10 replies to this topic

[LordNothing]

so i bought one of the last 2 lights i haven't mastered yet. the mlx-d. its arm grants a lovely -40% uac jam chance. upon seeing this the gears in my head start turning. now im not expecting to run a uac10 on this thing (i got a kitfox for that), but im kind of expecting a 2 or 5 to work great.

then you realize its a 25 ton mech and you aint got no tonnage for that. most you can muster is a uac2 and a ton and a half of ammo, not even 225 damage worth of shells. i can get another half ton if i take off the ersmall from the other arm. if i completely strip it, i might get at most another ton of ammo. that gives me a damage ceiling of 325, if i start stripping armor from more important locations (like the ct or the legs or the only weapon arm on the mech) i might get at most 3 tons of ammo, but thats leaning into the realm of insanity.

so why do you tease us with quirks and not let us pack enough ammo to actually use it effectively. werent we supposed to get ammo quirks on some of these smaller ballistics mechs? or at least give the 2 class guns the same ammo buff that the 10 class got some time ago (this will do little to help ac2 boaters to be effective, and only stands to make the system more viable across the board).

Edited by LordNothing, 29 October 2016 - 10:53 AM.

[Deathlike]

MLX needed that serious UAC buff... because you know that'll be a new meta....

Balance overlord strikes again!

[Juodas Varnas]

I think letting it remove the CAP from the head would help it a little too.
Open up an entire ton to work with.
I'd probably even unlock the JJs for them.

[LordNothing]

wouldnt mind a half complement rule on jump jets across the board. your mech only comes with half of the jumpjets locked, the other half are optional and can be replaced.

[jjm1]

This has been an issue for so damn long. Just another reason people are calling out PGI. They said all mechs would be viable, then nothing. Then they mentioned ammo quirks, then nothing.

Pretty sure they dont think about anything other than the next mech pack now. With the occasional drawn-out-of-a-hat nerf to keep the forum angry.

[Tier5 Kerensky]

What's wrong with ER-L or two?

[FupDup]

Teer Kerensky, on 29 October 2016 - 01:30 PM, said:

What's wrong with ER-L or two?

You don't have enough weight on the MLX for two unless you strip a lot of armor.

One ERLL is pretty weaksauce on its own.

[LordNothing]

Teer Kerensky, on 29 October 2016 - 01:30 PM, said:

What's wrong with ER-L or two?

i used to run a ppc and ecm, that was ok as a ranged sniper/spotter. any small laser and srm backstabber build works on pretty much any light mech. but i wanted to do something different than the usual cut and paste builds.

[Dee Eight]

LordNothing, on 29 October 2016 - 10:50 AM, said:

so i bought one of the last 2 lights i haven't mastered yet. the mlx-d. its arm grants a lovely -40% uac jam chance. upon seeing this the gears in my head start turning. now im not expecting to run a uac10 on this thing (i got a kitfox for that), but im kind of expecting a 2 or 5 to work great.

then you realize its a 25 ton mech and you aint got no tonnage for that. most you can muster is a uac2 and a ton and a half of ammo, not even 225 damage worth of shells. i can get another half ton if i take off the ersmall from the other arm. if i completely strip it, i might get at most another ton of ammo. that gives me a damage ceiling of 325, if i start stripping armor from more important locations (like the ct or the legs or the only weapon arm on the mech) i might get at most 3 tons of ammo, but thats leaning into the realm of insanity.

so why do you tease us with quirks and not let us pack enough ammo to actually use it effectively. werent we supposed to get ammo quirks on some of these smaller ballistics mechs? or at least give the 2 class guns the same ammo buff that the 10 class got some time ago (this will do little to help ac2 boaters to be effective, and only stands to make the system more viable across the board).

The problem is that they're quirking for loadouts from LORE builds while ignoring the fact that because they doubled the structure/armor of mechs to increase the TTK values, not to mention further structure/armor quirks have thus made it impossible for many LORE builds to actually kill anything at all because they didn't also increase ammo quantities for ballistic/missile weapons to match the doubled health of the targets.

SRMs are the exact number of missiles per ton as lore SRM2/4 packs (6 packs actually had less total missiles per ton). LRMs were 120 per ton in TT (regardless of launcher size) and now its 180 per ton in MWO. AC/2s were 45 shots per ton and now its 75, AC/5s were 20 and now its 30, AC/10s were 10 and now its 20, and AC/20s were 5 and now its 7. Gauss was 8 and now its 10. No consistency at all there.

The most damage per ton efficient weapons end up being 10 class autocannons or SRM or S-SRM launchers, then LRMs, then 2 and 5 class autocannons, then gauss and finally 20 class autocannons.

[MadHornet]

Here is my general opinion for the Mist Lynx.

http://mwomercs.com/...95#entry5433995

I love the 'mech, and I agree that buffing ballistics for a 'mech that can barely handle it is really dumb as hell. The AP needs to be optional as well.

[LordNothing]

Dee Eight, on 29 October 2016 - 05:18 PM, said:

The problem is that they're quirking for loadouts from LORE builds while ignoring the fact that because they doubled the structure/armor of mechs to increase the TTK values, not to mention further structure/armor quirks have thus made it impossible for many LORE builds to actually kill anything at all because they didn't also increase ammo quantities for ballistic/missile weapons to match the doubled health of the targets.

SRMs are the exact number of missiles per ton as lore SRM2/4 packs (6 packs actually had less total missiles per ton). LRMs were 120 per ton in TT (regardless of launcher size) and now its 180 per ton in MWO. AC/2s were 45 shots per ton and now its 75, AC/5s were 20 and now its 30, AC/10s were 10 and now its 20, and AC/20s were 5 and now its 7. Gauss was 8 and now its 10. No consistency at all there.

The most damage per ton efficient weapons end up being 10 class autocannons or SRM or S-SRM launchers, then LRMs, then 2 and 5 class autocannons, then gauss and finally 20 class autocannons.

thats pretty much been my take on ammo capacity. the 10 was utterly terrible until it got an advantage in ammo capacity. this tiny changed turned it into the barely viable boomstick to the formidable beast it is now. the 2 for the most part still has the same issues, its heat is a little better and its crit seeking ability gave it a slight improvement, but it still feels lackluster. its terrible when boated and worse when used in fewer numbers, and keeping the weapon in ammo is difficult across all weight classes. its usually a choice between crippling the backup weapons for a few more tons of ammo (effectively boating it), or simply not using it. even when boated on a 100 tonner its still one of the most ammo starved weapon systems in the game.

so im not against taking it to 180 or even 200 damage/ton across the entire system. this will certainly help light ballistic builds across the board, even bringing the weapon closer to viability on the heavier classes. i dont think it will every be op because of the face time requirement unless you ramp up dps or something stupid like that. give it ammo and it will still be the same lackluster weapon, it just becomes more viable on practically everything. and since there is no rhyme or reason to the ammo system in this game anyway, i dont see it as being totally game breaking.