92 replies to this topic

[Monky]

OneEyed Jack, on 26 March 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

That's not someting new, it's just a new way of representing the same old way. Where in TT the heat scale is 30 points, and has "invisible" heat that never gets marked because your heat sinks immediately reduce it, MWO adds that "invisible" amount to the heat scale. If you had 10 DHS in TT, to hit auto shut-down in one turn you'd have to create 50 heat (20 to overload the DHS and 30 to top the scale). In MWO, it the same way, but you'd have to create 50 heat all at once (heat scale of 50 with no "invisible" heat). The difference is due to it being a progression over time instead of being cut into a turn-based system, but the heat capacity over time is the same, aside from the 1.4 DHS. [Edit] And of course the slight boost from efficiencies.

This is incorrect because tabletop attempts to simulate a real time system. It is not abstracted into turns for the sake of turns, therefore heat 'floating' is an abstraction and not an intentional mechanic. See; Solaris rules.

Edited by Monky, 26 March 2013 - 01:23 PM.

[Tank]

SHS FTW! This thread made my day. Wonder whats next.

[OneEyed Jack]

Teralitha, on 26 March 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

Why not... those games were fun and balanced. There seems to be something inherently flawed with your logic....

Nothing wrong with my logic, just your ability to perceive logic... or common sense.

You are entitled to your opinion, and measuring fun is something that can never be anything but subjective. The thing is, those games would be long and drawn out and very few people are of the opinion that such a game would be fun. Since those few people aren't going to personally provide financial backing for the development and upkeep of the game, the devs have to create a game that's fun to a larger audience.

A separate queue might not be a bad idea, and I could see myself playing it occasionally, but that's the kind of feature that should be looked at when the core game is essentially "finished."

[Teralitha]

Skyscream Sapphire, on 26 March 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

Go ahead. Convince me I would better off running an energy build and "managing my heat" than I would running a ballistic build whose heat is covered by the engine heat sinks, doing just as much damage, and firing whenever I feel like it.

All the ballistic weapons run hot as well, except guass.

[Teralitha]

OneEyed Jack, on 26 March 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

Nothing wrong with my logic, just your ability to perceive logic... or common sense.

You are entitled to your opinion, and measuring fun is something that can never be anything but subjective. The thing is, those games would be long and drawn out and very few people are of the opinion that such a game would be fun.

A separate queue might not be a bad idea, and I could see myself playing it occasionally, but that's the kind of feature that should be looked at when the core game is essentially "finished."

I can see you were not around in closed beta. The game was more fun back then. I think every closed beta tester can agree on that.

The problem I see here is.... this game may not make it out of beta.

[Thirdstar]

Teralitha, on 26 March 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

I think every closed beta tester can agree on that.

P.S. I was around in CB.

Edited by Thirdstar, 26 March 2013 - 01:32 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

OneEyed Jack, on 26 March 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

That's not someting new, it's just a new way of representing the same old way. Where in TT the heat scale is 30 points, and has "invisible" heat that never gets marked because your heat sinks immediately reduce it, MWO adds that "invisible" amount to the heat scale. If you had 10 DHS in TT, to hit auto shut-down in one turn you'd have to create 50 heat (20 to overload the DHS and 30 to top the scale). In MWO, it the same way, but you'd have to create 50 heat all at once (heat scale of 50 with no "invisible" heat). The difference is due to it being a progression over time instead of being cut into a turn-based system, but the heat capacity over time is the same, aside from the 1.4 DHS. [Edit] And of course the slight boost from efficiencies.

But strictly speaking, this doesn't do the same, actually.
If you give people this extra heat capacity, you can do things that are different from the table top system in terms of damage and heat generation - and in the net sum, will be more than what you could do in the table top. But the most important thing might be big up-front bonus you can generate, which really makes alpha striking all that useful.

Mathematically, the correct way would probably have been to keep the heat capacity at 30, and instead require anyone that has an alpha potential above 30 to stagger his fire. YOucan still get your full DPS potential if you have the sinks for it, but you cannot risk firing all weapons at the same time. Heck, this might be explanation why Battletech requires mechs to always fire all their weapons desperately with separate hit location rolls and all - the pilots can't actually fire more than one weapon together.

A compromise could be making the capacity bonus much lower than it is right now - going from 30 + heat sinks to 30 + 1/2 heat sinks. Or even lower the base cap and the bonus, to, say 20 + 1/2 heat sinks.

But meh, all this theory and I know nothing will ever be done about.

[OneEyed Jack]

Monky, on 26 March 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

This is incorrect because tabletop attempts to simulate a real time system. It is not abstracted into turns for the sake of turns, therefore heat 'floating' is an abstraction and not an intentional mechanic. See; Solaris rules.

I never suggested that a turn-base TT game was divided into turns for the sake of turns. It's been a long time since I saw Solaris rules (hard to find these days) but, as I recall, it was essentially the same system divided into shorter turns (setting aside the other changes, such as range, as being irrelevant to the discussion).

It doesn't matter what it was intended to represent, the effect was that it created 'floated' heat, intentional or not. The heat gauge in MWO recreates the effect, and the intention be damned.

[MustrumRidcully]

Thirdstar, on 26 March 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

P.S. I was around in CB.

Can only provide a refutation.

No, the system was even worse then, because you couldn't even run the stock weapon configurations of a mech. Double Heat Sinks were the big hope - now they'd finally get to the real deal and fix all the wonkiness.

What a disappointment. Instead we get no changes to the base system, no heat scale, and just a confusingly implemented heat sink system that people are still not all aware of how it works and make bad decisions on false information.

Or did you mean that? In Closed Beta, we were all more bright-eyed and more optimistic and believed the Dev Blogs?
Maybe you're right. I retract my refutation.

[Thirdstar]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 March 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

Or did you mean that? In Closed Beta, we were all more bright-eyed and more optimistic and believed the Dev Blogs?
Maybe you're right. I retract my refutation.

Completely offtopic but what the hell. I was pumped that there was a new Mechwarrior game finally. I was even kicking myself for not getting into Founders. Oh how I cursed my luck.

[OneEyed Jack]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 March 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

But strictly speaking, this doesn't do the same, actually.

It does exactly the same thing, but without any of the heat penalties prior to shutdown, and in a smooth progression instead of a turn-based system. In a mech with 10 internal (2.0) DHS, you could imagine the first 40% (20 points) of the heat gauge as representing your heat sinks and the last 60% (30 points) as being the BT heat scale.

The differences are a lower potential heat capacity/dissipation (lack of true DHS), and higher heat generation from being able to fire weapons more often than in TT. There's also a slight boost if you have the heat efficiencies.

[John Norad]

Grayseven, on 26 March 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

Hate to say it, but I have to use heat management with DHS for some builds.

The problem isn't DHS, it's the weakness of SHS and the way heat is done in MWO. They need to revisit the heat mechanic and come up with a better system.

At no point should a 6PPC mech be safe from explosion after an alpha just because they don't restart. That much heat should damage the engine before it shuts down...

That's right.
Two words: heat capacity.
Apart from that, heat buildup, dissipation and duration.
Heat should stay around for longer than a second. Shutdowns should be longer, at least a bit, to represent a real drawback and danger.
Right now, heat is kinda hard to control, the heat scale moves pretty fast. It's actually easier and more efficient to concentrate on the aiming and just wait for the acustic warning. Watching the heat scale makes no sense. Heat feedback is limited. How about sweat dripping from the pilot's brows, hindering the view at some point, just like the spray water on the windscreen in a racing game? Displays getting blurry, mech sowing down, controls becoming less responsive..

All the things that would make MW:O more of a real simulation, all the things that would help bringing the big fat stompy robots to life, all the things that would create a unique and immersive playing experience, would potentially also help game balance.
Why? Because a complex simulation is more difficult to min-max. And because the gameplay itself is potentially a lot more fun and engaging, making 'stats' (hopefully) less important. Right now it's fast paced, repetitive, output-driven. Push button, receive bacon.

Edited by John Norad, 26 March 2013 - 01:55 PM.

[anonymous175]

[Weiland]

No one here wants to do anything other than argue and pad, it would seem.

Alas, the community here won't ever work together as well as, say, the one in Starbound, but one could hope for a bit more... cohesion?

[Teralitha]

Weiland, on 26 March 2013 - 03:03 PM, said:

No one here wants to do anything other than argue and pad, it would seem.

Alas, the community here won't ever work together as well as, say, the one in Starbound, but one could hope for a bit more... cohesion?

Let no good idea go unpunished.

[Sybreed]

Teralitha, on 26 March 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

I can see you were not around in closed beta. The game was more fun back then. I think every closed beta tester can agree on that.

The problem I see here is.... this game may not make it out of beta.

I really miss the old CB days when founders weren't even in...

[mekabuser]

i agree to the point that dblhs are defacto necessary as far as I can tell. I would love to see a link to viable single heat sink builds as the idea of HS in my legs being cooled by water is attractive.. I make generally cool running mechs but dont know if there are builds whereby I could run single HS , chance it that there is no water on map< or hot> and pack in some additional firepower via another mechanism.

[Mackman]

John Norad, on 26 March 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

That's right.
Two words: heat capacity.
Apart from that, heat buildup, dissipation and duration.
Heat should stay around for longer than a second. Shutdowns should be longer, at least a bit, to represent a real drawback and danger.
Right now, heat is kinda hard to control, the heat scale moves pretty fast. It's actually easier and more efficient to concentrate on the aiming and just wait for the acustic warning. Watching the heat scale makes no sense. Heat feedback is limited. How about sweat dripping from the pilot's brows, hindering the view at some point, just like the spray water on the windscreen in a racing game? Displays getting blurry, mech sowing down, controls becoming less responsive..

All the things that would make MW:O more of a real simulation, all the things that would help bringing the big fat stompy robots to life, all the things that would create a unique and immersive playing experience, would potentially also help game balance.
Why? Because a complex simulation is more difficult to min-max. And because the gameplay itself is potentially a lot more fun and engaging, making 'stats' (hopefully) less important. Right now it's fast paced, repetitive, output-driven. Push button, receive bacon.

You can't flatly say that it would help game balance. The truth is, the more complex the mechanics are, the harder it is to balance.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Thirdstar, on 26 March 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

Completely offtopic but what the hell. I was pumped that there was a new Mechwarrior game finally. I was even kicking myself for not getting into Founders. Oh how I cursed my luck.

and now?

[MightyMeatShield]

I understand the concern, but tying DHS to XL engines won't affect heat management at all. Any player can run a very heat efficient mech with XL engines and DHS. Sure it makes them die faster if they get hit in the side torsos, but that has no bearing on heat management.