Installer Steam
log på
|
sprog
简体中文 (forenklet kinesisk)
繁體中文 (traditionelt kinesisk)
日本語 (japansk)
한국어 (koreansk)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bulgarsk)
Čeština (tjekkisk)
Deutsch (tysk)
English (engelsk)
Español – España (spansk – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (spansk – Latinamerika)
Ελληνικά (græsk)
Français (fransk)
Italiano (italiensk)
Bahasa indonesia (indonesisk)
Magyar (ungarsk)
Nederlands (hollandsk)
Norsk
Polski (polsk)
Português (portugisisk – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (portugisisk – Brasilien)
Română (rumænsk)
Русский (russisk)
Suomi (finsk)
Svenska (svensk)
Türkçe (tyrkisk)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisk)
Українська (ukrainsk)
Rapporter et oversættelsesproblem
Diskussionsregler og retningslinjer
Rapporter dette indlæg
I'm finding ppc's are very handy when focus firing and being able to spread out abit. Heat can be an issue but so far its been working well. Did take a break but yeah find its good to have a PPC line of mech and an AC line of mechs. But PPC's are worth having IMO as long as your good at managing heat.
Well IF your within sensor range, they have your exact location. They may not be able to target, but they DO know EXACTLY where you are. They know your PRECISE location.
And in the case of L Laser, I would consider them sniper, if it was not for the fact that there is such a thing as EXTRA RANGE LASERS. Thus in my mind, all regular lasers, are regular weaponry, and only ER lasers, are sniping lasers. Calling a L laser sniping, largely devalues the purpose of the ER L Laser. Honestly thou, that was never the major debate. The entire start which made me bring up the topic, was someone mentioning AC20 in a sniper discussion. (which honestly made me go WTF)
Again most of this comes from the casual debate, of what truly constitutes sniping, in 100 ton vehicle combat, as opposed to infantry.
This is what makes the SWAT sniper example, not a properly scaled example. Its an infantry scenario, by infantry definition. So for such an example, you need to scale things up properly. The average engagement range for infantry and firearms is around 50m (actually most incidents are handgun within 25m, but I am doubling that for warfare and combat with rifles, disregarding civilian violence). Thus your example is around 3 times average engagement range for that sniper. If you were to extend by the same scale for mechs, what would be that range?
Its all down to one of the oldest of battletech discussions, the issue of scaling. So I personally question whether a looser or stricter definition, properly scales the definition of sniper. I just happen to lean toward the stricter definition.
Don't get me wrong, I don't see any problem with PPC or L Laser to start the process of building a energy based sniper. But until your using ER versions of those weapons, you are going by the loosest possible definition of sniping, and I personally wouldn't call them a sniper until that ER point.
I guess another consideration is also, how much someone personally names and uses different build types.
If in a player's mind there's only brawlers, missile boats and snipers, then yeah a lot of things would be sniper.
I tend to have around 20 different named types. Ranging from melee specialized samurais, flankers, harassers, brawlers, support gunners, 3 types of missile boat, hit and run specialists, etc. This makes sniper a very specific build for me, distinquished from support gunners and basic marksmen. Something as simple as whether or not it has jump jets, can completely change what I define the mech as.
So I admit, I may overthink language use, and get way to specific on terminology. Pretty sure a search of comment history would have a good 1/3 of debates, debating specifics of terminology.
And again, this is just my point of view, not arguing that everyone should strictly adhere to this. It just mostly a thought experiment on the scaling of infantry terminology, when it gets applied to 100 ton vehicle combat. (this then leads to the heart of the idea, of how does mech combat redefine warfare in general?)
(apologies if this did get too nerdy, I have a habit of overthinking and over analyzing unless I slow down my neurons a bit)
As to the original question of the OP, I prefer large laser myself, but to truly make either worthwhile, you eventually want ER version of them an plenty of heat sinks. Until that point, ballistics tend to be a superior sniping choice due to just how much of a range difference it is.
If multiple guns, AC2 (my intial sniper at start of game, is simply stripping down armor of shadowhawk, and placing 2 ac2s with a lrm 10, it hangs back and pops the weak targets while by brawlers brawl. In theory one could strip almost ALL armor and do a 3x ac 2, but its nice to have an indirect fire option and at least enough armor for an oops or two.), if singular weapon system, gauss rifle and breaching shot (ignoring guard can make a big difference in many examples). AC5, is good for either way (thou it doesn't quite have the range), and compares well to PPC (ppc has the slightly more damage, but is a lot more heat).
I don't think that's the case. What you detect is only an estimation provided by the computer, not where exactly the mech is, its position and the way he is moving. If not, why you can't fire at a mech with LLs at 301m but you can at 299m?
I think it is a very bad argument and I'll counteract by asking what would happen if a ER AC2 existed?, then isn't any more the regular AC2 a sniper weapon?. And in real life the fact very high powered sniper rifles with huge range exist don't preclude low power but accurate sniper rifles being named as such.
Not sure, but are you saying that "sniping" is only applicable to military?, not for other contexts like civilian policing (swat) or civilian internal security (civilian special forces like counter terrorism).
If due to the circumstances the swat (or counter terrorist) needs to fire within 20m and aim at a very small spot with a very small margin of error to solve the conflict and avoid a disaster, that's not sniping?. I think it is, that most people would consider it as such, and that range alone is not the defining factor. In this example a gun has the range and perhaps could do the job with a very lucky shot, and it would be the thing to try if there is no alternative, but has not the accuracy to do it self reliably, not the gun itself and not the aiming it provides. You'll need equipment like sniper rifles with very good aiming addons to have a good chance.
The thing about all of these is that when those terms are used is because a reason, to allow for many people on the same page so when you use a term most other people will understand what you're referring to. You could use a different name for each possible setup in the game if you want, but that won't make it useful.
I don't see any problem for you using any terminology you want. It's just that on my perspective I don't find it useful. Use of language requires making concessions because it is about many people using it. Like I said before, if circumstances changed my definition could become obsolete, useless, because now all mechs have unlimited visual range, so now another different definition would be adopted. Maybe a fully arbitrary one or maybe based on some other new game mechanics. But as it is now, I think most people understands a LL/AC10 weapon as sniper weapons.
And as I said before, this isn't too nerdy. I've been involved myself in discussions here way more nerdy than this XDDD
Sorry to self quote, I know how narcissistic that can seem.
Also to be clear, when I talk about liking the large laser, it is rather specifically in the case of the starting vindicator, I never made that clear. Later on once you get breaching shot, I would have to re-evaluate if the vindicator was still being used.
Beyond that, most of the linguistic debate (argument is way to strong of a word, its extremely civil and casual), is me refusing to call just good marksmanship (which is all I would call the last swat example) sniping. Just as range is not the only factor of sniping, neither is just being an excellent shot.
I mean context wise, we all understand what someone means when they say someone is sniping with an AC10, or someone snipes a target (regardless of range or weapon) its just some of us would never personally say that.....
But head hits are not the only target of sniping.
A 85 percent chance to hit center torso, leg, side torso, side plate (vehicle), or turret (vehicle) is where direct damage shines best. As every one tends to hit that point and eliminate the threat.
Focusing only on headshots vs targeted damage is silly, that's like focusing only on builds that excel at two skull missions
Even then a Jenner has to keep the evasion high to avoid getting killed. In early career if I have a Jenner I tend to do hit and run with it. Swoop in blast at something then sprint it away to min damage.
Yeah, I'm pretty fond of targeting a side torso that's either full of ammo or a Big Gun (or holding the arm with a Big Gun). Makes the enemy less of a threat, and helps concentrate your un-targeted followup fire, since that arm & side are gone.
But you forget that the 85% also applies to the multihit setups with a lot more firepower. And the funny thing is that big hitters are comparatively much worse against high base chance hit locations (but with more armor) than against the head. Because it's more likely they won't have damage enough due to being less efficient.
For example, the dual AC20 has lower chances than a Stalker to headcap a King Crab, but they're still considerable (32%), but you just can't CT core it with the AC20s, even at 0% DR. You can with a Stalker, and with meaningful chances (40%).
So it's quite the opposite to what you say. Big meaty hit locations of big mechs are the worst case scenario for big hitter weapons with lower damage/weight efficiency. And I guess (I can't calculate chances for vehicles) that's what happens against vehicles as well. Even worse, because vehicles have less hit locations and that favors a lot multiple smaller hits with a high volume of fire over pinpoint but much lower damage.
That could explain the difficulties I have with my 5xPPC++ (dmg) against vehicles in the open and from a side, and the cheesy time I have with my LRM boat against vehicles in cover from the front.
The advantage I see for big hitters is when you can't aim properly but a single very big hit anywhere is very likely will disable something, destroy a part or perhaps kill the target. In other words: in the early or early-mid game and later sometimes against heavier but very bad maintained targets.
I don't focus only on headshots but rather is me going against the current of people saying that big hitters like AC20s are good for that. They're not.
Using headshots as a reference is making a favor to pinpoint damge setups, because the bigger the mech...the head will still have 16+45 max total internal + struct, so big hitter will still stand a chance. But CT, LT, ... they won't, not for hard targets. Or course I'm speaking of single salvos, with two they recover spectacularly, now with good chances. But only because the multihit enter the domain of massive overdamaging the target, and still slightly increasing the difference with the dual AC20s.
And you may get lucky crits. But those are even easier with multihitters.
And a dual ac/20 is going to core or severly weaken pretty much any mech. And any five ppc hit will likely do enough to cripple the threats if not take them out at ranges that medium lasers can't hit them.
Missiles suck at precision strikes (outside of the center torso which they get a bonus to hit iirc as it's the main point of impact), and medium lasers/srms can't hit a target at true sniper ranges. So comparing brawling spam vs sniper weapons is silly. Sure that hunchback is nasty, if it gets into range with it's cannon / medium lasers... but when you blow the side torso off with a couple heavy hitter ppcs/large lasers, it's just an oversized light mech in damage output.. Same with many heavier mechs where they put most of the weapons on one side (or like the thunderbolt can be taken out through a snipe attack of a couple ppcs at range or opened up for an easy followup shot)
A mech with 20 medium lasers is going to wreck things.. but it can't do anything if you blow off a leg or take out the side torso eliminating most of them (torso and arm mounts on that side) before it even gets in range to use them
Ultimately though, single mech loadouts are probably not as important as your entire lance's loadout, if the individual loadouts complement each other.
I'm leaning towards LLs and AC5s with max accuracy buffs as my long range hitters these days, on the basis that head hits are not guaranteed, and far less probable than other targetting, and you only need something powerful enough to kill head armour and structure...even if you don't kill, a damaged head with no armour is highly susceptible to massed LRM and SRM without the need for precision shots.
I will say one thing though...4 damage buffed SRM6's is 288 damage, that's 48 more damage than 2 AC20's, with more potential for applying most of that damage on the target somewhere, as opposed to a yes/no equation for the AC20s, and for considerably less weight and heat buildup. That weight saving can be used to enhance accuracy, or provide supplementary weapons like LL or ML, or heat reduction which allows you to fire the full salvo more often...and you don't have recoil debuffs.
Use the called shots, the mech does not need to be knocked down. You can also position so you are more likely to hit an arm by getting higher elevation.. They also can be great for taking out SRM/LRM/PPC vehicles. Often they have lower armor on the side. I don't need to tell you how bad of an idea it is to get close to an SRM carrier in a smaller mech.
Upgrade your ship and you should be getting called shots by the time you are taking your first shot.
I run a typical 4 class drop meaning i only take one of each class in a drop. Sniping at range is vital when you have to kill 4 assaults + vehicles and reinforcements in a 4 1/2 skull mission. Half the posts on here i see are about running all heavies or head snipers or huge assault drops. I guess if that is what you wanna do. But there are lots of other ways to play.
Not really. The dual AC20 can't core even a heavy like an Orion unless underarmored or already damaged, while you have 91% with a Stalker. The dual AC20 can take the leg though, but the chances are not super good and he can't take the leg at all of a mech just one tier above like the Awesome. And taking a leg doesn't end the fight.
The 5xPPC++ imo doesn't cripple foes so easily (not talking about the debuff) mechs, not the hardest ones. The Range is quite good but often you can't fully take advantage of it. It's a very fine support mech, good as finisher, debuffer, and can be deadly against soft targets, but it's not a killer, not against hard targets. The A-II 6xLL version I'd say is a killer, even if the damage is not that much higher. In fact, damage being the same you have more chances to headcap (up to 20% DR) with 6xLL+++ than with 5xPPC++, and then on top you add something like 1xAC5, 2xAC2 or even 2xAC5, depending on how do you expect to play with him.
Funny enough, and perhaps surprisingly for many, IMO AC10s (and Gauss) are bellow AC2s in the endgame and on par with AC5s due to low weight and heat generation as extra punch for an already established primary weapon array. I even use them now in some ML/SRM setups as substitute for the usual single AC20 when fine tuning for heat/weight, not firing them ever at long range.
What bonus are you talking about, not sure I understand, the PS bonus?
First, take into consideration that when I'm comparing setups, not only but mostly, I do it between multihit brawlers and big hit brawlers like AC20s. Not so much Brawlers against Snipers.
Yes, SRMs will be worse outside the aimed location and when you don't aim at all, same reason as why big hitters become comparatively much better with regular shots (although the amount of firepower still matters, and more so the amount of the armor/struct of the target). But assuming the target is undamaged, against well armored heavies and assaults you won't destroy anything with a dual AC20 unless both shots land in the same location, but that is going to be quite uncommon outside PS aimed locations (regular shot or a PS miss), and even then many times you won't do if the target is big enough, the location has lot of armor or the mech has damage reduction at that moment.
For the range obviously the SRM/MLs are at disadvantage, but you're not comparing them on equal terms. You need another mech to spot for you while the brawler doesn't, so it's two mechs vs one. Or you can use rangefinders, in which case you still can't get a big chunk of the range of some weapons like PPCs and Gauss (although IMO this last one is a very bad weapon) and then you're not using a cockpit mod.
For example, when I play with just two mechs in 5-skull missions I recognize that definitely the sniper team sometimes has it a bit easier depending on the map. But there are some caveats: first, the fact I use one A-II as part of the team, with 6xLL plus one or two more weapons it packs a serious punch. Not very different than a Grasshopper kind of setup but with bigger guns. The other sniper, usually a KC with 4xLL plus something else not so much. As said before a couple extra weapons can make a big difference. Also I use Rangefinders+++, so you can fire at around 400m. That helps a lot, but then you're not using cockpit mods and it's much more likely you'll end injured at the end of the mission. Thay may matter or not, depending on the bench depth you have. Without the RF it becomes much harder, although still can be done, just using the weapons as if they were medium range ones. With the brawler couple I always tend to use them both at a time, avoiding combat and just bracing within cover if I have not morale enough for two PS, while I have a bit more leeway with the snipers.
And the third kind of team I play are Heavy mechs like Grasshoppers, Black Knights or even Black Knights B. Here is where the fun begins. Small lasers are really hard (risky) to use, because you need to enter very deep from sensor/visual range and all the foes attention is on your only two mechs. Sometimes you can do it when the circumstances are particularly in your favor but not most of the time. So I tend to replace them with a SRM4+++ or 4xERSL++, which is not perfect but makes it much easier. Still most of the time I just fire at ML/SRM range and only get closer when I see an opportunity (many missions never). Many 5-skull missions can be done with them, but depends a lot on the map. And of course they do much worse than snipers, because now on top of the lower range they also do less damage, as most of the time I'll be firing just 7xMLs or 7xML 1xSRM4.
Are you talking about PvP?
Also I regard very high attrition playstyles, which is quite the opposite of one shot kills, firing over many many turns while trying to not get hit at all are something I'm quite into. They take a lot of turns but with the benefit of being possible to do them in a very safe way. In contrast I have a very bad opinion of bracket range builds from a performance point of view. Nothing against playing them for fun or lore reasons though.
One example with two brawlers and two LRM boats (or one long range direct damage mech and one LRM boat): first brawler goes for the head, if he misses that the second goes also for the head. If first kills the mech then the second go for the CT of a different mech, to allow an easier third-fourth mech follow up with regular shots from the two remainder mechs. That follow up shot would be much harder if the the second shot was at a leg, because it has lower armor/struct, but also half he chance than the CT. Of course if you aim at a leg and destroy it then you'l get two extra free called shots, but if you have a very good chance at it then you also have a good chance at CT core.
In order to get that 90% hit chance into a single location you need to previously knockdown a mech and then aim at the CT with a maxed tactics pilot. If not, with morale based PS the chance will be 81%, 0.81 x 0.81 = 66% to land both shots with a dual AC20.
Unless changed in 1.6 the elevation does not affect chances to hit a leg or the torso. There is simply a bonus to base chance but the table used is the same. Even LRMs use that table with indirect fire, although it seems visually they do more damage to the head and torsos.
Sure, but what's your point? I've never said there aren't other ways to play. Some people play with stock loadouts only, with no JJs, only AC2s, ... And don't you think that the association sniping+head makes sense, that is something which often comes to mind when discussing about sniping?, or the same about sniping+assaults (capable of packing several sniping weapons)?
I disagree. Sniping is not vital if you can complete 5-skull missions (at least those non time limited) with just two assault brawlers, even two heavy brawlers. And the best setup (by far) against soft targets (lights, meds, vehicles) is IMO a dmg based LRM boat anyway, not a sniper setup. Ignoring indirect fire, a LRM boat setup can easily outdamage a dual Gauss setup both with and without PS. And the dual Gauss only gets the advantage (a massive one certainly) when aiming at the head. You need to boat multiple sniping weapons in order to outclass LRMs at long range and that will only work with PS. Even the powerful 6xLL 2xAC2 is on the same league as a dmg based assault LRM boat when not using PS, and on top of that has less range and no indirect fire.