212 replies to this topic

[IraqiWalker]

Jaeger Gonzo, on 27 September 2015 - 07:46 AM, said:

If we are at this. AC5 needs min range as well, for sake of unused AC10, as AC5 took its place.

Charge up mechanics was not implemented to mimic min range, but to desperate attend to desync GR with PPC, with was nonsense, as it is no problem to sync them still.

While this is true that in TT min range means just to hit penalty, by all means not damage reduction, same goes for LRM, its somehow hard to translate that correctly to FPS system.
So I was always lobbing for scaled down damage, as this was appearing while not perfect, but good enough solution.

But someone here mentioned about other way; making minimum convergence. That could work as well.

Having hard understandings min range on ballistic? Its even in some to days tanks. So that should not be an argue at all.

Actually there's a fluff portion that mentions that IS launchers keep their missiles unarmed, and only let them arm a second or 2 after launch (during that period they cross the 180 meters), while clan pilots on the other hand don't mind leaving the missiles armed in the launcher, since all their parts are protected by CASE II.

Also, yes, Gauss Charge was used for the desynch, but it has basis in lore, and TT.

Aethon, on 27 September 2015 - 08:07 AM, said:

None. The Gauss Rifle does not need time to charge, either; it finishes charging while the round is being loaded. THIS is why it makes no sense. It is also stupid from a common-sense point of view: if you were designing such a weapon, why would you complicate the trigger mechanism unnecessarily? Why would you design capacitors that explode even when they are not charged? Why would you not have it automatically charge while the slug is being loaded, so a mere press of the firing stud is all that is required?

It is silly, flavourless, and completely pointless. It does not stop anyone from brawling with Gauss Rifles; it serves only to annoy people who want it to feel like a Gauss Rifle.



See above. Also, minimum range does not have to be a 'reduce damage linearly' sort of thing like the PPC weaponry in MWO; it could be something that adds a sort of 'bloom' effect if firing under its minimum range, to simulate the idea that it is harder to bring this weapon to bear at closer ranges, due to the target's higher transverse velocity.

You mean like the charge mechanic that makes it harder to bring the weapon to bear at close ranges? Yes, we already have that.

Not to mention that the charge mechanic is AGAIN in flavor. It's in the lore. I also did say that they should make it so Gauss doesn't explode when it's not charge, since the only reason it explodes in the first place is that the capacitors are holding a charge when they are hit.

Look, Gauss gives you 15 PP FLD near instant damage at any location you aim at, for almost no heat. Making it snap fire was a huge problem. Understand that snap fire is one of the biggest issues with Gauss. If you're bringing it back, then you need some serious nerfs to the weapon, in another way.

We should NEVER have the Gauss Rifle we had in closed Beta, open Beta, and until the charge arrived.

I'd be okay with the Silver Bullet Gauss getting no charge.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 27 September 2015 - 08:53 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

You mean like the charge mechanic that makes it harder to bring the weapon to bear at close ranges? Yes, we already have that.

Except it doesnt really make it harder to bring the weapon to bear at close range. Again... I have absolutely no problem hitting mechs closeup with gauss. And its much easier to headshot with gauss at close range. Plus gauss mechs pretty much always carry lasers because lasers happen to be perfect complement for any situation gauss isnt ideal in.

What the charge mechanic in fact does is make it more difficult to snapshot with gauss... which is ridiculous since a sniping weapon SHOULD be able to snapshot.

Even with the chargeup nonsense Gauss is STILL an overpowered weapon. Its still being abused because Gauss' ability to snapshot was never really the problem: it was always the combination of high pinpoint damage+virtually no heat+long range that was the problem.

Quote

Look, Gauss gives you 15 PP FLD near instant damage at any location you aim at, for almost no heat. Making it snap fire was a huge problem

Which is why the better solution wouldve been to reduce the damage by giving it splash damage.

Gauss should be allowed to snapshot as a sniping weapon. It just shouldnt do 15 damage to one location. If it did 10 damage and 5 splash damage it would more or less be fine.

Like I said before, adding chargeup to gauss hasnt successfully balanced the weapon, its still abused as much as it always was and the pinpoint damage is as problematic now as it was 2 years ago. The entire problem has always been that gauss does too much pinpoint damage.

the combination of high pinpoint damage + practically no heat + long range is just asking to be an unbalanced weapon. its okay to have two of those three things... like PPCs and AC/20s have two of them. but you cant have all three of those things on the same weapon. Lowering the damage and adding a splash component is the only logical way to balance Gauss.

Quote

I say no to gauss splash damage. Gauss fires a solid projectile. CERPPC is an energy weapon subject to scattering. That is my story and I am sticking to it.

Why would an energy projectile be subject to scattering? a particle accelerator is extremely precise if nothing else. that makes no sense. if anything it would be the exact opposite...

ballistic projectiles deform and break apart when they hit targets... and they spiral and richochet through targets like crazy. especially since gauss is a non-explosive round that does damage solely through kinetic means and doesnt explode on impact like autocannon rounds.

from a realistic standpoint, it makes far more sense for gauss to splash than it does a PPC. but from a game balance standpoint any weapon that does high pinpoint damage needs some kindve game mechanic that makes that pinpoint damage spread out... whether its splash damage, burst fire, or beam duration.

Edited by Khobai, 27 September 2015 - 09:50 PM.

[Homeskilit]

Saying the gauss rifle is not hard to bring to bear at close range is really situational. At close range if you are engaged upon by an opponent you did not expect you have to decide between returning that fire, which mean charging the gauss and aiming it or maneuvering for cover. A good player will attempt to torso twist while charging and then torso twist back, fire, and twist away again. If not you can either hold steady and take the damage and then retreat. I think this a good thing as players should be given decisions to make that effect he game just as much as their play does.

Edited by Homeskilit, 27 September 2015 - 09:52 PM.

[Naduk]

Hey while we're at it lets give ER lasers of all flavors a 200m minimum range

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 27 September 2015 - 09:16 PM, said:

Why would an energy projectile be subject to scattering? a particle accelerator is extremely precise if nothing else. that makes no sense. if anything it would be the exact opposite...

Your so-called "precision" only exists inside a particle accelerator. Once the energy is released into the atmosphere, that is no longer the case.

Why do laser beams diverge? What is actually happening when you "see" the path of a laser beam?

[Funkin Disher]

I'm still behind the idea for having the charge increase a lower base velocity rather than how it is now. And do the same thing for PPCs.

Mystere, on 27 September 2015 - 10:05 PM, said:

What is actually happening when you "see" the path of a laser beam?

You know, i hadn't ever thought of that. Mind blown.

Edited by Funkin Disher, 27 September 2015 - 10:13 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

Khobai, on 27 September 2015 - 09:16 PM, said:

Mystere, on 27 September 2015 - 04:49 PM, said:

I say no to gauss splash damage. Gauss fires a solid projectile. CERPPC is an energy weapon subject to scattering. That is my story and I am sticking to it.

Why would an energy projectile be subject to scattering? a particle accelerator is extremely precise if nothing else. that makes no sense. if anything it would be the exact opposite...

What Mystere called "scattering" is actually known as "blooming", and is an issue with both particle beam weapons and laser weapons.

• "Laser beams begin to cause plasma breakdown in the atmosphere at energy densities of around one megajoule per cubic centimetre. This effect, called "blooming," causes the laser to defocus and disperse energy into the surrounding air. Blooming can be more severe if there is fog, smoke, or dust in the air."
  
• "Blooming is also a problem in particle-beam weapons. Energy that would otherwise be focused on the target spreads out; the beam becomes less effective:
  
  • Thermal blooming occurs in both charged and neutral particle beams, and occurs when particles bump into one another under the effects of thermal vibration, or bump into air molecules.
    
  • Electrical blooming occurs only in charged particle beams, as ions of like charge repel one another."

Both are also subject to "beam absorption".

• "A laser beam or particle beam passing through air can be absorbed or scattered by rain, snow, dust, fog, smoke, or similar visual obstructions that a bullet would easily penetrate. This effect adds to blooming problems and makes the dissipation of energy into the atmosphere worse."

PPC salvos, being "high-energy proton or ion bolts" (TechManual, pg. 233), would be subject to all of these issues.

• The protons/ions of the PPC bolt, being of like charges, would repel each other, causing the PPC bolt to lose cohesion (see: "electrical blooming").
  
• The protons/ions would impact the atmospheric molecules (and other particulates in the air, such as dust, fog, and so on), imparting their energy against those before reaching the target (see: "thermal blooming" & "beam absorption").

In fact, the TRO description of the "Parti-Kill Heavy Cannon PPC" used by the Manticore Heavy Tank (TRO 3026, pg. 64) describes how the weapon "fires an energy 'shell' that loses cohesion and disintegrates at 540 meters".

[pyrocomp]

Khobai, on 27 September 2015 - 09:16 PM, said:

Gauss should be allowed to snapshot as a sniping weapon. It just shouldnt do 15 damage to one location. If it did 10 damage and 5 splash damage it would more or less be fine.

Like I said before, adding chargeup to gauss hasnt successfully balanced the weapon, its still abused as much as it always was and the pinpoint damage is as problematic now as it was 2 years ago. The entire problem has always been that gauss does too much pinpoint damage.

No, splash for gauss is another 'magic' mechanic. I've seen many bullet impacts on hard surfaces, the 'splash' is extremely weak collateral going mostly parallel to the surface. So no, no splash. But to lower the PPLFD capability of the Gauss (and possibly remove it from current games for the pure laservomit to reign, which is bad) ask for through-and-through effect (as described in novelizations). E.g. 8 dmg to the front armor layer of the component being hit, 4 dmg to the IS of that component (with crit chance) and 3 adm to the back layer. If side projection is hit, then apply last 3 dmg to ST armor (if arm was hit) or CT IS (if ST was hit first). And live with it. Better and more interesting than 'splash'.

Edited by pyrocomp, 28 September 2015 - 02:38 AM.

[sycocys]

Matthew Ace, on 27 September 2015 - 04:50 AM, said:

Personally I'm fine with the Gauss charge, though I'd do things differently.



I like the gist of the idea, but not specifically all the drawbacks. Lower pitch and yaw sounds good, but I'd prefer more drawbacks towards accel/decel and turn rate nerfs.

For me, I think it would be interesting if the charge-up was done away with, but Gausses made stronger as a singular weapon, but somewhat less useful up close, as well as reduced in effectiveness when carried in multiples or when used together with most other weapons (exception being MGs/Flamers/NARC). Maybe we can throw in the movement nerfs from the above idea too.

More details in spoilers.

Spoiler

Numbers are arbitrary - but let's say...

• 20 damage
  
• 8 second cooldown
  
• Cannot be fired in multiples or together with any other weapons other than MGs/Flamers/NARC.
  
• Firing any Gauss Rifles induces a brief cooldown (let's say.... 0.75sec for IS, 1 sec for clan) to all other weapons including any other gauss rifles
  
• Firing any other weapons besides Flamers/MG/NARC induces the same cooldown to all Gausses.
  
• If lasers are fired, the brief cooldown window on Gausses will not start until the lasers finished burning.
  
• Any weapons (including other Gausses) in the midst of cooling down will have their cooldown delayed if Gauss Rifles are shot.

Yeah the numbers I posted are just fluid ideas to express the mechanic. It really is just about the stupidest thing I've ever seen to balance the weapons systems on a mech to mech basis. Someone was smoking some really potent stuff to come up with that idea.

[generalazure]

Mystere, on 27 September 2015 - 10:05 PM, said:

What is actually happening when you "see" the path of a laser beam?

And efficiency gets even worse once you're able to hear them

[pyrocomp]

generalazure, on 28 September 2015 - 03:21 AM, said:

And efficiency gets even worse once you're able to hear them

Not to mention 'feel them'.
But does it mean that laser damage (or damage fall curve) should be map depended? Smoked Morodor will be a hell for laser builds... wel it is now, but.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Nope!

It makes no sense and the charge-up kind of handles that.

Plus, i'm guessing the main issues people have with gauss are over 90m (with 2 LLasers or LPLasers), especially since the charge up makes it difficult to hit a target as close as 90m.

[Raggedyman]

Andi Nagasia, on 26 September 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

But how could Gauss have a Minimum range with it being Fired by magnates?
well most conventional RailGuns/CoilRifles they have a Protective Casing around them,
this Casing protects the Device from the Round during the Firing and is discarded after,

Hurm... I could see that doing less damage but no damage from being hit by a supersonic Protective Casing??

Andi Nagasia, on 26 September 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

Why 60m for IS and 90m for Clan?
Style= to make them abit different than each other,
Balance= because Clan Gauss is lighter,

Clan Tech is always better though, so it just seems arbitrary to make it that much worse in this case

Mystere, on 26 September 2015 - 08:54 PM, said:

How do you stop a bullet from doing damage as it exits the barrel?

Hide behind an Atlas?

[Greyhart]

Well I didn't notice this until after making a suggestion http://mwomercs.com/...age-and-spread/

What I suggest is that the damage below a optimal range should be spread out rather than focused on one part.

As for explaining it on gauss rifles. Perhaps the pressure and the acceleration of the rifle partly melts the ball of metal that then re-solidifies after a period of time.

Much like the idea in IEDs where they put a copper plate in front of the device that is liquidised by the explosion allowing it to penetrate the vehicles armour before re-solidifying and then bouncing around inside the vehicle (causing injury and damage).

Of course you could also make it that the spread damage effect only kicks in if you use multiple of the same weapon.

[Lugh]

Vlad Ward, on 26 September 2015 - 09:00 PM, said:

How about making short range weapons good inside their range profile again instead of trying to nerf long range weapons into the ground.

Gauss only wins in brawling range combat because AC/20, UAC/20, and SRMs are all ****.

HAHAHA No.

[Clownwarlord]

No, instead the charge up for gauss should be removed.

[VinJade]

IW
No it isn't in lore or TT games.
I checked the rules and no where does it say it is charged by the pilot. it is charged automatically unless actually stated other wise by the powers that be until then it is automatic.

anyone who has been with battletech long before the GR and when the GR was added knows this.

so please stop trying to mislead people by trying to say it is lore or TT.

[Strum Wealh]

VinJade, on 28 September 2015 - 05:28 AM, said:

IW
No it isn't in lore or TT games.
I checked the rules and no where does it say it is charged by the pilot. it is charged automatically unless actually stated other wise by the powers that be until then it is automatic.

anyone who has been with battletech long before the GR and when the GR was added knows this.

so please stop trying to mislead people by trying to say it is lore or TT.

The TT rules don't mention a lot of things, for the sake of abstraction in order to facilitate faster gameplay in a table-top environment.
They're very up-front about this point.
"Classic BattleTech turns represent ten seconds of real time, while each hex on a mapsheet represents thirty meters of a battlefield (for the exception, see Aerospace Movement, p. 74). However, players should note that such 'real world' terms are abstractions when applied to the board game. Classic BattleTech is a game, not a detailed simulation. Therefore, the real world must take a back seat to game play - for simplicity, length of play, space required and simple enjoyment." - Total Warfare, pg. 36
The MechWarrior video games, however, do not necessarily need to continue that abstraction, as the computers can perform all of the necessary arithmetic far more quickly than any human.
In fact, in many cases the abstraction is abandoned in favor of implementing more plausible weapon behaviors (e.g. lasers having not-insignificant burn times, LRMs not clustering into groups of five, and so on).

The Gauss Rifle is known to be something of a power-hog, even moreso than at least some of the DEWs.
This characteristic (and, specifically, that the power requirements of twinned Clan Gauss Rifles was such that the 'Mech's other weapons - CERMLs - suffered noticeable firing delays as a result) was even used as a prominent plot point in Phelan Kell's fight against Vlad Ward during the former's Trial of Position.
Additionally, the TT gameplay rules do allow the player to manually power-up/power-down the Gauss Rifle during combat; "During the End Phase of any turn, the controlling player may announce that he is powering down his weapon (or powering up a previously powered-down weapon). The change must be marked on the record sheet of the unit in question. A powered down Gauss rifle may not fire but does not explode if it suffers a critical hit. The powered-down weapon will still be destroyed, however, if it takes a critical hit." (Tactical Operations, pg. 102)

Clearly, PGI took these elements into consideration - along with their gameplay concerns & their desire to desynchronize the Gauss Rifles from the PPCs - when they came up with the charging mechanic.
The biggest change needed would be that the damage produced when the Gauss Rifle takes a critical hit should be proportional to the Gauss Rifle's level of charge at the time of the critical hit; a Gauss Rifle at 0% charge should produce 0% damage when destroyed, a Gauss Rifle at 31% charge should produce 31% damage when destroyed, a Gauss Rifle at 73% charge should produce 73% damage when destroyed, and only a Gauss Rifle at 100% charge should produce 100% damage when destroyed.

[Dimento Graven]

Andi Nagasia, on 26 September 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

so as most Meta Combat seems to be Gauss + Laser was thinking,
why not add in the 60m-90m Minimum range that Gauss had in TT?

But how could Gauss have a Minimum range with it being Fired by magnates?
well most conventional RailGuns/CoilRifles they have a Protective Casing around them,
this Casing protects the Device from the Round during the Firing and is discarded after,
-
so my idea, give IS-Gauss 60m & C-Gauss 90m No-Damage/Reduced-Damage Range,
this is because if the Shell hits before the Casing is discarded, the round disintegrates,
remember this Casing is designed to Carry the Round to allow it to reach High Speeds,
after leaving the Weapon it has to be discarded as its acting as access drag,

Why 60m for IS and 90m for Clan?
Style= to make them abit different than each other,
Balance= because Clan Gauss is lighter,

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

I'm sure there's been a lot of good points brought up by now, however, I saw the title, read the post, and have to comment as a long time gauss user.

Whether you intended to or not, or whether it's true or not, this post, and all the others in support of further handicrapping the gauss, from my own perspective, smacks of light pilot grumbles.

FIRST let's list the advantages of gauss:

1. Low heat, that's a big one.
2. Very fast, NOT INSTANTANEOUS, just VERY FAST travel time.
3. Fairly decent pin point, NOT INSTANTANEOUS, accuracy at distance.
4. It does 15 PP damage, per gauss, with a maximum of a potential 30 PP damage when equipped with dual gauss.

Now, let's list the disadvantages of gauss:

1. Ammo reliant, 10 shots per ton.
2. 90% chance for explosion should one of the weapon's crit slots get hit.
3. VERY HEAVY, VERY LARGE

Now, let's list all the things in MWO's implementation of gauss that limit their effectiveness:

1. You can only fire two at a time.
2. On some 'mechs, cannot fire at all if chain fire is enabled (I know, weird right?)
3. Charge up delay.
4. On some 'mechs if you have two gauss in two different types of locations and in two different
weapon groups, it's sometimes not possible to fire them simultaneously: ie: A gauss in a right arm and in a right torso can't always be charged and fired simultaneously. This happens in my Dirwolf where I might lose one torso or the other, and I have arm gauss in one weapon group, and torso gauss in the other. If I lose a side torso, and only have the two functioning weapons, it STILL won't charge them both at the same time, I'll only be able to fire them one at a time.
5. Close range convergence is not possible, ie: 10 meters (someone said that and I call ********, you weren't killed by converged gauss, you were killed by someone knowing to hit you with ONE gauss at a time, trying to converge gauss on a light 'mech 'pinballing' his way through your ranks is stupid, aim with only ONE of the gauss, and you'll have a better chance)
6. Even with ZERO ammo, and no capability to charge the weapon at all, it remains VERY explosive should it get a crit slot hit by even the weakest of weapons.
7. DPS/ton ratio is actually EXTREMELY low, heck it's got the LOWEST DPS/T rating of any weapon in the game, INCLUDING MG's, flamers, and small lasers.
8. With the charge cycle it matches only LRM 20's for slowness in reload time, this is huge
9. It has a DPS of 3.16. You're probably thinking, "YEAH BUT THAT's HUGE, WHEN DUAL GAUSSING THAT's 6.32!!!" And you'd be right, IF, we didn't have builds boating 8 small lasers, at 11.6 DPS, and you're thinking, "SO, IF THAT 8 SMALL LASER BUILD IS CAUGHT OUT IN THE OPEN FAR AWAY HE CAN BE HIT WITHOUT FIRING BACK." True, most good light 'mech pilots won't let that happen though, if they can help it. The good ones know to sneak up behind, get very close, alpha and keep close because that gauss at close range is very, VERY hard to use, the DPS of the small lasers means that the dual gauss weilder BETTER have other backup weapons, AND, not miss ANY of his gauss shots if he's to have a chance at killing the light 'mech small laser boat.

Considering that there are many other boat builds out there that stack higher DPS, longer range weapons out there (such as builds simply carrying ONLY 3 LL's @3*2.12 = 6.36 DPS, no ammo reliance, no explody weapon, actual instant travel time and the same level of convergence, and suffers the small drawbacks of range and heat limitations) a dual gauss build isn't that great.

Why do we see so many of them then?

It's a matter of perspective. We see many single gauss builds out there as well, it's just that the dual gauss builds take a lot of the heat because they're more noticeable, Jaeger, Catapult, Cataphract, King Crab, Direwolf (and in some respects even the Shadowcat). The only truly noticeable single gauss build is the Hunchback GI, and even with its incredible quirks it actually ends up with a LOWER DPS than a dual gauss build, AND, suffers all the detriments of gauss shoehorned into a MEDIUM frame. OH SO MUCH FUN having an explody weapon on a very obvious targeting point, and being essentially FORCED to run an XL to have ANY kind of reasonable movement profile...

No, again, I see posts calling for even more nerfs to an already overly nerfed weapon system and I immediately think of all the light pilots I've killed pissing and moaning about being shot by gauss. All the while they're running into large 'mechs at 150+ kph, pinballing off them, all the while blasting away, running their heat up to 99.9999999999999999% of total max with no ill effects on their 'mech, and I just mentally give them the finger, roll my eyes, and just try to find them in the game and punish them more.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 28 September 2015 - 07:57 AM.

[wanderer]

Honestly, RL railguns fire a saboted round that sheds the outer casing as it leaves the barrel- in part to reduce wear and tear to the weapon. While they fire a spike rather than a ball, a similar protective covering would only make sense for Gauss rifle rounds.

I'm still in favor of a universal min-range = reduced damage system rather than the all-or-nothing we have now. TT min range isn't binary either.