42 replies to this topic

[Gabriel Amarell]

I am aware that there have already been numerous threads on this topic but after seeing the screenshots http://www.pcgamer.c...in-cryengine-3/ I cannot help but bring it up again. I personally think that the lasers look awesome, but I am forced to wonder just how effective they will be. In Mechwarrior 4 Medium and Small lasers, Pulse/ER/Standard were completely worthless.

MLAS
Crits.1
Tons 1
Heat .3
Dmg. 1.2
Rec. 3

If from this your compute dps/crit (1.2/3)/1 = .4 dps/crit. now let me contrast with a weapon that I considered effective, the large laser, standard variant.

LLAS
Crits 2
Tons 5
Heat 2.5
Dmg. 7.5
Rec. 5

The same calculation dps/crit (7.5/5)/2 = .75 dps/crit

The numbers don’t seem too dramatic do they .4 vs .75 so a final comparison, something most of us who have played mechwarrior 4 would consider a powerful weapon the gauss rifle, for the sake of comparison, the IS model

Gauss Rifle
Crits 3
Tons 16
Heat .5
Dmg. 17
Rec. 8

dps/crit (17/8)/3 = .70833 dps/crit

I am aware that the amount of dmg a weapon does relative to its size is not the only measure of its value, and that having a relatively short recycle, low weight, and infinite shots are points in favor of the MLAS MPLAS ect. but the numbers don’t lie, if you were to take an Awesome (arguably the most energy friendly chassis in Mechwarrior 4) and load it up with as many MLAS as it could hold, do you really think that it would be competitive with a different chassis of the same weight using Gauss and LLAS assuming ceteris paribus. (all other factors being the same)

I would argue that ballistic/missile weapons should have an advantage in dps/crit to offset their limited ammunition, but the truth is that energy weapons required so many heat-sinks that they didn’t really have any advantage in terms of weight, and were only 56.5% as powerful as ballistic weapons (.4 dps/crit) / (.70833 dps/crit) = .56470 = 56.5%

Is having an infinite number of shots worth a downgrade of 43.5% dmg? How often did you run out of ammunition in Mechwarrior 4? For me personally I almost never ran out of rounds for my Gauss rifles.

IMO one of two things needs to happen, either ballistic/missile ammunition need to be reduced such that running out of ammo is a factor, and carrying enough reloads to insure you are not going to run out means having to sacrifice secondary weapons, OR if carrying sufficient reloads remains practical, energy weapons need to have their dmg. increased to the point where they are competitive, either by mounting 2 or 3 in a single critical slot (and not increasing the weight/heat), or by increasing the firepower of individual weapons (and not increasing the weight/heat). What I am saying is, if energy weapons are going to be weaker, but generate so much heat that with enough heat-sinks to use them they are NOT going to be lighter than ballistic/missile weapons AND ballistic/missile weapons are going to have sufficient ammunition that they are not in any real danger of running out of shots (as I would argue was the case in Mechwarrior 4) then why field energy weapons at all. If my 2 MLAS (with enough heat-sinks to use them effectively) are just as heavy as your AC 10 and are only half as powerful, and you can easily carry enough ammo to insure you’re not going to run out, then what advantage is having infinite shots to me, and why would I want MLAS at all? Either adjust ballistic/missile weapons so that running out of ammo is a real issue, (so that having infinite shots will mean something) or increase energy weapon dmg to be competitive since infinite shots is meaningless.

[Michael Rosario]

I believe you have read my mind. I totally agree.

[Steadfast]

Yes it is wort it. Lasers cant explode and take your torso/ Reactor with you. You forgot to consider that in your comparison. That makes them more powerfull than munition based ordnance.
Nonetheless, as we do not have any information available about dps or somesuch, this discussion is interesting, indeed - but moot imo.

Take care and c you in the field.
Daniel

[Scrawny Cowboy]

I agree, but I think increasing the damage would be a better route (and probably closer to canon) as to making less size and/or weight.

[Spooky]

Lasers are well balanced in MWLL (especially with the recent buff to PLs and HLs) so I am not really worried about it. In MWLL they might be too powerful even, due to heat management and coolant, but that's a different issue.

Also I am wondering why, out of all things you chose Damage per Critical as comparison. Apart from that being not the most important thing to worry about, this is not CBT, this is MWO. I doubt we will see criticals as use in CBT (and MW2/MW3) in MWO.

Edited by Spooky, 09 March 2012 - 02:48 AM.

[Volume]

I haven't posted here in a very long time, but for the love of Kerensky...I have to at least try to correct some of this.

1: MechWarrior Online will not have the same butchered numbers that MechWarrior 4 had. They have openly stated that they're trying to use the CBT/earlier games (MW2, MW3) as a guideline. Check the FAQ, check other dev quotes, if I had more time and effort I'd link them, and I apologize, but I'm just exasperated at this.

2: Not trying to flame, but you seem to have no concept of how messed up MW4 really was. For example, Gauss rifles are not three critical spaces. They're seven. They've been seven for years. They might change that, yes, but why not wait until they do, and confirm that they do, before assuming that they'll be three?

2a: Medium lasers do not do 1.2 damage, and they don't generate .3 heat.

2b: Large Lasers generate a fair amount of heat for damage that is less heat/damage efficient than MLAS, but the range is the real advantage.

3: It isn't a 43.5% damage reduction until we know the exact values that the developers will be using. They already referenced a hardpoint system in one of the videos, but that doesn't mean they're going to necessarily be using MW4 numbers or MW2 numbers. We don't know the values, and I love speculation, but at least speculate with values that make sense, not the kind of ridiculousness that MW4 had.

4: Heat sinks, ammunition, ECM/BAP/Optics equipment, endo-steel/ferro-fibrous, none of this things take up critical space in MW4, and some weapons like the AC20 come with 4 tons of ammunition for some ungodly reason, and some 'Mechs like the Dire Wolf (Daishi) you can load 3LBX20 and 2LBX10 on them (Wat) or 4 Cgauss on them like the Executioner (Gladiator) (wat) (with jumpjets since they also don't take critical space).

5: Pulse lasers will probably not even be available, and you can see already that the variants you can purchase in this game have the "standard" loadouts (HBK-4G, for example) and will have the AC20, SLAS, and two MLAS, rather than the "mechwarrior 4" loadouts of a LBXAC20, SRM6, and 2 Med lasers.

I played through Vengeance, BK, and Mercs and enjoyed them all mainly because I needed a 'Mech game. I don't hate them by any means, they just don't feel like a MechWarrior game compared to, say, MW3.

Considering they looked pretty effective in the gameplay videos, and how we aren't sure exactly how cooling or heat management will work until we get our hands on it, I would assume that our developers are competent enough to give each weapon a role and purpose.

Basically I think that yes, SLAS will be useful, so will MLAS, else the Swayback and other such MLAS boats would be completely useless.

And some people think lasers are going to be too strong (see that "AC/20 vs 4 medium lasers" thread.)

I understand your concerns and agree to a point, but I don't think that the numbers will be as terrible as MW4 where, yes, only LLAS were remotely useful.

Disclaimer: Just because I link to Sarna does not make me think I am better than anyone or "above" anyone. I'm not, and we're all fans, and I'm just trying to create an informed statement, citing information that has been true in BT/MW until MW4 came along.

Edited by Volume, 09 March 2012 - 03:28 AM.

[Sinitron]

Medium and small lasers are support weapons, like machineguns. You wouldn't deck out an Awesome in them - maybe a lighter chassis like the Wolfhound, but the primary weapon of the Wolfhound is usually a larger laser weapon, like the Large X-Pulse Laser of MW4.

[Jehan]

Sinitron, on 09 March 2012 - 03:49 AM, said:

Medium and small lasers are support weapons, like machineguns. You wouldn't deck out an Awesome in them - maybe a lighter chassis like the Wolfhound, but the primary weapon of the Wolfhound is usually a larger laser weapon, like the Large X-Pulse Laser of MW4.

Actually not. Medium lasers were the standard close combat weapon on mechs due to their high efficiency. Many times referred as the 'workhorse' weapons.
Almost all mech designs incorpore them. In canon, 2 medium lasers is a pretty much respectable power at close range, and any mech armed with 4+ medium lasers is perfectly able to shred any mech chassis to pieces. Furthermore, there is a variant of the hunchback (which is already seen in the 'hot-drop' teaser) wich replaces its AC 20 with some more medium lasers.

MW4 decided for some microsofty reason that medium lasers should be rendered just barely more effective than a machine gun instead. There's where they became 'support weapons'. In canon however, madium lasers are MAIN close combat weapons.

Edited by Jehan, 09 March 2012 - 04:41 AM.

[Redburn]

Sinitron, on 09 March 2012 - 03:49 AM, said:

Medium and small lasers are support weapons, like machineguns. You wouldn't deck out an Awesome in them - maybe a lighter chassis like the Wolfhound, but the primary weapon of the Wolfhound is usually a larger laser weapon, like the Large X-Pulse Laser of MW4.

No Flame, just a request. Please check canon and TT before making primary weapons statements like this. It's not right.

[Polymorphyne]

Tell the Black Hawk that Medium lasers are not primary weapons. Go ahead, just try.

[Havoc2]

Gabriel Amarell, on 09 March 2012 - 02:14 AM, said:

I am aware that there have already been numerous threads on this topic but after seeing the screenshots http://www.pcgamer.c...in-cryengine-3/ I cannot help but bring it up again. I personally think that the lasers look awesome, but I am forced to wonder just how effective they will be. In Mechwarrior 4 Medium and Small lasers, Pulse/ER/Standard were completely worthless.

I had to address this.

Pulse lasers (no matter the size or faction) were worthless.
Small lasers were better off being used as heat sinks.

Medium lasers however were great. One of my favorite Med loadouts was a Hellspawn running around with about 6 MLAS and streak SRM4s.

The LLAS will always be a favorite if you can fit it. It hits harder, has longer range and (IIRC) does more damage per heat cost per ton than an equal number of MLAS or SLAS.

[BduSlammer]

in the game from what i under stand ML-5 damage Lt L -3 Hvy L -8 PPC-10 AC-20 -20

[Polymorphyne]

Overall damage isnt the only thing to consider- refire rate, accuracy, time to hit target, etc...... of course in MW4 every weapon is deadly accurate......
MWO seems like it will adress this... which is good.

[Spooky]

Longsword, on 09 March 2012 - 05:31 AM, said:

Overall damage isnt the only thing to consider- refire rate, accuracy, time to hit target, etc...... of course in MW4 every weapon is deadly accurate......
MWO seems like it will adress this... which is good.

Address what, accuracy? Lasers were always accurate and there is no reason why they shouldn't be. Introducing randomness wouldn't make sense.

[3Xtr3m3]

Another factor to consider is cost of replacement. If you shoot my med. laser, I got a lot of replacements.
I shoot your OMGPPC4000, Good luck, replacing that and making a profit on the mission.

[Victor Morson]

I'd like to point out that in the videos we've seen of gameplay now, medium lasers fire at a SLOWER recycle than AC/20s. This suggests that they pack a hell of a punch, unlike previous versions and will likely be closer to how MPBT3025 presents them.

}{avoc, on 09 March 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

I had to address this.

Pulse lasers (no matter the size or faction) were worthless.
Small lasers were better off being used as heat sinks.

Medium lasers however were great. One of my favorite Med loadouts was a Hellspawn running around with about 6 MLAS and streak SRM4s.

The LLAS will always be a favorite if you can fit it. It hits harder, has longer range and (IIRC) does more damage per heat cost per ton than an equal number of MLAS or SLAS.

The funny part about MW4 is that they introduced the X-Pulse, which is exactly what the REGULAR Pulse should have been, instead of just fixing the standard useless pulse laser.

Also Medium Lasers were only great after Mercenaries. In Vanilla MW4 they were terrible, but after MW4M they became a decent backup weapon due to their light weight. Nowhere near canon effectiveness or what we see in MWLL, but still, really useful as a secondary weapon for the tonnage.

My best designs in the game used them - a Wolfhound with 3 Large, 3 Mediums and a Black Knight with 5 Large, 5 Mediums that was more than a match for typical Novacat ER Large boats due to the drastically superior heat effectiveness.

That said, I believe if you played Hardcore (Mektek's modded MW4) then you got actual medium lasers that did a ton of damage and finally could be considered primary weapons.

So yeah, ML in MW4 really depended on what version you were playing.

Edited by Victor Morson, 09 March 2012 - 07:19 AM.

[Polymorphyne]

Quote

Address what, accuracy? Lasers were always accurate and there is no reason why they shouldn't be. Introducing randomness wouldn't make sense.

I mean in relation to Autocannons and missiles..... the lasers accuracy being a bonus in comparison to autocannons.
In MW4 everything hits the exact spot you aim at with no reduction in accuracy for weapon type/etc.

[FinnMcKool]

NO

[Garth Erlam]

As a frequent Jenner pilot I can tell you that Medium Lasers are most certainly not useless in MWO.

[TheRulesLawyer]

What are you going on about?
Medium lasers are the most effective weapon per ton you can mount in battletech. Great damage to heat ratio, okay range, and really small and light. Lasers will be fine. Honestly they need to be lower DPS than ammo weapons for a couple reasons

1) You can take low percentage shots without worry
2) No risk of ammo explosions
3) You can't run out of ammo

So if you insist on running right up to someone where they can't miss you'll probably should be at a disadvantage vs ammo weapons. You probably should be. If you try to play at a longer range where you'll both be missing often, that's were energy weapons should shine.