55 replies to this topic

[Gas Guzzler]

Monkey Lover, on 25 January 2016 - 09:33 AM, said:

it takes a duration of 16% and a range of almost 10% to make clan er and er laser equal. So no, i don't see removing both. Thats still not counting clan is 1 ton less. Heat is a tiny bit better still on the clan.

Wait.. what? You mean it takes a 16% duration penalty and a 10% range buff to make IS ER LL equal to Clan ER LL? What does that have to do with anything. I'm just saying if you give it 15-25% range buff, why do you need it to ALSO have the duration advantage even moreso? You shouldn't need that to win trades, considering you already have a .25 second duration advantage.

[Mcgral18]

cSand, on 25 January 2016 - 09:55 AM, said:

They don't suck though, if you use them appropriately. But any weapon in this game barring the heavy hitters, carrying just 1 of it is... a waste of tonnage
|

They suck pretty bad.

Do the Opportunity Cost VS a Med laser, 1 ton each

6 damage VS 5
165M VS 270
4 heat VS 4 heat
0.75 duration VS 0.9s

That's pretty damn rubbish

[FupDup]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

Wait.. what? You mean it takes a 16% duration penalty and a 10% range buff to make IS ER LL equal to Clan ER LL? What does that have to do with anything. I'm just saying if you give it 15-25% range buff, why do you need it to ALSO have the duration advantage even moreso? You shouldn't need that to win trades, considering you already have a .25 second duration advantage.

While I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your idea, I have to point out that the Clam ERLL actually has a slightly higher "beam time efficiency" than an IS ERLL that lacks duration quirks.

Clam: 11 damage / 1.5 seconds = 7.33333 damage per second of holding the beam
IS: 9 damage / 1.25 seconds = 7.2 damage per second of holding the beam

So, if the Clammer holds his beam on the IS mech for the same 1.25 seconds, his damage dealt will actually be a tiny bit higher than the IS mech deals to him.

Mcgral18, on 25 January 2016 - 09:59 AM, said:

They suck pretty bad.

Do the Opportunity Cost VS a Med laser, 1 ton each

6 damage VS 5
165M VS 270
4 heat VS 4 heat
0.75 duration VS 0.9s

That's pretty damn rubbish

The default range is actually just 135m.

Edited by FupDup, 25 January 2016 - 10:01 AM.

[Mcgral18]

FupDup, on 25 January 2016 - 10:01 AM, said:

The default range is actually just 135m.

#pgiplz

[cSand]

FupDup, on 25 January 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

Currently, the appropriate use of the Inner Sphere vanilla Small Laser is to simply not use it.

I'm not talking about just mounting literally 1 of them either. Comparing 2 SL to 1 ML for the same weight (but 1 more slot and 1 more hardpoint), the SL's lose a massive chunk of range that isn't compensated enough to make it worthwhile in most cases.

Well it's pretty situational. My FS-9 with 8 spl is one of my favourites. And it cleans house. You're not gonna put 2 Sl over 1 medium given the choice, but let's face it, the SL is not meant to be some kind of bread and butter weapon. It is a last resort weapon at best for most mechs, or just filler cause you literally have nothing else to put in. And that's fine, sideline weapons like the MG, flamer, or Sl shouldn't be "even" in useability with ML or LL, or AC's, or w/e else. They are meant to be trivial weapons. These are weapons that aren't even really meant for mech-killing mechs. They are meant for anti-infantry or anti-vehicle mechs. 2 roles that don't exist in MWO (yet? heheheh)

[Gas Guzzler]

FupDup, on 25 January 2016 - 10:01 AM, said:

While I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your idea, I have to point out that the Clam ERLL actually has a slightly higher "beam time efficiency" than an IS ERLL that lacks duration quirks.

Clam: 11 damage / 1.5 seconds = 7.33333 damage per second of holding the beam
IS: 9 damage / 1.25 seconds = 7.2 damage per second of holding the beam

So, if the Clammer holds his beam on the IS mech for the same 1.25 seconds, his damage dealt will actually be a tiny bit higher than the IS mech deals to him.


The default range is actually just 135m.

Well when you consider that an IS mech with 4 ER LL, will typically trade 3-1, for a nominal total duration of 1.75 seconds, a Clan mech will trade 2-2 for a nominal total duration of 2 seconds. The IS mech will trade with a more frontloaded damage application.

If you look at just max alpha without ghost heat, you look at 27 damage over 1.25 seconds vs 22 damage over 1.5 seconds.

I don't know, there are a lot of factors to consider, but it is pretty obvious that Clan quad ER LL will lose trades handily against quirked IS quad ER LL.

[Monkey Lover]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

Wait.. what? You mean it takes a 16% duration penalty and a 10% range buff to make IS ER LL equal to Clan ER LL? What does that have to do with anything. I'm just saying if you give it 15-25% range buff, why do you need it to ALSO have the duration advantage even moreso? You shouldn't need that to win trades, considering you already have a .25 second duration advantage.

Because you need both to make the IS weapons even close to equal to clan weapons. Of course the range over 10% starts making them better than clans so you have to look at mech by mech to see 15- 25% range should be nerfed.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 25 January 2016 - 10:10 AM.

[Jess Hazen]

PAWQC suggests weapons quirks on chassis be removed from game forever.

[kapusta11]

cSand, on 25 January 2016 - 09:40 AM, said:

None of this matters since eventually IS gets ER mediums and smalls etc etc. IS should have less range, shorter duration, less power. I see no problems. Small lasers aren't supposed to be that effective. They are meant for small mechs. IS ERLL should not be out performing IS ERLL on any chassis, period.

IS mechs for the most part would be fine without weapons quirks period, providing that some of the actual weapons themselves had some minor adjustments made.. They have such a structure buff and mobility buff over Clams right now, and I hate to say it, but IS is now the EZ mode. I hate that since I'm an IS pilot. I don't fear the TBR of DWF much these days. It used to be that taking on a TBR 1 on 1 was a big deal, you had to have you head screwed on. Now it's like, yea OK I'll bust off your torso in a couple shots and that's it for you mate. DWF is harmless unless you are standing right in front of it and not moving. Balance is the best it's been in awhile, which is saying something, but they went too far in the other direction and neutered the Clammers.

Right and then IS ER ML wil compete with cER ML. IS ML and cMPL, IS LL and cLPL, WITH quirks, have almost the same damage per ton, damage per heat, burn duration, very similar range and thus share the same purpose and are actually balanced while still being somewhat different.

ER LLs are niche weapons and were probably left out of equation when the quirkening was done, that's why a disparity between IS and Clan variants is so glaring and indeed needs to be addressed.

Pilot skill tree nerfs hit clan mechs (and IS top tier assaults, so to speak) pretty hard, that is true but that is not a subject of current discussion. Same with cXL vs structure quirks.

Edited by kapusta11, 25 January 2016 - 10:13 AM.

[FupDup]

cSand, on 25 January 2016 - 10:05 AM, said:

Well it's pretty situational. My FS-9 with 8 spl is one of my favourites. And it cleans house.

SPL =/= SL

Also, not every gundam is the Fuegostarter.

cSand, on 25 January 2016 - 10:05 AM, said:

You're not gonna put 2 Sl over 1 medium given the choice, but let's face it, the SL is not meant to be some kind of bread and butter weapon. It is a last resort weapon at best for most mechs, or just filler cause you literally have nothing else to put in. And that's fine, sideline weapons like the MG, flamer, or Sl shouldn't be "even" in useability with ML or LL, or AC's, or w/e else. They are meant to be trivial weapons. These are weapons that aren't even really meant for mech-killing mechs. They are meant for anti-infantry or anti-vehicle mechs. 2 roles that don't exist in MWO (yet? heheheh)

Thoughts like the ones in this quote box are the reason that we can't have nice things. Stop denying us nice things.


And seriously, where the crap do people keep getting the idea that the Small Laser is anti-infantry? In BT, it does the exact same damage to infantry squads as a Medium Laser (e.g. they both kill 1 squad member if they hit). Is the Medium Laser an anti-infantry weapon too?

The Small PULSE Laser has a bonus against infantry (2d6, same as MGs), but the regular Small has no bonuses against them.

There are also no other stats that suggest being somehow good for killing vehicles, either.

Edited by FupDup, 25 January 2016 - 10:13 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Monkey Lover, on 25 January 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

Because you need both to make the IS weapons even close to equal to clan weapons. Of course the range over 10% starts making them better than clans so you have to look at mech by mech to see 25% range should be nerfed.

No, the IS ER LL already has a shorter duration with no quirks. It would need a duration PENALTY to be on par with the cERLL.

And then you consider 3 ER LL vs 2 cER LL when ghost heat comes in to play.

[Monkey Lover]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

Well when you consider that an IS mech with 4 ER LL, will typically trade 3-1, for a nominal total duration of 1.75 seconds, a Clan mech will trade 2-2 for a nominal total duration of 2 seconds. The IS mech will trade with a more frontloaded damage application.

If you look at just max alpha without ghost heat, you look at 27 damage over 1.25 seconds vs 22 damage over 1.5 seconds.

I don't know, there are a lot of factors to consider, but it is pretty obvious that Clan quad ER LL will lose trades handily against quirked IS quad ER LL.

They should lose trades that's the point on most these mechs with 25% range. That's because if you take out 1 st they die they might be running around at 65kph. They might have junk hitboxes.

If you push up and get close to them they will die stop trading.

[Khobai]

Quote

No, the IS ER LL already has a shorter duration with no quirks. It would need a duration PENALTY to be on par with the cERLL.

Well beam duration aside. How does it make any sense for the ISLL to outrange the CERLL, after quirks?

Its established canon that Clans should have longer range weapons. Even if MWO does the responsible thing of making Clans pay for that longer range with higher heat, longer cooldowns, and longer beam durations.

Quote

And seriously, where the crap do people keep getting the idea that the Small Laser is anti-infantry?

Dunno. The flamer gets a bonus vs infantry if I recall. And infantry arnt very hard to hit in the first place so you dont need the pulse laser bonus.

Edited by Khobai, 25 January 2016 - 10:18 AM.

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 25 January 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

Dunno. The flamer gets a bonus vs infantry if I recall. And infantry arnt very hard to hit in the first place so you dont need the pulse laser bonus.

Yes Flamers do. Its damage vs. infantry is 4d6, meaning that between 4-24 troopers will die if you hit an infantry squad with one of them.

[Monkey Lover]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 10:10 AM, said:

No, the IS ER LL already has a shorter duration with no quirks. It would need a duration PENALTY to be on par with the cERLL.

And then you consider 3 ER LL vs 2 cER LL when ghost heat comes in to play.

Thats because the clan erlaser has 18% more damage...... The clan all so packs 1 ton less weight with the "extra damage"

If you want to talk ghost heat that is another topic and i would agree clans should be able to bring 3 er lasers.

edit. Now thinking about it . IS should be nerfed to only 2. I dont want to see TTK decreasing more.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 25 January 2016 - 10:32 AM.

[MischiefSC]

I am 110% all over this idea.

I'd even be good with leaving overall laser quirks but have ERLLs exempt from them. If 800 is optimal long range for ERLLs, all of them (IS and Clan) are in the 1.3 to 1.5 range burn time (no way to reduce) then you dramatically reduce the ability to destroy an enemy before he closes to his fighting range.

Currently the reality is that the ERLL sniping game doesn't have a lot of drawbacks up close and has enough range to be able to cripple someone before they close. Longer burn time = more exposure and more time to twist away, plus less viable up close. Removing the range quirks from it prevents the redonkulous long range sniper stuff.

[Jables McBarty]

FupDup, on 25 January 2016 - 10:01 AM, said:

While I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your idea, I have to point out that the Clam ERLL actually has a slightly higher "beam time efficiency" than an IS ERLL that lacks duration quirks.

Clam: 11 damage / 1.5 seconds = 7.33333 damage per second of holding the beam
IS: 9 damage / 1.25 seconds = 7.2 damage per second of holding the beam

So, if the Clammer holds his beam on the IS mech for the same 1.25 seconds, his damage dealt will actually be a tiny bit higher than the IS mech deals to him.

Except the IS laser also comes with range quirks.

-A QKD-4G's 25% range boost with Level 5 Range Mod ERLL is at 911 optimal, over 1800 max.
-Pair a C-ERLL with a MkV targeting computer and Level 5 range and you get 851 optimal.

The IS laser already has a shorter burn time but with less DPS; add in the 4G's 15% (or 4H's 20%) duration reduction and you don't even need to focus, just brush an enemy and you're scratching armor at ranges where the Clanner can't compete.

Not to mention that IS PPCs get the Energy Range quirk boost while the Clan Targeting Computer boost is limited to beam weapons (ie lasers, and paltry single-digit boosts at that). IS PPCs doing half damage at 1500 meters where Clan is barely doing anything?

I understand that PGI needs to balance both Quick Play and CW, but take a map like Boreal Vault--get an IS firing line on the E5/F5 hills loaded with quirked IS ERLLs and the clans can barely open the gates--even though they supposedly have an advantage at range. (Granted I'm a CW nub, and was probably playing with other CW pug-nubs, but I think the point is valid regardless).

I wasn't around for previous balance passes, and I don't know what the solution is, but the CW tech base balance is non-existent for the moment. Maybe give different quirks in CW than QP, so that every chassis/variant is viable in QP but some are less so in CW. Because given the nature of the game there will always be non-viable chassis/variants for CW, right now it's just that the ones with quirked energy weapons are enormously dominant.

[kapusta11]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 10:10 AM, said:

No, the IS ER LL already has a shorter duration with no quirks. It would need a duration PENALTY to be on par with the cERLL.

And then you consider 3 ER LL vs 2 cER LL when ghost heat comes in to play.

No one's arguing that cERLL does not suck, it does, but saying that weapon quirks, which were ment to balance weapons that people use all the time, need to go away based on disparity between the other two weapons that no one ever sees outside of Boreal Vault and Polar Highlands, is irrational.

Edited by kapusta11, 25 January 2016 - 10:59 AM.

[MischiefSC]

FupDup, on 25 January 2016 - 10:01 AM, said:

While I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your idea, I have to point out that the Clam ERLL actually has a slightly higher "beam time efficiency" than an IS ERLL that lacks duration quirks.

Clam: 11 damage / 1.5 seconds = 7.33333 damage per second of holding the beam
IS: 9 damage / 1.25 seconds = 7.2 damage per second of holding the beam

So, if the Clammer holds his beam on the IS mech for the same 1.25 seconds, his damage dealt will actually be a tiny bit higher than the IS mech deals to him.


The default range is actually just 135m.

I don't mind the slightly higher beam efficiency for CERLL because the heat per damage is inferior. Sure, 1 for 1 the IS loses by 1/10th of a point of damage per second of staring but he can do so for significantly longer and the IS ERLL is still pretty viable up close where the CERLL is way less so, especially if you're stacking it with other lasers.

I don't consider that an unreasonable tradeoff.

[Jables McBarty]

Jables McBarty, on 25 January 2016 - 10:30 AM, said:

-Pair a C-ERLL with a MkV targeting computer and Level 5 range and you get 851 optimal.

And of course once you add in TC, you pretty much negate any weight/CS advantage. 4xCERLL + TCm4 is the same T/CS as 4xERLL.