17 replies to this topic

[Cache]

In TT there is an advanced rule that allows players to power down their gauss rifles in the end phase of a turn (or powering up a previously powered-down weapon) in order to avoid explosions. (Tactical Operations, p. 102)

With the upcoming reduction to gauss rifles' durability, I would like to propose that that rule (or a version thereof) be considered for MWO. "Off" can be nearly instantaneous, just like firing the weapon, but "on" should have a significant delay (10 seconds or so) for power-up to avoid abuse.

[Monky]

Some options I think would balance it;

Powering down takes a full reload cycle, powering on takes a full reload cycle (in this way you can't just quick-off the power to cheese out of the risk of an explosion). Also, give it a 15 heat penalty when shutting off, as that stored energy has to get out of the gun somehow, and would be enough to discourage constantly doing it in a fight when you're using a low heatsink Gaussboat.

[sycocys]

Not a bad plan, even if off reduced its explosion damage.

[DeadlyNerd]

And how exactly would that bring any balance?
You still wont be able to hit the K2 RT and LT unless you're Vasily Zaycev.
No one would use this, cause it would just hinder their dps and why on earth would you power down a gun in the heat of the battle.
In that exact heat of the battle your gauss arm/LT/RT will definitely FLY OFF if you lose armor on it, regardless of the status of your gauss.
Oh sure, while you're running around with a bare arm/RT/LT you could take pot shots, but with experienced players your CT will be stripped far sooner.

I'd very much like to troll you right now but forum rules forbid it so instead of having fun I hope I brought sense into your head.

Edited by DeadlyNerd, 29 November 2012 - 06:55 PM.

[sycocys]

Power it down so when your arm carrying it is about to go, it doesn't go boom and take out your side torso as well? Seems logical enough to me.

[DeadlyNerd]

Don't think it'll go boom enough to damage the CT.

As far as I understand the upcoming nerf, they'll just make it more fragile, not able to take out 2 mech parts upon blowing up

Also if you have XL, your gauss arm is the least of your worries..

Edited by DeadlyNerd, 29 November 2012 - 07:13 PM.

[Agarwaen]

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

Don't think it'll go boom enough to damage the CT.

As far as I understand the upcoming nerf, they'll just make it more fragile, not able to take out 2 mech parts upon blowing up

Also if you have XL, your gauss arm is the least of your worries..

The gauss does 20 damage when it explodes. that's a pretty big hit, and could nuke your side torso if you're low on armor.

[DeadlyNerd]

again, if you're sporting a XL engine, that gauss explosion is the LEAST of your worries cause you'll be dead long before it gets to blow up.

But I digress, sure add the button, let the newbs become more confused than they are now. It's a fine idea. It just wont make that much of a difference with all the forced brawling going on cause PGI can't initiate some kind of a contest for map making.

[sycocys]

If your not sporting and xl and trying to survive the inevitable blast - mitigating some of that damage could be useful.

[Cache]

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

And how exactly would that bring any balance?
You still wont be able to hit the K2 RT and LT unless you're Vasily Zaycev.

This is not about balancing the Gauss Cat. This is about balancing the fragility of the gauss in all Mechs. It is similar to dumping ammo, which I would also like to see implemented.

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

No one would use this, cause it would just hinder their dps and why on earth would you power down a gun in the heat of the battle.
In that exact heat of the battle your gauss arm/LT/RT will definitely FLY OFF if you lose armor on it, regardless of the status of your gauss.
Oh sure, while you're running around with a bare arm/RT/LT you could take pot shots, but with experienced players your CT will be stripped far sooner.

Obviously I would use it else I would not ask for it. Saying no one would is being a bit melodramatic. There have been many times when I would have loved to shut down my gauss before getting sucked into a brawl with my severely damaged armor. Shut it down until I can get clear and start hitting at range again.

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

I'd very much like to troll you right now but forum rules forbid it so instead of having fun I hope I brought sense into your head.

Speaking of melodramatic... it was a simple suggestion for the developers. There is no need for threats. If you can't keep a level head when reading a post like mine you need some help. Here's a suggestion for you: take your emotional issues elsewhere.

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

Don't think it'll go boom enough to damage the CT.

As far as I understand the upcoming nerf, they'll just make it more fragile, not able to take out 2 mech parts upon blowing up

Also if you have XL, your gauss arm is the least of your worries..

20 points of internal damage transferring inward is 20 points of internal damage is I would choose to avoid. CASE will protect my CT but so does shutting down the gauss before it pops.

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

again, if you're sporting a XL engine, that gauss explosion is the LEAST of your worries cause you'll be dead long before it gets to blow up.

With the impending fragility of the gauss, it will be the FIRST of my worries should I choose to use an XL (haven't used one yet). The gauss will pop long before the side torso internals and engine are destroyed, thus killing them early.

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

But I digress

That is an understatement.

DeadlyNerd, on 29 November 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

sure add the button, let the newbs become more confused than they are now. It's a fine idea. It just wont make that much of a difference with all the forced brawling going on cause PGI can't initiate some kind of a contest for map making.

Pressing the button is optional. How is that more confusing? Why argue if it's a fine idea and you don't mind adding the button?

Monky, on 29 November 2012 - 06:47 PM, said:

Some options I think would balance it;

Powering down takes a full reload cycle, powering on takes a full reload cycle (in this way you can't just quick-off the power to cheese out of the risk of an explosion). Also, give it a 15 heat penalty when shutting off, as that stored energy has to get out of the gun somehow, and would be enough to discourage constantly doing it in a fight when you're using a low heatsink Gaussboat.

I like the heat penalty, though maybe only 10 points. Powering on should take longer than one reload cycle, let that be part of the penalty. Perhaps 2x reload cycle.

[Churzy]

I think this would be a good thing. Confusing for new players? Perhaps, but that's why it's an advanced feature, like so many others. It's not like Mechwarrior is a button-bashing FPS; it is deep, complex, and hard to master.

Makes a whole lot of sense to disable weapons you're not going to "need" and that would be very much a liability. I guess that, for the same reasons, one should also be able to do an "emergency ammo dump", for when the weapon is disabled, or its storage is exposed - as ammo becomes an unnecesary risk. Obviously with current ammo prices, that would be a bit pointless, but still

[5th Fedcom Rat]

I'd like to have this option for when I run out of ammunition. Gauss becomes useless at that point, its not being charged with energy anymore, so why should it still explode? Perhaps make this option only available when you reach 0 ammo to simplify thing and avoid abuse.

[Alois Hammer]

Agarwaen, on 29 November 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

The gauss does 20 damage when it explodes. that's a pretty big hit, and could nuke your side torso if you're low on armor.

And you should have to suck it up, until "Eject Unused Ammo" is implemented for Autocannons as well.

[Cache]

Alois Hammer, on 01 December 2012 - 10:18 AM, said:

And you should have to suck it up, until "Eject Unused Ammo" is implemented for Autocannons as well.

I agree that this should be implemented at the same time as ammo dumping. No sooner, no later.

[Araevin Teshurr]

After hundreds of years of mech warfare across the galaxy, you should expect that your weapons would be rock solid by now. Seriously? What moron would buy and use an AC/5 if they new the gun jammed all the time? No one would, and the producer would be out of business, and the weapon long gone from the game. This whole idea that weapons should fail in battle is so stupid. Our mechs are getting blasted in battle causing things to fail, we wouldn't bring junk weapons to a fight on top of that, so we break our weapons on purpose when they should be highly durable after several hundred years of galactic warfare?

What's next? Get some dirt on the lens of your laser weapons and they explode on your mech? Oh sheet, they will work on that now too. Stupid

[Willie Sauerland]

Relaed, on 01 December 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

After hundreds of years of mech warfare across the galaxy, you should expect that your weapons would be rock solid by now. Seriously? What moron would buy and use an AC/5 if they new the gun jammed all the time? No one would, and the producer would be out of business, and the weapon long gone from the game. This whole idea that weapons should fail in battle is so stupid. Our mechs are getting blasted in battle causing things to fail, we wouldn't bring junk weapons to a fight on top of that, so we break our weapons on purpose when they should be highly durable after several hundred years of galactic warfare?

What's next? Get some dirt on the lens of your laser weapons and they explode on your mech? Oh sheet, they will work on that now too. Stupid

Hmmm... My weapon when I was in the Army was made by the lowest bidder (with parts manufactured by Mattel). Why should the future be any different?

The least bit of dirt can jam a rifle. A round misfeed can as well.

Um... Why can't/shouldn't an AC/5 jam again?

I know, I shouldn't insert my reality into your fictional universe. My apologies. Please continue on your rant and ignore my attempts at showing you the error of your ways.

Edited by Willie Sauerland, 02 December 2012 - 12:11 AM.

[Satan n stuff]

Relaed, on 01 December 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

After hundreds of years of mech warfare across the galaxy, you should expect that your weapons would be rock solid by now. Seriously? What moron would buy and use an AC/5 if they new the gun jammed all the time? No one would, and the producer would be out of business, and the weapon long gone from the game. This whole idea that weapons should fail in battle is so stupid. Our mechs are getting blasted in battle causing things to fail, we wouldn't bring junk weapons to a fight on top of that, so we break our weapons on purpose when they should be highly durable after several hundred years of galactic warfare?

What's next? Get some dirt on the lens of your laser weapons and they explode on your mech? Oh sheet, they will work on that now too. Stupid

Newsflash: weapons fail all the time in real life, why should it be any different in MWO? In real life more complex weapons are in fact more likely to fail than simple ones as the tolerances for the mechanisms are much smaller. Given that a UAC5 has twice the refire rate of the AC5, which we can assume is at it's maximum safe refire rate, the UAC5 should jam quite often. Aside from that, there is such a thing as competitive balance, sound to me like you want the UAC5 to be OP.

[Strum Wealh]

Relaed, on 01 December 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

After hundreds of years of mech warfare across the galaxy, you should expect that your weapons would be rock solid by now. Seriously? What moron would buy and use an AC/5 if they new the gun jammed all the time? No one would, and the producer would be out of business, and the weapon long gone from the game. This whole idea that weapons should fail in battle is so stupid. Our mechs are getting blasted in battle causing things to fail, we wouldn't bring junk weapons to a fight on top of that, so we break our weapons on purpose when they should be highly durable after several hundred years of galactic warfare?

What's next? Get some dirt on the lens of your laser weapons and they explode on your mech? Oh sheet, they will work on that now too. Stupid

Willie Sauerland, on 02 December 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

Hmmm... My weapon when I was in the Army was made by the lowest bidder (with parts manufactured by Mattel). Why should the future be any different?

The least bit of dirt can jam a rifle. A round misfeed can as well.

Um... Why can't/shouldn't an AC/5 jam again?

I know, I shouldn't insert my reality into your fictional universe. My apologies. Please continue on your rant and ignore my attempts at showing you the error of your ways.

Hence (from an in-universe perspective), why (in part) UACs became LosTech to begin with - the standard AC/5, despite its lesser effective range and lower damage output, is lighter (less tonnage required) and less bulky (fewer critical spaces required) and cooler-running (less heat per salvo) and more reliable (no jamming) and more flexible (easier/cheaper to create/use specialized munitions) and cheaper to create/use.

On a related vein, Gauss Rifles (again, from an in-universe perspective) would have also become LosTech due, in part, to reliability issues.
Even with the ability to safely drain the capacitors (which should be in-game, BTW ), they would have been notoriously fragile and few facilities had maintained the equipment or personnel to be able to maintain/repair them (and ComStar's little habit of assimilating or killing anyone with the requisite know-how (see "Operation Holy Shroud" and "Operation Holy Shroud II") wasn't helping matters); arguably, many "sensible" MechWarriors of the time would have switched them out for the more-rugged, more readily-available, cheaper ACs as the GRs eventually failed as a result of battlefield damage or lack of proper maintenance.

What remained after the first couple of Succession Wars were the cheaper, easier-to-make, "rock-solid" weapons and equipment; the fancier, harder to manufacture, less reliable items didn't see a resurgence until the discovery and dissemination of information and specifications contained within the Helm Memory Core in the late 3020s.