675 replies to this topic

[Y E O N N E]

Kaptain, on 16 July 2017 - 04:42 PM, said:

Agreed. I would like to see clan omni mechs get some of their build restrictions lifted. Lets start with being able to remove and move around heatsinks.

It's the Endo/Ferro slots, man.

I could have a UAC/20 Shadow Cat with 3x ERSL, but no. Slots kill it right out.

[Kaptain]

Yeonne Greene, on 16 July 2017 - 04:51 PM, said:

It's the Endo/Ferro slots, man.

I could have a UAC/20 Shadow Cat with 3x ERSL, but no. Slots kill it right out.

As an IS player I am totally down for lifting many of the build restrictions on clan Omni Mechs. We are quickly approaching a time where there will be more clan assault battle mechs than Omni Mechs. Mechs like the Loki and thore needs ff and es to be competitive and others need the ability to remove/move equipment or mount standard armor. Masakari vs marauder 2C is a good example of battlemechs invalidating Omni Mechs.

Edited by Kaptain, 16 July 2017 - 05:00 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Kaptain, on 16 July 2017 - 04:57 PM, said:

As an IS player I am totally down for lifting many of the build restrictions on clan Omni Mechs. We are quickly approaching a time where there will be more clan assault battle mechs than Omni Mechs. Mechs like the Loki and thore needs ff and es to be competitive and others need the ability to remove/move equipment or mount standard armor. Masakari vs marauder 2C is a good example of battlemechs invalidating Omni Mechs.

Warhawk still has the quad ER PPC role over the MAD-IIC.

Ebon/NTG top heavies as omnis.

Assault is definitely getting overrun with battlemechs though. Need Kingfisher Perfect addition now that laser vomit is strong again.

[NocturnalBeast]

Kaptain, on 16 July 2017 - 04:42 PM, said:

Agreed. I would like to see clan omni mechs get some of their build restrictions lifted. Lets start with being able to remove and move around heatsinks.

As much as I would hate to see that, it would break from lore about as much as anything else in this game.

[Dee Eight]

Wintersdark, on 16 July 2017 - 02:39 PM, said:

You're sure about 3.5 damage per shot, 30 shots per second? That seems... Extreme. Obviously there's no damage carryover, but with a missile travelling at 160m/s, and a 160m optimal range, a single AMS unit would destroy 30 missiles as it takes a full second for them to cover that 160m, and each 3.5 damage shot would fully destroy a missile.

You'd have single AMS units completely stopping LRM30 volleys, particularly considering the optimal->max range fire as well.

Yes I am sure. And having used a single AMS on most every IS assault and heavy and many mediums... I know how much they can stop in a typical QP match. I routinely would get more than 320 missiles from 1 ton of ammo. That's the protection equivalent of 10 tons of standard armor if its LRMs alone its stopping.

[Zergling]

In regards to ATMs, when I was testing them out on the PTS, the missiles tended to cluster into the CT of target mechs at close range, so with buffed spread and reduced minimum range they could be quite nasty in the 120-270 meter range bracket.

As for Clan Battlemechs vs Omnis, by the 3060s the stigma of standard battlemechs was already fading fast.

Wattila, on 16 July 2017 - 04:54 AM, said:

Are they?

cERML: 7/6.3 = 1.11 DPH
isERML: 5/4.5 = 1.11 DPH

The ER Medium Lasers are the only exception in Clan vs IS Lasers.

Eg:
cER Small Laser = 1.43 damage/heat
isER Small Laser = 1.48 damage/heat
cER Large Laser = 1.10 damage/heat
isER Large Laser = 1.13 damage/heat
cSmall Pulse Laser = 1.67 damage/heat
isSmall Pulse Laser = 1.75 damage/heat
cMedium Pulse Laser = 1.47 damage/heat
isMedium Pulse Laser = 1.58 damage/heat
cLarge Pulse Laser = 1.20 damage/heat
isLarge Pulse Laser = 1.43 damage/heat


The IS ER Medium Laser likely needs a drop in heat; it has worse damage/heat ratio than the IS ER Large, which is just bizarre and it shouldn't be like that.
If I were in charge of balance, I'd drop the IS ER Medium Laser from 4.5 to 4.2 heat, which would increase its damage/heat ratio to 1.18.

Edited by Zergling, 16 July 2017 - 07:01 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Zergling, on 16 July 2017 - 06:48 PM, said:

If I were in charge of balance, I'd drop the IS ER Medium Laser from 4.5 to 4.2 heat, which would increase its damage/heat ratio to 1.18.

Hey, you stole my number!

[Saber Avalon]

Gas Guzzler, on 16 July 2017 - 05:32 PM, said:

Warhawk still has the quad ER PPC role over the MAD-IIC.

Ebon/NTG top heavies as omnis.

Assault is definitely getting overrun with battlemechs though. Need Kingfisher Perfect addition now that laser vomit is strong again.

Warhawk
Marauder IIC

What? Are you kidding? The Warhawk is forced to have it's ERPPCs in the arms. The Marauder IIC can put all 4 in the torsos for higher hard points and use the arms as shields or split them so you can take advantage of arm's vertical movement while having higher hard points or go all in the arms. Add to that the MAD-IIC can up an engine size to be a bit faster plus it has more armour in the legs.

EDIT (had to check these):The Warhawk does have -4% ERPPC Heat generation and +10% ER PPC Velocity as a trade off, but it's marginal. Structure quirks may keep the arm there longer but at that point the guns can be destroyed before the arm.

Both end up with the same amount of heatsinks and fit a T-Comp MK II

Ed Steele, on 16 July 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

As much as I would hate to see that, it would break from lore about as much as anything else in this game.

It would break from table top rules, not really a lore thing. In lore they modified mechs all the time, Yen-Lo-Wang is a perfect example. Upgrading it to an AC20, Triple-strength Myomer Fibers, a Gauss Rifle..... I'm sure there's more, it just changed too much to remember. In table top that didn't really happen, that's why there's a group who wants a "stock match" option.

IS can modify stuff like crazy in this game, contrary to table top. They are damn near Omni-mechs in functionality, when comparing to lore, but we haven't said much about that now, have we? It'd be a pretty boring game and make even more mechs useless. A lot of the restrictions on clan mechs, in this game, don't really make sense anymore, once the new equipment comes in. Heck, for some, like the Summoner, they don't make sense now.

Edited by Saber Avalon, 16 July 2017 - 07:42 PM.

[Ripper X]

Baphomech, on 16 July 2017 - 01:35 PM, said:

PGI, you have been hyping this patch as the "Civil War" update for months, which includes mechs, weapons, and other equipment from the Civil War era of Battletech. However, your decision to have Faction Play take place in 3057, which is still the Clan Invasion era, is inconsistent and disappointing. The Faction Play setting should have advanced instead to sometime between 3062 and 3067, which is the actual timeline for the Civil War era (as well how the this update was marketed to the players). To a point, I understand doing this to help maintain the Clan vs. IS dynamic, but it could have been better communicated if it was the intent from the beginning. It would be unfortunate if it were instead a late-stage decision that was made for the sake of simplicity.

Marketing an upcoming feature one way, and then delivering something else, is an unsound marketing strategy for a game that runs on a F2P business model. It was my hope that you would have learned this by now.

What I'm hoping is that the FedCom Civil War era will be a bigger thing than just change in the timeline. I think they thought about it and went for instead was the last real Clan Invasion. Someone in PGI will eventually make an announcement.

[Kaptain]

Saber Avalon, on 16 July 2017 - 07:35 PM, said:

IS can modify stuff like crazy in this game, contrary to table top. They are damn near Omni-mechs in functionality, when comparing to lore, but we haven't said much about that now, have we? It'd be a pretty boring game and make even more mechs useless. A lot of the restrictions on clan mechs, in this game, don't really make sense anymore, once the new equipment comes in. Heck, for some, like the Summoner, they don't make sense now.

And not having ES/FF on certain omni mechs where others can easily field it makes no sense at all.
I would like to start with the ability to remove some equipment, namely masc and DHSs.
From there I would love to see the toggle for ES/FF be unlocked on clan mechs.
Maybe keep engines locked on clan omnis as a balance against omni pod customization.

There are many benefits to unlocking clan omni mechs. Better balance against "meta" omni mechs and clan battlemechs. Improved player experience possibly leading to better player retention. Build Diversity. Improved revenue from an increased interest in clan tech.

The only argument against is "Lore" so far... and at this point in MWO its hardly noticeable.

[NocturnalBeast]

Saber Avalon, on 16 July 2017 - 07:35 PM, said:

Warhawk
Marauder IIC

What? Are you kidding? The Warhawk is forced to have it's ERPPCs in the arms. The Marauder IIC can put all 4 in the torsos for higher hard points and use the arms as shields or split them so you can take advantage of arm's vertical movement while having higher hard points or go all in the arms. Add to that the MAD-IIC can up an engine size to be a bit faster plus it has more armour in the legs.

EDIT (had to check these):The Warhawk does have -4% ERPPC Heat generation and +10% ER PPC Velocity as a trade off, but it's marginal. Structure quirks may keep the arm there longer but at that point the guns can be destroyed before the arm.

Both end up with the same amount of heatsinks and fit a T-Comp MK II



It would break from table top rules, not really a lore thing. In lore they modified mechs all the time, Yen-Lo-Wang is a perfect example. Upgrading it to an AC20, Triple-strength Myomer Fibers, a Gauss Rifle..... I'm sure there's more, it just changed too much to remember. In table top that didn't really happen, that's why there's a group who wants a "stock match" option.

IS can modify stuff like crazy in this game, contrary to table top. They are damn near Omni-mechs in functionality, when comparing to lore, but we haven't said much about that now, have we? It'd be a pretty boring game and make even more mechs useless. A lot of the restrictions on clan mechs, in this game, don't really make sense anymore, once the new equipment comes in. Heck, for some, like the Summoner, they don't make sense now.

Yeah, but remember that the characters that you read about in the books were 1 out of billions and their modified Mechs were unique (which means incredibly rare). The Yen Lo Wang was a Solaris Mech and it had many sponsors who contributed money to make it what it was. the average Mechwarrior in the military of a faction would not have the resources to do that and most Mercs would be too poor to do that.

Ripper X, on 16 July 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

What I'm hoping is that the FedCom Civil War era will be a bigger thing than just change in the timeline. I think they thought about it and went for instead was the last real Clan Invasion. Someone in PGI will eventually make an announcement.

There is no FedCom in MWO, so the title "Civil War" is a misnomer. PGI has already altered the timeline and lore, so it is the "Civil War" era in name only.

[Wing 0]

InnerSphereNews, on 14 July 2017 - 07:08 PM, said:

Inner Sphere and Clan Standard Gauss Rifle
• Heat Penalty group is now linked with PPC.

I find this change very "Insulting". presenting bad proof of evidence. There's a better way but you don't have balls to approach it.

Edited by Wing 0, 16 July 2017 - 10:00 PM.

[Saber Avalon]

Kaptain, on 16 July 2017 - 09:07 PM, said:

And not having ES/FF on certain omni mechs where others can easily field it makes no sense at all.
I would like to start with the ability to remove some equipment, namely masc and DHSs.
From there I would love to see the toggle for ES/FF be unlocked on clan mechs.
Maybe keep engines locked on clan omnis as a balance against omni pod customization.

There are many benefits to unlocking clan omni mechs. Better balance against "meta" omni mechs and clan battlemechs. Improved player experience possibly leading to better player retention. Build Diversity. Improved revenue from an increased interest in clan tech.

The only argument against is "Lore" so far... and at this point in MWO its hardly noticeable.

It's not even an argument from a lore stand point, it's a table top rule that people are clinging to. Lore sides with being able to change and modify mechs. (See the response to my next quote for examples and proof)

Ed Steele, on 16 July 2017 - 09:16 PM, said:

Yeah, but remember that the characters that you read about in the books were 1 out of billions and their modified Mechs were unique (which means incredibly rare). The Yen Lo Wang was a Solaris Mech and it had many sponsors who contributed money to make it what it was. the average Mechwarrior in the military of a faction would not have the resources to do that and most Mercs would be too poor to do that.



There is no FedCom in MWO, so the title "Civil War" is a misnomer. PGI has already altered the timeline and lore, so it is the "Civil War" era in name only.

Yen-Lo-Wang is but one example and it's happened for many others too;

Grinner was upgraded by the clans to have clan weapons and if I recall the technician wanted to mount an AMS but it was against the mech's design, to use ammo, so he wanted to use an experimental laser AMS but it wasn't ready yet.

Every single clan battlemech that has an identical IS mech, but has the "IIC" designator, is actually an IS chassis that was upgraded to clan tech.

There are battlefield repairs that resulted in modified mechs, the Cataphract exists as a hackjob of different mech parts, there are mech variants that went extinct because a new version came out and all older versions were upgraded to the new one.

The clans also would move mountains for various trails. If a warrior wanted an old battlemech(or Omni) modified for a specific fit, at the request of a warrior about to undergo a trial, they'd do it.

Sarna has a list of customized mechs, it doesn't even include them all as Yen-Lo-Wang isn't on it nor is Grinner. So it's incomplete: http://www.sarna.net...Unique_%27Mechs

Heck, click into the first Jenner listed, there's another Jenner on it's page that was also customized. You could probably go through Sarna's list of every mech created and the majority probably have a custom one listed.

As for your point about being "unique"... that's why they're custom. The point is they were modified, in lore. Lore supports customizations.

Edited by Saber Avalon, 16 July 2017 - 10:09 PM.

[Zergling]

Saber Avalon, on 16 July 2017 - 07:35 PM, said:

Warhawk
Marauder IIC

What? Are you kidding? The Warhawk is forced to have it's ERPPCs in the arms. The Marauder IIC can put all 4 in the torsos for higher hard points and use the arms as shields or split them so you can take advantage of arm's vertical movement while having higher hard points or go all in the arms. Add to that the MAD-IIC can up an engine size to be a bit faster plus it has more armour in the legs.

EDIT (had to check these):The Warhawk does have -4% ERPPC Heat generation and +10% ER PPC Velocity as a trade off, but it's marginal. Structure quirks may keep the arm there longer but at that point the guns can be destroyed before the arm.

Both end up with the same amount of heatsinks and fit a T-Comp MK II

Warhawk Prime has another +10% ER PPC velocity for 8 set quirk bonus (and it should be running all Prime omnipods if it is doing quad ER PPC).
Further, it gets +18 side torso structure and +11 center torso structure.

Warhawk is also more agile, compare their base mobility stats:
Acceleration = 17.72 vs 10.79 (64% advantage for Warhawk)
Deceleration = 17.35 vs 14.71 (18% advantage for Warhawk)
Turn Rate = 42.39 vs 34.95 (21% advantage for Warhawk)
Torso Yaw Speed = 76.5 vs 63 (21% advantage for Warhawk)
Torso Pitch Speed = 48 vs 39 (23% advantage for Warhawk)

Lastly, the Marauder IIC's torso hardpoints (except for the high shoulder) aren't that much higher than the arm hardpoints on the Warhawk.

[Wintersdark]

Derek Church, on 16 July 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

So what's the solution to have under performing weapons both separably and in combination of each other? I'm not really pro Gauss/PPC mix but I do believable that the two weapons have been so "balanced" that they're difficult to run well outside of specialized builds for them specifically.

What? Gauss Rifles are not underperforming weapons by any stretch of the imagination.

PPC's are. They weren't in the past, and when they weren't, the GR/PPC combination was extremely potent, combining high damage in a PPFLD package, and while the PPC's where quite hot the cold GR pushes the alpha up to a insta-kill level.

It's most noticable with Gauss+ERPPC's. With the pairing, when ERPPC's have high projectile velocity, you can readily put 35 damage into a target's cockpit for a garaunteed one shot kill, or still cause 35 damage to whatever component you did hit. That's not the case now, because PPC's have slow projectiles. This desynchronizes the projectiles, and ensures you'll hit two different components (or partially miss) unless your target conveniently stands still. So, on live right now, Gauss+2ERPPC is pretty bad, purely because IS ERPPC's are horrifically terrible. That terribleness is 100% due to their projectile speed.

The slow firing and high heat isn't really a problem normally, but it becomes one when the projectile speed is so low: You miss often as a result, and still generate tremendous heat and have a long wait to fire again. This means your effective damage output is quite low.

Once ERPPC speed is back up, you get accuracy back, don't miss a lot of shots, so the cooldown/heat is much less of an issue. With ERPPC shots that synchronize with gauss rounds, you're getting good, accurate hits doing all their damage to a single component even at very long ranges.

Quote

Sorry but a speed buff to IS ER PPC's is not going to fix this, hell its not even a band aid to this particular problem. Simple put there either to hot, to heavy, or to slow. Frankly there an argument too be made that IS PPC's may well be all the above. Now these things in conjunction with ghost heat stops anyone from using more then two at a time is problematic. At least if you actually wish them to preform well individually.

And you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. We've been up and down this road many, many times over the years, and we've seen ERPPC's go from trash to great to utter trash more than once.

All ERPPC's need right now to be solid long range weapons is velocity. They're getting it, and they'll be great.

Ed Steele, on 16 July 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

As much as I would hate to see that, it would break from lore about as much as anything else in this game.

No more than Battlemechs having changable ES.

[Wintersdark]

Zergling, on 16 July 2017 - 10:53 PM, said:

Warhawk Prime has another +10% ER PPC velocity for 8 set quirk bonus (and it should be running all Prime omnipods if it is doing quad ER PPC).
Further, it gets +18 side torso structure and +11 center torso structure.

Warhawk is also more agile, compare their base mobility stats:
Acceleration = 17.72 vs 10.79 (64% advantage for Warhawk)
Deceleration = 17.35 vs 14.71 (18% advantage for Warhawk)
Turn Rate = 42.39 vs 34.95 (21% advantage for Warhawk)
Torso Yaw Speed = 76.5 vs 63 (21% advantage for Warhawk)
Torso Pitch Speed = 48 vs 39 (23% advantage for Warhawk)

Lastly, the Marauder IIC's torso hardpoints (except for the high shoulder) aren't that much higher than the arm hardpoints on the Warhawk.

Lastly? Nay, there's more:

The Warhawks arms can aim higher and lower than the Marauder torsos, and can react faster to rapidly moving targets.

The Warhawk isn't going to lose weapons in it's arms faster than the Marauder loses them in it's torsos, because nobody targets arms unless they're bloody stupid potatoes. Once you've shot off a Warhawks arm, you could have taken it's torso and crippled it's heat management. Instead, because the Warhawk's opponent is a drooling imbecile, the Warhawk still has a 25 point PPFLD alpha with extremely efficient cooling and is no closer to death than it was before the potato started shooting at it's arm.

[Wintersdark]

Dee Eight, on 16 July 2017 - 06:17 PM, said:

Yes I am sure. And having used a single AMS on most every IS assault and heavy and many mediums... I know how much they can stop in a typical QP match. I routinely would get more than 320 missiles from 1 ton of ammo. That's the protection equivalent of 10 tons of standard armor if its LRMs alone its stopping.

I think they're doing .35 damage, not 3.5.

At 3.5 damage, a single unskilled AMS would be able to take down 30+ LRM's fired in a single burst IS style. That doesn't happen.

What's more, at 3.5 damage per round, 30 rps, you'd be oneshoting missiles out to roughly 275m so you'd only need multiple shots per missile from 275-320.

Getting around 320 missiles downed per 2000 ammo means 320/2000 means 0.16 average damage per missile.

Your missiles destroyed per ton matches mine (I also frequently run AMS), but the other numbers don't match up.

---

Figured it out. It's not 3.5 damage per missile, it's 3.5 damage per second. 30 shots per second would put that at roughly .11 damage per round, unskilled. The AMS Overload skills current add 70% damage, so that brings us to .w damage per missile. As part of the firing rate is lerped down to zero, that makes .16 damage per round average seem pretty reasonable as the halfway point.... Which matches 320 missiles destroyed per 2000 ammo.

We can use this to extrapolate how the AMS Overload Nerf will hit us. We'll go down to 40% bonus damage, so that gives us 0.16 damage per round optimal, so that should take us to .14 in practice. 2000 rounds at .14 average damage per round gets us 280 damage - 280 missiles destroyed per ton post nerf.

[Cyrilis]

Roadmap for July said:

2017 MWO World Championship Tournament Supporter Pack

did I miss something or is it just not on the patch notes?

[tee5]

Is there a spreadsheet with dps, dph, range, damage, etc. for all old and new weapons?

[Odanan]

Yeonne Greene, on 16 July 2017 - 04:51 PM, said:

It's the Endo/Ferro slots, man.

I could have a UAC/20 Shadow Cat with 3x ERSL, but no. Slots kill it right out.

This.
It's unfair that omnis don't have "floating" endo and ff slots. And that's an IS player talking.

Edited by Odanan, 17 July 2017 - 01:28 AM.