534 replies to this topic

[Undead Bane]

DuoAngel, on 13 November 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

I just want reply (question) maybe off-topic, but close to heat dissipation problem. I have my G-Kitty build with 1 gauss and 2 MLas, have 10 HS (standard) onboard. And today I tried to shoot constantly only one of MLas, staying at base (it was forest colony to say). Maybe my math is bad, but... First 3-4 shots shown exactly 0% of heat, not even blinked. But after those 4 shots heat started to grow constantly (without drawbacks between shots I mean). Yeah, heat is apparently has to accumulate somewhere in chassis, but heatsinks... For example, if You fire two MLas at once, and stop shooting (heat will rise up), then heat will steady go down. But when You fire constantly, then that means, that HS don't work at all while shooting. Am I mistaken?

Yeah, there was some word about it. The general idea is fine, however, added by overal heat dissipation problem it makes things more messy.

[Vapor Trail]

Did this before class but couldn't post till now.

Apoc1138, on 13 November 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

you're arbitrarily increasing the time between shots for no decent reason... my actual DPS with 2 PPC's whilst I am engaging a target is 6.66DPS...

Nothing arbitrary about it, at least on my end. You're ignoring the heat buildup because you assume that it has no bearing on your engagement of targets.

Average Rate of Fire.

Sure, you can fire the PPCs at max rate of fire, generating 6.66 DPS. This is your max DPS. Also known as "leaning on the trigger."

How long can you keep that up? Basically you're able to add heat to your mech until you get close to the heat cap. Heat cap for double heat sinks is (30 + 2* #ofHeatSinks) (As far as I am aware. It's either that or 30 + #ofHeatSinks, which I find more rational, but hey, lets consider both).

So Heat cap MAY be 74 for this mech (or 52).

With 2 PPCs generating 18 heat per shot, firing once every three seconds. Dissipating 2.2 heat per second, or 6.6 heat per cycle, you build up 11.4 heat per shot.

First salvo, spike to 18. Cool to 11.4
Second salvo, spike to 29.4. Cool to 22.8
Third salvo, spike to 40.8. Cool to 34.2
Fourth salvo, spike to 52.2(*) Cool to 45.6
Fifth salvo, spike to 63.6. Cool to 57.0
Sixth salvo, spike to 75. (**)

Shutdown points are marked. You two extra salvos with the higher heat cap. You want to stop and wait after the fifth salvo. That's roughly twelve seconds from first shot leaving the barrel till the last leaving (salvos at 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12 seconds) for a total of 100 damage. The Gauss rifle fires four times in the same timeframe (0, 4, 8, 12). Which means GaussKitty just laid out 120 damage to your 100.

Now, by your own admission, you disengage to cool. The time you spend cooling MUST be included in your average rate of fire. Why? because you can no longer fire at max RoF. If you wanted to continue the engagement, you could... you'd just have to do so at a lower RoF than your max.

When you're too warm to continue with an engagement, you pull back, right? So what happens when you duck down and there's an unengaged mech that no one saw sneak up, standing where you thought you were going to be safe and pelting you with shots. What do you do?

Begin a new round of engagement at max RoF? No, because you are STILL too hot, you'll shutdown in two salvos, if not one. Run away while you cool? Guess what, you're still engaged and not firing. You CAN however, fire at a rate designed to hold your heat constant, or even slowly decrease it. This would be firing at the average rate of fire, or less than the average rate of fire.

Heat management is all about average rate of fire. Fire faster than average rate of fire, you build up heat. Fire slower, you dissipate heat. The Awesome did this in TT through volley fire.

The average rate of fire your mech can sustain doesn't really change unless the heat it's generating in ways other than weapons changes, or some factor affects how much heat you're dissipating changes. Simply saying "I either shoot at Max RoF or not at all" is a statement almost equal to "I never use chain fire" in counterproductiveness.

If you're good at heat management, you can engage at max RoF until you're just short of shutdown, begin to disengage while maintaining fire @ average RoF or slightly less until you have completely disengaged. Then cool your mech such that you return to baseline heat just as you reengage the same or the next target.

Average RoF isn't just about 1 on 1 engagements. Average RoF is about how your heat affects your mech at all points from the first shot you take, until your heat returns to baseline, regardless of the number of targets you engage.

The 'Headcapper' 6x PPC Awesome is the example of a mech designed around a 1 on 1 engagement. It completely ignores the consequences of firing 6 PPCs at once to get a single 60 pt alpha on a target.

Apoc1138, on 13 November 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

plus both my PPC's are arm mounted meaning I get greater elevation and lateral movement...

Chassis balance, not weapon balance. And the Cataphract and Jagermech are both going to feature arm mounted ballistics...

Apoc1138, on 13 November 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

firing 1 arm PPC and one torso gauss would be a nightmare,

See K2 comment. Gauss in one side torso, PPC in the other. But again, chassis balance, not weapon balance.

Apoc1138, on 13 November 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

plus you are slowing down the PPC to gauss rate of fire thus removing one of it's advantages.

And the combination STILL has a better damage output than dual PPCs for the same tonnage. Kinda the point.

Apoc1138, on 13 November 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

to fit 1 gauss I would need to remove 3 DHS', then remove another 5 tons from somewhere to fit the gauss, and then find space and tonnage to fit ammo for the gauss

Um... rejigger your math. I didn't add a Gauss to the Dual PPC build. I replaced a PPC with one.

2 PPCs 12 DHS(external).

- 1PPC (7 tons)
- 12 DHS(external) (12 tons, total of 19)
+ 1 Gauss (15 tons)
+ 4 tons ammo (4 tons, 19 tons).

Remaining PPC has slightly more cooling available than it did before, therefore can fire slightly faster equal to , because while you removed ~45% of the cooling capacity of the mech, you cut the heat generation by ~46%. If you want you can trade a ton of Gauss ammo for a DHS to improve cooling at the expense of duration on the Gauss.

Apoc1138, on 13 November 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

as long as I can kill a gausscat without shutting down, it doesn't matter where my heat bar is as long as it's below 100%... I am then maneuvering for the next target so I'm cooling down anyway, not because I need to but because I just am because I don't have anything in front of me to shoot at

Meaning you're making use of Average Rate of Fire without knowing you are, because you can manage your heat. Which is good.

It's the ones that simply shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot, shutdown, simply because there's a target in front of them that need the point driven in with a sledgehammer.

[Grizley]

To be fair, in Solaris machineguns made practically every other weapon obsolete.

They fired fast as crap, had improved range and zero heat. The best Solaris mech was max armor and a machinegun in every crit slot save 2 for ammo. You would saw an enemy in half before he managed to recycle a PPC once.

Also that ended up being something like 48 to point hits per round so you killed a ton of pilots and caused a ton of crits through armor.

[Green Mamba]

Have the Devs said anything about rebalancing weapons in Nov. 20 patch?

[Jubal Cornpone]

Grizley, on 13 November 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:

To be fair, in Solaris machineguns made practically every other weapon obsolete.

They fired fast as crap, had improved range and zero heat. The best Solaris mech was max armor and a machinegun in every crit slot save 2 for ammo. You would saw an enemy in half before he managed to recycle a PPC once.

Also that ended up being something like 48 to point hits per round so you killed a ton of pilots and caused a ton of crits through armor.

I was debating whether or not to get into this Solaris VII thing, but this is exactly what I remember. There was even an example mech, called I think "The Eviscerator" which mounted nothing but machine guns--at least 8 of them, possibly more, and was devastating, because within the arena everyone would always be in machine gun range, and it could fire absolutely nonstop. Now, this is all from over 20 years ago so I could be remembering wrong, but a game balanced to Solaris VII rules would be a miss in my opinion.

Jubal

[Grizley]

I actually tried machine guns in MWO specifically because of Solaris and how MWO seemed to be taking serious inspiration from that rules set.

False alarm, I'm pretty sure machine guns don't actually do any damage in MWO. A machine gun hit SHOULD hurt exactly as much as being hit by 1 SRM. It doesn't not even close.

[Slanski]

Grizley, on 13 November 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

I actually tried machine guns in MWO specifically because of Solaris and how MWO seemed to be taking serious inspiration from that rules set.

False alarm, I'm pretty sure machine guns don't actually do any damage in MWO. A machine gun hit SHOULD hurt exactly as much as being hit by 1 SRM. It doesn't not even close.

That's because all other weapons are damage/hit and arbitrary refire rate, while the Machine gun is a 2damage/xseconds weapon. The only weapon that was implemented with tabletop DPS. Everything else is firing wildy faster at changed rates. Not that I dislike the current gameplay, but it betrays a slight "seat of the pants" flying of the devs as opposed to a rigorous system.

[Asatruer]

Slanski, on 13 November 2012 - 04:52 PM, said:

That's because all other weapons are damage/hit and arbitrary refire rate, while the Machine gun is a 2damage/xseconds weapon. The only weapon that was implemented with tabletop DPS. Everything else is firing wildy faster at changed rates. Not that I dislike the current gameplay, but it betrays a slight "seat of the pants" flying of the devs as opposed to a rigorous system.

If only MGs did as much DPS as TT's DPS. Here they are doing around 0.04 DPS, and in TT they did 0.2 DPS.
Since in TT they were Small Laser with ammo and 2/3rds damage for no heat they should be doing 2/3rds of the SL's DPS here, which would be around 0.44 DPS here.

[Stabbitha]

Indoorsman, on 12 November 2012 - 01:55 AM, said:

I've agreed for a long time PPC are too hot. I think if ER PPC was slightly higher heat than PPC is right now, it would be fine. I think PPC should probably do slightly less damage in exchange for a little less heat. Maybe 8 or 9 damage for 6-8 heat instead of 10 dmg 9 heat. That seems like a good solution for PPCs w/o changing anything else. But it's really pointless to balance/work on PPCs right now anyways w/o them being fully funcional yet.

Have a look at your processes there to try and achieve balance.

Now consider that your PPC is doing the same or less damage as varieties of LL...

Oh yeah, + balance AC10's, AC20's etc around the new heat paradigm you've created.

I don't say this to be cynical or fault you for at least trying to come up with a solution (even if we have had a fairly adversarial posting relationship so far), but your solution opens up multiple cans of worms with implications for every weapon.

Quote

I think you musta missed me, you posted 2 times in a row @ me, <3

Lol, you wish laddie... =)

Quote

EDIT:

Also, decrease gauss ammo per ton to 8 rounds. I've suggested that back during closed beta. That would increase tonnage and make em less boatable if we get mechs w/many ballistic pts. And that wouldn't change heat or RoF since a few posters now say that would change the feel of em.

I agree with that, the original spec of 7/tonne iirc was bang on the mark, gauss was powerful but limited over a longer engagement. Ballistic vs energy was always balanced by ammo (incidentally by Abram's method of calculating heat neutrality).

Orzorn, on 12 November 2012 - 08:18 AM, said:

We're basically down to the wire. Add gauss minimum range (funny that the PPC has a minimum range when its such a weak weapon. They give the PPC a minimum because its canon, but not the gauss because it "doesn't make sense"? You can't go removing balancing factors like that and expect items to remain balanced) or alter the firing rate to 6 seconds, reducing the weapon's close range capabilities in exchange for being really great at taking long ranged shots.

This is unfortunately one of the inherent problems with partial adoption of TT rules.

PPC min range isn't a damage reduction, it's a danger of feedback to the person firing (ie. you do full damage but you can blow up your PPC). Given that it's a purely sci fi weapon, there is latitude for creating caveats to using it.

Gauss, like any ballistic weapon, is most effective at short range and should be less effective over long range. There is no reason, real, thematic or otherwise, why a GR would be ineffective at short range. (note: Railguns do actually exist).

Matist, on 12 November 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

I used to run this build until they nerfed small pulse into the ground. Now that mech runs 9 medium lasers. The thing of it is that engagements in this game are all pretty short range and it's extremely easy to close range on a target safely just by using terrain.

270m is "short range"? Given the cover in this game, and a bit of luck, I can get in to that range in an Atlas without taking a single point of damage (even on caustic). Did it last night where I flanked the missile boats and played merry hell with them.

[BoomDog]

Grizley, on 13 November 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

I actually tried machine guns in MWO specifically because of Solaris and how MWO seemed to be taking serious inspiration from that rules set.

False alarm, I'm pretty sure machine guns don't actually do any damage in MWO. A machine gun hit SHOULD hurt exactly as much as being hit by 1 SRM. It doesn't not even close.

I can say with certainty that MGs do damage.

Had a Cicada with 4 MGs on it. While fighting a Hunchback, he over heated. I came to a full stop and unloaded on his head. Sure enough, it turned red. Not quite enough to finish him, but he did turn around an run away, lol.

Also, watched a guy on my team (after I died) running around kill stealing with MGs. He's wait for some other mech to blast away the armor, then he'd go up and unload into the internal structure and get a crit. I know he was kill stealing because he wouldn't engage the mech until it was heavily damaged.

[Stabbitha]

Indoorsman, on 12 November 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

Except it
1. fires faster(much faster)
2. weighs more
3. has a minimum range
4. has a greater range
5. has no beam duration
6. causes cockpit shake
7. will have EMP on hit effect

ppc would be very different from a large laser, even w/same heat and damage and w/o #7

until the on hit effect works... it's kinda pointless for PGI to balance it now.

LL you have no need to lead the target (hitscan) and it's a lot easier to deliver the full damage rather than risk missing. Boating LL's on an Atlas gives you far more predictable dps/heat than PPCs.

But currently, ERLL's and LPL's are also almost pointless because of heat. Same with MPL's vs ML's, you get better DPS from bog standard IS old tech rather than the supposed tier 2 tech, mainly because most of the T2 stuff relies on running hotter and having full strength DHS working to negate the heat output.

Heat is broken and DHS is nerfed. Oh what a tangled web they weave...

Indoorsman, on 13 November 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

If instant travel, instant damage PPCs happened you would see MWO versions of this, minus the respawning:

I already posted a vid of hitscan PPC's from MW4 which worked perfectly well... Of course, MW4 had a bit more bouncy UI when walking which made aiming a tad more difficult (not much though) than MWO.

It all devolves back to accuracy and that is something they can never fix in this game without some element of luck/making shots less accurate. The major accuracy problems at the moment are weapons not lining up with the crosshair or lagshields. Atlas vs Atlas, I can pick the same armour plate every time. Jenners etc have no problems doing the same to the rear of slower mechs despite bouncing along at 130kph...

Literally ever mech game has made aiming a lot easier that it was on TT, by certain degrees. It's also the reason why certain builds were OP in various builds (MW2 leg loppers for example).

[Indoorsman]

Vapor Trail, on 13 November 2012 - 03:05 PM, said:

Now, by your own admission, you disengage to cool. The time you spend cooling MUST be included in your average rate of fire. Why? because you can no longer fire at max RoF.

You guys are anazlying a situation which is Gasscat vs PPC cat. That means 1v1. In 1v1 either opponent disengaging reduces BOTH opponents' "average" RoF. Not just the guy who disengaged. Say the Gausscat continues to fire at some random other person. Good for the gausscat, now the ppc cat pops him a couple times and hides again. But even then, the shots fired by the gausscat weren't hitting the ppc cat so for the comparison don't really matter. What matters is which one kills the other first, in your comparison anyways.

Situation A, both mechs stand there and shoot till other mech dies. Outcome: Gausscat wins due to higher DPS.

Situation B, Gausscat has no cover while PPC cat has cover. Both fire simultaneously. 3 seconds later PPC cat fires again. Between seconds 3 and 4 PPC cat takes cover. PPC cat reappears whenever it feels like it. PPC cat wins due to higher RoF.

Situation C, Gausscat has cover, PPC cat does not. Both fire simultaneously and Gausscat immediately takes cover. 4 seconds later a wild Gausscat appears! Gausscat wins due to burst.

Situation D, both have cover. Both fire simultaneously and Gausscat hides, PPC cat is sad. Gausscat reappears! Both fire. Gausscat wins due to burst.

The above situations assume EQUAL skill, they both know how to use cover to take advantage of RoF. A Gausscat would win 3 out of 4 situations. And that's w/o the heat system being involved at all. The heat generated by PPC would only matter in situation A(no cover) and it is a losing battle from the start... not just when it generates too much heat.

[Lord Draenor]

I see ppc once every 4 or 5 matches. I see gauss every match. Yeah, it's a close call

[Mavairo]

PPCs aren't the problem.

Gauss weapons are. Particularly mechs having the ability to mount 2 of them when it doesn't even make sense for them to be able to mount one. (certainly not in a CT at any rate) Alot of Gauss's issues would vaporize over night IF they moved the ballistic slots to the arms instead of the chin on the K2. It was a dumb idea to allow them to be chin mounted, or for that matter to not give gauss a minimum range either.

Edited by Mavairo, 13 November 2012 - 11:15 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Mavairo, on 13 November 2012 - 11:15 PM, said:

PPCs aren't the problem.

Gauss weapons are. Particularly mechs having the ability to mount 2 of them when it doesn't even make sense for them to be able to mount one. (certainly not in a CT at any rate) Alot of Gauss's issues would vaporize over night IF they moved the ballistic slots to the arms instead of the chin on the K2. It was a dumb idea to allow them to be chin mounted, or for that matter to not give gauss a minimum range either.

No, that would just remove the Gauss Cat. The Cataphract and Jagermech will replace it. Yes, they have some drawbacks, but there would still be no good reason to use a stock K2 with 2 PPCs. Even if you can't skimp on your ear armour anymore with the Gauss Cat.

I don't think any of the announced mechs so far has ballistics mounted in both side torsos, but they exist in canon,and they will either be OP because the weapon balance favors ballistic weapons (and particular Gauss Rifles, since they are even in TT by default superior weapons), or they will be balanced because PGI finally managed to balance all weapons.

It's not easy to balance weapons, but it's definitely easy to improve considerably from the current state. A
nd really, I am so arrogant here to say it's easy despite having no idea of their code -but if their itemstats.xml is really what the game use to determine weapon damage and heat, then it's easy. Give me a day and I will have hacked in workable stats. I already spend that day in Excel a few weeks ago...

Then let us test them for 1-2 weeks and tweak further.

Spoiler

From the thread in my signature

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 14 November 2012 - 01:15 AM.

[Apoc1138]

@Vapor Trail

before class eh... that explains alot

it is arbitrary because YOU have decided to create your own rule that says that a weapon must fire for 160 seconds continuously to be deemed "viable"... which is utter rubbish as a 1v1 never lasts that long

your math-fu has also failed you on 2 fronts... I can fire 8-9 full salvos before shutdown... I know this because I've tested it... so whatever your maths says, it's wrong
(you've assumed dissipation of 2.2... 22 DHS is more like 3.68 per second for a start)
secondly - to remove a PPC and add a gauss;
PPC off saves 7 tons... I would have to remove 3 DHS' to get the crit slots to fit the gauss, but I'm still short (7 + 3 = 10) 5 tons to fit the gauss... so I'd have to make yet more compromises to fit the gauss and that's before I even start to think about ammo for the gauss
I don't JUST have 2 PPC's, but using your build I would end up with JUST one PPC and one Gauss, or I remove all my heatsinks thus crippling my other weapons as well and I end up with a 1 trick pony that I can't use in any other situation
either I remove all my heatsinks to fit the gauss, or I remove all my other weapons to fit the gauss... either way I end up with too many heatsinks and no weapons or I end up with weapons I can't use because you've taken all my heatsinks away

if you can't even get these basics correct then I really have trouble believing any of your calculations

Quote

Now, by your own admission, you disengage to cool. The time you spend cooling MUST be included in your average rate of fire. Why? because you can no longer fire at max RoF. If you wanted to continue the engagement, you could... you'd just have to do so at a lower RoF than your max.

BZZZT wrong answer... I've never made such an admission... this goes back to YOUR arbitrary 160 seconds again... I size up my opponent and then use MY strengths to overcome HIS shortfalls. A Gauss user has long reload time, so I use cover to avoid getting shot at, NOT to cooldown. Cooling down is a byproduct of something I would be doing ANYWAY regardless of what weapons I had and how hot I might be.

I make no effort to cooldown... if I was doing that deliberately then I would ditch the PPC's and only use my UAC5 brawler build... as it is, I find the PPC build a decent anti gauss and overall good support fire mech that never shuts down during normal usage.

You seem to be basing all your calculations on 2 mechs standing in the open firing constantly... if this is how you are playing the game then maybe this is why you are not doing very well and feel the need to come up with charts to explain why you keep dying.

You're telling ME what I MUST do in order to CALCULATE how efficient a killer I am... well, I don't need to do any calculations because I have the scoreboard every round and first hand experience telling me that with a gauss or dual gauss I get worse results / damage / kills than when I use 2 PPC's

your math tells me that I MUST get killed by gauss users all the time, however my experience tells me this isn't true

you don't have access to all the game mechanics and you don't have access to the server side data regarding weapon usage / hit rates / damage / kills etc. so I'm going to rely on my direct experience and PGI's knowledge of the server side data and not a spreadsheet and chart that I already know is based on false assumptions

you can keep on telling me that PPC's are pointless and I will keep on using them to kill stuff

based on spreadsheets similar to yours that I created myself, I DID used to use gauss alot... since opening my mind to the idea that maybe playing the game on a spreadsheet was not the best way to be doing things and actually playing the game itself, my ideas on what weapons are "viable" has changed drastically

I don't know exactly what variables your math is missing, but it must be missing something because in game experience tells me your math is wrong

lets look at this another way... if I do 600 damage over 10 minutes and I get the most kills and XP at the end of the match, and close to the most damage... that means my average DPS in the round was 1DPS... so by your math I have what you are arbitrarily calling combat effective DPS of 4-5... I actually only need a DPS of 1 to win the round

obviously this isn't true either but I'm just using this as an example to highlight how silly your arbitrary 160 seconds is... no single engagement lasts for 160 seconds, so it's a pointless benchmark to use

my 10 minutes is just as arbitrary as your 160 seconds... I know I can kill most things in 20 seconds of sustained fire... so which one of these times would you like to keep using? I evaluate my weapon choices to a different set of criteria to you, I respect your right to evaluate your choices to your own criteria, but please don't force your criteria upon me

Edited by Apoc1138, 14 November 2012 - 09:23 AM.

[Mavairo]

MustrumRidcully, on 14 November 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

No, that would just remove the Gauss Cat. The Cataphract and Jagermech will replace it. Yes, they have some drawbacks, but there would still be no good reason to use a stock K2 with 2 PPCs. Even if you can't skimp on your ear armour anymore with the Gauss Cat.

I don't think any of the announced mechs so far has ballistics mounted in both side torsos, but they exist in canon,and they will either be OP because the weapon balance favors ballistic weapons (and particular Gauss Rifles, since they are even in TT by default superior weapons), or they will be balanced because PGI finally managed to balance all weapons.

It's not easy to balance weapons, but it's definitely easy to improve considerably from the current state. A
nd really, I am so arrogant here to say it's easy despite having no idea of their code -but if their itemstats.xml is really what the game use to determine weapon damage and heat, then it's easy. Give me a day and I will have hacked in workable stats. I already spend that day in Excel a few weeks ago...

Then let us test them for 1-2 weeks and tweak further.

Spoiler

From the thread in my signature

If people couldn't handle the mere thought of losing weapon arms, then they shouldn't be rolling a given mech chassis in the first place. I roll a Gauss in my 5N dragon with an AC2. It works just fine. Do people go for that ballistic arm once they figure out what it's spitting out at people? Oh god yes. And they should. (which is what my big right hand is for with it's 2 big lazorz) If people can't handle the thought of losing weapon arms, because they are trying to use a gauss in close combat, they're doing it wrong and deserve to lose the arms and weapons anyway.

There is no reason what so ever for the K2 to have chin ballistics that can mount gauss. You can't remove the gauss without popping the cat (unless you get those miracle hits that knock out a chin weapon without killing the mech.) reliably and for the power of Gauss that's incredibly stupid. Hell I'm being rather generous in saying it should still be able to field 2 gauss rifles at all really considering the devs felt gauss was so ludicrous, that you can't even fit 2 on a 5N dragon's ballistic crazed arm. Really no other mech off the top of my head gets access to Gauss Rifles, in it's Chin. The whole point of limb removal in mechwarrior is to knock out primary weapon systems or cripple enemy mobility.

Also, the K2s weapon arms would give it a abit more control to aim with. Minorly since the K2s arm travel is terrible mind you, but there would be abit more play on the Z axis.

That's still a hell of alot better than the current situation in terms of play for Everyone Else on the field that's not the K2. (I still feel the Gauss is still waaay too effective at close quarters ranges as well but I'd be willing to take the hard point relocation to start things off).

[Terror Teddy]

MustrumRidcully, on 13 November 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

Except then I am getting bored and build Ghetto K2 mechs (A C1 pretending to be a stock K2 with 2 PPCs. I have yet to hear complaints that my Medium Laser hardpoints shouldn't be able fit a massive weapon like the PPC)

Which is kinda funny.

Neither do people find PPC arms where a hunchbacks Medium lasers usually sit unbalanced or wrong.

And people dont cry about GaussRavens 50% total weight hanging on the left shoulder - but that could be because they don't find it as much of a cookie cutter build regardless of the silly image.

[Skyfaller]

Dont forget the PPC's screwed up trajectory.

Load it in a mech with arms like a Commando.

Swing arm to the full left or right.

Fire.

PPC round half the time fires FORWARD.

Now do it while moving.. the PPC round flies in completely idiotic random directions half the time.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sky, I haven't noticed this yet.
BUT I will pay closer attention for it happening.