Posted 08 May 2013 - 11:56 AM
Original Idea:
This is something I have discussed for a long time now. If you want to see any of my discussions, just check "My Posts" in my "Forum Profile".
Individual Convergence:
My original discussion was based on the idea that players aimed for LT/RT because the armor difference between LT/RT and LA/RA was not enough, thus taking off both locations when a torso section was removed was just more efficient. Especially when you can hit those locations on larger mechs pretty consistantly.
So, I had the idea that to place more emphasis on the ability to converge fire with arm mounted weapons, that all individual weapons (all locations, including arms) only fired straight ahead. But arms physically aimed at the convergence point of where the pilot aimed, thus arm weapons converged. Torso mounted weapons, while protected by more armor, do not converge their weaponry onto a single point, but instead only slightly converged onto a matrix projection of the mech's torso locations that is approximately 20% smaller which is essentially making all weapons angled towards the Torso crosshair by 20% from the straight ahead position.
What this was to achieve was more spreading of weapon fire, regardless of how the weapons were fired (alpha or group/chain), and place an emphasis on the converging utility of arms. This would spark more interest of players to aim for arms, considering it easier to aim damage onto a location of the players choice where torso weapons would be MUCH harder to get to land on a specific point.
But one problem I foresee with this change is that some mechs would be affected in no way by this change compared to now. The Jagermech is a great example. The arms is the major point of provided damage, and with no change in how they converge, would have the same relative power now while almost all other mechs would reduce in pin-point damage capability.
New Idea:
On attempting to fix this problem, I have had some ideas but none of them really felt "good" or actually worked, in theory. So, I thought about trying to adopt a compromise between a cone-of-fire and reduced convergence idea.
Cone-of-Fire without Individual Convergence:
Keep the same suggestion above about individual weapon convergence (or the lack thereof) but implement a cone-of-fire for ballistic (and ballistic-like) weaponry. On top of this, introduce a hardpoint size limit to keep mechs within their intended role.
This idea was to keep the original intent of more emphasis on arm convergence but balance weapons which place all their damage onto a single point when it strikes a location. Then to keep mechs that can boat, to stay as boats, and those mechs which were not boats, not to be able to boat.
The above changes would fix the situation of a Jagermech because it utilizes ballistic weapons, which utilize a cone-of-fire. But mechs that can converge many hitscan weapons (Stalker), are actually not that bad because you can react to laser fire due to the 1.0s beam duration. Even if 4 Large Lasers are hitting onto a single point, some mild torso twisting and movement will lead to more spreading. The other 2 possible mounted Large Lasers would hit different locations than the arms (due to no individual weapon convergence).
The cone-of-fire should be minimal and based on 4 different rates, none, small, medium, and large. The only way to achieve no cone-of-fire is to not be moving. A small cone-of-fire is achieved by moving between 0 to 50% throttle. A medium cone-of-fire is achieved by moving between 51 to 75% throttle. Large cone-of-fire is achieved by moving 76%+ or ascending/decending in the air.
None and small cone-of-fire would lead to at least 50% of the shots hitting a single location on a Medium sized mech. A medium cone-of-fire would lead to 25% of the shots hitting a single location on a Medium sized mech. A large cone-of-fire would lead to <10% of the shots hitting a single location on a Medium sized mech.
Supporting Ideas:
But to make the above ideas realized and balanced correctly, there would also have to be other changes. Some of these supporting ideas came from the community.
Reserve/Main Heatbar:
I especially liked the idea that the additional +heat capacity from heatsinks is actually it's own bar, next to the current heat bar. The main heat bar would always be 30, while the additional bar is based on the dissipation rate of heatsinks within 10s.
For example, 10 base DHS would have the base 30 main heat bar and an additional bar equal to 20. That additional bar would constantly replenish as long it is not full. The main bar would also constantly deplete if it is not empty. Anytime you fire a weapon that utilizes heat, it is used it from the additional bar first. If that bar is empty, it is used up in the main bar. As the main bar increases, heat penalties are introduced.
For each heat penalty threshold that is met, that penalty will stay on the mech until the main bar is completely reduced to 0%. Shutting down would remove the penalties (as it does now) but if you turned your mech back on during any of that time and you still have some in your main heat bar, you will go back to receiving the penalties.
This allows players to slow their RoF down into a 10s period and never receive any penalties what so ever. But if you fire at a faster rate, you might deplete the reserve bar and start introducing heat into the main bar. If you notice you are doing this, you could, just wait a few seconds for the reserver bar to fill back up so you can shoot again without introducing any heat to the main bar.
Sized Hardpoints:
This is another suggestion that I think would really help diversify the game a lot. It would also add more legitimicy to some mechs (HBK-4G vs HBK-4H). Adding a Large/Medium/Small quantifier along with TAG/NARC quantifiers.
Weapon Balance Changes:
Just some number changes to various weapons. I personally have an extensive list of value tweaks for almost every single weapon in the game. Should be able to find it somewhere among the posts I have.
These are just some ramblings and suggestions I have been asking the community and PGI for a while, or have seen put up by the community.
0
