482 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 24 December 2015 - 09:50 PM, said:

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.

Bat your eyes all you like. What we saw was 8 ht ppcs and 12 heat ERPPCs which is a far cry from 9 ht ppcs and 14 ht erppcs.-

[zudukai]

Strum Wealh, on 24 December 2015 - 09:50 PM, said:

'Mechs that have significant energy heat generation (a good number of them) and/or PPC heat generation quirks (a smaller, but not insignificant number)),

that's what the "rapid iteration" system is supposed to solve, the quirked mechs can have it's quirks changed to be either more in line with one or the other specific profile (faster projectile speed for example) or weapon system (Laser family or pulse family), or tweaked for more modest quirks, even some combination therein.

as of late however we are going steady for what, 6mo live server weapon changes? (i know the last patch has changes to weapons, merely ballparking a range of how often "rapid iteration" changes actually turn out for PGI) and the public test server with other changes not limited to specifically weapons.

i truly hope PGI actually l lays out a bimonthly plan for tweaks, so we can follow along with the Dev's thoughts on perceived key factors, or about the change/direction and why.

Edited by zudukai, 24 December 2015 - 11:59 PM.

[Deathlike]

You know what... taking a BJ-3 is much more productive taking a K2 for the sole purpose of running PPCs (including ERPPCs).

Actually running this in realtime is so much better than SpreadsheetWarrior.

zudukai, on 24 December 2015 - 11:58 PM, said:

that's what the "rapid iteration" system is supposed to solve, the quirked mechs can have it's quirks changed to be either more in line with one or the other specific profile (faster projectile speed for example) or weapon system (Laser family or pulse family), or tweaked for more modest quirks, even some combination therein.

as of late however we are going steady for what, 6mo live server weapon changes? (i know the last patch has changes to weapons, merely ballparking a range of how often "rapid iteration" changes actually turn out for PGI) and the public test server with other changes not limited to specifically weapons.

i truly hope PGI actually l lays out a bimonthly plan for tweaks, so we can follow along with the Dev's thoughts on perceived key factors, or about the change/direction and why.

Good luck with that. We're more in a 6-12 month cycle honestly. So, new rebalance in June!

[Y E O N N E]

BJ-3 runs cold enough that twin ERPPC are just a skitch on the hot side but still comfortable. It is an epic, epic CW fighter. Though with the new energy range enhancements, you don't need an ERPPC for most applications, so that makes it even better.

And it still takes skill to consistently land your PPC shots to the same component while jetting through the air.

I love that machine.

[Gunner Kisiel]

Alright, I will throw in my own suggestions to bring the PPC family in line with lasers.

Current important stats for:
IS-PPC: 10 dmg, 10 heat, 4 cooldown, 90-540 range, 7 tons, 1100 speed
IS-ERPPC: 10 dmg, 15 heat, 4 cooldown, 810 range, 7 tons, 1200 speed
CERPPC: "15" dmg, 15 heat, 4 cooldown, 810 range, 6 tons, 1200 speed

Suggested Stats:
IS-PPC: 10 dmg, 10 heat, 5 cooldown, 25-540 range, 7 tons, 1200 speed
IS-ERPPC: 12 dmg, 11 heat, 5 cooldown, 810 range, 7 tons, 1400 speed
CERPPC: 14 dmg (remove splash), 12 heat, 5 cooldown, 810 range, 6 tons, 1400 speed

1 extra damage than the already better large pulse lasers for the ERPPC versions

1 dmg/heat for ISPPC, compared to 1.57 for IS LPL
1.09 dmg/heat for ISERPPC, compared to 1.57 for ISLPL
1.17 dmg/heat for CERPPC, compared to 1.30 for CLPL

These would be very simple changes to implement.

Edited by Gunner Kisiel, 25 December 2015 - 05:49 AM.

[Matthew Ace]

Gunner Kisiel, on 25 December 2015 - 05:47 AM, said:

Alright, I will throw in my own suggestions to bring the PPC family in line with lasers.

Current important stats for:
IS-PPC: 10 dmg, 10 heat, 4 cooldown, 90-540 range, 7 tons, 1100 speed
IS-ERPPC: 10 dmg, 15 heat, 4 cooldown, 810 range, 7 tons, 1200 speed
CERPPC: "15" dmg, 15 heat, 4 cooldown, 810 range, 6 tons, 1200 speed

Suggested Stats:
IS-PPC: 10 dmg, 10 heat, 5 cooldown, 25-540 range, 7 tons, 1200 speed
IS-ERPPC: 12 dmg, 11 heat, 5 cooldown, 810 range, 7 tons, 1400 speed
CERPPC: 14 dmg (remove splash), 12 heat, 5 cooldown, 810 range, 6 tons, 1400 speed

1 extra damage than the already better large pulse lasers for the ERPPC versions

1 dmg/heat for ISPPC, compared to 1.57 for IS LPL
1.09 dmg/heat for ISERPPC, compared to 1.57 for ISLPL
1.17 dmg/heat for CERPPC, compared to 1.30 for CLPL

These would be very simple changes to implement.

Given your suggestion, as an IS player, why would I take the IS PPC over an IS ER PPC? 1 heat for extra range, velocity and 2 damage is a pretty tiny trade-off.

[Gunner Kisiel]

Quote

Given your suggestion, as an IS player, why would I take the IS PPC over an IS ER PPC? 1 heat for extra range, velocity and 2 damage is a pretty tiny trade-off.

Fair point.

In that case would probably change the IS-PPC to 10 dmg for 9 heat.

That would give it a 1.11 dmg/heat

OR

keep the stats as above and lower it to 6 tons weight. (this one feels like it has a bit more flavor to it.)

[Variant1]

I know how we can fix ppcs! NERF THEM INTO OBLIVION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





jk or am i? dun dun dunnnnnnnnnnnn

[Quaamik]

Interesting.

The 5 second cool down would greatly stretch out the length of time one could fire 2 without overheating. I'm not sure if it would make them in effective close in.

[Khobai]

Quote

The heat is fine if it was a decent PPFLD weapon

um it used to be a good pinpoint damage weapon and thats the WHOLE REASON it had to be NERFED.

the game needs to move AWAY from pinpoint damage, because it completely breaks the whole armor system.

thats why making ppcs do splash damage is the best solution, because it allows for PPCs to have higher velocity and lower heat, without repeating the failings of the past.

The less pinpoint damage the better off the game will be. That goes for all weapons including lasers. They really need to crackdown on laser vomit by putting all lasers in the same ghost heat group.

Quote

The 5 second cool down would greatly stretch out the length of time one could fire 2 without overheating. I'm not sure if it would make them in effective close in.

Theyre sniping weapons. Theyre not supposed to be effective close in. Thats what lasers are for.

One of the big problems is PGI made lasers too effective at sniping which overlaps with the role of PPCs. The range on most lasers weapons needs to be significantly reduced in order to restore PPCs back to their role as an energy based sniping weapons.

Cutting back laser ranges while implementing my proposed PPC changes would give both weapons a role... lasers would be better at short to medium ranges while PPCs would be better at medium to long ranges. Thats how it should be.

There would obviously be some overlap between weapons like the ERLL and ERPPC, but the mech's quirks should ultimately determine which weapon is better for that mech.

Edited by Khobai, 25 December 2015 - 08:15 AM.

[Quaamik]

The IS ERPPC is (or could be purposed as) a sniping weapon. However current velocity is too slow and damage vs heat makes it not worthwhile except on fast mediums.

The IS PPC has too short an ideal range and too short a max range to be one. Perhaps in tabletop it was, but not in MWO.

The c-ERPPC is has the same problems as the IS ERPPC a sniping weapon. Its too slow and too high heat to replace lasers on anything but mediums. The c-ERPPC has an additional problem, related to global balance. Clan is thin on effective brawling weapons. The only real effective thing it has is laser vomit. And the c-ERPPC has to via for hard points / tonnage with the c-LPL or c-LL, both of which are better general purpose and sniper weapons as they currently sit.

Since we have a player base that wants "point & click" firing with no thought needed for lead, the ONLY way to make the PPCs effective "sniper" weapons is to bump the velocity to insane levels. Even then, their heat vs damage makes them second best to zero time of flight hit scan weapons like lasers. Tweaking them further to become better than lasers at sniping is unlikely, because:
1) Fear of the Gauss & PPC meta.
2) PGIs stated intention that they do NOT want to encourage sniping.

So whatever we propose to "fix" them better work in the mid range or close range also, or in t end they will still be broken and not worth using.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gunner Kisiel, on 25 December 2015 - 06:45 AM, said:

keep the stats as above and lower it to 6 tons weight. (this one feels like it has a bit more flavor to it.)

PGI will not change weapon weights or crits as it breaks stock builds and loadouts.

[Bishop Steiner]

Khobai, on 25 December 2015 - 08:09 AM, said:

um it used to be a good pinpoint damage weapon and thats the WHOLE REASON it had to be NERFED.

the game needs to move AWAY from pinpoint damage, because it completely breaks the whole armor system.

thats why making ppcs do splash damage is the best solution, because it allows for PPCs to have higher velocity and lower heat, without repeating the failings of the past.

The less pinpoint damage the better off the game will be. That goes for all weapons including lasers. They really need to crackdown on laser vomit by putting all lasers in the same ghost heat group.



Theyre sniping weapons. Theyre not supposed to be effective close in. Thats what lasers are for.

One of the big problems is PGI made lasers too effective at sniping which overlaps with the role of PPCs. The range on most lasers weapons needs to be significantly reduced in order to restore PPCs back to their role as an energy based sniping weapons.

Cutting back laser ranges while implementing my proposed PPC changes would give both weapons a role... lasers would be better at short to medium ranges while PPCs would be better at medium to long ranges. Thats how it should be.

There would obviously be some overlap between weapons like the ERLL and ERPPC, but the mech's quirks should ultimately determine which weapon is better for that mech.

Where are PPCs ever described as sniping weapons? The two most famous PPC carriers, the Marauder and Warhammer are best known as infighters.

[Quaamik]

Khobai, on 25 December 2015 - 08:09 AM, said:

um it used to be a good pinpoint damage weapon and thats the WHOLE REASON it had to be NERFED.

the game needs to move AWAY from pinpoint damage, because it completely breaks the whole armor system.

thats why making ppcs do splash damage is the best solution, because it allows for PPCs to have higher velocity and lower heat, without repeating the failings of the past.

The less pinpoint damage the better off the game will be. That goes for all weapons including lasers. They really need to crackdown on laser vomit by putting all lasers in the same ghost heat group.

..............

I agree in theory that the whole game should move away from pinpoint damage. However, that requires an entire game re-balance moving away from near instant convergance, pinpoint IS ACs, pinpoint Gauss, and default "alpha" as the best firing solution. I doubt it could be done without breaking the game mechanics so that it would no longer be a fast paced fun game. I also don't think that lasers need to be nerfed with ghost heat to move in the direction of less pinpoint for them.

To move lasers alone away from pinpoint damage, just lengthen their firing duration. Add 25% to every laser firing duration, and remove the same actual time from their cycle time, and you get rid of a LOT of their pinpoint damage.

Putting splash on all the PPCs, and spreading the damage out more does allow for higher velocities and lower heat. But they become worthless for sniping and the velocity becomes meaningless. Unless you get into insane velocities (1800mps+), people will complain that they are hard to hit with at 1000+m (they still require lead). They will also complain that when they do hit they spread damage so much as to not be worth much. Yet when someone closes with them, the high recycle times makes the low heat meaningless and them worthless in brawling.

Look at this comparison:

Current stats for:
IS-PPC: 10 dmg, 10 heat, 4 cooldown, 90-540 range, 7 tons, 1100 speed, max range 1080

Current stats from IS AC10
10 dmg, 3 heat, 2.5 cooldown, 450 range, 12 tons, 950 speed, max range 900

The AC to has only 90 m less ideal range and 180 m less max range than the PPC. Flight times compare as:

AC10: time to peak ideal range: 0.47 s, time to max range: 0.947 s
PPC: time to peak ideal range: 0.49 s , time to max range: 0.982 s

Yet no one considers the AC10 a sniper weapon. Its firmly a brawling weapon. So why would the PPC not be considered a brawling weapon? Other than being completely outclassed in heat generated and cycle time?

Comparison time to target at 450 m:
AC10: 0.47 s
PPC: 0.41 s
ER PPC: 0.375 s
Gauss: 0.225
suggested changes from Gunner Kisiel PPC: 0.375 s
suggested changes from Gunner Kisiel ER PPC: 0.32 s

The Gauss is 100 ms faster to target (than the suggested changed versions) at 450 m and does 15 pinpoint damage. That's what makes it a good sniper weapon in this game. Splitting the difference in velocity between the AC10 and the Gauss does not turn the PPCs into sniper weapons, it just lets them use their longer range more effectively.

Bishop Steiner, on 25 December 2015 - 10:12 AM, said:

PGI will not change weapon weights or crits as it breaks stock builds and loadouts.

How does lowering the weight break a stock build?

Worst case, it leaves weight available in that build for added armor, heat sinks or equipment.

Edited by Quaamik, 25 December 2015 - 10:23 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quaamik, on 25 December 2015 - 10:21 AM, said:

I agree in theory that the whole game should move away from pinpoint damage. However, that requires an entire game re-balance moving away from near instant convergance, pinpoint IS ACs, pinpoint Gauss, and default "alpha" as the best firing solution. I doubt it could be done without breaking the game mechanics so that it would no longer be a fast paced fun game. I also don't think that lasers need to be nerfed with ghost heat to move in the direction of less pinpoint for them.

To move lasers alone away from pinpoint damage, just lengthen their firing duration. Add 25% to every laser firing duration, and remove the same actual time from their cycle time, and you get rid of a LOT of their pinpoint damage.

Putting splash on all the PPCs, and spreading the damage out more does allow for higher velocities and lower heat. But they become worthless for sniping and the velocity becomes meaningless. Unless you get into insane velocities (1800mps+), people will complain that they are hard to hit with at 1000+m (they still require lead). They will also complain that when they do hit they spread damage so much as to not be worth much. Yet when someone closes with them, the high recycle times makes the low heat meaningless and them worthless in brawling.

Look at this comparison:

Current stats for:
IS-PPC: 10 dmg, 10 heat, 4 cooldown, 90-540 range, 7 tons, 1100 speed, max range 1080

Current stats from IS AC10
10 dmg, 3 heat, 2.5 cooldown, 450 range, 12 tons, 950 speed, max range 900

The AC to has only 90 m less ideal range and 180 m less max range than the PPC. Flight times compare as:

AC10: time to peak ideal range: 0.47 s, time to max range: 0.947 s
PPC: time to peak ideal range: 0.49 s , time to max range: 0.982 s

Yet no one considers the AC10 a sniper weapon. Its firmly a brawling weapon. So why would the PPC not be considered a brawling weapon? Other than being completely outclassed in heat generated and cycle time?

Comparison time to target at 450 m:
AC10: 0.47 s
PPC: 0.41 s
ER PPC: 0.375 s
Gauss: 0.225
suggested changes from Gunner Kisiel PPC: 0.375 s
suggested changes from Gunner Kisiel ER PPC: 0.32 s

The Gauss is 100 ms faster to target (than the suggested changed versions) at 450 m and does 15 pinpoint damage. That's what makes it a good sniper weapon in this game. Splitting the difference in velocity between the AC10 and the Gauss does not turn the PPCs into sniper weapons, it just lets them use their longer range more effectively.



How does lowering the weight break a stock build?

Worst case, it leaves weight available in that build for added armor, heat sinks or equipment.

PGI will not give us 73 ton marauders. The stock mech has to fit the stock specs. Always has been PGI's paradigm. So instead of debating it with me, (feel free to take it up with Russ or Paul) just know that is the case, so that we stop wasting breath on the idea.

Also, why should the whole game get away from PP?

You might notice the overriding Meta is currently DoT/DpS. So it's not like killing PP fixes that.

The one thing PGI did get right in concept, was giving us several damage delivery mechanics. Adds immersion, flavor and realism.

[Quaamik]

I can understand them not giving 73 ton mechs. Not that the build is "broken", just that they aren't willing.

As to pinpoint: the "time to kill" has always been something that needs to be kept long to make the game enjoyable. High pinpoint makes that hard to achieve. Someone earlier this thread mentioned that anything over 30 pinpoint damage seems to be a problem, and while I might put the number a little higher, the concept is spot on. Because somewhere in the 30 - 40 pinpoint damage range starts getting "one shots" on lighter mechs, and even on heavies from behind.

As an example, the dreaded "Direstar" with 110 pinpoint damage and an additional 55 splash (27.5 on each componant). The 4 c-ERPPC Warhawk wasn't assumed to be a problem, and didn't becone one. I have to wonder if the "Direstar" would have been anything but a joke build if it delivered 55 pinpoint and 55 each to two componants as splash.

[Pariah Devalis]

Quaamik, on 25 December 2015 - 06:34 PM, said:

I can understand them not giving 73 ton mechs. Not that the build is "broken", just that they aren't willing.

As to pinpoint: the "time to kill" has always been something that needs to be kept long to make the game enjoyable. High pinpoint makes that hard to achieve. Someone earlier this thread mentioned that anything over 30 pinpoint damage seems to be a problem, and while I might put the number a little higher, the concept is spot on. Because somewhere in the 30 - 40 pinpoint damage range starts getting "one shots" on lighter mechs, and even on heavies from behind.

As an example, the dreaded "Direstar" with 110 pinpoint damage and an additional 55 splash (27.5 on each componant). The 4 c-ERPPC Warhawk wasn't assumed to be a problem, and didn't becone one. I have to wonder if the "Direstar" would have been anything but a joke build if it delivered 55 pinpoint and 55 each to two componants as splash.

I'm not sure referencing a straight up joke build that is about as likely to blow itself up as it is the enemy is the best option.

[Quaamik]

The reference was as an extreme an example I could think of. A simple change of damage from 10+2.5+2.5 to 5+5+5 turns a trick build that people hated because it could one shot anything (as long as it survived long enough to get that shot in) into something that would never survive past its first shot and rarely get a kill.

As a comparison, the stock Warhawk. With the current c-ERPPCs, even if you tweak the build so that it wont shut down after an alpha, does 40 points of pinpoint damage. with a frontal shot on the CT, every stock heavy and many mediums will walk away from that. They will hurt, but walk away. If we changed it o more pinpoint (say 15 per c-ERPPC), the few mediums would be able to survive a single hit, and a lot of heavies would potentially be crippled after a single hit (especially in a side torso).

So it makes sense that if we shifted the other way, to MORE splash, then lowered heat and lower cycling times would not be as big a deal.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quaamik, on 26 December 2015 - 01:58 PM, said:

The reference was as an extreme an example I could think of. A simple change of damage from 10+2.5+2.5 to 5+5+5 turns a trick build that people hated because it could one shot anything (as long as it survived long enough to get that shot in) into something that would never survive past its first shot and rarely get a kill.

As a comparison, the stock Warhawk. With the current c-ERPPCs, even if you tweak the build so that it wont shut down after an alpha, does 40 points of pinpoint damage. with a frontal shot on the CT, every stock heavy and many mediums will walk away from that. They will hurt, but walk away. If we changed it o more pinpoint (say 15 per c-ERPPC), the few mediums would be able to survive a single hit, and a lot of heavies would potentially be crippled after a single hit (especially in a side torso).

So it makes sense that if we shifted the other way, to MORE splash, then lowered heat and lower cycling times would not be as big a deal.

At the moment, the focus damage doesn't come close to compensating for th eheat/velocity. So not sure why you are so certain we need to dilute that part also to "make it work".

The KEY, IMO, is iterative. There is a reason I am not proposing 500 m/s velocity boosts, 2 pt heat drops on PPCs and 3 pt drops on ERPPCs. Because that would be pushing it too far with PP-FLD, and we have the historical proof of that.

1 pt heat drop does make a difference, without allowing spammage, and a mild m/s boost to the OP ranges also would not make them "instant supah sniper guns". Also, above all, it allows room for certain units like the WHK, AWS, etc, to get lesser, but still focused quirks.

Sorry but at no point has any argument remotely been made that PPCs need to do LESS actual and effective damage.

[Pariah Devalis]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 December 2015 - 02:06 PM, said:

Sorry but at no point has any argument remotely been made that PPCs need to do LESS actual and effective damage.

I'm going to repeat that.

Hell. I'm gonna repeat it again.

Bishop Steiner, on 26 December 2015 - 02:06 PM, said:

Sorry but at no point has any argument remotely been made that PPCs need to do LESS actual and effective damage.

I cannot fathom any reason why the idea of DILUTING the damage output of a weapon system that is already in a terrible spot as for usability is even remotely a positive for the weapon. It is under used. Russ states his numbers show it is under used. If we want spread damage, we can intentionally smear a LPLas.

What we need is solid front loaded damage at a fair heat level. I said fair, because I am all good for the current insanely hot 15 heat ERPPC if their pinpoint front loaded damage was worth it. I'd gladly take having to cool off every two or three salvos if it meant my ERPPC kicked like a mule.

Further, the biggest boon to harder hitting ERPPC will be to smaller mechs that practically can only make use of a single one, directly buffing mechs like, say, the Shadow Cat, Ice Ferret, Kit Fox, or Mist Lynx. After all, once your alpha is past about 34 damage (enough to headcap), any extra damage? That's gravy. And the laservomits we have galavanting around right now spit out over 50 damage as it is.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 26 December 2015 - 03:16 PM.