49 replies to this topic

[Almond Brown]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 August 2015 - 06:06 AM, said:

amen, brother, preach it.

Chant it too brother. RNG! RNG! RNG!

Perfect head shot lined up,

BOOM!

Damn!

Knee Capped em. LOL!

[Lugh]

Almond Brown, on 25 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

Chant it too brother. RNG! RNG! RNG!

Perfect head shot lined up,

BOOM!

Damn!

Knee Capped em. LOL!

I can think of nothing more frustrating...

[Bishop Steiner]

Almond Brown, on 25 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

Chant it too brother. RNG! RNG! RNG!

Perfect head shot lined up,

BOOM!

Damn!

Knee Capped em. LOL!

except one thing is not the other. I believe you are thinking "CoF". Which even THAT in most games is situational. Like you know..... gosh running full speed across briken terrain..... gun sway means perfect headshot near impossible, etc...... vs a nice long calm aimed shot, which usually only happens with minimal movement on your part.

But hey nice way to try to use a specious argument. I get it, all the "Pros" need their crutches and all...... (despite the real comp crowds in virtually every other real FPS having to overcome these things)

[Almond Brown]

Lugh, on 25 August 2015 - 08:13 AM, said:

I can think of nothing more frustrating...

But it is "Lore" dawg!

[Joseph Mallan]

Lugh, on 25 August 2015 - 08:10 AM, said:

1)Because the BT tonnage of the AC weapons doesn't make sense unless those weapons also included a bunch of ammo.
2) BECAUSE DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA

A better question is: why the laser meta is so afraid of the other two weapon systems being able to compete?

1) BattleTech battles are short & furious Weapons only carry 1-2 minutes of continuous fire!

2) I enjoy my AC20 very much! DEEP BASS *DAAKA* *DAKKA*

3) Lasers have been a if not THE staple weapon for over 30 years!

[Almond Brown]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 August 2015 - 08:16 AM, said:

except one thing is not the other. I believe you are thinking "CoF". Which even THAT in most games is situational. Like you know..... gosh running full speed across briken terrain..... gun sway means perfect headshot near impossible, etc...... vs a nice long calm aimed shot, which usually only happens with minimal movement on your part.

But hey nice way to try to use a specious argument. I get it, all the "Pros" need their crutches and all...... (despite the real comp crowds in virtually every other real FPS having to overcome these things)

And having to standing around to line up a shot would make MWO a better game? I wasn't arguing anything btw. I was simply pointing out what would essentially happen, in the minds of most of the player base, if ever a CoF was introduced.

With the number of Mech Sections, any CoF put in use would have to be so BIG at certain ranges, in order to actually "spread" fire around, it would be quickly become beyond ridiculous.

How many other Comp games allow each Player to Carry and Fire as many as 12 weapons at a time... Bogus argument...

Edited by Almond Brown, 25 August 2015 - 08:23 AM.

[MechaBattler]

It could use a buff. But not double.

[Spleenslitta]

Dakota1000, on 25 August 2015 - 03:53 AM, said:

I feel that buffing the ammo to double the TT values would help the ballistics and missiles. Currently Ammo values are buffed by anywhere between 20% and 50% while armor and internals are doubled. This means that given a gauss rifle you could fire an entire ton of ammo into an Atlas's frontal CT and not kill it unless it has over 36 rear CT armor. TT value for a Gauss rifle states it has 8 shots per ton, doubling this would mean you'd have 16 shots, 240 total damage compared to 150, more than enough to kill an Atlas.

This wouldn't raise the time to kill per weapon, but it might free up some tonnage allowing for more weaponry. It might also reduce the amount of laser boats running around as ballistics and missiles would be even more viable. If anything we'd get a new meta until its nerfed again, or we might actually see more diverse builds since people don't have to spent multiple tons of ammo on each gun for each kill.

There are both good and bad sides to this idea.
Good: Ballistic weapons heavier than MG would become more viable alternatives for light mechs.

Bad: There would be more ballistic boats with huge guns. More AC40 or 3 or 4 AC/UAC5.
Because more tonnage would be made available for weapons TTK would go downwards.

[Joseph Mallan]

Spleenslitta, on 25 August 2015 - 08:27 AM, said:

There are both good and bad sides to this idea.
Good: Ballistic weapons heavier than MG would become more viable alternatives for light mechs.

Bad: There would be more ballistic boats with huge guns. More AC40 or 3 or 4 AC/UAC5.
Because more tonnage would be made available for weapons TTK would go downwards.

Not really. The tonnage of the guns would inhibit bringing more weapons. Now AC2's you might get ONE more... But no More large ACs would not be possible.

[L3mming2]

Spleenslitta, on 25 August 2015 - 08:27 AM, said:

There are both good and bad sides to this idea.
Good: Ballistic weapons heavier than MG would become more viable alternatives for light mechs.

Bad: There would be more ballistic boats with huge guns. More AC40 or 3 or 4 AC/UAC5.
Because more tonnage would be made available for weapons TTK would go downwards.

ballistic boats are currently inferior to laser/guass boats ...

[Joseph Mallan]

L3mming2, on 25 August 2015 - 08:39 AM, said:

ballistic boats are currently inferior to laser/guass boats ...

What about laser/ACboats?

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

I'm just thinking that something like a gauss rifle, already the heaviest gun in the game, needing at a minimum 2 extra tons just to kill a 100 ton mech, and thats if you never miss a single shot and hit CT every time, just seems like a bit much. Thats 15 tons for the rifle and 2 tons for the ammo if you are IS. Second heaviest gun in the game, the AC20, comes with 7 shots for a max of 140 damage, once again if you hit CT every single time you wouldn't kill that mech unless you crit. Gauss rifle can explode and requires charging, AC20 is close range, has ammo that can explode, generates high heat, and both take up a large number of slots.

This isn't about the aiming at all really, even if you never miss the gun still needs a bit of a boost. I mean for 16 tons you're telling me at best I can do 150 damage, I know it goes up to 300 then 450 then 600, but for each of those you must add on another ton to something already so heavy.

As for lasers you can get 2 large lasers, ER even, and 6 heat sinks or you can get a gauss with 10 shots. When it comes to heat the ballistics can run very hot, unless its a gauss. I mean the AC2 deals 2 damage for 1 heat, and requires ammo and alone it weighs 6 tons, a medium laser deals 5 damage for 4 heat and requires no ammo, oh and its only one ton.

I know we haven't said much about the missiles, but LRMs have a very high chance to miss among other things, they're a topic all their own, and SRMs spread damage even with artemis.

[Hotthedd]

Doubling the ammo doesn't reduce TTK, but the freed up tonnage for more weapons does.

Yes, doubled armor is a band-aid fix, BUT it was brought about because (unlike in TT) MW:O has PPFLD from multiple weapons in one click, and a weapons fire rate TRIPLE TT values.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

We don't need doubled ammo - we can aim far more precisely and accurately in MWO than you can in TT. Expanded ammo is, however, worth taking a second look at.

Here are my recommendations:

Gauss - stay at 10/ton
AC20 - move to 8/ton
AC10 - move to 16/ton
AC5 - move to 32/ton
AC2 - move to 80/ton

LRMs - stay where they're at

SRMs and SSRMS - 120/ton

This regularizes AC ammo/ton, especially relative to the Gauss, which already has a lot of advantages. It also makes the SRM ammo/ton far more sensible, both giving it a small bump (it's the only ammo weapon that doesn't have one yet) and making the math for the launcher sizes work, even at the half ton.

Edit: All variant ACs should have the same ammo count. Also, bump LB-AC damage to 1.2 per pellet.

Edited by Levi Porphyrogenitus, 25 August 2015 - 09:37 AM.

[Chuck Jager]

1 more ton ammo or 1 more cmlas - I would still take the laser
or how about now being able to more effectively run quad gauss Dwolf or dual erppc + gauss Hellbringer or add other cheese builds to already meta clan

except for cuac10s and 20s 3tons of ammo for ballistics always last and 1 ton for 5 slots is pretty good on lrms. On Quirked IS mechs the ammo is the best balance for the quirks.

If you are running out of ammo you may not be helping your team by being to far from the main conflict. I see way to many mechs at 85% or higher at the ends of matches and they are not on the winning side.

[Lugh]

Joseph Mallan, on 25 August 2015 - 08:48 AM, said:

What about laser/ACboats?

Shh. He likely doesn't realize how much easier it is to ride the lightning while hot with ballistics...

[FupDup]

A lot of people are missing the point here...

Ammo buffs aren't about "getting rid of aim herpa derpa durr."

It's about lowering the opportunity cost of equipping a ballistic or missile weapon. As it stands now, these weapons are usually quite heavy, a problem which is only exasperated by their often high ammo requirements (most guns need at least 2-3 tons each).

Increasing ammo counts would have the effect of reducing the tonnage and critical slots required to use these weapons. This would help a larger number of mechs make effective use of these systems, whereas right now many mechs are almost forced to use energy weapons because they simply don't have the tonnage to take full advantage of other weapons systems (this is especially problematic for dakka).


To put it simply, ballistics and missiles can sometimes feel like they're high risk but moderate-low reward (depending on which specific gun and how large your mech is). The point of this change is to try to equalize the level of risk to reflect the level of reward we currently get.

Or, if you insist upon the "getting rid of aim herpa derpa durr" argument, then there is another way to equalize the risk/reward...and that would be to directly buff the lethality of these weapons, so that they are more consistently worth their high sacrifices. However, I get a funny feeling that most of you wouldn't support that, would you?

[Hotthedd]

FupDup, on 25 August 2015 - 09:49 AM, said:

A lot of people are missing the point here...

Ammo buffs aren't about "getting rid of aim herpa derpa durr."

It's about lowering the opportunity cost of equipping a ballistic or missile weapon. As it stands now, these weapons are usually quite heavy, a problem which is only exasperated by their often high ammo requirements (most guns need at least 2-3 tons each).

Increasing ammo counts would have the effect of reducing the tonnage and critical slots required to use these weapons. This would help a larger number of mechs make effective use of these systems, whereas right now many mechs are almost forced to use energy weapons because they simply don't have the tonnage to take full advantage of other weapons systems (this is especially problematic for dakka).


To put it simply, ballistics and missiles can sometimes feel like they're high risk but moderate-low reward (depending on which specific gun and how large your mech is). The point of this change is to try to equalize the level of risk to reflect the level of reward we currently get.

Or, if you insist upon the "getting rid of aim herpa derpa durr" argument, then there is another way to equalize the risk/reward...and that would be to directly buff the lethality of these weapons, so that they are more consistently worth their high sacrifices. However, I get a funny feeling that most of you wouldn't support that, would you?

Ummm...
Pinpoint damage weapons already ARE the most lethal weapons in the game.

[FupDup]

Hotthedd, on 25 August 2015 - 09:55 AM, said:

Ummm...
Pinpoint damage weapons already ARE the most lethal weapons in the game.

Currently, the most "meta" builds are usually laser boats, which are actually DoT...the exception to this is Gauss, which just so happens to have amazing synergy with lasers (and is also effective by itself).

[Hotthedd]

I realize what the "meta" min/max builds are.

I'm saying that they are "meta" because they are the easiest to hit (lasers).
PPFLD is still the most lethal. (But it takes more practice)