43 replies to this topic

[The Lighthouse]

Dimento Graven, on 26 August 2017 - 05:11 PM, said:

Snip

The post is getting really long so I will restrict myself from chopping up the comment too much. This will be prob my very last comment against you in this thread, because it is very obvious now that all you are doing is moving goalposts nonstop.


FIrst of all, I mean... all power to you to spend money on this game. Sure, if you say so, I will definitely research how much did you spend on this game indeed.

But, at the same token, I am not going to really bother pointing out references regarding the fact that Gauss Rifle is mainly long-range weapon as well. The reference is everywhere, and you can get it easily. If you can spend so much money, you should have no problem grabbing some of the novels from Amazon, right? Paperback version are ultra cheap these days and I am sure you have some spare to buy those books to get into Battletech lore, just like I did.

And speaking of Smurfy, it actually has very nice ability to tell you that sustained DPS I've been talking about. Experiment with it for a while and I am pretty sure you will find many cases where Gauss builds exceeds AC builds in terms of DPS.

And no, stop twisting my words. You know what I mean "AC vomit", yet you are again twisting into pure dakka build. I did face the terror of KDK-3 so you don't have to mention about it. And you definitely know this is not what I am talking about.

And...

Quote

Great! Yes, the tip of the gun was designed to hold its position while in movement. That doesn't mean the driver and crew aren't feeling the road, acceleration, deceleration, etc., etc., I especially bet they'll feel something when that cannon fires... And it SURE as heck doesn't excuse ZERO shake while a multi ton platform is being launched into the air by several FUSION powered jets.

Hey, it's not so cool that you are using this twisting trick again on this one. Just when were we arguing about drivers' comforts? Last time I remember, we were talking about aiming shaking which is related to weapons, not drivers. Sure crew would feel the vibration, but as the video shows, weapons should have no problem completely negate shaking effect.

Quote

We see whining because people want the game to be manipulated in such a way as they can ALWAYS win. People piss and moan about how gauss is OP, but then you find those people in game, and they're not using it. If it's so OP, why not? Answer: They haven't learned the skills to use the weapon in the same way those who have taken the time to practice are.

So, instead of adjusting their tactics (like not standing out in the open, not keeping their heat at 98% most of the time, no attempting to face tank every 'mech they come against, learning when it's better to AVOID fighting a 'mech (or multiple 'mechs) to work on getting a better position, they instead come here and complain like the 'natural order of things' has been violated by rapacious Satan worshipers.

Yes, that's true. But once again you are moving goalpost. The point is never about the fact that people whining in forums and subreddit. The point is that PGI apparently cares about these whining and implement lore-breaking, un-fun (it's subjective, I must admit) and extremely complicated methods to satisfy their demands when there is very simple solution to all of these (or maybe energy draw for extreme.)


I have no idea what are you trying to argue with me regarding PPC. The post is actually very confused.

One thing I must mention is that a lot of people still do play multiplayer mode for MW3, as well as MW4, even today. And whether you agree or not, they also say the balance is better than MWO.

Quote

And you're offended by my statement. You took it personally that I asked your for "where it was set in stone" these "rules" you keep referring to?

Good thing you are writing like this now! But again, you are twisting your own words here. You never wrote "like where it was set in stone" these "rules" you keep referring to?" This is what you wrote in the first place:

Quote

Can you show me those stone tablets where God came down from the mount and etched them with His holy finger?

Are you really going to claim that this has same tone as "like where it was set in stone" these "rules" you keep referring to?"

Quote

Yes, it's their decisions, they're not bound by anything we say. That is EXACTLY my point, so when you're being all authoritative about what should and should not be, YOU are NOT setting policy for PGI. Otherwise, NOTHING would get done, because YOU are WRONG about adding HUGE cool downs.

Argh..... I already said you should stop insulting me as an arrogant person, but you are keep doing it regardless. And this paragraph has a huge logical fallacy here. The fact that I am not setting policy for PGI does not mean that I am wrong about adding huge cooldowns. What do those two have any common?

It is, ultimately, your own opinion, just like mine. But the major difference is that my opinion is well supported by evidence (the fact that MW3 and MW4 were well received and people liked them) and data (the weapon stat from previous games) while your opinion is stemmed from... your own feelings really.

I am sorry to say, but your opinion is objectively far weaker than mine, unless you can bring some concrete numbers and references. You know, after all it is very basic stuffs for debates.


Finally, I am not even going to bother comment on rest of your comments. Pretty much all of them are twisting and moving goalposts, just like I described so far. You are just arguing for the sake of arguing, and I have no desire to waste my time for it.

Edited by The Lighthouse, 26 August 2017 - 07:48 PM.

[The Lighthouse]

Dakota1000, on 26 August 2017 - 06:36 PM, said:

@Dimento Graven: Good job keeping up this argument, you've pretty much said anything I'd have said.

Now, to address The Lighthouse's claim of the Gauss not having low DPS, I've put together a simple build showing how wrong that is.

Highest DPS gauss build in the entire game:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...af066cfe208079f

Litterally a mech with a single RAC5 and a cooling of 4 hps:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4aa8d35b299e844

Gauss is anything but a DPS weapon, it has some of the lowest DPS per ton out of any weapon in the game, its so incredably inefficient that its insane. If you're going for DPS just bring some UAC2s, 12 tons of gauss vs 5 tons of UAC2 + 7 heat sinks leaves the UAC2 producing a net heat per second of 0.06 while the gauss produces 0.17 heat per second if no one is double tapping, which would only make the UAC2 put out more than double the gauss DPS.

Really though a build that focuses on being entirely heat neutral is often a trash build, as burst DPS matters quite a bit. Many UAC2 builds focus on having upwards of 20 DPS, when double tapping, so that when someone peaks to go and push out a laser alpha, the 3 or so seconds it takes for the enemy to move out of cover, take a shot, then get back into cover allows the UAC2 build to pump out 60+ damage, and at the UAC2 ranges that demolishes the 4 CERLL 44 damage alpha, especially if they add a second to the peek to avoid ghost heat. You really don't need to be able to sustain your damage indefinitely, you just need to keep your fire going for a few seconds at a time, then you have some time to cool off. Having over a 70% cooling efficiency means you'll be very unlikely to be hitting your heat cap throughout most of the match. You just need to look at what your total DPS is and the time it takes you to overheat if pushing your mech to the limit, then decide what amount of damage you need so that you kill your enemy and won't need to be pushing your mech to the limit.

Now if we take the KDK-3's more common configuration of 2 UAC10s+2 UAC5s we see this in action:
(oh look, it also has more sustained DPS than the only gauss build and moves faster and has higher burst dps, hmmmmm)
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...8da66443042c2b1

The build's max DPS is 14.02 without double tapping, and it can hold that damage for a minute and 14 seconds. This gives them 1037.48 Damage that they put out before overheating if they just hold the trigger forever. If the pilot decides to double tap and magically never jams they have 28.04 DPS and it takes about 12.5 seconds to overheat this gives them 350.05 damage before overheating if they constantly fire.

Due to the nature of engagements in MWO, its superior for the player to double tap and fire out 350 DPS in 12.5 seconds, which is likely to kill a mech or two in that time then step back to cool off before repeating the process. The need to fire constantly for over a minute straight just often doesn't exist in MWO, enemies are peeking and poking, and so are you often times so in reality sustainable DPS becomes useless after a certain point.


Anyway Lighthouse, you've been factually wrong quite a bit here, I'd really recommend looking up some stats and doing some research if you think gauss is a good DPS weapon and even comparable in a brawl to an AC20. The only thing the gun has going for it is that assaults that can't fit a load of heatsinks can throw in one or two of them with a laser build to boost the alpha strike without overheating.

Sigh... is this some kind of joke?

So, you are using that troll quad bear build and non-practical build to disprove me? >.>


Please don't degrade yourself into potato to refute my argument. Let us just look at the realistic builds. Let's introduce our Misery for this little experiment. Ignore backplate armor value for a while...



http://mwo.smurfy-ne...14ec72fc2434007

Three Large Lasers, one ER Medium, One UAC-20, 310 light engine and rest of the tonnage goes to armor and heatsink. Max sustained DPS is 4.54.



http://mwo.smurfy-ne...538abfdc8ffc562

AM I seeing right? I changed UAC-20 into Gauss and I actually gained dps. 4.54 to 4.60! So does Gauss Rifle have more dps than UAC-20? Well, it's not. For burst dps, UAC-20 is definitely much higher. But for sustained dps, later build will win.



http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2d1de88a9e7ed7f

Slightly non-realistic build with 1.5tons left free. But this is a bit more heat-efficient build just in case you are trying to argue with that. OK, it does 5.54 dps now by sacrificing alpha damage.


http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2177b356a16cccd

Again it gains more dps after switch into Gauss.

See, with exception of pure gauss or pure dakka build, Heat generation really restricts ACs from actually exceeding Gauss Rifle in terms of sustained DPS. Yes, obviously for burst damage, it will be probably better with initial heat capacity and double tapping. But as the battle goes long, the gauss rifle can go toe-to-toe.

Basically, if you are going for ballistic, you are sacrificing long range, higher projectile speed, a little bit of sustained dps for great burst dps and maybe some durability. But none of these supports the claim that Gauss Rifle does only provide low dps. It is simply not true in most of realistic environment.

Edited by The Lighthouse, 26 August 2017 - 07:22 PM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

The Lighthouse, on 26 August 2017 - 07:17 PM, said:

Sigh... is this some kind of joke?

So, you are using that troll quad bear build and non-practical build to disapprove me? >.>


Please don't degrade yourself into potato to refute my argument. Let us just look at the realistic builds. Let's introduce our Misery for this little experiment. Ignore backplate armor value for a while...



http://mwo.smurfy-ne...14ec72fc2434007

Three Large Lasers, one ER Medium, One UAC-20, 310 light engine and rest of the tonnage goes to armor and heatsink. Max sustained DPS is 4.54.



http://mwo.smurfy-ne...538abfdc8ffc562

AM I seeing right? I changed UAC-20 into Gauss and I actually gained dps. 4.54 to 4.60! So does Gauss Rifle have more dps than UAC-20? Well, it's not. For burst dps, UAC-20 is definitely much higher. But for sustained dps, later build will win.



http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2d1de88a9e7ed7f

Slightly non-realistic build with 1.5tons left free. But this is a bit more heat-efficient build just in case you are trying to argue with that. OK, it does 5.54 dps now by sacrificing alpha damage.


http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2177b356a16cccd

Again it gains more dps after switch into Gauss.

See, with exception of pure gauss or pure dakka build, Heat generation really restricts ACs from actually exceeding Gauss Rifle in terms of sustained DPS. Yes, obviously for burst damage, it will be probably better with initial heat capacity and double tapping. But as the battle goes long, the gauss rifle can go toe-to-toe.

Basically, if you are going for ballistic, you are sacrificing long range, higher projectile speed, a little bit of sustained dps for great burst dps and maybe some durability. But none of these supports the claim that Gauss Rifle does only provide low dps. It is simply not true in most of realistic environment.

The non practical build was simply to show you how bad gauss DPS is in the first place. I then went over a very often used DPS build of dual UAC10s plus dual UAC5s which blasted the gauss build out of the water. Ironically, even that gauss "troll build" is better than your Misery's build in sustained DPS, and also beats your gauss Misery and LPL based Miseries in max DPS.

Though, two can play the *pull out random build* game.
Brawler Orion IIC with LBX: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...f38a1f6965e2503
Now with Gauss: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b4222965da124e9

Gauss build gets higher sustained DPS, however, the LBX20 build still has a full 24 seconds before overheating, giving it 408 damage before overheating firing at constant speed, which is much more than enough time to have killed the enemy before heat became an issue, which is what I explained in my previous post.

Also, in your comparison, the mech with gauss gets its side torso opened up in a single volley from the UAC20 mech if he double taps and the gauss gets crit out and dies as soon as the lasers reload. If the UAC20 jams then he still opens up and crits the gauss out upon laser reload. At this point the gauss build is really out of options. Having better sustain doesn't matter one single bit if you aren't alive to use it.

Lastly, here's an example where gauss actually provides you with less sustained DPS than an alternative:
Gauss: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...1c6d6215ffd1061
UAC10: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...ddc147c9e724a2c

While we're at it, here's a build that just drops a ballistic entirely and has higher sustained damage than either while also having higher total DPS than the gauss build:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...97899735caf1fd5

Here it is again with IS:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...adb5bca7ad6b830
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...7893c40ca67791c



Now that that's out of the way, sustained DPS as a stat itself is entirely worthless because none of the values that smurfy puts out as the sustained DPS is the real sustained DPS of the mech. Smurfy just says how many weapons you can be constantly firing from your build without overheating, but if you notice in the weapons lab, if you decrease how often you fire high heat weapons the DPS goes up up until the point that you're generating the amount of HPS that your dissipate.

With your Stalker builds the UAC20 build has higher sustained DPS, as it puts the majority of its DPS in a UAC20 that puts out an efficient 5 DPS while your gauss is a small part of the DPS in the build, putting out a very efficient 2.61 dps.

By doing the actual math on it the highest DPS of each build is:
UAC20: 6.48 firing the UAC20 100% of the time and only firing a single LL 69% of the time.
Gauss: 6.10 firing the Gauss 100% of the time and firing one LL 100% of the time and another LL 63% of the time.

Just like in a real fight, if you're overheating you'd stop firing your most heat inefficient weapons first, leaving only the more efficient ones going and sparingly firing the lasers when you have cooled off a bit.

As I said before, gauss's main good use is putting it onto a build that happens to have a load of free weight but not a load of free slots for heatsinks in the case of heavy assault mechs to boost the alpha strike potential of the mech without overheating or to tack onto sustained DPS of the mech, where the majority of the DPS is provided by other weapons.

[Dimento Graven]

The Lighthouse, on 26 August 2017 - 06:48 PM, said:

The post is getting really long so I will restrict myself from chopping up the comment too much. This will be prob my very last comment against you in this thread, because it is very obvious now that all you are doing is moving goalposts nonstop.

Moving goal posts? Mostly just trying to keep you factual and get you to clearly define yourself...

Quote

FIrst of all, I mean... all power to you to spend money on this game. Sure, if you say so, I will definitely research how much did you spend on this game indeed.

Go for it, me and my 400+ 'mechs and possibly dozens (honestly can't remember for sure) of gifted 'mech packs welcome the audit.

Quote

But, at the same token, I am not going to really bother pointing out references regarding the fact that Gauss Rifle is mainly long-range weapon as well. The reference is everywhere, and you can get it easily. If you can spend so much money, you should have no problem grabbing some of the novels from Amazon, right? Paperback version are ultra cheap these days and I am sure you have some spare to buy those books to get into Battletech lore, just like I did.

<chuckle> Couldn't find 'em could you?

And if you're referring to novels rife with 'poetic license'. Don't make me laugh, otherwise we'd be begging for cockpit seeking missiles, and jump jet induced damage values...

The game's rules aren't derived from plot points, they're derived from the TT rule sets published over the years.

And again, no where in any of those is the gauss rifle defined as a "primarily long range", "sniper", "non-brawling" weapon.

Quote

And speaking of Smurfy, it actually has very nice ability to tell you that sustained DPS I've been talking about. Experiment with it for a while and I am pretty sure you will find many cases where Gauss builds exceeds AC builds in terms of DPS.

It's a flat value, I can't make gauss DPS any greater than 2.61 per weapon.

In a face off of equivalent tonned 'mechs with similar armor with equally skilled pilots the greater DPS of AC can over come the gauss with a single crit. It doesn't take long, AT ALL, for most of the other AC's to chew through a component and start scoring crits.

With dual gauss I can do 60 damage in 11.5 seconds. Dual AC/20 I can do 120 in 12 seconds, if heat is problem after the second cool down I simply utilize a coolant flush, and fire.

Simple math. Simple knowledge of the game. No agenda inflicting the quality of my logic.

Quote

And no, stop twisting my words. You know what I mean "AC vomit", yet you are again twisting into pure dakka build. I did face the terror of KDK-3 so you don't have to mention about it. And you definitely know this is not what I am talking about.

And...

No, I don't know what you mean. Your definitions have been skewed and/or wrong from the outset, which is why I've worded the things as I did to give you room to refine your statements so that we can agree on exactly what you're trying to say and what you're point actually is, FOR EXAMPLE:

Quote

Hey, it's not so cool that you are using this twisting trick again on this one. Just when were we arguing about drivers' comforts? Last time I remember, we were talking about aiming shaking which is related to weapons, not drivers. Sure crew would feel the vibration, but as the video shows, weapons should have no problem completely negate shaking effect.

Uh huh, you show me a vid of a weapon that's being held steady by an external process, and my point was the people doing the aiming are probably going to be shaking around a lot as that tank moves at speed. If they're MANUALLY aiming the weapon as we, theoretically, are in our stompy robot sim, that movement while not affecting where the gun points, will probably make it more difficult for the gunner to aim properly. In other words, stick a rocket up that tanks *** and launch it into the air 50 meters and see if that beer, or the crew in it, aren't being just a little bit jostled, THEN call me, k?

That's what the appropriate cockpit shake occurring during an active JJ is all about. BUT AGAIN we come to the point where BASIC knowledge of the game and how it works and a tiny modicum of skill will counter that absolutely minor inconvenience, namely the pop-tart pilots who actually know what they're doing will jump up, cut thrusters (where the cockpit shake stops) aim and fire on the way back down to the ground.

The cockpit shake doesn't prevent pop-tarting, it just makes it slightly more difficult to do well.

Quote

Yes, that's true. But once again you are moving goalpost. The point is never about the fact that people whining in forums and subreddit. The point is that PGI apparently cares about these whining and implement lore-breaking, un-fun (it's subjective, I must admit) and extremely complicated methods to satisfy their demands when there is very simple solution to all of these (or maybe energy draw for extreme.)

No moving of goal posts, defining very specifically what does and does not occur in reality (even giving you room to elaborate to more clearly express your point, which you've decided not to) and that is, YES, while PGI does get ideas from these forums, Reddit, heck even Twitter, it is NOT bound by anything the posters say, and is not obligated to enact any change any poster has ever submitted.

You really seem to be trying to not so subtly hint at is that there's some super secret all powerful Unit that submits their commands to PGI and PGI does there bidding. Again, I gave you an opportunity to elaborate and you've decided it was a goal post move.

While not a totally impossibility, I reserve the right to be extremely skeptical until you provide proof. My tin foil hat is reserved for MY OWN paranoid fantasies, thank you.

Quote

I have no idea what are you trying to argue with me regarding PPC. The post is actually very confused.

You're the one who stated you like PPC builds and I was agreeing with you and listing the benefits of the weapons by comparing them against gauss.

Quote

One thing I must mention is that a lot of people still do play multiplayer mode for MW3, as well as MW4, even today. And whether you agree or not, they also say the balance is better than MWO.

More power to 'em and I'm glad they're playing a game they like.

[sarcasm]I'm certain there are no such things as weapon balance discussions on their forums too, and everyone is absolutely pleased to the dickens about how every weapon works and is perfectly balanced.[/sarcasm]

Quote

Good thing you are writing like this now! But again, you are twisting your own words here. You never wrote "like where it was set in stone" these "rules" you keep referring to? This is what you wrote in the first place:

Are you really going to claim that this has same tone as "like where it was set in stone" these "rules" you keep referring to?"

My friend, if you don't understand paraphrasing and difference between single and double quotes, well... Plus if you don't know that the phrase "set in stone" actually originated from the 10 Commandments (or RULES) being written on stone tablets... You may indeed need to stop posting here, there are other individuals on this forum that won't be as nice about it as I am being...

Quote

Argh..... I already said you should stop insulting me as an arrogant person, but you are keep doing it regardless. And this paragraph has a huge logical fallacy here. The fact that I am not setting policy for PGI does not mean that I am wrong about adding huge cooldowns. What do those two have any common?

Wow, you truly are not ready for the internet. If you are offended THAT EASILY you should never darken another forum with your shadow... You are wrong about the cool down, period. You do not set policy for PGI because of anything you've posted in any forum. These are both facts, and while not related, CAN be typed into a single paragraph and read by most people and understood to NOT imply that you are wrong because you're not allowed to set policy for PGI or any other bizarre interpolation you can come up with, but that you are wrong about the cool down period, AND, that you (nor anyone that I can tell) sets policy for PGI based off forum or twitter posts, or séance, or carrier pigeon, or what have you.

Quote

It is, ultimately, your own opinion, just like mine. But the major difference is that my opinion is well supported by evidence (the fact that MW3 and MW4 were well received and people liked them) and data (the weapon stat from previous games) while your opinion is stemmed from... your own feelings really.

Your opinion is wrong, and you're wrong to assume that long weapon reloads in other games means this one should have them too. Again, MW3 and MW4 were designed around single player experience, and as I understand it, had multiplayer more or less duct taped on. Neither were designed around the MMO experience.

Just because those other game's titles have the words "Mech Warrior" in them doesn't mean any value in them is necessarily valid for MechWarrior Online.

PGI is not obligated to use their values and data from them is like taking data on garbage collection from New York to justify a highway bill in California. Yes, both require roads and heavy equipment, gasoline will be burned BUT, they really don't apply to one another.

Quote

I am sorry to say, but your opinion is objectively far weaker than mine, unless you can bring some concrete numbers and references. You know, after all it is very basic stuffs for debates.

You mean besides all the concrete numbers FROM THIS GAME I've already brought, which conclusively show you've been wrong?

Quote

Finally, I am not even going to bother comment on rest of your comments. Pretty much all of them are twisting and moving goalposts, just like I described so far. You are just arguing for the sake of arguing, and I have no desire to waste my time for it.

'You keep using that phrase, I don't think it means what you think it means.'

Edited by Dimento Graven, 26 August 2017 - 10:29 PM.