Is headcapping too powerful?

[Jolly Joker]

I have the game open at the moment.
I looked at the 2 LL, 2ML, 3 AC2 and it cannot work in reality due to having way too many compromises in both armour and heat tolerance (still need 2 tons of ammo for 3 AC2), with those compromises you need to remove the ML to keep it safe.

No. We talk about a one-shot killer who is accompanied by three more mechs. A ton more or less ammo is meaningless in the big picture. Think of an Shadow Hawk D (which is ridiculously underarmored). 920 armor is quite a lot, and once you start killing off the opposition (and you have 3 more mechs to help) things roll. You have cover, you have Bulwark, you name it.

The 2N is a bit special but like everything available these days either in store or part of Flashpoint.
The Kintaro loses out because it has 5t less free tonnage, no DHS for cooling giving even more available tonnage, and not able to supplement the heavy weight of the SRM infernos with both dual ML and SL as with the Griffin 2N, while only Griffin supports for 5xJJ
For a scout the Inferno meta min/max build makes sense with the 2N as it has so much more than the Kintaro when looking at the sum of its parts.
The 2N is a beast for an inferno scout.

The 2N is as special as a UAC or ERM. The Kintaro can serve the same purpose as conventional mech. In other words the Inferno missiles can use a Kintaro just as well as a 2N, same way as a Marauder can use conventional weapons for the same purpose than the HM ones. Which is the main point here. You don't need flashy weapons to make a Marauder a killer and you don't need flashy mechs to make Infernos a killer. You can even use a Javelin N as Inferno carrier, if you are so inclined.

 

[Orbitone]

No. We talk about a one-shot killer who is accompanied by three more mechs. A ton more or less ammo is meaningless in the big picture. Think of an Shadow Hawk D (which is ridiculously underarmored). 920 armor is quite a lot, and once you start killing off the opposition (and you have 3 more mechs to help) things roll. You have cover, you have Bulwark, you name it.

The 2N is as special as a UAC or ERM. The Kintaro can serve the same purpose as conventional mech. In other words the Inferno missiles can use a Kintaro just as well as a 2N, same way as a Marauder can use conventional weapons for the same purpose than the HM ones. Which is the main point here. You don't need flashy weapons to make a Marauder a killer and you don't need flashy mechs to make Infernos a killer. You can even use a Javelin N as Inferno carrier, if you are so inclined.

Maybe I missed something but you mentioned using another Marauder to compliment the 1st one if using conventional Battletech weapons.
Seems the best option which comes down to using 4xML with 2xAC2 with pretty average damage in anything else and a 33% lethal chance when firing all weapons at a standard mechwarrior who has braced or standing and firing in cover.

The Griffin 2N is closer to the standard game which allowed other equivalent Lostech SLDF mechs rather than the Annihilator/Bullshark/UAC/LBX that requires a special narrative for them to exist and be available now.
Furthermore the Griffin 2N has not been upgraded like the Lostech weapons in recent patches and sees their damage increase greatly that it makes extreme builds more viable.
The Kintaro cannot really do 4x Inferno++ (equivalent to SRM6 size/weight) in a practical way mid-late game. It is not a Scout mech nor does it have any of the big advantages of the Griffin 2N that I have mentioned earlier and in this regard they are quite apart, and I really liked using Kintaro for some builds.
But the point was to to reflect the context of most here complaining about Marauder talk about the experience with UAC/patched uprated ER Medium Laser or other builds such as the UAC20+/++ and how the Griffin 2N falls into the same category where players are having a blast shutting down any mech with 4x inferno++ for the rest of the lance to do free called shots as it can be a very practical-powerful scout throughout much of the game and the perfect shutdown/disabler scout mech due to the sum of its parts.
It is not necessarily OP just how it is played, and viable depending how far one pushes it.
That said I do think the Marauder needs to be around 30% if a more finessed solution cannot be applied to the quirk, but I have been pretty consistent about it and how Called Shot Mastery/Resolve point situation goes beyond this.

Edit:
Sorry for late repeated revising, seems all of us a coming down with colds bah.

 

[Doctor Machete]

Would 4xML with 2xAC5 though make more sense when taking into account DR?

If instead of MLs were ERMLs I'd have no worries at all having around ten armor, but fighting primarily at ML range I'd tend to favor more armor and better cooling over damage. Still, the 4xML 2xAC5 can work integrated in a full lance if you're a bit careful but for most ppl the 4xML 2xAC2 is more foolprof.

Not sure if you modeled that separately and just was not worth showing due to greater compromise/benefits relative to AC2; per weapon 8t vs 6t, and 45/55dmg vs 25/35dmg

I don't understand what do you mean with that, because I'm already showing performance for different DR.

You need the possibility to fire consecutively for a few rounds if you do not have 100%, made more so that contracts throw multiple things at you and you are not going to always be doing just headshots.

How many turns do you think you're going to need?.

Look at his, same as before but now with two salvos in a row:

Spoiler

That's why Ace Pilot is so good for hit & run, because it helps you a lot to chain two PS from safe positions, be it from the same mech or by a wingman. And those two salvos combined are real killers.

 

[Jolly Joker]

I said, if you want a "safe" build with less weapons and more armour and less heat, you are free to use 2 or even more Marauders making the headcapping even more pronounced. But that's unnecessary. 4MLs and 2 AC2 is a ridiculous armament for a Mech with 42.5 free tons. It's 17 tons at 56 heat, which is the armament of a Blackjack. It's nonsensical.

The narrative is of no consequence for this issue. And the Kintaro CAN go with 4 SRM6s (or better with 3 SRM6, one SRM4 and one SRM2) for better heat management. I have a Kintaro with exactly that weaponry - who needs the 2 MLs, when you can bang out 288 alpha samage on missiles alone (and I'm even satisfied with 240). Just 48 heat, lots of JJs, lots of stab damage, very mobile, great mech. I'd easily slap on 4 Infernos, if I felt that was necessary, but it isn't. I have a Thunderbolt SE with 2 Infernos and 3 Flamers that is just as cool and has a plethora of damage weapons at that.
As mentioned earlier, the point is to identify what EXACTLY is the actual problem, and Infernos are pretty harsh stuff on any mech. Keep in mind, it doesn't matter whether the enemy doesn't fire a shot at all or whether they peel of a few kilos of armor. There are so many options to overheat a mech, and it even helps when they fire a nice salvo before they get burned, because they are already pre-heated then.
Infernos have their own thread, haven't they?

 

[Orbitone]

If instead of MLs were ERMLs I'd have no worries at all having around ten armor, but fighting primarily at ML range I'd tend to favor more armor and better cooling over damage. Still, the 4xML 2xAC5 can work integrated in a full lance if you're a bit careful but for most ppl the 4xML 2xAC2 is more foolprof.


I don't understand what do you mean with that, because I'm already showing performance for different DR.


How many turns do you think you're going to need?.

Look at his, same as before but now with two salvos in a row:

Spoiler

That's why Ace Pilot is so good for hit & run, because it helps you a lot to chain two PS from safe positions, be it from the same mech or by a wingman. And those two salvos combined are real killers.

Ah apologies I missed the 4xML with 2xAC5 in the list before, like a few others coming down with a cold so eyes going all squinty on me lol.
So sort of worth it in terms the 2xAC5 raises chance a fair bit vs DR20% (which can be reasonably common) but yeah the ML distance make the armour compromise too risky.

I was mentioning multiple round firing requirement in two ways, one you will at times need two consecutive attempts to headshot with the Marauder; it is difficult to assume how many Marauders a player will field to headcap but lets say most will go with one for mech diversity while others will go with a mix/all depending upon their fun goal.
The other was purely from a heat management perspective where in some of the nastier contracts/missions you are in a pretty big firefight, at times made worst by the map or scripted scenario, and I appreciate it does not affect the 4ML 2AC2 but would other build approaches.
Here it is not only about headkills but how often one can effectively output damage consistently when needed when lance is under pressure (bad rolls,bad situation,tanks-turrets,etc), especially in the hotter biomes which seem to pop up quite frequently for me.

 

[Kereminde]

And? How that contradicts what I've said?. This is not TT, here the expectations for many players are not going to be nearly the same, unless you aim (no pun intended) the game only at hardcore BT fans. If you pretend the game to be attractive to other kind of players it has to have some concessions (as it has clearly already done), and many players are just used to be able to aim at the head when aiming is a possibility, and used to the fact many many times in other games the only location you aim is the head (besides the center mass), because in lots of games hitting a limb makes no difference at all, but the head does.

So among the multiple ways to nerf headshots, several of which have been discussed here and several of which can be fine tuned until you hit a sweet spot, would you choose the one who is going (imo for sure) to have more complains of them all?. It would make much more sense not allowing PS at all unless the target is prone than disallowing just the head. Because if you drop a patch nerfing the head weight a tiny bit, both in general and also for the Marauder I don't think anybody is going to complain or ask for clarification, and if later you do it again, the same. It can be done incrementally and without altering the core mechanics.

Yeah, it's not tabletop. And it probably shouldn't be. But there's some things which keep things in check which HBS' game did not keep - and we're seeing the results of that. Headshots on demand with a full alpha strike, being able to spike someone into shutdown with heat weapons... these things just weren't something you could do in the tabletop. (There were other broken options, but they took some effort to get there.)

I'm quite certain, well . . . you don't care about it. And while you're fishing for me to advocate and try to play developer - no. That's HBS' job to do, not mine, and not yours. They want to "screw up" their game, that's on them. Players want to cheat their way through the game with headshot machines and then complain how it's trivialized? That's on the players.

 

[Retic73]

Players want to cheat their way through the game with headshot machines and then complain how it's trivialized? That's on the players.

Bingo! It baffles me how an OPTIONAL game mechanic can ruin a game for people who have spent time and effort maximizing the effect of said mechanic.
No, it's not too powerful. Why? Because your version of too powerful is different than mine, which is different than this group, which is different than that group, etc...
HBS has provided a game that allows for an immense amount of variability for a large number of play styles. Headcapping is one of them. Why are y'all trying to define how other people play their game when it in no way affects how you play your game?

 

[Kereminde]

Bingo! It baffles me how an OPTIONAL game mechanic can ruin a game for people who have spent time and effort maximizing the effect of said mechanic.
No, it's not too powerful. Why? Because your version of too powerful is different than mine, which is different than this group, which is different than that group, etc...
HBS has provided a game that allows for an immense amount of variability for a large number of play styles. Headcapping is one of them. Why are y'all trying to define how other people play their game when it in no way affects how you play your game?

The same can be said of our views, and whether they should take precedence. Which is why I just . . . don't want to play developer in lieu of HBS and say what's "better" or "worse" in a strict sense. They have their vision of the game, and it allows people to be as free as they want to with building insane 'Mech designs. Some people can build these things which would be at home in the post-Clan Sphere, and others can try insane radical designs which are just weird.

The Marauder's effectiveness seriously is too random to call "reliable", as far as I can call it. It's more reliable compared to other methods, certainly. But far more reliable? Hitting a 'Mech with all the ordinance I can until it goes down and doesn't get back up. Having a full Lance which can delete a single troublesome 'Mech (or render more than one into non-threats) is more reliable than sinking Resolve into Precision Shots and hoping it works. Because there's still a not-insignificant chance it won't happen.

But, well, since there's way more people who subscribe to the alternative view? Maybe I'm just decidedly wrong by right of popular opinion. It wouldn't be the first time. (The SHD-2H Shadow Hawk is a terrible machine stock, and not much better modified! The Clans aren't an issue until players get their hands on the units and don't buy into the roles. The Phantom Mech "skill" is nothing more than dumb luck and instrumentation glitching.)

 

[Prussian Havoc]

BATTLETECH is a living game.

HBS is actively developing BATTLETECH.

BATTLETECH Free Update 1.9 is in the works and expected... soon’ish.

HBS actively supports our Modding Community.

BATTLETECH is the best BattleTech game ever developed. It brought us Turn-Ordered BattleMech Combat. It bought us Mech Melee. It brought us Death From Above, It brought us E-Warfare. It brought us Clausewitzian Fog and Friction of War. It brought us Direct and Indirect Fire LRMs. It brought us HBS-brand Turn Order. It bought us HBS-brand Stability System. It brought us BattleMech Quirks. It brought us the finest in BattleMech Graphics. It bought us...

...it brought us the best of Big and Stompy gameplay. : )

 

[KnightCole]

Then don't do it? This seems like a simple solution, in the end. Nobody is putting a gun to your head telling you to play it that way.

Well, your right, they arent holding a gun to my head, they are holding like 32(More if you count each individual missile tube). When the game drops 4 mechs vs 8 Assaults, you gotta do something to even the odds.

I feel they should do something about A: Headcapping power and B: late game, where everything is just 8 assault mechs.
Sure, sure, its kinda rough, but it also gets a little stale pretty quick.

 

[KnightCole]

... how? Unless they take out the ability to do it at all, people are still going to do it. People did it before the Marauder's accuracy, so honestly? I don't see people stopping it even if they dropped the Called Shot Bonus entirely from the Marauder. And if they drop the Called Shot entirely for heads, this topic would pop right back up with the title "too easy to kill 'Mechs with focused fire" because someone decided to boat as many lasers and heat sinks as they could.

There's no getting away from this.

Well, if it became a thing of boating and killing everything super fast, then they could look at high end accuracy so as not to allow vomiting everything into 1 area.

Personally, I dont think the focus is to bad. Mechs can be fairly tough when RNG isnt on your side, paired with a little bit of manevering and turning the mech.

 

[Timaeus]

You can aim at a limb but not the head with normal PS?. I don't think that's going to fly for most people. I can see it, lots and lots of people asking if there is some bug preventing them from aiming at the head XDD. Because it doesn't make sense.

I would say explicitly denying head shots on PS would aggravate players more than not. I know it does to me in regards to Victoria. Restricting PS head hits by increasing chance to-hit (not the location roll) like TT isn't necessarily a bad idea though it would take some finesse given how much higher base to-hit can reach here so that it's both not a trivial increase and not so difficult as to be pointless. That and I'm not sure restricting it this way facilitates the game design goals HBS try to adhere to. I'm sure there are some other ideas that could work also, if needed.

Unfortunately as you say to do this there is now scope creep; it is not about fielding one but two in a lance, which going beyond what the context of the thread is really about...

What? no.
This thread is about if head capping to too powerful post Heavy Metal, and asked three questions, — 1)Should headshots be nerfed? 2)Should the called shot bonus to hit the head specifically be reduced? 3)Should it even be possible to make called shots at the head using Precision Shot? — and no restrictions were given in regards to what can cause this to be a possibility. Which means if head capping becomes easier because the player can field more units oriented around that then that means it can be taken into account also.

 

[Jolly Joker]

Thre is a big difference between the general principle and the specific case.
Example: Is the Snub PPC as such bad? Answer: No. 5x15 PPC damage for 35 heat and 6 tons of weight doesn't seem to be out of line. For 25 Heat? 5x25 damage?
What's more: if there are 5x25 Snub PPCs - why would you want to be happy and satisfied with the 5x15 version?

Same thing with headcapping. Is something wrong with it in general? Answer: No Head hits CAN happen, after all, they happen to you as well, at least prior to the endgame, and injure your pilots. Is it bad that you can try and better your chances to decapitate other mechs? Again, no, not in principle. Bettering chances is what you are doing the whole time, be it with firing angles, with distances and to-hit probabilities, with positioning, with everything. Trying to get behind a mech and hitting the back to avoid the thick armor, bulwark and so on is basically the same thing than trying to hit the head.

However, the devil is in the detail. By HOW MUCH can you better your chances? That is generally called game balance in these kind of games. How much damage an attack does. How much defense something has. How much damage is decreased in cover or with bulwark and so on. None of those values are written in stone as if they were a law of nature, but when they are put down, they have to start somewhere.

Which brings me to Called Shot Bonus, Called Shot Mastery and the Marauder bonus.

The values we have had before the Marauder ... I'm ok with the Called Shot bonus, but the 18% you get with CSM are already at the limit of what should be possible. Sure, if a Mech lies prone, you can pick your target (and there are those who simply want to exclude headshots from Precision Shot and allow it only for temporarily disabled mechs, and they have a point) and in that case, surely nothing is wrong with 18%. But 35%? On a moving mech?

See it this way: if the AI could work with Precision Shot and Marauders - how much head armor would you want to have on your mechs? 45? What would you think about the idiots limiting head armor to that amount?

Where probabilities are involved, there is no certainty. 95% aren't 100%, and everyone has seen 95% hits fail. But you know instinctively, that when you have 4 shots with 50% and you need 1 hit, your chances to score that 1 hit will be pretty good. Not certain - but GOOD ENOUGH TO GO. And good enough to score the desired result 9 out of 10 times and then some. When you think about it - calculating this is a lot of what the game is about. Shooting a turret - you look at the hit points you need, say 157, and you know you will need some overkill, but when you stand there with your Kintaro that has 24 SRMs with 10 hps each for 240 hps, will you really fire them all or will you check heat, ammo and hit percentage and fire only 18 for 180 at 95% to-hit prob? You'll go with less, because the prob to destroy the turret is GOOD ENOUGH.

And that's wat a dedicated Marauder at 35% Called Shot headshot probability is: GOOD ENOUGH to headcap the biggest threats right away. Not dead certain - nothing is. But really probable. And really probable is good enough, because, if it does work more often than not, say, 2 out of 3 times, this will allow a lot of immediate kills over the course of a mission and a career. And the one time it doesn't work? Nothing lost! Shots were not wasted (they hit something else) and your next Mech may be able to finish the job - that one maybe on brutal alpha power.

Now. The most important thing. This isn't a general problem. It's not "cheesy". You can, after all, do what you want. Go with Highlanders and Gauss Cannons, drown everything in Infernos, whatever. No - it's just too good and has no downsides. THAT is the real point. After all, you CAN equip a Marauder with a view on damage output. IN theory, you can equip it with 4 Snub PPCs++ and nothing else for 20x25 damage, 24 tons of weight, with a 20% heat Exchanger and slam 500 damage on an opponent - if you take a called shot on the torso, it's probably game over for the enemy (without any damage reduction). But that comes with a price.
So the question is this - can you equip the Marauder both reasonably AND good enough for probable headshots (without going for the optimum in weapons available - with the right weapons and enough space everything goes).
And that is the problem, the answer is yes - easily yes. You can just equip it, IGNORING the headcapping percentage (it has no missile HPs), and when you take a Called Shot you will still be successful in headcapping, and too often.
And THAT shouldn't be the case.

So, for me, with everything in the game, it's all a question of balance, and looking at the -10% lance damage reduction, the CS bonus in addition is simply too high - WAY too high.

 

[whymakemedothis]

Is headcapping too powerful? Yes but that is due to the weapons people are using not called shots.

All these headcapping builds I'm seeing have one thing in common which is ++ and lostech weapons. The reason this has gathered so much steam post heavy metal is not the Marauder, as there are other excellent headcapping builds that utilise other chassis, but UAC's. Previously the best weapons for headcapping were ML++ where at a maximum chance to hit the head of 18% you'd need 10 of them to be reliable and no chassis had the hard points to fit that many. With UAC2++ an Annihilator can fit 5 of them which gives you 10 rolls before you even account for any energy weapons on the build so when you only require two of those rolls to hit you can reliably headcap.

Currently I quite enjoy taking precision shots at the head with just a single Gauss rifle or ER PPC+ and breaching shot. At 18% that is just likely enough to pay off to make it worth my while but if you reduce that I'd only ever consider taking precision shots at the head if I was boating weapons which damages sniper builds.

Ultimately I don't believe it is precision shot that is the problem but over tuned weapons. If you want to "fix" it the solution isn't adjusting hit percentages and damaging other play styles but capping light weight weapons at 30 damage per shot. If you do that the Marauder's bonus would still be a problem but that can be adjusted without ruining called shots for sniper builds.

 

[Orbitone]

What? no.
This thread is about if head capping to too powerful post Heavy Metal, and asked three questions, — 1)Should headshots be nerfed? 2)Should the called shot bonus to hit the head specifically be reduced? 3)Should it even be possible to make called shots at the head using Precision Shot? — and no restrictions were given in regards to what can cause this to be a possibility. Which means if head capping becomes easier because the player can field more units oriented around that then that means it can be taken into account also.

Wrong choice of words by me, but expands the discussion.
By the same token it would be kinda ridiculous to field 2-4 Annihilators (20% AC bonus with great tonnage and importantly hardpoints) with UACs supplemented by a couple energy weapons and core on any of the Biomes, it is the player deliberate setup and fielding to maximise this that makes it trivial.

But in context of question the opposite should also apply, will headcapping be too powerful when the new store options come in; there should be a question 4 pertaining to weapons as the new update influences this a lot and how easy it is to currently purchase these; the official store option in the future patch is a consideration.
The vanilla realistic build (needs to come into medium range) for a Marauder lethal headshots 66% but that drops to 33% if the enemy is braced or is firing in cover.
The ideal non-vanilla (ER ML with UAC2s) that has greater range flexibility but weaker armour with the Marauder lethal headshots 76% and drops to 72% if the enemy is braced or is firing from cover.
The non-vanilla more survivable Marauder (less ER ML and extra UAC2) still with better range flexibility lethal headshots 73% and drops to 59% if the enemy is braced or is firing from cover.
For simplicity ignoring Bulwark, which should be a small segment of potential enemy mech warriors.

For it to truly work well and also benefiting with the range flexibility it relies upon a good mix of non-vanilla weapons; the enemy does make use of brace (influences 1st strike) and cover where it can.
Kudos to Doctor Machete for putting that chart together.

@Doctor Machete
Please could you run the figures again if the Marauder had somewhere around 28-30% bonus, which may be an interesting balance point between 'vanilla' and non-vanilla items that will have a greater divide in availability for those playing new store options or maybe some other options HBS introduce next patch (and those are official options rather than an individual player house rule).
The chart is incredibly useful.
Thanks

 

[KDubya]

You don't need the fancy Heavy Metal weapons to make a head hunting Marauder, it just makes it a lot more efficient.

Last run I had a house rule of no jump jets on non-stock so I wanted range to keep my Marauder safe from the mass of assault mechs. Using four Large Lasers+++ with +10 damage and +3 accuracy, max armor everywhere and five stock heat sinks I could occasionally kill on the first salvo, reliably kill with the second and very rarely need a third salvo.

Are we now saying that using a +++ Large Laser is LosTech? Heck using just bog standard LLasers would work the same up to 20% DR as two hits = 80 damage (100 with the +++ version).

Before the Marauder I'd make an Awesome with five Large Lasers +++ and it was lethal with only 18% Precision Shot. I'd try for heads if I needed the salvage or go for the near sure kill with center mass. The marauder just makes it the default choice for the first mech Every Single Mission.

 

[Jolly Joker]

Yup.
If you go for a very meagre 4 ML++ and 2 AC/2 ++ with 35 damage each, your 1-shot kill prob with a head-hit prob of just 20% is already at 34.5% (and not much lower with 18% head-hit prob). And that's a VERY conservative armament. At 25% you are at 46.5%, which, imo, should be the absolute max.

 

[Orbitone]

Yup.
If you go for a very meagre 4 ML++ and 2 AC/2 ++ with 35 damage each, your 1-shot kill prob with a head-hit prob of just 20% is already at 34.5% (and not much lower with 18% head-hit prob). And that's a VERY conservative armament. At 25% you are at 46.5%, which, imo, should be the absolute max.

To reiterate:
The vanilla realistic build (needs to come into medium range) for a Marauder lethal headshots 66% but that drops to 33% if the enemy is braced or is firing in cover.
That is not one shot lethal and not sure if it compares that well to the best coring mechs or an Archer with its cluster quirk going low armour and massing LRM++ damage racks (large damage beyond that of headshots and very flexible in use).
Non-vanilla Marauder mixing UAC with Lostech gives you 76% and 72% when braced or cover, along with much better range flexibility.
From the chart by Doctor Machete; 4xML with 2xAC2 otherwise it is too compromised.
You are probably better off going with a more versatile build/strong alpha and coring mech, take tanks-turrets,etc.

 

[Jolly Joker]

But that is exactly the problem: you can perfectly well do that and, with the current 35% have still an enormously good chance to destroy the head. Because you cannot put missiles onto it. All you have is 3 ballistic, 4 Energy and 2 Support hps. So what CAN you do? If you drop all HM weapons, what will you equip? With that kind of hardpoints, can you get a high alpha? You may try an AC/20 (which will kill a head, no matter what), and that's already a basic 35% chance. Put in 4 ML++s at that, the rest in armor and sinks. Headcapping chance: over 60% - with more damage output. Going for bigger guns will basically cover the cover and the bracing, increase the general damage output, but doesn't significantly decrease headcapping chances.
That's exactly what I mean: you can configure the mech any way you like, you will still end up with great decapitation prospects.

 

[whymakemedothis]

@KDubya I did say ++ and lostech so that includes your LL+++.

Your Awesome build is a good example as it does allow you to reliably head cap at 18%. However in this context reliable means per mission, not per turn. The new weapons allow you to have reliable per turn head cap builds from multiple mechs even at only 18%.

There are two separate issues here. First that the UAC2++, ML++ and ER ML increase the viability of so many mechs to be built as per turn head capping builds. The Second is the Marauder's quirk.

Trying to fix both by messing with called shot mastery will hurt other play styles in some cases making them nonviable. The way to fix these without negatively affecting other legitimate play styles is by reducing the damage of the various light weapons that do more than 30 damage and separately by reducing the effect of the Marauder's quirk. I think @Jolly Joker suggestion of 24% sounds about right.

However the assumption here is that HBS see head capping as it is now as illegitimate.