34 replies to this topic

[Roadbeer]

Not to derail my own thread here, but the reason you don't see the AC/2 in wide use is the crippling heat-scale applied to it. You can't fire the thing without cooking yourself off.

It wasn't long ago that the 6 AC/2 Jag was FOTM.

Back on topic,
I'm not saying that CBT rules are the Bible (immutable), but when you look at what the intent was, then transpose them into this game, something went horribly wrong. IMO it is keeping the per-shot values the same as the 10 second rule, yet increasing your ability to shoot that x4 in the same amount of time, all the while, trying to keep everything else exactly the same.

[FupDup]

Roadbeer, on 06 October 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

Not to derail my own thread here, but the reason you don't see the AC/2 in wide use is the crippling heat-scale applied to it. You can't fire the thing without cooking yourself off.

It wasn't long ago that the 6 AC/2 Jag was FOTM.

Back on topic,
I'm not saying that CBT rules are the Bible (immutable), but when you look at what the intent was, then transpose them into this game, something went horribly wrong. IMO it is keeping the per-shot values the same as the 10 second rule, yet increasing your ability to shoot that x4 in the same amount of time, all the while, trying to keep everything else exactly the same.

I'd say the issue with the AC/2 is more about the very low alpha damage rather than the heat (the heat just adds insult to injury).

Back to topic:
I've actually argued for something like this thread in the past...for example, having PPCs do 4 damage and 4 heat, with a 4 second reload time, against standard armor values. This concept isn't new to me. I'm just scared (okay, terrified) that PGI wouldn't modify the outlier cases that needed to be (i.e. T1 Autocannons except the AC/20 were all underpowered in TT, inferior to PPCs, SRM2 inferior to ML, LL having same damage per heat as a PPC but less range and damage, etc). These are the same people that fear 3-second Jenners and 6 MG Spiders.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Roadbeer, on 06 October 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

Not to derail my own thread here, but the reason you don't see the AC/2 in wide use is the crippling heat-scale applied to it. You can't fire the thing without cooking yourself off.

It USED to create its own ghost heat (call it what it is not the bs about heat scale) by its own refire rate. Does it still?

[Ultimax]

Mcgral18, on 06 October 2014 - 01:26 PM, said:

Nearly every weapon has a 4 second cooldown. MLs, AC20s, PPCs, Gauss, SRM6s. Long range weapons, short range weapons, big and small.

They share the same cooldown. I feel there could have been some diversity there. Long range, heavy weapons having longer cooldowns than their short range counterparts.

To be fair, the Gauss is technically near 5s.

[Mcgral18]

Ultimatum X, on 06 October 2014 - 05:40 PM, said:

To be fair, the Gauss is technically near 5s.

4.75


If it had a longer cooldown, no charge would have been necessary.

PPCs could have had a fast travel speed if they only fired every 6 seconds.

[Asmudius Heng]

I really do not care about the values compared to TT as long as the spirit of what the weapon is supposed to be about and do is kept.

At this stage of the game I do not know if it is worth revisiting where I started, but how to change things to make sure the weapons fill the right roles and niches while remaining balanced in the ecosystem of weapons and TTK etc.

[Ultimax]

Mcgral18, on 06 October 2014 - 05:42 PM, said:

4.75


If it had a longer cooldown, no charge would have been necessary.

PPCs could have had a fast travel speed if they only fired every 6 seconds.

The charge wasn't added because of the refire rate.

Making a weapon that can only fire every 6s is as bad as making a projectile that travels at 950m but has an 800m range.

[Mcgral18]

Ultimatum X, on 06 October 2014 - 06:40 PM, said:

The charge wasn't added because of the refire rate.

Making a weapon that can only fire every 6s is as bad as making a projectile that travels at 950m but has an 800m range.

You mean having a usable mid to long range weapon is a bad thing? The same weapon which can't be used as effectively while knife fighting?

[Tombstoner]

PGI's response to the plunging TTK from 250% increase in rate of fire was a 200% increase in armor.

The games still missing the 50% chunk. weapons are stronger in MWO then TT regardless of rate of fire.

This needs to be corrected. Its also why FF armor is useless for the space it takes.

[LORD ORION]

This is what happens when you double armor values, fail to enable any progressive heat penalties or internal damage to critical systems. (gyros, engine, sensors and life support).

A mech can tank incoming fire as inconsequential armor damage as long as its buddies are focus firing on the enemy mech. At this point the single mech is annhilated and was completely ineffective even as it hit the enemy.

Try that again with single armor values, internal damage and a heat scale that takes 10 seconds to bleed off the heat a weapon generated. (heat sinks shouldn't bleed off heat faster, just provide a larger pool for you to accumulate heat before penalty)

Sure the single target mech was still annihilated, but he hurt the crap out of his target's armor and maybe did some internal criticals that will be around for the remainder of the match. Also the cost of the rapid focus fire has put the remaining mechs all in heat penalty. (they fired twice in a 10 second period, so have 160% heat piled up still (100% from the second shots, and 60% from the original shot that has only drained off by 40% in 4 seconds). What do they do when buddies show up?

Now you only need to worry about limiting the ammo bins on the mechs so they can't always put it in safe places and store a crap ton of it which mitiagtes the advantage energy weapons have.

Edited by LORD ORION, 07 October 2014 - 08:05 AM.

[Tombstoner]

LORD ORION, on 07 October 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

This is what happens when you double armor values, fail to enable any progressive heat penalties or internal damage to critical systems. (gyros, engine, sensors and life support).

A mech can tank incoming fire as inconsequential armor damage as long as its buddies are focus firing on the enemy mech. At this point the single mech is annhilated and was completely ineffective even as it hit the enemy.

Try that again with single armor values, internal damage and a heat scale that takes 10 seconds to bleed off the heat a weapon generated. (heat sinks shouldn't bleed off heat faster, just provide a larger pool for you to accumulate heat before penalty)

Sure the single target mech was still annihilated, but he hurt the crap out of his target's armor and maybe did some internal criticals that will be around for the remainder of the match. Also the cost of the rapid focus fire has put the remaining mechs all in heat penalty. (they fired twice in a 10 second period, so have 160% heat piled up still (100% from the second shots, and 60% from the original shot that has only drained off by 40% in 4 seconds). What do they do when buddies show up?

Now you only need to worry about limiting the ammo bins on the mechs so they can't always put it in safe places and store a crap ton of it which mitiagtes the advantage energy weapons have.

TT used a 2d6 Hit allocation system that guaranteed some hits to the legs/arms. This fact alone is distorted in MWO.
Shots hit the CT with much higher frequency particularly on the atlas. its not just existence of focused fire, its the amount of fire directed into the CT. A torso that is still using the same armor restrictions from TT.

Ferrofiber armor should let a mech go beyond the normal weight limits on armor. Particulary in MWO since its not TT. it needs a use not as something to trade space for tonnage. It should be trade space for protection.

But the game really needs to look into how speed interacts with mech size and subsequent durability and hit frequency.
as it is my lights moving at 150kph need a lot more leg armor or ecm.

[Artgathan]

Roadbeer, on 06 October 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

Not to derail my own thread here, but the reason you don't see the AC/2 in wide use is the crippling heat-scale applied to it. You can't fire the thing without cooking yourself off.

Not to continue the derailment, but I would suggest that the reason the AC/2 is not in wide use is the exposure time required to make it effective. It ostensibly has roughly the same DPS as the AC/5 while only coming in at 75% of the weight. Unfortunately to maximize this you've got to stare down the enemy (which - to tie in a seperate issue - is part of the reason that direct fire LRMs are so useless).

That said, I've been interested in turning back to "TT" rates of damage application for a while. I think it would make for an interesting experiment (though, as others have pointed out the rates will definitely need to be adjusted - I don't know who thought the range on the AC/2 made up for it's piddly damage given the tonnage). It would also allow us to correct for the ammunition issues that some people rag on about (armor was doubled, but most ammo only went up about 150%, with the exception of SRMs which were not changed and should be).

However even with guns pushed back to TT levels, the ability to duct-tape weapons together and deliver it as pinpoint damage will still cause issues with TTK. Engine balance (meaning STD vs. XL) in MW:O is a little wonky due to the fact that players can effectively concentrate their fire - in TT having a STD typically means a significant increase in survivability over carrying an XL, whereas in MW:O there's almost no difference.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Mcgral18, on 06 October 2014 - 05:42 PM, said:

4.75


If it had a longer cooldown, no charge would have been necessary.

PPCs could have had a fast travel speed if they only fired every 6 seconds.

What is it with the charge? cause Id have to include that in the refire delay given you can shoot during that

Hey one shot every 10 sec would increase ttk wouldnt it? (well not in teams where one guy would immediately get focused by EVERYONE lol

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 07 October 2014 - 01:43 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 07 October 2014 - 01:42 PM, said:

What is it with the charge? cause Id have to include that in the refire delay given you can shoot during that

.75 is the charge, which lasts 1 second?

So, 4.75 total, .75 charge+4 second cooldown.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Mcgral18, on 07 October 2014 - 01:43 PM, said:

.75 is the charge, which lasts 1 second?

So, 4.75 total, .75 charge+4 second cooldown.

ah ok I havent used them since the charge was added so I didnt know