90 replies to this topic

[Bombast]

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:01 PM, said:

All it has is low heat, and with 7 slots, 15 tons, just for the weapon itself (not even including tonnage and slots for ammo), there are much better options available.

It still has it's two greatest assets - Pinpoint damage and absurd velocity. As for better options... at that range, what? ER PPCs are arguably better, but they're slow, reducing range accuracy, and hot - Triple ER PPC (And thus 30 pin point damage) is a furnace maker for most mechs. ER Large Lasers are as garbage as ever. LRMs are as sloppy as ever and have lower overall range. AC/2s spread their damage all over God's Green Earth at those kinds of ranges, and AC/5s are only marginally better than that.

[Arugela]

Bad joke, but they could add twerking. You twerk to get your quirk... Lets pretend it activates motors in the mechs legs to give a power bonus. >< Direwolf Twerks then fires extra strong quirked gauss. Either damage or velocity. maybe it builds up pressure. It would be funny.

You hold down button and mech bounces up and down activate all of it's servos/motors for a bit until a light goes green. You then have bonus to all ballistics and maybe missile velocity. It lasts so many shots. Could be a cool new mech device. Twerk Precharge device!. TPD Or servomatic precharge device. It uses existing parts of the mech to build up the pressure or electricity etc.

As a device it could allow the gauss to fire at it's 3x range while charged! Then it's a variable range weapon. They could let velocity increases increase range and damage over range as is realistic if I'm not mistaken. That would be an awesome bonus for all non laser weapons.

If they don't want twerking they could also just have all the servers motors spin and get hot. maybe adding heat. The cost is extra heat for the pressure/velocity/charge build up. Although with the right setup it might not add enough heat to be free with enough heatsinks. say you hold the button down and it takes 3-4 heat per second for several second to build up each time. You get up to 4 or more shots from balistic or missile weapons. Maybe with the skill tree allowing extra shots. Maybe at the expense of build up time to get the bonus. This could be compensate for by allowing partial buildups that let you stop the charge at one or any other number of shots and then fire.

A Chargable velocity and range boost would be nice for everything. LRM/SRM/SSRM/Balistics! The range boost could literally be everything that has a 2x boost getting a temp 3x boost and accompanying damage increase at range. Nothing to base damage or optimal range. Just range extention and damage from range issues.

Edited by Arugela, 23 January 2017 - 01:31 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 January 2017 - 01:06 PM, said:

Doesn't mean it still isn't powerful at long range.....

The point is, it's not as effective against average and above players as some of the extremist nay sayers want to make it out to be.

Quote

Polar and Tourmaline both have sufficient enough cover to push close enough for most setups. Really you should only have problems getting within range against a coordinated team that specifically setup for extreme range and even then you can generally make a push to get within that range.

...

Not that would stop you from closing enough distance to do enough damage with Gauss.....

Yeah a push through open terrain, where PPC/ERLLs now rule, but apparently you think its still the pilot's fault then...

I still see the 'cake and eat it too' perspective here.

Quote

If you don't know where those 12 mechs are then someone made an error with their scouting or you should play more cognizant, deploy a UAV if you are sitting somewhere that easy to flank.

...

The only time that is the case is if you make a push and your lights are more aggressive than the lights currently trying to shoot your rear, otherwise it was someone's fault for not being aware of the positioning of the enemy.

Again, somehow assuming that we'll be able to toss a UAV that lasts 15 minutes? And/or we're going to get 'perfect play' out of the players MM has tossed you in with...

'Cake and eat it too'...

Quote

So you think one of the best Clan ballistics should be buffed, lol sorry but you must be delusional. I don't think the Night Gyr or KDK-3 need to be any stronger (nor do I want to see a return of the quad Gauss Kodiak).

Well, if those PARTICULAR 'MECHS are the problem and not the weapon itself, I see an easy solution.

Readjust the mount points on those 'mechs to match the Atlas/KGC ballistic hard points: Low, very low, to limit their effectiveness.

Let's not 'toss the baby out with the bathwater' and nerf a weapon system, but leave ONE SIDE with mounting points more favorable than what the other side receives.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

The point is, it's not as effective against average and above players

Lolwut, you do realize that at long range the PPC/Gauss mechs like the KDK-3, Timby, and Night Gyr dominate regardless of player skill right?

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

Yeah a push through open terrain, where PPC/ERLLs now rule, but apparently you think its still the pilot's fault then...

Pushing across open terrain can be work. A lot of push oriented teams screw this up and try to snake their way to the enemy only to extend how long they take before they can do damage all the while taking more damage than they would've if they had just run straight at the enemy. It all depends on the range we are talking about and whether you are together or not (lights harassing the enemy backfield also helps greatly.

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

'Cake and eat it too'...

Speaking of this, maybe you shouldn't expect to have a perfectly defensible position where you can snipe from AND be safe from mechs flanking you.....sounds like you want to have it all more than I do.

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

Well, if those PARTICULAR 'MECHS are the problem and not the weapon itself, I see an easy solution.

Or perhaps the reverse is true, the weapon is fine you just take terrible mechs to run it on that don't have enough compensation to run those loadouts effectively. The next quote is where you pretty much admit this is the case (aka it isn't the weapon that is UP here):

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

Readjust the mount points on those 'mechs to match the Atlas/KGC ballistic hard points: Low, very low, to limit their effectiveness.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 January 2017 - 01:30 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 January 2017 - 01:30 PM, said:

Lolwut, you do realize that at long range the PPC/Gauss mechs like the KDK-3, Timby, and Night Gyr dominate regardless of player skill right?

Being clan 'mechs and faster than the typical IS assault, mobility makes a difference.

Sure. There's a significant difference crossing 200 meters of open terrain at 56.6kph vs nearly 70kph.

Quote

Pushing across open terrain can be work. A lot of push oriented teams screw this up and try to snake their way to the enemy only to extend how long they take before they can do damage all the while taking more damage than they would've if they had just run straight at the enemy. It all depends on the range we are talking about and whether you are together or not (lights harassing the enemy backfield also helps greatly.

So, are you saying "Screw it, cross open terrain regardless, just everyone cross it at the same time."?

It almost sounds like you're speaking exclusively from a competitive/full team perspective.

Me, I'm speaking from where the vast majority of game play occurs: Quick Play.

Not a lot of organization there...

Quote

Speaking of this, maybe you shouldn't expect to have a perfectly defensible position where you can snipe from AND be safe from mechs flanking you.....sounds like you want to have it all more than I do.

I actually don't play that way, but the whole perspective that the gauss is a support weapon, but you should be close to the enemy, no matter what leads us in to this portion of the discussion.

In every 'mech other than my KGC or DWF, it's not overly difficult to stay with the main force, and I do. However, if I'm in the KGC or DWF, it's another story. While the DWF carries enough fire power to dissuade most threats (if I can get a bead on 'em with the limitations in torso twisting and turning speed), the KGC's LACK of ability to sport dual gauss AND significant alternate weapons AND 'reasonable' speed, makes it significantly vulnerable to flanking no matter what.

Quote

Or perhaps the reverse is true, the weapon is fine you just take terrible mechs to run it on that don't have enough compensation to run those loadouts effectively. The next quote is where you pretty much admit this is the case (aka it isn't the weapon that is UP here):

Not at all.

From what I've seen from the responses here and in other discussions, when people start talking about how bad the gauss was before the nerf it's always "Yeah KDK and NTG's just kill with the gauss weapon", completely ignoring that out of all some, what? Nearly 400 chassis in the game, those are the only two that really get mentioned with any significant regularity when talking about how "deadly" the gauss is.

So, if I'm right and the weapon was fine before, and they're right the weapon was OP in those two chassis, then obviously it's chassis that need adjustment.

I've yet to see anyone post how deadly the Atlas gauss combo is, and only the hard core KGC pilots (like myself) will praise the ability of a dual gauss/ERLL/PPC combo in the KGC, and the primary difference between the two is that the IS ballistics are typically VERY LOW when compared to where they end up on the Clan.

Seems obvious at that point: Put the ballistic mounting points on those Clan 'mechs as low as they are on the IS equivalents, and see how they perform, to see if the gauss is somehow still OP and needs such a drastic range nerf.

[Alex Morgaine]

Only if the stock mech loads 2 or more gauss.

[Pjwned]

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:01 PM, said:

I disagree.

For the size, fragility, lack of DPS, simultaneous fire limitation, and firing process, the key differentiator it had for it besides the low heat, was its range.

Now?

All it has is low heat, and with 7 slots, 15 tons, just for the weapon itself (not even including tonnage and slots for ammo), there are much better options available.

Well, I was against the gauss cooldown nerf a while back, and I largely still am because it already had the worst DPS:tonnage ratio in the game and increasing the cooldown just made it even worse in that regard.

I doubt the cooldown is going back down to 4 seconds though, even if in effect it was a minimum 4.75 second cooldown, and I've never once been a fan of buffing an already strong aspect of a weapon to be even stronger just because something else got nerfed.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:47 PM, said:

Being clan 'mechs and faster than the typical IS assault, mobility makes a difference.

Sure. There's a significant difference crossing 200 meters of open terrain at 56.6kph vs nearly 70kph.

Moving goal posts.

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:47 PM, said:

So, are you saying "Screw it, cross open terrain regardless, just everyone cross it at the same time."?

It almost sounds like you're speaking exclusively from a competitive/full team perspective.

Me, I'm speaking from where the vast majority of game play occurs: Quick Play.

Not a lot of organization there...

You realize there is a double-edged sword with trying to use this argument right? Extreme range is MUCH harder to pull off in QP just like brawling is because both extremes require better than average coordination to pull off. Yes I was using coordinated to prove that there is a way to beat it, but you shouldn't be having range issues in QP since mid/long range is the dominant range in QP.

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:47 PM, said:

Not at all.

From what I've seen from the responses here and in other discussions, when people start talking about how bad the gauss was before the nerf it's always "Yeah KDK and NTG's just kill with the gauss weapon", completely ignoring that out of all some, what? Nearly 400 chassis in the game, those are the only two that really get mentioned with any significant regularity when talking about how "deadly" the gauss is.

It isn't just the KDK-3 and Night Gyr, those just happen to be the top mechs using them. Gauss is still one of the best Clan ballistics and doesn't need buffing in any fashion. If there is a ballistic that needs buffing on the Clan side, it is the UAC20 or LBX2/5s.

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:47 PM, said:

So, if I'm right and the weapon was fine before, and they're right the weapon was OP in those two chassis, then obviously it's chassis that need adjustment.

The chassis is strong with several builds right now each with their own advantage, unnerfing Gauss would actually hurt build diversity for the Night Gyr at least because of the strength of Gauss compared to most ballistics.

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 01:47 PM, said:

the KGC's LACK of ability to sport dual gauss AND significant alternate weapons AND 'reasonable' speed, makes it significantly vulnerable to flanking no matter what.

I've yet to see anyone post how deadly the Atlas gauss combo is, and only the hard core KGC pilots (like myself) will praise the ability of a dual gauss/ERLL/PPC combo in the KGC, and the primary difference between the two is that the IS ballistics are typically VERY LOW when compared to where they end up on the Clan.

Seems obvious at that point: Put the ballistic mounting points on those Clan 'mechs as low as they are on the IS equivalents, and see how they perform, to see if the gauss is somehow still OP and needs such a drastic range nerf.

You are doing the entirely wrong comparison. There are two things you SHOULD be comparing Gauss against:

• Other weapons for the ranges at which it is meant for (both within the weapon type and across all weapons
  
• Across tech base considerations.

Both for Clans and IS, Gauss now competes against PPCs/AC5s/AC10s and depending on the tech base the Gauss is either on par or better than the other options. The problem with the IS Gauss is partly to do with the iXL and the difference between Clans being able to run Gauss in the sides safer than the IS can (otherwise the Mauler would be a solid user of Gauss). Basically you are using bad mechs as an excuse to get a weapon buffed when you should be looking at it in context of how it compares to other weapons and only that. Using mechs as an excuse is how you end up with power creep because if there ever were a mech that had mounts like some Clan mechs enjoy suddenly it becomes overly strong.

In other words, you are doing it wrong.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 January 2017 - 02:43 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Pjwned, on 23 January 2017 - 02:34 PM, said:

Well, I was against the gauss cooldown nerf a while back, and I largely still am because it already had the worst DPS:tonnage ratio in the game and increasing the cooldown just made it even worse in that regard.

I doubt the cooldown is going back down to 4 seconds though, even if in effect it was a minimum 4.75 second cooldown, and I've never once been a fan of buffing an already strong aspect of a weapon to be even stronger just because something else got nerfed.

But we're demonstrating the continued ever painful downward spiral of the weapon here.

They keep making it worse and worse and giving it NOTHING to balance that risk-vs-reward calculation you do when you're building your 'mechs.

They've yet to address the dumbest aspect of the weapon, the possibility it will explode when hit, even when completely out of ammo and not charged at all, so no matter what, you're stuck with a 15 ton, 7 crit slot, bomb on your 'mech.

Thank god they're going to fix that overheating, non-registering of hit, issue (though admittedly I thought it was an HSR thing kicking me in the *** when ever it happened), at least that's something, but it's SO rare to overheat while firing a gauss rifle, it's an almost negligible fix.

The DPS/DPT of the weapon has continued to decline, year over year, and over they years they keep enforcing new limitations, and NOW it doesn't have the range it once did. It's like someone in PGI hates the gauss, but instead of an all out killing of the weapon they've been attempting to 'boil the frog slowly'.

[cazidin]

MODERATORS! LOCK DOWN THIS THREAD!

[Bombast]

cazidin, on 23 January 2017 - 02:53 PM, said:

MODERATORS! LOCK DOWN THIS THREAD!

[Dimento Graven]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 January 2017 - 02:42 PM, said:

Moving goal posts.

Not, but whatever...

Quote

You realize there is a double-edged sword with trying to use this argument right? Extreme range is MUCH harder to pull off in QP just like brawling is because both extremes require better than average coordination to pull off. Yes I was using coordinated to prove that there is a way to beat it, but you shouldn't be having range issues in QP since mid/long range is the dominant range in QP.

Your experience in QP is much different than mine then.

It's not at all hard, nor prior to the gauss range nerf, uncommon to pull off long range support in QP. In KGC's and DWF's you're pretty much forced to start out providing long range support due to speed issues.

Quote

It isn't just the KDK-3 and Night Gyr, those just happen to be the top mechs using them.

No, no, no, you don't get to do this... Let's tie this into:

Quote

Gauss is still one of the best Clan ballistics and doesn't need buffing in any fashion.

Nor do you get to do this.

Basically you're stating that the nerf was justified because of TWO SPECIFIC PLATFORMS, you've yet to deny that and appear to doubling down on that.

Worse, you do this:

Quote

If there is a ballistic that needs buffing on the Clan side, it is the UAC20 or LBX2/5s.

Now if there is ANY weapon system in the game that can qualify as a 'vomit' weapon it's the other clan ballistics, absolutely. Clan ballistics, at least up until recently, you could make builds capable of pushing out 2000 damage in under 3 minutes (someone at one point had a screen shot of a DWF doing it).

That and the fact, AGAIN, the weapon systems in and of themselves weren't really broke it was THE SPECIFIC PLATFORMS that they were being utilized on that were the problem, and if I remember correctly the KDK definitely received some specific adjustments, did it not? Yes it did. Prior to that the DWF also received some adjustments, too, correct?

So again, we don't need to nerf the gauss, or at least nerf it as drastically as it was, we need to adjust the specific platforms the weapon becomes OP on.

Quote

The chassis is strong with several builds right now each with their own advantage, unnerfing Gauss would actually hurt build diversity for the Night Gyr at least because of the strength of Gauss compared to most ballistics.

UNLESS you un-nerf the gauss, BUT shift the ballistics mount point to be LOWER on the KDK and NTG.

I think it's a great alternative myself.

Quote

You are doing the entirely wrong comparison. There are two things you SHOULD be comparing Gauss against:

• Other weapons for the ranges at which it is meant for (both within the weapon type and across all weapons
  
• Across tech base considerations.

Both for Clans and IS, Gauss now competes against PPCs/AC5s/AC10s and depending on the tech base the Gauss is either on par or better than the other options. The problem with the IS Gauss is partly to do with the iXL and the difference between Clans being able to run Gauss in the sides safer than the IS can (otherwise the Mauler would be a solid user of Gauss). Basically you are using bad mechs as an excuse to get a weapon buffed when you should be looking at it in context of how it compares to other weapons and only that. Using mechs as an excuse is how you end up with power creep because if there ever were a mech that had mounts like some Clan mechs enjoy suddenly it becomes overly strong.

In other words, you are doing it wrong.

First: No way, the KGC is NOT a bad 'mech.

Second I'm not doing it wrong: I don't bother comparing weapon vs. weapon because the game isn't played weapon vs. weapon it's played 'mech vs. 'mech, and a 'mech and a weapon system's overall performance is determined by the supporting technology in the platform AND positioning in the 'mech.

That's why no one really gives a crap about gauss in an Atlas, but people suddenly WOULD, if PGI created a variant where the ballistic hard point was at shoulder level.

The KGC is a GREAT 'mech, BUT, the fact that due to all the other considerations of IS tech, you end up with very limited build options that further limit performance makes the 'mech less than what it should be. Possibly the ONLY thing necessary to make the KGC a true top tier 'mech would be to provide it with the same level of torso buffs the Atlas got.

Instead you're piloting a 'mech with weapon systems that are even lower to the ground than the Atlas's problematic mounting points, but also more surface area than an Atlas, with about 1/3rd less the over all health of the Atlas.

Likewise with Clans, it's the fact that for whatever reason PGI insists that nearly EVERY weapon hard point in the torsos should be a HIGH mount, and the free CASE in every location, and the ST loss survivable XL's, and the smaller crit counts, and the lighter weapon systems, and the longer range weapon systems, and the harder hitting weapons systems, and smaller endo steel/ff armor crit counts, and the generally available TC's with ballistics buffs, so on and so forth, ad nausea...

Basically it has added up to weapons that when compared 1-to-1 initially 'looking' close to equal, but on a Clan 'mech they generally out perform the IS version, BECAUSE OF all the other crap that goes in a Clan 'mech.

Honestly you really seem to be working hard into turning this into a Clan vs. IS debate, when I'm stating the weapon system itself wasn't broken or OP for either side before the patch. Perhaps the Clan 'mechs they were generally being loaded up on allowed the weapon to over perform, but that's a problem with those specific 'mechs and should be addressed AT THE 'MECH level, NOT result in an across the board nerf.

cazidin, on 23 January 2017 - 02:53 PM, said:

MODERATORS! LOCK DOWN THIS THREAD!

Moderators he got his feelings hurt and instead of walking away from the thread has decided that if HE can't be the 'bell of the ball' in this thread it shouldn't exist.

A demonstration of extremism at its finest folks.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 03:12 PM, said:

Second I'm not doing it wrong: I don't bother comparing weapon vs. weapon because the game isn't played weapon vs. weapon it's played 'mech vs. 'mech

See, here is the problem with that, you are deliberately comparing mechs with low mounts to mechs with decent mounts and ignoring all other factors surrounding mech balance and squarely placing their problems on Gauss performance and not other issues. Weapons should be balanced without context of hardpoint layouts or mount locations because that is something that differs between mechs and there will eventually be a mech that suitably mounts that weapon.

The Kodiak is a perfect example of this, because it was one of the few mechs that could put the UAC10 to good use (the Night Gyr would've been the same way if we had gotten it before the Kodiak). The UAC10 was broken, but because no Clan mech before that could adequately run it like the others it was never noticed. The KDK-3 was broken sure, but it was compounded by the brokenness of the UAC10. Same thing with Gauss for the IS, they don't really have the greatest platforms (which is compounded by the fragility of iXLs with Gauss in the side torsos) but that doesn't mean they won't ever exist or that the Gauss is somehow weak. This is why you CANNOT compare that sort of information, sure you can keep in mind ghost heat limits and best outcome with regards to heat sink counts, ammo placement, or factoring in slot requirements (like 4 UAC5s in the torso disallowing XLs on the IS side).

That said, there are only 3 kinds of ballistics that see serious use on the IS side, UAC5s, AC5s, and Gauss; so it's not like Gauss is in this terrible horrible spot (not that it doesn't need a buff though, it just doesn't need a range buff).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 January 2017 - 03:23 PM.

[Bombast]

Dimento Graven, on 23 January 2017 - 03:12 PM, said:

First: No way, the KGC is NOT a bad 'mech.

...

The KGC is a GREAT 'mech, BUT, the fact that due to all the other considerations of IS tech, you end up with very limited build options that further limit performance makes the 'mech less than what it should be. Possibly the ONLY thing necessary to make the KGC a true top tier 'mech would be to provide it with the same level of torso buffs the Atlas got.

Instead you're piloting a 'mech with weapon systems that are even lower to the ground than the Atlas's problematic mounting points, but also more surface area than an Atlas, with about 1/3rd less the over all health of the Atlas.

Make up your mind, is the King Crab a great mech, or is it a fragile mech with ground scrapping hard points that can't carry enough firepower because all of it's variants have a predominately ballistic focus which precludes it from carrying real fire power?

Quote

Likewise with Clans, it's the fact that for whatever reason PGI insists that nearly EVERY weapon hard point in the torsos should be a HIGH mount, and the free CASE in every location, and the ST loss survivable XL's, and the smaller crit counts, and the lighter weapon systems, and the longer range weapon systems, and the harder hitting weapons systems, and smaller endo steel/ff armor crit counts, and the generally available TC's with ballistics buffs, so on and so forth, ad nausea...

While yes, this is a problem, and PGI is the final person to pass the buck, lets be honest here - We all know the reason. It's up at the top of this page, under the Mechwarrior Online logo.

Clan mechs get free CASE, durable XLs, smaller crit counts, lighter weapons, and longer range because them's the rules. And they get high mounted weapons because, well... go look at all the old art work. The Inner Sphere got cool looking mechs with interesting, varied designs and haphazard weapon placement. The Clans got uniform looking mechs that got a bunch of shoulder mounted weapons because theres, like, only 4 kinds of Clan battlemech arms and they're all little baby arms.

It's getting increasingly hard to take you seriously when you pretend not to know why things are the way they are. Because either you're fibbing, or you need to go find that out before throwing a fit and taking everyone else on.

Quote

Moderators he got his feelings hurt and instead of walking away from the thread has decided that if HE can't be the 'bell of the ball' in this thread it shouldn't exist.

You are just so precious.

Edited by Bombast, 23 January 2017 - 03:24 PM.

[cazidin]

Quicksilver, join us! There can be no mature discussion with him! We MUST lock this thread down immediately!

Thank you for your support, Bombast and Zombie-Reagan.

[Gas Guzzler]

Isn't the dual gauss + 2 PPC build pretty much one of the best builds on the KGC? The only good build I can think of not involving gauss is the 4UAC5 build, but unless you are farming pugs on Sulfurous Rift, I think that is outclassed by the dual gauss plus lasers or dual gauss + PPC builds on the KGC. So if the best build on the KGC involves dual gauss, than why do we need to buff gauss again?

[Bombast]

Gas Guzzler, on 23 January 2017 - 03:28 PM, said:

Isn't the dual gauss + 2 PPC build pretty much one of the best builds on the KGC?

No, the best King Crab build is sextuple AC/2s. Dakka for days!

But yes, the second best build is Dual PPC, Dual GRs. Come to think of it, isn't that the best build on everything that can carry that much weight?

[cazidin]

Gas Guzzler, on 23 January 2017 - 03:28 PM, said:

Isn't the dual gauss + 2 PPC build pretty much one of the best builds on the KGC? The only good build I can think of not involving gauss is the 4UAC5 build, but unless you are farming pugs on Sulfurous Rift, I think that is outclassed by the dual gauss plus lasers or dual gauss + PPC builds on the KGC. So if the best build on the KGC involves dual gauss, than why do we need to buff gauss again?

That's a fun build but, unfortunately, the KGC is a bit too slow and wide for my tastes. Gas Guzzler, together with Bombast, Quicksilver, and Zombie Reagan, we must shut down this thread!

[Dimento Graven]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 January 2017 - 03:21 PM, said:

See, here is the problem with that, you are deliberately comparing mechs with low mounts to mechs with decent mounts and ignoring all other factors surrounding mech balance and squarely placing their problems on Gauss performance and not other issues. Weapons should be balanced without context of hardpoint layouts or mount locations because that is something that differs between mechs and there will eventually be a mech that suitably mounts that weapon.

First off: I am in fact considering that OTHER factors of the platforms we load weapons into will affect their performance.

Second: In your own words you absolutely acknowledge this: "comparing mechs with low mounts to mechs with decent mounts..." Tacitly acknowledging that mounting locations make a BIG difference in how a weapon is going to perform.

You'll note I haven't even BOTHERED to try and bring the is heavy mech, JM6, into this argument at all, even though it's got shoulder level gauss mount points. And why not? The best Clan heavy 'mech for dual gauss, the NTG, is comparable right? Just 10 ton difference really... YOU KNOW WHY NOT! Because it's a stupidly out of balance comparison. There's really no way to load up a JM6 with dual gauss and have 70kph speed, AND have single torso loss speed, AND have enough ammo to be meaningful, AND have reasonable backup weaponry.

Quote

The Kodiak is a perfect example of this, because it was one of the few mechs that could put the UAC10 to good use (the Night Gyr would've been the same way if we had gotten it before the Kodiak). The UAC10 was broken, but because no Clan mech before that could adequately run it like the others it was never noticed. The KDK-3 was broken sure, but it was compounded by the brokenness of the UAC10.

The KDK allowed you to boat the UAC10 with high mounts, something the DWF couldn't do, and the KDK had better speed and maneuverability than the DWF did.

Perhaps the weapon system WASN'T ACUTALLY BROKEN, it was ENTIRE PACKAGE, system+system+feature+system+etc. that all added up to the UAC10 being broken. It wasn't broken on any other 'mech at the time, ONLY the KDK.

So really, was it the UAC10 that was broken, or the KDK?

Quote

Same thing with Gauss for the IS, they don't really have the greatest platforms (which is compounded by the fragility of iXLs with Gauss in the side torsos) but that doesn't mean they won't ever exist or that the Gauss is somehow weak. This is why you CANNOT compare that sort of information, sure you can keep in mind ghost heat limits and best outcome with regards to heat sink counts, ammo placement, or factoring in slot requirements (like 4 UAC5s in the torso disallowing XLs on the IS side).

That said, there are only 3 kinds of ballistics that see serious use on the IS side, UAC5s, AC5s, and Gauss; so it's not like Gauss is in this terrible horrible spot (not that it doesn't need a buff though, it just doesn't need a range buff).

Well since we can't get rid of the charge cycle, and we can't get rid of the slow reload, and we can't get of the explosiveness, and we can't get rid of the size, and we can't get rid of the weight, (capitalizing for emphasis, not yelling) WHAT OTHER OPTIONS ARE LEFT?

Gee, I dunno, undo the last range nerf? OH BUT WAIT, you're saying we can't do that either.

I have provided two options, one that addressed the supposed reasoning PGI gave when they nerfed it, mainly the single gauss/multi-energy weapon builds out there that were so common. Fine undo it for builds that load two gauss. So in effect I'm not calling for a 'buff' I'm calling for the nerf to be undone.

The other option was to leave the range the same, BUT, change the damage drop off to start around 80%.

If we're in agreement that something needs to be done to bring gauss back, great, but we can't reject every option.

If the gauss was too powerful in certain 'mechs, leave the range alone but make it mount lower in those 'mechs specific 'mechs.

[Gas Guzzler]

cazidin, on 23 January 2017 - 03:35 PM, said:

That's a fun build but, unfortunately, the KGC is a bit too slow and wide for my tastes. Gas Guzzler, together with Bombast, Quicksilver, and Zombie Reagan, we must shut down this thread!

That's a problem for most King Crab builds, but despite that, dual gauss dual ppc is STILL one of the best builds on the KGC. Its better on other mechs though.