68 replies to this topic

[kesuga7]

hmm odd
i remember they changed it on the forums where as you could only have polls in certain sections
which is still lame

[Asmosis]

heat is fine where it is, but theres a number of things they could to to help with the 35-60 pinpoint long range alpha builds, projectile speed is one of them.

This would also apply to all AC cannons, gauss and any variants of them in the future as well of course, not just PPC variants.

[Ilithi Dragon]

Heat is not fine where it is. My best friend, Catamount, was just telling me earlier this evening about a Catapult-C1 poptart/brawler hybrid of his he has. He swapped out the ERPPCs for regular PPCs, and was able to basically just turn them on and leave them on, in a Catapult that also carried a pair of SRM6s and a pile of ammo for them.

That just should not be something that can happen. The PPC has historically been a very effective sniper weapon, but at the cost of having a very high heat generation, which both limits the ability of mechs to boat a bunch of them, and limits its effectiveness as a brawling weapon.

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

I agree to a PPC heat increase. CD is fine and speed is fine too. What I think PGI should do is reduce heat dissipation rate the hotter a mech becomes. This is just physics. When a mech becomes hotter, that heat transfers to a HS, which then becomes hot and loses efficiency. This would encourage sensible use of the heat scale and for those people that like to alpa blast away their CD rate would get progressively worse untlil they drop below a "no effect level." It would also mean that investing in HSs is a good idea if you want to maximise your CD rate.

[Helsbane]

Stop nerfing things and make other weapons viable again. Increase SRM damage but fix the splash. Double the ammo per ton for ballistics. Make MGs an anti-mech weapon since infantry isn't a game feature.

And, perhaps my favorite suggestion, stop adding in new crap till all the existing mechanics work correctly. It's impossible to get a solution in place for existing problems if you bury them under another layer of crap every patch.

[Nasinil]

Check the stats of PPC and ERPPC theyre doing enough heat and have a lower DPS than any AC nerfing it means just making em useless.

[Thermidor]

I say increase the tonnage so that players can't boat them. The new overheating damage patch does little to curb boats as people still boat them and the movement patch (which has crippled this game) has still made PPC boats stupidly powerful, as you get stuck on a pebble and can't get away and then.... boom! death.

[Catamount]

Helsbane, on 07 July 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

Stop nerfing things and make other weapons viable again. Increase SRM damage but fix the splash. Double the ammo per ton for ballistics. Make MGs an anti-mech weapon since infantry isn't a game feature.

And, perhaps my favorite suggestion, stop adding in new crap till all the existing mechanics work correctly. It's impossible to get a solution in place for existing problems if you bury them under another layer of crap every patch.

I agree to all of this pretty much, because brawling weapons needs some serious love, but PPCs still need a heat adjustment. Ilithi is correct; my C1 with two PPCs was basically just able to fire them nonstop, not only without overheating, but on many maps without even blowing coolshots. When you're running around firing a pair of PPCs in the middle of the calderra and not caring much about your heat, or running around in the snow and literally not caring at all, I don't know what you're running but they aren't PPCs anymore.


Also, to be clear, the point is NOT to make PPCs bad in general with a massive weight increase or a ridiculous recycle time increase; it's to make them a niche weapon. There's a reason the aforementioned C1 ran two SRM6 packs, and that's because when I built it, not only did SRMs not suck, but PPCs did suck in brawling, because you could only fire them a couple times before running into serious heat issues. That's how PPCs have been for as long as I've been playing Mechwarrior; they were always great sniping weapons, but you could never fire them more than a few times. You certainly could never death hose them endlessly.

Edited by Catamount, 08 July 2013 - 07:11 AM.

[Shlkt]

I think 10 heat for the PPC is reasonable. For ERPPC, 13 heat seems more appropriate... 15 is kinda ridiculous.

In past MechWarrior titles, the PPC has always had a poorer heat efficiency than the medium laser (the good 'ol medium laser is a staple, after all). Remember, heat is basically mana. Your damage-to-heat ratio is the key limiting factor to sustained DPS, as all mechs have the same heat capacity (read: mana pool) regardless of weight.

Historical values for medium laser and PPC are 1.66 and 1, respectively, in terms of heat efficiency. In other words, past titles have the medium laser being 66% more efficient with its heat usage compared to the PPC.

With MWO's current weapon balance, though, the PPC and medium laser have the exact same damage-to-heat ratio, which practically means that the medium laser has suffered a very significant nerf. That doesn't seem right to me. As the OP mentioned, this wasn't a problem until HSR was implemented because PPCs were more difficult to use (and therefore the damage-to-heat ratio was lowered artificially due to missed shots).

[Krzysztof z Bagien]

Brown Hornet, on 07 July 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

I agree to a PPC heat increase. CD is fine and speed is fine too. What I think PGI should do is reduce heat dissipation rate the hotter a mech becomes. This is just physics. When a mech becomes hotter, that heat transfers to a HS, which then becomes hot and loses efficiency. This would encourage sensible use of the heat scale and for those people that like to alpa blast away their CD rate would get progressively worse untlil they drop below a "no effect level." It would also mean that investing in HSs is a good idea if you want to maximise your CD rate.

It's actually the oposite: the higher the temperature difference between objects (like hot heat sink vs cold environment), the faster heat transfers. So hot heat sink should actually cool faster and dissipate MORE heat per second.

Edited by Krzysztof z Bagien, 08 July 2013 - 10:13 AM.

[MountainCopper]

I also don't like on how PPCs are right now. Every SECOND mech has at least 1 PPC/ERPPC, many have multiple or "as much as possible".
Annoying and boring to be honest. You can't even show your head anywhere without being hit by multiple PPCs... removing halve or more of the front CT armour in 1 second.

Very nearly being direct-hit weapons on huge range, there still should be more penalty for the weapon itself. I'd start with the projectile speed, which was mentioned to be a good deal slower than it is now.

Edited by GoldenFleece, 08 July 2013 - 08:06 AM.

[ronalex1]

GoldenFleece, on 08 July 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

I also don't like on how PPCs are right now. Every SECOND mech has at least 1 PPC/ERPPC, many have multiple or "as much as possible".
Annoying and boring to be honest. You can't even show your head anywhere without being hit by multiple PPCs... removing halve or more of the front CT armour in 1 second.

Very nearly being direct-hit weapons on huge range, there still should be more penalty for the weapon itself. I'd start with the projectile speed, which was mentioned to be a good deal slower than it is now.

Edited by ronalex1, 08 July 2013 - 09:01 AM.

[ChapeL]

ErPPC could stand to be hotter for sure.. by how much ? Only testing will tell.

[Magicbullet141]

The ppc recharge times should be reset back along with heat increases. A longer recharge time just lets people be careless with heat.

[Ilithi Dragon]

Brown Hornet, on 07 July 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

I agree to a PPC heat increase. CD is fine and speed is fine too. What I think PGI should do is reduce heat dissipation rate the hotter a mech becomes. This is just physics. When a mech becomes hotter, that heat transfers to a HS, which then becomes hot and loses efficiency. This would encourage sensible use of the heat scale and for those people that like to alpa blast away their CD rate would get progressively worse untlil they drop below a "no effect level." It would also mean that investing in HSs is a good idea if you want to maximise your CD rate.

Krzysztof z Bagien, on 08 July 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

It's actually the oposite: the higher the temperature difference between objects (like hot heat sink vs cold environment), the faster heat transfers. So hot heat sink should actually cool faster and dissipate MORE heat per second.

What Krzysztof said. I actually think a good idea to try out for reducing the amount of PPC and laser boating in the game would be to reduce the total heat pool that mechs have, but make heat sinks work better the hotter a mech ran, so that the high damage alpha builds couldn't fire as many times in a row before they overheat, but the builds with lower damage alphas but higher DPS could put out their sustained, high-DPS fire for longer periods of time.

It would be realistic, and specifically target one of the main issues we are having right now. How well it would work, I'm not sure, but I think it's worth trying.

Helsbane, on 07 July 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

Stop nerfing things and make other weapons viable again. Increase SRM damage but fix the splash. Double the ammo per ton for ballistics. Make MGs an anti-mech weapon since infantry isn't a game feature.

And, perhaps my favorite suggestion, stop adding in new crap till all the existing mechanics work correctly. It's impossible to get a solution in place for existing problems if you bury them under another layer of crap every patch.

Oh, I agree that other weapons do need to be buffed as well, and I intend to make threads to that regard, but the PPCs are OP. They got buffs to counter latency issues a long time before HSR, and after HSR fixed the latency issues, the buffs were not removed. My suggestion merely restores them to the niche role they should have.

Nasinil, on 08 July 2013 - 03:52 AM, said:

Check the stats of PPC and ERPPC theyre doing enough heat and have a lower DPS than any AC nerfing it means just making em useless.

I have checked the stats of the PPC and ERPPC, and increasing the heat and reducing the travel speed won't make them useless, it will just make them more of a niche weapon, instead of an all-around high performing weapon.

And yes, all the AC weapons have a higher DPS than the PPCs, HOWEVER, the maximum theoretical DPS you get on paper is NOT the same as the actual, effective DPS you get in game. If you hold the trigger down and keep firing at a target until it dies, the ACs will win, but you almost NEVER get to do that in an actual game, you are much more often engaging and disengaging, firing in bursts and spurts, etc., and in those cases a weapon that deals high damage per single shot, and that can hit reliably, is going to vastly outperform a weapon that deals lower damage per shot even if it has a higher maximum DPS.

Thermidor, on 08 July 2013 - 06:47 AM, said:

I say increase the tonnage so that players can't boat them. The new overheating damage patch does little to curb boats as people still boat them and the movement patch (which has crippled this game) has still made PPC boats stupidly powerful, as you get stuck on a pebble and can't get away and then.... boom! death.

Increasing the heat does effectively increase the tonnage and crit size, because it increases the number of heat sinks required to use them effectively.

The steel pebble problem is an issue, and I think they have the degree slope for the slowdown and nogo zones set too low (any mech should be able to climb up a 45 degree slope without any issue beyond moving slower), but that's a discussion for another thread.

Shlkt, on 08 July 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

I think 10 heat for the PPC is reasonable. For ERPPC, 13 heat seems more appropriate... 15 is kinda ridiculous.

In past MechWarrior titles, the PPC has always had a poorer heat efficiency than the medium laser (the good 'ol medium laser is a staple, after all). Remember, heat is basically mana. Your damage-to-heat ratio is the key limiting factor to sustained DPS, as all mechs have the same heat capacity (read: mana pool) regardless of weight.

Historical values for medium laser and PPC are 1.66 and 1, respectively, in terms of heat efficiency. In other words, past titles have the medium laser being 66% more efficient with its heat usage compared to the PPC.

With MWO's current weapon balance, though, the PPC and medium laser have the exact same damage-to-heat ratio, which practically means that the medium laser has suffered a very significant nerf. That doesn't seem right to me. As the OP mentioned, this wasn't a problem until HSR was implemented because PPCs were more difficult to use (and therefore the damage-to-heat ratio was lowered artificially due to missed shots).

Your point on heat efficiency is spot on, Shlkt, exactly the point I'm trying to make.

As for 15 heat for the ERPPC... Remember, this is the IS ERPPC, it's supposed to be an iffy trade-off for the increased range at both ends, and we also have to remember that we need to balance for Clan weapons, as well. 15 heat is an iffy trade-off for an IS ERPPC, but for a C ERPPC that has extended range and does another 5 damage, it is a fair balance.

[Corvus Antaka]

shot speed should come down to 1600ms.

[Lugh]

Ilithi Dragon, on 08 July 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

[color=#959595]What Krzysztof said. I actually think a good idea to try out for reducing the amount of PPC and laser boating in the game would be to reduce the total heat pool that mechs have, but make heat sinks work better the hotter a mech ran, so that the high damage alpha builds couldn't fire as many times in a row before they overheat, but the builds with lower damage alphas but higher DPS could put out their sustained, high-DPS fire for longer periods of time[/color]

I stopped reading there. Heatsinks work LESS effectively the hotter they get. Basic physics. They weren't PUNISHING enough on the running hot piece on the last patch.

Traditionally, in past MW titles and TT both, anytime you ran hotter than 80% heat You started to fry up components of your mech.

It needs to be that way now. And they need to cap it with 150% HEAT = pILOT lifesigns null. Shutting down.

[Catamount]

Lugh, on 08 July 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

I stopped reading there. Heatsinks work LESS effectively the hotter they get. Basic physics.

I'm sorry, but this is incorrect.

Review the page on heat transfer, here

http://en.wikipedia....fer_coefficient

if h= Q / A * ∆T

where
Q = heat flow rate or heat transfer rate, J/s = W
h = heat transfer coefficient, W/(m²K)
A = heat transfer surface area, m²
ΔT = difference in temperature between the solid surface and surrounding fluid area

then you can reorder that equation to get

Q = h * A * ∆T

So Q is directly proportionate to ∆T, the difference in temperature between the object in question and its surroundings. Increase the heat of the heat sink relative to its surroundings, and Q, the rate of heat transfer into the surrounding, goes up.

Edited by Catamount, 08 July 2013 - 01:54 PM.

[Ilithi Dragon]

Lugh, on 08 July 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

I stopped reading there. Heatsinks work LESS effectively the hotter they get. Basic physics.

..............

No.

Catamount beat me to explaining the heat transfer coefficient, and did it better.

Lugh, on 08 July 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

They weren't PUNISHING enough on the running hot piece on the last patch.

Traditionally, in past MW titles and TT both, anytime you ran hotter than 80% heat You started to fry up components of your mech.

It needs to be that way now. And they need to cap it with 150% HEAT = pILOT lifesigns null. Shutting down.

I agree that heat needs to be increased for PPCs, that's what I'm arguing for here, but I disagree that we need to punish players for overheating that severely.

I've played MW3 and MW4:Venge and Mercs, and none of them inflicted internal damage for running hotter than 80% heat. In fact, I'm pretty sure none of them inflicted any damage for running to hot, unless you crossed the reactor failure threshold and blew your reactor. I am also not aware of any TT rules that caused internal damage from exceeding 80% heat capacity.

Edited by Ilithi Dragon, 08 July 2013 - 01:53 PM.

[Flying Blind]

I have wanted stiffer heat penalties since the beginning.

I'm not.gonna say we should never step away from TT values but I will say we should do so more carefully.
I definitely want the PPC family to generate more heat.