#9101
Posted 24 September 2014 - 08:15 PM
#9102
Posted 24 September 2014 - 08:32 PM
CycKath, on 24 September 2014 - 08:15 PM, said:
The Binary Laser Cannon is functionally identical to any other standard Laser as it is not much more than two Large Lasers fused together. Why it would be PP FLD or even PP FLD with splash? And yes, it is indeed a canon weapon. The coding part would hopefully be a bit streamlined by now, but mostly it will give some more variety to IS lasers. Balancing it should not be too hard since it really more of a big gun beam option for 'Mechs with available criticals, weight and heat capacity, but limited energy hardpoints. Better yet is that it is a post Exodus weapon so the Clans have no equivalent.
#9104
Posted 25 September 2014 - 04:10 AM
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Talos
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Toro
Yes I'm dirty periphery scum. What can I say, I like rooting for the underdog.
Edited by Logan Hawke, 25 September 2014 - 04:12 AM.
#9105
Posted 25 September 2014 - 04:20 AM
Logan Hawke, on 25 September 2014 - 04:10 AM, said:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Talos
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Toro
Yes I'm dirty periphery scum. What can I say, I like rooting for the underdog.
Both are interesting, but too bad, not enough variants
#9106
Posted 25 September 2014 - 11:06 AM
#9107
Posted 25 September 2014 - 08:59 PM
Logan Hawke, on 25 September 2014 - 04:10 AM, said:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Talos
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Toro
Yes I'm dirty periphery scum. What can I say, I like rooting for the underdog.
As mentioned above the variants are a bit scant, they also happen to be more than a bit extinct.
#9108
Posted 28 September 2014 - 04:09 AM
#9109
Posted 28 September 2014 - 05:25 AM
#9110
Posted 28 September 2014 - 05:35 AM
Me too...
#9111
Posted 28 September 2014 - 06:33 AM
Edited by SgtMagor, 28 September 2014 - 06:39 AM.
#9112
Posted 28 September 2014 - 06:41 AM
Nathan Foxbane, on 24 September 2014 - 08:32 PM, said:
better question is ...why in almost any scenario would anyone want it, lest they majorly break the canon design?
It's 4 crits and 9 tons..... and does the same heat as 2 large lasers, but only 75% of the damage of 2. In TT they ALMOST made sense as all that damage hit one location..... except that PPCs and ER PPCs were still better. (2 less damage, but also heat that ranged from 1 pt to 6 pts lower, significantly better range and were 2 tons lighter and 1 crit smaller to boot), especially since MWO has perfect convergence anyhow.
The design was scrapped and ignored for a reason. It's simply a bad design. We already have bad weapons in the game.
Edited by Bishop Steiner, 28 September 2014 - 06:44 AM.
#9113
Posted 28 September 2014 - 06:46 AM
#9114
Posted 28 September 2014 - 07:23 AM
As long as the weight and range are lore, I will allow them to tweak anything else.
Edited by Spheroid, 28 September 2014 - 07:26 AM.
#9115
Posted 28 September 2014 - 07:55 AM
Spheroid, on 28 September 2014 - 07:23 AM, said:
As long as the weight and range are lore, I will allow them to tweak anything else.
personally I'd rather they spend that time making the Pulse Lasers in general, more worth their weight, in more scenarios.
#9116
Posted 28 September 2014 - 07:58 AM
If I would encounter a Charger that would not absolutely suck in game, then it wouldn´t actually be a Charger. (leaving melee and unique Mechs aside)
The Hatamoto has variants galore. It has unique looks. The samurai theme was even part of the design process to instill some more snake pride. It gives the Dracs an assault that is clearly meant for them. (admittedly the Mauler cover that too)
Finally it is a samurai robot. Who wouldn´t like a samurai robot?
#9118
Posted 28 September 2014 - 08:14 AM
Bishop Steiner, on 28 September 2014 - 06:41 AM, said:
---
Are there any weapons in MWO that don't majorly break the canon design?
As for the Blazer, here are my own 2-minute ideas for its stats:
<Weapon id="1015" name="BinaryLaser" HardpointAliases="Energy,Laser" faction="InnerSphere"> <Loc nameTag="@BL" descTag="@BL_desc" iconTag="StoreIcons\BinaryLaser.dds" /> <WeaponStats Health="10" slots="4" type="Energy" projectileclass="" numFiring="1" damage="16.0" heatdamage="0" heatpenalty="2.8" minheatpenaltylevel="3" impulse="0.0" heatPenaltyID="3" heat="14.0" cooldown="3.5" ammoType="" ammoPerShot="0" minRange="0" longRange="450" maxRange="900" visRange="1500" tons="9" duration="1.2" lifetime="0" speed="0" volleydelay="0.0" maxDepth="10.0" /> <EffectList> <Effect name="Beam" asset="Objects/weapons/laser_beam_binary.cgf" /> <Effect name="BeamCap" asset="Objects/weapons/laser_impact_binary.cgf" /> <!--time : time it takes for the beam to scale to 100% for x,z scale distance : how much the beam grows in one sec--> <Effect name="ParticleBeam" asset="" /> <Effect name="TraceEffects" asset="laser_binary" /> <Effect name="Sound:Fire" asset="sounds/weapons:lasers:laser_binary_fire" float="0.0" /> <Effect name="Sound:PostFire" asset="sounds/weapons:lasers:laser_binary_power" float="0.0" /> <Effect name="DamageBrush" asset="Textures\\decals\\damage_brushes\\laser_binary.tif" /> <Effect name="DamageBrushType" asset="laser" float="32" float2="32" /> <Effect name="Projector:icecave" asset="textures/defaults/sparks_test.dds" vector="0.243,0.411,1.0" float="0.5" float2="1.5" float3="12" float4="160" float5="80" float6="6.5" num="9" /> </EffectList> <Audio OnDestroyedDialogue="BB_BinaryLaser_Destroyed" /> </Weapon>
TL;DR:
Pros:
- 1 ton less
- Slightly better heat efficiency due to slightly longer cooldown and beam duration (2LL = 1.65 heat per second and 14 heat per beam second, BLC = 2.95 heat per second and 11.67 heat per beam second)
- Only needs 1 hardpoint
Cons:
- 2 less alpha damage
- 0.2s longer duration
- Lower DPS due to slightly cooldown and beam duration (4.24 DPS vs 3.37 DPS)
Edited by FupDup, 28 September 2014 - 08:19 AM.
#9119
Posted 28 September 2014 - 08:17 AM
Bishop Steiner, on 28 September 2014 - 08:00 AM, said:
You´re a spokesperson for thousands now? Impressive, dear Bishop.
------------
Stupid quarrels over aesthetics aside, I still hope I have never to lay eyes on an effective Charger build. Takes away all the Charger flavour.
#9120
Posted 28 September 2014 - 08:18 AM
Molossian Dog, on 28 September 2014 - 08:17 AM, said:
------------
Stupid quarrels over aesthetics aside, I still hope I have never to lay eyes on an effective Charger build. Takes away all the Charger flavour.
every bit as much as you are.
18 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 18 guests, 0 anonymous users