16 replies to this topic

[Ayestes]

The problem that we seem to have encountered in MWO is high pinpoint alpha strikes being capable of ripping off a targeted component too quickly. It has even been addressed in the recent weapon balancing statement that has been released. I see many, many discussions and suggestions pertaining to solving this problem. Many of them to me seem to overreach and complicate the matter whether it be solutions involving heat, hardpoints, or convergence. Many of these suggestions do a lot more then potentially solving the high pinpoint alpha strike problem alone and would mess with loadouts and the current handling in gameplay. This problem needs a direct solution, and that is Heavy Impact Dispersal.

Taking chunks of 35-60 damage to your Center Torso or other components tends to be one of the biggest complaints. So let’s solve that with spreading out the damage without ruining the advantage of having great aim. The easiest way to do that is to still place most of the damage to the targeted component, especially when low alphas have been used. Therefore we need a limit before dispersion is applied within a second. We also need a spreading value that isn’t too terribly high, as the targeted component should always take more damage than the adjacent components. This would ensure that accuracy is always rewarded, which is something I think is important in MWO.

As to the specific values of this system, it would in the end be up to testing. As for my suggestions, I really think a non-dispersal limit of 20 per second and a dispersal coefficient of 50% would make the most sense. A single AC/20 shot would not have its damage dispersed, and no matter how much damage is applied to a specific section within a second the damage would always be greater in the targeted component then the adjacent components. These values are simple to understand as well. These are a decent starting point, and hopefully wouldn’t need to be changed at all.

Does this solve our high pinpoint alpha strike problem? Let’s look at a couple of examples using the suggested values for the system. A good set of alpha values to look at are common precision strike numbers involving PPCs, Lasers, Gauss, and AC/20 shots. A 35 damage shot would apply 20 of that damage to the targeted component before dispersal kicked in, and then the remaining 15 damage would be split between the targeted component and random adjacent components. Thus you would effectively have done 27.5 damage to the target and 7.5 damage of what would be basically be splash damage. A 40 damage alpha translates to 30 targeted damage and 10 adjacent damage, and a 60 damage alpha translates to 40 targeted damage and 20 adjacent damage. Even in the most extreme case of a x6 PPC target this would only be a 33% reduction in pinpoint damage. From my perspective, this appears to alleviate many of the pinpoint alpha issues without causing erroneous side effects many of the players would not like.

There are however some quirks to the system that aren’t readily apparent. This buffs lighter weaponry loadouts by allowing them to retain more precision by being less affected by dispersal. This means lighter mechs and standard engine users in comparison to others of the same class are less affected by dispersal, and thus may be shifted a bit up in terms of overall strength. To me this is small buff to Lights, Mediums, and most of all Brawlers. Missiles by nature already spread their damage, and thus would be less affected by dispersal as well. Basically any weapon that spreads their damage such as an LBX and MG would be less affected then pinpoint weaponry, and thus would less affected by dispersal. Another potential impact involves focus firing a target with your allies, as dispersal on a component could kick in before you have even shot at a target if an ally has caused that component to start dispersing the damage. It’s a minor nerf to teamplay in that regard, as calling out a component to focus fire would be slightly less effective as well as focus fire in general being affected by the system more than solo combat. Thus the only collateral changes I’ve foreseen would be minor buffs to lighter weapon loadouts, a minor buff to spread damage weaponry, and a minor nerf to focus fire. This while solving the problem of high pinpoint alpha strikes at its core.

One other issue that seems to standout to me is the Head. I think it would be best to remove the Head from the system completely and allow pinpoint Headshots to still function as they currently do now. Not to mention, damage spreading from adjacent components to the Head would complicate matters and should not be done. Leaving the Head out of this system entirely seems to be for the best.

I look at the system and I see it as a wonderful solution to the problem. I’ve read these threads and see many, many complaints about how focused the damage is. I see many solutions to the problem, but often these solutions seem to have secondary agendas such as promoting the original tabletop type of gameplay. I see MechWarrior as something inspired by the tabletop but one that needs its own systems. Solving the problem via heat means it only works with heat constrained builds to begin with, which many Poptart and Ballistic variants do not have as much trouble with. Spreading out the damage is the solution that many are trying to attain with their suggestions, so why not go straight to the heart of the matter? Heavy Impact Dispersal is a system that would accomplish that directly. Any high damage, pinpoint alphas would have part of their damage spread out. That is our goal, so why not solve that and that alone?

[Shae Starfyre]

I would think that with more armor options, the problem can be solved.

Ablative versus impact (weak to one, strong the other) Armor Concepts.

Or whatever that laser type armor is.

This way you are gaining resistance to one weapon type, but opening yourself up to another type. This will lead to more balanced weapon types, and extend the conflict a little (one on one or one weapon type against your armor resistant of that type).

We already have splash damage, although, as you suggest, it would be nice if splash damage was a reductive percentage of the whole (like a 70% to point, and 30% spread) on top of the hope-to-come-soon armor types.

Edited by Aphoticus, 17 May 2013 - 07:16 AM.

[Chavette]

Still very complicated as I believe a good player should be able to calculate approx dmg about to be dealt on the fly.

The idea I'm most friendly with is near 0 convergence for weapons. It would have similar end result to yours, but a more natural way of doing so.

[Ayestes]

Aphoticus, on 17 May 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

I would think that with more armor options, the problem can be solved.

Ablative versus impact (weak to one, strong the other) Armor Concepts.

Or whatever that laser type armor is.

This way you are gaining resistance to one weapon type, but opening yourself up to another type. This will lead to more balanced weapon types, and extend the conflict a little (one on one or one weapon type against your armor resistant of that type).

We already have splash damage, although, as you suggest, it would be nice if splash damage was a reductive percentage of the whole (like a 70% to point, and 30% spread) on top of the hope-to-come-soon armor types.

Armor with various resistances to certain damage types are interesting without a doubt, but I'm not sure it deals with pinpoint alpha strike damage as that can come in energy, ballistic, and mixed varieties.

Chavette, on 17 May 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

Still very complicated as I believe a good player should be able to calculate approx dmg about to be dealt on the fly.

The idea I'm most friendly with is near 0 convergence for weapons. It would have similar end result to yours, but a more natural way of doing so.

As to changing convergence, that carries a lot of side effects particularly in the handling of what we have now. Changing the controls seems like an idea that would be abrasive to much of the community. It's certainly an option, but given that it's been brought up so many times on the forums with little to no dev acknowledgement I'm not sure it's going to end up being there. I personally would hate my controls being messed with, and would still like to feel rewarded for being a pinpoint shot. It could also confuse the UI and limit understanding of the game to newer players.

I don't understand what you mean by a good player should be able to calculate aprox dmg on the fly though. I think it would be harder if convergence was played with then with Heavy Impact Dispersal. If you aim right with Heavy Impact Dispersal you hit that component and know you did the majority of your damage to that component. With convergence messed with you may have some of the damage completely missed and likely not be sure which weapon hit which component. It seems to me it would be more intuitive with the current aiming systems and only the situations in which you suffer high pinpoint alpha damage is some of that damage distributed to other components.

Edited by Ayestes, 17 May 2013 - 08:09 AM.

[Shae Starfyre]

It would not necessarily solve same weapon types (unless the armor was specifically designed against that weapon type), thus comes a more balanced load out...

Then, the alpha perspective would be limited in damage if their were multiple weapon types.

Two PPC and a Gauss against armor designed to reduce damage from energy weapons would have more impact on the PPC, while the Gauss would power through the armor (in case it is not well known, it is a high velocity slug - unless it is different in Cannon?).

20 points of PPC reduced by 50% (10)
15 points increased by 25% (18.75)

Total = 28.75 versus 35 Seems good.

Now, if you know this armor is available, and people started catching on, would you boat all PPC? I would think you would want a little more variety in case you encounter the wrong armor type.

This solves high alpha strikes, solves boating, solves pin-point accuracy of too much damage, etc. to a degree.

Another example: my Mercy 5 ML, SSRM, and a Gauss.

Normally, what is it; probably using old missile damage rules here, 45 damage.

Actually kinda of my point of being balanced, but here's the scenario.

Armor designed to reduce Energy Weapons: 25 ML reduced 50% (12.5), Missiles and Gauss Increased by 25% (missile not pin-point though) - 24

Total = 36.5

Against Armor designed to reduce ballistics:

Gauss and SSRM reduced 50% = 10
5 ML increased 25% = 31.5

Total = 41.5

Normal armor: 45 - Seems interesting and well rounded to me.

Now, I just put on 5 LL:

Laser Reduction Armor: 45 reduced by 50% = 22.5

Balistic Reduction Armor: 45 Increased 25% = 56.25

Normal: 45 of course.

Which would you choose; the boat or the balance?

Note: the only thing this really doesn't impact a lot are some Assaults and few Heavies which are by their nature well rounded to begin with; after all, no one complains about a boating Atlas. Now, that 9 ML Hunch would suffer, unless communication is used, and you could tell what Armor type someone has.

Edited by Aphoticus, 17 May 2013 - 08:39 AM.

[Ayestes]

I do think differing Armor types solves a completely different issue then what has been presented though. It solves boating a certain weapon type, which is not the same thing as a high damage, precision alpha strike. I would actually be for having new Armor types introduced in the future, but I think it's a solution for a different problem. That problem being boating and not precision alpha strikes.

[Shae Starfyre]

Well, what is an example of a pin-point alpha strike? 4 PPC at 40 damage to CT/Head, etc. And you brought that to the field against differing armor types?

You just did a measly 20 points.... But, on the flip side, it could have been 50.

What it does is change the mentality of the person creating the weapons load out, which inadvertently solves the massive alpha strike pin-point stuff.

Unless all of those SRMs, AC 20, and what-nots are all hitting the same place (looks around confused). Are they?

I even propose that if, and I think they are very long term thinking about this, is that they are making small changes here and there and adding things, that will eventually change the mentality of the player. Thus causing, inadvertently, a balanced game.

In fact, I further postulate that a lot of the issues people perceive are based on incompleteness of the game, and the lack of seeing the forest through the tress, because it is all we have to work with now.

Once there was this bad thing called ECM, now it is an even meaner thing called ECM + BAP. And later on down the road, it will be ECM + BAP + Console Module (or whatever that thing is that comes on the DDC).

And on, and on, and....

Until all features are in, we are merely pointing out incomplete ideas to fix balance issues that are not even here yet.

Edited by Aphoticus, 17 May 2013 - 09:15 AM.

[Ayestes]

A pinpoint alpha strike does not necessarily all come from either energy or ballistic. Yes, some easy examples are 4-6 PPC, 4-6 Large Lasers, double Gauss, or double AC/20. There are plenty that share both energy and ballistic though. Gauss and PPC being the most likely seen in the current meta, and any combination of Gauss and/or Autocannons with PPCs and/or lasers can do it. I commonly do this with my CTF-1X even, that carries x5 ML and an AC/20. I can focus the damage in one spot incredibly easily.

Varied armor types will solve boating a certain energy type and certainly does promote weapon diversity. That's certainly true. It does not solve pinpoint alpha strikes though, it would simply make the pinpoint alpha strikes more focused on weapon diversity between ballistic and energy. If weapon diversity is the problem you are trying to solve then that's fine, but pinpoint alpha strikes as a whole problem are still going to be around. I think it's a fine solution, but to a different problem then pinpoint alpha strikes.

[Shae Starfyre]

Question is, if we had different armor types now; Ablative Armor, Reflective, Signal Dispersing, etc., would your evaluation and differential change on the subject at hand?

I would suspect it would, as you would be taking that into account.

Such that, and with nearly ever other balance question, is the crux. At what point do we need to step back, and take a look at the whole, and do we do it now or later? Do we single out specifics or take a broad approach?

[Ayestes]

Actually it wouldn't, because even with varying armor types the problem would still persist. Being energy resistant or ballistic resistant does not make you less vulnerable to all forms of pinpoint damage. You might be less vulnerable to a quad PPC strike with Reflective armor, but the guy with Standard, Ferro-Fibrous, or Reactive armor still has problems. Not to mention you'd still have problems with pinpoint alphas via ballistic weaponry. Mixed weaponry types wouldn't care that much either. The problem still persists, it's just mitigated in a select few cases.

I think Heavy Impact Dispersal potentially solves the issue of pinpoint alphas, and differing armor types is a potential solution to something completely different. If differing armor types were already in the game, pinpoint alphas would still be a problem that could be solved by this proposed system. I certainly don't think differing armor types solves pinpoint alpha damage.

Edited by Ayestes, 17 May 2013 - 09:52 AM.

[Shae Starfyre]

I concede; unless, you think that Clan Weapons will not be affected by this kind of change?

[Ayestes]

Heavy Impact Dispersal would have to treat Clan and Inner Sphere weaponry the same. Clan tech in general would only make the pinpoint alpha problem worse I think, by allowing us to bring superior firepower on a chassis. Thus the system would need to apply to Clan alphas as well.

[Shae Starfyre]

Agreed, but then you are back to another issue... someone posted it early, something about an "Oh, my god, more poor commando!" Meaning, in effect, splash damage (Impact Dispersal) would/could become such an issue that the cry for change again arises.

Edited by Aphoticus, 17 May 2013 - 09:55 AM.

[Stampede]

This is interesting idea to curb the problem of focus pinpoint damage. Dual AC/20 jag's are pretty much guaranteeing to pinpoint explode 40 damage on anything they hit. A Jenner-F with 6 Medium Lasers is going to put 30 damage in one second on a pinpoint location if its target is slow or stopped. The point of THIS change is to mitigate damage caused from multiple sources in a split second. Such as three Dual AC/20 Jag's firing at one target (lets say an atlas in the center torso because its huge) if they all hit at optimal distance, they have the potential to deal 120 damage to his center torso in 1 second from focused fire. if the first 20 damage in 1 second went through, and the next 100 damage was halved and split to other sections (except head). the damage resolves so the center torso would take 70 + other armor sections taking 50 total damage in one second which is completely survivable for an atlas, and several other assault mechs... for that first volley.

Interestingly, you might be able to get away from this mitigation though use of rotational firing the weapons.

Edited by Stampede, 17 May 2013 - 10:10 AM.

[Shae Starfyre]

Stampede, increase those numbers by 20% when clan technology hits, and then see what the results are.

This is going to become a game of true grit and nerves of steal when it is finished. If this idea is implemented it may make all weapons (pin point alphas), essential LRM's of old on a commando.

The Atlas who sticks out to allow 3 Jags to focus fire on him while he looks at the pretty graphics will feel the pain of no CT armor, no Arms, and be lucky to have legs to stand on.

Until all is factored in, this kind of change or idea, needs to be watched carefully; as it is now, sure, anything facing three Jags like that without some mustard is going to be sorry for the exposure.

But in those rare cases, and I have done it a couple of rare times, under the right circumstance, used those weapons on themselves (friendly fire), loosing an arm, and getting back over a hill with at least some weapons.

It's not as cut and dry as, lets spread the damage (Although, I am not directly opposed to the idea in general), I just think it is too soon to come to this conclusion.

Once Clan tech is out, maybe the argument will change; it may spurn a host of other issues that will pale in comparison.

I think you will find that this will have no bearing at all in the long term, it may even exasperate the problem. Instead of an Arm being blown off a skilled pilot who turns in time, it will be his arm blows off, his side torso is in the red, his legs are orange, and his CT is yellow, and all the while his Head is just fine, while a small laser takes him out.

Comparing 3 Jags hitting one Mech of any size is not an issue of balance, it is a particular scenario which is glorified to be the reason for a needed change.

If the community keeps digging up solutions based on the flavors of the month, then the true issues will never be realized.

Again, the idea is promising, I just think it is too soon.

[Ayestes]

I think I may be misunderstanding you here. I think you are concerned about the splash damage effect being a problem. Keep in mind my suggestion isn't quite splash damage, it's just dispersal. It never creates extra damage, it only shifts the damage around if it has gone over that certain amount per second. 40 pinpoint damage would still deal 40 damage overall to a mech. It would not be like the missiles of old where a Commando would be hit entirely by the splash damage, it would just shift the damage around if they were smashed with a 40 damage alpha pinpointed to the chest for example. In that case the Commando would only receive 30 damage to the center torso, and would have the rest of the damage randomly or evenly assigned to adjacent areas. Possibly just 5 damage to the right torso and 5 damage to the left torso. Still would be a total of 40 damage. An Atlas who steps over a hill and takes 120 damage to the chest from 3 Jagers would instead be taking 70 damage to the center torso and about 25 to the right and left torsos. Again still a grand total of 120 damage.

Maybe I'm really misunderstanding you here, but I think you've misunderstood the system I've proposed.

Stampede brings up an excellent point though, involving the usage of alpha strike vs. chain fire. Chain fire could theoretically focus the damage better. Chain firing by nature spreads the damage out more though with mobility and twisting. With great aim and an opponent that isn't twisting you could bypass the system altogether. This to me is fine, since that would be over a much greater duration and that person if they wanted to spread the damage still would have to twist. It does actually make it more of a choice between alpha and twist, or chain-firing. It doesn't make the answer clear cut one way or another, but it certainly tones down the prevalence of alpha strike being the top choice.

[Shae Starfyre]

No, I get it; I even advocate it. It is just disturbing the Clan Technology coming out. This will disperse it in such a way that it will feel like splash damage.

This is just an assumption for right now, because it doesn't exist, but there are clan weapons out there that do like 20% more damage.

So the scenarios of spreading happy joy-joy 120 points will blow things apart instead of the majority being the same stupid blown apart scenario, but at least it is in my hands to move if I am situationally aware to let my arm go.

If this gets in before Clan Weapons, my lord, it will be a slag fest beyond imagining.

What is that site, sarn net or something... ER PPC doing 15, Pulses doing 13, Heavy Lasers doing 18 points of damage.

I'm just saying, without a few other things in the mix, like armor types, and more informational warfare, doing this too soon will be glorious!

Edited by Aphoticus, 17 May 2013 - 11:13 AM.