48 replies to this topic

[anglomanii]

i think it will depend on the tactical mix present in any ones given squad mates, i dont see this game being like WoT where the teh super heavies rule over all.

[Vaktor]

I usually like going with PPCs and Gauss Rifles depending on which mech I use... I like well place infrequent shots that make the player dread the seconds ticking away as they wait for my next shot, "Will this one kill me?" Muahahaha

Plus I am a bit of a run and gun type of fellow.

Edited by Vaktor, 08 July 2012 - 04:19 PM.

[ArchRakshasa]

As for hard hitting vs multiple hits... All is good for me depends on how I wish to torment my target. Dismemberment or alternating 2 batteries of srm6 while running a circle of death on target.

[Elendil]

Glythe, on 08 July 2012 - 04:09 PM, said:

Based on what? You'd rather shoot at someone with a .50 caliber bolt action rifle than an Uzi? I don't know about you but I'll take the Uzi every time. This isn't real life it's a game where mechs take lots of hits to go down before they die. Stop a moment to consider lag, the necessity to lead a target at range (remember different people in the same mech will be moving at vastly different speeds) and the time required for toso mounted weapons to adjust to aim at a target. You also have to factor in the speed of the projectile; remember that Gauss, AC/20 and PPC all travel at different speeds.

Bearing all that in mind scroll up and read what I posted about shorter range weapons. In this game (and the TT) close range weapons deal more damage for less heat and less weight. Range can be a killer but if you aren't a fast mech then you have to consider the possibility that someone who can choose the range of the fight can bring more smaller weapons to bear and nearly match the damage of your slow firing weapons at close range (in an otherwise "inferior" mech).



That's not true, watch the developer videos (Assault video). From what I can tell only the PPC is the only weapon that seems to disrupt another player's aim.

By "Real world" I didn't mean real life, nor did I imply it. The term was used to differentiate between theory crafting and practical application.
Also, in another thread there was a knockback discussion, and it was stated by the developers that weapons besides PPCs do disrupt your aim. And no, I can't provide you a link.

Why are you so passionate about this subject anyway? It's not like I care which is best, I'm simply explaining what I think and why...

[Glythe]

Elendil, on 08 July 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

The term was used to differentiate between theory crafting and practical application.

Why are you so passionate about this subject anyway? It's not like I care which is best, I'm simply explaining what I think and why...

You presume passion where there is none; although I feel you are passionate about your answer. I also get the feeling you are slightly ignorant about the MW weapons. Everything in this game is a trade off. More range? Sure thing but you get more heat too and less damage for the same heat ratio.

I pointed out that you seemed oblivious to my reply intended for someone who gave a similar answer to yourself about weapon effectiveness (bigger/slower > faster/smaller). I was merely pointing out again that purely by the numbers the short range weapons at close range out damage the long range heavy weapons. The point is that weapons good at one range are bad at another range (comparatively). Most people feel you need to choose to be specialized in either short-mid-long range or you need to find some kind of combination.

The best part about the game is that there is no best combination as almost everything so far seems well balanced against its peers.

[Xandre Blackheart]

It's not how hard you can hit them. It's how hard you can get hit.

Firepower vs armor is now the topic.

Or it's not how hard you can get hit, it's how hard it is to hit you.

Speed vs Armor is now the topic.

It's all a tradeoff. If you want to cut it down to the dirty, dirty, naked, hot naughty, wet basics, you can go make a post and title it:

Balance vs Specialization.

[Gozer]

In an assault I tend to be the Hit hard (hence whey I love the Awesome.)

Everything else I prefer lots of options and that requires multiple hits and more often.

[Elendil]

Glythe, on 08 July 2012 - 04:48 PM, said:

You presume passion where there is none; although I feel you are passionate about your answer. I also get the feeling you are slightly ignorant about the MW weapons. Everything in this game is a trade off. More range? Sure thing but you get more heat too and less damage for the same heat ratio.

I pointed out that you seemed oblivious to my reply intended for someone who gave a similar answer to yourself about weapon effectiveness (bigger/slower > faster/smaller). I was merely pointing out again that purely by the numbers the short range weapons at close range out damage the long range heavy weapons. The point is that weapons good at one range are bad at another range (comparatively). Most people feel you need to choose to be specialized in either short-mid-long range or you need to find some kind of combination.

The best part about the game is that there is no best combination as almost everything so far seems well balanced against its peers.

The discussion was about weapon speed, not range. And I am familiar with the weapon mechanics in MechWarrior.
I also have found that a balanced loadout is the best option for most 'mechs, but that wasn't the purpose of this thread.
I simply pointed out and explained the major mechanics that apply to the given styles of combat and tried to introduce a new mechanic which wasn't currently under discussion (knock-back), which adds value to fast or moderate speed weapons and alters the general perception that "bigger is always better". Bigger is only USUALLY better.

[Gamgee]

Hard.