647 replies to this topic

[K0M3D14N]

PLEASE buff the COM-3A. I consistently post 400-600dmg games in mine as it stands. Give me more to work with and I'll eat Assault tears until the end of time.

[stjobe]

ExAstris, on 02 October 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

Ballistics rule on heavy+

Yep. Pin-point front-loaded damage is just plain better than anything else, as I've been telling anyone that care to listen for a very long time now.

ExAstris, on 02 October 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

lasers rule on lights

Because pin-point damage-over-time is the best you can do if you cannot mount pin-point front-loaded due to weight restrictions.

ExAstris, on 02 October 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

anything IS relying on missiles is screwed.

Because you can't aim them AND they spread damage, so you can't exploit the weaknesses of PGI's implementation of BattleTech's armour and weapon systems.

Pin-point accurate, instantly converging, front-loaded damage simply breaks the armour system, allowing for ridiculously low TTKs and relegating anything not ballistic to second-tier weaponry (or worse).

Ballistics also got the largest boost DPS-wise as compared to the TT stats - as someone else pointed out, an AC/5 and a ML should have the same DPS, but currently the AC/5 has more than twice the DPS (3.0 vs 1.25).

On the same note, missiles got the lowest DPS boost of all the weapon systems. That the missile code is a hot broken mess only compounds the issue.

In the end though, the problems with weapon balance is that free customization and instant convergence means that the weapons that can do pin-point accurate front-loaded damage are just plain better than those who can't. That's why ACs, PPCs, and Gauss have ruled the roost for over a year now, why anyone that can strip off an energy weapon and put a ballistic there instead does, and why you only see those missile-only variants on the lower two tiers.

Edited by stjobe, 02 October 2014 - 10:00 PM.

[Wintersdark]

stjobe, on 02 October 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

Yep. Pin-point front-loaded damage is just plain better than anything else, as I've been telling anyone that care to listen for a very long time now.


Because pin-point damage-over-time is the best you can do if you cannot mount pin-point front-loaded due to weight restrictions.


Because you can't aim them AND they spread damage, so you can't exploit the weaknesses of PGI's implementation of BattleTech's armour and weapon systems.

Pin-point accurate, instantly converging, front-loaded damage simply breaks the armour system, allowing for ridiculously low TTKs and relegating anything not ballistic to second-tier weaponry (or worse).

Ballistics also got the largest boost DPS-wise as compared to the TT stats - as someone else pointed out, an AC/5 and a ML should have the same DPS, but currently the AC/5 has more than twice the DPS (3.0 vs 1.25).

On the same note, missiles got the lowest DPS boost of all the weapon systems. That the missile code is a hot broken mess only compounds the issue.

In the end though, the problems with weapon balance is that free customization and instant convergence means that the weapons that can do pin-point accurate front-loaded damage are just plain better than those who can't. That's why ACs, PPCs, and Gauss have ruled the roost for over a year now, why anyone that can strip off an energy weapon and put a ballistic there instead does, and why you only see those missile-only variants on the lower two tiers.

This post is all of the things.

Seriously.

All of the things.

[YueFei]

stjobe, on 02 October 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

In the end though, the problems with weapon balance is that free customization and instant convergence means that the weapons that can do pin-point accurate front-loaded damage are just plain better than those who can't. That's why ACs, PPCs, and Gauss have ruled the roost for over a year now, why anyone that can strip off an energy weapon and put a ballistic there instead does, and why you only see those missile-only variants on the lower two tiers.

A big part of the problem is the lack of efficiency of SRMs, at least for IS SRMs. It's FLD, but spread FLD. That used to not matter when SRMs had broken splash damage and were crazy good and gibbing people in 3 or 4 salvos. But these days, even against morons who just stand there and take it in the face, it takes forever to sandpaper their mech to death. The hard-capped range for SRMs also means taking tremendous risk to bring them into play. Longer ranged weapons lets you pick a spot and fire upon someone without having to step in closer and expose yourself to 3 or 4 enemies at the same time.

Clan SRMs are a different calculus because they weigh half as much as IS SRMs.

And the issue with LRMs need not be said.

So those missile hardpoints aren't as desirable as energy and ballistic hardpoints.

Missile splash damage used to be broken, but that was a big part of their deadliness. I would suggest that they implement damage transfer mechanic for missiles, same as the Clan ERPPC damage transfer mechanic. For example, LRMs could deal 1 damage to the component that is hit, and transfer X damage to adjacent locations. SRMs could deal 2 damage to the location hit, and transfer Y damage to adjacent locations. Tune X and Y as needed. So, while missiles are spread and unfocused, they should be brutal at basically blasting an entire mech apart all at once.

Edited by YueFei, 02 October 2014 - 11:34 PM.

[Hades Trooper]

What a lot of steaming cow dung,

This is list completel BS when u have a Raven 3L as a tier 2,

this is epic fail, don't even need to see more when u rate a 3L as a tier, 2, and of course, the people who rated this are pure IS players cause they want as many quirks as they can.

This is complete and utter steaming cow dung.

[Tim East]

WOOOO! Locust 3m Tier 4! Maybe we can trade some of those excessive weapon modules for a positive quirk that will actually get used.

[stjobe]

YueFei, on 02 October 2014 - 11:33 PM, said:

A big part of the problem is the lack of efficiency of SRMs, at least for IS SRMs. It's FLD, but spread FLD. That used to not matter when SRMs had broken splash damage and were crazy good and gibbing people in 3 or 4 salvos. But these days, even against morons who just stand there and take it in the face, it takes forever to sandpaper their mech to death.

Which in itself wouldn't be a problem if not for some weapons (ballistics) being pin-point instant convergence front-loaded. If all weapons spread their damage (or at least multiple weapons spread their damage), missiles wouldn't be so bad, comparatively.

It's only when you compare a LRM40 boat doing zero to 44 points, spread over several locations, to an AC40 boat doing its guaranteed 40 to a single location that the LRM40 comes out as bad.

The fact that some weapons spread their damage and some not basically make balancing them a nightmare, and I've been arguing for the reworking of ACs into burst-fire for longer than I care to remember. The Clan ACs show that it can be done, and that it's not the end of the world.

Edited by stjobe, 03 October 2014 - 08:01 AM.

[Threat Doc]

Having just gone over the Tier listing given in the parent post to this thread, I would have to agree with every tier assignment you've given for every 'Mech I drive. I can't wait to see what it is you're doing with these 'Mechs on the 21st.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

Other than some of those mechs seemed to be place in tiers due to old JJ mechanics. And that all the jagers belong in the same tier (arm mounted energy is not a major enhancement over the usual boating suspects) It all looks pretty decent. You just got to look at the list as tier 3 being an average mech. And gets better and worse from there.

However a scaling pass would help all those poor mediums and some heavies a whole lot more than quirks ever will.

[Sandslice]

Hades Trooper, on 02 October 2014 - 11:37 PM, said:

What a lot of steaming cow dung,

This is list completel BS when u have a Raven 3L as a tier 2,

this is epic fail, don't even need to see more when u rate a 3L as a tier, 2, and of course, the people who rated this are pure IS players cause they want as many quirks as they can.

This is complete and utter steaming cow dung.

If you think the list is only compiled to get 'Mechs buffed with quirks, then provide what you'd consider a better list along with why.

But based on the insight gained from answers to my questions, I can tell you why the 3L is T2 and not T1 as you are implying: the ECM allows it to be as high as it is. The other Ravens can peck (2 LL build) with the exact same arm geometry as the 3L, yet are bottom feeders (save for the 4X, which can actually flap its wings and bring a second 'Mech module.) While only the 3L has two missile racks, so does the Jenner-D, which does so with CT convergence, while splitting all of its energy between two nicely-placed arms instead of arm+torso.

It's clear, then, that it's the ECM that's carrying the 3L.

But perhaps you have a different perspective as to why the 3L should be T1?

[YueFei]

stjobe, on 03 October 2014 - 08:00 AM, said:

Which in itself wouldn't be a problem if not for some weapons (ballistics) being pin-point instant convergence front-loaded. If all weapons spread their damage (or at least multiple weapons spread their damage), missiles wouldn't be so bad, comparatively.

It's only when you compare a LRM40 boat doing zero to 44 points, spread over several locations, to an AC40 boat doing its guaranteed 40 to a single location that the LRM40 comes out as bad.

The fact that some weapons spread their damage and some not basically make balancing them a nightmare, and I've been arguing for the reworking of ACs into burst-fire for longer than I care to remember. The Clan ACs show that it can be done, and that it's not the end of the world.

I'd like to see something like Wanderer's idea adopted. Sized hardpoints, but not hardpoint restrictions. Something akin to the missile tube limits. You can shove a LRM20 into a 5 tube slot, and it'll fire in 4 batches of 5 each.

For autocannons, you can go ahead and shove an AC20 into a Jagermech's arm, but the smaller bore size means it'll fire in a longer burst of many shells. If you shove an AC20 into a Hunchback, it'll fire in a much shorter, more vicious burst of shells.

On the other hand, I'm actually OK with the current TTK. My HBK usually can fire at least 5 or 6 full salvos in a match before dying. I imagine in TT I probably wouldn't survive many more exchanges than that anyways. The hitboxes are a bigger deal for me. I'd love it if I could use the HBK's arms to intercept fire. But they are toothpick thin and it's a minor miracle whenever they absorb a hit.

I'd rather they did hitboxes like Carrioncrow has suggested. Then mech survival is more closely dependent on pilot skill, which I think would be really cool. Stare at enemies not moving and you should die quickly. Stay on the move, keep twisting and turning, and you should survive much longer.

Well, at least that's assuming your enemies don't just double-leg you. =/ But if that becomes an issue adjustments can be made for leg hitpoints. Or, rather than just a hitpoints adjustment it could be a damage resistance, that way you'd still be punished for running with low amounts of leg armor, and rewarded for fully armoring the legs.

Meh, I'm rambling.

[Destoroyah]

In a way I disagree with the raven 3L placement. If the placement of the 3L is due to the large laser sniper meta build I feel it's unfair to the mech. The 3L is supposed to be the scout mech supreme it carries all the goodies(cept JJ). I thought they were supposed to be considering the mechs intended purpose as well as it's meta statis. I don't think ECM alone would place the 3L so high as a scout when the Spider 5D has a much better profile and JJ making it a far superior scout if ECM was the main factor and it's a tier 3 mech. If you put a narc+ammo tag and BAP you can't fit the 2 Large lasers maybe 1. Would you consider that tier 2 still? That's the approach they should be taking with the 3L give it improved TAG/NARC/and BAP, a sensor range increase and maybe even a medium laser buff. So the meta build won't be improved too much and with the new rewards a alternative scout build would be a viable contender.

Example Scout Quirks

Mech/Equipment Quirks
25% increased sensor range: from 800m to 1000m
Improved ECM detection with BAP: A extra 100m added to the maximum distance you can target ECM covered mechs. (this isn't the range needed to cancel out a ECM but the distance outside the bubble at which you can target.)
(

Weapon Quirks
33% improved TAG Range: from 750m to 1000m
50% NARC projectile increase
50% increase NARC Range
Medium(Pulse) Laser Range or cooldown improvement: Nothing super big

Edited by Destoroyah, 03 October 2014 - 09:05 PM.

[Tezcatli]

Looking at the mechs in the tier lists and the limited differences between them. It's making me wondering just how much of a difference one tier is from another.

[Tincan Nightmare]

I'm curious to know how much impact ECM has on the tier list, as I would have expected the Cicada, Spider, and Commando ECM carriers to be ranked higher. Yes, as far as individual combat ability goes, those variants are generally considered the 'worst' of those mech chassis, but ECM has a very large effect on the outcome of battles and only comes on those few models. The 3L and D-DC as tier 2 seems right, but the other 3 should be bumped up a rank as well for how much impact they bring to a team with their ECM. I mean those variants are the most commonly used ones of those mech chassis (at least that I see during matches), and the reason is because of the ECM coverage they bring with them. So how much effect does ECM have on the ranking mechanics?

[ExAstris]

Tincan Nightmare, on 04 October 2014 - 02:57 PM, said:

So how much effect does ECM have on the ranking mechanics?

The rankings weren't determined by any algorithm, rather the input of a few select players.

So ECM's effect on the ranking can only be loosely abstracted by considering otherwise comparable chasses, which generally seems to be about a tier or so in effectiveness.

Perhaps for competitive 12 mans they're right, but for PUGs (even high ELO ones), I suspect they're underestimating the impact ECM has on the total match and more reflecting on how well they individually perform.


While that's speculative, what is for sure is that even PGI now is officially recognizing ECM mechs as still being flatly superior to otherwise comparable designs and ECM itself as still over-the-top. In the town hall, Russ didn't want to go into ECM too much because its such a Pandora's Box (pun intended, and he's right that its a complicated issue). He's fortunately leaning towards doing something about it, but there is no timetable, nor any definitive course of action settled on. Sadly, he seems opposed to removing the total radar block (which is the root of the problems).

Only time will tell. Two things;
1) Props to Russ for spending 3hrs off his off time to chat about these things.
2) ECM is my "one issue" that I'm still voting with my wallet on. Something fairly drastic needs to be done about it (especially for the puggers), and I'm approaching 2 full years now of withholding support (since Dec 12).

[Sorbic]

I do feel that the Jester, and maybe even the K2, should be dropped down another tier. You almost never see them doing consistently well and having 3 CTF's below/being ranked alongside Jagers? I'm not seeing it.

Also not sure if just removing the negative quirks will be enough for the Vic's. Especially considering the weapons that made those negative quirks show up aren't that good anymore. Of course if you guys plan on revisiting the quirks after the first round then maybe that small adjustment is ok. Better not to over shoot I suppose.

[Jemdeamon]

Thanks for the update! A lot of the mechs in the lower Tiers are the ones I like to pilot! I look forward to seeing what quirks they get and if they will make them more viable.

[Hardes13]

My ideas:
Awesome 8 T no heat penalty for normal PPC.... this build has allready 3 in the old build and this awesome should have 3+ PPCs. btw shoot torsotwist shoot is the way to play a awesome, so Lasers are not the Awesome weapons. Plus with normal PPCs you have not the Sniper problem

Highlander:
Hills are his homeland... plus hillclimb for him^^

Firestarter:
- heat for flamethrowers.

[ShadowbaneX]

Hardes13, on 05 October 2014 - 02:12 PM, said:

Highlander:
Hills are his homeland... plus hillclimb for him^^

That would just encourage people to use fewer jump jets. No Hill Climb, more thrust from Jump Jets.

[Voyager I]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2014 - 12:18 PM, said:

My problem with AC's is that in TT an AC5 had the same dps as a ML...5 damage/10 seconds. In MWO PGI have increased the ROF of AC's to the point where they vastly outperform lasers.

AC/2s and AC/5s are among the worst weapons in the game by TT rules while Medium Lasers are very good and very efficient compared to other L1 tech. The fact that the low-caliber autocannons have improved dramatically compared to their paperback incarnations is one of the things PGI has gotten right in their balancing.

High DPS on sustained fire weapons is also very easy to overvalue. They don't concentrate damage and require continuous line of sight to a target to function, meaning they will almost never live up to their theoretical potential, doing so requires exposing yourself to much greater risk than something that only needs to shoot once every four seconds, and the damage they do inflict will generally be less efficient than being able to immediately drop 30+ points on one location. An AC/5 needs to have better DPS per ton than an AC/20 or a Gauss Rifle to be worth using.