128 replies to this topic

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

This has to be one of the funniest threads I've ever seen. Gauss is fine, I definately think the more you have, the longer the charge time. This needs to be applied to all weapons in general, the more you boat the more the nerf it.

[Wintersdark]

RestosIII, on 26 December 2016 - 11:00 PM, said:

Yes, a Linebacker can reliably poke out of cover, fire PPCs, and get back into cover again before goose rifles can get a shot off. At least, if you want to be able to actually place those goose rifle shots on any specific section. If it weren't for the PPCs on poke bears, I'd be able to reliably poke them to death with one.

I can reliably CT hit a poking mech (one moving 100kph) with Gauss over and over.

You aim while he's moving out of cover, and you start charging the instant you see movement. You don't wait for him to get out, then aim-charge-fire.

You see pixels moving out of cover, you start charging, then start aiming.

Try it. To get a linebacker fully out of cover to poke takes roughly a second. At the end of that second, he's motionless as he's switching from 100% forward to 100% backwards. You've already aimed, and release.

Anything slow, and you hit them long before they clear cover, and my experience has been people eating Gauss rounds as they're moving out of cover tend to aim very poorly.

Just because you can't do it for some inexplicable reason does not mean nobody can.

Quote

Because something is "unique" doesn't mean it isn't terrible. And gauss is already being used everywhere. And not as just sniping weapons, but as PPFLD weapons for any range. A much longer cooldown would discourage using it as a close-range weapon, which is what a lot of people have wanted for awhile to make the AC/20 more worthwhile compared to it.

And PGI showed on the PTS that they were willing to think about a charge-up removal. I don't use the damn things right now because it's a liability when I carry it and try to use it for its actual goal of sniping. Remove the charge, and I'll finally be able to use it. Probably not going to be able to sway your mind with how argumentative I get when posting at 2 AM, but I'll stand by wanting the charge gone with long cooldowns, since it would make it usable for its proper role while making it harder for it to be just spammed as a no heat, long range AC/20 / 3x AC/5 for mid-range poking.

Again, your inability to use it just makes it terrible for you, not terrible overall.

[Lightfoot]

El Bandito, on 26 December 2016 - 08:22 PM, said:

In MW4: Mercs multiplayer, Gauss was pretty OP and it had 8 seconds cooldown. So your 6-7 seconds cooldown suggestion is nothing much, if you consider that current Gauss cooldown is 5.75 seconds already, with charge.
8 seconds minimum for the Gauss if charge is removed.

You have to compare it to the recycle on the LB-20X and AC20 which were 6 seconds in MechWarrior 4 with the Gauss Rifle being 8 seconds (25% longer). This was enough to allow LB-20X to overpower the Gauss at 350 meters or less and the Gauss did not explode in MW4. So 7 seconds with no charge-up is really too long, but since everyone here fears the Gauss, and they really do, I would go with 7 seconds. That would make it heavily weighted to long range.

PGI just loves the Twitch game so all the weapons recycle insanely fast in MWO and that is why they can't balance anything. TTKs are always going to be unrealistically fast in MWO even with apocryphal Gauss charge-ups, Ghost Heat, and Energy Draw.

[xWiredx]

I'd rather them back off the crit explosion chance from 100% (even 90% was too high but I'd take that over 100% any day) -and- take away the charge mechanic. I understand why it's there, to prevent the PPC/Gauss meta of old, but it seems like if anything the logic behind the charge mechanic that PGI gave would mean that it has a charge wait while attempting to fire with PPCs rather than all of the time like we currently have. Plus people are using macros to sync PPC/Gauss fire anyway, so in reality the charge mechanic is simply a disadvantage for people that don't use those.

[El Bandito]

xWiredx, on 27 December 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

I'd rather them back off the crit explosion chance from 100% (even 90% was too high but I'd take that over 100% any day) -and- take away the charge mechanic. I understand why it's there, to prevent the PPC/Gauss meta of old, but it seems like if anything the logic behind the charge mechanic that PGI gave would mean that it has a charge wait while attempting to fire with PPCs rather than all of the time like we currently have. Plus people are using macros to sync PPC/Gauss fire anyway, so in reality the charge mechanic is simply a disadvantage for people that don't use those.

Actually it is very easy to manually sync fire PPC and Gauss together. Many players wouldn't even need macro for that.

Edited by El Bandito, 27 December 2016 - 06:17 PM.

[C E Dwyer]

Kimberm1911, on 26 December 2016 - 06:37 PM, said:

Would it break the game if the Gauss rifle did not have a charging time. The charge seems a bit unnecessary due to its extremely long cool down, and the fact that it explodes if it's critted.

There isn't really a reason for it anymore, due to the increased cool down, and range nerf.

P.G.I like it in because it's supposed to make it feel more like a sniper weapon.

Some of the community like it in because it makes them feel special that they can make the charge up work with PPC's for pin point, while others can't.

But for game balancing there really isn't much point anymore

[PurplePuke]

Gauss charge up is cool. Makes it different and interesting, and adds variety to weapon usage and gameplay. Nerfing it is a stupid idea.

If anything, they should come up with other weapons mechanics to diversify gameplay. The game already has:

• LRMs and Streaks need target locks
  
• Gauss needs charge up
  
• PPCs with minimum range

And to a lesser extent:

• Autocannons require you to lead your target
  
• Lasers require a steady hand to keep on target during burn duration

They should come up with more of these to differentiate the weaponry in MWO. Not cancel the most interesting of them all: the Gauss charge-up.

Edited by PurplePuke, 27 December 2016 - 11:00 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

RestosIII, on 26 December 2016 - 11:31 PM, said:

First of all, I mean when people are poking against me. And isn't it a little bit telling that almost every time you see people bragging about how good the goose rifle is, and how it can't get changed up to a no-charge but long cooldown weapon that they're LIKELY using it with PPCs or laser vomit? Never bragging about using just them?

That would be because a Gauss Rifle is 12 or 15 tons and bringing two is hard to do for most 'Mechs...even Clan ones. One alone is not quite punchy enough, and bringing two often constrains your ammo by a lot (or if IS, means you run super slow and squishy). PPCs are a natural complement for Gauss, because they both fire projectiles with long range. For the same tonnage as one Gauss rifle, you can get two PPCs. Or you could get three ERLL, which also complement the Gauss very nicely.

It's a no-brainer to combine Gauss with other weapons, really.

[1453 R]

In general, I approve of the Gauss charge cycle. It makes the Goosewaffle feel like a Gauss Rifle and not just a giant heatless Supah-Autocannon superior in every way to all other ballistics, and it helps balance out the weapon. Also as proven in the PTS session where Gauss charge was disabled in the same space where the KDK-3 existed, chargeless Goosewaffles dominate the game completely even when firing them spikes your heat, and even when they have long-assed cooldowns.

Or rather, cGauss do.

I'm curious to see how reducing/eliminating charge cycle from the iGoose would work for differentiating the iGoose from the cGoose. I don't like the notion of the iGoose going back to being a magic heatless SupahAutocannon that obsoletes every single non-Goose ballistic weapon short machine guns, but it's nevertheless an elegant fix for the increased size and sharply increased weight on the iGoose, whilst also giving players an option of which behavior they prefer. The iGoose is larger and heavier, on 'Mechs with less overall space, and with larger, heavier PPCs to pair with them - Sphere dual-Goose/dual-Pepsi Gigaspikes are very difficult to build and rife with flaws their Clan counterparts don't have. I feel like iGoose being able to snapfire would be much less of a balance issue than cGoose snapfire, and would help redress that particular imbalance in the tech bases in a suitably Different-But-Equal manner.

Same for the light Goose, if it ever debuts. That weapon deals much less damage and could probably avoid a charge sequence for balance issues, though I'm equally curious to see how magshots/AP gauss could work as superlight ballistics with surprising range/damage but also a charge cycle, as possible froggy options for lighter 'Mechs.

There's ways to use this particular lever to better balance out the game. I'd like to see those ways experimented with.

[Y E O N N E]

What would most help balance the isGauss against the cGauss is removing or dramatically reducing chance to explode so I can take it in a side-torso with an XL. That, and bumping ghost limit up to 3 for IS PPCs. 3xPPC+1xGauss weighs the same and occupies the same number of slots as 2xcERPPC+2xcGauss; it does 5 less damage, but that's a far-cry smaller than the current gap of 15 to 20 using current build options.

[Wintersdark]

xWiredx, on 27 December 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

I'd rather them back off the crit explosion chance from 100% (even 90% was too high but I'd take that over 100% any day) -and- take away the charge mechanic. I understand why it's there, to prevent the PPC/Gauss meta of old, but it seems like if anything the logic behind the charge mechanic that PGI gave would mean that it has a charge wait while attempting to fire with PPCs rather than all of the time like we currently have. Plus people are using macros to sync PPC/Gauss fire anyway, so in reality the charge mechanic is simply a disadvantage for people that don't use those.

I've never known anyone to use a macro to fire gauss+ppc together. People who have bugs up their butts about macros seem to say that a lot, but seriously (and not to get into the macro argument here, because it's been had enough elsewhere) firing gauss and PPC together with gauss charge is easier without a macro than with one.

The same basically applies to all gauss usage. Unless you're really talented at macro creation (and few are) it's way, way easier to fire on release of the fire button than have some macro do it, because you need to control the instant the rifle fires not just have it fire off on it's own if you want to hit your target right.

Firing PPC and Gauss together is this hard: Press LMB, hold to charge; release LMB and tap RMB at the same time to fire gauss and PPC's. If this is too hard for someone (and they don't have a severe physical disability), then they're going to be unspeakably bad at this game at the best of times anyways.

However, the charge mechanic did serve to cut down the volume of gauss+ppc use by making it marginally more of a hassle to do. If anything, I'd argue this is a very good way to go. You still CAN use Gauss+PPC very effectively together, but doing so effectively adds the charge to the PPC as well - you can't snap-shoot the gauss+ppc combo.

Yeonne Greene, on 27 December 2016 - 11:15 AM, said:

What would most help balance the isGauss against the cGauss is removing or dramatically reducing chance to explode so I can take it in a side-torso with an XL. That, and bumping ghost limit up to 3 for IS PPCs. 3xPPC+1xGauss weighs the same and occupies the same number of slots as 2xcERPPC+2xcGauss; it does 5 less damage, but that's a far-cry smaller than the current gap of 15 to 20 using current build options.

Yeah.

I did think the last move for IS gauss was a good one (increased health on isGauss, 100% boomrate on cGauss) but they should go further. Given the XL problem IS side (the engine difference being the primary balance problem between the factions after all) making IS Gauss not boom at all is probably a good idea.

Or, maybe drop it to 10 damage, instead of 20.

[Y E O N N E]

Wintersdark, on 27 December 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

I did think the last move for IS gauss was a good one (increased health on isGauss, 100% boomrate on cGauss) but they should go further. Given the XL problem IS side (the engine difference being the primary balance problem between the factions after all) making IS Gauss not boom at all is probably a good idea.

Or, maybe drop it to 10 damage, instead of 20.

Thematically, I always thought it would be fitting if Clan Tech were superior, but had lots of little temperamental drawbacks to manage. Gauss is lighter, but not as robustly built and so it can explode. Clan ACs are lighter and smaller, but shorter barrels and more powerful powder charges to compensate result in lower accuracy. That sort of thing.

[Whitey On The Moon]

Peronally, I do not like the charge mechanic for a plethora of reasons but I do see the need for.it considering the current implementation of the gauss.
That being said, after reading through the responses, I'm left thinking
an idea is not responsible for the support it attracts..

[Snazzy Dragon]

I'll be perfectly honest, I always giggle when suggestions involving heat penalties when firing more than a single gauss rifle pop up...

[Y E O N N E]

Snazzy Dragon, on 27 December 2016 - 12:06 PM, said:

I'll be perfectly honest, I always giggle when suggestions involving heat penalties when firing more than a single gauss rifle pop up...

100% heat penalty added on would be a whopping 3 heat! 2spooky4me.

[Snazzy Dragon]

Yeonne Greene, on 27 December 2016 - 12:11 PM, said:

100% heat penalty added on would be a whopping 3 heat! 2spooky4me.

It's not like heat containment covers that or anything

[Mystere]

Wintersdark, on 27 December 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

I've never known anyone to use a macro to fire gauss+ppc together. People who have bugs up their butts about macros seem to say that a lot, but seriously (and not to get into the macro argument here, because it's been had enough elsewhere) firing gauss and PPC together with gauss charge is easier without a macro than with one.

Get a joystick with a 2-stage trigger (i.e. TG1/TG2 for a Thrustmaster). Charge gauss with TG1 and fire it along with PPCs (or any weapon for that matter) on TG2.

Easy peasy.

[Snazzy Dragon]

Mystere, on 27 December 2016 - 12:16 PM, said:

Get a joystick with a 2-stage trigger (i.e. TG1/TG2 for a Thrustmaster). Charge gauss with TG1 and fire it along with PPCs (or any weapon for that matter) on TG2.

Easy peasy.

The challenge is aiming with said joystick.

[Mystere]

Snazzy Dragon, on 27 December 2016 - 12:24 PM, said:

The challenge is aiming with said joystick.

Joysticks are fine when using PPFLD weapons. The same holds for missiles. The problem is with firing lasers and Clan autocannons.
But then again I'm also not talking about el cheapo gear here.

Also, who said you need to aim with the stick? I have heard of players in MWO using the stick for movement (i.e. throttle and turning). If you've been using something like a G13 on your left hand as your main gaming controller for a long time, switching to a stick should be easy.

Edited by Mystere, 27 December 2016 - 12:46 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Mystere, on 27 December 2016 - 12:16 PM, said:

Get a joystick with a 2-stage trigger (i.e. TG1/TG2 for a Thrustmaster). Charge gauss with TG1 and fire it along with PPCs (or any weapon for that matter) on TG2.

Easy peasy.

And cool!

But seriously, is there anyone for whom lifting a finger off one mouse button while pressing another is really so challenging? I mean, is it physically difficult to lift your index finger and press your middle finger down at the same time?

I don't understand why this is seen as sorcery requiring aid to accomplish.

But maybe it's just me, and normal humans game wearing mittens?

Or are one button mice really that common?