24 replies to this topic

[process]

Yeonne Greene, on 19 August 2018 - 07:25 AM, said:

I mean, if you want Clan lasers and IS lasers to feel the same, then by all means. I do not.

No, not the same. But I do want all lasers to feel good. I think if we can fit all IS lasers in a ~0.5 to 1 second duration bracket, and Clan lasers between ~0.75 and 1.25, then we can start rethinking damage and heat values. The PTS heat system provides much more flexibility since we aren't so concerned about laser alphas.

[Reno Blade]

As I had posted it before, my ideal laser balance was detailed here
https://mwomercs.com...nt-suggestions/
and
https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6140111

basically balancing around Medium class like this:

Quote

Imho, I think the IS lasers could need a little duration nerf in gernal as it is currently too easy to deliver laser damage for both sides.
No Std/ER Laser should be below 1.0 second duration (outherwise the pulses are not standing out enough vs STD/ER).

Aiming for a 1.0 DPS (incl. duration) per ton of the std medium laser would make the starting point
suggested values:
ML = 5dmg, 3.33heat, 3.8s cd, 1.2s duration = 1.0 dps and 1.5dph and 1.0dps/ton
ERML = 5dmg, 4.5heat, 4s cd, 1.4s duration = 0.9259 dps and 1.11dph and 0.9259dps/ton
CERML = 6dmg, 5.0heat, 4.6s cd, 1.6s duration = 0.9677dps and 1.20
dph and 0.9677dps/ton
CHML = 10dmg, 8.0heat, 6.0s cd, 1.8s duration = 1.28 dps and 1.25dph and 1.28dps/ton
MPL = 2.8dmg, 1.6heat, 1.0s cd, 0.6s duration = 1.75 dps and 1.75dph and 0.875dps/ton
CMPL = 3.0dmg, 1.7heat, 1.1s cd, 0.7s duration = 1.67 dps and 1.76dph and 0.833dps/ton

This would mean that CERML being better at dps and dph than IS ERML, but less efficient than the IS STD ML.
The HML would be better than CERML in dmg/dps/dph, but trade it off with long cd, beam and lower range, but would require facetime less often (but longer).
The Pulse lasers can deliver more dps and dph with a trade-off being tonnage and range and the dps behavior requiring facetime more often.

[process]

Reno Blade, on 19 August 2018 - 08:19 AM, said:

As I had posted it before, my ideal laser balance was detailed here
https://mwomercs.com...nt-suggestions/
and
https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6140111

That heading in the direction I want to go, with clearly defined roles and characteristics. However I still think those durations are too high. I think setting the IS ML to 0.9 duration should be the place to start.

In particular, the 1.8 duration on the CHML is way too long for its heat and range. I think it'd be better to lower the duration to maybe like 1.25, but jack the heat up, the idea being it would be used for mechs with low tonnage or hardpoints.

[Y E O N N E]

process, on 19 August 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

No, not the same. But I do want all lasers to feel good. I think if we can fit all IS lasers in a ~0.5 to 1 second duration bracket, and Clan lasers between ~0.75 and 1.25, then we can start rethinking damage and heat values. The PTS heat system provides much more flexibility since we aren't so concerned about laser alphas.

One problem is laser duration nodes; both sides have them, and they require you to expand that spectrum to prevent things from getting out of hand.

Another problem is that human reaction time and 'Mechs' ability to start and stop any sort of motion are both finite, so below certain thresholds the duration delta doesn't really mean anything. A delta of 0.2 seconds is about as small as you can go before it becomes superfluous. And, on top of that, if the Clan laser bundle is doing pragmatically the same damage as the IS bundle in the same window of reaction time, then you have a problem where the Clan bundle is getting to have its cake and eat it, too, since the IS bundle isn't gaining anything from the shorter duration.

And, since we're both at 80-90% after a shot, the shorter IS cycle times also don't count for anything.