1263 replies to this topic

[Huntsman]

SPL change = good

heat penalty = meh

LPL change = completely the wrong direction

What heat penalty is being considered for the LL?

Edited by Huntsman, 11 June 2013 - 11:40 AM.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Im interested in the pulse laser changes iv always liked them but could never justify their brutal short range and extra weight/heat. The anti-boating trick seems fairly rough shod but I can see what they are trying to do, By encouraging people to wait half a second to fire again they are reducing the odds of concentrated fire at a single point ofa mech.

The overheating penalty sounds fun but its too generous thats for sure, I would have it a scaling damage for everypoint over a 110% threshold so the more overheated a mech is the more damage over time its suffering, this would sharply punish those that go extremely over the limit but as the mech cools it would gradually take less and less damage untill heat was within safe levels again.

[Felicitatem Parco]

DocBach, on 11 June 2013 - 11:35 AM, said:

I think triple PPCs being penalized would hurt the Awesome

Actually, that is an awesome observation. I didn't think of that...

[Aslena]

This has a potential to work (heat) but... I think it will just add confusion to all those masses of new players... and it might cause a variance of weapons to be used but it still won't stop high alpha builds it will just make them more varied. (ex: 3xPPC + 3xERLL) (3ppc + Gauss) ect....

Also the LPL thing isn't good. People who would prefer to use it end up going with a PPC because it has to much of a range benefit over the LPL for about the same heat

If streaks targeting is changed that way they just won't get used anymore unless the damage is bumped.

also machine guns are going to be the best gun in game after this as well at a whopping 1dps per half ton of weapon with no heat

Edited by Aslena, 11 June 2013 - 02:53 PM.

[3rdworld]

Where are they buying all these bandaids?

& lawl at pulse lasers.

[DaZur]

One paper: Simple elegant and easily massaged post application... nice.

I thank-you for your continued efforts and will patiently wait to try it in a real-world setting!

[Synapse X]

Woooooooo this wont effect my stalker boat in the least, aside from making him even harder to kill by smaller mechs that had to boat to keep up.

[Acid Phase]

Mick Mars, on 11 June 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

As to the 6ml rule, why don't you just make those types of rules mech specific- i.e. for the 4p you can fire 6 at a time, but any other mech the limit is 4. On stalkers, make it 3 ppc at a time, but the awesome 8q and 9m(which are designed to boat ppcs) get a break at 4. I agree with some of the others as to the length of time between shots to get the penalty. Make it longer say to .75-1.0 secs. As far as pulse lasers go, rather than increasing dmg, why don't you reduce beam duration instead?

Yea, this would be closer to what an overall balance to heat should be like.

[Loc Nar]

I think this all sounds quite sensible and well reasoned, and pleasantly surprised as I didn't know pulse weapons were getting tuned too. Looking forward to the implementation and testing it all out.

I'm sure I'm not alone here, but I really appreciate getting updates and news like this from the dev team on this forum (even if it were bad news) as opposed to social media like twitter. Thanks PGI!

[Pando]

Great ideas. Love how it looks. Can't wait to test it

It's going to still be possible to run my 2PPC 2ERPPC boat, I just have to adjust my firing by .5 seconds? SIMPLE!

BRING ME MY PULSE LAZORS! I'm really excited for all of these changes.

Edited by Pando, 11 June 2013 - 11:44 AM.

[HRR Insanity]

Adding heat for multiple weapons fired simultaneously does not fix the problem. It attempts to put limits on the problem using the heat scale. This will likely NOT address many of the other combined weapon builds that will become more prevalent after this change (2xGR, 2xAC20, 3-4xAC5, 3xUAC5, 4-5xAC2) unless the developers jury-rig additional heat to weapons that are supposedly low heat ammo limited weapons. Moreover, at present, some of the best configurations in the game use 3xPPC+GR; this configuration is completely untouched by the proposed fix and will remain dominant.

Summary: The proposed change does not address the ability to create alphastrikes/groups of damage and thefore will not slow down mech deaths, will not improve the metagame, and is largely a waste of developer time.

Stop avoiding the underyling problem; fix it by adding weapon spread in a logical fashion.

Edited by HRR Insanity, 11 June 2013 - 11:53 AM.

[ohheLp]

The boating changes are a terrible idea.

There's no need whatsoever to penalise boating smaller weapons.

No one has ever complained about a 4p.

Please don't do anything to hurt mediums further.

PPC's are the only thing that need a tweak.

You could get the same results by adding 1 heat to them.

These changes make me really sad.

[Livewyr]

I can think of maybe ONE mech that can reach the 150% threshold in order to be effected by the damage..

the (6)PPC stalker

I can say as of right now, I don't see any real benefit to that...at all.
Please test that Idea A LOT.

(I think you'll find 110%-120% heat damage a much better idea..after all, it WAS mentioned a while ago that damage was being done too fast.)

[Evax]

I really like the part about "each weapon will be INDIVIDUALLY TUNED". Although with the ultra low heat of gauss, double gauss may take the dual ac/20 spot. Still with its' draw backs won't be that bad.

[keith]

like norm PGi goes to an extreme to nerf something instead of going to root of the problem. if there was a weight balance system for game types, u would not seem many heavy energy boats. now 6 ppc mech= insta shut down= extreme over kill. could have gotten away with making something like +10-15 heat so mech was unusable in combat, much worse fate then shutting where it cools faster.

[Homeless Bill]

In regards to heat penalties: please consider something else. It will do somethin for what we have now, but it leaves so many problems unsolved.

Why heat won't solve our balance issues:

Spoiler

1. It's going to be super arbitrary and hard to balance. I'd like to have faith in PGI to get the numbers right, but they frankly haven't impressed me in that category so far. They're getting better and better, but sculpting such an intricate layer on top of the heat system sounds pretty dangerous. There are so many weapon combinations that I think it will be extraordinarily difficult to integrate into what is already a delicate system.

2. It will punish players for doing it, but it won’t prevent them from doing it. Even assuming the heat balancing goes well, the penalties will have to be ridiculously severe to truly deal with things like the 4xPPC Stalker. It still doesn't solve that single, massive, focused burst that’s enough to leg a light whether by a skilled or lucky hand. It doesn't prevent them from doing what they do; it just means they'll have to be a little smarter about picking their shots.

3. This is the big one for me: it doesn't solve ballistics. No one really cares about this yet, but you will. You will if they decide to drop an Annihilator or Mauler on us. The minute we get something that can mount 4xUAC/5s plus change AND has the ability tank a good amount of damage, people will be ******** their pants. Even if they put ridiculous heat penalties on the autocannons, the Gauss rifle will continue to kick copious amounts of ***. 2xPPC + 2xGauss is pretty hard to solve with heat.

The AC/40 Catapult has to sacrifice speed, and the AC/40 Jagermech is really squishy. They're cheesy and still far too good for their weight, but they have exploitable weaknesses. Even if heat fixed PPCs and autocannons, once something that can effectively mount 3 Gauss rifles drops, it’s time to break out the tear jars. On the flip-side, it could also mean PGI avoids any 'mech that can boat large ballistics simply because they have no good way to balance them. Which is a really ****** solution. I want the Devastator and Annihilator, and I'll be damned if balance issues prevent that.

I beg you to read this proposal to fix things: http://mwomercs.com/...lance-solution/

Edit: The fact that this change will have no effect on the HGN-732 Cheese King confirms to me how utterly ineffective this solution will be.

Edited by Homeless Bill, 11 June 2013 - 05:13 PM.

[Hador]

Imo you should make the heat penalties for various weapons dependant on the type of mech.

So that a Hunchy-P can use more MLs witout drawback, an awesome more PPCs and so on.


But I guess that would make the whole system too complicated for practicable use...

Edited by Hador, 11 June 2013 - 11:55 AM.

[Ordate]

I see pros and cons to the solution. My only question is do weapons fall into groups or is each one distinct.

Aka erppc and ppc? Could a stalker boat 3 and 3 and not worry?

Or different sized LRM/SRM.

[Tennex]

now that all other boats are dead

the AC40 will reign supreme

[Zyllos]

I hope PGI can clearly see that this is the incorrect direction to go. It presents too many problems (can't penalize 3 PPCs due to Awesome but 3 PPCs deal 30 points of damage to a single location) for specific builds and really doesn't fix the core of the issue, "duck taped" weapon systems.

Fix the issues with all weapons hitting a single location and most of the problems will be fixed.