100 replies to this topic

[Vassago Rain]

HashtagComStarWasRight, on 30 September 2014 - 08:47 PM, said:

Except nobody has suggested that this be done. Merely that IS ACs fire in bursts like Clan ACs. Same damage, still able to put it all in one place. If you're good enough.

The clan ACs are trash, so yes, that's what you're suggesting.

[Ultimax]

HashtagComStarWasRight, on 30 September 2014 - 08:47 PM, said:

Except nobody has suggested that this be done. Merely that IS ACs fire in bursts like Clan ACs. Same damage, still able to put it all in one place. If you're good enough.

1) Making IS ACs burst fire will do exactly that, make them trash.

Clan ULTRA AUTOCANNONS are bad weapons, but at least they can double tap. IS AUTOCANNONS would (mostly) not be able to double tap.



2) You are under the silly illusion that "it just takes more skill!"


It's a ridiculous premise, the devs tried to sell us this tag line but really it's ridiculous and untenable.


It has nothing to do with "skill", it has to do with basic game mechanics and the fact that your target can use their own skill to mitigate your damage easier.




Here are some reasons, in bullet format, why "burst ACs" are bad compared to Lasers - both of which are spread/DoT weapons.

• Heavier.
  
• Take up more crit slots.
  
• Have projectile speeds & travel time, and are not hitscan.
  
• Affected by gravity.
  
• Ammo reliant (which requires even more tonnage, crit slots and risk explosions)

The single benefit is that they aren't "hot" weapons. That's really not sufficient to justify them being so bad.




The reason we see Dire Wolves take them, are because:

> The Dire Wolf can boat 40 to 50 tons of them, and would struggle to use all their tonnage if they solely used energy weapons.
>The Dire Wolf's terrible speed and poor maneuverability, means it needs some ballistics for the many situations where it simply cannot disengage from combat.
> Some players struggle to use Gauss

Edited by Ultimatum X, 01 October 2014 - 01:21 AM.

[Piney II]

If the Clan burst fire mechanic is forced on IS ACs, it won't be long before you won't see too many IS mechs on the field. Single shot FLD cannons is one of the few advantages IS mechs enjoy.

With all of the QQ about Clans being OP................and you want to gimp the IS mechs with this?

The Clan ACs are trash. They're only really effective when boated. Even then, they scatter damage all over a target.

All around BAD idea.

[CDLord HHGD]

Piney, on 01 October 2014 - 02:44 AM, said:

If the Clan burst fire mechanic is forced on IS ACs, it won't be long before you won't see too many IS mechs on the field. Single shot FLD cannons is one of the few advantages IS mechs enjoy.

With all of the QQ about Clans being OP................and you want to gimp the IS mechs with this?

The Clan ACs are trash. They're only really effective when boated. Even then, they scatter damage all over a target.

All around BAD idea.

1. I have never claimed clan mechs are OP. I have claimed that per lore, they are supposed to be OP.
2. I rarely listen to or take seriously QQ anyways.
3. If you read my OP, this was something I'd like to try but I even stated it might not the the way to go.
4. As I stated in the OP, there is precedent in lore.
5. I have had no issues using clan ACs not boated (and I hate boating btw).
6. There's enough people here who would like to try it to give it merit. So many people think I'm suggesting a perma-switch. I'm not.

[Ultimax]

cdlord, on 01 October 2014 - 04:41 AM, said:

5. I have had no issues using clan ACs not boated (and I hate boating btw).

You are using clan ULTRA Autocannons.

The IS only has UAC 5s, the rest are standard Autocannons.

Turning them all into burst fire would be a sad day for the IS.


Also having "no problem using them" doesn't mean they are good weapons.


Capable of dealing damage but with very poor efficiency - lots of wasted shots and ammo.

Actually that's very anti-clan in design philosophy.

[Piney II]

cd,

Switching the IS ACs to burst fire would wreck their value as an effective IS weapon. The IS ACs are one of the few advantages they have over Clan weaponry. While there is precedence in lore, lots of lore does not translate well into this game.

Temporary or permanent, it would gimp the IS mechs that use dakka..

I'll bet a majority of IS pilots would vote a solid naye to switching to burst fire.

[Ultimax]

Piney, on 01 October 2014 - 04:59 AM, said:

I'll bet a majority of IS pilots would vote a solid naye to switching to burst fire.

Well, the majority of the non-light pilots.

[Mawai]

Kassatsu, on 30 September 2014 - 08:34 PM, said:

I thought this was supposed to be a Battletech mechwarrior simulation game. Wasn't their tagline originally "the thinking man's shooter"? So much for that. Might as well just break down early and give every mech zero heat unlimited ammo AC20s and strip all of the armor off while standardizing hitboxes and speeds. It's already headed towards becoming a twitch shooter. Now we just need ironsights and aim assist.

Ok how about:

Concept: Thinking man's shooter game balance

It doesn't matter whether you call it an FPS or "Thinking man's shooter" or whatever term you apply to the game .. fact is that it requires balance.

You CAN'T have IS vs CLAN battles in a GAME ... if the matches are intrinsically uneven or unfair.

You CAN'T have fun balanced PUG matches IF half the mechs are so clearly superior to the other half that you significantly gimp your team if you don't take them. (The only mech I have that feeling about at the moment is the Locust ... there are a few Locust pilots who somehow manage to do some decent damage ... but the mech is so fragile that they blow up very quickly.

I don't know if PGI has run the numbers but I would be interested to know if there is a W/L correlation on tonnage or specific mechs on each team. For example ... does a team with 3 x 60 ton heavies vs one with 3x75 ton heavies (balanced in terms of the matchmaker) ... lose more often? Does total tonnage matter or do the presence of certain chassis (TBR for example) have a significant statistical impact on your changes to win a match? There is a lot more data mining work PGI should be doing ... maybe they should contract it out ... probably would not cost that much or take that long that way.

[Bishop Steiner]

Kassatsu, on 30 September 2014 - 08:34 PM, said:

I thought this was supposed to be a Battletech mechwarrior simulation game. Wasn't their tagline originally "the thinking man's shooter"?

So much for that.

Might as well just break down early and give every mech zero heat unlimited ammo AC20s and strip all of the armor off while standardizing hitboxes and speeds. It's already headed towards becoming a twitch shooter. Now we just need ironsights and aim assist.

Hasn't been that since Closed Beta.

HashtagComStarWasRight, on 30 September 2014 - 08:47 PM, said:

Except nobody has suggested that this be done. Merely that IS ACs fire in bursts like Clan ACs. Same damage, still able to put it all in one place. If you're good enough.

Lol. Actually being able to put the damage to one place has more to do with if your opponent is bad enough.

[Metus regem]

Bishop Steiner, on 01 October 2014 - 06:16 AM, said:

Lol. Actually being able to put the damage to one place has more to do with if your opponent is bad enough.

So I ran a 6-UAC 5 Dakka Wolf last night, for shits and giggles... and I'm sorry, but if you tried to face tank that thing, long enough for it to kill you, you deserved it... The burst firing CUAC 5, are just horrid, and with a little torso twisting action, you could double or even triple how long you would live against that thing. It was with out question the most damage inefficient build I have ever run... was it funny, and a little fun to run? Hell ******* yes!

[Molossian Dog]

Besides the factor mentioned in my last post (twitchy = bad for Mech combat), another one comes to mind.

It would do away with the "IS has FLD !omgwtfqq!, we Clammers need to be better in everything else" excuse.

That alone would be worth it.

Edited by Molossian Dog, 01 October 2014 - 07:40 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Ultimatum X, on 01 October 2014 - 04:56 AM, said:

You are using clan ULTRA Autocannons.

Um,no, I'm not......

[Jeon Ji Yoon]

Yeah, I hope they leave it alone. I believe it was in the 1st Master Rules they published for TT where they explain that the acs are 20mm, 40mm, 90mm and 120mm auto loading cannons (ac2-20) so to think and 120mm ac20 would fire 4-6 shells is a little weird...

[Ultimax]

cdlord, on 01 October 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

Um,no, I'm not......

Good for you on missing the actual point?

So you aren't using them, have no idea how crappy they are and want the IS to get the even worse versions with no double tap, while also being heavier and more crit slots?

[CDLord HHGD]

Before more people misconstrue what I was getting at, there is a post in here that gave us the best of both worlds.

PGI has stated in the past that they plan to bring in different weapons manufacturers (Pontiac AC20 vs the Luxor AC20). I think this would be an awesome way to do this, no difference in ammo, weight, crits, nothing except single slug vs burst fire like the Clans. Not sure if PGI is still planning on it or if they have provided more info to it, but this would satisfy everything.

[Mystere]

Piney, on 01 October 2014 - 02:44 AM, said:

If the Clan burst fire mechanic is forced on IS ACs, it won't be long before you won't see too many IS mechs on the field. Single shot FLD cannons is one of the few advantages IS mechs enjoy.

With all of the QQ about Clans being OP................and you want to gimp the IS mechs with this?

The Clan ACs are trash. They're only really effective when boated. Even then, they scatter damage all over a target.

All around BAD idea.

Considering that people do not seem to like so-called "trash" equipment in the game, and almost all of you consider Clan ACs to be trash, then the more logical course of action is to make Clan ACs act like IS ACs.

Ultimatum X, on 01 October 2014 - 04:56 AM, said:

Also having "no problem using them" doesn't mean they are good weapons.

Capable of dealing damage but with very poor efficiency - lots of wasted shots and ammo.

Actually that's very anti-clan in design philosophy.

And so, see above.

Edited by Mystere, 01 October 2014 - 08:23 AM.

[Molossian Dog]

@cdlord

Give it up, man. They want to hear a specific thing. And rage against it. That you aren´t saying it has no bearing.

Edited by Molossian Dog, 01 October 2014 - 08:24 AM.

[Mystere]

Mawai, on 01 October 2014 - 05:12 AM, said:

Concept: Thinking man's shooter game balance

Food for Thought: Asymmetric Balance

Most people here think of balance in the narrowest of terms: 1-on-1 balance, also known as equality. Why are people so afraid of asymmetric balance, or N-on-M? Yes it is hard to achieve. But when did doing something "hard" stop people from accomplishing new and potentially better things?

End of my Food for Thought

[Mystere]

Molossian Dog, on 01 October 2014 - 08:24 AM, said:

@cdlord

Give it up, man. They want to hear a specific thing. And rage against it. That you aren´t saying it has no bearing.

Agreed.

This thread is also quite funny because the mental gymnastics that Clan fans have been accused of using to preserve their toys are almost the same mental gymnastics being used by IS fans to preserve their toys.

I foresee the same mental gymnastics being employed once the King Crab comes out.

[Metus regem]

Mystere, on 01 October 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

I foresee the same mental gymnastics being employed once the King Crab comes out.

No, just get behind it, and give it a new bleeding ***-hole. It's the same with a Dire Wolf, get behind and **** it.