92 replies to this topic

[Amsro]

2.0 DHS are needed.

[Wolfways]

Amsro, on 27 October 2013 - 10:43 PM, said:

2.0 DHS are needed.

We've been saying this for a loooong time.

"Ask the Devs 27. Dec 04 2012

Q: Can we please at least try DHS at 2.0? It doesn't seem like much of a boost to lights who usually benefit mostly from the engine heat sinks, but heavies and assaults that use big energy weapons need the boost. [Wolfways]
A: No. Prior to releasing the Dual Heatsink upgrade the forums were abuzz with whether or not they would be mandatory on all Mechs. With the numbers we've chosen, they aren't, so I'd say we answered those questions well. [Garth]"

[Satan n stuff]

Wolfways, on 27 October 2013 - 11:14 PM, said:

A: No. Prior to releasing the Dual Heatsink upgrade the forums were abuzz with whether or not they would be mandatory on all Mechs. With the numbers we've chosen, they aren't, so I'd say we answered those questions well. [Garth]"

They aren't? I guess nobody told all the players who exclusively use DHS on their mechs.

[MustrumRidcully]

Serpentbane, on 23 September 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

instead of making p.r.s games, the maps should be huge, many times bigger. Forcing ppl to use tactics and take advantages of the different mechs. Open for longer range fireing, like R(really)LRM and artillery, depending on spotters etc. 1000m, come on, I hit car size targets at that range With my AG3. Also, some maps could be favorable for one mech size, for example cave networks with narrow passages etc. This way, Assaults could be devestating, but also prey.

Larger maps don't seem to have much impact on what kind of weapons are relevant, as long as you don't increase the weapon range and add zoom magnification steps.

If your LRM max range is 1,000m, then a mech that is capable of running 75 kp/h needs needs about 50 seconds to get into "melee" range. That won't change just because there are an extra 5,000m behind the LRM mech.

Bigger maps make primarily scouting more important, because it's easier to move past enemy lines.

[Vodrin Thales]

Wolfways, on 27 October 2013 - 11:14 PM, said:

We've been saying this for a loooong time.

"Ask the Devs 27. Dec 04 2012

Q: Can we please at least try DHS at 2.0? It doesn't seem like much of a boost to lights who usually benefit mostly from the engine heat sinks, but heavies and assaults that use big energy weapons need the boost. [Wolfways]
A: No. Prior to releasing the Dual Heatsink upgrade the forums were abuzz with whether or not they would be mandatory on all Mechs. With the numbers we've chosen, they aren't, so I'd say we answered those questions well. [Garth]"

I really think this is the wrong solution. Better to nerf the damage output of low heat weapons a little. Mechs die a bit to fast as it is. Greatly buffing energy DPS will not help that.

MustrumRidcully, on 28 October 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Larger maps don't seem to have much impact on what kind of weapons are relevant, as long as you don't increase the weapon range and add zoom magnification steps.

If your LRM max range is 1,000m, then a mech that is capable of running 75 kp/h needs needs about 50 seconds to get into "melee" range. That won't change just because there are an extra 5,000m behind the LRM mech.

Bigger maps make primarily scouting more important, because it's easier to move past enemy lines.

Larger maps also greatly increases the time out of combat, and this is not good.

[Serpentbane]

***** n stuff, on 26 October 2013 - 02:46 AM, said:

That seems unlikely, but it's possible the interface is bugged or there's a connection issue that prevents you from seeing the damage, or maybe you just didn't notice it. Do you have any screenshots?

No, sorry, this usually happens so fast and I have not tought about doing one either. But I'll keep it in mind.

[Serpentbane]

MustrumRidcully, on 28 October 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Larger maps don't seem to have much impact on what kind of weapons are relevant, as long as you don't increase the weapon range and add zoom magnification steps.

If your LRM max range is 1,000m, then a mech that is capable of running 75 kp/h needs needs about 50 seconds to get into "melee" range. That won't change just because there are an extra 5,000m behind the LRM mech.

Bigger maps make primarily scouting more important, because it's easier to move past enemy lines.

Bigger maps by them selvs would not solve the issues. But as you said, they would require more use of mech classes and tactics. LRM ranges could increase to 3000m, but this would reqire a scout holding targets. Also, incoming missle warning should also only be displayed if mech have AMS. Now, 3000m would be to long many say, but they could also have lets say 500m minimum arming distance, making LRM boating even more dangerous.

Also, this way, Assaults and heavies could remain high Damage/DPS output mechs, but also more easely avoided, requireing lights to scout and direct.

Only examples, but one way to go. Today we have small maps and CoD style PUG games, where lights are on the front line rather than scouting. When was the last time you saw a light carrying tags or NARCs?

Vodrin Thales, on 28 October 2013 - 11:50 AM, said:

Larger maps also greatly increases the time out of combat, and this is not good.

Good or bad, that depends on of this is implemented. We could have more mechs in a game, and higher revards. There could be revards based on classes and functions. Where lights gets points for spotting and targeting etc.

It would resculpt the game a little though, so I dont se it happening anytime soon.

[BrockSamsonFW]

Wolfways, on 27 October 2013 - 11:14 PM, said:

We've been saying this for a loooong time.

"Ask the Devs 27. Dec 04 2012

Q: Can we please at least try DHS at 2.0? It doesn't seem like much of a boost to lights who usually benefit mostly from the engine heat sinks, but heavies and assaults that use big energy weapons need the boost. [Wolfways]
A: No. Prior to releasing the Dual Heatsink upgrade the forums were abuzz with whether or not they would be mandatory on all Mechs. With the numbers we've chosen, they aren't, so I'd say we answered those questions well. [Garth]"

Are you sure he is talking about this game? lol

[MustrumRidcully]

Vodrin Thales, on 28 October 2013 - 11:50 AM, said:

Larger maps also greatly increases the time out of combat, and this is not good.

I agree, that's a problem. Maybe one could make the maps larger, but keep the enemy groups closer to each other? Then you need meaningful objectives around the map, of course.

Larger maps are C-Bill nerfs!!! [/tinfoil]

[KinLuu]

The Awesome just should be removed from the game, until PGI finds a way to give it some use.
Currently it is straight up worse than all other Assaults. A lot worse.

All the other assaults chassis, including energy heavy ones like the Stalker or the BM, are fine.

[MischiefSC]

I've been playing with a 2xERPPC Cataphract lately and have to say the biggest thing is A: quit trying to maximize your alpha strike damage. Instead look at mixing ranged alpha and shorter range DPS. With energy weapons that works best and controls your heat. A pair of ERPPCs is a {Scrap} ton of damage - you just need to ignore them when brawling. Have some MLs/LLs for that or even SRMs on your AWS build. Don't pack every slot with the biggest weapon you can fit and you'll find yourself actually more successful, not less.

[Wolfways]

MischiefSC, on 29 October 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

I've been playing with a 2xERPPC Cataphract lately and have to say the biggest thing is A: quit trying to maximize your alpha strike damage. Instead look at mixing ranged alpha and shorter range DPS. With energy weapons that works best and controls your heat. A pair of ERPPCs is a {Scrap} ton of damage - you just need to ignore them when brawling. Have some MLs/LLs for that or even SRMs on your AWS build. Don't pack every slot with the biggest weapon you can fit and you'll find yourself actually more successful, not less.

Brawling isn't a great idea when you have 2xML's and 2xMG's

[Lupus Aurelius]

Reposted from here:http://mwomercs.com/...86#entry2880886

Lupus Aurelius, on 30 October 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Ballistic firing speeds average at 2.36sec, or 4.24 times faster than BT, with average damage of 8.39, and an average heat of 2.14 .

Energy weapons firing speeds average 3.14 sec, or 3.19 faster than BT, with average damage of 6.67, and an average heat of 6.34 .

-Even though the heat reservoir is increased from TT, the heat dissipation of DHS external to the engine has been severely nerfed at 1.4 heat/10 sec.

-By varying the firing speeds of weapons from the original once per 10 seconds, the relative damages of those weapons have been drastically changed. An AC2 fired once every 10 seconds for 2 damage, the Gauss fired once every 10 seconds for 15 damage, the ERLL fired 8 damage (TT) in 10 sec.

-ACs, with lower heat, can fire 4 times faster and still not cap out the heat, but energy weapons firing barely over 3 times faster cannot, because the average heat for energy is 3 times greater than for ballistics, and the heat dissipation rates remain based on the 10 sec TT turn. Heat generation went up, but dissipation remained the same.

Ballistics fire on average 1.33 times faster with an average of 1.26 times more damage, than energy weapons. If you ratio the differences to bring them in line, in the 2.36 average firing time, energy weapons average 4.76 damage, vs 8.39 of ballistics. Thats half the damage in the same amount of time, on average.

This all would be obvious to a lobotomized chimp, and should have stood out like a sore thumb to PGI. In reality, ballistics have always been OP in MWO, but it took severely nerfing the energy suite to make it so visible.

A solution? A quick fix would be to bring things back to the same relative values in TT. If it fires 4 times faster than TT, have it generate 1/4 damage and 1/4 of the heat. Hard cap heat at 30, make DHS dissipate at 2.0 instead of 1.4. That would bring things back into the same relative balance from TT, and that that point, you look at armor and heat cap for mechs.