20517 replies to this topic

[Ovion]

zagibu, on 27 June 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

Mech rifles are less effective against battlemech armor (-2 damage IIRC), so they would be pretty bad if implemented like in TT.

Ay.

I'd be OK with does-no-crits.
Or maybe -10% damage to armour?
Or even nothing - with such low ammo rates, that's punishment enough in MWO - 81-84 damage per ton, fully half of AC's

[FupDup]

zagibu, on 27 June 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

Mech rifles are less effective against battlemech armor (-2 damage IIRC), so they would be pretty bad if implemented like in TT.

It was -3 actually.

[zagibu]

Yeah, it's pretty sad that there are no viable ballistics below the AC/5. Blame the source material, maybe?

[Odanan]

zagibu, on 27 June 2015 - 09:43 AM, said:

Yeah, it's pretty sad that there are no viable ballistics below the AC/5. Blame the source material, maybe?

AC/2 would be better without the heat issues... (I actually was very successful once with a AC/2 UrbanMech)

But in TT, AC/2 and AC/5 are terrible, specially the former.

[Nightshade24]

Ovion, on 27 June 2015 - 06:25 AM, said:

It's listed as a 3050 weapon (when it was originally made and implemented). yes, 'Modern' ones are later, but it's still a timeline viable weapon, and for MWO that's all that matters.

Mech Rifles are a lighter alternative:

As per thaeir game stats

Spoiler

Light Rifle:
1 Heat / 3 Damage / 3 Tons / 1 Slot
18 Shots per Ton Ammo
Short Range 1-4 / Medium Range 5-8 / Long Range 9-12

Medium Rifle:
2 Heat / 6 Damage / 5 Tons / 2 Slots
9 Shots per Ton Ammo
Minimum Range 1 / Short Range 1-5 / Medium Range 6-10 / Long Range 11-15

Heavy Rifle:
4 Heat / 9 Damage / 8 Tons / 3 Slots
6 Shots per Ton Ammo
Minimum Range 1 / Short Range 1-6 / Medium Range 7-12 / Long Range 13-18

-VS-

AC/2:
1 Heat / 2 Damage / 6 Tons / 1 Slots
45 Shots per Ton Ammo
Minimum Range 4 / Short Range 1-8 / Medium Range 9-16 / Long Range 17-24

AC/5:
1 Heat / 5 Damage / 8 Tons / 4 Slots
20 Shots per Ton Ammo
Minimum Range 3 / Short Range 1-6 / Medium Range 7-12 / Long Range 13-18

AC/10:
3 Heat / 10 Damage / 12 Tons / 7 Slots
10 Shots per Ton Ammo
Short Range 1-5 / Medium Range 6-10 / Long Range 11-15

AC/20:
7 Heat / 20 Damage / 14 Tons / 10 Slots
5 Shots per Ton Ammo
Short Range 1-3 / Medium Range 4-6 / Long Range 7-9

The rifles are shorter range, and lighter, but really limited on ammo, and would feasibly have a significantly slower fire rate, with the Heavy Rifle being comparable to the AC/5 at the end of the day.

So in MWO terms, you'd be looking at along the lines of:

Spoiler

Light Rifle:
1 Heat / 3 Damage / 3 Tons / 1 Slot
27 Shots per Ton Ammo
Range 360 (12) (max 720)

Medium Rifle:
2 Heat / 6 Damage / 5 Tons / 2 Slots
14 Shots per Ton Ammo
Range 450 (15) (max 900)

Heavy Rifle:
4 Heat / 9 Damage / 8 Tons / 3 Slots
9 Shots per Ton Ammo
Range 540 (18) (max 1080)

-VS-

AC/2:
1 Heat / 2 Damage / 6 Tons / 1 Slots
75 Shots per Ton Ammo (if matched usual +50%, would be 67-68)
Range 720 (24) (max 1440)

AC/5:
1 Heat / 5 Damage / 8 Tons / 4 Slots
30 Shots per Ton Ammo
Minimum Range 3 / Short Range 1-6 / Medium Range 7-12 / Long Range 13-18
Range 620 (20) (wasn't this originally 540 (18)?) (max 1240)

AC/10:
3 Heat / 10 Damage / 12 Tons / 7 Slots
15 Shots per Ton Ammo
Range 450 (15) (max 900)

AC/20:
6 Heat / 20 Damage / 14 Tons / 10 Slots
7 Shots per Ton Ammo
Range 270 (9) (max 540)

Light and Medium rifles would be great for smaller mechs that can't practically mount an AC10, and bridge the gap between the Maching Gun and the AC2

I'd also be able to whack 1-2 Light Rifles, or 1 Medium Rifle on a Locust for a giggle.

I understand Artillery being difficult, and potentially hard to implement, but it'd be nice - even if just Arrow IV.

I'd sorta given up on changeable ammo.... but you know, that could be a poor mans way to do it, at least for some things.

Well they do allow you to use different ammo for the LBX for clans at least, hence why the "AC" is in game, they just didn't allow the weapon to switch ammo like willy nilly like it did in lore.

Maybe the same way how you can click Artemis for your weapons, you may get the option to click a button for X ammo type to replace all of those standard ammo weapons for a new ammo type version.

Caseless ammo is also quite important as this is one of hte best ways to push the IS up to make them feel like they have something clearly better then clans.

[Odanan]

Special ammo for ACs and LRMs is still far ahead in the timeline.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Nightshade24, on 27 June 2015 - 06:08 AM, said:

Peter dexter as nearly all Solaris VII are 'apocryphal' and not 100% cannon, maybe 80% cannon, but not 100%.

He piloted a stormcrow in solaris... and in MW4 mercs... it had 4 x LRM 20... Low for MW: O standards, but "okay..." for TT.
Anyway. This could possibly be the hero stormcrow..... of course, no new hardpoints, but Side torso LRM quirks could be what makes this thing unique and be the best LRM stormcrow out there... custom solaris VII skin for the Factory would be nice, with reds and dark greys...

It is possible to loadout a stormcrow with 4 x LRM20.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...080ee08d8de7d0e

Maybe with a smaller engine it could equip more ammo.

[Nightshade24]

I Zeratul I, on 27 June 2015 - 04:05 PM, said:

It is possible to loadout a stormcrow with 4 x LRM20.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...080ee08d8de7d0e

Maybe with a smaller engine it could equip more ammo.

I didn't say it couldn't. I did say it have 3 tons of ammo like you said above.

Odanan, on 27 June 2015 - 03:59 PM, said:

Special ammo for ACs and LRMs is still far ahead in the timeline.

Armour piercing and Tracers are in timeline.

Caseless is only in a few years.

Flak is another...

ofc i do not know if these are lostech and refound by current time.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Nightshade24, on 27 June 2015 - 04:11 PM, said:

I didn't say it couldn't. I did say it have 3 tons of ammo like you said above.


Armour piercing and Tracers are in timeline.

Caseless is only in a few years.

Flak is another...

ofc i do not know if these are lostech and refound by current time.

I'm not doubting you.

I secretly hope someone runs that build, or PGI uses a modified version of that template for a hero mech if only for entertainment purposes.

I'm offering encouragement!

Maybe I'll use it myself as an LRM60 or 15x4 variant.

Edited by I Zeratul I, 27 June 2015 - 04:14 PM.

[Odanan]

But I would love to see (an effective) Inferno SRM.

[Ovion]

I Zeratul I, on 27 June 2015 - 04:05 PM, said:

It is possible to loadout a stormcrow with 4 x LRM20.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...080ee08d8de7d0e

Maybe with a smaller engine it could equip more ammo.

4xLRM15 would be far more efficient.

Hell, you can fit 5xLRM5 with 5T of ammo, over 4LRM20 with 3T.
SCR-A

4 and an ERLL could be good for a laugh.
SCR-A

4xM ports in the Side Torso's would be amazing though.
Give you up to 6 missile points.

[Nightshade24]

I Zeratul I, on 27 June 2015 - 04:13 PM, said:

I'm not doubting you.

I secretly hope someone runs that build, or PGI uses a modified version of that template for a hero mech if only for entertainment purposes.

I'm offering encouragement!

Maybe I'll use it myself as an LRM60 or 15x4 variant.

I actually run the 4 x LRM 15 one xD

[Strum Wealh]

Odanan, on 27 June 2015 - 03:59 PM, said:

Special ammo for ACs and LRMs is still far ahead in the timeline.

There are a fair number of alternate munition types that would currently fit with MWO's point in the BattleTech timeline.

[-Skyrider-]

Now after PGI has come out about this new IIC pack, it will make predicting new mech packs harder. From this pack and the couple before it PGI have been and probably will continue to make up as many variants as they want for our favorite mechs, to get them in game as long as it has one time wise variant out there. Now this does make sense from a money making point of view, just give the people what they want and then they through money at you. Some problems do arise from this mainly making all new mech packs a popularity contest to get the best mechs. (Which I'm not against) So we might see less variety among tonnages beyond what we have now, and have the game lack some rolls that need to be filled by less popular more versatile mechs that would push game play foreword and add diversity. Anyways I was just wondering what you guys have to say about this and which type of mech pack design you would rather have.

[Odanan]

Strum Wealh, on 27 June 2015 - 09:41 PM, said:

There are a fair number of alternate munition types that would currently fit with MWO's point in the BattleTech timeline.

Wow, there is really a quite number of special ammo available. How would they be translated to the game?

LRM/SRM:
- Follow-the-Leader LRM - missiles would fly in an orderly line (can all hit the same component, but can all miss).
- Swarm LRM - missiles would split in several sub-munitions closer to the target.
- Thunder LRM - impossible to implement in multiplayer because of the number of objects that would need to be stored in the server (imagine one single LRM boat launching dozens of these mines).
- Fragmentation - similar to Swarm, but ineffective against Mechs.
- Heat-Seeking - easier to hit hot targets, harder to hit cool targets.
- Listen-Kill - easier to hit non-Clan or ECMed units, even harder to hit Clan and ECMed units.
- Smoke - not very useful (because of the thermal view mode) and would make the game hellishly laggy.
- Inferno SRM - hopefully one day in the game (specially because it was always treated as a separated weapon).
- Tear Gas - no use in this game.

Autocannon:
- Flak - similar to the (real) LBX.
- Trace - not useful for the current IS ACs implementation (single round).
- Incendiary - very interesting concept: less damage, but adds heat.

Well, there is enough number of special munitions for PGI to study a change in the mech lab. Allowing only one ammo type to the weapon type at a time would simplify things.

[Strum Wealh]

Imagine a 'Mech loaded up with Flamers, inferno missiles, and incendiary AC shells...

[Odanan]

Strum Wealh, on 28 June 2015 - 04:22 AM, said:

Imagine a 'Mech loaded up with Flamers, inferno missiles, and incendiary AC shells...

As long as they do more heat to the target instead of you...

[Juodas Varnas]

Odanan, on 28 June 2015 - 07:02 AM, said:

As long as they do more heat to the target instead of you...

Well, truth be told, they used to add less heat to the enemy than to yourself in TT too.
(from what i recall, it was very awkward, the way it worked)
It generated 3 heat to you, but to the target it either dealt 2 damage or 2 heat, not both.
At least, i THINK that's how it worked.
It was mostly a utility weapon, to set the terrain on fire or something along these lines.
I don't know.

[Juodas Varnas]

What i WOULD like to see is the Plasma rifles.
They're quite a bit from the current timeline, but they're quite interesting.

They were 6 tons and 2 crit slots, dealt 10 damage, but also inflicted heat on the enemy ( i think the amount of heat was random- a d6 roll) and had decent range (identical to Large Lasers).
The problem with it was that it also generated 10 heat to you and also used ammo, but other than that, i think it would be a pretty sweet weapon to have in MW:O (if the heat-scale was redone, so that heat increase actually mattered)

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 28 June 2015 - 09:58 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Juodas Varnas, on 28 June 2015 - 08:16 AM, said:

Well, truth be told, they used to add less heat to the enemy than to yourself in TT too.
(from what i recall, it was very awkward, the way it worked)
It generated 3 heat to you, but to the target it either dealt 2 damage or 2 heat, not both.
At least, i THINK that's how it worked.
It was mostly a utility weapon, to set the terrain on fire or something along these lines.
I don't know.

That is, indeed, how Flamers worked in TT.

"Flamers can cause heat or damage at the discretion of the controlling player. Some weapons have the capacity to do both." - Total Warfare, pg. 213

"Heat-Causing Weapon: This weapon type may inflict additional heat, damage or both — the additional heat applies to 'Mechs and aerospace fighters/small craft only, as indicated in the notes on the appropriate Weapon and Equipment tables." - Total Warfare, pg. 113

Personally, I think it would have been interesting if PGI had implemented the Flamer as a dual-purpose DPS/HPS weapon:

• When fired, the Flamer delivers 0.08 damage to the target per "tick" at 10 ticks per second, resulting in 0.80 DPS being delivered to the target.
  
• When fired, the Flamer delivers 0.08 heat to the target per "tick" at 10 ticks per second, resulting in 0.80 HPS being delivered to the target.
  
• When fired, the Flamer delivers 0.12 heat to the firing unit per "tick" at 10 ticks per second, resulting in 1.20 HPS being delivered to the firing unit.

The value of 0.80 DPS/HPS was chosen due to this being the current DPS rating of the IS Machine Gun at the time of this writing, according to Smurfy.
The value of 1.2 HPS to the firing unit was chosen to keep the implementation true to the spirit of the BT Flamer, which produced 3 units of heat in the firing unit in exchange for imparting 2 units of heat (or 2 units of damage) to the target - in both cases, it's a 50% difference.

Thoughts?