212 replies to this topic

[Kin3ticX]

some rules dont translate to a shooter well

I dont like the min range in the PPC for the same reason. It just makes things more convoluted.

The charge up on the gauss does add a slight drawback but it also creates a big skill floor that is confusing for new players. Often when I talk to a struggling player they tell me they dont like to use gauss because of the chargeup.

[Dimento Graven]

wanderer, on 28 September 2015 - 06:22 PM, said:

It's not about DPS because it's about how much damage you can put into one location with minimal facetime. Please, sit there at MG range and we'll trade shots and see who dies first- me with the pinpoint damage delivery or you spraying MG ******* while your cone-of-fire drizzles yellow over my armor plating.

And the Gauss does it.

Except I won't be standing still, I'll be right up your ******** with my MG's on my light 'mech completely out maneuvering you, while you uselessly twist and turn praying to RNGesus that you can accidentally get ONE gauss to connect to me. Keep praying because while you're doing that I'll be peeling your ass like an onion...

[Pjwned]

Lightfoot, on 26 September 2015 - 08:40 AM, said:

Drop the non-Battle Tech Charge-Up first.

No, the charge-up is fine.

Quote

No it doesn't. I get killed by Gauss Rifles at 10 meters faster than at 500 meters.

Maybe don't stare down the barrel of a gauss rifle then because at that range it should be easier to dodge or at least spread the damage.

[Dimento Graven]

Khobai, on 28 September 2015 - 06:44 PM, said:

...

whats most important for games is implementing rules which establish balance. if gauss needs a minimum range for balance then it should get a minimum range. whether it makes sense or not has no real bearing.

And gauss IS balanced. It's the only weapon with a reload AND charge up cycle. It's the only weapon with a 90% chance of explosion, loaded or not, charged or not, if crited. It's the only weapon limited to how many can be fired at once.

Really, just how handicrapped do you want it to be?

Quote

This. The whole problem with DPS weapons is that they require facetime. Both the enemy giving you facetime as well as you giving the enemy facetime. And if one player decides not to give the other player facetime then the DPS ceases.

Um, ALL weapons have DPS, and gauss 'TEEHEEHEE' has amongst the lowest DPS/T of all the weapons in the game.

I now question whether you actually understand the argument, but let's continue...

Quote

Gauss is a weapon which strongly plays into the strategy of minimizing facetime with the enemy. In doing so you completely negate all of the enemy's DPS weapons.

Untrue. The gauss requires some face time. Good timing and skill can minimize it but not eliminate it, and let's face it, a clan or IS 'mech vomiting 8 ERLL's is doing comparable damage even when the gauss shooter isn't staying visible the full burn time.

Quote

And since gauss is also long range you can also negate all of their short range weapons by staying at long range. So basically a smart player using gauss really only ends up being susceptible to other players that are also using lasers/gauss (since ppcs are way too slow to hit anything at long range now).

If the gauss player is SMARTER than the short range player, this is true. If the short range player is stupid enough to NOT stick to cover and stay out of the frontal view of the gauss player, yep, pretty much he's dead and deservedly so. OF COURSE, the same moronic short range player would be just as dead to EVERY OTHER long range weapon too, but of course, you don't consider that.

No, the big bad gauss ate your baby, I know, I know...

Quote

Hence why the entire meta now revolves around laser/gauss and high mount weapons that help minimize facetime.

Again, ********, you really don't know **** about what you're talking about. The "meta" is about maximizing alpha's vs. heat. "Face time" is minimal factor and why builds that can easily boat lasers, AC's or missiles do so. The Direwhale with the Clan advantage of MUCH lighter weapons and an XL that can survive torso loss, can dual wield the gauss AND boat lasers or other AC weapons, TRUST ME, the gauss is loaded NOT because of range, NOT because of the speed of travel, NOT because of pin point damage but because you can stack 30 points of damage for nearly zero heat, allowing the use of a shitton of lasers or AC's, which will typically be the LARGEST portion of the alpha.

Yep, you don't really know what you're talking about.

Quote

So why do I think min range on gauss would probably be a good thing? Well by giving gauss a min range you incorporate a strong exploitable weakness into mechs that rely primarily on gauss to do their damage. Dual Gauss builds would have to be extra careful about engaging enemies close up because their gauss wont help them very much.

BEFORE they EVER consider implementing 'minimum' range on ANY weapon, they need to introduce collisions so that the 'meta' of creating hyper fast lights with huge short range alphas that do nothing but run into heavier 'mechs at maximum speed, and firing weapons is eliminated.

As "unreal" or "unfair" or "unbalanced" as any person's ignorance and lack of skill might make them believe firing two gauss once every 4 or so seconds might be, truly having a 20+ ton 'mech be capable of running 150+ kph into a much heavier 'mech with almost no damage, and no risk of falling down is actually the much more stupid.

So cry me a river little light pilot, it's oh so unfair that someone with skill can kill you while your at POINT BLANK range for just about EVERY OTHER weapon in the game, but the perceived lack of fairness PALES in comparison to the ability to pinball through 12 'mechs receiving little damage to show for it.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 28 September 2015 - 07:35 PM.

[fat4eyes]

Tractor Joe, on 28 September 2015 - 05:01 PM, said:

OP, Umm Physics.

I fully admit to not reading 8 pages of god only knows what, I'm sure some one has already hit on why you can't have a min range on Gauss, its a projectile, we going to create a wormhole thru space/time to enforce a min range?

Guys, the 'realism' of the gauss rifle is not what's at stake here, what's important is the discussion on whether the Guass rifle should get nerfs at short range. It's easy to invent plausible explanations for limitations on weapons in-game. Watch:

1. Why is there ghost heat? : Because weapons of similar types attach to the same heat dissipation 'bus', and this 'bus' has a limited capacity which leads to less efficient heat dissipation when it is overloaded (i.e. too many of the same weapons fire).

2. Why do clan autocannons fire in bursts? : Because to achieve weight and space savings the Clans instead chose to use smaller caliber cannons that fire bursts instead of one big cannon that just fires one shell.

3. Why do clan lrms stream instead of firing a single swarm?: Again to achieve space and weight savings, Clan LRMs have to packed in much tighter together than IS lrms. They are packed so close that if they were all fired at the same time, the backblast from one missile can cause the missile next to it to explode. So they stream the missiles so they don't blow each other up.

4. Why do clan lasers have much higher burn times? : Because clan lasers are more powerful and yet lighter and more densely packed than IS lasers, they would melt themselves if the laser was discharged over the same duration as IS lasers. So clan engineers designed it so the laser discharge takes longer, giving the heat the time to dissipate from the weapon without melting it.

5. Why do PPCs have a 90m minimum range? : Because they are equipped with a Field Inhibitor to prevent damage to the weapon when fired at short range.

Except for the last one, I just pulled these explanations out of my arse. So don't get hung up on realism guys. We're piloting 100 ton walking robots after all.

[Libas]

To all the people that say to nerf gauss
Go in front of a slingshot (that is a charge up projectile weapon) at 0 range a get a hit
Then repeat at 9 meters and tell me if it hurts more
If you find a weapon to good and you dont like it just say in a simple way (ie I dont like gauss because i got hurt by it -include some tears-) all the other imaginary staff you telling is just funny.

[Homeskilit]

Lol

[fat4eyes]

Libas, on 28 September 2015 - 07:45 PM, said:

To all the people that say to nerf gauss
Go in front of a slingshot (that is a charge up projectile weapon) at 0 range a get a hit
Then repeat at 9 meters and tell me if it hurts more
If you find a weapon to good and you dont like it just say in a simple way (ie I dont like gauss because i got hurt by it -include some tears-) all the other imaginary staff you telling is just funny.

Overpenetration. If the weapon is powerful enough and the target is close enough, it would send its projectile clean through its target, doing comparatively little damage. Happened all the time with tanks and warships in WW2. See, it's easy to come up with reasonable in-world explanations for just about any game mechanic.

Edited by fat4eyes, 28 September 2015 - 08:09 PM.

[bad arcade kitty]

overpenetration means it made a hole in both the front and the back armor

[Mystere]

fat4eyes, on 28 September 2015 - 06:53 PM, said:

If anything I want the Gauss to require EVEN MORE skill if you want to use it as a close range weapon. Forcing the use of advanced zoom for Gauss to work properly on top of the charge mechanic requires a LOT practice than just the charge up. And it wouldn't affect the viability of Gauss for long range at all.

There is a rather big difference between raising the skill bar and "raising the skill bar".

And by the way, I do not use advanced zoom ... at all.

Edited by Mystere, 28 September 2015 - 08:45 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Mystere, on 28 September 2015 - 08:43 PM, said:

...

And by the way, I do not use advanced zoom ... at all.

Experienced players know (well those that are paying attention anyway) that Advanced Zoom = lagged view. It only works well if you AND your target aren't moving. The moment anyone is moving, what's displayed in the adv. zoom. window is too lagged to be reliable for anything but lasers.

[IraqiWalker]

Khobai, on 28 September 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

Except gauss is a sniper weapon. it should be twitch shot. chargeup contradicts gauss' entire role of being a sniping weapon. A sniping weapon that cant twitch shot isnt a true sniping weapon.

No, not really, if we want to get into how SNIPING is actually done, a sniper will sight, range, hold their breath to stabilize their aim, and then fire. There is NO part of that, which implies snap shooting. Snipers never snap shoot. Also, need I remind you how overbearing Gauss was at sniping. NONE of the other long range weapons could even dent it. When a mech with ERLLs even shows an inch, I land 30 damage on it, and disappear, before it's lasers have even began to scratch my armor. At least now, those mechs have a chance, instead of being free kills for almost 0 return damage.

Khobai, on 28 September 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

And again the whole reason it was a nightmare before was the 15 FLPP damage. If you lowered the pinpoint damage by adding a splash component the weapon would no longer be a nightmare. Dual gauss couldnt even headshot at long range anymore.

No, it wasn't just the damage. In fact, that damage wasn't the highest part of it. The problems were 1 heat, virtually hitscan damage application, snap firing, and 15 damage PP FLD.

Khobai, on 28 September 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

And if you really insist on gauss having a minimum range, a better way to do it would be to give it a linear damage dropoff under 60m, like clan LRMs. That would actually make gauss useless at close range, unlike chargeup, which completely fails in that regard. Hitting things at close range with gauss is absolutely no problem for me, you just have to train yourself for the delay.

I don't want this silly minimum range implementation that is proposed in this thread. I personally see the charge as enough of a representation of TT minimum range

Khobai, on 28 September 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

All adding chargeup really did was hurt gauss' ability to snapshot at long range, which again, is contrary to gauss' entire role as a sniper weapon.

Yeah, it makes not snap fire, which is a good thing.

Khobai, on 28 September 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

Where are you getting this nonsense from? Did you even read the rulebook or just make up your own rules?

First off you dont get the -1 from the targeting computer when making aimed shots.

Might wanna read what people actually post. I said slaving the weapons to a TC gives you a -1 to aiming checks so your shots hit the mech, I didn't say to aimed shots (my problem with the awkward phrasing), or hitting a specific section. I know how TCs work, I use them whenever possible. In my book, they are one of the best pieces of equipment ton for ton.

Khobai, on 28 September 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

Secondly when making aimed shots with a targeting computer you have to apply a pretty severe penalty (+3) to your to-hit roll. Also you cant even make aimed shots with pulse lasers, the rules specifically forbid it.

Lastly, if you actually hit, you have to roll 2d6 and only on a 6,7,8 does your attack it hit the location you aimed at. On anything else you roll randomly for hit location

So yeah you people are completely wrong as usual.

Spoiler

No, in this case, my phrasing was just awkward. It also still doesn't refute my point that there were ways around random hit locations. Heck, even without TCs, you could make aimed shots.

By the way, in terms of probability, you have a 45% chance of hitting the section you are aiming for on 2xD6

Aethon, on 28 September 2015 - 04:05 PM, said:

Not quite. The Gauss Rifles in canon charged while the projectile was being loaded, and were fired when the pilot depressed the firing stud. When you think of it from a real-life standpoint, it makes sense. Unnecessarily complicating a trigger mechanism for someone who will be using it in combat is silly.

Yes, and taking over 200 years to figure out how to glue two single heatsinks together is silly as well, isn't it?

For clarification, I'm saying that the weapon's charge is in the lore, and TT, we just made it manual instead of automated. Even though there is no statement in the rule book mentioning that. It simply says that the capacitors retain the charge indefinitely. Which means that loading the shot, to trigger the charge could be manual.

Aethon, on 28 September 2015 - 04:05 PM, said:

I never had problems using the new Gauss Rifle in close quarters. If anything, it is easier than autocannons due to it being pretty much hitscan at brawling range, which means it syncs nicely with lasers against anything other than lights or really fast mediums.

Whaddya know, you managed to pass the gunnery test with the minimum range penalty applied. Working as intended.

Aethon, on 28 September 2015 - 04:05 PM, said:

I never had any argument with any of this; I am all for nerfing it in some other way to make the other ballistics more useful. I just hate the way it feels like a slingshot.

I don't contest that you have no arguments against it. I'm still saying if you want to remove it, come up with a solution that works. Minimum range, or movement penalties both either don't compensate enough, or just don't work.

fat4eyes, on 28 September 2015 - 06:53 PM, said:

To put the following into context, I was suggesting that the Gauss be very inaccurate or have reduced damage if you're not zoomed in using advanced zoom (like sniper rifles in other shooters).



I want the Gauss rifle to be very hard to use as a close-in weapon, not harder to use at all skill levels at all ranges. Forcing the use of advanced zoom for Gauss accuracy will not hurt the usability of the Gauss rifle at long range at any skill level (which is its purpose). It would however require A LOT MORE SKILL to use in short range. If you can hit a circling light mech at 100m using gauss with advanced zoom and charge up, then I won't complain because you deserved that kill.




If anything I want the Gauss to require EVEN MORE skill if you want to use it as a close range weapon. Forcing the use of advanced zoom for Gauss to work properly on top of the charge mechanic requires a LOT practice than just the charge up. And it wouldn't affect the viability of Gauss for long range at all.

So your solution is to add a multi million C-Bill to the weapon's price, and make it mandatory for the weapon to function, while also forcing people to lose a full mech module slot. While also forcing them to use Advanced Zoom at short range.

Have you ever used Advanced Zoom? Have you ever used Advanced Zoom at short range? It's insanely more disorienting than piloting with watery eyes.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 29 September 2015 - 01:00 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Aethon, on 28 September 2015 - 04:05 PM, said:

...

I never had any argument with any of this; I am all for nerfing it in some other way to make the other ballistics more useful. I just hate the way it feels like a slingshot.

And this sort of non-logic infuriates me.

You want to nerf one thing to somehow make other things better?

Think about that REAL hard please, I'll wait...

Ok, now that you have a migraine, here's why that logic is stupid:

Removing capability of one thing DOES ABSOLUTE **** TO ENHANCE THE FUNCTIONALITY OF SOME OTHER SEPERATE THING.

All you've done is make the first thing less capable, but done diddly to improve the other.

It's like saying, "I want your silver to tarnish faster so that my gold will be worth more", or "Bicycles should have square wheels so that cars will have better gas mileage."

Seriously, it's stupid, stop doing that.

[Dimento Graven]

IraqiWalker, on 28 September 2015 - 09:04 PM, said:

...

So your solution is to add a multi million C-Bill to the weapon's price, and make it mandatory for the weapon to function, while also forcing people to lose a full mech module slot. While also forcing them to use Advanced Zoom at short range.

Have you ever used Advanced Zoom? Have you ever used Advanced Zoom at short range? It's insanely more disorienting than piloting with watery eyes.

Again panicked and emotional thought process of the 'gauss ate my baby' crowd.

Light (or just stupid) pilots going into histrionics because they were pegged while playing badly. They hate on the gauss, and when it's gone, they'll hate on AC's, ALL OF THEM, after all an AC40 can be a full 1/3'd more deadly up close when wielded by an experienced skilled pilot, only the AC40 gives them a free ride to run out into the open until the stupid pilot gets really close.

The stupidity of this discussion is now beginning to grate.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 28 September 2015 - 09:19 PM.

[bad arcade kitty]

yeah

i meet such lights pilots from time to time, for instance that panther from the previous event (for some reason it's always panther pilots who are the whinniest while they have to get used how the positioning is important for their slow light), a panther and a jenner made a very daring raid into our positions, were cut down from their team, i chased the panther into a corner and burned it, my team killed the jenner, the panther's reaction was 'oh, of course i met a streakcrow'. sorry, but you could meet any properly built crow and you would die there in that situation, and if not to that crow then to her team

to meet the stuff like double c-uac/10 is much worse for lights than say double gausses which are pretty hard to shoot a light with, especially close, with uac10 you basically shoot like a laser beam but way more obliterating

Edited by bad arcade kitty, 28 September 2015 - 09:44 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

fat4eyes, on 28 September 2015 - 08:08 PM, said:

Overpenetration. If the weapon is powerful enough and the target is close enough, it would send its projectile clean through its target, doing comparatively little damage. Happened all the time with tanks and warships in WW2. See, it's easy to come up with reasonable in-world explanations for just about any game mechanic.

bad arcade kitty, on 28 September 2015 - 08:39 PM, said:

overpenetration means it made a hole in both the front and the back armor

Overpenetration would also mean internal damage, as the projectile is now punching neat little holes in the internal components as it passes through the 'Mech; the effect would be similar to the "Through Armor Critical Hits" ("TACs") from the TT game.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 29 September 2015 - 02:54 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

I don't want this silly minimum range implementation that is proposed in this thread. I personally see the charge as enough of a representation of TT minimum range

except weve already established chargeup doesnt hurt the gauss at short range. it mostly hurts the gauss snapshotting at long range.

chargeup up in fact doesnt represent minimum range at all. And actually does the opposite of hurting gauss as a sniping weapon.

again its contradictory. just like low projectile velocity is contradictory for the erppc.

Quote

NONE of the other long range weapons could even dent it.

Except even with chargeup gauss is still overpowered. so chargeup obviously fixed nothing whatsoever.

Again. The problem is the frontloaded pinpoint damage. Not its ability to snapshoot.

As long as gauss does high pinpoint damage at long range for minimal heat its always going to be overpowered. That is simply an irrefutable fact.

Edited by Khobai, 29 September 2015 - 03:36 AM.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 29 September 2015 - 03:21 AM, said:

except weve already established chargeup doesnt hurt the gauss at short range. it mostly hurts the gauss snapshotting at long range.

chargeup up in fact doesnt represent minimum range at all. And actually does the opposite of hurting gauss as a sniping weapon.

I think you've been missing a big point:

IraqiWalker, on 28 September 2015 - 09:04 PM, said:

No, not really, if we want to get into how SNIPING is actually done, a sniper will sight, range, hold their breath to stabilize their aim, and then fire. There is NO part of that, which implies snap shooting. Snipers never snap shoot.

[Aethon]

Dimento Graven, on 28 September 2015 - 09:14 PM, said:

And this sort of non-logic infuriates me.

You want to nerf one thing to somehow make other things better?

Think about that REAL hard please, I'll wait...

Ok, now that you have a migraine, here's why that logic is stupid:

Removing capability of one thing DOES ABSOLUTE **** TO ENHANCE THE FUNCTIONALITY OF SOME OTHER SEPERATE THING.

All you've done is make the first thing less capable, but done diddly to improve the other.

It's like saying, "I want your silver to tarnish faster so that my gold will be worth more", or "Bicycles should have square wheels so that cars will have better gas mileage."

Seriously, it's stupid, stop doing that.

It is not the only thing I would suggest, of course. But, your own non-logic fails to realize that this is a thread about the Gauss Rifle, not other ballistics. The thread is not called "How Ballistic Weaponry should be Balanced."

Think before you rage next time.

[Destoroyah]

I think all the ACs should receive a speed increase but velocity dies off quickly past the optimal range.