Jump to content

Alternative Method For Limiting Alphas


8 replies to this topic

#1 Snow Drift

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 22 August 2013 - 07:20 PM

I've been reading a lot of chatter about limiting the alpha strike potential and namely the effect of focusing all of those weapons at the same point. I'll start by saying I played the good old miniatures game for quite some time, so I have a pretty good feel for how things go. I also understand the difference between a discrete time scale (turn based game, AKA, Battletech) and a continuous time scale (real time game, AKA, MWO). That being said, I also understand the desire to not increase complexity.

Let me begin by making a few points that will set the stage:

In the board game, a turn was a window of time. While it seemed like you would fire X weapons all at once, the truth is you simply were firing them within that window of time. I understand the novels may portray it differently, but when it comes to the rules, that's the truth of the matter.

In MWO, things can actually happen at very small time scales, effectively, all at once. In reality, this wouldn't work very well from a pure physics perspective. More likely is the vehicle would chain fire, but relatively quickly; launching a full salvo in a matter of a couple seconds at most. LRM launchers that have limited numbers of tubes in the game behave this way.

When it comes to hit locations, I'll make two more similar points:

In the board game, when you hit with your huge alpha strike in that one turn, every weapon had a separate hit location roll (baring a few exceptions). This reduced the impact of the alpha strike a little bit compared to how it may have played out.

In MWO, since your cursor was at one place in space when you pulled the trigger, and every weapon fired off at once, all those weapons WILL hit the same spot (baring different flight times). Lasers will drag their damage across the target as things move, of course, and missiles will not all hit at the same time, likewise scattering damage. But most weapons thunk into the same location.

Now, this very point is how you solve the problem: Don't let all the weapons fire at exactly the same time. A weapon group will all fire off in short order with a single button push, but like missile artillery in real life, it won't all fire exactly together. The reasons this should be okay are backed up by the points above. It's still an alpha strike in the scope of the board game's time scale. You're still only hitting one fire button. You're just putting a small delay between each weapon triggering off. This will force weapons to scatter a little. Unless you have awesome aim of course, and keep those crosshairs on that bouncing target. If you do, then your skill is rewarded.

There's a few ways to do this:

You could put an automatic delay between firing each weapon in a group. It only needs to be on the order of 0.1 or 0.2 seconds.

You could implement a power consumption for each weapon. A engine may only put out its power rating in units, and triggering off each weapon consumes a given number of units. These should VERY rapidly regenerate, and would be larger on energy weapons and things like Gauss, but lower on missiles and ballistics. You could also have electronic warfare leach into this to make it a better trade off. Make sure you display this energy bar somewhere so pilots can watch it. But in the end, it should have a similar effect as above; adding only fractions of a second delay between weapons firing off.

I'm sure people can come up with more. I kinda like the latter, but it does add some complexity. And these ideas may have already been thrown out there. Great! I hope others like them or people come up with even better ones.

The keys are:

It doesn't require funky heat scales.
It doesn't artificially screw your aim up.
It matches reality pretty well.
People who're very good aim will still be able to focus their shots.
It rewards people who take time to aim each shot (like a real marksman).

No randomness. Simple. Skill still makes you awesome.

Discuss.

Edit: The latter method also allows for you to add greater flexibility for delays between higher power weapons, like say, PPCs and Gauss having a half second or so delay between triggering each off, while letting a bank of small lasers or AC/2s fire with impunity.

Edited by Snow Drift, 22 August 2013 - 08:04 PM.


#2 Lightfoot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,612 posts
  • LocationOlympus Mons

Posted 22 August 2013 - 07:56 PM

Well all the weapons have a different travel time which is how a real time MechWarrior simulation introduces randomized hit locations.

Now if you are so foolish as to walk straight at a Mech in MWO or real time sim, all those alpha-strike weapons will hit their target. However, if you move laterally in to your target, it will spread those alpha'd weapons into multiple locataions very similar to what the board game does with multiple hit rolls. Pilots just have to play it defensively and realize that moving straight at a target means they will likely face some alpha strikes on the way.

#3 Snow Drift

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 22 August 2013 - 08:11 PM

In that case, for it to be effective, weapon travel times need to be slower, apparently. The problem is pretty apparent: People are getting hit with huge salvos, and concentrated barrages are too effective. I don't think this is really being debated. The debate is around how you resolve it. Add slower travel times? Makes the game seem lame. Add random cross-hair movement? Good marksmen get penalized for no reason. Just make weapons not able to fire off all at once? Wait, that happens in real life! Can't do that.

Sorry for the sarcasm. But I think the point is to address the problem that you have 3 PPCs and 4 medium lasers all hitting the exact same point in space. It's easy to avoid when you realize we live in a 4 dimensional world. Time is on your side! Or not, if you suck at aiming, or are trying to hit a light mech.

Oh, I forgot! It makes light mechs more survivable. This will help once they fix HSR.

#4 Wyest

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 51 posts
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 22 August 2013 - 09:24 PM

Only problem here is now you have another thing to track. Either time delays or engine power... or both.

Adding complexity if it makes sense, sure. But I'd try a proper heat fix (sans ghost heat) and returning ammo to original levels first. Then see if this is even needed.

If firing 3 PPC's and 4 medium lasers blows your mech up, not many people will do it, even if they do all hit the same point at once. Unless theyre about to blow anyway, in which case, well, wasn't that what alpha was for? Those "well, this might kill me, but hell, I'm gonna die if I dont try anyway" moments?

#5 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 23 August 2013 - 01:28 AM

So another layer of complexity.
The idea behind the devs decission to limit Alpha with heat was right - only how they did was wrong.

I will go on your nerves until someone is listening:

increase the heat for each weapon at factor 3 and increase the dissipation at factor 4 (i don't care about heat capacity at the moment)

Even with > 20DHS you will not be able to fire 3 PPCs in the same moment - your mech will shut down.
But with 20 DHS you can fire 2 PPCs and after 2sec maybe the third one.

It could not be "exploited" like the artifical 0.5 break of phantom heat. Its more simpler and more linear - and much easier to understand

#6 MustrumRidcully

    Member

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

Posted 23 August 2013 - 01:58 AM

View PostWyest, on 22 August 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

Only problem here is now you have another thing to track. Either time delays or engine power... or both.

Adding complexity if it makes sense, sure. But I'd try a proper heat fix (sans ghost heat) and returning ammo to original levels first. Then see if this is even needed.

If firing 3 PPC's and 4 medium lasers blows your mech up, not many people will do it, even if they do all hit the same point at once. Unless theyre about to blow anyway, in which case, well, wasn't that what alpha was for? Those "well, this might kill me, but hell, I'm gonna die if I dont try anyway" moments?

The way I see it, a "forced chain-fire" system might be one of the systems with the least overhead. The game already tracks weapon cooldowns, this would just a slightly different cooldown. You need one extra value per weapon (if you make it weapon-specific, which is what I would recommend.) basically. The new program logic would be that the group-fire system doesn't fire all weapons at once, but only in successession according to this cooldown.

A "global weapon cooldown" system could work like this (with group-fire and alpha-strike still being command options that differ from pressing the fire button on a chain-fire group):
- One chain-fire cooldown value for each weapon
- When any weapon is fired, all weapons go on their chain-fire cooldown.
- You have a group-fire status for each weapon that says whether a group/alpha fire order was send to it.
- A Group-Fire process cycles through each "ready" weapon and checks if it has a group-fire status set to "fire", fires that weapon, and resets the status to "do not fire".

#7 Snow Drift

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 23 August 2013 - 04:02 PM

That is another plus to this method: From a code and game design perspective, a forced chain fire is pretty simple and straight forward. You could demo it in a couple hours on internal servers to see how it works. It's pretty low risk to try out, and doesn't have a huge impact that a lot of these others do in terms of implementation or interactions with other mechanics. They could try it out in short order, and if it seems to help, cool! if not, on to the next idea.

#8 Royalewithcheese

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,342 posts

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:06 PM

I think the issue with something like this would be the very fast-firing weapons - AC/2, UAC/5, MG, etc.

#9 Snow Drift

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 24 August 2013 - 08:11 AM

This is why I think the latter method I mentioned is a little better. It allows you to have some weapons with no cool down and continuously fire based on their normal reload timer. You could also just have the forced chain fire and each weapon has its own chain fire delay, rather than a global one. Could say it's taking into account the whole slew of reasons why you may not be able to fire multiple weapons exactly simultaneously. Recoil, power draw, whatever.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users