Sable Dove, on 09 June 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:
I would say only the heatsinks that are included with the engine count; even if that's less than 10. However, for in-engine sinks for 275+ rating, they do get the same values as other engine sinks, since it would be unfair for the DHS to get the bonus of using 3 less slots per sink, with DHS values, while the SHS only saves 1 slot each, and still gets the SHS values. Since being in the engine eliminates the drawback of the DHS, but not that of the SHS, they should not be dependent on the type of external heat sink.
On the armour distribution:
If armour were centralized, there would be more incentive to disarm enemies by taking off arms or side torsos, when currently, armour on the CT is so low (relatively speaking), that it makes very little sense to aim anywhere other than CT, except on a handful of mechs, and even then, you're virtually never going to target arms, because they have almost as much armour as side torsos, and destroying a side torso will also destroy the arm, if not the whole mech.
While I definitely would like it on a couple specific mechs, I would really like to see armour centralization on all mechs, to an extent. Mechs like the Spider or Raven obviously don't need it, due to their nice hitboxes, but mechs like the Catapult or Dragon need it desperately, as their huge CTs and de-centralized armour make them among the most fragile mechs in the game, but there is no reason not to use an XL, since you will basically never die through a side torso before your CT or head explodes.
On the Energy/Ballistic front: (Note, you can just assume that if I don't mention it here, I agree, or at least don't disagree with your suggestions on particular items)
Adding a minimum range to the ERPPC isn't going to hurt it much unless that range is at least 180m, and the damage drops off very quickly. And odds are most mechs simply aren't going to get within range before taking so much damage that they're almost surely going to die, even while the ERPPCs are doing reduced damage.
Even the 90m range minimum makes a huge difference in terms of damage, I will stand still with a PPC mech and trade shots with them if I am under 90m. The ERPPC even more so due to the massive amount of heat it generates. It is a weapon that you simply can't spam without serious consequences and definitely not when you are panicked and pointblank.
Quote
The real solution is heat penalties, slight penalties to convergence for movement, a lowered heat cap, or some combination thereof. ERPPCs are mainly an issue because they have one drawback, and that drawback is not penalized in any significant way. Don't get me wrong, a minimum range would be nice, but it would definitely not fix the fact that ERPPC boats can kill or cripple mechs with one or two hits anywhere up to 810m. The solution, to many problems in the game, is penalties for heat, and penalties to accuracy for excessive movement (and jumpjetting, as they've sort of realized; the penalty should apply as long as the mech is not on the ground, and should be worse for heavier mechs)..
I'm not saying accuracy penalties like you might see from hipfiring a weapon in your generic FPS. I'm talking tiny inaccuracies, enough that if you're moving at a moderate-high speed, or you know, if your mech is not on the ground at all, you can't hit the head of a pin at 600+m with all of your weaponry at the same time. Same if you're overheating, though heat penalties would be more severe than movement penalties, obviously.
I agree whole-heartedly, but PGI did mention some serious heat effects coming for people that continuously ride the red line. Something in the form of taking damage if you go too far over shutdown or even popping heat sinks which means continuous use will destroy sinks making you less and less heat effective.
You may start the match with 20 some odd HS but you redline a few times and now you are down to 14.
Worth considering, so I held back feedback in that direction until I see what they have planned.
Quote
I feel the LB 10-X still needs a significantly tighter spread, even if they did increase the rate of fire and range.
The problem with tightening the spread too much, you eventually just get to the point where it is not worth taking an AC10 because the spread on the LB10-X is too good, and you have to look at bringing it back down.
Instead just give it a lower cooldown. The AC10 needs to be worthwhile. It is a solid shot and should get the range bonus I talked about, but also the LB10-X SHOULD be worth it.
Let the LB10-X be the brawlers weapon that can pump out a lot more rounds and the way the spread is now the majority of the pellets will hit where intended at 200m but not all of them, but the cycle time should make up for the lack of accuracy on the pellets.
2.1 sec cycle time turns the LB10-X into a monster dps weapon coming in at 4.76 DPS, just shy of the 5 DPS a ac20 puts out.
Yes there is going to be some diffusion as not all the pellets are going to hit the same location but like any good brawling weapon it's going to have a quicker cycle-time allowing you to put followup shots quicker to hit damaged locations.
Quote
Your Flamer ideas, I can't agree with at all. They would certainly be better than what we have now, but they would still be a detriment. 2DPS for a maximum of 5 conscutive seconds, 64m range, and it still inflicts 20% more heat on the user than the target? Not useful. You will never be able to heat up an enemy mech to anywhere close to 90% before you shut down (especially if you're using other weapons), and you won't be causing any significant amounts of damage, since you have to fire in bursts, and odds are you overheat before actually running out of energy for them.
I can see two ways to make Flamers usable.
1. Leave the damage very low, but increase the heat inflicted to 2-2.5 HPS, reduce heat generated on user to 0. This makes the flamer a utility weapon, causing enemies to need to worry about their heat more. This would be more effective if heat carried any real penalties below 100% heat though.
2. Increase damage to ~4-5DPS, increase heat generated on user to 3 HPS (which is actually more then the ERPPC, BTW). This makes the weapon more useful as a backup, anti-light weapon, to force light mechs away, and hopefully into range of your bigger guns. It's not meant to be a damage dealer unless your enemy is dumb enough to get within 64m of you and stay there.
I'm smiling here, =) but i've got to stop you.
Did you do the math on my flamer idea? The Flamer deals: 2 DPS - An absolute must! It has to be a viable weapon, heat is the bonus but it is still only a 1 ton weapon.
You give 2.5 heat damage a second.
You Take 3.0 heat a second
The Flamer can only be used for 5 seconds on continuous fire before it needs to recharge it's juice.
So over those five seconds you will have caused:
10 Damage
12.5 heat to your intended target - (ER PPC is only 11 heat every time you fire)
15 heat to yourself.
There simply must be more heat taken by yourself than given to your target, this is simply to account for the damage itself and in many ways to discourage boating because the flamer itself is a penalty weapon. By that I mean you are penalizing another player and as such penalize yourself in some way as well, one of the game design pillars. The big difference being you know the penalty is coming!
The flamer is good, there are mechs out there stock that boat flamers but ultimately the flamer is a tactical weapon used to turn a fight.
Now keep in mind the flamer is still a 1 ton weapon but also keep in mind the Flamer isn't there to shut a mech down.
It's not, You don't take a flamer to stun lock another mech.
You take a flamer so that your target shuts himself down.
Lets look at some of those people who boat ERPPC or heavy energy builds. Now I know that once my heat gets to a certain percentage I can fire with out shutting myself down. Full Alpha cause's 32% heat, well that means at 67% I can fire all my weapons and not shut myself down. Boom you've got a flamer on me, that means I am going to have to wait even longer to Alpha, fire less weapons or chance the shutdown.
With the flamer you have no need to heat people up to that 90% heat cap, really it's just not your job to max them out and attempting to max them out is the wrong way to go about it. (Honestly)
Players will max out their heat all by themselves.
The purpose of the flamer is to turn the fight of an engagement, to force some hard choices on you intended target: Hold back weapons, Wait longer to cool down, Fire possibly shutdown, Fire everything and shutdown for a long time and possibly take damage.
You get into the middle of a brawl with other pilots and quickly everyone is going to red-line themselves pretty quickly. That flamer adding an additional 12.5 heat is the difference between a good pilot on their side shutting themselves down because they didn't realize they were getting hit with a flamer, your team corn-cobbing him in the CT and time he spends not doing anything.
This way the Flamer is effect at both damage, effects and can be used Intelligently to turn a fight.
Lets take the effect of a flamer and lets say we add 2 flamers
Now:
20 Damage over 5 secs
25 Heat to target over 5 secs
30 heat to yourself over 5 secs
What happens if we run triple flamers or lets go with quad flamers.
40 damage over 5 seconds
50 heat to target over 5 secs
60 heat to yourself over 5 secs
Now you start turning into a monster heat machine both in terms of what you deal and what you take.
Lets make a brawler build out of this and run Quad flamers and a Gauss Rifle. Now you have a low heat weapon paired with a high heat penalty weapon. You engage and fight and as the fight moves on it moves into brawling range - Boom, you dump those flamers on a target forcing him to the 90% max pretty quickly and he fires a high heat weapon shutting himself down. You drop the flamers to cooldown to recharge and take your time and plant your Gauss rounds where you want them.
He starts up again and you drop the flamers on him again, at this point he is frantic to get some shots off so he fire's again and shuts himself down and you plant your Gauss rounds.
The Flamers are recharging, they are not fully charged due to the time it takes to charge.
The smart move on his part would be for him to hold is fire until you exhaust what you have left in your flamer tanks knowing they need time to recharge for a longer bursts, so he holds his fire and checks only low heat options.
This type of play and counter play is awesome.
It probably won't work out that way in an actual match but either way I think people would agree that the flamer would be useful with out being overpowered with the above suggestions because the flamer is there to force some hard choices.
And though it may not cause a mech to be shutdown what it will cause is a mech to use less DPS than they are capable of, and if that's the effect then it's a great weapon to have because it also deals damage. =)
Quote
I do not think your pulse laser changes would not make them any more useful. If the bulk were dealt in the first third, it would be a slight improvement, but putting the bulk in the middle is more harmful, I'd say. I tend to hit far more at the start of firing than in the middle, or at the end; having my target partially obscured does not help me aim.
I would suggest increasing SPL damage to 4, reducing heat for all pulse lasers slightly, and possibly reducing beam duration further, to 0.50s for the MPL/LPL, and 0.25 for the SPL, making them much easier to hit with full force in only one or two locations. IT would also be much simpler, which means slightly less chance for it to screw up somehow.
That's a decent point, I always end up catching people with the beam in the middle part due to the way It typically works out. I fire hit a bump or something and the mouse slips i have to correct my aim and bring it back on target. But if you are more accurate in the first third then that is a valid point.
Solid recommendation.
Edited by Carrioncrows, 09 June 2013 - 07:55 AM.
6
