117 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 March 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

I did say it's easy to pick **** apart... but it's also a lot more useful to supply alternatives.

Sure, but it doesn't mean picking things apart is somehow not useful to the conversation. Sure it is nice to contribute alternatives, but you generally do that by picking things apart and learning what is and what isn't acceptable.

Bishop Steiner, on 10 March 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

And so far you've seemed to want to argue the minutiae, whilst ignoring the meat. Which, IMO, is a not only a tad disingenuous, but ultimately, counter productive for everyone.

I argued an extra post about how you considered range to be determined by accuracy rather than effective dps, if anything I was more guilty of derailing the topic with something that was not necessarily important to the topic at hand, but nothing about that is disingenuous or necessarily counter-productive (since semantics exists for a reason).

[Bishop Steiner]

kapusta11, on 10 March 2017 - 01:58 PM, said:

270m range
2x max range, so 5 damage at 540m
1200mps velocity
8 heat

what's up with the low heat thing?

And that is still an essentially useless "optimal" range compared to all the other 6-7 ton guns out there... or even most of the 4-5 ton ones. Max range may be a little light, but more flexible on that...since it is supposed to be pretty suboptimal at medium long range.

And where would you have the Cooldown set with those stats? (as that could make a difference with the lower heat, etc)

[Quicksilver Aberration]

kapusta11, on 10 March 2017 - 01:58 PM, said:

10 damage
270m range
2x max range, so 5 damage at 540m
1200mps velocity
8 heat
4 sec cooldown

Not really enough to make it worthwhile given the strength of the iLPL (hit-scan, very short duration, has more range, damage, and less heat for only 1 ton extra, also works well with iMLs).

[Andi Nagasia]

i think like this,
from my Topic on the SN-PPC & C-I-PPC,

Andi Nagasia, on 19 May 2016 - 02:21 PM, said:

As both are Available in time line,
should we be have these Other PPC Options?

=Snub-Nose-PPC(LosTech2685)(Tech3067)=
Weapon,........Damage,..Heat,..Speed,.Cool-down,..Range,..Max Range,..DPS,..Tons,..Crits,
Snub-Nose-PPC,.10.........10......1000........3.5.............0-420........820(X2)......2.8........6........2...

=C-I-PPC(Improved)(LosTech2822)(Tech3080)=
Weapon,........Damage,..Heat,..Speed,.Cool-down,..Range,..Max Range,..DPS,..Tons,..Crits,
C-I-PPC,............10............10......1200..........3.5............80-540....810(X1.5).....2.8.......6........2...

Both Could Be cool Editions,
IS getting a Lighter Smaller But Slower Close-Range PPC,
Clan Gaining another PPC Option, with Half ER-PPC Range,

Wow that Topics old, May 2016, still relevant though,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 10 March 2017 - 02:05 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 March 2017 - 02:00 PM, said:

Sure, but it doesn't mean picking things apart is somehow not useful to the conversation. Sure it is nice to contribute alternatives, but you generally do that by picking things apart and learning what is and what isn't acceptable.


I argued an extra post about how you considered range to be determined by accuracy rather than effective dps, if anything I was more guilty of derailing the topic with something that was not necessarily important to the topic at hand, but nothing about that is disingenuous or necessarily counter-productive (since semantics exists for a reason).

simply derailing it I would agree, but by continuing to focus on that derailment, it came across as disingenuous, whether it was intended to or not. As the difference between the two lies mostly in intent... which unlike your previous claim toward mine.. I will admit, I can only guess at.

So are we done with derailment theory? And back to the meat and gravy?

[Bishop Steiner]

Andi Nagasia, on 10 March 2017 - 02:03 PM, said:

i think like this,
from my Topic on the SN-PPC & C-I-PPC,

not loving the reduced speed, as, contrary to Fupdups post, it DOES greatly effect accuracy (and thus in some cases, range... but again, we have already removed long range from the basic equation here). The ultimate question of how much, of course, being largely based in how far out it's supposed to reach. AC10 is ...950m? And it's much benefitted by the Vel Increase on say, the RFL-3N. Hmmph.

Not sure about the Cooldown (that is one aspect I have really been struggling with), and really think it has way too long of a Maximum Range, compared to what I can only describe as my perception of the "spirit" of the weapon...based off it's TT stats.

Really with the MWO ranges, it's hard to realyl emulate the drop off precisely, but I do think a 1.5x max range is a relatively effective part of doing so.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 10 March 2017 - 02:09 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

@Bishop Steiner
True but i had to give it a Negative so normal PPC will still have use,
so as it has reduced Range, i gave it reduced Velocity as you really do need as much at closer range,
in this way im trying to keep the Skill levels the same for both at them Optimum Ranges, if that makes sense,
also its an old post so i havent edited it in forever, which is why it still has 10heat,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 10 March 2017 - 02:12 PM.

[Erronius]

Kiran Yagami, on 10 March 2017 - 01:56 PM, said:

I'd find that meme of Data throwing the ball to Lal, with you being Lal and the ball being the point, but I'm too lazy.

GIFs are SRS BSNS

[0bsidion]

Andi Nagasia, on 10 March 2017 - 02:03 PM, said:

i think like this,
from my Topic on the SN-PPC & C-I-PPC,

Wow that Topics old, May 2016, still relevant though,

I'd be mostly fine with those stats, just drop the damage down to 8 after 420m up to 630m and 5 after that till it hits max range. I think it'd be a nice addition. IS would finally have a PPC they could fit in those CT E hard points.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

450 Optimal range
900 Max range
10 damage
9.5 Heat (inline with iPPC)
1300 Velocity (should be inline with iERPPC velocity, which honestly iERPPCs should get a buff)
4 Cooldown

The goal should basically be the weapon between the iLPL and iERLL/iERPPC. Loses some of its uniqueness because it has to directly compete with the iLPL and losing effectiveness at around 550m due to halved max range hampers its usefulness overall. So you end up paying optimal range for a little extra velocity and no min range over the iPPC. Hopefully this would put more pressure on PGI to actually remove the min range on iPPCs and buff them as well as iLL so that they are just as useful (as it stands both are a bit lackluster as far as IS energy weapons go). Though I guess if we aren't too worried about outclassing the iPPC to begin with you could go 540 optimal and 810 max range.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 10 March 2017 - 02:16 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Andi Nagasia, on 10 March 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

@Bishop Steiner
True but i had to give it a Negative so normal PPC will still have use,
so as it has reduced Range, i gave it reduced Velocity as you really do need as much at closer range,
in this way im trying to keep the Skill levels the same for both at them Optimum Ranges, if that makes sense,
also its an old post so i havent edited it in forever, which is why it still has 10heat,

Normal PPC still has significant optimal range advantage and maximum. I actualyl would prefer to start it at 10 ht. It's easy to reduce if needed... but the amount of Butthurt and QQ generated when you have to add heat (or any nerf?)? It's just not worth it.

I'd rather it be released "broke an worthless" than "broke and OP" due to general forum entitlement issues.

[FupDup]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 March 2017 - 02:14 PM, said:

450 Optimal range
900 Max range
10 damage
9.5 Heat (inline with iPPC)
1300 Velocity (should be inline with iERPPC velocity, which honestly iERPPCs should get a buff)
4 Cooldown

The goal should basically be the weapon between the iLPL and iERLL/iERPPC. Loses some of its uniqueness because it has to directly compete with the iLPL and losing effectiveness at around 550m due to halved max range hampers its usefulness overall. So you end up paying optimal range for a little extra velocity and no min range over the iPPC. Hopefully this would put more pressure on PGI to actually remove the min range on iPPCs and buff them as well as iLL so that they are just as useful (as it stands both are a bit lackluster as far as IS energy weapons go).

That looks like a nearly direct upgrade over the iPPC.

Whether that means the iPPC is too weak or your SNPPC is too strong is up for debate. But it's really hard to debate that it's blatantly superior to the current iPPC.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

FupDup, on 10 March 2017 - 02:16 PM, said:

That looks like a nearly direct upgrade over the iPPC.

Whether that means the iPPC is too weak or your SNPPC is too strong is up for debate. But it's really hard to debate that it's blatantly superior to the current iPPC.

It is blatantly better than the iPPC because the iPPC is too weak just like the iLL is. That said it is meant to be in line with the better of the IS energy weapons (LPLs, ERLLs, and maybe ERPPCs).

iLL and iPPCs both need their range buffed (540 and 630-650 respectively) while iPPCs need to drop the minimum range concept (I'd much rather a charge-up concept be in place over that stupidity).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 10 March 2017 - 02:19 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 March 2017 - 02:14 PM, said:

450 Optimal range
900 Max range
10 damage
9.5 Heat (inline with iPPC)
1300 Velocity (should be inline with iERPPC velocity, which honestly iERPPCs should get a buff)
4 Cooldown

The goal should basically be the weapon between the iLPL and iERLL/iERPPC. Loses some of its uniqueness because it has to directly compete with the iLPL and losing effectiveness at around 550m due to halved max range hampers its usefulness overall. So you end up paying optimal range for a little extra velocity and no min range over the iPPC. Hopefully this would put more pressure on PGI to actually remove the min range on iPPCs and buff them as well as iLL so that they are just as useful (as it stands both are a bit lackluster as far as IS energy weapons go).

Interesting, though I still find myself disliking the longer maximum range. Just feels very out of character for the weapon to me. I'd rather it sacrifice on that and gain some in velocity or cooldown, TBH, both of which I feel would suit it's TT mechanics a little closer. (also why I would be willing to start at 10 ht).

But still closer to what I would consider a good fit... how about:
450 Optimal range
675 Max range
10 damage
10 Heat (inline with iPPC)
1300 Velocity (should be inline with iERPPC velocity, which honestly iERPPCs should get a buff)
3.5 Cooldown

?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 March 2017 - 02:17 PM, said:

It is blatantly better than the iPPC because the iPPC is too weak just like the iLL is. That said it is meant to be in line with the better of the IS energy weapons (LPLs, ERLLs, and maybe ERPPCs)

returning scaling minimum range to the ISPPC would help a little with that. But mostly, as an intended mid to long range weapon, the IS and ERPPCs really need an additional 250-300 m/s vel. Which would make them more practically accurate at longer ranges.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 March 2017 - 02:20 PM, said:

Interesting, though I still find myself disliking the longer maximum range. Just feels very out of character for the weapon to me. I'd rather it sacrifice on that and gain some in velocity or cooldown, TBH, both of which I feel would suit it's TT mechanics a little closer. (also why I would be willing to start at 10 ht).

But still closer to what I would consider a good fit... how about:
450 Optimal range
675 Max range
10 damage
10 Heat (inline with iPPC)
1300 Velocity (should be inline with iERPPC velocity, which honestly iERPPCs should get a buff)
3.5 Cooldown

?


returning scaling minimum range to the ISPPC would help a little with that. But mostly, as an intended mid to long range weapon, the IS and ERPPCs really need an additional 250-300 m/s vel. Which would make them more practically accurate at longer ranges.

Honestly if we aren't too worried about being better than the iPPC and are more worried about being as good as the iLPL, 540/810 ranges would be better and you could bump the cooldown back up (since heat is more of a concern than cooldown).

More velocity and more range on the iPPC (there doesn't need to be a 50% increase for ERs, why PGI is so insistent on that I will never know).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 10 March 2017 - 02:25 PM.

[0bsidion]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 March 2017 - 02:14 PM, said:

450 Optimal range
900 Max range
10 damage
9.5 Heat (inline with iPPC)
1300 Velocity (should be inline with iERPPC velocity, which honestly iERPPCs should get a buff)
4 Cooldown

The goal should basically be the weapon between the iLPL and iERLL/iERPPC. Loses some of its uniqueness because it has to directly compete with the iLPL and losing effectiveness at around 550m due to halved max range hampers its usefulness overall. So you end up paying optimal range for a little extra velocity and no min range over the iPPC. Hopefully this would put more pressure on PGI to actually remove the min range on iPPCs and buff them as well as iLL so that they are just as useful (as it stands both are a bit lackluster as far as IS energy weapons go). Though I guess if we aren't too worried about outclassing the iPPC to begin with you could go 540 optimal and 810 max range.

The LPL only has 7 heat compared to 10, and does 11 total damage compared to 10, plus the LPL has burn time so it's not all-or-nothing like the SNPPC. I'd say there's enough benefits there to keep the LPL in play.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

0bsidion, on 10 March 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

plus the LPL has burn time so it's not all-or-nothing like the SNPPC.

The burn time on LPL while it does hamper the weapon compared to PPFLD, it is still so short that it doesn't matter as much as one would think, not enough for something with such a horrible heat-damage ratio comparatively to actually be as competitive.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 10 March 2017 - 02:22 PM.

[Natred]

This looks like someone just edited sarna and made this weapon.. snub nose ppc?? Lolol i have read numerous battletech books and never heard of a "snub nose" ppc. Your thinking of a snub nose 38 special revolver.. rofl

[Bishop Steiner]

Natred, on 10 March 2017 - 02:24 PM, said:

This looks like someone just edited sarna and made this weapon.. snub nose ppc?? Lolol i have read numerous battletech books and never heard of a "snub nose" ppc. Your thinking of a snub nose 38 special revolver.. rofl

or you haven't touched an actual Classic Battletech TRO or Sourcebook in 10+ years.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 March 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Honestly if we aren't too worried about being better than the iPPC and are more worried about being as good as the iLPL, 540/810 ranges would be better and you could bump the cooldown back up (since heat is more of a concern than cooldown).

More velocity and more range on the iPPC (there doesn't need to be a 50% increase for ERs, why PGI is so insistent on that I will never know).

Heat is more of a concern than cooldown...in some situations. Both can matter in very different ways in a knife fight, which is what the SNPPC is mostly meant for... hence my dislike of 700 plus meter maximum ranges.... ( half second difference between volleys can kill you just as dead as a .5 difference in heat stacking up... and you can't use a coolshot to sidestep the cooldown in a furball)

Let's focus it on what it's niche is intended to be. I'd take a 600 meter max range if it meant a better cooldown and heat to damage ratio... because the gun isn't really meant for use much past 450m anyhow.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 10 March 2017 - 02:30 PM.