Jump to content

Laser Minimum Range Concept!(With Picture) Poll!


11 replies to this topic

Poll: Laser Minimum Range Concept!(With Picture) Poll! (35 member(s) have cast votes)

Could this Help Decrease High Laser Alphas and give All Lasers their Place?

  1. Yes! (11 votes [31.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.43%

  2. No! (24 votes [68.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 68.57%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Andi Nagasia

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,982 posts

Posted 05 November 2015 - 03:46 PM

many have said it, and many are on both sides,
but their usually isnt a Table or Graph, so i made one!

View PostAndi Nagasia, on 20 October 2015 - 08:07 PM, said:

Posted Image
Vertical Numbers are Damage, Horizontal Numbers is Range,

-Notes-
this is Just a Basic Idea about How Laser Min Range could work,
Some Have Expressed perhaps they should do Half Damage at 0m not 0,
that could also work as this Topic is just to Discuss Laser Min Range Viability,

-Discussion Topic-
(Laser Minimum Range Concept! With Picture! Discussion!)


Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

Edit- Link

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 05 November 2015 - 03:50 PM.


#2 Greyhart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 894 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 06 November 2015 - 02:38 AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Yes! It's simple elegant and should be easier to balance.

#3 zachyattacky

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Bold
  • The Bold
  • 36 posts
  • LocationMn

Posted 28 June 2016 - 06:37 AM

I like it, it would help with more diverse builds, a reason to carry more than one type of laser. I think that heat (maybe not so much) and damage might have to be adjusted slightly, maybe an extra point of damage at the optimal range or something just to make up for the loss of dps elsewhere.

#4 Kalimaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,811 posts
  • LocationInside the Mech that just fired LRM's at you

Posted 29 June 2016 - 03:38 PM

I say they are fine as is. While you may think that the heat is really at the end of a blowtorch, they cut better when pressing up against something.

#5 Kael Posavatz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 971 posts
  • LocationOn a quest to find the Star League

Posted 05 July 2016 - 08:13 AM

There are two issues, the first is the high alpha meta, the second is the need to balance the same set of core assets for two very different games.

This attempts to address the first, without considering the second.

In QP, the mixed-tech teams allow Clan Mechs to augment the weaknesses of their team's IS mechs, while the same team's IS mechs cover the weaknesses of the Clan Mechs. The maps are open enough that a team dominated by Clan-tech players (note, dominance does not mean most populous, but that these are the players driving the action) can use speed to keep the range open (two strengths of Clans), whereas a team that is IS dominant can use the cover of their clan tech to close to brawl-range where shorter beam durations and pin-point ballistics give them an edge.

In FP you have pure tech teams, which means neither side is able to use the other's strengths to cover their own weaknesses. Theoretically, this means each side should play to their strengths while guarding their weaknesses. Unfortunately, that is not what you get. Initial point of contact is often less than 400 meters, and time to close is less than five seconds. An IS team that is aggressively handled thus finds it fairly easy to get into their optimal range, while a Clan team has a hard time keeping the IS at theirs.

Furthermore, many of the FP maps have significant terrain features that tend to force close-range battles. Bunkering the O-gens was done to obviate against the light-rush tactic that both sides were sort of employing at the time. But this also had the effect of making the objective area more constricted.

As a result, in 'Attack' the terrain, close objectives, turrets, and need to address objectives, is weighted towards the defenders. The terrain features of most maps favor IS defense over a Clan defense. Vitric Forge and Emerald Taiga, both of which necessitate a brawl unless the IS team allows itself to be drawn into a less-than-optimal engagement, flat-out favor IS in any mode over the Clans. Notably, Grim Portico is open enough once past the gateway-chokepoint that attacker/defender are on a much more equal footing and often comes down to who has the better coordination (the Clans to keep IS at range by maneuvering and concentrating fire in chokepoints, or IS to hammer through chokepoints to close range) with the winner most often ending with a one wave advantage.

In counter-attack, the exposed nature of Omega is such that offensive units can engage it, and once ahead on kills, pull back to their side of the gates where the terrain usually favors a long-range engagement (in this scenario, Boreal, Sulfurous, and Hellebore become straight-up long-range duels that favor clans, while Portico, Forge, and Taiga are maneuvering free-for-alls where coordination trumps range or firepower).

#6 Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,187 posts

Posted 05 July 2016 - 10:48 AM

Please no! Stop nerfing things! Stop adding weird non-BT TT mechanics!

If you want longer TTK, you need to give incentive to other weapon systems.

Make PPFLD weapons better! PPC weapons need to be better. People complain about the poptart era, but TTK during those times made much longer matches! Most mechs were doing only 25 or 35 point alphas at much longer intervals. There was much more strategic game play back then! Where teams would try to out manuever each other, where flanks mattered, and brawling was much more fun because assaults and heavies didnt just get insta-jibbed when they crested over saddle.

But as it stands now, there is very little incentive to play PPFLD sniper mechs for anyone not sitting at the top tier of players. Now, many snipers just choose to boat ER LL. Make more weapons viable to improve diversity in game play!

Anyway, please no more nerfs!

#7 Greyhart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 894 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 22 August 2016 - 05:28 AM

if people want mixed load outs the minimum range idea is simplest and easiest understood way of doing it.

It's about trade offs you want to sit and snipe then you can but you will need something else for close encounters.

The game will always be about most damage to one spot in the minimum amount of time. heat between 0-99 is meaningless as there is no penalty and if you're hiding behind a rock all you have to do it wait a second or 2 more.

#8 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 518 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 26 August 2016 - 10:48 PM

yes lets have a total detachment from physics shall we ....

#9 Andi Nagasia

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,982 posts

Posted 15 September 2016 - 06:25 PM

View PostNARC BAIT, on 26 August 2016 - 10:48 PM, said:

yes lets have a total detachment from physics shall we ....

so in real life to Lasers stop after a certain amount? dont you still have to Focus them?
so if they are Focused for a certain range, wouldnt everything before and after that point be less effective?
(id like to know, im not a Physics major, and though i know alot about Science lasers arnt my strong point)

#10 MarsThunder

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 237 posts
  • LocationRussia, Moscow

Posted 16 September 2016 - 06:14 AM

The real lasers have no focusing range. A laser has maximum effectiveness at zero distance.
Effectiveness of laser degrades with distance due to dispersion on the fog and/or particles in air.
There are some other causes of laser effectiveness degradation but they have less contribution.

PS. Sorry for my bad english.

Edited by MarsThunder, 16 September 2016 - 06:15 AM.


#11 Andi Nagasia

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,982 posts

Posted 16 September 2016 - 12:18 PM

View PostMarsThunder, on 16 September 2016 - 06:14 AM, said:

The real lasers have no focusing range. A laser has maximum effectiveness at zero distance.
Effectiveness of laser degrades with distance due to dispersion on the fog and/or particles in air.
There are some other causes of laser effectiveness degradation but they have less contribution.

PS. Sorry for my bad english.

so particle lasers not Light Based Lasers? which does BattleTech have?
(i ask as im not sure the Exact Physics behind the BattleTech Universe)

#12 MarsThunder

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 237 posts
  • LocationRussia, Moscow

Posted 16 September 2016 - 01:36 PM

View PostAndi Nagasia, on 16 September 2016 - 12:18 PM, said:

so particle lasers not Light Based Lasers? which does BattleTech have?
(i ask as im not sure the Exact Physics behind the BattleTech Universe)

Sorry for telling not clear enough.
Lasers are always "light based": _L_ight _A_mplification by _S_timulated _E_mission of _R_adiation.
I have meant that some tiny hard particles in the air (smoke, for example) cause laser light to weaken.
Also the fog does the same.

Edited by MarsThunder, 16 September 2016 - 01:37 PM.






4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users