107 replies to this topic

[KHETTI]

Livewyr, on 27 July 2015 - 06:05 AM, said:

Why?

Everything has been basically double with the exception of the heat generated.

[Khobai]

Ammo doesnt need to be increased. Lasers need to be nerfed.

For starters, CERML and CLPL need to be in same ghost heat group. Why is PGI letting clan mechs circumvent ghost heat just by using a mix of two weapons with very similar characteristics. WHY PGI WHY?

Also the ranges on some of the weapons is just ridiculous. The max ranges on certain weapons need to be reeled in to encourage brawling more. More brawling also fixes LRMs because ECM gets countered more readily and locks get held more frequently.

As for increasing ammo. The only weapon that needs ammo increased is the SRM/SSRM because they never got the same 50% ammo increase as every other ammo using weapon. And buffing SRMs also encourages more brawling...

Lastly bringing back brawling helps address deathballing. Deathballing is enabled by being able to focus fire a large number of long-range weapons on the same target. Reducing the range of certain weapons and encouraging brawling more would help limit the effectiveness of deathballing by making it harder for an entire team to focus fire on the same mech (because friendly mechs would block eachothers LoS much more often).

Edited by Khobai, 27 July 2015 - 06:19 AM.

[KHETTI]

Khobai, on 27 July 2015 - 06:09 AM, said:

Ammo doesnt need to be increased.

Lasers need to be nerfed.

This exactly, energy weapons produce 50% less heat than they should.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

I'm one of those weird people that delibrately designs my mech so I run out of ammo in around 1 out of 10 matches.

I'd rather invest in backup weapons or more speed so I can be more effective in more matches.

[El Bandito]

Appogee, on 27 July 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:

Ah, so the 'easy mode' laser guy El Bandito wants double his dakka at no penalty...?

I bet you searched entire collection of my posts just to reply to this. You sad, sad person.

[Livewyr]

Yosharian, on 27 July 2015 - 06:08 AM, said:

Why do you go straight to double?

Balancing is best done in small increments, with enough time between adjustments to test the effects.

A more sensible suggestion would be to increase ammo counts by 10-15% and see where that gets us. I would be broadly in favour of that.

In some cases, that would be a small increase.

Missiles are already 50+ percent ammo increased.
AC20 is 40% increased
Gauss is 25% Increased.

I went to double because that's how much we increased the armor.

KHETTI, on 27 July 2015 - 06:09 AM, said:

Everything has been basically double with the exception of the heat generated.

That's true, but I think you forget that Heatsinks are super nerfed in this game. doing .1 heat per second, and the Double Heatsinks are 1.4 after the first 10.

Khobai, on 27 July 2015 - 06:09 AM, said:

Ammo doesnt need to be increased.

Lasers need to be nerfed.

Interesting outlook...considering that lasers are the only competitive weapons for clans (aside from Gauss)

Lasers already have a built in nerf in that they are lightsabers with damage compared to Gauss or IS ballistics.

[Mawai]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 July 2015 - 04:53 AM, said:

It is very rare I run out of Ammo for my AC20 or 3xSRM6. In fact I rarely run out of ammo period.

The only build I ever really run out of ammo on is my 4xAC5 Jager. This happens in between 10 and 20% of games and usually only if I last to the end and blew significant ammo on low probability shots. If I keep track of things and use ammo for decent shots or selective suppression fire then it works fine ... it adds a little extra challenge to the build. It has 7 tons of ammo.

I have also run out on my AC20 HBK-4G with 3 tons but also usually if I survive and have used ammo for low probability shots (I'm moving and my target is moving and range is 250 to 300m). Most of the time it is fine.

For the size of game (12vs12) and map size ... I don't think ballistics really need that much more if any ammo. I do not really want to see folks firing ballistics as indiscriminately as lasers ... lasers build up heat that limits their fire in most cases ... ballistics run out of ammo. I would not want to see my 4xAC5 Jager with "unlimited" ammo since it would be much too effective.

On the other hand, I wouldn't object to a 10% increase ... but I do think that ammo needs to be limited and scaled to the size of the game or else they become too good with the current design.

[Appogee]

El Bandito, on 27 July 2015 - 06:15 AM, said:

I bet you searched entire collection of my posts just to reply to this. You sad, sad person.

Now you own me money, too.

Ironically, it was just the next thread I read. You hypocritical, hypocritical person!

[Livewyr]

KHETTI, on 27 July 2015 - 06:11 AM, said:

This exactly, energy weapons produce 50% less heat than they should.

And DHS reduce 60% less heat than they should.

[Yosharian]

Livewyr, on 27 July 2015 - 06:16 AM, said:

In some cases, that would be a small increase.

Yes. That's the whole point. Small increases until the game is more balanced. The 'jumping straight to double' is attitude is what caused this problem in the first place.

Livewyr, on 27 July 2015 - 06:17 AM, said:

And DHS reduce 60% less heat than they should.

And heat sinks raise the heat cap when they shouldn't.

Edited by Yosharian, 27 July 2015 - 06:19 AM.

[Livewyr]

Something to keep in mind.. doubling ammo does not mean 10 guass rounds becomes 20...

5 AC20 rounds becomes 10 (instead of 7)
8 Gauss Rounds 16 (instead of 10)
20 AC/5 Rounds becomes 40 (Instead of 30)


etc...

[Khobai]

Quote

And heat sinks raise the heat cap when they shouldn't.

Actually they should raise the heat cap. They did in tabletop.

In tabletop, if you have 20 DHS in tabletop you need to generate 70 heat to automatically shutdown.

but if you only have 10 DHS in tabletop you only need to generate 50 heat to automatically shut down.


The problem is the lack of heat penalties. Theres no punishment for riding the heat curve and constantly running hot.

Quote

Interesting outlook...considering that lasers are the only competitive weapons for clans (aside from Gauss)

Lasers already have a built in nerf in that they are lightsabers with damage compared to Gauss or IS ballistics

I disagree. Clan autocannons are A LOT better now that they decreased the burst count and volley delay. I would argue that clan autocannons would be compeitive in lieu of a laser nerf.

And clan SRMs would certainly be competitive in a brawling meta. The problem is the current long-range meta takes a dump on brawling weapons. Brawling needs to be brought back and given some teeth.

The long-range meta is the whole problem. And lasers are primarily responsible for it.

Edited by Khobai, 27 July 2015 - 06:29 AM.

[Livewyr]

Khobai, on 27 July 2015 - 06:24 AM, said:

The problem is the lack of heat penalties. Theres no punishment for riding the heat curve and constantly running hot.

This I, absolutely, agree with.

[Mister Blastman]

Ascaloth, on 27 July 2015 - 04:52 AM, said:

Moar ammo per ton = moar free tonnage for weapons = moar weapons = moar alpha = less time to kill.

If the problem is the laser, then solve the laser.

The remove convergence. Don't sit here debating ammo.

[Livewyr]

Khobai, on 27 July 2015 - 06:24 AM, said:

I disagree. Clan autocannons are A LOT better now that they decreased the burst count and volley delay. I would argue that clan autocannons would be compeitive in lieu of a laser nerf.

And clan SRMs would certainly be competitive in a brawling meta. The problem is the current long-range meta takes a dump on brawling weapons. Brawling needs to be brought back and given some teeth.

The long-range meta is the whole problem. And lasers are primarily responsible for it.

Clan ACs are better than they were, but they are still inferior to the IS ACs, especially in a a brawling situation.

IS ACs get pinpoint and snap shot capability... something the clans do not get, which is crucial in a brawl since Facetanking is the premier way to die.
SRMs have bite, but they're still lacking in hit reg.

The long range game happened because Clans came out with long range weapons and multi round ACs, it was boosted when the IS got heat quirks (which allows them to increase DPS while clans are restricted to poking due to heat problems) and will remain that way because when it comes to a brawl, IS quirks rule without contest.

[Alistair Winter]

Livewyr, on 27 July 2015 - 04:47 AM, said:

So the 25% increased ammo for 100% armor has irritated me for a while, but now it hits me on a personal level. My Shadow Cat.

The SHC cannot change engines or MASC, or JJs, and cannot mount more than a couple tons of ammo for a Gauss Rifle. (Which is the prime variant, and strangely, PGI's P variant.)

In Battletech, that would be fine, as a couple of tons of GR ammo could do serious damage to normal armor values, but here we have double'd the armor (for a good reason) yet we only have 25% increased ammo on Ballistics. (Lasers do not matter as they have unlimited ammo) Missiles have between 0% and 50% increased ammo.

Why not make all ammo increased 100%? It is not as though this is a new idea, but it's more critical for me now, as my favorite mech is pretty much reduced to laser vomit, and not even a Lore build.

This is my new favourite thread. I agree 100% and it's a pity almost nobody's using the S-Cat as a gauss sniper. People will tell you that it's all because small mechs shouldn't equip ballistics anyway. Total nonsense and gibberish. The S-Cat gauss sniper would be a force to be reckoned with if everyone didn't have double armour. Right now, it still does a lot of damage, but it runs out of ammo too soon.

Ascaloth, on 27 July 2015 - 04:52 AM, said:

Moar ammo per ton = moar free tonnage for weapons = moar weapons = moar alpha = less time to kill.
If the problem is the laser, then solve the laser.

The problem isn't the laser. The problem is that lighter mechs such as the Blackjack, Kit Fox, Adder, Arctic Cheetah, Ice Ferret and Shadow Cat, which are all supposed to be carrying AC2s or bigger ballistics, simply don't have enough ammunition for those builds to be viable. As a result, almost everyone is turning to laser boating and missile boating.

Laservomit is a separate issue, because relatively cool lasers (or relatively hot ballistics, depending on how you look at it) reduce the amount of synergy and make it more effective to boat lasers than to combine weapons.

However... even if every ballistic weapon had its heat values reduced by 50%, which would instantly put an end to laservomit (at the risk of dakkavomit), it would have zero effect on the S-Cat gauss sniper. Because neither heat nor lasers are the problem described in the OP. The problem is...

... lighter mechs don't have enough ammo to use ballistic builds in MWO.

Appogee, on 27 July 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:

... and then the call will go out to double armor again.
... and then the call will go out to double the ammo again.
... and then the call will go out to double armor again.
... and then the call will go out to double the ammo again.

That doesn't follow. And even if it did, it's a terrible argument, because "the call will go out" to a thousand different things, no matter what change is made. Even if PGI decides to buff the MG 1%, the call will go out to nerf the MG again or to give the Ember negative ballistic quirks. Who cares?

[Khobai]

Quote

Clan ACs are better than they were, but they are still inferior to the IS ACs, especially in a a brawling situation.

Of course theyre still inferior. But I believe theyre competitive given all the other advantages clan mechs have. My brawling timberwolf with UAC/20 and CERML routinely tops the damage charts.

I definitely think nerfing the long range meta and seeing where the chips fall would be entirely beneficial.

Quote

and will remain that way because when it comes to a brawl, IS quirks rule without contest.

without the long-range meta there is no need to quirk IS mechs as heavily. more brawling fixes that problem too.

almost every balance problem in the game would get resolved by bringing back brawling.

Quote

The problem isn't the laser. The problem is that lighter mechs such as the Blackjack, Kit Fox, Adder, Arctic Cheetah, Ice Ferret and Shadow Cat, which are all supposed to be carrying AC2s or bigger ballistics, simply don't have enough ammunition for those builds to be viable. As a result, almost everyone is turning to laser boating and missile boating.

Well to be fair the AC2 sucks pretty bad anyway. I could probably support increasing the ammo per ton on the AC2 because the base tonnage cost of the AC2 is so out-of-whack to begin with. 6 tons for such a crap gun is ridiculous. halve the heat on the AC2 and double the ammo per ton, it might be okayish then.

CGauss doesnt need a buff though. Its already way better than its IS counterpart.

Edited by Khobai, 27 July 2015 - 06:51 AM.

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

Appogee, on 27 July 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:

... and then the call will go out to double armor again.

... and then the call will go out to double the ammo again.

... and then the call will go out to double armor again.

... and then the call will go out to double the ammo again.

This much is pretty obvious. In my meetings, we'd find it productive to address the solution and ask "Why" it exists or is a problem, and go back to the root.

Why double the ammo? The value for what you get compared to lasers is low.

Why? Lasers are of low tonnage and infinite ammo, ammo based are heavy AND require tonnage per trigger pull.

Why is that not enough? 12 man teams and double armor.

Why are there 12 man teams? (not Sure) Why double armor? To increase TTK.

Why was TTK so low that armor needed increased? PPFLD, being able to use cross hairs accurately enough to shoot at the precise location where people were aiming or leading weapons with little effort, especially against slower mechs.

So why hasn't PGI addressed accuracy, when it would change all of the band-aid solutions that stem from it?

Edited by 00ohDstruct, 27 July 2015 - 07:17 AM.

[Livewyr]

00ohDstruct, on 27 July 2015 - 07:12 AM, said:

So why hasn't PGI addressed accuracy, when it would change all of the band-aid solutions that stem from it?

At one time. PGI had convergence rate- but the amount of stress on the server was too great. (Warping, weapons crossing randomly, etc..)

The only thing I can really think of that would make since without making the game an RNG god prayer check, is weapon sway related to speed. Outside of that, you get the annoyance that came with WoT combat.

[MechWarrior5152251]

Best argument for leaving ammo the way it is is because it helps elite skill players slaughter the lower skill players. In Table Top a single mech could never kill 5+ enemy mechs, but in MWO it is common for skilled players to kill 5+ mechs solo. Running out of ammo means they can only do this with "Lazzors".