|
|
|
Mordel's Bar & Grill |
|
  |
» |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
 Posted: 25-Jul-2002 14:58 Post subject: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
  |
|
Reading a thread at CBT about the uselesness of omnimechs made me consider the nature of Btech combat. It does seem that a lot of the weapons fulfill the exact same roles with only minor variations. A clan large pulse, ER large laser, and ER PPC, Gauss Rifle, LB-10X, or UAC-10 all pretty much do the same thing. Also, weapons that in the real world shake things up quite a bit are pretty useless in Btech. Artillery is just kind of blah. There are no guided missiles to speak of. Heck, the missiles are just like the guns except without the punch. Mines aren't really that impressive. Bombs just suck. No direct fire weapon actually penetrates the armor (AP ammo does not do any internal damage). Perhaps the game has become over-balanced. What do you think?
_________________
Gangrene
[ This Message was edited by: Gangrene on 2002-07-25 15:01 ]
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Sarkkahn
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 12-Jul-2002 00:00
Posts: 394
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 15:31 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 14:58, Gangrene wrote:
A clan large pulse, ER large laser, and ER PPC, Gauss Rifle, LB-10X, or UAC-10 all pretty much do the same thing.
_________________
Gangrene
[ This Message was edited by: Gangrene on 2002-07-25 15:01 ]
|
|
no I disagree, all of those are deffinately different.
like for example the lbx and the ppc are WAY different besides being energy and ballistic the lbx only hits with so many and is way less accurate then the ppc.
I could go on and on but the short answer to your question is NO
_________________
You want some? Come and get it
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 15:46 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
like for example the lbx and the ppc are WAY different besides being energy and ballistic the lbx only hits with so many and is way less accurate then the ppc.
|
|
The accuracy of the LB-X is dependant on using cluster ammo. Cluster ammo sucks (and don't give me any "crit-finding" BS). Most players I know use regular ammo, hence no -1 to-hit and no spread damage.
So what's the difference, in terms of gameplay, betwen a laser and ballistic weapon? One uses ammo and one makes more heat? If that's all you got then the difference is largely in name only, since most battles do not run you out of ammo or make you overheat.
Quote:
|
I could go on and on but the short answer to your question is NO
|
|
No, please, go on. An opinion without reason is just an opinion.
_________________
Gangrene
[ This Message was edited by: Gangrene on 2002-07-25 15:47 ]
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8072
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 15:54 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 15:46, Gangrene wrote:
The accuracy of the LB-X is dependant on using cluster ammo. Cluster ammo sucks (and don't give me any "crit-finding" BS). Most players I know use regular ammo, hence no -1 to-hit and no spread damage.
|
|
Then they and you are using the LBx autocannons incorrectly.
You fire slug to rip off armor and follow it with cluster to find the holes.
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Hardware
Clan Ghost Bear
Star Colonel
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 605
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 15:57 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 15:46, Gangrene wrote:
The accuracy of the LB-X is dependant on using cluster ammo. Cluster ammo sucks (and don't give me any "crit-finding" BS). Most players I know use regular ammo, hence no -1 to-hit and no spread damage.
|
|
Well, if you're only using cluster or ball ammo then an LBX is as useless as tits on a bull. If you have an LBX you're obliged to take a ton of ball ammo and a ton of cluster. And yes, once you've opened a mech up, the cluster rounds do find crits.
Quote:
|
So what's the difference, in terms of gameplay, betwen a laser and ballistic weapon? One uses ammo and one makes more heat? If that's all you got then the difference is largely in name only, since most battles do not run you out of ammo or make you overheat.
|
|
You've never played level one, have you?
If there is any single weapon that is overbalancing the game it is the Gauss Rifle. Everything else is a trade off.
_________________
The more I get to know people the more I like my dog.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 16:07 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 15:57, Hardware wrote:
Well, if you're only using cluster or ball ammo then an LBX is as useless as tits on a bull. If you have an LBX you're obliged to take a ton of ball ammo and a ton of cluster. And yes, once you've opened a mech up, the cluster rounds do find crits.
|
|
I've used it like that before. I would trade knocking out a hand actuator or heatsink for straight punch damage any day.
And name any real life weapon that tries to justify its usefulness in statistical chances of finding a weak spot.
Quote:
|
You've never played level one, have you?
|
|
Why would I, since L2 came out over a decade ago. Anyways, balance should apply to all levels of play, not just one.
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8072
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 16:16 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 16:07, Gangrene wrote:
And name any real life weapon that tries to justify its usefulness in statistical chances of finding a weak spot.
|
|
Ummm, its not "statistical", its "logical".
You defeat a unit by making it unbattleworthy (not sure if that's a real word, but you get the idea  ), and ripping off its armor and destroying its internal components is a way of doing that. Logic says that the best way to do that is to hit the unarmored sections with as many hits as you can hoping to hit something vital.
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Ares
Clan Jade Falcon
Star Colonel
Joined: 20-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 737
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 16:43 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
[quote]
On 2002-07-25 16:07, Gangrene wrote:
And name any real life weapon that tries to justify its usefulness in statistical chances of finding a weak spot.
[quote]
How about a sawed-off shotgun? Or any grade of buckshot and a regular shotgun, for that matter. Hollowpoint pistol and SMG rounds, as well.
You breach a door with the buckshot, and fire at a person. 00 buck equals approx. eight .22 caliber sized projectiles fired at a person. A couple hit a kevlar vest the target is wearing(assuming), most hit the arms and legs of the target or miss, and maybe one or two completes a headshot. Of course, this depends on range and choke, but you get the idea. Automatic shotgun with a 8 round clip just throws out a wall of lead at someone.
Now, damage assessment: maybe a couple breach the vest, these smack into the heart and lungs, which is enough to kill directly or cause someone to become 'unbattleworthy' by the means of unconsiousness from blood loss and extreme pain. The head shot is a killer if its above the nose, and if its below, that guy isn't going to be very effective with his jaw missing. A throat shot, hit a windpipe or jugular and he's out of the fight. A guy won't be doing any running with his legs gone/disabled, and won't be shooting with his arms taken out of commission. A gut shot will kill eventually, from severe bleeding and reduce effectivness to almost nothing from the extreme pain.
Now, you can consider those organs 'internals' if you wanted to, as in a critical hit. This is why hostage rescue soldiers DO NOT use rifles chambered for 5.56. If your hit by a 5.56, theres a good chance its going to miss something important and let you continue fighting. If your hit by a shotgun slug in the torso, your gone, just from the impact ripping a hole into you which will bleed you dry in no time. 'Internals' are just an aftereffect to that, albeit a very nasty one, since the force of the slug will tear you apart and go right through kevlar, and knock you on your ass if it hits a rifle plate, maybe knocking you out. Pistol rounds are effective, especially soft-nosed or hollowpoint ones. They hit, make a nice big gaping hole, then shatter and ricochet in all directions, spraying fragments into your 'internals'. A kevlar vest will not consistently stop pistol or SMG rounds, maybe one or two at most. With a fully auto (and quite accurate) Heckler and Koch MP10(favorite weapon of counter-terrorists) your gonna spray about 3 rounds per second at someone and hit with all three. It's not hard to shoot a SMG like a MP10, anyone with a working eye and trigger finger attached to an arm can do it accurately.
Comments, anyone?
[ This Message was edited by: Ares on 2002-07-25 16:58 ]
[ This Message was edited by: Ares on 2002-07-25 16:58 ]
_________________
I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say will undoubtedly incriminate me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 17:28 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 16:16, chihawk wrote:
Ummm, its not "statistical", its "logical".
|
|
Maybe you didn't notice, but rolling for crits is mathematically a statistic. Your claiming its useful based on its "crit-seeking" ability, which is by no means a sure thing. Military convention is to minimize risk and luck in battle, not depend on it.
Quote:
|
You defeat a unit by making it unbattleworthy, and ripping off its armor and destroying its internal components is a way of doing that. Logic says that the best way to do that is to hit the unarmored sections with as many hits as you can hoping to hit something vital.
|
|
Have you ever looked at any real military hardware? Do tanks try to rip off armor, fire shotgun-like projectiles and hope they hit weak spots? They shoot a round designed to incapacitate or destroy the target in a single hit. The best way to destroy a target is to take it out in a single hit with overwhelming force.
Take missile warheads as an example. For attacking armored targets, they don't shape their charge to spread the blast over a large surface. They try to concentrate it on as small of an area as possible.
I've tried spreading SRM's and LB-X clusters on damaged mechs hoping to get crits. Soemtimes the results are nasty, but largely it is a waste of time. Usually a single AC/20 shot or gauss shot to any single location is more effective towards pulling a mech down.
But that's missing the point of my first thread. Btech has tons of weapon to fulfill a single role. That's a bit overkill. A little more diversity would be a good thing
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 17:39 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
The shotgun is actually a hunting weapon, not a frontline weapon against humans. The reason they are used in Police forces is because humans are not really armored targets. Just about everything internal is vital on a human. In the case of bullet proof vests and what not, note that when the vest-bearing, AK-47 wielding psychos were loose in Beverly Hills (I think it was there) the LAPD started looking for AR-15's and not shotguns.
The only time area saturation in hopes of hitting a vital target was used by the military (that comes to mind) is the saturation bombing techniques used in WWII. And that was largely due to the lack of precision weaponry avaliable.
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Ruger
Lyran Alliance
Hauptmann General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 2039
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 17:41 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 17:28, Gangrene wrote:
Quote:
|
You defeat a unit by making it unbattleworthy, and ripping off its armor and destroying its internal components is a way of doing that. Logic says that the best way to do that is to hit the unarmored sections with as many hits as you can hoping to hit something vital.
|
|
Have you ever looked at any real military hardware? Do tanks try to rip off armor, fire shotgun-like projectiles and hope they hit weak spots? They shoot a round designed to incapacitate or destroy the target in a single hit. The best way to destroy a target is to take it out in a single hit with overwhelming force.
|
|
No...IIRC, most modern tanks fire penetrators that go INTO the tank, spraying molten metal from the penetration into the interior to kill the crew or explode the ammo, or damage other critical components...
Since BTech has no real equivalent of a APFSDS (IIR the abbreviation correctly...armor piercing, fin stabilized, discarding sabot rounds or some such...don't feel like looking up the correct term right now), at least as far as game rules go, except perhaps the new armor piercing ammo, you have to bust through the magic armor and then try to hit the same spot to get crits...
And yes, ,modern tanks can fire cluster-type rounds...just ask our resident Canadian, Alexander...or Vampire...both will gladly tell you that...
Ruger
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8072
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 17:49 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 17:28, Gangrene wrote:
Maybe you didn't notice, but rolling for crits is mathematically a statistic.
|
|
Its called a game mechanic. Unless you can point out some sort of simulated combat that doesn't use some sort of random system your point makes little to no sense.
Most of rest of your post can also be answered the same exact way, Battletech's game mechanics aren't set up like the real world.
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vagabond
Mercenary
Mr. Referee
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 5724
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 17:55 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
i can see both sides of this aurgument..... both arguments, lol.
as for to many weapons doing the same things, i can see this and undserstand it because you left out 1 of the important factors. Production, and favoratism.
certain houses prefear ac's to ppc's, while others missiles to ac's. this in a small way explains the reason. i've played enough to know that ac's can be just as if not more effective as a ppc.
as for the lb vs ac argument, yes gangrene i can point out 1 weapon used in rl that is deployed to find week spots, cluster bombs. effective against infantry, light vehicles, tank treds, electronics, and swimming pools. the idea is to saturate the area with so many fragments that you'll criple any unit on the feild, and a crippled unit = useless unit = dead unit. [like a mech without 2 legs and an arm]
now, certainly, mech construction removes most of the inherent weeknesses of vehicles. but consider this point, weapon and armor technologies have [as vcampire has pointed out time n again] equilized and stagnated. an ac/20 dosent just go straight thru because its ability to penitrate [as per bt universe] is now equal to 0, because the armor is designed to counter its effective force.
reasons being simple, ac slugs, laser beams, and particle weapons have not improved for 700 years, and armor caught up by the end of the star league. then you enter the dark times, nothin improves.
so, were an ac/20 [who's slug is composed of god knows what] 650 years ago may have gone straight thru a 100ton unit, its know stopped by a 50ton unit [barrily, but it is].
now outside of game universe mombo jumbo, yes. i agree. theres little reason to decide between several of the weapons.
my personel opinion is that the whole system should be revamped, keeping the micro managment that we love, but updating the system from bt 1.4 to 2.0 [no i don't count fourth edition as a new x.0, its only 1.4]
_________________
one must work hard to cultivate the mind and body. and one must always cultivate the mind.
//^(^_^)^\\
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 17:59 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 17:41, Ruger wrote:
No...IIRC, most modern tanks fire penetrators that go INTO the tank, spraying molten metal from the penetration into the interior to kill the crew or explode the ammo, or damage other critical components...
|
|
What do you mean "No"? What do you think I meant when I wrote "They shoot a round designed to incapacitate or destroy the target in a single hit"? They are designed to kill in a single hit.
Quote:
|
Since BTech has no real equivalent of a APFSDS, at least as far as game rules go, except perhaps the new armor piercing ammo, you have to bust through the magic armor and then try to hit the same spot to get crits...
|
|
Now you're getting to the meat of what I want to discuss. The question is: should they? Would it be a better game if they tried to incorporate such equipment in a way that didn't bog down the game? IMO, the game could be improved in this area.
So far a lot of the weapons are balanced based on how they effect the user, not on how they effect the target. 10 points of damage from a PPC is no different then 10 points of damage from from an AC.
I guess this is why I like RenegadeTech (at least conceptually). And please say you haven't boughten into Cray's "magic armor" spiel.
Quote:
|
And yes, ,modern tanks can fire cluster-type rounds...just ask our resident Canadian, Alexander...or Vampire...both will gladly tell you that...
Ruger
|
|
I know they have specialized rounds, but do they use them in the manner I described? I believe most rounds are specialized for certain target types.
_________________
Gangrene
[ This Message was edited by: Gangrene on 2002-07-25 18:17 ]
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gangrene
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 939
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 25-Jul-2002 18:11 Post subject: RE: Is Battletech over-balanced? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-07-25 17:49, chihawk wrote:
Its called a game mechanic. Unless you can point out some sort of simulated combat that doesn't use some sort of random system your point makes little to no sense.
|
|
The original statement I made was "And name any real life weapon that tries to justify its usefulness in statistical chances of finding a weak spot." Note I didn't say "statiscal chances of hitting the target." So called "crit-seeking" is relying on a certain amount of luck beyond just hitting the target. I think most military pundits would frown on weapons designed to hopefully hit the right place, as opposed to just hopefully hitting the target.
Quote:
|
Most of rest of your post can also be answered the same exact way, Battletech's game mechanics aren't set up like the real world.
|
|
Game mechanics are an abstration. The game designers can do anything they want to them. That's the point of my question. Do you think they could do it a little better?
_________________
Gangrene
[ This Message was edited by: Gangrene on 2002-07-25 18:12 ]
_________________
Gangrene
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| |
» |
All times are GMT-05:00 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
