23 replies to this topic

[Agent1190]

I think the PTS needs to test ALL weapon stats, not just cool down, heat and damage. They just chose a few stats, but to balance the weapons, you have to take everything in together and balance them against their counterparts.

Comparing the CERML to the IS ERML:
Cooldown: IS = CLAN (both at 4)
Heat: IS (4.5) vs. CLAN (5.7)
Damage: IS (5) vs CLAN (5.25)
Range: IS (360/720) vs CLAN (400/800)
Duration: IS (.9s) vs CLAN (1.25s)

You have to hold the beam on target for 38% longer for 5% more damage. You endure 30% more heat build up for 5% more damage. Even with the extra 10% range for CERMLs, that's not balanced. It's broken.

Proposed changes: C-ERLL damage = 6 (which brings it to 20% more damage than IS ERML), duration = 1.10s (which is 19% longer than IS-ERML), heat = 5.4 (which is 17% greater than IS-ERML).

Comparing the C-ERLL to IS-ERLL:
Cooldown: IS (3.4s) vs CLAN (4s)
Heat: IS (8) vs CLAN (10.8)
Damage: IS (9) vs CLAN (10)
Range: IS (675/1350) vs CLAN (740/1480)
Duration: IS (1.10) vs CLAN (1.35)

Here we have a 19% greater duration for 11% more damage and a 15% cool down difference. Because of the 11% increase in range, the C-ERLL feels more balanced versus the IS-ERLL. The 26% difference in heat is the major outlier. Bring it in line with the other numbers and you'd have a good weapon system.

Proposed Changes: C-ERLL heat = 10, which is still 20% greater than IS-ERLL. Leave all other stats the same, they are fairly balanced.

Comparing the C-LPL to the IS-LPL
Cooldown: IS (3s) vs CLAN (3.2s)
Heat: IS (7.25) vs CLAN (10)
Damage: IS (10) vs CLAN (11)
Range: IS (365/730) vs CLAN (600/840)
Duration: IS (.67s) vs CLAN (1.09s)

The C-LPL is crap. 28% more heat for 9% more damage, if you can hold the beam on target for 40% more time! Even with the 40% greater optimal range than the IS-LPL, you can't brawl and you can't poke with that difference in duration - you won't get full damage on target. Personally, I'd take less range if it allows us to balance out the duration and heat.

Proposed Changes: C-LPL heat 8.75 (18% greater than IS-LPL), Duration .85s (22% longer duration than IS), Range 420/840 (14% greater than IS). The range also brings it more inline with the IS-ERML and IS-LPL differences.

Comparing the C-MPL and IS-MPL
Cooldown: IS (2.8s) vs CLAN (3s)
Heat: IS (3.8) vs CLAN (4.5)
Damage: IS (6) vs CLAN (6.25)
Range: IS (220/440) vs CLAN (330/480)
Duration: IS (.60s) vs CLAN (.90s)

At this point, just remove the C-MPL from the game. The PTS change to the C-MPL, 4% greater damage while enduring 16% more heat and requiring 50% more time on target... just trash it. Even with the extra range, it's worthless over its IS counterpart.

Proposed changes: C-MPL damage returns to 7 (16% greater than IS), duration to .75s (25% longer duration than IS), Range 260/520 (15% greater than IS).

[BTGbullseye]

I agree, but your reference points for your math is a little off... If you want to say "Clan has XX% more damage" then you have to say what percentage of the IS weapons damage is added to the IS weapon's damage to get the Clan damage, not what is subtracted from the Clan weapon. (yes, these are different percentages)

Example:

IS LPL: 10 damage
Clan LPL: 11 damage

The cLPL does 10% more damage than the isLPL.
The isLPL does 9% less damage than the cLPL.

See how that works?

Edited by BTGbullseye, 14 July 2018 - 09:59 PM.

[ADI84000]

well this pretty much sums up the pts nice post was gonna post something similar but no need now

[Agent1190]

BTGbullseye, on 14 July 2018 - 09:59 PM, said:

I agree, but your reference points for your math is a little off... If you want to say "Clan has XX% more damage" then you have to say what percentage of the IS weapons damage is added to the IS weapon's damage to get the Clan damage, not what is subtracted from the Clan weapon. (yes, these are different percentages)

Example:

IS LPL: 10 damage
Clan LPL: 11 damage

The cLPL does 10% more damage than the isLPL.
The isLPL does 9% less damage than the cLPL.

See how that works?

Yep, you are right. I had the figures backwards.

[Reno Blade]

If you really want to consider ALL stats, you have to use the same tonnage mech, same engine, slots, DHS and so on.
But Clans have much mor space and tonnage due to the tech upgrades and lighter weapons.

So now try to compare a 3x LPL +x build of Clan vs IS and add the tonnage and slots used for more DHS.
3x LPL is 21 tons for IS vs 18t for Clan
3x ERLL is 12tons and 3 slots vs IS for 15 tons and 6 slots.
Where the IS can have about 18-20 DHS the Clans can take 24-26 because of spare tonnage AND spare slots.
Don't even forget XL engine and smaller Endo/Ferro and we are at old arguments of balance issues.

But this exactly shows WHY clans have weapons with more downsides (beam/cd/heat) that are not equally outweighting the range and damage alone.

[Grus]

Because programming hard..

Reno Blade, on 15 July 2018 - 05:28 AM, said:

If you really want to consider ALL stats, you have to use the same tonnage mech, same engine, slots, DHS and so on.
But Clans have much mor space and tonnage due to the tech upgrades and lighter weapons.

So now try to compare a 3x LPL +x build of Clan vs IS and add the tonnage and slots used for more DHS.
3x LPL is 21 tons for IS vs 18t for Clan
3x ERLL is 12tons and 3 slots vs IS for 15 tons and 6 slots.
Where the IS can have about 18-20 DHS the Clans can take 24-26 because of spare tonnage AND spare slots.
Don't even forget XL engine and smaller Endo/Ferro and we are at old arguments of balance issues.

But this exactly shows WHY clans have weapons with more downsides (beam/cd/heat) that are not equally outweighting the range and damage alone.

you're not wrong. But the best way for me to describe what Chris is trying to do is this.. he's trying to make a F-22 preform like a P-51... that way, BALANCE!

But then I ask... why not just buy a p-51? It's way less expensive than a F-22..

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Reno Blade, on 15 July 2018 - 05:28 AM, said:

If you really want to consider ALL stats, you have to use the same tonnage mech, same engine, slots, DHS and so on.
But Clans have much mor space and tonnage due to the tech upgrades and lighter weapons.

So now try to compare a 3x LPL +x build of Clan vs IS and add the tonnage and slots used for more DHS.
3x LPL is 21 tons for IS vs 18t for Clan
3x ERLL is 12tons and 3 slots vs IS for 15 tons and 6 slots.
Where the IS can have about 18-20 DHS the Clans can take 24-26 because of spare tonnage AND spare slots.
Don't even forget XL engine and smaller Endo/Ferro and we are at old arguments of balance issues.

But this exactly shows WHY clans have weapons with more downsides (beam/cd/heat) that are not equally outweighting the range and damage alone.

Clans look OP on paper but are not OP in practice. There have been years of Paul balance done to make this happen, so that clans can look good on paper for Clan lorbies. The negative side effect is that it convinces people like you Reno that clans are OP, when they decidedly aren't. Clan vs IS were about in balance before this change came stumbling through. Clans are going to be relagated to the trash bin for this.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 15 July 2018 - 07:14 AM.

[Agent1190]

Reno Blade, on 15 July 2018 - 05:28 AM, said:

If you really want to consider ALL stats, you have to use the same tonnage mech, same engine, slots, DHS and so on.
But Clans have much mor space and tonnage due to the tech upgrades and lighter weapons.

So now try to compare a 3x LPL +x build of Clan vs IS and add the tonnage and slots used for more DHS.
3x LPL is 21 tons for IS vs 18t for Clan
3x ERLL is 12tons and 3 slots vs IS for 15 tons and 6 slots.
Where the IS can have about 18-20 DHS the Clans can take 24-26 because of spare tonnage AND spare slots.
Don't even forget XL engine and smaller Endo/Ferro and we are at old arguments of balance issues.

But this exactly shows WHY clans have weapons with more downsides (beam/cd/heat) that are not equally outweighting the range and damage alone.

You chose the second most unbalanced weapon system in the PTS to make your point. Here, let me help you:

Reno Blade (should have) said:
"So now try to compare a 3x MPL build of Clan vs IS and add the tonnage and slots used for more DHS.
3x MPL is 6tons and 6 slots vs IS for 6 tons and 6 slots.

Where the IS can have about 3 alphas in 10 (duration + CD + duration + CD + duration) seconds for 54 damage and 34.2 heat, and the clans can have 2 alphas in 10 seconds for 37.5 damage and 27 heat."

See man, when I change your argument to MPL, we see how the duration and cool down affect the CMPL and make it WORSE (even with clan perceived "advantages") than the IS MPL. The extra range is POINTLESS in this example when the IS mech is doing 40% more damage in 10 seconds.

Let's do the same calculations with the LPL, as you intended:

An IS mech with 3xLPL will do 30 damage for 21.75 heat. In 8 seconds that's 3 alphas (duration + CD + duration + CD + duration) for 90 damage total and 65.25 heat.

A Clan Mech with 3xC-LPL will do 33 damage for 30 heat. In 8 seconds that's only 2 alphas (duration + CD + duration = 5.38 seconds, the cool down from second alpha would take it passed the 8 second mark). So in 8 seconds, a clan mech with 3xC-LPL would do 66 damage for 60 heat.

I'd rather be the IS mech in these examples.

[Y E O N N E]

The root are the cXL, cDHS, cEndo, and cFerro.

It's lopsided because the big Clan 'Mechs can carry more DHS and/or bigger TCs than the break-even point for getting Clan and IS to match efficiency for a given range and quality of firepower. Note, this means the ligher Clan 'Mechs or Clan Omnis with big engines get shafted, but that's what happens when you try to hammer a nail with a back-hoe.

Note, I do not agree with PGI's current PTS numbers or approach.

[Siren Cortaine]

Effectively, lighter mechs are being punished for the high alpha of heavier mechs.

The 4MPL Purifier, one of the few viable Kitfox builds, gets kicked in the face for the second time running, while high-alpha Clan Heavies and Assaults (the whole point of this balance pass) are marginally affected.

GG, PGI. GG.

[Y E O N N E]

PIR-3 with 4x cMPL ought to be comparable to a Locust running 6x MedLas...but on PTS it is too hot for the tonnage it commands. 5x MedLas is 25 damage for 17 heat and 5 tons; 4x cMPL is 25 damage for 18 heat and 8 tons. Yuck.

[Rusharn]

Reno Blade, on 15 July 2018 - 05:28 AM, said:

If you really want to consider ALL stats, you have to use the same tonnage mech, same engine, slots, DHS and so on.
But Clans have much mor space and tonnage due to the tech upgrades and lighter weapons.

So now try to compare a 3x LPL +x build of Clan vs IS and add the tonnage and slots used for more DHS.
3x LPL is 21 tons for IS vs 18t for Clan
3x ERLL is 12tons and 3 slots vs IS for 15 tons and 6 slots.
Where the IS can have about 18-20 DHS the Clans can take 24-26 because of spare tonnage AND spare slots.
Don't even forget XL engine and smaller Endo/Ferro and we are at old arguments of balance issues.

But this exactly shows WHY clans have weapons with more downsides (beam/cd/heat) that are not equally outweighting the range and damage alone.

The premier weapons of both sides are the ERMed Lasers, which are the same tonnage, same slots. Comparing the PTS ERMed lasers the cERmed is vastly inferior, even with the cDouble heat sinks that cannot always be taken in the numbers needed to counter the vastly high heat.

[Naluca]

I have never really thought of any of my IS mech's as being very hot, is the Clan double heat sink really that good?

[PraetorGix]

Reno Blade, on 15 July 2018 - 05:28 AM, said:

If you really want to consider ALL stats, you have to use the same tonnage mech, same engine, slots, DHS and so on.
But Clans have much mor space and tonnage due to the tech upgrades and lighter weapons.

So now try to compare a 3x LPL +x build of Clan vs IS and add the tonnage and slots used for more DHS.
3x LPL is 21 tons for IS vs 18t for Clan
3x ERLL is 12tons and 3 slots vs IS for 15 tons and 6 slots.
Where the IS can have about 18-20 DHS the Clans can take 24-26 because of spare tonnage AND spare slots.
Don't even forget XL engine and smaller Endo/Ferro and we are at old arguments of balance issues.

But this exactly shows WHY clans have weapons with more downsides (beam/cd/heat) that are not equally outweighting the range and damage alone.

Sure, let's consider ALL stats. Except the ones that IS mechs have, like survival quirks or better agility or the ability to equip 2 HGauss and bring more of those dual HGauss wielding mechs to CW... I'm sure yours was a completely honest lapse of memory and not a convenient way to skew the argument, so please, let me refresh your memory.

[BTGbullseye]

Naluca, on 16 July 2018 - 02:26 PM, said:

I have never really thought of any of my IS mech's as being very hot, is the Clan double heat sink really that good?

Not really. Clan DHS take 1 slot less than the IS DHS, but have slightly lower stats outside of the engine to compensate.

[Parashurama]

BTGbullseye, on 17 July 2018 - 12:53 AM, said:

Not really. Clan DHS take 1 slot less than the IS DHS, but have slightly lower stats outside of the engine to compensate.

I believe the clan skill tree was also nerfed already to reduce cooling or heat gen compared to IS skill tree, correct?

[Y E O N N E]

BTGbullseye, on 17 July 2018 - 12:53 AM, said:

Not really. Clan DHS take 1 slot less than the IS DHS, but have slightly lower stats outside of the engine to compensate.

Not true, at least not when it comes to effectiveness as DHS.

Both Clan and IS double heatsinks outside of the initial 10 in the engine provide +0.15 dissipation and +1.5 capacity per unit. The only differences are the slot count and the corresponding amount of hitpoints.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 17 July 2018 - 07:00 AM.

[BTGbullseye]

Yeonne Greene, on 17 July 2018 - 06:59 AM, said:

Not true, at least not when it comes to effectiveness as DHS.

Both Clan and IS double heatsinks outside of the initial 10 in the engine provide +0.15 dissipation and +1.5 capacity per unit. The only differences are the slot count and the corresponding amount of hitpoints.

Uh, you're not addressing the question asked in the comment I answered in the comment you quoted...

Parashurama, on 17 July 2018 - 04:56 AM, said:

I believe the clan skill tree was also nerfed already to reduce cooling or heat gen compared to IS skill tree, correct?

Yes, it was indeed. Weapons tree has reduced effectiveness Heat Gen nodes. (-0.6% compared to the IS -0.75%) This is one of many reasons why all the hate for Clan DHS is not founded in reality anymore.

Edited by BTGbullseye, 17 July 2018 - 10:47 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

BTGbullseye, on 17 July 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

Uh, you're not addressing the question asked in the comment I answered in the comment you quoted...

Yes I am. He asked if Clan DHS are "really that good," you said no and added generically that they are slightly worse than IS DHS outside of the engine despite having one less slot which, unless you were referring solely to equipment health, is false.

[BTGbullseye]

Yeonne Greene, on 17 July 2018 - 10:56 AM, said:

Yes I am. He asked if Clan DHS are "really that good," you said no and added generically that they are slightly worse than IS DHS outside of the engine despite having one less slot which, unless you were referring solely to equipment health, is false.

Identical cooling and capacity with lower health still falls under the "lower stats" category.