247 replies to this topic

[Curccu]

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

Seriously, 30 damage? Come on dude, at that distance? FFS.

Why must we reinforce the PPFLD min-maxy meta? Dude, the problem isn't that it's not mixed with other weapons, it's the fact that it still hurts a lot. Hell the boom AC20, the 2x AC20, despite GH, is serviceable.

We got triple peeps, twin heavy peeps and in this thread even talking PPC capacitors which would bump that up so 30 isn't issue and haven't really been in long time.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

Why the hell would people bother with a 40-PPFLD short range when they can do 50 ppfld at much much longer-range? Charge time isn't exactly that much of a stumbling block, guys like you master pre-charging anyways.

Reading these forums, even this thread it seems to me massive issue for some players.... like manual transmissions on car for most of the 'murican ppl.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

Of course, granted, it depends on how much GH Multiplier the change becomes -- but the 2x HGRs typically are only supported by lasers, or none at all -- and the none-at-all can just as well handle the heat. I don't think it would be healthy for the game to have a 60 PPFLD, not at that distance.

I like the GH limit being reduced to 1 though, compounded with the increase of heat to 4, we can use it to imply increased heat with mid-ranged 50 PPFLD, but so far that is it. I think the rest are power-creeping -- and if your concern is with reference of "everything" else, I think everything else also needs some toning down as well TBH.

What I understand from QK post that he meant that ghostheat would be so bad that you basically cannot shoot more than one HGR or just limit charge to max 1 and at that point 30 damage would be ok to keep them viable and I agree.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

But you know, if we must power-creep, I think AC20 needs range bonus and +1 HSL.

HSL +1 should have been done Years ago or pretty much never even added limit IMO. At least when HGR was released AC20 hsl should have been bumbed up so you can shoot two without penalty.

[The6thMessenger]

Curccu, on 03 August 2022 - 02:24 AM, said:

We got triple peeps, twin heavy peeps and in this thread even talking PPC capacitors which would bump that up so 30 isn't issue and haven't really been in long time.

Not ones that does little heat that lets you use it whenever so long as you got ammo, and needs only like 18 tons -- note that 2x HPPC is at 20 tons and you still typically build it with more heatsinks. And if you don't know, that is on top of a -1 slot that would make it compatible with Light Engines -- or at least that is what we were talking about.

FFS

Curccu, on 03 August 2022 - 02:24 AM, said:

Reading these forums, even this thread it seems to me massive issue for some players.... like manual transmissions on car for most of the 'murican ppl.

Yeah but pro players get it, and so far if that's the case, it only really serves them more than the common folk -- again the min-maxing attitude of the comp guys again, the high-risk high-reward BS. At least back then they learn the tools of the trade and had to git-gud, instead of calling the shots.

Curccu, on 03 August 2022 - 02:24 AM, said:

What I understand from QK post that he meant that ghostheat would be so bad that you basically cannot shoot more than one HGR or just limit charge to max 1 and at that point 30 damage would be ok to keep them viable and I agree.

Something I already acknowledged. Even so, people shoot 3x CERPPC, even if the GH is incredibly bad that we tend to overheat in just one shot. A 2x HGR, even if it GHs, 60 PPFLD at a distance is still quite devastating. At least pre-buff, that's just 50 at 220m.

But why must be an 18-ton weapon be comparable to a 30-ton setup? 450m optimal range be damned.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 August 2022 - 03:21 AM.

[Curccu]

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 03:02 AM, said:

Not ones that does little heat that lets you use it whenever so long as you got ammo, and needs only like 18 tons -- note that 2x HPPC is at 20 tons and you still typically build it with more heatsinks. And if you don't know, that is on top of a -1 slot that would make it compatible with Light Engines -- or at least that is what we were talking about.

FFS

And if you use that weight difference to get that 14 shots out of HGR vs infinite ammo, HPPCs are also XL compatible already.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 03:02 AM, said:

Yeah but pro players get it, and so far if that's the case, it only really serves them more than the common folk -- again the min-maxing attitude of the comp guys again, the high-risk high-reward BS. At least back then they learn the tools of the trade and had to git-gud, instead of calling the shots.

So are we balancing game by what only top players can do or for the masses?
I haven't played lately but when I did (few months ago) HGR was pretty damn rare sight.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 03:02 AM, said:

Something I already acknowledged. Even so, people shoot 3x CERPPC, even if the GH is incredibly bad that we tend to overheat in just one shot. A 2x HGR, even if it GHs, 60 PPFLD at a distance is still quite devastating. At least pre-buff, that's just 50 at 220m.

But why must be an 18-ton weapon be comparable to a 30-ton setup? 450m optimal range be damned.

Well even 4xcERPPCs for some builds like HGN-IIC-A so 40 pinpoint + 20 splash @ 890m with 1900m/s velocity before skilltree.
And I don't know why are you comparing that setup to single HGR without ammo

[The6thMessenger]

Curccu, on 03 August 2022 - 04:25 AM, said:

And if you use that weight difference to get that 14 shots out of HGR vs infinite ammo, HPPCs are also XL compatible already.

And again, you build heat-sinks on the HPPCs.

I'm not really all too concerned with the 1:1 build, people find ways to make the build fit. My concern is it's performance if it is on the field -- as in a 450m 30-PPFLD heat-neutral weapon, seems to me is just power-creep.

Curccu, on 03 August 2022 - 04:25 AM, said:

So are we balancing game by what only top players can do or for the masses?
I haven't played lately but when I did (few months ago) HGR was pretty damn rare sight.

I'm sorry, do you not understand where I stand with this? I do not want the increase of gauss-charge that was proposed by QK -- the one with the 30-PPFLD outwards 400m-450m optimal range in lieu of 1.0s charge.

I don't want their min-max approach, maximizing specialization while making things harder such as the aforementioned increased charge time for the HGR to justify broken PPFLD.

Sadly, even their discord is out right "Comp Balance" (as of right now, last I checked), FFS, they really like their skill.

Curccu, on 03 August 2022 - 04:25 AM, said:

Well even 4xcERPPCs for some builds like HGN-IIC-A so 40 pinpoint + 20 splash @ 890m with 1900m/s velocity before skilltree.

You mean they still do it despite the horrible heat-spike? Exactly my concern -- that the 60 PPFLD of two 1-GH 30-PPFLD outwards 450m HGR, is likely to be just done despite the high heat-spike.

If your justification is that those other weapons are able to do it, then if anything the other weapons should be toned down than the HGR being brought to their exaggerated levels.

Curccu, on 03 August 2022 - 04:25 AM, said:

And I don't know why are you comparing that setup to single HGR without ammo

Because I wasn't, I was comparing the 18 ton HGR to the 30-ton of 2x GR. What I was citing with the 3x CERPPC is the heat-spike in practice.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 August 2022 - 05:13 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

Seriously, 30 damage? Come on dude, at that distance? FFS.

Only if the ghost heat/charge limit is changed so that you can only fire one at a time would I say 30, sorry I might not have been clear about that. 30 or 30/30 is still better than 50 imo. Then if you really wanted to make the Fafnir fearsome/special you could give it a quirk to change that limit so that it can fire both if was really deemed necessary (I still am on that fence on whether that is really healthy, but meh).

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

Why must we reinforce the PPFLD min-maxy meta? Dude, the problem isn't that it's not mixed with other weapons, it's the fact that it still hurts a lot. Hell the boom AC20, the 2x AC20, despite GH, is serviceable.

It is alright, but the boom AC20 builds died with the introduction of HSR and Ghost Heat which double whammy'd it to death. Compared to other what one might call short range poke builds (typically snubnose and MLs compete for the same title) I don't think most dual AC20 builds have done well outside of the dual LBX20 HBK-IIC it niche circumstances.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

Charge time isn't exactly that much of a stumbling block, guys like you master pre-charging anyways.

I think the thing that everyone forgets about charge time though, is that unless you are predicting needing to shoot (which you aren't always) you aren't always able to snap shot. So if someone is able to get the jump on you (like a light), you aren't going to be able to necessarily flick and shoot them. Charge-up is interesting because of this in that it does actually place some limits on snapshots (it has irritated me a few time). Not saying it comes up all the time but it does come up enough that it can cause some hesitation (especially at extreme range poke fights).

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 12:52 AM, said:

The charge time is a no-no. We HAD the 1.0s, charge time, and it only served to ruin the timing because people have to wait for .25s longer.

I proposed the 0.75s for the LGR because it's also ruining the timing, but on the different direction, that the 0.25s less charge up time, isn't really being utilized properly in my experience that it ends up being rather inefficient.

IMO, them having sync'd charge times matters more for cases where you are mixing them. If they are meant to be used for distinct circumstances then I don't feel like they need to be the same especially if the AV cues line up. I think the biggest problem with charge times is that I'm not 100% sure the audio cue lines up with the different charge time (could be wrong on that though).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 August 2022 - 10:24 AM.

[Staude Coston]

name='Navid A1' timestamp=
Hello people.

======================
TLDR:
Would you be ok if Light Gauss rifles were linked again with PPC family in their heat penalty group (like regular Gauss), IF it allows us to boost individual PPC type and Gauss rifles weapons on their own?


======================


Further boosts to SNPPCs might also be considered following this.



SNPPCs 15dmg+2,5+2,5 it's doable, isn't it

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 10:22 AM, said:

Only if the ghost heat/charge limit is changed so that you can only fire one at a time would I say 30, sorry I might not have been clear about that. 30 or 30/30 is still better than 50 imo. Then if you really wanted to make the Fafnir fearsome/special you could give it a quirk to change that limit so that it can fire both if was really deemed necessary (I still am on that fence on whether that is really healthy, but meh).

But GH limit can be ignored anyways -- that is what I was saying, like the 3x CERPPC, despite overheating the mech after 1 shot. And giving Fafnir +1 HSL with that is exactly counterproductive to the concern.

Even then, 30/30 PPFLD is still kind of nasty, that's like 4x GR territory, but at 450m range.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 10:22 AM, said:

It is alright, but the boom AC20 builds died with the introduction of HSR and Ghost Heat which double whammy'd it to death. Compared to other what one might call short range poke builds (typically snubnose and MLs compete for the same title) I don't think most dual AC20 builds have done well outside of the dual LBX20 HBK-IIC it niche circumstances.

Yeah, well, they kinda need a buff TBH. +1 HSL is a good step, but still AC20s need more than that.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 10:22 AM, said:

I think the thing that everyone forgets about charge time though, is that unless you are predicting needing to shoot (which you aren't always) you aren't always able to snap shot. So if someone is able to get the jump on you (like a light), you aren't going to be able to necessarily flick and shoot them. Charge-up is interesting because of this in that it does actually place some limits on snapshots (it has irritated me a few time). Not saying it comes up all the time but it does come up enough that it can cause some hesitation (especially at extreme range poke fights).

I'm not challenging the concept of charge-up time, but I do question the point the challenge of it at a mechanical level. Making things of different charge-up time simply increases the required training between Gausses because it's not transferrable. It's just extra BS to be learned.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 10:22 AM, said:

IMO, them having sync'd charge times matters more for cases where you are mixing them. If they are meant to be used for distinct circumstances then I don't feel like they need to be the same especially if the AV cues line up. I think the biggest problem with charge times is that I'm not 100% sure the audio cue lines up with the different charge time (could be wrong on that though).

IIRC the audio cues does not line up, but I don't remember the era where HGR was at 1.0s charge up.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 03:02 PM, said:

But GH limit can be ignored anyways -- that is what I was saying, like the 3x CERPPC, despite overheating the mech after 1 shot. And giving Fafnir +1 HSL with that is exactly counterproductive to the concern.

Even then, 30/30 PPFLD is still kind of nasty, that's like 4x GR territory, but at 450m range.

It also costs a bare minimum of 36 tons and takes up your entire side torsos. I'm okay with incremental changes though to be clear, it is just if we limit charge up to one HGR at a time it better be worth it especially if its cooldown is around 5+ seconds thus why I thought it might be worth bumping damage. Again, can definitely play with the numbers as its range gets bumped up. I definitely think it should get bumped though, it seems weird to make the weapon incentivized to close to AC20 ranges.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 03:02 PM, said:

Yeah, well, they kinda need a buff TBH. +1 HSL is a good step, but still AC20s need more than that.

I'd agree, part of the problem is you can't really combine them with XLs either due to slot constraints (because of them having to be mounted in the side torso or arms with actuators) or the mech just can't run XLs due to hitboxes making it a death trap. You need that speed to close that gap. Either way, yeah, bumping the HSL +1 would be nice but still doesn't quite capture some of the problems with them (tonnage just to mount them is another issue).

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 03:02 PM, said:

I'm not challenging the concept of charge-up time, but I do question the point the challenge of it at a mechanical level. Making things of different charge-up time simply increases the required training between Gausses because it's not transferrable. It's just extra BS to be learned.

IIRC the audio cues does not line up, but I don't remember the era where HGR was at 1.0s charge up.

Just linking these two because this is really the problem. The audio/visual cues need to line up with the charge time because then the only thing to learn is when the charge up is complete (which if you are relying on cues rather than an internal clock, then you have less to relearn). The alternative is to make them mechanically less awkward and either you can hold the charge (at the expense of continual heat) or you can make it so that once they hit full charge they immediately fire. The latter makes them less awkward to work because the main problem is letting the charge go just so you don't waste a shot once you a free to cancel the charge, especially if you take the unnecessary gauss charge skills. The former means there needs to be a way to "cancel" charges.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 August 2022 - 04:01 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 03:55 PM, said:

It also costs a bare minimum of 36 tons and takes up your entire side torsos. I'm okay with incremental changes though to be clear, it is just if we limit charge up to one HGR at a time it better be worth it especially if its cooldown is around 5+ seconds thus why I thought it might be worth bumping damage. Again, can definitely play with the numbers as its range gets bumped up. I definitely think it should get bumped though, it seems weird to make the weapon incentivized to close to AC20 ranges.

Dude, 25 damage outwards 450m is already pretty ******* dope from a 18 ton, and you already let them use Light Engines in that scenario. You are giving the power of a 2x GR usually for heavies on the mechs that wouldn't be able to do so otherwise -- so why 2x GR again if it's just at 660m? Why not just be faster and lighter, and stand closer?

Gauss has 1:1 damage right? So basically the 25 damage is 25 ton, so that's like a 7-ton save from the setup -- and mediums can reliably mount these. Grid-Iron can mount these, and that dude has a -50% Gauss CD.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 03:55 PM, said:

I'd agree, part of the problem is you can't really combine them with XLs either due to slot constraints (because of them having to be mounted in the side torso or arms with actuators) or the mech just can't run XLs due to hitboxes making it a death trap. You need that speed to close that gap. Either way, yeah, bumping the HSL +1 would be nice but still doesn't quite capture some of the problems with them (tonnage just to mount them is another issue).

I'd honestly rather just address the shortcomings than make a niche. Why not increase the IS AC ranges to that of Clan? That way you can bump the AC20 range from 270m to 360m, while the AC10 retains relevance by being outwards 540m. Alternatively also increase velocity.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 03:55 PM, said:

Just linking these two because this is really the problem. The audio/visual cues need to line up with the charge time because then the only thing to learn is when the charge up is complete (which if you are relying on cues rather than an internal clock, then you have less to relearn). The alternative is to make them mechanically less awkward and either you can hold the charge (at the expense of continual heat) or you can make it so that once they hit full charge they immediately fire. The latter makes them less awkward to work because the main problem is letting the charge go just so you don't waste a shot once you a free to cancel the charge, especially if you take the unnecessary gauss charge skills. The former means there needs to be a way to "cancel" charges.

I honestly happen to like the charge, and it's good as it is. I just wanted the gauss family to share the same charge-up time for simplicity and transference of training.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 August 2022 - 05:10 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 04:42 PM, said:

Dude, 25 damage outwards 450m is already pretty ******* dope from a 18 ton, and you already let them use Light Engines in that scenario. Gauss has 1:1 damage right? So basically the 25 damage is 25 ton, so that's like a 7-ton save from the setup -- and mediums can reliably mount these. Grid-Iron can mount these, and that dude has a -50% Gauss CD.

It's hard to say how many mediums outside the Grid Iron would bother with heavy gauss even with LFE, because DPT-wise, these still come nowhere near energy weapons and given the mobile and fragile nature of mediums typically, energy weapons just meld better with the playstyle. Gauss boats are generally lacking in damage output compared to other builds which is why strong Gauss boats are far and few between (KDK-3 is probably the only one?). All I'm saying is I still think we are over-estimating how good just a change to range and a reduction in slots actually is, but definitely still worth the attempt to do something to it because right now it doesn't really make sense.

Again, not saying it has to be 30 damage, or even have the charge limit changed. I just think it would be nice. I do think it would be nice to see the charge limit increased for LGR though if they stay 10 damage.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 04:42 PM, said:

I'd honestly rather just address the shortcomings than make a niche. Why not increase the IS AC ranges to that of Clan? That way you can bump the AC20 range from 270m to 360m, while the AC10 retains relevance by being outwards 540m. Alternatively also increase velocity.

Not against that either.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 04:42 PM, said:

I honestly happen to like the charge, and it's good as it is. I just wanted the gauss family to share the same charge-up time for simplicity and transference of training.

I'm not against it per se, I just don't like that we are hard trained on setting them the same across the board or that we are stuck with 0.75s just because cues can't be aligned or we fear it will cause cross-wiring. That sounds unnecessarily rigid. We already have velocities and durations that are all inconsistent and it isn't as big of a deal (I do dislike it significantly because it changes synergies first but muscle memory second).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 August 2022 - 05:00 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 04:57 PM, said:

It's hard to say how many mediums outside the Grid Iron would bother with heavy gauss even with LFE, because DPT-wise, these still come nowhere near energy weapons and given the mobile and fragile nature of mediums typically, energy weapons just meld better with the playstyle.

Certainly more now because of the op setup. Of course that's just one thing, the other is actually how they perform in the field. Sure GI might be just one broke gauss platform -- but nothing is stopping EVERYONE from running it, as if the game becomes Gauss-Iron Online. Not saying that WILL happen, but just highlighting something.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 04:57 PM, said:

Gauss boats are generally lacking in damage output compared to other builds which is why strong Gauss boats are far and few between (KDK-3 is probably the only one?). All I'm saying is I still think we are over-estimating how good just a change to range and a reduction in slots actually is, but definitely still worth the attempt to do something to it because right now it doesn't really make sense.

I'm really more on the side of everything else just needs toning down. And why do we need gauss-boats to be that powerful? Surely they can also be mixed with lasers?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 04:57 PM, said:

Again, not saying it has to be 30 damage, or even have the charge limit changed. I just think it would be nice. I do think it would be nice to see the charge limit increased for LGR though if they stay 10 damage.

Yeha, it's nice, okay I can give you that. But it's an online multiplayer game that requires a semblance of balance, or it could become unfun.

The 3x LGR for 30 damage at 810m is kind of fine for me, though that will ruin a bit of things. I happen to like 2x LGR + 2x ERPPC of Warhammer. Though I guess that could still be done by HG linking the LGRs, allowing 3 to fire at once, but would still hit GH.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 04:57 PM, said:

I'm not against it per se, I just don't like that we are hard trained on setting them the same across the board or that we are stuck with 0.75s just because cues can't be aligned or we fear it will cause cross-wiring. That sounds unnecessarily rigid. We already have velocities and durations that are all inconsistent and it isn't as big of a deal (I do dislike it significantly because it changes synergies first but muscle memory second).

Velocities and duration aren't as attention-required as with having to charge the gauss. As in you literally have to pay attention for it to fire at all.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 August 2022 - 05:33 PM.

[Alstren]

Snubs OP... Buff Pulse Lasers nuff said

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 05:30 PM, said:

I'm really more on the side of everything else just needs toning down. And why do we need gauss-boats to be that powerful? Surely they can also be mixed with lasers?

All I'm saying is that Gauss by itself, really hasn't been that dangerous since the honestly the Gaussapult days so bring up DPT feels a bit deceptive. By that metric, AC20s are also really great.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 05:30 PM, said:

Yeha, it's nice, okay I can give you that. But it's an online multiplayer game that requires a semblance of balance, or it could become unfun.

The 3x LGR for 30 damage at 810m is kind of fine for me, though that will ruin a bit of things. I happen to like 2x LGR + 2x ERPPC of Warhammer. Though I guess that could still be done by HG linking the LGRs, allowing 3 to fire at once, but would still hit GH.

I get it, I just don't like that we are incosistently applying a rule. The charge limit was put in place because ghost heat on Gauss didn't make sense, so it still seems weird that everything just has a two limit charge up given the purpose of it originally. I think changing that to be more in line with how ghost heat works would definitely help alleviate some concern that people have about buffing heavy gauss and allow it to be more potent for most mechs which can't run dual HGR. I can't think of what 3 LGR would really open up but meh, seems reasonable given how AC10s are.

The6thMessenger, on 03 August 2022 - 05:30 PM, said:

Velocities and duration aren't as attention-required as with having to charge the gauss. As in you literally have to pay attention for it to fire at all.

I guess, but imo the velocities causing missed shots is more problematic and harder to correct than learning timings on Gauss charge (only because I use audio cues but meh) but that is just me.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 07:53 PM, said:

All I'm saying is that Gauss by itself, really hasn't been that dangerous since the honestly the Gaussapult days so bring up DPT feels a bit deceptive. By that metric, AC20s are also really great.

Sure, but the thing with the AC20 is that it's held back by the 270m optimal range, it's DPT is held back by the fact that it's not really easily usable

As in, so the **** what? Enjoy your 1.428 damage/ton, at 270m, you ******* cretin -- lol. Kind of like, enjoy your 1.3888 DPT at 220m as with HGR right now, or the ATM's 4.2857 DPT is restricted between 120m-245m.

That's not the same with our new proposal with HGR, it's much more relevant now because it's no longer restricted to the 220m min-range, it's much more usable outwards 450m by your proposal -- and note that even if it's 25 damage, at 450m outwards 900m, the basic standard, it's still dealing 20 damage at 540m -- which is twice of AC20 range, and is PPC range.

I bet if you let AC20 participate outwards 450m as well, even if it still has it's 900m/s velocity, it'll be a largely different and much more relevant story because you can actually much easily bring that DPT advantage to bear.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 07:53 PM, said:

The charge limit was put in place because ghost heat on Gauss didn't make sense, so it still seems weird that everything just has a two limit charge up given the purpose of it originally. I think changing that to be more in line with how ghost heat works would definitely help alleviate some concern that people have about buffing heavy gauss and allow it to be more potent for most mechs which can't run dual HGR.

Yeah well, I agree with the difference in charging with respect with gauss, but that seems mechanical and new codes -- which PGI seem to be unable to do these days, so we're stuck with 2x Gauss of either class -- it's not as much as consistency, but limitation of PGI's capability. If they could only just make MWO UE4, then they could do **** with it, like modders did.

If it were possible, the 1x HGR mechanical hard-cap i mean, would probably work, the 30 damage is still hard to justify -- possibly could be if we retain it's STD engine requirement so **** that. But I bet people wouldn't be happy being unable to fire two of them, especially Fafnir. +1 HSL is one thing, but mechanical differences between mechs would prolly be too much for PGI.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 07:53 PM, said:

I can't think of what 3 LGR would really open up but meh, seems reasonable given how AC10s are.

Cancer long-range attritions, maybe, once we get the redefinition of their range roles. But yeah, maybe but not sure.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 August 2022 - 07:53 PM, said:

I guess, but imo the velocities causing missed shots is more problematic and harder to correct than learning timings on Gauss charge (only because I use audio cues but meh) but that is just me.

The thing with velocity is that, it's different from being able to get a shot out at all.

Even if you're using LGR/HGR outwards 810m with 2300 m/s, that's still like 0.352s of anticipation where the moving target would be. The AC20 at 900 velocity, it's pretty much 316.8m of distance. So basically not only you have to deal with the gauss mechanic, you also have to worry with velocity on top.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 August 2022 - 08:25 PM.

[Nightbird]

If ACs are on the table, I suggest change the max range (not optimal) so for IS:

AC/2 720 optimal 1500 max
AC/5 620 optimal 1500max
AC/5 450 optimal 1500 max
AC/20 270 optimal 1500 max

Basically slow velocity rather than artificial damage drop off should be used to limit the usefulness range. If you can lead with an AC20 at 900 meters, you should be rewarded with some damage.

I also suggest revisiting max range for damage drop-off weapons to allow more range overlap. For example, if the optimal ranges of 3 laser weapons are 200, 300, 400, instead of having the max range be 400, 600, 800, let it be 600, 700, 800. This gives longer range weapons an advantage at range, but allows attrition and lets people deal some damage back in most situations.

[The6thMessenger]

Nightbird, on 03 August 2022 - 08:37 PM, said:

I also suggest revisiting max range for damage drop-off weapons to allow more range overlap. For example, if the optimal ranges of 3 laser weapons are 200, 300, 400, instead of having the max range be 400, 600, 800, let it be 600, 700, 800. This gives longer range weapons an advantage at range, but allows attrition and lets people deal some damage back in most situations.

I like the idea of higher max range for the ACs, but I can't justify that on the lasers -- mainly because they have unlimited ammo. That also defeats the purpose of ER Lasers. Also out-ranging presents a counter play with weapons, even if they just do glancing damage.

I'd say: 360/540/720/900m optimal, and 900/1080/1440/1800m max for the ACs.

In that scenario, AC20 still deals 10 damage at 630m, so you are still rewarded with some damage.
I can also agree with a bit of buff for the Smalls though. Sure as hell they are anemic as ****, I don't think being able to molest people at longer ranges would be the end of the world.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 August 2022 - 10:02 PM.

[vonJerg]

Nightbird, on 03 August 2022 - 08:37 PM, said:

If ACs are on the table, I suggest change the max range (not optimal) so for IS:

AC/2 720 optimal 1500 max
AC/5 620 optimal 1500max
AC/5 450 optimal 1500 max
AC/20 270 optimal 1500 max

Basically slow velocity rather than artificial damage drop off should be used to limit the usefulness range. If you can lead with an AC20 at 900 meters, you should be rewarded with some damage.

I also suggest revisiting max range for damage drop-off weapons to allow more range overlap. For example, if the optimal ranges of 3 laser weapons are 200, 300, 400, instead of having the max range be 400, 600, 800, let it be 600, 700, 800. This gives longer range weapons an advantage at range, but allows attrition and lets people deal some damage back in most situations.

Can you imagine a flight path of AC20 slug at 1500m range? Bloody howitzer, we like's, me want's, Cauldron make it so, pls pls pls, pls!!!

[Staude Coston]

Nightbird, on 03 August 2022 - 08:37 PM, said:

If ACs are on the table, I suggest change the max range (not optimal) so for IS:

AC/2 720 optimal 1500 max
AC/5 620 optimal 1500max
AC/5 450 optimal 1500 max
AC/20 270 optimal 1500 max

Basically slow velocity rather than artificial damage drop off should be used to limit the usefulness range. If you can lead with an AC20 at 900 meters, you should be rewarded with some damage.

I also suggest revisiting max range for damage drop-off weapons to allow more range overlap. For example, if the optimal ranges of 3 laser weapons are 200, 300, 400, instead of having the max range be 400, 600, 800, let it be 600, 700, 800. This gives longer range weapons an advantage at range, but allows attrition and lets people deal some damage back in most situations.

From IS point of view PERFECT
keep it up AC20 at 900 meters 18.85 dmg would be doable

1500 meters 16,85 dmg

Edited by Staude, 04 August 2022 - 05:06 AM.

[vonJerg]

And do not forget to add blast radius, copy/paste from artillery strike shells.

So IS would use HE shell, and CLAN would use cluster munition.

[Staude Coston]

vonJerg, on 04 August 2022 - 05:19 AM, said:

And do not forget to add blast radius, copy/paste from artillery strike shells.

So IS would use HE shell, and CLAN would use cluster munition.

I'll let Cauldron calculate the radius Otherwise everything perfect I would suggest that the clan side can also use mouse traps