44 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

It's a good start. Forcing a 0.5 second wait rather than pumping out a penalty when not holding out to that wait on your own is another way to do it. Still though, it falls under the same complexities (MWO's learning curve is steep and then to learn about this too is a put off as it's a whole new list of charts to look at) as Paul's proposal.

My own idea targets the heat system itself, and aims to simplify it. At the moment you can tack in additional heatsinks to allow you to both cool off faster and reach higher heat levels too. Tabletop you only cooled off faster. Whether you had 10 standard heatsinks or 22 double heatsinks, you still had a maximum heat threshold of 30.

Let's say you fired two ER PPCs. Tabletop the heat was 15 (you also fired one at a time even if you fired both in the same turn), but since the turn lasts 10 seconds you some of that heat.

In MWO if it were not for the rising threshold, 2 ER PPCs would instantly shut you down. But because of that, 22 "1.4" heatsinks bring us to 92 maximum heat threshold. Then the reduction in heat generation on all high power weapons (only) allows us to abuse 3 or more alpha strikes. Meanwhile 30 standard heatsinks only brings you to 90, with 1x cooling per heatsink so it takes forever to drop down just 10% of the heat you gain.

To me the easiest solution is to find a point of threshold and say "That's your heat threshold, period." I'm thinking 15 1.4 heatsinks is a good spot, 63 heat threshold. You could get one and a half alpha strikes with 4 of the current ER PPCs, hit over 100% and be stuck there a bit. Or you could start using smaller weapons or chainfire them. This would also affect AC/20s a little bit to make them space out their shots, AC/10s and UAC/5s would suffer a bit heatwise and AC/2 + AC/5 combinations in macro rapid fire would suffer quite a bit (mostly the AC/2s in such rapid fire).

Gauss would remain unaffected. But overall the goal is to return heat management as a mechanic. Check out my ideas in the second link in the signature for a much better explanation.

[jollyrancher1]

Brown Hornet, on 23 June 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Jollyrancher, I think yr suggestion is good as a starting point. It would be good if they limited the 0.5s dealy to weapons not mounted to the same part of the mechs. E.g. each segment fires separately. You's still have the swayback putting out a high dps alpha and make hps much more valuable than they r now.

With the medium laser limit set to 6 the hunchback would be limited to 6 medium lasers, then after a .5 second delay of pulling the trigger the other 3 lasers could fire.

However if they mount 5 medium lasers and 1 or even 2 large lasers then the alpha would be very high.
1LL Hunchy
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...31cde512fb04b10
2LL Hunchy
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...5a648dbbfdc48aa

It seems you have found the an achilles heel of this setup. There is no limit in place to keep a energy boating mech from bumping up to 1 or 2 large lasers instead of more medium lasers and heatsinks.

Then the awesome would be the most high alpha mech on the battlefield:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...2b36dbf50018a6e

Stalkers with the same high alpha in mind would be:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4a274abe212c32f
They end up with 7-9 tons to work with for missiles too.

Quickdraw ends up somewhere in between:
2ppc 2LL 2 med xl325:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...65e2ea9ab3ddba8
3LL 3med xl350:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...f20d3c0fbf88f1e

Firebrand with 2ppc 2LL 2med 2 mg xl300:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3ad8f2a4d9a4f9e
Firebrand with 2ppc 2LL 2med 2 mg 250 std:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...622e456511b4465

The hunchback-4P is the main mech to end up with what seems like an advantage. So if this idea is to stand you would have to pick between keeping the 6 medium laser limit and dropping the 6 limit all together. This change only really affects 2 mechs the hunchback 4p and the blackjack 1x.

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

I thought I'd better elaborate on my hardpoint restriction concept, tho I do admit that it might not be viewed positively by people that like to have maximum firepower, but the alternative is that we're actually seeing unfeasible designs out there right now because not every map allows u to advance protected (if u wish) into an enemy force. So here are 2 worked examples on an Atlas-D-DC and Awesome 9M, because I'm familiar with them and they can be powerful but not quite OP.

AS7-D-DC
CURRENT HPs (no size restrictions)
RA = 1 Energy
RT = 2 Ballistic
LT = 3 Missile
LA = 1 Energy

PROPOSED HPS
RA = 1 size "L" Energy hardpoint
RT = 2 size "L" Ballistic hardpoints
LT = 3 size "M" Missile hardpoints
LA = 1 size "L" Energy hardpoint

AWS-9M
CURRENT HPs (no size restrictions)
RA = 1 Energy
RT = 1 Energy
CT = 2 Missile/ Energy
H = 1 Energy
LT = 1 Energy
LA = 1 Missile

PROPOSED HPS
RA = 1 size "L" Energy
RT = 1 size "L" Energy
CT = 2 size "S" Missile and/or 2 "M" Energy
H = 1 size "S" Energy
LT = 1 size "L" Energy
LA = 1 size "S" Missile

Now, what do the Ls, Ms and Ss mean?
L = large, medium or small weapons (i.e. everything - NO RESTRICTIONS)
M = medium or small weapons (e.g. AC10 and smaller ballistics, MLs, MPLs, SRM4 and smaller, LRM10 and smaller)
S = small weapons only (e.g. MG, AC2, LRM 5, SRM2, SSRM2, NARC, TAG, SPL, SL, Flamer)

ALSO:
2 "M" hardpoints = 1 "L" hardpoint
2 "S" hardpoints = 1 "M" hardpoint

NOTE: I haven't worked any OP Chassis yet because I don't play any of them. I only use Atlas, Awesomes, Centurions and Spiders

Edited by Brown Hornet, 23 June 2013 - 09:11 PM.

[jollyrancher1]

Koniving, on 23 June 2013 - 04:27 PM, said:

It's a good start. Forcing a 0.5 second wait rather than pumping out a penalty when not holding out to that wait on your own is another way to do it. Still though, it falls under the same complexities (MWO's learning curve is steep and then to learn about this too is a put off as it's a whole new list of charts to look at) as Paul's proposal.

My own idea targets the heat system itself, and aims to simplify it. At the moment you can tack in additional heatsinks to allow you to both cool off faster and reach higher heat levels too. Tabletop you only cooled off faster. Whether you had 10 standard heatsinks or 22 double heatsinks, you still had a maximum heat threshold of 30.

Let's say you fired two ER PPCs. Tabletop the heat was 15 (you also fired one at a time even if you fired both in the same turn), but since the turn lasts 10 seconds you some of that heat.

In MWO if it were not for the rising threshold, 2 ER PPCs would instantly shut you down. But because of that, 22 "1.4" heatsinks bring us to 92 maximum heat threshold. Then the reduction in heat generation on all high power weapons (only) allows us to abuse 3 or more alpha strikes. Meanwhile 30 standard heatsinks only brings you to 90, with 1x cooling per heatsink so it takes forever to drop down just 10% of the heat you gain.

To me the easiest solution is to find a point of threshold and say "That's your heat threshold, period." I'm thinking 15 1.4 heatsinks is a good spot, 63 heat threshold. You could get one and a half alpha strikes with 4 of the current ER PPCs, hit over 100% and be stuck there a bit. Or you could start using smaller weapons or chainfire them. This would also affect AC/20s a little bit to make them space out their shots, AC/10s and UAC/5s would suffer a bit heatwise and AC/2 + AC/5 combinations in macro rapid fire would suffer quite a bit (mostly the AC/2s in such rapid fire).

Gauss would remain unaffected. But overall the goal is to return heat management as a mechanic. Check out my ideas in the second link in the signature for a much better explanation.

I agree that the heat system isnt right where it is now, but changing the heat threshold does little to stop the problem of high pinpoint alphas. Its the fact that it can be fired all at once that makes a 6 ppc stalker so mean. And if the developers were looking into having a number based weapon boating heat penalty, I doubt it would be a stretch to do a limit on shots at once because of newb friendliness or too many charts.

[MustrumRidcully]

jollyrancher1, on 19 June 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

Convergence would be a cool way to nerf the long range sniping. However it wouldn't change the ac20 jeagers. Still a better way to stop some of the ppc boating than fiddling with heat penalty.

It would also affect the AC/20 Jagers, since the 2 AC/20s are very far apart - without good convergence, you either hit opposing sides on the enemy mech, or miss iwth one of them.

But the problem with altering convergence is that there is no UI feedback for convergence, no indicators.


So I really like your simple approach, I suggested something like that, too. It can be done in a very limited fashion, only affecting the weapons we really need to worry about. A simple rule:
If you fire a PPC, ER PPC, AC/10, AC/20 or Gauss Rfile, all other PPCs, ER PPCs, AC/10s, AC/20 and Gauss Rifles go on a 0.5 second cooldown.

We probably don't need to worry about any of the other weapons. While you can "alpha-boat" lasers, lasers all have a beam duration that will usually introduce damage spread on its own.

Brown Hornet, on 23 June 2013 - 09:06 PM, said:

I thought I'd better elaborate on my hardpoint restriction concept, tho I do admit that it might not be viewed positively by people that like to have maximum firepower, but the alternative is that we're actually seeing unfeasible designs out there right now because not every map allows u to advance protected (if u wish) into an enemy force. So here are 2 worked examples on an Atlas-D-DC and Awesome 9M, because I'm familiar with them and they can be powerful but not quite OP.

AS7-D-DC
CURRENT HPs (no size restrictions)
RA = 1 Energy
RT = 2 Ballistic
LT = 3 Missile
LA = 1 Energy

PROPOSED HPS
RA = 1 size "L" Energy hardpoint
RT = 2 size "L" Ballistic hardpoints
LT = 3 size "M" Missile hardpoints
LA = 1 size "L" Energy hardpoint

AWS-9M
CURRENT HPs (no size restrictions)
RA = 1 Energy
RT = 1 Energy
CT = 2 Missile/ Energy
H = 1 Energy
LT = 1 Energy
LA = 1 Missile

PROPOSED HPS
RA = 1 size "L" Energy
RT = 1 size "L" Energy
CT = 2 size "S" Missile and/or 2 "M" Energy
H = 1 size "S" Energy
LT = 1 size "L" Energy
LA = 1 size "S" Missile

Now, what do the Ls, Ms and Ss mean?
L = large, medium or small weapons (i.e. everything - NO RESTRICTIONS)
M = medium or small weapons (e.g. AC10 and smaller ballistics, MLs, MPLs, SRM4 and smaller, LRM10 and smaller)
S = small weapons only (e.g. MG, AC2, LRM 5, SRM2, SSRM2, NARC, TAG, SPL, SL, Flamer)

ALSO:
2 "M" hardpoints = 1 "L" hardpoint
2 "S" hardpoints = 1 "M" hardpoint

NOTE: I haven't worked any OP Chassis yet because I don't play any of them. I only use Atlas, Awesomes, Centurions and Spiders

Unless I am mistaken, the Atlas actually uses an LRM20 in its stock loadout. Your hard point system would make the stock D-DC illegal.

That is the problem with lots of the hard point restriction system. If you want to fight boating, you would have to invalidate certain stock mechs. Or you don't solve the problem you wanted to solve.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 23 June 2013 - 11:34 PM.

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

@ mustrum. No it would allow 1 "L" size missile hardpoint but you'd need to give up 1 "M" hp instead. I explain that towards the end of my post. Still legal. What I'm trying to achieve is something that supports the original D-DC and 9M design intent but limit OP customizations.

[Koniving]

jollyrancher1, on 23 June 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

I agree that the heat system isnt right where it is now, but changing the heat threshold does little to stop the problem of high pinpoint alphas. Its the fact that it can be fired all at once that makes a 6 ppc stalker so mean. And if the developers were looking into having a number based weapon boating heat penalty, I doubt it would be a stretch to do a limit on shots at once because of newb friendliness or too many charts.

True. But how would standardizing a heat threshold not change it? If you could only fire 4 ER PPCs once without shutting down and had to wait until less than 10% before you can safely fire again, and 6 ER PPCs would instantly shut you down in much the same way 4 does it to this guy here...


Note: At 3:12 he fires at 74% and survives, just to move again within a couple of seconds. With the threshold reduction if he fired at even 30% he'd self-destruct instantly with my solution.

How would that not stave off high alphas? The only thing it wouldn't affect is gauss rifles admittedly, but those 3D cataphracts with the twin ER PPC and gauss? They wouldn't be able to cool fast enough to fire anywhere near as often. I once watched someone in a cataphract 3D (as the last player against readily damaged enemies) take out 6 players back to back within less than 30 seconds and only reach 90% heat. Here, he'd be shut down by the 3rd shot and stuck there more than long enough to be taken out.

Setting a heat threshold of say 15 "1.4" heatsinks (63 heat) for all mechs regardless of heatsink counts would actually buff standard heatsinks, and only leave them impaired in the sense of cooling rate. ~They~ would be able to fire twice as much as they can now. This would make trial mechs viable.

Furthermore it buffs lights (who could barely manage 12 double heatsinks if even) so that they can fire more before having to hold back. Mediums would be able to brawl without shutting down as often, allowing them to take on their role a bit more properly.

All mechs using alpha strikes of any sort would suffer significantly. Right now in my Cataphract 1x I can do 3 back to back alpha strikes of 5 large lasers. After the threshold I'd only be able to do 2 and would be forced to shut down for 4 seconds before I could even risk powering back up.

Seen the 30 PPC Hunchback? It would self destruct before reaching 12 shots, and yes that's with the slower shots which would stay cooler than those PPCs.

The core issue right now is 22 1.4 heatsinks allows you to have a threshold of 92. Actually since MWO's first 10 built-in heatsinks are true doubles it's around a threshold of 110. Ultimately it's because your threshold rises with every heatsink you add. Therefore assaults are always at the advantage.

So long as you carry 22 "double" heatsinks you can fire almost 4 times more often than someone with just 10 standard. It's made even worse because not only do you have a higher threshold to abuse but you cool faster than they do too.

Solution? Remove the rising heat threshold. Bam.

Right now if you could put 9 MLs into an assault mech with 22 doubles (110 threshold) you can fire them 3 times back to back without a problem. The 4th time you'd be shut down for 3 seconds and able to fire again.

Remove that rising threshold (and set it to 15 doubles for a 63 threshold but keep those 22 double heatsinks, making them true doubles) and 9 MLs in the same assault mech and he'd shut down the second time he fired.

Same 9 ML in a Hunchback, with the standardized 63 threshold and only 12 true double heatsinks. He'd be able to fire them twice. Remain shut down for the same amount of time. The only difference? The assault mech would cool faster because he's got mot heatsinks.

But to have the same alpha strike limit regardless of what mech you're in makes ALL the mechs viable. It makes alpha striking dangerous, too.

A Jenner and your typical Awesome has the same size power plant, a 300 rated engine. The difference between them is one should cool twice as fast due to having twice as many heatsinks. With a limit on threshold they can both alpha strike just as much (they have the same power plant), but the Awesome cools twice as fast to zero so the Awesome would be ready to fire again sooner.

Since MWO has a rising threshold, though, the Awesome can fire twice as many alpha strikes, and be ready to fire again 1.8 (the true doubles plus the 1.4s) times as fast. The end result is the Awesome can fire alphas almost 4 times as often as the Jenner, thereby making lights and mediums useless.

So...

TL;DR

• Rising threshold makes assaults the go-to mech due to the fact that they can abuse alpha strikes almost 4 times as often as lights and mediums, twice as often as most heavies.
  
• Rising threshold at 22 double heatsinks allows for 110 maximum heat for shutting down. Currently 220 heat is required to do significant damage to yourself. 165 is required to start doing CT damage in Paul's solution.
  
• Assuming that the 10 true double heatsinks built into the engine raise the threshold only by 1.4, then the threshold is 92, in which case it takes 184 to do significant damage to yourself. That means you must generate a minimum of 138 to do CT damage according to Paul's solution.
  
• If we predefine the threshold of all heatsinks regardless of number or type to that of 15 "1.4" heatsinks (63 heat), 120 heat would instantly kill you and 90 heat would be Paul's "150%" threshold for receiving rapid CT damage.
  
• The average 6 ER PPC stalker generates 66 heat with MWO's current heat generation. In tabletop (with the 30 heat threshold) the 6 ER PPC stalker generates 90 heat.
  
• The most any 2 ER PPC + gauss build could fire in rapid succession is 4 times and be shut down for up to x seconds.

If we take the same idea of setting a threshold limit but instead of 63, set it to tabletop's 30:

• 6 ER PPCs would instantly kill yourself.
  
• 4 ER PPCs would shut you down for nearly 8 seconds and even firing a small laser at the same time would cause you to receive instant damage to your CT.
  
• 6 standard PPCs would cause you instant damage to the CT but you could survive firing them all. You wouldn't ever be able to fire them all again.
  
• 4 LL would just barely keep you at 93% alpha striking once.
  
• 6 ML would bring you to 80%. 9 ML would overheat you and keep you still for a bit.
  
• A twin ER PPC + Gauss build could only safely fire once. Even after waiting 4 seconds to fire again he'd shut down.
  
• A twin PPC + Gauss build would only be able to fire, wait the minimum 4 seconds and fire again. A third time would keep him shut down for at least 6 seconds minimum, with another 6 before he can fire again (only to immediately shut back down).
  
• All of the above would be true whether you're in a light, a medium, a heavy or an assault. It would be true if you're using standard or double heatsinks. It would be true even if you're in a trial mech. The only change is wait times to cool off based on the number and type of heat sinks.
  
• This makes ~all~ mechs fair and brings back heat management as a real mechanic.

Twin PPC + gauss is likely to get swapped for twin Gauss + a PPC after this change.
Further ideas of mine included dispersing PPC damage into a spread-out effect similar to missile splash but dividing from a pool of 10 damage. (Simplified: Your hit splashes over CT and RT; divide the 10 damage into 2 sections. 5 damage CT, 5 damage RT. Although it's preferred to do at least 60% to where you hit, and 40% divided into other sections so say I hit your center torso and it splashes left and right. We'd do 6 damage CT, and 2 damage LT, 2 damage RT.)

Why disperse PPC damage? Have a look at my Pretty Baby after I'm hit.

We already see a dispersion / splash-like visual effect and we need to reduce pin-point damage. Why not disperse it?

Simple way to solve ballistic problems is already in the works.

Weapon variants that are upcoming (mentioned several times in ATDs although no specifics have been given) are hopefully going include predefined lore variants such as:

• the Chemjet Gun AC/20 which at best guess might do a 4-round burst AC/20 pumps out 4 shots of 5 damage each to total 20),
  
• the Super Crusher Heavy AutoCannon AC/20 (rapidly fires a burst of 10 shots either at 1 shot per 0.1 seconds or 1 shot per 0.2 seconds, each doing 2 damage to total 20 damage).
  
• With these versions the AC/20 as we know it will likely get removed or otherwise modified to encourage the use of the previously mentioned AC/20s.

My way to fix the UAC/5 based on the description of the UAC on Sarna is likely to have its single shots divided into 2, each doing 2.5 damage, with the "double tap" firing another burst of 2 shots at the risk of jamming. Possibility of the jam rate being reduced. Not sure how variants would work, as these would rely on 'half' versions of the regular AC/5 and however their variants work.

The ideas overall are found in the second link of my signature.

Edited by Koniving, 24 June 2013 - 04:49 AM.

[jollyrancher1]

@ Koniving

I totally agree that the better way to fix this problem is by overhauling the heat system. However if they want to keep most of the same game play that they have now, then they might not go so drastic as to change it all around at this time. My solution is a band aid on the real problem of the heating system they are currently using. But if we could have the high pinpoint alpha problem changed sooner as opposed to later that would be great.

[Grey Black]

In response to everyone clamoring for hardpoint size restrictions. ... I disagree. Hardpoints are an effective way to limit where weapons can be placed as is.

However, something has to be done about the high alpha build effectiveness. As such, instead of putting size restrictions on hardpoints, why not work in reverse? That is, make it so weapons consume more hardpoints as a weapon quirk?

Take the PPC. To mount a PPC now, it requires 1 hardpoint to mount. Instead, why not make it so you have to have 2 hardpoints? This will reduce the number of PPCs a mech can hold and decrease a build's alpha.

Certain chassis may need to be modified to allow this restriction, such as the Catapult K2, but it will also fix other problems fthan cause them.

[jollyrancher1]

Grey Black, on 25 June 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

Certain chassis may need to be modified to allow this restriction, such as the Catapult K2, but it will also fix other problems fthan cause them.

I think it would end up being more than a few chassis, and we would end up with too many high alpha laser mechs.

[jollyrancher1]

I was playing with the 2 hunchback 4p builds mentioned earlier that used LL and ML. Those builds would not be nerfed with the plan I have. They are pretty devastating in terms of alpha damage, but are pretty weak to sniper fire much the way the hunchback 4p plays with 9 medium lasers. The extra kick is really nice and the heating on the 2 LL one is about 2 alpha strikes before shutdown. It will core an atlas with about 4 direct alpha hits. 48 damage pinpoint alpha.

The tweaked 2LL 6ML hunchback 4p build:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...1a53e3b5cc48e76

I dont have any good ideas on how to put the hunchback 4p down a notch with this system yet. The heat penalty option ends up with the same argument I have against the 6ppc stalker in that the weapons can be fired once is the problem, not the combat usefulness of the high alpha pinpoint heat builds. Anyone have any ideas that would solve this issue? If not then having no limit on medium lasers might be a better option than the 6 limit. I kinda wanted to keep the 6 ML limit in because that is one of the numbers thrown in by the developers.

From the command chair:
An example:
Mech Model: Hunchback-4P
This Mech (known as the Swayback) is capable of firing 9 energy weapons all at the same time. There are 6 energy hardpoints in the pod on its shoulder, one on each arm and one on the head. The most common build for this Mech is to boat it with Medium Lasers.

We take into consideration that the 6-pack pod is intended to be fired all at once and a player should not be penalized for this. It is for this reason that we would set the Medium Laser threshold to 6; meaning that firing 6 MLs simultaneously will NOT suffer from a heat scale penalty. The 6 MLs will generate the standard amount of heat currently in the game.

The heat scale penalty kicks in when the player fires 7 or more MLs and for each ML fired beyond 7, the heat scale increases. The breakdown would look as follows (Keep in mind, these numbers are for demonstration purposes only):

6 ML fired = 0 heat penalty
7 ML fired = 5 heat penalty
8 ML fired = 10 heat penalty
9 ML fired = 20 heat penalty

To avoid the heat penalty while playing a Swayback is easily avoided if the player fires 6 MLs and waits 0.5 seconds and then fires the remaining 3 MLs. Doing so will result in 0 heat penalties.

Investigation items are not locked in and are exactly that... thoughts and tests. Do NOT go flying off the handle about how this won't work or that won't work until we make an official post. It will severely help your blood pressure.

[jollyrancher1]

A 6 energy weapon per volley limit might work. Fires from largest to smallest weapon, and excludes small lasers, flamers, and tag. Most mechs only have 6 energy points anyway, and that way it would be in line with clan mechs hopefully. Then you would not only have the hunchback 4p and blackjack 1x boating slightly nerfed, but something like the nova's 12 lasers as well. http://www.sarna.net...28Black_Hawk%29

The battlemaster takes a bad hit from this limitation though as it has 6 medium lasers and 1 ppc according to serna. http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Battlemaster If it fires all 6 lasers it could not fire the 1 ppc without having to wait the .5 seconds or if they are grouped together it would not fire one of its medium lasers in an alpha strike. I just kinda hate the idea of nerfing a stock load out in any way. It is the only stock mech I have found so far that has this problem.

[jollyrancher1]

I figured out a way to make the battlemaster have a full alpha. Change the limit to 6 laser weapons and not include the ppc in that limit. That way a mech could fire 6 medium lasers and 1 ppc at the same time. The 6 medium lasers would trip the .5 wait timer, but then a mech could still fire 1 ppc. This design actually fits exactly in line with the battlemaster BLR-1G. http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Battlemaster "Versatile and powerful, the BattleMaster was one of the best known mechs in existence."

Edited by jollyrancher1, 30 June 2013 - 10:13 AM.

[CH3WBACCA]

a capacitor would be a good balancer. the generator constantly feeds the capacitor, and to fire a weapon you need a certain amount in the capacitor.

the generator should charge it fast enough to keep up with most every weapon setup, but the capacity of the capacitor shouldn't allow several large weapons to alpha at the same time.

the larger weapons would need more energy, therefore the bigger the weapon, the fewer you can fire at the same time.

[jollyrancher1]

CH3WBACCA, on 30 June 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

a capacitor would be a good balancer. the generator constantly feeds the capacitor, and to fire a weapon you need a certain amount in the capacitor.

the generator should charge it fast enough to keep up with most every weapon setup, but the capacity of the capacitor shouldn't allow several large weapons to alpha at the same time.

the larger weapons would need more energy, therefore the bigger the weapon, the fewer you can fire at the same time.

This ruling doesnt apply for ac20s. They are an explosive powered projectile so a capacitor limit wouldn't be right. You could argue that recoil from firing two ac20s at once is too much strain on the chassis, but then an ac20 and ppc mech would have a balance of energy and explosive powered projectiles not requiring a capacitor recharge time.

The stock Awesome and Battlemaster would be at a big disadvantage as well if they weren't given the ability to do a full alpha strike with either 3ppc or 6 ML and 1 ppc. You could just say that they have a larger capacitor, but then they could fire more energy weapons than other mechs by an amount that would have to be completely made up.

The main problem with doing a capacitor themed ruling system is that some mechs need alot more energy weapons fired at once than others. So in the end it would affect the high damage pinpoint energy boating mechs and not the ballistic/energy boating ones.

Without that ruling the battlefield would have a lot of these running around.
Misery: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...c75d2f6e33dfbad
Atlas rs: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...24613cc0a473a93

If you keep the ac20 .5 second wait in those mechs they change slightly. They have to downgrade to an ac10 or suffer the .5 wait. Personally I think this would make an ac10 a much more valued weapon. It could be combined with 2 ppcs to give you a 30 damage pinpoint alpha at 450 meters or so. Then the mech owner has to choose between more stopping power in the ac20 or a higher alpha with the ac10.

Then the battlefield would have some of these mechs that chose a higher pinpoint alpha at the cost of 10 damage.
Misery: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...01c254df4025437
Atlas rs: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...333ae115d54afe5

I started off throwing lore to the wind and just putting down some limits on weapons based on what I thought would positively affect gameplay, not what limits make the most sense or fit the lore. It becomes a problem of which would you prefer lore or gameplay. Its pretty hard to come up with a reasoning based on lore that also helps directly with gameplay. Its also pretty difficult to come up with numbers of weapons that can be fired at once so that mediums have the option of ppcs/LL and assaults cant bring just ppcs and LL without spreading the damage. The ac20 and gauss limit of 1 is a given for me, but perhaps not for others. A 3 ppc limit is 30 damage and would not hamper a 6 ppc stalker very much. A heavy class mech with 2ppc and a guass gun is also very powerful. 1ppc per .5 seconds would be silly so im not even going to bring it up. If you go with a 4 LL limit then most assaults and heavies will use 4 LL and have a 36 damage pinpoint alpha leaving them with little other weaponry used. The large lasers also overlap with mediums at close range so they could bring 3 LL and 3 ML doing a 42 damage alpha and that is with a 6 laser weapon limit. Without the 6 laser weapon limit it would be even higher. So the problem is in where the pinpoint alpha damage should be nerfed to. It is completely opinion based as to what limit to use on weapons so that the high damage pinpoint alphas get nerfed the right amount.

In the end im just making up numbers that I think would affect gameplay in the most positive way.

On a side note how much force is put on a mech firing an ac20. A 1/7 ton shell is really hard to shoot due to the recoil from a realistic physics standpoint.

[jollyrancher1]

Just tried out the battlemaster's energy weapons load out with these limitations on a hunchback4p and it was pretty impressive. The battlemaster ends up putting out a 53 damage pinpoint alpha strike with 2ppc 2LL and 3ML. http://mwo.smurfy-ne...60fa546f7a6ce41 Im completely fine with this being one of the highest energy only alphas in the game. It cores heavy mechs out in 2 concentrated hits to the ct. However, the heating is horrible of course and to get the full damage you must concentrate laser fire and be within 270m. The hunchback doesnt really have the weight to put on that weaponry effectively so mediums most likely wont be running around in the meta with this high of an alpha. Heavy and assault mechs with more than 6 energy hard points in the future though might be able to use it, but for a while at least it will be somewhat limited to battlemasters and awesome 8qs. The addition of any ballistics or missiles other than the ac20 and gauss rifle would add to the alpha strike, however there are no mechs right now that can run ballistics and more than 6 energy hard points. Any additional energy hard points over 7 and the mech must wait .5 seconds to fire its last energy weapon unless it uses a small laser, flamer, or tag.

An awesome 8q with a 3 ppc limit instead of 2 could put out a 58 damage alpha. http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0d3963437cdb032

These are very specific builds that cater to not waiting for the .5 seconds. Simply putting on 4 or 6 ppcs and spreading damage out is almost just as enticing as running a super high alpha build. To me that is the perfect nerf, when the 6ppc weapon system gets bumped down to make running it viable and situational, all the while hopefully putting an end to the peek a boo style gameplay that is very prevalent in mwo.

[Syllogy]

Reluctantly, I feel that the best way to handle the High Damage Alpha problem is still hardpoint size-related restrictions.

[Kyrs]

Very interesting tread!
But the weapon type of those hard point limitation can be easily work around and we will end up with only few model of chassis to be competitive.

Option C:There also the option of just capping the max output of a alpha strike base on the fact that your engine can only give you X amount power per second for your weapon.

ex: max output 24 damage (optimal) per .5 second if that output is exceed then your weapon jam until the .5 second is done

edit: Also the could be the option of adding a capacitor module that can increase the output to 30 BUT this engine module is NOT compatible with CoolShoot.

Option D: Or we could just remove the bonus heat cap from heat sink and cut the heat cap in half.. BUT double the cooling rate of rate of heat sink to force people en chain fire after one alpha.

Edited by Kyrs, 01 July 2013 - 10:15 AM.

[jollyrancher1]

Syllogy, on 01 July 2013 - 04:07 AM, said:

Reluctantly, I feel that the best way to handle the High Damage Alpha problem is still hardpoint size-related restrictions.

The main problem with hard point restrictions is that it is very opinion based and I fear that we will end up with much less variety on the battlefield. If you show me a hard point system outline that brings alot of options to the table and limits the high pinpoint alphas I might agree with you, but to me the hard point restriction route ends up limiting the creativity of builds that lets you cater a mech to your own play style. Missile tubes are already restricted in a somewhat similar fashion as a hard point size restriction and all it leads to is some mechs not being able to run larger lrms without being penalized. So I would think a similar thing would happen for ppcs. There would be mechs that simply cannot run ppcs. Not limiting this lets people completely specialize their mech in energy or ballistic weapons without it being so powerful that simply getting shot once leads to 40 or 60 damage in one hit to one location. These are the reasons a hard point size restriction system ends up fixing some of the peek a boo of the game, but leaves you with much less options.as far as specializing. Also the jeager with dual ac20/gauss would be unaffected if the jeager had 1 large ballistic spot on each arm.

[jollyrancher1]

Kyrs, on 01 July 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

Very interesting tread!
But the weapon type of those hard point limitation can be easily work around and we will end up with only few model of chassis to be competitive.

Option C:There also the option of just capping the max output of a alpha strike base on the fact that your engine can only give you X amount power per second for your weapon.

ex: max output 24 damage (optimal) per .5 second if that output is exceed then your weapon jam until the .5 second is done

edit: Also the could be the option of adding a capacitor module that can increase the output to 30 BUT this engine module is NOT compatible with CoolShoot.

Option D: Or we could just remove the bonus heat cap from heat sink and cut the heat cap in half.. BUT double the cooling rate of rate of heat sink to force people en chain fire after one alpha.

Here is the list so far of 4 ways to limit the boating of high pinpoint alpha mechs.

Option A: Weapon limit Proposed in the first post of this thread
Not very newb friendly as it has many rules. Also this limitation is completely pulled out of thin air for the sake of gameplay.

Option B: Hard point restrictions
The main problem with hard point restrictions is that it is very opinion based and I fear that we will end up with much less variety on the battlefield.

Option C: Capacitor restrictions
Lore ends up not nerfing ac20 jeagers or if you count ballistics and missiles into the max alpha limit it would limit the alpha strike on many of the stock variants that are the starting point of all of mechwarrior and set the archetype for the chassis.

Option D: Overhaul the heating system
This option is my first choice as well, however it would require alot of work by the devs and change the game completely.

I prefer option A of course, how about anybody else?