17 replies to this topic

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

There have been all manner of ideas thrown around about how to change PPCs to limit their ability to focus 40-60 damage on a single point near-instantaneously. From changing heat to adding randomness to various blanket anti-boating or anti-alpha measures, they all have some merits and some problems, most of which the bulk of the community cannot agree upon.

In the last NGNG podcast Russ mentioned a suggestion to make the PPC do a portion of its damage as splash damage (say, 7/3 or thereabouts). Splash might well be a decent way to go, but it seems dangerous, given the problems PGI has had with splash damage mechanics in the past with missiles weapons.

What if PGI took inspiration from the novels. PPCs are always described as man-made lightning, slinging a bolt of what is essentially electricity (a stream of electrons) at the target, complete with static build-up prior to the shot being fired (much like a building lightning strike).

Make the PPC do 5 damage to the location it hits. Then, have the bolt jump to one adjacent location, doing 3 damage. Finally, have it jump one more time to a third adjacent location (which could be a repeat of the first, or a totally new one), for the last 2 damage (making up the 10 total damage of one shot). For extra points this could have a crazy amazing lightning animation with arcs of electricity connecting the locations as the damage jumps.

Here's how a 4 PPC build would work:

4 PPCs to the CT would do 20 damage.

Then, each PPC determines where its arc will jump to. Say there's an even distribution of odds that it will jump to any given attached location aside from the head, which would have a much smaller chance (say, 10% and only adjacent to the CT).

Let's say that 2 PPCs jumped to the left torso, one to the right torso, and one to the left leg. So total damage is now 20 to the CT, 6 to the LT, 3 to the RT, and 3 to the LL.

The final jump is one from the LT back to the CT, one from the LT to the LA, the one from the LL to the LT, and the one from the RT to the RA. That puts a total of 22 to the CT, 2 to the LA, 2 to the RA, 3 to the RT, 3 to the LL, and 8 to the LT.

Suddenly that 40-damage alpha still hurts, and could cause all kinds of trouble to an already-opened up target, but isn't an instant location destruction (or fully half the CT armor of an Atlas). Skill would still matter a lot, as that initial lump of damage (half the total output of the hit) is on the aim point, and controlling arcing by hitting places that have a cluster of vulnerable spots (say the left side is opened up, arm, torso, leg, and the CT is low on armor, you'd shoot the LT to maximize the impact of the arcing to weakened locations).

This would work especially well if combined with a slightly more meaningful EMP effect than just a 4-second ECM shut-down. Have mechs that get hit with PPCs lose target data (not locks, just detailed target damage and payload readouts) and have their seismic modules shut down for a few seconds.

I suggested this once a few weeks back but didn't do anything with it. However, Russ' comments on the Podcast reminded me of this idea, and it seemed interesting enough to merit its own thread.

Please add in whatever input you can. Tell me why it's a bad idea, or why it'd be a good one. Play around with the numbers to try to get some theory-crafting done to help make whatever discussions may follow a bit more useful for PGI. Explain why it will or won't work, how it will fix or break the game.

Please refrain from simply heaping abuse on one another. Don't just spam posts about making Elo public or people wanting to over-nerf the PPC or whatever.

Thank you for your time, and hopefully for your input.

TLDR - Make PPCs do half their damage on-hit and the other half over a short series of damage "jumps" to random adjacent locations.

[Homeless Bill]

PPCs are such a tiny part of the problem:

Spoiler

Most of the solutions I see being thrown around are solutions to the current symptoms of our problem: PPCs. Heat and PPCs are being debated ad nauseum simply because they are the flavor of the month. PPC boats are a serious problem, but to ignore large ballistics is a dangerous mistake. I fear that the tunnel vision about the current metagame will result in PGI ignoring the impending problems that will be introduced by new ‘mechs and the arrival of the Clans.

Not many people think ballistics are a huge problem right now, but I’d argue that’s only because we don’t have a particularly scary ballistics platform in the game. The AC/40 Catapult has to sacrifice speed, and the AC/40 Jagermech is really squishy because of its profile and XL. They’re still cheesy and too good for their weight, but they have exploitable weaknesses. If, however, PGI decided to drop a Mauler, Devastator, or Thunderhawk on us, there would be untold amounts of whine.

That exact thing could be said for PPCs: if we didn’t have any assaults that could boat 4+ PPCs, they wouldn’t be nearly as reviled. Heavies have to make serious sacrifices to boat them and don’t have the armor to take serious punishment, just like the current scenario with ballistics. When an assault starts boating something unbalanced, it becomes immediately apparent.

The minute PGI releases a ‘mech that can mount 4xUAC/5s plus change and has the ability tank a good amount of damage, the community will be ******** its collective pants. Even if they add ridiculous heat penalties to the autocannons, the Gauss rifle will continue to dominate. 2xPPC + 2xGauss and 3xGauss builds are impossible to solve with heat.

Even more dangerous than new ballistic ‘mechs are the Clan ballistic weapons. The Clan UAC/20 is a mere 12 tons and 8 critical slots. The double-tap will be able to put 40 damage on a single spot. Now imagine a ‘mech with jumpjets that mounts two of them. You’re imagining a stock Hunchback IIC, and it’s absolutely terrifying. Something drastic must be done to prevent Clan assault ‘mechs from being able to kill an Atlas with a single alpha.

My suspicion is that PGI’s plan is to avoid any assault ‘mech that can boat large ballistics simply because they have no good way to balance them – which is a really ****** solution. There’s no reason that balance issues should prevent awesome ‘mechs like the Mauler from showing up.

And if ballistics weren’t bad enough, Clan missiles will bring a host of problems: half-tonnage, no-minimum-range LRMs will make previous LRMageddons look tame, and lightweight SSRM6 packs will make the Splatcats of yesterday a laughing matter. Though the arrival of the Clans is not an immediately pressing issue, it’s better to have a system in place now than to ignore the horrible balance problems for later.

Edited by Homeless Bill, 01 July 2013 - 07:23 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I wouldn't mind testing this out.



And it could be also be described as the arcing damage, be the thermal damage from the PPC, and the 5 damage be the kinetic damage of the concentrated stream.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Clan tech poses all manner of problems all on its own, but since PGI is abandoning the 1:1 timeline progression it won't be an issue for a goodly while yet. Still, this change would fix the problem of cERPPCs well before they ever show up in-game.

As for ballistics, the UAC5 is a problem. The others are not (unless they're too weak). The UAC5's base rate of fire is way too high relative to the other ballistic options, and a lucky streak while double-tapping just amplifies the problem.

However, that's not particularly important for this thread. High rate of fire weapons pose a different problem from high-alpha weapons, and they will have different balance solutions. As for AC20s, a dual-AC20 assault would be scary, but then it ought to be, and it'd have plenty of weaknesses to balance it. The AC20 is in a pretty good place right now, and until game play is evened out a bit in other ways (missile guidance fixes, PPC fixes, etc.) it is not something that anyone needs to lose sleep over.

The dual-AC20 Jagers and Cats are not a problem, they just feel like one since SRM-carriers can't compete right now (despite on-paper better damage output). A dual-AC20 assault mech will likewise not be a real problem.

[XphR]

Personally I think the idea of electrical filaments jumping and rolling form location to location would look amazing.

You would have to decide how to handle the loss of damage to dissipation in water. For instance, creeping electricity on any location in water would end its journey jumps remaining or not.

[Gaan Cathal]

XphR, on 01 July 2013 - 08:16 PM, said:

You would have to decide how to handle the loss of damage to dissipation in water. For instance, creeping electricity on any location in water would end its journey jumps remaining or not.

Erm, no you wouldn't. Unless you're somehow firing through a substantive amount of water at an enemy outside it, but I can't imagine that being a problem unless we get some decidedly odd maps.

[Diablobo]

Bad idea.

The whole idea of armor is to keep the damage out, and the whole idea of having a weak spot is to keep it from getting hit again. If a PPC is going to almost definitely do crits on an weak spot even though the shooter doesn't actually hit that spot, it is a bad idea. It would be like a Plasma Torpedo in Star Fleet Battles. It doesn't matter where you shoot someone, if they have a weak spot, you are going to get crits. Lame.

[Unbound Inferno]

Testing, sure. Keeping? Well I don't know.

That's 12 chances for one or more to nick the head for a free shot, just because you hit the mech SOMEWHERE.

But, seeing how PGI works things, odds are it would be a small radius from where the arc could hit, then a small one for another 2, one from the end of that one and one from the impact point. With their infamous hitbox designs I think you'll see instant CT damage, and alot of it initially from the circle sizes. Mainly because I think its easier to leave a chance CT than code it can't damage that. I don't doubt it could be done well, I just can't trust them to hit it in one shot.

If you ask me, either sounds worse than just taking a random cone of fire for aiming.

But yeah - fun to test. Not something to keep, but testing would be needed.

[Jam the Bam]

I would back this simply because it would look cool. Screw balance. I want my lightning gun.

[buckX]

Unbound Inferno, on 02 July 2013 - 01:08 AM, said:

Testing, sure. Keeping? Well I don't know.

That's 12 chances for one or more to nick the head for a free shot, just because you hit the mech SOMEWHERE.

I figure it would probably lower the chances of getting your head blown off. An alpha wouldn't do it anymore, and you can always set the jump chances to be similar to the hit box sizes. Head could only jump from the CT, and even then, you could give it a 10% chance, with RT/LT getting 25%, and RL/LL getting 20%. The expected head damage from a 4PPC CT hit would be 10% of the 3 damage from each of 4 shots, or 1.2 damage. At those kinds of levels, head damage isn't scary, and in fact tends to be beneficial, since you make fully use of your armor. I hate getting head shots on light mechs, for example, because I won't end up killing them by taking out the head, so any damage that lands there is wasted.

[XphR]

Gaan Cathal, on 01 July 2013 - 11:35 PM, said:

Erm, no you wouldn't. Unless you're somehow firing through a substantive amount of water at an enemy outside it, but I can't imagine that being a problem unless we get some decidedly odd maps.

No, Im talking about hitting a target that is partially submerged, not firing from a submerged position or through a massive water fall from a path carved out behind it (I could see a larger water feature added to a future map).

If you fire at a Mech that happens to be standing in a lake with its legs submerged and hit CT... Using the three jump instance, if on the first jump one of the submerged legs was hit, the remaining electrical charge would be grounded to and dissipated outward by the volume of water (possibly as negligible damage to other submersed near Mech with a lesser positive charge).

[Gaan Cathal]

XphR, on 02 July 2013 - 09:53 AM, said:

No, Im talking about hitting a target that is partially submerged, not firing from a submerged position or through a massive water fall from a path carved out behind it (I could see a larger water feature added to a future map).

If you fire at a Mech that happens to be standing in a lake with its legs submerged and hit CT... Using the three jump instance, if on the first jump one of the submerged legs was hit, the remaining electrical charge would be grounded to and dissipated outward by the volume of water (possibly as negligible damage to other submersed near Mech with a lesser positive charge).

If you're actually talking about it as conveying damage via an 'electric shock' as per an electric eel or live-wire/static then that would apply equally on land. Electric current would always follow the path of least resistance to the ground, irrespective of water or not.

However, if you're playing the realistic physics card then that arcing wouldn't happen anyway. A PPC could feasibly have the appearance of a 'lightning gun' but that would actually be energy lost from the weapon into atmosphere, not the actual attack as such. A stream or packet of protons or ions sufficient to damage nonorganic material would do so by atomic energy transfer, not by the mechanics of an electric shock.

That said, realistic physics. Battletech. They fell out in the early 80's and haven't spoken since.

NB: I work with particle accelerators, that is the basis for the sentiment expressed above.

[XphR]

Gaan Cathal, on 02 July 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

If you're actually talking about it as conveying damage via an 'electric shock' as per an electric eel or live-wire/static then that would apply equally on land. Electric current would always follow the path of least resistance to the ground, irrespective of water or not.

However, if you're playing the realistic physics card then that arcing wouldn't happen anyway. A PPC could feasibly have the appearance of a 'lightning gun' but that would actually be energy lost from the weapon into atmosphere, not the actual attack as such. A stream or packet of protons or ions sufficient to damage nonorganic material would do so by atomic energy transfer, not by the mechanics of an electric shock.

That said, realistic physics. Battletech. They fell out in the early 80's and haven't spoken since.

NB: I work with particle accelerators, that is the basis for the sentiment expressed above.

NB: That was the point of the thread, as well, I concur.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

XphR, on 02 July 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

NB: That was the point of the thread, as well, I concur.

Yeah, the whole point is to combine balance with cinematic flavor and old-school BattleTech aesthetics.

As for

Unbound Inferno, on 02 July 2013 - 01:08 AM, said:

That's 12 chances for one or more to nick the head for a free shot, just because you hit the mech SOMEWHERE.

But, seeing how PGI works things, odds are it would be a small radius from where the arc could hit, then a small one for another 2, one from the end of that one and one from the impact point. With their infamous hitbox designs I think you'll see instant CT damage, and alot of it initially from the circle sizes. Mainly because I think its easier to leave a chance CT than code it can't damage that. I don't doubt it could be done well, I just can't trust them to hit it in one shot.

One of my objectives with this suggestion was to replace splash damage for PPCs with a unique mechanic that would not be impacted by buggy code and messed up hit boxes. PGI should be able to put in a jump behavior that is irrespective of distance between hit point and jump point.

As for the head, as I said in my first post, they could cap the jump chance to the head at 10% or thereabouts (maybe even less, but 10% should be plenty), and it'd only jump from the CT. Given that the damage for a jump to the head would be only 3 or 2 points each, and jumps would be rare events, it doesn't seem like a terrible thing. As BuckX said above:

buckX, on 02 July 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:

I figure it would probably lower the chances of getting your head blown off. An alpha wouldn't do it anymore, and you can always set the jump chances to be similar to the hit box sizes. Head could only jump from the CT, and even then, you could give it a 10% chance, with RT/LT getting 25%, and RL/LL getting 20%. The expected head damage from a 4PPC CT hit would be 10% of the 3 damage from each of 4 shots, or 1.2 damage. At those kinds of levels, head damage isn't scary, and in fact tends to be beneficial, since you make fully use of your armor. I hate getting head shots on light mechs, for example, because I won't end up killing them by taking out the head, so any damage that lands there is wasted.

I figure PGI could do something like set a % for each location. For example:

The LA has a 75% chance to jump to the LT and 25% to jump to the LL.

The LT has a 33% chance to jump to the LA, CT, or LL.

The CT has a 10% chance to jump to the Head, 25% to jump to the LT, 25% to the RT, 20% to jump to the RL, and 20% to jump to the LL.

The Head has a 100% chance to jump to the CT.

Destroyed locations would need to be removed from the running (rerolled by the computer or something until a valid location is chosen). Hits to destroyed locations would count as half damage hits to the next location inward as now, but with said new location as the jump-off point (leg destroyed means a half damage hit to the side torso and determining arc locations from there).

[MasterErrant]

the novels rarely accurately reflect the game. most of them are related only in names and such.

What if PGI took inspiration from the novels. PPCs are always described as man-made lightning, slinging a bolt of what is essentially electricity (a stream of electrons) at the target, complete with static build-up prior to the shot being fired (much like a building lightning strike).

PPCs can be anything from plasma to protons to nuclei including electrons.  there is no one way to do it.
there is nothing wrong with PPCs that adjust their proportional hbeat and imposing the corect heat system on the game wouldn't fix.   all these other fixes are bandaids covering up developer lazyness.

Edited by MasterErrant, 02 July 2013 - 04:48 PM.

[Waking One]

Just remove weapon convergence (or let players set the range for it) and all your alpha problems are fixed and it will truly take skill.

[zraven7]

A PPC isn't a "Lightning Gun". It's a Particle Projection Cannon. It fires particles at speed to deal impact and heat damage. Also, it is highly likely that the particles would have the charged scrubbed off of them during the firing, rendering them neutral so as to maiontain the stability of the shot. There wouldn't be a charge in what struck the mech.

PPCs are fine. And no, I don't run a Stalker, I run a Spider, and he has 1 PPC on him.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

zraven7, on 02 July 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

A PPC isn't a "Lightning Gun". It's a Particle Projection Cannon. It fires particles at speed to deal impact and heat damage.

And yet the novels describe man-made or synthetic lightning that skitters across a mech's armor. They have incidents where people feel the hairs on their arms stand up as a charged PPC points at them, like a lightning bolt on the verge of unleashing itself in a storm. There are descriptions of bolts of lightning that arc to their targets and blast off chunks of armor in a ragged line.

They may look more like Ghostbusters-style particle throwers than real lightning, but then those had lots of electrical effects when they went off.

You have to remember that BattleTech was a product of the '80s, and in most gaming science fiction settings the "rule of cool" trumps realism. In the real world a particle cannon would behave one way, but in BattleTech it behaves another.

Ultimately, it's a matter of what would both look amazing and help with some of the balance problems that MWO currently suffers. The answer is to implement something like my proposed solution.