259 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

I felt that with Clan ACs (really just LBX with slug ammunition), the stream was too inferior to the UACs that it never made sense to use them Instead, I made all ACs PPFLD so that out of AC, UAC, and LBX, ACs are the most efficient of the 3 at max of optimal range. UACs in order to not simply be an upgrade to ACs needed the stream characteristic, and I also added a tiny amount of spread to make their max efficiency near the middle of optimal range. For LBX the max efficiency is the first third of optimal range where you can fit all pellets onto one component with equipment clearing crit potential as a bonus over ACs and no facetime versus UACs.

[Y E O N N E]

I don't think you've done enough to offset the weight penalty of IS ACs. A half second shorter cooldown and 170m/s advantage isn't going to make a 12-ton, 3-heat, 450 m isAC/10 equitable to a 10-ton, 2 heat, 540 m cAC/10 if both are PPFLD because of they way such ACs get used. They are for dealing out a single hammer blast, not maintaining contact with the target. In that respect, the cAC/10 is quite dramatically superior. What's going to happen is I am going to mount three or four of them and poptart the crap out of the IS with it on a Night Gyr, non-stop at mid-range. Meanwhile, the IS one continues to be awkward and hot, being paired only with PPCs. And, seriously, slug-shot LB-X is notba Clan technoligy. Either give the IS their 11 ton, 6-slot slug weapon or drop the cAC entirely.

I also don't think your heatsinks are differentiated enough. When the skill tree makes them near-enough-as-makes-no-difference, the exercise is moot given thevquantities involved. Similar for projectile speeds, getting 15% in the skill tree plus being more able to run a Targeting Computer basically puts it over into usable territory to the point where the innate advantage the IS had evaporates at all practical levels. Same problem the ER PPCs currently have.

[Nightbird]

Yeonne Greene, on 23 October 2017 - 08:54 AM, said:

I don't think you've done enough to offset the weight penalty of IS ACs. A half second shorter cooldown and 170m/s advantage isn't going to make a 12-ton, 3-heat, 450 m isAC/10 equitable to a 10-ton, 2 heat, 540 m cAC/10 if both are PPFLD because of they way such ACs get used. They are for dealing out a single hammer blast, not maintaining contact with the target. In that respect, the cAC/10 is quite dramatically superior. What's going to happen is I am going to mount three or four of them and poptart the crap out of the IS with it on a Night Gyr, non-stop at mid-range. Meanwhile, the IS one continues to be awkward and hot, being paired only with PPCs. And, seriously, slug-shot LB-X is notba Clan technoligy. Either give the IS their 11 ton, 6-slot slug weapon or drop the cAC entirely.

I also don't think your heatsinks are differentiated enough. When the skill tree makes them near-enough-as-makes-no-difference, the exercise is moot given thevquantities involved. Similar for projectile speeds, getting 15% in the skill tree plus being more able to run a Targeting Computer basically puts it over into usable territory to the point where the innate advantage the IS had evaporates at all practical levels. Same problem the ER PPCs currently have.

Thx for the feedback!

Re: AC10, the IS version is 20% heavier and 50% hotter, and I gave them 22% more DPS and 16% more velocity. This is the 'right direction but magnitude may be wrong' that I promised. It's hard to balance based on mech because the right mech to carry the weapons might not exist on both sides, but using the night gyr example, it would take 33 tons to take 3ac10s with tc3 to match the velocity of the IS versions. Compared to 3 IS AC10s which the cataphract and new victor (70/80tons) can carry, at 36 tons the IS version weighs 9% more for 22% more DPS but is a bit hotter. What numbers would you propose?

Re: heatsinks and heat in general between IS/Clan, agreed. I will not try to compensate in weapon stats though, I'm brainstorming ideas outside of it.

[Y E O N N E]

Not just tons, also slots and the fact that an IS 'Mech is going to drain away 21 with just the guns, 14 for the Endo/7for the Light Ferro, and another 10-12 with the necessary LFE/XL. Realistically, that Cataphract has to run XL, which is its own balancing problem.

TBQH, I would rather just leave cACs out entirely. It really isn't fair that the nearly-identical isLB-10X doesn't get its slug firing spin just because the inferior AC/10 is a thing. The one-slot reduction alone would open up a host of build options for the IS, nevermind the extra ton saved. NSR9J? Can use all six lasers with it. Marauder? Can take double 10s.

But if you insist, then the AC/10 ought to have a cool-down of around 2 seconds for 5 DPS so it can actually fire fast enough to be worth remaining in contact with the target and not be straight-outclassed by the burst on the UAC/10. 10 DPS with two, add some lasers to get around 14-17? Now you're getting somewhere. Now it's tough t choose between AC abd UAC an hard to say whether the cAC is better because two AC/10 provide more efficient DPS than three cAC/10 so, while the cAC might be hetter at poking, the isAC/10 can push better.

[MischiefSC]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2017 - 09:35 AM, said:

Thx for the feedback!

Re: AC10, the IS version is 20% heavier and 50% hotter, and I gave them 22% more DPS and 16% more velocity. This is the 'right direction but magnitude may be wrong' that I promised. It's hard to balance based on mech because the right mech to carry the weapons might not exist on both sides, but using the night gyr example, it would take 33 tons to take 3ac10s with tc3 to match the velocity of the IS versions. Compared to 3 IS AC10s which the cataphract and new victor (70/80tons) can carry, at 36 tons the IS version weighs 9% more for 22% more DPS but is a bit hotter. What numbers would you propose?

Re: heatsinks and heat in general between IS/Clan, agreed. I will not try to compensate in weapon stats though, I'm brainstorming ideas outside of it.

Slots and tons are the killer. Take the KDK3 and use 100% IS tech on it - see what you get. You can't do 4 AC10s, the best you get is 4xUAC5. XL is flat out suicide on it. Even if IS XL survived ST loss, you are nine slots short between IS Endo and bigger IS XL before you put a single weapon on and all those weapons are bigger.

Make an EBJ with IS weapons.

Then make me an IS medium, assault or heavy with 9-12 energy hardpoints.

It's hardpoints and slots and tonnage. You can balance weapons 1 to 1, the problem is that Clans can bring MOAR on most builds -

but not all. Which skews things even more because you can't just make Clan weapons inferior 1 to 1 on the idea they can bring more of them because then you bone bad Clan mechs.

[Nightbird]

That's the case with live, yes, are you saying the proposed changes are in the wrong direction or are you saying the magnitude is off?

[MischiefSC]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2017 - 12:02 PM, said:

That's the case with live, yes, are you saying the proposed changes are in the wrong direction or are you saying the magnitude is off?

Neither. I'm saying that we need an additional balancing dimension and I'm trying to figure out what would be best. What you need is a balancing factor to offset the overall slot/tonnage advantage Clan mechs have without shafting every Clan mech with less than 9 hardpoints. The other facets to balance are good, though I would say IS DHS need an advantage for out of engine DHS bigger than what you've got. Bigger DHS don't just cost in total DHS available; they have a steep opportunity cost when matched with also bigger IS weapons and equipment. Perhaps the better offset is to make IS weapons universally 15-20% cooler on damage/heat? That way fewer IS heatsinks are required for the same damage output.

In the end I really come down to just buff IS gear by a non-arbitrary percentage (couldn't tell you what it is off the cuff) to offset the steeper opportunity cost and inability to boat on the same scale, then individually quirk Clan mechs (and IS mechs for that matter) with few hardpoints. The idea is that a an IS mech with 7 hardpoints that's going to have literally 20 fewer applicable slots (due to bigger DHS, XL, Endo and weapons) and 6 fewer tons in the context of spending 6 (or more) extra tons on the same weapon loadout is still going to be comparable to a 9 hardpoint Clan mech.

It's not just about balancing gear to gear, it's about opportunity and potential loadout. The result is going to be making IS gear a tiny bit stronger than you have already and then serious quirks for hardpoint starved Clan mechs.

[Nightbird]

I'm thinking of rolling the slot issue for DHS, endo, ferro into a flat heat capacity increase. There's no point is buffing those directly because you can't bring them anyways. The amount I haven't done the math on, but would be from tonnage/5 to tonnage/4. A locust isn't hurt as much by slots as an annihilator. This is 20-25 more heat for a 100 ton mech for free.

[MischiefSC]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2017 - 12:23 PM, said:

I'm thinking of rolling the slot issue for DHS, endo, ferro into a flat heat capacity increase. There's no point is buffing those directly because you can't bring them anyways. The amount I haven't done the math on, but would be from tonnage/5 to tonnage/4. A locust isn't hurt as much by slots as an annihilator. This is 20-25 more heat for a 100 ton mech for free.

Maybe. However heat isn't always the critical part of builds. For some mechs it is, but not all. The inability to take the same tier of firepower is at the crux of it. I can't make a 65-85 pt laser alpha on pretty much any IS mech, but I can on a Clan mech. I can't take a medium with 12 ERSMLs or 10HSML and 4 MGs, for 80 pts of laser damage and 4 MGs to eat what it opens up. That level of firepower is a product of available hardpoints, tonnage and slots.

It's the size of the waves AND the motion of the ocean.

[Nightbird]

Well, I'm pretty sure this game is going to turn into Rob the Robotwarrior and give you what you want Same damage, same heat, same tonnage, same slots, same play style, only some things will be labeled IS and some things Clan whatever those things mean.

[Nightbird]

Added this for now:

IS vs Clan Heat Capacity:
Innersphere and Clan heat dissipation systems differ in that Clan systems are able to isolate heat from the rest of the mech as it is removed from hot equipment and circulated to heatsinks. This allows the rest of the mech to operate under a narrow ideal temperature band for the most part. On the other hand, IS heat circulation systems fail to keep all the heat contained, allowing some of it to bleed into the entire mech eventually heating up every beam of structure, plate of armor, and piece of equipment in the mech. While this has the positive benefit of allowing the entire mech itself to store some heat, increasing total heat capacity by (Mech Tonnage/4), the wide swings in expected operating temperature have some very serious consequences. Every piece of equipment manufactured by the Innersphere have to be built to accommodate the wide swings in temperature without failing. The only way to do this is to make them bulkier, with pockets of open space left everywhere so that when thermal expansion takes place, it fills the free spaces instead of creating pressure that would form cracks or outright destroy the equipment. This is especially evident in bulk of light weight Innersphere Endo-Steel structure and Ferro Fibrous armor technologies, which are far more susceptible to temperature than their standard counterparts.

[Nightbird]

MischiefSC, on 23 October 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

Slots and tons are the killer. Take the KDK3 and use 100% IS tech on it - see what you get. You can't do 4 AC10s, the best you get is 4xUAC5. XL is flat out suicide on it. Even if IS XL survived ST loss, you are nine slots short between IS Endo and bigger IS XL before you put a single weapon on and all those weapons are bigger.

If you must take the same loadout, piloted the exact same way then you're right. You can't match Clan tech used in it's most optimal way.

Let's think outside the box, take the KDK-3 with the proposed IS tech. A closer range, you can take 4 Rotary-5s with standard engine. Firing 2 at a time, you can maintain 30DPS without jamming for two bars, which if it is 3 seconds, equals 6x30=180 damage. After which you torso twist and wait 6 seconds, then do it again. Built on an Anni this comes with 11 tons of ammo, but obviously KDK-3 has better mounts. With clan tech? Just 22DPS max with double tap, 15.5DPS average on the KDK-3 with 2uac10, 2uac5.
(http://mwo.smurfy-ne...6af5a6b18c056a3)

What about at longer range, say 550 meters? Take the IS-2UAC10, 2PPC build with the KDK-3. I gave the IS UACs 25% the spread of clan UACs, making them better at range. The 60 damage double tap will be much more focused than the damage you take back, leading to a win. From 300-450 meters? Try the Nightstar/Anni with 2UAC10s and 2UAC5s, better DPS and better spread. The cost is that you will be slower than the KDK-3 with Clan tech, but otherwise it's a straight upgrade.

Edited by Nightbird, 23 October 2017 - 05:54 PM.

[Shifty McSwift]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2017 - 07:01 AM, said:

I felt that with Clan ACs (really just LBX with slug ammunition), the stream was too inferior to the UACs that it never made sense to use them Instead, I made all ACs PPFLD so that out of AC, UAC, and LBX, ACs are the most efficient of the 3 at max of optimal range. UACs in order to not simply be an upgrade to ACs needed the stream characteristic, and I also added a tiny amount of spread to make their max efficiency near the middle of optimal range. For LBX the max efficiency is the first third of optimal range where you can fit all pellets onto one component with equipment clearing crit potential as a bonus over ACs and no facetime versus UACs.

Yeah slug ammunition if you consider all ACs as giant shotguns or literal cannons. Which the term Assault Cannon seems to indicate is not entirely the case, I started out that way, but now consider it more just about how the weapon discharges its volleys AC vs LB dynamic as slug vs buckshot is broken, you NEED to boost LBX from that point or it just sucks by comparison, which means changing how the gun functions, which really means it ISN'T the "same gun firing different bullets", they become two very different guns.

Again, UAC, which always comes up, is broken in itself, it is an RNG double or nothing sort of gun, and really shouldn't be measured against AC and LBX in the same manner, it more distinctly operates like a different gun in its size difference and jam chance, which doesn't exist in the AC/LBX discourse.

Just like with PPC really, why does clan PPC splash while others even heavy PPCs do not? Are the clans firing a different projectile?

[Asym]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2017 - 02:54 PM, said:

Well, I'm pretty sure this game is going to turn into Rob the Robotwarrior and give you what you want Same damage, same heat, same tonnage, same slots, same play style, only some things will be labeled IS and some things Clan whatever those things mean.

First OP, great research and work.... Great data and facts.....neat stuff that many new players would never know.

For many new players, this is fascinating and at the same time frustrating. Many of us played all of the MW games and read a few books but to many of us, this was the fun "stompy robot game" when we needed a break from other, more involved games..... I still have Mercenaries loaded and play every so often.

NB, you observations are spot on; "target, cease fire..." you hit this in the head: instant kill.

Rock-and-Sock'em-Robots only needs a red and a blue robot (we have that already;) danger close with enough armor and degraded weapons to make the FPS arena Solaris concept work for 15 minutes....

Edited by Asym, 24 October 2017 - 05:51 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Shifty McSwift, on 23 October 2017 - 08:33 PM, said:

Just like with PPC really, why does clan PPC splash while others even heavy PPCs do not? Are the clans firing a different projectile?

Clans managed to increase output, but their quest for lower weight and bulk meant they were unwilling to add more equipment to further improve collimation of the particle beam and handle the increased particle density. The result is a PPC that deals the same damage as a Star League-era ER PPC to a single location additional collateral near the impact side. Later Inner Sphere PPC developments were unable to fully replicate the weight and bulk savings to go with the increased output and so focused on creating a design that maximizes precision lethality and maximizes tactical utility for the resources it commands, resulting in the Heavy PPC. Lessons learned in the development of the HPPC were scaled down to result in the Light PPC a short time later.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 24 October 2017 - 05:01 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2017 - 04:18 PM, said:

If you must take the same loadout, piloted the exact same way then you're right. You can't match Clan tech used in it's most optimal way.

Let's think outside the box, take the KDK-3 with the proposed IS tech. A closer range, you can take 4 Rotary-5s with standard engine. Firing 2 at a time, you can maintain 30DPS without jamming for two bars, which if it is 3 seconds, equals 6x30=180 damage. After which you torso twist and wait 6 seconds, then do it again. Built on an Anni this comes with 11 tons of ammo, but obviously KDK-3 has better mounts. With clan tech? Just 22DPS max with double tap, 15.5DPS average on the KDK-3 with 2uac10, 2uac5.
(http://mwo.smurfy-ne...6af5a6b18c056a3)
What about at longer range, say 550 meters? Take the IS-2UAC10, 2PPC build with the KDK-3. I gave the IS UACs 25% the spread of clan UACs, making them better at range. The 60 damage double tap will be much more focused than the damage you take back, leading to a win. From 300-450 meters? Try the Nightstar/Anni with 2UAC10s and 2UAC5s, better DPS and better spread. The cost is that you will be slower than the KDK-3 with Clan tech, but otherwise it's a straight upgrade.

I get where you're going, I do, especially with the ballistic changes you've got. The Clan version would still be significantly faster (the IS version would need to run a STD 300, Clan version is running an XL350 or 375. My concern is in hardpoints and available total slots, especially around energy. I can run a KDK 3 with 2 uac10s, 2 uac5s and 4 cermls with a XL 350 and get more damage and better cooling. Or drop the cermls to ersmls and go to an XL 375 (with less DHS because less heat).

I like where you're going and I'm all for keeping them differentiated - I'm just saying that IS still needs a bit more of a buff because I don't see where you're accounting for the reduced slots functionally requiring smaller engines and fewer total weapons mounted.

[Nightbird]

Shifty McSwift, on 23 October 2017 - 08:33 PM, said:

Yeah slug ammunition if you consider all ACs as giant shotguns or literal cannons. Which the term Assault Cannon seems to indicate is not entirely the case, I started out that way, but now consider it more just about how the weapon discharges its volleys AC vs LB dynamic as slug vs buckshot is broken, you NEED to boost LBX from that point or it just sucks by comparison, which means changing how the gun functions, which really means it ISN'T the "same gun firing different bullets", they become two very different guns.

Umm did I miss a /sarcasm tag?

AC stands for Autocannon (self-loading or auto-loading cannon). Only the Innersphere has the regular AC, which can only shoot in a straight line. The LBX-AC is a variant of Autocannon that can shoot two types of ammunition: one big slug in straight line or a bunch of smaller sub-munitions in a spread. PGI's MWO doesn't have ammo switching, otherwise you would be able to carry both types of ammo and switch between them. Finally, Clans don't have a regular AC, the C-AC you see ingame in literally LBX cannons using slug ammunition because we can't switch ammo on the fly.

[Shifty McSwift]

Nightbird, on 24 October 2017 - 02:15 PM, said:

Umm did I miss a /sarcasm tag?

AC stands for Autocannon (self-loading or auto-loading cannon). Only the Innersphere has the regular AC, which can only shoot in a straight line. The LBX-AC is a variant of Autocannon that can shoot two types of ammunition: one big slug in straight line or a bunch of smaller sub-munitions in a spread. PGI's MWO doesn't have ammo switching, otherwise you would be able to carry both types of ammo and switch between them. Finally, Clans don't have a regular AC, the C-AC you see ingame in literally LBX cannons using slug ammunition because we can't switch ammo on the fly.

Sorry, autocannon... An autocannon that only fires a single slug per volley... Why not call it a cannon? What part of the weapon is automatic? I'm no lore buff so surely there's an explanation like this;

Yeonne Greene, on 24 October 2017 - 06:14 AM, said:

Clans managed to increase output, but their quest for lower weight and bulk meant they were unwilling to add more equipment to further improve collimation of the particle beam and handle the increased particle density. The result is a PPC that deals the same damage as a Star League-era ER PPC to a single location additional collateral near the impact side. Later Inner Sphere PPC developments were unable to fully replicate the weight and bulk savings to go with the increased output and so focused on creating a design that maximizes precision lethality and maximizes tactical utility for the resources it commands, resulting in the Heavy PPC. Lessons learned in the development of the HPPC were scaled down to result in the Light PPC a short time later.

To explain it all away instead of just kind of noticing that in effect this comes across as pretty dumb. They 'advanced' tech in a way that made it worse, and stuck with that. I am starting to think the things wrong with the game come down to the ridiculous justifications like this. "No UAC CANNOT be different because of Psalmcannon verse 434: Where upon thou shalt not reduce UAC damage below unto double or nought for ye is the bearer of lores."

Edited by Shifty McSwift, 24 October 2017 - 07:26 PM.

[Shifty McSwift]

I guess a similar response to the question in the title with that in mind is just; No. The lore we have in MWO is the lore of MWO, why cut the player base in two to test some "late lore" ideals that never extended to MWO in the first place? Is this lore not good enough for you? Then you have the TT version to play.

Enjoying the lack of room this reasoning provides?

[Y E O N N E]

Shifty McSwift, on 24 October 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

To explain it all away instead of just kind of noticing that in effect this comes across as pretty dumb. They 'advanced' tech in a way that made it worse, and stuck with that. I am starting to think the things wrong with the game come down to the ridiculous justifications like this. "No UAC CANNOT be different because of Psalmcannon verse 434: Where upon thou shalt not reduce UAC damage below unto double or nought for ye is the bearer of lores."

It's not that stupid.

When you want to make something smaller and lighter, you usually have to increase the efficiency. But there's also application to consider.

So, in that vein, you could say that the Clan scientist caste did this so they could shrink it. However, their design was so efficient that it could fire with 50% greater power than it did before by increasing the mass of the beam by 50%. The kinetic energy in the particles is a separate problem from making those particles useful, though. A particle beam is more potent the denser the stream is. However, the denser it is, the more it wants to attenuate as its constituents repel one another. So you have to squeeze it tighter still. You want to squeeze tighter, you need to have the appropriate equipment. If your first priority is to shrink the original and you've already accomplished that, and you also get this bonus effect on the target out of the deal, are you going to take it? Probably, because it's still better than the version that came before it in every conceivable way.

This is not lore justification; in lore the cERPPC is just alighter, smaller, more efficient ER PPC with no drawbacks whatsoever. What we have here is some plausible fluff to justify a game mechanic, that game mechanic being splash damage and the broad goal being to introduce some technological drawbacks where none previously existed but really should have. Nothing more, nothing less.

Independent of all this, though, I say PPCs are supposed to be BEAM WEAPONS. They are described as beam weapons and, realistically, they would be beam weapons because they don't shoot fuzzy lumps at hypersonic velocities, they shoot a stream of ions travelling at relativistic speeds, AKA fast enough that we might as well call it hit-scan at terrestrial scales. You want to know what the splash damage really is? Thermal expansion. The beam penetrates the top layer and deposits into the layers below, heating them up and causing structural failure. Dump energy fast enough and it will do so spectacularly. You'll also irradiate whoever is inside with a nice, healthy dose of bremsstrahlung. So you get a small hole at the impact, weakened material around the impact (depending on how heat conductive it is; less is worse for the target), and a dead pilot.

PPCs, combined with the gamma ray lasers that we call Large Lasers, create one extremely nasty battlefield environment. Cancer for everybody in the nearby vicinity three years down the road. Enjoy.