123 replies to this topic

[Wil McCullough]

i expected the wolfhound nerf.

i'm averaging a 2.0 wlr in qp with that thing.

considering there's like only 4 other active wolfhound pilots (or something), and knowing pgi balances by stat sheet rather than actual performance, i made the wolfhound seem like it's over-performing.

sorry guys.

[Bombast]

November11th, on 18 September 2017 - 08:25 PM, said:

MRMS just became Long Range Missiles. Therefore defeating their original purpose.
I digress though, I actually like the change. It will help me with longer range trades .

Well, they'll likely still be trash ranged weapons. But being able to to trash damage from range while waiting for your moment is better than having to do something stupid early in a match. I may actually put MRMs back on the Catapult after this.

[stealthraccoon]

I love everything about the patch and I am in totally agreement with the PGI....

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 18 September 2017 - 05:48 PM, said:

Light Gauss needs to be 10 damage

Not at that tonnage. LGR has superior ballistic behavior than the AC10. It would phase out the AC10 in terms of poking, when the go-to DPS is usually AC5s and UAC5s.

[InvictusLee]

FupDup, on 18 September 2017 - 08:25 PM, said:

Spread will still restrict their function that those ranges though.

They're missiles. They are going to spread no matter what. If you dont want spread, use LLs instead.

[The6thMessenger]

November11th, on 18 September 2017 - 08:43 PM, said:

They're missiles. They are going to spread no matter what. If you dont want spread, use LLs instead.

Right well, it's not that people don't want it to spread, it's just not as effective as it needs to be because of it. Damage increase would probably be okay too, just as well other approaches. It just needs to bring the MRM to where it's supposed to be in the balance.

[Y E O N N E]

The6thMessenger, on 18 September 2017 - 08:40 PM, said:

Not at that tonnage. LGR has superior ballistic behavior than the AC10. It would phase out the AC10 in terms of poking, when the go-to DPS is usually AC5s and UAC5s.

The AC/10 is already phased out on all but the most quirked 'Mechs.

PGI really needs to re-align the entire suite of ballistics.

[The6thMessenger]

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 08:49 PM, said:

The AC/10 is already phased out on all but the most quirked 'Mechs.

PGI really needs to re-align the entire suite of ballistics.

Eh, true. But i'm still opposed to that damage buff on the LGR, that's just wrong considering it's tonnage. If it were a 13-tonner weapon, it would be a different story cause it'd be competing with the UAC10, but it's not.

[InvictusLee]

The6thMessenger, on 18 September 2017 - 08:45 PM, said:

Right well, it's not that people don't want it to spread, it's just not as effective as it needs to be because of it. Damage increase would probably be okay too, just as well other approaches. It just needs to bring the MRM to where it's supposed to be in the balance.

Idk man... my MRM URBIE IS GONNA BE AWSUM.

[Valhallan]

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 08:49 PM, said:

The AC/10 is already phased out on all but the most quirked 'Mechs.

PGI really needs to re-align the entire suite of ballistics.

Eh the saving grace of standard/light ac's in the uac/rac world was specialized munitions. Buuuuut LBX issues so .

[Khobai]

Quote

Not at that tonnage. LGR has superior ballistic behavior than the AC10. It would phase out the AC10 in terms of poking, when the go-to DPS is usually AC5s and UAC5s.

not really since the UAC10 has much higher dps

and the UAC10 already makes the AC10 completely obsolete so why even mention the AC10?

AC10 is already as obsolete as obsolete gets so its the last thing you should be comparing light gauss to

Edited by Khobai, 18 September 2017 - 09:33 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

The6thMessenger, on 18 September 2017 - 08:55 PM, said:

Eh, true. But i'm still opposed to that damage buff on the LGR, that's just wrong considering it's tonnage. If it were a 13-tonner weapon, it would be a different story cause it'd be competing with the UAC10, but it's not.

That's not wrong at all; considering its tonnage and the full Gauss being 1-to-1, thematically it should really be 12 damage. But that's a meaningless way to measure it regardless.

The problem with LGauss is that all of the other extreme range guns offer a superior ability to burst down the target. ERPPC, ERLL, UAC/2, even standard AC/2. The standard Gauss, even, can multiply the impact of a smaller number of ERLL by a lot. Unless you shorten the cool-down to a point where I can squeeze out two rounds in the time it takes an ERLL boat to expose, fire, and recover (~2.5 second window), there's no point in taking the LGauss at 8 damage. It simply can't offer enough firepower to be worth 12 tons. And if we do reduce the cool-down enough for it to be useful (8/(2.5+0.5) = 2.66 DPS), we've truly made the AC/10 obsolete because now the LGauss has such a short cool-down that it is overly forgiving during closer engagements. Why take the heat-generating AC/10 at that point?

On the other hand, if we up the damage to 10 we can keep the cool-down longer since its alpha potential is now actually worth something on its own and its DPS is competitive for its range (10/ (3.25+0.5) = same 2.66 DPS) but the poor follow-through makes it less desirable up close. Even if we buff the AC/10 (i.e. 540 m and 1100 m/S), the LGauss retains a role for sustained DPS at extreme range comparable to a pair of well-sinked ERPPC.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 18 September 2017 - 09:31 PM, said:

not really since the UAC10 has much higher dps

and the UAC10 already makes the AC10 completely obsolete so why even mention the AC10?

AC10 is already as obsolete as obsolete gets so its the last thing you should be comparing light gauss to

Yes it is, because the LGR is at 12 tons and UAC10 is at 13 tons. And you need to balance by that too.

Why mention the AC10? Because it's part of the game, it's part of the power curve. When double-tap isn't needed, or the burst-fire isn't wanted, we turn to the AC10. Granted, we should be buffing the AC10, but that doesn't mean that the LGR should step out of bounds of a 12-tonner just so it could match relevance with a 13-tonner. The UAC10 deserve it's spot because it's 1 ton heavier.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 09:42 PM, said:

That's not wrong at all; considering its tonnage and the full Gauss being 1-to-1, thematically it should really be 12 damage. But that's a meaningless way to measure it regardless.

Thematic? Yes! Balance-wise, not so much.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 09:42 PM, said:

The problem with LGauss is that all of the other extreme range guns offer a superior ability to burst down the target. ERPPC, ERLL, UAC/2, even standard AC/2. The standard Gauss, even, can multiply the impact of a smaller number of ERLL by a lot. Unless you shorten the cool-down to a point where I can squeeze out two rounds in the time it takes an ERLL boat to expose, fire, and recover (~2.5 second window), there's no point in taking the LGauss at 8 damage. It simply can't offer enough firepower to be worth 12 tons. And if we do reduce the cool-down enough for it to be useful (8/(2.5+0.5) = 2.66 DPS), we've truly made the AC/10 obsolete because now the LGauss has such a short cool-down that it is overly forgiving during closer engagements. Why take the heat-generating AC/10 at that point?

Honestly, i think that cooldown approach is the way to go, along with increased damage/ammo-ton. How i would solve this is that the LGR would have the same cooldown as the AC10, but it needs a 0.75s charge, making it consistent with the other gauss rifles and despite low cooldown would make poor follow through.

Velocity: 2400
Range: 810
Damage: 8
Charge Time: 0.75
Cooldown: 2.5s + 0.75

The relevance of that versus the AC10 is that the AC10 would have the ability to snap-fire and better DPS, when range isn't needed. Of course this requires the AC10 would be elevated in the first place, such as maybe 1150 velocity. Versus the lasers? It still does 8 instant damage, and at a speed of 2400.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 09:42 PM, said:

On the other hand, if we up the damage to 10 we can keep the cool-down longer since its alpha potential is now actually worth something on its own and its DPS is competitive for its range (10/ (3.25+0.5) = same 2.66 DPS) but the poor follow-through makes it less desirable up close. Even if we buff the AC/10 (i.e. 540 m and 1100 m/S), the LGauss retains a role for sustained DPS at extreme range comparable to a pair of well-sinked ERPPC.

That's actually a very good way to put it.

Although at such an extreme range, wouldn't 10 PPFLD be too good? Sure it's not the same tonnage as the ER-PPC, nor have unlimited ammo, but if ammo is all it's constraints at an incredibly long range that somewhat deters most retaliation, i would argue that 10 damage is too good.

2xERLLs imo is balanced on that range, so does AC2s, because their damage is spread. I mean sure the 2x AC2 can do 8 damage in just two bursts, but so what? That's spread around, we're talking about 8 ppfld here. So does 2xERLL doing 18 damage under 1.10s, because that's plenty of time to torso twist. And lets face it, at 750m, chances are our damage would be spread more by our less steady hand than enemies actually torso-twisting. That's why the approach i see fit on the LGR is that of it's cooldown to spread it's damage at a long range.

At best, I could probably compromise to 9 damage, i'm still opposed in buffing the damage, but if we do it's best to still not have it match up PPFLDs.

Velocity: 2400
Range: 750
Damage: 9
Charge Time: 0.75s
Cooldown: 3.0s

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 September 2017 - 10:31 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Why mention the AC10? Because it's part of the game, it's part of the power curve. When double-tap isn't needed, or the burst-fire isn't wanted, we turn to the AC10.

there is no reason to use an AC10 ever again

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 18 September 2017 - 10:44 PM, said:

there is no reason to use an AC10 ever again

And that's a problem.

[MechaBattler]

Jun Watarase, on 18 September 2017 - 05:34 PM, said:

I cannot help but facepalm at the patch notes. PGI logic is just amazingly wrong.

[/size][/font]

This completely ignores the fact that the go to weapon for long range combat has been the ER LL for like, a year. PGI doesnt play their own game, so they have NO idea what the meta is.

PGI logic : Surely giving a 12 ton weapon the same DPS as a 15 ton weapon makes it good right? It's 3 tons lighter!

Player logic : Why should i care when i have been boating ER LLs for the past year?

PGI logic : But it generates low heat!

Player logic : Yea, that really matters when i'm sniping from 800+m on alpine peaks or polar highlands...do you even play the game?



Still doesnt address the fundemental issue that 1x AC 20 is better than 1x heavy gauss, simply because it is lighter, you can use one with a LFE and it has no charge up time.



Doesn't address the issue that the RAC 2 sucks (especially in comparison to the RAC 5).

PGI logic : But you can boat more now to make up for the fact that one or two are underwhelming!

Player logic : Or i can just use two RAC 5s...



PGI makes zero attempt at understanding why boating UAC 5s is common and most UAC 10 builds in FP are on Kodiaks/Annihilators. Lowering AC 10 heat down to 2.75 doesnt do a thing at all. All this will do is encourage more clan UAC 5 boating because clan UAC 10s will be less attractive. You might see slightly more IS UAC 10 builds in QP i guess. Slepinirs/Maulers are not going to stop boating UAC 5s because of this. Again, this is what happens when you dont play your own game and have no idea what people actually use.

PGI logic : We will make the IS UAC 10 cooler so people will use it more!

Player logic : Uh, who cares? My 4x UAC 5 mauler/slepinir still does more DPS at a longer range and is cooler?

[/size][/font]

PGI logic : We will increase the max range more even though everyone has been telling us that the problem is that the spread makes it unusable at 300+ meters as it is. Surely players will use it at longer ranges where it is even less ineffective than before?

It is painfully obvious that PGI has never tried using MRMs at 450 meters before.

[/size][/font]

PGI Logic : Assassins have good performance, so they don't need more missile velocity.

Player logic : We don't use the assassin for missile velocity quirks, do you even know why the assassin is outperforming most lights/mediums at the moment?



PGI logic : Dragons are performing well, even though the only dragons in FP are the occasional 3x LPL dragon, so we have to nerf their energy quirks.

Player logic : That's okay, we will just boat LPLs on another mech instead and everyone running medium lasers/MPL in QP get shafted.

[/size][/font]

PGI Logic : We will discourage people from using the stock ER PPC + LPL combo (which was never popular compared to laser vomit anyway) and just encourage more LPL boating instead.

Player logic : So we will either boat LPLs on the WHK-C or run laser vomit on the MAD-IIC instead which has better in almost every way.

I could go into more detail but this is all a classic example of what happens when you only look at stats and have no idea what people actually bring in real world matches. Like, really, the DRAGON of all mechs is OVER PERFORMING?! When almost every IS mech in the first three waves is a laser vomit grasshopper, warhammer, black knight or battlemaster on most maps? Where is it over performing, in tier 5 matches?

Absolutely no mention of how laser vomit is "over performing" or how LBXs are "under performing". Funny that.

[Y E O N N E]

Just FYI, I think the charge on LGauss is currently 0.5 seconds, not 0.75.

The6thMessenger, on 18 September 2017 - 10:08 PM, said:

Honestly, i think that cooldown approach is the way to go, along with increased damage/ammo-ton. How i would solve this is that the LGR would have the same cooldown as the AC10, but it needs a 0.75s charge, making it consistent with the other gauss rifles and despite low cooldown would make poor follow through.

Velocity: 2400
Range: 810
Damage: 8
Charge Time: 0.75
Cooldown: 2.5s + 0.75

The relevance of that versus the AC10 is that the AC10 would have the ability to snap-fire and better DPS, when range isn't needed. Of course this requires the AC10 would be elevated in the first place, such as maybe 1150 velocity. Versus the lasers? It still does 8 instant damage, and at a speed of 2400.

By adding another 0.25 seconds to the charge cycle, you've just cut the DPS to 2.46. A pair of ERPPC is once again flatly superior since we've long since hit the point of diminishing returns on improved velocity and range. And I've always got TCs to exacerbate that facet.

I am personally not ever going to consider the LGauss unless its DPS is notably better than the ERPPC. At 12 tons for 8 damage, it has insufficient alpha to combine one with a bundle of ERLL and it costs too much weight to combine two with ERLL or anything else with similar range.

LGauss with those stats simply cannot get the damage up. And, thematically, the Gauss has always been more about getting its DPS through up-front damage and not rate of fire. Standard ACs do the rate of fire thing.

Quote

That's actually a very good way to put it.

Although at such an extreme range, wouldn't 10 PPFLD be too good? Sure it's not the same tonnage as the ER-PPC, nor have unlimited ammo, but if ammo is all it's constraints at an incredibly long range that somewhat deters most retaliation, i would argue that 10 damage is too good.

I wouldn't say it's too good. What you're talking about here is the LGauss being useful as a power position weapon. The counter to power position is to either poptart or expose as a team and attempt to establish dominance by presenting too many targets. Bursting down with ERLL is than adequate for fighting it off, as it's still got considerable gaps between shots, charge delaying aim, etc.

Quote

ERLLs imo is balanced on that range, so does AC2s, because their damage is spread. That's why the approach i see fit on the LGR is that of it's cooldown to spread it's damage at a long range.

UAC/2 are an odd beast; while they spread, they also do a devastating amount of damage to all of the components they hit (never would've expected 2-class to be considered good 3 years ago). Remember, we're talking four of these things; that's potentially 22.24 DPS and it's going to be going for ~3 seconds. Out of all the options here, it's the most savage, and it deals out even more punishment to slower 'Mechs with no appreciable gap.

Quote

At best, I could probably compromise to 9 damage, i'm still opposed in buffing the damage, but if we do it's best to still not have it match up PPFLDs.

Velocity: 2400
Range: 750
Damage: 9
Charge Time: 0.75s
Cooldown: 3.0s

IMHO, same problem as before: ERPPC are flatly superior and even moreso this time. But I'd be more willing to try this.

Quote

ERLLs imo is balanced on that range, so does AC2s, because their damage is spread. That's why the approach i see fit on the LGR is that of it's cooldown to spread it's damage at a long range.

The ERLL does most of its damage in one place, having only a 0.93 second burn properly skilled. When shooting at 800 m, even the 2000 m/s Gauss has a propensity to miss the target, so I'd say the precision is a wash at worst.The real buzz about ERLL, though, is that you can bundle them into big groups that will do two and a half times the damage of a pair of LGauss. Even just three ERLL and a single standard Gauss will give you a better single-shot punch than any combination of LGauss with itself or ERLL.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 18 September 2017 - 11:06 PM.

[CancersCincar]

November11th, on 18 September 2017 - 08:43 PM, said:

They're missiles. They are going to spread no matter what. If you dont want spread, use LLs instead.

Hey, it's almost like you thought what a majority of people thought when they were putting the meta together.

MRMs would be pretty good if their spread was tighter. Just imagine if their spread was "mostly the center torso and a side torso" instead of "the torso in general" or "partially whiffing an Atlas near max range."

Patch notes were pretty underwhelming. The Uziel should have received armor quirks instead of structure quirks , and it was a bit weird to watch them swap the Kintaro and Archer from structure to armor quirks in the same patch notes.

Aside from the above, or really even including the above, the patch notes are pretty meh all around. I hope you like laser vomit because tomorrow it will still be laser vomit.

[The6thMessenger]

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 11:03 PM, said:

By adding another 0.25 seconds to the charge cycle, you've just cut the DPS to 2.46. A pair of ERPPC is once again flatly superior since we've long since hit the point of diminishing returns on improved velocity and range. And I've always got TCs to exacerbate that facet.

Kinda why i considered 9 damage, at 2.5s + 0.75s, and 2.769 DPS.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 11:03 PM, said:

I am personally not ever going to consider the LGauss unless its DPS is notably better than the ERPPC. At 12 tons for 8 damage, it has insufficient alpha to combine one with a bundle of ERLL and it costs too much weight to combine two with ERLL or anything else with similar range.

You'd probably be able to sustain it better than going 2x ERPPC + 3x ERLL though. Obviously the LGR is supposed to capitalize on range, so it's synergy is not about being able to put a considerable alpha, but to be able to do a decent one at extreme range.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 11:03 PM, said:

LGauss with those stats simply cannot get the damage up. And, thematically, the Gauss has always been more about getting its DPS through up-front damage and not rate of fire. Standard ACs do the rate of fire thing.

Thematically? Yes. Balance-wise, we have to play around it. There's a lot more things to consider than just muh-lore.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 11:03 PM, said:

I wouldn't say it's too good. What you're talking about here is the LGauss being useful as a power position weapon. The counter to power position is to either poptart or expose as a team and attempt to establish dominance by presenting too many targets. Bursting down with ERLL is than adequate for fighting it off, as it's still got considerable gaps between shots, charge delaying aim, etc.

And i would say that its too good. Whether that has counters isn't really that much relevant in turning the argument around, as if it's just either-or approach. I would argue that the question would be, how effective would the counters against it instead.

I'm not that keen in counting the ERLLs, cause the LGR minimizes exposure via shooting a projectile that deals all it's damage at once. So really that's not really as good. It also need not to be a campler, you can keep moving, and keep shooting, combine that with range and speed, then it would be hard to take down -- although arguably maybe even more of a nuisance than a massive threat.

But at 10 damage/shot, it's definitely a threat, a threat that has barely any down time and is good at hitting targets from afar.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 11:03 PM, said:

UAC/2 are an odd beast; while they spread, they also do a devastating amount of damage to all of the components they hit (never would've expected 2-class to be considered good 3 years ago). Remember, we're talking four of these things; that's potentially 22.24 DPS and it's going to be going for ~3 seconds. Out of all the options here, it's the most savage, and it deals out even more punishment to slower 'Mechs with no appreciable gap.

Sure, but still 8 PPFLD, that means 8 damage dumped at a single component no questions asked. UAC2 would have deal with convergence, and erroneous convergence due to lead for moving targets, could even jam. Also the stare time that comes with it -- plinkers do have the tendency to stare, an then factor in the heat there.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 11:03 PM, said:

The ERLL does most of its damage in one place, having only a 0.93 second burn properly skilled.

Considering torso-twist, also constant-aim that when we readjust, it largely deviates at a range. So moving target would be likely to have a spread laser damage -- sure we could concentrate at times, but the thing is that 8-PPFLD does away with that.

Yeonne Greene, on 18 September 2017 - 11:03 PM, said:

When shooting at 800 m, even the 2000 m/s Gauss has a propensity to miss the target, so I'd say the precision is a wash at worst.The real buzz about ERLL, though, is that you can bundle them into big groups that will do two and a half times the damage of a pair of LGauss. Even just three ERLL and a single standard Gauss will give you a better single-shot punch than any combination of LGauss with itself or ERLL.

That's why i suggested 2400 m/s, hell i'd go even 3000 m/s. But another thing is that, while the ERLL need to focus 0.93 stare time, the LGR can snap fire and hide immediately as he shot the shell. Even if the shooter stared for the time it took the shell to land at 750m target, that's still 0.375s, nowhere near the ERLL's stare time.

[Spheroid]

@Khobai: How is the AC-10 obsolete? On the Rifleman-3C AC-10s +mlas is one of the best available builds. What other loadout would be better? Your choices are either dual RACs or some laser gauss combo.

I don't accept preference of the 5D or 3N as valid answer.

Edited by Spheroid, 19 September 2017 - 12:18 AM.