62 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

I don't think anyone is asking the game to be exactly like how they are in real life. But again, your fictional universe should be able to correlate a little bit to real life.

And since everything is so arbitrary anyways, why not tweak the mechanics to better fit our expectations from other sources such as real life (again, just as an INSPIRATION), movies, TV, and other video games.

Asym, on 24 April 2018 - 11:52 AM, said:

Ok, ok, ok,,,,,,..geeze.

Where to start:

1) are you a USA MOS 19 or OSI 12? If not, stop Googling, please. It causes those of us who are 19/12's shivers like finger nails being dragged on a chalkboard. Oh God, stop.....
2) Ah,........ Gauss, Coil, Rail guns are accelerated KE weapons... The logic being that KE rounds are safer to store cause they don't go "boom" when you get hit and hit you will be in combat... Extreme acceleration.... Even if you could place an explosive charge in a G/C/R projectile, it wouldn't likely work because of the extreme inertia and acceleration causes anything but solids to do stupid stuff......or not work at all; if electrical.....Liquids do not compress........explosives are mostly.........and contain...... Then, let's talk about temperatures at WARP 9 speeds. Let's use warp instead of real words; it's easier... Extreme temps melt......just about everything....etc, etc, etc,....
3) I'm not sure what you were trying to say with the "all ballistic based on weapon are kinetics" comment? HEAT/HEP-HESH rounds are truly ballistic ammunition with chemical energy warheads.... (utilizing different destructive principles no less)
4) Rail and coil guns are the most similar to Gauss technologies...

OK, I'm tired now........ Sigh.

Yea yea yea, same with the previous guy, get off your high horse and stop trying to pick apart semantics. Nothing I said differs what you said. I also said that ammunition CAN have chemical warheads, but its NOT IN THE GAME (thus, NOT being discussed ATM). By all mean, go convince PGI to put different ammo types that can change characteristics of weapons, but until that happens...

Like a nerd "o Spark didn't say earthlings are so and so, Spok actually said so and so and something slightly different"

Give me a break.

(Also, I am aware that gauss is most similar to rail gun, but WTF does that have to do with what I am propose changing? In this context, I was merely pointing out the difference in approach between showering someone with 10,000 rounds of smaller caliber weapons vs 1 giant specifically designed armor penetrating rounds.

One is designed to strip
The other is designed to pierce

If you want to nerd out about the correct military semantics, that's your business. But, hey dood, super lame.)

Edited by razenWing, 25 April 2018 - 02:58 AM.

[Shadowomega1]

All weapons in BT have the chance of through armor criticals however both AC and LRM/SRM have special munitions that give a much higher chance of through armor crits. However, due to the rng nature this rule was never brought into MWO. If someone has a TRO with this info it would be much appreciated if you can post the rules for that including those for the Gauss rifle.

[Asym]

Reality and games, I agree, do not work all that well together... Not hit, no harm and no foul meant: have fun and we'll keep wondering when the game decides to change again....confounding, confusing and causing conflicts of every opinion.

[mistlynx4life]

Quote

...and it's not just a PiR going around stripping back armor, it's about how it completely outclassed other light mechs like Myst Lynx...

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

1v1 me bro.

You bring your Piranha and I'll bring my MIST LYNX and we'll see what's what.

[razenWing]

mistlynx4life, on 25 April 2018 - 08:27 PM, said:

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

1v1 me bro.

You bring your Piranha and I'll bring my MIST LYNX and we'll see what's what.

Doesn't prove anything. Proton can probably beat me in a stock urbie. But that doesn't take away from the fact that between EQUAL skill opponents, PIR completely outclass other lights.

There's honestly a fair way to do this, and PGI can do this easily. Just program 2 bots and have them go at it with equal parameters. I guarantee you that PIR will win 9/10 times.

But if you want to duel (I don't have a PiR), add me, I'm always down for a good duel.

[kuma8877]

razenWing, on 26 April 2018 - 04:42 AM, said:

Doesn't prove anything. Proton can probably beat me in a stock urbie. But that doesn't take away from the fact that between EQUAL skill opponents, PIR completely outclass other lights.

There's honestly a fair way to do this, and PGI can do this easily. Just program 2 bots and have them go at it with equal parameters. I guarantee you that PIR will win 9/10 times.

But if you want to duel (I don't have a PiR), add me, I'm always down for a good duel.

I don't really think Escort level AI is gonna show you the results you want. You'd have to have separate engagement parameters as the loadouts would be by default different and would require engagement/defense criteria to match. Not to mention accounting for jumpjets and other equipment. Setting up a USEFUL AI scenario is a lot more work than just, give them the same parameters and go at it, especially if they have to be played different to be successful in their own way. More variables need to be accounted for.

[razenWing]

kuma8877, on 26 April 2018 - 04:52 AM, said:

I don't really think Escort level AI is gonna show you the results you want. You'd have to have separate engagement parameters as the loadouts would be by default different and would require engagement/defense criteria to match. Not to mention accounting for jumpjets and other equipment. Setting up a USEFUL AI scenario is a lot more work than just, give them the same parameters and go at it, especially if they have to be played different to be successful in their own way. More variables need to be accounted for.

There's already a website with mock battle simulator (I don't know the site atm, as I am at work) where you can simulate battles between mechs with customized loadouts.

[Koniving]

razenWing, on 24 April 2018 - 03:38 AM, said:

Most people would pick B right? Cause, in reality, that's how it works. That's honestly what a Gauss Rifle round should do. It should be the one that's penetrating armors and shredding the internal components.

The Gauss Rifle was super effectively at delivering crits.
Each crit did 15 damage, it could net up to 3 crits like any other weapon per bullet. This meant that in addition to the 15 damage, it also could do up to 3 lots of 15 crit damage, or 45 crit damage instantly destroying almost ANY equipment instantly upon a successful roll. This also translated to 15 base + (15% of 15 OR 45 for min and max crits) 17.25 structure damage with 1 successful crit up to 21.75 damage with 3 successful crits.

So PGI nerfed the living **** out of it.

As such, the MG is actually terrible at critting on the per bullet level, but the spam nets dozens upon dozens of little 1x multipliers for something like 52% chances. and 3x multipliers at something like 6% chances, to net between 0.10 CRIT damage and 0.30 CRIT damage, which translates to .10 base + (15% of .10 OR .3) = 0.115 to 0.145 structure damage per bullet that nets between 1 and 3 crits at 10 bullets per second).

So, the answer in this case is A.

This said BT summarizes that it takes roughly a hundred mech MG bullets to get through 2 points of armor and a couple of seconds of fire. Which is pretty much what MWO does.

[Koniving]

In both BT and MWO, the Gauss Rifle should do what the lore versions do... and they do in BT with through armor crits.

Mech armor has a Barrier Armor Rating of 10. Anything that amounts to over 10 damage from a single weapon has a chance of doing up to 3 crits THROUGH THE ARMOR.

The lore version of the Gauss Rifle punches straight through mechs. Entrance hole, exit hole. In one case a single shot hit two mechs. As such, the Gauss should also have the ability to punch through the armor and deal some internal damage; it'd be nice to see a split of the 15 damage between damage done to armor and to the insides. Even at bare minimum MWO mechanics, 15 damage to the armor + a single through armor crit, would also do 2.25 damage to structure. If we had the triple crit still available (PGI locked it so that Gauss can only get ONE crit), we'd be able to net 6.75 damage to structure on the luckiest shot...at a 3% chance to net the triple crit.

[kuma8877]

razenWing, on 26 April 2018 - 05:05 AM, said:

There's already a website with mock battle simulator (I don't know the site atm, as I am at work) where you can simulate battles between mechs with customized loadouts.

When you get a chance, I'd like see what that entails. If the arena is MWO then that simulator needs to account for the same kinds of variables and possibilities to be useful for here. It has to be more than stat smashing because each chassis needs to be piloted ever so slightly different to maximize combat effectiveness, especially amongst lights in MWO.

[Asym]

Koniving, on 26 April 2018 - 05:12 AM, said:

In both BT and MWO, the Gauss Rifle should do what the lore versions do... and they do in BT with through armor crits.

Mech armor has a Barrier Armor Rating of 10. Anything that amounts to over 10 damage from a single weapon has a chance of doing up to 3 crits THROUGH THE ARMOR.

The lore version of the Gauss Rifle punches straight through mechs. Entrance hole, exit hole. In one case a single shot hit two mechs. As such, the Gauss should also have the ability to punch through the armor and deal some internal damage; it'd be nice to see a split of the 15 damage between damage done to armor and to the insides. Even at bare minimum MWO mechanics, 15 damage to the armor + a single through armor crit, would also do 2.25 damage to structure. If we had the triple crit still available (PGI locked it so that Gauss can only get ONE crit), we'd be able to net 6.75 damage to structure on the luckiest shot...at a 3% chance to net the triple crit.

Bingo, we have a winner.... If we interject reality, the Gauss concept is outright fatal (as it is in real life (Rails, Coils, etc...)). Can't have that in the game or everyone that could carry one would and the NTG with both: well, that would be so OP at range..... no wonder they nerf'd everything: can't have reality.

ERPPC's as well: because the energy released at impact would be incapacitating to electrical systems...even if just for a few seconds till back-ups rebooted the stabilization and control processors...

We have the same arguments in WoW's where a 16 inch HE shell doesn't outright destroy a destroyer within eyesight.... Yeah, like a 2800 pound projectile going say 1200 FPS hits a 1 inch thick piece of steel and explodes with twice the force of a modern JDAM and the destroyer limps away to fight another day... YEP, that makes sense.... Can you imagine the blast effect and the crew?

Let's just have what ever fun there is and call it a day.

[Metus regem]

razenWing, on 26 April 2018 - 05:05 AM, said:

There's already a website with mock battle simulator (I don't know the site atm, as I am at work) where you can simulate battles between mechs with customized loadouts.

http://www.4eye-labs...mwo-simulator/#

There you go, it takes builds from Smurfy's.

[Koniving]

Yay! A winner..

Asym, on 26 April 2018 - 07:04 AM, said:

ERPPC's as well: because the energy released at impact would be incapacitating to electrical systems...even if just for a few seconds till back-ups rebooted the stabilization and control processors...

BT has a "scientific counter" for the PPC claim, though.

TechManual, under Pages 31 and 33.




So not much for system shutdowns. This said mech tasers kinda work "through" this issue.

(TechManual, in turn, is a derivative explanation from BattleTechnology which also explains why PPCs don't affect systems. BattleTechnology also went a step farther to explain why we don't receive heat from laser damage as lasers burn our armor, or heat from flamers [before flamers had the option of HEAT OR DAMAGE] which is basically "the armor is good at diffusing heat from external sources." Sadly this falls apart when you can gain 2 heat from standing in a hex with a fire started by a stray ER PPC.)
Electrical interference typically comes out of your own equipment.

But since we know PGI won't take suggestions... we should just have fun, debate about it and move on.

Spoiler

Or when they do take suggestions, they put it on the wrong offending system. (Gauss Charge up? Happened several months after I was bringing suggestions about PPC charge up and splitting AC's front loaded damage to something more damage over time, using PGI's own pre-vis video for Mechwarrior 5 [the one before MWO] in which the Warhammer had a charging mechanic on the PPCs and the Autocannon fired continuous shells...]. Both things as possible ways to eliminate the far deadlier AC + PPC combinations as the Gauss + PPC combinations were more outliers that were easily defeated and carried risk. Not long after Gauss charge-up, we got burst fire Clan ACs... not quite what was asked for and we got them for the wrong reasons).

(Last edit; readability.)

Edited by Koniving, 26 April 2018 - 07:30 AM.

[Metus regem]

Asym, on 26 April 2018 - 07:04 AM, said:

Bingo, we have a winner.... If we interject reality, the Gauss concept is outright fatal (as it is in real life (Rails, Coils, etc...)). Can't have that in the game or everyone that could carry one would and the NTG with both: well, that would be so OP at range..... no wonder they nerf'd everything: can't have reality.

ERPPC's as well: because the energy released at impact would be incapacitating to electrical systems...even if just for a few seconds till back-ups rebooted the stabilization and control processors...

We have the same arguments in WoW's where a 16 inch HE shell doesn't outright destroy a destroyer within eyesight.... Yeah, like a 2800 pound projectile going say 1200 FPS hits a 1 inch thick piece of steel and explodes with twice the force of a modern JDAM and the destroyer limps away to fight another day... YEP, that makes sense.... Can you imagine the blast effect and the crew?

Let's just have what ever fun there is and call it a day.

Doesn't get much better in WoWP (I've been having a ton of fun there)... I've got my P-38J with a 37mm cannon upgrade on top of the 4x50's and some how I don't just annihilate a BF-109E in one hit.... P-47's sure, they were flying tanks but a 109?

[Asym]

Koniving, on 26 April 2018 - 07:21 AM, said:

Yay! A winner..


BT has a "scientific counter" for the PPC claim, though.

TechManual, under Pages 31 and 33.




So not much for system shutdowns. This said mech tasers kinda work "through" this issue.

(TechManual, in turn, is a derivative explanation from BattleTechnology which also explains why PPCs don't affect systems. BattleTechnology also went a step farther to explain why we don't receive heat from laser damage as lasers burn our armor, or heat from flamers [before flamers had the option of HEAT OR DAMAGE] which is basically "the armor is good at diffusing heat from external sources." Sadly this falls apart when you can gain 2 heat from standing in a hex with a fire started by a stray ER PPC.)
Electrical interference typically comes out of your own equipment.

But since we know PGI won't take suggestions... we should just have fun, debate about it and move on.

Spoiler

Or when they do take suggestions, they put it on the wrong offending system. (Gauss Charge up? Happened several months after I was bringing suggestions about PPC charge up and splitting AC's front loaded damage to something more damage over time, using PGI's own pre-vis video for Mechwarrior 5 [the one before MWO] in which the Warhammer had a charging mechanic on the PPCs and the Autocannon fired continuous shells...]. Both things as possible ways to eliminate the far deadlier AC + PPC combinations as the Gauss + PPC combinations were more outliers that were easily defeated and carried risk. Not long after Gauss charge-up, we got burst fire Clan ACs... not quite what was asked for and we got them for the wrong reasons).

(Last edit; readability.)

Great reply but, in reality, even with static wicks and ground paths, several (more than one) PPC hits would fry those and the resulting surges would incapacitate the mech; especially, if the paths are damages from "other weapons"... For damaged mechs, PPC's would be fatal electrical kills... take the NTG as an example: the Gauss rifle punches a hole through a torso and the immediate ERPPC's exploit that un-protected entry point...tripping the electrical systems off line, if only to automatically reset the circuit breakers if the systems as EMP protected...

I know: it's a game.....

[razenWing]

I always thought PPC should short fry the system a little bit. Imagine if it does the following...

CT Hit: Reduce Speed 20%
Head Hit: Scramble HUD for 5 seconds
Hit in region with weapon: Disable weapon for 5 seconds
Leg Hit: No Effect (can't think of major electrical components that would be in the leg)

Imagine... shock troopers...

Nuff said.

[JP Josh]

just be happy i cant make my mg death a pult.

[Metus regem]

razenWing, on 26 April 2018 - 10:36 AM, said:

I always thought PPC should short fry the system a little bit. Imagine if it does the following...

CT Hit: Reduce Speed 20%
Head Hit: Scramble HUD for 5 seconds
Hit in region with weapon: Disable weapon for 5 seconds
Leg Hit: No Effect (can't think of major electrical components that would be in the leg)

Imagine... shock troopers...

Nuff said.

I would think that hitting the leg could cause the myomers to act uncontrollably for a short bit....

[razenWing]

Metus regem, on 26 April 2018 - 01:57 PM, said:

I would think that hitting the leg could cause the myomers to act uncontrollably for a short bit....

I mean, disable JJ if you have it. Otherwise, too OP if you create a weapon that makes someone wander around aimlessly for 5 seconds. (would be hilarious though, DANCE ATLAS, DANCE!)

[Metus regem]

razenWing, on 27 April 2018 - 07:03 AM, said:

I mean, disable JJ if you have it. Otherwise, too OP if you create a weapon that makes someone wander around aimlessly for 5 seconds. (would be hilarious though, DANCE ATLAS, DANCE!)

Less dancing, more increased chance to fall over due to the myomers contracting and relaxing in an uncontrolled way.