I note that threads seem to die off for a couple of reasons. Either they cease to be topical (unlikely in this case) or enough reasoned, well-articulated debate has been put forth in such explicit detail that no one feels the need to add more, as anything to be said has already been well-covered and in better form than the next poster could muster.
Then the thread topic gets buried on the front page by whatever flame war or e-peen wankfest is the latest surging hot-topic.
I think we're in that territory. This board has the quiet feel of completion, like were done talking and just waiting to finish our drinks and go home. It makes me wish there was a little flag next to the 'like' button that said 'complete' and if enough votes were logged the board would become dev required reading, after 'Heart of Darkness' and 'EA's Guide to Budget Game Design'.
Edited because my inner grammarnazi is threatening to annex Poland.
I like Koniving's suggestions for heat balancing. That said, in the interest of continuing the discussion, I would like to offer up my own.
I always wondered why we couldn't have two bars for heat: Heat Reserve and Heat Capacity.
Heat Reserve
A mech's Heat Reserve is the amount of heat it can dissipate in 10 seconds (like TT). For instance, (using current numbers) a mech with 12 DHS would have a heat reserve of 22.8 heat. A mech with 12 SHS would have a heat reserve of 12. The Heat Reserve is depleted by a pilot firing weapons, and gradually refills over 10 seconds (proportionate to the number and type of heatsinks). The Heat Reserve does NOT replenish if there are points in Heat Capacity.
Heat Capacity
Heat Capacity is a fairly direct translation of the TT heat table. It caps out at 30 heat. All heat penalties apply at a set percentage point. Once a pilot has depleted their Heat Reserve they begin using up their Heat Capacity. Heat Capacity decreases at a rate according to the number and type of heatsinks the mech has.
This combination system allows for a hard-coded heat penalty system that is easy for players to understand. If you hit X% on your capacity scale, you incur penalty Y.
There's no "Well 50% on my Stalker means 38.4 heat points, but on my Centurion it means 20 because I have fewer heatsinks". In the proposed system, 50% heat capacity is the same point for all mechs.
The easiest thing to code in would be a proportional decrease in mech functioning (IE: if your Heat Capacity is at 0%, everything functions at 100%, if you hit 50%, you run at 50% speed, weapons fire 50% slower, you turn 50% slower, etc...). However I think a linear drop-off in functioning might be too punishing (even if it is easy to understand).
If we want to be more devilish there are several tweaks we could add to the system:
Mechs decrease their Heat Capacity based on the total number of heatsinks, not type; but their Heat Reserve is replenished based on the number and type. This means that mechs using DHS have greater burst potential (they have a larger heat reserve that replenishes faster), but mechs using SHS have greater sustained potential (if they carry larger numbers of SHS, they can decrease their Heat Capacity faster).
Alternatively, the Heat Reserve could simply be a function of the total number of heatsinks (regardless of type; so that 10 DHS provides a Heat Reserve of 10, as does 10 SHS), but DHS provide better cooling throughout the scale.
MustrumRidcully, on 18 August 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:
I wonder what else the future has in store for MW:O's weapons and heat system...
I can't see myself keep playing this game if things keep the way they are, but I can't really believe it to be changing either.
We're up to see more "ghost" features of doubtful inspiration, nature and effect in a futile try to balance a complete interdependent weaponry/heat/ammo/range system by tangling with one game mechanic after another, I'd say.
And I'm unfortunately not talking about Clan Ghost Bear here.
Ah, well, I tried. I don't think they'll change their heat system or achieve balance in the lifetime of the game anymore. Anyone still optimistic, would you like this torch?
I must agree that some mechs can be bult heat neutral.
Lets say (my expiriance)
HBK-4SP
-16xDHS
-3x MED. PULSE LASER
-2x SRM4
When brawling heavy/assault who have double armor and packing 2xERPPC +gauss (35DMG) can shoot them weapons constantly without overheating while in my HBK with 3x pulse laser (18DMG) i overheat @ 5th shot even if im careful and dont shoot weapons that often. So in most cases i cant finish my job destroying him couse if i overheat and stand still i get destroyed in a jiffy so i must run like hell to cooldown a bit but take massive damage in the process. My thinking is that 3xMPL's cant be cooled with 16xDHS is shait at best.
I understand that assaults can pack lot more DHS but can pack lots of firepower too and if medium is limited so much with them big hitboxes, top speed of 92kph and a change, lot less armor than heavier classes, limited hardpoints and tonnage restriction it should be allowed to be heat neutral with limited firepower of 18 in my case (only mpl's couse SRM4 dont do lot of heat)...
I've built an Atlas with the goal of demonstrating a faint hint as to what it would be like with a heat capacity of 30.
In reality my capacity here is:
30 base + 40 = 70 + (maybe can't prove if these are working or not) 10 to 20%.
Cooling 4/sec + (maybe) 7.5 to 15% faster cooling.
It's hard to say, because no standard heatsink test beyond 10 adds up on paper compared to the game when unlocks are applied.
But the long and short of it is, while your capacity would be around 30 to 36 (with 20% heat containment), your cooling would be akin to this with 22 true DHS. Of course, a single firing of twin ER PPCs would be an immediate shutdown every time unless you had the full elite unlocks, in then it'd be 83.33% every time you fire. But watch these cooling rates.
I like Koniving's suggestions for heat balancing. That said, in the interest of continuing the discussion, I would like to offer up my own.
I always wondered why we couldn't have two bars for heat: Heat Reserve and Heat Capacity.
Heat Reserve
A mech's Heat Reserve is the amount of heat it can dissipate in 10 seconds (like TT). For instance, (using current numbers) a mech with 12 DHS would have a heat reserve of 22.8 heat. A mech with 12 SHS would have a heat reserve of 12. The Heat Reserve is depleted by a pilot firing weapons, and gradually refills over 10 seconds (proportionate to the number and type of heatsinks). The Heat Reserve does NOT replenish if there are points in Heat Capacity.
Heat Capacity
Heat Capacity is a fairly direct translation of the TT heat table. It caps out at 30 heat. All heat penalties apply at a set percentage point. Once a pilot has depleted their Heat Reserve they begin using up their Heat Capacity. Heat Capacity decreases at a rate according to the number and type of heatsinks the mech has.
This combination system allows for a hard-coded heat penalty system that is easy for players to understand. If you hit X% on your capacity scale, you incur penalty Y.
There's no "Well 50% on my Stalker means 38.4 heat points, but on my Centurion it means 20 because I have fewer heatsinks". In the proposed system, 50% heat capacity is the same point for all mechs.
The easiest thing to code in would be a proportional decrease in mech functioning (IE: if your Heat Capacity is at 0%, everything functions at 100%, if you hit 50%, you run at 50% speed, weapons fire 50% slower, you turn 50% slower, etc...). However I think a linear drop-off in functioning might be too punishing (even if it is easy to understand).
If we want to be more devilish there are several tweaks we could add to the system:
Mechs decrease their Heat Capacity based on the total number of heatsinks, not type; but their Heat Reserve is replenished based on the number and type. This means that mechs using DHS have greater burst potential (they have a larger heat reserve that replenishes faster), but mechs using SHS have greater sustained potential (if they carry larger numbers of SHS, they can decrease their Heat Capacity faster).
Alternatively, the Heat Reserve could simply be a function of the total number of heatsinks (regardless of type; so that 10 DHS provides a Heat Reserve of 10, as does 10 SHS), but DHS provide better cooling throughout the scale.
Thoughts?
Since you describe Capacity as not filling until Reserve is full and then Reserve not depleting until Capacity is empty, for all intents and purposes you are describing a single bar w/two segments. Ironically, that is already what we have, though the implementation leaves something to be desired.
I've had some discussions w/Koniving on the idea of what you call "Heat Reserve". PGI implemented it in an attempt to mimic the TT design, where heat gets to dissipate before it gets applied to the heat scale for potential penalties. A Marauder firing both PPCs doesn't go up to 20 on the heat scale and then drop back down; it just goes up by 4 (or 5/6, depending on movement that turn) because 16 heat gets dissipated before it ever "counts." The point was to keep mechs from yo-yoing in and out of penalty territory just from firing weapons their heat sinks could support. Of course, MWO doesn't HAVE heat penalties and just gives you 30 points + heat sink value, free and clear, which is the problem.
I agree (with both you and PGI) that a a form of reserve is necessary, for a couple of reasons:
If we ever do hope to get heat penalties implemented (PGI says it's something they'd like to investigate, but heaven knows if that'll ever get past words), then the initial problem stands. A mech w/16 double heat sinks should not face heat penalties for firing a single ER PPC. Having mechs lurch up and down in speed (for example) every time they fired even conservatively would be horrible for the game. There has to be a "green band" that mechs can stay in if they control fire.
Without penalties, a flat heat threshold at 30 makes it easier for mechs to run cool enough to not have to pay attention to heat all. Penalties started happening at 5 heat more than a mech could cool in a turn. In order for that number to be 30 or more, a mech would need at least 13 double heat sinks (in TT; more in MWO), and thus likely something planning on running warmer anyway. 30 is too high a number to give cooler designs a reason to at least glance at their heat gauges. The number needs to be flexible so that it is more in-tune w/the mech's capabilities.
With penalties, the "Heat Capacity" portion of the gauge needs to be somewhere you only go if you're overtaxing the mech. Without penalties, the Capacity portion needs to be much smaller than 30 and the Reserve needs to make up the rest of that. That said, I have issues w/the Reserve being equal to dissipation because it continues to incentivize (though to a lesser degree) front-loading attacks (fire all of your weapons in a rush and then duck back to cool). I'd like to see Reserve be a fraction of the cooling capacity (something like 25-50%), so that you can fire up to your cooling capacity over a "turn" w/o penalty but not all once.
most of the current balance problems could be solved by combining the heat cap/dissipation tweaks here and then lowering the ammo per ton on ballistic weapons since right now the only ballistic you have to worry about running out of ammo on is an AC/20
SteelPaladin, on 05 September 2013 - 09:33 PM, said:
Spoiler
Since you describe Capacity as not filling until Reserve is full and then Reserve not depleting until Capacity is empty, for all intents and purposes you are describing a single bar w/two segments. Ironically, that is already what we have, though the implementation leaves something to be desired.
I've had some discussions w/Koniving on the idea of what you call "Heat Reserve". PGI implemented it in an attempt to mimic the TT design, where heat gets to dissipate before it gets applied to the heat scale for potential penalties. A Marauder firing both PPCs doesn't go up to 20 on the heat scale and then drop back down; it just goes up by 4 (or 5/6, depending on movement that turn) because 16 heat gets dissipated before it ever "counts." The point was to keep mechs from yo-yoing in and out of penalty territory just from firing weapons their heat sinks could support. Of course, MWO doesn't HAVE heat penalties and just gives you 30 points + heat sink value, free and clear, which is the problem.
I agree (with both you and PGI) that a a form of reserve is necessary, for a couple of reasons:
If we ever do hope to get heat penalties implemented (PGI says it's something they'd like to investigate, but heaven knows if that'll ever get past words), then the initial problem stands. A mech w/16 double heat sinks should not face heat penalties for firing a single ER PPC. Having mechs lurch up and down in speed (for example) every time they fired even conservatively would be horrible for the game. There has to be a "green band" that mechs can stay in if they control fire.
Without penalties, a flat heat threshold at 30 makes it easier for mechs to run cool enough to not have to pay attention to heat all. Penalties started happening at 5 heat more than a mech could cool in a turn. In order for that number to be 30 or more, a mech would need at least 13 double heat sinks (in TT; more in MWO), and thus likely something planning on running warmer anyway. 30 is too high a number to give cooler designs a reason to at least glance at their heat gauges. The number needs to be flexible so that it is more in-tune w/the mech's capabilities.
With penalties, the "Heat Capacity" portion of the gauge needs to be somewhere you only go if you're overtaxing the mech. Without penalties, the Capacity portion needs to be much smaller than 30 and the Reserve needs to make up the rest of that. That said, I have issues w/the Reserve being equal to dissipation because it continues to incentivize (though to a lesser degree) front-loading attacks (fire all of your weapons in a rush and then duck back to cool). I'd like to see Reserve be a fraction of the cooling capacity (something like 25-50%), so that you can fire up to your cooling capacity over a "turn" w/o penalty but not all once.
It could definitely be done with only a single bar which would help reduce HUD clutter. The "heat reserve" exists for a few reasons (one of which is preventing the "lurching up and down" in speed every time someone pulls the trigger, another is to normalize the percentages at which heat penalties are incurred).
As for exacerbating the "peek and shoot" game play, the heat reserve definitely encourages this type of game play. However, Peek and Shoot with front-loaded damage will always be the most effective form of game play because of the advantages it confers (I get to shoot you, and you don't get to shoot me). The only way I can think of (off the top of my head) to encourage less peek and shoot would be to give damage bonuses for remaining in the LOS of your target for X amount of time (or if your heat dissipation rate increased with your current speed?).
There's Snub-Nosed PPCs for brawling. "PPC shotguns." But regular PPCs and ER PPCs were always supposed to be a bad choice for close up tangling as the PPC person always lost. Heck, the PPC mech on TT usually loses up close too.
Right, but in Mech Warrior games, fun should always trump over straight TT translation like PPC min-range. PPC's were fun to use in previous Mech Warrior games, especially since they were good up close and out to their max range. Some things in TT need to stay in TT. Only us grognards know what the hell a PPC min range is - heck PGI doesn't even explain it in-game.
"Why can't my blaster make damage up close?" - Says new player Joe McBobstein
"Well, because TT," Dev
"What's TT?" Joe McBostein
"Uh, Table Top, for Battletech," Dev
"Oh cool, but my gun needs to do damage up close, because FPS game and it worked in those other Mech games, K? Thx bai now," - Joe McBobstein
General Taskeen, on 30 September 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:
Right, but in Mech Warrior games, fun should always trump over straight TT translation like PPC min-range. PPC's were fun to use in previous Mech Warrior games, especially since they were good up close and out to their max range. Some things in TT need to stay in TT. Only us grognards know what the hell a PPC min range is - heck PGI doesn't even explain it in-game.
"Why can't my blaster make damage up close?" - Says new player Joe McBobstein
"Well, because TT," Dev
"What's TT?" Joe McBostein
"Uh, Table Top, for Battletech," Dev
"Oh cool, but my gun needs to do damage up close, because FPS game and it worked in those other Mech games, K? Thx bai now," - Joe McBobstein
PPCs had a minimum range due to a flaw with the weapon so drastic that the counter correction applied to it was to use an attached mechanical apparatus so that the weapon focused its energy well beyond the barrel for a number of technical and mechanical reasons. Early PPCs had a frequent rate of destroying the very mechs they were mounted on and resulted in many deaths.
(It's also why the weapon should have kept the simple firing delay like it did in closed beta; where the energy focused in a large ball beyond the barrel and then after building up for half a second was thrust forward. You could see the charge up, the energy forming, etc which matched up with the lore. In its current form it makes no sense, but in the original closed beta form the build up formed a ball of energy beyond the barrel, where it made perfect sense. Back then people complained because this meant half a second delay for any weapon + half a second for the PPC to build up and deploy = miss 50% of the time, and 30% of the time missed anyway due to no lag compensation. After HSR though it should be perfectly fine to put it back in. Perhaps shorten the delay.)
The main issue with the weapon is if it did not focus the energy beyond the barrel.the feedback had a tendency of frying electrical systems on the mech using the PPC, in addition to the barrel having a chance of literally melting before the blast is launched, causing internal explosions when this occurred (as it'd fire regardless). The 'performance' of a PPC below 90 meters was essentially a difficult thing to do damage with but not impossible (the assumption being that you'd hit the target doing the energy build up and not 'oh he's just within 45 meters of my beam'). Of course, PGI tried to implement this concept in a linear method and it found itself heavily abused because without the delay (charge up without the annoying hold the button aspect) the actual concept can't be achieved correctly in a way that can't be abused. (i.e. you hit the target before the build up of energy is completed; it does the damage built up, not damage based on how many meters away).
We're missing is another mechanic. For example, the weapon 'could' do damage close up when you switch off the field inhibitor. Toggled off, you can do 100% damage at 0 meters. The downfall is there's a high chance of the PPC doing 100% of the 10 damage to yourself and destroying your weapon and NOT to your target.
This aspect is also required in order to give favor to ER PPCs, whose super amounts of heat (along with PPC heat) were intended to prevent boating. Given MWO's rising threshold mechanic; this is a non-issue and thus boating them is perfectly fine. Resulting in our ghost heat counter balance rather than a removal of the problem.
Edit: Tried to add this but the post below made it separate so edited it in.
The min range stuff is in the books, the fiction, and even is in the older games (yes, even the MW-2 PC rulebook. It was removed from the PS1 version as well as the threshold increased to 40 for a more "arcade" feeling). The only one game I'm aware of where it is not applied to is the SNES Mechwarrior 3050 (Sega Battletech). There, it was a 1-second charge up to do full damage. (Gauss Rifle had a charge up mechanic too, but it affected range).
ER PPCs have overcome this problem but are actually supposed to be extremely rare in addition to insanely hot. In past mechwarrior games you could not fire 2 of them at the same time (except the 40 threshold MW2 'arcade'-ish versions and the MW4 cluster-duck Microsoft did to entertain twitch-shooter fans) which more than counters the otherwise advantageous abilities they have.
Thank you Koniving, yes TT is not a set of numbers of rules, there is a whole bunch of fluff, logic and other things to back up the number decisions and quirks, and a lot of it is cool, even if sometimes science squints at it funny. A LOT of this fluff would make good mechanics for MechWarrior, even if the fluff part is ignored in TT.
Technoviking, on 30 September 2013 - 09:50 AM, said:
Thank you Koniving, yes TT is not a set of numbers of rules, there is a whole bunch of fluff, logic and other things to back up the number decisions and quirks, and a lot of it is cool, even if sometimes science squints at it funny. A LOT of this fluff would make good mechanics for MechWarrior, even if the fluff part is ignored in TT.
Indeed. Have you seen the firing rates of MW:LL's autocannons?
Think that firing rate is insane? I did too before I started really looking into the battletech fluff and wanted to know how they could get away with 1 times armor and live so freaking long with weapons like THAT! O_O! Here's a secret: Each shot is doing 1 damage. It appears to fire every 0.4 seconds (faster than an AC/2), and totals to 5 in 2 seconds. That's "slower" than MWO's AC/5 by 0.5 seconds. The best part? It delivers non-focused damage and is lore/fluff focused -- even better is the fact that it makes you feel awesome! Autocannons have multiple variants. Dozens upon dozens actually.
(Quick side note: PPCs in MW:LL seem to have a 7 second delay. Gauss Rifle has a 6 second delay. Thought that was interesting. SLs appeared to fire like machine guns with rapid 'insta-hit' shots, but still deal 3 damage in 3 seconds just like MWO's dps.)
For example as I'm sure you know the more common ACs are actually fully automatic MG style. Then in mixed calibers, burst-fire versions loaded internally by magazines called cassettes. And finally the ultra rare single shot ACs, which is what MWO has as the only version.
Of course, there's more than 44 regular medium laser variants listed on Sarna. Not counting the variants of variants (same weapon, different companies, fluffed to have slightly different prospects).
I believe I saw a listing of over 32 different "MGs", 20 of which were mech mountable, ranging from 5mm multi-barrel arrays to 20mm Gatlings. Most of the range issues with MGs are actually fluffed to be a combination of three things; Some MGs are designed to 'spray' in such a way that the bullets literally shatter as they leave the barrels, thus significantly reducing their effectiveness against armored targets. Others use multiple barrels that fire at the same time and thus the shots are not focused as well as they could be to penetrate. The third is that the range for some MGs actually has nothing to do with the limitations of the bullets or accuracy at range (the usual excuse is the lack of accuracy beyond a stated range) but beyond 90 meters they no longer have sufficient power to deal 'optimum damage' to mech armor. Then there's one that's actually described like a lawn-watering sprinklers -- as in it literally pivots left and right as part of the firing sequence to make its shots more difficult to for infantry and light vehicles avoid. (I believe it's a combination of these reasons that MWO uses a cone of accuracy.)
There's one AC/2 that fires 10 shots to do 2 damage, its caliber isn't that much higher than the MG but its barrel is much larger and there's quite a bit more propellant per shell.
But what I find the most hilarious is that there's one Autocannon 20, the Pontiac 100, that supposedly fires a blitzkrieg of 100 bullets in less than 2 seconds and is described as a "hailstorm of bullets ripping through armor like a hundred hot needles into warm butter."
-------------
But on the original topic here..
Recent vids:
Spoiler
Before Ghost Heat: Which I think is trying to sweep the threshold problem under the rug.
Example of a near heat neutral build on MWO: 32 SHS.
Fun fact: 2 ER PPCs = 30 heat. 1 ER PPC should generate 50% heat. Would shut down on every firing unless chain-fired. Would require slightly less than 10 seconds to cool back to zero in a correct threshold. Note these ER PPCs are generating 13 heat each.
An example of a build that has been ENHANCED and made DEADLIER thanks to Ghost Heat! O_O!
Used to do two alpha strikes, lots of scattered damage. Sometimes required 3 alphas to kill an assault mech. But shut down in two. With a proper threshold would shut down immediately on the first alpha. Here's why I say it benefits: Chain firing focuses the missiles much more on the CT. Instead of just 12 LRM-15s fired and shutting down I'm getting up to 16 LRM-15s out before I shut down, in a really rapid firing rate.
An epic rush with twin large and twin ER large. I would have shut down upon firing both pairs of LLs back to back on a proper threshold.
Example of a lower-threshold heat neutral build. Would work with a 30 threshold without a problem. The PPC would generate 33.33% heat. The lasers in the teens. The Gauss might do 1% heat if even. So long as I didn't spam everything at once, it'll be heat neutral. Notice it's certainly inferior to most builds, isn't it? Hardly terrifying.
And this Heavy Metal shotgun + AC/2 build as awesome as it is, would have shut down a LOT sooner and required a LOT more heat management with a proper threshold.
This Flamer Stalker build would spam less, but be just as deadly with a lower threshold (the flamer heat penalty could then be removed, too).
This Misery build, great as it is, would still be quite awesome even after the threshold change. Twin PPC + AC/5 + twin SL 1 SPL. Skip to 6:50 (after the Star Wars pun at the beginning).
Just imagine how much less PPC spam would come from this mech.
Wee!
Btw if they EVER remove heat penalties from the AC/2s for sequenced fire, I'd love to make some updated MG-style examples of the multi-shot ACs.
-------
Random for the record: Despite popular belief to include my own, the ChemJet Gun is in a book and described as a 4 shot, not a 3 shot. Also learned the "Devastator" as I called it which I remembered where the Atlas couldn't use it due to the recoil causing the Atlas to fall on his backside -- was the only singleshot UAC/20 model in existence taken from a Cauldron Born and it is NOT a regular singleshot AC/20. Even so, I still can't find a reference to a 203mm single shot AC/20 on ANY mech so far. But I found one of it on a 100 ton tank that's stated to be able to "tangle with an Atlas and have a chance of winning."
Official art depicts the UAC/20s on the Hunchback II-C to be 6-shots = 20 damage. Given the rotating barrel array design these are actually MG-style (blam, blam, blam, blam, blam, blam - slow, constant fire with no 'genuine' cooldown. Much like an AC/2 in MWO.) where the "double tap" of MWO would require an Ultra-mode toggle to double the firing speed. Still can't find fluff on them to confirm.
The thing is, if you made AC's do damage over time like lasers, then I can't really see any reason why I would use AC's... energy weapons would just be better then.
The chief benefit of AC's over lasers now is that they do damage in a single chunk, rather than the energy weapon's burn time.
While heat would traditionally benefit AC's over energy weapons, the ballistics wouldn't traditionally have the additional accuracy concerns that stem from their travel time nature.
3
