretending anymore.

Oh that is cute, I did not immediately hop on board with your proposal (which was taking the OP overboard), and instead posted my concerns with it, so I am not even pretending...

Go home.

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2014 - 11:16 PM, said:

Not quite ready to go that far, but close.

At some point what went from a debate, appears to have become someone jumping on their soapbox and whether or not he is willing to de-escalate or not, only he can say.

At the moment, he seems more interested in "winning the argument". Perhaps Livewyr, this is the place where you follow your own advice to me a dozen pages back (which I did follow) and step a way for a time.

You have contributed.. what? Repeated, unchanged ideas...

Ignoring my (adopted) compromise for several pages only to "ask about it" when you get called out?

Edited by Livewyr, 20 June 2014 - 06:20 AM.

[Statius]

0.1 would not be so if the whole had ten ticks, say, for an AC20 and longer range. And for an AC2 or AC5, with a shorter burst would preserve near FLD, with the possibility of some spread on a moving target.

[Artgathan]

What if we gave IS the ability to control their bust length?

IE: like in most FPS games with automatic weapons, you empty your mag by holding down the trigger, but if you let up you'll stop firing. This would allow the IS more precise application of damage because they wouldn't "throw away" shots due to a mandatory burst length. In MWO makes each "shot" correspond to a "cassette" of X rounds. Each ton of AC ammo gives you 75/30/15/7 cassettes.

[Livewyr]

Statius, on 20 June 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

0.1 would not be so if the whole had ten ticks, say, for an AC20 and longer range. And for an AC2 or AC5, with a shorter burst would preserve near FLD, with the possibility of some spread on a moving target.

The spread would be moved arguably on a light mech, or something going over 120kph. (I mean, pull out a stopwatch and click it for just 0.10 seconds, and you will know what I am getting at.)

Something moving 80-110kph would still, more often than not, eat all of it in the same component.

----------------

That said, my initial proposal being 0-0.3, I could see moving it to 0-0.2
(AC2 = 1 bullet)
(AC5 = 2 bullets at 0.1)
(AC10 = 2 bullets at 0.15)
(AC20 = 3 bullets at 0.2)

That (AC20) is 1/3rd of the MPL beam duration, so it is possible for a medium to get at least one of the shells to land on a different component, which at 6-7 points could mean a lot.)

-------------------------------

(Arguing with myself: Even leaving AC5s at .1 would mean the meta still putting 30PP in one component...)

Starting to lean more towards damage arc anyways.
That or move AC5 and AC10 to the flat 0.2 or 0.3.

Edited by Livewyr, 20 June 2014 - 06:19 AM.

[BourbonFaucet]

Livewyr, I like the idea of IS AC's becoming burst as well. Before the clan update I had this idea in mind for the distribution:

AC/2: 4 Shells of .5 damage each
AC/5: 5 Shells of 1 damage each
AC/10: 5 Shells of 2 damage each
AC/20: 4 Shells of 5 damage each.

Every cannon has a .35 firing duration.

Of course, this setup is not likely viable anymore with the current game, but I wanted to share it with you.