342 replies to this topic

[LordNothing]

i loved mw3 pulse. i wouldnt mind longer than usual burn times so long as they are interruptable. thats one thing i dont like about clan larges, you hit the button and you are stuck firing for a long time, if your team gets in the way, there is no abort, burn through or risk deflecting into somone else, deflecting up or into the dirt also kind of works without sweeping through too many friendlies. this is why when clan i prefer ppcs to lpl/erll.

so something like that mw3 pulse mechanic would be awesome on some of the meaner dirtier longer burning lasers. charge mechanic is not terrible if the weapon is really powerful, so i have nothing against that mechanic applying to heavy lasers. new mechanics add variety and make the game less boring.

Edited by LordNothing, 28 June 2016 - 11:33 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

dervishx5, on 28 June 2016 - 09:23 PM, said:

That's not how heavy lasers work. Heavy lasers charge up for about 1 second before firing what is basically a double inner sphere laser in terms of damage with the same range. That's why they have a +1 to hit, because it throws off the pilot's timing.

MW3 pulse lasers have never existed in canon. I'm not opposed to them but I just wanted to point that out.

I didnt Make LL based on how another game has done it,
I came up with my Own Stats and Ideas on how to Balance them out,

How i see heavy Lasers is 2 Lasers of a lower Class Tied together,
look to my Stats, Heavy-LL is like 2ER-ML that take up more Space and 1Damage but LL CoolDown,
but why? so HardPoint Starved Mechs can be Given something to help with how Starved they are,
an SHC with 3HLL would have 6ERML in Comparison, a WHK could have 2HLL(4ERML per arm),

[wanderer]

But that's wrong, you dummy.

What you're describing is a binary laser (aka a Blazer).

Clan Heavy Lasers actually overbalance on beam power vs, properly focusing it, giving you a shorter range weapon with huge punch for the weight but lousy heat-to-damage and relative inaccuracy compared to more refined Clantech weapon systems.

Later, they fix the accuracy issue by using high-capacity but unfortunately explosive materials that turn the "improved" heavy lasers into bombs much like Gauss weaponry.

[Andi Nagasia]

@wanderer
i know that but based on its TT stats(CERMLvsHLL) thats how i see it Balanced for MWO,
this way HardPoints Starved mechs will gain something to Help them,

Implemented like in Lore and TT Ether No one would use them,
or people Would Boat them for Most Alpha Power,

My Idea is about in between Lore and TT,
Less-Damage, Less-Heat, But balanced inline with C-ER-ML,

[Snowbluff]

No, Heavy Lasers have improperly contained heat. That's what gives them the penalty to hit.

If I were to put them in the game, I'd probably give them slightly messed up convergence or cone of fire to demonstrate that. I don't like CoF, but it fits the fluff here.

[Andi Nagasia]

Snowbluff, on 30 June 2016 - 03:03 PM, said:

No, Heavy Lasers have improperly contained heat. That's what gives them the penalty to hit.

If I were to put them in the game, I'd probably give them slightly messed up convergence or cone of fire to demonstrate that. I don't like CoF, but it fits the fluff here.

Yes but as we dont have Convergence or Accuracy Penalties,
im using the Heavy Laser as a Platform to Help Hardpoint Starved mechs,
also a HLL has the same Range as a ER-ML but Twice the Damage,
so i dont see how my State are Departing form BattleTech/TT/Lore?

[Bad Pun]

I would absolutely love to see Rotary Cannons added. I know that I'm biased, I'm a total Dakka fiend and I do indeed run a 6 UAC-2 Dire Wolf. With a macro. (Yes, I know. Shame on me.)

I believe that they could be quite well balanced for public play with a cone of fire, a lowered rate of fire (as it stands, one RAC-2 would have a RoF of 500 rounds/min. Maybe 350? And 150 for RAC-5s?)

An easy way to balance it is already a mechanic to the weapon. Jamming.

While my Dakka Dire can put out a thousand rounds/min, one jam doesn't shut me down, only reduce my rounds/min by about 166. A jam with a Rotary shuts it down completely.

The second, as much as it gives me fits, is ghost heat. Firing more than one should definitely spike. We certainly don't want King Crabs running four of these.

The last one is that cone of fire I had mentioned. I don't mean the spray that we get with MGs, but just little to be sure that damage isn't focused on one component, since that's the job of the bigger cannons.

As I said, I'm biased, but the IS need the variety.

Later, I might craft a hypothesis for HAGs.

[Funkin Disher]

Missing Streak LRMs, but looking at our current lock and tracking system there would have to be some reworking to incorporate them anyways.

I'd love to see MRMs, I can imagine them firing in fast moving streams and tracking your reticle with limited maneuverability.

[Bad Pun]

Streak LRMs would be tasty, likely working like SSRMs with longer range. There would be a difficulty in getting hits at long range with enemy mechs ducking from cover to cover. It should be pretty easily balanced with AMS and the lack of indirect fire. Though I may not use them.

I would also take some MRMs, absolutely. Maybe they deal less than SRMs per projectile and have the ripple fire, but hey, I'd still love them. I'd take these at least half as often as SRMs.

My vote is yes though, give us these.

Edited by Bad Pun, 05 July 2016 - 09:11 PM.

[DAYLEET]

So in all likelyhood this is the big thing comming that was teased if you can call 2 vague word "tease".?

Mcgral18, on 12 July 2015 - 07:06 PM, said:

Your Heavy Lasers are simply too fantastic...they're nearly double the performance of their IS normal counterparts.

Heavies should have longer burn times than Pulse Lasers!


Keep their TT optimal range, but drop their falloff damage to 0.5, so the HML deals 10 damage at 270M, but nothing at 405M (while an unquirked isML will deal 2.5)

Increase their burn time to slightly above their ER counterparts (aside from the ERLL).

cant we be stupid OP for the first 6 months and then just much better for another 6months? it worked for the Clans. I had bad things to say about first year but now i have seen the light, it was for the best.

Edited by DAYLEET, 05 July 2016 - 09:36 PM.

[ChaoticUrlond]

Ya'll need to understand, that Developers failed to give us what LBX is supposed to do, you entrust them to make MRMs which has different types of ammo? Once the Devs figure out how to do that. I'd welcome the multi difference ammo. But I agree with the thread, the builds of every mechs are just bland. We need something to spice up the flavor and bring new life to the game.

[Mcgral18]

DAYLEET, on 05 July 2016 - 09:34 PM, said:

So in all likelyhood this is the big thing comming that was teased if you can call 2 vague word "tease".?


cant we be stupid OP for the first 6 months and then just much better for another 6months? it worked for the Clans. I had bad things to say about first year but now i have seen the light, it was for the best.

What's this tease?

[DAYLEET]

Mcgral18, on 05 July 2016 - 10:11 PM, said:

What's this tease?

i have no idea, a townhall ago, dont remember which one. he said "something big" was going to happen soon. maybe it has already happened i dunno but doubt it.

[Navid A1]

I know its strange. But Gyrok proposed some good suggestions a while ago regarding new tech.

http://mwomercs.com/...-timeline-skip/

With some adjustments to some stuff like X-pulses damage, it would be an all round reasonable set of suggestions.

[wanderer]

MRMs are going to be SRM-style launchers with LRM damage and spread/streaming damage out the wazoo.

That's within PGIs capacity as there's literally nothing new about their performance.

[GreenHell]

I'd like to see the return of the Snub-Nose PPC (SNPPC) and the Light PPC (LPPC).

Then, combine them with the PPC-Capacitor for EPIC WIN!
MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[wanderer]

Sadly, those show up at the end of the 3060s, not the beginning.

[Bad Pun]

OK, as I had mentioned, I was intending to formulate a hypothesis on the workings on HAGs. What I believe would be a decent way to implement them would be to work them as a sort of Gauss Machine Gun.

As opposed to making it a UAC-1 that fires really fast or a gauss shotgun, I think it would be more like a gauss minigun with a very short belt. I imagine about 600-700 rounds/min. with a reload period, essentially a cooldown, after it fires as many rounds as it's rated for.

The TT rules that improve accuracy at close range, but reduce it at long range tell me that it should have a slight cone of fire. To balance, I'd imagine the same chargeup mechanic as the rifle, but maybe only .5 seconds. With a cooldown of about 2 seconds, giving 2.5 seconds before firing again.

Heat, iirc was about 1/shot. Perfectly in line with balancing this tool, imo, as it's a long range machine gun. Ammo, if I've read Sarna right, should be about 120 per ton, though most ballistics get about 150. Exceptions to that are the 20's that get 140 damage potential per ton, and 10's that get 200. With the gauss properties of good range and fast projectile speed, maybe a bit more per ton could be warranted, but I don't think it should be more than 150, if at all.

Again, like my opinion on the RACs, firing more than one should trip ghost heat, but I think it should be fairly low as compared to RACs, which have much more damage potential per shot.

Again, just another opinion from a fellow pilot~

[ScrapIron Prime]

If there is no ammo selector switch, there is absolutely no point to ATM systems. It will be more efficient to equip an SRM or LRM. The point of the ATM was to be able to have both for only the cost of the ammo.

Also... I note 3060 keeps us away from rotary Autocannons. Pity.

[Kangarad]

Does the LAMS (laser anti missiles system) count as a weapon? afterall its just a small pulse laser designated to shoot down missiles vs the normal ams with the machine gun.

LAMS should take arround= 2 slots with 1 ton of weight and produce half the heat of a spl per second when active at a greater srm takedown rate vs the ams which would be predominately against lrms/mrms