135 replies to this topic

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Homeless Bill, on 11 July 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

They ninjaed my thread and released this all at the same time. I think that's their way of saying, "**** no."

Heat penalties make me sad. Especially for large lasers. Seriously, guys?

You attracted too much attention.

[Verenus]

If they would just fix convergence so that only arm weapons (on those mechs that can actually move their arms) would converge pinpoint alphas would be out of the window and at the same time make fighting a lot more immersive and intense as weapons will be hitting a lot more than just the CT of every mech. It will also help light and medium mechs (smaller frame so weapons are closer together = more pinpoint like damage, while they become even harder to hit without convergence from bigger mechs).

This fix they are implementing now is just foolish and very unfriendly for new players who will just be wondering why they are overheating all the time when they've finally maxed out all those cool hardpoints on their new mechs. It also does nothing to fix the high damage/short combat times from everyone dying to CT destruction, something PGI has acknowledged themselves. It will just make it even more difficult to play properly ...

Looks like I'll be shelving this game again till they find a proper solution I don't even have a single mech with more than two PPC's or anything like that, but this is just silly ...

[Trauglodyte]

Roland, on 11 July 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

But the 31% occurred on a map that was actually hotter than the map where firing the same weapons on the test server generated 39%.

That would suggest that firing the weapons on the test server was generating more heat, for some reason. About 25% more heat... a 25% increase in heat is non-trivial.

Presumably, if you did it on the same map, the heat difference would be even higher.

Efficiencies may not be counted on the test server.

[FupDup]

Trauglodyte, on 11 July 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

Efficiencies may not be counted on the test server.

They are.

[Trauglodyte]

Then I've got nothing. Doesn't seem right that 6 would incure the penalty when the chart listed 6 as the baseline before heat additions. Unless it is a coding error.

[Goose]

OK: So we have our OPCount, but Penalty Schedual is a mystery.

I notice ER Larges aren't on the list at all, let alown as part of Larges or Large Pulses.

Setting the CT damage to 100% seems … odd: You will take damage, but using the override button lets you move while talking moar damage to a random location? Or has all the previous "over 100%" stuff been replaced by the new mechanic?

[Deathlike]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 11 July 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

yeah. no where near a heat penalty. and a bad scientific test too.

Well, don't take my word as gospel, but I ran the classic 4 med + 2 SSRM2 Jenner-D out on the test server on Frozen City (Night?), and the heat was higher that I ever recall when running a Jenner.

Anyways, I've reposted most of what I said in Homeless Bill's missing box thread:
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2547256

Sometimes, I don't even know how bad Paul realizes he sounds.

[Corvus Antaka]

Deathlike, on 11 July 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

Well, don't take my word as gospel, but I ran the classic 4 med + 2 SSRM2 Jenner-D out on the test server on Frozen City (Night?), and the heat was higher that I ever recall when running a Jenner.

Anyways, I've reposted most of what I said in Homeless Bill's missing box thread:
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2547256

Sometimes, I don't even know how bad Paul realizes he sounds.

I won't deny there is the possibility of a bug here, but the heat changes are not in effect on the test server, and 6 MLaser builds are not affected anyhow.

[Deathlike]

Is it just possible that mech efficiencies aren't applied altogether? That would easily account for some of the strangeness.

[Jonny Taco]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 11 July 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

1. it is STILL beta.

After this remark, your village idiots comment was pretty ironic...

Just in bubs, beta is the time to complain about problems and bring up issues, not the time to sit idly by...

[Rippthrough]

Paul, I'm going to break your heat penalty system for alphas so much it's not even funny. Just a heads up.

Plus, I get to watch all the new guys rage quit after accidentally alpha striking a random number of arbitary weapons, that'll be good for the game.

Edited by Rippthrough, 11 July 2013 - 01:11 PM.

[Deathlike]

In 3 months, the "its a beta excuse" will die a horrible death.

[MustrumRidcully]

*sigh*
Rushing headlong into walls.

And the Gauss isn't even on the list!

Why are 3 PPCs, that deliver a 30 damage alpha, penalized, but 2 Gauss Rifles, that deliver a 30 damage alpha, not penalized?

Is the community team sure that our comments get to Paul? Maybe you use the wrong e-mail address or something?

SirSmokes, on 11 July 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

There should be quarks for mechs with stock weapon loads to not suffer penalties.

a) This system is bad.
Whatever system there is, no exceptions. If boating 3 PPCs is deemed OP if you can alpha strike with them,giving this ability to the Awesome makes it not balanced just because it came stock that way.
c) Quarks are elemental particles anyway.


I guess I won't buy Projekt Phoenix after all

*sigh*

[FupDup]

Deathlike, on 11 July 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

In 3 months, the "its a beta excuse" will die a horrible death.

The next excuse will probably be "BUT F2P ARE ALWAYS IN DEVELOPMENT, BRAH!!!"

[General Taskeen]

Homeless Bill, on 11 July 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

They ninjaed my thread and released this all at the same time. I think that's their way of saying, "**** no."

Heat penalties make me sad. Especially for large lasers. Seriously, guys?

Your thread became self-aware. They can prolong it, but Judgement Day is inevitable.

[Joseph Mallan]

Deathlike, on 11 July 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

In 3 months, the "its a beta excuse" will die a horrible death.

You man laid to rest. Cause til the game is launched Officially it is beta.

[kesuga7]

tank scot ac 40 jaggers and 2+ppc boats are getting a nerf



what bout highlander boats

Edited by kesuga7, 11 July 2013 - 01:18 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

DV McKenna, on 11 July 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

Goldvision, see's nothing.

I thought it was panda vision?

I always misread that name.

[Goose]

PEEFsmash, on 11 July 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

Firing 6 MLs DOES incurr extra heat penalty …

That can't be right: Why would an AC/20 be listed as one, when they could have just upped the heat for it?

Six MLs shouldn't have done anything extra: Seven should …

[CutterWolf]

Did PGI really have to re-invent the wheel?? Really?? You mean that just puting the heat values to Table Top levels was too hard? Really? You want "real" heat penaltys?

Try this on for size, TT vs MWO heat levels:

TT ERPPC = 15 heat, MWO = 10
TT PPC = 10 heat, MWO = 8
TT Larger Laser = 8 heat, MWO = 7
TT Larger Pulse Laser = 10, MWO = 8.5
TT AC-20 = 7 heat, MWO = 6

The funny thing is that LRM & SRM's are currently doing TT level heat. Why the other are not is anyones guess.

Now comes the, "how to stop boating or at least curve it down" answer.

Simple fix, "weight restricted/limited hard points"

Restrict/limit Mech hard points by "class & roll" (side effect of this is, we now just fixed role warfair) This system would restrict the ablitiy for some Mechs to mount heavy weapons they were never suppose to carry in the first place (returning real role warfair) and would limit the total amount of a single weapon type able to be mounted to correct boating a single weapon type thus making it OP.