84 replies to this topic

[Curccu]

MechMaster059, on 07 June 2022 - 07:21 PM, said:

With regards to your desire to create TC's that boost brawlers, a simple example could be a missile TC that gives the following benefits: Missile TC:
+0.25 seconds lock duration to LRM, ATM, STREAK
+5% speed to LRM, ATM
-5% spread to MRM, STREAK
+10% range to SRM +5% damage to all missiles
This gives each missile type a little something of what it needs to do better at it's job without favoring one missile type over another.

Each of these values alone are that good that TC would be mandatory for every missile mech

ps. spread doesn't work with streaks, they got funny homing design unlike any other in game.

[MechMaster059]

Curccu, on 08 June 2022 - 12:13 AM, said:

Each of these values alone are that good that TC would be mandatory for every missile mech

That's really great. They're just numbers to illustrate a point, not something that's finalized and yes, the new normal would be for mechs to ALMOST ALWAYS be equipped with at least 1 kind of TC. A "missile boat" that is only armed with missiles would most definitely be equipped with a Missile TC.

The question is, would it also be equipped with a general TC and what mark of TC's would it equip. Not a big deal.

[cazeral]

Currently using a MKVIII on one of my IS mechs that's giving it a 1k effective range and stretching out to around 1.5k for notable damage. The mech is quirked with an inherent 10% boost and running all range skill points but does go to show that targeting computers are a real positive (especially with the critical boost and enhanced zoom as well).

[panzer1b]

Basically the way i go about it is that only the TC-1 is truly viable on laser vomit mechs (the 5% velocity is irrelevant in practice for ballistic/ppc mechs). You get minor crit boots which never hurt, and you get 4% range for a single ton which stacks better then 5% for 2t (range/tonnage efficiency gets worse as you go up). If you are low on slots and high on tonnage, a TC-1 is basically a free boost. On a clam mech that already has 25+ DHS in it, then usually having that 4% range is well worth it over a minor boost to DPS which rarely makes a noticeable difference. Ofc this is rarely the case on smaller mechs like meds/lights where every ton counts, but 75% of heavys can bring a TC-1 and get a tradeoff that usually benefits you in gameplay. Its just so common to be firing a bit outside of optimal range, and 4% makes your burns do just a bit more damage which often counteracts the loss of 1 DHS(unless you are using a build that doesnt fight often outside of optimal laser ranges).

The larger TC4-7 is helpful for mechs that are dedicated snipers using either PPCs or ERLLs, primarily limited to high tier competitive FP mechs. It doesnt really help much in QP (again, outside of coordinated team dependent strats), since it is very rare for a ERLL or PPC mech to actually sit at over 1km and actually contribute to the game (most of the time when i see this its a mech thats out of the fight until the end game where they usually get eaten by lights that get in their face). The velocity boost is nice too which makes PPCs (or even dakka) more effective past ~800m, however any less then 20% velocity isnt really noticeable or even worth wasting tonnage on so its either all or nothing (dont bother with a TC-1/3 if you want to velocity boost, more ammo or DHS is almost always more useful).

They are sorta niche, and primarily limited to 2 applications, but at least its not dead weight useless equipment, at least teh TC-1 for laser vomit and the TC-4+ for sniping.

[Meep Meep]

panzer1b, on 08 June 2022 - 01:36 AM, said:

It doesnt really help much in QP (again, outside of coordinated team dependent strats), since it is very rare for a ERLL or PPC mech to actually sit at over 1km and actually contribute to the game

Thats more due to many maps simply not being viable to sit back and snipe for most of the match and the typical assault snipers can't move fast enough to easily reposition to a brand new area. I've overcome this by running an ecm cicada with three er larges. It works a whole lot better than you would think too due to the quirks and is very good at enticing wall flower snipers to reposition. Plus its small size and ecm make it hard to spot unless they see you firing.

Snipecada

Sadly no slots or tons for a tc unless you want to shave a bunch of armor off the ct, leg and torsos and use light ferro or use a lower rated light engine. Not my choice but if you feel comfy with a glass cannon or slower than urbie medium then it might be worth the extra range.

[caravann]

Might as well use a Raven if you going to use a light mech. I build all mechs to run at 81kph
You can build a sniper out of EBJB. Who said it had to be an assault who throttle at 75kph
Medium and heavy are very familiar in speed. Dervish is the slowest mech I have beside an atlas.
Dervish has armor of a 60ton and runs at 70kph. Most Heavy are well balanced in speed and armor.
Medium mechs either have to sacrifice speed or armor.

Most medium to assault are slower than an urbanmech 91kph

If you want a long range and quick mech you'll find one amongst the heavy. The clan mechs tend to be faster.
Take a look at hellfire who is canon to use heavy large lasers. Or hellbringer prime who is an all mechs build frame in one.

The orion 2C-B is worth mentioning.

[Kanil]

I'm not sure what this is supposed to accomplish, beyond adding a TC tax to your builds.

Does this do anything beyond reducing the amount of viable builds from current to "current except also can afford TC tax". Like my Thanatos can't afford a TC tax so I just move that same build over to the Sleipnir, why does that make the game better?

[Meep Meep]

caravann, on 08 June 2022 - 03:34 AM, said:

Might as well use a Raven if you going to use a light mech.

I've tried the raven 3l as a sniper and while you can wedge in 3 er larges the heat management isn't near as good as the cicada due to 3 less sinks and it has a fair bit less armor and structure plus no energy quirks at all. You can drop the engine to a 180 and fit in 12 sinks for decent heat management but then you are going clan light speed no better than a fast assault. On the other hand there are plenty of non ecm mechs across the weight classes that can pull off a sniper fit but then you have no ecm and will get spotted as soon as you try to expose for some shots. Though if you are dropping with an ecm lancemate then the issue is moot if you stick together.

Edited by Meep Meep, 08 June 2022 - 01:14 PM.

[MechMaster059]

"beyond adding a TC tax to your builds"

What if the first TC has little or no tax?

A new head slot exclusively for TC's. Any TC put into this particular slot gets -0.5 tons bonus.
(Imagine there are only 5 marks of TC starting at 0.5 tons and incrementing by 0.25 tons each up to 1.5 tons)

[Horseman]

MechMaster059, on 07 June 2022 - 07:21 PM, said:

Missile TC:
+0.25 seconds lock duration to LRM, ATM, STREAK
+5% speed to LRM, ATM
-5% spread to MRM, STREAK
+10% range to SRM
+5% damage to all missiles

Look up what Artemis does and what it used to do. Same for TAG.

[MechMaster059]

Horseman, on 08 June 2022 - 09:10 PM, said:

Look up what Artemis does and what it used to do. Same for TAG.

Artemis and TAGs provide much better benefits but have their costs as well. A TAG takes up a slot and a ton all by itself and needs LOS. Artemis is heavier as well. Missile TCs would complement them, not conflict with them.

[Horseman]

MechMaster059, on 08 June 2022 - 11:40 PM, said:

Artemis and TAGs provide much better benefits but have their costs as well. A TAG takes up a slot and a ton all by itself and needs LOS. Artemis is heavier as well. Missile TCs would complement them, not conflict with them.

You know that there's nothing wrong with having different support equipment for different weapons, right?
As designed, TCs are only (and always have been) for direct fire weapons.
Missile weapons have Artemis, TAG and, for the lock-on variants, APs: those serve as their "targeting computers".
That you want to eat your cake and have it too is a you problem.
That you can't perform well with missile weapons - which is the only reason why you'd argue for those buffs - is a you problem as well.

Edited by Horseman, 10 June 2022 - 06:50 AM.

[MechMaster059]

Horseman, on 10 June 2022 - 06:48 AM, said:

You know that there's nothing wrong with having different support equipment for different weapons, right?
As designed, TCs are only (and always have been) for direct fire weapons.
Missile weapons have Artemis, TAG and, for the lock-on variants, APs: those serve as their "targeting computers".
That you want to eat your cake and have it too is a you problem.
That you can't perform well with missile weapons - which is the only reason why you'd argue for those buffs - is a you problem as well.

It's getting boring going and back and forth with you. You obviously haven't read my new Targeting Computer Rework Proposal thread in which I specified TC's for Energy, Ballistic, and AMS as well. The consensus here is that the only direct fire weapons meaningfully now helped by TC's are the longest range sniper builds. My new proposal provides buffs to brawler builds as well. Why would I propose an AMS TC that boosts AMS range and Laser AMS heat reduction if I was biased in favor of missiles?

The only mech I own has an ER LARGE LASER, MRM 20, RAC5, and an AMS. I consider the RAC5 the main armament of my mech. I don't run LRMs because my mech can only hold 1x LRM 20 which fires 2 salvos of 10. I found too often the missiles just got shot down so I switched to an MRM. Artemis is not available on my mech. You have no idea how I play the game. None.

Artemis is not universally available. I guess you think mechs that can't equip it should just suck it up.

I can see by your 4,243 post that you are known as what I call a "status quo defender". You accept 8 ton TC's because they've always "been that way".

I'm done replying to your posts.

[YueFei]

MechMaster059, on 10 June 2022 - 07:25 AM, said:

The only mech I own has an ER LARGE LASER, MRM 20, RAC5, and an AMS.

The above is not a good loadout. There's a lot of good players who would be happy to help give advice on mech building and loadouts. I suggest you reach out for suggestions from them.

[MechMaster059]

YueFei, on 10 June 2022 - 09:16 AM, said:

The above is not a good loadout. There's a lot of good players who would be happy to help give advice on mech building and loadouts. I suggest you reach out for suggestions from them.

I figured it might not be. What's wrong with it?

I tried 2x U/AC2's, 2x LBX5's, and then 2x RAC2's for ballistics. The U/AC2's jammed a lot (yes I have the anti-jam skill points) and the 2xLBX5's / 2xRAC2's were heavy so I had to downgrade my missile slot. The ER LARGE LASER gives a nice little sniping option vs enemy mech peeking around corners at a distance.

Edited by MechMaster059, 10 June 2022 - 09:27 AM.

[Lord Sevenous]

There are no "anti jam skills" just "shorter jam skills"

Every Mech can use Artemis (IF you have SRM/LRM installed)

So you obviously don`t understand the game mechanics BUT you want to change things...
(maybe you should learn first....)

Edited by Lord Sevenous, 10 June 2022 - 09:40 AM.

[Nightbird]

Oof coming the forums talking up a storm and then sharing that build is not a good way to start MWO my friend...

[caravann]

MechMaster059, on 10 June 2022 - 09:18 AM, said:

I figured it might not be. What's wrong with it?

I tried 2x U/AC2's and then 2x LBX5's for ballistics. The U/AC2's jammed a lot (yes I have the anti-jam skill points) and the LBX5's were heavy so I had to downgrade my missile slot. The ER LARGE LASER gives a nice little sniping option vs enemy mech peeking around corners at a distance.

If you going for a single laser go for a large pulse laser. ER Large Laser work when you got two of them.
RAC let you put the gun on the same button since it will only fire when held down. Replace RAC5 with RAC2 and replace the ER Large laser with a large pulse laser.

This is not always the case depending on what mech used; technically you only need one leg, one center and one head.
You can get out higher amount of tonnage by reducing armor where it won't matter. In most cases it takes as much time to break a leg as it would to core the mech and it's a flip of a coin what leg is the weakest.

The MRM 20 works well, It's best when used with medium lasers and there's no build who goes entirely wrong with MRM based on the good amount of ammo for each bin. Each weapon increase heat that stacking has disadvantages. It's mostly useful when armor is removed but in most of those cases having a lot of weapons gives a chance that 1-2 are still intact. The issue with MRM is that you have shotgun/ lvomit weapon while focusing on DPS with a RAC. The RAC itself is having the gauss mechanic and it works better with gauss than it does with MRM because you will automatically stop shooting with the RAC.
Your shots land in a line which is the opposite of MRM. The burning time benefit MRM. The burning time doesn't help RAC.
The RAC is overvalued, UAC5 is a better gun in term of how much damage you get for each shot. Stacking help for the same reason stacking heavy machineguns. RAC is nerfed and each shot from a RAC5 deals 2 damage.

[pattonesque]

MechMaster059, on 10 June 2022 - 09:18 AM, said:

I figured it might not be. What's wrong with it?

I tried 2x U/AC2's, 2x LBX5's, and then 2x RAC2's for ballistics. The U/AC2's jammed a lot (yes I have the anti-jam skill points) and the 2xLBX5's / 2xRAC2's were heavy so I had to downgrade my missile slot. The ER LARGE LASER gives a nice little sniping option vs enemy mech peeking around corners at a distance.

1. what mech are you running this on?

2. I would be careful about falling into the trap of putting on a single weapon with the intent of using it in a certain range bracket. If you have a single ER Large Laser to offer yourself some sniping capability, what this means is that you'll be going up against mechs with say, SIX ER Large Lasers in that bracket who will carve you up. And the tonnage devoted to the ERLL degrades from your combat potential in other range brackets. Just in general it's best to commit to a single range -- if you're gonna brawl, go all in on brawling, etc.

[YueFei]

MechMaster059, on 10 June 2022 - 09:18 AM, said:

I figured it might not be. What's wrong with it?

I tried 2x U/AC2's, 2x LBX5's, and then 2x RAC2's for ballistics. The U/AC2's jammed a lot (yes I have the anti-jam skill points) and the 2xLBX5's / 2xRAC2's were heavy so I had to downgrade my missile slot. The ER LARGE LASER gives a nice little sniping option vs enemy mech peeking around corners at a distance.

Well, with the caveat that I'm not a very good player, I'll try to give my assessment.
(Just keep in mind that better players may disagree with my assessment and if so, you should look to their advice and not mine)

Your loadout is not focused and doesn't synergize. You don't necessarily need to "mono-boat" (all weapons of the same type), but you still want weapons that have similar profile (range, duration, cooldowns, alpha-oriented / sustain-oriented, hitscan / projectile) so that you can be at an advantage in your chosen range bracket and engagement type.

As it is now, you're at a disadvantage at all range brackets and engagement types against any opponent that has a focused build.

If you encounter a long range specialist, your single ER Large will lose out against their loadout every time you trade with them. You're better off just not even trying to expose against them at long range. Even if you do manage to get closer, the rest of your loadout doesn't have either a massive throw-weight (alpha-oriented) nor does it have threatening DPS (sustain-oriented), because the MRM20 and ER Large don't give you a lot of front-loaded damage, and the single RAC5 doesn't give you a lot of DPS, either.

If you encounter a mid-range specialist, their mid-range loadout might out-trade you even at long range despite damage fall-off, simply because they'll have a greater throw-weight of guns than you. Your single ER Large does 9 damage, meanwhile if your opponent has 6 ER Mediums doing 30 damage total, and even if he's only getting 33% of his full damage due to fall-off, his 10 damage would still be greater than your 9 damage. The advantage he has over you only intensifies at mid-range, again for the same reasons as before. If you trade alpha-for-alpha at midrange, you'll barely get any uptime on the RAC5, and otherwise it's a single MRM20 and ERLLas for you. Even if all he has is 6xERMLas he can out-trade you simply by taking his shot while on the move, because you can't accurately hit with both the MRM20 and ERLLas at the same time. The MRM20 you have to lead the shot, and the ERLLas is hitscan which you must track on the target throughout its duration. If instead you faced a sustain-oriented build in a high face-time fight, say a 2xRAC5, his 2xRAC5 is going to significantly out-DPS your 1xRAC5, so again you're fighting uphill here.

Same deal with Brawlers. Your loadout doesn't have enough alpha or DPS to really force a brawler to alter their approach path. It's likely that a brawler could just straight up face-rush you across open ground starting from 700 meters away and still be intact enough upon arrival to win with sheer alpha and DPS.

Since you've already mentioned that you've tried builds with 2 ballistics, I'd suggest going in that direction, say with 2xRAC5s, and dropping the missile slot and the ER Large. You do not have to fill out every weapon hardpoint your mech has.

The choice of chassis also makes a big difference. Which mech chassis and variant are you using?