1084 replies to this topic

[xenoglyph]

Honestly, if PGI devs don't know that SRMs need an immediate damage boost I just don't know what to say.

If you guys played in actual matches every once in a while you wouldn't have to **** things up several times in a row just to get them right. Playing the game more wouldn't waste developer time, it would save you a lot of time in the long run and probably save your game, too.

Edited by xenoglyph, 11 July 2013 - 10:17 PM.

[psihius]

Buff it for time being, but when the root cause is found and fixed - change the values accordingly.

[ACfromDC]

I’m amazed at all the chicken littles out there. Do you even read the Dev post or just like to make things up? Two things from Paul’s Post that people seem to miss…


1. There are some tweaks that need to be done but those will come with subsequent patches.

2. This is very experimental and is being addressed aggressively as I mentioned in my previous weapons update. The first set of numbers are for the immediate effect on the current meta-game but more weapons and balancing will occur with each patch you see on our path to Launch.

I’m sure most of your “What about X” will be addressed in some form in later patches. My two cents are try it first then talk. I think it is a “good” way to stop high alpha (no matter the size of your mech or the weapon combos you try to use). Just because your mech comes stock with those weapons doesn’t mean that you should be allowed to fire them all at once without a penalty. I also believe it will help stop the high alphas of clanner mechs too. If an Inner Sphere PPC is at 2, what will clanners be 1?

I think it will help create a move, aim, shoot, dodge, re-aim, shoot that people want from when we only had SHS and you had to think about what weapons to group together and aim. There is a reason why we have 6 weapon groups.

I also believe that it will make the games longer without people just getting instant killed which is good for everyone. And with the lower alpha’s I think people will start to move on to some other mechs that they want to play, instead of thinking they have to take an assault to survive until hopefully some sort of tonnage limit is implemented.

Edited by ACfromDC, 11 July 2013 - 10:45 PM.

[hammerreborn]

INSEkT L0GIC, on 11 July 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:

Hmmm. It was 1.3m as of the March 21 hotfix, if that was the latest SRM adjustment.

http://mwomercs.com/...erver-downtime/

That would put SRM at 2.1 damage per missile -- 1.5 base + 0.6 splash (40%)

Increasing base to 2.0 would result in 2.8 damage per missile -- 2.0 base + 0.8 splash (40%)

Which would increase an SRM6 from a 12.6 to a 16.8 damage potential. Seems a bit much to me.

It got reduced to like 5 centimeters a while back.

[Foster Bondroff]

This is not a good solution at all, cause you don't adress the core problem we currently see. Its not alphas per se, but it is the pinpoint alpha.

So why you don't adress weapons accuracy. Play around with convergence. Introduce some way so it is no longer instant, but it really takes time, a steady and calm aim to hit one point with 2 or more weapons mounted across different locations. Even just copying the system used by WOT for shot dispersion is a better solution than this approach.

In my eyes you are currenty creating layer after layer after layer and so on, to balance things which in the end creates an unnecessary complex system that is impossible to balance properly.

This approach will break together the moment you introduce clan weapons. Or will you than create the next arbitrary layer of balance for clan weapons? Will they than suddenly have max alpha 1 for CER PPC or C Gauss? With whatever ridiculous penalty multiplier you need. What about C UAC/10 & 20? Ever imagined the sheer damage output of those base on current UAC5 mechanics?

All that would have been adressed by reducing pin point accuracy, but is not adressed by this heat penalty approach.

Why you stick so hard to that pin point convergence?

Edited by Foster Bondroff, 11 July 2013 - 10:25 PM.

[Brut4ce]

INSEkT L0GIC, on 11 July 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:

Hmmm. It was 1.3m as of the March 21 hotfix, if that was the latest SRM adjustment.

http://mwomercs.com/...erver-downtime/

That would put SRM at 2.1 damage per missile -- 1.5 base + 0.6 splash (40%)

Increasing base to 2.0 would result in 2.8 damage per missile -- 2.0 base + 0.8 splash (40%)

Which would increase an SRM6 from a 12.6 to a 16.8 damage potential. Seems a bit much to me.

I think they managed to bring it down even further Insekt Logic, to something like 0.5m and much less splash. It has also been noted by Paul that splash damage Cannot be removed completely because of the mechanics of the engine or something that causes the missiles to behave much differently without splash (Somehing like most hitting one spot i think...).
Anyhow i more than welcome the damage buff since SRMS have always been limiting weapons in terms of range/spread so if someone walks up in the face of an SRM carrier they deserve what thgey get. Stay above 150m (which is pretty easy) and problem solved. As far as streaks go, we'll have to wait and see how they behave if their damage is raised, mainly because of the lock on mechanic.
Also Even if Hit detection is resolved, which for me is a more serious issue to be resolved, as it will COMPLETELY change the game if ppl can get a 90-100% hit registration, SRMS still are at a disadvantage because of spread.
Finally as far as the heat scale i dunno, live tests will tell. I can only speak for myself, that apart from a couple of laser boats with 4-5 LLasers and my old Splatcat, it won't affect me, as i didn't and don't really use boating.
*S*

[ACfromDC]

Foster Bondroff, on 11 July 2013 - 10:24 PM, said:

So why you don't adress weapons accuracy. Play around with convergence. Introduce some way so it is no longer instant, but it really takes time, a steady and calm aim to hit one point with 2 or more weapons mounted across different locations. Even just copying the system used by WOT for shot dispersion is a better solution than this approach.

So let me get this right, he is able to alpha me for 45pts of damage 4 times in a row before he shuts down…it is okay cause that 180pts of damage will be spread out over my mechs entire body? And what about fast mechs…going to need you to stop and shoot to hit anything? And if we implement WOT style will my AC round ricochet of the target, lrms/srm randomly fail, lasers don’t hit at full strength?

Oops…I’m doing that “what if” thing without trying the new heat system 1^st.

What is so wrong with putting out smaller amounts of damage over time to a place that I keep hitting without some bogus feature added to reduce my aim?

Edited by ACfromDC, 11 July 2013 - 10:39 PM.

[Mylardis]

I have to admit, I am disappointed.

I really understand that quite often, due to superior knowledge of the "inner" workings of a software product, developers just really know it better. Even if a majority of customers disagrees at first, or doesn't understand instantly.

I can accept that, and would always want to believe, that developers want their products to be as good as possible, so they won't damage them on purpose.

In this case though, I do not understand the reasoning. It sounds like a scrum approach to a set of problems but choosing the wrong path. I'm not going into details here, many have pointed out why the solution itself will not change much. I have tried to offer a comprehensive solution to all the problems which result in the current meta (this is the main thing which needs to be understood: The meta is the result of a few problems, not the problem itself).

So, just to cut down to the "game" and "fun" and "software product" point of view: As some others have pointed out, adding layers of complexity is normally considered wrong, as it makes products less enjoyable and less accessable. This is the case here.

I also understand that a better solution, of which many have been offered (I personally will stick to a combination of limiting hardpoints and greater heat penalties while actually keeping convergence as it is - complete explanation can be found in the thread linked above) will take more time than 1 or 2 weeks after coming home from vacation.

Please, by all means, take that time. I don't think a real MWO fan wants this to fail. We want you to succeed.Take the time needed, tell us what you plan and then do it. Don't go for the easy solution - easy solutions, as pointed out by many here, are mostly wrong solutions.

Try again. Speak to us. If you have the right ideas, most of us will be here to support you, even if we have to wait longer than a week.

[MightyK]

This is too complicated! How will you ever communicate those Alpha Numers to players who do not read the forum 24/7?!

[ACfromDC]

MightyK, on 11 July 2013 - 11:03 PM, said:

This is too complicated! How will you ever communicate those Alpha Numers to players who do not read the forum 24/7?!

I do agree with you there. I mean if repair/re-arm was too complex...what is this rocket science. Not a lot of training out there yet for people who have little knowledge of the game. I was one of those guys who knew very little about MechWarrior never played TT, filling the mech with the most weapons possible with .5 heat eff, not understanding the walking/torso twist making people sick trying to watch me play and lasers flying everywhere cause I didn't understand the arm/center aiming. Would be nice to see a feature in UI 2.0 that when you group weapons together in mech lab it would show your heat out put in an alpha shot with that weapon group and the remaining heat you have left or that you are over.

Edited by ACfromDC, 11 July 2013 - 11:26 PM.

[Asmosis]

first thing im doing is taking a 6 ppc stalker out to see if it has a self destruct button

also why are ac2's not on the list? they are much more deadly than any beam/missile weapon.

*edit*

I disagree with it being too complicated though. New players have no idea how much heat capacity they have in the first place, or their heat disipation. Its not available in the client at all, so most wouldnt even notice the heat penalties, they would just be running hot and either reduce/remove weapons or add more heatsinks (like you do for any build thats running hot).

Edited by Asmosis, 11 July 2013 - 11:36 PM.

[MountainCopper]

Kunae, on 11 July 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

Pft.

They are easy meat for any Jenner that's not built stupid. Also for any other mech that effectively engages them from beyond 300m. Basically anything with Large Lasers.

All AC ballistics do 100% damage at optimum range going down to 0% damage at 3x that range with a linear degradation between the two.
So with an AC20 you still do 50% damage at 540m, which is 2x the optimum range of 270m. Still hurt...

[Nulnoil]

[Zuesacoatl]

And so begins SRM online. I hope they take more than this poll into consideration. The only people who will vote on it for the most part are those that want to boat them.

[MavRCK]

KaoS Legion has repeatedly told PGI exactly what to do with their SRMs, PPCs, etc.

When PGI doesn't listen to arguably the best team in MWO since closed beta, why would they listen to 24+ pages of the community?

Paul talks about the Splatcat as if it's some demi-god of a mech...

It's an XL-engine brawler!

JESUS --- it NEEDS an XL engine -- in other words, it has a HUGE DISADVANTAGE to BALANCE its ADVANTAGE.

Let's do some simple math:

Disadvantage + Advantage = Balance

OMFG.. the sheer facepalm WTF that PGI does is maddening... nerfing SRMs over 1 stupid build that was BALANCED!?!?!?!!?!?!?!!

Wall + Face + Repeat 10x = PGI Facepalm

Edited by MavRCK, 11 July 2013 - 11:47 PM.

[ACfromDC]

Daumantas Galland, on 11 July 2013 - 11:45 PM, said:

Your right cause everyone who plays those mechs can only be effective if they min/max to boat the most weapons with the highest alpha and greatest heat eff. Oh no you mean I will have to think and I will have to control my heat and rate of fire no matter what mech/weapon load out I take.

Edited by ACfromDC, 11 July 2013 - 11:53 PM.

[Peter2000]

There need to be downvote buttons on this forum. This boating penalty is an awful idea. All it's going to do is promote 2xERPPC + Gauss even more. Plus the good 4xERPPC stalkers don't care - at all. They will just fire all 4 and eat the heat no problem in sniper-on-sniper exchanges. In a brawl, even firing .5s apart, they can get their alpha off quicker than anyone with lasers (and SRMs are garbage, and AC/20 boats are either kite-able or running XLs).

Look towards a real solution that addresses alphas with a penalty that applies BEFORE firing, not just an after firing penalty on boating.

[Carrioncrows]

1. SRM's should lock on. ----> See my Thread
2. The weapons are not the problem, it's pinpoint damage to one location --> See Homeless bill's thread.
3. If you absolutely must implement this then at least reduce the number of PPC's fired to 1 instead of 2. ----> See this thread.

[MustrumRidcully]

Nebelfeuer, on 11 July 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

You might want to get rid of the idea that a mech that carries a big weapon loadout is supposed to fire it repeatedly together.
Look at the stockloadouts and you will notice that most mechs are not capable of alphastriking repeatedly without getting heatissues. Though the method is differend the result will be closer to original rules in effect fo a good part of the weapons.

The current aproach may not be the best but it at least goes into the right direction and at least incentives to try differend loadouts then pure boating and pinpoint alphastrikers. It will probaly need a few adjustments like the ER/PPC fix anounced for the later patch and AC/gauss intergration and a few value adjustments but it might work out in the end.
An aproach closer to TT rules(heatchart+values and/or convergence) might solve the desired probles more efficiently though.

Here's the thing - those stock mechs can do this without needing an arbitrary extra heat production value. Heat is just simple addition, and comparing the result to a table to figure out the effect.

This is a convoluted solution.

But there is also the other misconception that mechs are supposed to overheat. Some mechs do. but the idea of heat is just to create an interesting design space when making mechs. You have a trade-off to consider - sustainability vs burst damage potential.

PGI's heat system is rigged for something else - you'll overheat eventually, because you sure as hell ain't gonna install 20 standard sinks or 10 DHS just to run 2 Medium Lasers (well, on a Spider you might have to). They seem to want everyone to overheat eventually and try to avoid people being able to build heat neutral mechs. But that's not necessary at all, because there is always a trade-off to consider - tonnage spent on sinks to become heat neutral is tonnage not spend on guns, ammo or armour that you might have needed in a critical situation,where a few points of heat wouldn't have hurt you that much.

PGI's heat system uses a high heat cap, which makes it difficult to actually achieve the kind of trade-offs the system needs. Those Quad PPC Stalkers aren't heat efficient in MW:O, they overheat fast. But they don't overheat fast enough, you can pull out 120 damage before you overheat even if you basically take no time to cool off.

But that is just the heat side of PGI problems. The reason Quad PPC Stalkers are popular is not just because they are "heat effective", so to speak - it's because 40 damage alphas to a single hit location is just too good to pass up. And this problem isn't really heat related. It's just that precise application of damage is very, very valuable in a game with multile hit locations with each their own hit points. You don't get any consolation prizes for shooting half the armour off of 3 locations. You get a prize for shooting off all the armour of one location.

This is the problem they need to fix, and they should find a solution that interacts with this directly, instead of indirectly via the heat system. Just note that their table doesn't include the Gauss Rifle, despite everyone in CLosed Beta remembering those Dual Gauss Snipers that got to circumvent the heat system problems and delivered pinpoint precise alphas. And that was without HSR! The only limit back then was probably the same limit that we have now with the AC/40 Jagermechs. It's just a 65 ton mech. There are still mechs that can bring 35 tons more to compensate these advantages. The Quad PPC Stalker had only 15 tons above it, and that seemed insufficient.

[MustrumRidcully]

Nebelfeuer, on 11 July 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

You might want to get rid of the idea that a mech that carries a big weapon loadout is supposed to fire it repeatedly together.
Look at the stockloadouts and you will notice that most mechs are not capable of alphastriking repeatedly without getting heatissues. Though the method is differend the result will be closer to original rules in effect fo a good part of the weapons.

The current aproach may not be the best but it at least goes into the right direction and at least incentives to try differend loadouts then pure boating and pinpoint alphastrikers. It will probaly need a few adjustments like the ER/PPC fix anounced for the later patch and AC/gauss intergration and a few value adjustments but it might work out in the end.
An aproach closer to TT rules(heatchart+values and/or convergence) might solve the desired probles more efficiently though.

Here's the thing - those stock mechs can do this without needing an arbitrary extra heat production value. Heat is just simple addition, and comparing the result to a table to figure out the effect.

This is a convoluted solution.

But there is also the other misconception that mechs are supposed to overheat. Some mechs do. but the idea of heat is just to create an interesting design space when making mechs. You have a trade-off to consider - sustainability vs burst damage potential.

PGI's heat system is rigged for something else - you'll overheat eventually, because you sure as hell ain't gonna install 20 standard sinks or 10 DHS just to run 2 Medium Lasers (well, on a Spider you might have to). They seem to want everyone to overheat eventually and try to avoid people being able to build heat neutral mechs. But that's not necessary at all, because there is always a trade-off to consider - tonnage spent on sinks to become heat neutral is tonnage not spend on guns, ammo or armour that you might have needed in a critical situation,where a few points of heat wouldn't have hurt you that much.

PGI's heat system uses a high heat cap, which makes it difficult to actually achieve the kind of trade-offs the system needs. Those Quad PPC Stalkers aren't heat efficient in MW:O, they overheat fast. But they don't overheat fast enough, you can pull out 120 damage before you overheat even if you basically take no time to cool off.

But that is just the heat side of PGI problems. The reason Quad PPC Stalkers are popular is not just because they are "heat effective", so to speak - it's because 40 damage alphas to a single hit location is just too good to pass up. And this problem isn't really heat related. It's just that precise application of damage is very, very valuable in a game with multile hit locations with each their own hit points. You don't get any consolation prizes for shooting half the armour off of 3 locations. You get a prize for shooting off all the armour of one location.

This is the problem they need to fix, and they should find a solution that interacts with this directly, instead of indirectly via the heat system. Just note that their table doesn't include the Gauss Rifle, despite everyone in CLosed Beta remembering those Dual Gauss Snipers that got to circumvent the heat system problems and delivered pinpoint precise alphas. And that was without HSR! The only limit back then was probably the same limit that we have now with the AC/40 Jagermechs. It's just a 65 ton mech. There are still mechs that can bring 35 tons more to compensate these advantages. The Quad PPC Stalker had only 15 tons above it, and that seemed insufficient.