182 replies to this topic

[Der Zivilist]

Double Heatsinks are in: http://mwomercs.com/...-devs-1-answer/

[Xandre Blackheart]

Der Zivilist, on 08 July 2012 - 02:50 PM, said:

Double Heatsinks are in: http://mwomercs.com/...-devs-1-answer/

Well that is good news for Large Laser enthusiasts... Because they'll benefit from them even more than PPC's will since large lasers take fewer crit slots and weigh less per ton per point of heat and damage than PPC's.

I guess you could try to extrapolate and say why not go with medium lasers if you like efficiency so much? Those are 5 damage for 1 ton /1 crit and only 3 heat!

True. But the range is only 270m. At some point my personal preferences dictate that the 450m range is desirable enough to justify the inefficacy to gain 180m but the increase for range in favor of loss of efficiency isn't enough to go for the extra 90m a PPC would bring.

Edited by Xandre Blackheart, 08 July 2012 - 03:04 PM.

[Glythe]

Xandre Blackheart, on 08 July 2012 - 03:04 PM, said:

Well that is good news for Large Laser enthusiasts... Because they'll benefit from them even more than PPC's will since large lasers take fewer crit slots and weigh less per ton per point of heat and damage than PPC's.

I guess you could try to extrapolate and say why not go with medium lasers if you like efficiency so much? Those are 5 damage for 1 ton /1 crit and only 3 heat!

I started to bring up the medium laser issue but you've done it for me. You're much better off with medium lasers in terms of heat compared to the Large Laser. What you're really paying for is the extended range. For 3 more heat you're adding 180m to your medium laser range and all you get is 3 more damage.

Compare those two and then look at the LL compared to the PPC. For 2 more heat you get two more damage and more range? You would expect the drop off to be a lot less efficient when you move up the scale. But if the minimum range is a problem for the PPC everything makes sense; all you've done is shift the range out 90 meters and slightly increased the damage. But in so doing you have created a dangerous blind spot. That is on par with the shift from ML to LL.

Finally look at ER PPC to PPC. They have the same weight, critical space and damage; the only differences are heat and range. The standard PPC has ranges from 3-18 (90-540 meters) with 10 heat. The ER PPC has ranges from 0-23 (690 meters) with 15 heat.

We know ER PPC is in the game. Why would it stay if PPC could be used from 0-3 meters? No one would take ER PPC over PPC if the minimum range is not in place. You just can't justify a small range increase for a 50% heat increase (there's also the CB cost, and the BV cost to consider too) considering that PPC is one of the best range weapons out there.

Medium lasers have short range and small lasers have even shorter range (and are of course the most efficient). To upgrade to the large laser from the medium you lose a lot of heat efficiency but gain a lot of range and a little damage. The only way balance is going to be achieved for the PPC is with the minimum range requirement when compared to the rest of the energy line. When you consider the numbers on the weapons, the Assault video featuring a PPC catapult and the previous dev response there is no question in my mind that the PPC must have a minimum range gap.

No one has mentioned the illegitimate laser child..... the large pulse laser. I didn't cover them because they are extremely inefficient. These guys need some serious balancing help just from the numbers perspective (maybe they'll get balance in their cycle rate). If you consider upgrading to Large Pulse Lasers from Large Lasers you notice that you lose all but 30m of range advantage you achieved with the LL and only gain 1 damage for 2 increased heat (bringing it the same heat as a PPC but with 1 less damage). Did I mention that the LPL weighs as much as the PPC? If the weight wasn't the same as a PPC then I could maybe consider using them; I realize that would go against canon but overall game balance is the better consideration.

Edited by Glythe, 08 July 2012 - 03:38 PM.

[Xandre Blackheart]

Yes that sounds about right.

I do agree that a minimum range restriction on the PPC is a good idea from a balance perspective, from an efficiency/tactical standpoint it is less critical since there are ways to mitigate it. - such as 4 small lasers for 2 tons - they cover the range gap nicely and even more efficiently. Of course it's 2 more tons, but range is an important tactical consideration you have to pay for.

For some people the extra 90m range is going to be worth that extra 2 tons of small lasers per PPC to cover the gap. For some they'll pick the ERPPC and argue that it's worth the extra heat and the bonus of no gap. I still think that Large Lasers are the best compromise (more efficient - just as or more tactically expedient).

I also agree that pulse versions are trash the way they are currently in TT.

Edited by Xandre Blackheart, 08 July 2012 - 03:51 PM.

[Sept Wolfke]

Xandre Blackheart, on 08 July 2012 - 01:40 PM, said:

I don't even know if double heatsinks are in the game at this point BTW, but I'm not sure that changes the issue even if they are.

double heatsinks are one of the core pieces of advanced tech, I'd say it's safe to plan for them being in the game.

[Xandre Blackheart]

Sept Wolfke, on 08 July 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

double heatsinks are one of the core pieces of advanced tech, I'd say it's safe to plan for them being in the game.

Apparently they are, see above posts. Which means I am going to be a large laser foo!

[Otto Cannon]

I've always found PPC's to be a more interesting and tempting choice when designing a mech build for someone else to use, but when it comes to the harsh practicalities of what I choose to take into a fight the large laser wins every time.

Unless the PPC looks and feels irresistibly amazing to use in this game I'll probably still stick to my beloved lasers.

[Glythe]

Now before we go and decide that the PPC is garbage.... do yourself a favor and watch the Assault developer video (skip to the middle). The Catapult hits the Atlas with PPC and physically rocks his mech. I can only assume they have decided that in MWO the disruption effect (from the lore) will hinder an opponent's aim when they are hit with PPC.

PPC isn't my style as I dislike weapons with big limitations (like a 90m minimum range). And while I prefer the LL it certainly has its drawbacks too... namely that 4 ML should win over 2 LL and 2 ML in an Atlas fight at close range (all else being equal).

[Xandre Blackheart]

I've stated several times it's likely to be a superior weapon in certain circumstances. Particularly in circumstances involving, say a 460m chasm.

I would never say the PPC is garbage. It's not like it's a large pulse laser or anything....


And for your example of 4 ML, yes but at 90m 8 SL are going to trounce 4 ML. It is of course a tradeoff for range. But at some point the benefits of range become vanishingly small for the heat and weight involved.

Edited by Xandre Blackheart, 08 July 2012 - 04:23 PM.

[Glythe]

Xandre Blackheart, on 08 July 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

And for your example of 4 ML, yes but at 90m 8 SL are going to trounce 4 ML. It is of course a tradeoff for range. But at some point the benefits of range become vanishingly small for the heat and weight involved.

Well we don't know at exactly what range lasers do optimal damage. At their extreme range it might be the cast that 8 SL will still lose to 4 ML.

What are you piloting that has 8 laser mounts? I can only assume you mean a swayback. What beats 8 SL? The answer is of course 8 ML!

[Xandre Blackheart]

Glythe, on 08 July 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

What are you piloting that has 8 laser mounts? I can only assume you mean a swayback. What beats 8 SL? The answer is of course 8 ML!

Well that's where the hardpoint limitations come in. To prevent boating. Otherwise we'd all be rockign small lasers.

Because 8 SL vs 8 ML?

8 SL - 4 tons for 24 damage at 8 heat
8 ML - 8 tons for 40 damage at 24 heat

Include your heat sink tonnage and it's 12 tons for 24 damage vs 26 tons for 40 damage

which comes out to .5 damage to weight for SL vs .65 damage to weight for ML (efficiency measurement, the closer to zero you are the more efficient you are) - i other words 2 damage per ton of SL vs 1.5 damage per ton of ML.

Or to illustrate it more clearly, I can get 24 tons of small lasers w/heatsinks for 48 damage Vs 26 tons of medium lasers w/heatsinks for 40 damage and have 2 tons left over for armor.

Which is why it's good that range is a consideration and also why we have to have hardpoints, Because range is not THAT much of a consideration if you can close quickly enough. I'd do it if hardpoints allowed it.

[light487]

Good thread.. I enjoyed the reading

[Butane9000]

Did you also factor in that PPC's can do electrical damage to the mech itself. Specifically send surges through the cockpit jamming screens for a bit?

[Jakob Knight]

Well, the reason the PPC was seen as a better weapon in the TT setup was that it was capable of decapitating any mech if it hit the cockpit/head. The extra damage was enough to break through the head armor, whereas the LL would not. Other than the AC/20 and AC/10 weapons (and later the Gauss Rifle), this was the only other weapon that could do that.

However, with the doubling of armor I've heard about, this is likely not going to be the case in MWO. And, until we see how Large Lasers and Pulse Lasers perform, we won't really be able to tell if the PPC is going to have a solid reason for being favored.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 08 July 2012 - 07:21 PM.

[Damion Sparhawk]

Jakob Knight, on 08 July 2012 - 07:19 PM, said:

Well, the reason the PPC was seen as a better weapon in the TT setup was that it was capable of decapitating any mech if it hit the cockpit/head. The extra damage was enough to break through the head armor, whereas the LL would not. Other than the AC/20 and AC/10 weapons (and later the Gauss Rifle), this was the only other weapon that could do that.

However, with the doubling of armor I've heard about, this is likely not going to be the case in MWO. And, until we see how Large Lasers and Pulse Lasers perform, we won't really be able to tell if the PPC is going to have a solid reason for being favored.

yeah personally while I like having 'weak points' on mechs for the sake of being able to make those epic shots, I don't think you should ever be able to one shot a mech without nearly a full alpha strike hitting an achile's heel.

[HANGMAN1962]

well as devs have pointed out that a ballistic hardpoint w/ac2 can be replaced w/a guass or ac20 then it stands to reason a med laser can be replaced w/a ppc.
why have a methude work for missile and guns but not energy weapons?!
a ppc will do dmg to 1 location same as an ac10.
ppc's down side is/was min range and longer reload the large laser.
l.lasers are beter for lite/med mechs as thay gen. less heat,wiegh less and take less space.
the choice for ll or ppc is more about heat and wieght/space then the dmg output.
a laser do's dmg be a continuos burn,a ppc is a lightning stroke and how long do's it take for a lightning bolt to travel miles of distence?!
a hartbeat or less!
16 heat for 2 ll's is more manegable then 20 heat for 2 ppcs especiully w/single heatsinks.
and this is why lits meds used LL's over ppcs.
when clans come into play you'll want the ppc's over LL's cus you'll need them!

[Akaryu]

the large laser is the better of the two for drawn out battles as a human opponent unless they are incompetent wont go down easily like an ai.

[Damion Sparhawk]

as for the decision whether to go PPC or LL, I think generally it's going to be determined by your loadout, if you're building a mech to be a brawler and let's say you're focusing on heavy hitting weapons, so you pack a couple AC/20 and a couple tons of ammo, you've still got the base 10 heatsinks, why not throw an ERPPC for the difference in heat? would give you a heavy shooting weapon with some serious range that could also punch up close.
also, I rather like the Large Pulse Laser quite a bit, I frequently load it out on light/medium mechs as my energy weapon of choice, why? simple. decent range, reasonable damage, rapid cooldown and no ammo, considering my shadowcat was often rocking an LBX AC/20 and an SRM pack besides once I'd gone through my ammo (presuming I lived that long) I could still pop some shots, the extra heat was negligeable since I didn't have anything else generating heat and there's not a lot of weapon slots on that small a mech so it's not like I could've loaded down on anything else. Sure it's not the most efficient point for point, but for what I needed it for it was perfect.

[Calisrue]

Okay i'm a noob in this regard. I've played alot of the PCs games m2t through 4 and it just seemed beyond pure dmg potential, ppcs did a little bit more imparting heat and maybe carrythrough damage is there with other beam weapons but it just felt what i was doing was splashier with a ppc... maybe it was just the graphics (and i'm not sure if there was any knockback factor)

All this being said the new ppcs will be completely different in a balance sense from old ppcs vs large lasers because of dmg over time targeting with lasers.. so we'll have to see how that rolls

[Starne]

Now, this will depending how PPCs work in the game. Personally my money is on them functioning like autocannons than lasers, but who knows..

As we've seen in the videos, Lasers deal their damage of the course of a few seconds, and that damage can be spread out across the target. If PPCs function like they do in MWLL(for example), then they deal all of their potential damage at once, and to a single location on the target. With a laser, some of the potential damage can be mitigated(spread out across multiple hit locations, or even some of it lost if the laser wanders off target) if the shooter doesn't keep their aim steady for the duration of the firing. With a PPC, you shoot, and if it connects, you deal full damage to whatever part of the target the shot struck.

Personally, I'm a fan of Energy weapons of all types.

Edited by Starne, 08 July 2012 - 08:06 PM.