170 replies to this topic

[warner2]

Trissila, on 26 October 2017 - 08:12 PM, said:

Making weapons not go to the same crosshair won't make the game any harder. It'll just add an extra step or two when alpha-ing, just like ghost heat does now with builds firing part of their alpha, then at exactly 0.5 seconds later firing the the rest. It'll add fractions of a second to a properly-built 'mech's alpha time, and players running bad bracket builds and/or standing out in the open will still get stomped.

Personally I think this is flawed reasoning. Players abandoned Gauss and PPC pretty quickly once they were linked, didn't they? I think that 0.5 sec seems to matter.

[Trissila]

warner2, on 29 October 2017 - 09:34 AM, said:

Personally I think this is flawed reasoning. Players abandoned Gauss and PPC pretty quickly once they were linked, didn't they? I think that 0.5 sec seems to matter.

A) Velocity and timing matter a whole lot more with very-long-range sniper weapons that have projectile velocity
2) GaussPeeps is 60 PPFLD. So is 2xUAC/10+2xUAC/5, but when GaussPeeps has delay in it that is comparable to UAC double-tap time, it makes zero sense to use GaussPeeps over Dakka when GaussPeeps will instantly kill you if you pull the trigger 0.01 seconds too fast but Dakka will never instantly kill you.
C) Ghost heat instantly killing you for firing one millisecond too fast is stupid and kills an otherwise good build simply because the risk is never worth it.

Edited by Trissila, 29 October 2017 - 10:02 AM.

[Shifty McSwift]

Well, they should totally have built in macro keysets in the settings for exactly that kind of stuff, but apparently it is ok to use outside macros that make it so clicking within .5 seconds won't fire.

[warner2]

Trissila, on 29 October 2017 - 09:55 AM, said:

A) Velocity and timing matter a whole lot more with very-long-range sniper weapons that have projectile velocity
2) GaussPeeps is 60 PPFLD. So is 2xUAC/10+2xUAC/5, but when GaussPeeps has delay in it that is comparable to UAC double-tap time, it makes zero sense to use GaussPeeps over Dakka when GaussPeeps will instantly kill you if you pull the trigger 0.01 seconds too fast but Dakka will never instantly kill you.
C) Ghost heat instantly killing you for firing one millisecond too fast is stupid and kills an otherwise good build simply because the risk is never worth it.

Fine so educate me then. If it's so easy to work around a mechanic that introduces a 0.5 second firing delay then why did Kodiak players abandon 4UAC10 and switch to 2UAC10+2UAC5? It seems to me that players don't in-fact like ghost heat or staggered fire mechanics because it interferes with their ability to alpha fire, and in turn the alpha fire is why the laser vomit meta is so strong?

[Athom83]

FantasticMrDark, on 26 October 2017 - 06:26 AM, said:

How about we just remove ghost heat and dust off Energy Draw? maybe this time have it be 1 damage = 1 energy (for everything thats not SRMs) that would streamline the entire system and not have it be a complicated mess.

Standard AC's and LBs would technically also not take energy. Maybe if each weapon had their own energy requirements (ER lasers require slightly more than std equivalent, etc), then maybe it could work. However, 1 damage = 1 energy simply would not work as that would essentially make (U)AC/20s and heavy lasers essentially useless as they would take to much energy for their actual effect.

[Khobai]

Quote

Fine so educate me then. If it's so easy to work around a mechanic that introduces a 0.5 second firing delay then why did Kodiak players abandon 4UAC10 and switch to 2UAC10+2UAC5?

simple. because with x2 UAC10 x2 UAC5 you can strip all the armor out of both the arms and save enough tonnage to run a 400 engine. thats why people did it.

but with x4 UAC10 you cant do that, because theres not enough crit slots in the side torsos for all your ammo. it was really the combination of both being able to use a 400 engine + no ghost heat that made x2 UAC10 and x2 UAC5 popular.

if it were possible to use a 400 engine with x4 UAC10 without giving anything else up, people definitely wouldve done it. the 0.5 ghost heat delay wasnt really a big deal, especially with how often UACs jam; they jam like every other time you fire them. the real problem was having to downgrade to a smaller engine, and since all your agility stats were tied to engine size at the time, it meant a loss of agility as well as speed.

gotta go fast. 400 engine or gtfo.

Quote

Personally I think this is flawed reasoning. Players abandoned Gauss and PPC pretty quickly once they were linked, didn't they? I think that 0.5 sec seems to matter.

Because Gauss/PPC was dependent on doing all its damage to one location

CUACs arnt dependent on that because they spread damage around. They rely on out-dpsing the target.

The reason for the Kodiak using x2 UAC10 and x2 UAC5, like I said above, was about being able to use a 400 engine for the extra agility/speed. Because agility used to depend on engine size before they desynced it.

Edited by Khobai, 29 October 2017 - 12:06 PM.

[davoodoo]

warner2, on 29 October 2017 - 10:10 AM, said:

Fine so educate me then. If it's so easy to work around a mechanic that introduces a 0.5 second firing delay then why did Kodiak players abandon 4UAC10 and switch to 2UAC10+2UAC5? It seems to me that players don't in-fact like ghost heat or staggered fire mechanics because it interferes with their ability to alpha fire, and in turn the alpha fire is why the laser vomit meta is so strong?

Fairly easy, DOUBLE ******* TAP.
because of that you add up extra 1s + burst durations.

Edited by davoodoo, 29 October 2017 - 10:20 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Tarogato, on 29 October 2017 - 01:53 AM, said:

Side torsos are almost as healthy as CTs,

They ain't. If they were, isXL would not actually be as big of a problem as it is because taking a side wouldn't be much of a shortcut to a kill.

I mean, stock, I've got 92 CT armor on a Marauder with 46 structure. The side is 64 and 32.

So that's 138 vs. 96, and that doesn't account for crits against structure.

So I don't know about you, but a 30% reduction from CT to ST seems like a far cry from "almost as healthy as CTs" to me.

[Tarogato]

Yeonne Greene, on 29 October 2017 - 10:28 AM, said:

They ain't. If they were, isXL would not actually be as big of a problem as it is because taking a side wouldn't be much of a shortcut to a kill.

[...]

So that's 138 vs. 96, and that doesn't account for crits against structure.

That's a difference of only one laservom alpha. An arm on the other hand is exactly half of the health of a CT, so I can justify going for it if it means stripping the mech. But if going for side torso didn't kill the mech outright and it didn't remove the adjacent arm? Why bother... just aim for the CT. Only 30% more damage to kill the mech out right, why bother aiming for a component that won't kill take the mech out the fight.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 29 October 2017 - 10:16 AM, said:

simple. because with x2 UAC10 x2 UAC5 you can strip all the armor out of both the arms and save enough tonnage to run a 400 engine. thats why people did it.

but with x4 UAC10 you cant do that, because theres not enough crit slots in the side torsos for all your ammo. it was really the combination of both being able to use a 400 engine + no ghost heat that made x2 UAC10 and x2 UAC5 popular.

if it were possible to use a 400 engine with x4 UAC10 without giving anything else up, people definitely wouldve done it. the 0.5 ghost heat delay wasnt really a big deal, especially with how often UACs jam; they jam like every other time you fire them. the real problem was having to downgrade to a smaller engine, and since all your agility stats were tied to engine size at the time, it meant a loss of agility as well as speed.

gotta go fast. 400 engine or gtfo.

This is you, not understanding any reason why people switched to UAC10/UAC5 builds. 400 XL is being over-engined. That delay is the EXACT reason people switched, the problem was that you couldn't mix it with any other weapons very well so you just went with engine over anything else, but it was still considered by some to be better than the competition (it wasn't) so they used it despite that disadvantage.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 29 October 2017 - 12:04 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Tarogato, on 29 October 2017 - 11:41 AM, said:

That's a difference of only one laservom alpha. An arm on the other hand is exactly half of the health of a CT, so I can justify going for it if it means stripping the mech. But if going for side torso didn't kill the mech outright and it didn't remove the adjacent arm? Why bother... just aim for the CT. Only 30% more damage to kill the mech out right, why bother aiming for a component that won't kill take the mech out the fight.

One laser vomit alpha is significant all on its own, because that's one more hit you can expose for. More realistically, that extra armor is worth several minutes of incidental fire.

As for why bother? Because it will slow the 'Mech down if it's equipped with LFE or cXL. Because many 'Mechs still have the majority of their firepower there. Because many 'Mechs have the majority of their heatsinks there. Any of those things will take a 'Mech out of the fight directly either via death or disarmament or indirectly with loss of mobility and sudden heat-capping.

Taking the arm with it right now just happens to be a nice benefit.

[Kin3ticX]

cant remove ghost heat. only add that I don't understand why PGI would ban Gauss PPC but leave in the giant vomit and gauss vomit alphas. Either link that **** up or remove the PPC Gauss link.

[Y E O N N E]

Kin3ticX, on 29 October 2017 - 12:05 PM, said:

cant remove ghost heat. only add that I don't understand why PGI would ban Gauss PPC but leave in the giant vomit and gauss vomit alphas. Either link that **** up or remove the PPC Gauss link.

At the very least, bump the PPC+Gauss link up to 3. Or at least do it for the IS only if NTG poptarting remains a fear.

[Khobai]

Sometimes all you need to do to mostly disarm a mech is destroy the ST. So you blow out the ST and just leave the mech alive with 1-2 lasers or whatever and go after another enemy mech thats a much bigger threat.

Quote

This is you, not understanding any reason why people switched to UAC10/UAC5 builds. 400 XL is being over-engined. That delay is the EXACT reason people switched, the problem was that you couldn't mix it with any other weapons very well so you just went with engine over anything else, but it was still considered by some to be better than the competition (it wasn't) so they used it despite that disadvantage.

there was no such thing as being overengined when engine size was directly linked to how agile a mech was.

dont be an idiot. people absolutely used 400XLs on Kodiaks for the extra agility they afforded. agility directly impacted survival in this game so engine size directly increased your survival up until they decoupled agility from engine size. and you couldnt use the 400XL unless you stripped the armor off the arms of the kodiak. which could only be done if you used x2 UAC5 and x2 UAC10.

Sometimes all you need to do to mostly disarm a mech is destroy the ST. So you blow out the ST and just leave the mech alive with 1-2 lasers or whatever and go after another enemy mech thats a much bigger threat.

Quote

This is you, not understanding any reason why people switched to UAC10/UAC5 builds. 400 XL is being over-engined. That delay is the EXACT reason people switched, the problem was that you couldn't mix it with any other weapons very well so you just went with engine over anything else, but it was still considered by some to be better than the competition (it wasn't) so they used it despite that disadvantage.

there was no such thing as being overengined when engine size was directly linked to how agile a mech was.

dont be an idiot. people absolutely used 400XLs on Kodiaks for the extra agility they afforded. agility directly impacted survival in this game so engine size directly increased your survival up until they decoupled agility from engine size. and you couldnt use the 400XL unless you stripped the armor off the arms of the kodiak. which could only be done if you used x2 UAC5 and x2 UAC10.

the ghost heat delay was part of the reason. it was not the ONLY reason. the extra bump in agility and speed from the 400 engine is really what made it more worthwhile.

Edited by Khobai, 29 October 2017 - 12:16 PM.

[Deathlike]

Kin3ticX, on 29 October 2017 - 12:05 PM, said:

cant remove ghost heat. only add that I don't understand why PGI would ban Gauss PPC but leave in the giant vomit and gauss vomit alphas. Either link that **** up or remove the PPC Gauss link.

Increasing Gauss heat is Lostech.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Khobai, on 29 October 2017 - 12:07 PM, said:

there was no such thing as being overengined when engine was directly linked to how agile a mech was

There was, EVEN in those days.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 29 October 2017 - 12:10 PM.

[Tarogato]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 29 October 2017 - 12:00 PM, said:

This is you, not understanding any reason why people switched to UAC10/UAC5 builds. 400 XL is being over-engined. That delay is the EXACT reason people switched, the problem was that you couldn't mix it with any other weapons very well so you just went with engine over anything else.

Not to mention that some people do still run the 4x UAC10. I was running that build a couple hours ago, actually. Ever since the massive agility nerfs to the KDK, I feel like you need the stopping power of all 4x UAC10 to justify using the mech at all, unless you have some other weird build that offers more than the 2UAC10+2UAC5. For a weapon that fires in multi-shell volleys already, and it's a dakka mech which means it benefits from facetime more than any other archetype, ... it's kind of okay to split your fire by 0.5s. It just means the mech is properly a DPS mech, instead of being capable of legitimate short-exposure 80-pinpoint alphas, which is what made it overpowered when it didn't have ghost heat.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 29 October 2017 - 12:07 PM, said:

there was no such thing as being overengined when engine was directly linked to how agile a mech was

dont be an idiot.

Yes there is. The tonnage committed to certain builds due to an oversized engine is a major factor. Even with or w/o linked agility, the difference between a 375CXL and 400CXL is major tonnage-wise, but not a major difference speed/agility-wise on a 100 tonner.

If you were comparing the difference between a 300 and 325 engine on a 45 to 60 tonner, a legit argument could be made. Then again, if a normal Atlas (excludes Boar's Head) could use a STD/LFE 400 engine, noone in their right mind would spend that enormous waste of tonnage for that.

Mech building isn't just about min-maxing, it's about practicality too.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 October 2017 - 12:12 PM.

[Shifty McSwift]

Tarogato, on 29 October 2017 - 12:10 PM, said:

Not to mention that some people do still run the 4x UAC10. I was running that build a couple hours ago, actually. Ever since the massive agility nerfs to the KDK, I feel like you need the stopping power of all 4x UAC10 to justify using the mech at all, unless you have some other weird build that offers more than the 2UAC10+2UAC5. For a weapon that fires in multi-shell volleys already, and it's a dakka mech which means it benefits from facetime more than any other archetype, ... it's kind of okay to split your fire by 0.5s. It just means the mech is properly a DPS mech, instead of being capable of legitimate short-exposure 80-pinpoint alphas, which is what made it overpowered when it didn't have ghost heat.

Like many other things in the game my good friend Tarogato unfortunately they mostly just end up as potato mashers. I mean that in the nicest way possible, but like a number of weapons and mechs, they excel only at punishing mechs who refuse to move and twist or react well at all.

Edited by Shifty McSwift, 29 October 2017 - 12:15 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

There was, EVEN in those days.

there wasnt. hence why kodiaks used 400 engines. derp.

Quote

Yes there is. The tonnage committed to certain builds due to an oversized engine is a major factor.

it wasnt a factor for a 100 ton mech, specifically the kodiak, which is what were talking about.

it was able to use both a 400 engine and still have an effective loadout, so thats exactly what people did.

because the 400 engine gave it extra speed and agility, which directly affected its survivability.

you think people just stuck 400 engines on them for no reason? it was a calculated decision. because people figured out they could make their kodiak as agile as lighter mechs by jacking its engine upto a 400. there was no such thing as being overengined in the kodiak.

yes other mechs might not have benefitted from maxing thier engines as much as the kodiak, but the kodiak is what we were discussing. not other mechs.

And when agility was decoupled from engine size, why do you think the Kodiak-3 suddenly took such a huge hit? Because the fact it could use that 400 engine no longer mattered as much since it didnt significantly improve its agility anymore. It ended up being a huge nerf. Which is why the Kodiak-3 is suddenly not as good despite being able to use the same exact loadout.

Quote

If you were comparing the difference between a 300 and 325 engine on a 45 to 60 tonner, a legit argument could be made. Then again, if a normal Atlas (excludes Boar's Head) could use a STD/LFE 400 engine, noone in their right mind would spend that enormous waste of tonnage for that.

Kodiak pilots did. what was generally considered the best kodiak-3 loadout of the time used a 400 XL.

because the kodiaks loadout was entirely contained in its side torsos it was able to strip its arm armor off to make the 400 engine more economical.

I was answering a question specific to the kodiak. the whole context was the kodiak and the kodiak alone. other mechs are irrelevant in that context because they are not kodiaks.

Edited by Khobai, 29 October 2017 - 12:33 PM.