137 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Nine-Ball, on 04 October 2023 - 04:50 PM, said:

Of course the enemy can dodge your entire shot and the majority of your burntime. That is what you call a skill issue -- just ask me and my 56% accuracy using X-pulse. Yet such issues are more easily correctable with concentration and better shot selection as opposed to trying to accurately lead a target for an entire second.

Don't get me wrong, hitscan is more beneficial, but saying the more PPFLD of the X-Pulse is some magical benefit is misleading. It is better, but by like 1% compared to RACs. RACs have three detriments, spin-up time, spread, and bullet velocity. Jamming is pretty inconsequential given how heat is generally more of a limiting factor than jam time otherwise I might have listed it as a fourth. It has nothing to do with the PPFLD or lack there of. Your saturating damage whether you like it or not (barring bad players just standing still long enough for you to do significant damage).

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 06:20 PM, said:

The only one of these that are legitimately competitive is ERML+Gauss but given the dominance it has in the game maybe that's a good thing. It really messes with how laser vomit on the Clan side plays out as well since you would now have to switch all your medium lasers to pulse to get the same benefit.

Yeah, but you're punishing the other acceptable basic build, when only a few is good and competitive. So no, it isn't good.

And having to switch to pulse for the same purpose isn't good for the game either. That restricts the poke builds that the lights could do, reducing them to mostly leg-chomping squirrels, and many of them rely on the alpha of basic-*** medium lasers. Such as say the Locust with 5 ML, the Purifier with 5 ERML. It's kinda fine for the clans, or at least they'll get away with it better since their entire tech-base is generally lighter.

This rework of STD vs Pulse vs XPulse of yours, looks like it's a solution looking for a problem, and it'll find a bigger one than it purports to solve.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 04 October 2023 - 06:35 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 04 October 2023 - 06:29 PM, said:

Yeah, but you're punishing the other acceptable basic build, when only a few is good and competitive. So no, it isn't good.

That's kinda silly reasoning, if a weapon were OP, would you not nerf it because it enables other builds that aren't competitive? No, you wouldn't.

The6thMessenger, on 04 October 2023 - 06:29 PM, said:

And having to switch to pulse for the same purpose isn't good for the game either. That restricts the poke builds that the lights could do, reducing them to mostly leg-chomping squirrels

Huh? AFAIK most of the legit light builds already use pulse (IS use MPLs while Clans use HML/LMGs or SPLs), so this more opens up the door for punishment lights that function similar to the laser vomit HBK-IIC but with more manueverability. Poke, do a boat load of damage on a target who isn't paying attention to you because you are on its flank, cool down and reposition, repeat. That second poke is often pretty risky for lights that are trying to play more at range.

Yes, it will change things but that's kinda par for the course with any balance change, weapon power is relative to other weapons so any change shifts the balance and can impact the viability of all builds.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 04 October 2023 - 07:12 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 04 October 2023 - 06:29 PM, said:

This rework of STD vs Pulse vs XPulse of yours, looks like it's a solution looking for a problem, and it'll find a bigger one than it purports to solve.

It really isn't the laser category (especially at short range) is congested with a bunch of weapons that all compete for the same role. The only difference from what I'm proposing and what other people have been proposing is turning the tuning around.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 04 October 2023 - 07:16 PM.

[Curccu]

MechMaster059, on 04 October 2023 - 01:04 PM, said:

It's hard to grasp what a huge buff better damage / heat efficiency would be until it's in game. I think you're being a little flippant about how much impact better front-loading of the damage would be as well. It would make XPLs noticeably better against light mechs and other fast movers.

I didn't get overheated I got my face melted or had to get back to cover because incoming fire with alphas that can two shot my vulcan while I poked with my 4,4 damage alpha. If it would be 8,8... for SXPL and MXPL that might help because extended brawling times.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 07:11 PM, said:

That's kinda silly reasoning, if a weapon were OP, would you not nerf it because it enables other builds that aren't competitive?

No, you wouldn't.

What? This isn't helping your case, you're applying a sweeping nerf on all the builds that use them (the standard/ER MLs). The potency distance effectively remains the same from ERML-Gauss to every weapon that also use ML -- people will still be funneled to the ERML-Gauss because it's still the best among the mixes of ML, or none of the ML builds at all because the ML are now weaker.

Also, ERML-Gauss isn't really OP either, it's just good. It's the rest that needs buff.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 07:11 PM, said:

Huh? AFAIK most of the legit light builds already use pulse (IS use MPLs while Clans use HML/LMGs or SPLs)

That's a bit of a mislead, and quite frankly, so what? They can still run ML boats regardless.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 07:11 PM, said:

so this more opens up the door for punishment lights that function similar to the laser vomit HBK-IIC but with more manueverability.

But why tho? That just makes lights even unpleasant to take, because now you got less builds that work. You basically take out their options.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 07:11 PM, said:

Poke, do a boat load of damage on a target who isn't paying attention to you because you are on its flank, cool down and reposition, repeat. That second poke is often pretty risky for lights that are trying to play more at range.

I don't get it. If your concern is risk, why the continuous laser that increases risk? The idea of front-loaded burst of laser is that, the light can already be retreating once it does its full damage and caught the attention of target. This continuous beam is antithetical to the application of these poke lights, and will quite frankly extinct the effective use with them.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 07:11 PM, said:

Yes, it will change things but that's kinda par for the course with any balance change, weapon power is relative to other weapons so any change shifts the balance and can impact the viability of all builds.

It's more of a question of whether we should -- and quite frankly, why fix what ain't broke? Thus we shouldn't.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 07:15 PM, said:

It really isn't

It kinda is. It's change for the sake of change, when current system is working and isn't really problematic. The XPL's issue is potency -- and the lack of it.

Weapons with same mechanics and application, isn't necessarily redundant so long as they also have other situations that excel at. Such as in the case of C-LPL vs C-ERLL, and though the C-LPL will excel in repeated pokes, the C-ERLL can be very very oppressive from a distance.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 04 October 2023 - 10:47 PM.

[MechMaster059]

Curccu, on 04 October 2023 - 08:52 PM, said:

I didn't get overheated I got my face melted or had to get back to cover because incoming fire with alphas that can two shot my vulcan while I poked with my 4,4 damage alpha. If it would be 8,8... for SXPL and MXPL that might help because extended brawling times.

Try my CDA-3F build:
A\692:Z0|EdpS0|a@|Y?|i^|i^qS0|a@|Y?|i^|OG|OGr00s00tS0uS0v30w404040

It has a -20% cooldown quirk that the Vulcan doesn't have which is pretty big. It also has -20% JJ heat. (It seems the VT-5M is quirked specifically for LPLs.)

Because XPLs deal their damage out in a stream of damage rather than a big burst, it's possible to melt an assault for 4-5 seconds if it's involved in a brawl with one of your teammates before it even realizes a 2nd person is firing upon it... LOL. That happened with the Stone Rhino I melted in Polar Highlands. It didn't seem to even realize I was firing upon it. (Not sure if you read that example in my OP)

[Curccu]

MechMaster059, on 04 October 2023 - 10:48 PM, said:

Try my CDA-3F build:
A\692:Z0|EdpS0|a@|Y?|i^|i^qS0|a@|Y?|i^|OG|OGr00s00tS0uS0v30w404040

It has a -20% cooldown quirk that the Vulcan doesn't have which is pretty big. It also has -20% JJ heat. (It seems the VT-5M is quirked specifically for LPLs.)

Asked Cauldron few weeks back, pulse laser quirks work with Xpulses also.
So
-15% CD
+25% range
-10% heat

So loses a bit on CD but wins big on range.

[MechMaster059]

Curccu, on 05 October 2023 - 04:28 AM, said:

Asked Cauldron few weeks back, pulse laser quirks work with Xpulses also.
So
-15% CD
+25% range
-10% heat

So loses a bit on CD but wins big on range.

Mech DB doesn't show those LPL quirks being applied to LXPLs but I verified in game that you're correct, they're being applied to LXPLs.

Here's the bad news:
I tried recreating my CDA-3F build on the VT-3M and can't because... the lower arm actuator's on the VT-3M block FF armor which causes the mech to miss out on -0.4T. Not that it matters much because the VT-3M doesn't have a 2nd laser mount in its LT to put a ML anyway. (These builds rely upon saving weight by completely stripping armor off the arms so the laser mount in the VT-3M's RA is useless.)

I also noticed the CDA-3F has massively better armor/structure quirks to improve survivability.

I do have 2xML on my CDA-3F build backing up the 2xLXPLs to give it some reliable alpha as well. What is your exact VT-3M build?

You have to play a good build more than just 1 evening to see what I'm talking about with LXPLs, but like I said, I know overall that XPLs are weak weapons which is exactly what I'm trying to fix here.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 04 October 2023 - 10:36 PM, said:

What? This isn't helping your case, you're applying a sweeping nerf on all the builds that use them (the standard/ER MLs). The potency distance effectively remains the same from ERML-Gauss to every weapon that also use ML -- people will still be funneled to the ERML-Gauss because it's still the best among the mixes of ML, or none of the ML builds at all because the ML are now weaker.

Yeah I don't think they will, they might be funneled to pulse and Gauss but it won't be as potent. As for nerf vs buff, power creep is bad and that's part of what contributes to the situation we have in this game where weapons get buffed and then survivability has to be increased to compensate.

The6thMessenger, on 04 October 2023 - 10:36 PM, said:

That's a bit of a mislead, and quite frankly, so what? They can still run ML boats regardless.

But why tho? That just makes lights even unpleasant to take, because now you got less builds that work. You basically take out their options.

I don't get it. If your concern is risk, why the continuous laser that increases risk? The idea of front-loaded burst of laser is that, the light can already be retreating once it does its full damage and caught the attention of target. This continuous beam is antithetical to the application of these poke lights, and will quite frankly extinct the effective use with them.

Those poke builds you reference aren't great builds anyway? So how is that taking away competitive options when it was never one in the first place?

All of that is regardless though, the goal isn't to make this a nerf, it is to change the weapon and make normal lasers more distinct from pulse. Doing that by making the weapon from burst alpha (which pulse already is) to a burst DPS weapon.

The6thMessenger, on 04 October 2023 - 10:36 PM, said:

It's more of a question of whether we should -- and quite frankly, why fix what ain't broke? Thus we shouldn't.

It kinda is. It's change for the sake of change, when current system is working and isn't really problematic. The XPL's issue is potency -- and the lack of it.

Weapons with same mechanics and application, isn't necessarily redundant so long as they also have other situations that excel at. Such as in the case of C-LPL vs C-ERLL, and though the C-LPL will excel in repeated pokes, the C-ERLL can be very very oppressive from a distance.

That's because we don't have the cERLPL yet, but when that happens we will likely see the same sort of situation that we do with iLPLs vs iLLs. One typically wins out. It is broke because there isn't a situation where cERSL really win out anymore, same with cHSL. cSPL, cERSL, cERmL all compete for the same profile, cERmL have one benefit at least in that they help skirt ghost heat but that seems sort of silly when you could just bump up the ghost heat limit and achieve the same result. Same is true for iSPLs vs iSL, one is better than the other and because there is no real distinction between the two, one is used over the other in all situations. Right now you will either see cSPL + cERmL or iSPLs but not really any of the others because they provide little to not benefit over cSPLs resulting in redundant/superfluous weapons.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 October 2023 - 07:11 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:27 AM, said:

That's because we don't have the cERLPL

Have you heard anything about C-ER Pulse and Imp Heavy lasers being implemented? I sort of assume they will be at some point but not heard anything.

Full disclosure, the only reason i care is i reaaally want the SHC-I for the right arm, and it comes with 2xERMPL and 2xIHML

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Widowmaker1981, on 05 October 2023 - 07:26 AM, said:

Have you heard anything about C-ER Pulse and Imp Heavy lasers being implemented? I sort of assume they will be at some point but not heard anything.

Full disclosure, the only reason i care is i reaaally want the SHC-I for the right arm, and it comes with 2xERMPL and 2xIHML

Improved heavy lasers would seem a bit odd to implement (same for improved heavy gauss) since they would just have shorter durations at the cost of exploding like Gauss which is worth it in both mediums. I expect ER pulse would be at some point soon given x-pulse is in and both have the same availability year afaik.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:27 AM, said:

Yeah I don't think they will, they might be funneled to pulse and Gauss but it won't be as potent.

But see, they are funneled away from it.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:27 AM, said:

As for nerf vs buff, power creep is bad and that's part of what contributes to the situation we have in this game where weapons get buffed and then survivability has to be increased to compensate.

I don't like power-creep, and don't like the direction of cauldon for that. But sweeping nerf is bad as well.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:27 AM, said:

Those poke builds you reference aren't great builds anyway? So how is that taking away competitive options when it was never one in the first place?

My concern is largely about making them an option at all. Your approach is just "**** em".

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:27 AM, said:

All of that is regardless though, the goal isn't to make this a nerf, it is to change the weapon and make normal lasers more distinct from pulse. Doing that by making the weapon from burst alpha (which pulse already is) to a burst DPS weapon.

And like I said, a solution looking for a problem.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:27 AM, said:

That's because we don't have the cERLPL yet, but when that happens we will likely see the same sort of situation that we do with iLPLs vs iLLs.

So your plan is just ruin the current status quo, and just make the cauldron add the necessary weapons that would fix your idea of a new balance order? And they will do this why? People will agree to this why?

I'm pretty sure they added the blazers and x-pulse to fill the gaps. I doubt they will purposefully make one, and add it in.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:27 AM, said:

It is broke because there isn't a situation where cERSL really win out anymore, same with cHSL. cSPL, cERSL, cERmL all compete for the same profile.

cERSL is backup. The game isn't aching for their lack of prominence.

It's a 0.5t equipment that you can put on anywhere, with an acceptable performance better than the micros. The rework won't change that.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 02:54 PM, said:

But see, they are funneled away from it.

I don't like power-creep, and don't like the direction of cauldon for that. But sweeping nerf is bad as well.

My concern is largely about making them an option at all. Your approach is just "**** em".

And like I said, a solution looking for a problem.

So your plan is just ruin the current status quo, and just make the cauldron add the necessary weapons that would fix your idea of a new balance order? And they will do this why? People will agree to this why?

Oh they won't do any of this, but they also will likely not do anything in this forum around lasers so that argument is a bit moot. That said yes, why create new options when there are plenty of redundant options already in the game? There isn't really a reason to have LLs and LPLs compete for the same role, they aren't substantially different enough to offer something unique that the other can't provide other than maybe hardpoint compression. Same would be true if they made XLPLs function like they should and be the pulse equivalent of iER lasers.

Yes this is a fundamental shift that would change builds, welcome to any substantial balance change. Any shift in the meta (or status quo as you call it) could cause builds to suddenly lack in effectiveness. The question is whether it ends up increasing the variety we see in the meta, and given the dominance (at least on the Clan side) of laser/gauss vomit, it could loosen that grip a bit. This might at least increase the tonnage tax to pull it off while offering something unique like what x-pulse could potentially offer. Hell, it would hurt the biggest gripe all the brown sea has about the game these days with cERLL.

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 02:54 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure they added the blazers and x-pulse to fill the gaps. I doubt they will purposefully make one, and add it in.

Blazers don't really fill any gaps, and neither do x-pulse (at least as is). Blazers are really only useful now on mechs that lack the hardpoints to mount double LLs instead and the number of those is....few and far between. As for x-pulse, well we've already covered that they really don't do anything useful currently.

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 02:54 PM, said:

cERSL is backup. The game isn't aching for their lack of prominence.

It's a 0.5t equipment that you can put on anywhere, with an acceptable performance better than the micros. The rework won't change that.

Micros are better because they allow you to skirt ghost heat and offer better heat efficiency and duration than cERSL for a negligible drop in range. Heavy smalls also just aren't worth it. They also happen to line up exactly with cSPL recycle times so it's kind of hard to not just stack the two together if you have the hardpoints.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 October 2023 - 05:47 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:26 PM, said:

That said yes, why create new options when there are plenty of redundant options already in the game? There isn't really a reason to have LLs and LPLs compete for the same role, they aren't substantially different enough to offer something unique that the other can't provide other than maybe hardpoint compression. Same would be true if they made XLPLs function like they should and be the pulse equivalent of iER lasers.

I can see the difference with range, tonnage, heat. Yeah it's redundant in application, but it does have build application and range application. Sorta like you can't just replace the 2x ERLL in a Cheetah with 2x LPL, for the purpose that it requires 4 more tons, and when you do, it's range is shorter.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:26 PM, said:

Yes this is a fundamental shift that would change builds, welcome to any substantial balance change. Any shift in the meta (or status quo as you call it) could cause builds to suddenly lack in effectiveness. The question is whether it ends up increasing the variety we see in the meta, and given the dominance (at least on the Clan side) of laser/gauss vomit, it could loosen that grip a bit. This might at least increase the tonnage tax to pull it off while offering something unique like what x-pulse could potentially offer. Hell, it would hurt the biggest gripe all the brown sea has about the game these days with cERLL.

I see more reduction in the choices in the meta.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:26 PM, said:

Blazers don't really fill any gaps, and neither do x-pulse (at least as is). Blazers are really only useful now on mechs that lack the hardpoints to mount double LLs instead and the number of those is....few and far between. As for x-pulse, well we've already covered that they really don't do anything useful currently.

It's more like the HLL equivalent to the IS, that laser-vomit gap between IS vs Clan. The C-HLL, C-ERLL, and C-LPL being basically poke-builds are redundant, but it's the power difference and range that sets them apart. These options are pretty much missing to the IS.

Yeah, XPLs suck, but that's an issue of potency than application.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 05:26 PM, said:

Micros are better because they allow you to skirt ghost heat and offer better heat efficiency and duration than cERSL for a negligible drop in range. Heavy smalls also just aren't worth it. They also happen to line up exactly with cSPL recycle times so it's kind of hard to not just stack the two together if you have the hardpoints.

But see, they do have uses. There's also the issue of when you have limited hardpoint selection.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 07:27 PM, said:

I can see the difference with range, tonnage, heat. Yeah it's redundant in application, but it does have build application and range application. Sorta like you can't just replace the 2x ERLL in a Cheetah with 2x LPL, for the purpose that it requires 4 more tons, and when you do, it's range is shorter.

I see more reduction in the choices in the meta.

If you are taking 2 cERLL in a Cheetah, you are doing a diservice to your team so not really sad to see that mech go. I don't mind weapons that fill tonnage/hardpoint gaps much in the same way that LPPCs/PPCs/HPPCs sort of did. That said, I don't think that's really what should be the purpose of pulse vs lasers because that typically plays out in edge cases. cERLL, cHLL, cLPL are different from the LPPC/PPC comparison here because they aren't really used differently for most builds (like LPPCs are better options for lights and some mediums). cERLL are special in that they are better suited to just cERLL boating with maybe Gauss, and that's likely only because there is no cERLPL equivalent.

You aren't going to change the meta without actually diversifying options, point blank.

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 07:27 PM, said:

It's more like the HLL equivalent to the IS, that laser-vomit gap between IS vs Clan. The C-HLL, C-ERLL, and C-LPL being basically poke-builds are redundant, but it's the power difference and range that sets them apart. These options are pretty much missing to the IS.

It literally is just 2 LL stuck together for 1 less ton, but 0.25s extra duration. It's different from the cHLL in that it doesn't save much tonnage. It makes tonnage taxed gauss vomit IS builds slightly better, but those are far and few between and I'd have rather they just make the iLL not suck without quirks.

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 07:27 PM, said:

But see, they do have uses. There's also the issue of when you have limited hardpoint selection.

Even on limited hardpoint mechs, you are better off with cSPLs because cERSL just feel like garbage comparatively. If you want more range than cSPLs, honestly the cHMLs are the better option over cERSL.

I think what you are getting at is more something that is actually exacerbated in MW5 with its bad sized hardpoints, in that often you are trying to binpack when you build a mech. The problem is that there isn't a larger medium laser that you can magically upgrade to when you don't have the hardpoints or have a mix of weird hardpoints. LPPCs/PPCs/HPPCs if they actually had more appropriate tonnages (3.5/7.0/10.5 or 3/6/9) offer up a decent solution to that problem because it changes the breakpoints. For example without them, if you have 10 tons for energy weapons, you can slap a PPC but not much else mixes with it, you are better off just taking a lighter mech where the single PPC is solid, or a heavier mech that can mount two of them. Whereas with an HPPC/LPPC you can fill that gap. Which is totally fine to fill, that just shouldn't be the purpose of different weapon types like pulse vs standard lasers. I honestly don't care if we start making things up, maybe that probably should happen.

Putting on my system's designer hat, these are orthogonal issues and you solve them in separate ways.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 October 2023 - 09:09 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 08:58 PM, said:

cERLL, cHLL, cLPL are different from the LPPC/PPC comparison here because they aren't really used differently for most builds (like LPPCs are better options for lights and some mediums).

So like, why are you bringing it up?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 08:58 PM, said:

You aren't going to change the meta without actually diversifying options, point blank.

Fair, but does it need to be changed? This is more on the realm of, not because we could means we should.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 08:58 PM, said:

It literally is just 2 LL stuck together for 1 less ton, but 0.25s extra duration. It's different from the cHLL in that it doesn't save much tonnage. It makes tonnage taxed gauss vomit IS builds slightly better, but those are far and few between and I'd have rather they just make the iLL not suck without quirks.

Well, yes, you just described what a Blazer is. It's not supposed to be an HLL, it's supposed to fill the gap in the IS vs Clan tech as a high-powered laser, not to be an exact expy of the HLL. It is something to pad the IS laser vomit.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 08:58 PM, said:

Even on limited hardpoint mechs, you are better off with cSPLs because cERSL just feel like garbage comparatively. If you want more range than cSPLs, honestly the cHMLs are the better option over cERSL.

Yeah, but not every mech can spare the tons.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 08:58 PM, said:

I think what you are getting at is more something that is actually exacerbated in MW5 with its bad sized hardpoints, in that often you are trying to binpack when you build a mech. The problem is that there isn't a larger medium laser that you can magically upgrade to when you don't have the hardpoints or have a mix of weird hardpoints.

Dude, I just mod it away in MW5, because PGI ****** up the mechlab. Though my point of concern is something like the Shadow-Cat with it having paltry hardpoints, that is typically relegated to heavy energy weapons, and cannot boat light ones.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 08:58 PM, said:

I honestly don't care if we start making things up, maybe that probably should happen.

Well, Cauldron is starting to break construction rules, so you might get your wish. But it always come back on the issue of, not because we can, doesn't mean we should.

On a short tangent however, the issue of PPC sizes, the LPPC/PPC/HPPC, even SNPPC, is that their application is largely the same, it's a sniper-poke, and they even share the same range. LPPC mitigates this by having faster CD that lets it mix better -- but not stellarly with ACs or other implement with rapid fire. But the PPC vs HPPC has this pitfall of being basically in the same ppfld snipe.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 October 2023 - 08:58 PM, said:

Putting on my system's designer hat, these are orthogonal issues and you solve them in separate ways.

Not by making more problems tho.

[Widowmaker1981]

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 09:33 PM, said:

On a short tangent however, the issue of PPC sizes, the LPPC/PPC/HPPC, even SNPPC, is that their application is largely the same, it's a sniper-poke, and they even share the same range. LPPC mitigates this by having faster CD that lets it mix better -- but not stellarly with ACs or other implement with rapid fire. But the PPC vs HPPC has this pitfall of being basically in the same ppfld snipe.

The HPPC and PPC do overlap a fair bit, its true - which one to use comes down to whether you have 2 or 3 clustered energy HPs. If you have 3, PPCs are a bit better (imo) - for 1 slot and 1 ton you get a 20% faster cooldown, but on say a Corsair-7A you're better off with HPPCs because it lets you strip the right arm and you get a much better left peek.

The point is they do all have uses, and it seems very reasonable to me that they overlap a lot because.. they are all PPCs.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 09:33 PM, said:

Fair, but does it need to be changed? This is more on the realm of, not because we could means we should.

I mean the fact that they made X-Pulse not just an ER pulse for the IS like it should be, something tells me that they wanted to add more interesting weapons/options to lasers. I see no problem with trying to make weapons more interesting. This game isn't like standard FPS where the difference in weapons can come down to armor penetration and such like the difference between AKs in CS:GO (which can one tap helmeted players) vs the M4A1-S which is silenced meaning no tracers or sound to judge enemy positions on. Mechwarrior's equivalent version of that is firing mechanics like charge up, beam duration, lock-ons, projectiles, etc.

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 09:33 PM, said:

Well, yes, you just described what a Blazer is. It's not supposed to be an HLL, it's supposed to fill the gap in the IS vs Clan tech as a high-powered laser, not to be an exact expy of the HLL. It is something to pad the IS laser vomit.

Yeah, but not every mech can spare the tons.

It doesn't close any gap when two LLs are actually better. At that point its only point is for hardpoint starved mechs or for like 1 of 3 mechs that can abuse the +1 laser HSL quirk. It opens up lasers + gauss for like 2 mechs, not exactly that helpful compared to buffing iLL

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 09:33 PM, said:

On a short tangent however, the issue of PPC sizes, the LPPC/PPC/HPPC, even SNPPC, is that their application is largely the same, it's a sniper-poke, and they even share the same range. LPPC mitigates this by having faster CD that lets it mix better -- but not stellarly with ACs or other implement with rapid fire. But the PPC vs HPPC has this pitfall of being basically in the same ppfld snipe.

Not by making more problems tho.

The HPPC/PPC solves the issue you were talking about though in reference to the Cheetah. What if there was a LPL that was 9 tons and was equivalent to mounting 1.5 of the normal cLPL. Then who would care about the 2 cERLL Cheetah when you can just mount the 9 ton laser that has equivalent performance? No one which is what my point was. The breakpoints for some of the bigger weapons is rough for lighter mechs and leaves them in rough spots. HPPC and LPPCs offered them options to get around those breakpoints while still accomplishing the same role. The relationship between them is better than with how lasers work because lasers just are not designed that way, the smaller ones all have different range/duration/cooldown profiles that make them awkward to mix together. Again, orthogonal issues. The Viper is a good example with ERPPCs since it has a similar issue as the Cheetah, one cERPPC just isn't enough and without stripping significant armor you can't really mount 2 (though 2 is actually pretty nice on it). If there were a heavy ERPPC equivalent for clans, it would fit really nice on the Viper and be a solid middle ground.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 06 October 2023 - 07:42 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 05 October 2023 - 09:33 PM, said:

Not by making more problems tho.

Huh? The current situation is the worst of both worlds. We are using other weapons to cover up gaps thanks to the lack of build options to cover breakpoints and doing it by making weapons feel more and more bland. If you want more weapons to cover up breakpoints that's totally fine, but that is an issue not even specific to lasers, it is across the board in the game.

I do find it ironic that here I am trying to "break" the "peekaboo" meta that so many of you complain about and suddenly you dislike the idea of changing the status quo, like what? Keeping in mind I'm also trying to make the burst DPS weapons actually competitive and not just end up be a nerf but that's regardless.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 06 October 2023 - 09:12 AM.