Current time: 11-23-2024, 04:16 PM
PACT Regulations for LR
#46
On the TP, like NiX said, I'm against it. But in the event that we do allow using it, I'd suggest restrictions on its use.

Anyway, onto the actual issue... The most obvious disadvantage (if it can be called as such) of allowing TP for bladers is that the blader won't have a left arm gun. But it'll help bladers to get really close-in for the strike. One strike could change an entire battle, especially with a good right arm weapon and support back weapons. I guess this is the initial idea of allowing TP for bladers.

But with TP and the blade on, the AC's offense won't necessarily go down, but its risk during offense won't be as high (or in fact, it's offensive risk may go down to safe even in CQC) as when the AC didn't have TP on. But because of the TP, its defensive capabilities would go way up. Dodge would go up, and theoretically, life expectancy of the AC. FA heavies would now move like a midweight, mids to lights, lights to lighter lights. Also, this'll change entire playstyles of certain leg types. Heavies will be used as mids, mids as lights, and lights as hovers that can fly.

Next, the TP would greatly increase the effectiveness of the right-arm weapon of the AC. For example, it would be soooo much easier to land RL hits on the opponent because it'd be easy to get into proper positions. Though this won't necessarily apply to all weapons, some weapons will be boosted so much to the point that the pilot can just rely on the R-arm weapon, then finish off whatever is left of the opponent with the blade, or a R-hangared weapon, which is quite contrary to the idea of being a blader in the first place.

Also, I think tanks can be totallly out-maneuvered by, let's say, a LW+TP+Blade+Pixie3+no other weapons. Even if the tank would OB around a lot, and have the Anoku on, the average speed and average turning speed of the LW would still outrun the tank in the long run. This may possibly negate an entire leg type.

And NiX and Mix got the rest covered.

But if we do allow the TP, I'd suggest several things. Initially, I was thinking of certain weapon/part combinations would be banned. I'm still unsure of this, so I won't suggest it first. However, I suggest that the TP-Blader won't be allowed to hit-and-literally-run-away. For example, ultra LW AC with the starter blade and RS. Unload the RS at mid-long range, then run from your opponent till the time runs out. AP lead = Win. But, that would be complete abuse of the privilege of using the TP. In that regard, we shouldn't allow such a playing style. Also, the blader should not have a Left hangared weapon, nor should be allowed to the drop the AC's blade for any reason.

So, what do you guys think? Sorry if I'm against the idea. I'd really like to use the TP too, myself, for blading (or parry blading... in my dreams, hahaha!), but it doesn't feel right with too much boost on the performance of the AC (for me, at least).
"Numbers are not part of the real world; they're part of something else."

-Prof. Rolly Panopio, UPLB Math Division
Reply
#47
Hehe sorry blader folks... but it looks like TP is getting banned no matter what. Tongue Unless of course anyone else has something that'll really help the side of keeping TP...
Reply
#48
The TP is lightweight, has a little lower heat, has tremendous boost power, but also has high charge drain...
I agree on banning this on anything but a tank Happy ...

I was thinking of Nix's suggestion on rating AC's with their parts...
With further testing and thinking out, I found out that it is possible, because LR has performance ratings for every individual part...

If we have to use it, we will need a list of all parts with their ratings...
Then, I'll check if there's a possible calculation for it, something that will really tell how tiered a part is...
After that, I'll try to fuze it with my rating system, if it bites, we could have a better Core Rating System that we can use in the long run...
'Signatures are overrated.'
Reply
#49
why not try a cqc tourney only using flamethrowers, rockets, blades etc.....
Reply
#50
The issue on the TP really needs further testing IMO, GH might pass by my house someday for some testing and we'll prolly get to a verdict on the issue by then.
Reply
#51
Ok...
Now... I'd like to ask for help on this one...
To anyone who's not busy, please send a list of parts and their performance ratings to my by PM...
For Example:
Macaque
S,S,S,S,S

Just one part category for person please...
'Signatures are overrated.'
Reply
#52
IMO, the letter-grading system of NX-LR should be totally ignored. Looking at the numbers is the only real way to evaluate a part.

As for the TP, like I said, I'm still BARELY for it.
Reply
#53
Serene, is there some way in which this ranking system you propose be done in a manner which places importance on the numbers behind the letters, instead of the letters themselves? I am agreeing with NiX on his statement. There are many more statistics to look at behind those five letters per part.

The ability to sort out parts according to tiers requires an intricate and working knowledge of each and every part's statistics, as well as it's performance in a real combat situation. There are, after all, a lot more factors to keep in mind in while playing when compared to just looking at the part in the garage. Sa tingin ko, mas magandang doon tayo magsimula magsort. Sort the frame parts and weapons into tiers based on what they actually bring to the table during a match. Like, for example, place MGs in the mid to low tier, because while they have the ammo, they don't have the accuracy. Place Loris in the top tier, because for its weight and drain, grabe ang cooling at defense niya. That's not something that can automatically be done by just looking at the letters, unfortunately. Pagkatapos nun, pwede nang sumunod yung final 'letter grade' ng bawat AC, pero again, hindi siguro dapat naka-base yun sa kahit anong letter na binibigay nung game. Dapat tayo ang magbigay. Siguro makikita mo na ang problema dun, medyo pumapasok siya sa subjective territory.

Tulad ng sinabi ko dati nung nasa subject pa tayo ng maps to ban, sa tingin ko hindi magandang i-baby masyado yung mga players. Hindi rin naman kasi masyadong accurate yung letter system ng AC eh, it really isn't, even if you take just 2 or 3 out of the 5. High performance doesn't really hinge on that, but on the synergy between the player, his playing style, and his AC. Of course, using top tier parts is a real big help. Tongue

I still want to see if this way of balancing parts will work in a tourney setting, I really do. But right now, I'm starting to have my doubts as to whether it can hold up. Random pairings is innately fair anyway, and it's admittedly simpler.
Reply
#54
Here's my suggestion (mentioned it before but it seemed to go unnoticed Tongue):

Get a complete list of the ACs used in the previous PACT tournament. Look at the parts used in those ACs, and make a ranking of parts based on how far those ACs got. We can also use ACs entered in other (possibly foreign) tourneys to check for other winning parts. This'll be a tedious job though.

For Example:
Based on the previous PACT, we are certain that parts such as EYE3, RL, DINGO2, and big GL, are all top-tier parts.


EDIT: Mix, when will you and Rick do some testing on the TP? Sama ako!!! Bahay ni Rick. Heheh. Kung gusto niyo nga, kahit bahay ko eh Tongue AC slumber party? LOL that's so gay. Smile)
Reply
#55
Maybe I can use just the numbers...

Defense, Attack, Weight, Cooling, Ammo, Boost Power, Radar Range, these are just the few basic things people look for in parts...

I'm thinking of setting another grading system using those stats to tell how tiered they are in a more logical way compared to the older one...

I'm studying to be a programmer, if I can't work with it or at least make a grading system based on current data, I should start changing my line...
It'll be good training for me too...

The list will be pretty long...
'Signatures are overrated.'
Reply
#56
Tomorrow Thursday after 12 noon. You know how to get here? Big grin YM me for any questions.
Reply
#57
<!--QuoteBegin-Serene+Nov 8 2006, 06:00 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Serene @ Nov 8 2006, 06:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Maybe I can use just the numbers...

Defense, Attack, Weight, Cooling, Ammo, Boost Power, Radar Range, these are just the few basic things people look for in parts...

I'm thinking of setting another grading system using those stats to tell how tiered they are in a more logical way compared to the older one...

I'm studying to be a programmer, if I can't work with it or at least make a grading system based on current data, I should start changing my line...
It'll be good training for me too...

The list will be pretty long... [/quote:adb67a0612]
Yes, that's what I had in mind. Use the numbers, compare them. Tapos build the tier listings according to that. I'll start looking out for this stuff too, so I can contribute to a tentative list in the near future.

I know that list is going to be long, as there are so many parts in AC, but once it's done, hopefully we've all learned something new. Plus, we'll have a resource for basing our judgments on.

<!--QuoteBegin-NiX+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (NiX)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->AC slumber party? LOL that's so gay. Smile)[/quote:adb67a0612]
Yeah um, don't worry man, it won't be a slumber party... maybe just... uhh, an afternoon spent with AC. Tongue
Reply
#58
Now...
I need help on every input...
Someone to be in charge of heads, cores, arms, legs, back weapons, right arm weapons, left arm weapons, boosters, extension and inside units?

Well, one category per person lang...
Who wants to volunteer, I'm exempted, I'm going to code this you know...

For Armor:
Weight
Shell Defense
Energy Defense
Armor Points
Cooling

For Weapons:
Weight
Attack
Ammo
Attack Heat
Firing Rate

For Boosters:
Weight
Boost Power
Booster Heat

Well, I'm leaving Booster Accel, FCS, Generator and Radiators out...
Still considering them as user prefered parts and Boost Accel and boost accel as a UPStat...

Come on guys, I need your Co-op...
This will be the biggest TRR Project for now...
Well, next to the ER at least...
'Signatures are overrated.'
Reply
#59
LOL that'll probably be BIGGER than ER. Good luck guys. Let me just point out that aside from the number stats on parts, there are many more hidden stats to consider.

For example:
1) OB Cores have their own respective start-up heat THAT IS NOT INDICATED IN THE GAME.
2) Weapons: some may look really good on paper, but can never hit anything. Note that the accuracy of weapons (the velocity of their bullets and the weapon's own tracking properties) CANNOT be quantified.
3) The cooldown period of blades (how long it takes before you can slash again) are also not indicated in the game.
4) The endurance of a frame part (in terms of how much it can take before breaking) is also not indicated.

All I'm saying is that making a tier for parts transcends all those numbers. A tier-list should be based on how those parts have performed in actual combat. If you ask me, the easiest way to make a tier list is through a survey.

Off-topic:
Anyhow, Rick and Mix, if you guys are gonna play on Thursday, count me out. Tongue I'm not on break right now, in case you guys forgot. Hehehe. If ever you guys do play on a Saturday, then I'm in. Wink
Reply
#60
Another thing, legs have a hidden stat for their hardlanding. For example, 99XS and Panther's performance doesn't drop as radically as other LWs when damaged, nor do they hardland like the others.

Also, the trajectory of missiles are not indicated. Certain trajectories are simply better than others (e.g. NYMPHE > NYMPHE2).
"Numbers are not part of the real world; they're part of something else."

-Prof. Rolly Panopio, UPLB Math Division
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  PACT Regulations - ACV 1.01 NiX 51 69,507 06-14-2012, 09:05 AM
Last Post: NiX
  ACV PACT NiX 8 15,011 05-08-2012, 07:11 PM
Last Post: farmboy28
  PACT VI NiX 295 351,758 02-25-2012, 02:35 PM
Last Post: Shintetsu
  PACT 6 NiX 36 50,142 01-21-2011, 05:46 PM
Last Post: beastkiller
  PACT Regulations for LR Two-on-Two NiX 143 199,361 10-23-2010, 02:44 AM
Last Post: clonezero
  PACT 5 Discussion Thread NiX 87 146,520 08-05-2009, 10:38 PM
Last Post: Grim
  Future PACT? maitreya 35 42,772 06-17-2009, 03:57 PM
Last Post: Shintetsu
  PACT 4 - Let's go RAVENS! NiX 164 235,855 06-25-2008, 06:44 PM
Last Post: Serene
  LR PACT: Ban Harpy 2? NiX 5 11,855 05-05-2008, 08:44 PM
Last Post: NiX
  LR PACT: Limit Conditionally Banned Parts? NiX 2 7,509 05-05-2008, 08:43 PM
Last Post: NiX

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)