61 replies to this topic

[bacon_avenger]

Karaipantsu, on December 11 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

I doubt Sabot will end up on A class mechs.

Sometimes, I think NDA's stifle good discussion and debate over if a given class and loadout are a good idea and how to balance them.

[Necro]

bacon_avenger, on December 11 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

Karaipantsu, on December 11 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

I doubt Sabot will end up on A class mechs.

Sometimes, I think NDA's stifle good discussion and debate over if a given class and loadout are a good idea and how to balance them.

Just be very vague and add the word plausible to everything.

Or say you had a dream that "..." happened in

[marshalade]

Necro, on December 11 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

Just be very vague and add the word plausible to everything.

Or say you had a dream that "..." happened in

Great way to attempt to circumvent the rules and still break them. Sabot can and should be tried on an A class, but definitely with a primary besides the Slug Rifle. HEAT might make an interesting matchup.

[draco7891]

D20Face, on December 11 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

If the A class does both less damage and has less health then a person using it will never get kills unless the opponent is significantly worse.

Only if this is the Crimean War and we stand in rows and take turns shooting at each other like proper honorable gentlemen.

Fortunately, this is Hawken, and you discount the speed, agility and maneuverability of A-classes, which has both been significantly buffed since CBE1/2, and is the offset to the A-class HP deficit.

If A-classes could kill C-classes as fast as C's kill A's, then there would be absolutely zero reason to pick any chassis other than A. A's get agility, B's get abilities, C's get an HP buffer.

Draco

[Karaipantsu]

Didn't I just make an example of why HEAT/Sabot would be awful on an A-class_  There'd be absolutely no way to catch a sniper that can engage effectively nearly anywhere, escape without issue, and dole out TONS of damage.  You can't give that kind of firepower to a class that decides when and where to engage.

[Beemann]

D20Face, on December 11 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

If the A class does both less damage and has less health then a person using it will never get kills unless the opponent is significantly worse.

With the optimization nerfs they lost 220 health points. That's almost 33%.

Losing all that health hit the survivability of A classes hard enough that they will die in a 5 second engagement against any class should the enemy hit both secondary shots.

They need to be able to kill people in at least a somewhat similar amount of time.

Except I'm not saying that they should have WORSE weapons, I'm saying their weapon options should be equal
Offensive options should be fairly even, whereas speed and mobility are traded off
The Flak (and the Vulcan) offer too much power given that mobility goes a long way when it comes to making up for the range limits
And the optimization nerfs gave them a bigger health bonus than C mechs (~33% instead of 20%)
So you're now suggesting that we make balance changes based on something that was, in the first place, imbalanced

Comparing direct TTK on lights vs heavies is like comparing the two in a chase. We all know who is going to win if you don't leverage your actual advantage

@Karaipantsu
The HEAT and Sabot aren't range limited. The range they have is an advantage, not a balancing factor (like it is with the limited range of the Flak guns and the Vulcan). While it can be argued that keeping high speed and range leaves a large advantage in itself, this is not restricted to those two weapons whatsoever. As well, the mobility in this game is not such that you can continuously run away. Remember that it is much easier to engage than it is to leave an engagement

Edited by Beemann, December 11 2012 - 01:27 PM.

[Necro]

Ok, this is kinda dragging the thread off topic but we have 3 balancing factor here factors in this game.

Speed.

Health.

Damage.

The only problem is all the weapons have the same damage no matter what health and speed there stuck on. So until there are more weapons or variants of those weapons there is simply no easy fix to balance these things without taking into account what will happen on a different chassis. The solution "these weapons don't belong on X class" Kinda sucks for variety so the only thing I see is more weapons,

[Beemann]

If damage remains the same there are two balancing factors. Short of arbitrary limits on damage, the only way to balance damage is to deny certain weapons to lower mech sizes. Alternatively this can be seen as denying the ability to easily circumvent a weapon's drawbacks (and a way of showing a C mech advantage would be if we included something like rocket jumping in this game. Much like how you could, in Tribes 2,  have an excessively speedy heavy overriding the lights advantage through intelligent explosives use, you can, in Hawken, circumvent the flak issue by having someone fast enough to force engagements when and where they please. The issue with this is that escaping is such a huge deal in Hawken. 9 times out of 10 you wont escape a good player if you are/were fighting on equal ground)

[The_Silencer]

Necro, on December 10 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on December 10 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Akrium, on December 10 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

I have no idea what DPS means but I'm gonna talk about it like I do.

Actually no one seems to realize that dps is theoretical because you wont ever be hitting with every pellet with sustained fire.

It's actual REAL dps is much lower in terms of use, just like every weapon in the game.

There needs to be a more accurate way, like maybe WoW's recount add-on, to actually tell what your dps is in use.

Just as side note.. I think Necro made a good point up there. This is not an RTS game in which, most of the times, weapons do always end up hitting their target (projectiles, beam and energy weapons, et cetera). The DPS of, mostly at this case, primary weapons subsequently get more relative than absolute performances due to a wide variety of factors. AS for example, distance or range, accuracy, heat, real hits and so forth. That should be positively taken into account as well.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Necro, on December 10 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on December 10 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Akrium, on December 10 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

I have no idea what DPS means but I'm gonna talk about it like I do.

Actually no one seems to realize that dps is theoretical because you wont ever be hitting with every pellet with sustained fire.

It's actual REAL dps is much lower in terms of use, just like every weapon in the game.

There needs to be a more accurate way, like maybe WoW's recount add-on, to actually tell what your dps is in use.

You have done a grand job in missing the point I was making. I'm fully aware that on paper and in practice DPS can work out to be entirely different, but that had nothing to do with what I was getting at.

My mockery of Akrium's post was pointing out the fact that he was saying that you can't get 160 DPS no matter what because people weren't accounting for heat.
That, of course, is insanely stupid. Seeing as the Miniflak (and every other weapon) can fire continuously without overheating for at least 1 or more seconds, heat doesn't play into factoring DPS. If perhaps he were talking about damage per minute (but who ever does that_) or total potential damage before overheating, he may have had something. But instead he talks about Damage Per Second, and starts ranting on about it while being entirely wrong.

[Necro]

AsianJoyKiller, on December 11 2012 - 02:18 PM, said:

Necro, on December 10 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on December 10 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Akrium, on December 10 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

I have no idea what DPS means but I'm gonna talk about it like I do.

Actually no one seems to realize that dps is theoretical because you wont ever be hitting with every pellet with sustained fire.

It's actual REAL dps is much lower in terms of use, just like every weapon in the game.

There needs to be a more accurate way, like maybe WoW's recount add-on, to actually tell what your dps is in use.

You have done a grand job in missing the point I was making.

I never missed any point you were making I just didn't address it at all.
It's self explanatory that heat wont be taken into account in dps unless your counting dps over an extended amount of time.

I instead brought up the fact that it's a rapid fire high spread weapon and you won't ever be hitting with every pellet every second.
This is the case with every weapon because you won't always hit with every projectile and some are easier to hit with then others.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Necro, on December 11 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on December 11 2012 - 02:18 PM, said:

Necro, on December 10 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on December 10 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Akrium, on December 10 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

I have no idea what DPS means but I'm gonna talk about it like I do.

Actually no one seems to realize that dps is theoretical because you wont ever be hitting with every pellet with sustained fire.

It's actual REAL dps is much lower in terms of use, just like every weapon in the game.

There needs to be a more accurate way, like maybe WoW's recount add-on, to actually tell what your dps is in use.

You have done a grand job in missing the point I was making.

I never missed any point you were making I just didn't address it at all.
It's self explanatory that heat wont be taken into account in dps unless your counting dps over an extended amount of time.

I instead brought up the fact that it's a rapid fire high spread weapon and you won't ever be hitting with every pellet every second.
This is the case with every weapon because you won't always hit with every projectile and some are easier to hit with then others.

...
So if you weren't addressing the point I was making, why bother replying to me_

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, December 11 2012 - 02:43 PM.

[Necro]

AsianJoyKiller, on December 10 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Akrium, on December 10 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

no idea what DPS means

[Baslok]

"don´t touch the scout"    

[AsianJoyKiller]

Necro, on December 11 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on December 10 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Akrium, on December 10 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

no idea what DPS means

Stop being stupid.
I have a perfect understanding of what DPS is.
I'm not talking about effective DPS during combat, which is much different than theoretical DPS on paper. It's obvious (at least to people who use their brains) that Akrium was talking about DPS from an "on paper" standpoint (considering those were the stats he was debating), where you're only considering the base statistics and not variables of combat.
So if you had any ability at all to understand context at all, you would have understood that I was talking about "on paper" DPS.

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, December 11 2012 - 02:54 PM.

[Necro]

AsianJoyKiller, on December 11 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

Necro, on December 11 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on December 10 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Akrium, on December 10 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

no idea what DPS means

Stop being stupid.
I have a perfect understanding of what DPS is.
I'm not talking about effective DPS during combat, which is much different than theoretical DPS on paper. It's obvious (at least to people who use their brains) that Akrium was talking about DPS from an "on paper" standpoint (considering those were the stats he was debating), where you're only considering the base statistics and not variables of combat.
So if you had any ability at all to understand context at all, you would have understood that I was talking about "on paper" DPS.

Stop making things personal.
You just asked me why I replied to you and I showed you why. Nothing more.

You said one person doesn't understand dps...and I added most people don't understand what dps is because there using that as there primary argument for balancing and not considering dps changes during actual use.

[The_Silencer]

I think that this would be a good time for some few recorded gameplay video samples..

[Decoy101x]

Necro, on December 11 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

Ok, this is kinda dragging the thread off topic but we have 3 balancing factor here factors in this game.

Speed.

Health.

Damage.

The only problem is all the weapons have the same damage no matter what health and speed there stuck on.

false. apparently hellfires do less damage on a bruiser than a C class mech

[Necro]

Decoy101x, on December 11 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

Necro, on December 11 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

Ok, this is kinda dragging the thread off topic but we have 3 balancing factor here factors in this game.

Speed.

Health.

Damage.

The only problem is all the weapons have the same damage no matter what health and speed there stuck on.

false. apparently hellfires do less damage on a bruiser than a C class mech

Really_!

Then they just need to keep doing this for every mech. balancing then becomes easy.

[DM30]

Decoy101x, on December 11 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

Necro, on December 11 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

Ok, this is kinda dragging the thread off topic but we have 3 balancing factor here factors in this game.

Speed.

Health.

Damage.

The only problem is all the weapons have the same damage no matter what health and speed there stuck on.

false. apparently hellfires do less damage on a bruiser than a C class mech

If that's true it's news to me. I used both Bruiser and Rocketeer in CBE3 and never noticed a difference in damage output, but since I was assuming they were the same I never checked the actual numbers in the garage. I'll have to double check that once open beta starts.