15 replies to this topic

[ZeroKelvin]

I couldn't figure out if they are or not, can someone clarifiy?

[MadPanda]

I tried the highest targeting computer (VII) and it only increased the range of my medium pulse lasers from 400 to 430 which obviously isnt the 15% increase promised. The other things like crit chance increase etc. are really hard to tell. Overall the only benefit I can literally see is the zoom increase.

[Khobai]

Quote

I tried the highest targeting computer (VII) and it only increased the range of my medium pulse lasers from 400 to 430 which obviously isnt the 15% increase promised. The other things like crit chance increase etc. are really hard to tell. Overall the only benefit I can literally see is the zoom increase.

targeting computer level 7 only gives +7.5% range increase

they never promised 15%. they said the values were subject to change. and they changed them.

[MadPanda]

Khobai, on 20 July 2014 - 05:09 AM, said:

targeting computer level 7 only gives +7.5% range increase

they never promised 15%. they said the values were subject to change. and they changed them.

Well I looked up the values from the Command Chair forum thread, so I guess they really should update it since it is also the first thing google finds. They are themselves spreading misinformation .

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

MadPanda, on 20 July 2014 - 05:14 AM, said:

Well I looked up the values from the Command Chair forum thread, so I guess they really should update it since it is also the first thing google finds. They are themselves spreading misinformation .

It's pgi...what do you expect... a straight answer right off the bat?

[Khobai]

the command chair posts says the values were subject to change. and they put the changes in the patch notes a month ago. I dont see the issue here.

[Mudhutwarrior]

The command console is three tons of useless. Nuff said.

[Xeno Phalcon]

I can't speak for command console but targeting computers I broke down the ranks in my warhawk thread:

Quote

The small ones arnt bad for the added crit (minor but still handy) and the targeting data. Main use for tac comps on lasers is the addition of crit, though the range can be fun to play around with it not all together practical.

the mk 1 is one slot, one crit and gives you

+7.25% crit
+2.25% beam range
+4.50% projectile speed
+4.50% hud zoom
+2.25% sensor range
-22.50% targeting time

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

Ranks 2, 3 and 4 all give the same incremental boosts as fallows; (per rank increase)

+1% crit
+1% beam range
+2% projectile speed
+2% hud zoom
+1% sensor range
-10% targeting time

IE the rank IV is +3% crit on top of the original +7.25% so the rank IV has a total of +10.25% crit

------

From there the larger tactical computers give less per ton at the following rate per rank

+0.75 crit
+0.75% beam range
+1.50% projectile speed
+1.50% hud zoom
+0.75% sensor range
-7.50% targeting time

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

In the end the rank 1 has the most bang for its buck, while the 2, 3 and 4 are still respectable, then the 5 , 6 and 7 ranks are the least efficient.

[Angel of Annihilation]

I was just going to post this very same question.

I have recently been experimenting with a build that mounts a MK V targeting computer. The only noticeable difference is that my ER MLs go from 450m to 477m, hardly worth the 5 ton weight in and of itself. All the other benefits are subjective at best. I mean I have no clue if the 11% crit rating is allowing me to get alot more crits or not and the lock on times may or may not be faster but I hardly notice in the heat of combat.

Therefore I was hoping to get some input from other players and see what they thought.

Here is the thing though. Some of these computers are rather bulky and heavy. Mk V is 5 tons, 5 slots. Mk VII is 7 tons and 7 slots. The way I see it is that for them to be viable, they have to be able to replace a pretty major weapon. That being the case, are the providing the same benefit as a couple of med lasers, large larger. AC/5 or PPC would? If not, then they become a hard sell.

Right now the only reason I have the Mk V mounted is because the lovely restrictions of not having dynamic slots has me in a position where I could replace the MK V with 2 DHS but end up with 3 tons unused and nothing else that will fit in the 4, one off crit slots I have located in 4 seperate sections of the mech. The Mk V allows me to fill out the weight but I just have to ask myself if mounting the 2 extra DHS and behing short on weight by 3 tons wouldn't have more benefit.

Note: I would be nice if you got some type of bonus for being underweight, like maybe a few more kph or slightly better hill climb.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 20 July 2014 - 05:26 AM.

[ZeroKelvin]

So CC is still doing nothing?

[Livewyr]

ZeroKelvin, on 20 July 2014 - 05:36 AM, said:

So CC is still doing nothing?

Technically, yes, it is doing something.
Effectively, No, it does not do anything.

[Willard Phule]

I don't know about anyone else, but it's working well for me.

I've been driving a Timberwolf with 2 CERLLs, 4 CERMLs and a TC5. I've been popping components left and right with it.

I played around with them at first, using all of them except for the TC7, and I seems to me that you really don't notice any difference until you start loading a TC4 or better....then...it's absolutely worth it.

[Undercover Brother]

I honestly can't see a difference with the Command Console...

As for the T.C.s, well, I SUCK as a player. But I've found that putting even an Mk1 TC in my Clan mechs, my DMG goes up by an astonishing 200. Considering I average 350 to 400 DMG in the exact same builds (and comparable I.S. builds), and with even the base TC I'm jumping to an average of 600 DMG per match (and it seems to be from popping crits), I'm happy. Now, whether or not the TC Mk7 bumps me even higher, I don't know. Just like with the I.S. Assaults, I am a complete waste when it comes to CLAN Assaults, and hardly drop 300 DMG per match before I'm LRM blasted or zerg rushed and killed. To me, there's no noticeable difference between the Mk1 and the Mk7, except for a lot of weight and space.

[Xarian]

I use a TC mk5 in my laser-heavy TBR build (mix of cERLL and cERML), as well as my laser-heavy or UAC-heavy DWF builds. My laser-heavy SCR builds use a mk2 or mk3 depending on my mood.

I'm not a big TBR guy, but my laser-heavy TBR build got a huge boost out of using the targeting computer. The first test run on the build mentioned above got me 850 damage and 6 kills - I was focusing on armor-stripped locations, and the critical bonus combined with the extra range was astonishing.

The major thing about the beam range isn't the extra 30m or whatever of the optimal range, but how it affects damage falloff at other ranges. For example, at 675 meters a cERML does 50% of its maximum damage (3.5). With a TC mk5, however, you get 6% more beam range, allowing you to do 58.5% of your maximum damage (4.1). This is a 17% increase.

You also get 11% bonus crit. I'm not sure if this additive or multiplicative, but if it's multiplicative (which it probably is, as additive would give your lasers the same crit rates as machineguns) then you're getting 6.9% more overall damage against armor-stripped locations (normally you'd get 62% bonus damage from crits, which increases by 11% to 68.82% bonus damage). Combined with the range buff mentioned above, this works together to give you 30% improved damage at that range (675 meters).

The reason for the apparently reduced effectiveness at higher versions is because these bonuses are all multiplicative. You don't just get more crit, or more range - you get all of them, and they multiply together to become even more effective as you rank up the computer.

Here's the breakdown, looking only at crit% and beam range, using 675 m with cERML:
mk - armored damage bonus % - unarmored damage bonus %
1 - 6.6 - 9.7
2 - 9.4 - 13.0
3 - 12.2 - 16.3
4 - 15.0 - 19.6
5 - 17.0 - 22.0
6 - 19.0 - 24.4
7 - 20.9 - 26.8

If you take those numbers above and divide each one by its tonnage, you notice that the TC mk7 is only 45% as effective per-ton than the TC mk1 (or 40% when you consider unarmored damage). When you factor in crit slots too, this is even worse.

I'm going to assume the following:
1 crit slot is worth 0 tons in "effectiveness"
7 crit slots is worth 3 tons in "effectiveness"
2-6 crit slots are worth (#-1)/2 tons in "effectiveness"

When you throw that in, the mk7 drops down to being only 32% as effective as the mk1 (28% for unarmored damage). To balance this, I am going to use the mk3 as a benchmark - it's near the middle of the pack in terms of effectiveness, but slightly favors the "more effective" side (though nowhere near as much as the mk1 or mk2). Using the above conversion of crit slots to "effectiveness", and choosing crit slots to give you reasonable numbers, you get the following:

mk - tons - crit slots
1 - 2.3 - 1 (if you really insist on making the mk1 1 crit slot; I think it'd be much better for balance if it took 2)
1 - 1.8 - 2
2 - 2.6 - 2
3 - 3.0 - 3
4 - 3.8 - 3
5 - 4.0 - 4
6 - 4.6 - 4
7 - 4.7 - 5

Edited by Xarian, 20 July 2014 - 10:07 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Well it seems some people are getting some use out of the TC. For me I don't see any huge jumps in damage whether I use them or not.

I guess the only way to find out is for someone who likes statisical analysis to play 50 matches with and 50 without and then total up the the damage and total components destroyed numbers.

One thing I did notice what a couple of Kills that seemed way too easy when I was using the TC though this happened only 1 or 2 times. Seems like I would fire at a CT that was maybe red armor and the enemy would just explode. I am thinking perhaps, what I might have been seeing is as soon as the armor went, I managed a triple crit to the CT which would often take out the engine and cause the mech to die, even if it had a ton of internal structure left.

So maybe it is useful after all but the issue is, I have no hard numbers to back it up so it might have been just me imagining things.

[Willard Phule]

Viktor Drake, on 20 July 2014 - 09:33 AM, said:

Well it seems some people are getting some use out of the TC. For me I don't see any huge jumps in damage whether I use them or not.

I guess the only way to find out is for someone who likes statisical analysis to play 50 matches with and 50 without and then total up the the damage and total components destroyed numbers.

One thing I did notice what a couple of Kills that seemed way too easy when I was using the TC though this happened only 1 or 2 times. Seems like I would fire at a CT that was maybe red armor and the enemy would just explode. I am thinking perhaps, what I might have been seeing is as soon as the armor went, I managed a triple crit to the CT which would often take out the engine and cause the mech to die, even if it had a ton of internal structure left.

So maybe it is useful after all but the issue is, I have no hard numbers to back it up so it might have been just me imagining things.

It's not so much a drastic increase in damage as it is a drastic increase in components destroyed...and that increases your survivability.

You try to exfiltrate the enemy's lines only to run straight into an enemy Assault. The TC gives you a better chance of tearing off an arm or torso on your way out...thus preventing you from dying immediately. At least, that's how it's been working for me.