4 replies to this topic

[Shifty McSwift]

Ok so this is a pretty wide reaching kind of discussion potentially, but the main focus is to discuss the distinctions of weapon types we have, how that balance plays out and whether or not it manages to achieve a balance in how weapon choice is selected generally, and in how the meta game maximises potentials.

So the distinctive stats on a few weapon archetypes for example;

Laser;
Pros; Precise aim, very flexible in range/damage options, infinite ammunition
Cons; Deals its damage over a period of time, tends to run very hot, gives away position easily

Targeted Missile;
Pros; Can be used very effectively in situations other weapon types struggle with (shooting without LOS and/or or homing in on targets etc), cause visual disruptions on target (screen shake, smoke),
Cons; Require time to lock, damage can be easily spread by target, usually very restrictive in combat usage (usually range related), sometimes indirect flight paths, ammunition requirements

Ballistics;
Pros; high velocity, generally pinpoint damage (instant and accurate), good range, minimal indication of shot origin, low heat, variable damage
Cons; Very prone to weapon/ammo damage effects (exploding), high weight/space requirements, specific downfalls such as jamming or charge time, ammunition requirements

Now, in the overarching theme of weapon type distinctions are they enough? Or do we have enough options? And are they really "balanced" or should they be, in any kind of rock, paper, scissors kind of dynamic?

I find (and it very much seems the "meta gaming" norm is) that lasers (and pulse) and missiles in particular have relatively good balancing measures in many cases that make them sub optimal performers in a general sense to the ones that do not, such as ballistic, gauss and PPC. The end result of this is overall higher performance or successful gameplay comes from running them over the other more 'balanced' weapon groups.

I know you are often able to and encouraged to mix up weapon groups, and that at the end of the day there will always be a 'best' and 'worst' weapon, particularly from person to person, with differing playstyles and expectations, but I really feel like more has to be done, in either defining these distinctions further and/or further mitigating the effectiveness of the 'best' or 'meta' weapons (like in how they staggered the shots of clan AC, and in how clan PPCs have splash damage), I think a lot of issues could be solved overall by managing this further.

What do you guys think? Happy with the current distinctions? Think I am crazy for asserting that ballistic types get the best deal? Think all meta based eventualities should be ignored due to their eventual and unavoidable nature? Please, discuss.

[Templar Dane]

Lasers, other than the pros you listed, are tonnage light for the damage they deal.

Ballistics aren't all pinpoint IE LBX/clan UACs. I'd also point out that with their different projectile speeds, mixed autocannons are hard to impossible to converge on one component on a moving target. While any mix of lasers will all converge perfectly, always. There's also the issue with ballistics, especially 2 and 5, generally best in a dps role which is kinda bad compared to alpha....

Take an AC 2. It weighs 6 tons plus ammo. It deals 2 damage. Trading with ANY weapon in this game is gonna be a bad trade, but it 'makes up for it' with a good rof. If you just sit there and stare at the target, while he alphas, then torso twists away...you are going to lose. Even with an AC5/uac5........each individual shell does the damage of a medium laser. Dude fires 6 medium lasers at you, then gets into cover. Maybe you got 2 volleys off, that's 10 damage while he did 30.

edit

Also forgot to mention that since armor was doubled in MWO, we generally carry double or even triple the amount you could get by with in tabletop/older games. All ballistic and ppc velocities were nerfed quite a while back as well.

Edited by Templar Dane, 09 April 2017 - 06:44 AM.

[Revis Volek]

Ballstics get a good deal, but no better then any other weapon honestly.

When compared in a vacuum, we see that weapon balance isnt that far off, a few outliners and some clan stuff that still a bit OP in comparison but honestly its looks close (ish) on paper.


But then we get into what Dane spoke off, convergence, travel speed of rounds, Hit scan vs Projectile, etc.

Ballistics are not all PPFLD only the IS ones are and no LBX is. But they are DPS weapons on clan side and just kings of raw damage for the most part but lasers being hotter and more precise with similar dmg outputs but the ability to be a surgeon and end up with much lower dmg at end game. IS ballistics are more designed for brawling and quick snap shots of 10 and 20 rounds hidden in volleys of SRM;s that deal a real punch.

But the balance issues are not in the weapons persay, like i said them seem pretty ok on paper so why do we have these discussions then from time to time? Why does Clan feel so much better then IS if it isnt the weapons?

its in a mech ability to survive and make use of said weapons he is in possession of, lighter weapons, less crit slots, more DHS and more room for CAP, TC's AMMO etc, make the clan mechs a bit more durable too because they have better odds most the time that their weapons wont get crit'd out quite as fast as the IS mech they are engaging. Also the disparity in Cxl and ISxl engines. This is the difference between a 1 shot death in a IS light and a 1 shot better play it safe the rest of the match Clan mech.

The weapons wouldnt be so bad if the mechs and engines were more balanced.

I will say one thing, IS AC20 needs more health or a way low crit chance, It seems to get blown off so damn fast these days!

Edited by Revis Volek, 09 April 2017 - 07:06 AM.

[Shifty McSwift]

Revis Volek, on 09 April 2017 - 07:03 AM, said:

I will say one thing, IS AC20 needs more health or a way low crit chance, It seems to get blown off so damn fast these days!

I'll tell from experience running a single clan AC20 on an assault they are extremely prone to being destroyed too, so that isn't just an IS trait it seems.

Templar Dane, on 09 April 2017 - 06:39 AM, said:

Lasers, other than the pros you listed, are tonnage light for the damage they deal.

Ballistics aren't all pinpoint IE LBX/clan UACs. I'd also point out that with their different projectile speeds, mixed autocannons are hard to impossible to converge on one component on a moving target. While any mix of lasers will all converge perfectly, always. There's also the issue with ballistics, especially 2 and 5, generally best in a dps role which is kinda bad compared to alpha....

Take an AC 2. It weighs 6 tons plus ammo. It deals 2 damage. Trading with ANY weapon in this game is gonna be a bad trade, but it 'makes up for it' with a good rof. If you just sit there and stare at the target, while he alphas, then torso twists away...you are going to lose. Even with an AC5/uac5........each individual shell does the damage of a medium laser. Dude fires 6 medium lasers at you, then gets into cover. Maybe you got 2 volleys off, that's 10 damage while he did 30.

edit

Also forgot to mention that since armor was doubled in MWO, we generally carry double or even triple the amount you could get by with in tabletop/older games. All ballistic and ppc velocities were nerfed quite a while back as well.

Well it seems the main draw in AC at the moment is its potential for sustained DPS, combined with twist times (and the lower heat buildup rates) make variants of it (particularly AC10 and 20 in both factions) the optimal brawling gun. While the main draw for the PPC and gauss meta is generally that pinpoint damage at massive velocities and great range and great heat efficiency (combining gauss and PPC, not PPCs alone). Those points make them the "meta" weapons for those tasks, and despite the "nerfs" that they have so far seen, they stay in that category.

They could use some more work just to bridge that gap IMO, but that's just my opinion of course.

[Shifty McSwift]

Revis Volek, on 09 April 2017 - 07:03 AM, said:

Ballstics get a good deal, but no better then any other weapon honestly.

When compared in a vacuum, we see that weapon balance isnt that far off, a few outliners and some clan stuff that still a bit OP in comparison but honestly its looks close (ish) on paper.


But then we get into what Dane spoke off, convergence, travel speed of rounds, Hit scan vs Projectile, etc.

Ballistics are not all PPFLD only the IS ones are and no LBX is. But they are DPS weapons on clan side and just kings of raw damage for the most part but lasers being hotter and more precise with similar dmg outputs but the ability to be a surgeon and end up with much lower dmg at end game. IS ballistics are more designed for brawling and quick snap shots of 10 and 20 rounds hidden in volleys of SRM;s that deal a real punch.

But the balance issues are not in the weapons persay, like i said them seem pretty ok on paper so why do we have these discussions then from time to time? Why does Clan feel so much better then IS if it isnt the weapons?

its in a mech ability to survive and make use of said weapons he is in possession of, lighter weapons, less crit slots, more DHS and more room for CAP, TC's AMMO etc, make the clan mechs a bit more durable too because they have better odds most the time that their weapons wont get crit'd out quite as fast as the IS mech they are engaging. Also the disparity in Cxl and ISxl engines. This is the difference between a 1 shot death in a IS light and a 1 shot better play it safe the rest of the match Clan mech.

The weapons wouldnt be so bad if the mechs and engines were more balanced.

I'll just say I chose three pretty quick examples, true to all the extended points on the weapons, I wasn't trying to quantify all of the archetypes and attributes exactly (but it is good to know them all), more just get to discussing whether or not they are entirely effective at creating those distinctions, and whether some of those distinctions are the source of some of the "unbalanced" aspects.