11 replies to this topic

[Sader325]

AC20 - 20 bullets.

AC2 - 2 bullets

etc.. etc..

Also, increase the duration of lasers by about 50% across the board.

If you're trying to stop pinpoint damage, then why don't they just break up damage so its easier to spread across the mech?

Why are we creating convoluted power mechanics when we can just change how the guns shoot?

[Drunken Skull]

No, because that's not how it works. Effectively, you want all AC's and Gauss canons to be an AC2... Also, you want the **** nerfed out of lasers, combined, that will mean you screw up all brawling mechs not to mention the tactics used like torso twisting and shield-arming... Youre not affecting "pinpoint damage" at all, your'e just increasing face-time required to fire the weapon, they will still be as deadly accurate as before, so fail on that point too.

Calling this one an all round bad idea IMO.

I think the OP needs to learn to torso twist when taking fire, learn how to use a shield-arm, how to use cover effectively, and not face-tank all the time.

EDIT: Just saw OP is a TIER 1, so not sure what the real excuse for this thread is...

Edited by Drunken Skull, 05 September 2016 - 12:08 AM.

[RestosIII]

I'd honestly love all Autocannons that aren't packing LBX rounds to be the burt-fire Clans have, but increasing the amount of shells per shot as drastically as you're asking? Please no. I'd prefer not having to play like my AC/20's are massively oversized MGs. That's what RACs will be for

Also Has stream firing is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of.

Edited by RestosIII, 04 September 2016 - 11:47 PM.

[El Bandito]

More projectiles = more hit reg issues.

[RestosIII]

El Bandito, on 04 September 2016 - 11:50 PM, said:

More projectiles = more hit reg issues.

Imagine the amount of shells in the air a single KD-3 would create. Then make that an entire lance of KD-3's. RIP hitreg for that match.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Sader325, on 04 September 2016 - 10:54 PM, said:

Also, increase the duration of lasers by about 50% across the board.

No, no more lightsabers, thanks.

[Hotthedd]

Autocannons, yes. They should be burst fire, (but 10x2 shells from an AC/20 would be overkill). It would be just as effective if the bursts were normalized, but the damage were higher for bigger guns (I mean, there is a reason that there is different ammo for each gun as opposed to missiles which are normalized as either LRM or SRM, regardless of the launcher size).

Gauss Rifles, however are single projectile weapons. It's just how they work.

[roboPrancer]

I'm all in favor of trying to find new dynamics to balance weapons, as opposed to just fiddling with the numbers, but I really can't get behind this idea of yours.

[Paigan]

Sader325, on 04 September 2016 - 10:54 PM, said:

AC20 - 20 bullets.

AC2 - 2 bullets

etc.. etc..

Also, increase the duration of lasers by about 50% across the board.

If you're trying to stop pinpoint damage, then why don't they just break up damage so its easier to spread across the mech?

Why are we creating convoluted power mechanics when we can just change how the guns shoot?

I had similar ideas myself (ever since TT times):
Most games (and even BT and MWO art) have autocannons as rapid fire weapons that actually fire more like lasers in MWO do.

Those howitzer-like ACs we have are ... weird.

My take on balancing would be:

- Lasers are small, light, accurate, ammoless and powerful BUT: VERY hot.
- ACs are big, heavy, have ammo, are moderately strong (and also streamy) BUT: have no heat at all.

This would automatically prevent boating in a very natural way:
- You cannot just boat lasers as the heat would kill you (mind you with adjusted heat and dissipation values, not the values we have now)
- You cannot just boat ACs as you would squander all the heat dissipation capacity and wouldn't deal enough damage.

So the both weapon types (and PPCs, missiles, etc.) would have to be combined to complement each other.


The way BT (and MWO) balances is very weird:
ACs are basically too heavy explosion-prone crap, are even as hot as energy weapons (wtf?) and therefore have to be weird-patchwork-balanced by stuff like screen shake and front-loaded pin-point damage.

And still both weapon types can be boated.

Why not make a proper, complementing concept and have something that works?
But no, that wouldn't be BT anymore with its crappy balance.

Edited by Paigan, 05 September 2016 - 06:48 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Paigan, on 05 September 2016 - 06:47 AM, said:

I had similar ideas myself (ever since TT times):
Most games (and even BT and MWO art) have autocannons as rapid fire weapons that actually fire more like lasers in MWO do.

Those howitzer-like ACs we have are ... weird.

My take on balancing would be:

- Lasers are small, light, accurate, ammoless and powerful BUT: VERY hot.
- ACs are big, heavy, have ammo, are moderately strong (and also streamy) BUT: have no heat at all.

This would automatically prevent boating in a very natural way:
- You cannot just boat lasers as the heat would kill you (mind you with adjusted heat and dissipation values, not the values we have now)
- You cannot just boat ACs as you would squander all the heat dissipation capacity and wouldn't deal enough damage.

So the both weapon types (and PPCs, missiles, etc.) would have to be combined to complement each other.


The way BT (and MWO) balances is very weird:
ACs are basically too heavy explosion-prone crap, are even as hot as energy weapons (wtf?) and therefore have to be weird-patchwork-balanced by stuff like screen shake and front-loaded pin-point damage.

And still both weapon types can be boated.

Why not make a proper, complementing concept and have something that works?
But no, that wouldn't be BT anymore with its crappy balance.

You are right, except that it can be done within the framework of BT.

All PGI has to do is use ALL of these tools for balance:

Weight/Crit space/Damage/Projectile speed/Spread/Range/Damage delivery/Accuracy/Ammo/Cooldown/and Heat.

Weight: Ballistics are heavier, Missiles less so, and Energy weapons even less (overall) Should stick to TT values.
Crit Space: As now, bigger weapons = more space. Should stick to TT values.
Damage: Self-explanatory. Should stick to TT values.
Projectile Speed: Energy fastest, Ballistics (should be slowest with physics), but PGI has free reign here.
Spread: Self explanatory, again PGI has a pretty long leash to balance and stay true to BT.
Range: This can be fine tuned for balance as well. (TRYING to stay close to canon where possible)
Damage delivery: FLD, DoT, burst fire, spread fire...All can be played with for balance.
Accuracy: PGI can play around with this without breaking any rules. (As a matter of fact I would say that MW:O weapons are far too accurate ATM)
Ammo: Can be tweaked for balance
Cooldown: Easy way to balance, and PGI has free reign.
and Heat: Which is the only thing they seem to want to deal with. (but without an actual heat scale, which would make heat matter)

Edited by Hotthedd, 05 September 2016 - 08:01 AM.

[Mcgral18]

El Bandito, on 04 September 2016 - 11:50 PM, said:

More projectiles = more hit reg issues.

Oh, I still remember the days where in an 8 VS 8 match, you could outright crash the game instance with MGs and Lasers


Those, which calculate every instance they're fired for (and MGs which never end, plus more crits than usual)


They've made improvements, but I'll always remember that one time we had to ban MGs to finish a Comp match. (From when the Ember didn't suck balls)

Edited by Mcgral18, 05 September 2016 - 07:24 AM.

[Cyborne Elemental]

The extra load on the server would be pretty heavy.

Tracking all those extra objects would just add more problems to a game with enough hitreg problems AS IS.