180 replies to this topic

[Snazzy Dragon]

Yeonne Greene, on 13 December 2017 - 07:32 PM, said:

Whatever happened to Quicksilver, anyway? Did he move on from MWO?

I imagine the stale meta, small selection of comp viable mechs, boring quick/group/fw play, and lack of patches that make sense balance wise recently might drive someone to take a break

[valrond]

Yeonne Greene, on 13 December 2017 - 08:33 PM, said:

Both of which have some fairly extreme drawbacks and don't, on the sum, allow the IS to have similar capabilities.

It's like the whole PPC thing. IS have four flavors of PPC, and none of them are as good in any niche as the cERPPC across all niches.

Yeah, and the Autocannons too? Why don't the clans have a solid slug AC-20 or AC-10 like the IS has?

This is beating a dead horse. IS has a lot more options for specialization than the clans.

Oh, and Snubs and Heavy PPC are pretty good. A lot more heat efficient than the clan ERPPC.

[Snazzy Dragon]

valrond, on 13 December 2017 - 11:18 PM, said:

Yeah, and the Autocannons too? Why don't the clans have a solid slug AC-20 or AC-10 like the IS has?

This is beating a dead horse. IS has a lot more options for specialization than the clans.

Oh, and Snubs and Heavy PPC are pretty good. A lot more heat efficient than the clan ERPPC.

lol
SNPPC has crap range, LPCC tickles, the PPC and ERPPC still suck compared to the cERPPC, and the HPPC is so tonnage intensive that you don't really get the number of DHS you need to keep them even remotely under control. Plus they still have a minimum range.

I'll put it this way: quad cERPPC warhawk can easily fit 10+18 DHS

A dual HPPC IS assault will struggle to fit more than 10+8

[visionGT4]

valrond, on 13 December 2017 - 11:18 PM, said:

Yeah, and the Autocannons too? Why don't the clans have a solid slug AC-20 or AC-10 like the IS has?

This is beating a dead horse. IS has a lot more options for specialization than the clans.

Oh, and Snubs and Heavy PPC are pretty good. A lot more heat efficient than the clan ERPPC.

Heres a specialist build that covers all engagement scenarios

12 ton goose + cEMRL's + 2 slot DHS

[Tiewolf]

valrond, on 13 December 2017 - 11:18 PM, said:

Yeah, and the Autocannons too? Why don't the clans have a solid slug AC-20 or AC-10 like the IS has?

This is beating a dead horse. IS has a lot more options for specialization than the clans.

Oh, and Snubs and Heavy PPC are pretty good. A lot more heat efficient than the clan ERPPC.

Like Yeonne Greene said the magic word is "drawbacks". Snubs have only a short range, HPPC are only good at medium range and have a minimum range. Not to mention the heatsink difference between clan-IS that is linked to the performance of this heat intense weapon system. The point is that CER-PPC combined with the ability to boat tons of double heat sinks are good or at least decent in all scenarios while IS is only good in a very specific circumstance.

Do you see the magic solid slug AC20 or AC10 on IS side everywhere? No? Well there might be a catch with these weapon systems too like maybe low velocity or a lot of tons for the bang.

Sad that this gauss topic is so old. But we all know, thx to pgi`s efforts to eliminate IS quirks while buffing the higher clan values via a % based skill tree, that finally Clan - IS balance is super close.

[Khobai]

The only reason the C-ERPPC is better is because IS-DHS are garbage.

If IS-DHS and C-DHS were equal, then the C-ERPPC would be inferior to the IS-ERPPC

Higher velocity, lower heat, and superior quirks are better than weighing 1 less ton, more heat, slower cooldown, and doing crappy splash damage that vanishes into thin air half the time. If cooling potential for IS was made equal, the IS-ERPPC would pull ahead at that point.

If IS-DHS were significantly buffed (and they should be significantly buffed), then the state of the C-ERPPC would likely have to be reevaluated. the C-ERPPC itself is not all that great, its just the fact that C-DHS are so much better than IS-DHS that gives it a leg up. The disparity between C-DHS and IS-DHS is mostly the problem when it comes to energy weapon balance.

Quote

Do you see the magic solid slug AC20 or AC10 on IS side everywhere? No? Well there might be a catch with these weapon systems too like maybe low velocity or a lot of tons for the bang.

AC20 being ghost heated at 1 is what stops it from being used.

and its not even ghost heated at 1 because PGI is afraid of dual AC20.

its ghost heated at 1 because PGI is afraid of the massive alphas that would result from dual AC20 combined with 1-2 PPCs

if AC20 was set to a ghost heat limit of 2, it would have to be linked in the same ghost heat group as PPCs and Gauss. And that would probably work.

Although at that point, if youre going to start linking all weapons in the same ghost heat group, giving us energy draw 3.0 would probably make more sense

Edited by Khobai, 14 December 2017 - 12:59 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

valrond, on 13 December 2017 - 11:18 PM, said:

Yeah, and the Autocannons too? Why don't the clans have a solid slug AC-20 or AC-10 like the IS has?

Because the Clan ones weigh less, are smaller, and have greater range? You can't even fit an AC/20 or a pair of UAC/5 into a side torso with an XL. Hell, even when you can fit 2x UAC/10 and 2x UAC/5, you barely get enough ammo because the slot consumption is ridiculous.

So how do you propose to nerf a single-shot Clan AC? Are you willing to take a 25-33% hit to rate of fire with it? Eat more heat? Both at once?

Quote

This is beating a dead horse. IS has a lot more options for specialization than the clans.

Nonsense. They have more gimmicks and memes, but gimmicks and memes are not specialization.

Quote

Oh, and Snubs and Heavy PPC are pretty good. A lot more heat efficient than the clan ERPPC.

Doesn't matter, they don't have the range. 540 meters is solidly mid-range. Solidly the domain of the MCII boogeyman. Plus, easy to duck under those guns and there are no light-weight, low-heat weapons with sufficient punch to pair them with. That's why there are no comp builds that use them. Once upon a time, UACs ran cold enough and reliable enough for non-ERPPCs to carve a niche for themselves, but PGI killed it.

At any rate cERPPC can be sinked so well that they are as useful at close range as a pair of Snubs while being more useful than a pair of isERPPC at extreme range. If I could, I would swap my Arrow to from LFE to cXL and from SN-PPC to cERPPC in a heartbeat.

[Khobai]

Quote

So how do you propose to nerf a single-shot Clan AC? Are you willing to take a 25-33% hit to rate of fire with it? Eat more heat? Both at once?

same way most clan weapons are balanced: more heat, slower rate of fire, longer range

for example:
Clan AC20 (12 tons) = 20 damage, 7.5 heat, 5.0 cooldown, 360m range, 650m/s, and less crit health
IS AC20 (14 tons) = 20 damage, 6 heat, 4.0 cooldown, 270m range, 750m/s, and 5%-10% ballistic quirk(s)

Edited by Khobai, 14 December 2017 - 01:24 AM.

[Lunatic NEo]

You are right! Its so unfair, IS never wins and cant win cause the Clan Tech is sooooo much better in every aspect. Its lighter, needs less space, XL Engine!, 7 Slot Ferro and Endo, 2 Slot DHS, no Slot Case.

Ok, Clans dont have MRM's, Heavy Gauss, Light Gauss, Rocket Launchers, Snub PPC, Light PPC, Heavy PPC, normal PPC, normal Lasers,1 Bullet AC's, 100T Mechs with any Armor Quirks (except negative ones), 40 Tons smaller Drop Decks in FW (the only mode where Clan vs IS Balance counts), Rotary AC's, Machine Guns which dont spread like LBX Cannons, extreme long burning Lasers, quite fragile DHS and Gauss Rifles, no Stealth Amor (but who uses this, am i right?), fixed equipment in all their Omnis which are more then 50% of their Mechs available, most Omnis with Quirks have low slung Arms, 100T Mechs without any meaningful Quirks (but they dont need em anyways cause they are still much better then everything IS can bring, am i right?).

Yeah... i dont see a reason why we shouldnt buff IS and nerf Clan even more. Something like Ghost Heat Link all Clan Weapons to a maximum of 2. Serves em right vor shooting Machineguns with Lasers!
IS obviosly needs more range, less heat, more armor and structur quirks, better movement, more dmg weapons (for offsetting that they weight more), XL Engines without disadvantages like death.

Well, let me dream, that would be such a great game.

Edited by Lunatic NEo, 14 December 2017 - 04:15 AM.

[Tiewolf]

Lunatic NEo, on 14 December 2017 - 04:13 AM, said:

You are right! Its so unfair, IS never wins and cant win cause the Clan Tech is sooooo much better in every aspect. Its lighter, needs less space, XL Engine!, 7 Slot Ferro and Endo, 2 Slot DHS, no Slot Case.

Ok, Clans dont have MRM's, Heavy Gauss, Light Gauss, Rocket Launchers, Snub PPC, Light PPC, Heavy PPC, normal PPC, normal Lasers,1 Bullet AC's, 100T Mechs with any Armor Quirks (except negative ones), 40 Tons smaller Drop Decks in FW (the only mode where Clan vs IS Balance counts), Rotary AC's, Machine Guns which dont spread like LBX Cannons, extreme long burning Lasers, quite fragile DHS and Gauss Rifles, no Stealth Amor (but who uses this, am i right?), fixed equipment in all their Omnis which are more then 50% of their Mechs available, most Omnis with Quirks have low slung Arms, 100T Mechs without any meaningful Quirks (but they dont need em anyways cause they are still much better then everything IS can bring, am i right?).

Yeah... i dont see a reason why we shouldnt buff IS and nerf Clan even more. Something like Ghost Heat Link all Clan Weapons to a maximum of 2. Serves em right vor shooting Machineguns with Lasers!
IS obviosly needs more range, less heat, more armor and structur quirks, better movement, more dmg weapons (for offsetting that they weight more), XL Engines without disadvantages like death.

Well, let me dream, that would be such a great game.

Well i don`t know what to say...

Many clan mechs don`t need quirks and quirks were for the most part there to flaver omnis a bit under the 3 mech rule. Some really need quirks too and they have quirks. Nearly ALL IS mechs need quirks to compete with unquirked clan mechs!
Most new tech exept MRMs and LFE are just garbage or useless gimmecks. Most of the new clan tech is great like ATMs or Heavy Lasers! LFE doesn`t even come close to C-XL but shares the same drawbacks. Omnis, fixed engine or not, are one reason why clan is better not worse! First you can boat all hardpoints and second you can place em in the mech parts you want em to be. I could go on and on, but i guess you wouldn`t take off your clan glasses anyway.
But i am with you that nerfing clans is not a good option to achieve balance with maybe the exeption of linking laser ghostheat to 6 for all lasersclasses. This would balance the omni hardpoint boating on clanside a bit and lower the unreal pin point laser alphas.

Edited by Tiewolf, 14 December 2017 - 04:53 AM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Blame what little search engine this forum has. It does give the mod something to do. If PGI actually fixed the forums (chuckles-how many years now...) so the default search shows the NEWEST threads instead of the oldest threads first.. then may be...

And may be increase the font size of the time stamp too since more are using 2k-4k resolution monitors, still small footprint (24-27in monitors). Even using the default 130% increase some print is easily missed due to font size...

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 14 December 2017 - 05:49 AM.

[Daggett]

Khobai, on 13 December 2017 - 07:21 PM, said:

ancient but still relevant

Relevant yes, but most things written in this thread are now heavily outdated so i would rather start a new thread.
I only needed to read the first few posts to get my necro-sense tingling.

New players reading this however could easily get confused.
And i blame PGI's inability to implement a proper search function too for any necro that's showing up.

Edited by Daggett, 14 December 2017 - 05:10 AM.

[Dr Hobo]

Why not keep the charging mechanic,but if you're holding a charge and it gets critted,then it explodes with a 100% chance,and if not a 25% chance?

[McGoat]

I wonder how many of you actually play both sides. Most of this reads as speculation, and it's quite silly.

[Tarl Cabot]

Lunatic NEo, on 14 December 2017 - 04:13 AM, said:

snip...

You do realize many on the opposite end of your POV are Clanners who have played both sides? The real issue is PGI lack of or unwillingness to apply more creativity to different aspects of the game, to use TT/lore as a guideline/flavor instead of doing that rarely while at the same time applying only one portion of a ruleset while ignoring the rest of it.

TT/Lore - dice determined hit/miss and location / mechwarrior put crosshairs on his target, battlecomputer lined up the weapons then would give tone when high probability of hits for most weapons on a TIC (weapon group). The closest MWO comes to this is LRM/SSRM/ATM.

MWO - FPS - no convergence, no bloom, other crosshair stuff, etc. Basically hit the SPOT you are aiming for with non-missile weapons being fired from different body sections.

isXL death w/loss of one side torso but PGI is only using a partial of the rule set, there is no true engine crit system that affects a mech, be it running a STD, isXL, cXL or LFE. Simply a flag. If this engine equipped and one ST destroyed, this happens.

Minimum range - no damage at all - in TT/lore those min ranges required a higher gunnery roll for a hit, ie it made it harder to hit an opponent, it does not eliminate the damage. But PGI has removed the damage completely. Since this is a FPS there is no dice/battlecomputer doing the work. PGI could then use a sharp reduction in damage. It would not even have to be linear at the drop off. Different ways to add the flavor without making the weapon completely useless because another mech is hugging you, and there are physical attacks are not possible where you can punch or kick that pesky light away.

And yes, Clan LBX2-5, cHag, UAC2, isAC2-5, isUAC2-5, is/cGauss Rifle, isLFG/HGR, isLRM, cATM, isLPPC, PPC, HPPC all have a minimum ranges in TT. Stressing though it only made it more difficult to hit target that was within the minimum range.

Copy/paste rule/description from TT manual on how gunnery skill is modified when a target is inside a weapon's min range.

Quote

Spoiler

Minimum Range Modifier

Some weapons, such as particle projector cannons, autocannons
and long-range missiles (LRMs), are designed to be
fired at long-range targets. When fired at close-range targets,
they lose much of their effectiveness. The minimum effective
range of each available weapon—the range at which the
weapon becomes less effective than normal—appears on the
Weapons and Equipment Table, p. 60.

Players can use the following formula to determine the
minimum range modifier: [Min. Range] – [Target Range] + 1 =

Minimum Range Modifier.
In the Minimum Range diagram below, a 'Mech mounts
a particle projector canon (PPC), which has a minimum
effective range of three hexes. If the 'Mech is firing the
PPC at a target unit three hexes away, the modifier would
be +1 (3 (minimum range) – 3 (target range) +1 = 1). If
the target unit is only two hexes away, the modifier is
+2 (3 (minimum range) – 2 (target range) +1 = 2). If the
target is one hex away, the modifier is +3 (3 (minimum
range) – 1 (target range) +1 = 3); these numbers assume
a Gunnery Skill of 4.

If the ’Mech in the above example allows its target to
move to within 2 hexes of its position, the player must modify
the BattleMech’s to-hit number because the target stands
inside its weapon’s minimum effective range. The Base ToHit
Number is 4 because the MechWarrior’s Gunnery Skill
Level is 4, and the Minimum Range Modifier is +2. This gives
the attacking ’Mech a Modified To-Hit Number of 6, the
same as if the target were at medium range.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 14 December 2017 - 05:51 AM.

[Dr Hobo]

Tarl Cabot, on 14 December 2017 - 05:45 AM, said:

You do realize many on the opposite end of your POV are Clanners who have played both sides? The real issue is PGI lack of or unwillingness to apply more creativity to different aspects of the game, to use TT/lore as a guideline/flavor instead of doing that rarely while at the same time applying only one portion of a ruleset while ignoring the rest of it.

TT/Lore - dice determined hit/miss and location / mechwarrior put crosshairs on his target, battlecomputer lined up the weapons then would give tone when high probability of hits for most weapons on a TIC (weapon group). The closest MWO comes to this is LRM/SSRM/ATM.

MWO - FPS - no convergence, no bloom, other crosshair stuff, etc. Basically hit the SPOT you are aiming for with non-missile weapons being fired from different body sections.

isXL death w/loss of one side torso but PGI is only using a partial of the rule set, there is no true engine crit system that affects a mech, be it running a STD, isXL, cXL or LFE. Simply a flag. If this engine equipped and one ST destroyed, this happens.

Minimum range - no damage at all - in TT/lore those min ranges required a higher gunnery roll for a hit, ie it made it harder to hit an opponent, it does not eliminate the damage. But PGI has removed the damage completely. Since this is a FPS there is no dice/battlecomputer doing the work. PGI could then use a sharp reduction in damage. It would not even have to be linear at the drop off. Different ways to add the flavor without making the weapon completely useless because another mech is hugging you, and there are physical attacks are not possible where you can punch or kick that pesky light away.

And yes, Clan LBX2-5, cHag, UAC2, isAC2-5, isUAC2-5, is/cGauss Rifle, isLFG/HGR, isLRM, cATM, isLPPC, PPC, HPPC all have a minimum ranges in TT. Stressing though it only made it more difficult to hit target that was within the minimum range.

Copy/paste rule/description from TT manual on how gunnery skill is modified when a target is inside a weapon's min range.

Do you think convergence,heat penalties and other TT things would help or hurt MWO?

If we had those,do you think that it would even the field a little bit?

I don't mind clans being better,they were better in TT. It's just we can't do the underhanded tactics we could in TT to give us an edge(I.e DFA,multiple units attacking the same clan mech etc,loading a mech with satchel charges in the armor and blowing yourself up).

[theta123]

Ursh, on 01 July 2015 - 12:53 PM, said:

No, most of the clan mechs that can equip gauss can only equip one. There are multiple IS mechs that can do dual gauss effectively.

the lowest yet viable build for a single gauss mech for clans is the 35t adder. The first IS mech that can do the SAME is the phoenix hawk zt 45 tonnes.

[Grus]

Gas Guzzler, on 01 July 2015 - 12:50 PM, said:

So as we all know aside from weighing 3 tons more the IS Gauss behaves exactly like the Clan Gauss. Otherwise, they are exactly the same. What if PGI raised IS gauss hitpoints and lowered its explosion damage a little bit? Or maybe just one or the other. Rationale is the extra 3 tons is used to aid in weapon shielding/explosion containment. Clans stripped it because their XLs aren't so fragile, and something something.

Its a slight buff that makes putting Gauss in IS XL side torsos not so suicidal, but will be far from game breaking as it literally behaves the same as the Clan Gauss otherwise.

I think its fair... doesn't involve neutering the Clan Gauss at all..

sounds like you want the behaviour of clan gauss in a is mech... simple fix, go clan.

Now before you explode, hear me out on this part. I don't think they should explode at all. Reason being IS the charge mechanic, capasiters will explode IF they are charged, and because we have to charge the gauss in order to fire it the ONLY time it would go pop is that narrow window just before you fire.

[Gas Guzzler]

Grus, on 14 December 2017 - 10:37 AM, said:

sounds like you want the behaviour of clan gauss in a is mech... simple fix, go clan.

Now before you explode, hear me out on this part. I don't think they should explode at all. Reason being IS the charge mechanic, capasiters will explode IF they are charged, and because we have to charge the gauss in order to fire it the ONLY time it would go pop is that narrow window just before you fire.

I tend to agree. If there is no charge, there is no explosion.

However I will point out that this thread is a couple years old. There is a difference in hit points between Clan and IS gauss. I think if they didn't explode I would be happy.

[Tarl Cabot]

Dr Hobo, on 14 December 2017 - 06:03 AM, said:

Do you think convergence,heat penalties and other TT things would help or hurt MWO?

If we had those,do you think that it would even the field a little bit?

I don't mind clans being better,they were better in TT. It's just we can't do the underhanded tactics we could in TT to give us an edge(I.e DFA,multiple units attacking the same clan mech etc,loading a mech with satchel charges in the armor and blowing yourself up).

Convergence/Bloom would help some when tied to more than one weapon being fired. Heat Scale penalties for movement/agility/bloom change the meta. It would make the peek/scoot more dangerous since both forward and backward speed would be affected, allowing slightly more time to fire on target. It would also set a better guide for behavior since it would be a mech physical effect.

There would basically be more gray areas.. transition areas instead of on/off. But as long as the base foundations between Clan and IS are not close to parity, ie isXL vs cXL, the playing field would not be even. There is a reason players equip XL engines in their IS mechs, to provide more speed, ability to equip more armor and better weapons than stock to be more competitive against Clan Omni/battlemechs. CGL understood that even more, basically starting things over with the WoB/Dark Ages/etc. And that is JUST for the boardgame timeline which uses dice for hit/miss and location per weapon.

But even though previously PGI had shown interest in providing a fully functional engine crit EACH time they added or changed the penalties to the cXL, doing so would not be as beneficial to MWO as some may think. Which would mean PGI should go in the opposite direction. They have done it for the cXL, and technically the LFE, they should do the same for the isXL while slightly modifying the cXL/LFE. And with the way the transferring of damage is setup, increasing that for STD would provide minimum benefit, unless said percentage from ST to CT is slightly increased for STD but decreased for cXL/isXL/LFE. And that variable could be a different percentage for each engine type but PGI, if a change like that was made they would keep it at one threshold for the c-isXL/LFE.