263 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

Soy, on 02 April 2015 - 03:51 PM, said:

It's too much theorycrafting and numbers in a vacuum for my taste, so.

Which parts?

Since just September, we have had 1500 m/s PPC/ERPPCs

We've had them at 850 & 950.

We have ERPPCs now at 1050.


And we have like a half dozen mechs ranging from +20% to +40% velocity covering almost every possible speed between 950 and 1500.



None of this portion is theory-crafting, these are things that we can test right now.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 02 April 2015 - 04:00 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Gas Guzzler, on 02 April 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

Well, all this IS vs Clan BS aside, it seems the majority want PPCs brought back in line with the other weapons in this game.

.

Hard numbers aside, do you at least agree some more velocity would be welcome without PPCs becoming "OP"?

Its not really in a vacuum, we all know what 1500 m/s ER PPCs are like (no one used them in quantities of more than one).

Had PGI put PPCs and ERPPCs at like 1150-1200 and 1300 way back when, there never woulda been an issue with the 1200-1300 velocity.

Didnt they first over nerf them to like 850 for PPC and like 950 for ERPPC then buffed them to the 950 and 1050 we have now? Does PGI not believe in small steps? They have some idea cuz current clan quirks are small near meaningless numbers...but still...why didnt they try like 1200 first?

[Koniving]

Kain Thul, on 02 April 2015 - 01:50 PM, said:

If you think I am nuts with those heat values look at what they did with the ERLLAS. It is supposed to be 8 damage 12 heat but they changed it to 9/8 because that kind of damage/heat ratio would be crap in this game yet they did not touch the ERPPC with this same amount of favor.

They left the PPC 10/10 and ERPPC 10/15 but move the LLAS to 9/7 from 8/8 and ERLLAS to 9/8 from 8/12????

No wonder why everyone uses lasers.

Not a fan of your desire to reduce heat, but recycle times isn't a bad idea.

I gave you a like for realizing what they did with lasers.

[Gas Guzzler]

LordKnightFandragon, on 02 April 2015 - 04:00 PM, said:

Had PGI put PPCs and ERPPCs at like 1150-1200 and 1300 way back when, there never woulda been an issue with the 1200-1300 velocity.

Didnt they first over nerf them to like 850 for PPC and like 950 for ERPPC then buffed them to the 950 and 1050 we have now? Does PGI not believe in small steps? They have some idea cuz current clan quirks are small near meaningless numbers...but still...why didnt they try like 1200 first?

It was because everyone hated the 50 pt alpha dire and complained about it a lot, so they needed to "bring this weapon combination back in line" with the rest of the game. Yes, they should have exercised the incremental approach they are using for Clan quirks at that point.

Or, ya know, ER PPC negative velocity quirks in the Dire is a clever way to stop that combo from hurting too many people.

[Pjwned]

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 03:44 PM, said:

Piloting skill only overcomes so much when it comes to difference in speed.

When you consider that piloting skill includes not being in a bad position then it overcomes enough.

Quote

Again, it is the only direct fire weapon that has this which I find a little puzzling, so why not increase the heat and remove the minimum range.

If you want to campaign for it to be even less heat efficient than it is now just so you don't have to worry about positioning then go ahead I guess, it's a fair tradeoff if that's what you really want but I can't imagine you'll get much support for the idea, and I don't particularly like it myself because I don't see it as being worthwhile.

Quote

My poor Vindi would gladly trade extra heat for the ability to actually hit Firestarters that find me an easy kill. You can say "mount backup weapons" until you're blue in the face but it doesn't address the fact certain mechs are hamstrung by this little factor and the fact it is the only weapon that pay this price even when it isn't that great of a weapon anymore is only continues to baffle me.

The mechs are only hamstrung if they don't bring any backup weapons and allow enemy mechs to get within 90m without blowing them up, which if anybody finds themself constantly dealing with then they probably need to change something.

Quote

It did have a linear falloff a long time ago though but was removed somewhere along the lines for whatever reason.

And it should be re-implemented because it was dumb to remove entirely. I don't disagree with a minimum range penalty but I do disagree when a shot at 89m means 0 damage while a shot at 90m means 10 damage because that's dumb.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Pjwned, on 02 April 2015 - 04:14 PM, said:

When you consider that piloting skill includes not being in a bad position then it overcomes enough.

It is situational and the situation occurs more frequently on the lighter end. Part of the reason PPC lights have never been the most popular is their inability to deal with lights that get within that minimum range which occurs more frequently when you are more often than not having to sacrifice speed to do it. Not it isn't the entire reason you don't see PPC lights but it is definitely a factor. The problem is still that it enforces the piloting skill to be the deciding factor rather than gunnery allowing some ability to overcome bad positioning like any other long-mid range direct fire weapon.

Pjwned, on 02 April 2015 - 04:14 PM, said:

The mechs are only hamstrung if they don't bring any backup weapons and allow enemy mechs to get within 90m without blowing them up, which if anybody finds themself constantly dealing with then they probably need to change something.

Or the weapon could be like any other direct fire weapon and not require backup weapons to be useful at all ranges it happens to encompass. Out of curiosity, do you believe the Gauss should've had a minimum range as well considering it has always been the best (and unique) ballistic and many times the best weapon in the game and was meant to be a long range weapon and actually had it in canon?

LATE EDIT::I only resort to that sort of argument because it still does not make sense to say that the PPC is seriously unique or dangerous enough that it warrants doing no damage at a short range considering other weapons have been more powerful than the PPC throughout MWO and been similar in function to the PPC yet have never suffered the similar issue. Now I doubt the comp guys really care because not many get within 90m anyway, it is more of a PUGlandia related issue. The point is if it is worried that it is too powerful overall or just too powerful at short range there are other ways to balance it that play better than minimum range and I include LRMs in that category.

The linear falloff within minimum range is still a fundamentally flawed approach in this game, but it is far less egregious than what we have now and the re-institution of that would do wonders as far as I'm concerned.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 02 April 2015 - 04:43 PM.

[Chagatay]

What I am for is a change in the current system that is:

PPC quirked mech ok to use PPCs.
PPC not quirked mech not ok to use PPCs.

What I would want is the following change to bring PPCs up to at least viable on non-chosen platforms while still keeping some of the flavor of quirks. The major problem I have is that the disparity of velocities between mechs with and without quirks is too high.

Slightly buff all PPCs by 150-200m/s
Reduce any quirks to 15% max / 10% max if clan* (if a mech had a 40%/30% velocity quirk it is now 15% if mech had a minor boost like 20% make it 5%)

Example mech that would not be changed much:

TDR-9S (prechange with quirks)
1050*1.3 or 1365 m/s
after 150m/s change:
1200 *1.15 or 1380 m/s

*assumes clan will equip a tc mk1 to compensate 6t+1t = 7t both at 3 slots seems fair to me.

[Novawrecker]

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

It's bad counter play which is bad game design.

Call it what ever pleases you.

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

Even in TT you had the ability to luck out and hit a mech within that range.Currently if you hit a mech at even 89m, you do 0 damage.

This subject again. Not everything translates well from paper to digital game. It's the reasons we see that many (minor) differences from the tabletop versions

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

As for bad decision to rely solely on PPCs, you do realize that no other direct fire weapon requires this right?

Your example of the Vindy using a PPC to shoot a light mech within 90m is a bad idea, not due to lousy design, but to lousy player choices. Btw, you do realize that every mech that can sport a PPC can also sport back up weapons? Be it due to cover the PPC's range min, its heat gen, both, added weaponry, or just for the lulz Also, you do realize that if standard PPCs had no range min, no one would EVER use the IS ERPPC (not that it's used in great quantities now, but it is used).

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

I suppose you could argue MGs/Flamers require backup weaponry but let's not even drag that mess into this conversation.

You are welcomed to put what ever the heck you want, even the poultry launcher if it suits your fancy As long as you're not the schmuck trying to fire a PPC at a target under 90m

[Soy]

Ultimatum X, on 02 April 2015 - 04:00 PM, said:

Which parts?

Since just September, we have had 1500 m/s PPC/ERPPCs

We've had them at 850 & 950.

We have ERPPCs now at 1050.


And we have like a half dozen mechs ranging from +20% to +40% velocity covering almost every possible speed between 950 and 1500.



None of this portion is theory-crafting, these are things that we can test right now.

Well, my point's been missed since like first page or whatever... my point is... they've gone thru so many changes, OP dudes talkin about changes, etc... whatever, **** on newbs with em, or don't, I give up on tryin to even figure out what the god damn velocity is in a vacuum cuz TCs, quirks, etc... just fire and forget (cuz enemy dead hopefully gg).

[Gas Guzzler]

Soy, on 02 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:

Well, my point's been missed since like first page or whatever... my point is... they've gone thru so many changes, OP dudes talkin about changes, etc... whatever, **** on newbs with em, or don't, I give up on tryin to even figure out what the god damn velocity is in a vacuum cuz TCs, quirks, etc... just fire and forget (cuz enemy dead hopefully gg).

Well newbs just stand there so it's easy. Non-newbs don't so you have to guess what their next move is.

End of the day its not that big of a deal, I'm not struggling with the game as it is now, just want more variety. Laser spam gets old.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Novawrecker, on 02 April 2015 - 05:02 PM, said:

Your example of the Vindy using a PPC to shoot a light mech within 90m is a bad idea, not due to lousy design, but to lousy player choices. Btw, you do realize that every mech that can sport a PPC can also sport back up weapons? Be it due to cover the PPC's range min, its heat gen, both, added weaponry, or just for the lulz

2-3 Medium Lasers isn't going to stop a Firestarter from making short work of you inside that range, but 2 PPCs that had no minimum range and 2-3 extra DHS would certainly help. The problem here is that minimum range is a hamfisted way to balance long range weaponry vs short range weaponry. In the previous mods of MW4, balancing long range vs short range was typically done by increasing the DPS and alpha capability of the short range weapons in comparison. So you weren't unable to do damage or deal with weird minimum range mechanics to stop your good DPS, you were simply unable to compete in an extended firefight. The thing was though that if you were decent shot you had a chance to overcome that particular disadvantage.

This is the problem with minimum ranges including the falloff as rather than just increase the DPS, they artificially lower the DPS at short range which minimizes the amount gunnery skills can overcome that deficiency. The irony is that the PPC is the only weapon that suffers this particular deficiency because of justifications like "its unique" or it runs "cool" to balance it from becoming powerful all the sudden like minimum range is all that is stopping it from becoming the uber god weapon when we know this is not the case.

Then of course there is this justification:

Novawrecker, on 02 April 2015 - 05:02 PM, said:

Also, you do realize that if standard PPCs had no range min, no one would EVER use the IS ERPPC (not that it's used in great quantities now, but it is used).

If that is all that is stopping the ERPPC from becoming a forgotten weapon, something tells me there is probably more problems with the ERPPC that just its lack of minimum range. PPCs are not good weapons and are only tolerable with quirks, so if PPCs are that way then ERPPCs must be terrible and thus the reason for this entire thread because not only do PPCs need help, PPCs and ERPPCs should not be competing with each other directly because they are meant for slightly different ranges.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 02 April 2015 - 05:23 PM.

[MechaBattler]

I don't really want to see a return to PPCWarrior Online. But I wouldn't be against them reverting the heat on them to what it was before. And then tone down the heat quirks on mechs, give them more velocity in return.

[Pjwned]

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 04:28 PM, said:

It is situational and the situation occurs more frequently on the lighter end. Part of the reason PPC lights have never been the most popular is their inability to deal with lights that get within that minimum range which occurs more frequently when you are more often than not having to sacrifice speed to do it. Not it isn't the entire reason you don't see PPC lights but it is definitely a factor. The problem is still that it enforces the piloting skill to be the deciding factor rather than gunnery allowing some ability to overcome bad positioning like any other long-mid range direct fire weapon.

Gunnery skill is still quite important, it's just that PPCs require a bit more piloting skill than most weapons (due to the nature of PPCs) to not get caught in a dead zone if you're relying on them as your main firepower.

Quote

Or the weapon could be like any other direct fire weapon and not require backup weapons to be useful at all ranges it happens to encompass.

There aren't other high damage energy based pinpoint weapons though.

Quote

Out of curiosity, do you believe the Gauss should've had a minimum range as well considering it has always been the best (and unique) ballistic and many times the best weapon in the game and was meant to be a long range weapon and actually had it in canon?

The charge-up mechanic handled that far more gracefully than a minimum range penalty on a ballistic weapon, especially because the resulting massive projectile velocity increase really cemented its role as a solid long range weapon.

Quote

LATE EDIT::I only resort to that sort of argument because it still does not make sense to say that the PPC is seriously unique or dangerous enough that it warrants doing no damage at a short range considering other weapons have been more powerful than the PPC throughout MWO and been similar in function to the PPC yet have never suffered the similar issue. Now I doubt the comp guys really care because not many get within 90m anyway, it is more of a PUGlandia related issue. The point is if it is worried that it is too powerful overall or just too powerful at short range there are other ways to balance it that play better than minimum range and I include LRMs in that category.

I don't see better alternatives for PPCs because increasing the heat sounds dumb and it makes the weapon worse for people that don't consider the minimum range a big deal, and LRMs have a minimum range penalty for a very good reason.

Quote

The linear falloff within minimum range is still a fundamentally flawed approach in this game, but it is far less egregious than what we have now and the re-institution of that would do wonders as far as I'm concerned.

I still don't find it flawed because the minimum range is small enough that even with the current system it's really not such a big deal, you take several steps away (if that) from the enemy and you're clear to fire, and if you can't then you either played badly or got outplayed. I find it flawed how exactly the penalty is implemented, but not that it exists.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Pjwned, on 02 April 2015 - 05:26 PM, said:

There aren't other high damage energy based pinpoint weapons though.

There are, but you don't acknowledge it because it is "balanced" by the high heat. This was the irony in your "moving goal posts" statement is that YOU added that it is unique not just because it is a high damage PPFLD energy weapon, but also that it has low heat. That is also ignoring the fact that how does that even matter anyway? Most matches can be accounted for ammo wise so that advantage isn't a large one. The drawback of ballistics isn't really ammo, it is the high initial tonnage investment you have to make to mount one. The I-Gauss requires 18 tons to run effectively as opposed to the PPC's 7 tons (because those 10 free DHS can cover a single PPC's heat) with more PPCs only increasing the tonnage required to be effective thanks to heat and DHS to a point where the Gauss is a better investment tonnage wise. This is exemplified by the power of Gauss Vomit for the Clans, and why it is better than pure laser vomit even in some cases of CW.

Pjwned, on 02 April 2015 - 05:26 PM, said:

The charge-up mechanic handled that far more gracefully than a minimum range penalty on a ballistic weapon, especially because the resulting massive projectile velocity increase really cemented its role as a solid long range weapon.

I agree.
I would actually prefer the charge up in exchange for higher velocity and no minimum range on the PPC.
Edit: Adding clarification for Soy, no I would do not advocate a charge up as stands currently, but if the fear is that any significant buffs were to turn the PPC back into a god weapon at long range, I would much prefer a charge up mechanic as opposed to a minimum range as a balancing mechanic.

Pjwned, on 02 April 2015 - 05:26 PM, said:

I don't see better alternatives for PPCs because increasing the heat sounds dumb and it makes the weapon worse for people that don't consider the minimum range a big deal, and LRMs have a minimum range penalty for a very good reason.

You havn't said this yourself, but you must ask, if minimum range isn't a big deal (which it isn't outside PUGlandia), why does it need to have more heat to remove the minimum range? If it isn't a significant factor in the weapon, why is it there as a balancing mechanism in the first place, especially given that it currently is not a good weapon.

I agree that LRMs have a minimum range penalty for a good reason, but that is just because LRMs were implemented poorly in MWO which is something I think we can both agree on.

Pjwned, on 02 April 2015 - 05:26 PM, said:

I still don't find it flawed because the minimum range is small enough that even with the current system it's really not such a big deal, you take several steps away (if that) from the enemy and you're clear to fire, and if you can't then you either played badly or got outplayed. I find it flawed how exactly the penalty is implemented, but not that it exists.

It isn't that big of a deal, until you encounter that situation, and at that point it leaves you feeling cheated because there is nothing you can do at that point. That is a bad thing to happen in any game, you should have some ability to fight back, which linear falloff does allow for, but as I said is still a flawed approach to balancing a midrange weapon like that.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 02 April 2015 - 05:56 PM.

[Soy]

Are some people in this thread actually advocating a charge mechanic on PPC? If so plox walk off nearest cliff, thx.

[CocoaJin]

I love using (ER)PPCs...you can't really be Kuritan without them.

[Pjwned]

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 05:18 PM, said:

2-3 Medium Lasers isn't going to stop a Firestarter from making short work of you inside that range, but 2 PPCs that had no minimum range and 2-3 extra DHS would certainly help.

It's not like your PPCs cease to exist until an enemy light mech is within 90m you know, use that high pinpoint damage to soften them up beforehand and if they still get close then use some backup weapons that are already more efficient in those ranges anyways.

Quote

The problem here is that minimum range is a hamfisted way to balance long range weaponry vs short range weaponry. In the previous mods of MW4, balancing long range vs short range was typically done by increasing the DPS and alpha capability of the short range weapons in comparison. So you weren't unable to do damage or deal with weird minimum range mechanics to stop your good DPS, you were simply unable to compete in an extended firefight. The thing was though that if you were decent shot you had a chance to overcome that particular disadvantage.

The biggest reason for a minimum range penalty on PPCs is that unlike lasers they have no burn time, so without any sort of counterplay against them it would be easy for PPC mechs to completely dominate light mechs, adding to the list of mechs that already do this, and just like before the gauss rifle was changed it's dumb to have a snapfire, pinpoint, high damage weapon with no minimum range; you can have 3 out of 4, but not 4 out of 4. You say that it would help a lot against light mechs to not have a minimum range on PPCs, but what you fail to see is it would help too much against mechs that are already squishy; it would be too easy if you could simply click on a mech and have it take an assload of pinpoint damage from point blank with essentially no chance of missing due to the almost non-existent travel time, and no other weapon can do that aside from the gauss rifle which has a charge-fire mechanic to make it less of an issue.

Quote

This is the problem with minimum ranges including the falloff as rather than just increase the DPS, they artificially lower the DPS at short range which minimizes the amount gunnery skills can overcome that deficiency.

It's "artificially lowered" for good reason, and it only minimizes the effect of gunnery skill if you fail to be a threat before they close in and if your piloting skill is also lacking.

Quote

The irony is that the PPC is the only weapon that suffers this particular deficiency because of justifications like "its unique" or it runs "cool" to balance it from becoming powerful all the sudden like minimum range is all that is stopping it from becoming the uber god weapon when we know this is not the case.

It may not become an "uber god weapon" without a minimum range but that's not the only time people should be concerned about imbalance either and that's not much of an argument either.

[Pjwned]

WM Quicksilver, on 02 April 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

There are, but you don't acknowledge it because it is "balanced" by the high heat. This was the irony in your "moving goal posts" statement is that YOU added that it is unique not just because it is a high damage PPFLD energy weapon, but also that it has low heat.

I don't really acknowledge the ER PPC in this regard because it's the exception to prove the rule due to its massively increased heat; it might as well have the drawbacks of requiring ammo because it runs so damn hot and that's why I absentmindedly dismiss its existence as another high damage pinpoint energy weapon.

Quote

That is also ignoring the fact that how does that even matter anyway? Most matches can be accounted for ammo wise so that advantage isn't a large one. The drawback of ballistics isn't really ammo, it is the high initial tonnage investment you have to make to mount one. The I-Gauss requires 18 tons to run effectively as opposed to the PPC's 7 tons (because those 10 free DHS can cover a single PPC's heat) with more PPCs only increasing the tonnage required to be effective thanks to heat and DHS to a point where the Gauss is a better investment tonnage wise. This is exemplified by the power of Gauss Vomit for the Clans, and why it is better than pure laser vomit even in some cases of CW.

So what I'm getting from this is that despite their lower tonnage and crit slots PPCs are better for sustainability unless you get to the point where you boat so many that the heat is too much and you have to supplement your alpha with gauss rifles to go further, meanwhile this situation only happens with 1 mech in the entire game. Am I missing something here or is this not very convincing?

Quote

I agree.
I would actually prefer the charge up in exchange for higher velocity and no minimum range on the PPC.
Edit: Adding clarification for Soy, no I would do not advocate a charge up as stands currently, but if the fear is that any significant buffs were to turn the PPC back into a god weapon at long range, I would much prefer a charge up mechanic as opposed to a minimum range as a balancing mechanic.

I would rather see PPC and gauss retain their flavor as is than to see a ballistic gauss rifle and a pseudo energy gauss rifle clone, and not just because "it's more interesting that way" but because if both weapons have a charge-up time then that removes the functionality of PPC being a snapfire weapon--there are still autocannons for that I guess but it's not really the same.

Quote

You havn't said this yourself, but you must ask, if minimum range isn't a big deal (which it isn't outside PUGlandia), why does it need to have more heat to remove the minimum range? If it isn't a significant factor in the weapon, why is it there as a balancing mechanism in the first place, especially given that it currently is not a good weapon.

It's not such a big deal for the pilot using the PPCs is what I mean, it's still an important enough balancing factor and especially in the situations you're complaining about.

Quote

I agree that LRMs have a minimum range penalty for a good reason, but that is just because LRMs were implemented poorly in MWO which is something I think we can both agree on.

I don't really think they were implemented poorly, LRMs just need more tweaks like fixing the broken ECM jesus box.

Quote

It isn't that big of a deal, until you encounter that situation, and at that point it leaves you feeling cheated because there is nothing you can do at that point. That is a bad thing to happen in any game, you should have some ability to fight back, which linear falloff does allow for, but as I said is still a flawed approach to balancing a midrange weapon like that.

I don't feel cheated because if I boat a weapon that's weak in (very) close range and lose due to its weakness then that's my fault if it happens.

Edited by Pjwned, 02 April 2015 - 06:43 PM.

[XX Sulla XX]

Here is the thing with PPCs. PPCs have caused the biggest problems with the game. If PPCs work really well with good velocity and heat etc then you get game play problems. You start to get the long range game meta instead of mid range like we have now. That hurts the game. If jump jets are decent at all you start getting jump sniping dominating. You get really high pin point front loaded damage. These thing hurt game play for 98% of the population.

You have to be VERY VERY careful adjusting PPCs.

[LordKnightFandragon]

XX Sulla XX, on 02 April 2015 - 06:15 PM, said:

Here is the thing with PPCs. PPCs have caused the biggest problems with the game. If PPCs work really well with good velocity and heat etc then you get game play problems. You start to get the long range game meta instead of mid range like we have now. That hurts the game. If jump jets are decent at all you start getting jump sniping dominating. You get really high pin point front loaded damage. These thing hurt game play for 98% of the population.

You have to be VERY VERY careful adjusting PPCs.

Yeah, so PGI's answer? just leave them absolutely useless so no one uses them.

Jump sniping? Let mechs get high enough to JJ, but make JJ regen slow, make fall damage hurt and overall make it a situational type of deal. Not where you can JJ on every single shot, make it where only certain spots you can get high enough and have enough JJ juice to feather on the fall...

PPCs, give them enough velocity to be useful at mid range, but not to much that they become the new meta all over. I fail to see how a 1200-1300 velocity would suddenly make the game a PPC meta, aside from the fact they would be useful and everyone woud flock to them simply because they are "new"...