1263 replies to this topic

[SVK Puskin]

Big Giant Head, on 18 June 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

LOL.

[SICk Nick]

Anyone like my post on the previous page about heat damage and pilot damage and such?

[Shumabot]

SICk Nick, on 19 June 2013 - 02:05 PM, said:

Anyone like my post on the previous page about heat damage and pilot damage and such?

That idea gets floated a lot, it's more simmy but doesn't address any of the games balance or gameplay issues. It actually makes quite a few of them worse.

[SICk Nick]

Hmm. Well, if your pilot died, or became incapacitated after overheating a few times I figured that might discourage high-heat alpha builds and add some cool effects at the same time. I dunno tho. I'm an aircraft mechanic, not a game designer.

[Side Step]

How are you going to communicate a system like this to the average player? Is this something only forum warriors will know?

While I appreciate what you're trying to do; heat scale is not the way to do it.
The whole system seems arbitrary and clunky. It's a much too complex way of balancing weapons. A system which doesn't even take into consideration high alpha builds using a mix of weapon types, or weapon types that generate low amounts of heat for it's high damage.

The system also promotes macroing to time shots.

This will not magically solve anything. It'll just make the on-going balancing act a much more convoluted and difficult process down the road.

Edited by Side Step, 20 June 2013 - 06:03 AM.

[Jestun]

SICk Nick, on 19 June 2013 - 11:37 PM, said:

Hmm. Well, if your pilot died, or became incapacitated after overheating a few times I figured that might discourage high-heat alpha builds and add some cool effects at the same time. I dunno tho. I'm an aircraft mechanic, not a game designer.

Overheating is a small issue.

Good mechwarriors with high alpha builds know exactly when they can and cannot fire, it would not resolve the issue in anything other than new players who just started trying a high alpha build or bad players that constantly overheat.

IMO penalties need to either be to the amount of heat produced when firing multiple weapons (as proposed in the OP) or the heat dissipation rate, or they need to apply penalties below the 100% heat limit (which is the limit for the engine, not the mech - it's entirely possible that lower heat could degrade performance both in the mech and the pilot).

I think I actually favour the two that are not being considered, as heat penalties which vary both from mech to mech and from weapon to weapon sounds overly complex. While I in no way support dumbing the game down I also don;t support making it needlessly complex.

[dyndragon]

dyndragon, on 11 June 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

The post Paul made unfortunately doesn't tell us what they were specifically trying to tweak and fix, so I'm going in with these assumptions:

• Trying to fix focused damage problem with boated weapons
  
• Trying to fix high heat alpha builds that have no real disadvantage, other than periodically shutting down (non issue at range)
  
• Trying to balance heat and damage output in a way that is not too complex so they can code it and meet the release date, and still makes sense to players.

I'm aware of TT rules, and I believe it was said before that the TT rules for heat penalties were too complicated. This proposal, however, I think is even MORE complicated, and I can't imagine being in PGI's position and having to balance all the different permutations of chassis, weapons, heat thresholds, etc. This is pure craziness. And then when the clans show up?!


My feedback is this:
The TT rules are simple, easy to tweak (and hopefully easier to code), understandable, and should deal with all 3 assumed points. You don't even need to implement ALL of them to gain the desired effects and fix the parts of the game that have issues.

Your proposed changes are (my feedback and opinion, again) opaque, add complexity to the game (with your system, you are implying that we are going to have to refer to a forum post that tells us chassis+weapon combination=heat penalty because there's no way in hell I can remember all that), and introduce "fictional" heat that does not necessarily make sense when IN the game. Again, your approach seems to be the untested sledgehammer method, whereas I think the TT heat penalties are more subtle and don't cause anyone to absolutely stop their playstyle now, and it affects ALL mechs equally.

As I recall, TT rules go something like this:

At:

• >X% heat, aim suffers slightly
  
• >X+Y% heat, aim suffers more, speed reduction
  
• >X+Y+Z% heat, aim suffers even more, even more speed reduction, random damage to random internal
  
• >X+Y+Z+T% heat, all the above, plus more movement or rotational penalties with random damage to random internal, chance to blow ammo (hey, make CASE more of a strategic and important decision!)
  
• >100% heat, chance to blow ammo, shutdown but can be overridden
  
• etc....to >125% heat, chance to meltdown core
  
• >150% heat, BOOM (I wouldn't actually suggest this as part of the MWO though--well, maybe a chance to explode outright).

Aim penalty could be illustrated by a flickering HUD, or, just use that random divergence you introduced with JJ in increasing amounts. That fixes point 1, not for the first shot at 0% heat, but it won't let someone continuously abuse it. In my opinion, this balances the player ability to place shots where he wants them, but not abuse the system to do it repeatedly.


High alpha builds can no longer just alpha strike with no risk, other than minor damage, nor can they alpha strike with 100% precision. This deals with point 2 regarding no risk heat management.

The TT rules are a simple set of rules that apply the same EVERYWHERE, and, at least having never seen the source code of your game, should be a simple routine to code since it does not require complex logic and knowledge of what kind of mech + what kind of weapons+ timing of weapons, etc etc to code. Just "if heat > x%, increase weapon divergence, slow mech y%, etc." It's a gentle tweak that can be illustrated easily without reading manuals or memorizing formulas through HUD warnings ("WARNING: Heat at X%, with illiustrative effects that demonstrate what happens to your mech--ex. HUD flickering, reticle expanding or swaying, flashing speed indicator to show you aren't running at max speed, so forth). This should maintain the spirit of point 3.

I seriously hope you reconsider this, or else I think you will be drowning yourself in whack-a-mole balancing everytime some new tech or chassis is released. Or, you'll be dealing with obsolete weapons and chassis that are never used because of some heat penalty issue.

Just a follow up to my own post a while back...

Effectively, if you put this sort of heat scale in game, you are artificially limiting the amount of damage an alpha can do. Why? Because players will just maximize damage output and minimize heat impact. It would be stupid to design your mech to generate extra heat, so players will just go up to the point of no extra heat penalty, and stop. Hence, it is an artificial damage cap.

If an alpha damage cap was the goal, you might as well just skip this whole complicated mess, and just institute that a mech can not output X amount of damage within Y time.

Just another way of thinking of this heat scale proposal.

[Havok1978]

Deathlike, on 12 June 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

I used to run the build he did on a BJ-3, and I found that brawling with a BJ is a terrible way to go (at least the BJ-1X has speed, the BJ-1 with the AC20 can be reasonably annoying). I improved the stock build of the BJ-3 by changing the engine and increased the DHS on it and it ran that much better. I actually was surprised it worked out like that (I also had to move the PPC over to the same side despite the asymmetric nature of the change, it worked out better for me).

I brawl mediums with mine typically and use it as an interceptor... oh wait i disagreed with victor... awaiting his response of a non 3ppc and guass build in 5 mins and counting...

[MWHawke]

With their track record, I am pretty sure they will push for the changes anyway and not read any of these posts because there are "too many negative posts"..

[jollyrancher1]

Ive got a thread started that tells a way to change the high alpha problem while not affecting heat. I think it is a much better solution to the high alpha problem than changing the heat or changing the convergence or even changing the mechlab.

Check it out here: http://mwomercs.com/...-meta-gameplay/

The jest of it is that instead of heat for weapons fired every .5 seconds lock firing more than X number of weapons of a type at once. Therefore it spreads some of the damage based on skill.

[Foster Bondroff]

I think changing the DHS values might be a better idea than a heat penalty/theshold for using weapon X Y-times in a period-Z would be.

We currently make a very good experience in the german community with a 3035 stock tournament. The games are much more fun, more challenging, more tactical in nature than the current stuff in regular 8vs8.

The main reason for this is simple, due to the use of SHS and 3025 tech the overall damage output is simply much lower than in regular gameplay. This also indicates the the "anti boat threshold" mentioned will not be a solution to the problems in the regular gameplay.

I won't repeat in detail that any choosen threshold number is arbitrary. But once there is such a number player will simply combine different weapons type to achieve similar alpha strikes as now. And than the game will be the same alpha boating as now.

So a solution should go in the direction of reducing damage output in regular play even with advanced 3050 tech.

I think the best way to try is to change the DHS mechanic.

First the all DHS should have the same values. No difference between the max 10 engine DHS and additonal DHS. The current mechanic benefits builds most, that use a low number of DHS, cause engine DHS give the most advantage in heat dissipation and heat threshold.

So 4+ PPC/Laser boats are viable, cause a low number of DHS give enough heat threshold to make those builds work.

On the other side builds that try to go for DPS and cooling do not benefit as much from DHS cause all additional DHS after engine DHS give less heat threshold and less heat dissipation.

Simply said installing a 4th ER PPC into an assault is more valuable for combat performance than installing 7 additional DHS.

My suggestion would be (and i am not really the first to make this) is to change the heat threshold and heat dissipation for DHS.

Make all DHS have the same values. For a starting point i would try the following values heat threshold 1.4 to 1.6 / heat dissipation 1.8 to 2.0.

[AndyHill]

jollyrancher1, on 20 June 2013 - 04:57 PM, said:

The jest of it is that instead of heat for weapons fired every .5 seconds lock firing more than X number of weapons of a type at once. Therefore it spreads some of the damage based on skill.

Make that about 1 second cooldown time and set X = 1 and I'm with you (also, general cooldown time could be about 10s to make carrying many weapons a viable option) and I'm with you.

[AndyHill]

It would be interesting to see how 3025 tech would change the game - I believe it would make things more interesting, because it should help a bit with the pinpoint alpha thing.

However, in BTech weapons are balanced mostly by their

positive factors
- damage (also ability to damage one location or do criticals)
- range

and negative factors
- size
- weight
- heat
- ammo

and perhaps most of all, availability. In MWO we also have
- cycle time
- projectile type (guided, beam, projectile) and speed

Why are we only (at least in the original proposal and majority of the following discussion) talking about heat? It's only one parameter for balancing weapons in BTech between each other. In BTech heat is also more of a gameplay element than in MWO, so it has a dual role (and this heat gameplay mechanism defines the balancing effect of weapon heat). To me, when discussing heat and not size, weight etc. as a balancing mechanism can only possibly ever make sense, if hot weapons are in general OP.

At the moment that might actually be the case, at least partially, but I really don't believe there's much to gain by just nerfing PPCs and LLs (let alone LPL). The more heat efficient boat builds are right around the corner, if heavy energy weapons are nerfed.

More importantly, any change in heat mechanisms that don't also touch weight, size, projectile speed, cooldown and other such variables to make larger, heavier and cooler weapons less efficient as well will simply screw weapon balance and result in an oh so very predictable rebound fix once everyone realizes that hot weapons are no longer useful. I'm not at all against heat changes (lower cap, more dissipation, penalties), but to me heat is not a solution to the pinpoint alpha issue.

[SJ SCP Wolf]

Shumabot, on 19 June 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

Sure. CS:GO doesn't exactly have enough different in it to qualify as an actually different game for me though. Taking source and just putting the code and visuals from the left 4 dead molotov cocktail in isn't exactly a "sequel". Either way, the CS scene is dead as a dornail outside of China.



Ok, heres your next question:

Your solution solved nothing and greatly exacerbated already existent balance issues with the non viability of light and medium mechs, why did you post it?

The hell are you talking about? You claim my proposal invalid and don't give a single supporting argument or proposing a better way yourself? You are barely worth responding to.

Light mechs would be just fine unless if they are running around at red line the entire match. Running around at red line should NEVER be a long term option in any match and if light mechs are running around constantly at max heat the heat system is broken.
My proposal is elegant, simple, in line with BTU and actually addresses the problem.

Edited by SJ SCP Wolf, 21 June 2013 - 05:35 AM.

[Shumabot]

SJ SCP Wolf, on 21 June 2013 - 04:52 AM, said:

The hell are you talking about? You claim my proposal invalid and don't give a single supporting argument or proposing a better way yourself? You are barely worth responding to.

Light mechs would be just fine unless if they aren't running around at red line the entire match. Running around at red line should NEVER be a long term option in any match and if light mechs are running around constantly at max heat the heat system is broken.
My proposal is elegant, simple, in line with BTU and actually addresses the problem.

Every energy focused light and medium mech in the game are forced to run hot because that's how they do their damage. A Jenner F dashes in, fires 3-4 volleys which almost redlines the mech and then it runs away to cool off. Your proposal doesn't heavily impact alpha stalkers or highlanders because they don't need to run hot (especially the highlander), they have plenty of time between volleys, especially if they're playing carefully. Medium and light energy builds do not have that luxury, they need to be able to maximize their damage immediately. You sure did make the Awesome 8Q even more of a joke though.

Quote

My proposal is elegant, simple, in line with BTU and actually addresses the problem.

Sure, it's all those things. It's also ineffective and exacerbates imbalance problems. That suggestion has been floated constantly since this game came out, there's a reason no one actually considers it.

[SJ SCP Wolf]

Shumabot, on 21 June 2013 - 05:21 AM, said:

Every energy focused light and medium mech in the game are forced to run hot because that's how they do their damage. A Jenner F dashes in, fires 3-4 volleys which almost redlines the mech and then it runs away to cool off. Your proposal doesn't heavily impact alpha stalkers or highlanders because they don't need to run hot (especially the highlander), they have plenty of time between volleys, especially if they're playing carefully. Medium and light energy builds do not have that luxury, they need to be able to maximize their damage immediately. You sure did make the Awesome 8Q even more of a joke though.



Sure, it's all those things. It's also ineffective and exacerbates imbalance problems. That suggestion has been floated constantly since this game came out, there's a reason no one actually considers it.

Running hot is not the same as running above red line. Running almost at red line is not going to destroy your sinks. Hell you can modify the solution to give heat sinks there own 'health' or crits the same as weapons. So the first time above red you take a bit of damage to them. Each time a bit more until finally it blows and then on to the next one.

A bad hard point config is PGI's problem. Not mine. Specific variant issues due to hard points are a completely separate issue that need to be addressed outside of the alpha build problem. Prime move bringing irrelevant to the conversation points up.

You continued to shoot down the proposal without adding any solution yourself or even contributing to the discussion beyond a whine. Good on you.

*All equipment should be able to be destroyed. Heat sinks, weapons, engine, gyro electronics. All of it.

Edited by SJ SCP Wolf, 21 June 2013 - 06:27 AM.

[Havok1978]

possible solution, though a weird one...

borrowing from several ideals, approaches, and entirely too much monster energy I bring you ... failboat... behold!

thought process: uhhhh.... I am the great cornhollio! I need TP for.. er.. wait... no... thats not it...

seriously though.. Each mech variant is a variant for a reason... they have different hardpoints sure... but lets look a bit deeper...

hardpoint size restrictions ala MW4... keeps "main-gun" weapons as just that... mains...
variant quirk approach.. aws-q is ppc boat... hbk-p is mlas boat.. etc

aws-q for example has not only the hardpoint size for ppc's but also the "infrastructure" for them on that variant only.

explaination: ppc weapon is 7 tons, however the supporting infrastructure <power delivery, capacitors, magic elves etc>
will vary per mech... so the Q has this infrastructure in place cuz thats how it was designed and manufactured for 3 ppc while the M would not.

adding a 4th ppc to this mech will incur penalty. <extra heat, or loss of accuracy, convergence issue,said magic elves stealing mechwarriors under pants, etc> unless extra tonnage/crit slot is dedicated for the supporting infrastructure.

hbk-4p medium laser pod allows this pod to be used in similar manner.. has power output to allow for 6mlas or a ppc or two etc, cept incase of ppc's would need emp shielding implemented sooo extra tonnage/critslot usage...

this type of "system" would allow us to continue to use the mechlab to build our own flavor of frakenmechs or alpha builds.. but putting a weapon on a mech or variant of mech that doesnt support or was never meant to support said weapon system would either face a penalty.. or have to allocate extra tonnage/critslots to compensate in order to avoid said penalty.. this would allow hardpoint "sizing" persay without actually making the hardpoints.. sized...

dunno, it makes sense to me, but im on my third monster so .. whatever.

the jist of it is pretty much-
use a weapon over a certain amount on a supporting mech = penalty
use a weapon not meant for the mech = penalty
allocate extra crit slots and tonnage to circumvent penalty = less overall crits and tonnage

that "may" discourage boating or not, I dont know, I'm sure theres flaws everyone will be more than happy to point out...
perhaps as a community we can all contribute to a system that will work that the devs will inevitably ignore anyway.. but, hey, its worth a shot right?

Edited by Havok1978, 21 June 2013 - 08:58 AM.

[jollyrancher1]

This is a bit of a repost but I would like to get the word out that I have listed a good possible solution to the high pinpoint alpha problem here:
http://mwomercs.com/...-meta-gameplay/

It is as .5 second wait solution so that it will cause snipers and ac20 jeagers to spread the damage a little. Not to keep them from bringing the loadout or penalizing their heat.
But that is only if you see high pinpoint alpha's as a problem.

[Koniving]

This looks to be edited in, but...

Paul Inouye said:

We considered the notion of doing a max heat threshold reduction but this would have ended up nerfing every weapon system and every Mech in the game. This is why the heat scale penalty path was chosen since it lets us address every weapon individually and also allows us to take into consideration all Mech builds.

That was sort of the idea, Paul. Although actually depending on where you set that heat cap at, you could be buffing lights and mediums while only nerfing high alpha assaults and heavies. Somewhere mid-post I'll give you an idea of where I had in mind to set this.

Koniving said:

There's a reason we outcried for double armor back in closed beta when the heat was super high and we had standard heatsinks! We. Are. Dying. Too. Fast. After one of the recent tournaments "Damage output is too high," Russ Bullock himself said it! We cannot nerf the damage as they are set by lore, and in my opinion doing weird little heat penalties is a bandaid to a broken system.

I realize the pages are so full of different ideas it isn't funny but please sit down and have a gander at this one if you would. In reality all the builds on MWO are invalid given the current heat system. I know it's only a basis upon which MWO was built but Battletech doesn't have a rising threshold that increases with additional heatsinks. Between that and the lack of pin-point convergence is why tabletop does not have this problem.

Of the two we can address convergence with simple methods.

• I'm certain this was already in the works given the confirmation by Bryan that we'd see variations of weapons by manufacturers, but autocannons have many variations and are grouped by damage categories. For example one AC/20 fires 4 rounds totalling 20 damage. Another one, the Super Crusher Heavy Autocannon is an AC/20 that fires 10 rounds rapidly per trigger squeeze each doing 2 damage for the total of 20. Perhaps the removal of the current AC/20 or an increase in price / lower range compared to multi-shot 20-rated autocannons to discourage one-shot AC/20s and encourage multi-shot AC/20 use?
  
• Battletech lore depicts weapons such as UACs to be smaller caliber weapons than their standard AC brothers. Upon discovering this the smaller barrels of the UAC/5s suddenly made sense but the shots are larger than the barrels since they are normal AC/5 bullets! To be a smaller caliber means it is a smaller bullet that does less damage, and compensates by firing more than one to make that total. As an example if the AC/5 shoots 1 shell to make 5 damage, the UAC/5 would then shoot 2 shells with 2.5 damage each per trigger squeeze, and when "double-tapped" they can fire a second volley of 2 shells. Not only would this allow us less concentrated damage, it would make the UAC/5 look even cooler due to the more frequently spinning barrels, the faster firing look and sound, and top it off the fact that it would not need to jam so often and I don't believe virtually anyone will complain!
  
• PPCs and dispersion damage. From a graphical standpoint when the PPC hits a target there's a splash-like visual effect. Why not capitalize on that? But let's redesign the splash system in general, instead of adding to the total damage why not divide from a total damage pool so if you hit two sections with the splash, the damage would be divided into 5 here and 5 there (simplified) or divide it so that more is at the impact site and 'some' spreads to the adjacent section within the splash range.

Spoiler

PPC effect as it hits my Pretty Baby.

Note the visual fidelity of the dispersion across my mech. The visuals are already there; give it some proper splash that divides damage from a pool of 10.

• Speaking of splash, consider using the same method to fix splash damage on missiles; divide from a damage pool and place their damage back to 2.5 (SRMs) and 1.8 or so (LRMs). Then have this damage divided into the splash with the concentration on where it hits and maybe 25% of 2.5 (0.625) placed into splash. This focuses the remaining 1.875 damage directly where it hits. After all missiles should try to pierce and thrust its explosive kinetic energy into the mech's interior not spread damage around the surface; that should be an afterthought.
  
• Keep Gauss Rifles as they are. Between being 15 tons, highly volatile, and a general high risk to carry they are plenty balanced and worthy of the way they deal their damage. They can still remain the sniper's favorite weapon.
  
• We just reduced a lot of concentrated pinpoint damage issues without any cones of accuracy or any non-skill based crazy ideas. We kept Bryan's vision of a skill-based environment. The changes in most cases are simple ticks in the CryEngine or simple 5 second script edits that even I can do (reworking splash not so much) which means ~far less~ work for the entire team, Paul.

The other issue to address is a serious underlying root cause of many of our problems.

We have a balancing issue where the mech that can fit the most heatsinks can strike with the exact same weapons not only twice as much before shutting down, but twice as fast at cooling off too!

That makes it essentially 3 to 4 times superior than the mech with less heatsinks and the same weapons. It should be the mech with the most heatsinks can fire just as much as the other mech before shutting down, but be ready to fire that much again faster.

That's a huge difference. If anything this idea should buff the presence of light and medium mechs who can't carry that many heatsinks and still have weapons.

• Regardless of 10 or 40 heatsinks I should be able to fire such and such a laser "this many times," with a variation only in how fast my dissipation is. Not how much maximum heat I can generate. Only how much I can sink per second.
  
• It should not be "If I have 10 heatsinks I can fire it 6 times and alpha strike only once. But if I have 10 double heatsinks I can fire the same weapon 18 times and alpha strike three times because of increased threshold and increased dissipation." That doesn't make sense. Which is why you had to nerf double heatsinks to 1.4 heatsinks, because you increase threshold too and eliminated heat as a mechanic!
  
• If anything it should be and if you read nothing else read this one bullet: "If I have 10 heatsinks I can fire it 6 times and alpha strike once or twice. But if I have 10 double heatsinks or 20 standard heatsinks I can fire it 12 times because it cools off twice as fast between shots. Yet I can still only alpha strike once or twice since my threshold doesn't increase. As such though I can reach a safe point to restart from a shutdown faster, but I can never alpha strike more than the person with 10 single heatsinks."
  
• With the bullet directly above, "My dissipation rate may change but my threshold can never increase or decrease regardless of how many heatsinks I add or lose. Therefore, I cannot abuse alpha strikes."

Getting hot is fine.

• It forces us to either reduce the frequency of our shots or to build cooler-running, lower-damage builds. That is the point of heat management!
  
• It makes things like machine guns (no heat generation, light weight) and flamers valid (which still generate zero heat against enemies with sustained fire from 4 flamers to various bodyparts of a willing ally possessing 15 double heatsinks for 2 minutes straight since their thresholds and dissipation power is so insanely high. Placing a standardized threshold regardless of heatsinks would finally fix this still long-standing issue with the flamers so that they are useful against non-trial mechs).
  
• It allows us to have a reason to use small lasers. To use low heat energy weapons.
  
• It gives us a reason to chainfire as a necessity to fighting rather than "zomg I got 6 large lasers if I just time my shots I can alpha all I want and I'll never shut down!"
  
• It lets us know anything beyond 2 PPCs is not a good idea unless we're really good shots.
  
• It makes instant kill shots a one in 6 to 10 second or longer thing rather than a 1 every 2 to 5 seconds occurrence.
  
• Trial mechs would be viable again! Stock builds usable!
  
• Single heatsinks would have a purpose once again and not a drastic disadvantage since all mechs would either have the same predefined heat threshold or one established for each weight class.
  
• Most of all it makes the game fun.

Have you tried it after making double heatsinks actually give 2 times dissipation along with the no threshold rise? Go with a pre-established threshold. Twice that of tabletop, 60 something as a starting point. I believe that would make a huge difference. An alpha strike is meant to be a risky last resort, not the only thing you do every time you fire your weapons. It's even described as such in the Mechwarrior 2 playstation manual. All anyone does are alpha strikes, and that's because we can pump out 3 to 5 before overheating, and then with an override we can turn 5 PPCs to 30 non-stop, back when regular PPCs fired faster!
Paul, if you're thinking the heat then becomes too much after doing so on certain maps then perhaps rolling back temperatures on Caustic or Tourmaline to something more inhabitable (neither of them really show the effects of their heat in terms of visual impairment, mirages, etc anyway) may help? I mean 95 Celsius is 206 degrees Fahrenheit! Inhospitable as that sounds it baffles me to even need to make a map that hot -- which was only truly necessary with a max heat threshold that rises when we tack on more heatsinks!

I think the word Heat Cap isn't quite correct. This implies that heat could still rise.

I was thinking more of a Specific Heat Limit Period. For example the heat threshold of the current 15 double "1.4" heatsinks. That's what? Approximately 63 heat units? Whatever it really is the threshold given with 15 "1.4" heatsinks seems to be a solid spot. Whether it's a slight bit more than twice Battletech's heat threshold or not, it seems fitting given we shoot faster than the mechs on the tabletop and have twice the armor and structure as well! Just apply that to all mechs regardless of how many heatsinks you have. Bam. You just buffed lights and mediums, slightly nerfed assaults (but only to the point that two alphas with 4 vanilla PPCs would result in a shutdown).

• Assaults would still be better, because they'd have 2.0 heat dissipation from true, real, actual double heatsinks and more of them than say a light or medium can carry.
  
• It'd only prevent assaults from doing so many high heat alpha strikes! That's exactly what we want when we cry for balancing!
  
• Lights and mediums would thusly buffed enough to compete since their heat threshold would now be higher than they could ever achieve before except under the strictest circumstances.
  
• The weapons themselves, by themselves, are fine. It's the fact that we can alpha strike so many times back to back without a care in the world that is an issue.

Mech combat shouldn't be about instant kills but drawn out battles with a sense of pride for every kill, not a sense of shame for having to resort to a cheesey high alpha build because none of the other weapons are remotely usable. Those other weapons are barely usable for one reason and one reason alone; we can alpha strike so many times with an incredibly high heat threshold. 22 "1.4" heatsinks gets us what, 90 heat as our limit? 110? These are supposed to be heavily armored mechanical behemoths not a 3 second thrill!
There's a reason we outcried for double armor back when the heat was super high and we had standard heatsinks! We. Are. Dying. Too. Fast. Damage output is too high, Russ Bullock himself said it! We cannot nerf the damage as they are set by the lore, and in my opinion doing weird little heat penalties is a bandaid to a broken system.
Take a peek at these videos. Please.

This was fun. Notice how I'm spacing out my shots with chainfire? Back then we had single heatsinks only. Heat management. Everyone loved it.

This was fun. I have my streaks spaced out and chainfired. Is it because of some weird heat penalty? No. It's because heat management meant something back then since heat thresholds barely rose with single heatsinks. Honestly they shouldn't rise at all.

More modern. This with more heat management would be fun. But heat management almost doesn't exist as I pump out an excess of 150 damage with a 2 second overheat consequence. What's to penalize me for spraying like this and butchering everything I see in seconds? Nothing. Nothing at all.


If you have a few minutes, read these.

The first was dug up from 2012 when the Muromets first came out and is about my first one on one fight using a Muromets against an Atlas DDC who happens to have PPCs, Gauss, and 3 SRM-6s and how I took it out despite being heavily outgunned in terms of firepower.

Koniving said:

If you don't seem to be getting anywhere shooting at an enemy's body, try a leg. I probe them frequently. Everyone lowers armor there to have more room for weapons.
An example follows: Yesterday I was fighting an Atlas with my Muromets (a cataphract). He had twin PPCs, Gauss Rifle, and 3 SRM-6s. I closed in so his PPCs would be largely ineffective and focused on the gauss rifle. My twin medium lasers, large laser, AC-20, and twin machine guns just hammered and hammered. When it became raw, the Atlas became smart. He torso twisted when I was about to fire my AC-20 again, and his arm soaked up the damage instead. Immediately he turns back and unleashes SRM and Gauss love (by some miracle it didn't explode with the loss of armor). The machine guns took care of it though with a critical hit, the result caused his side torso to explode.
From there he started to move a lot to keep me from focusing in on his other side (he'd be defenseless then). He took advantage of the hills he was near to keep his body raising and lowering as he destroyed my AC-20. As the fight continued he became desperate and started firing his PPCs at close range, combined with the devastation of his 3 SRM-6, I soon found myself in a world of hurt. I needed him to stop moving. With my medium lasers torso mounted, I kept them on his torso while I used CTRL and probed his leg with MGs and a large laser. His "shiny" new healthy armor was instantly removed; he couldn't have had more than 9 armor on his leg!!! With it raw, I focused all my weapons on it. He was legged in an instant. No longer going up and down it was easier to focus his side torso.
His next shot took out my all but 1 medium laser and 1 machine gun. Two ML shots and some machine gun spray later, he lost his other side torso. Now disarmed, I proceeded to shoot him in the chest. At the end of this one on one (conquest map, everyone else fighting at Theta while I'm near the dropship) I pressed T and told him that was a great fight. Sadly he responded with "That sucked, you wouldn't be able to take me out if I had my streaks." Meh. So he wasn't a good sport. I went on to wander off and find Epsilon to cap it. Shortly after we won. I had two kills and somewhere in the 700's for damage with no assists.
That Atlas was tough.

Long story short, taking out his leg is what won it for me. Otherwise it would have been too hard to focus my shots and I would have lost.

Good luck out there.

This second one, more recent, is about me and a friend piloting Miseries and coming across an enemy 2-man lance that between them had 8 ER PPCs and a Gauss Rifle, and our valiant fight against them that lasted several minutes and began at 300 meters.

Koniving, on 11 June 2013 - 05:30 AM, said:

The battletech and mechwarrior series has never been about quick kills. It's not supposed to be. It's supposed to be the challenge of two or many behemoths battling each other in a battle of wits, skill, luck and cunning.

Yesterday me and another guy were piloting Miseries on voice comms. We've been brawling enemies in two on one battles when they are isolated. Finally it boils down to two enemies left. Both of them had 4 ER PPC rigs (one a stalker, one an Atlas RS with a Gauss Rifle on the side). They had just killed the 6th player, leaving only the two of us.

My teammate had been soaking most of the damage up to this point. When we charge them, he dies in the first volley of 8 ER PPCs. The enemy stalker shuts down. The Atlas is still moving. Since the enemy stalker was the weakest of the two in terms of armor, I went for him. With both of them pelting me from different angles at every opportunity that they could, I had my twin standard PPCs, 3 Medium Lasers, UAC/5, and Streak SRM-2 loaded up. I tore through the side of the stalker. He began to panic and move behind the Atlas who I had stomped passed.

I whirl around to give chase -- all of us repeatedly powering down because every single one of us are running hot on Tourmaline. With the Atlas between me and the other stalker while it cooled down, I began using only the streak and the UAC/5 to help facilitate my own cooldown while still doing damage but the damn thing keeps jamming! I cut to just the cannon as I push past the Atlas; I was going to disable that stalker altogether. When the stalker peeked to shoot at me from behind the Atlas, I let off an alpha strike. PPCs at 89 meters, 3 ML, streak and a UAC/5 into his surviving shoulder. Cherry red but I shut down. The Atlas just did another alpha strike into my side and powered down. I hear sparks. I've lost my side. It's now or never. I power up prematurely. "Override shutdown." Another alpha! Power down immediately. The stalker lost his other side torso. He's effectively weaponless.

The Atlas is panicking, powers up to give off another alpha just to shut right back down. Since I lost a laser, a PPC, and a streak, I now had better heat efficiency. Though I lost a few heatsinks as well. Still I was able to power right back up. My CT armor is gone thanks to that last strike. I whirl around counter-clockwise, not giving him any more chances to hit the weakened side. If he's gonna hit me he's gonna hit armor. I go for the gauss rifle. He's within 60 meters, so that PPC won't do jack here. Twin ML, UAC/5 barrage (when the thing doesn't jam), his armor shreds on the right torso. The Gauss Rifle explodes on him. His internals go to dark orange immediately. His last alpha with the gauss and 4 ER PPCs went into my arm and armored side torso; both went red in armor only. I'm still pumping UAC/5s into it and follow up with a PPC though I've been circling and not backing away (staying this close makes his ER PPCs imprecise and spreads the damage). His arm falls off, his shoulder is gone. My heat's doing so much better now. He's down to two ER PPCs.

But now I have a problem. His good arm is on the same side as my weak torso. There's no getting around this, he's got me pegged. By this time he'd been stripped of armor all along his back and on his center torso, but it's still bright yellow. My CT's become dark orange. We tussel a bit more. Ramming each other even though knockdowns are gone. Targeting each other's weak spots. We still occasionally get shut down but nowhere near as often now. The enemy stalker, now just a walking phallus on legs, attempts to interject by ramming me and getting between me and my enemy in seemingly coordinated attempts to soak up my fire and then hit me when my weapons are recycling.

Ultimately he becomes cherry red. A shot or two would kill him. I've lost my other side torso leaving me with only a medium laser in the center torso. I line up my shot. He lines up his. I fire and cutting into the beam is that damn stalker! The stalker dies. As he falls over I'm stuck waiting for the laser to recharge. The Atlas fires two ER PPCs into my center torso. From my perspective it may as well have been to my cockpit.

Defeat.

The enemy Stalker: "OMFG why won't you just die!?!?!?!?!?" came his response over the chat. "Holy ****!"
The Atlas: "You were one pain in the *** to put down."
Koniving: "Good fight."

-----------------------------

My partner said if I went with an AC/5 instead, I never would have jammed and I would have won that since I spent most of the fight with the thing jammed. I have to agree.

That's what mechwarrior is about. The "Thinking Person's Shooter." Challenging fights, battles of wit, and improving upon yourself, your teamwork, and finally your mech.

The franchise died with MW4 because of stuff like this.


MechAssault tried to pick up the pieces by preventing those instant kill alphas, but then Microsoft tried to redesign it to entertain call of duty and halo players. Just went downhill and died from there.

To me, fights like that are what mechwarrior online should be about. PGI calls it the thinking person's shooter. Let's make it that way because of the tactics and strategy we have to use to take down tough opponents that can take a beating and because we have to manage our heat.

Paul, with the "weapon cap" idea, you're bound to turn this into the "Thinking person's shooter" where instead of strategy and tactics, we have to think of ways to "circumvent the penalty system" which trust me, they will come up with ways to do it.

Here's to hoping you'll give my ideas another try with a more objective mindset. Remember, a standard heat threshold for all mechs at the range of 15 double "1.4" heatsinks, regardless of what kind of heatsinks and how many the mechs have. Remove the threshold rise per heatsink b.s. and then boost double heatsinks to 2x. Give it a try. I think you'd be pleasantly surprised.

If you've read this, thank you. I appreciate your consideration and while these two fixes may resolve many issues, I am aware there are some slight kinks or flaws to work out as well but if you can craft something as immensely complex, time-consuming and work-heavy as the weapon threshold idea then you can easily come up with adequate solutions for the far fewer issues of my incredibly simple fixes to MWO's core mechanical flaws.

Edited by Koniving, 03 July 2013 - 05:49 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Please, Niko Snow/Garth, please ensure Koniving's post above gets put on Paul's desk ASAP.