9 replies to this topic

[MauttyKoray]

NOTE: This is a first revision of an idea for lasers. Input and constructive discussion is welcome, off topic conversation or derailing of the topic with QQ about balance of ISvClan and similar such is not.

Also, I know this only covers lasers, however I have not yet figured out a write-up for ballistic ranges or PPCs. (though I would assume a similar method could be applied to PPCs as was done here with lasers)

My general thoughts on the lasers were that you have standards as the basis, with ER gaining a touch more firepower with longer optimal range (and slightly higher maximum as a result, but not as much as current game state) at the cost of higher heat and burn time. Inversely pulses trade off better DPS with a lower burn time in exchange for reduced range and due to the lower burn time, higher heat from the overall reduced time it takes to burn and cycle the weapon.

As for the Clan vs IS, this should be made clear as Clans tend to have even longer burn times and heat generation than the IS lasers do with (heat generation mitigated by the spread over burn, however still makes them hot when used more than 1 at a time), with again slightly higher damage (usually 1 point) due to their lore based tech improvement.

I'm 100% for balancing the sides and weapons themselves while keeping some flavor to them. I'm not a fan of the Clans being 100% better (sorry TT/Lore guys!) but I absolutely despise the stance that people have been taking about pretty much uniforming and making this game 'Copy/Paste Mech Wars'.

Post in Spoiler:

Spoiler

Here's a write up for my idea on this issue balancing standard and ER weapons and reeling in ranges, especially the Maximum ranges (which are insane). Be nice, it was a rough pass with small revisions and I gave up because the overall topic was absolutely troll-worthy in its responses.

I think a lot of the issue in the fact that we can SHOOT OVER 1000M. LRMs were supposed to be the farthest reaching weapon in the game, but now we have post-1000M energy and ballistics that make fights really insane and people sniping with 3ERLLs out at like 1300M.

IMO we need to refocus this issue on the Maximum Ranges of weapons, and reign them in significantly. Reduce them to things like 20% of the current Effective Range or something (change depending on weapon I guess?), go through and change each weapon.

Lets say
SLs-80% while the ERs get like 50%
MLs 60% while the ERs get 25%
LLs at 30% with the ERs netting a 10%

Quote

SL - 135 / 243 (3 dmg, 2 heat, 2.25 CD, 0.75 duration, 1 DPS)
CERSL - 200 / 300 (5 dmg, 3 heat, 2.25 CD, 1.00 duration, 1.53 DPS)

^- Thats an issue imo, massive DPS difference. Possibly reduce by 1 DMG? Brings the DPS down to 1.23 while the remaining weapon is untouched. Balancing the IS ERSL, I'd say 4 dmg, 4 heat, 2.25 CS, 0.9 duration = 3.15 TCT and 1.26 DPS. This would give the ERSL a slightly better DPS at a heat cost (remember clans were supposed to be superior in heat... lets give it some flavor).

Quote

ML - 270 / 432 (5 dmg, 4 heat, 3 CD, 0.9 duration, 1.28 DPS)
CERML - 405 / 506 (7 dmg, 6 heat, 3 CD, 1.15 duration, 1.68 DPS)

^- again, clans are only ER, IS will also get ER, assumption is they will be similar to CER, possibly with slightly less duration, and 1 point less damage, and slightly less range (maybe 50m?). Problem is making both ML and ERML viable once it happens. Suggested, 6 dmg, 5 heat, 3 CD, 1 duration for = 4 TCT with a 1.5 DPS. Bring the range up to be a bit more competitive and the slightly lower DPS will be made up for by the lower burn time. I honestly wanted to suggest 6 heat for the ISERML, but I feel like that would cause I riot without a tweak to something else... maybe 6 heat, but then keep 0.9 duration for 1.53 dps? Or 7 dmg 7 heat but then 1.10 duration for 1.7 DPS? <--That doesn't sound bad...heat penalty and lower range would give it a nice balance for a higher damage burst over the same duration. Unique but neither overpowering the other at all situations?

Quote

LL - 450 / 562 (9 dmg, 7 heat, 3.25 CD, 1 duration, 2.12 DPS)
ERLL - 675 / 742 (9 dmg, 8 heat, 3.25 CD, 1.25 duration, 2 DPS)
CERLL - 740 / 814 (11 dmg, 10 heat, 3.25 CD, 1.50 duration, 2.31 DPS.

^- I actually see no issue with the LL series personally, OTHER THAN, the ridiculous range they've had for so long. I'm sorry but I like this A LOT MORE, a max of 814m on a LL without modules/quirks/etc? YES PLEASE. The CERLL has a noticeably higher DPS and slightly more raw damage, but that's spread over an extra .25 seconds and an extra 2 heat generated in total. Plus the reduction to a mere 100m or less in difference between the C and IS ERs feel like a much better place for them to sit by far.

These are weird... CSPL is +80%, CMPL is +70%, and CLPL is +100??? W...T...F... these are all sort of nope. Another split modification incoming!

SPLs-100% while the Cs get like 70%
MPLs 75% while the Cs get 35%
LPLs at 50% with the Cs netting a 15%

Quote

SPL - 110 / 220 (4 dmg, 2 heat, 2.25 CD, 0.5 duration, 1.45 DPS)
CSPL - 165 / 280 (6 dmg, 3 heat, 2.25 CD, 0.75 duration, 2 DPS?!)

^Huge DPS difference, recommend either reducing CSPL to 5 dmg for 1.66 DPS (preferred method) or up heat to 4 to compensate mainly for superior DPS and lesser so for range superiority. It can nearly compete with an ISMPL in range and has huge DPS, not okay.

Quote

MPL - 220 / 385 (6 dmg, 4 heat, 3 CD, 0.6 duration, 1.66 DPS)
CMPL - 330 / 445 (8 dmg, 6 heat, 3 CD, 0.85 duration, 2.07 DPS) <- WOW

^Again, recommend reducing damage to 7 for a 1.81 DPS at least. 2.07 is massive and we wonder why we have issues with PPFLD laser vomit?

Quote

LPL - 365 / 547 (11 dmg, 7 heat, 3.25 CD, 0.67 duration, 2.80 DPS) <-Seriously?
CLPL - 600 / 690 (13 dmg, 10 heat, 3.25 CD, 1.12 duration, 2.98 DPS) <-SERIOUSLY?!

^(I say 540 / 621 is better on CLPL)
^Sorry but no, 600m? Bad, this is really messed up, I know CERLL is far but think of this as a non-ER laser, even the CSPL and CMPL are restricted to a +50% gap, this one is +64%! Its bad, I have to say. I understand more IS tech is beyond this but...WOW. Reduce to 540 which is just below at 48%
^Once again, WTF NEARLY 3 DPS?! Here's my suggestion below:

Quote

LPL - 365 / 547 (10 dmg, 7 heat, 3.25 CD, 0.75 duration, 2.50 DPS) <-up to 8 heat? combat LPL boats?
CLPL - 540 / 621 (12 dmg, 10 heat, 3.25 CD, 1.15 duration, 2.72 DPS)

^Makes the LPL a low duration alternative to LL at cost of range with slightly more damage and it at least tones the DPS down, LPL boats are an issue. Still the highest DPS for lasers thought with respectable range for IS.
^CLPL reduced as well, but retains slightly higher DPS over the cost of a much lower duration and massive heat generation.



HOWEVER, quirks will need a major overhaul after this. Missiles don't follow this mechanic so there isn't really an issue there, but ballistics will also need a similar overhaul to pull them in and stop letting them hit at stupidly insane ranges, I understand some are supposed to shoot 'far' but 720/1440 on an AC5 and 540/1080 on an AC10 is silly.

Think of it this way, the clans 'improved' their tech, so think of them producing 'less waste' (smaller maximum range %s) and instead having a higher effective range to begin with, maybe doing a little more damage, but improvements will require more heat, longer burn times, etc. In contrast, hastily improved IS tech will have better range, damage, and retain a better burn time, but at the cost of generating more/comparable heat to the Clan's weapons without achieving quite the damage or range. Its all trade off and finding a place for it to sit.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 30 January 2016 - 04:36 PM.

[Mcgral18]

I'd like to re-iterate...nerfing the only good Small Lasers in the game isn't something I can support.
cSPL, maybe a small touch down, but cERSL? It's an actual choice to take a pair over a cERML.

isSL VS isML? You'd be foolish to choose a pair.


Buff the isSLs, don't nerf the cSLs.


As for ranges, I'm already feeling the current nerf for cSPLs. (let alone the IS ones...that much be a painful experience)
If you drop their damage to the ERSL range, it's a solid NOPE from me, because I'll just take the ERSLs (which are now shorter ranged than the old cSPLs)


cLPL touchdown, I can support. It's silly that IT still has the 1200M range (the only, previously, regularly used Clam long range laser) while the cSPL and cMPL (of all things) got the nerf.
A major PGI decision there.

[Wolfways]

I'm not sure why weapons would need range nerfs as the majority of arena maps already do that.

[MauttyKoray]

Mcgral18, on 30 January 2016 - 04:16 PM, said:

I'd like to re-iterate...nerfing the only good Small Lasers in the game isn't something I can support.
cSPL, maybe a small touch down, but cERSL? It's an actual choice to take a pair over a cERML.

isSL VS isML? You'd be foolish to choose a pair.


Buff the isSLs, don't nerf the cSLs.


As for ranges, I'm already feeling the current nerf for cSPLs. (let alone the IS ones...that much be a painful experience)
If you drop their damage to the ERSL range, it's a solid NOPE from me, because I'll just take the ERSLs (which are now shorter ranged than the old cSPLs)


cLPL touchdown, I can support. It's silly that IT still has the 1200M range (the only, previously, regularly used Clam long range laser) while the cSPL and cMPL (of all things) got the nerf.
A major PGI decision there.

Here's the problem, you're talking about the current state of the game, quirks included. I'm talking solely of the base stats on the weapons themselves. Also take into account that LLs and ML (standard, ER, and Clan) have mitigated maximum range as well.

If you'd like to input on the CER/SLs, please input relevant ideas on the ranges/stats.

My general thoughts on the lasers were that you have standards as the basis, with ER gaining a touch more firepower with longer range at the cost of higher heat and burn time. Inversely pulses trade off better DPS with a lower burn time in exchange for reduced range and due to the lower burn time, higher heat from the overall reduced time it takes to burn and cycle the weapon.

As for the Clan vs IS, this should be made clear as Clans tend to have even longer burn times and heat generation than the IS lasers do with (heat generation mitigated by the spread over burn, however still makes them hot when used more than 1 at a time), with again slightly higher damage (usually 1 point) due to their lore based tech improvement.

I'm 100% for balancing the sides and weapons themselves while keeping some flavor to them. I'm not a fan of the Clans being 100% better (sorry TT/Lore guys!) but I absolutely despise the stance that people have been taking about pretty much uniforming and making this game 'Copy/Paste Mech Wars'.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 30 January 2016 - 04:30 PM.

[Wintersdark]

I like how you point out the DPS differences as huge, but pass entirely over the HPS/HPD differences. Those should really be in that list too.

Without them, it certainly seems to be deliberately biased.

[MauttyKoray]

Wintersdark, on 30 January 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

I like how you point out the DPS differences as huge, but pass entirely over the HPS/HPD differences. Those should really be in that list too.

Without them, it certainly seems to be deliberately biased.

Actually that's pretty much an oversight and I didn't even think about the HPS/HDPS (HPD would be Heat per Dissipation, lol). Thanks for inputting that and I'll work that into the next revision of the stats.

I'll have to take in a little extra time though, as I don't have the base HDPS on hand for MWO, plus that would have to be taken into account based separately upon the use of IS SHS/DHS and Clan DHS wouldn't it? Otherwise, the HPS would be an easy calculation.

Edit: This is the kind of constructive input I'm talking about.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 30 January 2016 - 05:03 PM.

[Wintersdark]

MauttyKoray, on 30 January 2016 - 04:58 PM, said:

Actually that's pretty much an oversight and I didn't even think about the HPS/HDPS (HPD would be Heat per Dissipation, lol). Thanks for inputting that and I'll work that into the next revision of the stats.

I'll have to take in a little extra time though, as I don't have the base HDPS on hand for MWO, plus that would have to be taken into account based separately upon the use of IS SHS/DHS and Clan DHS wouldn't it? Otherwise, the HPS would be an easy calculation.

Edit: This is the kind of constructive input I'm talking about.

Excluding quirks:

cERSL: DPS: 1.54, DPH: 1.67, HPS: 0.92
SL: DPS: 1.0, DPH: 1.5, HPS: 0.67

So, the cERSL does 50% more damage, but generates roughly 50% more heat per second continually firing. It's *slightly* more efficient at converting heat into damage, but not enormously.

cERML: DPS 1.69, DPH: 1.17, HPS 1.45
ML: DPS 1.28, DPH: 1.25, 1.03

So a Medium Laser pushes roughly 25% less DPS, but it does so at 30% less HPS, being more efficient than the clan ERML.
cMPL: DPS 2.08, DPH: 1.33, HPS 1.56
MPL: DPS 1.67, DPH 1.5, HPS 1.11

20% less dps for the MPL, but more heat efficient and 30% less heat per second.

cLPL: DPS 2.97, DPH 1.3, HPS 2.29
LPL: DPS 2.81, DPH 1.57, HPS 1.79
LL: DPS 2.12, DPH 1.29, HPS 1.65

Again, while the IS lasers are pushing less DPS (though the LPL vs. cLPL is very close) they're doing it at comparable to better damage per heat and and substantially less heat per second.

cERLL: DPS 2.32, DPH 1.10, HPS 2.11
ERLL: DPS 2.0, DPH 1.13, HPS 1.78

Only 14% less dps, comparable heat conversion, and 15% less heat per second.

The picture is much less one sided with this. Energy heavy IS mechs are more heat efficient, and can push more damage out before hitting heat cap. While Clan DHS do dissipate a tiny bit more now, in practice that's a very, very small amount (it only affects PoorDubs, so 0.01HPS per DHS>10)

Now, I'm not saying all is wonderful and balanced, but that it's a much more complex comparison than just the DPS.

And its all before quirks. Virtually all major energy based IS mechs are sporting multiple energy quirks. Even if we ignore the (soon to be reduced) enhanced ranges, move have 10-15% heat reductions (and they're already more heat efficient) and cooldown decreases (thus generally offsetting the heat reduction and shifting it to DPS increase at the same heat generation).

Now, I'd be first in line to argue that they should just buff IS lasers and remove those quirks, as it makes weapon vs. weapon discussions way easier to have without having to either creatively ignore the mechs using said weapons having multiple 10-25% buffs, or hand-wave away issues because just a couple mechs have really huge quirks for specific weapons.

This, of course, is where my disgruntlement with quirks in general comes in, as it's extremely irritating to try to discuss base weapon performance when there are armor, structure, and weapon quirks on the field.

[MauttyKoray]

Oh you were talking about DPH? I guess I was thinking in more of a real heat dissipation stat or something. Effectively the amount of heat both generated and dissipated over the course of the weapon used.

ex: Tabletop uses a '10 second turn' to calculate heat generated and dissipated. Which effectively is like saying over a 10 second period, the mech is able to fire 'x weapons' which generate 'y' heat of which 'z' can be cooled within that period. Minding the fact that this is a 10 second interval, not an 'instant' like how mechs alpha strike in MWO. So I've been trying to keep everything balance in that respect.

I thought the range advantage the Clan weapons kept would help compensate though. Mind you, I'm both an IS and Clan player, having started as and always been a loyal Kell Hound, but I switched to Wolf for the ability to play to my schedule in a unit. So I have experience with both and would also prefer a 'balanced' game with flavor to either an imbalanced one or a bland Copy/Paste faction shooter.

[Wintersdark]

Yeah. While I'm in a Clan CW unit, I'm not a dedicated "Clanner" - I've got some 70 IS mechs I use regularly in addition to my 50 or so Clan mechs.

It's why I really support the range nerf. Not because I want to see IS lasers nerfed - current CW state notwithstanding, I still feel IS vs. Clan is as balanced as it's ever been, if still imperfect. However, Clan ER Lasers simply should have a range advantage at the cost of burn time and heat. They do. And the heat generation difference is pretty substantial, too.

There's some imbalances, still. Clan Small Pulse Lasers are still extremely good brawling weapons (but don't need a nerf, we absolutely don't need to be nerfing brawling anywhere, particularly not clan side). I'd personally recommend dropping Medium Laser heat by 1 point.

This brings them down to their TT heat, but I don't care about that (TT balance != MWO balance, and really should be disregarded in balance discussions) - what it DOES do is makes the "general purpose" short ranged IS laser substantially more heat efficient, giving IS a strong competitor in the bracket.

In the mid-range bracket, the ghost heat differential is an important consideration, allowing IS mechs to better utilize 3xLPL and LL builds, which are extremely effective, and not really an option Clan side. The clan weapons are smaller and lighter, but even if you calculate in the weapon+1DHS (giving you comparable size and weight) the IS weapons are still more heat efficient, so that seems pretty reasonable, all in all.

And, of course, quirks.

So, yeah. If I where kind for a day, I'd go ahead with cutting out the big range quirks IS side. On the mechs that lost a lot (those that were kind of "dog" mechs anyways) I'd give them comparable heat and cooldown buffs instead. This preserves the "Clan Weapons Shoot Further/IS Weapons Are Cooler" concept. I'd drop ML's to 4 heat, as well.

Then go from there.

[MauttyKoray]

I'll look into the CPL range and ML heat, but ultimately I'm also attempting to future-proof, or at least mitigate, the balance while keeping in mind that IS ER lasers will also make a debut in the future.

The maximum range mechanic has also been a big balance issue imo, the purely 2x range is crazy and creates issues like the super sniper C/ER/LLs we've had to deal with. Though, the 1 heat on ML may actually play into balancing the IS ERML as well.