100 replies to this topic

[Zyllos]

I am in the same boat as the minority here.

I only play IS and I want multi-shot ACs...

[Mcgral18]

Bilbo, on 30 September 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

It would be a slaughter. All they have going for them is the pinpoint damage. If you take that away, they would be outranged, outgunned, and fairly well screwed.

Pulse laser meta?

They are pretty nice compared to the terribad Clan MPLs. Still bad weapons, though.

[Johnny Z]

cdlord, on 30 September 2014 - 06:25 AM, said:

Let me preface this by stating that I LOVE my HBK-4G with an AC20. I was also on the "don't touch my AC" bandwagon. My opinion has changed somewhat....

I would like to try the scenario where ALL (IS and Clan) ACs operated the same, i.e. burst fire instead of the single shell the IS enjoy now. The Clan advantage would still be with the weight and size (crits) of the ACs, and with more options for UAC and LBX.

There is precedent for this in the Lore and previous Mechwarrior games.

Not saying this is the way we have to go, but I'd like to try it.

Dont the clan AC's also do more damage and have a longer range? Or is that just the Clasers?

[Blakkstar]

The burst-fire ACs actually bothered me in the MW games. That concentrated 20-point impact (or damage for all ACs) is supposed to be the benefit of the massive weight and need to carry ammo of the autocannon weapon class. I know the lore says they are gatling-style cannons that fire bursts, but the TT rules operate as if they fire a single slug. It should be the same for both Clan and IS autocannons.

The larger problem is that PGI still doesn't seem to have an endgame in mind regarding the IS/Clan tech discrepancy. They're walking a confusing line between game mechanic balance and meta balance, and still can't decide if the two sides should be equal at a 1-1 level or if another balancing mechanism is needed.

[Bilbo]

Mcgral18, on 30 September 2014 - 08:09 AM, said:

Pulse laser meta?

They are pretty nice compared to the terribad Clan MPLs. Still bad weapons, though.

Sure, if you can get the team to move. As it stands, they'll be crushed as they try to trade shots with clan mechs they can't reach.

[CDLord HHGD]

Johnny Z, on 30 September 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

Dont the clan AC's also do more damage and have a longer range? Or is that just the Clasers?

All the game info you could ever want and hope for.

[Mawai]

cdlord, on 30 September 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

Why? They are supposed to be outclassed by clan tech.

That depends

In the lore (TT), clan tech outclasses all of the IS tech. Weapons, engines, mechs, everything ...

BUT, this isn't TT and never will be. It also is not a single player Mechwarrior video game where you can put 30 IS mechs against a single clan mech and the clan player can still win.

MWO is a multiplayer online game. As a result, the BALANCE between IS mechs and clan mechs matters (unless everyone should be forced to choose clan mechs if they want to win and IS mechs if they want to roleplay).

PGIs design decision in this matter is to TRY to differentiate the tech ... make it different but equal. One of these differences was to make clan damage higher but to make it harder to apply consistently by requiring a longer time on target. More damage, greater skill required, and the opponent has a opportunity to try to avoid the damage by getting out of the way or torso twisting to spread it.

If IS ACs were changed to multi-shell damage over time weapons this would significantly degrade their effectiveness. This might be a good thing since the PP FLD damage can be an issue ... however, it would significantly weaken the IS mech capabilities and balance. There is a reason why Cataphracts and Jagers are usually considered effective IS mechs ... it is due to multiple low heat/reasonable damage ballistics that can deliver all of their damage to a target at one point.

Converting IS AC damage to a damage over time might be good in the long run ... but to balance things out it would probably require a reduction in refire rate as well as some changes to energy weapons .. reducing the IS energy weapon burn time.

IS weapons would do less damage total ... but would apply it over a shorter time frame thus requiring less time on target to deliver that damage.

In any case, the goal is a rough BALANCE overall between clan and IS since otherwise there won't be much of a game.

[Destructicus]

The thing is I'm pretty sure IS pilots don't realize this would do more harm than good for them

I get it
Multishot AC's are new , they seem fun and different
But they're terrible compared to IS A/Cs

[Shalune]

Strongly disagree. Point damage ACs is one of several key things that give IS mechs an advantage over clans.

[Christof Romulus]

You may be willing to sacrifice.

I am not.

[Piney II]

Destructicus, on 30 September 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

The thing is I'm pretty sure IS pilots don't realize this would do more harm than good for them

I get it
Multishot AC's are new , they seem fun and different
But they're terrible compared to IS A/Cs

^^^^This.

[Turist0AT]

MeiSooHaityu, on 30 September 2014 - 07:26 AM, said:

IS ballistics would need a counter advantage in some way. What would it be?

Would IS ballistics enjoy a faster cooldown, quicker travel times, or maybe more ammo per ton? We know it couldn't be range or weight.

If the IS mechs lose FLD, they need another advantage to off-set the nerf they just recieved. Seeing as how good FLD is, it would need to be one heck of a Buff.

No ghost heat?

[Metus regem]

Johnny Z, on 30 September 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

Dont the clan AC's also do more damage and have a longer range? Or is that just the Clasers?

IS UCA 5 max rage is 1200m 5 damage over 1 shell (5 dmg/shell)
C UAC 5 max range is 1260m 5 damage over 3 shells (1.6667dmg/shell)

The Range is not that big of a difference... and AC, always do the same damage depending on the type (2/5/10/20) 'cept clan versions can put all that damage all spread all over a mech due to the burst system.

[Blakkstar]

Mawai, on 30 September 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

PGIs design decision in this matter is to TRY to differentiate the tech ... make it different but equal. One of these differences was to make clan damage higher but to make it harder to apply consistently by requiring a longer time on target. More damage, greater skill required, and the opponent has a opportunity to try to avoid the damage by getting out of the way or torso twisting to spread it.

That's a correct assessment, and a mechanic that I'm ok with to reflect how a skilled Clan warrior can be more effective in combat according to lore. The problem is that's still not a real solution by itself. All it does is make IS tech n00b-friendly and Clan tech deadly in the hands of skilled players. The question then becomes what kind of "balance" do you want: real game balance where the two sides handle differently but equal in the hands of equally skilled players, or the meta balance that reflects the reality of most players not being skilled enough to get the most out of Clan tech?

These are questions that PGI needed to answer before the first Clan mech dropped in a game.

[Ultimax]

I really see no reason for this change.

Front loaded ACs are a nice IS advantage,

On top of that, you forget that while the Clan UACs are pretty mediocre and not really worth the tonnage - the IS versions would be even worse because most of them are not Ultra ACs and would not get double tap.



Do me a favor, do yourself a favor, go for 2 weeks and use a clan mech with nothing but the standard Clan Autocannons (Non-UACs) and then get back to us on this concept.


The Clan UACs are not very good weapons, the basic Clan Autocannons are outright garbage - I see no reason to inflict them on the IS.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 30 September 2014 - 08:52 AM.

[StalaggtIKE]

cdlord, on 30 September 2014 - 06:25 AM, said:

Let me preface this by stating that I LOVE my HBK-4G with an AC20. I was also on the "don't touch my AC" bandwagon. My opinion has changed somewhat....

I would like to try the scenario where ALL (IS and Clan) ACs operated the same, i.e. burst fire instead of the single shell the IS enjoy now. The Clan advantage would still be with the weight and size (crits) of the ACs, and with more options for UAC and LBX.

There is precedent for this in the Lore and previous Mechwarrior games.

Not saying this is the way we have to go, but I'd like to try it.

Any particular reason why you want to try it?

[Livewyr]

Fierostetz, on 30 September 2014 - 07:56 AM, said:

whoah whoah whoah - a big chunk of the playerbase can't even move and shoot at the same time. You're talking a heap of new variables to further confuse the new guys. I get what you want to do, but in it's current state the game is nowhere near ready for such a change.

Indeed, it is not a priority and should definitely wait until after CW is implemented. I do think it should be added shortly there-after though because the weapons would help balance out the chassis differences allowing chassis' performances to be even more effected by pilot skill and style.

[Sjorpha]

I want IS to keep it's slug autocannons, I like the difference in feeling it gives between IS and Clan.

[kapusta11]

I don't get it, first you say 50+ laser DOT(!) alpha from Timberwolf is OP, then you want to turn IS 30 FLD alphas into DOT ones. Where is the logic?

Edited by kapusta11, 30 September 2014 - 09:12 AM.

[Molossian Dog]

Frankly speaking I would be willing to try it out.

FLD is making the game more like other shooters. Twitchy. Mech combat shouldn´t feel twitchy.
And the game mechanics encourage cover humping and (previously) poptarting enough already.