653 replies to this topic

[Yokaiko]

Karl Streiger, on 28 March 2015 - 09:47 AM, said:

Problem is they need a time for the players to adjust, but hell a ultra 10 means an endless stream of 2.5dmg bullets - well same as the ac2 dakkas of the past.

I can do the same thing with 3 er-mlas.....without running out of ammo

[Mcgral18]

kapusta11, on 28 March 2015 - 09:04 AM, said:

If you don't have enough firepower as the result of tonnage or hardpoint constraints like Ice Ferret being overengined is indeed bad, otherwise speed = less facetime and with CXL engine you risk nothing.

Night Gyr will have 71 kph movement speed and JJs, based on my experience piloting XL280 Cataphracts I say that's more than enough.

Honestly, due to Endo+Ferro+JJs, it lacks crit slots.

The 325 or 350 still allows for plenty of weapons, with more heatsinks.
It still allows for plenty of deadly loadouts, but I actually had to go a half to full ton underweight because there wasn't enough crit slots for another ton of ammo.
Play around with SSWs if you want to get a picture of the constraints. Fixed ferro slots also restrict dual Gauss to either arm, so no sword and boarding, unlike the Timby.
It does however come LRM80+A stock....it does that better than the PeaceDove.

TT construction rules for a 75 tonner is 300 or 375 though. (or lower, but you REALLY don't want that)

[Repasy Cooper]

Khobai, on 28 March 2015 - 09:11 AM, said:

Its not just the Ice Ferret. Every single clan light gets screwed by locked engine ratings.

The best solution remains to unlock engine ratings and impose engine caps on any mech that could abuse unlocked engine ratings. You would fix most clan mechs overnight without making mechs like the madcat/daishi any better.

Engine, armor type, internals and heat sinks are locked for all omnimechs. This is the compromise PGI made to omnitech to avoid making battletech obsolete. Why are people still talking as if they will release these restrictions on omnimechs? It makes no sense. The Clan omnimechs will NEVER be able to change engine rating. Same goes for armor type, heat sinks, and internals. Because this is the prominent disadvantage omnimechs are supposed to have.

The ONLY Clan mechs that may be able to modify these components are Clan battlemechs, never omnimechs. And for that matter, IS omnimechs (when they are released) you can bet will have the exact same restrictions as Clan omnimechs. The locked components are actually a feature of omnitech, not Clantech.

So for example, if PGI ever released the Warhammer-IIC, the mech would start out with Endo Steel, Ferro-Fibrous armor, and a Standard 320 engine, but it would have the ability to change all these component upgrades (with the max engine rating capping somewhere around 385-400 most likely). The hardpoints would be locked to 1 energy for each arm, 2 energy for each side torso, 1 missile hardpoint for the right torso, and 1 energy hardpoint for the head. ECM wouldn't be available for this standard variant, as Warhammer-IIC's did not make use of it until redesigns over a hundred years after the Warhammer-IIC 2.

As another example, take the IS omnimech Sunder, a real powerhouse mech inspired by the Loki and Thor. This guy would be locked with standard armor, standard internals, double heatsinks, and a 360 XL rated engine. These components cannot be modified, as they are the base of the omnimech. Moreover, 14 double heatsinks would be locked to the omnimech as well. The hardpoints, however, would be modifiable. Based on PGI's code of releasing a mech with at least 2 alternate variations, I imagine that the first three Sunder omnimechs released would be the SD1-O, SD1-OA, and SD1-OB. Taking this into account, ECM would not be available for this omnimech. Also, shuffling omni-pods would allow you to equip:

1 ballistic hardpoint OR 1 missile hardpoint in the LA

1 energy hardpoint OR 2 energy hardpoints in the RA

1 energy hardpoint OR 1 energy hardpoint & 1 C3 master w/ TAG in the LT

1 energy hardpoint OR 1 energy hardpoint & 1 C3 master w/ TAG in the RT

2 missile hardpoints OR 1 missile hardpoint in the CT

1 missile hardpoint OR no hardpoints in the HD

Also, even though neither of these chassis were ever equipped with AMS in TT BT, they would still probably have the ability to equip one or two AMS depending on the variant (since there are no A-pods / B-pods).

This is the compromise between battletech and omnitech. Battletech allows for customizable components but locks the hardpoints. The omnimech has locked components but modifiable hardpoints. You can't just let omnimechs edit locked components, that would make them SO UNBELIEVABLY OP!!! PGI will never compromise on this issue, so you guys might as well drop it.

Edited by Repasy, 28 March 2015 - 10:17 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mcgral18, on 28 March 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

Honestly, due to Endo+Ferro+JJs, it lacks crit slots.

The 325 or 350 still allows for plenty of weapons, with more heatsinks.
It still allows for plenty of deadly loadouts, but I actually had to go a half to full ton underweight because there wasn't enough crit slots for another ton of ammo.
Play around with SSWs if you want to get a picture of the constraints. Fixed ferro slots also restrict dual Gauss to either arm, so no sword and boarding, unlike the Timby.
It does however come LRM80+A stock....it does that better than the PeaceDove.

TT construction rules for a 75 tonner is 300 or 375 though. (or lower, but you REALLY don't want that)

yeah, pretty much, the point. But I learned long ago that arguing anything with Khobai is a waste of breath, so, meh.

Mcgral18, on 28 March 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

TT construction rules for a 75 tonner is 300 or 375 though. (or lower, but you REALLY don't want that)

wait, you mean those std 250 packing Orions aren't Meta?

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2015 - 09:50 AM, said:

sure you do. It's in 2 areas, your shorten the burst, and you increase projectile speed. some need tweaks more than others. UAC10 is about the only halfway decent tuac the clans have.

If they were truly as useful as you think , the comps would be running them.

I love the cuac10, but yeah... As it stands, its bad. Probably the best of the lot as uac2's are silly, 5's do too little damage per bullet, 20's are way too hard to land shells where you want them due to loooooong burst times and very slow projectile speed.

Faster bursts and projectile speed across the board would help a lot. As it stands, the lbx's are arguably better, and lbx's are still bad compared to proper autocannons.

[Deathlike]

Wintersdark, on 28 March 2015 - 11:28 AM, said:

I love the cuac10, but yeah... As it stands, its bad. Probably the best of the lot as uac2's are silly, 5's do too little damage per bullet, 20's are way too hard to land shells where you want them due to loooooong burst times and very slow projectile speed.

Faster bursts and projectile speed across the board would help a lot. As it stands, the lbx's are arguably better, and lbx's are still bad compared to proper autocannons.

I did a brief Clan LBX experiment to find out.

Clan LBX10s are strangely better than 2 CLBX5s and far far better than an CLBX20. I didn't bother with the LBX2, because it tickles.

I'm not actually aware ff the IS LBX10 has better spread than the Clan LBX10... but they feel very similar.

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 28 March 2015 - 05:16 PM, said:

I did a brief Clan LBX experiment to find out.

Clan LBX10s are strangely better than 2 CLBX5s and far far better than an CLBX20. I didn't bother with the LBX2, because it tickles.

I'm not actually aware ff the IS LBX10 has better spread than the Clan LBX10... but they feel very similar.

just how scientifically tested was this? Because tbh, the lb-5X is actually surprisingly good, in part because of how tight the spread is...but also, high RoF, low heat. Mind you, I'm not anti LB-10X (I mean, I prefer the ac10, but don't always have the option), and use it a fair bit (SMN-P and CN9-D), just curious what criteria was set to determine this?

Mind you, I prefer a single ac10 over 2x ac5, so I'm not disagreeing, just curious.

[Repasy Cooper]

Deathlike, on 28 March 2015 - 05:16 PM, said:

I did a brief Clan LBX experiment to find out.

Clan LBX10s are strangely better than 2 CLBX5s and far far better than an CLBX20. I didn't bother with the LBX2, because it tickles.

I'm not actually aware ff the IS LBX10 has better spread than the Clan LBX10... but they feel very similar.

Heh, that reminds me of when I threw a pair of LB20-X on a Hellbringer. That's right, a pair. On a Hellbringer.

Had ammo shortage risks, but interestingly enough this was automatically mitigated through tactical play. When your only weapons are close range, you tend not to fire them unless you have a for-sure point blank shot. Resulted in an insanely good ambush mech! Would not recommend for ComWar of course, as ambush is more or less useless in that scenario (pretty easy to tell where the enemy is gonna pop up), but MAN did I EVER shred some mechs to pieces. Sent players crying home to their mommies every time they attempted to push through the tunnel on Crimson Strait. I was just around the corner every time without fail, armed with a hailstorm of pellets

[FupDup]

I'm going to chime in about Clan ballistic bursts...they're not long. The longest burst is the Clan UAC/20, which takes a grand total of 0.68 seconds to get all 5 shells out (first shell is instant, next 4 shells have a 0.17 second delay between each of them). The Clan Small Pulse Laser is 0.75 seconds. If you feel that shorter than a Small Pulse Laser is too long, I don't really know what to tell you...

They don't need shorter bursts, they just need a velocity bump of something like 200-300* m/s. Then you can keep the full burst on-target more reliably and at longer distances, while still being less efficient at damage allocation than IS ACs (which they absolutely MUST be, given their weight/slot/range/doubletap advantages). Also helps against fasties.

*(Maybe 400, but that's the limit, except maybe the [U]AC/2 could possibly use 500 extra speed but nothing higher than that).

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 28 March 2015 - 08:52 PM, said:

I'm going to chime in about Clan ballistic bursts...they're not long. The longest burst is the Clan UAC/20, which takes a grand total of 0.68 seconds to get all 5 shells out (first shell is instant, next 4 shells have a 0.17 second delay between each of them). The Clan Small Pulse Laser is 0.75 seconds. If you feel that shorter than a Small Pulse Laser is too long, I don't really know what to tell you...

They don't need shorter bursts, they just need a velocity bump of something like 200-300* m/s. Then you can keep the full burst on-target more reliably and at longer distances, while still being less efficient at damage allocation than IS ACs (which they absolutely MUST be, given their weight/slot/range/doubletap advantages). Also helps against fasties.

*(Maybe 400, but that's the limit, except maybe the [U]AC/2 could possibly use 500 extra speed but nothing higher than that).

How long is the burst on a IS Autocannon again?

You see, the problem I have with your comparison, is Lasers are massively lighter than Autocannons. It's apples and oranges. It's how do Clan ACs stack up against IS ACs. And yes, for that, the burst is too long. I agree the velocity needs a bump, but it does not obviate the need for a shorter burst. The UAC20 should be .5ish second bursts, with 300 m/s higher projectile speed, which is still slightly inferior, damage on target, in most cases to the IS AC20, but has the advantages of lighter weight, double tap and C.ACs should simply not exist at all.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2015 - 09:01 PM, said:

How long is the burst on a IS Autocannon again?

IS ACs pay for that by being heavier, bulkier, not shooting as far, not double tapping in most cases, and being mounted on mechs that don't get to use smaller items like Endo/FF/DHS/etc or super XLs.

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2015 - 09:01 PM, said:

You see, the problem I have with your comparison, is Lasers are massively lighter than Autocannons. It's apples and oranges. It's how do Clan ACs stack up against IS ACs. And yes, for that, the burst is too long. I agree the velocity needs a bump, but it does not obviate the need for a shorter burst. The UAC20 should be .5ish second bursts, with 300 m/s higher projectile speed, which is still slightly inferior, damage on target, in most cases to the IS AC20, but has the advantages of lighter weight, double tap and C.ACs should simply not exist at all.

0.5 seconds combined with the better velocity would pretty much negate most of the intended drawbacks of burst in the first place, because velocity itself already increases accuracy as it is -- so effectively you're double-buffing its accuracy in one swoop.

This is a 12 ton 8 slot gun that can deal twice the damage of the 14 ton 10 slot IS AC/20, with a longer max range. It has to be significantly (not just slightly) less efficient in damage allocation or else the situation is gonna be heavily skewed.


Related: A smidgen longer durations don't stop the Clan ERML and LPL from being way better than their IS counterparts, and the ERSL/SPL/MPL to a lesser extent. It has to be a noticeable amount for the difference to be meaningful, as seen with the CERLL.

And yes, lasers are actually a somewhat decent comparison point here, because Clan [U]ACs basically are ammo lasers. It's just like how IS lazors have to be DoT to try to balance them against IS ACs, to make up for their various other advantages.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2015 - 09:01 PM, said:

How long is the burst on a IS Autocannon again?

You see, the problem I have with your comparison, is Lasers are massively lighter than Autocannons.

Being lighter doesn't make up for the heat efficiency problem though. The most efficient laser the clans have still generates twice as much heat as a UAC20 to do the same damage. We often get into the wrong way of thinking that double heat just means you need double the DHS but those free truedubs throws everything out of whack with that line of thinking. That's why even if it is slightly less heat efficient, builds that mix energy AND ballistic are almost always better than pure energy boats.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 28 March 2015 - 09:44 PM.

[Deathlike]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2015 - 08:42 PM, said:

just how scientifically tested was this? Because tbh, the lb-5X is actually surprisingly good, in part because of how tight the spread is...but also, high RoF, low heat. Mind you, I'm not anti LB-10X (I mean, I prefer the ac10, but don't always have the option), and use it a fair bit (SMN-P and CN9-D), just curious what criteria was set to determine this?

Mind you, I prefer a single ac10 over 2x ac5, so I'm not disagreeing, just curious.

It's not uber-scientific. It's like my own personal testing of the LBX10.

The CLBX5 testing was strictly on the Summoner-D... when trying to figure out between 1 LBX10 or 2 LBX5.

The criteria is simply... if I was able to be more effective with the dual LBX5 in the same range as the LBX10 when I use it. I had figured out that the tonnage saved is more worthwhile. It is what it is.

The LBX20... I forget what mech I tested it on... probably the Warhawk or something like that. The spread is so huge, I'd just have to literally facehug, and I like my closing distance to not literally always be "facehugging". I always need space to operate after all. I can deal with faster cooldown LBX10s than an LBX20 honestly.

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 28 March 2015 - 11:47 PM, said:

It's not uber-scientific. It's like my own personal testing of the LBX10.

The CLBX5 testing was strictly on the Summoner-D... when trying to figure out between 1 LBX10 or 2 LBX5.

The criteria is simply... if I was able to be more effective with the dual LBX5 in the same range as the LBX10 when I use it. I had figured out that the tonnage saved is more worthwhile. It is what it is.

The LBX20... I forget what mech I tested it on... probably the Warhawk or something like that. The spread is so huge, I'd just have to literally facehug, and I like my closing distance to not literally always be "facehugging". I always need space to operate after all. I can deal with faster cooldown LBX10s than an LBX20 honestly.

yeah, LB-20X feels like twice the spread of SRMs. even on my facehugger SCR, I ended up dropping it for an LB-10X, with the tighter cluster and better RoF, it just seems I am doing more effective damage with it.

On the summoner, I tried the nipplecannon lb-5x and it never worked. But I think that was because on a twist and shout skirmisher, DPS weapons are not the way to go.

The 2 mechs I find the LB5s more effective for me on, are the Gargamel and the TBR-S. ( I run another TBR with the LB10, and so have a decent baseline). Int the GRG, I find the dual lb5x/ dual srm4 pretty vicious, at least until I run out of ammo.

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 March 2015 - 06:45 AM, said:

yeah, LB-20X feels like twice the spread of SRMs. even on my facehugger SCR, I ended up dropping it for an LB-10X, with the tighter cluster and better RoF, it just seems I am doing more effective damage with it.

On the summoner, I tried the nipplecannon lb-5x and it never worked. But I think that was because on a twist and shout skirmisher, DPS weapons are not the way to go.

The 2 mechs I find the LB5s more effective for me on, are the Gargamel and the TBR-S. ( I run another TBR with the LB10, and so have a decent baseline). Int the GRG, I find the dual lb5x/ dual srm4 pretty vicious, at least until I run out of ammo.

I've experimented a lot with them on my Direwolf. The standard build I run is 4 ERML and 2 Gauss, with the rest being flexible. I used to use a UAC20 + SRM8 (because being able to dump 110+pt alpha strikes is fun) but heat and range issues got me changing things.

I've tried both LBX10 and 2xLBX5 pretty extensively, and like both for a very similar reason.

Now, as a rule of thumb, I hate LBX autocannons - I've spoken at length on why, so I won't go into it here - but as Clan LBX's are arguably better than their terrible UAC's (while still being worse than proper autocannons), I've been given them a go.

In both cases, it's providing another 10 points of damage downrange at (important point) very low heat, 0.8HPS for the 10 and 1.2HPS for the two 5's. They group about the same amount in my experience; the 10 leaves more tonnage free for Other Stuff, the 5's fire further. While LBX's at range are not extremely (or, really, at all) effective, I've found the 2 5's to work better for me, in this build because the two 5's chainfiring constantly while I'm bearing lasers and gauss on targets is extremely disruptive. People for some reason tend to panic when there's a Direwolf firing ballistics at them. They see the gauss firing flares (which are quite distinctive), and the ballistic hits. So, against groups of targets at range I keep firing the LBX's spreading damage over multiple targets if there are any, while reserving the Gauss rounds for the target I'm actually trying to bring down. It's extremely effective at getting the other mechs acting defensively.

On the other hand, when I'm closer (and the LBX's can actually be effective) they tend to push a lot of damage through to structure as the Gauss+ERML's tear through armor like nobodies business.

Best, the whole mech can basically fire forever, runs very cool.

The 10 works very well up close, but when you want to be firing at range as well, the firing rate of 2 5's is much more useful.

Edited by Wintersdark, 29 March 2015 - 07:53 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

i hope they unlock Ferro and Endo for Omni-Mechs,
most IS players seem to be pushing for IS-construction rules for IS-Omnis,

[Bishop Steiner]

Andi Nagasia, on 29 March 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

i hope they unlock Ferro and Endo for Omni-Mechs,
most IS players seem to be pushing for IS-construction rules for IS-Omnis,

I'd even settle for the unlocked DHS (though if I had to choose one or the other, Endo/FF would be my choice), though both would be ideal. One thing unlocked DHS would have is it wouldn't further benefit/promote laser vomit builds, as any additional weight would be at the expense of cooling. So there might be some merit for this over Endo, though it doesn't really do much for mechs like the Mad Dog.

[Andi Nagasia]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 March 2015 - 10:53 AM, said:

I'd even settle for the unlocked DHS (though if I had to choose one or the other, Endo/FF would be my choice), though both would be ideal. One thing unlocked DHS would have is it wouldn't further benefit/promote laser vomit builds, as any additional weight would be at the expense of cooling. So there might be some merit for this over Endo, though it doesn't really do much for mechs like the Mad Dog.

the thing is even though Endo/Ferro would help Clan Underperformers,
some IS players feel that doing such would Make Clan mechs more broken,
(they dont acknowledged that some Clan mechs are Underpreformers)

its these same Players that are asking for IS Omni-mechs to have everthing unlocked,
so IS Omnis would have Battle-mech construction rules as well as swappable hardpoints,

[Bishop Steiner]

Andi Nagasia, on 29 March 2015 - 12:24 PM, said:

the thing is even though Endo/Ferro would help Clan Underperformers,
some IS players feel that doing such would Make Clan mechs more broken,
(they dont acknowledged that some Clan mechs are Underpreformers)

its these same Players that are asking for IS Omni-mechs to have everthing unlocked,
so IS Omnis would have Battle-mech construction rules as well as swappable hardpoints,

Which just don't work.

[Lightfoot]

Repasy, on 28 March 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

Engine, armor type, internals and heat sinks are locked for all omnimechs. This is the compromise PGI made to omnitech to avoid making battletech obsolete. Why are people still talking as if they will release these restrictions on omnimechs? It makes no sense. The Clan omnimechs will NEVER be able to change engine rating. Same goes for armor type, heat sinks, and internals. Because this is the prominent disadvantage omnimechs are supposed to have.

The ONLY Clan mechs that may be able to modify these components are Clan battlemechs, never omnimechs. And for that matter, IS omnimechs (when they are released) you can bet will have the exact same restrictions as Clan omnimechs. The locked components are actually a feature of omnitech, not Clantech.

So for example, if PGI ever released the Warhammer-IIC, the mech would start out with Endo Steel, Ferro-Fibrous armor, and a Standard 320 engine, but it would have the ability to change all these component upgrades (with the max engine rating capping somewhere around 385-400 most likely). The hardpoints would be locked to 1 energy for each arm, 2 energy for each side torso, 1 missile hardpoint for the right torso, and 1 energy hardpoint for the head. ECM wouldn't be available for this standard variant, as Warhammer-IIC's did not make use of it until redesigns over a hundred years after the Warhammer-IIC 2.

As another example, take the IS omnimech Sunder, a real powerhouse mech inspired by the Loki and Thor. This guy would be locked with standard armor, standard internals, double heatsinks, and a 360 XL rated engine. These components cannot be modified, as they are the base of the omnimech. Moreover, 14 double heatsinks would be locked to the omnimech as well. The hardpoints, however, would be modifiable. Based on PGI's code of releasing a mech with at least 2 alternate variations, I imagine that the first three Sunder omnimechs released would be the SD1-O, SD1-OA, and SD1-OB. Taking this into account, ECM would not be available for this omnimech. Also, shuffling omni-pods would allow you to equip:

1 ballistic hardpoint OR 1 missile hardpoint in the LA

1 energy hardpoint OR 2 energy hardpoints in the RA

1 energy hardpoint OR 1 energy hardpoint & 1 C3 master w/ TAG in the LT

1 energy hardpoint OR 1 energy hardpoint & 1 C3 master w/ TAG in the RT

2 missile hardpoints OR 1 missile hardpoint in the CT

1 missile hardpoint OR no hardpoints in the HD

Also, even though neither of these chassis were ever equipped with AMS in TT BT, they would still probably have the ability to equip one or two AMS depending on the variant (since there are no A-pods / B-pods).

This is the compromise between battletech and omnitech. Battletech allows for customizable components but locks the hardpoints. The omnimech has locked components but modifiable hardpoints. You can't just let omnimechs edit locked components, that would make them SO UNBELIEVABLY OP!!! PGI will never compromise on this issue, so you guys might as well drop it.

No. What I find is that if the Clan mech has no Endo Steel it is restricted to Energy weapons that are capped by heat. Clan Missiles are highly nerfed and virtually worthless unless boated to the extreme, but that requires the mech has lots of missile hard points. I can go along with the locked Engines at this point because the mech gets the benefit that the Engine bestows. However, the locked equipment and internals/armor is not working and is not balanced. It is so out of balance that it can't be fixed with Quirks.

Right now I can tell PGI not to bother making the Gladiator, it's junk in their locked down Clan Mechlab, but I guess enough players will buy it to make it worth making. I will not be one of them. It's just the Summoner revisited. 8 tons of fixed Jump-Jets and 5 tons of ST internals leaves it with a payload of 25 or so tons. That's not an assault mech except in Stock Mechs Only.

And that is the issue. Mechs with FF and Endo and no jump-jets will be the edge that the Clans are balanced on and the rest will never compete. You can't nerf every Clan mech with Endo and FF so instead let every Clan mech equip Endo and FF. It's like a reverse nerf to arrive at a functional balance that makes owning Clan mechs as fun as owning Inner Sphere mechs.

Truth is I hate most of my Clan mechs because the load-outs are so Vanilla. I mean for cryin out loud the Clan weapons are just a little lighter and smaller than Inner Sphere versions and already heavily nerfed with spread damage and duration. PGI is acting like they are all some kind of BFG Gun.

And omnimechs can be modified as easily as standard mechs in Mechlab because Mechlab is not part of Battle Tech. Mechlab is the player's Mech Factory created for MechWarrior games and Mechs can be completely redesigned into new variants in a Mech Factory in Battle Tech. Got that? MechWarrior's Mechlab is a Mech Factory for Battlemech redesign.