36 replies to this topic

[Wild_Alaskan]

PerfectDuck, on 12 December 2015 - 01:30 AM, said:

Spoiler

Context: Counter-Attack mode, with us defending Omega. Seismic was detected around the open Beta Gate where we grouped up. Our whole team pushed out immediately behind my Atlas. Masakari, cauldron-borns and madcats among other rabble were taken down

It's a lot easier to spearhead a push when you know you have people like pwn and Philly behind you

[DaFrog]

PerfectDuck, on 12 December 2015 - 03:17 AM, said:

Since you brought up the vomit cauldron, let's compare it to a similar IS counterpart
For below stats, "Fast Fire", cooldown modules and double basics are applied


EBJ-A 2C-LPL 4C-ERML
EBJ-A

For simplicity, C-ERML will wait slightly to fire synchronous to C-LPL
C-ERML With Module: fires every 3.64s
C-LPL With Module: fires every 3.82s

EBJ Heat Dissipation: 4.89 heat/s
EBJ Heat Capacity: 79.80

Full volley: (2x C-LPL + 4x C-ERML): 44.0 heat cost, 54 damage
Heat recovered before next volley (3.82s): 18.68
Heat recovery vs cost (aka "Cooling Efficiency"): 42.5%

Heat Simulation
0.00s 1st Volley: 44.00/79.80: 55%
3.82s 2nd Volley: 69.32/79.80: 86%
7.64s 3rd Volley: 94.64/79.80: 119% (Overheat) (by 8.79s, 162 damage dealt)

Ultimate sustainable DPS: 6.357 (derived from dmg-to-heat ratios and dissipation)



TDR-5SS 2LPL 5ML
TDR-5SS

For Simplicity, LPL will wait slightly to fire synchronous to ML
ML With Module: fires every 2.94s
LPL With Module: fires every 2.88s

TDR Heat Dissipation: 3.59 heat/s
TDR Heat Capacity: 74.40

Full volley: (2x LPL + 5x ML): 28.9 heat cost, 47 damage
Heat recovered before next volley (2.94s): 10.55
Heat recovery vs cost (aka "Cooling Efficiency"): 36.5%

Heat Simulation
0.00s 1st Volley: 28.9/74.40: 39%
2.94s 2nd Volley: 47.25/74.40: 64%
5.88s 3rd Volley: 65.6/74.40: 88%
8.82s 4th Volley: 83.95/74.40: 112% (Overheat) (By 9.72s, 188 damage dealt)

Ultimate sustainable DPS: 6.63 (derived from dmg-to-heat ratios and dissipation)


Similarities? Differences?



If by 'before it overheats' you mean it waits a little while between shots then maybe... my example opted for max heat sinks instead of 6erml

You forgot the range advantage. Strike one, swing again.

[PerfectDuck]

DaFrog, on 12 December 2015 - 08:44 PM, said:

You forgot the range advantage. Strike one, swing again.

The whole point of that exercise was to debunk the clans-so-op claim that an ERML-based EBJ can core out a king crab without overheating.

Advantage at range is countered by push-based tactics, and pugs lack this crucial counter thus they lost Tukayyid for IS. If the event was unit-based play only I'd have put my money on IS winning.

[Ihasa]

My take on the stats is that a whole bunch of people played over a whole lot of little time, but probably not quite as many put in 36 hour days, or took off a day from work, or "forgot" to shower or supported their local paraphernalia store in some different way.

Well there's that, and that these stats are pretty much overly generalizing superlatively vague trends that they mean pretty much nothing to anyone except PGi who will interpret them anyway they deem "fit".

Edited by Ihasa, 13 December 2015 - 12:00 AM.

[LeeNTien]

Dominuus, on 12 December 2015 - 03:34 AM, said:

As the numbers were as nearly even as the stats show, why did the IS queue take so long to make a match.

63 battlegrounds, a battle was launched as soon as the ground for it cleared. Clans had less people, so, less groups were waiting for a battleground to clear for a drop, while more IS meant more groups waiting. The only way to drop faster would be having 20 or so more battlegrounds on the planet. Or having less IS. More clans would not change a thing for IS, just make it as long for the clans as well.

[Adamski]

LeeNTien, on 13 December 2015 - 02:25 AM, said:

63 battlegrounds, a battle was launched as soon as the ground for it cleared. Clans had less people, so, less groups were waiting for a battleground to clear for a drop, while more IS meant more groups waiting. The only way to drop faster would be having 20 or so more battlegrounds on the planet. Or having less IS. More clans would not change a thing for IS, just make it as long for the clans as well.

The population imbalance was cut in half compared to the last event, as shown in the OP. If PGI was really interested in solving it, they would reduce the redicu-*******-lous 3 day cooldown on switching contracts down to 4-8 hours, and give players the info they need to see which factions need boosting.

Since PGI now has a Player Skill Rating system, I'm eager to see average PSR of the different factions and what impact that has on performance.

[Jon Gotham]

PerfectDuck, on 12 December 2015 - 02:03 PM, said:

This is exactly what I wanted someone else to say. Thunderbolt is vastly better at protecting its CT, turning torso sideways is a good approach option while the Ebon doesn't really stand a chance of doing that at all. Another TDR variant has shorter beam duration and is probably better for this build while the 5SS should probably boat Medium Pulses. I'm all for humiliating shamefur cranners but I'm not going to stand around throwing B.S. to imply their mechs are vastly overpowered or something. IS mechs are better for brawling! Night's Scorn has been on both sides of this. Myself and several others longed dearly to have good brawl mechs once again when we were with the clans. We *love* pushing into clan groups with our brawl decks, the CW maps have lots of cover, valleys and chokes to make it doable, and doing precisely that is how we got this "IS Exemplar" badge thingy. With all these structure quirks, you just have to have a pair and be willing to take damage for your team, which pugs are always too afraid to do. When IS mechs are used properly, best the clan-mechs can do is use superior speed to run away and abandon rest of team. Ha ha ha.

This folks is the bare facts. I've been occasionally with NS when we have done this, this was pre nerfs btw. The clanners just can't hold a close brawly fight, they overheat too fast and spread damage too much, plus most of the time our brawl waves were simply tougher on a mech to mech basis..HOW are peeps still claiming IS UP? I've been on both clan and IS and can only 100% concur with Perfectduck here.
Facts are facts. Balance isn't where it should be yet.

[PerfectDuck]

Adamski, on 13 December 2015 - 11:01 AM, said:

Since PGI now has a Player Skill Rating system, I'm eager to see average PSR of the different factions and what impact that has on performance.

I'm barely even rank 3.. CW is all I ever do and we have many pilots like that who have wanted to join my unit specifically because they're interested in CW gamemode mainly.

[Lily from animove]

Adamski, on 12 December 2015 - 02:06 AM, said:

Sorry, all the heatsinks that were changed got an 8% increase in dissipation.

No your math is totally wrong. Only external DHS changed, the first internals stay with the true dub behavior, so a mech with 14 DHS and 10 internals have not gotten 8% dissipation buff. its a lot less. And on a light fielding 8+2 its also not 8%

example:

10+2 config:

before change: 20+2,8 dissipation = 22,8
after change: 20+3 dissipation = 23
thats a delta of 0,2 heat which is 0.88% of the former 22.8 increased heatdissipation.
Ontop the ST loss nerf means that most clanners will have a reduced dissipation making them have less heatdissipation for the time with a ST lost.

above calculation does not include pilot skill tree values, but they are not changing anything dramatic.

kamiko kross, on 14 December 2015 - 08:54 AM, said:

This folks is the bare facts. I've been occasionally with NS when we have done this, this was pre nerfs btw. The clanners just can't hold a close brawly fight, they overheat too fast and spread damage too much, plus most of the time our brawl waves were simply tougher on a mech to mech basis..HOW are peeps still claiming IS UP? I've been on both clan and IS and can only 100% concur with Perfectduck here.
Facts are facts. Balance isn't where it should be yet.

because "people" still do not twist and people still do poke-battles vs the clanners. They can't use the strength their mechs offers.

Edited by Lily from animove, 16 December 2015 - 05:55 AM.

[Adamski]

I specifically said the heatsinks that were changed got a 8% buff in dissipation.

[Lily from animove]

Adamski, on 16 December 2015 - 06:00 AM, said:

I specifically said the heatsinks that were changed got a 8% buff in dissipation.

yes but how makes it sense that clanners make 10% more damage due to changes between 1% and 1,5% better heat dissipation?

that was a complete nonsense conclusion

Edited by Lily from animove, 17 December 2015 - 04:14 AM.

[Murphy7]

Quote

Advantage at range is countered by push-based tactics, and pugs lack this crucial counter thus they lost Tukayyid for IS. If the event was unit-based play only I'd have put my money on IS winning

If the event were unit based only, I wonder if the distribution of units would have been more even across the factions.

On a different note, how cool would it be if for an even they had a units only CW, with something else strictly for unaffiliated player in the public queues?

[PerfectDuck]

Murphy7, on 16 December 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

If the event were unit based only, I wonder if the distribution of units would have been more even across the factions.

On a different note, how cool would it be if for an even they had a units only CW, with something else strictly for unaffiliated player in the public queues?

Early on in development I remember them considering merc units getting their own planets and being their own factions. You can still see on the map now all the neutral border worlds that were put in toward this end but 10 factions is already probably too many and the population can't support even more so it was decided not.

[Agent1190]

I wonder if it's possible to see the matches broken down into group sizes. How many IS/Clan matches were conducted by 12-mans, 12-solos, etc. It would account for disparity in Victory/Loss numbers if one side had more coordination than the other.

None of these numbers mean clans/IS are less balanced. You can't balance "coordinated team vs. baby seals," you can't balance "veteran vs. noob."

[Murphy7]

Quote

I wonder if it's possible to see the matches broken down into group sizes. How many IS/Clan matches were conducted by 12-mans, 12-solos, etc. It would account for disparity in Victory/Loss numbers if one side had more coordination than the other.

None of these numbers mean clans/IS are less balanced. You can't balance "coordinated team vs. baby seals," you can't balance "veteran vs. noob."

Very true. Although in the coordination picture, you can get smaller groups amongst skittles, and I would be interested in the win rates for one side based on the largest group in the one side. For example, a group with an 8-man and a 4-man, a group with an 8 man and two duos, a group with an 8 man and 4 solos - would all three be counted as "8-man" teams for purposes of determining a winning percentage.

On the one hand, That kind of parsing would create a 12x12 grid of winning percentages, honestly, but there are some things that would fall out and would be useful for the community to know as a whole. Our assumptions based on our own anecdotal experienced evidence is that:

Grouping is stronger than playing solo
Coordination is OP
Larger groups naturally have an advantage

But I do wonder where the breaking point is - 8 man, 9 man - is there a strong uptick once you have a full lance working together, etc.

[pwnface]

PerfectDuck, on 12 December 2015 - 03:17 AM, said:

Since you brought up the vomit cauldron, let's compare it to a similar IS counterpart
For below stats, "Fast Fire", cooldown modules and double basics are applied


EBJ-A 2C-LPL 4C-ERML
EBJ-A

For simplicity, C-ERML will wait slightly to fire synchronous to C-LPL
C-ERML With Module: fires every 3.64s
C-LPL With Module: fires every 3.82s

EBJ Heat Dissipation: 4.89 heat/s
EBJ Heat Capacity: 79.80

Full volley: (2x C-LPL + 4x C-ERML): 44.0 heat cost, 54 damage
Heat recovered before next volley (3.82s): 18.68
Heat recovery vs cost (aka "Cooling Efficiency"): 42.5%

Heat Simulation
0.00s 1st Volley: 44.00/79.80: 55%
3.82s 2nd Volley: 69.32/79.80: 86%
7.64s 3rd Volley: 94.64/79.80: 119% (Overheat) (by 8.79s, 162 damage dealt)

Ultimate sustainable DPS: 6.357 (derived from dmg-to-heat ratios and dissipation)



TDR-5SS 2LPL 5ML
TDR-5SS

For Simplicity, LPL will wait slightly to fire synchronous to ML
ML With Module: fires every 2.94s
LPL With Module: fires every 2.88s

TDR Heat Dissipation: 3.59 heat/s
TDR Heat Capacity: 74.40

Full volley: (2x LPL + 5x ML): 28.9 heat cost, 47 damage
Heat recovered before next volley (2.94s): 10.55
Heat recovery vs cost (aka "Cooling Efficiency"): 36.5%

Heat Simulation
0.00s 1st Volley: 28.9/74.40: 39%
2.94s 2nd Volley: 47.25/74.40: 64%
5.88s 3rd Volley: 65.6/74.40: 88%
8.82s 4th Volley: 83.95/74.40: 112% (Overheat) (By 9.72s, 188 damage dealt)

Ultimate sustainable DPS: 6.63 (derived from dmg-to-heat ratios and dissipation)

Similarities? Differences?

Duck, a better comparison would be with the BL-KNT, the premier IS laser vomit heavy.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...d450266fe07ebca

[Jon Gotham]

Also on that comparison..something that can't be factored in really is the fact the Tbolt's weapon delivery is near pinpoint, the EBJ's isn't. Assuming basic defensive twisting the EBJ falls even further behind as it's damage gets spread thinner and thinner whereas the Tbolt's goes pretty much where it's aimed.
My mantra of EFFECTIVE/EFFICIENT damage, the thing the Sphere tech is king at.