1263 replies to this topic

[Xenok]

JuiceCaboose, on 12 June 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

I'm all for the PPC penalty, but on the fence about the Medium Laser one. The reason is because the example you used, the Laserback, is designed for one hard alpha, then chain fire after that. A mech can recover from a medium laser alpha, or even multiple successive ones fairly well.

Hmmmm....

9 medium lasers = 45 point alpha
4 PPC =40 points

The 9 medium lasers are more likely to get a one shot kill than the 4 PPCs, assuming they all his the same area of the mech.

You also have 2 AC 20 = 40 damage, 6 srm 6 =56 damage (always spread about a bit) and other high alpha builds. Anything greater than a 36 point alpha is a chance for a one shot kill. They are attempting to put a cost on that one shot kill.

On a personal level I like the one shot kill builds in the game, makes you have be more aware of your environment, who is where and what are they packing... I do not think it needs a change but can see a positive effect if its done based on chassis rather than broadly by weapon type.

[FupDup]

Xenok, on 12 June 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

Hmmmm....

9 medium lasers = 45 point alpha
4 PPC =40 points

The 9 medium lasers are more likely to get a one shot kill than the 4 PPCs, assuming they all his the same area of the mech.

You also have 2 AC 20 = 40 damage, 6 srm 6 =56 damage (always spread about a bit) and other high alpha builds. Anything greater than a 36 point alpha is a chance for a one shot kill. They are attempting to put a cost on that one shot kill.

On a personal level I like the one shot kill builds in the game, makes you have be more aware of your environment, who is where and what are they packing... I do not think it needs a change but can see a positive effect if its done based on chassis rather than broadly by weapon type.

You're forgetting that Medium Lasers last for one second, making it very easy to accidentally spread out that damage across multiple hitboxes. They also have a much shorter range and overall slightly higher heat (4 PPC = 32, 9 ML = 36).

Medium Lasers aren't a problem. At all. This change isn't needed and doesn't even solve the real problem builds.

Edited by FupDup, 12 June 2013 - 08:04 PM.

[Lightfoot]

The heat penalties looks like large weakening of Energy weapons and not so much for Ballistics.

When will you consider raising DHS 1.4 to DHS 1.6 or 1.7? When DHS 1.4 was added it was done so with the idea that it could be moved up later when heat balancing mechanics were more fleshed out. It seems like this is happening now with Heat Penalties and Overheat Damage being added.

I just know that when I am in say an AWS-9M and I use the default stock loadout, the heat build-up is intensely overdone. With the new heat penalties you would start damaging the mech after the third salvo unless you allowed 10-15 seconds to cool back down. Now if you could fire 4 salvos of 3x ERPPC's before capping heat and then cool to zero heat in 10 seconds, that might be some realistic balancing that players could moderate in combat. That might be DHS 1.6-1.7 with 21 DHS or some other solution.

[Gaden Phoenix]

stjobe, on 12 June 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

Yes, that's exactly what we've been trying to communicate to them since closed beta: The heat system is broken. It does not work. This is evidenced in the high-heat alpha game-play we see today, and further evidenced by the proposed band-aid fix in the OP. They need to re-work it, and luckily it's not that complicated of a fix (in theory): 1. Drastically lower the heat cap (by as much as half) 2. Drastically raise heat dissipation (by as much as double) 3. Optionally lower the heat cap increase from both single and double heat-sinks. That should take care of the high-heat mess we're in, and the solution to the pin-point damage problem is also (in theory, if not in practice; it'll take some coding) easy: 1. Rework all ballistics to fire in bursts of about 1 second, just like energy weapons. 2. Rework the PPC as a beam weapon, since that's what it's supposed to be. These two major fixes will eliminate both high-heat alphas and pin-point damage in one fell stroke, and I'm confident PGI could pull it off in good time before release, leaving them with a game in a much better state, closer to its BattleTech roots, and much, much easier to balance. It'll also increase the skill needed to play the game when you'd need to also hold ballistics on target to do your full damage, like we have to with energy weapons currently.

This. This here, is a way better solution.

[Gaden Phoenix]

I believe that PGI should gather a panel of top players (based on their ELO score) and consult them for advise. This would do 2 things for thiem:
1. Allow them to be more aware of player trends, issues players face and allow them to better decisions
2. Come across as being more in touch with the community and thus getting less flak for everything they do.

Edited by Gaden Phoenix, 12 June 2013 - 08:10 PM.

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

I have some comments on the proposed S-SRM and Pulse Laser changes

The S-SRM changes are fine but only if you bump SRM damage up. I suggest starting at 1.8 dmg/missle, up from the current 1.5 dmg/ missile and monitor feedback from there.

The Pulse Laser changes are bad because they are currently the most underutilised weapon group in the game atm. I think more people use flamers and mgs than pulse lasers. The SPL change is ok, but it's still pitiful when compared against MLs for the same weight. The LPL change is really bad. Why would you ever use a LPL over a regular LL or PPC? The LPL needs to have a niche for people actually prepared to brawl in this game for a change. I don't think there should be equivalent variance in DPS or HPS for pulse lasers. If you go ahead with the change you will end up changing it again when people stop using LPLs.

[Haitchpeasauce]

Heat is not the single solution to all the problems! But there needs to be more than just "take damage if you overheat to 150%"
At high heat, weapon convergence should suffer.
At very high heat, targeting and the HUD should start to fail.
At extreme heat, the mech should then take damage.

Heat also doesn't address ballistics, or that big converging alpha strikes still happen ... something like Homeless Bill wrote ... there could be a scale of how much strain each weapon generates on the targeting computer. So it's like another heat scale, but it's universal across the board of weapons, and it applies to convergence upon firing.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

pesco, on 12 June 2013 - 01:32 AM, said:

Re heat penalty: Hahahaha, band-aiding over the breakage caused by not doing heat properly. Nice to see you acknowledge that.

Re overheat damage: See above!

Re MG damage: Ah, 1DPS, you're getting closer to the AC/2 where it should be...

Re Streak SRM targeting: Why do they still all fire AND all hit? Why don't you just go read the book and make the targeting behave the way it should?



Man, I really wish you guys knew what you were doing, but you don't.

Hey pesco, long time no see. Also, QFT.

[MavRCK]

Quote

Heat Damage at High Heat Levels
We now have a system in test that will apply damage to your Mech’s internal center torso if your Mech exceeds 150% of its tolerable heat level. While your Mech is above 150% heat, it will take damage over time. Once your Mech has cooled below 150%, it will no longer take heat damage. Be careful with that override button or high heat alphas when you’re near your max heat threshold.

>> I'd like to know the rate at which damage occurs, what if any chance of an ammo explosion may occur, how much damage can the internals take before something bad happens... i need to know this in order to weigh the risk / benefits

>> It's not clear if you intend to remove the override function - I hope not.. As it stands I dislike the heat system.. I really enjoyed the previous heat system where you could override and ride the limits of heat before taking damage.. it's a skill! I hope this new system allows for another skill to develop and allow a mechwarrior to play the benefits vs risk game!

Quote

Heat Penalty

>> I'm torn about this. On one hand, thank you for trying to address this issue. On the other hand, I am not convinced this is really an issue and a solution. ( I could be wrong! )

>> Wouldn't it be easier just to focus on the heat generation of the individual weapons?

>> Moreover, does creating a solution like this take away your finite resources from other larger issues in the game?

>> The issue of boating isn't boating itself, such as the PPC stalker or highlander -- the real issue is that there is no effective counter to this boating -- that is, an effective brawling or short range (or even LRM indirect range) game.

>> I think balance of the game will take care of the boating issue without the need to create a separate system. In general, I believe that the game balance is best served by sequential small nerfs and moderate buffs. (I hate to draw attention to the competition, but LoL / Riot is quite good at this approach and saves their big changes for the end of the year after the ranked season is finished!)

Quote

SSRM, Flamers, MGs, Pulse Laser

>> Cool. Thank you.

>> What about SRMs? They need a buff to damage of about 25%

>> What about ER Lasers? They need a decrease in heat generation of about 5-10%

Quote

Jumpjets

>> Get rid of the shake.

>> You know how cheesy this turned out?

>> You're killing lights.

>> Chuck E Cheese.

>> Make the convergence widen a bit instead? Has to sharpen immediately once the JJ are cut though..

>> Jump jets in assaults weigh too much to be valuable in brawling... I have to sacrifice JJs or other things to make it viable.... consider making them 0.5 tons lighter? <3 for brawling highlanders - I swear I'll make that Victor deadly if you do! <3

>> The acceleration needs to be faster... use fuel quicker then.. but the acceleration up and turning needs to be faster... it's too slow... the fall can be as it is (slower).. but quicker up please

(Yes I know JJ's went in the discussion.. but you know us KaoS players... we're sh*t disturbers )


<3 <3 <3

M

Edited by MavRCK, 12 June 2013 - 09:18 PM.

[TygerLily]

Interested to see how it works.

As far as the 4P, this is kind of nitpicking the tree rather than commenting on the forest sort of thing:

The 4P with mediums already has the MAJOR drawback that it's weapons are all in one, very conspicuous location...They don't necessarly need a nerf. Also, for heat management I fire the head laser with the box lasers, and the arms separately all together. It makes my OCD explode that I'll be penalized if I don't fire ONE crosshair laser with my cirlehair lasers...*twitch*

[Selbatrim]

This has probably been said but how about penalizing ANY weapons fired simultaneously. 2 weapons increases heat by 20%, 3 by 30% etc

Its either that or add some % spread to the aim of the weapons when fired in a group. 5-10% Might not be the biggest issue at close range but sure 3 or 6 ppcs at 500+ range would land 25-50 meters apart if not chain fired.

Also, add recoil to Dakka weapons and missiles. You got 4 AC2s going mental? then good luck hitting the same spot twice. bigger weapons = more recoil.

Don't quote me on the percentages.

[DeaconW]

Kitane, on 11 June 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

1) Treat ER PPC and PPCs as a one type of weapon, ER LL and LL too.

Agree with this.

Quote

2) Set the PPC limit to 2, 3 PPC + Gauss builds should already be affected by a penalty.

3) AC20 should be limited to one, with a significant heat penalty for firing two at once.

Couldn't disagree more with these.

Quote

4) 150% heat limit is not going to have any noticeable effect on the game. Most builds will never get that high even if they tried.

Agree.

Zyllos, on 11 June 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

I am personally against the idea of applying higher heat when firing more weapons. It just doesn't quite make any sense.

It also doesn't fix the problem of "duck taped" weapon systems.

Even if you made all weapons randomly pick a spot when firing, but all weapons fired will pick the same randomly selected spot, will still be problems because all the weapons will randomly hit a single point in space.

That is the problem I have with the current gameplay. All the weapons hit a single point, no matter what type of weapon, in any situation, at any given time. They will always hit dead center of the torso or arm crosshair. That is the issue at hand, so enforcing more heat for firing more weapons doesn't fix this problem.

Agree. The problem is convergence. PGI should fix that FIRST before doing anything to heat mechanics.

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 11 June 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

This heat penalty system sounds great, but it appears that it won't do anything to deal with dual AC/20 boats or dual gauss boats. Does PGI not feel that dual ac/20 boats or dual gauss boats are an issue? or is other balancing in the pipes for this? How about 4 lrm 15's?

What do you think mechs should be allowed to carry? All of those are very vaild builds on some mechs. Sorry, a mech with two of the same weapon is not a "boat"....

[AndyHill]

Fut, on 12 June 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

All group firing?
I think this is a rather broad stroke, as I don't see any problems arising from firing 2SL at once.

I believe the simplest solution has been suggest many times already, and it's introducing a heat penalty a la TT.
This will allow people to customize their Mechs any way they want, but might make them think twice about firing 4+ PPCs (or 9 MLs...etc) at the same time - as that would put them into higher heat levels and render their Mech less effective (via targeting/movement penalties...etc). That Alpha will still be very useful, but only in certain situations.

Win-win-win.
Everybody is happy.

You are absolutely correct in my suggestion being a broad stroke, but as I said I don't really see alternatives. I agree that your suggested heat system change would be welcome and I've been hoping for such a change since early closed beta. However, I believe that pinpoint alpha -ability is such a fundamentally important thing for effective mechwarrioring that if there are severe heat penalties people will simply gravitate towards less heat sensitive builds - and of course, snipers don't mind momentary speed penalties that much while they're cooling behind cover.

Also heavy heat penalties can't touch this guy: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Annihilator and depending on implementation, all clan omnimechs may be able to boat cool ballistics. The 45 alpha of three gauss rifles isn't exactly the 60 from 6 PPCs, but there's a range advantage and the gauss shots will keep on coming without any need for cooling... In any case, I really believe PGI need to come up with not only a solution for the current pinpoint alpha builds, but also a robust, future(clan) proof game mechanics that will limit the alpha-based instakill meta we have now.

As for the small lasers, I'm not really afraid of an alpha strike from two of them, but still, that's twice the pinpoint alpha intended for that weapon. Note that things like double armor are born from the fact that 'mechs have the ability to deliver immense pinpoint alpha to instacore their opponents, so the entire balance could be looked at again - and I have a hunch that it would end up being better.

Basically if we had
- no alphas
- sensibly thought out hardpoint maximum sizes
- heat penalties and balance closer to the TT
I believe we'd have twice the game we have now.

Of course I like playing MWO even though I don't agree with many of the design decisions. However, this heat thing is the first decision I feel has real game-killing potential in it. And we're about to have the 3pv showed down our throats as well...

[Havok1978]

Deathlike, on 12 June 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

These changes go beyond builds.. if you think this will truly change the situation, it'll only remove people who are complete newbies to the system... those that have a clue will still be using it w/o changing too much or going to the next best thing... which ultimately changes nothing.

So, if you think you'll be happy about it, prepare to be immensely disappointed.

FupDup, on 12 June 2013 - 02:13 PM, said:

Actually, the ERPPC (Gauss to a lesser extent because of explodability and size) is effective at all ranges and roles. Jack of all trades and a master of everything.


Also, the patch only harms the 4 ERPPC Stalker (6 PPC Stalkers already were outclassed by 4 ERPPC). Everything else with 2-3 ERPPC + 1 Gauss is literally not affected whatsoever by the heat changes because you need at least 4 PPCs to get the penalties (see developer post).

well actually everyone in this thread seems to keep forgetting, Paul did not say "here are the new changes" he said here are some examples... which means they are still open to tweaking them, the limits he has given arent the actual numbers either.

They very well could say .. hey watch this.. lets put the penalty at 3 ppcs save for the awesome or this variant or that variant... similar to the PROPOSED, hunchback quirk. They are trying to stop the pro-boat gamers, and this is beta still. reguardless if money has exchanged hands or not this is in fact still beta.. every balance they try to implement is an attempt to see what will happen and how we feel about them, cuz we are beta testers.

they are not gonna say, oh the gaming community is throwing a tantrum, we better reverse our course of action. what they will do is commit the action anyways then after about a month they will see what we have to say at that time. It is human nature to resist change after one has become accustom to the way things are.

and as for people who keep flaunting that highlanders with 3 ppc's and a guass arent effected? dont hold your breath too long. that could suddenly get added to the agenda or could now be on pauls mind as to the next "problem" to be dealt with.

as this exploit is dealt with and crossed off thier board of things that need fixes, another one will arise to take its place.
again, this is NOT spreadsheet warrior online, PGI has no intention of it being spreadsheet warrior online and they dont want folks walking around oneshotting each other like its call of duty, and they will fix it, be it a bandaid or a redesign.

theres more than 2weapons in this game for a reason and theres more than 4 mechs for a reason. just becuse some people choose to cheese it up and have the same loadout on every mech they own doesnt make them uber leet, it makes them boreing. It also defeats the purpose of the game.

I have 50 mechbays currently, almost every mech i own has a different loadout and is used for different purposes and they are almost all mastered. so ya, I guess that makes me an uneducated noob cuz i dont have 4 mechs with identical loadouts.

I actually spent time playing the game and tinkering with loadouts to produce the desired effect I wanted from a chassis.

In the end its all marketing anywayz. most gaming has went that way since the P2P model hit the market.

[Kaio-Kerensky x10]

Havok1978, on 12 June 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

well actually everyone in this thread seems to keep forgetting, Paul did not say "here are the new changes" he said here are some examples... which means they are still open to tweaking them, the limits he has given arent the actual numbers either.

He can tweak them right out of existence. Changing the numbers doesn't change the fact that this change is intended to affect exactly one mech using exactly one weapon. Changing the numbers doesn't make this intuitive. Changing the numbers won't prevent a lengthy period of adjustment where not-at-all-overpowered builds are hit with the nerfhammer for not fitting into a badly-documented template.

There are simpler ways to solve the problem. There are more comprehensive ways to solve the underlying problems. The target mech isn't even very good!

This is a bad idea.

[Uncleclint]

This new heat penalty at alpha shooting don´t impress me much. I will wait and see how this goes, but i got a bad feeling about it.

-As many other posters have already mentioned, a heat penalty system closer to the TT system might be the best way. Whatever this damage over time-thing will be like, i don´t think it is supporting the general mechwarrior feeling at all. It just don´t feel right.

-And the alpha strike problem wouldn´t exist in the way it does at the moment, if certain weapons had their correct heat values...


-oh and before i forget. why not just change MG damage to 10 per bullet? With all the baby steps damage increase lately, why not make a big leap and save one or ten years of baby stepping???

Edited by HAS UncleClint, 12 June 2013 - 11:45 PM.

[FiveDigits]

Havok1978, on 12 June 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

[...] they are not gonna say, oh the gaming community is throwing a tantrum, we better reverse our course of action. what they will do is commit the action anyways then after about a month they will see what we have to say at that time. It is human nature to resist change after one has become accustom to the way things are. [...]

We are not opposed to change. In fact it was PGI's stance that everything is "working as intended" (be that PPCs, jump jets,ECM or Streaks). Only repeated community outcries got them to react ... months later.

We are opposed to the design anti patterns (Burden of Knowledge this time again) we get thrown at us as balance fixes. At the same time there's plenty of well thought-out proposals made by the community (yes, the spreadsheet warriors) that get summarily ignored.

It is just frustrating.

[Kmieciu]

Victor Morson, on 12 June 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

While individual 'mech balancing is important later on, the actual root cause is no weight limits. If the majority of PPC/Gauss snipers were running 50 tonners and had 1 of each, nobody at all would care.

The root causes are weapon convergence and high heat capacity.

If we get weight limits, I'll just switch to HBK-4P 3xPPC 16 DHS 92 kph.
30 points of pinpoint alpha up to 540 meters 70 points of heat capacity (elite pilot skills).
On a heat neutral map, it can alpha strike 6 times and not overheat.

30 points of damage to a single component is a big deal, even for an Assault mech.

There are only two possible solutions to the "high alpha" meta game:

- random weapon spread when group firing (this is already implemented for jump jets so it's definitely doable)

- group fire is removed from the game and 0.5 second interval is hard coded, so that you cannot use a macro

All other changes are pointless, because every time the devs change damage/heat values , the players find the most efficient weapon and we will boat them to achieve accurate pinpoint damage. First it was the Gauss, Small pulse lasers, medium pulse lasers, then large lasers and now PPCs.

Edited by Kmieciu, 13 June 2013 - 12:40 AM.

[Victor Morson]

Havok1978, on 12 June 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

... words ...

An idea was pitched. A terrible idea everyone calls bad, because it is in fact a very, very bad.

What does this have to do with a million things you think Paul might or might not say about future nerfing? The core system is an awful, awful idea with no redeeming value. Why even put it there in the first place?

[Victor Morson]

Kmieciu, on 13 June 2013 - 12:27 AM, said:

The root causes are weapon convergence and high heat capacity.

That's not the root cause of the actual frustration: That is entirely the lack of tonnage/BV balancing. Period. Flat out.

Even the high alpha builds don't have enough firepower to destroy proper 'mechs in two salvos without incredible luck, but when you have 5-7 80-100 ton 'mechs on the enemy team, yeah - that's enough in the air to kill you instantly. Nerfing convergence won't change this. You'll just get scattershot by the same 5-7 assaults (or the occasional high end heavy).

Every problem people have with "alphas" would go away if assaults made up less than 20% of the battlefield. Nobody is going to get mad about the kinds of alphas that Trebs & Centurions can deliver, accuracy be damned.