1125 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

Navid A1, on 09 February 2018 - 05:19 PM, said:

will go through those numbers.
i too like to see them played

Thank you. Now i can get head-shotted by Gauss-PPC snipers, cored in the rear by a hungry piranha, lurmed to death by hungry lurm boats, owned by Gauss/Laser Vomit -- in peace.

Before you go though, here's the forumla:

Quote

Standard DPS Formula = ((((jamRampUpTime - rampUpTime) * rof) * damage) / (jamRampUpTime + jamRampDownTime))

Quote

Redline EDPS Formula = (((((jamRampUpTime - rampUpTime) * rof) + ((1 / JammingChance) / rof)) * damage) / (jamRampUpTime + JammedTime + ((1 / JammingChance) / rof)))

https://www.reddit.c...yaynay/dtzhtsw/

Edited by The6thMessenger, 09 February 2018 - 05:24 PM.

[Khobai]

naterist, on 09 February 2018 - 02:29 PM, said:

Remove the ability for lrm boats to get non line of sight locks for lrms unless tag/narq are used.

then why would you ever use LRMs?

they cant compete with direct fire weapons.

the only reason to use LRMs is for indirect fire, if you cant indirect fire theres no reason to use them

and you cant guarantee someone on your team will always have TAG/NARC

Edited by Khobai, 09 February 2018 - 05:26 PM.

[HammerMaster]

Khobai, on 09 February 2018 - 05:23 PM, said:

then why would you ever use LRMs?

they cant compete with direct fire weapons.

the only reason to use LRMs is for indirect fire, if you cant indirect fire theres no reason to use them

and you cant guarantee someone on your team will always have TAG/NARC

Hence narc/tag your own and I can't stress enough a 100% lrm overhaul.

[naterist]

Khobai, on 09 February 2018 - 05:23 PM, said:

then why would you ever use LRMs?

they cant compete with direct fire weapons.

the only reason to use LRMs is for indirect fire, if you cant indirect fire theres no reason to use them

and you cant guarantee someone on your team will always have TAG/NARC

because giving 11 guys indirect fire with 1 spotter is not a fun experience. lrms should not be boated exclusively in teir 5 for indirect fire, and used as a supplemental in higher teirs. lrms have a spot, and its in group que when you have a team set up for it. giving new solo players the ability to piggy back off their teams locks without having to ever get forced into learning positioning and realistic cover basically ensures that new players never see a need to learn what are basically essential skills for raising your personal skill level, and leads to teir 5 being lurm-pocalypse, and this lurm-pocalypse is occuring to the only part of the playerbase that doesnt understand how to easily avoid lrms.

even in their current, indirect fire role, they are useless against anyone who knows what their doing. require INTENTIONAL, PRE-THOUGHT-OUT teamwork for them to maintain that playstyle ensures that people stop using them as a crutch, and overall skill level of new players goes up.

Edited by naterist, 09 February 2018 - 05:36 PM.

[Nightbird]

Stop turning MWO into Rob the ROBOWARRIOR... that is all

https://mwomercs.com...t-server-chance

[Khobai]

Quote

Hence narc/tag your own and I can't stress enough a 100% lrm overhaul.

pugs cant control if someone on their team is going to have narc/tag

you are literally killing lrms outside of group play

thats not how you fix a weapon system when 90% of people dont play in groups.

thats how you KILL a weapon system.

Quote

because giving 11 guys indirect fire with 1 spotter is not a fun experience. lrms should not be boated exclusively in teir 5 for indirect fire, and used as a supplemental in higher teirs. lrms have a spot, and its in group que when you have a team set up for it. giving new solo players the ability to piggy back off their teams locks without having to ever get forced into learning positioning and realistic cover basically ensures that new players never see a need to learn what are basically essential skills for raising your personal skill level, and leads to teir 5 being lurm-pocalypse, and this lurm-pocalypse is occuring to the only part of the playerbase that doesnt understand how to easily avoid lrms.

if lrms were fixed properly there would be no lurm-pocalypse. but you dont even want to fix them.

removing lrms from pugs by shutting down indirect fire, making them a group play only weapon that requires a NARC/TAG spotter, thats only ever used for trolling, and not used at the highest levels of competitive play is ridiculous.

thats not fixing lrms. its systematically removing them from the game except when your group wants a laugh at the expense of whatever pugs youre sealclubbing.

again its obvious you dont want lrms to be an actual viable weapon. you want lrms gone from pug play. and all you want is PPFLD sniping. you would rather get rid of lrms completely because their low skill ceiling offends you and you get embarrassed whenever a pug with lrms kills you with his nubtubes.

what a travesty this is turning into. there is no real balancing going on here.

Quote

even in their current, indirect fire role, they are useless against anyone who knows what their doing. require INTENTIONAL, PRE-THOUGHT-OUT teamwork for them to maintain that playstyle ensures that people stop using them as a crutch, and overall skill level of new players goes up.

so make them more useful against anyone who knows what theyre doing.

and increase the skill ceiling required to use them.

but dont kill them off. killing weapons off does not increase weapon diversity.

Edited by Khobai, 09 February 2018 - 06:18 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 09 February 2018 - 05:47 PM, said:

you cant control if someone on your team is going to have narc/tag

you are literally killing lrms outside of group play which is idiocy

Isn't that the point of indirect-fire supportive weapon is to COORDINATE with the team though?

[HammerMaster]

Khobai, on 09 February 2018 - 05:47 PM, said:

pugs cant control if someone on their team is going to have narc/tag

you are literally killing lrms outside of group play which is idiocy

thats not how you fix a weapon system when 90% of people dont play in groups.

thats how you KILL a weapon system.



if you fixed lrms properly there will be no lurm-pocalypse.

but removing lrms from pugs by shutting down indirect fire, making them a group play only weapon, thats only ever used for trolling, and not used at the highest levels of competitive play is ridiculous.

thats not fixing lrms.

again its obvious you dont want lrms to be an actual viable weapon. you want lrms gone from pug play. and all you want is PPFLD sniping. you would rather get rid of lrms completely because their low skill ceiling offends you and you get embarrassed whenever a pug with lrms kills you with his nubtubes.

what a travesty this is turning into. there is no real balancing going on here.

Ease up buddy. I agree. In TODAY'S implementation.
Hence a total overhaul. So maybe it can be in the spirit of TT implementation and ECM Jesus box can be scaled back to TT implementation also.
I also mostly use lrm and want them viable in fp and qp in all tiers. I'm advocating a rethink. Not a wipe. That's preposterous.

Edited by HammerMaster, 09 February 2018 - 06:20 PM.

[EvAbsence]

My knee-jerk reaction to these values:

'Hi. I'm really accurate. I want to buff basically everything, so that my accuracy brings me greater benefits against your inaccuracy.'

[HammerMaster]

Navid A1, on 09 February 2018 - 11:39 AM, said:

The thing you are missing here is how different builds go against what.

Here is how different mechs SHOULD operate:

Brawlers:

• useless in long range
  
• can't stand in the open
  
• heat efficient
  
• Very high alpha AND dps (burst abd sustained) up close
  
• dependent on the chassis agility
  
• accessible to all weight classes
  

mid-range laser boats:

• weak at range
  
• can't stand in the open
  
• very high alpha
  
• excellent mid-range poking
  
• good in holding firing lines
  
• average dps
  
• low heat efficiency
  
• manageable in close range
  
• accessible to all weight classes

AC centric builds:

• massive sustained dps
  
• good alpha
  
• manageable heat
  
• manageable at long range
  
• manageable if moving in the open is a must
  
• mid-range area-denial platform
  
• require face time constantly
  
• generally requires heavy and assault mechs

Long range laser builds:

• High alpha at long range
  
• High burst dps at long range
  
• long range area-denial platforms
  
• manageable in the open
  
• low heat efficiency
  
• very weak at close range
  
• require face time
  
• accessible to mediums and upwards

Gauss + PPC combinations (excluding 2G+2P)

• Pinpoint damage
  
• minimum face time
  
• very strong at static trades
  
• low dps
  
• low heat efficiency depending on the build.
  
• heavily dependent on the platform's agility and JJs (considering size and and weight of the weapons)
  
• vulnerable to critical hits
  
• weak in the open
  
• weak in close range
  
• accuracy affected by convergence against moving targets
  
• requires assault mechs for a 3 combination

Gauss vomit mechs

• Best of both worlds from mid-range laser baoting and Gauss + PPC

ROCK, PAPER, SCISSORS

Lrm conspicuously missing...

[Andi Nagasia]

Bilbo999, on 09 February 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Doubling LRM velocity will bring on a LRMpocalypse the likes of which hasn't been seen since half an Atlas' dome was the cockpit. Doesn't matter what you do with AMS damage.

if they Double LRM Velocity, LRMs will move Threw AMS range Twice as fast,
Double AMS damage this will balance this back to what we have now, but AMS will be too Strong vs other Missiles,
doubling all other(non LRM) Missile health will balance them back with double double damage AMS,

really all that would change is LRMs would get to their target faster,
and be more reliable for Damage, but would still be useless vs AMS, and may get people to bring AMS,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 09 February 2018 - 06:46 PM.

[Kuaron]

EvAbsence, on 09 February 2018 - 06:18 PM, said:

My knee-jerk reaction to these values:

'Hi. I'm really accurate. I want to buff basically everything, so that my accuracy brings me greater benefits against your inaccuracy.'

Yes, kind of this.

If we want balance, let's speak about balance. And suggest something about balance in the first place, not about buffing almost everything because evil PGI nerfed parts of it at some point.
I mean, a good part of the suggestions consist of reverting some former nerfs.
And what does it say about authors, if they still didn't get used to the PGI's changes or manage to see their reasons?

Don't get me wrong, there are good ideas contained in the suggestions, but there is no reason an overall weapon buff would improve the game...

Edited by Kuaron, 09 February 2018 - 06:50 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

I see that the isERML in the spreadsheet is still way too hot at 4.5 heat. Meanwhile, we've dropped the standard ML to 3 and the LL to 6.5?

Unless you also plan requesting an overhaul to isDHS, I think that ERML heat needs to come down to 4, tops, to get the collective result we need on mid-range (400-600 m) IS energy builds. Realistically, it could probably be even lower than that at 3.75 or so; the ERLL is +1 heat over the LL, it doesn't quite make sense for a weapon just over half as powerful to also take a 1 point hit. If that ends up being too much, the LL can always come back up to 7.

The cLPL is also way too cold for the number of cDHS you can bring.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 09 February 2018 - 06:53 PM.

[Bilbo999]

Andi Nagasia, on 09 February 2018 - 06:45 PM, said:

if they Double LRM Velocity, LRMs will move Threw AMS range Twice as fast,
Double AMS damage this will balance this back to what we have now, but AMS will be too Strong vs other Missiles,
doubling all other(non LRM) Missile health will balance them back with double double damage AMS,

really all that would change is LRMs would get to their target faster,
and be more reliable for Damage, but would still be useless vs AMS, and may get people to bring AMS,

They'll leg every light that is unfortunate enough to get targeted. Anything slower than a light won't have time to get to anything approaching cover before they melt, and I'm not even considering that more than one person on a 12 man team might take more than 2 launchers.

Edited by Bilbo999, 09 February 2018 - 07:07 PM.

[YueFei]

With regards to Gauss+PPC combinations:
Gauss current velocity is 2000 m/s, cERPPC is 1500 m/s. Assuming you take full velocity nodes, that's a +15% boost, making both of them 2300 m/s and 1725 m/s, respectively.

Against a target at 500 meters, the Gauss will hit in 217 ms, and the PPC would hit at 289 ms. It's a difference of 72 ms.

A target with 2 meter-wide hitboxes (for reference the Atlas torso hitboxes are about 2.4 meters wide), in order to guarantee that a simultaneous shot with perfect convergence were to strike two different hitboxes, would need to be moving laterally at 27.7 m/s (100 kph). Of course, a slight imprecision (say, Gauss hits dead-center of a side torso hitbox, instead of on the edge of the hitbox) and the following PPC bolt would strike the adjacent hitbox (arm or CT) if the target is moving even 50 kph.

Basically, it's OK to allow combinations of Gauss+PPC, and if counter-play to spread damage via lateral movement is not possible in actual play/testing, then differentiate the two weapons by further velocity changes, perhaps by slight buffs to Gauss velocity.

Edited by YueFei, 09 February 2018 - 07:09 PM.

[kuma8877]

Kuaron, on 09 February 2018 - 06:48 PM, said:

Yes, kind of this.

If we want balance, let's speak about balance. And suggest something about balance in the first place, not about buffing almost everything because evil PGI nerfed parts of it at some point.
I mean, a good part of the suggestions consist of reverting some former nerfs.
And what does it say about authors, if they still didn't get used to the PGI's changes or manage to see their reasons?

Don't get me wrong, there are good ideas contained in the suggestions, but there is no reason an overall weapon buff would improve the game...

Some of the intent is to have balanced fun, not strict balance. While I'm not really partial to any changes, suggested or otherwise, as I couldn't tell you a single quirk on a single one of my mechs, I thought I would point out the intended spirit of the discussion. Especially since the conversation has been going on for a bit.

As such, buffs are generally perceived as more fun than nerfs (even if minimally so).

Edited by kuma8877, 09 February 2018 - 07:13 PM.

[Troa Barton]

naterist, on 09 February 2018 - 02:29 PM, said:

Remove the ability for lrm boats to get non line of sight locks for lrms unless tag/narq are used.

It really just gets people out of that "lurm from behind a wall 700meters away from the frontline" mentality, without effecting the upper teirs. Also ends the nonstop lurmaggedon happening in teir 5.

Absolutely not, that is a defining characteristic of the weapon. That's like adding dispersion to lasers the whole point of lasers is that they are pinpoint.
The reason Lurmageddon happens in tier 5 is because it's a lock on weapon, enemies at that tier don't yet understand how to counter them, opponents are usually out of position, and it's effective at all ranges above 180m. LRMs have a very low skill floor, but I will argue that they have a very high skill ceiling which is why you don't see big boats very often in tier 1.
LRMs are better the closer you get and the better LRM players will be very careful about their positioning and what targets they engage.
Using LRMs at high tier is VERY different to using them at low tier, a high tier player in a light will jump the low tier missile boat staying out at 700m. You wont catch a missile boat at high tier doing that and living very long, you move with the team or you die.

[Troa Barton]

Andi Nagasia, on 09 February 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

hey @Navid A1

what do you think of my missile Proposal,
Double LRM Velocity, Double AMS Damage, Doubled All non LRM Missile Health?
it makes LRMs more reliable without changing the Dynamic between AMS and Missiles,

Not directed at me but I do like this however doubling the velocity and AMS DPS would not balance out it would be a nerf to LRMs.
Doubling the velocity and say a .3-4 DPS increase on AMS damage would be closer.
This would really hurt smaller tube counts however LRM 5s and 10s would be DOA.
This would also hurt clan LRMs more since they come in one at a time.

[Troa Barton]

Navid A1, on 09 February 2018 - 04:42 PM, said:

What is your suggestion?

Not directed at me but I'll throw some feedback into RACs. DPS weapons are cold, RACs are hot DPS weapons with spread.
That's why RACs aren't viable, they are too hot for their intended role and the spread makes them less useful than UACs or standard ACs when it comes down to killing a target.

[naterist]

dropped with what im assuming was a teir 5 team tonight. they saw the enemy had a large amount of lrms coming from behind walls they couldnt see through. their bold solution to the problem was to stay away and not do anything, because one guy getting targeted would mean his instant death.

yes, i can see giving people the ability to click a button quickly from outside of LOS and then see massive rewards for it is very conducive to the overall populations enjoyment of this game.





and for those saying discontinueing lrm locks from teammates will disrupt lrm usage at high teir, then clearly you are not using them at high teir. high teir lrm users bring their own tag and artemis so they can get their own locks, and fully use the buffs gained from the artemis system.

Edited by naterist, 09 February 2018 - 08:17 PM.