13 replies to this topic

[Jungle Rhino]

Proposition:

1. Set the heat capacity of ALL mechs regardless of heatsink quantity or type to 30
2. Increase dissapation of all DHS to 2.0
3. Remove alpha heat scale penalties


Reasoning:

While David made a rational arguement in the last Ask the Devs for the current heat capacity calculation I beleive that PGI have made a fundamental error. To say that a mech with 30 heatsinks firing a 30pt heat alpha in TT never increases in heat is not true. It does - it is just that at the end of the turn (10s) it is back to where it started so the net gain is 0. The capacity of ANY mech in TT to exceed their cooling is the same at 30 heat each. Regardles if it is a Jenner with 10SHS or an Awesome with 22 DHS. This is also tied to the fact that weapons fire a lot faster in MWO than TT - i.e. PPC every 4s rather than 10s. By setting the heat capacity of all mechs to 30 it automatically limits heat dependent high alpha builds (ballistics high alpha builds are weight limited). Note that with the current master level pilot skills in play this cap raises to 36.

Increasing the dissapation of DHS external to the engine to 0.2hps will help hot, heatsink dependent mechs overcome the reduced cap. It also makes bringing more heatsinks important for sustained combat. It also removes the penalty of mechs who are unable to fit a 250 engine. Finally it is simpler to understand and makes a lot more sense.

With the drastic reduction in heat capacity the possiblity of 4/6ppc alpha strikes ceases to be a threat. So there is no real need for the alpha heat scale penalty system. This removes a massive amount of unnecessary complexity from the game, again making things simple and intuitive oncce more.


Methodology:

In order to develop this proposition I sat down and constructed a spreadsheet to calculate the heat position of any given mech firing alpha-strikes over time for both the currently implemented method (including heat scale penalties and the impending PPC heat increase) and my proposed method (with changes mentioned above). I was also able to easily calculate the total alpha damage over time as an additional metric. I then plotted these as graphs to make it easy to visualise.

I selected a number of mechs to look at, full list is below but I can easily add more to this. Note that due to somewhat cumbersome method of calculation I can only work with alphas that have the same cycle time on all weapons. Full list of mechs I considered are:

6 LL Stalker (20 DHS) - silly hot alpha build
6 PPC Stalker (17 DHS) - ridiculous hot alpha build
3 PPC Awesome (22 DHS) - sensible hot alpha build
ERPPC + 2 PPC + Gauss Highlander (14 DHS) - recently nerfed popular alpha build
9 ML Swayback (18 DHS) - recently nerfed alpha build
6 ML Jenner (14 DHS) - core out in Atlas in 4 seconds!
3 UAC Ilya (10 DHS) - cool sustained DPS ballistics
2 Gauss 2 ML Jagermech (10 DHS) - cool high alpha sustained DPS ballistics
2 AC20 Jagermech (10 DHS) - cool high alpha sustained DPS ballistics
AC20 + 2 LL + 3SRM Atlas (17 DHS) - high heat high alpha brawler
2 ERPPC + Gauss Highlander (17 DHS) - popular alpha build
4 LL Stalker (24 DHS) - sensible hot alpha build

Note I did my calculations working with the pilot skills at master level, so heat dissaption of 1.2 and heat capacity of 1.2 (making it 36 for all mechs), also 0.95 reduction in cycle time for Fast Fire. But I also built in the option to easily adjust these back to new pilot status of 1.0 - which makes a massive difference btw (more on that later).


Results:

Looking at the results it is very hard to compare the different mechs directly with each other as the different weapons systems obviously work very differently. It is more interesting to look at the differences between the two systems within a specific mech, notably a mech considered to be quite good (or bad) in the current system. Also when looking at the graphs it is probably wise to remember that in most typical sniping duels you are only firing a single alpha, while in mid-range engagements you may only have 5s of sustained fire, and even most brawls only last 20-30s before somebody goes down. In other words read with a grain of salt as spreadsheets only give you a fraction of the story.

The 6 LL Stalker actually still works with the existing heat system (just), but under my proposed system in overheats and shuts down after a single alpha (42 heat vs 36 capacity).

The 6 PPC completely overheats and explodes in both systems as you would expect.

The 3 PPC Awesome is interesting so here is the heat graph:



Under the existing system the 3 PPC Awesome (or indeed any heavy/assault with 3 PPCs) is mildly nerfed by the heat scale alpha penalty - but it still chucks out 3 alphas in less than 10s. The revised system actually slows this alpha down slightly, but then gives much superior sustained DPS. BUT it becomes VERY easy to shut yourself down as you can see that you need to wait for your heat to drop to about 25% before you can safely alpha. Chainfire would be recommended.

Here is the Damag vs Time plot for interests sake:


Ok another heavy hitter that has been nerfed by the heatscale system is the Highlander with ERPPC + 2 PPC + Gauss. This is interesting to compare with the 3 PPC boat as the Gauss sucks up a lot of tonnage that could otherwise be used for cooling.



Quite similar to the previous 3 PPC mech the proposed changes would slow down the second alpha strike, with increased dissapation allowing for an eventual increase in total damage. Note that this graph is slightly misrepresentative as the Gauss rifle could keep firing independently of the PPCs as it is pretty much free from the heat limitations. BUT that is the entire point of the exercise - breaking up those initial big alpha strikes. Again VERY easy to overcook in this as you need to alpha from almost 0 heat.

Next up I wanted to show you the current meta favourite - the 2 ERPC + Gauss in either a Highlander/Cataphract:



Well, doesn't that paint a picture! As you can clearly see, without any heat scale penalty this badboy can alpha 5 full times before it has to even worry about overheating under the current system! The proposed system would cut that to two, and slow down the subsequent alphas while also forcing the pilot to actually watch his heatmeter! Interestingly the damage over time is actually pretty comparable here out to a minute thanks to the massive heat capacity it benefits from under the current system.

Also note that total DoT is similar to the 3 PPC build - the extra weight of the gauss limiting HS dissapation is telling. Under the current system this loadout is hands down better than 3 PPCs in all ways - bigger alpha, better sustained damage - which limits choice when building competitive mechs.




Ok next up check out some heat neutral (or close to it) ballistic builds:



As this only has 10 DHS in the engine the dissapation is actually identical. So the parameters of a dakka build like this remain unaffected by the proposed system. It is also worth pointing out that this build does a ridiculous 870 damage from 60s of continous firing. So we already have high DPS, heat neutral builds in the game - yet they aren't breaking it.

The double Gauss is basically the same - but trades overall DPS for alpha potential.

What is problematic however is the double AC20 jager-boom:



The changes to alpha heat scale have reigned this monster in, but barely. You can still fire 3 full alphas for 120 pinpoint damage before you have any chance of overheating. The proposed system doesn't really help either - in fact it would make the JM close to heat neutral. But that raises a key point. AC20s are ballistics - they are not meant to be heat limited. This demonstrates that the heat system is only one aspect of the problem PGI face. There needs to be some type of adjustment to pinpoint damage to solve this underlying issue. Trying to use the alpha heatscale to control AC20s is really a square peg in a round hole - and doesn't actually work that well as you can see here.

The 6ML Jenner and 9ML Swayback both came out reasonably close to where they already are but again with slightly less frontend and better sustained DPS. Chainfire would be necessary on the 9ML swayback as its alpha heat (36) would hit capacity (36).

The brawler Atlas loses an alpha at T=4s due to lack of heat (but it is a monster alpha of 74 damage!) so overall damage is less. A slightly more sensible build with 2 SRM6 and extra DHS would probably run overall much nicer.

The 4LL Stalker is viable under both systems - sustained damage is up overall (shows a similar trend to the 3PPC build). This is fair enough as 4LL seems pretty sensible and runing that close to heat neutral probably isn't going to break the game.

Conclusions:

This proposed heatscale would certainly limit large, high heat alphas - and would simplify the very complex ruleset that PGI are contructing to manage heat. I also think it would make adding extra doubles in mechlab a tough decision at the expense of endosteel (for more weight) or a larger engine. Forcing players to chainfire or risk overheating would be a big change to the current 'alpha alpha alpha' gameplay - and whether the gameplay would be more enjoyable or not is certainly debatable. But alternatives do exist and I am a little dissapointed that PGI are being so incredibly conservative with their test server changes.

Unfortunately there is no clear heat-based solution to the problem of the double-jager-boom mech, other than the current, slightly awkward, heat scale penalty. It seems to me that there needs to be supplemental changes to address the issue of pinpoint alpha damage at a fundamental level, which would leave the heat system free to function as it should.

Finally, having embarked on this task it has become more clear to me the enormity and complexity of the task facing PGI. So I will probably be a bit more easy on them. BUT I still think they need to try a lot more different ideas, and learn to admit when they have made a mistake (it's not too late for ECM to change!).

btw if anybody knows of a good free file hosting servie I can chuck up a link to my spreadsheet and you can play around with your own values for capacity/dissapation etc. or add new mechs to consider.

Edited by Jungle Rhino, 31 July 2013 - 06:59 AM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Looking forward to your work, nice so far.

[Miekael]

Jungle Rhino, on 31 July 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:

Unfortunately there is no clear heat-based solution to the problem of the double-jager-boom mech, other than the current, slightly awkward, heat scale penalty. It seems to me that there needs to be supplemental changes to address the issue of pinpoint alpha damage at a fundamental level, which would leave the heat system free to function as it should.

First, great write up, I like what you propose. As for the balancing factor of the AC/20s (and ballistics in general) I think a convergence mechanic is almost mandatory. My reasoning is this, both missile and laser groups have inherit mechanics that allow them to spread damage. Missiles break up in flight path and spread out, lasers have a beam duration and damage over time. The only weapons lacking any sort of spread properties are the ballistics and PPC family line. I think if those weapon systems had a convergence mechanic, balancing the weapons VS other groups would become a lot easier, and you wouldn't have to apply arbitrary heat penalties to weapons that were designed to run cooler. I also think that if those weapons had to deal with convergence, that we could see a major shift in the meta, since achieving pinpoint accuracy would become a lot harder to begin with, even if the spread was only a few meters at most.

[BP Raven]

Very well written and concise presentation. Will probably be ignored by PGI.

[Jesus Box]

My alternative heat system proposed is the one we had before. It was working fine. The heat scale change did nothing but throw a monkey wrench(Dev related pun missing) into an already working system.

Seriously, just like with ECM; a better way to do it is to remove it. What we had before was before. The game is slowly being watered down and made worse; not better. I wish I could travel back to November, that wonderful time before the Devs started doing all this stupid shät. You had more bugs back then and game breaking glitches or crashes; but the game was actually better balanced.

[NinetyProof]

A game without choice is a game that is un-fun.

The Boating solution that PGI put in works and actually works well. It still allows players to boat if they want, and even hit "alpha" if they want (like for the kill shot on the last mech in the match).

It does this by not "nerfing" or "changing" individual weapon balance. Weapons can now be balanced based upon each weapon and can make sense on a weapon by weapon comparison. All other solutions, such as yours, penalize non-boaters and start to skew of "weapon by weapon" balancing.

Basically by separating the "boating controls" from the "weapon damage" controls, PGI can now tweak things to achieve whatever result they want. It's the right long term solution that allows PGI to tune / tweak / balance in a sensible / flexible manner.

The aversion to complexity is not a valid reason to hamstring PGI with regards to the tools they have for balance / tweaking the game. Further more Ghost Heat is really not very complex at all. The system is actually working and achieving the desired goals. Imagine That ...

[Jesus Box]

You're right in your first sentence, and that's exactly why the change is moronic. They are nerfing builds that were perfectly viable choices already. Now most people will never use them again and switch to other builds that haven't have the axe taken to them. Why do people act as if you have more choices/builds than before when the exact opposite is the reality? These changes are not expanding or improving the game in any way. They're restricting and watering it down. It's like the new talent tree system on WoW now. It's practically built for dummies with few actual choices to be made. This is where MW is headed with changes like these. They may as well yank out the ability to even customize Mechs if they're going to do crap like this. But they might someday do that, if they continue down this downward loony path. There are already people suggesting it. Just make a flat build for every variant, balance them accordingly, then let people pick the one they want to play. Nice and simple.

Edited by Jesus Box, 31 July 2013 - 11:34 AM.

[Volthorne]

Jesus Box, on 31 July 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

Angry rant

I'm inclined to agree with Ninety on this one. The "boating penalties" (this is actually very misleading, it's more of an "Alpha-strike penalty") don't actually affect the overall available loadouts. What it does is modify HOW some loadouts play. Can you still take a +4-PPC Stalker? Hell yeah. Can you now blow away most opponents in one or two shots? Not unless you want to be a sitting duck for the teammates of the guy you just scrapped.

This is actually similar to what Riot Games does: if they can't find a number that solves a certain problem on a certain Champion, they re-work the core issue. Nerfing PPCs by a few points of heat (each) wouldn't have changed much. At best you'd have spaced out the time between alpha-strikes. The scaling penalties make it so you don't WANT to alpha-strike with lots of the same weapon unless you absolutely have to.

This being said, the proposal in the OP actually does very little good on any front. Plus it makes DHS a "must-have" item (there are currently some builds that are better off with SHS instead of DHS).

Edited by Volthorne, 31 July 2013 - 12:58 PM.

[Donnie Silveray]

Some good notes, Volthorne has a point, and if anyone mentiones Convergence I am going to punch a puppy.

[VanillaG]

When you look at TT, heatsinks are capacity and dissipation. More heatsinks means that you can fire more or hotter weapons in a turn and any heat that is leftover is accumulated and dissipated in subsequent terms if you do not fire as many weapons. If you have read the latest Ask the Devs, the devs mentioned that they are simulating a realtime heat system not a static 10 second system. If the current heat capacity levels are too high, the devs should have the ability to modify it by changing the following values without having to rewrite the entire system:

• Change the base capacity to number lower than 30. Currently every mech starts with 30 and that is modified by the number and type of heatsinks as well as pilot tree modifiers. You could even "quirk" each chassis to have different starting values depending on how that variant comes equipped by default.
  
• Change how adding additional heatsinks affect capacity. Currently adding heatsinks provides linear increase in both capacity and dissipation. You could change to where the capacity is not linear so at some point adding additional heatsinks provide diminishing returns for capacity but is linear for dissipation. If you wanted to keep it linear you could just make the capacity value smaller than the dissipation value.
  
• Change the Pilot efficiencies. You could make the capacity skill an elite skill so it is never doubled or just change the amount of the bonus.

While it may seem that the current system is horrible, blindly changing out to a different system is just to risky. The devs should have enough values to modify to implement almost all of the ideas without ripping out the current system.

[Jungle Rhino]

Volthorne, on 31 July 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

Plus it makes DHS a "must-have" item (there are currently some builds that are better off with SHS instead of DHS).

I'd be interested if you could show me one?

There is no reason whatsoever to be running SHS in the current system unless you are a low heat ballistic build with an engine smaller than 250. From my experience any builds that combine these parameters (i.e. Gauss poptart RVN-4X) are fairly pants. Possibly MG troll SDR-5K could benefit - but if you aren't runnning an XL255 in a SDR you are probably doing it wrong anyhow.

[Jungle Rhino]

VanillaG, on 31 July 2013 - 02:15 PM, said:

• Change the base capacity to number lower than 30. Currently every mech starts with 30 and that is modified by the number and type of heatsinks as well as pilot tree modifiers. You could even "quirk" each chassis to have different starting values depending on how that variant comes equipped by default.
  
• Change how adding additional heatsinks affect capacity. Currently adding heatsinks provides linear increase in both capacity and dissipation. You could change to where the capacity is not linear so at some point adding additional heatsinks provide diminishing returns for capacity but is linear for dissipation. If you wanted to keep it linear you could just make the capacity value smaller than the dissipation value.
  
• Change the Pilot efficiencies. You could make the capacity skill an elite skill so it is never doubled or just change the amount of the bonus.

Personally I would like nothing more than for the devs to try a few things! The problem is that they don't seem to want to which is a shame.

That is a good point on the pilot efficiencies. Having gone through the numbers I cannot overstate what a massive impact these have on heat management and resulting damage output. It is absurd really as new players, or even experienced players in a new mech are just in a totally different league until they have got these skills mastered and doubled up.

[TemplarGFX]

Can someone link me to the information behind the new heat system that has been implemented?

This forum/site is f***ing terrible, you cannot find any important information. Not even the links provided by friggin PGI work.

[Mahnmut]

I just wanted to add that once we get 12v12, ballistic weapons are going to be ammo limited so that will be another balancing factor. I really don't see a need to balance them with heat.

Edited by Mahnmut, 31 July 2013 - 04:35 PM.