70 replies to this topic

[Moldur]

Khobai, on 22 June 2016 - 09:27 AM, said:

no one should die easily. armor technology surpasses weapons technology in the battletech universe. thats why mechs live so long in tabletop, and weapons can only chip away at armor, rather than penetrating through it. TTK should definitely be higher in MWO to make it feel more like a mech sim/fps hybrid game rather than call of duty with mechs.

It sounds reasonable, but assuming the new new minimap or other soon-to-be feature does nothing to keep people from piling together in big groups, this will be really detrimental to the usefulness of the individual while heavily favoring focused fire. The disparity of TTK of an individual firing on another vs a group firing on an individual increases. i.e. If we all had 10 hitpoints and did 5 damage per shot, 1 guy could do the job, 2 would be better, 3 would be overkill. If we all had 100 hitpoints and did 5 damage per shot, 1 guy would take forever to kill a guy, while 10 guys would only need 2 salvos. It is a see-saw of sorts.

I suppose you could counter by saying it would change the dynamic of the game so much that focused fire would fall apart since TTK would be so long that firing lines could be overrun before anyone was seriously damaged.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Moldur, on 22 June 2016 - 09:40 AM, said:

I suppose you could counter by saying it would change the dynamic of the game so much that focused fire would fall apart since TTK would be so long that firing lines could be overrun before anyone was seriously damaged.

This is the exact counter argument to extending TTK. Dakka/Brawl pushes for days.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 22 June 2016 - 09:49 AM.

[Coolant]

I haven't noticed needing extra ammo.

[Navid A1]

Hotthedd, on 22 June 2016 - 08:52 AM, said:

You are correct that I did not factor the ability to take a larger engine into account, but that supports my point! Yes, I am basing my argument more on boats than single weapons because that is what we get in MW:O. PGI has habitually made the mistake of attempting to balance on the premise of a single weapon, but in MW:O multiple weapons of the same type will ALWAYS be the most efficient way to kill enemies due to instant convergence.
An A/C boat is dangerous because of its high DPS (and PPFLD). It is more dangerous if it also has a backup weapon (or more speed, or better dissipation, etc.)

Is is breaking the game? No. Is the AC/10-UAC/10 the current FOTM because of the ammo increase? Yep. What do you think will happen if that power creep were applied to ALL ACs?

If an extra DHS is unnecessary, then the bonus weight/crit savings will go to something else that is more effective. You are asking for a buff to a weapons system that, quite frankly does not need it. The dakka builds are already very strong and very popular.
If an extra DHS won't make a difference, or possibly a faster engine or more armor or an extra backup weapon is negligible, or the extra ammo is not a big deal, then WHY are you asking for it in the first place?

To help the hard-point starved mechs such as summoners and shadowcats.

it was NEVER about boats... it is NOT going to affect boats in ANY WAY.

Yet it will make a night/day difference on low-hardpoint mechs which are currently extinct.

[627]

How about a module? You can get up to [10-20]% more ammo if you equip "LRM tight packed 5" for 3million cbills?

It is not about another cbill sink but the idea is you have to give up another weapon module slot for it. I mean there are enough builds that can last a match without ammo problems...

So you have to choose... more range, faster or more rounds.

We should start thinking sidegrades, not upgrades. we have enough powercreep already.

[Funkin Disher]

1 Ton ammo = 200 damage.

Said it so many times now...

[Navid A1]

Funkin Disher, on 23 June 2016 - 09:53 PM, said:

1 Ton ammo = 200 damage.

Said it so many times now...

That sums it up.

627, on 23 June 2016 - 09:26 PM, said:

How about a module? You can get up to [10-20]% more ammo if you equip "LRM tight packed 5" for 3million cbills?

It is not about another cbill sink but the idea is you have to give up another weapon module slot for it. I mean there are enough builds that can last a match without ammo problems...

So you have to choose... more range, faster or more rounds.

We should start thinking sidegrades, not upgrades. we have enough powercreep already.

Yes, that could work...

Also in the past:

[XtremWarrior]

I have a question for the ones saying we don't need more ammo/ton:

Would you put back the AC10 ammo to 10 shots per ton?
If not, why would AC10s be the sole AC in the game carrying 200 damages per Ton? Why is it ok for this peculiar weapons?


(i wouldn't go for double value but a bit more ammo per ton - OP's value, for exemple - on all ACs other than the "10" would help decrease the All-Mighty-Lasers domination)

Edited by XtremWarrior, 24 June 2016 - 01:37 AM.

[TexAce]

Sorry but no. Would reduce TTK.

If you want your ammo to last till the last enemy mech, simply equip more of it. Trade damage for ammo. Simple as that. This would increase TTK.

[Navid A1]

TexAce, on 24 June 2016 - 01:44 AM, said:

Sorry but no. Would reduce TTK.

If you want your ammo to last till the last enemy mech, simply equip more of it. Trade damage for ammo. Simple as that. This would increase TTK.

Where should i equip it?... carry bags?
Imagine a summoner or a shadowcat... where should the ammo go? magic extra tonnage?
more ammo per ton will have zero effect on boats... but it will help underperforming mechs to carry a big gun.

Right now... if a mech can not boat 2 or more heavy ballistics, or don't have 6 or more lasers or is not super quirked for PPCs... its considered utterly useless.

Why is that?... because of the crazy durability quirks everywhere.... why the hell should i put spend tonnage on more ammo when i can pack 2-3 LPLs and do a ton more damage that i can ever do with a single heavy ballistic.
And everyone wonders why lasers are meta.



Also...
Why is it so hard to understand that more ammo does not increase potential BURST DPS which is the main reason behind TTK.
Do people even know what factor affect TTK?.... (highly doubt it)
Carrying more ammo does not make a weapon fire faster. Also a single double heatsink, or a 1 ton heavier engine have practically no effect.

[Strum Wealh]

XtremWarrior, on 24 June 2016 - 01:35 AM, said:

I have a question for the ones saying we don't need more ammo/ton:

Would you put back the AC10 ammo to 10 shots per ton?
If not, why would AC10s be the sole AC in the game carrying 200 damages per Ton? Why is it ok for this peculiar weapons?

Set the AC/10 & LB 10-X to 15 rounds per ton (for a damage potential of 150 dmg/ton), to bring them in-line with the other current AC settings (AC/2 at 150 dmg/ton (75 rounds/ton, 2 dmg/round), AC/5 at 150 dmg/ton (30 rounds/ton, 5 dmg/round), AC/20 at 140 dmg/ton (7 rounds/ton, 20 dmg/round), UAC/5 at 150 dmg/ton (30 rounds/ton, 5 dmg/round)).

--------------------

XtremWarrior, on 24 June 2016 - 01:35 AM, said:

(i wouldn't go for double value but a bit more ammo per ton - OP's value, for exemple - on all ACs other than the "10" would help decrease the All-Mighty-Lasers domination)

If "the All-Mighty-Lasers domination" is the problem, then the solution is to address the lasers directly, through any of several available means (increasing per-salvo heat generation, decreasing per-salvo damage output, increasing "burn time", and/or increasing recycle time).

[Navid A1]

Strum Wealh, on 24 June 2016 - 02:05 AM, said:

----------

If "the All-Mighty-Lasers domination" is the problem, then the solution is to address the lasers directly, through any of several available means (increasing per-salvo heat generation, decreasing per-salvo damage output, increasing "burn time", and/or increasing recycle time).

Doesn't matter with the current insane armor and durability quirks.

Energy wepons have infinite ammo and instant travel time and more punch than so called ballistic spitball shooters...that is what matters.

Besides... why are we arguing?

PGI has already abandoned the forums...

What is the point.

[Karl Streiger]

XtremWarrior, on 24 June 2016 - 01:35 AM, said:

I have a question for the ones saying we don't need more ammo/ton:

Would you put back the AC10 ammo to 10 shots per ton?
If not, why would AC10s be the sole AC in the game carrying 200 damages per Ton? Why is it ok for this peculiar weapons?

First the 20shots per ton for AC10 were created to buff this supar weapon system (strange decision but not the worst ever made)

If the burst damage is adequate i would take the AC10 with 10shots per ton - even when I can only load 1-1.5tons as long as the damage i can deal in a short period is measurable higher than those of energy weapons.

Maybe some can remember the AC10 and the PPC of CB -both with 3sec cooldown: Complete Wrong - although the heat system with SHS did work so the issue of PPCs was heat and so again the 3sec cooldown for AC10 allowed it to be fired more often - although the Gauss was the better choice in most cases.

Navid A1, on 24 June 2016 - 02:11 AM, said:

Doesn't matter with the current insane armor and durability quirks.

Energy wepons have infinite ammo and instant travel time and more punch than so called ballistic spitball shooters...that is what matters.

Besides... why are we arguing?

PGI has already abandoned the forums...

What is the point.

this would matter when the cooldown for energy weapon get increased (its obscene that PPC and AC20 used to have the same cooldown)

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Ammo based weapons need at least 200 damage per ton.

Lets look at an AC20, alone its 14 tons, you need ammo to fire it, 1 ton of ammo gives you only 140 damage

So lets look at a large pulse laser given 15 tons to work with, 7 tons and you get 8 heatsinks. Your mech comes with 10 stock. It takes 18 SINGLE heatsinks to completely negate its heat, so you'd never overheat and never run out of ammo with that large pulse laser, but after just 7 shots your AC20 is worthless tonnage.

I'm just saying could all weapons get at least 200 damage per ton to make them not so out of balance. You can fire a laser all you want on pot shots and get little bits of damage here and there without any waste since you cool off quick enough, but with ammo based weapons every shot you take has to count or reduces the maximum damage you can do in that match and can leave you with nothing if you survive long enough.

[Navid A1]

Dakota1000, on 24 June 2016 - 02:20 AM, said:

Ammo based weapons need at least 200 damage per ton.

Lets look at an AC20, alone its 14 tons, you need ammo to fire it, 1 ton of ammo gives you only 140 damage

So lets look at a large pulse laser given 15 tons to work with, 7 tons and you get 8 heatsinks. Your mech comes with 10 stock. It takes 18 SINGLE heatsinks to completely negate its heat, so you'd never overheat and never run out of ammo with that large pulse laser, but after just 7 shots your AC20 is worthless tonnage.

I'm just saying could all weapons get at least 200 damage per ton to make them not so out of balance. You can fire a laser all you want on pot shots and get little bits of damage here and there without any waste since you cool off quick enough, but with ammo based weapons every shot you take has to count or reduces the maximum damage you can do in that match and can leave you with nothing if you survive long enough.

sadly, all people have in their minds is that ballistic boat that killed them last match.
Its obvious in their responses.

not ONE time anyone considered low performers with limited ballistic based hardpoints.

[Pjwned]

We do need more ammo, but it needs to come in exchange with ammo explosions mattering a lot more, which means needing a critical hit system that doesn't suck ***.

Armor/structure quirks just need to go away.

[TexAce]

Navid A1, on 24 June 2016 - 02:03 AM, said:

Where should i equip it?... carry bags?
Imagine a summoner or a shadowcat... where should the ammo go? magic extra tonnage?
more ammo per ton will have zero effect on boats... but it will help underperforming mechs to carry a big gun.

Right now... if a mech can not boat 2 or more heavy ballistics, or don't have 6 or more lasers or is not super quirked for PPCs... its considered utterly useless.

Why is that?... because of the crazy durability quirks everywhere.... why the hell should i put spend tonnage on more ammo when i can pack 2-3 LPLs and do a ton more damage that i can ever do with a single heavy ballistic.
And everyone wonders why lasers are meta.



Also...
Why is it so hard to understand that more ammo does not increase potential BURST DPS which is the main reason behind TTK.
Do people even know what factor affect TTK?.... (highly doubt it)
Carrying more ammo does not make a weapon fire faster. Also a single double heatsink, or a 1 ton heavier engine have practically no effect.

Nope. Wrong.

For everyone who knows how to manage his/her ammo and has no problems right now, it just means they can trade a ton of ammo for a ML or SL, which in return DOES reduce TTK.

I really couldn't care less for everyone who puts ACs up to the neck onto their mechs and then cant find place for ammo for all those ACs. Take one AC less, you have enough place for ammo..

Basic rules should not change for outlier mechs like the Summoner which would probably stay shite neverthanless. If its so bad, give it an ammo quirk and call it a day.

Edited by TexAce, 24 June 2016 - 03:02 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

TexAce, on 24 June 2016 - 03:00 AM, said:

Nope. Wrong.

For everyone who knows how to manage his/her ammo and has no problems right now, it just means they can trade a ton of ammo for a ML or SL, which in return DOES reduce TTK.

I really couldn't care less for everyone who puts ACs up to the neck onto their mechs and then cant find place for ammo for all those ACs. Take one AC less, you have enough place for ammo..

Basic rules should not change for outlier mechs like the Summoner which would probably stay shite neverthanless. If its so bad, give it an ammo quirk and call it a day.

"Nope. Wrong."

Even if you managed your ammo perfectly and had 100% accuracy you'd still be unable to do the amount of damage a mech using lasers can do. The mechs that can boat high amounts of ACs could actually suffer increases to time to kill if they used lasers due to the heat they generate stopping that mech from being able to use its main weapons more, but would it really be a problem if something like a 4 UAC5 Mauler threw on a couple medium lasers anyway?

Mechs like the Summoner, Shadow Cat, Adder, and Nova are limited to taking mostly energy or SRM based loadouts because they can't handle the weight of a large ballistic and its ammo.

If you put 2 UAC10s on a Summoner you don't even have a full ton left over if you are running max armor, if you are running a Shadow Cat bringing a UAC20 and nothing else and maxing out on ammo would leave you with only a potential max damage of 560, Nova is even more limited.

You never see anyone doing effective builds on a Shadow Cat with heavy ballistics but you always see them running a few lasers instead because with the lasers they can throw on a TC, ECM, and even CAP if they want to and still have those 2 LPL able to fire all match while bringing all those things and a UAC20 would leave you with just a single ton of ammo.

A considerable increase in ammo per ton allows these mechs to actually take something other than lasers or SRMs and be effective through the match. Otherwise the trade-off for taking a large ballistic is everything else that mech can carry.

Edited by Dakota1000, 24 June 2016 - 03:18 AM.

[Navid A1]

TexAce, on 24 June 2016 - 03:00 AM, said:

Nope. Wrong.

For everyone who knows how to manage his/her ammo and has no problems right now, it just means they can trade a ton of ammo for a ML or SL, which in return DOES reduce TTK.

No. Actually encouraging the use of ballistics with increase TTK.
The reason behind current low TTK is giga-alpha laser vomits. Its mostly because DPS weapons are mostly sh*t unless boated.
You can already achieve better damage output with lots of LPLs and MLs than you can with anything else. The reason is that they dont need ammo and they have bigger punch than ANY ballistics.... and they are light.

TexAce, on 24 June 2016 - 03:00 AM, said:

I really couldn't care less for everyone who puts ACs up to the neck onto their mechs and then cant find place for ammo for all those ACs. Take one AC less, you have enough place for ammo..

You can't be further away from reality than that.
You seriously think that the the ammo difference adds up to the weight of a whole AC less or more?
If ammo is increased by 30%... the weight saving of most boats will add up to maximum 3 tons.
Now show me a ballistic that is 3 tons.
in other words... if you have to take one AC less to have enough ammo... there is a good chance you did not have enough ammo in the first place... even with 50% more ammo per ton.

Also regarding the weight saving...
A "boat" does not rely on that extra medium laser to output damage. Its a BOAT... it relies on its main DPS weapons.

TexAce, on 24 June 2016 - 03:00 AM, said:

Basic rules should not change for outlier mechs like the Summoner which would probably stay shite neverthanless. If its so bad, give it an ammo quirk and call it a day.

I am all for it honestly!
Also... if basic rules should not change... then lets revert armor values back to TT numbers and remove quirks.... right?

Edited by Navid A1, 24 June 2016 - 03:26 AM.

[TexAce]

Navid A1, on 24 June 2016 - 03:22 AM, said:

No. Actually encouraging the use of ballistics with increase TTK.
The reason behind current low TTK is giga-alpha laser vomits. Its mostly because DPS weapons are mostly sh*t unless boated.
You can already achieve better damage output with lots of LPLs and MLs than you can with anything else. The reason is that they dont need ammo and they have bigger punch than ANY ballistics.... and they are light.




You can't be further away from reality than that.
You seriously think that the the ammo difference adds up to the weight of a whole AC less or more?
If ammo is increased by 30%... the weight saving of most boats will add up to maximum 3 tons.
Now show me a ballistic that is 3 tons.
in other words... if you have to take one AC less to have enough ammo... there is a good chance you did not have enough ammo in the first place... even with 50% more ammo per ton.

Also regarding the weight saving...
A "boat" does not rely on that extra medium laser to output damage. Its a BOAT... it relies on its main DPS weapons.






I am all for it honestly!
Also... if basic rules should not change... then lets revert armor values back to TT numbers and remove quirks.... right?

All I hear is "Uh I cant put an AC20 on my shadowcat". Well put an AC10.

"Uh I cant boat 4 AC5s on my Phract". Well put 3 ACs.

If a mech is not designed to work with a specific weapon and still be reliable, dont force it to be.

You want 2 AC10s on a Summoner? Live with the consequences. Or Put in 2 UAC5s.

All I know for me is that all my AC builds would profit immensly from an ammo buff, even becoming too strong, because my builds are already built REASONABLE to begin with.

Edited by TexAce, 24 June 2016 - 05:58 AM.