68 replies to this topic

[oldradagast]

Lucian Nostra, on 13 April 2016 - 05:53 AM, said:

I suggest before knocking something you actually understand it. What reduced damage on Gauss rifles? There is no reduced damage on ANYTHING in TT for range.. being under min range imposes a penalty to shoot because of targeting software, cumbersomeness of the weapon and the way to weapon fires its projectile. Hell even LRMs do full damage under min range at massive to hit penalties.

Now, if only PGI realized that PPC's weren't meant to do zero damage under their minimum range and people stopped trying to use Lore to defend that silliness... on topic indirectly since we're talking about currently useless weapons (PPC, LBX, etc.)

[LordNothing]

the problem with that is the lb10 (and other lbs but these numbers are for the 10) is balanced as a weapon that has a 540 meter optimal range and a 1,620 max range. it should be balanced as if it only had a 300 range and a 600 meter max. it shouldn't have a max range falloff like an ac since it already has a source of damage falloff (spread). the two stack and the numbers falsely define the weapon's capabilities. by the time you pass optimal the spread has already made the weapon useless and further reduction is pointless. whatever balance metrics they use do not compensate for this. you might argue that its crit seeking capabilities make up for it but i think those abilities are grossly overstated.

the large pellet damage / low count is actually more to reduce the game's physics complexity, as thats the thing that can really kill performance. but i think it kind of goes overboard. not enough people boat 2 class guns for it to matter. i can boat 10s and put 40 pellets into the air but put 12 into the air with a lb2 dire and you are supposidly breaking things. so bringing it up to 4 or 5 pellets is still less pellet spawny than a quad 10 build.

[wanderer]

Rushin Roulette, on 13 April 2016 - 03:48 AM, said:

Well, seeing as many of the TT rules are just compeltely unrealistic and can not be explained (Gauss dealing reduced damage under minimal range for example)

Gauss rifles are less -accurate- inside minimum range, not less damage in TT.

And as far as the LB-X is concerned, it's not a shotgun in TT. It's a flak cannon- a shell that bursts and sprays the target with submunitions when it hits, not an oversized blunderbuss like MWO would have it. Heck, even the old Flak Cannon from Unreal Tournament would be a more accurate representation than what we have here.

Heck, turning the LB-X in MWO to a solid shot that does random scatter damage across a 'Mech it hits would be closer to it's original function than what we have now.

Karl Streiger, on 13 April 2016 - 05:59 AM, said:

anyhow all those range rules were necessary to play a balanced game on a table - and should never have been translated with no change into a first person shooter.

What's hilarious is that AC/2, AC/5's and UAC/5s all have minimum ranges in TT along with Gauss rifles.

MWO just arbitrarily decided ballistics ignored that and slapped penalties on PPC's and LRMs anyway.

[Death Proof]

I'd love to see all LBX weapons fire a number of "pellets" with each round according to its rating (i.e., 2 for LBX-2, 5 for LBX-5, etc.) with each pellet causing 2 damage.

Adjust the spread pattern as needed.

Tabletop BT was written for...the tabletop game. They need to let go of all these arbitrary rules that worked fine in a tabletop setting, but really have no place in a realtime environment.

Identifying the spirit of what the weapon was supposed to be is most important...then start from there to see how that weapon should act in a realtime setting like MWO.

[Alex Morgaine]

El Bandito, on 13 April 2016 - 05:04 AM, said:

2/5/10/20 can simply be the number of pellets fired, the pellet damage itself can be changed. PGI already changed a lot of weapons' damage value, so there is no reason not to touch LBX numbers.

I think the pellets should deal around 1.5 damage, for starters, and the LBX range reduced.

Hmmm... I count about 19 bullet effects on the wall. Assuming one overlaps that would be a 20 equivalent.
Can that be used as a way to fix up lbx issues?

[ColdPsyker1]

Mystere, on 13 April 2016 - 02:02 PM, said:

Somewhere on these forums is a first/second-hand statement stating specifically that PGI is unable to implement ammo switching because the developer who wrote the code no longer works for PGI. Implied but not stated is that no one else in PGI understands the code.

That would be a presumption that would hold up in court. thanks

[LordNothing]

Mystere, on 13 April 2016 - 02:02 PM, said:

Somewhere on these forums is a first/second-hand statement stating specifically that PGI is unable to implement ammo switching because the developer who wrote the code no longer works for PGI. Implied but not stated is that no one else in PGI understands the code.

ive seen unqualified modders take horrible spaghetti code and turn it into a well polished machine capable of things well beyond what was though possible by the original coder. so i totally have to call bs on this notion that the code is in fact a cryptic mess that no one can make sense of.

Edited by LordNothing, 13 April 2016 - 07:57 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Arent LBX generally accepted as being crap? And the larger the bore the worse?

Also; that hilarious line about them having fired the guy who did the code for the ammo and thats why there will never be switching.

LordNothing, on 13 April 2016 - 07:55 PM, said:

ive seen unqualified modders take horrible spaghetti code and turn it into a well polished machine capable of things well beyond what was though possible by the original coder. so i totally have to call bs on this notion that the code is in fact a cryptic mess that no one can make sense of.

Not saying its TRUE (in my case) but saying thats the excuse we've been given

ColdPsyker1, on 13 April 2016 - 07:32 PM, said:

That would be a presumption that would hold up in court. thanks

Didnt know this was a case where a legal definition was required as proof? IE we're not in court

oldradagast, on 13 April 2016 - 04:31 PM, said:

Now, if only PGI realized that PPC's weren't meant to do zero damage under their minimum range and people stopped trying to use Lore to defend that silliness... on topic indirectly since we're talking about currently useless weapons (PPC, LBX, etc.)

Especially when lore isnt used for a damn thing else in this game

Such a bs excuse when we're looking at what 16/32 points a ton armor etc etcetcetcetc of things that ARENT lore in this game roflmao

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Think flak cannon opposed to shot gun.