1125 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 06:36 PM, said:

Then my question to you is... in their present state, are you usually already firing LPPCs at their maximum possible firing rate?

If the answer to that is "yes, almost always" then a CD buff will help LPPCs. If your answer is "only half of the time or less" then a damage buff might be more appropriate.

Yes, i am actually. At least with my Locust PB build.

[Khobai]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 06:51 PM, said:

Removing the deadzone doesn't help the LPPC in its intended niche.

if its intended niche is "not being fun", youre absolutely right.

if your goal is to make it a fun weapon, the deadzone needs to be removed.

not just on the LPPC. but on all PPCs. and all other weapons in the game. deadzones arnt a fun game mechanic.

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 06:51 PM, said:

It just turns it into another Snub.

it doesnt. since the snub should not only be more damaging than a regular PPC but should also be the most heat efficient of all PPCs due to having the shortest range.

Edited by Khobai, 23 February 2018 - 07:09 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 06:51 PM, said:

Removing the deadzone doesn't help the LPPC in its intended niche. It just turns it into another Snub. There's a reason it has more range than the Snub, and that's because it isn't supposed to be used for brawling. If you want to brawl, go mount a Snub, SRMs, or small/medium lasers instead.

We have been over this.

One of the problems with PPCs is that, to run them effectively, you have to dedicate everything to them because of the heat, and that includes with your changes. If you bring other weapons with them, which you have to do to cover the dead-zone, you are running them ineffectively barring a few very specific use-cases. If you remove the dead-zone, then you can run them competitively with the [c]ERPPCs because you can dedicate your build to them without having to worry about that dead zone making it easy for something like a Piranha or Assassin to neutralize you.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 23 February 2018 - 07:10 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 23 February 2018 - 06:40 PM, said:

then why would anyone ever use pulse lasers? if LPPCs have better dps, better range, and are PPFLD instead of beam duration?

LPPCs should definitely not be energy dps weapons because thats what pulse lasers are for.

The role of LPPCs should be a PPFLD alternative to ISERMLs/ISLLs.

Because LPLs have better damage and damage/heat even though shorter range, has no cockpit-shake, deals more damage/hardpoint, can be alpha-ed for more damage. Here we are again, your narrow-mindedness is showing.

There's more to Pulse-Lasers than just DPS, they also have range-brackets, they are also for brawling and close-range because they deal better damage/heat, add in the LPPC's minimum range, the low damage/heat, and high heat/sec it's less sustainable at the Pulse-Laser's range-bracket.

Quite simply, even if LPPCs have high DPS, i'd still go for LPLs and MPLs if i could engage them at a closer range, cause not only it runs cooler with respect to damage, I could dump a lot of damage all at once.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 23 February 2018 - 07:25 PM.

[Davegt27]

I think PGI applied the heat penalties to the wrong side
my IS Mechs are overheating like crazy now

[Khobai]

Quote

Because LPLs have better damage and damage/heat even though shorter range, has no cockpit-shake, deals more damage/hardpoint, can be alpha-ed for more damage. Here we are again, your narrow-mindedness is showing.

There's more to Pulse-Lasers than just DPS, they also have range-brackets, they are also for brawling and close-range because they deal better damage/heat, add in the LPPC's minimum range, the low damage/heat, and high heat/sec it's less sustainable at the Pulse-Laser's range-bracket.

Quite simply, even if LPPCs have high DPS, i'd still go for LPLs and MPLs if i could engage them at a closer range, cause not only it runs cooler with respect to damage, I could dump a lot of damage all at once

LPPCs shouldnt have high DPS though. Because PPCs arnt DPS weapons. Again thats what pulse lasers are for.

The SNPPC should be the closest PPC type weapon to a DPS weapon, and even that shouldnt be a real DPS weapon either.

I agree LPPC should be 6 damage. Rather than reducing its cooldown to a ridiculous 2.5.

But the zero damage deadzone also needs to be removed. Its not a fun mechanic.

Quote

I think PGI applied the heat penalties to the wrong side
my IS Mechs are overheating like crazy now

Yes which is why all ISDHS need to be turned into true double heatsinks.

That would allow IS to be able to use PPC type weapons better.

Edited by Khobai, 23 February 2018 - 07:40 PM.

[PocketYoda]

Squarebasher, on 23 February 2018 - 06:56 AM, said:

I would like to repeat what Kanajashi said in his video about this, which goes for both IS and clan, and that is ERLs should have there maximum ranges reduced. It is far to easy for laser boats to just sweep across mechs with no real need for accuracy, bring back the skill and make ERPPCs and AC2s etc the weapons to take for long range.

Totally agree on this their range has become ridiculous and has turned mechwarrior into a poke fest (especially clan side), at least in tier 3 and below, PPC and some Ballistics also need to be toned back range wise this all would help increase TTK a lot.. and promote less standing around doing nothing but sniping the whole game..

Some skills and quirks allow mechs to hit stupid insane distances that should not be allowed...

Also lower LRMS and ATM ranges some what as well..

Edited by Samial, 23 February 2018 - 07:49 PM.

[R Valentine]

Bud Crue, on 23 February 2018 - 01:32 PM, said:

Sure they can. Timber S ring any bells? But they have other options too on a variant level. Example: if the Deathstrike is OP with gause vomit as the build, give it a cooldown quirk that screws with the timing of those two weapon types or increased heat production or whatever. But there is no reason to hit all MKiis because 1 variant with 1 particular build is OP. They've done this sort of thing before. Moreover they could also do positive quirks to entice alternative builds. All depends on the variant and what is "OP" atnthe moment on that variant.

They didn't nerf the Timberwolf. They tried, but it still maintains those negative quirks today and runs just fine. What they did was outdated it with Kodiak, Hellbringer, Ebon Jaguar, and other clan mechs. And when was the last time PGI added a negative quirk? The Timberwolf? Hardpoints are always unnerfable. The only reason Kodiaks aren't around as much is because they outdated that mech as well, with the good ol' Mad Cat Mk.II B. Things only ever get worse with hardpoint inflation. They never get better, especially with PGI's unwillingness to change hardpoints. Guess what's coming next. The Blood Asp, where the prime variant has the same hardpoint count as Deathstrike. Ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh boy! The next OP clan light will have 16 machine guns.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 23 February 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

LPPCs shouldnt have high DPS though. Because PPCs arnt DPS weapons.

The SNPPC should be the closest PPC type weapon to a DPS weapon, and even that shouldn't be a real DPS weapon.

Because you say so? No, **** that.

With LPPCs, DPS is the most sensible option without making it a lot more meta, and it serves lights which are the target mechs in the first place as they have a faster playstyle.

SNPPC while should also be a DPS weapon, the two can fill their own range-brackets, it just needs better heat so it's not heavily constrained within it's range and versus other weapons in the range bracket.

To be fair, 5 damage and 2.5s CD would just give it 2.00 DPS, for scale the AC2 has 2.78, the LGR has 2.58 DPS. So i wouldn't call it "High DPS", it's just a bit more competitive.

[FupDup]

I already told you a while ago that 2.5s cooldown on the LPPC would be too cray cray.

3.5 would be a nice starting point to differentiate them from the PPC/HPPC in ways other than fitting requirements.

[R Valentine]

Why should any PPCs have a minimum range at this point? Every PPC with a minimum range sees virtually no use. Why? Because a Parana can crawl up your rear and laugh at your inability to damage him while his 12 MGs rip you to shreds. The IS ERPPC is the least heat efficient weapon in the game and probably the rarest. I see LPPCs more than those, and even those are still obnoxiously rare. They don't do nearly enough damage per ton and again, garbage heat. Even snubs aren't great. They time well with an AC/20, but that's about it.

[Mcgral18]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 06:51 PM, said:

Removing the deadzone doesn't help the LPPC in its intended niche. It just turns it into another Snub. There's a reason it has more range than the Snub, and that's because it isn't supposed to be used for brawling. If you want to brawl, go mount a Snub, SRMs, or small/medium lasers instead.

They could revert to the progressive min range

Where no isPPC will be instantly nothing at 90, but progressively worsen
Not a very good Snub if it does 3 damage at 50M (or whatever rate they want)

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 23 February 2018 - 07:53 PM, said:

I already told you a while ago that 2.5s cooldown on the LPPC would be too cray cray.

Yeonne Greene, on 23 February 2018 - 07:09 PM, said:

One of the problems with PPCs is that, to run them effectively, you have to dedicate everything to them because of the heat, and that includes with your changes. If you bring other weapons with them, which you have to do to cover the dead-zone, you are running them ineffectively barring a few very specific use-cases. If you remove the dead-zone, then you can run them competitively with the [c]ERPPCs because you can dedicate your build to them without having to worry about that dead zone making it easy for something like a Piranha or Assassin to neutralize you.

Considering that lights using them would dedicate for the LPPCs, i don't think so. Of course heavier mechs would have some sort of AC alternative, perhaps. Then again with larger and more potent choices, it's still probably not that good.

FupDup, on 23 February 2018 - 07:53 PM, said:

3.5 would be a nice starting point to differentiate them from the PPC/HPPC in ways other than fitting requirements.

Consensus is at 3s, that's probably what will go through. It's okay i guess, but maybe a good compromise.

[Y E O N N E]

The6thMessenger, on 23 February 2018 - 08:00 PM, said:

Considering that lights using them would dedicate for the LPPCs, i don't think so.

I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about, here...

Quote

Of course heavier mechs would have some sort of AC alternative, perhaps. Then again with larger and more potent choices, it's still probably not that good.

Seen any PPC+AC 'Mechs being properly effective lately?

[The6thMessenger]

Yeonne Greene, on 23 February 2018 - 08:07 PM, said:

I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about, here...

LPPC + Lights. That was for Fup Dup, 2.5s cooldown for LPPCs aint that cray cray, they can only mass a few LPPCs versus a lot more lasers.

Yeonne Greene, on 23 February 2018 - 08:07 PM, said:

Seen any PPC+AC 'Mechs being properly effective lately?

Honestly not much. What point are you trying to hammer there? Cause if we did the LPPC cooldown buff thing, would people suddenly do the LPPC+AC? The point was is that PPC+AC would still be better choice than LPPC+AC.

[Tarogato]

FupDup, on 23 February 2018 - 06:55 PM, said:

By that logic Gauss, ERLL, ERPPCs, AC/2s, etc. should also have a min range deadzone.

Maybe if you had different versions of those guns, like an AC2 with higher damage and velocity, at the expense of a minimum range limitation, or same said of gauss.

Think about it like this,

Std laser family ----> SL = ML = LL = ERLL
They all have the same characteristics, just suited to different ranges.

Std autocannon family ----> AC2 = AC5 = AC10 = AC20
Same weapons, but again adjusted to fit different ranges.

MRM family ----> MRM10 = MRM20 = MRM30 = MRM40
Same weapons, adjusted to be at different tonnage investments.

Std PPC family ----> LPPC = PPC = HPPC
Same weapons, adjusted to be at different tonnage investments.

SNPPC =/= PPC
removes minimum range, loses long range, maybe costs a little bit of heat.

ERPPC =/= PPC
removes minimum range, costs a lot of extra heat, gains longer range.



If you want to remove the minimum range from LPPC, you should also remove it from the PPC and HPPC as well to be consistent because they are all supposed to be the same type of weapon. And if you do that and remove the minimum range, than you lose a lot of the distinction that comes with the SNPPC and ERPPC. Why ever mount SNPPC again if LPPC can do the same thing with more range? So I think the minrange should stay.

Yeonne Greene, on 23 February 2018 - 07:09 PM, said:

One of the problems with PPCs is that, to run them effectively, you have to dedicate everything to them because of the heat, and that includes with your changes. If you bring other weapons with them, which you have to do to cover the dead-zone, you are running them ineffectively barring a few very specific use-cases. If you remove the dead-zone, then you can run them competitively with the [c]ERPPCs because you can dedicate your build to them without having to worry about that dead zone making it easy for something like a Piranha or Assassin to neutralize you.

And I think that's fine. If you want to bring relatively low heat pinpoint alpha weapons, then you should suffer a dead zone that makes you vulnerable to PNA / ASN. If you don't want to be vulnerable to that, then go pay the extra heat for ERPPC, or the range for SNPPC, or get rid of your PPFLD and take lasers instead.

Khobai, on 23 February 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

LPPCs shouldnt have high DPS though. Because PPCs arnt DPS weapons. Again thats what pulse lasers are for.

The SNPPC should be the closest PPC type weapon to a DPS weapon, and even that shouldnt be a real DPS weapon either.

This I agree with. I just don't think PPCs should be fast-firing weapons. I just don't see them as the type of weapon that should be sitting out in the open shooting over and over again like a pulse laser. I think their role is to deal more concentrated damage than a laser, but less often.

The6thMessenger, on 23 February 2018 - 07:50 PM, said:

With LPPCs, DPS is the most sensible option without making it a lot more meta, and it serves lights which are the target mechs in the first place as they have a faster playstyle.

And to me it makes more sense to give LPPC a damage boost, because a cooldown boost means that these mechs (lights mostly) need to expose more, sit out in the open, and deal damage, and I think that goes against the role for PPCs. If you want constant exposure DPS, go mount LL or LPL instead. Let the PPC (and LPPC) be the sneaky short-exposure PPFLD weapon, which is a different playstyle altogether. (which is another point - making LPPCs into a DPS weapon is shifting them into the same playstyle as LPL, when really shouldn't we be moving toward differentiating the playstyles, making them more unique?)


And even if *you* personally are firing your LPPCs off cooldown every single time, that doesn't mean that the majority of people are. In fact, with a cooldown boost, I doubt the vast majority of players would see any improvement at all, because they just aren't firing fast enough to make use of it to begin with.

Khobai, on 23 February 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

Yes which is why all ISDHS need to be turned into true double heatsinks. That would allow IS to be able to use PPC type weapons better.

That doesn't make PPCs better versus lasers though. It just makes IS as a whole overpowered. =P

[Khobai]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 08:17 PM, said:

If you want to remove the minimum range from LPPC, you should also remove it from the PPC and HPPC as well to be consistent

yes. exactly. remove deadzones from every weapon in the game. bad mechanic is bad.

not saying they cant or shouldnt have damage dropoff instead. but they shouldnt do 0 damage.

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 08:17 PM, said:

That doesn't make PPCs better versus lasers though. It just makes IS as a whole overpowered. =P

I doubt true dubs would make IS overpowered.

IS can only run 2/3rds-3/4ths as many DHS as clans due to crit slot limitations. So making their DHS 1/3rd stronger helps balance things out.

clan laser vomit mechs usually have around 25 DHS which is 41 dissipation

an equivalent IS laser vomit mech with 19-20 true dub DHS would still only have 38-40 dissipation

Edited by Khobai, 23 February 2018 - 08:29 PM.

[FupDup]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 08:17 PM, said:

-
If you want to remove the minimum range from LPPC, you should also remove it from the PPC and HPPC as well to be consistent because they are all supposed to be the same type of weapon. And if you do that and remove the minimum range, than you lose a lot of the distinction that come with the SNPPC and ERPPC. Why ever mount SNPPC again if LPPC can do the same thing with more range? So I think the minrange should stay.

It's pretty obviously implied that this would definitely apply to the PPC and HPPC as well.

As for "why ever use the Snubber?" I wouldn't want to use it even in the current game. It needs more efficient damage per heat than other PPCs since it has the shortest range, and potentially a little bit faster cooldown but that's optional.

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 08:17 PM, said:

And to me it makes more sense to give LPPC a damage boost, because a cooldown boost means that these mechs (lights mostly) need to expose more, sit out in the open, and deal damage, and I think that goes against the role for PPCs. If you want constant exposure DPS, go mount LL or LPL instead. Let the PPC (and LPPC) be the sneaky short-exposure PPFLD weapon, which is a different playstyle altogether. (which is another point - making LPPCs into a DPS weapon is shifting them into the same playstyle as LPL, when really shouldn't we be moving toward differentiating the playstyles, making them more unique?)

I think what you're missing is that it's not just about PPCs vs. lasers. It's also about all of the PPCs against each other. Specifically, the LPPC + PPC + HPPC all do the exact same thing with just different fitting requirements. This means that inevitably one combination will become the most optimal, i.e. using 2 PPC instead of 1 LPPC + 1 HPPC is an overall downgrade.

The idea is to try to find little sub-roles for the three regular PPC types. It doesn't have to be faster cooldown, but there should be SOME kind of tangible difference between those three guns other than picking which combination of tonnage and damage per gun is mathematically superior in most scenarios.

[The6thMessenger]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 08:17 PM, said:

And to me it makes more sense to give LPPC a damage boost, because a cooldown boost means that these mechs (lights mostly) need to expose more, sit out in the open, and deal damage, and I think that goes against the role for PPCs. If you want constant exposure DPS, go mount LL or LPL instead.

Exactly that, they could be exposed more, because they generally are better at engaging and disengaging. With LPPCs being able to dump damage at an even longer range than LLs and LPLs, they ALREADY have better exposure time in comparison and so double-downing on that route isn't want i want.

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 08:17 PM, said:

Let the PPC (and LPPC) be the sneaky short-exposure PPFLD weapon, which is a different playstyle altogether. (which is another point - making LPPCs into a DPS weapon is shifting them into the same playstyle as LPL, when really shouldn't we be moving toward differentiating the playstyles, making them more unique?)

Again, range-bracket. LPPCs would still have heat that holds it back, with range that gives it a range to excel on.

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 08:17 PM, said:

And even if *you* personally are firing your LPPCs off cooldown every single time, that doesn't mean that the majority of people are. In fact, with a cooldown boost, I doubt the vast majority of players would see any improvement at all, because they just aren't firing fast enough to make use of it to begin with.

Yeah *you* doubt. 4s vs 2.5s of cooldown, that's a big difference.

To be fair though, they might not see much difference cause they didn't use it in the first place to see those difference. So that's probably right in THAT scenario.

FupDup, on 23 February 2018 - 08:27 PM, said:

It's pretty obviously implied that this would definitely apply to the PPC and HPPC as well.

As for "why ever use the Snubber?" I wouldn't want to use it even in the current game. It needs more efficient damage per heat than other PPCs since it has the shortest range, and potentially a little bit faster cooldown but that's optional.

I think what you're missing is that it's not just about PPCs vs. lasers. It's also about all of the PPCs against each other. Specifically, the LPPC + PPC + HPPC all do the exact same thing with just different fitting requirements. This means that inevitably one combination will become the most optimal, i.e. using 2 PPC instead of 1 LPPC + 1 HPPC is an overall downgrade.

The idea is to try to find little sub-roles for the three regular PPC types. It doesn't have to be faster cooldown, but there should be SOME kind of tangible difference between those three guns other than picking which combination of tonnage and damage per gun is mathematically superior in most scenarios.

^This, exactly this. LPPC needs to be it's own thing, and be good at it for it to be an actual choice versus other PPCs.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 23 February 2018 - 08:36 PM.

[BreakinStuff]

I dunno if this has been addressed, but the only PPC that can achieve the 45-damage 3-weapon combo is the heavy PPC.

All of the in-game values on my client for the ERPPC and the CERPPC are listed at 10 for damage. currently according to the client, the CERPPC only holds a weight/crit slot advantage.

Is this in error?

And the HPPC holds the old Vanilla PPC ranges and minimum ranges.

And why is fighting at range cancerous? Even the Polar Highlands have approaches brawlers can use to get into their weapon ranges without popping over the hills and skylining themselves. Even in my King Crab with the Dual AC/20s I can still get into range and get kills on people because there's more cover available in the maps now than there were three years ago when I got bored and wandered off.

The only possible argument I could see to that (all of the maps now have some form of cover to advance behind) is from people who want to be able to just run in a straight line, ignore the terrain and enemy fire and magically achieve brawl.