100 replies to this topic

[verybad]

Vlad Ward, on 30 November 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

So? It's fluff science from the 80's and the blue spheres look cooler.

THe Blue Sphere PPCs were like giving grandma a long, juicy kiss on the lips.

NOT COOL!

Edited by verybad, 30 November 2012 - 09:49 PM.

[bobthebomb]

Garth Erlam, on 30 November 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

The most popular ideas around the studio for this currently:
1) Make LL/ERLL have very quick fire time - about fast as a SL.
2) Make PPC shots hit much, much, much, much faster and have less heat.

I agree !

1) yea sound good, maybe LL should have medium laser beam duration and ER same a sl
2) PPC a lot more projectile speed, ERPPC make it hit scan (but remove the no range limit for the er).

And see how it goes from here.

Edited by bobthebomb, 30 November 2012 - 10:06 PM.

[LaserAngel]

Well, I'm glad to see the good ideas for making some of my favorite weapons a bit more viable and reflect the tabletop lore more so. I might have to drag out those ER Large Lasers more often on my Awesome.

[Reno Blade]

Both options sound great.
But for the heavy energy weapons, the heat scale is just "too short".
MLaser__5dmg__4heat__1ton
MPulse__6dmg__5heat__2tons
LLaser__9dmg___7heat__5tons
erLL____9dmg__10heat__5tons
LPulse__10dmg__9heat__7tons
PPC____10dmg__9heat__7tons
erPPC__10dmg_13heat__7tons
Gauss__15dmg__1heat_15tons

I would decrease all large energy weapons by 1-2 heat. the 5x-7x of a medium laser in weight alone is a good balancing factor.
MLaser__5dmg__4heat__1ton
MPulse__6dmg__5heat__2tons
LLaser__9dmg___6heat__5tons
erLL____9dmg__9heat__5tons
LPulse__10dmg__7heat__7tons
PPC____10dmg__8heat__7tons
erPPC__10dmg_12heat__7tons
cerPPC_15dmg_14heat__6tons
Gauss__15dmg__3heat_15tons

Edited by Reno Blade, 01 December 2012 - 07:53 AM.

[Hekalite]

Garth Erlam, on 30 November 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

To be clear, popular ideas were: Faster PPC projectile; shorter bean duration for LL/ERLL; much less heat on PPC.

Yes please! Soon.

[Deadoon]

Garth Erlam, on 30 November 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

The most popular ideas around the studio for this currently:
1) Make LL/ERLL have very quick fire time - about fast as a SL.
2) Make PPC shots hit much, much, much, much faster and have less heat.

Pretty much both of those would make the respective weapons much more viable than they currently are. If those get in, energy weapons will finally be a viable choice as a mech design basis that isn't based on cost saving strategies.

[Vapor Trail]

Wouldn't argue with a near-hitscan PPC and ERPPC. The Warhawk is one of my all-time favorite mechs.

Heat is going to be the issue that makes or breaks the PPC IMO.

Currently you have to haul quite a bit of tonnage (and/or critical space) in heat sinks to make the PPC perform as well relative to the Gauss as it did in TT. That is to say, 75% of the average DPS. The PPC does have the advantage of being able to front load, so it can get a jump on the Gauss... but in any situtation involving combat greater than twenty or thirty seconds, the PPC used like that can turn into a huge liability. Which is where the stock AWS-8Q gets into trouble. If you fire the PPCs in salvos or in chain no more than once every ten seconds, you're fine.

But when you've got a dual Gauss mech (Prhact or Cat, no-matter) pounding away at you for more than twice your damage output, you really want to step it up. Stepping it up means firing faster, firing faster generates heat at a really nasty rate, which even double heat sinks would be incapable of keeping up with. That, coupled with the low heat threshold of the SHS installed causes the 8Q to overheat in seconds.

In the lore, it's a battlefield dominator. In the game, it's a popgun, good for two shots, and then effectively an animated lawn ornament for half a minute.

Edited by Vapor Trail, 01 December 2012 - 08:28 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Garth Erlam, on 30 November 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

The most popular ideas around the studio for this currently:
1) Make LL/ERLL have very quick fire time - about fast as a SL.
2) Make PPC shots hit much, much, much, much faster and have less heat.

Garth Erlam, on 30 November 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

To be clear, popular ideas were: Faster PPC projectile; shorter bean duration for LL/ERLL; much less heat on PPC.

Cyril Horatio, on 30 November 2012 - 06:35 PM, said:

I know I may be taking the unpopular side on this one, but I vote leave the heat alone. Between the proposed increased PPC shotspeed and EMP effects, lowering the heat produced could unbalance it. I feel the PPC is a weapon that should require a certain degree of skill to use well, as much of the lore seems to indicate. Keeping the heat high is a good way of keeping things in check, as well as making boating PPCs difficult.

I agree with Cyril - the heat generation on the PPC and ER-PPC is fine as is; both should have a relatively high per-salvo heat generation as a counterpoint to the combination of substantial per-salvo damage, substantial striking range, and lack of ammunition concerns (and, as far as the real-time game is concerned, high projectile velocity and EMP effects).

[MustrumRidcully]

Strum Wealh, on 01 December 2012 - 08:44 AM, said:

I agree with Cyril - the heat generation on the PPC and ER-PPC is fine as is; both should have a relatively high per-salvo heat generation as a counterpoint to the combination of substantial per-salvo damage, substantial striking range, and lack of ammunition concerns (and, as far as the real-time game is concerned, high projectile velocity and EMP effects).

The per Salvo damage of 2 Medium Lasers is 10. What#S so special about the PPC?

This isn't Battletech, where we roll our hit locations for every single gun. We have convergence. There is no difference in MW:O between 4 weapons dealing 5 damage each and 1 weapon dealing 20 damage.

And the trade-offs for the range and the "no ammo" concerns are not appropriate for the PPCs. There must be trade-offs, yes, but the current ones are too high. THe PPC is outperformed by many ammo based weapons by a considerably margin. There is no reason to use a PPC if you can use a Gauss, AC/5s, AC/10 (the worst of all the ACs right now), and the Ultra AC/5.

The only reason to use a PPC currently is because you are already running 2-3 of the aformentioned weapons and you have Double Heat Sinks. If you use it in another context, you're mech is automatically less efficient.

This does account for ammo cost, for heat sink cost, for engine heat sink (and their unique mechanics), and all that.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 01 December 2012 - 09:06 AM.

[John Norad]

verybad, on 30 November 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

ER weapons are highly inoptimal, (..)

That's because current maps and game modes don't require long range weapons to be effective. There's very little use for that extra range. I'd say give them some use instead.
If that range was an advantage often enough, the added heat penalty would be ok.

Oh, and of course it's also because heat dissipation is capped and too low, and doesn't really allow for sustained long range energy weapon use. It's far easier to optimize for brawling.

[Taemien]

Garth Erlam, on 30 November 2012 - 11:38 AM, said:

The idea of decreasing LL/ERLL beam duration is to make them better ranged 'sniping' weapons than they are. That said the LL is pretty damn close to where (I'd) want it.

The thing with burn duration is that it only really comes into play when using faster assets. When I'm running in a heavy or assault I typically run with Lasers. When I'm running something faster than 65kph, I prefer to use Pulse Lasers as my erratic movements make it more viable.

I use ER Large Lasers on some of my bigger machines and they work great when the terrain allows for them. River City on the upper base works wonders to get early game damage off. I like the idea someone had of allowing ER weapons to do more damage over their listed weapon ranges. I think that would be a good start.

Getting pelted by ER PPCs or ER Large Lasers at 1200 meters (doing 8 and 6 damage respectfully at that range) would make those weapons fearful. One would have to seek cover or face alot of damage before they could even fire back. But the damage wouldn't be enough to be catastrophic until they are in optimal range.

[LaserAngel]

Taemien, on 01 December 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

Getting pelted by ER PPCs or ER Large Lasers at 1200 meters (doing 8 and 6 damage respectfully at that range) would make those weapons fearful. One would have to seek cover or face alot of damage before they could even fire back. But the damage wouldn't be enough to be catastrophic until they are in optimal range.

It's also a soft counter to LRMboats and Gausscats. You have infinite ammo and can take cover before those missiles hit.

Edited by LaserAngel, 01 December 2012 - 09:30 AM.

[LordBraxton]

Mancu, on 30 November 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

Sorry but the blue spheres were an abomination. PPCs are supposed to be bolts of charged enegery streaking at the enemy like lightning.

Id love to see PPCs connect from barrel to enemy mech.

Thats how I always pictured them, a bolt of white manmade lightning arcing from weapon to target.

For an instant the 2 mechs would appear connected, the flash would be blinding, and it would sound like a thunderclap.

[Arclight]

Rather happy with LL currently. Been having a good time with a K2 sporting 4 LL.

PPC, tried them on the K2, not impressed. Not enough punch for the heat requirements, only being as fast as an AC/2 seems off as well ("bolt of lightning" vs projectile).

ER weapons, won't touch them. Heat is ridiculous. I agree with tweaking down DHS to keep heat management relevant but imo it put ER weapons in a difficult spot. Maybe not unviable, but I really won't touch the things right now. Don't know how shortening duration on ERLL would work out, but definitely something to try. With PPC being the hottest running weapon around by a mile, there's a fairly big margin to play around in (3hps vs 2hps for the AC/2). Turning down the heat a bit sounds like a good idea.

Edited by Arclight, 01 December 2012 - 10:13 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

MustrumRidcully, on 01 December 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:

The per Salvo damage of 2 Medium Lasers is 10. What#S so special about the PPC?

This isn't Battletech, where we roll our hit locations for every single gun. We have convergence. There is no difference in MW:O between 4 weapons dealing 5 damage each and 1 weapon dealing 20 damage.

Two Medium Lasers will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area over the course of one full second at a distance of 270 meters or less, generate 8 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

One PPC will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area immediately upon impact at a distance of 90 to 540 meters, generate 9 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

One ER-PPC will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area immediately upon impact at a distance of 810 meters or less, generate 13 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

The PPC delivers the same amount of damage at twice the range of the Medium Lasers, requires fewer hardpoints on a 'Mech, and has no concerns for "burn time" (making it better-suited for "off-the-hip" shots).
The ER-PPC has the same manner of advantages over the Medium Lasers as the standard PPC, while being able to reach thrice as far and being able to deliver that same 10 units of damage from barrel to range.

The primary advantages to using two Medium Lasers within their niche (instead of PPCs or ER-PPCs) is the lesser tonnage and (rather slight, in comparison to the standard PPC) lesser heat generation.

Lessening the heat too far on the PPC and ER-PPC (moreso with the former than the latter) removes one of the primary reasons to take Medium Lasers (among other things) in their stead, and is likely to result in close- and medium-range weapons being wholly ignored (or very nearly so) in favor of boated PPCs/ER-PPCs.

MustrumRidcully, on 01 December 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:

And the trade-offs for the range and the "no ammo" concerns are not appropriate for the PPCs. There must be trade-offs, yes, but the current ones are too high. THe PPC is outperformed by many ammo based weapons by a considerably margin. There is no reason to use a PPC if you can use a Gauss, AC/5s, AC/10 (the worst of all the ACs right now), and the Ultra AC/5.

The only reason to use a PPC currently is because you are already running 2-3 of the aformentioned weapons and you have Double Heat Sinks. If you use it in another context, you're mech is automatically less efficient.

This does account for ammo cost, for heat sink cost, for engine heat sink (and their unique mechanics), and all that.

As noted above, twin Medium Lasers will produce 8 units of heat per salvo versus the PPC's current 9 units of heat per salvo.
They will deliver the same damage, for very nearly the same heat generation, at half of the range.
They will consume more hardpoints, and they don't even have the advantage of cycling more quickly.

Unless one has a rather tight tonnage or space budget or plans to constantly fight at ranges of less than 90 meters, why would one take two Medium Lasers over an equally cool-running (or potentially cooler-running) PPC?

That the proverbial "workhorse weapon of the Inner Sphere", among others, would become obsolete is part of why the PPC and ER-PPC heat levels are better off where they are.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 01 December 2012 - 09:42 AM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

ML are hitscan, and burn times make them far better at tagging fast-movers. PPCs meanwhile are very much heavier (consider, for a moment, the number of extra heatsinks or Gauss ammo or whatever you could fit be using 2 ML instead of a PPC) and have a relatively slow projectile speed. ERPPCs have far and away too much heat to make them useful in the current heat implementation.

[Major Dick]

Easy way to balance the no ammo costs of lasers is to make them cost more to repair. I do agree with Renoblade for the most part on his rebalancing. MPL, ML, and SL are fine the issue is with the higher damage energy weapons since when you start making them noticeably less heat efficient coupled with the extra tonnage doesn't allow you to pack in the heat sinks to use them efficiently.

[LaserAngel]

Major ****, on 01 December 2012 - 10:11 AM, said:

Easy way to balance the no ammo costs of lasers is to make them cost more to repair. I do agree with Renoblade for the most part on his rebalancing. MPL, ML, and SL are fine the issue is with the higher damage energy weapons since when you start making them noticeably less heat efficient coupled with the extra tonnage doesn't allow you to pack in the heat sinks to use them efficiently.

I believe the increased repair costs of energy weapons are already a feature implemented.

[MustrumRidcully]

Strum Wealh, on 01 December 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Two Medium Lasers will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area over the course of one full second at a distance of 270 meters or less, generate 8 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

One PPC will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area immediately upon impact at a distance of 90 to 540 meters, generate 9 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

One ER-PPC will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area immediately upon impact at a distance of 810 meters or less, generate 13 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

The PPC delivers the same amount of damage at twice the range of the Medium Lasers, requires fewer hardpoints on a 'Mech, and has no concerns for "burn time" (making it better-suited for "off-the-hip" shots).
The ER-PPC has the same manner of advantages over the Medium Lasers as the standard PPC, while being able to reach thrice as far and being able to deliver that same 10 units of damage from barrel to range.

The primary advantages to using two Medium Lasers within their niche (instead of PPCs or ER-PPCs) is the lesser tonnage and (rather slight, in comparison to the standard PPC) lesser heat generation.

Lessening the heat too far on the PPC and ER-PPC (moreso with the former than the latter) removes one of the primary reasons to take Medium Lasers (among other things) in their stead, and is likely to result in close- and medium-range weapons being wholly ignored (or very nearly so) in favor of boated PPCs/ER-PPCs.

As noted above, twin Medium Lasers will produce 8 units of heat per salvo versus the PPC's current 9 units of heat per salvo.
They will deliver the same damage, for very nearly the same heat generation, at half of the range.
They will consume more hardpoints, and they don't even have the advantage of cycling more quickly.

They also consume 5 tons less than the PPC and 1 Crit less than the PPC. That's 5 tons you could equip with heat sinks.

The bit of extra range is not worth the tonnage difference. It may have been in in the table top, because the range advantage there didn'T just mean you could fire further away - you could also hit more precisely with the PPC at closer range (unless you got in the minimum range).

The only advantage of the 3 advantages the PPC enjoyed in the table top that is still left is the ability to reach further out than the Medium Laser. Hit probability and single hit location damage are all gone. That to me highly suggests it needs some of the cost it paid for its advantages refunded.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 01 December 2012 - 10:22 AM.

[Reno Blade]

Strum Wealh, on 01 December 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Two Medium Lasers will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area over the course of one full second at a distance of 270 meters or less, generate 8 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

One PPC will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area immediately upon impact at a distance of 90 to 540 meters, generate 9 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

One ER-PPC will deliver 10 units of damage to a single area immediately upon impact at a distance of 810 meters or less, generate 13 units of heat, and will recycle every three seconds.

The PPC delivers the same amount of damage at twice the range of the Medium Lasers, requires fewer hardpoints on a 'Mech, and has no concerns for "burn time" (making it better-suited for "off-the-hip" shots).
The ER-PPC has the same manner of advantages over the Medium Lasers as the standard PPC, while being able to reach thrice as far and being able to deliver that same 10 units of damage from barrel to range.

The primary advantages to using two Medium Lasers within their niche (instead of PPCs or ER-PPCs) is the lesser tonnage and (rather slight, in comparison to the standard PPC) lesser heat generation.

There is the point, tonnage have to be included if you compare heat and damage vs MLaser.

For 20damage, you can use 2PPCs for 14 tons and 18 heat
SHS: 8slots/8ton (8xSHS) + 6slots/14ton (2xPPCs) = 14 slots/22 tonns.
DHS: 0slots/0ton (0xDHS) + 6slot/14ton (2xPPCs) = 6 slots/14 tonns.

Or you use 4 MLaser for 4 tons and 16 heat
SHS: 6slots/6ton (6xSHS) + 4slots/4ton (4xMLaser) = 10 slots/10 tonns.
DHS: 0slots/0ton (0xDHS) + 4slot/4ton (4xMLaser) = 4 slots/4 tonns.

as soon as you go over 20 heat, you also see the effect on DHS with the amount of slots/tonns.

easyer to see with 30 damage:
For 30damage, you can use 3 PPCs for 21 tons and 27 heat
(including 10SHS or DHS internal)
SHS: 17slots/17ton (17xSHS) + 9slots/21ton (3xPPCs) = 28 slots/27 tonns.
DHS: 15slots/5ton (5xDHS) + 9slot/21ton (3xPPCs) = 26 slots/26 tonns.

Or you use 6 MLaser for 6 tons and 24 heat
SHS: 14slots/14ton (14xSHS) + 6slots/6ton (6xMLaser) = 20 slots/20 tonns.
DHS: 9slots/3ton (3xDHS) + 6slot/6ton (6xMLaser) = 15 slots/9 tonns.

So comparing the worst numbers, 15slot/9tons for 6MLaser vs the 26slots/26tons for 3PPCs, this is 1,7x the slots and 2,9x the tonnage for PPCs.

As much as i love PPCs (Marauder fan), the inability to pack enough SHS/DHS for dual PPCs is sad.
If I want to rebuild a marauder, i can cram in 15-16 DHS in a CTF-1X for example.
If you can not pace yourself (because someone breaks through formation and attacks you), you cant hold up the DPS like SRM/AC builds do to defend yourself.

Edited by Reno Blade, 01 December 2012 - 10:48 AM.