13 replies to this topic

[AncientRaig]

So, just figured I'd through my 2 cents in. Firstly, laser changes:

Not really too upset with this. The lower damage isn't lore friendly, but I think if the heat and burn time were toned down a more it'd be pretty functional. Something like 5 heat and a 1 second burn time for the ERML could be pretty viable. Clan DPS goes up, and the time needed to be facing the enemy goes down a little. Laser vomit is still viable, but the total amount of damage per alpha is reduced. I think it'd achieve PGI's goals without invalidating an entire playstyle. Clan lasers still do a little more damage than IS ones, but they only burn slightly longer and generate slightly more heat to balance it out.

Secondly, Gauss changes:

Really not seeing what this accomplishes. I bought a Deathstrike in order to test how the changes effect the build that probably caused this change to show up and I have to say, the mech really isn't all that effected. Gauss recoil effects don't really do anything to effect the standard firing pattern of gauss vomit mechs, which is to fire the lasers as the gauss rifles are charging. The recoil effects only cause deviation once the weapon has fired, so most of the laser damage will already be dealt before the recoil happens.

*Edit* Also, I'm not entirely sure if this is something done this patch or not, but something needs to be done about Clan ERPPCs. I was running a Timber Wolf build with 2 ERPPCs and 2 UAC2s to see if the old MW2 intro build could be done in MWO. It had 2 extra heat sinks beyond the locked engine ones and I almost shut down just from firing the two PPCs twice. It hit like 90% heat. This is ridiculous.

Edited by AncientRaig, 14 July 2018 - 09:38 PM.

[process]

For the most part, the PTS lasers aren't as bad as I thought. It's nice to have cooler weapons and the ability to link 3 large lasers.

Heavy lasers are still trash though. The high damage for the heavy large laser in particular was the only thing making the heat and burn time worth it.

[Rydiak Randborir]

The Gauss change is meant to force players into the fire-while-charging playstyle, instead of the charge-then-fire playstyle. The latter is more effective in terms of front-loading damage, which means it gets damage to a single point better/faster before an enemy starts to react/torso-twist. For players who have always used the former playstyle there will be no effective difference, which I think is a nice touch to this change.

[Jackal Noble]

AncientRaig, on 14 July 2018 - 09:24 PM, said:

*Edit* Also, I'm not entirely sure if this is something done this patch or not, but something needs to be done about Clan ERPPCs. I was running a Timber Wolf build with 2 ERPPCs and 2 UAC2s to see if the old MW2 intro build could be done in MWO. It had 2 extra heat sinks beyond the locked engine ones and I almost shut down just from firing the two PPCs twice. It hit like 90% heat. This is ridiculous.

Welcome to pretty much any attempt at mix-building with Clan mechs. It can be made to work but it's disgustingly hot as ****. Why can I have 2 gauss, 2 ERLL and 4 ER Meds etc and have a workable build but the moment I try to throw any other ballistic that is not gauss into the picture with a PPC it barely functions. I don't know what needs to be done, but the problem imo honestly isn't meta las-vomit - It's the lack of anything else (mixed / eclectic builds) being viable.

One of my fav alt MCIIB builds is quad of any of the 2's and 2 ppcs - when it works it's great, but it's really hot and there are better builds. I sometimes switch the peeps to ERLLS, but it is relatively weak for what it is vs what it should be.

Further, for the optimal(sub lol) Clan tonnage explain why on a EBJ at 65 tons running 3 Large pulse and a single LBX2 is crazy hot.

[A Headless Chicken]

I know right, its almost as if all weapons have different heat values!

[Jackal Noble]

Rydiak, on 15 July 2018 - 07:16 PM, said:

The Gauss change is meant to force players into the fire-while-charging playstyle, instead of the charge-then-fire playstyle. The latter is more effective in terms of front-loading damage, which means it gets damage to a single point better/faster before an enemy starts to react/torso-twist. For players who have always used the former playstyle there will be no effective difference, which I think is a nice touch to this change.

Which basically means other than changing up one's firing style, is a stupid and unneeded change and will not accomplish jackshit.
I would much rather see C-gauss be dropped to 12-13 damage and lose the super annoying 100% crit chance. Clan mechs as anyone with some level of common sense and experience in this game knows, are fragile. Paired with that, when a component that is say, housing a gauss rifle, is even slightly stripped of armor it is almost guaranteed to pop. That's a terrible and lame mechanic.

I am continually amazed at how insanely long a Marauder 3R with an Hgauss (that takes up what 14 slots?) survives with a cored right torso through multiple subsequent hits. It's flat out bizarre mechanics. This is an example, I am by no means saying it should be changed, just the opposite for Clan equipment.

[Y E O N N E]

Rydiak, on 15 July 2018 - 07:16 PM, said:

The Gauss change is meant to force players into the fire-while-charging playstyle, instead of the charge-then-fire playstyle. The latter is more effective in terms of front-loading damage, which means it gets damage to a single point better/faster before an enemy starts to react/torso-twist. For players who have always used the former playstyle there will be no effective difference, which I think is a nice touch to this change.

This isn't what happens in practice, though. 'Mechs have finite movement and, when you are decent, it's easy enough to track a part through the twisting. Most targets also tend to face back toward their attacker after the laser burn, thinking that was it, giving the attacker the big juicy. Add on the fact that lasers don't really trigger a whole lot of warning that you are getting hit by them other than the paper doll changing colors, and players' reaction times are simply not good enough for the placement of the Gauss volley during the burn to matter.

The dark secret of torso-twisting is that it only really works when you are being shot at indiscriminately or when you are twisting before the enemy begins shooting.

[Agent1190]

The PTS change is trash - PGI didn't touch laser duration, which is ****. You do less damage, but burn time remains the same.

[Rydiak Randborir]

Yeonne Greene, on 15 July 2018 - 07:30 PM, said:

This isn't what happens in practice, though. 'Mechs have finite movement and, when you are decent, it's easy enough to track a part through the twisting. Most targets also tend to face back toward their attacker after the laser burn, thinking that was it, giving the attacker the big juicy. Add on the fact that lasers don't really trigger a whole lot of warning that you are getting hit by them other than the paper doll changing colors, and players' reaction times are simply not good enough for the placement of the Gauss volley during the burn to matter.

The dark secret of torso-twisting is that it only really works when you are being shot at indiscriminately or when you are twisting before the enemy begins shooting.

I don't understand the disagreement. The change exactly transitions Gauss Vomit from charge-then-fire to fire-while-charging because of the new recoil effect. And if I start taking hits from an enemy mech's lasers (especially an enemy I wasn't aware of or previously taking fire from), I am going to turn a shield arm towards that enemy long before the .75 second charge-up of the Gauss is completed. You can't shield against the charge-then-fire method as easily because the Gauss hits are front-loaded, as opposed to back-loaded.

[Kmieciu]

Agent1190, on 15 July 2018 - 07:32 PM, said:

You do less damage, but burn time remains the same.

And you generate more heat per damage.

[Y E O N N E]

Rydiak, on 15 July 2018 - 11:00 PM, said:

I don't understand the disagreement. The change exactly transitions Gauss Vomit from charge-then-fire to fire-while-charging because of the new recoil effect. And if I start taking hits from an enemy mech's lasers (especially an enemy I wasn't aware of or previously taking fire from), I am going to turn a shield arm towards that enemy long before the .75 second charge-up of the Gauss is completed. You can't shield against the charge-then-fire method as easily because the Gauss hits are front-loaded, as opposed to back-loaded.

The disagreement is over whether or not the change in placement of the Gauss volley relative to the laser burn duration will have the effect of spreading the damage around, and I assert that it does not. If you take the Gauss hit first, you immediately start twisting and the lasers spread. If you take the lasers first, you MIGHT start spreading if you see them hit you. It doesn't matter at all where the Gauss are, the potential for spreading damage remains unchanged.

At the end of the day I will have whatever part of your 'Mech that I want because you will be distracted by the other 11 'Mechs on my team and where they are and your reactions will be slowed accordingly. This nerf does nothing but confuse less capable players.

[Rydiak Randborir]

Ah, I see. We're differing on opinion of weapon effectiveness, essentially. I value the PPFLD of Gauss much higher than the duration-based damage of Lasers, which is why I think this is effective in reducing Gauss Vomit lethality.

Using the meta 80-damage alpha Deathstrike as an example (2 Gauss, 2 ERLL, 4 ERML), 30 damage comes in the form of PPFLD from the Gauss.  50 damage comes in the form of burn via lasers.  Assuming we have a window of 0.5s before a target responds to incoming fire, in 0.5s of burn-time the lasers will do 19.348 damage vs the 30 damage that the dual Gauss would do. Obviously a target that is slower to react to incoming fire, or presents the targeted component for longer (or doesn't shield it at all) will improve the effectiveness of the lasers, but my point is that leading with 30 damage is stronger than leading with 19.348 damage.

Also, keep in mind that with the pre-charge method lasers are being fired WITH the Gauss, so the comparison really becomes 49.348 damage vs 19.348 damage.

Edited by Rydiak, 16 July 2018 - 01:34 PM.

[Naluca]

In the 4vs4 it was easier to focus on targets and set incoming laser fire and twist. I am not sure the same effect would occur in a 12vs12 match.

[Y E O N N E]

Rydiak, on 16 July 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

Ah, I see. We're differing on opinion of weapon effectiveness, essentially. I value the PPFLD of Gauss much higher than the duration-based damage of Lasers, which is why I think this is effective in reducing Gauss Vomit lethality.

Using the meta 80-damage alpha Deathstrike as an example (2 Gauss, 2 ERLL, 4 ERML), 30 damage comes in the form of PPFLD from the Gauss.  50 damage comes in the form of burn via lasers.  Assuming we have a window of 0.5s before a target responds to incoming fire, in 0.5s of burn-time the lasers will do 19.348 damage vs the 30 damage that the dual Gauss would do. Obviously a target that is slower to react to incoming fire, or presents the targeted component for longer (or doesn't shield it at all) will improve the effectiveness of the lasers, but my point is that leading with 30 damage is stronger than leading with 19.348 damage.

Also, keep in mind that with the pre-charge method lasers are being fired WITH the Gauss, so the comparison really becomes 49.348 damage vs 19.348 damage.

My original post already dealt with your scenario. The truth is very few targets are fast enough at twisting to stop most of the laser burn from going where the attacker wants. If you watch even the comp players, they typically fire the Gauss independent of the laser beam anyway simply because they don't often get a chance to fire them together for a clean hit; it's often better to stagger them out so you can get the target to re-present the component so both the majority of the burn and the Gauss go where you want without the target's twisting skills factoring in.