100 replies to this topic

[Logan Pryde]

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.

please do! beam weapons (other than small and meds) are suboptimal in the current build, it's all ballistics and missles these days... it doesnt feel like mechwarrior without some erlarge and erppc flying thru the air!

[WardenWolf]

Elizander, on 30 November 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

You don't have to implement it all at once. You can do it one tweak at a time just so you don't overbuff anything.

This - Please! It feels like sometimes 2-3 changes are made to a single weapon all at the same time, and it ends up over buffing / nerfing them. For example, the double-buff on Streaks - or the upcoming double-nerf on Gauss. I'd rather you just fix the Gauss exploding properly first, and see if that is enough of a nerf before also reducing their healthy. Baby steps

As for what I feel about the large and ER energy weapons, here are my thoughts:

- I don't use ER Large Lasers because keeping on target at extreme distance for the beam duration is hard.
- I don't use Large Pulse Lasers (anymore) because they are just too hot for the benefit
- I don't use normal PPCs because of the reduced damage close-in
- I do use normal Large Lasers because they seem decently balanced though a little hot
- I do use ERPPCs because they pair perfectly with a Gauss rifle - similar ranges, similar projectile speeds, etc. They do run *very* hot, though, even with just two of them and a lot of DHS.

My biggest thing would be to fix DHS back to full effectiveness, as it would help deal with the excess heat on the ERPPCs and other large energy weapons. If you are worried that this buffs lighter mechs too much, as I saw you mentioned a Cicada with 19 DHS (the same as my Atlases!!! how the heck?!?) in another thread, then consider this:

DHS effectiveness in Light Mechs (those outside the engine): 1.4
In Mediums: 1.6
In Heavies: 1.8
In Assaults: 2.0

This would give your bigger mechs more of a boost from them, without overpowering your lighter mechs.

Also, for the lasers, a reduction in beam time would be nice. What are beam times sitting at right now, though?

[Garth Erlam]

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.

[Kobold]

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.

Garth I loves you. I didn't see your first post when I made mine.

[MustrumRidcully]

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.

You mean beam duration, not recycle time. I wouldn't make the shots itself happen more often, but lowering the beam duration will definitely be a good idea to make them able to utilize their range.

PPCs shots faster would also be neat. Less heat will probably be a must, unless something significant changes about the heat system itself (e.g. something like doubling the dissipation of all heat sinks.)

But, ER LLs should probably also get a lower heat. Unless you plan to make their beam duration even shorter than that of the LL. I think it would probably benefit more from a lower heat, though.

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.

It is pretty close where it needs to be, at least if I trust my benchmarks (and I do, otherwise I wouldn't plaster them everywhere!), since with Double Heat Sinks, it is close to the AC/5, it's competitor in range on the ballistic side.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 30 November 2012 - 01:33 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

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.

Have you guys thought about having the artists take another pass at the PPC and bringing back MW2's blue spheres of death?

Lobbing some of those around with a Gauss slug's projectile speed will certainly increase the PPC's usage through sheer aesthetic appeal.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 30 November 2012 - 01:34 PM.

[Monky]

PPC and ER PPC need to be hitscan, as they necessitate having backup weapons, meaning they are ridiculously inefficient (90 meter minimum range on PPC making it useless up close, tons of heat on ER PPC making it useless in a serious firefight). So long as you have crosshairs on target they should be able to hit with that level of inefficiency.

ER Large needs a burn time between Large Pulse and regular Large Laser.

[Mancu]

Vlad Ward, on 30 November 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:

Have you guys thought about having the artists take another pass at the PPC and bringing back MW2's blue spheres of death?

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

[Vlad Ward]

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.

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

Edited by Vlad Ward, 30 November 2012 - 01:40 PM.

[Martini Henrie]

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.

Nah, the current animation is much better. The LL is pretty much right, and everything Garth said about the ERLL I would go along with. I can see PPC/ERPPC being an issue for quite some time as I believe they will be difficult to balance cause/effect against heat and other weapons.

Having said all that, there are a lot of viable weapons in game and only a few stragglers left to get in to the right area.

[Onyx Rain]

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.

Would like to see all the lasers have a shorter beam duration....nothing insane, but shorter. Especially with the net code/hit detection problems mechs just shed laser damage like they've got rain-x for lasers all over their mech.

PPC should have a shorter min range, possibly decrease the heat by 1 or 2......and ERppc runs to hot, needs to be 10-11 heat max...these changes will really force you to think about what is better, er large, large, ppc, erppc for your particular build and what you want to do with it.

Er large laser should have slightly shorter beam duration and a heat of 8-9. We don't need to be penalized so much for a slightly better weapon like we are in so many cases in this game.

Make large pulse lasers 11-12 damage, possibly shorter beam duration. Still not worth using with such short range/high heat IMO

Small pulse lasers, should either have a much much shorter beam duration and/or 1 more damage. They are pretty much stupid to use right now in 90+% of cases (People who are using them are usually gimping themselves and would be better off with smalls and/or mediums, or a combination instead.)

Do the devs have something against .5 dmg and/or heat values? .....The sweet spot for a lot of weapon dmg/heat values is probably at that .5 mark

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.

I like the thinking here, and agree the LL is almost perfect as is...maybe shorter beam duration. Might be the netcode/hit detection problems but I feel like it is under powered right now.

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.

All for faster PPC/ERppc projectiles....for some reason so much harder to hit with then a gauss rifle (which I use a lot)

Yes to shorter beam durations.

PPC suffers from the min range....it may be canon but the fact is for many people any kind of min range makes the weapon not fun to use....I would reduce it to 50-70meters, do that and the heat may not need to be adjusted...maybe take it down by 1, and increase the projectile speed like you said.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 30 November 2012 - 05:10 PM.

[BoomDog]

I don't suppose we could get you guys to double check the PPCs damage?

Was in a cap rush once and didn't fire a single shot till I got to the enemy cap. There was an AFK mech sitting there, so I fired four shots at it before the timer ran out.

The after battle report said I did 20 damage???

I'm certain I was outside the 90 meter range. I suppose something else could've caused this, but it'd be nice if someone double checked just to make sure.

[Cyril Horatio]

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.

Now, if we change up the way heat is delivered to your mech, that could work. Currently the weapons give heat in different ways:

Lasers = heat is given to mech over during burn-time
Missiles = heat given depending on launcher size and available tubes. (An Awesome firing a LRM 10 from its tiny arm launcher experiences a smaller heat spike than a catapult firing the same 10 missiles at once.
ACs and PPCs = instant heat spike

What if for PPCs we took a mix of laser and ballistic style heat? Normal PPC generates 10 heat points. Currently, we take that 10 heat as a massive spike. How about on firing, 5 heat points are taken immediately as a spike, with the other 5 heat over time in the same way as a laser?

This would result in the PPC being a bit easier to manage, but still requiring fairly good heat discipline, due to the high heat produced.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

ER weapons aren't bad. The problem is that the maps offer ample cover and the ability to close distance very easily while using cover. No player with half a brain is going to stand out in the open to get hit enough to die. It would help if we could actually pick the map we wanted to play on, then you could pick Caustic for ER weapons or Frozen City for close range builds... but that would allow you to rig the game, wouldn't it? I like Forest Colony and Caustic Valley. They are well designed and offer areas of openness and cover. But I hate Frozen City. That map can go to hell.(and freeze over) It was basically made for the guys with AC 20s and Medium Lasers.

[Bloody]

PGI wants you to use ammo weaponry as that costs money and becomes a viable cash sink. /shrug

i am gonna laugh when clan mechs come in and a Stormcrow fires its weapons and blows up

Edited by Bloody, 30 November 2012 - 06:47 PM.

[Karyudo ds]

Logan Pryde, on 30 November 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

please do! beam weapons (other than small and meds) are suboptimal in the current build, it's all ballistics and missles these days... it doesnt feel like mechwarrior without some erlarge and erppc flying thru the air!

Pfft, you mean it doesn't feel like Mechwarrior without 6 ERLarger Madcats running around

Only problem with good energy weapons is that is makes it harder and harder to justify ammo costs when I could shoot pew pew instead of Artemis missiles.

Shorter LL durations don't sound bad though, harder-faster-cooler PPC's also sound great. I can kill with them, but they feel like they are a bit more work than they should be.

[AlanEsh]

Zeh, on 30 November 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

Just to clarify,
For 1), You're talking about beam duration, not weapon cycle time, right?

I assume you mean beam duration? If so, that sounds great.

So where does that leave the LPL?

[SteelPaladin]

Angelicon, on 30 November 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

So where does that leave the LPL?

Higher damage and cooler in exchange for its shorter range.

ER weapons are the tech 2 general purpose weapons that are more accurate and longer range than than tech 1 versions at the cost of a lot more heat. Pulse weapons are the brawler weapons that are also more accurate than tech 1 versions, but get more damage instead. They pay a lesser heat cost than ER weapons because they also trade in range.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

ER weapons should have a ballistic fall-off profile (3x range, instead of only 2x).

Also, they really need to have a point or two of heat shaved off (the base LL and PPC might need heat reductions as well to keep them competitive).

I dislike using the Pulse advantage (shorter burn time) for ER weapons. Keep the two distinct. What are you getting when you go from standard to ER? More range. What is the cost? More heat. What about Pulse? You get shorter burn time and slightly boosted damage. What is the cost? More heat, significant tonnage increases, and much shorter range.

If you gave ER lasers one of the main advantages of Pulse, then suddenly the tradeoff for upgrading to Pulse, which is already prohibitive for the LPL, becomes entirely too costly.

As for PPCs, I'd rather they have a velocity measured in terms of C (.25 C, .75 C, etc.) rather than 1000 m/s or whatever. They are particle cannons, so they should act like it.

[SteelPaladin]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 30 November 2012 - 09:35 PM, said:

ER weapons should have a ballistic fall-off profile (3x range, instead of only 2x).

Also, they really need to have a point or two of heat shaved off (the base LL and PPC might need heat reductions as well to keep them competitive).

I dislike using the Pulse advantage (shorter burn time) for ER weapons.  Keep the two distinct.  What are you getting when you go from standard to ER?  More range.  What is the cost?  More heat.  What about Pulse?  You get shorter burn time and slightly boosted damage.  What is the cost?  More heat, significant tonnage increases, and much shorter range.

If you gave ER lasers one of the main advantages of Pulse, then suddenly the tradeoff for upgrading to Pulse, which is already prohibitive for the LPL, becomes entirely too costly.

As for PPCs, I'd rather they have a velocity measured in terms of C (.25 C, .75 C, etc.) rather than 1000 m/s or whatever.  They are particle cannons, so they should act like it.

The thing is, more range automatically equals more accuracy (which is what shorter burn time gives) in the source material, so the baseline numbers that they use for ER weapons are giving you a heat penalty commensurate w/getting BOTH more range and better accuracy.

Ultimately, accuracy is not "the pulse advantage." It is PART of the pulse advantage. Extra damage is the other part. The tech 2 items all have two advantages. ER weapons get range + accuracy. Pulse weapons get damage + accuracy.

Edited by SteelPaladin, 30 November 2012 - 09:45 PM.