e: July 2015 update: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2s2czpajwwa6lvk/mwodpsjuly2015.xlsx?dl=0 Introduction: So this is something I use a lot when I build a mech - thought it'd be a useful spreadsheet to share: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/51188363/mwodps.xlsx It was posted on Dec. 8th, 2012 - the spreadsheet should be pretty easy to update if you're using it at any point in the future. The current numbers will hopefully change some as the devs improve the game. If you're reading this months later the weapon evaluations posted later here might be all wrong. edit: Nov. 2013 update - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/51188363/mwodpsnov2013.xlsx The math: Basically it takes the raw weapon data (as provided by http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/) and runs it through a series of (actually pretty simple) calculations, starting with basic stuff like "How many tons of ammo does this need to fire for 2 minutes?" and "How many tons of DHS do I need to hit neutral heat if I use this thing?". It then gets a little more complicated - "How many tons of ammo does thing need to fire for 2 minutes + how many tons of DHS does this thing need to be heat neutral?" "How does this compare with the weapon's dps?" (It also looks at dps relative to heat/tonnage only, but that is generally less useful). The heat + tonnage efficiency step described above is the first dark blue column in the spreadsheet - 'DPS / Tons inc. 2 min ammo + DHS req for neutral heat'. I think this is a rather useful efficiency stat to have -- it gives you a rough breakdown of how weapons compare in terms of dps vs heat generated/tons required. The big winners here are uac5, slas, mlas, srm4+6, and lrm5+15. This is primarily relevant if you're using a mech with a lot of open slots but problems with heat/tonnage (most light mechs). It highlights weapon efficiencies -- you'll get more dps for your heat/tons using a small laser than a large laser. It then moves on to do the same thing but accounting for how many slots weapons use - I actually did this via converting the slots required into slots that could otherwise be spent on DHS, and then combining the slots, tonnage req, and dhs req into a final efficiency score (the second dark blue column). This is primarily relevant if you're using a mech that has limited slots, heat, and tonnage (most heavy/assault mechs). Lasers look pretty similar to the first dark blue column (they generally use very few slots), but ACs get significantly less efficient and missiles become somewhat less efficient. How to use the math?: I think that efficient dps is important in MWO, and this spreadsheet is designed to figure out which weapons have the most efficient dps. That said, the game rewards more than just efficient dps when it comes to builds. A uac5 has something like 30% more efficient dps than a gauss rifle, but if you put two gauss rifles on a catapult (or cataphract) you can stay further away (so you need less armor/a smaller engine), and you can guarentee that you deliver damage to the same point on the mech (thus destroying components/actually killing mechs). This sheet will let you see exactly what kind of efficient dps you're losing when you put two gauss on a mech instead of two uac5, but you'll have to make your own decision on whether the pinpoint damage makes it worth doing so. (For me, the answer is generally 'it depends' - I really like dual gauss catapult/phract builds, though.) Finally, remember that filling all hardpoints with weapons will almost always give better returns than upgrading existing weapons. Also, it's important to note that efficiency becomes less important the more free tons you have per hardpoint. If you take a theoretical 30 ton, 6 energy hardpoint mech, you probably want to put 6 slas on it. On the other hand, if you have a 90 ton, 6 energy hardpoint mech, putting 6 slas on it would be pretty useless. 6 llas, while less efficient, would run very comfortably on that chassis. edit: Some of the above examples are wrong now (e.g., UAC5 was nerfed), but the point I'm trying to make is the same. I removed specific weapon examples because they're all outdated now. Of note is that the LBX10 seems great with the crit buff, but really probably sucks because you can't get the damage exactly where you want it to be. -- Conclusion: I hope this post was useful. I'm pretty sure that my spreadsheet/valuation is not perfect, and I'd appreciate any logical feedback people had (especially on how to improve final efficiency score in spreadsheet - I think the slots calculation might be too simplistic, and it's entirely possible there're errors somewhere along the line). Remember that efficient dps is important when you are building a mech, but it is not everything -- there're quite a few situations where for whatever reason you want to use a less efficient weapon to fulfill some specific task.
Great guide! Though I tend not to take raw numbers as gosple when building a mech. Take LBX...Technicly on paper its sort of underpowered because of the shot gun spread effect. In deed I had a D-DC with 2 LBX and 3 srm6 and exchanged that for 1 ac20 and 3 SRM6....much more effective in that situation. On the other hand I run a catapult K2 with dual LBX10 and 4 med lasers. Before you laugh think on this a bit. A. It can slap a commando in the face at range B. 20 pellets coverging on a mechs chest (given 100-110 m range) gives 20 crit chances ....granted only a crit chance with 1-2-3 damage each but you get a 3 crit on a gauss and BOOM . C. It is effective fire support....you may well get kills with this weapon system but not as many as you will get compnent destroyed and such. LBX dose not have the raw killing potential of its other friends in the Ballistic field(yet....if they add switchable ammo then it may bump a few ticks up) But depending on how its used its good for more than just slapping lights in the face with glancing blows.
Wow, my mech must be totally inefficient. I tend to use LB-X, ERPPC,and ERLL. But despite being inefficient, seems to do quite well. For some reason, when I use the weapons that are listed as efficient here, I do very badly. Yes there is a point to this: Efficiency and numbers don't mean everything. Use the weapons you like, they are all useful in the right situation or the right hands. EG: My CN9-AL build has gotten me more kills than any other mech I have tried and the weapons are some of the least efficient. My inefficient weapons, ERLL and ERPPC, give me the range to be effective in combat but where I have time to cool down. It's role is sniping and light mech hunting. It is not as effective at close range, but is able to take on other mediums with ease. I have also destroyed much heavier mechs close in with it despite its inefficiencies.
It is definitely not impossible to do well with ERLL or ERPPC. A skilled player with those will most likely perform better than a worse player with more efficient weapons. They are still pretty bad weapons, though. It's important to consider what you're giving up - normal llas and normal ppcs are approx. 30% more efficient than ER versions. Considering, that, let's take the above CN9-AL with 2 ERLL and 1 ERPPC (+ams/1t ammo, xl 260, endo, dhs, and enough dhs for 1.03 heat efficiency). You hit 7.6 dps, 2.4 heat neutral dps. As an alternative, you could pick up a hunchback 4sp. With the same upgrades (ams/1t ammo, xl 260, endo, dhs), you could run 3 arm-mounted PPCs at 0.96 heat efficiency - 10 dps, 2.5 heat neutral dps, and the PPCs should all hit the same component. If you wanted to keep the large lasers, you could do something like 3llas + 1ppc, for 9.7 dps, 2.6 heat neutral. Both of these builds would have a little less range than yours, but they can do about 30% more damage before hitting the heat cap, and a tiny bit more afterwards. In addition, the PPC build is all pinpoint damage. Really though, if you're optimizing a team in which you want to use a medium for some reason, you would probably use a gausscat as a sniper (they're very very good), and use the medium slot the CN9-AL would otherwise occupy for a brawler hunchback. Something like 2 srm6 and 5 mlas, xl260, etc. With this (assuming you hit with only half of your missiles), you hit 10 dps, 5 heat neutral dps. If you're able to hit with all of your missiles (not practical unless you get behind an atlas or something), you end up at 13.75dps, 6.1 heat neutral. This is basically trading 400~ range for 32%~ more damage pre-heatcap and 100%+ (!) more damage after 8 seconds of firing. I'm pretty sure any of the 4SP builds here, given comparable pilots, would be able to deal more damage and contribute more to winning the game than the CN9-AL. Note: all of the figures above assume you have no piloting skills. If you're driving a mastered mech you end up at: CN9-AL, 2 ERllas/1 ERPPC: 8.1 dps, 2.9hndps, 9.6 sec to overheat 4SP, 3 PPC: 10.81dps, 3.3hndps, 8.2 sec to overheat 4SP, 1 PPC/3 llas: 10.34dps, 3.4hndps, 9.5 sec to overheat 4SP, 5mlas/2srm6 (100% missile hit): 14.73dps, 7.4 hndps, 17 sec to overheat 4SP, 5mlas/2srm6 (50% missile hit): 10.68dps, 6.3hndps, 17 sec to overheat P.S - Please don't take this as an attack on your personal skill. I'm pretty sure that if you're consistently doing very well with 2 ERLL and 1 ERPPC you're better at the game than I am. I just think the build is mediocre.
No offense taken Heavenly Lotus. Though it's 1 ERLL, 1 ERPPC, and 2 ML. I stay back from combat with it and snipe for as long as I can and that gives me plenty of time to cool down. When I close I don't use the MLs until I have to. I also do better with this than any other mech I have tried, including the HBKs for some reason. The ERPPC really gets people, they like to close to get inside the range of my PPC till I shoot them close in, lol. I have never relied upon the data when building a mech because the data doesn't mean anything when you're in the middle of a firefight. I just want to be comfortable with the mech. Comfortable = proficient. At the time of making it, I wanted the mech to be cheap to repair and rearm. This was very cheap. No reload costs at all and averaged about 20k to repair. I traded the extra heat for a little extra range.
Efficiency matters if a mech is standing still and firing on cooldown. If you or your target does any terrain-weaving or such (e.g. Dragons and hit and run tactics) then efficiency matters much less. LBX and pulse lasers are good against lights and lag shield. The difference in how lasers and pulse lasers calculate damage during the beam alters how someone might favor one over the other. Pulse lasers with shorter beam duration is also another consideration, that imho as a dragon pilot, outweighs efficiency. Efficiency is a consideration if you have no breaks in firing. If contact is for 5 seconds, for example, then there is time for cooling down and compensating for inefficiency. It really depends on role and how you pilot during the fight.
Agreed. @ Lotus I did read all of your original post and it has many important points. Well written and thought out. It has actually made me start considering efficiency more when building a mech. Thanks for the discussion and post!
Thank you very much for this spreadsheet. I'm a newby and not much of a pilot (well, better than a few, but definitely not the better half of the playerbase I've seen), but I like doing my research. I tend to know how to play a game (or class/spec) a lot better than I can play it at first, simply because I read before I get a lot of practice in (might as well practice right, right?). Sidenote: freeze left column is really nice with this spreadsheet. Anyway, I just wanted to make a few comments based on other things I've been reading. If you disagree with me, I'd be happy to hear why. Forums are nice to share information when you're right and get it when you're wrong . I'll preface this by saying the other factors I bring up are not in the scope of your spreadsheet, so I'm not criticizing it, just bringing these up. First off, one thing I consider is the limitted number of hardpoints for weapons. For example, I have two energy hardpoints on my Spider (excluding the point I'm using for TAG). I could go small lasers for efficiency, but if I can make mediums work just fine, I don't need the small. It's not like I can put on 4 small or 2 medium, my choice is 2 of each. Energy Weapons - The bigger the less efficient, but I think you're trading efficiency for range. I don't really see much point in small lasers unless I plan to be that close all the time. Most of the time I'm engaging at 125-ish meters. PPC vs. ER PPC - ER PPC might be less efficient, but it has no minimum range and a greater effective range. PPCs in general do their damage at once, compared with the brief moment it takes lasers to do their damage. Someone mentioned a spider build with a PPC in the spider section, saying by concentrating the damage it made hit-and-run tactics easier. AC-10 - it might be the least efficient cannon, but according to a page I read on crits (specifically on mwowiki.org), it was saying that most items have 10 health, so small crits are nice, but won't take out an item very quickly. An AC-10 crit (or something similarly powerful, e.g. PPC, or something more powerful) will take out an item with 10 health in 1 crit. LB 10-X - I don't think anyone uses this for efficiency, but I also don't think most people use shotguns for efficiency. The LB is the only weapon in the Ballistic or Energy categories that shoots a spread, which can be nice when trying to hit things that are difficult to hit with focus fire. Like you said in the OP, sometimes you don't want efficiency. But that doesn't discount from your spreadsheet.
Hi, I got back into MWO recently, and updated this - available at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/51188363/mwodpsnov2013.xlsx if anyone is interested. Looks like quite a few changes in the year~ I was gone. Lots of plas/missile buffs, huge ERPPC nerf, UAC5 nerf, etc.
Hi, I started playing again. Looks like there was a lot of changes. I updated spreadsheet mentioned in the OP to a 2015 version: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2s2czpajwwa6lvk/mwodpsjuly2015.xlsx?dl=0 I started putting a few perks in, but only for the light mechs I care about. Not sure how useful this is to others right now, but figured I'd post an update anyway. Seems like my Jenners are outclassed by Firestarters now. But maybe the Ravens are still good?
