74 replies to this topic

[needforsleep]

6xLight PPC Jenners

[Shadey99]

needforsleep, on 07 July 2015 - 08:22 PM, said:

6xLight PPC Jenners

You really plan to fit 18 tons of weapons in a Jenner? Each Light PPC is 3 tons (so 6 are 18), not to mention using 12 crits (2 each). Of course even if you did all of that you'd still only deal 30 damage per alpha.. And you'd have to wait until 3067...

Edited by Shadey99, 07 July 2015 - 08:40 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

Nightshade24, on 07 July 2015 - 01:40 AM, said:

technically we do not know how it'll be... never been in a game, it could be as fast as a AC 20 for all we know...

But anyway... I do not think the 8 bullets vs 1 bullet would go well... Do mortars have HE ammo? I want splash damage so much for them for some reason... so that even a near miss could do damage.

Splash would be a good way to make them more indirect oriented. You don't splash on a missed direct fire shot, since it will just keep going. However, if the shell slams close by, it will splash. Making vertical drops better.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Nightshade24, on 07 July 2015 - 01:40 AM, said:

technically we do not know how it'll be... never been in a game, it could be as fast as a AC 20 for all we know...

But anyway... I do not think the 8 bullets vs 1 bullet would go well... Do mortars have HE ammo? I want splash damage so much for them for some reason... so that even a near miss could do damage.

Well, it could always be set that direct fire = shallow-arc stream, indirect fire = high-arc cloud/splatter, so that indirect fire is like a RL mortar launcher.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 08 July 2015 - 03:28 PM.

[Crow Splat]

TheSilken, on 06 July 2015 - 05:00 AM, said:

You do know that you listed the larger versions for the artillery pieces right which are unable to be mech mounted? The mech mounted ones have significantly less range, weight, and size. Also the artillery cannon you listed is not a single weapon it's talking about a classification that describes the mech equip-able versions for the artillery pieces.

Here:
Long Tom Cannon: 20 tons, 15 crits ( http://www.sarna.net...Long_Tom_Cannon )
Sniper Artillery Cannon:15 tons, 10 crits ( http://www.sarna.net...rtillery_Cannon )
Thumper Cannon: 10 tons, 7 crits ( http://www.sarna.net.../Thumper_Cannon )

Add these and Add the Pillager. I would pay an absurd sum (like gold clan mech level) for a chrome Pillager Anvil.

[Calebos]

And what about new vehicles in the game? It would be good to have some kind of support or smaller vehicles with wheels or tracks. As tanks, hovercrafts, etc. ...

But I know. It is too much work to do. PGI are not able to solve several problems long time existing in the game so this new content is out of the line ...

Edited by Calebos, 30 July 2015 - 04:19 AM.

[Goombah]

I've been harping for a while that lights and many mediums desperately need weapon options. Ballistic hard points are virtually worthless as the only options are .5t mgs and 6t ac/2. Likewise, missile heavy lights and mediums are locked into brawler srm builds with no recourse, don't even joke about lrm lights!
The only options most mechs under 50 tons have is laserboating , which generally locks you in to long range LL builds or high alpha MLas builds.
I feel that in order to balance the weight classes effectively we need primitive tech Rifles or out of timeline Light ACS for ballistic heavy underweights, and dumb fire MRMs for missile heavy lights and mediums.
It's not fun having no mid range alternative between the pulse laser and srm knife fights and hot, low dps long range laser builds. Close range is extremely dangerous for lights, and any heavy laserboat will out perform a light sniper.
If we can't get dynamic objective based gameplay that requires an element of spe
ed, or vastly expanded information warfare element to brawling, then we need something to do with all the mechs that can't boat laser vomit other than painfully grind and sell them.

[Torezu]

Goombah, on 20 August 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

Ballistic hard points are virtually worthless... Likewise, missile heavy lights and mediums are locked into brawler srm builds with no recourse, don't even joke about lrm lights!

AC/5s and AC/10s are options on mediums, and a few lights, when they're the "main gun" and capable of going through nearly all (or all) of the ammo before the mech is destroyed or the game is won. LRMs can work on mediums, and even a couple lights, for harassment, though SRMs are usually a better option for lights because they add to alpha damage.

Goombah, on 20 August 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

It's not fun having no mid range alternative between the pulse laser and srm knife fights and hot, low dps long range laser builds. Close range is extremely dangerous for lights, and any heavy laserboat will out perform a light sniper.

That's your trade-off. Go close range for higher damage, perform better but take more risk of accurate, hard return fire. It's that way with basically every mech, whether it's with ballistics, energy, or missiles. The mid-range for lasers is MLs, and AC/5-10s, and, yes, LRMs. Yes, MRMs and shorter-range, lighter ballistics would be nice.

Goombah, on 20 August 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

If we can't get dynamic objective based gameplay that requires an element of speed, or vastly expanded information warfare element to brawling, then we need something to do with all the mechs that can't boat laser vomit other than painfully grind and sell them.

Be creative with your builds. I've seen successful Ravens with AC/10s and even a couple with a 20, Jenners with a pair of LRM 5s and 4 MLs, and those 1 ERLL Spiders that are incredibly annoying.

The infowar changes are coming, and Conquest already requires speed to some extent. PGI's been doing relatively well in the couple months I've been playing - give them time.

[Goombah]

I know all of that. I know what the trade offs are. It's just old and boring.
And every new ballistic 20-30 tonner is just another bad joke.
I want to see new GOOD builds, new fun trade offs, more variety in how hard points are used.
We have very powerful pulse anklebiters, why not powerful daka ankle biters?
I should have been more specific.
We need more light guns to make non crappy builds with.
There's plenty of terrible ac/20 ravens.
Loads of God awful lrm locusts I know.
I would like more COMPETATIVE variety.
There's a reason every time they release another light mech' its "sigh, just another laserboat."
ACS are too heavy, missiles have hilarious fail hit detection.
The tedium of MLas, Mpulse, Spulse is getting old. Real old.
With some weight class appropriate guns we could do something other than troll our own teams with ultra/5 locusts. I don't hate my team that much.

We could get like, light ac5 and 4 mpulse cicada
Or a pair of light ac2 on a spider, and actually get 7 tons of ammo to go with it.
3 light ballistics on the shadowhawk, so you don't have to go 70 kph in it.
If I could fire MRMs at decent range, 600 meters? I would have a reason to play some of the missile heavy light and middleweight mechs. You could pack a mean ass punch in a treb or oxide with MRMs. I might have to dust off the missile wolverine.
I have over 70 robots, sold many more.
I've played more than my fair share of "creative" (terrible) builds for fun at my teams expense.
They just plain don't work as well.
A narrow band of builds work very well.
I just want more mechs to be good, more builds to be good, I think more weapon variety will help with that.
Most MOBAS or fighting games have relatively wide varieties of viable characters, why is my 4 ballistic 1 energy cicada delegated to **** teir? Why do we level up three mechs and sell one because its the Trash model?
I just want everyone to have more fun with the game.

Then again, the blistering hot 200 MRM damage alphas from catapults and awesome would be NOT FUN LOL. So what the hell do I know!

Edited by Goombah, 20 August 2015 - 11:35 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

Goombah, on 20 August 2015 - 11:28 PM, said:

I know all of that. I know what the trade offs are. It's just old and boring.
And every new ballistic 20-30 tonner is just another bad joke.
I want to see new GOOD builds, new fun trade offs, more variety in how hard points are used.
We have very powerful pulse anklebiters, why not powerful daka ankle biters?
I should have been more specific.
We need more light guns to make non crappy builds with.
There's plenty of terrible ac/20 ravens.
Loads of God awful lrm locusts I know.
I would like more COMPETATIVE variety.
There's a reason every time they release another light mech' its "sigh, just another laserboat."
ACS are too heavy, missiles have hilarious fail hit detection.
The tedium of MLas, Mpulse, Spulse is getting old. Real old.
With some weight class appropriate guns we could do something other than troll our own teams with ultra/5 locusts. I don't hate my team that much.

We could get like, light ac5 and 4 mpulse cicada
Or a pair of light ac2 on a spider, and actually get 7 tons of ammo to go with it.
3 light ballistics on the shadowhawk, so you don't have to go 70 kph in it.
If I could fire MRMs at decent range, 600 meters? I would have a reason to play some of the missile heavy light and middleweight mechs. You could pack a mean ass punch in a treb or oxide with MRMs. I might have to dust off the missile wolverine.
I have over 70 robots, sold many more.
I've played more than my fair share of "creative" (terrible) builds for fun at my teams expense.
They just plain don't work as well.
A narrow band of builds work very well.
I just want more mechs to be good, more builds to be good, I think more weapon variety will help with that.
Most MOBAS or fighting games have relatively wide varieties of viable characters, why is my 4 ballistic 1 energy cicada delegated to **** teir? Why do we level up three mechs and sell one because its the Trash model?
I just want everyone to have more fun with the game.

Then again, the blistering hot 200 MRM damage alphas from catapults and awesome would be NOT FUN LOL. So what the hell do I know!

Light ACs are 3068 tech AT LEAST.

Out of the weapons we have right now, the only ballistic weapons lights can use are MGs, up to AC 5s, and they have their trade offs, but they are effective in their own ways. MGs are the only ballistic weapon that qualifies for "ankle biter" role, and the last time it had even a tiny buff, the entire player base cried enough tears to drown the planet 3 times over, and got them nerfed.

[Spleenslitta]

So many weapons that are available in the timeline and yet PGI chose to ignore them.
Rifles are easily made into balanced weapons since AC's have the word Auto in it. Thus AC have a faster firerate and better range in exchange for greater weight.
Rifles would make ballistic weaponry more available for light mechs.

They could balance Mortar through tracking strenght. It could be completly useless against a target traveling at higher speeds but capable of decent tracking against slower targets through tiny ailerons adjustments or something similar.
I'm not saying exact speeds on purpose.
They otherwise weight the same but mortars ignore AMS to balance out the limited tracking capabilities.

Binary Laser has loooooads of ways it could be balanced. Here are some examples-
- Shorter burn duration than a regular Large laser to make up for the huge weight.
- Transfering heat to target.
- Better critical chance against internal components.
- Could strike components through armor if the full laser duration is held on a single enemy part...for example the left torso.
- Greater long range limit like the Gauss Rifle.

[Spare Parts Bin]

Love this thread but you guys missed special A/C ammo, so far that is all I remember ya'll missed.

Great thread.

[Omaha]

Wut no mines?

[Spleenslitta]

Spare Parts Bin, on 22 August 2015 - 07:28 AM, said:

Love this thread but you guys missed special A/C ammo, so far that is all I remember ya'll missed.

Great thread.

Unfortunatly the developer in charge of making the ammunition code did a big mistake.
He made it impossible to have multiple ammunition types unless the entire code is done from scratch.
It's a big undertaking from what i've heard. Naturally this dev was fired for his error.

[IraqiWalker]

Spleenslitta, on 22 August 2015 - 07:30 AM, said:

Unfortunatly the developer in charge of making the ammunition code did a big mistake.
He made it impossible to have multiple ammunition types unless the entire code is done from scratch.
It's a big undertaking from what i've heard. Naturally this dev was fired for his error.

It's the same guy who was in charge of the LBX ammo. From what I have heard (which seems to be less than what you have heard), he was fired, and his bit of the code is basically a no-man's land that none of the programmers fiddle with, because they can't figure out his structure.

[IraqiWalker]

Spleenslitta, on 22 August 2015 - 06:53 AM, said:

So many weapons that are available in the timeline and yet PGI chose to ignore them.
Rifles are easily made into balanced weapons since AC's have the word Auto in it. Thus AC have a faster firerate and better range in exchange for greater weight.
Rifles would make ballistic weaponry more available for light mechs.

They could balance Mortar through tracking strenght. It could be completly useless against a target traveling at higher speeds but capable of decent tracking against slower targets through tiny ailerons adjustments or something similar.
I'm not saying exact speeds on purpose.
They otherwise weight the same but mortars ignore AMS to balance out the limited tracking capabilities.

Binary Laser has loooooads of ways it could be balanced. Here are some examples-
- Shorter burn duration than a regular Large laser to make up for the huge weight.
- Transfering heat to target.
- Better critical chance against internal components.
- Could strike components through armor if the full laser duration is held on a single enemy part...for example the left torso.
- Greater long range limit like the Gauss Rifle.

I completely disagree on the rifles. Remember, they deal their damage -3 against mech armor. Meaning the Light rifle deals ZERO damage against mechs.

The tonnage investment is just too much. The Medium rifle is 5 tons, and only has 9 (would be 12, or 15 in MWO) shots per ton of ammo, for 3 damage. Considering the tonnage invested, I might as well put an AC 2 for 6 tons instead of 5, and would only need 1 or 2 tons of ammo, instead of 7+

Also, weren't those rifles hand held? Meaning mechs without hands couldn't use them?

More weapons is definitely what we want, and I would love to have the rifles in the game, but I don't think they would help ballistics, or light mechs with ballistics.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 22 August 2015 - 08:59 AM.

[Spleenslitta]

IraqiWalker, on 22 August 2015 - 08:58 AM, said:

I completely disagree on the rifles. Remember, they deal their damage -3 against mech armor. Meaning the Light rifle deals ZERO damage against mechs.

The tonnage investment is just too much. The Medium rifle is 5 tons, and only has 9 (would be 12, or 15 in MWO) shots per ton of ammo, for 3 damage. Considering the tonnage invested, I might as well put an AC 2 for 6 tons instead of 5, and would only need 1 or 2 tons of ammo, instead of 7+

Also, weren't those rifles hand held? Meaning mechs without hands couldn't use them?

Sarna says nothing about the rifles being handheld. Rifles probably refers to the cannon barrels being rifled.
Rifles would be like the cannons we have on a real life modern tank. Except they cannot use special ammunition....but then again AC's can't do it either in MWO because that developer screwed up the ammunition code.

But in any case PGI could just skip that -3 damage to mech armor. PGI has changed a bunch of other things afterall.
Such as changes to range, heat, damage and firerate...
if they didn't change the firerate from the boardgame then all our weapons would have a firerate of 1 shot every 10 seconds.
They have made a few mech variants for MWO that wasn't in the original canon so why not?

Besides....look at all those poor light mechs. They have so few choices in ballistic weapons when you look at the weight.
For a light speed is life. If a light puts in an AC10/LBX 10/AC20 with enough ammo to make it worthwhile it's bound to have huge limitations on it's speed.

MG is fine since it's so light.
AC2 family has some severely long facetime to rival the PPC in pure damage. AC2 does 5x2 damage in 3.6 secs but spread out.
3.6 secs is a long time for a light mech. 6 tonns + ammo is heavy for a weapon that inefficient. Trust me...i've experimented with all the AC2's.
Clan UAC2 was the closest to actually be decent as a standalone weapon like the PPC.

AC5 is heavy enough that the speed or backup weapons becomes a bit limited. UAC5 is somewhat worse than that again for a light mech and it's more ammohungry.
AC10 or LBX 10 ...well let's just say it might be able to cram a medium laser or two in there but speed is limited for sure.

AC20 or Gauss? That light mech will be incredibly slow and it probably won't have much ammo.

But if we had the rifles lights mechs could have some actual choices that won't slow the mech too much.

[IraqiWalker]

Spleenslitta, on 22 August 2015 - 09:26 AM, said:

Sarna says nothing about the rifles being handheld. Rifles probably refers to the cannon barrels being rifled.
Rifles would be like the cannons we have on a real life modern tank. Except they cannot use special ammunition....but then again AC's can't do it either in MWO because that developer screwed up the ammunition code.

But in any case PGI could just skip that -3 damage to mech armor. PGI has changed a bunch of other things afterall.
Such as changes to range, heat, damage and firerate...
if they didn't change the firerate from the boardgame then all our weapons would have a firerate of 1 shot every 10 seconds.
They have made a few mech variants for MWO that wasn't in the original canon so why not?

Besides....look at all those poor light mechs. They have so few choices in ballistic weapons when you look at the weight.
For a light speed is life. If a light puts in an AC10/LBX 10/AC20 with enough ammo to make it worthwhile it's bound to have huge limitations on it's speed.

MG is fine since it's so light.
AC2 family has some severely long facetime to rival the PPC in pure damage. AC2 does 5x2 damage in 3.6 secs but spread out.
3.6 secs is a long time for a light mech. 6 tonns + ammo is heavy for a weapon that inefficient. Trust me...i've experimented with all the AC2's.
Clan UAC2 was the closest to actually be decent as a standalone weapon like the PPC.

AC5 is heavy enough that the speed or backup weapons becomes a bit limited. UAC5 is somewhat worse than that again for a light mech and it's more ammohungry.
AC10 or LBX 10 ...well let's just say it might be able to cram a medium laser or two in there but speed is limited for sure.

AC20 or Gauss? That light mech will be incredibly slow and it probably won't have much ammo.

But if we had the rifles lights mechs could have some actual choices that won't slow the mech too much.

If a light mech is packing an AC 20 or Gauss, it SHOULD be slow.

I get that you're trying to find weapons that fill the gap between the 0.5 ton MGs, and the 6 ton! AC2s, and I would like that too, but there's a reason that even in TT, with the best tech in the game (3100 era), lights are usually packing lots of energy weapons, or small size SRM/MRM/ATM/Rocket launchers.

[Spleenslitta]

IraqiWalker, on 22 August 2015 - 07:52 PM, said:

If a light mech is packing an AC 20 or Gauss, it SHOULD be slow.

I get that you're trying to find weapons that fill the gap between the 0.5 ton MGs, and the 6 ton! AC2s, and I would like that too, but there's a reason that even in TT, with the best tech in the game (3100 era), lights are usually packing lots of energy weapons, or small size SRM/MRM/ATM/Rocket launchers.

Yes it's supposed to be slow if it's packing an AC20. But look at the alternatives available.
If i want to use a ballistic weapon on a light mech i want more alternatives than just the MG.
AC2 is dead in the water, AC5/UAC5 becomes quite heavy for a light mech and bigger ballistic weapons ain't real alternatives.

A 3 tonn+ammo light rifle sounds like a good alternative if they remove the -3 damage to mech armor.

Why do you feel threatened by such a weapon?
It's within the timeline and when you think about it that -3 damage doesn't make much sense. Think about it like this.
A tank in the board game takes 3 points of damage from a small laser just like a mech. Why shouldn't it be the same for the Rifles?

What's so special about an armor plate mounted on a mech instead of a tank? It's still the same armor.
If -3 damage against mechs makes sense then that's the same as saying that Ghost Heat actually makes perfect sense too.

Edited by Spleenslitta, 22 August 2015 - 11:07 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

Spleenslitta, on 22 August 2015 - 11:06 PM, said:

Yes it's supposed to be slow if it's packing an AC20. But look at the alternatives available.
If i want to use a ballistic weapon on a light mech i want more alternatives than just the MG.
AC2 is dead in the water, AC5/UAC5 becomes quite heavy for a light mech and bigger ballistic weapons ain't real alternatives.

A 3 tonn+ammo light rifle sounds like a good alternative if they remove the -3 damage to mech armor.

Why do you feel threatened by such a weapon?
It's within the timeline and when you think about it that -3 damage doesn't make much sense. Think about it like this.
A tank in the board game takes 3 points of damage from a small laser just like a mech. Why shouldn't it be the same for the Rifles?

What's so special about an armor plate mounted on a mech instead of a tank? It's still the same armor.
If -3 damage against mechs makes sense then that's the same as saying that Ghost Heat actually makes perfect sense too.

1- Not threatened by the weapon, just don't see it being effective, because of how it functions

2- The -3 comes from how the ammo interacts with mech armor. Those shells, were effective against "old" armor. They do diddly against the new armor. If you are in a game where you use low tech units, from pre-unification era, the rifles do full damage to them. The whole point is that they used out-dated ammo, propellant, and materials.

Look at it this way:
If you use a musket against a kevlar vest, it won't be as effective as a modern .50 cal round. Hell, it won't be as effective as a .32