137 replies to this topic

[MechMaster059]

What follows is an analysis of the problems with the current implementation of X-Pulse lasers and how to address them. (This isn't a "feature" so it seems like this is the correct place to post)

TLDR:
X-Pulse lasers currently having terrible alpha making them weak weapons in the peek-a-boo meta and where cover is available. Conversely, against distracted targets or targets caught in the open, Medium and Large X-Pulse lasers have tremendous damage output that is overpowered. Both issues can be solved by increasing weapon cycle time resulting in front-loaded damage output that increases alpha in short bursts even with reduced overall DPS.

Below I show how an MXPL with a 0.80 second cycle time and 42% increased DPS over an MPL has equivalent DPS for a 1.80 second burst to the current implementation of an MXPL with a 0.50 second cycle time and 70% increased DPS over an MPL. (See the pretty spread-sheet picture below for proof)

Hear me now and believe me 5 years later: It will be difficult to make X-Pulse lasers work well unless the cycle time is increased.

=====

I tried out the newest version of 2xLXPL lasers with the following build on a CDA-3F:
A\692:Z0|EdpS0|a@|Y?|i^|i^qS0|a@|Y?|i^|OG|OGr00s00tS0uS0v30w404040

The weak:
- River City, I sneak up behind an enemy heavy mech and start firing, it IMMEDIATELY turns around and starts firing back forcing me to run away without inflicting much damage.
- Other times firing upon lights/mediums which quickly get behind cover or jump-jet upwards bringing my damage output to a quick end.
- I struggle to maintain every pulse of damage upon the same component in face-brawls due to fast weapon cycle time making it hard to re-adjust aim against constant torso-twisting before the next pulse fires.

I found the situation where I tried back-stabbing the heavy mech and it turning around to shoo me away before I could inflict any meaningful damage into its back particularly disturbing. It really drove home to me the fact that against players with a fast reaction time, XPLs have serious issues that need to be resolved before they can become good weapons without being OP.

The strong:
- Polar Highlands (Domination), enemy Stone Rhino is standing there in one of those little pathway choke-points facing off with an assault on my team. It keeps moving forward to strike, then backing off behind some cover. I can still barely see him even when he backs off. I sit there for over 10 seconds melting right through his front CT armor. Same match, a battered laser vomit Cougar engages me near the end, I'm burning through him, I twist to eat his ER Medium laser salvo, then twist back and melt his RT off. I feel safe and certain that within the remaining cooldown time of his laser vomit I can kill him. Domination timer ends before I can get the kill. My end score: 3 kills, 950+ damage dealt.
- Grim Plexis, see at the end of a losing match that an enemy Thunderbolt boating 3xLXPLs has over 1,100 damage dealt.
- Enemy CDA-3F boating 3xLXPLs having 900+ damage at end of match in 2 back-to-back matches. (The inspiration for my build, though I chose to go with 2xLXPLs + 2xML for better heat management and some reliable alpha in brawls)

Make no mistake about it, the +70% DPS on a MXPL and +50% DPS on a LPXL compared to their standard pulse laser counterparts is OP. It's harder to notice in the MXPL due to its short range putting the equipped mech in more dangerous and dynamic situations where it's harder to maintain time on target/component. The long range of the LXPL allows it to better exploit the massive DPS boost over a LPL. Keep in mind that when you have 2xLXPLs equipped, that's equivalent in DPS to carrying a 3rd LPL for FREE.

Other Observations:
- XPLs have the same slot and weight requirements of their PL counterparts, thus they should be balanced with PLs in mind as their primary competitors. The current DPS boost of +30%(SXPL), +70%(MXPL), and +50%(LXPL) relative to their PL counterparts is an irregular distribution that doesn't match the DPS distribution of standard PLs. (1.53 DPS SPL, 1.76 DPS MPL, 2.93 DPS LPL) This indicates XPLs were designed without proper numerical analysis done. They need to be normalized to the same flat % DPS boost across the board. (Notice the very similar DPS of the SPL and MPL, this is due to the MPL having nearly twice the range of a SPL making it much safer and more likely to be in range to fire at all.)

- The ratio of cooldown / duration for standard Pulse lasers is ~4:1. For XPLs that ratio is 1:1. This means the Laser Duration skills are OP AS HELL on XPLs. The reason Laser Duration skills give a much bigger percentage gain than the global cooldown skills is because the duration of lasers is usually a small fraction of the overall cycle time so they need to give a high percent to even be noticeable. This is not the case with XPLs. Increasing the cooldown time on XPLs would mitigate this.

- The fast cycle time and 1:1 ratio of cooldown / duration on XPLs makes it impossible to chain-fire more than 2 of them at a time. Allowing chain-fire for more XPLs would smooth out their heat generation which would help maintain fire when a mech approaches its heat cap. Again, increasing the cooldown would help mitigate this. Laser weapons are often mounted in matching pairs so the number of XPLs that can be chain-fired should be an even number. The next even number after 2 is 4, so being able to chain-fire 4 XPLs means they need a cooldown that is 3x longer than their duration.
(I'm getting weird results chain-firing 2 MXPLs on a Firestarter for around -25% loss in DPS and 2LXPLs on my CDA-3F for around -30% loss in DPS compared to alpha-firing them. The cooldown is slightly longer than the duration on the Firestarter and the LXPLs on the CDA-3F have a slightly shorter cooldown (thanks to -20% cooldown quirk) than duration. I was expecting about -5% lower DPS instead of -25/30%. Can anyone explain what I'm missing here?)

- As others have noted on the forum, having the same damage / heat ratio of PLs greatly diminishes the value of the increased DPS. Being more heat efficient would make XPLs an attractive option to pair with other hot weapons giving them an extra niche to fill compared to PLs. I had recommended a buff of 10% better damage / heat for XPLs but after play-testing them, I'm sure that won't be enough and now recommend 20% better damage / heat compared to PLs. This would result in XPLs still having higher heat / second than PLs to differentiate them and more harshly punish missing with them compared to PLs.

=====

Given the above, what needs to be done?

- XPLs need to be given enough alpha to have at least a little bite to them for very short durations when boating 2x or more of them.
- XPLs need to have their cooldown increased to allow front loading of damage to achieve the above point and enable chain-firing up to 4x of them.
- XPLs need to be made more damage / heat efficient

And now for some magic... How do you make a +42% DPS weapon do +70% DPS? The following spread-sheet picture shows you how:

X-Pulse Cycle Time Damage Distribution:


I chose to use the MXPL as an example since it was the closest to being balanced when XPLs were first introduced.
- The first line of each entry is the title
- The next line is the time scale divided into ¼ second increments.
- The next line shows the cycle time of a given version of MXLP being fired. Each little block represents 0.05 seconds. The black blocks represent firing duration, the empty blocks represent cooldown.
- The last line shows total damage done after each pulse as a function of time.

1. The top entry in orange shows the damage output of the original values for the MXPL.
2. The 2nd entry shows an MXLP with its cooldown doubled to 0.50 seconds for a total cycle time of 0.75 seconds and the pulse damage increased accordingly to equal +42% DPS relative to an MPL.
3. The 3rd entry shows an MXLP with its duration lowered to 0.20 seconds and cooldown increased to 0.60 seconds for a total cycle time of 0.80 seconds and +42% DPS relative to an MPL.
4. the 4th entry shows an MXLP with its cooldown tripled to 0.75 seconds for a total cycle time of 1.00 seconds and +42% DPS relative to an MPL.
5. The 5th and final entry shows the damage output of current values for an MXPL with +70% DPS relative to an MPL.

Notice:
- The 0.80 second cycle time entry has equal total damage dealt out to 1.80 seconds compared to the current implementation of an MXLP!
- The 1.00 second cycle time entry has equal total damage dealt out to 2.25 seconds compared to the current implementation of an MXLP!
(I thought I had made a mistake when I first saw these numbers. This shows the power of front-loading damage that increasing cycle time makes possible. They start out hitting stronger so the current implementation of an MXPL needs a couple of seconds to catch up. This means that in peek-a-boo situations, this proposed implementation would be EQUAL in damage output to the current implementation, yet NOT overpowered in sustained fire situations!)
- The increased cooldown gives players a nice window of time to re-adjust aiming at whatever component they're trying to hit in a face brawl.
- The numbers in red show the awful alpha for a single pulse of the lower cycle time entries.
- The purple 4.00 number with a green background at 1 second for the middle entry is the HIGHEST damage dealt at 1 second of all the entries.

Problem with the 1.00 cycle time entry:
- A 1.00 second cycle time is long enough for the weapon to lose its RAC-like nature which would be a shame and make the weapon less differentiated from other laser weapons than it is now. I consider this a significant drawback.
- Since it throws out ½ as many shots, missing a shot becomes a more painful loss of damage output.

Problems with the 0.75 cycle time entry:
- It can't chain-fire 4x XPLs.
- While it's a large improvement over the current implementation, it still doesn't front-load enough damage.

Recommended choice:
The middle entry with a duration of 0.20 seconds, a cooldown of 0.60 seconds and a +42% DPS boost over an MPL.
- Front-loads a sufficient amount of damage for a 1-pulse alpha to potentially destroy a damaged and exposed component when boated 2x or more.
- Still would fire much more rapidly than other lasers to maintain RAC-like feel.
- Shoots enough pulses to mitigate the consequences of missing a pulse.
- Can chain-fire 4x XPLs.

Computing for +20% damage / heat gives the following final recommended values for each XPL:

Recommended Values:


Legal Disclaimer:
Piranha Games Inc. may implement any of these suggestions, in whole or in part, without attribution for free.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 03:44 PM, said:

I've pitched in some front-loading to the Cauldron before, I was just told off by Tiy0s for it being OP, a special comment that it was so over-tuned. Low alpha was the weapon's point they said.

In my comment about the game being alpha, peekaboo based, Brauer said that the weakness of alpha builds were low DPS, that they can be DPSed off. So maybe they have a different take due to a different environment -- as in they are in a coordinated environment where they can push off the alpha-based peekaboo mechs, and wouldn't let you get away with what you can get away in QP.

Numbers look like nerf, MXL has -0.5 DPS, while LXL has -0.27. Even though it's front-loaded, you gotta remember that it's still a starey DPS weapon, that frontloading ain't going to amount for much because it's supposed to be done repeatedly and quickly anyways.

Your 1-second 2-second chart, while looks like it will work in theory -- though I think that's already dubious, in practice the encounters don't happen in a vacuum.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 October 2023 - 04:27 PM.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 04:10 PM, said:

I've pitched in some front-loading to the Cauldron before, I was just told off by Tiy0s for it being OP, a special comment that it was so over-tuned. Low alpha was the weapon's point they said.

The point isn't to turn XPLs into alpha weapons, the point is to give them just enough alpha to not totally suck.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 04:10 PM, said:

Numbers look like nerf, MXL has -0.5 DPS, while LXL has -0.27. Even though it's front-loaded, you gotta remember that it's still a starey DPS weapon, that frontloading ain't going to amount for much because it's supposed to be done repeatedly and quickly anyways.

The numbers are a nerf for continuous DPS. That's intentional. The MXPL and LXPL are over-boosted on DPS.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 04:10 PM, said:

Your 1-second 2-second chart, while looks like it will work in theory -- though I think that's already dubious, in practice the encounters don't happen in a vacuum.

It would be challenging for a mech you sneak up on or catch at an angle to duck behind cover in less than 2 seconds.

Edited by MechMaster059, 02 October 2023 - 04:41 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 04:29 PM, said:

It would be challenging for a mech you sneak up on or catch at an angle to duck behind cover in less than 2 seconds.

Sure. Why DPS weapons lately have been rather hard to implement, such as the RACs. Often you have to force committed engagements, and as a result more prone to being a damage magnet.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 04:29 PM, said:

The point isn't to turn XPLs into alpha weapons, the point is to give them just enough alpha to not totally suck.

The numbers are a nerf for continuous DPS. That's intentional. The MXPL and LXPL are over-boosted on DPS.

In your own chart, the current MXL has it beat in the 2-second mark, able to do 6 damage earlier than your recommended rework, and the 2.25s mark. Your thesis essentially boils down to it being only good at incredibly specific encounters where the window is at 1s long. But again, encounters aren't in a vacuum, they don't revolve on 1s long encounters, you'd be sure as hell to fire more than twice for such weapon.

As a DPS weapon, it is your job to make the encounters longer for the DPS to work -- but the DPS is lower.

I think your suggestion is ultimately to the detriment of the weapon, because it's being incentivized to work better on an application it's not supposed to be good at, while making it worse at it's supposed niche. If you want a 1s weapon, go with lasers, poke and hide.

Maybe buff the upfront damage? 2/2.4/3.9 damage is what I prefer. You can keep your 1s 2-burn rule, the 0.2s burn + 0.6s CD, and the DPS is still high as a result.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 04:29 PM, said:

It would be challenging for a mech you sneak up on or catch at an angle to duck behind cover in less than 2 seconds.

But since your idea of frontloading is that it's better at 1s mark, as if wedging it on a Large-Laser burn. That seems kinda moot, no?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

So there are roughly 4 types of weapons with regards to how they do damage over time:

• Instantaneous Alpha (PPFLD ie Gauss/PPCs)
  
• Burst Alpha (Laser Vomit)
  
• Burst DPS (cUAC dakka sort of falls into this category, RACs)
  
• Sustained DPS (AC5/AC10 boats)

Lasers will never be sustained DPS due to how energy weapons are designed in TT, lightweight and hot. Combined with how heat works different between the two mediums (overheating is punished in TT vs a resource to consume like Mechwarrior). This means unless it is paying for the heat efficiency in an upfront tonnage investment (as sustained DPS is really meant for mechs you anchor your team to) then it tends to fall more in the burst DPS category. The problem with X-Pulse is they just don't do damage fast enough to matter. You get heat-capped for the LXPLs before you can really compete with damage. I tried it out with a 4 LXPL Stalker because the mech has one of the better profiles for staring down enemies and still rolling damage while also having good mounts in the arms and it plays alright. I was able to punish PUGs but against more competent opponents it would've been blown out of the water even with good spots to poke from.


I don't feel like x-pulse have any chance of usurping gauss/laser vomit or dakka from the throne especially given it is IS laser vomit which feels on the whole, too hot.

So unless it boosts the DPS or makes them more heat efficient, like 6th said this won't move the needle and in the case of the MXPL, is a straight up nerf.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 02 October 2023 - 08:07 PM.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 07:18 PM, said:

...

I think the way you set up the weapon makes it a massive nothing-burger. It ain't got enough alpha to complete with the legit lasers in the first place -- nor it should, forcing it to the playstyle that it isn't suited to begin with, while it'll have a reduction with it's DPS when it already feels bad right now.

I'm not "forcing it to the playstyle that it isn't suited to". The point is merely to make it not worthless in peek-a-boo situations as it is now. If you were to boat 4xMXPLs you could do 16 damage in 1 second. Yes, 4xMPL could do 24 damage in that window but they would miss out on the sustained DPS boost, extra heat efficiency (I boost heat efficiency), and extra range so there's a fair trade-off there.

The point in front-loading more damage is to fill a pot-hole figuratively speaking. Right now XPLS are REALLY BAD at peek-a-boo to a degree that's making the weapon too niche. The point isn't to make them "good" at alpha strikes, but merely not terrible where they constantly let fast enemies get away nearly unscathed.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 07:18 PM, said:

In your own chart, the current MXL has it beat in the 2-second mark, able to do 6 damage earlier than your recommended rework,

Is this a joke? My recommendation is only +0.05 seconds later (an imperceptible difference in time) at also doing 6 damage compared to the current MXPL at 1.80-2.00 seconds.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 07:18 PM, said:

and the 2.25s mark. Your thesis essentially boils down to it being only good at incredibly specific encounters where the window is at 1s long. But again, encounters aren't in a vacuum. As a DPS weapon, it is your job to make the encounters longer for the DPS to work -- and the DPS is lower. And there are lasers that do more upfront damage.

You don't seem to be grasping the point here. MXPL and LXPL have OVERPOWERED SUSTAINED DPS so I bring it back in line. The danger with this nerf is that it threatens to make XPLs even worse in peek-a-boo situations than they already are. Increasing the cycle time and front-loading the damage AVOIDS this problem. In fact, for very short 1 second burst, my proposal does BETTER ALPHA than the current MXPL even though it has higher sustained DPS.

So if a light mech zips on by, or you see someone through a crack between buildings you can still do a meaningful amount of damage for a short burst.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 07:18 PM, said:

Maybe buff the upfront damage? 2/2.4/3.9 damage is what I prefer.

If you look at the picture more carefully, the 1.00 second cycle time example I provided does just that, 2.5 alpha for MXPL. I mention two drawbacks to this longer cycle time:
1) It starts to become slow enough to not feel as machine-gunny
2) It throws out ½ as many pulses so missing a pulse of damage is more painful.

That being said, it still would be a vast improvement over their current implementation.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 October 2023 - 08:03 PM, said:

...

So unless it boosts the DPS or makes them more heat efficient, like 6th said this won't move the needle and in the case of the MXPL, is a straight up nerf.

I'm getting the vibe you didn't read my post. I proposed making XPLs +20% more damage / heat efficient than their corresponding PL versions.

MXPLs doing +70% more DPS than MPLs is OP and irregular considering SXPLs do +30% more and LXPLs do +50% more. Is there some reason MXPLs and LXPLs should have such a massive boost in DPS compared to SXPLs? No there isn't, the people who designed XPLs simple didn't perform any basic numerical analysis before assigning the weapon values.

Nine-Ball, on 02 October 2023 - 08:54 PM, said:

...
(but not quite sustained DPS due to needing to cooldown for long periods).
...

Kind of a contradiction that they're supposed to be sustained DPS weapons yet can't sustain their output because they overheat so quickly isn't it? This is why I propose making XPLs +20% more damage / heat efficient than PLs.

Edited by MechMaster059, 02 October 2023 - 09:14 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

I'm not "forcing it to the playstyle that it isn't suited to". The point is to merely make it merely not worthless in peek-a-boo situations as it is now.

...

The point in front-loading more damage is to fill a pot-hole figuratively speaking. Right now XPLS are REALLY BAD at peek-a-boo to a degree that's making the weapon too niche. The point isn't to make them "good" at alpha strikes, but merely not terrible where they constantly let fast enemies get away nearly unscathed.

To the detriment of it's DPS. Dude, that is it's weakness, it's the point. Might as well go legit lasers.

Now, I don't disagree with the front-loading, but I'm pretty sure it needs that high DPS to be relevant.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

Is this a joke? My recommendation is only +0.05 seconds later (an imperceptible difference in time) at also doing 6 damage compared to the current MXPL at 1.80-2.00 seconds.

Oh wow, now we're not supposed to nitpick time? But see, the current weapon does better for longer encounters, exactly as intended and best to it's role.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

You don't seem to be grasping the point here.

I am. It's simply not as big as you think it is, likewise isn't being realistic nor practical.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

MXPL and LXPL have OVERPOWERED SUSTAINED DPS so I bring it back in line.

Kinda the point of the weapon system, because you have to give it a trade-off for extended periods of being out of cover. If it's not as good, people are less likely to sustain, but to poke -- and they go for basic lasers for that one.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

The danger with this nerf is that it threatens to make XPLs even worse in peek-a-boo situations than they already are. Increasing the cycle time and front-loading the damage AVOIDS this problem.

But you wouldn't have the problem, if you aren't nerfing it in the first place, would you?

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

In fact, for very short 1 second burst, my proposal does BETTER ALPHA than the current MXPL even though it has higher sustained DPS.

But again, whyyyyy? Dude there's lasers that will do better under that 1s of peek. You are just deterring use beyond 1s of poke by having lower bursting and sustaining DPS, while there are better weapons for that 1s of peek. You are obsoleting the weapon.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

So if a light mech zips on by, or you see someone through a crack between buildings you can still do a meaningful amount of damage for a short burst.

Which a basic pulse-laser will do better for a shorter amount of time -- remember that the MPL does 6 damage under 0.6s, while your MXL does 4 under 0.8s with two whole burn. ****, for the tonnage, you can basically get two basic-*** Medium Lasers, and deal 10 damage under 0.9s, 8.8889, at 0.8s mark -- which is more than twice your MXL.

You seem to be so entrenched on old MXL vs new MXL, but what you don't understand is that in reality is the MPL vs MXL, it's PL vs XL.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

If you look at the picture more carefully,

What, you think just because I disagree with you, means I didn't looked at it carefully? Please.

I specified the 2/2.4/3.9 damage on S/M/L, of the 0.8s cycle, the image I was specifically citing. It is plain buff of yours.

Your 2 bullet points are moot and irrelevant, basically strawmanning at this point, and quite frankly I don't appreciate such dishonesty.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

That being said, it still would be a vast improvement over their current implementation.

It wouldn't.

You got a weapon (debatably) slightly better peek, but still worse vs legit lasers -- and worse at it's supposed role of sustain and burst DPS so there's even less point to take them.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

I'm getting the vibe you didn't read my post.

Because everyone that reads your proposal must like it, yes?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 October 2023 - 09:37 PM.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

To the detriment of it's DPS. Dude, that is it's weakness, it's the point. Might as well go legit lasers.

Now, I don't disagree with the front-loading, but I'm pretty sure it needs that high DPS to be relevant.

If you're not able to see that MXPLs doing +70% more DPS than MPLs is overpowered then there's not much point in going around in circles on this point. You don't think the current MXPLs (and LPXLs) DPS should be lowered but you're simply wrong so that's the end of that discussion.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

...

blah blah blah... more totally failing to grasp the point of the post because you don't realize that MXPLs and LXPLs have OP sustained DPS.

...

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

You seem to be so entrenched on old MXL vs new MXL, but what you don't understand is that in reality is the MPL vs MXL, it's PL vs XL.

Actually I do understand this. That's why I normalize their DPS boost vs PLs to a uniform +42% instead of the current weird +30%, +70%, +50% DPS that XPLs have.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

I specified the 2/2.4/3.9 damage on S/M/L, of the 0.8s cycle, the image I was specifically citing. It is plain buff of yours.

Oh OK, I though you just meant in general. So using your numbers with a 0.8 cycle time that would result in:

SXPL +63% DPS vs SPL
MXPL +70% DPS vs MPL (What it's currently at)
LXPL +66% DPS vs LPL

So make them all have OP sustained DPS? Ya, um... no. I think I'm starting to see why Tiy0s takes your recommendations with a grain of salt.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

Your 2 bullet points are moot and irrelevant, basically strawmanning at this point, and quite frankly I don't appreciate such dishonesty.

LOL wut? You don't seem to understand what a strawman argument is. I thought you were referring to the 1.00 second cycle time example which does indeed put out 1/2 as many pulses. No dishonesty there. You weren't referring to it though so yes, now I know my bullet points weren't relevant to what you intended.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

You got a weapon (debatably) slightly better peek, but still worse vs legit lasers -- and worse at it's supposed role of sustain and burst DPS so there's even less point to take them.

+20% damage / heat efficiency would make it MUCH better at sustained DPS even with an overall DPS reduction.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

Because everyone that reads your proposal must like it, yes?

Yes.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:52 PM, said:

So make them all have OP sustained DPS? Ya, um... no. I think I'm starting to see why Tiy0s takes your recommendations with a grain of salt.

And you think he will take yours? A straight up nerf, to the problem where XPLs are already not appreciated, when their (Cauldron's) philosophy is already about maximizing advantages hence the +70% DPS.

Please.

But hey, tell you what, why don't you go over their discord and pitch it yourself?

Oh wait, I forgot, you threw shade at them:

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

...the people who designed XPLs simple didn't perform any basic numerical analysis before assigning the weapon values...

Well, to be fair, they didn't got it right the first time, likewise I personally do not like some of their approaches as well.

But you know what they did? They didn't nerfed the DPS, they buffed it. And it took +70% DPS for the MXL to feel close to right. If it were as overpowered as you make it up to be, then it should reflect with the result, not the basic fear mongering just because it's +70%. Even RACs have astronomically high DPS to their counterpart, see RAC2 vs AC5, and their DPS for their stare-down still feels utterly ****.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:52 PM, said:

Actually I do understand this. That's why I normalize their DPS boost vs PLs to a uniform +42% instead of the current weird +30%, +70%, +50% DPS that XPLs have.

...

+20% damage / heat efficiency would make it MUCH better at sustained DPS even with an overall DPS reduction.

Yet you show otherwise. What you don't get with the supposed "broken" dps, is that it's offset with opportunity cost.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with reduced heat, but why would we bother staring for so long, when we can just peekaboo with existing lasers? It took +70% DPS difference for current MXL to feel a lot better.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:52 PM, said:

If you're not able to see that MXPLs doing +70% more DPS than MPLs is overpowered then there's not much point in going around in circles on this point.

You don't think the current MXPLs (and LPXLs) DPS should be lowered but you're simply wrong so that's the end of that discussion.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:52 PM, said:

Yes.

Cool, believe what you want, lol. You're entitled to your religion, that's what the 18th Article of the UDHR is for.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 October 2023 - 10:32 PM.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:55 PM, said:

And you think he will take yours? A straight up nerf, to the problem where XPLs are already not appreciated, when their (Cauldron's) philosophy is already about maximizing advantages hence the +70% DPS.

Please.

They basically applied a simple doubling of DPS to each XPL with the patch. That's not numeric analysis. That's pulling numbers out of one's rear and hoping for the best.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:55 PM, said:

But hey, tell you what, why don't you go over their discord and pitch it yourself?

Oh wait, I forgot, you threw shade at them:

Not throwing shade, simply stating facts. Each XPL has a flat +50% boost in DPS over the previous smaller size of XPL. This results in the weird +30%, +70%, +50% boost in DPS vs standard PLs. In other words, whoever set the current numbers on XPLs didn't understand that their numbers needed to be balanced relative to standard PLs rather than themselves.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:55 PM, said:

Well, to be fair, they didn't got it right the first time, likewise I personally do not like some of their approaches as well.

But you know what they did? They didn't nerfed the DPS, they buffed it. And it took +70% DPS for the MXL to feel close to right.

The community gave feedback that XPLs were UP and so they applied a brainless x2 DPS buff. This isn't analysis, this isn't solving the problem. Now LXPLs are OP if you boat more than 2x of them on a mech.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:55 PM, said:

If it were as overpowered as you make it up to be, then it should reflect with the result, not the basic fear mongering just because it's +70%.

I don't think you read my entire post. I explain why MXPLs OP DPS is harder to notice than LXPLs OP DPS. The extended range on LXPLs makes a HUGE difference in usability.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:55 PM, said:

Yet you show otherwise. What you don't get with the supposed "broken" dps, is that it's offset with opportunity cost.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with reduced heat, but why would we bother staring for so long, when we can just peekaboo with existing lasers? It took +70% DPS difference for current MXL to feel a lot better.

You seem to think a +42% DPS advantage over standard PLs is garbage. It's not. It's still very strong though not enough on its own. That's what the extended range and +20% damage / heat efficiency is for.

Nine-Ball, on 02 October 2023 - 10:12 PM, said:

Not really when I clearly stated they're not quite sustained DPS due to needing to cooldown for long periods.

So they're clearly sustained DPS weapons due to the garbage alpha but high DPS yet they need to cooldown a lot. OK, got ya.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 10:37 PM, said:

They basically applied a simple doubling of DPS to each XPL with the patch. That's not numeric analysis. That's pulling numbers out of one's rear and hoping for the best.

Not throwing shade, simply stating facts. Each XPL has a flat +50% boost in DPS over the previous smaller size of XPL. This results in the weird +30%, +70%, +50% boost in DPS vs standard PLs. In other words, whoever set the current numbers on XPLs didn't understand that their numbers needed to be balanced relative to standard PLs rather than themselves.

It's called Testing. Because things on paper, does not necessarily reflect those in practice.

Sure, they had some screw-up with the first iteration. But you know what, the difference is that. They look beyond symmetry, but the result -- and the result is, well, not in your favor.

What can we extrapolate from your numbers based on what we already know? XPLs are stare-down weapons that worked better when they boosted the DPS. What do you think will happen when you nerf the DPS said weapons?

Like what I said before, pitch it to them. With your mathematic geniusness, you sure to get a throne among the Cauldron.

TBT, I like the idea of some front-loading, I just didn't like the DPS -- and the defensive diva, that's utterly childish and pathetic.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 10:37 PM, said:

The community gave feedback that XPLs were UP and so they applied a brainless x2 DPS buff. This isn't analysis, this isn't solving the problem. Now LXPLs are OP if you boat more than 2x of them on a mech.

Wow, really? No wai!

Is that why people have been complaining that LXLs are underpowered and aren't dominating for whatever reason? Cause the ones doing well are the basic lasers, and only the MXL because it's +70% DPS.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 10:37 PM, said:

I don't think you read my entire post. I explain why MXPLs OP DPS is harder to notice than LXPLs OP DPS. The extended range on LXPLs makes a HUGE difference in usability.

Because nobody that disagrees with you ever reads your post, amirite?

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 10:37 PM, said:

You seem to think a +42% DPS advantage over standard PLs is garbage. It's not. It's still very strong though not enough on its own. That's what the extended range and +20% damage / heat efficiency is for.

Given with what we've seen, result triumphs your belief in symmetry -- because that's what this uniform +42% is, just symmetry within the spreadsheet, with no regards to the result. It took +70% DPS for MXL to be acceptable.

Again, I don't deny the advantage of (less) heat, but still, at this point, at practical application, why would I bother sustaining when I can peekaboo?

Okay, consider this, 2.2 heat dissipation 30 heat-cap, 6 MXL.

Old MXL:
> 18 DPS
> 10.8 HPS
> Net HPS: 8.6
> Time to OH: 3.488
> Max Damage: 62.784

New MXL:
> 15 DPS
> 7.86 HPS
> Net HPS: 5.66
> Time to OH: 5.3
> Max Damage: 79.51

I will give you this: 79.51 > 62.784. But you know the problem there? 3.488s < 5.3s. At the same 3.488 at only 15 DPS, that's 52.32 damage.

So, why would I bother firing for 5.3s, 1.812s longer? You do realize that 62.784 is more front loaded than 79.51? That it is safer to blow all my load for 3.488s, and cool down afterwards, than the extra 1.812s.

Facetime is already the weakness of the weapon, and your point with the heat as if it's a plus, is simply more of it?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 October 2023 - 11:09 PM.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 10:53 PM, said:

It's called Testing. Because things on paper, does not necessarily reflect those in practice.

Sure, they had some screw-up with the first iteration. But you know what, the difference is that. They look beyond symmetry, but the result -- and the result is, well, not in your favor.

If they look beyond symmetry then why did they set the numbers to be a uniform +50% DPS increase per weapon size? (SXPL: 2 DPS, MXPL: 3 DPS, LXPL: 4.4 DPS - see the pattern?)

See the ugly truth is, they didn't do any "testing" for XPLs or they would have known they were UP in the 1st iteration.. They pulled the numbers out of nowhere. The "testing" has already been done to balance the damage output of standard PLs. That's why applying a normalized % DPS increase to XPLs is such a no-brainer. You can assume standard PLs have already taken such "testing" into account.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 10:53 PM, said:

What can we extrapolate from your numbers based on what we already know? XPLs are stare-down weapons that worked better when they boosted the DPS. What do you think will happen when you nerf the DPS said weapons?

Well ya, giving a flat DPS boost to a weapon tends to make it "work better".

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 10:53 PM, said:

Like what I said before, pitch it to them. With your mathematic geniusness, you sure to get a throne among the Cauldron.

TBT, I like the idea of some front-loading, I just didn't like the DPS -- and the defensive diva, that's utterly childish and pathetic.

Why would I get a throne from the Cauldron? It's probably a very small clique of people there who make all the balance decisions and I'm not part of the clique.

Diva? This is what happens when you're not part of the clique and offer suggestions, you get called a "Diva". I'm used to this kind of lame ad-hominem on game forums.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 10:53 PM, said:

Wow, really? No wai!

Is that why people have been complaining that LXLs are underpowered and aren't dominating for whatever reason? Cause the ones doing well are the basic lasers, and only the MXL because it's +70% DPS.

The most recent patch is relatively new and XPLs are still too hot. I'm telling you, boating 2+ LXPLs puts out an OP amount of damage.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 10:53 PM, said:

Given with what we've seen, result triumphs your belief in symmetry -- because that's what this uniform +42% is, just symmetry within the spreadsheet, with no regards to the result. It took +70% DPS for MXL to be acceptable.

My +42% assumes standard PLs are properly balanced relative to each other. There's a discussion to be had whether or not that assumption is valid but that's why I feel confident applying a normalized value of +42% to XPLs.

The current +70% isn't a result of "testing", it was a brainless 2x DPS boost across the board for all XPLs.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 10:53 PM, said:

Again, I don't deny the advantage of (less) heat, but still, at this point, at practical application, why would I bother sustaining when I can peekaboo?

Okay, consider this, 2.2 heat dissipation 30 heat-cap, 6 MXL.

Old MXL:
> 18 DPS
> 10.8 HPS
> Net HPS: 8.6
> Time to OH: 3.488
> Max Damage: 62.784

New MXL:
> 15 DPS
> 7.86 HPS
> Net HPS: 5.66
> Time to OH: 5.3
> Max Damage: 79.51

I will give you this: 79.51 > 62.784. But you know the problem there? 3.488s < 5.3s. At the same 3.488 at only 15 DPS, that's 52.32 damage.

So, why would I bother firing for 5.3s, 1.812s longer? You do realize that 62.784 is more front loaded than 79.51? That it is safer to blow all my load for 3.488s, and cool down afterwards, than the extra 1.812s.

Facetime is already the weakness of the weapon, and your point with the heat as if it's a plus, is simply more of it?

Thank you for this analysis. Seriously. I didn't realize my proposed heat efficiency boosted the facetime of the weapons by a massive +50% before overheating resulting in MORE TOTAL DAMAGE DEALT compared to a higher DPS version of the MXPL. This is EXACTLY what I was going for with my proposal.

Why go for this over standard lasers? Because THAT'S THE POINT with XPLs, you can put out MUCH more total damage before over-heating compared to standard PLs and deal the damage much faster than regular lasers. (assuming you can maintain facetime, that's the trade-off) This opens up new use-cases for them like pairing them with UACs or PPCs as a sustained DPS back-up weapon when things get too hot.

Edited by MechMaster059, 03 October 2023 - 12:21 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

If they look beyond symmetry then why did they set the numbers to be a uniform +50% DPS increase per weapon size? (SXPL: 2 DPS, MXPL: 3 DPS, LXPL: 4.4 DPS - see the pattern?)

And they did this on one particular set, so they must do it to ALL particular set, why?

Let's turn this on it's head, and point out that they did the XPLs differently, so we should change up the PLs right?

So they did this on one thing, so they must do it to one another? Might as well try to get two candy bars because another kid is getting two, what a childish argument.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

See the ugly truth is, they didn't do any "testing" for XPLs or they would have known they were UP in the 1st iteration.. They pulled the numbers out of nowhere. The "testing" has already been done to balance the damage output of standard PLs. That's why applying a normalized % DPS increase to XPLs is such a no-brainer. You can assume standard PLs have already taken such "testing" into account.

Testing was the live change, and then the appropriate buff. That's ultimately how things work here, it's perpetual testing, else there wouldn't be changes to the balance at all. Pushing their changes to the live-server however is the necessity with the lack of funds.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

Well ya, giving a flat DPS boost to a weapon tends to make it "work better".

Exactly. And right now, MXL is working the best of XPLs so far, so they did something right. That which your nerf will undo, is that really hard to get?

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

Why would I get a throne from the Cauldron? It's probably a very small clique of people there who make all the balance decisions and I'm not part of the clique.

Because of your self-professed geniusness? But yeah, I figure they'd prefer the smell of their own farts instead. So you'll fit right in!

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

Diva? This is what happens when you're not part of the clique and offer suggestions, you get called a "Diva". I'm used to this kind of lame ad-hominem on game forums.

Lol, no. Ad-Hominem is a fallacy that assumes you're wrong by the critique of character, than the strength of your position.

I was simply describing you after the fact of your demonstrated behavior. You don't want to get called a "diva", don't act like that.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

The most recent patch is relatively new and XPLs are still too hot. I'm telling you, boating 2+ LXPLs puts out an OP amount of damage.

I just said the DPS was fine, not the heat. As for the OP amount of damage with LXL -- with it's stare-down? Not really. It should get more with respect to it's contemporaries -- the basic laser, and it's opportunity cost.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

My +42% assumes standard PLs are properly balanced relative to each other. There's a discussion to be had whether or not that assumption is valid but that's why I feel confident applying a normalized value of +42% to XPLs.

And nothing else? There's also a difference in range, burst duration, heat, and damage, a lot of which that makes the PLs play differently -- as in the LPLs are pokey while MPLs are brawly, and SPLs are chewey. XPLs have normalized durations and CDs -- they are ALL chewey, but different ranges.

This departure alone should contaminate your assumption.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

The current +70% isn't a result of "testing", it was a brainless 2x DPS boost across the board for all XPLs.

Which works. So I don't know what to tell you, going against what works, would imply that it will work less better.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

Thank you for this analysis. Seriously. I didn't realize my proposed heat efficiency boosted the facetime of the weapons by a massive +50% before overheating resulting in MORE TOTAL DAMAGE DEALT compared to a higher DPS version of the MXPL. This is EXACTLY what I was going for with my proposal.

I agree, and quite frankly I like the sustain. But the problem is that you're now doing less for the same duration you'd be staring, and that is not good. You are simply making the user stare more, else they will get less. That simply abiding more to the face-time requirement of the weapon, but is getting less paid for it.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 12:09 AM, said:

Why go for this over standard lasers? Because THAT'S THE POINT with XPLs, you can put out MUCH more total damage before over-heating compared to standard PLs and deal the damage much faster than regular lasers. (assuming you can maintain facetime, that's the trade-off) This opens up new use-cases for them like pairing them with UACs or PPCs as a sustained DPS back-up weapon when things get too hot.

Again, I agree with the heat buff, that's always been what I want -- for the XPLs to be the versatile lasers, even take their GH out. The problem is the DPS nerf, that results into less front loading.

Heat buff is nice, but the DPS is necessary. It being the point, does not make it good.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 October 2023 - 02:20 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 03:44 PM, said:

[size=4]
...

What tier are you?

I know asking that will annoy you, but it is relevant.

I havent tested the XPLs in game, so im not saying you're wrong, but it is absolutely true that some weapons, (including RACs which are very similar to XPLs in use) are OP in T5 games while being UP in T1 games, because they rely on target error to shine.

It may be that the DPS increase over regular pulses makes XPLs simultaneously too strong in T5 while being too weak in T1, because the downside of facetime is punished much more heavily.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

A little late on my side to the party but meh.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

I'm getting the vibe you didn't read my post. I proposed making XPLs +20% more damage / heat efficient than their corresponding PL versions.

I did but I don't think you understand what you are asking for. If any weapon makes sense to make sustained DPS, it is the BLazer because large mechs are able to boat a number of them to make the most of them similar to AC5s/AC10s but also has enough range to be useful. The problem with making SXPLs and MXPLs sustained DPS is that they just don't have enough range to justify bothering with them. Short range sustained DPS just doesn't really make sense as short range HAS to have the ability to burst down damage to combat long range. Which is why sustained DPS is normally plays along mid/long range to extreme range.

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

Kind of a contradiction that they're supposed to be sustained DPS weapons yet can't sustain their output because they overheat so quickly isn't it? This is why I propose making XPLs +20% more damage / heat efficient than PLs.

Who said they were supposed to sustain damage? If anything their current stats seem to suggest this was meant to be like cUACs and be burst DPS not sustained thus why they have similar DPH as standard pulse.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 October 2023 - 10:22 AM.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

And they did this on one particular set, so they must do it to ALL particular set, why?

Huh? You said:

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 10:53 PM, said:

It's called Testing. Because things on paper, does not necessarily reflect those in practice.

Sure, they had some screw-up with the first iteration. But you know what, the difference is that. They look beyond symmetry, ...

You're saying their wacky DPS distribution on XPLs is a result of "testing" and that they were "looking beyond symmetry" as if some kind of thorough engineering had taken place, yet the DPS boost from one XPL to another is a symmetrical +50% so clearly you're WRONG.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

Let's turn this on it's head, and point out that they did the XPLs differently, so we should change up the PLs right?

XPLs are new, PLs have been around a long time, hence the assumption that PLs are already properly balance.

FAIL.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

So they did this on one thing, so they must do it to one another? Might as well try to get two candy bars because another kid is getting two, what a childish argument.

You yourself acknowledged that XPLs are competing against PLs when you said:

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

You seem to be so entrenched on old MXL vs new MXL, but what you don't understand is that in reality is the MPL vs MXL, it's PL vs XL.

Basically you don't want to admit that no real testing was done and they just picked a nice looking DPS distribution within the weapon family rather than properly balancing them against PLs.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

Testing was the live change, and then the appropriate buff. That's ultimately how things work here, it's perpetual testing, else there wouldn't be changes to the balance at all. Pushing their changes to the live-server however is the necessity with the lack of funds.

So they do their testing in the PROD environment. Got it.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

Exactly. And right now, MXL is working the best of XPLs so far, so they did something right. That which your nerf will undo, is that really hard to get?

You keep saying this. I've noticed LXPLs becoming a problem. MXPLs not so much despite their absurd +70% DPS boost. Do you have some mech boating MXPLs that you're afraid will be nerfed? You yourself proved with your analysis that if you can maintain face-time my proposal is actually a net buff to the weapons damage output.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

Because of your self-professed geniusness? But yeah, I figure they'd prefer the smell of their own farts instead. So you'll fit right in!

LOL. They wouldn't really let me in and they'd just ignore me anyway. This is the nature of most organizations. This is why I post directly on the forums.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

Lol, no. Ad-Hominem is a fallacy that assumes you're wrong by the critique of character, than the strength of your position.

I was simply describing you after the fact of your demonstrated behavior. You don't want to get called a "diva", don't act like that.

My "diva" behavior exists entirely in your head.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

And nothing else? There's also a difference in range, burst duration, heat, and damage, a lot of which that makes the PLs play differently -- as in the LPLs are pokey while MPLs are brawly, and SPLs are chewey. XPLs have normalized durations and CDs -- they are ALL chewey, but different ranges.

This departure alone should contaminate your assumption.

Undoubtedly these differences would have an effect on tuning the weapons over time, but not at the introduction of them. Their DPS boost should have started out balanced relative to PLs and then tuned from there over time, not some weird +30%, +70%, +50% distribution.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

Which works. So I don't know what to tell you, going against what works, would imply that it will work less better.

Except they still don't work. I still almost never see SXPLs and strangely I haven't seen MXPLs much either. I suspect they're being held back by their bad heat profiles. I see LXPLs frequently and they're becoming a problem.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

I agree, and quite frankly I like the sustain. But the problem is that you're now doing less for the same duration you'd be staring, and that is not good. You are simply making the user stare more, else they will get less. That simply abiding more to the face-time requirement of the weapon, but is getting less paid for it.

Again, if you're convinced the DPS on the MXPL and LXPL isn't overpowered then you're going to have a hard time seeing much value in my proposal. Yes, the user has to stare more but in return they get a weapon with much better heat management.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 02:15 AM, said:

Again, I agree with the heat buff, that's always been what I want -- for the XPLs to be the versatile lasers, even take their GH out. The problem is the DPS nerf, that results into less front loading.

Heat buff is nice, but the DPS is necessary. It being the point, does not make it good.

Many people rightfully want a heat buff to XPLs. The problem is that if this heat buff is given then MXPLs in their present state will likely suddenly become OP and LXPLs will become even more OP. (Basically MXPLs are so hot that their absurdly high DPS can't be properly exploited because the equipped mech has to stop firing them to avoid overheating)

Widowmaker1981, on 03 October 2023 - 02:42 AM, said:

What tier are you?

LOL, uh oh... here we go with this... but I'll bite anyway...

I'm about 1/3rd into tier 3 and slowly advancing due to my skill suddenly improving whenever I play a mech using HAGs. Tier 3 is a large step up in difficulty compared to tier 4. I was even considering writing a post about this problem. I spent about 2 months waffling back and forth at the boundary between tier 3 and tier 4 because the skill difference is so stark.

I occasionally see "star" players like Sneaky Snek and Sean Lang in game. I've been killed by GeeRam. (Vitric Station, was in my Rasalhague painted Trebuchet when he 1-shot my arm off with his 2xHAG30 + ERLL equipped Stone Rhino. Things went downhill quickly for me from there)

I've been playing long enough to have direct experience with nearly every aspect of the game.

Widowmaker1981, on 03 October 2023 - 02:42 AM, said:

I know asking that will annoy you, but it is relevant.

I havent tested the XPLs in game, so im not saying you're wrong, but it is absolutely true that some weapons, (including RACs which are very similar to XPLs in use) are OP in T5 games while being UP in T1 games, because they rely on target error to shine.

It may be that the DPS increase over regular pulses makes XPLs simultaneously too strong in T5 while being too weak in T1, because the downside of facetime is punished much more heavily.

LXPLs are too strong. MXPLs would be too strong if boating them didn't overheat a mech so quickly. SXPLs have a respectable DPS boost relative to SPLs but without a heat efficiency buff they're still not worth it.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 October 2023 - 08:33 AM, said:

...

The problem with making SXPLs and MXPLs sustained DPS is that they just don't have enough range to justify bothering with them. Short range sustained DPS just doesn't really make sense as short range HAS to have the ability to burst down damage to combat long range. Which is why sustained DPS is normally plays along mid/long range to extreme range.

This is an interesting point and something I suspect might be one of the reasons why MXPLs don't seem to be much of a problem despite their very high DPS. The obvious counter to your point is: Machine Guns. They're short ranged DPS and very good at it when boated. Of course they also produce ZERO HEAT. There's a use case for SXPLs to be boated on light mechs for the purpose of chewing through an enemy mechs legs but they're too hot to serve this function.

There's a role for short range sustained DPS if a weapon's heat profile allows it. Currently SXPLs and MXPLs are too hot to be worth it.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 October 2023 - 08:33 AM, said:

Who said they were supposed to sustain damage? If anything their current stats seem to suggest this was meant to be like cUACs and be burst DPS not sustained thus why they have similar DPH as standard pulse.

If they're not intended to be sustained damage then there won't be any use for them. This game is already loaded with burst weapons, it doesn't need another. It would be a wasted opportunity if PGI goes the route of trying to turn XPLs into yet another peek-a-boo type weapon.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

You're saying their wacky DPS distribution on XPLs is a result of "testing" and that they were "looking beyond symmetry" as if some kind of thorough engineering had taken place, yet the DPS boost from one XPL to another is a symmetrical +50% so clearly you're WRONG.

Lol, just lol. You do realize I can just as well cite their wacky distribution on the XPLs to justify wacky distribution on the PLs?

The idea of "looking beyond symmetry" is that they aren't beholden to consistency to just one metric so it feels organized to a spreadsheet, but rather to the result.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

XPLs are new, PLs have been around a long time, hence the assumption that PLs are already properly balance.

FAIL.

It's called consistency. Funny you want that on a spreadsheet, but not on logic. Also what you're doing is special pleading.

The current MXL is also pretty balanced right now, shouldn't that be the baseline instead?

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

You yourself acknowledged that XPLs are competing against PLs when you said:

Basically you don't want to admit that no real testing was done and they just picked a nice looking DPS distribution within the weapon family rather than properly balancing them against PLs.

They are competing for relevance, and that is a matter of different application, not redundancy. They are competing in a manner that they should be better at their own niche.

Testing is done in live server, that is why they buffed it later patch. Seems like you need to first grasp the idea that funds are limited, and they can't do PTS.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

So they do their testing in the PROD environment. Got it.

Yes, and that's called a controlled environment. Personally my pet peeve with their philosophy, with QP on the backburner. But this is better than just throwing an idea, and being a diva about it.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

You keep saying this. I've noticed LXPLs becoming a problem. MXPLs not so much despite their absurd +70% DPS boost. Do you have some mech boating MXPLs that you're afraid will be nerfed? You yourself proved with your analysis that if you can maintain face-time my proposal is actually a net buff to the weapons damage output.

And you forgot the BUT on that analysis. But Face-Time is incredibly risky, the same reason that RACs are complicated to use. That is something that you still not get, that is something you conveniently ignore. That high cumulative sustained damage isn't going to worth much when you CAN'T achieve it, whether safely or at all.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

They wouldn't really let me in and they'd just ignore me anyway. This is the nature of most organizations. This is why I post directly on the forums.

Oh jeez, I wonder why they wouldn't let a genius diva in. Obviously they're missing out.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

My "diva" behavior exists entirely in your head.

Nope, it's in this thread.

Spoiler

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

If you look at the picture more carefully

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:06 PM, said:

I'm getting the vibe you didn't read my post.

The6thMessenger, on 02 October 2023 - 09:28 PM, said:

Because everyone that reads your proposal must like it, yes?

MechMaster059, on 02 October 2023 - 09:52 PM, said:

Yes.

A petulant diva.

Like I said before, don't want to be called a diva? Don't act like one.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

Undoubtedly these differences would have an effect on tuning the weapons over time, but not at the introduction of them. Their DPS boost should have started out balanced relative to PLs and then tuned from there over time, not some weird +30%, +70%, +50% distribution.

Okay, so how's the performance in practice however? Because that +70% distribution is just okay-ish.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

Except they still don't work. I still almost never see SXPLs and strangely I haven't seen MXPLs much either. I suspect they're being held back by their bad heat profiles. I see LXPLs frequently and they're becoming a problem.

This argument boggles my mind. You already barely see them, but you want them nerfed? How are they overpowered again?

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

Again, if you're convinced the DPS on the MXPL and LXPL isn't overpowered then you're going to have a hard time seeing much value in my proposal. Yes, the user has to stare more but in return they get a weapon with much better heat management.

Because objectively, there isn't a value. Not with it's horrible DPS. If you just truly understand how dangerous face-timing is.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

Many people rightfully want a heat buff to XPLs. The problem is that if this heat buff is given then MXPLs in their present state will likely suddenly become OP and LXPLs will become even more OP.

Almost like we want the middle ground of cold XPLs, but good DPS.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

LOL, uh oh... here we go with this... but I'll bite anyway...

I'm about 1/3rd into tier 3 and slowly advancing due to my skill suddenly improving whenever I play a mech using HAGs. Tier 3 is a large step up in difficulty compared to tier 4. I was even considering writing a post about this problem. I spent about 2 months waffling back and forth at the boundary between tier 3 and tier 4 because the skill difference is so stark.

And that is why you don't see where we are coming from.

Here's a thought, maybe the PSR ain't the problem, it's you?

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

I've been playing long enough to have direct experience with nearly every aspect of the game.

That's funny, that's really funny.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

LXPLs are too strong.

They aren't.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

(Basically MXPLs are so hot that their absurdly high DPS can't be properly exploited because the equipped mech has to stop firing them to avoid overheating)

MXPLs would be too strong if boating them didn't overheat a mech so quickly.

This is an interesting point and something I suspect might be one of the reasons why MXPLs don't seem to be much of a problem despite their very high DPS.

Almost like that was the point. Almost like they are balanced, and working as intended, despite the +70% DPS you are whining about.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

SXPLs have a respectable DPS boost relative to SPLs but without a heat efficiency buff they're still not worth it.

Almost like they needed a buff all along.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

The obvious counter to your point is: Machine Guns. They're short ranged DPS and very good at it when boated. Of course they also produce ZERO HEAT. There's a use case for SXPLs to be boated on light mechs for the purpose of chewing through an enemy mechs legs but they're too hot to serve this function.

There's a role for short range sustained DPS if a weapon's heat profile allows it. Currently SXPLs and MXPLs are too hot to be worth it.

Almost like you're not supposed to sustain close-range brawls with XPLs. Why not use the MG for sustaining close range instead? Seems like you're struggling to grasp the idea of making weapons distinct, that they have different applications.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

If they're not intended to be sustained damage then there won't be any use for them. This game is already loaded with burst weapons, it doesn't need another. It would be a wasted opportunity if PGI goes the route of trying to turn XPLs into yet another peek-a-boo type weapon.

Yeah, the cauldron has this problem of front-loading, and they can't admit it. Or rather, they admit it's a problem in QP, but it's fine in Comp where they have coordinated teams that are coordinated enough to make use of the DPS weapons.

How things work is unfortunately what you have to contend with. Simply putting a sustain-dps laser, and calling it the point, does not make it practical or worthy of use -- it has to be competitive, and what you proposed ain't. If you can only pull your head out of your-*** the clouds.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 October 2023 - 06:29 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

This is an interesting point and something I suspect might be one of the reasons why MXPLs don't seem to be much of a problem despite their very high DPS. The obvious counter to your point is: Machine Guns. They're short ranged DPS and very good at it when boated. Of course they also produce ZERO HEAT. There's a use case for SXPLs to be boated on light mechs for the purpose of chewing through an enemy mechs legs but they're too hot to serve this function.

There's a role for short range sustained DPS if a weapon's heat profile allows it. Currently SXPLs and MXPLs are too hot to be worth it.

So this is where we get into PUGs vs coordinated play. In coordinated play they are much less useful because they exacerbate the weaknesses of lights further by effectively being vulture units more so than making plays. In other words they are great for furthering the snowball but not really much else. They can't really threaten other lights which is also the limitation of SRM boat lights. Don't get me wrong, the SDR-5K was once used by EmP with the ERLL and 4 LMGs but the ERLL was the bigger threat.

In brawls, they are even less useful because keeping a steady stream on targets is harder in more chaotic fights compared to SPLs.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 03:21 PM, said:

If they're not intended to be sustained damage then there won't be any use for them. This game is already loaded with burst weapons, it doesn't need another. It would be a wasted opportunity if PGI goes the route of trying to turn XPLs into yet another peek-a-boo type weapon.

You clearly missed the burst DPS concept which doesn't have that many weapons. UACs is pretty much it.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 October 2023 - 06:44 PM.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Lol, just lol. You do realize I can just as well cite their wacky distribution on the XPLs to justify wacky distribution on the PLs?

No you can't. PLs are long established weapons. They're already balanced.

FAIL

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

The idea of "looking beyond symmetry" is that they aren't beholden to consistency to just one metric so it feels organized to a spreadsheet, but rather to the result.

Yet that's exactly what they did within the weapon family, made it a uniform +50% DPS boost per size just because. You don't seem willing or able to grasp the concept that PLs already being balanced and being the primary competitor to XPLs means they providing the foundation for how to implement XPLs so there's not much point in going around in circles on this.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

It's called consistency. Funny you want that on a spreadsheet, but not on logic.

Non-sequitur.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

They are competing for relevance, and that is a matter of different application, not redundancy. They are competing in a manner that they should be better at their own niche.

That's what I'm going for here.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Testing is done in live server, that is why they buffed it later patch. Seems like you need to first grasp the idea that funds are limited, and they can't do PTS.

Which is to say no testing is done at all. Changes are just directly deployed to PROD.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

And you forgot the BUT on that analysis. But Face-Time is incredibly risky, the same reason that RACs are complicated to use. That is something that you still not get, that is something you conveniently ignore. That high cumulative sustained damage isn't going to worth much when you CAN'T achieve it, whether safely or at all.

I do get face-time is risky. That why XPLs get a massive DPS boost (42% is still very large despite your hyperventilating that it's "bad") and why I propose giving them a large heat efficiency boost as well and I don't advocate for reverting the range buff.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

And in this thread.

Spoiler

A petulant diva.

Like I said before, don't want to be called a diva? Don't act like one.

Me: "If you look at the picture more carefully"
I can see how from your perspective I may have sounded condescending but I wasn't. It's hard to gauge a person's tone via text.

In my mind I was thinking you may have glossed over the 0.75s and 1.00s cycle time entries because I didn't highlight them in the image and I focused mostly on the 0.80s cycle time entry. My intent was merely to draw your attention to the 1.00s cycle time entry a 2nd time.

Me: "I'm getting the vibe you didn't read my post"
I'm still getting that vibe because you've made no mention of the fact that the Laser Duration skills are VERY OP for XPLs which I mentioned in my original post. Not being a diva, just making an observation there.

You: "Because everyone that reads your proposal must like it, yes?"
Me: "Yes"
That's just me making a joke. (Though people really should agree with my proposals)

Maybe you're a little bit sensitive?

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Okay, so how's the performance in practice however? Because that +70% distribution is just okay-ish.

Just because MXPLs are being held back by their heat profile doesn't mean +70% DPS isn't OP.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

This argument boggles my mind. You already barely see them, but you want them nerfed? How are they overpowered again?

Because making them more heat efficient and better front-loading of the damage are massive buffs. There's more to a weapon that just its DPS.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Because objectively, there isn't a value. Not with it's horrible DPS.

It's hyperbolic to say a +42% DPS buff relative to PLs would be "horrible DPS". In fact, I'm concerned their DPS might still be too high if my proposal was fully implemented.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Almost like we want the middle ground of cold XPLs, but good DPS.

Exactly. +42% is good DPS.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

And that is why you don't see where we are coming from.

Here's a thought, maybe the PSR ain't the problem, it's you?

The lamest forum cop-out possible. The "You need to be a pro-level player to have an opinion" schtick.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Almost like that was the point. Almost like they are balanced, and working as intended, despite the +70% DPS you are whining about.

Not "working as intended" if almost no one is using them.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Almost like they needed a buff all along.

Yes, that's why my proposal is a complete buff to SXPLs, both DPS(+30% --> +42%), heat efficiency(+20%), and better front-loading of damage(1 dmg --> 1.75 dmg).

D I V A A L E R T
It's comments like this that give me the vibe you haven't read my original post in its entirety.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Almost like you're not supposed to sustain close-range brawls with XPLs. Why not use the MG for sustaining close range instead? Seems like you're struggling to grasp the idea of making weapons distinct, that they have different applications.

Not really sure what the point of using MXPLs/SXPLs over MPLs/SPLs would be if XPLs are supposed to be yet another burst weapon...

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

How things work is unfortunately what you have to contend with. Simply putting a sustain-dps laser, and calling it the point, does not make it practical or worthy of use. If you can only pull your head out of your-*** the clouds.

Face time DOES happen in the game and the point is for XPLs to excel at it compared to other types of lasers, otherwise players may as well just stick with the existing lasers and ignore XPLs. (Which is what they're doing with SXPLs and to some degree MXPLs)

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 October 2023 - 06:44 PM, said:

So this is where we get into PUGs vs coordinated play. In coordinated play they are much less useful because they exacerbate the weaknesses of lights further by effectively being vulture units more so than making plays. In other words they are great for furthering the snowball but not really much else. They can't really threaten other lights which is also the limitation of SRM boat lights. Don't get me wrong, the SDR-5K was once used by EmP with the ERLL and 4 LMGs but the ERLL was the bigger threat.

In brawls, they are even less useful because keeping a steady stream on targets is harder in more chaotic fights compared to SPLs.

All valid points. This is why I suspect SXPLs and MXPLs would make great SECONDARY / COMPLEMENTARY weapons by mixing them with other types of lasers.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 October 2023 - 06:44 PM, said:

You clearly missed the burst DPS concept which doesn't have that many weapons. UACs is pretty much it.

I meant big-alpha weapons like laser vomit, PPCs, and UACs, etc. XPLs can't possibly be good alpha/burst weapons without making them ridiculously OP due to their low damage/fast cycle time. They'll always need much more time on target than laser vomit/PPCs/UACs so why even bother trying to make them compete with that? There's a role to be filled for a heat efficient laser that can continuously spew out large amounts of damage as long as the player can continually see the target which DOES happen.

Edited by MechMaster059, 03 October 2023 - 07:17 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

No you can't. PLs are long established weapons. They're already balanced.

FAIL

Lol. Yes I can. It's called consistency.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Yet that's exactly what they did within the weapon family, made it a uniform +50% DPS boost per size just because. You don't seem willing or able to grasp the concept that PLs already being balanced and being the primary competitor to XPLs means they providing the foundation for how to implement XPLs so there's not much point in going around in circles on this.

We're going in circles because you can't seem to grasp the issue of difference in application and the danger of face-timing.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Non-sequitur.

Nope. It is. It's hypocrisy otherwise. So aside from being a petulant diva, you're a hypocrite.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

That's what I'm going for here.

But that doesn't make it good.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Which is to say no testing is done at all. Changes are just directly deployed to PROD.

No. The live is the testing.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

I do get face-time is risky.

Yet you show otherwise.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

That why XPLs get a massive DPS boost (42% is still very large despite your hyperventilating that it's "bad") and why I propose giving them a large heat efficiency boost as well and I don't advocate for reverting the range buff.

Meanwhile MXL is working fine.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Me: "If you look at the picture more carefully"
I can see how from your perspective I may have sounded condescending but I wasn't. It's hard to gauge a person's tone via text.

In my mind I was thinking you may have glossed over the 0.75s and 1.00s cycle time entries because I didn't highlight them in the image and I focused mostly on the 0.80s cycle time entry. My intent was merely to draw your attention to the 1.00s cycle time entry a 2nd time.

Would be understandable the first time. But the repeated assumption of just not understanding your proposal, why we're disagreeing with it, is the issue.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Me: "I'm getting the vibe you didn't read my post"
I'm still getting that vibe because you've made no mention of the fact that the Laser Duration skills are VERY OP for XPLs which I mentioned in my original post. Not being a diva, just making an observation there.

Nope, not me, that was QK. Also still being a diva.

And the problem with percentages is that, they are more useful the larger the value is. why it's much more useful to say the HLL and the Blazer, but little on XPL. Remember the +0.05s one? If you can understand that, you should understand this.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

You: "Because everyone that reads your proposal must like it, yes?"
Me: "Yes"
That's just me making a joke. (Though people really should agree with my proposals)

And there it is. They "should"? Again, a diva. Your proposal should be agreeable.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Maybe you're a little bit sensitive?

Maybe. But more likely, you're being a diva.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Just because MXPLs are being held back by their heat profile doesn't mean +70% DPS isn't OP.

Hmm, no, it is. What is your metric of "OP" even? Is it just because it's characteristically high?

Because what is OP is something that is over-performing, something that upsets the balance, something that usurps and renders other weapons not worth taking. If the MXPL does so much DPS, yet is held back that other weapons retain choices, that it's not guarantee of good performance -- even in your own words, barely people take them, then what is even the issue? Why fix what ain't broke? Why is nerf is the response to an already weak weapon that people don't take?

See, that's why change of baseline to MXL should work, and why weapons get buffed time to time, why there's power-creep too. Your dismissal of it, the call of "FAIL", is clearly just the lack of understanding how things work.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Because making them more heat efficient and better front-loading of the damage are massive buffs. There's more to a weapon that just its DPS.

And I agree, as I said before I would like colder XPLs. But DPS is a big factor that you can't ignore.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

It's hyperbolic to say a +42% DPS buff relative to PLs would be "horrible DPS". In fact, I'm concerned their DPS might still be too high if my proposal was fully implemented.

Exactly. +42% is good DPS.

Okay. But again, how would that be in practice? Because +70%, in practice, pretty much nailed the MXL in it's spot.

So if you're reducing the DPS by +28% from MPL, we can safely assume the same reduction.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

The lamest forum cop-out possible. The "You need to be a pro-level player to have an opinion" schtick.

T1 ain't pro lol. But it does give others above you better reputation to talk about it, as based on how you talk, there is clear lack of understanding of the risk of face-timing, now matter how hard you say "I do". If your basis of changes is only from the perspective between T3-T4, how applicable is that to the rest of the environment where different things happen?

The answer is obviously that it's not applicable. Hence the idea is shot down.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Not "working as intended" if almost no one is using them.

So I'll be the devil's advocate and ask, if they are so bad that people don't take them -- why make them worse?

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Yes, that's why my proposal is a complete buff to SXPLs, both DPS(+30% --> +42%), heat efficiency(+20%), and better front-loading of damage(1 dmg --> 1.75 dmg).

Still lower DPS on MXL and LXL. If I wanted to poke, I'd poke with legit PLs.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

D I V A A L E R T

Your new entry catch-phrase I take it? Suits you.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

It's comments like this that give me the vibe you haven't read my original post in its entirety.

I really don't care about your opinion.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Not really sure what the point of using MXPLs/SXPLs over MPLs/SPLs would be if XPLs are supposed to be yet another burst weapon.

So you probably struggle to find the difference in application of ACs, UACs, and RACs, I take it?

Because SPLs and MPLs aren't burst weapons, they are poke weapons with good DPS.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

Face time DOES happen in the game and the point is for XPLs to excel at it compared to other types of lasers, otherwise players may as well just stick with the existing lasers and ignore XPLs. (Which is what they're doing with SXPLs and to some degree MXPLs)

So you do understand that your proposal will make them worse.

That's like an admission of guilt to a court of law, that you are aware of your actions; you might as well say:

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

There's a role to be filled for a heat efficient laser that can continuously spew out large amounts of damage as long as the player can continually see the target which DOES happen.

Sure. But you can't do that with horrible DPS -- that means, reduction of their current DPS ain't doing them any favors.

Even RACs have astronomically high DPS, and they are barely useful, at least in my experience in T1 QP.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 October 2023 - 08:01 PM.