Best way to deal damage?

This is sort of a follow-up post to my weapon groupings post, with a bit of a different topic so I felt it should be its own thread. In the previous post, I talked about how to build your mech to use a simple set of groups, instead of something that has a lot of odds and ends that make it more and more complex to use (and in this case, complexity isn't always rewarded with better results). What I'd like to talk about here is what is the best way to deal damage?

There are several factors involved with dealing damage, such as range, heat, spread, etc. However, the weapons tend to break up into fast-and-light vs. slow-and-heavy and pinpoint vs. spread. As for builds, you have high alpha builds, high max DPS builds, and high sustained builds. Some are very high on both, others are pretty pathetic. Let's take a look at two Yen-Lo builds: a specific take on the most popular build, and my variant that looks great on paper but didn't do so well in practice.

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=45&l=3f98f01d0f846abfa205d7aeadb6331fd68df2b0
http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=45&l=4952f329cb665f8952bb0c2be6ee1127a8e0df51

The AC/20 build has an alpha of 30, max DPS of 7.50 and sustained DPS of 4.88. While the alpha is smaller in my build (20 instead of 30), a double-shot with the UACs brings it up, the max DPS jumps up to 11.59, and the sustained DPS to 5.80. That's a 54% increase in max DPS, and a 19% increase in sustained. It's a little slower, and the ammo won't last as long, but on paper this seems to be a really good option. In practice, however, I've found the AC/20 to be vastly the superior weapon. Part of it relates to time-on-target while skirmishing (if you don't get full time on target, the slower AC/20 comes into its own), but I also have come to believe that pinpoint alphas are the most important stat, damage-wise, in this game, which is kind of a let down.

What I've found, through a lot of different builds, is that if you are plinking away with AC/2s or UAC/5s, or you are repeatedly pelting the target with a sustained barrage of medium lasers, you're giving them time to twist around between alphas and mitigate the damage. Take the situation of an AC/2 vs. an AC/10. Both do 4 DPS. However, if you have the 10 and someone else has the 2, you fire your shot and hit them CT, they fire and hit you CT. You've done 10 damage to their CT, they've done 2 to yours. Then you twist around while they continue firing, and maybe take another hit CT, two hits left torso, a hit right torso and a hit to the right arm. Wait, you've taken an extra half second to get your next shot off, letting them get an extra hit in the process!
However, even though they've done 12 damage to your 10, you've taken no more than 4 damage to any one area. You've done 10 damage to their CT. If you figure an arbitrary number like 60 front armor and 40 health, then by the time you've gotten 10 hits in, your CT will be dark orange and your other parts will be light orange or yellow, whereas the enemy will be cored and dead.

Granted, the AC/2 is lighter and smaller, enabling you to get more DHS, ammo, or even weapons. However, even if you double the output by saying 2 AC/2s (same weight as 1 AC/10), you will still have an easier time coring someone with the AC/10. In this case you'll probably come out cored and orange on your CT and one or both sides, but you'll still be the last man standing.

This only factored in if you're torso twisting. If the enemy is twisting to protect himself, he is probably going to do less damage with the higher-DPS, lower-alpha build. If we're talking about more than just AC/10 vs. 2xAC/2, if you can core someone within a shot or two, at that point they focus heavily on defense. If you're focusing on protecting your CT, it makes it very hard to aim, even with slower, bigger guns.

What does this mean about the state of the game? To me, it means that your pinpoint alpha is your most important stat, followed closely by your maximum DPS. While sustained DPS builds might do more damage, the high-alpha build is more likely to rip components off and/or force your enemy to play defensive. It means that weapons like AC/20 and Gauss are by far the best ballistic weapons, with the AC/10 and LBX coming in behind. It means UACs and smaller ACs require too much time on target to compete with the big bursts of the other weapons.
It means SSRMs targeting CT are much better than SRMs that can go all over or ASRMs which take up much more tonnage. It means that LRMs tracking CT makes them very powerful even at 0.7 damage per missile, especially in large volleys. These combine together to mean that aiming CT with everything, even on lights, is often your best bet.

Honestly, I'm a little disappointed by what I've found. I mean, obviously everyone min/maxes, but this game has largely deteriorated into how big of a pinpoint alpha can you get, and how many shots can you get with them? I hope they find a way to make smaller, efficient weapons more viable, because as it stands I think the big guns have a monopoly on this game, and it's not just at long range.

 

I applaud your post. You used the maximum number of words to demonstrate what I think is reasonably intuitive to most players that have over a couple hundred games :wink:

Seriously, though, you are completely correct with your two main points:
- pinpoint damage (even at a lower dps) is > spread out damage in almost every case
..compounded by the fact that:
- most pinpoint damage weapons are also those that are fire and forget which is naturally > weapons you have to fire while tracking the target.

However, there is one main point to consider, the above only holds true for similar experienced players. Everyone has come across the 5 PPC STK that misses 60% of his shots, or the atlas/phract that bury their shots in the ground. So, for those that know how to aim and wait for their shots, yes pinpoint alpha warrior online is where the damage comes in.

 

Not even those that are fire-and-forget, but the slower your weapon, the more defensive maneuvering you can do between shots.

I think its even beneficial to the less skilled player, because when they hit - they hit HARD. Even when they miss, people start freaking out, because they don't want to GET HIT.

Not really, because even though I realize this, I still have AC/2 and UAC/5 in quite a few of my builds.

 

So, two parts to this:
1. that's where experience comes in. We've all done it where a light (even a Spider 5D ERPPC) can way out damage an atlas or hgn, or an HB takes out 3 of the enemy at the end of the game. "Less Optimal" builds doesn't mean the odds aren't in your favor.
2. it's a game and we're not fighting to save our lives - we play what's fun and what we enjoy. If my life depended on it, I'd be in an atlas but in mwo, I don't even own one...

 

I've found that those builds that do well while your whole team is dead and you clean up aren't necessarily good builds (from a combat-only perspective), because you can only do well in them with the conditions that your team is not dealing damage to the enemy and you are not getting hit.

While this is true, MechSpecs is here for min/maxing. Unfortunately, I'm starting to realize that while we look down on people who just try to boat in the biggest alpha, that ends up being the best build more often than not. I was looking forward to balancing speed, range, heat, alpha, burst DPS, and sustained DPS. Unfortunately, it's become a matter of how big of an alpha can you get and still move fast enough to hit the enemy?

 

So much of this game is situational though - I can own 2 ac20 jagers with my 2 ac10+3ML jager the majority of times. However, if I get jumped in River City Night upper by one, I'm toast... a 4ERPPC STK with good aim catches me in a flat spot of alpine vs me face-hugging a 5 PPC stk by himself...

Maybe it's just because I'm new to the site and don't understand the mission statement (you have a mission statement, right, Grimm?) but I value the varied builds on here when purchasing a new mech and seeing what people have done with them (or even coming back to mastered mechs to see what people are doing with them with the evolving state of the weapon stats). 'Min/maxing' or even alphas can't always be taken as a literal, end-all be-all target that is held up as the perfect build that each player should learn to play to be 'their best'.

Naturally, there are plenty of shit builds I see out there too and they certainly need some help...

 

It saddens me to agree with this because its true. A 35 alpha Highlander poptart team with crap dps will ruin, I mean dominate, almost every game because its about minimizing received damage by hiding and maximizing pin point alpha.

Its this sort of meta that ruins most online games because when it comes down to it; it's only about winning no matter what. You can't argue that they should take more balanced fun mechs just because. Some people just want to win no matter what it takes period and if they will always find the utmost advantageous method to do it.

Its up to PGI to balance this game around the spirit(?) of Battletech and the awesome idea of giant war machines stomping around battlefields carrying vast arrays of weaponry equal to a battalion of tanks.

Not hide behind a hill alpha striking all game, or boating, or any of that dull crap.

If I wanted to just win for the sake of winning constantly I'd just arm wrestle my wife every night.

I don't know why some people play really, what's the point of battletech/mechwarrior if you only play to win the easiest way possible no matter what. There's no argument against it though so the Devs need to cap max amount of similar weapons on chassis, cause drastic heat problems for those PPC snipers and overall balance out the need for all types of weapons.

On my phone, no proof reading. Forgive my potentially horrible rambling.

 

Capping similar weapons would be tricky to do, as some mechs are pretty much built for that (think 9xML Hunchback), but some of the most OP builds right now aren't even boating (Guass + 2xER PPC Cataphract, dual AC/20 Jager). I think if they made riding your heat high more of an issue, the game would completely change. I think they might be afraid of that, because such a shift would likely disrupt the playerbase, but overall it would be a good move.

Satisfactory, I am here because the idea is to min/max. I try to have varied builds, and I usually do pretty well in them. But I'm finding the pinpoint alpha to be the much better option, and just like any MMO I've played, having options doesn't give you the option to play how you want to play - it gives you the opportunity to be stupid*. I'd like a game that rewards making a build that fits your playstyle, and as it stands this game mostly rewards cheese. Granted, I think they're working on some of the issues (I haven't seen anything regarding CT-seeking missiles or sniping, but I've heard they're looking at PPC heat and potentially nerfing poptarting down the line).

*This sounds kind of harsh, and this game isn't *too* bad, especially in PUGs. But It is very hard to balance games like this, and you eventually end up with people figuring out what works best and going with that; and if you do anything else, you're "bad". In the situation above, I made a dual-UAC/5 build for the yen-lo. It was theoretically better, but because it didn't fit the model of success in this game, it ended up being bad compared to what I could have had.

I know I should direct my concerns to PGI, but as it stands my concern relates to builds in this game. You can randomly pick 10 builds on this site for one mech, and I'm pretty sure you'll find one of two things:
1) 7 of the builds use the same basic template, but with minor variations (i.e. trading out engine speeds for DHS, trading DHS for ammo, grabbing utility) and the other 3 are crap. This is probably the case if you're looking at SDR-5D, COM-2D, or Yen-Lo-Wang.
2) 2 builds are golden, 4 builds are great on paper, but would suffer against a golden build, and 4 builds are utter crap that people threw together with no concept of how the weapons work together or how to do efficient groupings (or even which weapons are good).

In a better balanced game, these choices would be good or bad depending on playstyle instead of cheese. While some builds would still be just bad, it would make a lot of builds better, and I think a lot of people happier.

 

I mean, the problem is largely that the DPS of high-alpha weapons is equivalent or superior to low-alpha weapons.

AC/2's do 4 DPS, but so do AC/10's. AC/20's do 5 DPS. Large Lasers do 2.12 DPS, PPCs do 3.33.

There is a balancing factor that exists, which is DPS vs. burst, but PGI are incompetent at balancing shit, so instead we have the PPCgeddon that is the meta-game.

 

Would increasing the critical space requirements of high burst weapons help balance things out? Adding an extra critical to the PPCs would reduce the maximum number any mech could take and remove it as an option from some mechs all together.

 

The fun in it for me is trying to work out of the box and produce good builds without arriving at that lowest common denominator. Yeah I could drive a dual AC/20 setup around but what's the point? Yeah you blow people up, great, no kidding. I just don't find it fun. I don't have anything in particular against boating either. I would just rather try to find a way to do it that no one else has thought of yet and make it a good solid mech...that's my idea of fun. Obviously not all my hairbrained schemes work, but that's part of the experience too...

 

Games die if what's fun isn't also effective. AC/40 builds should be effective, sure, but they should be effective in a different way to a quad AC/2 build, instead of just all-around better.

For hit and run, an AC/20 should be very effective. For straight-up shooting people in the face while standing still, it should always lose.

This is the fundamental flaw in PGI's weapon balancing. A Large Laser should beat a PPC with an equal amount of constant time on target. However, currently it's reversed.

 

Heads would roll if PGI did this. Sure it's more balancing to the real time translation from table top but your table top die hards would go critical mass.

Ultimately when it comes to these PPCheese/pop tard/ high alpha builds too many people try to build mechs to brute force their way through the problem when all it needs is a little finesse in the form of clever maneuvering. Thats why this is a co-operative PVP game and why I feel no love for those who try to play it solo, get their ass whipped and cry about it. In a group these builds will kill you, just with the group you have significantly higher odds of taking care of the problem.

It's troublesome dealing with these and being a light/medium pilot I still get one shot as soon as my guard drops. However, I can honestly say every time I got one shotted I did something wrong and got called on it. The rest of the time we move as a group, out maneuver and try to flank these builds.

So moral of the story is you are not going to build a mech to out power/survive these builds. Your only option is to grab friends and out tactic the other team. The very core of B-Tech/MW IMO.

 

Increasing size of ppc wouldn't help every highlander and cataphract will remain the same. I don't think its a fair trade off anyway. Same with nerfing accuracy while jumping as a friend suggested because players such as myself who use their Highlanders as mid-range brawlers that like to stay airborne and twist about in a melee to get shots off.

What needs to be done is a game wide balancing to restrict the concentration of similar weapon types, with exceptions to perhaps small and medium lasers since their range is so limited. (Though I hate those boats too like swaybacks - but the chassis is limited to big hump so its limited).

Multiplitive heat for similar high-heat weapons such as PPC's and perhaps a delay when multiple heavy weapons are fired at once like missiles with the bay doors closed. This was explained in battletech because of the enormous amounts of energy the weapons draw from the reactor to fire. Jump up, fire PPC...thousand one thousand two... Gauss fires.

(TLDR)Perhaps nerfing Alpha Strike this way is the answer?

Can't fire that Gauss and PPC at the same time or large lasers etc. That would benefit high dps low damage fast firing weapons. Mechs would work best with mixed weaponry to keep a healthy chainfire going. Have a couple fast firing high dps weapons with a big weapon or two for a spike in damage at opportune moments.

Its always been alpha strike that seems to be the way weapons are exploited in these mech games.

 

Dwergi, your comments about the raw DPS of various ballistics ignore weight. Per-ton (granted, not including ammo and all that), AC/2s do 0.67 DPS, UAC/5s (according to Michael’s testing) do 0.56 DPS, AC/20s do 0.36 DPS, AC/10s 0.33, and AC/5s 0.37. PPCs are supposed to be balanced in their high heat cost, but that doesn’t seem to stop it from working.

Michael, that’s an interesting suggestion, but I’m not sure crit slots is the answer. I think the size of AC/20s (coupled with their need for ammo and the lack of ballistic slots, requirement for a STD engine in most cases…) are not too overpowered, even if they’re often the best option. I don’t really see it as a fix for Gauss. I’m thinking PPCs would be the only thing that could be affected by this, but it would more limit the number of available heat sinks than the size.

Warchanter, while this is true, you’re basically having fun by challenging yourself. How do you challenge yourself? By doing something that works less. Wouldn’t it be more fun if instead of cheese builds and non-cheese builds, you had pros-and-cons? If you are taking that build not because it’s “not a cheese build”, but because it’s one you like?

Untamed, the problem with that is you don’t always have people online. For example, there’s a TS server I play on that isn’t always up. Good players and great teamwork in there, but not all the time. Then the people I drop with in my mostly-casual unit are sometimes great tacticians, and other times just a group of people hanging out while running around with lasers. The answer to cheese builds shouldn’t be “just get a team together” because that discourages just playing on my own.

Fherot, poptarting does need to get nerfed. Slight inaccuracy while jumping will let you still be useful at close range, but it won’t let you get pinpoint shots behind cover at long range. It might not be perfect accuracy, but that’s the tradeoff for being able to shoot over teammates or barriers.

---

I’m not really sure what the answer is. Multiplicative heat would actually hurt builds making use of the quicker-higher DPS weapons, because you get more use out of them by using more of them. While I’ve been hesitant to agree, I think having problems such as slowing down, sluggish maneuvering, and inaccuracy problems at high heat might help tone down the weapons, but the problem there is you completely slow down the game.

Overall, I think most of the solutions we can come up with address PPC boats, but fail to address the fact that a single AC/20 is generally better than 2 AC/2s or UAC/5s, when they should both have their pros and cons.

 

On the same token the answer to every build that gives the community trouble shouldn't automatically be "nerf" every time the meta changes and lo and behold thats what gets screamed every time. The tragic reality everyone needs to realize here is that even though we may think they are cheesy they are no less viable or any more against the rules than any build posted on this forum. We hate them because they are effective and don't let us walk out and ROFL stomp the opposition. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but friends on or not the answer to confronting a foe with superior fire power always has been and always will be tactics.

If I do not feel like playing with a group or have none available I play my solo account that shall forever remain unnamed. Or better yet I go play a solo game. I am not trying to be rude about it but the nature of the game is co-op PVP and regardless of what mood you are in when you wish to go stomping around in giant robots it is not going to change the aforementioned facts. Life and especially warfare isn't fair nor has it been nor will it ever be. What sets the good pilots apart is how they deal with such problems and so rarely can you deal with them alone.

 

In a well-balanced game, it shouldn't be about firepower vs. tactics. The two should be separate entities. It should be that you have different tactics if using Build A vs. Build B. It shouldn't be that Build A is only competitive if you outpilot Build B. I'm not saying I play solo to completely ignore tactics, but that I am only one person on the team. I cannot control the pugs, I cannot make them work together if they don't want to. Often times "tactics" becomes follow a mech that's slower than me and hope he doesn't get me killed. It also ends up a LOT meaning either sit there while my team gets picked apart by snipers because I'm not trying to go peek-a-boo with my balanced build of 2xER LL (and brawling stuff) against a team of dedicated snipers, or I try to close in to use those weapons to my advantage and I just get focused and killed.

Granted, even if everything were balanced, I'd probably still get creamed in that situation. The problem exists, however, that I present an argument that AC/20 is better at killing than the heavier and higher-DPS dual-UAC/5 build, and the only counters I get are "I like variety", "I like a challenge", and "I just use tactics." The problem I have is that on the YLW, for example, it actually allows me to use more tactics if I have the AC/20 (shoot and maneuver with less loss of DPS) than dual UAC.

I also realized the problem regarding tabletop vs. MWO. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in tabletop, isn't it random where you hit? i.e. you attack, you roll the die, and the die tells you where you hit. This would make it harder to do what people can do in-game and just burst down a component. I think that might be part of the issue here.

 

Get rid of alpha strike. Can't fire more than 6 small lasers, 4 medium lasers or 2 large lasers at the same time. Can't fire energy hungry weapons together like 2 of any PPC or Gauss, add a global cool down of 1 second for the fusion reactor to cycle through each weapon.

Alpha strike just turns the game into Alpha Strike Online. Add that challenge of only being able to fire a few small weapons, couple medium or 1 large weapon at one time.

I would love to see my beloved philosophy of having a linked blister of rapid fire small weapons like medium pulse/AC2's an such linked to pepper people. A couple large lasers for the twin-alpha consistent high damage and a big AC20, Gauss or pack of SRM6 for punch.

Would make for some interesting combinations of mechs relying on cockpit rattle, maneuverability and DPS with a big finisher gun(s).

Versus: hmm ppc are good. Ill make a mech that has ppc, ppc, ppc, ppc, ppc, ppc and an er ppc for flavor.

Live a little, out pilot and outshoot eachother instead of cowering behind cover poking up to alpha strike pin point damage at naughty enemies.

As a survivor of the Great 7 ER Large Nova Cat Shifest of 2000-2003 I really wish they'd implement something to encourage loadout variety and toe to toe combat.

 

The problem with getting rid of alpha strike is some mechs will end up with useless hard points, or (on the flip side) you'll see more macros to essentially chain-fire an alpha strike.

I don't think that just getting rid of alpha is a good solution, you have to make it cost more than just "oh, now I'm at high heat." Again, boiling the problem back down - what does removing alpha strike do to prevent a Yen-Lo-Wang with a single AC/20 from being the obviously better choice to the same mech with dual UAC/5? Can't stop the single weapon from alpha-striking...

 

It's random if you don't aim for a location which increases difficulty a bit. Furthermore firing while jumping is one of the harder shots to make in table top if I remember correctly.

Firepower and tactics will never be separate entities as your tactics are entirely dependent upon your weaponry. There is a term for firepower without tactics and it's "Spray and pray". We have a term for tactics without weaponry it's called "The Team America World Police secret signal". Basically throw your empty hands in the air scream and wave them hoping you don't get shot. Tactics can't do anything without weaponry and weaponry will never be placed in it's proper position or use without tactics. Thats just a fundamental fact. Weapons have to be used certain ways and in certain situations and tactics is how you get them to the right place at the right time.

We also have to realize that not a single one of us know or can produce every effective tactic on a moments notice. We all have specific styles and specific styles don't always allow for other styles. For instance I am a light/medium pilot. There are a couple of fast heavies I am good in, but ultimately put me in any given heavy or assault and things aren't going to go as well as if you put me in a Centurion. Now flanking people and being sneaky while my assaults gather aggro I can do. Part of tactics is bringing the proper tools. Even if you're pugging there is nothing stopping you from typing out a plan and seeing who is on board with it as the devs have said since day 1.

I agree with the weight vs damage argument. I have always felt the ballistics were a bit too heavy. Some of this is implementation in how MGs were misrepresented. In TT there wasn't this massive weapon effectiveness gap between AC2s and MGs. The difference between them was more like a gauss vs an AC20: damage is similar but one can do it a lot further off than the other. With MGs always being so underpowered it has created a dead spot in ballistic damage that previously didn't exist.

Also I believe a lot of the weapons being out of balance is the fault of how the length of a turn in TT game was translated to real time. If you directly translate some of these weapons into TT then you find craziness like PPCs firing 5 times in one turn (do I need to mention that the only weapons that generally fired more than once were UACs and you MAY get a second shot out jams permitting?) Because of this not a single weapon in the game translates properly. Perhaps Solaris 7 rules (which were in a higher time resolution) being implemented or applied to weapon cool downs would help. Solaris 7 split everything into much smaller turns and some weapons weren't always up and ready the next turn.

Ultimately I do not foresee this game ever being truly balanced like an RTS and such and I for one hope it never is. I feel it would take a bit of the character of the game away and make it bland. I believe re-balancing the heat of energy weapons was the incorrect move, rather the re-evaluation of all weapon cool down times/DPS would have been the better way to go. I believe as we see more ballistic weapons from TT make it into the game there will be less issues. We have a lot of higher tech energy weapons but only a couple of higher tech ballistic weapons. The ones we do have aren't fully implemented properly in their ammo selections/uses.