721 replies to this topic

[Unbound Inferno]

Deathlike, on 15 July 2013 - 10:51 AM, said:

Got that right. You think CT coring was bad? add a volley of 30 LRMs you can't dodge.

[jeffsw6]

Unbound Inferno, on 15 July 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

You do realize what that would do for my 6x LRM5 A1?

Yes, but it's 30 of them, instead of 60 to 80 that people jam into a Stalker, because that is how many you need to be effective through AMS. :/

[DarkJaguar]

AndyHill, on 14 July 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

It seems that I've already forgotten how much the heat system punishes in MWO. However, if I get the chance to do a lot of burst damage, I'll always take that instead of sustained fire. Since you enjoy making graphs, I might learn a bit more about your system with a couple of example builds:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...60a94a01deb175f
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...288d213706ca7f9
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...f28b926c497d855

Sorry it took me so long to respond. I took my kid to the creek yesterday. Anyway...

HBK-4P

Spoiler

Yours


Stock

STK-3F

Spoiler

Yours


Stock

AS7-D

Spoiler

Yours


Stock

How do you feel about these comparisons?

Edited by DarkJaguar, 15 July 2013 - 12:19 PM.

[Teralitha]

Pht, on 15 July 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

You've made an elementary mistake. The actual recycle rates in TT aren't 10 seconds for everything. The actual recycle rates (can I fire this weapon this turn?) is controlled by the heat mechanic. The 10 second refire simply expresses another opportunity to pull the trigger. Run hot enough, and you're in shutdown, and you can't even fire.

Heat controls damage output for everything in the TT... and it does so in the lore, too.

This guy has it right. As I also have said many times.. HEAT. But how to fix it? My own suggestion is to remove double heat sinks, and then tweek single heat sinks. Once that is in a sweet spot, adjust weapons..... and for heavens sake... slow them down.....

Edited by Teralitha, 15 July 2013 - 12:27 PM.

[DarkJaguar]

Teralitha, on 15 July 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

This guy has it right. As I also have said many times.. HEAT. But how to fix it? My own suggestion is to remove double heat sinks, and then tweek single heat sinks. Once that is in a sweet spot, adjust weapons..... and for heavens sake... slow them down.....

You don't need to remove DHS to make SHS viable, you need to reduce the heat of High-critslot weapons like the autocannon family to make them viable with SHS.

[FatBabyThompkins]

An idea I had on how to implement an ever increasing heat attack penalty is to simulate an ever increasing malfunctioning targeting computer. First penalty has the reticule jump a random direction for a fraction of a second and then back on target. Just enough time to distract someone. Second penalty will include a fading reticule. Third penalty will see reticule flashing on and off randomly.

Similar effect could be used to simulate pilot heat distress. First heat penalty causes a lessening of color saturation. Second heat penalty causes a general blurring (including HUD and in cabin information). Third heat penalty causes dimming of the screen (simulating blackout).

The point being to distract the human player by running too much heat. More advanced players will be able to overcome some of the distraction, increasing skill cap.

This does not affect alpha, but would affect follow on shots, especially if the two penalties have different time tables. Burst heat affects the targeting computer and the reticule. Prolonged heat affects the pilot. Alpha your PPCs? The targeting computer starts to go haywire, but your cabin isn't affected yet. Continually firing your PPCs keeping your heat high even without exact reticule? Now your cabin starts to heat up and you start to feel its effect. Essentially, turns high heat to running in hardcore mode: no reticule, no HUD.

Then add modules or similarly purchasable items to reduce the effect, but not eliminate it. Make it a trade off for other modules. Want the best sniper build? Can't take seismic sensor...

[DarkJaguar]

FatBabyThompkins, on 15 July 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

An idea I had on how to implement an ever increasing heat attack penalty is to simulate an ever increasing malfunctioning targeting computer. First penalty has the reticule jump a random direction for a fraction of a second and then back on target. Just enough time to distract someone. Second penalty will include a fading reticule. Third penalty will see reticule flashing on and off randomly.

Similar effect could be used to simulate pilot heat distress. First heat penalty causes a lessening of color saturation. Second heat penalty causes a general blurring (including HUD and in cabin information). Third heat penalty causes dimming of the screen (simulating blackout).

The point being to distract the human player by running too much heat. More advanced players will be able to overcome some of the distraction, increasing skill cap.

This does not affect alpha, but would affect follow on shots, especially if the two penalties have different time tables. Burst heat affects the targeting computer and the reticule. Prolonged heat affects the pilot. Alpha your PPCs? The targeting computer starts to go haywire, but your cabin isn't affected yet. Continually firing your PPCs keeping your heat high even without exact reticule? Now your cabin starts to heat up and you start to feel its effect. Essentially, turns high heat to running in hardcore mode: no reticule, no HUD.

Then add modules or similarly purchasable items to reduce the effect, but not eliminate it. Make it a trade off for other modules. Want the best sniper build? Can't take seismic sensor...

AWESOME ideas for how to implement advanced heat effects, I'd love to see these in play.

[RG Notch]

Teralitha, on 15 July 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

This guy has it right. As I also have said many times.. HEAT. But how to fix it? My own suggestion is to remove double heat sinks, and then tweek single heat sinks. Once that is in a sweet spot, adjust weapons..... and for heavens sake... slow them down.....

Give it a ******* rest with your anti DHS campaign.

[jeffsw6]

RG Notch, on 15 July 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

Give it a ******* rest with your anti DHS campaign.

People who want DHS eliminated should try playing a trial mech on Caustic or Tourmaline. Or any mech with a few lasers and only SHS. Even if your opponents all had the same setup, it would be pretty ridiculous. Whichever team happens to have a mech with an AC/20 = winner.

[Deathlike]

jeffsw6, on 15 July 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

People who want DHS eliminated should try playing a trial mech on Caustic or Tourmaline. Or any mech with a few lasers and only SHS. Even if your opponents all had the same setup, it would be pretty ridiculous. Whichever team happens to have a mech with an AC/20 = winner.

No Gauss?

[Skinflowers]

Lugh, on 15 July 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

http://www.dtic.mil/...oc?AD=ada437023

Your wish is my command :

page 41

The M256 main gun is a “precision,
direct fire weapon where accuracy is of the utmost importance” according to Army
Research Laboratory (ARL) responsible for the gun’s development (Morgan-Brown
2003). The goal of the ARL, published in its March 2003 electronic newsletter, is “one
shot, one kill” directed at a target as small as one meter square over a mile away
(Morgan-Brown 2003). While one lab strives to build the most accurate tank possible,
soldiers continue to test the systems in field laboratories from the NTC to Iraq. During
the Army’s 2001 Division Capstone Exercise (DCX) at the NTC, the Army tested its
latest M1A2 upgrade--system enhancement program (SEP). The M1A2 SEP performed
up to par, allowing gunners the ability to “kill” moving enemy armor at 3,400 meters,

Accuracy of 1meter on a round 120 mm

Read your quote again.

That's not the reality, that's the goal.

" The goal of the ARL, published in its March 2003 electronic newsletter, is “one
shot, one kill” directed at a target as small as one meter square over a mile away
(Morgan-Brown 2003)"

What he said originally is true. A weapon with a CEP of zero does not exist and i'll stick my neck out here and say it will be unlikely to ever exist. I'd say probability (rather than random) is real. Random has become, unjustly, a dirty word with respect to MW:O.

Edited by Skinflowers, 15 July 2013 - 01:27 PM.

[AndyHill]

DarkJaguar, on 15 July 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

How do you feel about these comparisons?

I don't know if I feel overly strongly about the results, I was just curious to see how those 'mechs would work. The results are quite revealing, however. Am I reading correctly that even the 6LLAS Stalker would barely register on the heat scale? Also, perhaps not the most important thing ever, but when you make more graphs in the future, would it be a lot of trouble to do more than one 10 second cycle? It doesn't necessarily reveal anything important, but I liked how you could observe a number of cycles when the shorter cooldown MWO weapons were shown on a 10 second scale.

[Warge]

jeffsw6, on 15 July 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

People who want DHS eliminated should try playing a trial mech on Caustic or Tourmaline. Or any mech with a few lasers and only SHS. Even if your opponents all had the same setup, it would be pretty ridiculous. Whichever team happens to have a mech with an AC/20 = winner.

That's why ACs should fire bursts...

[jeffsw6]

Deathlike, on 15 July 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

No Gauss?

Yeah I have to give you that.

Okay, if DHS are removed, matches on Caustic and Tourmaline will be won by whichever team has Gauss Rifles and AC/20s.

Or more correctly, the team that has more non-energy-weapons?

EDIT: Hey, you guys side-tracked me!

The point is, if you think deleting DHS is a good idea, go play a few dozen matches with only SHS mechs. It is really bad. That is all.

Edited by jeffsw6, 15 July 2013 - 04:40 PM.

[Leonidesalinas]

Garth Erlam, on 09 July 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

Hey guys, I wanted to thank you for all of these ideas, and wanted you to know they have been forwarded to design. I cannot guarantee they'll be used, but thanks for the effort of putting your thoughts and ideas to paper text

this is all we wanted, Garth. thank you for considering this. these ideas in this thread (the OP namely) would fix this game.

[Lord of All]

jeffsw6, on 15 July 2013 - 04:38 PM, said:

Yeah I have to give you that.

Okay, if DHS are removed, matches on Caustic and Tourmaline will be won by whichever team has Gauss Rifles and AC/20s.

Or more correctly, the team that has more non-energy-weapons?

EDIT: Hey, you guys side-tracked me!

The point is, if you think deleting DHS is a good idea, go play a few dozen matches with only SHS mechs. It is really bad. That is all.

Yeah. you can't boat!

[jeffsw6]

Like 2 large lasers is too much heat for SHS on those maps. How is that boating?

[DarkJaguar]

AndyHill, on 15 July 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

I don't know if I feel overly strongly about the results, I was just curious to see how those 'mechs would work. The results are quite revealing, however. Am I reading correctly that even the 6LLAS Stalker would barely register on the heat scale? Also, perhaps not the most important thing ever, but when you make more graphs in the future, would it be a lot of trouble to do more than one 10 second cycle? It doesn't necessarily reveal anything important, but I liked how you could observe a number of cycles when the shorter cooldown MWO weapons were shown on a 10 second scale.

Lasers by my design are constant burn weapons, so their heat is spread out over time as well. I could tune their HPS numbers to make them register better, but this is just my starting point, so while it barely registers on the scale (6 large lasers output 4.8 HPS, 20DHS negate 4.0 HPS, leaving a growth of .8 HPS) it's balanced out in that it's not dealing it's damage in one hit either. You basically trade heat efficiency for Burst damage, which I feel is actually a pretty good balance mechanic (or else why would you ever take a LL over a PPC aside from weight?). DOT weapons are also extremely useful against fast targets, I could see that Stalker being a nasty Light/Medium killer, but it would get it's *** handed to it one on one with a stock STK-3F (which probably wouldn't do as well against lights or mediums).

[8RoundsRapid]

Leonidesalinas, on 15 July 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

this is all we wanted, Garth. thank you for considering this. these ideas in this thread (the OP namely) would fix this game.

Don't use the word 'we' as if you speak for us all. I, for one, can say w/ 100% certainty that a simple, 'thanks guise! passin the buck on this one!' is NOT what I want to hear or see.

In fact, no words from PGI can save them at this point. We all know their words aren't worth the pixels they're printed on.

[Pht]

DarkJaguar, on 15 July 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

You don't need to remove DHS to make SHS viable, you need to reduce the heat of High-critslot weapons like the autocannon family to make them viable with SHS.

I honestly don't see the advantage of having to scratch-build a balancing patch/system when an entire usable system has been given to us that has 30 years of balancing work on it already done.