304 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

DONTOR, on 31 July 2015 - 09:09 AM, said:

Its about 3 years over due for sure, seriously, when is this gonna happen!

Never. 10 heat sinks minimum is a hard TT rule.

What they need to do is make the first 10 DHS TrueDubs, no matter if they come with the engine or are external. That would help not just our Commandos, but all sub-250 engined 'mechs.

[3xnihilo]

BarHaid, on 31 July 2015 - 08:45 AM, said:

Do you see this giant hole in my center? DO YOU!?!?

Ohhhh...I thought that was an outward sign of your unfulfilled longing to be loved by PGI the way Locusts were loved by PGI in the quirkening.

[happy mech]

stjobe, on 31 July 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

Never. 10 heat sinks minimum is a hard TT rule.

What they need to do is make the first 10 DHS TrueDubs, no matter if they come with the engine or are external. That would help not just our Commandos, but all sub-250 engined 'mechs.

did mechs in tabletop have such outrageous quirks too? this is not tabletop

all heatsinks need to be the same, else smaller mechs have huge advantage vs mechs that need the additional heatsinks but those additional heatsinks are crap

[BarHaid]

3xnihilo, on 31 July 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

Ohhhh...I thought that was an outward sign of your unfulfilled longing to be loved by PGI the way Locusts were loved by PGI in the quirkening.

Love me, love my Commando hole?

[Tahribator]

I don't know how I missed this thread for so long. For the OP:



I actually liked the 3A before the quirks, but after the quirks the poor Commando is left so far behind that even a 'Mech hipster like me doesn't dare touch it. A 25 ton ammo limited SRM platform just doesn't work. The TDK is one of the better ones because it's a pure energy 'Mech and can have firepower without sacrificing its speed. Though even then it's really hot running 'Mech and 4 energy hardpoints don't offer much damage potential.

I really hope PGI gives the Commando some very nasty SRM quirks. However before all, it needs some kind of an SRM ammo quirk to make SRM tonnage actually managable. Perhaps thrown in a few armor quirks to make it really tough (it's a short range 'Mech after all, almost a micro-brawler).

[no one]

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 08:09 AM, said:

removal of the 10 hs requirement is what the ammo dependant commando really needs

That's been an integral part of how 'mechs be put together since the long long ago.

3xnihilo, on 01 July 2015 - 03:26 PM, said:

If we could get something like 100% increase in srm ammo per ton ...

This, however, has merit.

SRMs are the ONLY ammo dependent weapon in MWO that never got an ammo increase in the doubled armor system. The major effect of lower ammo counts is higher effective weapon weight, since people aren't going to take a weapon that turns into dead weight in two minutes. So SRMs are effectively to heavy to make useful weapons on a light 'mech.
Add to that damage spread, lowered critical damage, slow flight speed, noticeable shake when backstabbing, hard maximum range, AMS . . . SRM lights just don't pack enough SRM to be effective machines unless you're good enough, or the enemy's bad enough to let you cram yourself into their backs for multiple volleys. The stealth commando has a better shot at this than most 'Mechs, but it's lacks the firepower to chew through a big 'Mech before it's support stomps you.

That said, one of my favorite cherry tapping 'Mechs is the naked locust. 4srm4s, 3 tons of ammo, no armor. 1/2 kdr. . . and I frequently run out of ammo before I run out of locust.

Edited by no one, 31 July 2015 - 11:36 AM.

[stjobe]

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

did mechs in tabletop have such outrageous quirks too? this is not tabletop

This is still ostensibly (and however tenuous) "A BattleTech Game". As such, it needs to at least pay some dues to the 30 years of lore that comprises the BattleTech universe.

Breaking the 10 heat sinks minimum rule breaks the 'mech construction rules, and invalidates any stock builds.

Besides, I played this game before we had the 10 HS minimum, and before we had DHS. I wouldn't recommend trying to drop a Commando with 7 SHS - I speak from experience when I tell you it'll be rather hot.

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

all heatsinks need to be the same, else smaller mechs have huge advantage vs mechs that need the additional heatsinks but those additional heatsinks are crap

Yes, this has been a point of contention ever since DHS were introduced (although I think you've got it a bit mixed up; it's generally the smaller 'mechs that are penalized, not advantaged).

The 1.4 FauxDubs penalize every sub-250 engined 'mech in the game for no good reason. The 3-second Jenner excuse was so idiotic it beggars belief; the Jenner in question would of course run a XL300 engine, with 10 TrueDubs, so wouldn't be affected at all.

But since PGI is more stubborn than a whole herd of mules, they're not going to make all DHS TrueDubs, but they might be convinced to at least make the first 10 heat sinks TrueDubs if enough people pester them about it.

Edited by stjobe, 31 July 2015 - 12:00 PM.

[happy mech]

stjobe, on 31 July 2015 - 11:58 AM, said:

This is still ostensibly (and however tenuous) "A BattleTech Game". As such, it needs to at least pay some dues to the 30 years of lore that comprises the BattleTech universe.

Breaking the 10 heat sinks minimum rule breaks the 'mech construction rules, and invalidates any stock builds.

Besides, I played this game before we had the 10 HS minimum, and before we had DHS. I wouldn't recommend trying to drop a Commando with 7 SHS - I speak from experience when I tell you it'll be rather hot.

balance > lore
from what i know about the heat system, pgi took some things, changed some things, and generally created a completely different system (engine weight and such), so slap a "10 hs because of lore" on it is quite funny
besides, your mech works ok if the hs get destroyed, let the player decide if his mech is hot, when 9 erppc dws can function why not 7 dhs commandos

stjobe, on 31 July 2015 - 11:58 AM, said:

Yes, this has been a point of contention ever since DHS were introduced (although I think you've got it a bit mixed up; it's generally the smaller 'mechs that are penalized, not advantaged).

The 1.4 FauxDubs penalize every sub-250 engined 'mech in the game for no good reason. The 3-second Jenner excuse was so idiotic it beggars belief; the Jenner in question would of course run a XL300 engine, with 10 TrueDubs, so wouldn't be affected at all.

But since PGI is more stubborn than a whole herd of mules, they're not going to make all DHS TrueDubs, but they might be convinced to at least make the first 10 heat sinks TrueDubs if enough people pester them about it.

10 dhs mechs take the most out of it
awesome with 19 dhs and only energy hardpoints is screwed, the under 250 rating engine are disadvantaged too of course but a bit less
3 second jenner? wow

pgi is doing maps, mechs, events, whatever, but adjusting the system that is present in every match, and requires one person to adjust some numbers and then let it test, that looks impossible
fixed 30 heat cap has been suggested long ago as a solution to high alphas and ghost heat, all dhs being the same dissipation
i have made a post here proposing how the new values could be http://mwomercs.com/...45#entry4594145 if you are interested, but i am a bit bitter about it, just look at clan streaks, pgi do not understand numbers

[stjobe]

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

balance > lore

Sure, but balance can respect lore and not just ignore it. Removing the 10 heat sinks rule ignores lore, making the first 10 DHS TrueDubs respects it. They both solve the same problem.

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

from what i know about the heat system, pgi took some things, changed some things, and generally created a completely different system (engine weight and such), so slap a "10 hs because of lore" on it is quite funny

The system isn't so different as you might think. Engine weights match TT weights with one or two exceptions, heat capacity is identical apart from the bonuses from pilot skills and the fact that some DHS are FauxDubs.

The biggest issue with the heat system is that they decided to increase rate of fire without increasing dissipation to match; dissipation is still at TT rates while rate of fire is on average three times faster.

Oh, and that they decided to completely ignore any heat penalties except shutdown at 100%.

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

besides, your mech works ok if the hs get destroyed, let the player decide if his mech is hot, when 9 erppc dws can function why not 7 dhs commandos

Balance. Balance is the answer. It's not just about build what you want, there are supposed to be trade-offs to make in every facet of building a 'mech. Whether to take Endo-steel or regular structure, whether to go XL or standard, it is supposed to be tricky (if not outright unachievable) to get the "perfect" 'mech.

MWO isn't at that point, and a lot of it is because of stupid design decisions way back in 2011-2012.

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

10 dhs mechs take the most out of it
awesome with 19 dhs and only energy hardpoints is screwed, the under 250 rating engine are disadvantaged too of course but a bit less

The Awesome is screwed for many reasons, but the main issue isn't that external heatsinks are 1.4. That said, I'm all for going to 2.0 on all DHS, but it isn't likely to happen.

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

3 second jenner? wow

I bet you haven't heard about the 6 MG Spider either (CCQ 3: Why is Machine Gun damage so low)?

It's been three ... interesting... years, to say the least.

[3xnihilo]

If we could get double ammo and srm4 cooldown like a huginn on the 3A it would be a beautiful mech. I wouldn't even put lasers on it.

[no one]

happy mech, on 31 July 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

balance > lore

Poor implementation of the heat system really is to blame for most of what you're complaining about. It's not just that they gave people a huge, penalty free heat gauge. They increased the heat of some weapons as well as doubling armor and rate of fire, but didn't double the heat dissipation rate from BT. SHS in MWO are actually 0.5 HS, and Doubles are actually 0.7 HS.

Their decision to reduce the effectiveness of DHS from true doubles to 1.4s would have been pretty reasonable IF they'd started with a dissipation rate that made sense given the other changes.

stjobe, on 31 July 2015 - 01:48 PM, said:

The system isn't so different as you might think. Engine weights match TT weights with one or two exceptions, heat capacity is identical apart from the bonuses from pilot skills and the fact that some DHS are FauxDubs.

I agree with you on every point, but one thing worth noting is that you're talking about the OVERHEAT PENALTY capacity. The important difference is that there was an amount you could fire in a 10 second turn without triggering any overheat penalties, defined by the number of heatsinks on your 'mech. Overheat starts giving a 'mech negative modifiers at 4 overheat.

In BT a 10 DHS 'Mech can fire two PPCs each 10s turn for 0 overheat. So how do you deal with a heat spike of 10 when you have a penalty at 4 overheat?

Two solutions:
- Give 'mechs a pre-overheat buffer.
- Divide weapon heat into 'Discharge' and 'Recharge' heat. Discharge heat is delivered when/as the weapon's fired. Recharge heat is delivered as the weapon reloads or recharges.

I'd use a combination of both approaches. Give 'Mechs a small buffer as a function of their heat sink type/number, and then divide weapons heat into charge and discharge heat. Weapons like lasers already generate heat over time due to their burn duration, but making it a part of all weapons could help a lot with weapon balancing. A PPC that frontloads 4 heat and then adds 1.5h/s during it's recharge would play much differently than one with 2.5 h/s recharge heat if you had (arbitrarily) a 5 point buffer before accumulating overheat penalties.

Overheat in general would be more serious if you were penalized for it.

Edited by no one, 31 July 2015 - 07:41 PM.

[stealthraccoon]

AC10 ammo/ton got buffed up by 1/3rd, I'd like to see SRM ammo get a similar treatment.

As for the "lets's double armor values but not double ammo capacity" argument, Sarna.net lists SRM6 ammo/ton as 15, and SRM4 as 25 - I assume that is number of volleys, so that would equal to 90 total missiles for the 6-pack and 100 total missiles for the 4-pack (why can you fit an extra 10 missiles in the ammo bins for the 4? who knows, maybe additional bulk of disposable clips or disintigrating belts - I see no fluff regarding the answer).

I think they did actually double the ammunition amounts for SRM's, but the effectiveness of the weapon itself has changed. Hike it up another half dozen or so volleys per ton and it might make the difference.

Commando's could use more missile velocity and range - yes it should inherently be a short range striker, but we shouldn't have to be restricted to leg-humping all the time...

[3xnihilo]

I guess we can hope that the new balancing system they implement will help the commando. It isn't too likely they will change any quirks between now and then.

[jper4]

so I finally broke down and joined the club- didn't want to use the MC til there's a sale so went with the 1B,2D and 3A.

1B- went with the 2ML,LL loadout- played one match- did decently- survived at 28% w/xl engine. did about 230dmg 0 kill/8assists and stalled a cap long enough for our side to get back and finish them off in mordor- arm lasers that actually move like arms seem odd in a light (I don't have firestarters). ran pretty warm though

3A- originally tried a ML,LPL- played one match, we won on cap with our last guy getting the cap as 3 enemy mechs circled the base trying to get him. I ran around like crazy trying to get them to focus on me instead of stopping the cap- worked to various degrees and i'd take quick runs across the base to speed up the cap. ended up one of the last three to die at their base. 200 dmg and 6 assists. thought about trying missiles but can never squeeze more than a couple of tons of ammo in. 2MPL/2SRM2s seem the best combo for that.

2D- for some reason ECM mechs tend to be my worst mechs in the chassis (except the PB). first match I tried going 2SRM 4 and a SL- did under 50 dmg and died. next match tried an ERLL- 50 dmg and died. now have a ML, SRM 4 and SRM 2 in it- haven't tried it out yet, or maybe ML/3SRM2s.

thought about tossing NARC on one of these but don't seem to have the tonnage for it without losing a lot of the limited offense they have.

but yes I've now finally started the third of the sacred "lousy light" trinity of locusts/urbies/commandos.

[3xnihilo]

Tanar, on 06 August 2015 - 06:02 PM, said:

so I finally broke down and joined the club- didn't want to use the MC til there's a sale so went with the 1B,2D and 3A.

1B- went with the 2ML,LL loadout- played one match- did decently- survived at 28% w/xl engine. did about 230dmg 0 kill/8assists and stalled a cap long enough for our side to get back and finish them off in mordor- arm lasers that actually move like arms seem odd in a light (I don't have firestarters). ran pretty warm though

3A- originally tried a ML,LPL- played one match, we won on cap with our last guy getting the cap as 3 enemy mechs circled the base trying to get him. I ran around like crazy trying to get them to focus on me instead of stopping the cap- worked to various degrees and i'd take quick runs across the base to speed up the cap. ended up one of the last three to die at their base. 200 dmg and 6 assists. thought about trying missiles but can never squeeze more than a couple of tons of ammo in. 2MPL/2SRM2s seem the best combo for that.

2D- for some reason ECM mechs tend to be my worst mechs in the chassis (except the PB). first match I tried going 2SRM 4 and a SL- did under 50 dmg and died. next match tried an ERLL- 50 dmg and died. now have a ML, SRM 4 and SRM 2 in it- haven't tried it out yet, or maybe ML/3SRM2s.

thought about tossing NARC on one of these but don't seem to have the tonnage for it without losing a lot of the limited offense they have.

but yes I've now finally started the third of the sacred "lousy light" trinity of locusts/urbies/commandos.

Welcome to the club my friend I like the 2D with 1ml, 3 srm2 or 2 srm4. It is like a quick fragile Urbie. Just stick with the big boys and let them get all the attention. The limited range means you will have some kinda meh matches in the current long range poking meta, but if you can get in close you can be a real nuisance with the unlimited screen shake of 3 srm2's chain fired. You will also want to get the TDK eventually it is an amazingly fun mech!

[stealthraccoon]

Tanar, on 06 August 2015 - 06:02 PM, said:

but yes I've now finally started the third of the sacred "lousy" trinity of locusts/urbies/commandos.

Aww, those three are my favorites sniff sniff

I never ran the 3A with a focus on energy - always loved the srm12 with small lasers as back ups.

Edited by stealthraccoon, 07 August 2015 - 12:30 PM.

[jper4]

those three are pretty much the only lights I have other than the panther which I had picked up to get the enforcers and jenners which I haven't touched in ages- well and the original spider-urbie. I did want to try a missile commando though- even thought about LRMs with it:)

[3xnihilo]

stealthraccoon, on 07 August 2015 - 07:42 AM, said:

Aww, those three are my favorites sniff sniff

I never ran the 2A with a focus on energy - always loved the srm12 with small lasers as back ups.

I need to try that 3A build. I have typically run 2ml, srm8

[Brizna]

I don't have the test client installed so I haven't had a chance to try the commando. Anyone has? How did you like it?

At first sight the new quirks seem to be a buff for CMD, but that's mostly because previous quirks *****ed, I suppose than since quirks have been nerfed across the board for most mechs CMD has to be in a better relative position, being again pretty durable as a combination of the structural quirks and diminished firepower on enemy mechs.

[Fat Jack Murphy]

i had quite some fun with doing "the wrong Thing ™" with commandos lately:
slow engine, whatever electronics fit, lot of short range weaponry. then hide behind some assault.
when the duelling starts i use my 60kph to get behind whoever is involved. most dont see a slow commando with an ecm as an issue... oops. bam. Alpha

same crazy idea i used with the "free firestarter" i got (i dont Level FS, so i used engine on a Blackjack and put in a 100 Standard and two ER PPC). in the heat of battle, that slow dual ER is the last Thing ppl expect. like spanish Inquisition n stuff... urbie in disguise.
or prep that Little bugger with 3 LRM5 and tag, flank them, go drive them to cover. when they realize they have been hunting a 80 kph light with LRMs, it is too late most of the time. Team wins, i earn 10 assists. not bad for a bit of extra tonnage. tactic seems to work in CW too, much to surprise - stick behind the assault, visual aim and deal some cover fire - saves space for to cataphracts and a 75tonner