66 replies to this topic

[Carrie Harder]

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

Technically, all Shadowhawks have 1 ballistic hardpoint stock. It's because of PGI that it has 3.

Such inflations are necessary to help create some sort of variant flavor (although to be fair, PGI fails at this sometimes...). It can also help prevent situations where one variant just gets blatantly more hardpoints than another (although again, this hasn't always succeeded in MWO...).

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

Now that said 3 AC/2s are great right now. Increase their firing speed and you'll have a hard time carrying the ammo and you'll spend all your time triggering ghost heat.

What is the point of a ballistic buff if you can't use it?

If you plan to use a ballistic quirk, a more useful one might be extended range due to "accuracy" or "stability" of the torso mounted weapons.

Also, by the same logic a Dire Wolf with 6 ballistic slots should be buffed where one using only 2 ballistic slots should be left the same or nerfed.

o.o; That doesn't make much sense at all.

3 AC/2s are not "great" right now. Maybe great for inflating damage scores, but not quite so great for killing things. For your proposed range quirk, that would not help very much for the majority of weapons. The AC/2 in particular already does such low damage that even a modest Large Laser does almost twice its damage at the AC/2s optimal range.

The Dire Whale is a bad example, because the Dire Whale actually has more than enough tonnage to make very good use of all 6 ballistic slots. The loadout climate for mediums isn't quite the same as the world of mediums...

Edited by Carrie Harder, 02 September 2014 - 01:36 PM.

[Xyroc]

Bump this ... dont forget the HGN too!

[Koniving]

Carrie Harder, on 02 September 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

Such inflations are necessary to help create some sort of variant flavor (although to be fair, PGI fails at this sometimes...). It can also help prevent situations where one variant just gets blatantly more hardpoints than another (although again, this hasn't always succeeded in MWO...).



3 AC/2s are not "great" right now. Maybe great for inflating damage scores, but not quite so great for killing things. For your proposed range quirk, that would not help very much for the majority of weapons. The AC/2 in particular already does such low damage that even a modest Large Laser does almost twice its damage at the AC/2s optimal range.

The Dire Whale is a bad example, because the Dire Whale actually has more than enough tonnage to make very good use of all 6 ballistic slots. The loadout climate for mediums isn't quite the same as the world of mediums...

Perhaps. However AC/2s aren't supposed to be majorly effective unless boated (just a canon fact)

But watch this. With the original form of ghost heat they were perfectly usable on a 50 ton mech like the Hunchback and the triple AC/2s were quite effective even with rapid chain fire. (This macro slowed them down, the much faster rate is actually 'regular' fire). Skip to about 8 minutes for actual combat.


It's incredibly easy and you could do it with the Centurion CN9-AH before PGI eliminated it for being OP and too similar to the Yen Lo Wang. (3 AC/2 was nasty!)

If you've got trouble doing it with a Shadowhawk you're simply doing it wrong.

What really has the problem, in my opinion, are the single ballistic slots. What if you had an AC/2 there or an AC/5? What kind of use is just one AC/5 in MWO?

The meta ones are the 2H and the twin ballistic ones because twin UAC/5s. A ballistic quirk will only encourage that on the 2H.

The Dire Wolf is a prime example because of that. It's the exact same problem on a larger scale to get the message across.

Just to note: The Dragon before the ghost heat.


Dragon after the nerf.


Dragons right now... shut down in 3 seconds with 3 AC/2s fired like that and it's only a 10% increase without elites. Fired with all 3 at once you shutdown in 5 to 7 seconds (varies for some reason).

Currently, if you have an elited mech (+5% faster firing ) and you tack on 3 AC/2s on a Shadowhawk 2H with a 5% increase and congratulations, you just killed any possibility of a 3 AC/2 build unless permanently left with basics only.

And a 10% increase? It wouldn't even last 3 seconds of fire without nearly killing itself in ghost heat.

Meaning the only thing that could use it are twin AC/5 builds, twin UAC/5 builds and AC/10 and AC/20 builds.

Why buff that?

On the other hand... that poor 1 ballistic Shadowhawk needs a reason to carry ballistics. On the 2D and 2D2 I dont' carry any ballistic weapons. It's impossible to have sufficient firepower to warrant it and still use my missile slots. I mean seriously what's 1 AC/5 or AC/10 gonna do for me?

Edited by Koniving, 02 September 2014 - 02:01 PM.

[Carrie Harder]

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

Perhaps. However AC/2s aren't supposed to be majorly effective unless boated (just a canon fact)

Why not? The thing takes up 6 tons before ammo is even counted. A modest Medium Laser is highly effective and only costs a fraction of that (1 ton) and doesn't even need ammo. Many weapons less than 6 tons, such as SRMs and other energy weapons, are also effective without mass-boating. Why should weapons that require a (relatively) high tonnage sacrifice only be decent when boated? Seems kind of arbitrary.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

But watch this. With the original form of ghost heat they were perfectly usable on a 50 ton mech like the Hunchback and the triple AC/2s were quite effective even with rapid chain fire. (This macro slowed them down, the much faster rate is actually 'regular' fire). Skip to about 8 minutes for actual combat.
-video-

It's incredibly easy and you could do it with the Centurion CN9-AH before PGI eliminated it for being OP and too similar to the Yen Lo Wang. (3 AC/2 was nasty!)

If you've got trouble doing it with a Shadowhawk you're simply doing it wrong.

The Shadow Hawk as a whole is an amazing robot, but the 2H in particular is a sub-par variant because its low on energy and has a hard time making use of the ballistics that it gains in place of those energy. And if you use less than 3 ballistics, then there's no point to using the 2H in the first place (use a different variant). It's not the worst medium by any stretch, but it certainly is not on the level of the other Shads.

PS: Your video seems a bit...outdated. The gun used to have more dakka back then.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

What really has the problem, in my opinion, are the single ballistic slots. What if you had an AC/2 there or an AC/5? What kind of use is just one AC/5 in MWO?

The meta ones are the 2H and the twin ballistic ones because twin UAC/5s. A ballistic quirk will only encourage that on the 2H.

The 2H isn't the Shadow Hawk's meta variant. The 5M is, because it can do [ER]PPC + AC/10 or 2 AC/5. Or at least, that would be the meta variant before recent "balancing" changes. Maybe the medium mech meta shifted to SRMs by now, which would boost up the 2D2's status (cuz 4 missiles). The 5M can also usually be configured for more roles in general. The 2H is mostly relegated to a troll-ish variant that gives a spacebucks bonus for Phoenix buyers.

PS: 2 UAC/5 is not a good Shadow Hawk loadout because it requires a STD engine. STD engines on Shads are not utilizing the chassis' full potential, because the mech has good enough hitboxes to survive well with an XL and mediums can use all the tonnage they can get. The risk/reward curve leans strongly towards XL engines on Shaq Hawks.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

The Dire Wolf is a prime example because of that. It's the exact same problem on a larger scale to get the message across.

Just to note: The Dragon before the ghost heat.
-video-

Dragon after the nerf.
-video

Dragons right now... shut down in 3 seconds with 3 AC/2s fired like that and it's only a 10% increase without elites. Fired with all 3 at once you shutdown in 5 to 7 seconds (varies for some reason).

Currently, if you have an elited mech (+5% faster firing ) and you tack on 3 AC/2s on a Shadowhawk 2H with a 5% increase and congratulations, you just killed any possibility of a 3 AC/2 build unless permanently left with basics only.

And a 10% increase? It wouldn't even last 3 seconds of fire without nearly killing itself in ghost heat.

Meaning the only thing that could use it are twin AC/5 builds, twin UAC/5 builds and AC/10 and AC/20 builds.

Why buff that?

That's more of a heat problem than a problem with a quirk. Speaking of which, a ballistic heat reduction quirk in place of that might be workable, provided that the AC/2 in general (used on any robot) got some kind of loving.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

On the other hand... that poor 1 ballistic Shadowhawk needs a reason to carry ballistics. On the 2D and 2D2 I dont' carry any ballistic weapons. It's impossible to have sufficient firepower to warrant it and still use my missile slots. I mean seriously what's 1 AC/5 or AC/10 gonna do for me?

The 2D2 and 2D are not "poor." Load up a UAC/5 or AC/10 on your shoulder and you're good to go, and can carry some MLas and SRMs/SSRMs. A lone AC/10 isn't amazing, but it's passable, especially when mounted so high up. A lone UAC/5 is quite good, at least until the RNG gods decide you haven't made your daily sacrifice to them.

As an example of a loadout I used to run:
SHD-2D2
Might not work as well with the SSRM damage reduction in present-day, though (I used this build while grinding them, when the Phoenix pack first came out). The 2D can be configured similarly, although it can have heat issues due to the third laser.

Edited by Carrie Harder, 02 September 2014 - 02:21 PM.

[Koniving]

Carrie Harder, on 02 September 2014 - 02:17 PM, said:

Why not? The thing takes up 6 tons before ammo is even counted. A modest Medium Laser is highly effective and only costs a fraction of that (1 ton) and doesn't even need ammo. Many weapons less than 6 tons, such as SRMs and other energy weapons, are also effective without mass-boating. Why should weapons that require a (relatively) high tonnage sacrifice only be decent when boated? Seems kind of arbitrary.

Medium laser is also only decent when boated. Remeber that in tabletop you get one use every 10 seconds. Keep in mind you can only fire 3 ML safely with a 10 SHS mech. You can fire 10 AC/2s safely with the same mech.

An AC/2 is lore proper a 25mm to 90mm cannon that supposedly has a shot count of 4 (for an 80mm) and to 10 (30mm; no idea what the 25mm is as I haven't found an example of it yet) and is designed to blast through concrete walls and lightly armored vehicles as a means of clearing out ground forces in support of a larger machine. AC/2s through AC/10s are supposed to be able to run normally on machines (like tanks) that don't even have heatsinks without causing much if any problem at all. (Yes. On a ZERO heatsink machine).

A machine gun is 20mm to 25mm. The MG is exactly as effective but at significantly less range and with a higher shot count.

Keep in mind the ammo in BT is a use count not a shot count. It's not 45 shots for an AC/2 it's 45 uses of 180 shots to 450 shots per ton. The MG isn't 200 shots but (they go up to 100 shots per second) up to 20,000 rounds per ton. But both only do 2 damage in 10 seconds. Firing non-stop with an AC/2 lore proper would generate 1 heat. Only 1 heat, for 10 seconds of firing.

---
Lore reasons aside...

An AC/2 is actually DRASTICALLY superior to an ML.
Currently an AC/2 does 28 to 30 damage at 10 seconds (with elites it's actually 34).
An ML only does 15 damage in 10 seconds. Elites or not, as it isn't fast enough to mean anything.

So an AC/2 is vastly superior already when it shouldn't be.

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

Now that said...
Lets say I'm in a Shadowhawk 2D or 2D2. Okay so I've got an AC/10 or an AC/5 so I can still use my missiles with a 5% faster firing rate (EliteS)
You're in a 2H. You have twin UAC/5s or a UAC/5 and AC/5 and 15% faster firing rate (5% from elites and 10% from a ballistic quirk). AC/2s are worthless and the possibility of ever using them was destroyed by the quirk. Thus UAC/5 and AC/5 are the only real way to go.

I can do between 35 damage in 9.48 seconds (AC/5) and 50 damage in 9.52 seconds (AC/10). That's with my elite 5% faster firing rate.

You with your 15% due to 10% faster ballistics and 5% faster elite....
Are doing at minimum 80 damage in 9.877 seconds and up to 120 damage in 9.877 seconds provided you don't make the UAC/5 jam.

In what way is that fair? If anything you made the 2D2 and the 2D rather worthless. I realize David decided "the 2H is the premier battlemech for boating ACs" but why does that let your mech be so much more superior to mine?

Now, on the other hand, the 2H has very few, almost unusable missile slots. The 2D2 and 2D have a lot of missiles. If we use the same logic, now we created LRM boats from hell spamming endless streams of LRM-5s that wear down your AMS in seconds and blind you far worse than an A1 ever could.

How is that fair either?

I do see where you are coming from, but I also see the bigger picture. I see mechs obsoleting other mechs entirely. Using "it has more hardpoints so buff them" as the basis for quirks is as short sighted as ghost heat, "It'll fix boating but we'll leave lots of exploits for variety.... wait... people are making things worse. This wasn't supposed to happen!"

But.. What if that one AC/5 to AC/10 could do 40 to 50 in 10 seconds (I kid you not, the AC/10 with a 15% faster speed buff won't get out 6 shots until after 10 seconds, so it's a very soft buff that makes it only slightly useful instead of massively exploitable).

The ultimate idea of a quirk system is to make one variant more useful without obsoleting all other variants.

Have you noticed on Clan mechs, the more hardpoints of this type you have the SLOWER your reload/recharge time is? A Dire Wolf's two arms stack to give it a 15% slower firing speed.
Having too many ballistic hardpoints gives you a slower reload.
Having too many of this gives you slower... slower... slower.

You're wanting faster. Well the Clan mechs get faster reload/recharge times for having less. Only 1 energy hardpoint instead of 2? Faster recharge time! Only 1 ballistic? Faster reload time!

It isn't only smart (to think I'm actually praising something this developer has done.... I need my head examined) but it encourages the use of "less" rather than "more" without blatantly outdoing "more."

Edited by Koniving, 02 September 2014 - 02:51 PM.

[Carrie Harder]

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Medium laser is also only decent when boated. Remeber that in tabletop you get one use every 10 seconds. Keep in mind you can only fire 3 ML safely with a 10 SHS mech. You can fire 10 AC/2s safely with the same mech.

An AC/2 is lore proper a 25mm to 90mm cannon that supposedly has a shot count of 4 (for an 80mm) and to 10 (30mm; no idea what the 25mm is as I haven't found an example of it yet) and is designed to blast through concrete walls and lightly armored vehicles as a means of clearing out ground forces in support of a larger machine.
A machine gun is 20mm to 25mm. The MG is exactly as effective but at significantly less range and with a higher shot count.

Keep in mind the ammo in BT is a use count not a shot count. It's not 45 shots for an AC/2 it's 45 uses of 180 shots to 450 shots per ton. The MG isn't 200 shots but (they go up to 100 shots per second) up to 20,000 rounds per ton. But both only do 2 damage in 10 seconds. Firing non-stop with an AC/2 lore proper would generate 1 heat. Only 1 heat, for 10 seconds of firing.

A Medium Laser used alone is orders of magnitude more decent than a lone AC/2, not just because of damage but because it requires way less tonnage. When discussing weapon balance, the raw damage/heat/whatever numbers aren't the only thing that matters...the "ratios" or "efficiency" also matter.

As an example, one might say that an AC/10 and a PPC were equal in Tabletop. After all, they both do 10 damage, right? But the PPC pays far less tonnage to achieve that damage, and doesn't need ammo, and gets a bit more range. And before you say heat, remember that you have 10 heatsinks built into your engine for "free" and can use the PPC's tonnage savings on even more sinks. Or even upgrade to DHS to make the deal even better. In the end, the PPC is the superior gun in just about every situation, except for being a bit less accurate in close range (min range), but that can be solved by using your spare tonnage to mount backup weapons.

Back to the AC/2, being able to fire 10 of them on a mech with 10 SHS isn't an "advantage." 10 of them requires 60 freaking tons and barely does more damage than a single 7 ton PPC. The tonnage you pay for the AC/2 in TT is disproportionally greater than the rewards you get for doing so. In others words, it's a high risk low reward weapon.

But, I'm not sure why we're even getting into the TT stats in the first place, given that we're playing a real time game that should have the goal of being balanced. Don't wanna derail this too hard.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

---
Lore reasons aside...

An AC/2 is actually DRASTICALLY superior to an ML.
Currently an AC/2 does 28 to 30 damage at 10 seconds (with elites it's actually 34).
An ML only does 15 damage in 10 seconds. Elites or not, as it isn't fast enough to mean anything.

So an AC/2 is vastly superior already when it shouldn't be.

Damage per 10 seconds is a fairly meaningless stat to go off of in a real-time game. DP10S assumes that both the target and the shooter stay exposed for an entire 10 consecutive seconds. In MWO, that very rarely happens, only during periodic brawls that break out later in the match. If I poke my head up just long enough to fire an ERLL at you (1 second), you will have dealt roughly 4 damage with that AC/2 and I will have dealt up to 9 damage (depending on my aim). So even though it's rated at more "DP10S," you actually did way less than that number because I don't have to sit in your crosshairs for 10 seconds and take it.

As for the overall utility of the weapon, I touched on this in the previous quote area. It's not just the total damage that matters, it's also about what you pay to get that damage. The ML is far, far more economical because it's just 1 ton and doesn't need ammo. It can be squeezed onto just about any mech in the game and can compliment pretty much any playstyle. It really is the workhorse of the Inner Sphere.


EDIT: I don't know why we even got to comparing it to the ML in the first place, though. I'm comparing it to itself right now. It just doesn't feel like the rewards I get are equal to the tonnage risks I pay for it. High risk, low reward. It's not totally "useless" but it certainly isn't "good" by any stretch of the imagination.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

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

Now that said...
Lets say I'm in a Shadowhawk 2D or 2D2. Okay so I've got an AC/10 or an AC/5 so I can still use my missiles with a 5% faster firing rate (EliteS)
You're in a 2H. You have twin UAC/5s or a UAC/5 and AC/5 and 15% faster firing rate (5% from elites and 10% from a ballistic quirk). AC/2s are worthless and the possibility of ever using them was destroyed by the quirk. Thus UAC/5 and AC/5 are the only real way to go.

I can do between 35 damage in 9.48 seconds (AC/5) and 50 damage in 9.52 seconds (AC/10). That's with my elite 5% faster firing rate.

You with your 15% due to 10% faster ballistics and 5% faster elite....
Are doing at minimum 80 damage in 9.877 seconds and up to 120 damage in 9.877 seconds provided you don't make the UAC/5 jam.

In what way is that fair? If anything you made the 2D2 and the 2D rather worthless. I realize David decided "the 2H is the premier battlemech for boating ACs" but why does that let your mech be so much more superior to mine?

The 2H is only better at one specific role (AC boating). The 2D2 and 2D are both more effective for using energy weapons, and the 2D2 is better at missile boating.

For your "damage per 10 seconds" breakdown see my previous quote area. You don't need to stay exposed for 10 consecutive seconds during combat, especially not in a medium mech. Most of the time, you'll be taking one shot or a few shots, and then ducking back behind whatever cover you have nearby.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Now, on the other hand, the 2H has very few, almost unusable missile slots. The 2D2 and 2D have a lot of missiles. If we use the same logic, now we created LRM boats from hell spamming endless streams of LRM-5s that wear down your AMS in seconds and blind you far worse than an A1 ever could.

How is that fair either?

The 2D and 2H actually have the same number of missile slots, the difference is the 2H rarely has the tonnage to use them because of its greater emphasis on ballistics. Lurm spam is an entirely different topic than this discussion here. Also, the 2D2 and 2D are already very good variants, so they arguably don't even need any quirk buffs. Maybe I could see some kind of modest laser heat reduction on the 2D (all 3 lasers are arm mounted, which to me points towards a brawling type of role), but that's about it.

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

I do see where you are coming from, but I also see the bigger picture. I see mechs obsoleting other mechs entirely. Using "it has more hardpoints so buff them" as the basis for quirks is as short sighted as ghost heat, "It'll fix boating but we'll leave lots of exploits for variety.... wait... people are making things worse. This wasn't supposed to happen!"

But.. What if that one AC/5 to AC/10 could do 40 to 50 in 10 seconds (I kid you not, the AC/10 with a 15% faster speed buff won't get out 6 shots until after 10 seconds, so it's a very soft buff that makes it only slightly useful instead of massively exploitable).

And that's the thing, some kind of ballistic quirk for the 2H wouldn't obsolete the other Shads. The other Shads all get more energy hardpoints, and in the case of the 2D2 it also gets one more missile.


But if you really must object to it that much, how the heck is the 2H supposed to compare to the other Shads? Remember, the single and only positive attribute it has over the others is that third ballistic slot. And the most you can get with that is a triplet of AC/2, which isn't even that good (decent DPS =/= good killing efficiency). Using them on MGs is funny but not very effective. If you use only 1 or 2 ballistics on the 2H, it's basically worse than the others. That dakka dakka is all he's got, unless you've got a better idea (queue to insert other idea here, if applicable). Currently, the 2H is inferior to the other Shads in all respects excluding ballistic hardpoints...which can barely be used effectively with our current tech available.

If we had Light ACs ahead of the timeline, this issue would be completely solved (as mentioned earlier), but unfortunately dat timeline is still enforced. No fun allowed.

Edited by Carrie Harder, 02 September 2014 - 03:27 PM.

[Ultimax]

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Medium laser is also only decent when boated.

1 x AC 2 + 3 Tons Ammo = 9 Tons for 2.78 DPS
Alpha potential = 2


3 x MLAS + 3 Tons DHS (+10 in the engine) = 3.78 DPS - overheat in 5:27 (which is basically never).
Alpha potential = 15

Unless we consider "3" medium lasers to equal "boating".

The only thing the AC 2 wins at is range in this comparison, but really who cares?

Range:


1 x AC 2 + 3 Tons Ammo = 9 Tons for 2.78 DPS
Alpha potential = 2

1x ER LLAS + 4 Tons DHS (+10 in the engine) = 2.12 DPS
Alpha potential = 9
Overheat = never


I know which of those choices I'd go with.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 02 September 2014 - 03:27 PM.

[Deathlike]

Guys, guys, guys...

The "competitive groups" have deemed Victors are fine as is.

Paul listens to such groups and as such, will not change the Victor anytime soon.

Book of Paul said:

The competitive groups have spoken.
We will stay the course.

[Kjudoon]

M0rpHeu5, on 19 August 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

With the JJ nerf i don't think it needs to move with the same agility as an Atlas

till fixed, they stay shelved.

[Jazzbandit1313]

JagdFlanker, on 19 August 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

what? the Victor was never nerfed. what are you guys talking about? quit making things up

I was about to go grab this screenshot before i scrolled down. lol

[Mystere]

Sephlock, on 19 August 2014 - 11:17 AM, said:

First buff the Highlander .

No, first make the Awesome really worthy of the name.

[Ultimax]

Koniving, on 02 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Encyclopedia Konivinga: Vol 30

Kon, dude.

Look I feel like you put a ton of effort into your posts, and even when I disagree with you I respect the effort & thought that you clearly put into them.

But I really can't digest a massive wall of text every other post.



"KISS" principle is something I learned to stick to on gaming forums a long while ago when I wanted my ideas to gain traction.



Anyway, I think your 30 heat cap system doesn't take into consideration enough things.

I can build several very large, very deadly, non-SRM/LRM based alphas that will see me well under the 30 heat mark.


A system like you propose looks very restrictive, forces players to try and "DPS" more but "DPSing" is pretty derpy.


So weapons and builds that are forced into DPS, will simply lose out to whatever clever way to circumvent your system players would come up with - which I have full confidence they would do.

[Carrie Harder]

Ultimatum X, on 02 September 2014 - 08:01 PM, said:

Kon, dude.

Look I feel like you put a ton of effort into your posts, and even when I disagree with you I respect the effort & thought that you clearly put into them.

But I really can't digest a massive wall of text every other post.



"KISS" principle is something I learned to stick to on gaming forums a long while ago when I wanted my ideas to gain traction.



Anyway, I think your 30 heat cap system doesn't take into consideration enough things.

I can build several very large, very deadly, non-SRM/LRM based alphas that will see me well under the 30 heat mark.


A system like you propose looks very restrictive, forces players to try and "DPS" more but "DPSing" is pretty derpy.


So weapons and builds that are forced into DPS, will simply lose out to whatever clever way to circumvent your system players would come up with - which I have full confidence they would do.

*Cough cough Gauss Rifle cough cough*

Edited by Carrie Harder, 02 September 2014 - 08:03 PM.

[Ultimax]

Carrie Harder, on 02 September 2014 - 08:03 PM, said:

*Cough cough Gauss Rifle cough cough*

Clan (using current values, since he's working off those)
Gauss x 2 + CLPL x 2 = 50 point alpha. 18 heat.
Gauss x2 + CLPL x2 + 2x CERMLAS = 64ish Alpha. 26 Heat.
Gauss + 2x CLPL + 2x CERMLAS = 50 point alpha. 26 heat.


IS
Gauss + 3x ER LLAS/LLAS (LOL!) = 42 point alpha. 30.5/24.5 Heat. (3x ERs + Gauss would be over 30, my bad)
Gauss +2x PPC = 35 Point Alpha. 20 Heat.

There are more, just a few examples.


Or do we just keep hammer nerfing every weapon until people can survive without trying to keep themselves alive?

Edited by Ultimatum X, 02 September 2014 - 08:17 PM.

[Sovery_Simple]

Three things

1: Kon, you don't understand medium mechs, just no. Go back to heavies and assaults, you're doing fine there if my memory serves. Damage / Tonnage ratios are in strict play for a medium mech, and an AC2, even three of them, is piss poor for a medium mech.

2. Don't compare clan part bonuses to IS bonuses, they're apples and oranges. A shad 2h can't wake up tomorrow and go "You know, I'm feeling minnesota today" and strip off all of his 2h segments for some extra energy hardpoints, or some extra missiles. He's stuck with the ballistics, where a direwolf could go "I want all of the dakka in this match to fit inside my chassis" and load up some franken-variety of modules and carry three jagers per arm or such.

3. As a HBK pilot, don't compare the G with the H, and act like the G is the weaker variant. The H has two extra energy slots in the RT instead of the 2 ballistic slots in the G's RT. A medium mech can readily use those 2 energy slots, wheras 3 ballistic slots come up quite lacking for the tonnage a HBK can play with (insert 3 ac2's, with an even stricter limit than the 55 ton shad.)
In fact, the reason the HBK-H runs "so hot" is because he can actually -use- his extra hardpoints on two more MLas, thus causing him to generate additional heat in normal play.
There is a reason HBK pilots advised all newcomers to "buy the H, don't buy the G", and that's because A: it has better hardpoints, and B: it has a better hitbox model (slightly smaller RT.)

No disrespect guy, just trying to make sure someone doesn't stumble on this and get the wrong idea about med mechs and hardpoints and all that jazz. ~.^

[HammerSmythe]

Add another +1 for un-nerfing the Victors.

I shouldn't have to put a ginormous engine in just to get up to the twistability and turnability of an Atlas....

[vash021]

You get a nerf
You get a nerf

You over there get a nerf

Everyone Gets a nerf

NERF NERF NERF NERF



I'll be back!!

[Iron Riding Cowboy]

vash021, on 02 September 2014 - 08:55 PM, said:

You get a nerf
You get a nerf

You over there get a nerf

Everyone Gets a nerf

NERF NERF NERF NERF



I'll be back!!

[Joseph Mallan]

M0rpHeu5, on 19 August 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

With the JJ nerf i don't think it needs to move with the same agility as an Atlas

As I found yesterday on my Alt, the Victor was more agile than my Atlas ever was.

[Mcgral18]

Joseph Mallan, on 03 September 2014 - 02:26 AM, said:

As I found yesterday on my Alt, the Victor was more agile than my Atlas ever was.

With the same engine, they do indeed have the same turn rate. Atlas is at 40.13 with a 350, while the Victor with 350 is supposed to be 50.16, but it's at 80% which brings it to 40.128...rounded to 40.13.

It also twists at the same speed, 40 degrees a second for the Atlas, or unnerfed 50 for the Victor...and 80% brings that down to 40.

Same engine gives the same twist and turn speed. It's not even normalizing, since it's 20 tons lighter!


This is assuming the quirks aren't put directly into the game files, but are calculated afterwards (hence why Smurfy would have unnerfed numbers listed, without the quirks)

Edited by Mcgral18, 04 September 2014 - 07:52 AM.