5 replies to this topic

[Renthrak]

There is a lot of discussion about Alpha Strike builds, 6xPPC Stalker chief among them. Regardless of which side you stand on, it seems everyone has a fairly strong opinion on the subject.

For perspective, I gathered a half dozen examples, both Clan and IS, of high damage and high heat Alpha Strike 'Mechs. In order to compare them, I listed the weapons and heatsinks, along with the heat and damage for an Alpha Strike. This is a simple calculation, ignoring range and missile damage spread, but it should serve well enough.

The questions are simple: Do you think that each 'Mech in the list should be able to fire an Alpha Strike without overheating, and if so, should they be capable of more than one (assuming a second strike is fired as soon as all weapons are ready)? For 'Mechs in general, should Alpha Strikes be used as a last resort or not, should there be penalties, and which weight class should most often fire an Alpha Strike?

For the purposes of the poll, consider "Overheat" to mean that the heat exceeds the 100% point of a 'Mech's heat threshold, the point at which automatic shutdown or override will occur.

This is entirely a matter of opinion. Do you think it should be a certain way? It doesn't matter what is or is not possible in-game or in TT rules, this is about personal feelings.

Example 'Mechs:

Awesome AWS-9M - 80t
3x ERPPC
1x SPLAS
1x MPLAS
2x SSRM2
20x DHS
55 heat Alpha Strike (45 MWO)
47 damage (45 MWO)

Black Hawk (Nova) Prime - 50t
12x ERMLAS (Clan)
14x DHS
60 heat Alpha Strike
60 damage

Kodiak Prime - 100t
1x UAC/20 (Clan)
1x ERLLAS (Clan)
2x SSRM6 (Clan)
8x ERMLAS (Clan)
20x DHS
67 heat Alpha Strike
110 damage

Masakari (Warhawk) Prime - 85t
4x ERPPC (Clan)
1x LRM10 (Clan)
20x DHS
64 heat Alpha Strike
70 damage

Stalker STK-5S - 85t
2x LRM10
2x SRM6
4x MLAS
2x LPLAS
20x SHS
48 heat Alpha Strike (46.6 MWO)
70 damage (72 MWO)

Stalker STK-3M (Custom) - 85t
6x PPC
16x (?) DHS
60 heat Alpha Strike (48 MWO)
60 damage (60 MWO)

Edited by Renthrak, 29 April 2013 - 07:57 PM.

[danger uxo]

Just as a note, my votes are based on the canon definition of overheat: when a BattleMech's heat production has exceeded its heat capacity to the point where waste heat has been generated that is tracked on the heat scale resulting in penalties.

Given the way PGI has currently implemented heat my definition of overheat may be different than a good number of MWO players though so I would recommend defining what overheat means in your poll to get more accurate results.

[Renthrak]

danger uxo, on 29 April 2013 - 06:54 PM, said:

Just as a note, my votes are based on the canon definition of overheat: when a BattleMech's heat production has exceeded its heat capacity to the point where waste heat has been generated that is tracked on the heat scale resulting in penalties.

Given the way PGI has currently implemented heat my definition of overheat may be different than a good number of MWO players though so I would recommend defining what overheat means in your poll to get more accurate results.

Good point. I'll specify in the OP.

[MustrumRidcully]

The problem is that this is ultimately a too short-sighted approach. There are two sides to the coin:

1) Should the Awesome overheat on an alpha strike? Maybe.
2) Should the Awesome be able to sustain his maximum rate of fire for some time? Yes, because that's one of his defining features in the table top and why it deserved its name.

The heat capacity is too high, but the heat dissipation is too low. Stock configurations that were designed to sustain their fire for several turns can't, but you can still build alpha-strike boats that exceed anything that a table top custom mech could have dealt without overheating*. Coupled with the far higher accuracy and "selectability" of hit locations in MW:O, this just can't get to balanced results.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 30 April 2013 - 02:09 AM.

[One Medic Army]

MustrumRidcully, on 29 April 2013 - 10:57 PM, said:

The problem is that this is ultimately a too short-sighted approach. There are two sides to the coin:

1) Should the Awesome overheat on an alpha strike? Maybe.
2) Should the Awesome be unable to sustain his maximum rate of fire for some time? Yes, because that's one of his defining features in the table top and why it deserved its name.

The heat capacity is too high, but the heat dissipation is too low. Stock configurations that were designed to sustain their fire for several turns can't, but you can still build alpha-strike boats that exceed anything that a table top custom mech could have dealt without overheating*. Coupled with the far higher accuracy and "selectability" of hit locations in MW:O, this just can't get to balanced results.

I pretty much agree with (Archchancellor) Ridcully here.
I'd like it if it was feasible to be something approaching heat neutral with PPCs, Large Lasers, or even a decent array of medium lasers. At the same time I'd also like it if you were in danger of heat penalties if you had a bunch of high-heat weaponry and you fired all of it at once.

Of course, there's a large difference between MWO and TT:
In TT you tried to stay as close to 0 heat as possible, and if your round started with your mech above 0 heat you took penalties.
In MWO you can run around at 99% heat without any penalties.

Personally I'd really like to see a a few things tried out on the test realms, like lowering heat capacity by a significant margin, but increasing heat dissipation to match fire rates (and having true DHS while we're at it). Of course since this would just result in people making even hotter builds and using chain firing, an increase in the cycle times of all weapons and possibly a global damage nerf/armor buff would have to go with.

Edited by One Medic Army, 29 April 2013 - 11:31 PM.

[Renthrak]

I suspect that one of the primary reasons that there are no heat penalties in MWO isn't related to the game itself.

From a code standpoint, it's much easier to deal with the effects of a heat system that is either "Below 100%" or "Above 100%". With how quickly the current heat level changes, combined with the varying rate of cooling based on different factors, keeping the client-side heat penalties synched with the server would probably be a nightmare.

That really only leaves heat dissipation and heat threshold as balance mechanisms, unless PGI radically changes their approach.

Part of the problem we have, as beta testers, is not knowing what PGI's vision is. We can make all sorts of random suggestions, striking out in different directions hoping for something to catch their interest, but we're firing blind. Honestly, it would be much easier to figure out how to contribute if they would share how they want things to work in the first place. Do they want to see Alpha Strikes and/or a small number of massive damage shots be the primary form of combat, or do they envision a more careful use of individual weapons and groups to achieve a constant barrage of strikes to wear down targets? If they want some of both, then how much should either method be favored?

"Hit them with everything you've got" vs. "Pick which weapon to fire based on the situation". If we knew where PGI wants to be on that scale, it would be easier to make recommendations. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what we as players want if PGI is unwilling to try it, so it would be nice to know those limits.

What concerns me most is that one of the major balancing factors of many canon 'Mech designs is the inability to use all of the 'Mech's weapons simultaneously due to heat. The Black Hawk and Masakari are some of the most familiar examples of this. They carry enough firepower to kill or disable almost anything short of an Atlas with a single Alpha Strike. If it is not desirable for 'Mech battles to be decided by a single shot, then how do you discourage players from doing so? Without a lower heat threshold with higher heat dissipation to compensate, I really don't know.