482 replies to this topic

[Strum Wealh]

IMO, what it would take to really "fix" the PPC family would entail drastic changes to other areas of the game for multiple weapon systems, so it is unlikely that the PPC family will ever truly be "fixed".

As far as (more) "quick-and-dirty" adjustments go:

• I agree with restoring the PPC minimum range to the original linear fall-off from 10 damage at 90 meters to 0 damage at 0 meters.
  
• I agree with a projectile speed increase across the board for the IS ER-PPC and the Clan ER-PPC, but not the Standard PPC.
  
• I disagree with with lowering the per-salvo heat generation of any member of the PPC family, as high per-salvo heat is one of the main limiters mitigating the combat effectiveness of massed PPCs on a single chassis - Standard PPCs should stay at 10 heat per salvo & ER-PPCs should stay at 15 heat per salvo.

For the IS ballistic weapons, the time-to-optimal range is generally between 0.35 and 0.55 seconds (0.47s for the AC/10, 0.36s for the AC/2, 0.42s for the AC/20, 0.54s for the AC/5, 0.33s for the Gauss Rifle, 0.49s for the LB 10-X, and 0.52s for the UAC/5).
For the Standard PPC, the time-to-optimal range is 0.49 seconds (as the Standard PPC has the same optimal range (540 meters) and the same projectile speed (1100 m/s) as the LB 10-X). However, the time-to-optimal range for the IS ER-PPC (and the Clan ER-PPC, which shares the same optimal range and projectile speed) is 0.68 seconds.

IMO, this is why so many people complain about the ER-PPC "bring unusable at its optimal range" - it takes between 25% and 88% more time for an ER-PPC bolt to travel out to its optimal range than it does for the Standard PPC bolt, AC shells, and Gauss Rifle slugs to do likewise.
In order to being the ER-PPCs in-line with these other weapons, the ER-PPC bolt speed would have to be increased to 1650 m/s. This would give the ER-PPC bolts a time-to-optimal range of 0.49 seconds - the same as that of the Standard PPCs.
If that is judged to be too much, setting the ER-PPC bolt speed to 1500 m/s would give it a time-to-optimal range of 0.54 seconds - identical to that of the AC/5 (the longest time-to-optimal among the IS ballistics).

Making only these changes (restoration of the Standard PPC linear drop-off, and increasing the ER-PPC projectile speed to 1500-1650 m/s) should, IMO, make the weapons more effective in-game without pushing the pendulum too far in the other direction and bringing about a new "PPC-vomit"/"lightning-vomit" era.

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 24 December 2015 - 12:40 PM, said:

IMO, what it would take to really "fix" the PPC family would entail drastic changes to other areas of the game for multiple weapon systems, so it is unlikely that the PPC family will ever truly be "fixed".

As far as (more) "quick-and-dirty" adjustments go:

• I agree with restoring the PPC minimum range to the original linear fall-off from 10 damage at 90 meters to 0 damage at 0 meters.
  
• I agree with a projectile speed increase across the board for the IS ER-PPC and the Clan ER-PPC, but not the Standard PPC.
  
• I disagree with with lowering the per-salvo heat generation of any member of the PPC family, as high per-salvo heat is one of the main limiters mitigating the combat effectiveness of massed PPCs on a single chassis - Standard PPCs should stay at 10 heat per salvo & ER-PPCs should stay at 15 heat per salvo.

For the IS ballistic weapons, the time-to-optimal range is generally between 0.35 and 0.55 seconds (0.47s for the AC/10, 0.36s for the AC/2, 0.42s for the AC/20, 0.54s for the AC/5, 0.33s for the Gauss Rifle, 0.49s for the LB 10-X, and 0.52s for the UAC/5).
For the Standard PPC, the time-to-optimal range is 0.49 seconds (as the Standard PPC has the same optimal range (540 meters) and the same projectile speed (1100 m/s) as the LB 10-X). However, the time-to-optimal range for the IS ER-PPC (and the Clan ER-PPC, which shares the same optimal range and projectile speed) is 0.68 seconds.

IMO, this is why so many people complain about the ER-PPC "bring unusable at its optimal range" - it takes between 25% and 88% more time for an ER-PPC bolt to travel out to its optimal range than it does for the Standard PPC bolt, AC shells, and Gauss Rifle slugs to do likewise.
In order to being the ER-PPCs in-line with these other weapons, the ER-PPC bolt speed would have to be increased to 1650 m/s. This would give the ER-PPC bolts a time-to-optimal range of 0.49 seconds - the same as that of the Standard PPCs.
If that is judged to be too much, setting the ER-PPC bolt speed to 1500 m/s would give it a time-to-optimal range of 0.54 seconds - identical to that of the AC/5 (the longest time-to-optimal among the IS ballistics).

Making only these changes (restoration of the Standard PPC linear drop-off, and increasing the ER-PPC projectile speed to 1500-1650 m/s) should, IMO, make the weapons more effective in-game without pushing the pendulum too far in the other direction and bringing about a new "PPC-vomit"/"lightning-vomit" era.

Heat IS a mitigating factor, but with PGIs implementation of Heat Scale, perhaps too much of one, which is Why I recommended basically a 1 pt drop across the board. Seems minor on the surface, but does add up.

[Quaamik]

Most of us on this thread seem to agree that the current PPC / ERPPC / C-ERPPC are all sub standard. They are ineffective compared to lasers or other comparable weapons and in need of some loving. So lets start again with where they are:

_________dmg_/_heat_/_cycle_/_speed___/_range_/_max range_/_impulse_/__special
PPC______10__/_10__/__4s__/_1100mps_/__540__/__1080____/__0.03___/_no damage under 90 m
ERPPC____10__/_15__/__4s__/_1200mps_/__810__/__1620____/__0.03__/_(none)
C- ERPPC_15*__/_15__/__4s__/_1200mps_/__810__/__1620____/__0.03__/_splash damage(10+2.5+2.5)
All disable ECM for 4 s.

Now since we agree that they are broken at these figures, changing them to be better than ANY of these figures would not result in armagedon. So while making ER PPCs duplicate C-ERPPCs might not be good for overall game balance between IS and Clan, it also would not make IS ERPPCs overpowered.

Also, from the comments made here, we would all like to see other auxillery effects. We just seem divided as to whether those effects (like knocking out ECM) would really effect "balance" or would just add flavor.

So what about his:

_________dmg_/_heat_/_cycle_/_speed__/_range_/_max range_/_impulse_/__special
PPC______10*_/__9__/__4s__/_1300mps_/_540__/__1080____/__0.03__/_splash damage(8+1+1)
ERPPC___13*_/__13_/__4s__/_1300mps_/_810__/__1620____/__0.03___/_splash damage(9+2+2)
C- ERPPC_16*_/__15_/__4s__/_1300mps_/_810__/__1620____/__0.03__/_splash damage(10+3+3)
All disable ECM for 4 s, all knock off target lock for 1 s, all make HUD shake / fizzle*.

Note that from a game I was in last night, it appears as if the HUD fizzle may already be in game.

PPC vs ERPPC: lower heat, shorter range, vs higher damage longer range & higher heat.

At 1300 mps, it would be 0.41 seconds to ideal range for a PPC and 0.62 seconds to ideal range for ERPPCs or C-ERPPCs.

Edited by Quaamik, 24 December 2015 - 01:02 PM.

[Quaamik]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 December 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

Heat IS a mitigating factor, but with PGIs implementation of Heat Scale, perhaps too much of one, which is Why I recommended basically a 1 pt drop across the board. Seems minor on the surface, but does add up.

I agree.

Currently, alpha strikes rule the day. It takes some skill to manage a weapon that cannot effectively alpha with more than one other weapon. Which s why you see a preponderance of small and medium laser builds, as well as more large laser builds on the IS side than the clan side. None of the changes suggested here would affect that. There would still be the same atrocious ghost heat penalties for 3 PPCs / ERPPCs / c-ERPPCs as before.

However, the lower per weapon heat would allow cycling them sooner after one another, and cycling more of them before hitting max heat.

If there s a real fear of them being paired with Gauss, then add Gauss into the PPC group for ghost heat. It shouldn't affect Gauss alone (I have yet to see a 3 Gauss build) but it would prevent the from being paired as 2 PPC / 1 Gauss or 2 Gauss / 1 PPC.

Edited by Quaamik, 24 December 2015 - 01:16 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quaamik, on 24 December 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

I agree.

Currently, alpha strikes rule the day. It takes some skill to manage a weapon that cannot effectively alpha with more than one other weapon. Which s why you see a preponderance of small and medium laser builds, as well as more large laser builds on the IS side than the clan side. None of the changes suggested here would affect that. There would still be the same atrocious ghost heat penalties for 3 PPCs / ERPPCs / c-ERPPCs as before.

However, the lower per weapon heat would allow cycling them sooner after one another, and cycling more of them before hitting max heat.

If there s a real fear of them being paired with Gauss, then add Gauss into the PPC group for ghost heat. It shouldn't affect Gauss alone (I have yet to see a 3 Gauss build) but it would prevent the from being paired as 2 PPC / 1 Gauss or 2 Gauss / 1 PPC.

actually, I feel the OP did address it, just not enough to cause a PPC Meta to accrue, or change mechanics and roles drastically from what they have been for 3 years. It's far less likely to YoYo from bad to OP.

It doesn't require any massive changes to any one facet...especially if one can simply make minor changes to multiple facets.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 24 December 2015 - 01:24 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

We fix PPCs by making them not suck. Duh!

[Kraftwerkedup]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 December 2015 - 10:52 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...49-04-nov-2014/
well, a month before, actually. And the base speed was boosted 100 m/s. so post quirkening the TDR-9S was 1207.5 m/s. Not exactly murderous on it's own, but when they were using 7.5 heat ERPPCs every 3 seconds, it didn't matter if they were Carlos Hathcock. The skies were filled with Lightning.

Sunuva

Yup it was the month before.

Not bad on its own, but yeah when you throw on the quirks, it was devastating.

And extra points for the Carlos Hathcock reference.

Sniper pew pew.

[Gorgo7]

Higher velocity PPC's are fine by me. Lower heat ERPPC's are all good too. Clan ERPPC's same heat but increased damage...13-2-2?

Quirks should NOT be adjusted until some time has passed. Say, two months or so. Give the Quirked mech a reason to shine with PPC's, don't penalize them so they are in the same pool as everything else.

AWS
BNC
BLR
MAL
ZEU
BLR
K2
FB
TDR
BJ
CDA
GRF
VND
PNT

[YueFei]

Playing with the PPC/ERPPC/cERPPC heat is a good idea, but has to be done carefully.

PGI tended to do things far too heavy-handed. What they don't understand is that reducing a weapon's heat by 20% doesn't necessary reduce heat accrued by 20%. That's the problem. If a salvo builds 30 heat, and during the weapon's cooldown time a mech's heatsinks can remove 15 heat, that leaves you with 15 excess heat-per-salvo. If you reduce heat by 20% for that salvo, it will produce 24 heat instead of 30 heat, and leave you with 9 excess heat-per-salvo. You would effectively have a 40% reduction of excess heat-per-salvo.

That's a huge buff. Whereas before the heat reduction, maybe such a build doesn't quite have enough spare heat to kill the enemy before red-lining on heat and being overwhelmed, that same build post-heat-reduction might very well have enough sustained output to win out.

Also gotta remember that a heat reduction is an indirect buff to the impact of a coolant flush, in terms of how many extra shots a coolant flush provides you with.

[Quaamik]

Gorgo7, on 24 December 2015 - 02:38 PM, said:

Higher velocity PPC's are fine by me. Lower heat ERPPC's are all good too. Clan ERPPC's same heat but increased damage...13-2-2?

Quirks should NOT be adjusted until some time has passed. Say, two months or so. Give the Quirked mech a reason to shine with PPC's, don't penalize them so they are in the same pool as everything else.

The problem with not adjusting quirks when a weapons stats are adjusted is that you can create seriously unbalanced mechs. Ideally the weapon should be balanced so that few if any mechs need a quirk to be competitive with it. Those that do might need special adjustments that should be thought out after looking at the weapons balance.

I could live with that for clan ERPPCs, but I think that adding 3 to the pinpoint is going to make IS pilots scream.

Edited by Quaamik, 24 December 2015 - 05:27 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Here is the thing, unless you bring the IS ERPPC to heat neutral or better

Definitely. And the way I would fix that problem is by making IS ERPPCs do splash damage and giving them less range (810m is insane compared to other weapons, even gauss is only 660m). By lowering pinpoint damage and range you can also lower their heat.

But also remember we have mechs like the Awesome/Masakari that are supposed to use 3-4 ERPPCs/CERPPCs. So the heat has to come way down so you can play mechs like theyre supposed to be played.

Edited by Khobai, 24 December 2015 - 05:39 PM.

[Pariah Devalis]

Khobai, on 24 December 2015 - 05:34 PM, said:

Definitely. And the way I would fix that problem is by making IS ERPPCs do splash damage and giving them less range (810m is insane compared to other weapons, even gauss is only 660m). By lowering pinpoint damage and range you can also lower their heat.

The heat is fine if it was a decent PPFLD weapon. Diffusing the damage to make it even less of a PPFLD weapon is just.. so wrong, thematically and functionally. Drops the need to actually have skill and lead targets properly. Also? Oh, great, I spend 6 tons getting a weapon that smears. Wonderful. I could get a 6 ton weapon that stands a chance of drilling just one part for full damage in an LPlas.

[Bishop Steiner]

Khobai, on 24 December 2015 - 05:34 PM, said:

Definitely. And the way I would fix that problem is by making IS ERPPCs do splash damage and giving them less range (810m is insane compared to other weapons, even gauss is only 660m). By lowering pinpoint damage and range you can also lower their heat.

But also remember we have mechs like the Awesome/Masakari that are supposed to use 3-4 ERPPCs/CERPPCs. So the heat has to come way down so you can play mechs like theyre supposed to be played.

or certain mechs need those quirked to compensate. Still say the AWS for instance should not get GH on PPCs till the 4th.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 December 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

Heat IS a mitigating factor, but with PGIs implementation of Heat Scale, perhaps too much of one, which is Why I recommended basically a 1 pt drop across the board. Seems minor on the surface, but does add up.

That even dropping the per-salvo heat generation by a single point "really adds up" is part of the problem.
(That PGI's implementation of the heat scale is a lot more forgiving than that of the source material also doesn't help matters. )

The problem is stated in Quaamik's post.

Quaamik, on 24 December 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

However, the lower per weapon heat would allow cycling them sooner after one another, and cycling more of them before hitting max heat.

The point that "the lower per weapon heat would allow cycling them sooner after one another, and cycling more of them before hitting max heat" translates into "the weapon becomes more 'spammable' in terms of rate of fire of a single weapon & chain fire of a group of identical weapons ('cycling them sooner after one another, and cycling more of them before hitting max heat') and group fire (less heat per weapon for a group of identical weapons equates to less heat for firing a group of identical weapons)".

That path leads back into the era of quad/hex-PPC Stalkers, "Direstars", and the like.
The per-weapon PPC & ER-PPC heat being where it where it is now (where most 'Mechs can't handle more than 2-3 (ER-)PPCs) is one of the main factors - if not the main factor - that holds back the "'faux-Hellstar or GTFO' for every heavy & assault 'Mech" scenario.

Additionally, the 1-point drop for the Standard PPC had already been done - the PPC base heat was set at 9 units with the August 06, 2013 patch (after being set at 8 units with the February 05, 2013 patch, which came after being set at 9 units at some point prior to Nov. 20, 2012 (the last available set of patch notes in the archive)), and remained at that level until the September 03, 2013 patch.

• Before 11/20/2012: PPC heat from 10 to 9 (Also: ER-PPC heat from 15 to 13)
  
• At 02/05/2013 (at least 2 months elapsed): PPC heat from 9 to 8 (Also: ER-PPC heat from 13 to 11)
  
• At 08/06/2013 (~6 months elapsed): PPC heat from 8 to 9 (Also: ER-PPC heat from 11 to 12)
  
• At 09/03/2013 (~1 month elapsed): PPC heat from 9 to 10 (Also: ER-PPC heat from 13(?) to 15)

(Interestingly, we're now seeing the part of the same cycle with most of the larger lasers, which compete with the PPC family in the "big, hard(er)-hitting energy weapons" arena.

• The IS Large Laser is currently at 7 units of heat per salvo (should be 8).
  
• The IS ER Large Laser is currently at 8 units of heat per salvo (should be 12).
  
• The IS Large Pulse Laser is currently at 7 units of heat per salvo (should be 10).
  
• The Clan ER Large Laser is currently at 10 units of heat per salvo (should be 12).
  
• The Clan Large Pulse Laser is currently at 10 units of heat per salvo (should be 10).

But, this thread is focused on PPCs, and an in-depth discussion the bigger lasers is likely better left as another discussion for another thread & another time, yes?)

By contrast, having each member of the PPC family has a reasonable time-to-target at their respective optimal ranges (by way of comparison to the other travel-time-dependent direct-fire weapons, the ballistic weapons) makes each member of the PPC family a comparably-viable option for attacking targets at (or within) that optimal range versus their closest mechanics-wise competitors (the other travel-time-dependent direct-fire weapons, the ballistic weapons).

[Bishop Steiner]

Disagree. Because as of now, mechs like the K2 can barely use dual PPC let alone ERPPCs, compared to other weapons, DPS HPS and other considerations.

You get a lot more bang for buck with 2 ac10 than 2 PPC on it. Or lasers.

While it's true they recycle faster than in TT, so you have to expect them to run hotter, so does everything else, but none become as restrictive endurance wise as the PPC family does.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 December 2015 - 06:33 PM, said:

Disagree. Because as of now, mechs like the K2 can barely use dual PPC let alone ERPPCs, compared to other weapons, DPS HPS and other considerations.

You get a lot more bang for buck with 2 ac10 than 2 PPC on it. Or lasers.

While it's true they recycle faster than in TT, so you have to expect them to run hotter, so does everything else, but none become as restrictive endurance wise as the PPC family does.

According to Smurfy, a stock K2 (With 20 SHS! And a -10% energy heat generation quirk.) can fire its PPCs (only the PPCs) continuously for approximately 22 seconds (~6 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, t=16.00, and t=20.00) before overheating & shutting down.

• Switching from 20 SHS to 20 DHS (and making no other changes) increases the time-to-shutdown to approximately 40 seconds (~11 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, t=16.00, t=20.00, t=24.00, t=28.00, t=32.00, t=36.00, and t=40.00).

Switching the PPCs of a stock to ER-PPCs (and making no other changes) can fire those ER-PPCs (only the ER-PPCs) continuously for approximately 11 seconds (~4 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, and t=12.00) before overheating & shutting down.

• Switching from 20 SHS to 20 DHS (and making no other changes) increases the time-to-shutdown to approximately 15 seconds (~5 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, and t=16.00)

A K2 with only twinned AC/10s will effectively never overheat (time to overheat with the stock 20 SHS is estimated at 10 minutes and 19 seconds), and one ton of AC/10 ammo (20 rounds) will provide 25 seconds of continuous two-cannon fire (11 salvos at t=0.00, t=2.50, t=5.00, t=7.50, t=10.00, t=12.50, t=15.00, t=17.50, t=20.00, and t=22.50).

• A K2 with twinned AC/10s, 7 tons of ammo, 12 DHS, and most of the armor stripped from the arms will have an estimated time-to-overheat of 7 minutes & 21 seconds, and enough ammunition for nearly 3 minutes of continuous fire.
  
• A K2 with twinned AC/10s, 9 tons of ammo, 10 DHS, and most of the armor stripped from the arms will have an estimated time-to-overheat of 2 minutes & 5 seconds, and enough ammunition for nearly 4 minutes of continuous fire.

However, the twinned PPCs/ER-PPCs weigh only 14 tons, never run out of ammunition, and pose no risk of dying via an ammunition explosion.
The twinned AC/10s, on the other hand, require 25 tons (x2 12-ton guns plus one of ammo) to fire continuously for as long as a stock K2 would take to overheat itself with its PPCs.

The lasers, IMO, have heat issues in the other direction (that is, the bigger lasers produce too little heat per salvo), and part of the solution to "laser-vomit" is to increase their per-salvo heat generation back to the canonical levels (as was done with the PPC family).

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 24 December 2015 - 07:45 PM, said:

According to Smurfy, a stock K2 (With 20 SHS! And a -10% energy heat generation quirk.) can fire its PPCs (only the PPCs) continuously for approximately 22 seconds (~6 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, t=16.00, and t=20.00) before overheating & shutting down.

• Switching from 20 SHS to 20 DHS (and making no other changes) increases the time-to-shutdown to approximately 40 seconds (~11 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, t=16.00, t=20.00, t=24.00, t=28.00, t=32.00, t=36.00, and t=40.00).

Switching the PPCs of a stock to ER-PPCs (and making no other changes) can fire those ER-PPCs (only the ER-PPCs) continuously for approximately 11 seconds (~4 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, and t=12.00) before overheating & shutting down.

• Switching from 20 SHS to 20 DHS (and making no other changes) increases the time-to-shutdown to approximately 15 seconds (~5 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, and t=16.00)

A K2 with only twinned AC/10s will effectively never overheat (time to overheat with the stock 20 SHS is estimated at 10 minutes and 19 seconds), and one ton of AC/10 ammo (20 rounds) will provide 25 seconds of continuous two-cannon fire (11 salvos at t=0.00, t=2.50, t=5.00, t=7.50, t=10.00, t=12.50, t=15.00, t=17.50, t=20.00, and t=22.50).

• A K2 with twinned AC/10s, 7 tons of ammo, 12 DHS, and most of the armor stripped from the arms will have an estimated time-to-overheat of 7 minutes & 21 seconds, and enough ammunition for nearly 3 minutes of continuous fire.
  
• A K2 with twinned AC/10s, 9 tons of ammo, 10 DHS, and most of the armor stripped from the arms will have an estimated time-to-overheat of 2 minutes & 5 seconds, and enough ammunition for nearly 4 minutes of continuous fire.

However, the twinned PPCs/ER-PPCs weigh only 14 tons, never run out of ammunition, and pose no risk of dying via an ammunition explosion.
The twinned AC/10s, on the other hand, require 25 tons (x2 12-ton guns plus one of ammo) to fire continuously for as long as a stock K2 would take to overheat itself with its PPCs.

The lasers, IMO, have heat issues in the other direction (that is, the bigger lasers produce too little heat per salvo), and part of the solution to "laser-vomit" is to increase their per-salvo heat generation back to the canonical levels (as was done with the PPC family).

Your math is wrong. Because you also have 10 tons in SHS or DHS that the AC10 does not.

So it's a pretty fallacious argument to compare a mech running 20 Heatsinks vs 1 running 10 and then claim that the PPCs version is "only" 14 tons.
CPLT-K2ac10
CPLT-K2
the AC10 version has nearly TWICE the sustained Maximum DPS (6.6 vs 3.4). And 7 tons is enough to last a whole 15 minute match in actual practice, 90% of the time. Running the maximum DHS able to be fit, you still end up with a mere 3.7 DPS for dual PPCs...and that's packing no backup weaponry. (31 SHS interestingly bring it to a 3.6 DPS.)

and just comparing the weapons side by side:
2x AC10 DPS: 8 HPS: 2.4
2x PPC DPS: 5 HPS: 5
2x ERPPC DPS: 5 HPS: 7.5

AC10s, unquirked CD: 2.5s
PPCs, unquirked CD: 4s
ERPPCs, Unquirked CD: 4s

After 10 seconds: (Assuming base 10 engine DHS)
AC10x2: 4 volleys for 80 damage @ 24 heat (4 pts waste)
PPCx2: 2 volleys for 40 damage @ 40 heat (20 pts waste, 6 pts waste with 20 DHS)
ERPPCx2: 2 volleys for 40 dmg @ 60 heat (40 pts waste, 26 pts waste with 20 DHS)

20 seconds:
AC10x2: 8 volleys for 160 damage @ 48 heat
PPCx2: 5 volleys for 100 damage @ 100 heat
ERPPCx2: 5 volleys for 100 dmg @ 150 heat

30 Seconds
AC10x2: 12 volleys for 240 damage @ 72 heat
PPCx2: 7 volleys for 140 damage @ 140 heat
ERPPCx2: 7 volleys for 140 dmg @ 210 heat

40 seconds
AC10x2: 16 volleys for 320 damage @ 96 heat
PPCx2: 10 volleys for 200 damage @ 200 heat
ERPPCx2: 10 volleys for 200 dmg @ 300 heat

50 seconds
AC10x2: 20 volleys for 400 damage @ 120 heat
PPCx2: 12 volleys for 240 damage @ 240 heat
ERPPCx2: 12 volleys for 240 dmg @ 360 heat

60 seconds
AC10x2: 24 volleys for 480 damage @ 144 heat
PPCx2: 15 volleys for 300 damage @ 300 heat
ERPPCx2: 15 volleys for 300 dmg @ 450 heat

This also ignores factors like endo, XL engines and such, in which the PPC armed K2 becomes more limited because of the needed crit space for said DHS.

Longer you go, the more the AC10 outstrips the PPC. When one adds in the requisite tonnage needed for those extra minimum 10 DHS, factors into the crit space required, suddenly the ammo and it's miniscule explosion % isn't such a big deal.

I get you love TT Lore correct, but in this instance, in MWO it doesn't fit. Sorry.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 December 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:

Your math is wrong. Because you also have 10 tons in SHS or DHS that the AC10 does not.

So it's a pretty fallacious argument to compare a mech running 20 Heatsinks vs 1 running 10 and then claim that the PPCs version is "only" 14 tons.
CPLT-K2ac10
CPLT-K2
the AC10 version has nearly TWICE the sustained Maximum DPS (6.6 vs 3.4). And 7 tons is enough to last a whole 15 minute match in actual practice, 90% of the time. Running the maximum DHS able to be fit, you still end up with a mere 3.7 DPS for dual PPCs...and that's packing no backup weaponry. (31 SHS interestingly bring it to a 3.6 DPS.)

and just comparing the weapons side by side:
2x AC10 DPS: 8 HPS: 2.4
2x PPC DPS: 5 HPS: 5
2x ERPPC DPS: 5 HPS: 7.5

AC10s, unquirked CD: 2.5s
PPCs, unquirked CD: 4s
ERPPCs, Unquirked CD: 4s

After 10 seconds: (Assuming base 10 engine DHS)
AC10x2: 4 volleys for 80 damage @ 24 heat (4 pts waste)
PPCx2: 2 volleys for 40 damage @ 40 heat (20 pts waste, 6 pts waste with 20 DHS)
ERPPCx2: 2 volleys for 40 dmg @ 60 heat (40 pts waste, 26 pts waste with 20 DHS)

20 seconds:
AC10x2: 8 volleys for 160 damage @ 48 heat
PPCx2: 5 volleys for 100 damage @ 100 heat
ERPPCx2: 5 volleys for 100 dmg @ 150 heat

30 Seconds
AC10x2: 12 volleys for 240 damage @ 72 heat
PPCx2: 7 volleys for 140 damage @ 140 heat
ERPPCx2: 7 volleys for 140 dmg @ 210 heat

40 seconds
AC10x2: 16 volleys for 320 damage @ 96 heat
PPCx2: 10 volleys for 200 damage @ 200 heat
ERPPCx2: 10 volleys for 200 dmg @ 300 heat

50 seconds
AC10x2: 20 volleys for 400 damage @ 120 heat
PPCx2: 12 volleys for 240 damage @ 240 heat
ERPPCx2: 12 volleys for 240 dmg @ 360 heat

60 seconds
AC10x2: 24 volleys for 480 damage @ 144 heat
PPCx2: 15 volleys for 300 damage @ 300 heat
ERPPCx2: 15 volleys for 300 dmg @ 450 heat

This also ignores factors like endo, XL engines and such, in which the PPC armed K2 becomes more limited because of the needed crit space for said DHS.

Longer you go, the more the AC10 outstrips the PPC. When one adds in the requisite tonnage needed for those extra minimum 10 DHS, factors into the crit space required, suddenly the ammo and it's miniscule explosion % isn't such a big deal.

I get you love TT Lore correct, but in this instance, in MWO it doesn't fit. Sorry.

The original comparison was made using this (as close to the stock form as could be done, while still accommodating twinned AC/10s and one ton of ammo), versus the stock K2 & this one (where the Standard PPCs were switched out for ER-PPCs, with no other changes made).

"A K2 with only twinned AC/10s will effectively never overheat (time to overheat with the stock 20 SHS is estimated at 10 minutes and 19 seconds), and one ton of AC/10 ammo (20 rounds) will provide 25 seconds of continuous two-cannon fire (11 salvos at t=0.00, t=2.50, t=5.00, t=7.50, t=10.00, t=12.50, t=15.00, t=17.50, t=20.00, and t=22.50)."

"Switching the PPCs of a stock to ER-PPCs (and making no other changes) can fire those ER-PPCs (only the ER-PPCs) continuously for approximately 11 seconds (~4 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, and t=12.00) before overheating & shutting down."

"A stock K2 (With 20 SHS! And a -10% energy heat generation quirk.) can fire its PPCs (only the PPCs) continuously for approximately 22 seconds (~6 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, t=16.00, and t=20.00) before overheating & shutting down."

So, yes, the Heat Sinks were accounted for in the comparison.

Indeed, a stock K2 and a minimally-modded-to-accept-twinned-AC/10s K2 would have roughly identical times-to-overheat.
Yes, the AC/10 version will put much more damage down-range within that timeframe (180 damage downrange in 20.00 seconds of continuous fire) than the stock K2 within the same timeframe (120 damage downrange in 20.00 seconds of continuous fire).
However, the AC/10 version will be weaponless after that, while the stock K2 can fight on with its main weapons and its secondary weapons (which the AC/10 version lacks).

Edited by Strum Wealh, 24 December 2015 - 09:05 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 24 December 2015 - 09:05 PM, said:

The original comparison was made using this (as close to the stock form as could be done, while still accommodating twinned AC/10s and one ton of ammo), versus the stock K2 & this one (where the Standard PPCs were switched out for ER-PPCs, with no other changes made).

"A K2 with only twinned AC/10s will effectively never overheat (time to overheat with the stock 20 SHS is estimated at 10 minutes and 19 seconds), and one ton of AC/10 ammo (20 rounds) will provide 25 seconds of continuous two-cannon fire (11 salvos at t=0.00, t=2.50, t=5.00, t=7.50, t=10.00, t=12.50, t=15.00, t=17.50, t=20.00, and t=22.50)."

"Switching the PPCs of a stock to ER-PPCs (and making no other changes) can fire those ER-PPCs (only the ER-PPCs) continuously for approximately 11 seconds (~4 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, and t=12.00) before overheating & shutting down."

"A stock K2 (With 20 SHS! And a -10% energy heat generation quirk.) can fire its PPCs (only the PPCs) continuously for approximately 22 seconds (~6 salvos at t=0.00, t=4.00, t=8.00, t=12.00, t=16.00, and t=20.00) before overheating & shutting down."

So, yes, the Heat Sinks were accounted for in the comparison.

Indeed, a stock K2 and a minimally-modded-to-accept-twinned-AC/10s K2 would have roughly identical times-to-overheat.
Yes, the AC/10 version will put much more damage down-range within that timeframe (180 damage downrange in 20.00 seconds of continuous fire) than the stock K2 within the same timeframe (120 damage downrange in 20.00 seconds of continuous fire).
However, the AC/10 version will be weaponless after that, while the stock K2 can fight on with its main weapons and its secondary weapons (which the AC/10 version lacks).

except realistically the 2x AC10 easily mounts 4x MLs. A degree of backup weaponry the DHS clogged PPCs version, cannot. And again, having run well over 1000 matches in k2s of both configs? the AC10 realistically WILL NOT run out of ammo in a match with 7 tons.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 24 December 2015 - 09:11 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 December 2015 - 09:10 PM, said:

except realistically the 2x AC10 easily mounts 4x MLs. A degree of backup weaponry the DHS clogged PPCs version, cannot. And again, having run well over 1000 matches in k2s of both configs? the AC10 realistically WILL NOT run out of ammo in a match with 7 tons.

So, if we keep the same cooling capacities (same heat cap + same dissipation rate) between a stock K2 and a twinned-AC/10/quad-MLas build (since heat is one of the main points under debate), we end up with something like this.

Again, the AC/10 + MLas version has a much higher damage output (which, considering the fact that it's spending 29 tons of weapons and ammo on its loadout versus the 18 tons spent on the weapons and ammo for the stock K2, probably should be the case)... until the AC ammo bin runs dry.

However, the real question still stands: how does one make single or dual (ER-)PPCs a more attractive option, without opening the door to massed (4+) (ER-)PPCs being the "best" option for anything and everything with 4+ energy hardpoints & 28 tons to spare?
Reducing per-salvo heat generation makes (ER-)PPCs more spammable (doubly-so on those 'Mechs that have significant energy heat generation (a good number of them) and/or PPC heat generation quirks (a smaller, but not insignificant number)), and we've already seen what comes of that.