342 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

wanderer, on 27 June 2016 - 12:47 PM, said:

I'm not for implementing 3060 weaponry until they, y'know, manage to get the 3050-era ones mostly working first.

There's a fair-sized chunk of ballistic weapons missing, and every 'Mech mounted artillery-type weapon (unless you count LRMs) doesn't exist in MWO. Neither the short range arty cannons or the longer range Arrow IV's.

For that matter, we don't have hardened armor either.

its True some Weapon reworks are needed such as LRM Targeting and LBX Ammo Switching,
but the problem is that balancing some weapons arnt easy, no matter how easy it seems,

people want to Balance IS-ML to a C-ER-ML,
thats like Balancing a Bell-Pepper with a jalapeno,
ER is Extended Range that means more heat for more range,
IS Need their ER-ML then we can Properly balance them,
IS-ML Balanced to (IS-ER-ML) Balanced to (C-Er-ML)

[Red Shrike]

FP is being held together by ducttape and prayers and you want to introduce even more stuff to the already volatile mix?

Why not skip ahead a little further to the FedCom Civil War? Then I can pretend to be Spectre.

Edited by Red Shrike, 28 June 2016 - 10:54 AM.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

Russ has stated over and over, mech portable Long Toms and Arrow IV's will never happen (partially due to crit splitting which they fudged stuff with the king crab to work around and due to AoE weapons make them a bit nervous I believe for good reason).

I would love me some MRM's though, make them ripple fire mode would be one way to balance them and make them a lot more inaccurate (as they are in lore) due to having to constantly adjust aim as it fires, as well as it would constantly add heat due to the heat of the launch is over a period of time instead of just a wall of missiles (as fun as that is) and would make it easier to implement without having to make new launcher models.

[wanderer]

Quote

Russ has stated over and over, mech portable Long Toms and Arrow IV's will never happen (partially due to crit splitting which they fudged stuff with the king crab to work around and due to AoE weapons make them a bit nervous I believe for good reason).

PGI's incapability to even handle things like crit-splitting should tell you how much competence they really have developing the game.

"Can't do X" is basically PGI putting themselves into an ever-smaller range of new stuff, simply because it seems they're doing more shuffling around of existing code than actually being able to make new things that have to do with their violent combat robots.

[Andi Nagasia]

wanderer, on 28 June 2016 - 02:59 PM, said:

PGI's incapability to even handle things like crit-splitting should tell you how much competence they really have developing the game.

"Can't do X" is basically PGI putting themselves into an ever-smaller range of new stuff, simply because it seems they're doing more shuffling around of existing code than actually being able to make new things that have to do with their violent combat robots.

i think its less They Cant do it, but they are worried about doing it,
worried about the some things working where they shouldnt, but should,

some Awesome!
LCT- CT(PPC)= would be awesome,
ADR- CT(ERPPC)= would be awesome

Some Abit Broken,
Any Mech with a Head-Energy(ERPPC/LPL)= abit Broken,
TBR- CT(Gauss/AC20)= cool but Bad idea,

[Quaamik]

Honestly if they introduced all the 3060 weapons listed here for IS as the current balance is, I'd stop playing.

Balance - that's a joke.

Clan armor is paper thin, IS has unlockable equipment that on Clans are locked, Clan weapons produce more heat and spread damage more (only the clan gauss and the clan PPC are pinpoint, vs PPC, ERPPC, AC5, AC10, AC20 and gauss on the IS side).

Clan mechs are at a competitive disadvantage. Until they are balanced against IS, no new weapons should be added.

[MischiefSC]

If existing is/Clan tech was better balanced I'd be excited. As it is the concept fills me with a creeping dread.

[DivineEvil]

Moonlight Grimoire, on 28 June 2016 - 11:39 AM, said:

Russ has stated over and over, mech portable Long Toms and Arrow IV's will never happen (partially due to crit splitting which they fudged stuff with the king crab to work around and due to AoE weapons make them a bit nervous I believe for good reason).

I would love me some MRM's though, make them ripple fire mode would be one way to balance them and make them a lot more inaccurate (as they are in lore) due to having to constantly adjust aim as it fires, as well as it would constantly add heat due to the heat of the launch is over a period of time instead of just a wall of missiles (as fun as that is) and would make it easier to implement without having to make new launcher models.

Crit splitting is already present for mech upgrades, so its a lame excuse for them. All they need to implement is a new weapon hardpoint specifically for artillery weapons, which only specific, otherwise inferior variants of some preselected chassies would be capable of taking. Crits would then be split between an arm and torso on the side where it is located.

Mech Mortars do not require crit-splitting to begin with. They don't even require artillery hardpoints and could have been placed into regular Ballistic hardpoints, given the appropriate visual placements on the mech are provided.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

DivineEvil, on 28 June 2016 - 04:57 PM, said:

Crit splitting is already present for mech upgrades, so its a lame excuse for them. All they need to implement is a new weapon hardpoint specifically for artillery weapons, which only specific, otherwise inferior variants of some preselected chassies would be capable of taking. Crits would then be split between an arm and torso on the side where it is located.

Mech Mortars do not require crit-splitting to begin with. They don't even require artillery hardpoints and could have been placed into regular Ballistic hardpoints, given the appropriate visual placements on the mech are provided.

Indeed, I feel that crit splitting was more of an attempt to prevent min-maxing or an easy way out when it came to dealing with them not knowing how to do it. Either way, Mech Mortar's would be fun, I rather not have players running around with Arrow IV's and Long Toms on their mechs just for the sake of, well, I don't know why really, just a knee jerk reaction to the idea of it. Though admittedly I fined Arrow IV's more viable so long as you had a way to fire it at a spot in an artillery like manner from World of Tanks or Armored Warfare and not needing a lock. Long Tom's I did use in MW4:Mercs on a Fafnir due to lulz so I really shouldn't be so scared of allowing them, guess it is just the ingrown fear of player controlled artillery that World of Tanks left me with, not PTSD, but, a phobia.

That being said now I want crit splitting so my king crab has it's hand actuators back, are they useful? No, wish they were though! Maybe we will someday be able to pick things up and hit other mechs with it, using a Locust or Arctic Cheetah to hit another Locust or Arctic Cheetah, or remove a Kodiak 3's arm and shove the claws into their cockpit.

[DivineEvil]

Moonlight Grimoire, on 28 June 2016 - 05:07 PM, said:

Indeed, I feel that crit splitting was more of an attempt to prevent min-maxing or an easy way out when it came to dealing with them not knowing how to do it. Either way, Mech Mortar's would be fun, I rather not have players running around with Arrow IV's and Long Toms on their mechs just for the sake of, well, I don't know why really, just a knee jerk reaction to the idea of it. Though admittedly I fined Arrow IV's more viable so long as you had a way to fire it at a spot in an artillery like manner from World of Tanks or Armored Warfare and not needing a lock. Long Tom's I did use in MW4:Mercs on a Fafnir due to lulz so I really shouldn't be so scared of allowing them, guess it is just the ingrown fear of player controlled artillery that World of Tanks left me with, not PTSD, but, a phobia.

That being said now I want crit splitting so my king crab has it's hand actuators back, are they useful? No, wish they were though! Maybe we will someday be able to pick things up and hit other mechs with it, using a Locust or Arctic Cheetah to hit another Locust or Arctic Cheetah, or remove a Kodiak 3's arm and shove the claws into their cockpit.

Arrow-IV is a lock-only weapon. It's basically an LRM/20, that fires one large missile over pretty much any distance in MWO. It would, of course, require an unparalleled reloading time and ability to use several AMS systems to shot down the missile in order to keep them balanced. Long Tom Cannon, on the other hand, would probably require a separate tracking mechanism, that would give you a visual or audial clue when the selected target is not moving, which would guarantee a direct hit, but otherwise would get a high chance of missing and causing only middling splash damage.

Besides, very few mechs, like Catapults, Thunderbolts and Stalkers would be able to mount either of those anyway, and we're talking about the heaviest weapons mechs can carry, that would occupy almost the entire side of a mech on their own.

Edited by DivineEvil, 28 June 2016 - 05:22 PM.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

DivineEvil, on 28 June 2016 - 05:21 PM, said:

Arrow-IV is a lock-only weapon. It's basically an LRM/20, that fires one large missile over pretty much any distance in MWO. It would, of course, require an unparalleled reloading time and ability to use several AMS systems to shot down the missile in order to keep them balanced. Long Tom Cannon, on the other hand, would probably require a separate tracking mechanism, that would give you a visual or audial clue when the selected target is not moving, which would guarantee a direct hit, but otherwise would get a high chance of missing and causing only middling splash damage.

Besides, very few mechs, like Catapults, Thunderbolts and Stalkers would be able to mount either of those anyway, and we're talking about the heaviest weapons mechs can carry, that would occupy almost the entire side of a mech on their own.

From what I remember on tabletop you could also TAG an area instead of a mech to fire an Arrow IV at, and yeah I know the Longbow and a few other mechs could carry it due to it is a massive system due to the potential (then again there is an Arrow IV carrying Urbie in canon that has a Davy Crockett warhead). It would let us have a few other missile focused mechs into the game since they do carry Arrow IV's but it would be a weapon much more for group play than the pug queue with it's reliance on locks and coordinating where and when to put the missile. Probably better to have it as an off board weapon so to speak in place of the Long Tom Cannon nuke thing and just have Arrow IV's rain down on a place that commander designates during a match, or someone who is dead or waiting for their mech to drop or something.

[DivineEvil]

Moonlight Grimoire, on 28 June 2016 - 05:28 PM, said:

From what I remember on tabletop you could also TAG an area instead of a mech to fire an Arrow IV at, and yeah I know the Longbow and a few other mechs could carry it due to it is a massive system due to the potential (then again there is an Arrow IV carrying Urbie in canon that has a Davy Crockett warhead). It would let us have a few other missile focused mechs into the game since they do carry Arrow IV's but it would be a weapon much more for group play than the pug queue with it's reliance on locks and coordinating where and when to put the missile. Probably better to have it as an off board weapon so to speak in place of the Long Tom Cannon nuke thing and just have Arrow IV's rain down on a place that commander designates during a match, or someone who is dead or waiting for their mech to drop or something.

I would personally prefer to have both. At least it would take up the place of LRMs, that are kinda used as an artillery weapon atm (which it isnt and never were), which in turn would allow to tweak LRMs for more direct usage over shorter range, with indirect capability.

Being more suited for group play does not makes these weapons invalid, because group play and particularly Community Warfare are essential parts of MWO experience, that are sustained by the most devoted part of player base. Besides, these AoE weapons would allow to break up the death-ball mentality and generally static behavior, which now is only discouraged by Strike consumables to a questionable degree.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

DivineEvil, on 28 June 2016 - 05:49 PM, said:

I would personally prefer to have both. At least it would take up the place of LRMs, that are kinda used as an artillery weapon atm (which it isnt and never were), which in turn would allow to tweak LRMs for more direct usage over shorter range, with indirect capability.

Being more suited for group play does not makes these weapons invalid, because group play and particularly Community Warfare are essential parts of MWO experience, that are sustained by the most devoted part of player base. Besides, these AoE weapons would allow to break up the death-ball mentality and generally static behavior, which now is only discouraged by Strike consumables to a questionable degree.

I agree with your points, like I said before I was having a knee jerk reaction due to World of Tanks and getting nuked from arty before I stopped playing for the sake of my health. I do want LRM's to be buffed for direct fire capability while you have guided indirect fire mode as a secondary function leaving indirect fire to Long Toms, mortars, Arrow IV's, and consumables, hell give us missiles that deploy mines, believe that is one ammo type the Arrow IV has, don't know if LRM's ever got that nor Thunderbolt LRM's.

On the note of breaking up death balls with an AoE weapon in the game if you throw in needing multiple AMS maybe people will start taking AMS more often, still see very few players carrying it in pug queue down in Tier 4.

[MauttyKoray]

LordNothing, on 26 June 2016 - 10:46 PM, said:

nekro much?



as much as i would love to see ammo switching (not just lbx, but things like inferno ammo for srms and different lrm ammo), but i really dont think you need that to add new weapons. the mechanics already exist to add new lasers and autocannons, you could probibly implement arrows as lrm-1s with splash. new weapon mechanics would be awesome but i wouldn't let their absence hold things up too much, and they could be applied retroactively (gauss charge up for example).



i would only do filler tech before advancing the timeline if there was a balance issue. such as clan streak crow dominance in scouting. either severely buffing is ssrm2s or pre-introducing 4s and 6es, or both. clans have 2 additional missile options from the is, however i might opt for streak4s and inferno2 launchers instead for variety.

autocannons are a mess with the clans getting 3 complete sets where the is has 1 complete set and a couple extras tacked on. its not so terrible if you ignore cacs (which are weak, neglected, and ignored by pgi and should probibly be deleted), but clans still have a 2 weapon advantage which racs 2s and 5s would easily fill.

is still has more ppc variety but the clan version blows both out of the water. lasers are probibly the area that needs work. is does have 3 options for large lasers to clans 2. so clan needs another ppc equivalent option and another large laser equivalent option. they both have 2 small and medium laser options. so i think in terms of weapons quantity energy is pretty even. so if you give is er meds and smalls, you would need to give the clan a couple more options as well (er micro lasers for example).

this of course ignores cross tech balance. but i feel that is for the most part at an all time high. you cant really take one side and give them better all around options and give the other side more situational options, i think that would make for bad balance. so i am firmly focused on both sides having the same number of options.

You're...kidding right? The weight/range may be something but the Clan ERPPCs suffer from extra heat while having their damage made into a 10/2.5/2.5 split, which is understandable in a balancing mechanic but people who mainly play IS don't seem to understand that it also means their PPC Cap will have to be split as well to balance it. Yeah... plus then there's the need to do something to keep it from entirely replacing the standard PPC, other than the extra crit slots, possibly a longer cooldown even if not charged.

As for the UACs, something needs to be changed for both factions to eliminate the balance per faction method they're using with (U)ACs otherwise the IS will have entirely superior versions. Oh boohoo, so the clans have slightly lighter/smaller ones, out of all the IS and Clan mechs I've used the only real issues are the Assaults that can multi-boat them, I'm talking about the standard 1-2 of them being used on a mech. IS UACs will completely obliterate Clan UAC usage especially in the higher weights because of the multi-tap UAC mechanic and IS PPFLD. I'm truly worried that double taps with 10s and 20s become a META and one of the worse ones we've had.

This is combined with the fact that UACs completely negate the use of standard ACs in this game because they function identically but UACs are superior with the ability to multi-tap in pinch situations. Hopefully PGI will stop being lazy about it and drop the faction argument balance with the inclusion of missing IS UACs and instead differentiate the UAC and AC mechanic to give each a use.

As for Lasers, this is where I hate a lot of the crying about balance as players want their IS Small/Medium lasers balanced with Clan ER lasers...which doesn't work, because then you're causing issues for IS ER lasers when they come into play. This is why I would like them to put the filler weapons in so that they can better balance the existing game. They've already semi-thrown out the timeline for the sake of adding mechs people want over mechs in the timeline, or as Russ said that things like the Mad Cat MkII will come soon but not before they finish adding some other mechs within the timeline they want to first. I just wish they would say '**** it' for the sake of balance and at least add these weapons that would improve gameplay balance and stop all the QQ'ing and ****** mechanics like the Clan UACs.

Also no, I don't mean make all UACs full damage PPFLD, I made a write up of it somewhere that got buried about all (U)ACs losing PPFLD in favor of giving standard ACs the burst fire that UACs have, while splitting the fire of the UACs into however many bullets they fire now and adjusting the stats to match. i.e. An AC20 would fire a 4 round burst of 5 damage each while an UAC20 would instead fire 5 damage shots at 1/4 its current cooldown and heat and the UAC mechanic would be limited to refiring only at 1/2 the cooldown (thus double the DPS potential of an AC) with compounding heat/jam chance on each successive shot that is fired before allowing the full cooldown to cycle. I wrote this as a way to make ACs and UACs unique in both mechanics and gameplay potential (ACs with a focused burst while UACs would have a more consistent suppressive fire) and to future proof the inclusion of RACs if we ever get that fire which are supposed to be able to unload rounds at 3x the rate of UACs (or 6x that of ACs).

[wanderer]

Andi Nagasia, on 28 June 2016 - 04:06 PM, said:

i think its less They Cant do it, but they are worried about doing it,
worried about the some things working where they shouldnt, but should,

some Awesome!
LCT- CT(PPC)= would be awesome,
ADR- CT(ERPPC)= would be awesome

Some Abit Broken,
Any Mech with a Head-Energy(ERPPC/LPL)= abit Broken,
TBR- CT(Gauss/AC20)= cool but Bad idea,

You can't split small weapons between locations according to construction rules, so that's not a problem. AC/20, UAC/20, LB-20X in MWO only. Heavy Gauss (not standard), artillery cannons, and Arrow IV can be as well, but aren't in MWO.

[Andi Nagasia]

wanderer, on 28 June 2016 - 08:49 PM, said:

You can't split small weapons between locations according to construction rules, so that's not a problem. AC/20, UAC/20, LB-20X in MWO only. Heavy Gauss (not standard), artillery cannons, and Arrow IV can be as well, but aren't in MWO.

Ok so it was only Overly Large weapons? +8Slot weapons, cool, never mind then,
though i would love a Unicorn PPC Adder,

[wanderer]

DivineEvil, on 28 June 2016 - 05:21 PM, said:

Arrow-IV is a lock-only weapon. It's basically an LRM/20, that fires one large missile over pretty much any distance in MWO. It would, of course, require an unparalleled reloading time and ability to use several AMS systems to shot down the missile in order to keep them balanced. Long Tom Cannon, on the other hand, would probably require a separate tracking mechanism, that would give you a visual or audial clue when the selected target is not moving, which would guarantee a direct hit, but otherwise would get a high chance of missing and causing only middling splash damage.

Incorrect. Arrow IV's can be fired like any other artillery weapon, and only the TAG-guided version is a "lock-on" type of weapon (with a more focused detonation to reduce collateral damage). They're also immune to AMS.

They'd certainly have one of the slowest reload times in the game, though, not to mention AC/20 levels of ammo, and deal their damage in 5-point hits rather than the full damage to a single location. They aren't LRMs- you don't have random amounts of damage hit the target, nor will the full damage fail to actually damage the target (depending on range).

Far as aiming one, it'd likely be one of the few cases where third-person view would be handy- hold down the fire button, you see a firing arc that increases in distance. Release to lock down range, hit fire again to launch the shell/missile.

Quote

Besides, very few mechs, like Catapults, Thunderbolts and Stalkers would be able to mount either of those anyway, and we're talking about the heaviest weapons mechs can carry, that would occupy almost the entire side of a mech on their own.

Let's just ignore the Clan Naga, which is actually built to handle a pair of Arrow IV launchers then. In-timeline, the Catapult-C3 is the most notable Arrow IV 'Mech carrier for the IS, though the -C5 is more likely what MWO versions would end up closer to given the usual upgrades. Arty cannons don't end up standard on anything, while mortars fire like artillery but use standard ballistic hardpoints.

It'd definitely be a limited number of chassis, though. They'd have to specifically be given an "artillery" hardpoint for most arty-type weaponry.

[wanderer]

Andi Nagasia, on 28 June 2016 - 09:00 PM, said:

Ok so it was only Overly Large weapons? +8Slot weapons, cool, never mind then,
though i would love a Unicorn PPC Adder,

Nope, although there are ways to get more space in the head, none of them would apply to an Adder even given later tech. Stuff like compact gyros would definitely make CT hardpoints a lot more useful, though- and IS 'Mechs would eventually be able to get two spaces in the head with a small cockpit, or even more for a torso-mounted cockpit.

[Bradigus]

Heavy lasers should behave like pulse lasers did in MW3, or to an extent how flamethrowers perform now.

The basic idea is to give clans a weapons set which they could control with precision while utilizing their supposed mobility advantage over inner sphere mechs.

A heavy laser could be fired and its burn ended at will, but like the flamer it would fill up a cooldown bar that would slowly dissipate after you let off the trigger. Burning for the full duration would only net you the normal heat cost for the normal amount of damage, but keeping the burn going would start to quickly heat up the mech in exchange for increased damage. On the other end of the spectrum, burning only for short durations such as to keep up peek-a-boo poking would be less heat intensive, but would slowly fill the endurance bar for the heavy laser and net you less burst damage overall.

Heavy lasers should have the same ranges as inner sphere standard ones, to offset the fact they would weigh the same as extended range lasers. Heavy lasers would also deal slightly increased damage for increased heat costs at their base levels. They would take up similar space as the inner sphere lasers, just like they are described in the tabletop to taking.

In this incarnation heavy lasers would provide clans a viable alternative to pulse and ext. range lasers, while also providing a unique gameplay mechanic that would reward thoughtful useage and alleviate firepower issues on hardpoint starved clan mechs.

[dervishx5]

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.

Edited by dervishx5, 28 June 2016 - 09:24 PM.