91 replies to this topic

[Homeless Bill]

Quoted from my solution to this problem:

Homeless Bill, on 10 June 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

FORGET HEAT
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.

[Victor Morson]

Jetfire, on 11 June 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

Honestly I think this could work very well, but they will need to give us a lot more detail. Also, it seems to apply only to multiples of EXACT same items. Making it more viable to make mixed alpha builds which honestly makes sense.

No it doesn't. The only people running large banks of weapons are using things like MGs, Lasers, SRMs.. they're the ones that are being seriously hit by this.

Those of us running pinpoint accurate core-you builds aren't even going to notice this. Maybe, maybe the 3 PPC + 1 Gauss Highlander will go out of style. Maybe, it'll turn into a 2 PPC + 1 ER PPC + 1 Guass Highlander.

I've said it before but it cannot be understated that this hurts the wrong people.

[HRR Insanity]

I warned them...

http://mwomercs.com/...om-closed-beta/

PGI's 'balance crew' are continuing to apply bandaids to a gaping wound that will never be corrected unless the ACTUAL issue is addressed.

This is just another example of trying to fix the problem by avoiding fixing the problem.

Edited by HRR Insanity, 11 June 2013 - 12:51 PM.

[Ozric]

Aye we need more information, but does it really look like the sky is falling? We don't know how many weapons is too many or how much penalty they bring, and I assume it will be geared more towards 6 PPC stalkers than 6 MLAS jenners anyway. If it scales properly then only a few builds should be affected.

[Victor Morson]

Lord Ikka, on 11 June 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

There are a couple of reasons I agree with PGIs new take on this.

1- It is addressing excessive overheating Mechs, whether they are boating or not, with the 150% heat internal damage. Not the best, I think starting at 130% might be better, but at least it is a start.

Nobody has an issue with increasing penalties to heat, at least that I know of. They want to add more, be my guest! I welcome these changes. Forcing pilots to manage their heat is a very good thing. Making people rethink stupid builds because they are too hot (and thus a liability) is a good thing.

Artificially adding stuff like this is so, so not a good thing. This reminds me of one of those comedy skits where a speaker asks "Do you want X?" and everyone cheers, then asks "Do you want Y?" and everyone cheers, then says something really horrible or dumb and there's silence.

Lord Ikka, on 11 June 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

2- They are specifically not rendering TT standard builds useless, as the 4SP shows, because they are using the TT builds as a starting point. Very few TT builds have close to seven med lasers! So they use that as a cutoff. Same with PPCs, the three PPC TT standard Awesomes won't get punished for their build, but more than that will.

They already are useless. They will always be useless. None of this will make them not useless.

Lord Ikka, on 11 June 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

I agree with the OP that six PPCs aren't the most worrisome Mechs right now, but PGI is finally addressing the issue, and it looks like they are trying to do it in a way that isn't punishing everyone.

Did you read the OP? It specifically goes over the ways that they are punishing everyone (except the target goal).

Ozric, on 11 June 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

Aye we need more information, but does it really look like the sky is falling? We don't know how many weapons is too many or how much penalty they bring, and I assume it will be geared more towards 6 PPC stalkers than 6 MLAS jenners anyway. If it scales properly then only a few builds should be affected.

If 6 is the hard limit, it will impact the 6 Mlas Jenner just as badly as it impacts the 6 PPC Stalker. Unless the heat penalty is adjusted for each weapon, at which case, they've just turned Mechlab into a horrendous spreadsheet-required nightmare.

Plus, on top of that, if 6 were the limit that would be dumb anyway because as I pointed out in the OP that 6 PPC Stalkers are total crap. 4 PPC Stalkers will absolutely outperform them every.. single.. time.

If this whole mess is a way to stealth nerf 6 PPC Stalkers it is even worse than I feared.

Edited by Victor Morson, 11 June 2013 - 12:50 PM.

[armyof1]

Victor Morson, on 11 June 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

No it doesn't. The only people running large banks of weapons are using things like MGs, Lasers, SRMs.. they're the ones that are being seriously hit by this.

Those of us running pinpoint accurate core-you builds aren't even going to notice this. Maybe, maybe the 3 PPC + 1 Gauss Highlander will go out of style. Maybe, it'll turn into a 2 PPC + 1 ER PPC + 1 Guass Highlander.

I've said it before but it cannot be understated that this hurts the wrong people.

Frankly I can't see how you have enough info to say who it will or will not hurt yet since we don't even have enough info to draw any conclusions. Maybe we should see when more detail is released before we make up our minds?

[Victor Morson]

HRR Insanity, on 11 June 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

I warned them...

http://mwomercs.com/...om-closed-beta/

PGI's 'balance crew' are continuing to apply bandaids to a gaping wound that will never be corrected unless the ACTUAL issue is addressed.

This is just another example of trying to fix the problem by avoiding fixing the problem.

I think it might be that they the problem is not understood. This is why they desperately need some "community managers" that play the game heavily working actually at PGI for better perspective, honestly.

For example, I am honestly concerned that they look at the current weight situation and go:

"Hey, everyone is driving assaults. That must mean everyone likes driving assaults, nothing to see here!"
"People are taking lots of damage from the kinds of guns only assaults can mount! Quick, let's nerf Alpha strikes, that's what all the cool kids pugs are blaming!"

I have to wonder if there is any realization that the reason everybody drives assaults is because everyone drives assaults, and without weight limits, it's just an arms race. Assault pilots are highly, highly vulnerable when mediums and lighter heavies are the majority force!

I keep going back to what sounds like an unrelated point, but I really believe it's the entire reason for the high-damage frustration right now. This is like an RTS where you can freely choose to build a medium tank or your super unit with no downsides for picking the latter, what are you going to do?

[One Medic Army]

Well, are reading and seeing that they're going to tweak the number of weapons that can be group fired without penalty for each weapon type (6 for ML, and 3 for PPC to start), I'm willing to give it a try.
Of course, it won't do all that much to 4PPC Stalkers, and the 6s can fire 3 and 3, or just alpha and wait a little longer to cool.

Also, an implementation question: will PPCs and ERPPCs be counter separately? Will a 4 PPC stalker be able to swap one out for an ER and thus avoid all heat penalties?

Oh, and yes I agree this isn't fixing the underlying issues.

Edited by One Medic Army, 11 June 2013 - 12:58 PM.

[Dude42]

I fully agree that PGI's proposed solution is quite terrible.

My proposal: Move PPC and ERPPC heat(and projectile speed) back to where they belong. Implement damage for overheating past 110% even without override, and increased damage with override. Fix instant convergence.

Now PPCs are a non-issue and balanced.

See how easy that was?

[Victor Morson]

armyof1, on 11 June 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

Frankly I can't see how you have enough info to say who it will or will not hurt yet since we don't even have enough info to draw any conclusions. Maybe we should see when more detail is released before we make up our minds?

They clearly laid out specifically how it will operate, which will specifically hurt lights & mediums at worst and make mechlab a convulted mess at worst. And it still doesn't address the actual issue anyway.

All you need to draw the conclusion that this is terrible is the ability to read.

(Or do you actually think this is going to do anything at all to the typical 1 Gauss + 2 PPC builds, or the upcoming 2 Gauss Victor builds? Because it won't. At all.)

Edited by Victor Morson, 11 June 2013 - 12:59 PM.

[Ozric]

Victor Morson, on 11 June 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:

If 6 is the hard limit, it will impact the 6 Mlas Jenner just as badly as it impacts the 6 PPC Stalker. Unless the heat penalty is adjusted for each weapon, at which case, they've just turned Mechlab into a horrendous spreadsheet-required nightmare.

Plus, on top of that, if 6 were the limit that would be dumb anyway because as I pointed out in the OP that 6 PPC Stalkers are total crap. 4 PPC Stalkers will absolutely outperform them every.. single.. time.

If this whole mess is a way to stealth nerf 6 PPC Stalkers it is even worse than I feared.

It doesn't have to be a linear scale. SLAS could have a cap of ten, for example, while you might only be able to have a pair ERPCCs before incurring penalty. The amount of penalty could also vary from weapon to weapon, or even from chassis to chassis. Quirks right?

[Lord Ikka]

Unless you take away all customized Mechs, which is one of the reasons people like this game- making the Mech they buy their own, you will not get rid of cheese builds. This heat penalty does not punish anyone other than min-maxers, because of the amount of weapons you have to put on to get a penalty. How many of you run something with 7 or more medium lasers or 4+ PPCs? If you don't run builds that aren't like that, this won't effect you at all. I agree that it is a bandaid, but it is not close to as bad as most of the posters think it is. It will not punish Light/Medium Mechs- the only ones effected right now would be the Hunch 4SP and the Blackjack 1X.

[Victor Morson]

Lord Ikka, on 11 June 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

Unless you take away all customized Mechs, which is one of the reasons people like this game- making the Mech they buy their own, you will not get rid of cheese builds. This heat penalty does not punish anyone other than min-maxers, because of the amount of weapons you have to put on to get a penalty. How many of you run something with 7 or more medium lasers or 4+ PPCs? If you don't run builds that aren't like that, this won't effect you at all. I agree that it is a bandaid, but it is not close to as bad as most of the posters think it is. It will not punish Light/Medium Mechs- the only ones effected right now would be the Hunch 4SP and the Blackjack 1X.

Lots and lots of people run builds like: 8 Medium Lasers, 3 SRM6, 4 LRM10, etc. 4 PPC Stalkers hit roughly as hard as 2 PPC + 1 Gauss. 6 PPC Stalkers suck anyway and are clearly inferior to these.

If we trade the current 4x PPC Stalkers for 3x PPC 1x Gauss Misery, how is that going to help anything other than Misery sales? (Perhaps I have said too much!)

Literally every 'mech I can think of outside of the 4 PPC Stalker that carries more than 3 of the same gun are all lights and mediums without exception in the current line-up.

Edited by Victor Morson, 11 June 2013 - 01:02 PM.

[DaZur]

I'm completely open to giving it a try before lambasting it with hyperbole...

[Victor Morson]

DaZur, on 11 June 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

I'm completely open to giving it a try before lambasting it with hyperbole...

Are you completely open to living with a horrendous broken system for 6 months?

Because that's what happens every time something awful happens here. Once something dumb like this gets put in, they will refuse to take it out, and instead try to hammer and hammer it to make it more tolerable instead.

See: Trial 'Mechs, ECM as a missile hard counter, the missile nerfs, etc.

Effectively if this is horrendous we might get a tiny reduction to it's awfulness once a month or every other month for half a year, before they either finally give up on it or we stop complaining because the pain is less than it was.

Edited by Victor Morson, 11 June 2013 - 01:05 PM.

[Ralgas]

While i agree with trying limiting the alpha strike to ~30 dmg before penalties (which appears to be the intent here) unless they apply it to mixed weapon alpha's it means nothing.

[armyof1]

One Medic Army, on 11 June 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

Well, are reading and seeing that they're going to tweak the number of weapons that can be group fired without penalty for each weapon type (6 for ML, and 3 for PPC to start), I'm willing to give it a try.
Of course, it won't do all that much to 4PPC Stalkers, and the 6s can fire 3 and 3, or just alpha and wait a little longer to cool.

Also, an implementation question: will PPCs and ERPPCs be counter separately? Will a 4 PPC stalker be able to swap one out for an ER and thus avoid all heat penalties?

I think it will make quite a difference against PPC boating. For one thing you'll have to make 2 shots on the same mech part to damage it 60 points instead of 30 on two different parts if you can't pull it off. I'm not sure if 0.5 secs is enough though, that could be a thing that needs to be increased.

And yes ERPPC and PPC should most probably be considered to be same weapons at least to some degree, otherwise it would be so easy to carry 50/50 and alpha away.

Edited by armyof1, 11 June 2013 - 01:20 PM.

[Sprouticus]

Victor Morson, on 11 June 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

No it doesn't. The only people running large banks of weapons are using things like MGs, Lasers, SRMs.. they're the ones that are being seriously hit by this.

Those of us running pinpoint accurate core-you builds aren't even going to notice this. Maybe, maybe the 3 PPC + 1 Gauss Highlander will go out of style. Maybe, it'll turn into a 2 PPC + 1 ER PPC + 1 Guass Highlander.

I've said it before but it cannot be understated that this hurts the wrong people.

you do realize that if you convert a PPC to an ERPPC that you have given yourself a heat penalty on your own, right?



On topic:

I like this model. They can tweak it as needed on a per weapon basis, it is another tool they can use to balance weapons. Think of it this way. Right now they only have 2 axis that they can balance on, heat and damage. Now they have a 3rd, max weapons per shot.


Boating has always been a problem in MWO. 9 ml fast hunchies, Streakcats, splatcats, lrmboats, PPC boats, and PPC gauss boats. Even 5 LL cataphracts are nasty. The issue is PGI has to manage weapons based upon the worst case scenario (max boating, so mechs with only 1 or 2 of any hardpoint are useless.

Not so if they can penalize boating without penalizing non boated versions!


Example:
6 ML Jenner- no panalty
2x PPC Cent-AL- no panalty
3 PPC/2 LL Cataphract- no penalty


Depending upon the numbers for missiles, you can manage things even more. for instance ou might set the max for LRM20's at 2 and LRM 15's at 3 and LRM10's at 4.

The key here is it gives them options.


Is it a bit clunky, yes. Will there be a learning curve? Yes. Am I ok with a slightly more complex game that gives the Dev the ability to balance weapons better....absolutely.

[Victor Morson]

armyof1, on 11 June 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

I think it will make quite a difference against PPC boating. For one thing you'll have to make 2 shots on the same mech part to damage it 60 points instead of 30 on two different parts if you can't pull it off. I'm not sure if 0.5 secs is enough though, that could be a thing that needs to go increase.

And yes ERPPC and PPC should most probably be considered to be same weapons at least to some degree, otherwise it would be so easy to carry 50/50 and alpha away.

What even qualifies as a PPC boat? Because again, outside of the niche Stalker, everyone runs Gauss + PPCs. Again I cannot stress enough the Victor will allow 2x Gauss at Awesome 9M speeds, too. Do 3 PPCs count? Because that sucks, to remove the alternate 3 PPC (instead of 1 Gauss + 2 PPC) build as a viable option - poor Awesome 8Q, too.

Are we talking 4? Because if we're talking 4, we're talking about one specific Stalker build. Once you go past 4 and into 5-6 you're back to "the build is terrible anyway" logic, so why nerf that in the first place?? Are they seriously going to call 2 PPCs a boat?

There is absolutely no way this will work out to stop pinpoint damage, high-alpha snipers. None.

[Tennex]

I hope the example he uses was just a way to pitch the idea.

and not a concrete numbers. Because all of those numbers seem arbitrary. and 5+ heat after 6 MLs is just too high.

0.5 seconds based off of chain fire? horribly bad reasoning. (it should be a percentage of a weapon's cooldown)


So basically if those numbers are true. all the 8 ML medium builds are essentially firing at 13 MLs heat

Edited by Tennex, 11 June 2013 - 01:12 PM.