108 replies to this topic

[KraftySOT]

Youre trying to make the case that point weapons are better than area weapons....

This goes against...well...450 years of warfare.




Yer laser has a very very low probability of killing this soldier, while he has a great chance at killing you.

A flamer makes this soldier very, very dead. As would artillery.



This man has defeated your laser

Edited by KraftySOT, 10 December 2014 - 03:39 PM.

[FupDup]

KraftySOT, on 10 December 2014 - 03:30 PM, said:

You can test this yourself. Get a laser pointer, some friends, go to the woods. Try and paint them with the laser pointer.

Aiming in this game is easier than aiming in real life because we get targeting reticules and we don't have anything like shaky hands. I'm pretty sure our beams are also bigger than a handheld laser pointer as well. The smallest and weakest laser we have in MWO weighs 500 kilograms (the Small Laser).

KraftySOT, on 10 December 2014 - 03:30 PM, said:

Compare that to simply saturating a 60 foot radius in 2,000 degree plasma.

Not only have you killed them, youve turned their cover and concealment in an empty smoldering parking lot, still on fire, which now cant be occupied by more infantry.

Infantry in a trench? No problem. In a house? No problem. Patch of woods? No problem. In a bunker? No problem. Behind a shield? No problem. Using anti mech artillery piece with a shield? No problem.

Something like a Pak36 with a shield, would defeat your lasers.

A little shield like that would get instantly obliterated by a futuristic energy weapon that weighs a full metric ton. A Medium Laser (1000 kilograms) is more than twice as heavy as a Pak36.


Keep in mind that I'm not saying that one laser used alone has the same effectiveness as one Flamer used alone, I'm saying that lasers are more than good enough to use against infantry while still being better in all other roles. In plain English:

Flamer
Good against infantry
Useless against everything else

Lasers
Decent against infantry
Very good against everything else

I know which of the two choices that I would pick.

[pwnface]

INFANTRY DON'T EXIST. WHO CARES?

This autistic argument between you guys will make all the imaginary infantry suicide if they have to listen to this crap.

Edited by pwnface, 10 December 2014 - 03:39 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

I say this in every flamer thread, I'll say it in this one too.

• I really want flamers to be buffed as damage dealers. I would love to use them on my Firestarters.
  
• PGI really doesn't want flamers to be buffed. All jokes aside, they're not so dumb that they fail to recognise how bad flamers are. There must be a reason why they don't want people to use flamers. My bet is that it's too taxing for the servers. It's probably the same reason why we can't have an on/off toggle for the TAG beam. All that continuous use of TAG and multiple flamers would increase the workload for the servers, which are already struggling during peak hours, from what I understand.

pwnface, on 10 December 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

INFANTRY DON'T EXIST. WHO CARES?

This autistic argument between you guys will make all the imaginary infantry suicide if they have to listen to this crap.

Would they use lasers or flamers? I personally think lasers would be more effective.

[KraftySOT]

Flamers.

Much bigger than lasers.

[pwnface]

Alistair Winter, on 10 December 2014 - 03:40 PM, said:

I say this in every flamer thread, I'll say it in this one too.

• I really want flamers to be buffed as damage dealers. I would love to use them on my Firestarters.
  
• PGI really doesn't want flamers to be buffed. All jokes aside, they're not so dumb that they fail to recognise how bad flamers are. There must be a reason why they don't want people to use flamers. My bet is that it's too taxing for the servers. It's probably the same reason why we can't have an on/off toggle for the TAG beam. All that continuous use of TAG and multiple flamers would increase the workload for the servers, which are already struggling during peak hours, from what I understand.

You might be on to something, I remember when our unit was running Novas with C-ERSML and machine gun spam for testing a drop deck the servers would freeze and crash like 80% of the time. Maybe it is too many hitscan calculations to handle at the same time.

[KraftySOT]

FupDup, on 10 December 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

Aiming in this game is easier than aiming in real life because we get targeting reticules and we don't have anything like shaky hands. I'm pretty sure our beams are also bigger than a handheld laser pointer as well. The smallest and weakest laser we have in MWO weighs 500 kilograms (the Small Laser).



A little shield like that would get instantly obliterated by a futuristic energy weapon that weighs a full metric ton. A Medium Laser (1000 kilograms) is more than twice as heavy as a Pak36.


Keep in mind that I'm not saying that one laser used alone has the same effectiveness as one Flamer used alone, I'm saying that lasers are more than good enough to use against infantry while still being better in all other roles. In plain English:

Flamer
Good against infantry
Useless against everything else

Lasers
Decent against infantry
Very good against everything else

I know which of the two choices that I would pick.

But youre talking about flashing over these targets. Even the highest power lasers today, used in experimentation, need time on target before they start boring holes through steel.

You can lump it under "future tech" but the reality is a laser is a laser is a laser.

You can look up the megawatts for Btech lasers, and atomic lasers at Cern...see which is more powerful. Even those lasers couldnt do what a single section of 150mm howitzers could do in the same amount of time.

[Sigmar Sich]

Quote

I think this is making it much more complicated than it needs to be.

1) Reduce self heat from 1 heat per second to 0.2-0.25 per second.
2) MAYBE reduce DPS to 0.5, I'd say try it with the same DPS and see how well it works.
3) Keep 90% heat generation cap.

True. Originally, i had same way and even numbers in mind )
I thought of different mechanic as alternative to to heat cap - dont want to be flamed to shutdown - dont shoot. Let the player be in control of heat management, not the automatic failsafe.
PS Would be fun to watch flamer mechs duel.

Edited by Sigmar Sich, 10 December 2014 - 03:48 PM.

[KraftySOT]

Of course, none of this has anything to do with the MWO flamer being totally useless, and totally screwed up heat when you start hitting another mech....

Its fuuuuucked up.

No argument from me.

However, yeah I take issue with lasers even being feasible combat weapons, at all, ever, let alone that theyd be even marginally useful in killing infantry that dont act like Jihadis, standing around in the open.

Well trained infantry are going to decimate mechs. And used right in the TT, they do that.

[FupDup]

KraftySOT, on 10 December 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

But youre talking about flashing over these targets. Even the highest power lasers today, used in experimentation, need time on target before they start boring holes through steel.

You can lump it under "future tech" but the reality is a laser is a laser is a laser.

You can look up the megawatts for Btech lasers, and atomic lasers at Cern...see which is more powerful. Even those lasers couldnt do what a single section of 150mm howitzers could do in the same amount of time.

So you're basing your whole analysis off of present day lasers? If that were the case, why is the Medium Laser such an awesome weapon? Why do any of our current mech-mounted lasers burn through heavy armor in a short time?

Because space magic, that's why.

KraftySOT, on 10 December 2014 - 03:48 PM, said:

Of course, none of this has anything to do with the MWO flamer being totally useless, and totally screwed up heat when you start hitting another mech....

Its fuuuuucked up.

No argument from me.

However, yeah I take issue with lasers even being feasible combat weapons, at all, ever, let alone that theyd be even marginally useful in killing infantry that dont act like Jihadis, standing around in the open.

Well trained infantry are going to decimate mechs. And used right in the TT, they do that.

Also note that the heat in the video wasn't triggered by shooting at another mech. The heat started off very low, but MWO's Flamers generate exponentially higher heat as you fire them longer. By the time I got to the trial Centurion, the exponential effect kicked in enough to make an impact on my Stalker's 51 SHS.

Edited by FupDup, 10 December 2014 - 03:57 PM.

[KraftySOT]

FupDup, on 10 December 2014 - 03:54 PM, said:

So you're basing your whole analysis off of present day lasers? If that were the case, why is the Medium Laser such an awesome weapon? Why do any of our current mech-mounted lasers burn through heavy armor in a short time?

Because space magic, that's why.

Because space magic. And because the medium is statistically the best.

And present day lasers are as good as lasers get. Its focal size, beam width, power, size, weight, heat. As you add one, you lose another, same with missiles.

You dont get super duper space missiles...because physics doesnt change.

Edited by KraftySOT, 10 December 2014 - 03:58 PM.

[Davers]

pwnface, on 10 December 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

I think this is making it much more complicated than it needs to be.

1) Reduce self heat from 1 heat per second to 0.2-0.25 per second.
2) MAYBE reduce DPS to 0.5, I'd say try it with the same DPS and see how well it works.
3) Keep 90% heat generation cap.


Infantry don't exist. Who cares about imaginary infantry. Go play TT if you want infantry.

Somehow this sounds worse than how they are now. Probably the drop in DPS.

[KraftySOT]

And an Atomic Laser and a PPC is the same thing.

Totally dont operate in real life, like they do in sci fi land.

You gotta suspend disbelief in fantasy otherwise it gets....silly.

[FupDup]

KraftySOT, on 10 December 2014 - 03:57 PM, said:

Because space magic. And because the medium is statistically the best.

And present day lasers are as good as lasers get. Its focal size, beam width, power, size, weight. As you add one, you lose another, same with missiles.

You dont get super duper space missiles...because physics doesnt change.

Physics do change when you step into the BT universe, where ER lasers don't do any more damage than normal lasers (higher energy output should mean more damage!), where giant robots are even feasible as combat vehicles, where smaller caliber ballistics somehow have longer range than larger caliber ones, and you can destroy a mech's entire arm by shooting it in the hand enough times.

Edited by FupDup, 10 December 2014 - 04:07 PM.

[KraftySOT]

FupDup, on 10 December 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:

Physics do change when you step into the BT universe, where ER lasers don't do any more damage than normal lasers (higher energy output should mean more damage!), where giant robots are even feasible as combat vehicles, where smaller caliber ballistics somehow how longer range than larger caliber ones, and you can destroy a mech's entire arm by shooting it in the hand enough times.

Oh yeah no I totally agree with you.

But even in their reality, beam width is still pretty small. Flamers are just better anti infantry weapons. Lasers will do. I mean imagine your mech comes up on a convoy of motorized infantry. The lasers are clearly better there than the flamer.

BT physics are all mixed up girl.

And id say infantry on the move, on the attack, routed, lasers do just fine. But against defensive positions, theyre barely effective at all.

And infantry on the attack against mechs is just...stupid...unless youre under excessive artillery and air cover with a large combined arms force.

Edited by KraftySOT, 10 December 2014 - 04:06 PM.

[CocoaJin]

Davers, on 10 December 2014 - 03:27 PM, said:

Flamers should be a viable weapon choice, even if it has a smaller niche than the medium lasers it competes with.

The closest parallel/competing weapon system to flamers would be MGs. Both are primary anti-infantry and soft target ordnance and secondary/improvised anti-mech weapon systems, both are .5 tons, both realitivly short ranged, both hit-scan, both understandably suck against mechs.

Edited by CocoaJin, 10 December 2014 - 04:15 PM.

[Lily from animove]

fix heta first, because for some awkward reason flamers seem to trigger ghosheatmechanic by themself startig to create an exponential heatcurve. which makes even 2 flamers a NEVER heat neutral build no matter how much DHS you stuff in the mech.

[pwnface]

Davers, on 10 December 2014 - 03:58 PM, said:

Somehow this sounds worse than how they are now. Probably the drop in DPS.

The drop in DPS may not be necessary but the decreased heat would allow mechs to keep flamers on an enemy mech for a much longer duration before overheating. The increased time on target would effectively increase the damage dealt as well.

Exponential heat generation on the flamers definitely needs to go as well.

Edited by pwnface, 10 December 2014 - 04:20 PM.

[CocoaJin]

FupDup, on 10 December 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:

Physics do change when you step into the BT universe, where ER lasers don't do any more damage than normal lasers (higher energy output should mean more damage!), where giant robots are even feasible as combat vehicles, where smaller caliber ballistics somehow have longer range than larger caliber ones, and you can destroy a mech's entire arm by shooting it in the hand enough times.

Larger projectiles have shorter ranges as a mechanic to emulate the difficulty in placing rounds on target at range due to burst fire recoil of ACs Their short range in BT is more of an imposed effective range of the crappy weapon system, not a reflection of actual projectile ranges/flight characteristics.

[Davers]

CocoaJin, on 10 December 2014 - 04:14 PM, said:

The closest parallel/competing weapon system to flamers would be MGs. Both are primary anti-infantry and soft target ordnance and secondary/improvised anti-mech weapon systems, both are .5 tons, both realitivly short ranged, both hit-scan, both understandably suck against mechs.

Sorta.

Even in TT Machine guns are pretty much immune to ammo depletion. They have something like 200 rounds worth of ammo, making them the most damaging substance in all of BT when they explode. Since you would NEVER USE 200 rounds of ammo in even 4-5 matches, jettisoning machine gun ammo turn one is a common tactic as it is far more dangerous to you than your opponent.

Even so, machine guns are now useful vs mechs, while flamers are still not.