29 replies to this topic

[zagibu]

I don't think we need another artificial system on top of all the other stuff we already have. Instead, they should make allround layouts viable by creating diverse battle situations that require different weapon systems. Mech vs. mech will obviously always favor high pinpoint alphas.

[Hit the Deck]

zagibu, on 29 June 2015 - 09:15 AM, said:

I don't think we need another artificial system on top of all the other stuff we already have. Instead, they should make allround layouts viable by creating diverse battle situations that require different weapon systems. Mech vs. mech will obviously always favor high pinpoint alphas.

I guess like what your signature says???

[Y E O N N E]

I feel like there's a general lack of understanding about what quirks really do. Quirks are durability buffs, all of them, they are just mostly indirect ****. Observe:

• Increased range ---> fire from safer distances, take less damage trying to get close
  
• Increased cool-down ---> fire faster, kill enemy with more hit-points to spare
  
• Increased velocity ---> require fewer attempts to land desired hit, save hit-points
  
• Decreased heat-gen ---> fire more often, kill enemy with more hit-points to spare
  
• Decreased duration ---> spend less time exposed to enemy fire, save some hit-points
  
• Increased armor/structure ---> have more hit-points to begin with
  
• Increased twist angle ---> move components completely out of view, saves their hit-points
  
• Increased twist speed ---> more effectively distribute damage to multiple components, saves hit-points per component
  
• Increased turn rate ---> see increased twist speed, also allows easier navigation out of tricky spots, saves hit-points by reduction in chances of getting stuck
  
• Increased acceleration ---> reduces exposure time, saves hit-points

'Mechs that are bad are bad because they are fragile. Fragility stems from many factors, including but not necessarily limited to:

• Lack of hit-points on easily targeted components
  
• Inability to twist far enough, fast enough
  
• Inability to get competitive burst damage out
  
• Hard-point placement requiring increased exposure
  
• Low acceleration preventing decreased exposure

These things tend to work in combination. Generalist 'Mechs are bad because they can't get sufficient burst damage out at medium range (300-600 meters). SRM, LRM, and AC don't synergize well at those ranges, if at all, due to differing velocities. ACs can work, but the inclusion of an AC means reduced energy punch, heat-sinks, and ammo. That's why most generalist 'Mechs are best used as brawlers; at <200 meters, the velocity differences are rendered moot and you can just wail on the target for great burst and sustained damage.


The inability of a generalist 'Mech to do competitive burst damage at medium range syngergizes in a negative way with low hit-points, easily targeted geometry, low agility, and bad hard-point placement.

So, you've potentially got a 'Mech that doesn't have a lot of hit-points to begin with, has to expose itself a lot to fire, can't adequately shield its components, can't return to cover quickly, and can't deal adequate burst damage at the most frequent engagement ranges. Remind you of any 'Mechs? Victor comes to mind, for me. Dragon, too. Commando, though its speed helps it tremendously. Mist Lynx, Atlas.

Personally, I'm against most weapon quirks. I think it's short-sighted to differentiate the weapons of a single tech set among the 'Mechs based on some arbitrary, "lostech" boosters. If the equipment is just universally bad without quirks (and it really is), then the equipment is bad and should be made universally better. If the chassis has deficiencies even then, we know why it is bad from the above statements so why don't we look at what ways they are specifically lacking and apply a more direct durability buff? We know a Battlemaster has problems because it can't twist far enough or fast enough to shield, so we should increase its twist angle and twist speed. We know the Atlas is slow and has to expose the whole 'Mech to fire, so we provide it additional armor and structure everywhere. Things like that.

Weapon quirks notwithstanding, the Hunchback is probably one of the best examples of quirking. We all knew that the hunch was where all of its weapons were contained and that was its weak point. Remove the hunch, remove the 'Mech from the fight. So PGI gave that Hunch a rather substantial hit-point increase. Now the hunch is actually pretty tough to remove and, if you are suffering return fire from it, you'd be better off going for the CT or a leg. The Hunchback is currently what I would consider one of the most solid Inner Sphere medium chassis. You can't really go wrong while driving one in public matches. It is fast, it is small, it has no more glaring weak point, and it can bring a nasty payload. Its only remaining problems are those associated with inferior IS tech, and you don't buff the 'Mech to fix the equipment you are compelled to put on it.

edit: really, PGI? the word "a i d s" as in "helpful items" is filtered?

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 29 June 2015 - 09:46 AM.

[stjobe]

Yeonne Greene, on 29 June 2015 - 09:45 AM, said:

I feel like there's a general lack of understanding about what quirks really do. Quirks are durability buffs, all of them

One 'mechs "durability buff" is the other 'mechs "TTK reduction".

Not that I disagree particularly with your analysis, just wanted to point out that there's more than one perspective:

• Increased range ---> fire from farther away, can engage sooner
  
• Increased cool-down ---> fire faster, kill enemy faster
  
• Increased velocity ---> require fewer attempts to land desired hit, kill enemy faster
  
• Decreased heat-gen ---> fire more often, kill enemy faster
  
• Decreased duration ---> spend less time exposed to enemy fire, kill enemy faster
  
• Increased armor/structure ---> have more hit-points to begin with, can kill more 'mechs before dying
  
• Increased twist angle ---> easier to maneuver and still fire on-target
  
• Increased twist speed ---> can re-align on-target faster after defensive twisting
  
• Increased turn rate ---> see increased twist speed
  
• Increased acceleration ---> reduces exposure time, can re-engage faster

[Y E O N N E]

stjobe, on 29 June 2015 - 11:06 AM, said:

One 'mechs "durability buff" is the other 'mechs "TTK reduction".

Not that I disagree particularly with your analysis, just wanted to point out that there's more than one perspective:

• Increased range ---> fire from farther away, can engage sooner
  
• Increased cool-down ---> fire faster, kill enemy faster
  
• Increased velocity ---> require fewer attempts to land desired hit, kill enemy faster
  
• Decreased heat-gen ---> fire more often, kill enemy faster
  
• Decreased duration ---> spend less time exposed to enemy fire, kill enemy faster
  
• Increased armor/structure ---> have more hit-points to begin with, can kill more 'mechs before dying
  
• Increased twist angle ---> easier to maneuver and still fire on-target
  
• Increased twist speed ---> can re-align on-target faster after defensive twisting
  
• Increased turn rate ---> see increased twist speed
  
• Increased acceleration ---> reduces exposure time, can re-engage faster

Time-to-kill and durability are inherently linked. A universally low TTK is synonymous with universal fragility and universally powerful weapons. They are all saying exactly the same thing.

As for your bullets, they are saying the same things, essentially. The difference between my list and your list is that my list is distilling the result of each quirk into its ultimate, practical effect while yours is detailing the interim effects. Being able to engage sooner due to range, for example, means you can fire before your target for a given level of damage and damage rate. That means less incoming damage, which means more hit-points saved, which means your durability has been increased. Note, increased range does nothing to help you if your enemy enjoys the same benefit. For another example, killing the enemy fast means there's less time for him to shoot back. If your DPS goes up for whatever reason (decreased cool-down, less waiting on heat, etc.) and his stays the same, you save on hit-points.

Obviously, though, increased durability means you can be more dangerous and harm/kill more 'Mechs before dying. That's really what it's all about. Armor/structure is a resource and every time we go to shoot, we are making a mental calculation on how much that shot will cost us in terms of hit-points from our 'Mech. The entire meta of this game revolves around doing as much damage as possible in exchange for as few personal hit-points as possible, which is why burst or impulse DPS is typically the most important damage measure. We are trying to maximize the ratio between percentage of total hit-points removed from target per second over the percentage of total hit-points lost from self per second. Because some 'Mechs can't really improve their burst DPS, especially forced-generalist 'Mechs, the only way to really increase their effectiveness is to do something that decreases the percentage of hit-points lost.

You can actually increase the effectiveness of any 'Mech in this game by increasing its hit-points. A Dragon with Timberwolf hit-points all-around and without those insane AC/5 quirks would actually be quite dangerous. It could probably even reasonably mount an XL and trade blows without fear of being popped in the opening trade. Yes, it has more CT hit-points than a TBR right now, but most of that is in structure. Structure is less valuable than armor because of crits.

[Hit the Deck]

Yeonne Greene, on 29 June 2015 - 09:45 AM, said:

I feel like there's a general lack of understanding about what quirks really do. Quirks are durability buffs, all of them, they are just mostly indirect ****. Observe:
....

Uh..., will you say that increasing the lethality of a tank's cannon is a buff to its durability? I guess not but when you say "survivability" then I can accept that. Survivability is indeed a component of effectiveness and a buff to it can certainly be applied to problematic chassis. I lean more to increase these generalists' mobility/agility but some armor buffs for fatties certainly can't hurt.

[Y E O N N E]

Hit the Deck, on 29 June 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

Uh..., will you say that increasing the lethality of a tank's cannon is a buff to its durability? I guess not but when you say "survivability" then I can accept that. Survivability is indeed a component of effectiveness and a buff to it can certainly be applied to problematic chassis. I lean more to increase these generalists' mobility/agility but some armor buffs for fatties certainly can't hurt.

I suppose "survivability" is the better word, but I don't think it gets the idea across as well.

That said, durability in this case is how much potential abuse can it sustain. We are counting rounds that make contact as well as rounds that do not for any reason attributable to the 'Mech being fired upon (i.e. AMS, twisting out of the way, killing the enemy before he can fire, etc). If a tank can stop damage by out-ranging his opponent, it is more durable against the potential threats arrayed against it.

[Ultimax]

stjobe, on 29 June 2015 - 09:11 AM, said:

"more of the same weapon is best" - how you got from that statement to "choosing completely different firing mechanisms" is beyond me.

Because it's not just "more of the same weapon is best".


It's about having similar firing mechanisms, similar delivery & similar cooldowns.


The best builds are and have been mixed loadouts for a long, long time.

Everyone is still dizzy about laser vomit, but the strongest builds right now Combine Gauss + Lasers.



Those builds work because they are mixed loadouts, because you take advantage of your heat bar and can continue to put out damage when you are hot. It works because while the firing mechanisms are different, Gauss velocity is strong enough that you don't need to lead as much (and you can also open up with Gauss and follow with lasers for "bonus" damage, which is good for when you don't want to reveal your location right away to make sure the Gauss hits).



If Clan UACs had really high velocities*, you'd see them combined even more with lasers because suddenly their delivery would synnergize better than now.


*The UAC 2 can do it, but the added heat is undesirable.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 29 June 2015 - 02:58 PM.

[FupDup]

Ultimatum X, on 29 June 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

Because it's not just "more of the same weapon is best".

It's about having similar firing mechanisms, similar delivery & similar cooldowns.

The best builds are and have been mixed loadouts for a long, long time.

Everyone is still dizzy about laser vomit, but the strongest builds right now Combine Gauss + Lasers.

Those builds work because they are mixed loadouts, because you take advantage of your heat bar and can continue to put out damage when you are hot. It works because while the firing mechanisms are different, Gauss velocity is strong enough that you don't need to lead as much (and you can also open up with Gauss and follow with lasers for "bonus" damage, which is good for when you don't want to reveal your location right away to make sure the Gauss hits).

I think a part of it is that people seem to have different definitions of what makes a "mixed loadout."

For some people, a mixed loadout is having something with 8+ weapon groups like AC/2 + Flamer + Large Laser + LRM10 + SRM4 + LB 10-X + SSRM2 + Machine Gun + Small Laser, or something of that nature.

And for people like you and me, something like lasers + Gauss or ACs + PPCs is a mixed build. Some of my own mixed builds are the 4 ERML + 2 UAC/5 Hellbringer and 3 MPL + 2 ARLM15 + TAG Cauldron Born.

Edited by FupDup, 29 June 2015 - 02:02 PM.

[Ultimax]

FupDup, on 29 June 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

I think a part of it is that people seem to have different definitions of what makes a "mixed loadout."

For some people, a mixed loadout is having something with 8+ weapon groups like AC/2 + Flamer + Large Laser + LRM10 + SRM4 + LB 10-X + SSRM2 + Machine Gun + Small Laser, or something of that nature.

And for people like you and me, something like lasers + Gauss or ACs + PPCs is a mixed build. Some of my own mixed builds are the 4 ERML + 2 UAC/5 Hellbringer and 3 MPL + 2 ARLM15 + TAG Cauldron Born.

Yeah good points.


I don't there can be any compromise here. If people want to play 3+ weapon systems be my guest.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 29 June 2015 - 03:03 PM.