87 replies to this topic

[Gyrok]

Yeonne Greene, on 26 March 2016 - 03:33 PM, said:

Having the damage per tick be even isn't necessarily the goal.

Another way you could do it is leave cERLL at ghost 3, then shorten the duration just enough to make it worth firing through the ghost.

You would be absurdly hot unless they reduced the penalty for firing a 3rd.

[Y E O N N E]

Gyrok, on 26 March 2016 - 06:47 PM, said:

You would be absurdly hot unless they reduced the penalty for firing a 3rd.

It has to be 33 damage at 740 meters worth of hot, which means a tiny bit hotter than 4x isERLL because 65 meters is a mathematically stronger advantage than 3 damage. You also need to count the fact that a dedicated Clan ERLL carrier will be able to carry about 30% more DHS than the dedicated isERLL carrier of comparable weight...which means those cERLL have to be hot enough to not gain a soft DPS advantage, either.

Again, though, it's only one way to skin a cat.

[Gyrok]

Yeonne Greene, on 27 March 2016 - 09:09 AM, said:

It has to be 33 damage at 740 meters worth of hot, which means a tiny bit hotter than 4x isERLL because 65 meters is a mathematically stronger advantage than 3 damage. You also need to count the fact that a dedicated Clan ERLL carrier will be able to carry about 30% more DHS than the dedicated isERLL carrier of comparable weight...which means those cERLL have to be hot enough to not gain a soft DPS advantage, either.

Again, though, it's only one way to skin a cat.

Well, but you would get into scenarios where 6 ERLL assaults for the IS would no ghost heat, where clans would be ghost heat per volley with such a load.

Add to that clan DHS are already 1.1 to heat cap versus the 1.5 the IS gets, and the dissipation is basically the same, so it is not enough to offset the higher heat.

I would be all for your method if cDHS were restored to normal...

Edited by Gyrok, 27 March 2016 - 09:17 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Gyrok, on 27 March 2016 - 09:16 AM, said:

Well, but you would get into scenarios where 6 ERLL assaults for the IS would no ghost heat, where clans would be ghost heat per volley with such a load.

Add to that clan DHS are already 1.1 to heat cap versus the 1.5 the IS gets, and the dissipation is basically the same, so it is not enough to offset the higher heat.

I feel it necessary to point out here that the majority of IS extreme range specialists are assaults while the Clan options are heavies or mediums because the mounts on Clan assaults are not good for this. That makes the comparison a little less apples to apples. I think what we really need is a reasonably speedy Clan >85 tonner with cockpit-level mounts (i.e. the Omen or Mad Cat Mk. II). The Warhawk has the number of hard-points but must expose too much.

I also feel compelled to point out that it's also 0.15 Clan dissipation versus 0.14 IS. When we're talking about the typical 16-20 DHS vs. 20-30 (would be 30+ on a Clan assault), that's a dramatic difference in dissipation for a negligible difference in cap. I mean, let's pull out the WHK just for some what-ifs should a Clan 85-ton Assault with high energy mounts pop up, shall we?

I get 5x cERLL with 30x cDHS and a TC1...and I still have more than two tons left over. The Omen is a Clan BattleMech, so I have room to increase my engine. Comfortably. This gets even more ridiculous on a Mad Cat Mk. II.

So, really, that's what we're contending with. A Stalker only has 20 isDHS with 6x isERLL and plods along at a piddly 61.5 kph. A Battlemaster only has 19 at 63.5kph. With 5x isERLL, the Battlemaster has 20 at 67.5 kph. Even with an XL, I can't get more DHS in. So if we make it too easy to fire 3x cERLL by making the heat profile similar to the isERLL, also with a similar duration, what happens is that you have two 'Mechs with similar range and firepower...but one which can fire more often because it dissipates at a rate of 5.75 h/s versus 4.23 h/s. The Clan 'Mech even has the higher cap at 86.40 vs. 81.60. And it will be faster.

So that's fun theoretical stuff, how about 'Mechs that are actually in the game?

Assuming 3x cERLL heats about as much as 4x isERLL while having similar duration, you can drop that fourth laser on the Hellbringer and cram in four more cDHS (actually five, but one is in an armorless arm). Now you have 24 vs. 18, a 33% improvement. Assuming we've removed weapon quirks, the HBR now has a leg up on the QKD unless we make the isERLL colder than it is or the cERLL hotter. Which is currently why we have quirks, the equation is just currently lopsided.

There are a whole host of things we can do to ERLLs from both sides to make them even, I just want you to measure all of the outcomes before championing anything in particular.

[Tarogato]

Crickey, I've had enough of all this bickering and I can't be arsed to read the rest of it, so let me just do some maths...

Here's my worksheet: https://docs.google....#gid=1316222417

Interesting tidbit: If you equip 4x ERLL on both IS and Clan, those both have the same DoT (damage over time... or kinda like damage per tick, or dps)

• Clan: 22.000
  
• IS: 22.154 (including 10% duration quirk)
  
• IS: 20.571 (without duration quirks)

I would say IS wins without a doubt, especially when you also consider that IS can stagger 3+1, while Clan is forced to stagger 2+2. But to add insult to injury, the Clan loadout is 4 tons lighter, so if we add extra heatsinks

• IS heat per weapon cycle: 32
  
• Clan heat per weapon cycle: 37

Clan is objectively hotter, and only gets 4 meters of extra range (basically nothing at all), while having roughly equal damage over time.

---

Now, as to the whole LL vs LPL thing... the answer is simple. LL are better beyond ~480 meters (exact range depending on quirks and modules, but LL is easily better outside 500 meters)




However, there's a few questions left over. Large lasers weigh two tons less, so how does the heat efficiency compare when you spend the saved tonnage on extra heatsinks? Also... how does the ERLL compare?




As you can see, the LPL is the optimum weapon in its own optimum range. As soon as you are at 500 meters, the LPL is inferior. From 410m to 465m, the LL with two extra heatsinks is superior. From beyond 465m, the ERLL with two extra is superior. I've also included in the graph the LL and ERLL without extra heatsinks.

(note: if you use 4x LL, it weighs one ton less then 3x LPL, so you only get one extra heatsinks, so the efficiency is quite terrible, however still superior to 3x LPL outside 500m)

---

CONCLUSION:
For best results:

Use LPL inside ~450m
Use LL between ~450m and ~630m
Use ERLL beyond ~630m

[Rathverge]

Tarogato, on 27 March 2016 - 12:36 PM, said:

CONCLUSION:
For best results:

Use LPL inside ~450m
Use LL between ~450m and ~630m
Use ERLL beyond ~630m

Trying to be reasonable and logical in a forum with no hidden agenda...
How
Dare
You.

[Tarogato]

Rathverge, on 27 March 2016 - 12:59 PM, said:

Trying to be reasonable and logical in a forum with no hidden agenda...
How
Dare
You.

[ArmandTulsen]

If it hasn't been said yet, ERLL (forget LL) for CW/FW, LPL for QP.