81 replies to this topic

[Scout Derek]

SirSmokes, on 18 October 2020 - 01:42 PM, said:

Why would that be a dumb combo at 300 and in massive low heat alpha near of over 100?

If you can hit the same component all in the same area that is.

And it's dumb because you're juggling two different playstyles together, it's not going to end well.

[VonBruinwald]

Pseudo98, on 18 October 2020 - 01:08 PM, said:

Please define 'low hanging fruit' because I think you've got it wrong.

...when done with your definition please provide a quote/estimate of cost and time for you as a single individual if you were a developer to code this all for CryEngine 3.5.

I think you're overcomplicating things in your mind. Behold the Clan AC20 for IS mechs:

<Weapon id="2000" name="ClanAutoCannon20" HardpointAliases="Ballistic,LargeWeapon,AutoCannon,AC,AutoCannon20,ISAutoCannon,ISAC,ISAutoCannon20" faction="InnerSphere">
	<Loc nameTag="@AC20" descTag="@AC20_desc" iconTag="StoreIcons\AutoCannon20.dds"/>
	<WeaponStats Health="16.5" slots="9" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="4" damage="5" heatdamage="0" heatpenalty="24.0" minheatpenaltylevel="2" heatPenaltyID="9" impulse="0.09" heat="6.0" cooldown="4.0" ammoType="ClanAC20Ammo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="12" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="750" volleydelay="0.11" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0"/>
	<Ranges>
	  <Range start="0" damageModifier="1.0" interpolationToNextRange="linear"/>
	  <Range start="360" damageModifier="1.0" interpolationToNextRange="linear"/>
	  <Range start="720" damageModifier="0" interpolationToNextRange="linear"/>
	</Ranges>
	<EffectList>
	  <Effect name="Projectile" asset="objects/weapons/autocannon_shell.cgf" scale="1.0" mass="10"/>
	  <Effect name="ProjectileMaterial" asset="mat_ac20"/>
	  <Effect name="Muzzle" asset="mech_weapons.autocannon_20.muzzle_flash"/>
	  <Effect name="MuzzleFP" asset="mech_weapons.autocannon_20.muzzle_flash_fp"/>
	  <Effect name="Sound:Fire" asset="sounds/weapons_clan:cannon_clan:cannon_clan_fire" float="0.0"/>
	  <Effect name="Sound:PostFire" asset="sounds/weapons_clan:cannon_clan:cannon_clan_tail" float="0.0"/>
	  <Effect name="Sound:Reload" asset="sounds/weapons_clan:cannon_clan:cannon_clan_reload" float="1.5"/>
	  <Effect name="DamageBrush" asset="Textures\\decals\\damage_brushes\\ac_20.tif"/>
	  <Effect name="DamageBrushType" asset="direct" float="64" float2="64"/>
	</EffectList>
	<Audio OnDestroyedDialogue="BB_AutoCannon_Destroyed"/>
  </Weapon>

Now, I did this in a very hack-happy way:

• Duplicated the IS AC20 (and gave it a unique id)
  
• Gave it Clan AC20 stats/effect

But it'll append to the weapons.xml in the gamedata.pak and should, in theory, work fine. Granted it's a sloppy way of doing things, technically it's a new gun so you're doubling the amount of weapons in game. But it serves the purpose.



Edit: Should probably have switched the weapon name/description tags so you're not playing guessing games as to which AC20 is the Clan one and which is the IS one in the lab. They'll look identical.

Hardest part of this was actually finding the weapons.xml

Edit Edit:

Looks like the hardest part of doing things this way would be the UI for switching armour, internals and heatsinks. Was thinking it might be racs but they could reuse old assets like when newtech was first added.

Edited by VonBruinwald, 18 October 2020 - 02:24 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Scout Derek, on 18 October 2020 - 01:58 PM, said:

If you can hit the same component all in the same area that is.

And it's dumb because you're juggling two different playstyles together, it's not going to end well.

Not really you want too be close to make most of ATMs. At 300 in ATM and MRM would both get too the target pretty damn fast and there going to most like nail the guy hard if you can aim the MRMs ATM don't need any aiming so not really that strange

[Willard Phule]

Scout Derek, on 18 October 2020 - 01:06 PM, said:

that's a dumb combo.



What you two are overlooking looking in mixtech is the fact that IS viable builds that run IS XL or LFE, can now run clan upgrades too. Do you really want to deal with a Vulcan with clan XL? with Clan FF and Clan Endo? Clan DHS? I can almost guarantee by allowing free mixtech you would legitimately destroy the balance, hands down. Instead of making something new you'd absolutely make something much, much, much more terrifying.

Agreed, however, it works both ways. I don't see it as breaking the current level of power as much as I see it as changing that level. There are a lot of unspokens with mixtech, and we've only focused on the weapons. For example: Basic tech is based on faction. An Atlas can have a Clan XL (if you can afford it), but the internal structure and armor will still be IS based. On the other side of the board, a Supernova A packing MRMs all of a sudden becomes useful again.

Every other MW title has incorporated mixing the tech bases to one level or another except this one. At this point, it's hard to ignore the people it would bring back just to see it and/or new players it would attract because right now, MW:O is doing neither.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 02:12 PM, said:

Agreed, however, it works both ways. I don't see it as breaking the current level of power as much as I see it as changing that level. There are a lot of unspokens with mixtech, and we've only focused on the weapons. For example: Basic tech is based on faction. An Atlas can have a Clan XL (if you can afford it), but the internal structure and armor will still be IS based. On the other side of the board, a Supernova A packing MRMs all of a sudden becomes useful again.

Every other MW title has incorporated mixing the tech bases to one level or another except this one. At this point, it's hard to ignore the people it would bring back just to see it and/or new players it would attract because right now, MW:O is doing neither.

Still not seeing how it's strange at all? Massive blast of close range damage to strip frontal armor

[The6thMessenger]

Scout Derek, on 18 October 2020 - 01:06 PM, said:

that's a dumb combo.

What you two are overlooking looking in mixtech is the fact that IS viable builds that run IS XL or LFE, can now run clan upgrades too. Do you really want to deal with a Vulcan with clan XL? with Clan FF and Clan Endo? Clan DHS? I can almost guarantee by allowing free mixtech you would legitimately destroy the balance, hands down. Instead of making something new you'd absolutely make something much, much, much more terrifying.

[Scout Derek]

SirSmokes, on 18 October 2020 - 02:08 PM, said:

Not really you want too be close to make most of ATMs. At 300 in ATM and MRM would both get too the target pretty damn fast and there going to most like nail the guy hard if you can aim the MRMs ATM don't need any aiming so not really that strange

I can already tell you're set on believing that the two will synergize really well. They really won't, as someone with experience with both weapon types. Unfortunately can't argue any further than that, because it ain't going to go nowhere.

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 02:12 PM, said:

Agreed, however, it works both ways. I don't see it as breaking the current level of power as much as I see it as changing that level. There are a lot of unspokens with mixtech, and we've only focused on the weapons. For example: Basic tech is based on faction. An Atlas can have a Clan XL (if you can afford it), but the internal structure and armor will still be IS based. On the other side of the board, a Supernova A packing MRMs all of a sudden becomes useful again.

I mean, I can go in and do some black magic to give a live example of what it'd look like, that is.

If people really want mixtech it'd have to be limited to variants, AND EVEN THEN, it'd still have some issues.

[Willard Phule]

SirSmokes, on 18 October 2020 - 02:17 PM, said:

Still not seeing how it's strange at all? Massive blast of close range damage to strip frontal armor

You say that like it doesn't happen already. It most certainly does. My entire point has been that the "balance" that PGI chose to use between tech bases for the weapons involve heat and recharge rate. Putting a Clan XL in an IS mech is one thing, using the weapons is another. Especially when the IS mech has cooldown boosts. You'll find yourself overheating a LOT more often.

Like I said before, every other "MechWarrior" title that had a "Mercenaries" title attached to it allowed mixed tech. Perhaps, if it had been released with only IS tech and that's what the balance base had originated from, mixed tech would have broken it. As it was, that was the techbase the entire thing originated with. Allowing mixed tech in MW:O would pretty much do the same thing. Change the level everything is based on.

[The6thMessenger]

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 03:36 PM, said:

You say that like it doesn't happen already. It most certainly does. My entire point has been that the "balance" that PGI chose to use between tech bases for the weapons involve heat and recharge rate.

And your point is pointless compared to the actual result when those differences are already taken in account. It's mere differences in execution, "balance" is decided by actual performance.

Again, see the UAC5 comparison.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 October 2020 - 03:41 PM.

[Willard Phule]

Scout Derek, on 18 October 2020 - 03:02 PM, said:

I mean, I can go in and do some black magic to give a live example of what it'd look like, that is.

If people really want mixtech it'd have to be limited to variants, AND EVEN THEN, it'd still have some issues.

And yet, it's been done in every other MW title. And every other BT title related game out there.

[Scout Derek]

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 03:44 PM, said:

And yet, it's been done in every other MW title. And every other BT title related game out there.

and the results are usually the same, IS tech usually gets a backseat ride while people spam gauss and LL from the clans, Or LBX spam.

There's also a factor that the other games play extremely different from MWO, and TTK is also very different, for that matter.

Well, almost different. MW3 shares MWO tactic of boating a weapon type to kill people, and MW4 shares the high alpha method of killing people, and then some boating.

Edited by Scout Derek, 18 October 2020 - 03:51 PM.

[Willard Phule]

The6thMessenger, on 18 October 2020 - 03:40 PM, said:

And your point is pointless compared to the actual result when those differences are already taken in account. It's mere differences in execution, "balance" is decided by actual performance.

Again, see the UAC5 comparison.

The UAC5 comparison that showed the IS UAC5 fires faster than the CUAC5? I didn't see that one, but it does. In fact, every IS ballistic reloads faster than clan ballistics. Or the one with the whole DPS comparison? One thing that comparison doesn't take into account is the assumption that 100% of every point of damage fired is both registered by the server and on target. That whole spazz fire thing the Clans have virtually guarantee that at least some of your golden bb's are either going to miss or the server will ignore. If the whole "Clan AC" placeholder for the solid slug LBX shot a single slug, you'd see them used a LOT more than they are. IS ballistics may be unforgiving, but they're brutal when on target. Assuming the server registers it.

The entire argument doesn't take into consideration the hardpoints available. You think just because the AC or Laser you're going to slap in your Cyclops weighs half as much as you've been using means you can mount twice as many? Not if you don't have the hardpoints for it. It will, however, give you additional weight to throw into a larger engine or more heatsinks. And if you're running Clan weapons, heat sinks are a necessity.

[The6thMessenger]

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 03:55 PM, said:

The UAC5 comparison that showed the IS UAC5 fires faster than the CUAC5? I didn't see that one, but it does. In fact, every IS ballistic reloads faster than clan ballistics. Or the one with the whole DPS comparison? One thing that comparison doesn't take into account is the assumption that 100% of every point of damage fired is both registered by the server and on target. That whole spazz fire thing the Clans have virtually guarantee that at least some of your golden bb's are either going to miss or the server will ignore.

There's the solid number that I gave you based on cold-hard calculation, but now you're going on a tangent about connection issues? That sounds more like excuses than anything.

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 03:55 PM, said:

If the whole "Clan AC" placeholder for the solid slug LBX shot a single slug, you'd see them used a LOT more than they are. IS ballistics may be unforgiving, but they're brutal when on target. Assuming the server registers it.

But it's not. The CACs are burst fire, and unfortunately superfluous. PGI could remove the GH limit, that which allows us to pad dakka by CACs, and do stuff like 2x UAC10 + 2x CAC10 -- then it would be useful.

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 03:55 PM, said:

The entire argument doesn't take into consideration the hardpoints available.

Allow me to retort: Your argument does not take account the fact that Clan-Tech is inherently op by design, and PGI has only balanced it around the Clans using it.

Best serviceable UAC5s in the Anni is actually 5, that means for your 45-Ton investment, that's 19.53 EDPS. If you can put 6 CUAC5s however at 42 Tons, that is 20.1 EDPS. But if you really want to point out 6x UAC5 Annihilator, tell you what I concede to that specific build, that's your victory, no matter how pyrrhic it is.

Willard Phule, on 18 October 2020 - 03:55 PM, said:

You think just because the AC or Laser you're going to slap in your Cyclops weighs half as much as you've been using means you can mount twice as many? Not if you don't have the hardpoints for it. It will, however, give you additional weight to throw into a larger engine or more heatsinks. And if you're running Clan weapons, heat sinks are a necessity.

You can mount upper class of weapons for DPS. Hell, the CUAC10 is just 10 tons, 1 ton shy over the UAC5. If it was UAC5 at 10 tons with it's current EDPS/Ton, it would reach 4.340277 EDPS, but the CUAC10 reaches 4.77327 EDPS. The CUAC10 is also at 540m range, versus the 600m of UAC5, which means you might as well stand closer and shoot again -- you also have ensured 10 damage/peek versus the variable UAC5.

Take the Seipnir for example, if allowed to mix-tech, you can actually boat 4x CUAC10s -- unfortunately it hits GH, so the next best thing is 2x UAC10 + 2x UAC5, so that is 16.24654 EDPS, versus the 4x UAC5's 15.624 EDPS. That means for 34 fons, you can get 16.24654 EDPS, while for the 36 tons you get lower 15.624 EDPS. And that's just 14 slots, versus the 4x UAC5's 20 slots.

For 2 tons, you get lower EDPS, a bit higher range, synergistic weapons, and better convergence. That's just about it really, it's probably something that the elites might see to be good, but realistically to the general pug, the Clan UACs are a better choice.

Even then you can also boat 4x CAC10, which is 15.503876 solid reliable DPS. Meanwhile, you couldn't boat 4x AC10 on the same Seipnir, and even the 4x AC5 only reaches 12.04819 DPS.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 October 2020 - 04:59 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Scout Derek, on 18 October 2020 - 03:02 PM, said:

I can already tell you're set on believing that the two will synergize really well. They really won't, as someone with experience with both weapon types. Unfortunately can't argue any further than that, because it ain't going to go nowhere.

Well really we are both talking out our asses here we really wouldn't know till we tried it I think it would work well but till we do it it's all speculation

[Bud Crue]

With all due respect to everyone and their opinions,but last I checked this is a PvP game based on 100's of mechs being (theoretically) "balanced" in that they are all supposed to (ha!) have a role and potential equivalent game play value (again, theoretically, but Paul and Chris have repeated this absurdity time and again, so that is game play reality whether we agree or not).

Adding in mix-tech would maybe be fun, but it would make the vast majority of variants, if not entire chassis, completely irrelevant. If the goal for PGI is to increase potential monetization, mix tech would do the opposite.

[Scout Derek]

SirSmokes, on 18 October 2020 - 05:24 PM, said:

Well really we are both talking out our asses here we really wouldn't know till we tried it I think it would work well but till we do it it's all speculation

https://cdn.discorda...3.25.38.DVR.mp4

No speculation at all anymore is it?

3 Alphas to kill via CT, by the way, and that's standing still.

[The6thMessenger]

Scout Derek, on 18 October 2020 - 11:36 PM, said:

https://cdn.discorda...3.25.38.DVR.mp4

No speculation at all anymore is it?

3 Alphas to kill via CT, by the way, and that's standing still.

Holy ****.

Wait that isn't the sweet spot though.

[Scout Derek]

The6thMessenger, on 18 October 2020 - 11:43 PM, said:

Holy ****.

Wait that isn't the sweet spot though.

Can get another one, it's not a big deal.

Edit: results are the same, was in optimal range due to having quirked 22.05M or something along those lines.

https://cdn.discorda...8.29.41.DVR.mp4


Back to my point though, waste of tonnage and weapon systems. Enjoy Sandblasting people with the loadout, sure you'll get damage but killing potential is very low.

Edited by Scout Derek, 18 October 2020 - 11:55 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Scout Derek, on 18 October 2020 - 11:45 PM, said:

Can get another one, it's not a big deal.

Edit: results are the same, was in optimal range due to having quirked 22.05M or something along those lines.

https://cdn.discorda...8.29.41.DVR.mp4


Back to my point though, waste of tonnage and weapon systems. Enjoy Sandblasting people with the loadout, sure you'll get damage but killing potential is very low.

HA Cool!

Strangely it has somewhat the near same volley duration, I felt it to be synergistic. I feel that it could work, but only at the short distances.

It's still I would say a forbidden pairing. Can you do more with other forbidden pairing? Like Clan-Tech Vulcan with CMPLs, Urbanmech with CUAC10s and CERMLS, I think they need to get the point hammered.

[Scout Derek]

The6thMessenger, on 18 October 2020 - 11:59 PM, said:

HA Cool!

Strangely it has somewhat the near same volley duration, I felt it to be synergistic. I feel that it could work, but only at the short distances.

It's still I would say a forbidden pairing. Can you do more with other forbidden pairing? Like Clan-Tech Vulcan with CMPLs, Urbanmech with CUAC10s and CERMLS, I think they need to get the point hammered.

Already did testing on Vulcan Mixtech; IS Mpls will always perform better due to duration and heat. I'll give you some urbanmech testing here shortly.

EDIT: Unable to upload the video right now because not on a discord server with 100MB upload limit, but basically went like this;

Clan Tech urbanmech, with 5 C-MPL and 15DHS to shoot through a Atlas-D Stock CT: 20 Seconds
IS Tech urbanmech, with 5 IS-MPL and 14DHS to shoot through a Atlas-D Stock CT: 18 Seconds

Coolshot was deployed, as the mech was reaching it's heat capacity.

Clan Urbanmech ended with 97% heat right after killing the Atlas
IS Urbanmech ended with 72% heat right after killing the Atlas

UACs proved to be very unpredictable; some tests the UACs never jammed, others it jammed completely, and other times it jammed once. Both UACs yielded these results, I took a Dragon 5N, 3C-UAC/5 Vs 3 IS-UAC/2, and even with the Clan UACs jamming completely and then halfway, with IS UACs doing the same and full jamming, the IS UAC/2 only had 2 more seconds over the C-UAC/5, and this was using a Macro for IS-UACs, the Clan UACs I never used a macro, just simply clicked as fast as I could.

TLDR; IS UAC/2s are absolutely trash, however you put it.

Edited by Scout Derek, 19 October 2020 - 12:51 AM.