534 replies to this topic

[Omegaspecter]

It really does seem silly to triple weapon fire rate and then not increase HS capabilities at all.

[Knightwyvern]

Omegaspecter, on 03 November 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

It really does seem silly to triple weapon fire rate and then not increase HS capabilities at all.

Or, in the case of the DHS, actually decrease them.

[Vlad Ward]

Omegaspecter, on 03 November 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

It really does seem silly to triple weapon fire rate and then decrease HS capabilities.

Fixed for why my laserboat Awesome that I dumped 35,000,000 c-bills into is going to cry buckets of tears on Tuesday.

[Larrak]

Vlad Ward, on 03 November 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

I just think this "Heat Neutral Tonnage" figure is absolute bollucks and I'm tired of people referencing it as if it means anything.

AI have no qualms with more heat efficient builds like the SL Jenner. I just don't see the need to be totally heat neutral all the time.

Common misconception. Heat neutral is just used as a baseline to show how hot something is, how much tonnage you need to run it cool, etc. Having a completely heat neutral build is almost always a very poor build actually, it sacrifices too much weaponry, and you won't always be firing every second.

I mean in TT, you could make a mech completely heat neutral with all weapons firing all the time, but it was dumb:)

Edited by Larrak, 03 November 2012 - 04:12 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Larrak, on 03 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Common misconception. Heat neutral is just used as a baseline to show how how something is, how much tonnage you need to run it cool, etc. Having a completely heat neutral build is almost always a very poor build actually, it sacrifices too much weaponry, and you won't always be firing every second.

I mean in TT, you could make a mech completely heat neutral with all weapons firing all the time, but it was dumb:)

Yes. Except that people like the OP reference it as if it's impossible to use weapons without running heat neutral. They replace weapon tonnage with "Effective tonnage" that makes a boatload of gameplay assumptions that are nowhere close to sound.

If we were to ask the OP, PPCs would weigh 37 tons.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 03 November 2012 - 04:12 PM.

[Larrak]

Vlad Ward, on 03 November 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

Yes. Except that people like the OP reference it as if it's impossible to use weapons without running heat neutral. They replace weapon tonnage with "Effective tonnage" that makes a boatload of gameplay assumptions that are nowhere close to sound.

If we were to ask the OP, PPCs would weigh 37 tons.

Well, I think what he is saying is that you should be able to run some of your weapons heat neutral. For instance in TT the K2, with 20 heatsinks and 2 PPCs, is heat neutral when stationary and only firing PPCs. However if you start moving, or firing your medium lasers, it overheats.

Look at the state of the game right now, everyone runs around with medium lasers as their primary weapon even on on Atlas! Those are basically backup weapons in TT, you can fire them all day without overheating.

Triple the Rate of Fire, keeping heat dissipation the same. It screwed every high heat weapon. Which is incredibly boring for game purposes, only a few weapons are viable.

[Clay Pigeon]

srms got turned to crap, which is why everyone uses streaks. Before you could lead your shots and get decent groupings at 100m, now anything over 50 is terrible.

[Draco Argentum]

MustrumRidcully, on 03 November 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

Also, if you're a good beta tester, there will be a patchmas and the easer bunny may also have something in store for you.

Patch Claus isn't real.

MustrumRidcully, on 03 November 2012 - 01:19 PM, said:

Please don't say "the TET from Mustrum Ridcully" - I didn't invent them, I just made some charts around the concept from another Closed Beta Tester. If I only remembered who he was to properly credit him.

His name is Byterot.

Vlad Ward, on 03 November 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

Yes. Except that people like the OP reference it as if it's impossible to use weapons without running heat neutral. They replace weapon tonnage with "Effective tonnage" that makes a boatload of gameplay assumptions that are nowhere close to sound.

If we were to ask the OP, PPCs would weigh 37 tons.

But only your first weapon can be undersinked. Once you have one weapon overheating you the rest have to be heat neutral or you overheat faster.

[Omegaspecter]

Larrak, on 03 November 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

Triple the Rate of Fire, keeping heat dissipation the same. It screwed every high heat weapon. Which is incredibly boring for game purposes, only a few weapons are viable.

Agreed..... how are they ever going to bring clan tech into the game (which runs hotter) with some IS tech being nearly impossible to use.

Edited by Omegaspecter, 03 November 2012 - 06:45 PM.

[Tempered]

Something that I never see brought up in these discussions is the fact that you NEVER get full damage from your laser hits. I've shot my lasers at a standing still target, then died immediately there after to see how much damage is done. It is never full damage. All of your charts and math and what not assume full damage. It is actually worse than your math shows.

Ballistics and missiles are full damage as long as you hit.

[Jukebox]

StrataDragoon, on 03 November 2012 - 02:07 PM, said:

I rather see the math from a programmer that designed/helped designed MWO

WHEN I PUNCH THE NUMBERS INTO MY CALCULATOR IT MAKES A SMILEY FACE!

or something to that degree

[Tennex]

YAAAAAAY

[Abrahms]

A good idea is to make a loadout that can sustain damage for about 30 seconds. 20 minimum. If you cant fire on cooldown for more than 10 seconds, then 9/10 times youre in the wrong mech. Basically only a Jenner or something really fast can ever benefit from running that hot. Far too much of a DPS loss in a game with doubled armor.

[Abrahms]

!

[SpiralRazor]

Abrahms post is horribly, horribly written, but he is essentially correct.. High heat weapons just flat out suck for the damage that they deal.

Low heat weapons will always be good, barring massive changes.

Missiles are not OP, they are finally just worth using.

Lag shield being fixed will cause some of this to go away.

[Abrahms]

SpiralRazor, on 04 November 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

Abrahms post is horribly, horribly written, but he is essentially correct.. High heat weapons just flat out suck for the damage that they deal.

Low heat weapons will always be good, barring massive changes.

Missiles are not OP, they are finally just worth using.

Lag shield being fixed will cause some of this to go away.

Basic meritless insult followed by unavoidable concession. A good start

[MCXL]

Wanna know more about this stuff? Check out my thread.

http://mwomercs.com/...r-the-solution/

Edited by MCXL, 04 November 2012 - 02:32 PM.

[SpiralRazor]

Abrahms, on 04 November 2012 - 01:48 PM, said:

Basic meritless insult followed by unavoidable concession. A good start

Dude, you badly need an editor...reading your original post was painful.

Then again, youve said nothing here that i havent been saying since before you started posting on the beta forums bro.

Theres no concession when i said the same thing two weeks after CBT went live when i had enough experience to competently comment.

The only saving grace was the hope of having DHS at 2.0....

[Wingbreaker]

The reason we can't have nice things is the fact that 95% of the player base doesn't understand frontloading and "cost based choice" systems.

You're one them.

/PPCS ARE BAD, AND YOU SHOULD FEEL BAD

[Nacon]

Oh look... another of these threads and it has 5 pages so far.