19 replies to this topic

[Zylo]

With state rewind working for ballistic and lasers it is time for PGI to examine the heat and damage balance of the energy weapons. For this comparison of weapons I am using the IS values on http://www.sarna.net and comparing them to the in game displayed values.

Small laser
Sarna = 1h, 3d
MWO = 2h, 3d

Small pulse laser
Sarna = 2h, 3d
MWO = 3h, 3d

Medium laser
Sarna = 3h, 5d
MWO = 4h, 5d

Medium pulse laser
Sarna = 4h, 6d
MWO = 5h, 6d

Large laser
Sarna = 8h, 8d
MWO = 7h, 9d

ER Large laser
Sarna = 12h, 8d
MWO = 9.5h, 9d

Large pulse laser
Sarna = 10h, 9d
MWO = 7.3h, 10d

PPC
Sarna = 10h, 10d
MWO = 8h, 10d

ERPPC
Sarna = 15h, 10d
MWO = 11h, 10d


The small and medium lasers of both normal and pulse types follow a pattern in MWO with their heat values set higher than the values shown on sarna. When the large lasers of all types and the PPCs of both types are examined this pattern changes with the large lasers having lower heat + higher damage and the PPCs having the same damage but lower heat.

Increasing the heat values of the PPC and ERPPC to match Sarna displayed values would probably be a quick fix for the current jump sniper problem many players are complaining about as well as reducing the number of PPC boats like 4 or 6 PPC stalkers.

The large lasers of all types need damage reduced and heat increased to match Sarna values.

With the 2 new larger maps the range advantages of all types of large lasers and PPCs will still make them desired weapons for some configurations but on the smaller maps these weapons will be very heat inefficient. The result should force more diverse builds rather than the current builds that encourage boating PPC/ERPPC and in some cases all types of large lasers.



TL;DR version:
Heat needs to be increased to TT values on LLas, ERLLas, LPLas, PPC, ERPPC and damage decreased to TT values on LLas, ERLLas, LPLas as these weapons are now performing better than they should be, especially on the larger maps. These changes made sense on the old small maps but now with both large and small maps these advantages are no longer needed.

Edited by Zylo, 22 April 2013 - 11:34 PM.

[KinLuu]

The LPLas is too good? Especially on larger maps?

WHAT AM I READING?

All pulse lasers are currently outclassed by the normal lasers, for various reasons.

The buffs to PPCs and LLas should indeed be reconsidered.

[MustrumRidcully]

Why are you completely ignoring rate of fire? Do you understand that all the sarna values are based on a game where weapons deliver their damage and heat in 10 second turns? Are you aware that heat sinks still operate based on a 10 second cycle, while most all weapons have a cycle time of less than 5 seconds?

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 22 April 2013 - 11:29 PM.

[Zylo]

MustrumRidcully, on 22 April 2013 - 11:29 PM, said:

Why are you completely ignoring rate of fire? Do you understand that all the sarna values are based on a game where weapons deliver their damage and heat in 10 second turns? Are you aware that heat sinks still operate based on a 10 second cycle, while most all weapons have a cycle time of less than 5 seconds?

Rate of fire would be another way to handle minor adjustments to weapon balance but the current issues are entirely caused by the heat and damage values which is why rate of fire was not mentioned.

How many PPC boats did you see before the heat was reduced?

How many large laser boats did you see?

These were very heat inefficient builds and without any large maps the range advantage was not significant.

[GalaxyBluestar]

i drive an 5 LL stalker

I approve of these things coming to pass even if my build gets nerfed cause when i built it there was no coolant no staterewind
and no one called it cheese. now even though LPLs and LL are for fools who will be out ranged and blown apart before getting close in such old assault boats the whole heat table should get some scrutiny.

although reverting directly to sarna may be overkill, who knows.

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 22 April 2013 - 11:35 PM.

[Ialti]

KinLuu, on 22 April 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

The LPLas is too good? Especially on larger maps?

WHAT AM I READING?

All pulse lasers are currently outclassed by the normal lasers, for various reasons.

The buffs to PPCs and LLas should indeed be reconsidered.

^ This. Plus there's no way to implement TT in and online FPS/simulator environment. Changes will happen.

[Zylo]

KinLuu, on 22 April 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

The LPLas is too good? Especially on larger maps?

WHAT AM I READING?

All pulse lasers are currently outclassed by the normal lasers, for various reasons.

The buffs to PPCs and LLas should indeed be reconsidered.

It's not that the LPLas is OP, it's just that compared to the other pulse lasers it's performing better than it should be. I think all the pulse lasers need some work but I'm not really sure what would be the best plan to fix them.

[KinLuu]

Zylo, on 22 April 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:

It's not that the LPLas is OP, it's just that compared to the other pulse lasers it's performing better than it should be. I think all the pulse lasers need some work but I'm not really sure what would be the best plan to fix them.

In my eyes they need to be able to outdps normal lasers. To be able to do that they would need to do less heat/shot, but more heat/time and more shots/time. That way they would be the short ranged brawling choice for energy weapons, in addition to the MLas, which currently outclasses all pulse lasers in that niche.

[Lord Ikka]

Ugh. There were a lot of changes to heat due to massive testing during Closed Beta. Back then, ERPPCs, large and large pulse lasers were a joke, no one took them due to the massive heat barrier (which was set to TT standard), same with PPCs but to a lesser extent. The Gauss rifle became the default weapon of choice because of the low heat/high damage, thus the gaussapult became the premier cheese build. With the current heat stats, you actually see the heavier energy weapons actually used, rather than just ballistics.

[Inkarnus]

the problem of the Lplas are that they are overshadowed by ppc in range and effictivness and even er ppc deal same damage for 1 heat more but 500 more meters for full damage

so why use it anywas if you could just use a substitute wich is far better even overshadowingthe large and er large laser

Edited by Inkarnus, 22 April 2013 - 11:48 PM.

[Zylo]

Lord Ikka, on 22 April 2013 - 11:46 PM, said:

Ugh. There were a lot of changes to heat due to massive testing during Closed Beta. Back then, ERPPCs, large and large pulse lasers were a joke, no one took them due to the massive heat barrier (which was set to TT standard), same with PPCs but to a lesser extent. The Gauss rifle became the default weapon of choice because of the low heat/high damage, thus the gaussapult became the premier cheese build. With the current heat stats, you actually see the heavier energy weapons actually used, rather than just ballistics.

With the original small maps there was not a significant advantage gained by running with the larger energy weapons because the maps were small and enemies could rush in and brawl easily within the first minute or 2 of each fight. The gauss rifle was used on nearly every ballistic mech, I had a gauss rifle on every Atlas I piloted in closed beta and most other pilots did the same with the gauss rifle. Even Hunchies could be seen running around with gauss rifles though the fast small laser boat hunchback was a more common sight.

Now we have 2 new large maps and will probably see additional maps continue to be larger. The heavier long range weapons would still be very effective on these large maps but if a mech boating these weapons dropped on a short range map they might be in trouble. Currently they are not at a significant disadvantage on a small map and that's the problem with the current weapon balance.

Edited by Zylo, 22 April 2013 - 11:56 PM.

[Lefty Lucy]

In TT ML>>all.

There's no reason to use it as a template for good balance, without even getting into the fact that MWO is a fundamentally different game.

[Kiiyor]

Lefty Lucy, on 22 April 2013 - 11:56 PM, said:

In TT ML>>all.

There's no reason to use it as a template for good balance, without even getting into the fact that MWO is a fundamentally different game.

AMEN!

[Zylo]

Lefty Lucy, on 22 April 2013 - 11:56 PM, said:

In TT ML>>all.

There's no reason to use it as a template for good balance, without even getting into the fact that MWO is a fundamentally different game.

Would you say the current dominance of the long range energy weapons is good for balance?

With the larger maps these weapons no longer need the reduced heat values that were set when we only had the small maps. Players would still want to have some long range weapons for the larger maps but they might also want to have more heat efficient shorter range weapons for the small maps.

Encouraging weapon diversity is the goal here, I'm not saying everyone should be running around with only MLas but they also shouldn't only be running around boating PPCs.

Edited by Zylo, 23 April 2013 - 12:01 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Zylo, on 22 April 2013 - 11:33 PM, said:

Rate of fire would be another way to handle minor adjustments to weapon balance but the current issues are entirely caused by the heat and damage values which is why rate of fire was not mentioned.

How many PPC boats did you see before the heat was reduced?

How many large laser boats did you see?

These were very heat inefficient builds and without any large maps the range advantage was not significant.

How many PPC mechs did you see immediately after the heat change, vs how many did you see immediately after the missile fiasco and the Highlander introduction?

Also, do you realize that Double Heat Sinks in MW:O work differently from the table top?
A Stalker with 20 DHS in the table top would have the heat sink power of 40 standard heat sinks. In M:WO, it's only the heat sinking power of 34 heat sinks (unless the Stalker's engine is rated below 250, then it would be even less).

Zylo, on 23 April 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

Would you say the current dominance of the long range energy weapons is good for balance?

The dominancy of any type of weapon is a sign of poor balance, obviously. But you need to look at more things then just "OMG, the values are not like in the table top!"

One of the primary reasons these weapons work right now is that the damage you can deal with these alpha strikes is so high that it doesn't matter that you can't sustain it. Raising the heat level by a few points won't change this fundamentally, because mechs have a heat capacity of 50+ to work with.
It needs a much more systematic approach.
It also won't fix the fundamental problem of why "boating" is deemed superior to the alternative - convergence.

Quote

With the larger maps these weapons no longer need the reduced heat values that were set when we only had the small maps. Players would still want to have some long range weapons for the larger maps but they might also want to have more heat efficient shorter range weapons for the small maps.

Encouraging weapon diversity is the goal here, I'm not saying everyone should be running around with only MLas but they also shouldn't only be running around boating PPCs.

You don't encourage weapon diversity by turning a commonly used weapon in a uncommonly used weapon.
You discourage weapon diversity by making only a few set of weapons competitive, and introducing convergence so that the best choice is to use many instances of the same weapon.

Oh, and for fun:
Damage to Tonnage Efficiency Charts for indiviual engagements of 5, 10 or 15 second duration, after the missile fiasco:

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 23 April 2013 - 12:10 AM.

[Yokaiko]

KinLuu, on 22 April 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

The LPLas is too good? Especially on larger maps?

WHAT AM I READING?

All pulse lasers are currently outclassed by the normal lasers, for various reasons.

The buffs to PPCs and LLas should indeed be reconsidered.

No nerfs to the medium and small should.

[AndyHill]

Basically PGI have thrown the TT weapon balance out the window completely by about tripling the heat production in the first place. In that kind of an environment, of course the bigger, hotter energy weapons will need some kind of buffs to become viable. With tremendeous pinpoint alpha capability built-in they just happen to become monsters at the same time.

I think PGI will have a difficult time finding a workable balance with entertaining gameplay on the path they've chosen, going back to TT values on some weapons won't help when things like firing rate and heat production/dissipation are completely different.

[Zylo]

MustrumRidcully, on 23 April 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

How many PPC mechs did you see immediately after the heat change, vs how many did you see immediately after the missile fiasco and the Highlander introduction?

Also, do you realize that Double Heat Sinks in MW:O work differently from the table top?
A Stalker with 20 DHS in the table top would have the heat sink power of 40 standard heat sinks. In M:WO, it's only the heat sinking power of 34 heat sinks (unless the Stalker's engine is rated below 250, then it would be even less).



You don't encourage weapon diversity by turning a commonly used weapon in a uncommonly used weapon.
You discourage weapon diversity by making only a few set of weapons competitive, and introducing convergence so that the best choice is to use many instances of the same weapon.

I actually saw lots of PPC stalkers and awesomes showing up after the heat was reduced, large laser versions as well. Players tested these designs and were proving they were effective as long as some SRM6 or AC/20 boat didn't rush up and attack. This was of course back when we only had small maps.

When larger maps were introduced there was a decline in the number of short range mechs which made it less risky to take that PPC or large laser boat, the population of PPC and large laser boats continued to increase.

The missile nerf finally changed the balance to favor the current designs. The highlander translated these designs into a very common poptart even though some players had been doing this for a while in the cataphract 3D.

I don't think these changes would make the PPC and large lasers uncommon due to the larger maps we have now. If we only had small maps then they probably would not be used but now we have Alpine and Desert which are very common in the map rotation. A good player running these long range weapons has a significant range advantage on a large map. On a small map they would be in trouble. This forces balance in the same way a short range mech might be in trouble on a large map but would dominate on a small map.

I just noticed the chart you posted:

MustrumRidcully, on 23 April 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

Oh, and for fun:
Damage to Tonnage Efficiency Charts for indiviual engagements of 5, 10 or 15 second duration, after the missile fiasco:

While that efficiency is great on the smaller weapons I would like to see a small laser boat ripping apart a high alpha design. Efficiency doesn't mean much for the smaller weapons if the mech using them can't survive long enough due to being hit by less efficient weapons that do more damage per shot.

Edited by Zylo, 23 April 2013 - 12:25 AM.

[GalaxyBluestar]

KinLuu, on 22 April 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

The LPLas is too good? Especially on larger maps?

WHAT AM I READING?

All pulse lasers are currently outclassed by the normal lasers, for various reasons.

The buffs to PPCs and LLas should indeed be reconsidered.

i thought LL weren't touched at all? someone can give me a reminder if they got heat reduction or something but the only buff i'm awear of is staterewind, cause no one before had said LL are OP till very recently.

Zylo, on 23 April 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

I actually saw lots of PPC stalkers and awesomes showing up after the heat was reduced, large laser versions as well. Players tested these designs and were proving they were effective as long as some SRM6 or AC/20 boat didn't rush up and attack. This was of course back when we only had small maps.

When larger maps were introduced there was a decline in the number of short range mechs which made it less risky to take that PPC or large laser boat, the population of PPC and large laser boats continued to increase.

The missile nerf finally changed the balance to favor the current designs. The highlander translated these designs into a very common poptart even though some players had been doing this for a while in the cataphract 3D.

I don't think these changes would make the PPC and large lasers uncommon due to the larger maps we have now. If we only had small maps then they probably would not be used but now we have Alpine and Desert which are very common in the map rotation. A good player running these long range weapons has a significant range advantage on a large map. On a small map they would be in trouble. This forces balance in the same way a short range mech might be in trouble on a large map but would dominate on a small map.

you're wrong on many accounts with regards to LL boats, they're most effective at 450m think about it, ac20's get simillar damage to range ratios! a jager ac40 and cataphact 4 LL boat have simillar potential, now are they in dominance? are they considered OP? perhaps but what do you blame the weapon or the stacking ability? all these factors have to be considered for balancing. now onto the main part of this thread discussion.

assault LL boats have always been a compromise build, range is limited, heat limited and firepower limited all good BUT it's a master of none of those catagories. until coolant and staterewind helped it out. staterewind good coolant, balance breaker. howevere at the moment a laser boat on an assault class is poor, you lack manouverability to negotiate the sniper fire and make flanking manouvers on your own, {doing this in an assault whilst the rest continue playing sniper will get you focus killed fast} now using a LL boat in the current large map conditions... so what if i can throw a shot at 800m-900m, what damage am I getting for it? a tickle is what i'm getting whilst ppcs and erppcc/gauss especially rip it up at those ranges, that's why larger maps DO NOT favour the LL boat, it's out ranged and out gunned unless you can manouver into the ideal 400-600m balanced fire zone, try convincing pug snipers to close in on targets whilst they want to continue with the winning sniper meta and you'll understand LL boats are pack donkeys now and nothing more. no brawlers to engauge, the snipers kill em before you get to meet them. no flanking lrm boats, the one guy who is an lrm boat sits behind the sniper mech wall. LL are infact a medium range weapon for IS but being a laser in nature it can make greater distances, at the moment i'd be better off with ER cause although heat goes up my damage rating at the greater oppotune ranges dictated by the majority of players now favour that range advantage. honestly through the last couple of days i revisited this game i feel my mech is not the allrounder flexible fighter it once was, more like obsolete. it feels like it has little work it can be good at doing unless in river city or frozen city and it's fodder on the sidelines for every other moment i get more work swatting lights with it that anything and lights were once the counter to assaults! so LL i feel if not on a 75kph+ mech it's not nearely as usefull as... well no need to guess. Many other builds are feeling the same, missing those brawler cats and atlas yet?

please keep it in mind that this discussion has only been warrented by the current meta coupled with the age old heat problem, bare in mind how much of what is being deployed and how it's used {or other things which aren't being used at all because of the meta and that's A LOT at the moment} before conducting your thoughts on balance.

btw love this thread it's like old GD where serious chatter by serious people kinda meant something, stuff we need to think about right now.

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 23 April 2013 - 01:29 AM.

[Curccu]

Yes LPLs and ER LL are so OP thats why we see them in every damn mech we encounter.