Mizeur, on 15 July 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:
This analysis also needs to account for heat sinks, heat management, the C-ERPPC damage mechanic, and range. It would be useful to simulate several volleys, as well.
Because of heat, isn't the optimal Inner Sphere loadout 1xPPC, 1xERPPC? And likewise, isn't the optimal ammo load 3+ tons of ammo so that you get at least another 30 seconds of 25-30 point converged shots?
2xCERPPC also has a slight range bonus over the IS PPC+ERPPC combo but it's offset by the heat which limits the number of full strikes it can fire. The arc mechanic also makes it somewhat more forgiving for imprecise aim which can help destroy targeted components faster.
I chose the loadout of 2x ERPPC and 1x Gauss because that's the TBR's meta build and the argument Gyrok made is that the TBR is actually at a disadvantage compared to the IS 'Mechs. So, I loaded up the competitive IS 'Mechs similarly to the TBR in an attempt to make as direct a comparison as possible. The 2.5 tons was all I could fit into the TBR, so to make it fair that's all I put into the IS 'Mechs. The ON1-K actually needs to drop the half ton to fit an extra heatsink to get closer to the TBR (and it's still only 2.62), the CTF-3D has to drop an engine size or two to fit more ammo (while also sacrificing heat dissipation), etc. Even if the optimum meta for IS is 1x PPC, 1x ERPPC, and 1x Gauss, that doesn't change the tonnage and slot requirements or the heat dissipation but it does severely handicap the range. At the extreme ends, the TBR has the advantage in firepower. The TBR can choose to stay at those extremes because it's faster.
I also already accounted for the splash. That's the extra 10 points of damage in the Timberwolf's alpha. Those 10 points add up fast. That's another boon for the TBR. I believe I mentioned the splash rewarding imprecise aim, though that could have been in the unposted rough draft and I neglected to put it in the final one you see here. Range on Clan Gauss and ERPPC is identical to the IS counterparts.
I also did look at heat. Dissipation in the TBR was 3.11 with all skills unlocked. The best IS could muster while actually fitting the weapons, Endo-Steel, max armour, and the XL 325 was 3.27, all skills unlocked, on the HGN-733 after cramming in as many heatsinks as possible. Using the more realistic STD 325 build only let dissipation get up to 2.78 heat/sec. This is all because the TBR has a ludicrously sized engine for its class and it comes with 5 extra heatsinks already pre-installed.
As for being limited, are you calling the IS combo or the Clan combo limited? The C-ERPPC generates the same amount of heat as an IS ERPPC. That makes the IS PPC+2xERPPC combo at a disadvantage because of both range and damage potential without any cool ballistics to fall back on. Even still, three IS PPCs of any variety are only offering 30 damage, while the TBR with two C-ERPPC and a gauss rifle remains at 45 (35 pinpoint). Factor in the superior heat dissipation on the TBR, as well as the splash, and now you're
really hurting.
For the record, I really don't give a damn about "this or that is OP" or "I am t3h l33t play3r." I play mostly for fun and never run any sort of "meta" build. Gyrok's claiming to be an engineer just ruffled my feathers after flaunting empty, meaningless numbers that offered no basis for useful comparison and then demanding numbers from Adiuvo (who promptly shot a large hole right through Gyrok's numbers). I was compelled to make the comparison he should have made, and I set some controls so anybody can replicate those builds if she wants. We all know that numbers don't tell the whole story, but Gyrok said he won't accept anything but numbers. The numbers say that the TBR is better, the end. As far as can be quantified, the TBR has distinct advantages over IS 'Mechs within 5 tons in either direction that cannot be compensated for in equipment. What this suggests is that the TBR is the superior machine, no matter how slight, for anybody who is good with those 70- and 80-ton IS 'Mechs. We've seen some
results of the VTR-DS vs. the TBR and they seem to say otherwise, but the sample size is too small, the repetitions are not enough, and the skill gap is too unknown. The teams were also never counter-balanced in any way. Too much of the experiment was determined by the human factor. As such, I can't really make any meaningful speculation about the potential superiority of hardpoint placement on the DS over the TBR or what effects using IS AC/5s may have had. All I can say is that the TBR has definitive speed, weight, and engine durability advantages and that the pilots likely dropped the ball (or were short a man) on the matches they lost...and that's not a slight.
At the end of the day, player skill
is the most important factor in deciding winners and losers, Gyrok is correct there. Unfortunately for the rest of his arguments in this thread, it isn't the only factor. So, "L2P" is never an appropriate response, especially when dropping in public matches against players who are possibly just as skilled but want to use all of what the game is offering (i.e. the Arrow I bought with real money) and not simply game a broken system which, make no mistake, is just that. If skill was all it took, then whenever somebody asks "which 'Mechs are the most viable" the list would include every 'Mech in the game.
4
