315 replies to this topic

[Dee Eight]

In TT, a regular PPC or AC/5 shot 540 meters. A Gauss shot 660 meters. An ER PPC shot 690. A Clan ERLL shot 750m. An I.S. ERML shot 570 meters. Also there was no double optimal = max range crap. That's purely a construct of this game.

[MovinTarget]

Dee Eight, on 12 December 2016 - 07:11 AM, said:

In TT, a regular PPC or AC/5 shot 540 meters. A Gauss shot 660 meters. An ER PPC shot 690. A Clan ERLL shot 750m. An I.S. ERML shot 570 meters. Also there was no double optimal = max range crap. That's purely a construct of this game.

We have to toe the line carefully as to what we call crap... Its already been made pretty clear that TT does not translate well in many aspects to RT/FPS...

The funny thing, I've made it a habit to read up on all the mechs in Sarna, starting with the lightest and just made it to the Enforcer today... Here's an excerpt from the TRO:
"The Enforcer's primary weapon is a Federated Autocannon/10, an excellent large-caliber model firing in bursts of ten rounds... While one ton of ammunition only allows for ten bursts total.." (bold added for emphasis)[/color]

They way that is described sounds closer to how the MWO CUAC fires (save for not having a double-tab) than what was implemented...

The point being these are two different beast and in many ways TT over-simplified so many things that gaps have to be filled in games like MWO because, okay maybe 2X Optimal is not a perfect equation for max range, but if you are trying to make the game a bit more realistic it makes more sense than a beam/projectile ceasing to do *any* damage once it has travelled some distance. They also try to handle trajectory of shells and things like that, things that TT could just ignore or hide behind Targeting Computers and Gunnery Skill...

I guess the other thing I should research is if AC rounds actually carried any form of explosives or were they just slugs? If they carried a payload then their damage should be less affected by distance since the majority of its damage is based on detonation. Granted inertia would play a role, but if a mech steps on an AC/20 shell laying on the ground and there is a payload detonated, how damage does it do vs an AC/20 round fired at the same leg?

TT is great for inspiration but not practical for all RT/FPS application.

Edited by MovinTarget, 12 December 2016 - 07:54 AM.

[Lizardman from Hollywood]

Widowmaker1981, on 12 December 2016 - 02:50 AM, said:

[/i]

This is starting to get a bit annoying.. putting in Decals for totally unknown units like http://www.sarna.net...Gunzburg_Eagles with barely a stub in Sarna, that arent represented by a unit in game at all and dont have a lore insignia , yet my unit (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Battle_Magic) which has 40+ people ingame who would INSTANTLY buy the Decal, is much better fleshed out in Sarna, good looking lore insignia and all and exists in this timeframe.. still no dice.

Get over yourself. They JUST put in black widow Co and 21st strikers for light horse this patch. Obviously they have to clear the ensignias thru catalyst first and maybe even the authors who invented them. Honestly I wouldn't raise too much of a stink about it because if you are using copywrited material for your logo you just might get popped with a C&D from its owner.

[MovinTarget]

Sephrus Shanadar, on 12 December 2016 - 08:07 AM, said:

Get over yourself. They JUST put in black widow Co and 21st strikers for light horse this patch. Obviously they have to clear the ensignias thru catalyst first and maybe even the authors who invented them. Honestly I wouldn't raise too much of a stink about it because if you are using copywrited material for your logo you just might get popped with a C&D from its owner.

Additionally, it may be little known to you or even Sarna, doesn't mean its not used by/known to somebody.

[Chilly]

MovinTarget, on 10 December 2016 - 01:14 PM, said:

People wanted content, this patch has content. Give it an honest go before devolving to troll rage plz.

Couldn't agree more!

[Felicitatem Parco]

Dee Eight, on 12 December 2016 - 07:11 AM, said:

In TT, a regular PPC or AC/5 shot 540 meters. A Gauss shot 660 meters. An ER PPC shot 690. A Clan ERLL shot 750m. An I.S. ERML shot 570 meters. Also there was no double optimal = max range crap. That's purely a construct of this game.

This game is constructed far better than TT is, so far as a video game. It would be absolute folly to say a burst of shells from a rapid-fire autocannon would shear more than a ton of ablative armor at 270m, but deal zero damage at 271m. That is just a construct of a TableTop dice-rolling game ruleset, and not appropriate for a Mech sim.

[Dex Spero]

Flying Fox 333, on 09 December 2016 - 11:03 PM, said:

OMG thank you for this Flying Fox. I truly did laugh out loud.

[Dex Spero]

Spheroid, on 10 December 2016 - 12:57 AM, said:

The laser vomit is real. Do they know what increasing the heat cap by that much will do?! Good time to be a Clanner I guess.

Not just for Clanners though. I'm excited to see what a 7% increase in external DHS and a 27% increase in Heat Capacity means for my Grasshoppers. Oh, and Warhammers. And Marauders. And my Cicadas. And I can't forget my Pirate's Bane. And of course there's my...

This is going to be an interesting change for everyone. Thanks PGI!

[sierra gulf]

Dee Eight, on 12 December 2016 - 07:11 AM, said:

In TT, a regular PPC or AC/5 shot 540 meters. A Gauss shot 660 meters. An ER PPC shot 690. A Clan ERLL shot 750m. An I.S. ERML shot 570 meters. Also there was no double optimal = max range crap. That's purely a construct of this game.

In Tactical Operations from the current set of TT core rulebooks there are rules for an additional Extreme Range bracket beyond long range, and even LOS range for some weapons (p. 85). The current rule doesn't exactly follow he MWO mechanic, though there have been past iterations, such as in the old Battle Technology magazine, that have been closer and actually extended the potential range of weapons even further.

[Dex Spero]

Gentleman Reaper, on 10 December 2016 - 04:43 PM, said:

Would this look good? I'm working on a full list of my dream stats for every weapon.

Damage: 3
Burn time: 0.75 -> 0.6
Cooldown: 3 -> 2.4
DPS: 1 -> 1.25
Heat: 2 -> 1.5
HPS: 0.67 -> 0.625
Optimal range: 150
Max range: 300

Are you ever going to publish the whole list? I'd love to see it

[Dex Spero]

MovinTarget, on 11 December 2016 - 02:42 PM, said:

And if the light packs start winning too easily, break out the streak boats!

Jagermech double LB 10-X Flyswatter build also works wonders.

[-Ramrod-]

Anybody know if the Early Adopter Variant will have a C-Bill bonus? I doubt it but it would be nice. And as crazy as it sounds with that one missile hardpoint and 15% cooldown...I'm thinking a NARC. If you're havin' trouble with lights or brawling 2 assaults would be nice to get missile support and cancel out the light's ECM. But that's just me. Otherwise I think this variant is good for one thing...parts.

[Azghuld]

all this balance work on IS and Clan mechs... sounding more and more like post-Dark Age era to me. kinda seems like Omni-mechs are losing their edge over IS counterparts every major patch. might as well advance that calendar date and make IICs available to both sides. and of course letting Alex use his make-sexy powers on some more ugly IS designs is always a good thing.



* i apologize to anyone triggered by my reference to that-era-of-BT-gaming-that-should-never-be-mentioned.*

Edited by Azghuld, 12 December 2016 - 11:36 AM.

[QueenBlade]

Ramrod AI, on 12 December 2016 - 11:04 AM, said:

Anybody know if the Early Adopter Variant will have a C-Bill bonus? I doubt it but it would be nice. And as crazy as it sounds with that one missile hardpoint and 15% cooldown...I'm thinking a NARC. If you're havin' trouble with lights or brawling 2 assaults would be nice to get missile support and cancel out the light's ECM. But that's just me. Otherwise I think this variant is good for one thing...parts.

No, just the [S] variant will have the C-Bill bonus.

[WarHippy]

For the most part it looks pretty good. However, I am a bit skeptical that the escort game mode won't be an endless roller coaster of balancing that still results in a frustrating game mode to play. As for FW I think my biggest concern at the moment is how much we will be playing essentially quick play matches rather than FW. I already hate skirmish and I can't see myself playing FW during that phase, and then we have three more phases of quick play before we get to the actual FW maps. I have other gripes as well, but I will bite my tongue on those for now.

[Javin]

They are moving to AI mechs. Which is a fun addition. It will be rough at first but soon ™ we may see tanks, vtols, and other fun.

[Greenburg Godzillas]

For the Escort mission, given that the 'nodes' give ECM, I think most of the defenders challenge will be to find the Atlas.

Oh, and I will be painting my Atlas in a similar color scheme as the "VIP" Atlas. So, leg us all....

[MovinTarget]

Javin, on 12 December 2016 - 12:35 PM, said:

They are moving to AI mechs. Which is a fun addition. It will be rough at first but soon ™ we may see tanks, vtols, and other fun.

If done right, as others have pointed out, the AI development may have some symbiosis with the MW5 development, and vice versa.

[NocturnalBeast]

Azghuld, on 12 December 2016 - 11:08 AM, said:

all this balance work on IS and Clan mechs... sounding more and more like post-Dark Age era to me. kinda seems like Omni-mechs are losing their edge over IS counterparts every major patch. might as well advance that calendar date and make IICs available to both sides. and of course letting Alex use his make-sexy powers on some more ugly IS designs is always a good thing.



* i apologize to anyone triggered by my reference to that-era-of-BT-gaming-that-should-never-be-mentioned.*

Since the Clan genie has already been let out of the bottle, making a rollback to 3025 era unpalatable, I agree that PGI should just move the timeline forward to the current post Dark Age (lore reset) era (of course this would require allot more tech and Mechs to be added to the game).

[-Ramrod-]

QueenBlade, on 12 December 2016 - 11:08 AM, said:

No, just the [S] variant will have the C-Bill bonus.

Kewl thanks. Would have been nice if it had a C-Bill bonus though.

Azghuld, on 12 December 2016 - 11:08 AM, said:

all this balance work on IS and Clan mechs... sounding more and more like post-Dark Age era to me. kinda seems like Omni-mechs are losing their edge over IS counterparts every major patch. might as well advance that calendar date and make IICs available to both sides. and of course letting Alex use his make-sexy powers on some more ugly IS designs is always a good thing.



* i apologize to anyone triggered by my reference to that-era-of-BT-gaming-that-should-never-be-mentioned.*

Honestly...I still do better or as well with Clan mechs than I do IS. Even with the recent nerfs the Clan mechs still seem quite dangerous. Only thing I have to complain about are the UAC's. The 17% jam chance seems like 34%. And the 8 second unjam time to me is waaaay too long. I think it was at 5.5 before. Just do 6.5 or 7.