70 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

The6thMessenger, on 25 July 2017 - 04:54 PM, said:

Well, i guess kind of, I agree. PGI didn't seem to be above retcon.

But if there's supposed to be different distinct weaponry, then the HGR could compensate with better damage retention to range. Previously i made an error, but i do believe that the weapon would still be fine doing 25 damage at 0m-270m, 20 damage at 540m which is already better over the AC20, 15 damage at 810m, 10 damage at 1080m, 5 damage at 1350m, and then zeroes out to 1620m.
....

Yup, this is/was the range bracket of HGR that was asked for before the weapon went live (in PTS and live server).

The weapon needs to be good or fills the niche nicely considering its enormous drawback. HGR should be the "poster boy" of IS' give and take philosophy (actually because of their heavier and bulkier equipment) vs Clan's good at almost everything.

[Kubernetes]

HPPCs are amazeballs.

Heavy Gauss is situational, but absolutely devastating in pairs.

MRMs-- lots of damage potential, but its killing potential is horrid.

RACs are kinda meh. Too hot to pair with other weapons but not strong enough to stand on their own.

[InspectorG]

LFE , ERML, and MGs are the winners.

[Khobai]

Quote

i do believe that the weapon would still be fine doing 25 damage at 0m-270m

but how does that compete with an ISUAC20 that does 40 damage at 0m-270m, fires faster, weighs less, and has no chargeup or reticle shake.

HG is never going to compete with autocannons.

its gotta be turned into a proper gauss weapon, not some fail quasi-brawling autocannon wannabe that cant even beat an AC10

like I said

22 damage, 570m/1140m, 6s+1s cooldown

and limit of firing 1 at a time (either with a charge limit of 1 or some incredibly prohibitive ghost heat). being able to fire two of the things simultaneously at long range without at least a massive heat penalty would just be too good.

maybe even lower it to 10 crit slots so you can use an LFE with it, but with the added restriction that it cant be placed in arms. Heavy gauss should not be allowed in arms, because in the lore its too heavy for arms and firing it would damage the arm its placed in.

Edited by Khobai, 25 July 2017 - 08:58 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

but how does that compete with an ISUAC20 that does 40 damage at 0m-270m, fires faster, weighs less, and has no chargeup or reticle shake.

25 PPFLD.

Versus burst-fire, that you need to direct the i would assume to be a spray that lasts 0.55s. Also Jam chance and jam time.

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

HG is never going to compete with autocannons.

Yes, and i would say that it's not supposed to. It's not supposed to pepper enemies, it's supposed to poke a massive hole.

So far the major similarity the two has is short-range PPFLD, which is the thing that has to go.

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

its gotta be turned into a proper gauss weapon, not some fail quasi-brawling autocannon wannabe that cant even beat an AC10

Like i said, with my range-bracket, of it doing 20 damage at 540m, it already beats the AC20, and then at 810 doing 10 damage, it already beats the AC10.

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

like I said

22 damage, 570m/1140m, 6s+1s cooldown

Yes, we get it, to hell with our inputs right?

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

and limit of firing 1 at a time (either with a charge limit of 1 or some incredibly prohibitive ghost heat). being able to fire two of the things simultaneously at long range without at least a massive heat penalty would just be too good.

Kind of the high point of investing a cumulative 36-ton weapon.

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

maybe even lower it to 10 crit slots so you can use an LFE with it, but with the added restriction that it cant be placed in arms. Heavy gauss should not be allowed in arms, because in the lore its too heavy for arms and firing it would damage the arm its placed in.

If PGI didn't shrink the LB20X, i doubt it would shrink the HGR.

[Khobai]

Quote

Yes, and i would say that it's not supposed to. It's not supposed to pepper enemies, it's supposed to poke a massive hole.

but autocannons already do that. and do it better.

heavy gauss needs to poke a massive hole at gauss ranges. not autocannon ranges.

so we both agree heavy gauss needs more range.

Quote

Yes, we get it, to hell with our inputs right?

the improved heavy gauss is a canon weapon. so why do you need anyones inputs? just use the canon stats.

Quote

Kind of the high point of investing a cumulative 36-ton weapon.

except AC20s cant do it. So why should heavy gauss be able to? especially if its range is increased to gauss range.

you should not be able to fire heavy gauss simultaneously without at least a ghost penalty.

Quote

If PGI didn't shrink the LB20X, i doubt it would shrink the HGR.

they need to shrink both if theyre not going to allow crit splitting.

heavy gauss should be 10 crits but can only put it in a side torso, not in an arm

LBX20 should be 10 crits but you can put it anywhere

Edited by Khobai, 25 July 2017 - 10:23 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:15 PM, said:

but autocannons already do that. and do it better.

heavy gauss needs to poke a massive hole at gauss ranges. not autocannon ranges.

Define "gauss range"? Isn't it enough that the HGR -- as i suggested it -- does a whole lot more damage than the AC20, while does AC20 damage at twice the same range?

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:15 PM, said:

except AC20s cant do it. So why should heavy gauss be able to? especially if its range is increased to gauss range.

you should not be able to fire heavy gauss simultaneously without penalty.

Whatever happens to "its a gauss"?

Under what grounds? That an AC20 doesn't do it, so it should not be able to do it to?

50 PPFLD does scare me yes, but that's just non-sequitur. The HGR is a fundamentally different weapon, filling in a different role. Such as it's not supposed to be for brawling.

Besides, an AC20 or even UAC20 can LFE, while the HGR can't. This weapon is just wracked with enough drawbacks as it is, lay off would you?

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:15 PM, said:

they need to shrink both if theyre not going to allow crit splitting.

Need to? Really?

But you know what, I AGREE. If LB20X were to be a real choice over the AC20 or UAC20, it needs to have the same trend as the LB10X of -1 crit and ton from the AC10.

But then PGI is just going to just dissapoint you. I'd rather aim on a much reasonably attainable changes.

[Khobai]

Quote

Define "gauss range"? Isn't it enough that the HGR -- as i suggested it -- does a whole lot more damage than the AC20, while does AC20 damage at twice the same range?

not if you dont have ghost heat.

if youre letting heavy gauss do 40-50 damage at twice the range of AC20s without ghost heat while the AC20 is subjected to ghost heat.

thats not really okay.

but sure with ghost heat that range is fine for the heavy gauss. id actually make it 22 damage and 570m/1140m myself because thats what improved heavy gauss is. makes the most sense to use canon stats to me.

Quote

50 PPFLD does scare me yes, but that's just non-sequitur. The HGR is a fundamentally different weapon, filling in a different role. Such as it's not supposed to be for brawling.

did you forget? they recently nerfed gauss/ppc combos to prevent the same thing.

so no it has nothing to with AC20s being a fundamentally different weapon. because even on gauss/ppcs theyve curbstomped the ability to fire them at the same time

and theres no reason they shouldnt do the same thing on heavy gauss. 50 PPFLD simply should not be allowed with any weapon combos. not without a hefty ghost heat penalty at least.

Quote

But you know what, I AGREE. If LB20X were to be a real choice over the AC20 or UAC20, it needs to have the same trend as the LB10X of -1 crit and ton from the AC10.

the issue of 11 crits->10 crits is more a qualify of life fix than a balance fix.

because MWO doesnt allow critsplitting. and the only reason weapons that took up that many crit slots existed in tabletop is because critsplitting also existed.

even at 10 crits, the LB20X is NEVER going to be a choice over the AC20 or UAC20. but at 11 crits its never going to be a choice at all. people who would otherwise just use it for fun wont even be able to use it.

Edited by Khobai, 25 July 2017 - 10:40 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

not if you dont have ghost heat.

Wut? So it doesn't have ghost heat, so you want it to be far better?

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

did you forget? they recently nerfed gauss/ppc combos to prevent the same thing.

Forget? No. Care? Also no. Good riddance.

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

so no it has nothing to with AC20s being a fundamentally different weapon. because even on gauss/ppcs theyve curbstomped the ability to fire them at the same time

and theres no reason they shouldnt do the same thing on heavy gauss

But the main thing with gauss ppc combo is just that, they are easier to achieve, better sustainability due to unlimited ppc "ammo". Better cooldown. And then there's just immense range that just made it possible.

The 2x gauss PPC combo at it's peak does 40 PPLD + 10 splash, over what 660m? 810m for the PPC. Even if it's 44 tons for IS, you gotta admit the LFE or XL-engine makes it easier to bear, and still have decent move-speed.

What does the 2x HGR have? (my suggestion), 270m 50 PPFLD, 540m 40 PPFLD, 810m 30 PPFLD, 1080m 20 PPFLD, 1350m 10 PPFLD, 1620m 5 PPFLD. Needs charge, which means you can't just fire it on demand. It already does less at the same 660m range of the GR. Not to mention the standard engine needed, which means that not only the 2x HGR does gauss-ppc worse due to lower range, the user would also be a lot slower than they would with XL or LFE.

If anything at all, it could stand a lower range (from my suggestion), but same starting max range. Such as 0-270m 25 damage, 405m 20 damage, 540m 15 damage, 675 10 damage, 810m 5 damage, and 945m max range.

Yes there is a reason why they shouldn't do the same thing with the HGR, 50 PPFLD needs to be done closer. It's because it fulfills a different role. It's Because it does things differently. That difference in range alone should be a massive red-flag to you.

They deserve vaporizing people up close by up-close, we mean 270m. The Gauss-PPC doesn't deserve vaporizing people afar. Do you understand?

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

the issue of 11 crits->10 crits is more a qualify of life fix than a balance fix.

because MWO doesnt allow critsplitting. and the only reason weapons that took up that many crit slots existed in tabletop is because critsplitting also existed.

And i agree. But with PGI being just THAT stubborn, you should go to them directly.

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

even at 10 crits, the LB20X is NEVER going to be a choice over the AC20 or UAC20. but at 11 crits its never going to be a choice at all. people who would otherwise just use it for fun wont even be able to use it.

I did say the trend of -1 ton and crit from AC10. So with the LB20X having -1 ton and crit from the AC20, that should be at 13 tons, and 9 crit slots.

13 tons alone would make it already a viable choice for my urbanmech.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 25 July 2017 - 10:56 PM.

[AphexTwin11]

Mcgral18, on 25 July 2017 - 04:17 PM, said:

They already do

Nearly Triples the LMG, doubles the MG, and 1.77 HMG

Potato plz

[MechaBattler]

Has anyone found good builds with Light Gauss? I'm finding it hard to want to spend the c-bills on it.

[davoodoo]

The6thMessenger, on 25 July 2017 - 10:44 PM, said:

13 tons alone would make it already a viable choice for my urbanmech.

I wonder whats the competition at 13 tons, oh yea uac10...

[Mcgral18]

AphexTwin11, on 26 July 2017 - 09:49 AM, said:

Potato plz

I'm not sure you understand how to use that term

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Khobai, on 25 July 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

even at 10 crits, the LB20X is NEVER going to be a choice over the AC20 or UAC20. but at 11 crits its never going to be a choice at all. people who would otherwise just use it for fun wont even be able to use it.

Do you really believe that? The obvious advantage of the LB20X is no ghost heat as well as running cooler overall. The faster velocity makes it a better handling weapon than either the UAC20 or AC20 in general.

Quad LB10X was already a legit QP build before CW tech- quad LBX Mauler is probably my most played build overall. The biggest disadvantage of it was its slow speed and even if you can't fit an LFE, twin LB20X grants much higher mobility by virtue of the much lower weight. You trade ~3dps vs. twin LB20X and twin ML, for +8-10kph (54.2 vs. 62.9) and actual armored shield arms at the 325 engine cap thanks to the lower overall tonnage. That's a massive improvement for a mech that's accustomed to being a <60kph, at a time when many people seem to think a 60kph mech is unplayable.

Hypothetically making LB20X 10 slot would be nice.. but fitting an LFE doesn't really give me anything anyways since I'm already at the engine cap. The mech already runs cool, and the only other realistic use for the tonnage is putting ammo in the arms. Functionally it just means I can upgrade the mediums to MPL.

On that basis, I think it's already a decent weapon on the Mauler and Annihilator which sit at engine cap- I'm not going back to quad 10s.

A change to 10 slots would make it viable on many others like the Boomhammer, Sleipnir which have excess engine cap to benefit from, and arm-mounted ballistics like the King Crab. Being able to frontload 40-70 damage vs. having to double tap your AC20s to avoid ghost heat (or just having dramatically higher heat efficiency vs. eating the ghost heat on 2 AC20s) is a pretty major advantage that I think you're ignoring.

[Y E O N N E]

Quad LB-10X the most-played Mauler?

Lolno.

Definitely LRM Maulers.

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Yeonne Greene, on 26 July 2017 - 06:16 PM, said:

Quad LB-10X the most-played Mauler?

Lolno.

Definitely LRM Maulers.

My most played.

LRM Maulers are probably the most common simply because that would encompass pretty much every failfit yard sale Mauler in existence.

[The6thMessenger]

davoodoo, on 26 July 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

I wonder whats the competition at 13 tons, oh yea uac10...

It's certainly better than competing AC20 or UAC20. You could burst 2 volleys of UAC10 for 20 damage, but you can do so as well with LB20X, albeit spread, at a shorter range, and at a longer cooldown. Granted less ammo/ton too.

[AssaultPig]

Good: HPPCs, IS ER meds and smalls, heavy smalls, light MGs

Bad: heavy meds and larges, light gauss, snub-PPCs

Fun but impractical: MRMs, RACs, heavy gauss

just... why?: microlasers, light ppcs, ATMs

Edited by AssaultPig, 26 July 2017 - 06:36 PM.

[Hit the Deck]

AssaultPig, on 26 July 2017 - 06:35 PM, said:

....
just... why?: microlasers, light ppcs, ATMs

Chris wants to make ATMs the mid-range bracket capable missile system on the Clan side (MRMs' quasi-counterpart).

[Khobai]

Well the only other option would be to give STD engines a massive buff

If youre going to force people to take STD engines with LBX20 and Heavy Gauss, then STD engines should be every bit as good as LFE.

Either way a buff needs to happen. Either LBX20/Heavy Gauss need to to be 10 slots so you can take LFE with them. Or STD engines need to be every bit as good as LFE.

Quote

Chris wants to make ATMs the mid-range bracket capable missile system on the Clan side (MRMs' quasi-counterpart).

MRMs and ATMs should be fundamentally different IMO

MRMs should peak in effectiveness at medium range and they shouldnt be better than SRMs at short range.

ATMs should be mildly effective at all ranges (short, medium, and long), just not better than SRMs at short range or better than LRMs at long range. ATMs should give up the damage of more specialized weapons in exchange for being effective at all ranges. They should be a jack of all trades and master of none weapon.

Essentially ATMs should be less effective than SRMs at short range and less effective than LRMs at long range but more effective than if you took SRMs and LRMs together. Thats the proper balancing point for ATMs.

Edited by Khobai, 26 July 2017 - 07:05 PM.