90 replies to this topic

[Y E O N N E]

Tarogato, on 05 February 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

And so if you change PPCs to a hitscan laser, and balance them so that they are unique and different from other lasers (ideally by being short duration), then what have you accomplished in terms of actual meta balance?

Nothing. If you can poptart with a 0.67s duration large pulse (which you can), then you can poptart even better with a PPC that has a burn duration of 0.50s or less. You may have made PPCs no longer PPFLD, which sounds like a nerf, but you also made them incredibly short duration long range hitscan, which is very strong.

Does Large Pulse lose to PPCs now? Yes it does. Why? Because the Large pulse requires more exposure to use.

Quote

If you finagle all the numbers so that it comes out as a net nerf to PPCs and they perform worse than they did before, then why go through all the bother of changing the mechanics of it?

Some of the more...qualitative?...changes in behavior nerf very specific things. Going from FLD to duration wrecks pop-tarting by making it less efficient on the poke in terms of damage out over damage in.

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 01:05 PM, said:

I didn't think of that. So adding a charge mechanic to PPCs would actually make poptarting even stronger. Because if you're poptarting, you're pre-charging anyways. But if you're trying to shoot at a poptart, you have to charge reactively. Making another weapon (PPCs) also require a charge will subtract from the available weapons that can counter poptarts. =/

Nope. Forcing the pop-tart to expose more means lasers (and UAC/2 spam) have more of an opportunity to burn it down. Longer cycle time also means that, using PPCs, you do not have enough output to have the weapon serve as the backbone for pretty much any strat; they become more niche, as they should be IMHO.

Quote

Leave the PPC as it is now and just nerf it. Same difference. It still has the effect of nerfing the mechs that benefit by having good hardpoints... and also nerfing the bad mechs with bad hardpoints. You'd still have to counteract the nerf by buffing those chronic underperformers like the Vindicator and Awesome that didn't deserve nerfs in the first place. So I really don't see the need to go through all the effort of completely changing how the weapon works and also risk making it either overpowered or completely junk in the process of re-imagining it.

And how exactly do you propose to nerf the PPC itself? Simply longer cool-down? That takes the pop-tarts out of the picture. However, it also takes PPCs out of the picture pretty much entirely since not only is it low-DPS now, it still has projectile velocity to manage. The risk is now higher than the potential reward and we're back to dakka or laser vomit. We buff projectile velocity up to compensate and make it at least useful on flanker 'Mechs, and we might as well make it a beam anyway.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 February 2017 - 12:49 PM, said:

I'm going to point this out real quick even though I'm late to the party, adding charge-up does limit a weapons usefulness regardless of how good you are at charge-ups. There is a reason the Night Gyr fails at being able to deal with the pre-nerf poptart Summoner and really a good HBK-IIC-A. That Gauss charge-up really hampers its ability to deal with other poptarts (which is why mixing PPCs and dakka works better for anti-poptart shenanigans).

As to the topic of making the PPC a longer ranged LPL with charge-up, honestly I'm ok with it since it makes energy weapons consistently different. As for how to balance PPCs against Pulse which are supposed to be the "accurate" weapons, well honestly you could make them or standard lasers more DPS oriented (like dakka lasers or like the continuous beam laser from MP3x) that way there is more contrast between lasers and PPCs (besides the charge-up). Basically you want PPCs to be to lasers like Gauss is to ACs. Sure you will still be able to poptart, but it disallows the ability to make snapshots if it has a charge up which is a pretty big change.

Pretty much all of this is what I had in mind. Lasers become the DPS option; you're going to have BLRs and KDK-5s applying the constant pressure that pins the enemy team, since they will have the cycle rate to take any shot that presents itself. The role of the PPC is lots of up-front damage from weird angles at weird (but long) intervals. Cagey. You'd probably still take the HBK-IIC or similar to do this, working in tandem with Light escort to find ways to whack the bigs and get them out of camping locations. You probably wouldn't boat the PPC, you'd probably use it to surge output of higher DPS weapons like UAC/2 or some other ballistic.

In my brain, standard lasers are more or less unchanged from current, but pulse lasers cycle rapidly and continuously as long as you have the heat capacity to keep it up. Like strobes.

[justcallme A S H]

MechaBattler, on 04 February 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

What if IS XLs gave a performance bonus? 12% turn rate, 20% acceleration/Deceleration, 3% speed tweak.

To a degree you already get some of that. Bigger engine, faster turn/twist rate - while also allowing more weapons/cooling due to the XL weight advantage. That is where the bonus is in that respect.

A lot of IS mechs already have accel/decell quirks so that would make it a bit harder to work out.

But I get your point. IS XL does need attention. The cERPPC/Gauss also does as well (well, mainly the poptart ability, if mechs had to expose way longer it'd be less effective).

[Pjwned]

Snazzy Dragon, on 04 February 2017 - 07:09 PM, said:

isXL in anything over 50 tons just is not very much fun with all the pinpoint front loaded damage running around lately

With many mechs like the black knight and warhammer that have lost a good deal of both offensive and defensive quirks, they simply feel like death traps rather than a tool to increase firepower, and even with the XL I'm often disappointed with the firepower because I know I could get better out of a Clan mech - the heat does not matter to me because of the sheer boatability of cDHS as well and I know that I can afford to make more trades with that mech because of cXL

I've been trying to finish out mastering my warhammers lately, as an example, but the feeling constant paranoia over getting hit in a side torso that has red armor and getting hit by some PPFLD shot getting crit and smashing that ST into oblivion is overriding the sheer fun factor of dakkadakkadakka doom on a black widow

The slightest lapse in concentration and/or mistake in twisting can end your match so fast right now in an isXL heavy or assault and in games with higher average skill more players will know from your loadout if they can instagib you on a ST destruction

Subbing out a STD engine you lose too much speed and firepower to be relevant and often you will be left behind because you cannot keep up in a 50-55KPH mech anymore and really when your heavy has the firepower of something 30 tons lighter with clan tech you are not really an asset worth keeping to the team anyway

I know that the overriding argument is "just git gud" but I'm only human- I make mistakes in matches, teams aren't perfect, and I'm not an ultrametatier player by any means-- and in clan mechs I can at least pull something out of it, on an isXL I am just dead and that is not much fun

So, what you're saying is that there are consequences when you equip the most fragile engine in your large, slow moving mechs that are effectively glass cannons.

What an absolute farce, I mean everybody should just be able to cram in as much firepower with no real consequences, and who cares about those STD engines LOL those are old pieces of junk that have no value whatsoever because they're heavy even though they're more durable (because who cares about durability if it's not on my XL engines) LOL!!!

Edited by Pjwned, 06 February 2017 - 05:59 PM.

[MechaBattler]

justcallme A S H, on 06 February 2017 - 05:53 PM, said:

To a degree you already get some of that. Bigger engine, faster turn/twist rate - while also allowing more weapons/cooling due to the XL weight advantage. That is where the bonus is in that respect.

A lot of IS mechs already have accel/decell quirks so that would make it a bit harder to work out.

But I get your point. IS XL does need attention. The cERPPC/Gauss also does as well (well, mainly the poptart ability, if mechs had to expose way longer it'd be less effective).

The way I see it the Clan XL does everything the IS XL does with less slots and better survivability. We could give it structure buff to the side torsos when equipped. And that'll make it a crappy approximation to the Clan XL. Or we could make it the performance engine. Make it perform better than the Clan XL.

Eh at the end of the day. PGI is gonna do what PGI gonna do. Which is apply a bandaid.

[Tarl Cabot]

Gas Guzzler, on 06 February 2017 - 01:44 PM, said:

I think the issue of IS XL heavies being less viable has less to do with PPFLD and more to do with the fact that all of those heavies were nerfed. Do you think that might be possible?

Especially for IS mechs, they are in a constant state of flux, both offensive and defensive quirks. This alone is likely why PGI has not made major changes to the weapon's base values themselves, so they would rather change a set of values for Clan mechs without seriously pissing off loads of people because said people are aware of the advantages of Clan tech overall, regardless of some of the belly aching.

As for IS meta mechs, vet/elite teams can make them work if they are restricted to the IS tech but then that also means their payload is identical to harness the positives while attempting to reducing the negative aspects. But throwing that out into the general public, but it random group queue, solo queue or FP/pugs they do not have the durability, are often the only battlemaster at the moment, marking it as a primary target. And all it takes, if running isXL is only ONE torso, either sides or CT.

Since I rarely in a full unit drop I "tend" to run mine w/STD so I do not carry 5LPL, but I still have had some interesting encounters where I would lose one side torso vs two opponents with them turning away from me thinking I was dead, allowing me to finish them off before they can re-engage. Their teammates would finish me off though. Of the two drops where that occurred one noted in general, "BM, STD really?" But that also means I am not carrying a more effective load and I tend to be just a tad faster that the other assaults.

Atm I have lost my CT 27% of time before losing a side torso, 39% of the time losing both ST torso before CT is destroyed while 44% it is a ST then CT. If I was running an isXL the BM would have died each time any torso was destroyed. And in a semi-PUG environment I would need to utilize my teammates as buffers to get the most out of a heavier payload.

For the general population using isXL on many mediums, heavies and assaults have had similar results, they then decide to go STD, be slower, less or lesser damage/lighter weapons, will that not affect people's attitude about wanting to fight Clan mechs, never mind the more competitive units tending to go Clan more often unless IS side has a distinct advantage for awhile, even then it may not be worth it because it does require to run almost one specific build due to setup and the current quirks, quirks which gets change as often as... nm..

PGI failure to bring into parity the negative aspect of isXL and cXL based on a rule meant for a different environment while all the while PGI whining they want to "balance" techs with minor flavors. The isXL/cXL negative effect is completely opposite of what they said THEY want to do... instead doubled the Clan's heat penalty from 20% to 40%, their next step could very well change the MOVEMENT penalty from 20% to 30-40%.... How is that exactly good for game play? It is still better than dying with the loss of just one side torso....

[justcallme A S H]

Tarl Cabot, on 06 February 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

Atm I have lost my CT 27% of time before losing a side torso, 39% of the time losing both ST torso before CT is destroyed while 44% it is a ST then CT. If I was running an isXL the BM would have died each time any torso was destroyed. And in a semi-PUG environment I would need to utilize my teammates as buffers to get the most out of a heavier payload.

Where does one find these stats? Or you record yourself?

I know I die from a LOT of IS XL/Torso kills, but by that point I've generally got the mech down to between 20-40%. So losing arms, cherry torso's and usually CT opened to varying degrees. So roughly the same longevity as Clan mechs. Ok one torso down and it's death but it's so close to death most of the time it's kinda fair enough as I would have not a lot of effective use after torso loss anyway. Joy of IS mechs and why I love running them, that fast twist Clans lack (generally speaking)

[RestosIII]

justcallme A S H, on 06 February 2017 - 06:42 PM, said:

Where does one find these stats? Or you record yourself?

I'll go now.

[Tarogato]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 February 2017 - 05:43 PM, said:

Does Large Pulse lose to PPCs now? Yes it does. Why? Because the Large pulse requires more exposure to use.

Actually large pulse is better than PPC and ERPPC right now on the IS side. You may notice that the Battlemasters and Grasshoppers aren't running PPCs. And nobody's really running the BJ-3 anymore, either. It's only the clan side where cERPPC beats cLPL, and that's because of the recent cLPL range nerf, and the inundation of new chassis that can poptart extremely well, which shifted the meta from midrange laservomit to PPFLD.

Quote

Some of the more...qualitative?...changes in behavior nerf very specific things. Going from FLD to duration wrecks pop-tarting by making it less efficient on the poke in terms of damage out over damage in.

Going from a projectile that takes time to travel and requires lead to a long range laser that burns even shorter than a quirked IS small pulse laser... is a substantial upgrade. I'd much rather have instant-hitscan short duration PPCs than have projectiles. They would be massively stronger and I would abuse the f*** out of them. Again, I don't think you understand how strong it is to have a long range laser also be extremely short duration. Charge mechanic or not. You can't just swap the mechanic over and be done with it, it would requires some extensive rebalancing.

Quote

Nope. Forcing the pop-tart to expose more means lasers (and UAC/2 spam) have more of an opportunity to burn it down. Longer cycle time also means that, using PPCs, you do not have enough output to have the weapon serve as the backbone for pretty much any strat; they become more niche, as they should be IMHO.

But you don't have to expose for longer. Have you ever timed how long the exposure time is on actual popshots with PPFLD? On average it's probably longer than 0.50s.

In fact, here's what it would look like to poptart with gauss and a laser-PPC that has a 0.35s burn duration (longer than your proposed 0.25s). I only used a RVN-4X because I didn't have any other mechs though could poptart gauss + IS SPL without me spending extra C-Bills, plus it has that 30% duration quirk, and it's all high-mounted, so that's nice.





Making the effort to hold the SPL on target didn't really feel any different to me from just firing a projectile. The duration is so ridiculously short that I didn't have to expose any more than I would have if I were only aiming and firing the gauss alone. Like I said, you'd have to make the duration on PPCs much longer, closer to large pulse duration, for it not to be overpowered. At that point... you're essentially making them the same as lasers, so it defeats the purpose of them being PPCs at all.

Quote

And how exactly do you propose to nerf the PPC itself? Simply longer cool-down? That takes the pop-tarts out of the picture. However, it also takes PPCs out of the picture pretty much entirely since not only is it low-DPS now, it still has projectile velocity to manage. The risk is now higher than the potential reward and we're back to dakka or laser vomit. We buff projectile velocity up to compensate and make it at least useful on flanker 'Mechs, and we might as well make it a beam anyway.

Only the cERPPC needs nerfed right now. I would start by reducing or removing PPC velocity from Targeting Computers. I would increase the heat from 14.0 to 14.5. And then I would wait a patch, see what people think, and debate whether to decrease the velocity from 1,300 to 1,200. If that still isn't enough, I would increase the heat back up to it's Tabletop value of 15. Hypothetically, if the meta then shifts back to cLPL, then I've achieved my goal and found a balance, where probably 15 heat is too much and 14 heat is too little, so 14.5 is probably about right.

Innersphere PPCs and ERPPCs, however, need buffs, as they are always eschewed in favour of the LPL and ERLL. I would decrease each of their heat values by 0.5. Wait a patch, gather feedback, and debate whether to increase the velocity's by 100.

[justcallme A S H]

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Only the cERPPC needs nerfed right now. I would start by reducing or removing PPC velocity from Targeting Computers. I would increase the heat from 14.0 to 14.5. And then I would wait a patch, see what people think, and debate whether to decrease the velocity from 1,300 to 1,200. If that still isn't enough, I would increase the heat back up to it's Tabletop value of 15. Hypothetically, if the meta then shifts back to cLPL, then I've achieved my goal and found a balance, where probably 15 heat is too much and 14 heat is too little, so 14.5 is probably about right.

Innersphere PPCs and ERPPCs, however, need buffs, as they are always eschewed in favour of the LPL and ERLL. I would decrease each of their heat values by 0.5. Wait a patch, gather feedback, and debate whether to increase the velocity's by 100.

100% agree on cERPPC

IS PPC/ERPPC do still suck absolute balls. They are really only worthwhile on heatgen/velocity quirked mechs. The other one is the splash damage of Clan. Even if you don't hit what you were aiming for, you can still be damaging it.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

It's only the clan side where cERPPC beats cLPL, and that's because of the recent cLPL range nerf, and the inundation of new chassis that can poptart extremely well, which shifted the meta from midrange laservomit to PPFLD.

The shift happened well before the cLPL range nerf, the range nerf only solidified the cERPPC's dominance.

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Going from a projectile that takes time to travel and requires lead to a long range laser that burns even shorter than a quirked IS small pulse laser... is a substantial upgrade.

This isn't quite right, mainly because of how bad HSR can be with hitscan weapons. Honestly nailing lights is easier with projectile PPCs than it is with lasers some times.

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

But you don't have to expose for longer. Have you ever timed how long the exposure time is on actual popshots with PPFLD? On average it's probably longer than 0.50s.

In fact, here's what it would look like to poptart with gauss and a laser-PPC that has a 0.35s burn duration (longer than your proposed 0.25s). I only used a RVN-4X because I didn't have any other mechs though could poptart gauss + IS SPL without me spending extra C-Bills, plus it has that 30% duration quirk, and it's all high-mounted, so that's nice.

That video shows you exposing more than you would have if you had the ability to snapshot, Summoners and Hunchbacks right now do not expose that high or long.

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Only the cERPPC needs nerfed right now. I would start by reducing or removing PPC velocity from Targeting Computers. I would increase the heat from 14.0 to 14.5.

PPC heat nerfs will not impact cERPPC performance, the HBK-IIC-A used them in the Tourney client and I don't think PPCs had been changed yet in them. Removing the TComp velocity would be nice but it would need something in return given that the extra crit chance wouldn't be worth the tonnage at that point (and I only support that because velocity should be a static statistic and not quirked or anything across mechs).

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Innersphere PPCs and ERPPCs, however, need buffs, as they are always eschewed in favour of the LPL and ERLL. I would decrease each of their heat values by 0.5. Wait a patch, gather feedback, and debate whether to increase the velocity's by 100.

Decreasing the heat on them a little bit is ok (if only to remove quirks related to them), but velocity definitely needs to be increased on several IS weapons to make up for their lackluster performance comparatively. The fact the ERPPC can somewhat compete with iERLL at range on certain mechs is a good sign, but the fact they require quirks is the problem.

[justcallme A S H]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 February 2017 - 08:14 PM, said:

Decreasing the heat on them a little bit is ok (if only to remove quirks related to them), but velocity definitely needs to be increased on several IS weapons to make up for their lackluster performance comparatively. The fact the ERPPC can somewhat compete with iERLL at range on certain mechs is a good sign, but the fact they require quirks is the problem.

They don't really compete though. IS ERL beats ERPPC IMO. More exposure time but if you can aim, you're doing far more dmg.

There aren't a lot of good poptart IS heavy/Meds with mounts like a SMN/HBK-IIC/NTG. Add in the lacklustre ERPPC in the first place. I am going to take a wild stab that MRBC S9 is going to be HBK-IIC/NTGs for the most part. GHP 5Ps will now take a back seat to the NTG - at the highest level, as will the TBR.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 06 February 2017 - 08:46 PM.

[Tarogato]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 February 2017 - 08:14 PM, said:

This isn't quite right, mainly because of how bad HSR can be with hitscan weapons. Honestly nailing lights is easier with projectile PPCs than it is with lasers some times.

Anecdotally, I haven't had any trouble with laser registration, or registration of any kind. Less anecdotally, I've heard a lot more people complain about PPC registration than laser registration (actually, I pretty much never see anybody complain about laser registration)

Quote

That video shows you exposing more than you would have if you had the ability to snapshot, Summoners and Hunchbacks right now do not expose that high or long.

Maybe I'm just shjt at poptarting then, because I wasn't exposing any more than I would have if I were in a Hunchie or Night Gyr.

Quote

PPC heat nerfs will not impact cERPPC performance, the HBK-IIC-A used them in the Tourney client and I don't think PPCs had been changed yet in them. Removing the TComp velocity would be nice but it would need something in return given that the extra crit chance wouldn't be worth the tonnage at that point (and I only support that because velocity should be a static statistic and not quirked or anything across mechs).

If 15 heat isn't enough, then yeah, I'd also drop 100 from the velocity. I'm just remembering back to when cERPPC had 15 heat and absolutely nobody used them, even on the HBK-IIC-A. It wasn't until the KDK came out that the pop-hunchie and pop-timber really took hold for good, because the KDK was kinda the enabler for the PPFLD meta.

[Dino Might]

Pjwned, on 06 February 2017 - 05:58 PM, said:

So, what you're saying is that there are consequences when you equip the most fragile engine in your large, slow moving mechs that are effectively glass cannons.

What an absolute farce, I mean everybody should just be able to cram in as much firepower with no real consequences, and who cares about those STD engines LOL those are old pieces of junk that have no value whatsoever because they're heavy even though they're more durable (because who cares about durability if it's not on my XL engines) LOL!!!

So...you're saying we should play Clan mechs, right?

[Y E O N N E]

Tarogato, on 06 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Actually large pulse is better than PPC and ERPPC right now on the IS side. You may notice that the Battlemasters and Grasshoppers aren't running PPCs. And nobody's really running the BJ-3 anymore, either. It's only the clan side where cERPPC beats cLPL, and that's because of the recent cLPL range nerf, and the inundation of new chassis that can poptart extremely well, which shifted the meta from midrange laservomit to PPFLD.

I am looking at the whole field. If Clan ERPPC is beating the isLPL, then PPCs are beating LPL.

And actually, I would say the isPPC is still beating the LPL. You aren't seeing it, though, because there are no IS 'Mechs with the appropriate layouts and hardware access to do it like the Clans do it, with the BJ-3 being the only exception. The only reason the BJ-3 isn't in vogue is because the HBK-IIC has an edge on it due to splash and having more built-in protection. It's not even a question of heat efficiency and engine types, because a BJ-3 on a STD 235 with 2x PPC and 13x DHS runs as efficient as the HBK-IIC running 20x cDHS and a cXL 275....and that's without the quirks factoring in. The BJ-3 is extremely good with those heat, velocity, and range quirks. The HBK-IIC is just that much better due to splash and armor.

BTW, nobody is taking isLPLs in Leagues that I've seen unless it's a Medium in Drop 1. So, honestly? Kind of a moot point to say that LPL > PPC.

Spoiler

Quote

Going from a projectile that takes time to travel and requires lead to a long range laser that burns even shorter than a quirked IS small pulse laser... is a substantial upgrade. I'd much rather have instant-hitscan short duration PPCs than have projectiles. They would be massively stronger and I would abuse the f*** out of them. Again, I don't think you understand how strong it is to have a long range laser also be extremely short duration. Charge mechanic or not. You can't just swap the mechanic over and be done with it, it would requires some extensive rebalancing.

So, I've actually run the numbers through my spreadsheet now, roughly:

Spoiler

For reference, most of the other weapons are hanging out around a score of 490. The addition of the PPCs actually makes the LL and ERLL look better than they did before. I haven't even added spool-up to this; spool-up requires that you know where the target is before-hand or you have a high risk of wasting heat into the ground or thin air; there is no aborting the charge like with Gauss because would be a fire-and-forget mechanic were it to be implemented. Even knowing where the target is, getting the beam to land on the component you want will be difficult without rising higher into the air to give yourself time to zero on it. The spool-up would probably be pulled out of the duration rather than the cool-down.

On a note of intrigue, we could probably let them cycle faster if we diffuse the damage into splash. Getting slapped with 2.5+5+2.5 or 5+5+5 at 600 meters is still pretty damn painful, and probably more effective than you would at first think, but it won't be the instant can-openers we have now.

Would you still like to have hit-scan PPCs knowing that you will be exposed for between 0.5 and 0.75 seconds to get that shot off, that you will get punched in the heat-sinks with 10 to 15 heat, and that there will be a huge 10 second gap before you can fire again? Would you still like them knowing that ER Large Lasers will have more range and the ability to deal more damage to one component when fired in triplets in the time it takes the PPC to complete its burn? Do you still want it knowing that the damage can be distributed a little bit, making it less potent against smaller 'Mechs?

I will tell you what happens if you build your deck around this weapon: you are going to get pushed on and demolished by dakka and lasers boats at range unless you forgo boating them and mix your build with something that can provide greater total DPS over a longer interval. Requiring a greater variety of weapons, and de-powering long range trading by making the slower-burning lasers more useful, loosens the requirements for what makes a 'Mech good. That means more 'Mechs become useful. That is exactly the result we are trying to achieve.

I understand perfectly well what I am doing.

Quote

But you don't have to expose for longer. Have you ever timed how long the exposure time is on actual popshots with PPFLD? On average it's probably longer than 0.50s.

In fact, here's what it would look like to poptart with gauss and a laser-PPC that has a 0.35s burn duration (longer than your proposed 0.25s). I only used a RVN-4X because I didn't have any other mechs though could poptart gauss + IS SPL without me spending extra C-Bills, plus it has that 30% duration quirk, and it's all high-mounted, so that's nice.




Making the effort to hold the SPL on target didn't really feel any different to me from just firing a projectile. The duration is so ridiculously short that I didn't have to expose any more than I would have if I were only aiming and firing the gauss alone. Like I said, you'd have to make the duration on PPCs much longer, closer to large pulse duration, for it not to be overpowered. At that point... you're essentially making them the same as lasers, so it defeats the purpose of them being PPCs at all.

Yes, you do. I've amended the duration above to 0.5-0.75 seconds, for starters.

Second, there are no 'Mechs that have PPC and Gauss mounted as high and close together as the SPL and Gauss on that Raven, which also has a ridiculously small profile that no Heavy will ever possess. The best is the SMN with 2x PPC. Right now, the amount of time the top of your 'Mech stays exposed is probably a half second total...that's including the rise, the shot, and the release. If you are peaking higher up than that, either your Lights are dropping the intel ball or you are doing it wrong.

With 0.75 second beams, that SMN will have to rise higher to get them out...and even then it's pretty much a waste of a 'Mech since it features a whopping 1.86 PP DPS with those two PPCs. You'd be better off taking a PPC and a UAC/10, because even 1x PPC+ 1x Gauss is going to leave you hanging with a piddly 3.3 DPS. And on top of this, there's still reticle shake to manage and I'm not necessarily canning the idea of increasing its linger time as we go up the tonnage scale, so there's that, too.

Quote

Only the cERPPC needs nerfed right now. I would start by reducing or removing PPC velocity from Targeting Computers. I would increase the heat from 14.0 to 14.5. And then I would wait a patch, see what people think, and debate whether to decrease the velocity from 1,300 to 1,200. If that still isn't enough, I would increase the heat back up to it's Tabletop value of 15. Hypothetically, if the meta then shifts back to cLPL, then I've achieved my goal and found a balance, where probably 15 heat is too much and 14 heat is too little, so 14.5 is probably about right.

Innersphere PPCs and ERPPCs, however, need buffs, as they are always eschewed in favour of the LPL and ERLL. I would decrease each of their heat values by 0.5. Wait a patch, gather feedback, and debate whether to increase the velocity's by 100.

I don't disagree that IS PPCs need help, but I don't think it's as dramatic as you make it out. The Marauder 5M is almost as competent at pop-tarting as the TBR. It is held back by isXL exploding and the extra weight on the 2xAC/5 or Gauss Rifles. No amount of buffing the weapon is going to really overcome that unless it's a damage buff, because we're at the "fast enough" point for the projectiles in question on the Clan side that if increasing the velocity on IS PPCs by 50% hasn't helped, it is not ever going to unless we make them so fast that they might as well be hit-scan. IIRC, most Clan pop-tarts aren't even using big TCs to boost the projectile speed significantly. The TC1 isn't giving it a game-changing boost, it's more of a convenience item, you need a TC IV for it to really start getting good and most builds I've seen choose more DHS over more velocity because the most threatening 'Mechs are not really that hard to hit. It seems only the HBK-IIC is really taking a Mk. IV, and I think that's more a player preference thing than an absolute must-have, especially now that the cUAC/2 build has proven itself the superior option at the longer ranges.

[MW222]

Runable but you need to use cases.

[Tarogato]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 February 2017 - 09:07 PM, said:

I am looking at the whole field. If Clan ERPPC is beating the isLPL, then PPCs are beating LPL.

That kind of generalisation would get you into a lot of trouble.

Quote

And actually, I would say the isPPC is still beating the LPL.

Okay. Tweet Paul/Russ that you think IS PPCs need nerfed or LPLs need buffed. Make a thread about it. I doubt it would be received well, considering PPCs are one of the worst IS weapons at the moment, and LPL is one of the best IS weapons. I'm willing to bet that your assessment of the balance between these two weapons is being spoiled by the amount of PPC quirks going around that just barely make the PPC almost viable on a very select few mechs.

Quote

You aren't seeing it, though, because there are no IS 'Mechs with the appropriate layouts and hardware access to do it like the Clans do it, with the BJ-3 being the only exception.

Except I already mentioned two - the Grasshopper (which can have three high-mounted PPCs, and jumpjets!) and the Battlemaster (which has enough cockpit-mounted hardpoints for six PPCs). You're ignoring the fact that these mechs are taking LPLs, not PPCs. There's also the CPLT-K2, which has PPC quirks, and runs better with UAC5 and LPL, and the TDR-9S, which ... doesn't get used at all. The WHM-6D gets a PPC quirk, and it runs LPLs always. Same with the Black Knights. Actually, I didn't even notice until now... but four of the Battlemasters have a smattering of PPC quirks. But for them it's always LPL and ERLL. Noticing a pattern? The Blackjack was the only real PPC mech that I can think of they came into any vogue in recent times, and the WHM-6R only uses PPCs to support its UACs. Personally I liked LPLs on it better.

Quote

BTW, nobody is taking isLPLs in Leagues that I've seen unless it's a Medium in Drop 1. So, honestly? Kind of a moot point to say that LPL > PPC.

It doesn't help that PGI buffed the heck out of clan DHS in the past few months. Midrange pushing / pseudo-brawling used to be a viable strat, running mostly IS LPLs. But with the heatsink changes, Clan mechs have the DPS to keep up and receive such a push ezpz in competitive environments.

Quote

So, I've actually run the numbers through my spreadsheet now, roughly:

Spoiler

For reference, most of the other weapons are hanging out around a score of 490. The addition of the PPCs actually makes the LL and ERLL look better than they did before. I haven't even added spool-up to this; spool-up requires that you know where the target is before-hand or you have a high risk of wasting heat into the ground or thin air; there is no aborting the charge like with Gauss because would be a fire-and-forget mechanic were it to be implemented. Even knowing where the target is, getting the beam to land on the component you want will be difficult without rising higher into the air to give yourself time to zero on it. The spool-up would probably be pulled out of the duration rather than the cool-down.

On a note of intrigue, we could probably let them cycle faster if we diffuse the damage into splash. Getting slapped with 2.5+5+2.5 or 5+5+5 at 600 meters is still pretty damn painful, and probably more effective than you would at first think, but it won't be the instant can-openers we have now.

For what it's worth, I tried doing the same thing, back when I was trying to balance heavy lasers. The numbers in that image will probably make absolutely no sense without an explanation, but suffice it to say that I couldn't even get the weapons already in the game to be rated via weighting their various stats/parameters, using a single "utility score" value. It was all kinds of dubious and questionable, and I just gave up after a couple hours of fudging numbers. It might be possible, but even if you do manage it, it doesn't trump two things: actually playing and experiencing how the weapons handle, and seeing how effectively they are used by expert players vs the majority of players.

Quote

Would you still like to have hit-scan PPCs knowing that you will be exposed for between 0.5 and 0.75 seconds to get that shot off...

I'll just cut you off right there, because it sounds like you're describing lasers, not PPCs. How long do you want this PPC burn duration to be anyways? Like I said before, the longer it gets, the more like a laser it becomes, and the less interesting and more same-y it is. 0.50 seconds is probably too long - at that point, it will handle like a laser, it will feel like a laser, it will look like a laser, it will deal damage like a laser, and it will just generally be a laser. Why? Why do you want PPCs to be lasers? I don't und

Quote

Yes, you do. I've amended the duration above to 0.5-0.75 seconds, for starters.

Oh, I see. So PPCs are now the same as large pulse lasers, except worse. Less damage, more heat, same or slightly less duration, and barely more range. Why?

Quote

IIRC, most Clan pop-tarts aren't even using big TCs to boost the projectile speed significantly. The TC1 isn't giving it a game-changing boost, it's more of a convenience item, you need a TC IV for it to really start getting good and most builds I've seen choose more DHS over more velocity because the most threatening 'Mechs are not really that hard to hit. It seems only the HBK-IIC is really taking a Mk. IV, and I think that's more a player preference thing than an absolute must-have, especially now that the cUAC/2 build has proven itself the superior option at the longer ranges.

In my experience, the only PPFLD mechs that don't take TCs are the Timber, and ummm... I think the MAD-IIC? I guess the SMN as well, but that has outrageous PPC quirks that deserve to be removed, and I'm not sure how most people build that one. I have a TC2 on mine, and Gman has a dainty little TC1 on his, but it's probably fine without it. The Kodiak and Night Gyr definitely run at least TC3, and the HBK-IIC-A runs upward of a TC4, depending on application. Oh, and the Nova. The Nova gets quirks to make up for the lack of TC as well. Except for the Timber and MAD-IIC, nobody really run's cERPPC unless they can fit a TC or get quirks.

To be fair, you're right... most of them aren't taking the larger TCs, but they are taking the smaller ones, which leaves them open to target with nerfs, which I think would be appropriate. =]

Edited by Tarogato, 06 February 2017 - 10:35 PM.

[El Bandito]

Pjwned, on 06 February 2017 - 05:58 PM, said:

So, what you're saying is that there are consequences when you equip the most fragile engine in your large, slow moving mechs that are effectively glass cannons.

What an absolute farce, I mean everybody should just be able to cram in as much firepower with no real consequences, and who cares about those STD engines LOL those are old pieces of junk that have no value whatsoever because they're heavy even though they're more durable (because who cares about durability if it's not on my XL engines) LOL!!!

Clanners can do that already. Why not even out the playing field?

[Snazzy Dragon]

MW222, on 06 February 2017 - 09:29 PM, said:

Runable but you need to use cases.

CASE does absolutely nothing for Inner Sphere XL engines within the context of MechWarrior Online

[RestosIII]

Snazzy Dragon, on 06 February 2017 - 11:05 PM, said:

CASE does absolutely nothing for Inner Sphere XL engines within the context of MechWarrior Online

#CASEIIOrRiot

[Jman5]

I see lots of great players do very well with IS XL engines.

Personally though, I try to avoid builds with IS XL engines if I can help it. I run a couple builds with XL like the Jager, but otherwise, I mostly stick to standard engines. I think sometimes you can really surprise people when you don't go down after your opponent XL checks you. There are some mechs where XL is so common, I'll start turning away after knocking their side torso out only to have to double-take when I realize he's still up and fighting.