Jump to content

Gameplay - Heat Scale Addition


461 replies to this topic

#81 Tsenado

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 90 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:29 PM

View PostNiko Snow, on 16 July 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:


Weapon SystemMax No-Heat Penalty AlphaScale Multiplier
AC/20124.0

Why nerf the AC20x2 jaggers so badly? they do great damage yes, but with massive penalties (super close range, XL engine/slow mech, easily kill chassis, now with the massive 24x heat), if you ever drive one of these, you'd take precaution facing your enemies cause they die so easily.

They aren't godly like the snipers where they can kill at long range, I don't know, I never understand these patches.

Edited by Tsenado, 16 July 2013 - 12:43 PM.


#82 MustrumRidcully

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 10,644 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:32 PM

View PostRhinehardt Ritter, on 16 July 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:



As was previously said. Just becomes it comes with that many weapons or slots does not mean you were meant to be able to constantly Alpha Strike.

The Awesome having 3 PPC's was a VERY big deal in tabletop (which the whole BT/Mechwarrior universe is based on). Fire 2, and then fire 1. It's that simple.

For the Hunchback, fire your pod lasers, and then your arm/head mounted lasers.

1) I am willing to agree on Awesome and similar examples in general. It'S not that these mechs "needed" a nerf but if we want to avoid people getting cheap and easy high precision alpha strikes, no mech can be exempt.

2) The Hunchback does not get the same type of advantage from boating its MLs then a PPC mech would, simply because the medium lasers spread their damage. Alone on that account, it shouldn't need a harsh penalty, if any at all.

3) It doesn't make sense to affect weapons (which according to smurfy, it does) that have a cooldown of less than 1 second, because that means you can never equip a number behind their "max_alpha" without being unable to use a weapon's rate of fire. WHich essentialy means you don't need to equip that weapon at all, unless you want to bring a spare the other breaks, but bringing a 6 ton spare is... questionable*.

4) It makes even less than to apply a penalty on a single shot. (See Gauss Rifle). That's just hiding a heat increase to the weapon itself.

---

* And here I was,worrying about my "no group fire" approach and how it might screw over weapons like the AC/2 that come only with a 0.5 second recycle time, and how I can navigate this problem, and PGI just does its own system and completely ignores this problem.
Being in charge of design on a AAA title seems easier than I was led to believe!

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 16 July 2013 - 12:33 PM.


#83 Thermidor

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:38 PM

Another failure from the ******* from PGI? No surprise here.

#84 Hythos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 527 posts
  • LocationLOS ANGELES, er, I mean Dustball

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:38 PM

View PostRhinehardt Ritter, on 16 July 2013 - 12:21 PM, said:


So...just because it was designed to fire 3 at once doesn't mean there wasn't a price to pay for it. Read the canon books. If you fire 3 high heat weapons at once there is a price to pay. It doesn't mean you can do it constantly non stop.

So...you are saying that 6 PPC stalkers are ok just because a tank or two and the Awesome can fire 3? I think what you are missing is that the Awesome was something VERY Special...that was the only inner sphere mech at this point that had 3 PPC's. And again, that doesn't mean you could do it non stop.

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C, correct?

If a Schrek can fire Three PPC's with 30 HS's non-stop, and an Awesome was intended to do the same at a slight heat build-up - enabling it with 15x2HS (or in the case of MWO, sufficient quantities to match the heat-generation of 3xPPC + movement), then yes, a unit should be able to move, fire, and be heat-neutral... after 10 seconds. Non-stop, every 10 seconds.
Also, I don't remember mentioning anything about a Stalker, or 6xPPC units.

#85 TostitoBandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationWashington, USA

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:43 PM

Epic failure. A single gauss shot creates 4 heat now.

#86 Sign

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 51 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:43 PM

I find this addition hideous and disgusting. It doesn't fix the pinpoint damage issue.

A proper heat scale penalties and convergence, PLEASE, not this abomination.

#87 TheSteelRhino

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 600 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:44 PM

View PostHythos, on 16 July 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C, correct?

If a Schrek can fire Three PPC's with 30 HS's non-stop, and an Awesome was intended to do the same at a slight heat build-up - enabling it with 15x2HS (or in the case of MWO, sufficient quantities to match the heat-generation of 3xPPC + movement), then yes, a unit should be able to move, fire, and be heat-neutral... after 10 seconds. Non-stop, every 10 seconds.
Also, I don't remember mentioning anything about a Stalker, or 6xPPC units.


Here is the thing. You aren't firing PPC's in MWO every 10 seconds.l.you are firing every 4 seconds (or maybe you are patient and do wait 10). In which case case if you use TT heat values that's 10 heat per ppc, every 4 seconds right? (unless you want 10 second turns)...so that's 60 Heat after 8 seconds, plus movement. You drain heat at 3 per second with 15 DHS.

So maybe the system isn't perfect but it's one way to get there. Either way..you shouldn't be alpha striking as often as you are in MWO.

I will even admit I'd prefer a Heat scale closer to tabletop with damage and penalties etc...and change the way convergence works...but...I'll take what I can get .


But in the end, I think that the excessive boating has to stop. I can happily live with 2PPC's or large lasers if it's in the overall best interest of game playbility.

Edited by Rhinehardt Ritter, 16 July 2013 - 12:45 PM.


#88 DeathlyEyes

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Messenger
  • 940 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationMetaphorical Island somewhere in the Pacific

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:46 PM

Can't use an atlas with 41 heatsinks and 4 ppcs. THIS IS WRONG. Cannon states that this should be possible fix it now.


ANH-1E - This field-expedient refit was used by the Dragoons after the Battle of Misery. All of the autocannons were removed and replaced with four PPCs and two additional Medium Lasers. The ANH-1E also carried forty-one heat sinks, enough to fire the main weapons continually. BV (2.0) = 1,62

Also if we are going to do these silly heat caps make it affect all weapons equally. Make it based off of how much heat is generated within a set amount of time not based off what weapons are fired. This is not fair and does not affect all play styles equally.

#89 Hythos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 527 posts
  • LocationLOS ANGELES, er, I mean Dustball

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:47 PM

View PostTsenado, on 16 July 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Why nerf the AC20x2 jaggers so badly? ....


Ultra-AC/20's will generate additional heat when firing double-rate. The weapons listed on their 'penalty' chart were highly likely, specifically listed because of future-proofing Clans from being /facerollingly easy... 2xUltra-AC/20 at double-rate = pinpoint 80dmg, with 28 heat per trigger-pull. With a heat-penalty of 50%(? is that right?) - double-rate will generate ~20 heat (7+7(1.5)); It won't be absolutely restricted, but will carry the penalties we see.

Large Lasers are likely the same issue (assuming LL = ERL), in that Clans can be mounted in single critical slots - some units can have 2xERL's in the CT and remain Zombified.

I'm not arguing a point for/against Clans, but rather am looking at other possibilities for things that wouldn't otherwise make too much sense - Large Pulse nerf included.

#90 Asatruer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 235 posts
  • LocationSeattle

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:49 PM

View PostSevronis, on 16 July 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

From just what I've skim-read in this thread... all the players that have an issue with the new heat scaling are of course the boaters.
Ok, can you show me my boats?
Spoiler


View PostSevronis, on 16 July 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

The Awesome was also always a mech known for bad heat issues.
This is demonstrably not the case in BattleTech. Now the Blackjack BJ-2 variant on the other hand, now that was a mech that was known for bad heat issues, so much so that FASA errata'd it into having Double Heatsinks.

#91 Galerius

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 202 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationSeattle, WA

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:50 PM

Is this a move to increase the number of people who purchase Coolant flush?

This heat penalty seems rustic, too high, this implementation needs review, unless profit is what is behind such a move.

#92 Tsenado

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 90 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:52 PM

View PostHythos, on 16 July 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:


Ultra-AC/20's will generate additional heat when firing double-rate. The weapons listed on their 'penalty' chart were highly likely, specifically listed because of future-proofing Clans from being /facerollingly easy... 2xUltra-AC/20 at double-rate = pinpoint 80dmg, with 28 heat per trigger-pull. With a heat-penalty of 50%(? is that right?) - double-rate will generate ~20 heat (7+7(1.5)); It won't be absolutely restricted, but will carry the penalties we see.

Large Lasers are likely the same issue (assuming LL = ERL), in that Clans can be mounted in single critical slots - some units can have 2xERL's in the CT and remain Zombified.

I'm not arguing a point for/against Clans, but rather am looking at other possibilities for things that wouldn't otherwise make too much sense - Large Pulse nerf included.


When you are talking about Clans then it's a different story, we aren't anywhere near getting anything Clan at the moment, and to be honest I never want to see the Clans tech, hard enough as it is to balance what we already have.

Some of us spent MC for the Jagger Hero, and this is what we get to drive a jagger lol

#93 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:52 PM

Yep, there is heat penalty for FIRST Gauss rifle, it's in the files. But it seems those penalties in general are somewhat off, it seems they are lower in game than one would expect.

#94 Riddler9884

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 88 posts
  • LocationMiami, Fl

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:55 PM

Ok, I have tried to patiently read this feedback thread but I am still no close to understanding how this change works exactly.

I am going to be blunt, I am boat PPC's and I boat Large Lasers. I don't boat 6 PPC'S but I do boat 4 PPC's meaning I am still not off the hook. I also don't want to cry foul like many people do here without getting my facts strait.

Now I remember when the entire forum went up in flames about pay to win and bombardment modules, the Dev's made a command chair and explained it in the most simplest form, heck they threw in a chalkboard. Can we have that for the Heat scale?

Edited by Riddler9884, 16 July 2013 - 12:57 PM.


#95 tredmeister

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 112 posts
  • LocationDeep Periphery

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:55 PM

View PostHythos, on 16 July 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C, correct?

If a Schrek can fire Three PPC's with 30 HS's non-stop, and an Awesome was intended to do the same at a slight heat build-up - enabling it with 15x2HS (or in the case of MWO, sufficient quantities to match the heat-generation of 3xPPC + movement), then yes, a unit should be able to move, fire, and be heat-neutral... after 10 seconds. Non-stop, every 10 seconds.
Also, I don't remember mentioning anything about a Stalker, or 6xPPC units.

I agree that 6 (or even 4-5) PPC Stalkers are ridiculous!
However, my 3 PPC Awesomes are cannon builds (Upgraded to DHS's) and I usually only alpha maybe 3-4 times in a match. I use chainfire probably 80% of the time, and I am no slacker at heat management either. I still occasionally screw up and shut down, and now that's a sure death sentence. I am instantly "self cored" and waiting for a Spider to finish me off with a small laser.

View PostMustrumRidcully, on 16 July 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

... I am willing to agree on Awesome and similar examples in general. It'S not that these mechs "needed" a nerf but if we want to avoid people getting cheap and easy high precision alpha strikes, no mech can be exempt....


You know... for all the crying that used to go on about the MW4 hardpoint system, I definitely think it beats what we have now!

Edited by tredmeister, 16 July 2013 - 12:59 PM.


#96 Hythos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 527 posts
  • LocationLOS ANGELES, er, I mean Dustball

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:58 PM

View PostRhinehardt Ritter, on 16 July 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:


Here is the thing. You aren't firing PPC's in MWO every 10 seconds.l.you are firing every 4 seconds (or maybe you are patient and do wait 10). In which case case if you use TT heat values that's 10 heat per ppc, every 4 seconds right? (unless you want 10 second turns)...so that's 60 Heat after 8 seconds, plus movement. You drain heat at 3 per second with 15 DHS.

So maybe the system isn't perfect but it's one way to get there. Either way..you shouldn't be alpha striking as often as you are in MWO.

I will even admit I'd prefer a Heat scale closer to tabletop with damage and penalties etc...and change the way convergence works...but...I'll take what I can get .


But in the end, I think that the excessive boating has to stop. I can happily live with 2PPC's or large lasers if it's in the overall best interest of game playbility.


I'd say things are fine. This should really be solved by a COOLING issue, NOT a heat-generation-issue; the penalty-model should follow subsequent heat-generation and not the initial influx. But in any case, ADDITIONAL heat, is not appropriate.

Generating 30pts of heat from any source, SHOULD be dissipated in 10 seconds - at 3HPS (heat-per-second - since some readers will appreciate the 1337-5933k jargon). If generating 30pts of heat every 4 seconds, only 12 should have been dissipated by the time the 2nd volley is fired. Therefor, retained heat should jump to +18 after that 2nd volley, and be affected by heat-penalties (-movement, slowed aiming/manual targeting, etc).

#97 Asatruer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 235 posts
  • LocationSeattle

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:59 PM

View Posttredmeister, on 16 July 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

You know... for all the crying that used to go on about the MW4 hardpoint system, I definitely think it beats what we have now!

Seems more and more true.

#98 Meridian

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 73 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 01:00 PM

View PostIqfishLP, on 16 July 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

My 6x LL Boat died after NINE Shutdowns with over 250% heat.

You should get more damage.


How do you know you hit 250%? I've never seen the readout go past 100%. So I basically never know if I've "kinda overheated" or if I should just get a drink while I wait to restart.

#99 StoneHinge

    Rookie

  • Fury
  • Fury
  • 4 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 01:06 PM

View PostH1veM1nd, on 16 July 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

I'd still like an explanation of where this multiplier is actually being utilized.

2 PPC alpha with 10DHS in normal weather generated 30% heat (16 heat / 55 heat capacity is roughly 30%).
3 PPC alpha with the same mech reached 67% heat. 67% x 55 = 36.85 heat produced

Try and make a factor or addition of 7 work anywhere into those maths.
IN AN ATTEMPT TO CLEAR THE AIR, Using these numbers as an example (Assuming the data he collected is correct). 2 PPC alpha is working as normal; when you fire 3 the MULTIPLIER is used in this way (As far as I can tell): For each weapon fired over the limit it adds 7 heat (Including all those that are fired). SO: The original heat (16) + (Heat penalty (7) * 3 PPCS USED) = 37 Heat as was shown. I'm not sure if this is 100% correct but its the only way I can see the multiplier being used as described and getting that outcome.

#100 Yenisey

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 01:06 PM

Heat scale - it's a crooked nail. Lacked of logic... sigh...
You guys need rebalance of weapon and implement more agressive penalties for overheat.





42 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 42 guests, 0 anonymous users