Jump to content

Pts2 Builds Tested And Results


211 replies to this topic

#201 Quicksilver Aberration

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nightmare
  • The Nightmare
  • 11,807 posts
  • LocationKansas City, MO

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:02 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 25 August 2016 - 08:56 AM, said:

The ED of .75 makes them more attractive than other options for brawling.

No, it forces you to take them, because even in live UACs (especially 20s) have actually been the ones needing incentive to take for brawling. LBX20/10s have always been better for combining with splat builds because UACs like lasers, require more facetime, and face time is bad.

That said, if the Spirit Bear could mount more SRMs instead of the LBX, it would probably do that instead because LBX are still bad compared to SRMs.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 25 August 2016 - 09:06 AM.


#202 TKSax

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,057 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:37 AM

View PostJack Shayu Walker, on 25 August 2016 - 08:38 AM, said:


TK... you do understand that in the PTS, everything got worse right? If you deal over 30 heat, you get penalized with energy draw. If LBXs had 0 draw, I could work up to 30 damage off lasers and then mount 2 LBX. It would not be better than live, I know this, believe me, I do. However it would theoretically be the ONLY build in MWO at that point capable of pulling off a 50 pt alpha unpenalized, which is kindof a big deal.


Yes but he asked you why you were not running them in live client, as nothing has changed in the PTS as far as the weapon stats it just got added to energy draw. But on the live client there is 0 penalty for LBX.

Why does it work better than Live? Becuase AC's are better in live in most cases than PTS. LBX has not changed. I run Dual LBX10 SRM4 2ML Brawler Orion IIC all day in live (sometimes lbx20) It works better than AC:s for brawling.

Edited by TKSax, 25 August 2016 - 09:45 AM.


#203 Jack Shayu Walker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God
  • The God
  • 1,451 posts

Posted 25 August 2016 - 10:15 AM

View PostTKSax, on 25 August 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:


Yes but he asked you why you were not running them in live client, as nothing has changed in the PTS as far as the weapon stats it just got added to energy draw. But on the live client there is 0 penalty for LBX.

Why does it work better than Live? Becuase AC's are better in live in most cases than PTS. LBX has not changed. I run Dual LBX10 SRM4 2ML Brawler Orion IIC all day in live (sometimes lbx20) It works better than AC:s for brawling.


Because every single weapon got significantly worse on the PTS. I don't run them on live because on live cUACs aren't penalized by Energy Draw, so they're better. Under these theoretical rules where double LBX has 0 energy draw, all weapons except LBXs will have gotten significantly nerfed.

Because everything around the LBXs will have gotten significantly nerfed, and the LBX in theory won't have, I will take the LBX as it allows me to play with larger alpha strikes, which I enjoy.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 25 August 2016 - 10:15 AM.


#204 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2022 Gold Champ
  • CS 2022 Gold Champ
  • 4,938 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 25 August 2016 - 10:35 AM

View PostJack Shayu Walker, on 25 August 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

Because everything around the LBXs will have gotten significantly nerfed, and the LBX in theory won't have, I will take the LBX as it allows me to play with larger alpha strikes, which I enjoy.


You get larger alpha with LBX only in potential max damage.
In game play LBX are worse than any other cannon when you consider damage to a component. You draw 7.5, but you o less than 6-7 damage to a specific component.

Its similar to the "alpha" you get from SRMs... it is large and energy draw allows for more of them to be fired (because of someone's desire who we don't know at all!!!)
But no more than 30 hits the location you want anyway.

LBX is better because all other ACs got nerfed is just flawed logic.
it is just basic logic.
The student failing a course every year would not become a better student if all other students fail as well.

LBX has one use... and that is when you absolutely face-hug the enemy.

These forums are the only place you have to explain common sense.




You know what I think?
I think PGI's final goal is to pull the plug on this game.. yet they don't want to kick people out... They want people to leave themselves... and based on what I'm hearing from here and there... they will achieve their goal.

#205 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 25 August 2016 - 11:17 AM

View PostTKSax, on 25 August 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:

Why does it work better than Live? Becuase AC's are better in live in most cases than PTS. LBX has not changed. I run Dual LBX10 SRM4 2ML Brawler Orion IIC all day in live (sometimes lbx20) It works better than AC:s for brawling.

It's the same thing, TK. whether AC's got worse or LBX's got better, the end result is that comparatively the LBX's are more competitive choices vs. AC's.

Clan side, it was already closer (less so IS side) due to how UAC's are more likely to spread damage. Pro tip: LBX20 on a HBR fires so tight you can land all damage on a CN9's center torso at 100m.

IS side, you get smaller and lighter, and while LBX critting is awful, the spread was recently tightened to a decent point. PTS, you can run a SRM/LBX Shadowhawk for example and still be dropping 44pt instant alpha strikes for 13 heat. Meanwhile, your opposition is capped at 30pt alphas. These builds are used live now with LBX's; on the PTS the build is relatively stronger because the opposing builds are weaker.

#206 TKSax

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,057 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 25 August 2016 - 11:33 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 25 August 2016 - 11:17 AM, said:

It's the same thing, TK. whether AC's got worse or LBX's got better, the end result is that comparatively the LBX's are more competitive choices vs. AC's.



Not arguing that, but he lets make the spread on SRMS wider but you can fire a lot make the LBX's better than anything else and they pair with SRMS well... hmm. We now have Cone of Fire.. everyone rejoice...

#207 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 25 August 2016 - 11:39 AM

View PostNavid A1, on 25 August 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:

You get larger alpha with LBX only in potential max damage.
In game play LBX are worse than any other cannon when you consider damage to a component. You draw 7.5, but you o less than 6-7 damage to a specific component.

Its similar to the "alpha" you get from SRMs... it is large and energy draw allows for more of them to be fired (because of someone's desire who we don't know at all!!!)
But no more than 30 hits the location you want anyway.
Because of someone's desire? Asking for lower SRM draw was basically in every single recommendation post. Lower SRM draw was even more common than lower laser draw. The brawlers in particular literally begged for it (for good reason).

I don't think you really understand what spreads currently are, certainly not for all mechs (as I said above, spread differs per mech)

Quote

LBX is better because all other ACs got nerfed is just flawed logic.
it is just basic logic.
The student failing a course every year would not become a better student if all other students fail as well.
In MWO, how good a build is is entirely based on how well it performs relative to all the other builds, because builds can only be measured against other builds. Even in your grossly inaccurate example, if one student failed with D, and every other student failed with an F, that D student is more employable given that set of students are the only options there are as he's clearly the best student.

But silly analogy aside, a build is bad if it's not as good as other builds. That is the ONLY metric that matters. How bad it is correlates directly to how much worse it is than the builds it's fighting against. Whether you nerf the strong build or buff the weak build, either way the delta is smaller and thus afterwards the weaker build - even if it's stats didn't change, is a better build than it used to be.

Quote

LBX has one use... and that is when you absolutely face-hug the enemy.

These forums are the only place you have to explain common sense.
I don't think you really know what LBX spreads are, particularly not per mech.

Since they tightened the spreads, you CAN land all your pellets on target components within short ranges (not face-hugging range; anywhere in brawl range). I made the same arguments you're making right now, until I sat down and started making videos and testing to prove my point, and found myself wrong.


Look at Quicksilver and Gas's posts above, do you think they're wrong? Are you telling me Quicksilver's BSing me about LBX's used in comp play right now on live for brawlers? Hell, it wasn't too long ago that I had this very same argument from your side vs. Quick and Yvonne Greene.

Likewise, SRM's. Are you telling me SRM's are bad? LBX+SRM brawlers are bad?

You're just spouting stuff that was true, and you've had no reason to actually look in to. It's not the same now. I made those same mistakes before actually researching myself. That last spread tightening round made a big difference. They're still not good longer range weapons on live, and are only situationally decent at mid range on PTS, but at short range LBX's are very strong choices.

With that said, in a 1v1 fight my 2xLBX10 2xLPL Orion-IIC did extremely well vs. a quad LPL Orion-IIC on the PTS. With a 26pt energy draw per pair, LPL's need more than two full seconds face time to fire both sets and generate 52 damage and 40 heat IF you don't trip ED. The 2LBX10 2LPL Orion-IIC on the other hand requires 1s face time to deliver 46 damage at 24 heat. As the 4LPL build spreads damage from his second pair at least (nobody is standing still while you spend 2 seconds burning a hole in their ST), it's able to deal comparable damage in a very tight burst (cLBX10's spread very little) in half the time at almost half the heat. The quad LPL build heatcaps very quickly, while the LBX/LPL build never does.

#208 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 25 August 2016 - 12:24 PM

View PostTKSax, on 25 August 2016 - 11:33 AM, said:

Not arguing that, but he lets make the spread on SRMS wider but you can fire a lot make the LBX's better than anything else and they pair with SRMS well... hmm. We now have Cone of Fire.. everyone rejoice...

Like I said, this whole PTS does make the game feel more like Battletech.

#209 TKSax

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,057 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 25 August 2016 - 01:09 PM

View PostWintersdark, on 25 August 2016 - 12:24 PM, said:

Like I said, this whole PTS does make the game feel more like Battletech.

4v4 will do that and ..., this is Mechwarrior....

#210 Nightmare1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,636 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeeking over your shoulder while eating your cookies.

Posted 25 August 2016 - 02:52 PM

View PostJohnny Z, on 24 August 2016 - 06:40 PM, said:

Cluster of moronic babbling.


I don't really have time to pander to yahoos who won't read my post and who lack the ability to think critically. Please get lost.

View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

It might be considered that if the lower heat over all didn't counter what you say. I mean having to pace your shots instead of mashing fire every time your weapons are off cooldown has made a huge difference in gameplay for me. Most of my builds i've droped at least 2 heatsinks and one i've dropped 4. Pacing your weapon fire reaps better heat management overall. And i've tried this with not only my own builds but with as many meta mechs as i could think of. Instead of alpha'ing all the damage in 1 second you have to do do shots over 3 seconds.


Pacing won't actually improve the gameplay or TTK, realistically. Think about it. Even if PGI went so far as to hardcap alpha damage at 30 points, period, that's still 180 points of focused damage from only six BattleMechs. In the group queue, getting focused and insta-killed by six or more Mechs is fairly common, particularly in the competitive arena.

Think of it this way. You drop in an Atlas, the tankiest Mech in the game. You have 124/2 points of internals, plus 27 points of internals from quirks. Your max frontal armor is 124 points. Your total HP for your CT then, is 213. Even hardcapped at 30 points of damage, you will only have 89 points of health remaining in your CT. The first six that fire rotate off and let the next six shoot. Four of them fire into you to finish you while the other two suppress your foundering allies. The initial six rotate back in and fire again, all of this happen in about two-second's time.

Your team falls apart around your, crumbling like an old adobe wall, while the time to kill goes up by about two seconds.

Is this latest boondoggle of PGI's really worth it for just two seconds? I think not.

In pug matches, you will see a bit more of an effect since pugs are disorganized. I predict that 12v12 groups won't see TTK increases. If anything, TTK for small groups will actually decrease while TTK for large groups will increase since the large groups will keep doing what they do best, and the small groups won't be able to fight back effectively with all these nerfs.

That's actually what has me the most frustrated right now. I play primarily with non-meta Mechs in a small group environment. Half my fun Mechs are no longer viable now, and I'm looking at the prospect of suffering more losses because I won't be able to output as high a rate of fire as I can now, in order to carry my team. The solution, then, would be for me to join a larger Unit, but I don't want to leave the Unit I'm in now.

PGI's "fix," in it's current state, is a menace.


View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

Example 1 - metawhore timberwolf with 2 large pulse, 4 er mediums. Shoot the large pulse then when energy bar is full again 1.5 seconds later you shoot your er mediums.


I don't run meta so I don't particularly care about this example. Besides, I already stagger fire most of my weapons in two or three groups as they are. I'm most unhappy about the nerfs to my beloved AC/20. The HBK is getting defanged hard, as are my Centurions.


View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

Example 2 - direwolf with 2 ERPPCS, 2 Gauss rifles. you shoot either the gauss rifles first then 1.5 seconds later the ERPPCs or the other way around. It's the same damage just not all at once in one spot AND over 3 seconds instead of 1.


Again, not my play style. I'm a brawler at heart, and PGI is effectively removing brawling from the game. It was my favorite thing in the books and the old games and now we won't be allowed to have it because too many people whined about their TTK being too short. They should have just learned to torso twist.


View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

I just don't get the doom and gloom that can come from 2 extra seconds, or how stagger firing breaks every single build you could possibly have.


Not doom and gloom over two seconds or stagger fire - I already stagger fire. It's the rate of fire nerfs to the cooldowns, as well as the massive heat increases to ACs that bug me. Most of my Mechs are brawlers with SRM or AC focuses. PGI is effectively telling me that I'm not allowed to brawl any more and that I have to play as a sniper. I don't really want that; I like being able to play as skirmisher, sniper, and brawler. I don't want to be limited to just one play mode.

The HBK-4G is my all-time favorite Mech in this game. Mine has an alpha of 35 points of damage, but the PTS puts that at 50% heat. You can't brawl with that. In order to have the DPS, I basically have to strip the three Medium Lasers off of it, put in three extra heat sinks, and then just run the AC/20. That doesn't really make for a fun Mech though.

Basically, these changes will make MWO even more of a poke game with short range Mechs all but disappearing. That's what I'm so frustrated.


View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

pace your button mashing. It's like you haven't ever not alphastriked before.


I already do you nitwit, lol. Most of my Mechs run two or three weapon systems, so I can't alpha strike anyways if I want to be accurate. The travel times for ballistics, lasers, and missiles are too different.


View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

It might be true to say lights won't be effected by this as much as assualts but light mechs will have to pace their weapon fire more too. Damage all around is slowing down. NOT REDUCED, just slowed down in pacing.


Actually, Lights can scoot under the 30 points of damage threshold pretty easily and escape the heat penalties. The only pace change they'll have will come from the global cooldown nerf.

Assaults will get hit with both heat and cooldown nerfs. Like I said, why even bother with an Atlas? You're TTK won't change but you won't be able to fight back as well. You'll just die with even less to show for it now.

View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

And that is assuming that this is THE final build that will go live.


Heaven help us if it does!


View PostSable, on 24 August 2016 - 07:54 PM, said:

Instead of making i'm gonna quit or refund threats why not provide your feedback and see what happens.



Who said anything about quitting and asking for a refund? I said I was waffling about whether to stick with the game or not if this sort of change goes live. I never stated that I was leaving for sure though. I love BT/MW enough that I would likely tough it out until PGI came to its senses, but, then again, I may take a break for a bit too.

As for refunds, I don't believe in doubling back on something if you knew what it was you were getting into from the start. Besides, I haven't purchased anything this year that I could even ask to have refunded.

View PostTKSax, on 25 August 2016 - 01:09 PM, said:

4v4 will do that and ..., this is Mechwarrior....


Bingo!

This 4v4 is nice in the sense that it lets you have quick matches, but it fails utterly at allowing us to estimate the full impact of all these changes. You have to look beyond 4v4 at the phenomenon that is 12v12. Let's face it, 12 Mechs focusing on your Mech will result in the same TTK as what we have right now, even with all these changes. The only result, is that they'll run a bit hotter, so it might take them an extra minute to ROFLStomp the enemy team as they run away screaming.

#211 Jack Shayu Walker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God
  • The God
  • 1,451 posts

Posted 25 August 2016 - 08:14 PM

View PostNavid A1, on 25 August 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:


You get larger alpha with LBX only in potential max damage.
In game play LBX are worse than any other cannon when you consider damage to a component. You draw 7.5, but you o less than 6-7 damage to a specific component.

Its similar to the "alpha" you get from SRMs... it is large and energy draw allows for more of them to be fired (because of someone's desire who we don't know at all!!!)
But no more than 30 hits the location you want anyway.

LBX is better because all other ACs got nerfed is just flawed logic.
it is just basic logic.
The student failing a course every year would not become a better student if all other students fail as well.

LBX has one use... and that is when you absolutely face-hug the enemy.

These forums are the only place you have to explain common sense.




You know what I think?
I think PGI's final goal is to pull the plug on this game.. yet they don't want to kick people out... They want people to leave themselves... and based on what I'm hearing from here and there... they will achieve their goal.


We were discussing a theoretical situation in which LBs had 0 draw, not 7.5.

#212 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2022 Gold Champ
  • CS 2022 Gold Champ
  • 4,938 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:42 PM

Just found another contradiction in PTS2:

SRMs

Basically, 1 person close to PGI was upset that he could not fire his 4xSRM6 alpha.
So they did lower the draw for SRM6 so that you can fire 4 at the same time ( they did reduce the spread to do some damage control)
And then for some unholy reason they decided to nerf the SRM 4 spread as well.

So now:
You can fire 4 SRM6 with no penalty for 52 damage alpha
but somehow 5 srm4s give you penalty for a 43 alpha on top of a nerf to its spread...

All because someone needed to be able to run his pet build.

So think twice before you say things like: "energy draw is targeting large alphas"





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users