Jump to content

Why The Developers Failed At Weapon Design


128 replies to this topic

#81 MustrumRidcully

    Member

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

Posted 10 October 2013 - 07:18 AM

View PostPrezimonto, on 09 October 2013 - 07:31 PM, said:


I wish they'd just add a delay and target lock required to perfect convergence. Essentially, your weapons zero in from neutral (aimed perfectly forward on the width of your mech, unless you have actuator on your arms to allow better) as you hold your cursor over a mech, after you acquire a lock.

This mirror's the LRM lock on system, without requiring a lock to fire. All weapons are better after a target lock and "zoom in" time. Firing on the go is harder, perfect convergence requires that you expose yourself. It's a good balance.

It would also instantly illustrate the completely awful implementation of ECM to all players rather than just LRM users.


This just screws over people that use mixed weapons the most.

Taking long aim for a single alpha - that might be worth it. So build a boat, take the aim, alpha with pinpoint precision.

A non-boat? Taking that extra time for convergence for each weapon that needs a different lead? No one will want that.

The only thing you could do is making the wait for convergence not worth it - but then you just removed precision, you didn't acutally create a rule that made boating less interesting.

In the table top, the main reason for building a boat was that you had to worry only with one range. Your mech was a specialist, and specialists beat jack of trades pretty much all the time in a team based game. But you could still build specialists without boating. Maybe you found 2 PPCs too hot - then pick an LL and a PPC and 2 extra heat sinks. You're still great at medium ranges. You could even use LRMs instead of LLs, if you wanted to.
Basically, you could tweak a lot in a loadout without immediately switching from "easy-to-use" build to "usability nightmare" mech.

#82 TexAce

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,861 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 10 October 2013 - 07:24 AM

View PostFupDup, on 09 October 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

It's the heat system. Heat dissipates too slowly and our capacity is way too high. What we need is for heat to cool off quickly, but with a very low capacity to prevent alpha strikes from energy boats (they would shutdown instantly if they didn't space out their shots).

View PostJohn Wolf, on 09 October 2013 - 05:48 PM, said:

@Fup,

So, like go back to the 30 scale hard lock? How fast do you suggest heat dissipates? 3 ERpeeps shutsdown?

@Rhent

We talking about the older game hardpoint locks? Like If it comes with a PPC standard, you can't strip it to add as many Mediums as you want? Sorry, not following you just yet.


I posted a solution a time ago for this but all the people afraid they couldn't boat anymore and it would nerf their OP skillolz are ranting against it

see here: http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

#83 Gaan Cathal

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,108 posts

Posted 10 October 2013 - 07:27 AM

View PostTexAss, on 10 October 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:


I posted a solution a time ago for this but all the people afraid they couldn't boat anymore and it would nerf their OP skillolz are ranting against it

see here: http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1


That's because your idea fixes the heat system with DHS, and then reintroduces the current "big alpha best alpha" setup with SHS, especially since the historically alpha-happy mechs are Assaults with plenty of tonnage but somewhat crit-limited, so moving to SHS as soon as it has any advantage is a good move. They'll easily be hitting half again as many SHS as they would have had DHS.

So you solve the problem, then reintroduce it. Removing equipment redundancy is admirable, certainly, but I don't see "a way around alpha-limiting" being the way to do it.

#84 Prezimonto

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 2,017 posts
  • LocationKufstein FRR

Posted 10 October 2013 - 08:22 AM

View PostMustrumRidcully, on 10 October 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:


This just screws over people that use mixed weapons the most.


I'm not suggesting a different mechanic for each weapon, I also think that if you single fired weapons they should go exactly where you aim.

I'm suggesting a generic way to add a "targeting" computer. If you're happy chain firing and solo firing, I think each shot should go exactly where you put it. (making mixed load outs actually easier to deal point damage with a variety of weapons over a short period of time)

Think about it in the frame of reference of the LRM target lock. You must target the mech, then you must hold your cross-hair on/near the mech for a few seconds until you get a solid ring. Once you've got a solid ring you get the 2 second hold before your lock goes away, you can lead a target/move around/jj/whatever you need to do (or 3.5 seconds for adv. target decay).

If you applied that to this system you have a wait and hold time before getting perfect convergence of your weapons, you must hold that lock near the target to maintain that convergence with line of sight (I'd argue or with a spotter and C3/Slave units but since they don't exist, just with a spotter).

You can single fire any weapon and get a spot on shot.
You can, with a delay and/or LoS/spotter, maintain perfect convergence on all follow-up shots on a single mech.
You can not switch targets and get perfect convergence with out the delay unless you are:
1) single firing a weapon
2) using arms with full shoulder actuators only.
You can still fire any combination of weapons and expect to do good damage, just not pin-point.

Essentially, this is a simplified version of Homeless Bill's targeting computer. One that uses only the targeting mechanics already in the game.

Is it a perfect solution that makes sense for all situations? Probably not, that would require a much more complicated system. Does it deal with convergence, reward single firing of weapons, and is it fairly intuitive for a player to grasp? Probably.

Edited by Prezimonto, 10 October 2013 - 08:23 AM.


#85 TexAce

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,861 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 10 October 2013 - 08:22 AM

View PostGaan Cathal, on 10 October 2013 - 07:27 AM, said:


That's because your idea fixes the heat system with DHS, and then reintroduces the current "big alpha best alpha" setup with SHS, especially since the historically alpha-happy mechs are Assaults with plenty of tonnage but somewhat crit-limited, so moving to SHS as soon as it has any advantage is a good move. They'll easily be hitting half again as many SHS as they would have had DHS.

So you solve the problem, then reintroduce it. Removing equipment redundancy is admirable, certainly, but I don't see "a way around alpha-limiting" being the way to do it.


the dissipation with SHS wouldn't be like it is now with DHS, but much slower, a six PPC stalker was able to alpha how often before heat scale came? once every minute? every 30 seconds? In my proposal he would need to cool off much longer, 2-3 minutes. So you can shoot of those 6 PPCs but if you have to wait 2-3 minutes before you can do it again you think twice about alphaing.

This makes alphaing the "last rescue, high risk" that it is in the lore and not what we have now, where people alpha every 20 seconds.

#86 Kraven Kor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,434 posts

Posted 10 October 2013 - 08:26 AM

View PostRhent, on 09 October 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

If you want a change, quit buying mechs. Everyone has enough mechs now due to ghost heat and unlimited hard points. The best mechs are already in the game, they can't release anything else worth buying now.


I'd disagree there.

We are missing a ballistics-heavy assault mech such as the Annihilator or Mauler, and, naturally, melee mechs with hatchets and the like. The latter being a twinkle in our eye at best.

#87 Gaan Cathal

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,108 posts

Posted 10 October 2013 - 08:41 AM

View PostTexAss, on 10 October 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

the dissipation with SHS wouldn't be like it is now with DHS, but much slower, a six PPC stalker was able to alpha how often before heat scale came? once every minute? every 30 seconds? In my proposal he would need to cool off much longer, 2-3 minutes. So you can shoot of those 6 PPCs but if you have to wait 2-3 minutes before you can do it again you think twice about alphaing.


Why does everyone always bring up 6-PPC Stalkers? They were never good. The 4-PPC build was the brutal one, precisely because with current dissipation the 6-PPC build didn't have enough cooling, the 4-PPC build did.

View PostTexAss, on 10 October 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

This makes alphaing the "last rescue, high risk" that it is in the lore and not what we have now, where people alpha every 20 seconds.


There's quite a lot of builds that should be able to alpha on cooldown. 3-4MLs and an SRM6 should overheat you if you constantly alpha for several volleys. That's an engagement time limiter, not an actual alpha limiter. Not all alpha is big alpha.

#88 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 10 October 2013 - 09:48 AM

View PostKhobai, on 10 October 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

The devs themselves have said that the heat system is primarily intended to limit alphastriking. The only reason alphastriking needs to be limited is convergence. So the heat system does directly bandaid convergence, or at least a symptom of convergence.
---

That's not my primary goal of heat changes, that is the devs' primary goal of heat changes.

#89 Xanquil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 474 posts

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:00 AM

Even if the heat system was changed to 1/2 cap and 2x recovery (like I showed earlier) we would still be inflicted with ghost heat.
Why because without any change to the pinpoint nature of weapons, ghost heat is the only "effective" way to curb high damage pinpoint alpha strike.

But as been pointed out with more and more chassis being put out with ballistic hardpoints even ghost heat is starting to fail at what it was intended to do.
Heat isn't going to ever be able to replace the balance system left out by PGI, random hit locations.

As I stated in many other discussions;
The key problem and the core of most of the MW:O weapon balance issues is pinpoint accuracy. No amount of hardpoint limitations, heat changes, weapon quirks(charge up) and/or armor changes( short of removing hit locations) is going to fix that.

So what should PGI do, keep treating the symptoms with things like ghost heat and hardpoint limits, or fix the cause pinpoint accuracy?

#90 DoktorVivi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 239 posts
  • LocationWyoming

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:17 AM

I think the heat system is missing two things:

A: Heat penalties like in TT.

B: The true reason why energy-based mechs existed in canon: to lessen reliance on ammo in long campaigns / missions / away from supply lines.

People would rely on ballistics much less if they had to worry about finding more ammo. While repair / rearm was flawed, this could be implemented by reducing the amount of ammo / ton every mech starts with in a match. The fewer supply lines you have / the farther away you are from them, the less ammo you start a match with. You'd have to carefully protect your supply lines to keep your ballistic mechs supplied.

Unfortunately, from the design docs, it doesn't really look like CW will support something like intentionally cutting supply lines / distance from supply lines since you're basically just battling on an abstract 'front.'

Though I guess they could do some sort of randomly-assigned mission that would achieve the same effect. Standard game mode, but winning cuts enemy supply lines, reducing their ammo until / unless they are able to complete a similar mission to restore their supply lines.

#91 New Day

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 1,394 posts
  • LocationEye of Terror

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:21 AM

View PostFupDup, on 09 October 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

It's the heat system. Heat dissipates too slowly and our capacity is way too high. What we need is for heat to cool off quickly, but with a very low capacity to prevent alpha strikes from energy boats (they would shutdown instantly if they didn't space out their shots).

Also much more organic than adding a whole another system on top of the current one. I don't know why they just don't put it on the TS. No GH, DHS add the same amount of heat capacity (or no capacity) as SHS. And see what happens.

Edited by NamesAreStupid, 10 October 2013 - 11:22 AM.


#92 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,274 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:36 AM

Heat scale, and standard heat is whats used, because, whether or not PGI considered adding size to weapons to further reduce customisation, in closed beta, it was shouted down by the twitchers and min maxers, with the cry of.

This is mechwarrior online not...Battletech...

so fingers need to be pointed at more than just PGI, for heat scale, because without convergence, and weapon limitations, and an open customisation style, heat is..the only way to go..

Though to be honest these kinds of posts are not going to change things now, this is what we're getting, unless people want ui2 and cw delayed even more, all that will happen are balancing tweaks

#93 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,274 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:41 AM

View PostDoktorVivi, on 10 October 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

I think the heat system is missing two things:

A: Heat penalties like in TT.

B: The true reason why energy-based mechs existed in canon: to lessen reliance on ammo in long campaigns / missions / away from supply lines.

People would rely on ballistics much less if they had to worry about finding more ammo. While repair / rearm was flawed, this could be implemented by reducing the amount of ammo / ton every mech starts with in a match. The fewer supply lines you have / the farther away you are from them, the less ammo you start a match with. You'd have to carefully protect your supply lines to keep your ballistic mechs supplied.

Unfortunately, from the design docs, it doesn't really look like CW will support something like intentionally cutting supply lines / distance from supply lines since you're basically just battling on an abstract 'front.'

Though I guess they could do some sort of randomly-assigned mission that would achieve the same effect. Standard game mode, but winning cuts enemy supply lines, reducing their ammo until / unless they are able to complete a similar mission to restore their supply lines.



Ammo replacment might happen in CW who knows , its actually the only way PGI can go now, having comitted to heat scale, an abstract system, of spare parts and ammo depending on how far into capturing a planet in a series of battles, with modifiers of how close to your own jump stations and 'health' of the faction economy.

Also would be a big plus for 'loyalists' over merc units and singletons, as the house units would be effected less

#94 Vodrin Thales

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 869 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:49 AM

View PostJohn Wolf, on 09 October 2013 - 05:44 PM, said:

Rhent,

Thanks for sharing your viewpoint on it. And I do see a lot of ballistics but I wouldn't say they dominate the battlefield like the PPC days of not so old. Do you have any suggestions on how to correct the flaw you're speaking of? Do ballistics store too much ammo? since they are supposed to be lower heat based on limited ammunition reserves do you think that might correct things? or perhaps another option?


The problem is that AC's can instantly deliver heavy damage to one panel of a target mech.

I'll give you my solution which I think is a bit better than Rhent's because hardpoint limitations greatly limit the amount of mech customization you can do, and I think that reduces one of the most appealing parts of this game.

I'd say that heavier autocannons should deliver there damage with a burst of shots instead of one shell increasing the chance their damage will be spread to multiple areas of the target mech. Then also eliminate full perfect convergence making weapons mounted on different parts of a mech converge on slightly different target points. This solves the problem of pinpoint damage being superior (causing mechs to mount more auto cannons).

#95 Kaldor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,239 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:52 AM

View PostFupDup, on 09 October 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

It's the heat system. Heat dissipates too slowly and our capacity is way too high. What we need is for heat to cool off quickly, but with a very low capacity to prevent alpha strikes from energy boats (they would shutdown instantly if they didn't space out their shots).



JFC... This is the solution that has been preached for over a year. PGI continues to ignore. Player base declines. Game dies.

#96 Ahja

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 141 posts

Posted 10 October 2013 - 11:56 AM

Well poster its hardly the end of the game but you are correct in regards to hard points being the key not heat. As for ballistics being uber they are and always have been all the way back to BT/MW. At this time ballistic uberness is not so much that they are great. Its that all the other systems and not working right. Just look at PPC's they have no EM pulse or heat buildup on targets and the have been manipulated to death.

#97 Vodrin Thales

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 869 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 10 October 2013 - 12:01 PM

View PostAhja, on 10 October 2013 - 11:56 AM, said:

Well poster its hardly the end of the game but you are correct in regards to hard points being the key not heat. As for ballistics being uber they are and always have been all the way back to BT/MW. At this time ballistic uberness is not so much that they are great. Its that all the other systems and not working right. Just look at PPC's they have no EM pulse or heat buildup on targets and the have been manipulated to death.


Lasers far outperformed ballistics in original BT, and several of the MW games. It was giving standard lasers a beam duration that made AC's better.

#98 RandomLurker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts

Posted 10 October 2013 - 12:22 PM

Thinking about it over the night I came up with an idea that I havn't seen anywhere else. It's basically stolen from Eve Online, son anyone familiar with that will get how it works.

The idea is to make heat dissipation dynamic based on the current heat %. Peak dissipation would be somewhere in the middle, say for argument purposes at 50%. This means, when your heat is at 40-60%, you'll be dissipating the maximum amount of heat per second. Now, if you alpha past that, your dissipation decreases. This means that you sacrifice a large amount of sustained DPS in order to get an aplha strike. On the flipside, you sacrifice Alpha in order to get DPS.

-------

I'll try to make some examples in case they are needed.

For sake of argument, let's say a peak dissipation of 5/sec and peak rate is at 50% heat. Minimum rate is half that, shutdown threshold is 50. My math isn't the best so the following will be an approximation. No way I'm going to be able to do compounded heat scale calculations on my own- someone else wanna do some nice graphs?

Firing two ERPPC puts you at 30 heat, or 60% of threshold. This puts you at roughly 4.5 heat/sec dissipation to start with. 4 seconds of cooldown later, you are down to about 18 heat Fire those 2 ERPPC again, now you are up to 48 heat and 2.5 dissipation- right next to shutdown, and not going down quickly either. This is the price of alpha striking.

Compare that to chain firing. One ERPPC, 15 heat, 30% threshold, or about 3 heat/sec. 2 seconds later, the next ERPPC is fired bringing you to about 26 heat (15 - (3 hp/s * 2 sec))+15, and puts you squarely at maximum dissipation. 2 seconds later, the first ERPPC is fired again. This gives you about 30 heat (26 - (5 hp/s * 2 sec)) + 15. 2 seconds later, ERPPC shot #4 and you are at roughly 36 heat. (30 - (4.5hp/s * 2 sec)) + 15

As you can see, the same two weapons fired on cooldown result in completely different heat scales depending on whether they are Alpha'd or chained. This puts a lot of the balance on pilot skill and tactical choice, where it belongs.

#99 Lupus Aurelius

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 509 posts
  • LocationHarlech, Outreach

Posted 10 October 2013 - 02:08 PM

Reposted from here: http://mwomercs.com/...t/page__st__100

View PostLupus Aurelius, on 07 October 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:


Currently, MWO mechs function more like omni-mechs, with the ability to fit way beyond what the original balancing concepts of BattleTech and MW computer games. Heatsinks remain badly broken, as well as the whole heat system, allowing for builds that can fire indefinitely without ever overheating. A variety of mechs are being fitted with weapon systems they never would have been able to before, a good example is the Dual AC20 Catapult, whereas the 2 ballistic spots originally were machine guns.

It still boils down to these two items that have been brought up for a long time now. Heat and the fitting mechanics.

Heat:

Currently, heatsinks add heat levels to a mech, as well as heat dissipation speed. This encouraged use of lower heat-high damage builds. Dual to quad AC5 and UAC5 builds that deliver pinpoint damage at range with almost no heat now rule. In the past, it was the 4-6 PPC Stalker, or the 6 LL Stalker, jump sniping PPC/Gauss Highlanders, the list goes on. But the real issue here has always been HPS – how much damage can you put out for as long as possible. Instead, heat should be handled as follows:
  • -Each Mech has a base heat amount, unique for the most part, with bigger mechs having better heat than lighter ones.
  • -Engines are not only rated by speed but also by heat level, larger engines having better heat than smaller ones. This would be an interesting mechanic, do you go for a larger engine for more speed and heat, but less firepower, or a smaller engine to save weight and add firepower, but with less heat?
  • -Heat sinks do not add more heat level to the mech, they merely increase the heat dissipation rate, so the more heatsinks you have, the faster the heat dissipates. DHS at that point can actually be "double" single heat sinks, and there would actually be a reason at times to use single heat sinks.
High heat alphas would have been reduced to 1 possible with an immediate shutdown, and possibly internal heat damage, with the above mechanic. Also, it would allow for a more balanced heat rating for weapons, instead of AC5/UAC5 doing 1 heat every 1.5 secs vs ERPPCs doing 15 heat every 4 seconds. Ballistics would still have lower heat, but the ability to fire multiple ballistics at one time continuously could also be curtailed.

Heat handled per the above would also reduce the use of alphas to a "last resort" type of maneuver, since doing more than 1, or possible 2, alphas would shut down almost any mech. Now it would be an issue of how to deliver damage over time instead of all at once, making the games longer with more variety of tactics.

Weapon Hardpoints:

Until the introduction of omni-tech to the IS, there were the stock models only. Modifications cost dearly, and also could be the source for significant issues in running a mech. That’s fine for tabletop, but in a computer game, you want people to have some ability to customize their ride. But the current mechanics make all mechs basically omni-mechs. So long as there are open criticals in that location and you have the tonnage, you can fit any of that type of weapon in that location, up to the quantity limit.

Instead,hardpoints should not open to all the crits in that location. Besides the number of weapons of that type, there also needs to be a limit as to the number of crits that can be used for those weapon types. All of the crit slots in that location would no longer be able to fit that weapon type. So, having 3 energy on a right torso might mean there were only 6 energy crits there. You could fit 3 large lasers, 2 PPCs but not 3 PPCs, or a PPC/LL/ML. Same for ballistics and missiles, 2 ballistics in an arm, but only 5 ballistic slots, so you could fir 2 AC2, an AC2 and an AC5, but not 2 AC5s. Similar to the way it was in MW4.

These 2 mechanics combined would remove a lot of the boating issues, and actually force balanced builds. It would also make each mech more unique, giving more variety for lance compositions and not just seeing the same handful of mechs all the time, boating whatever the FOTM is. Chasis with heavy energy build would have higher base heat, so mech like the Awesome would actualy be able to do what it was designed for, be a PPC platform, Mechs with heavy ballistic builds might have lower heat, but more crit space for ballistic weapons. It would make each mech more unique, as well as more balanced in relation to each other. And also would help eliminate the ridiculous balancing by nerfing or adding unnecessary mechanics..

Approaching the historical issues by addressing the root causes, such as convergence, the heat system in general, and the fitting mechanics would have addressed those issues in a more accurate way. However, under the current mechanics, PGI is balancing by heat, therefore the premise of the OP.


#100 Prezimonto

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 2,017 posts
  • LocationKufstein FRR

Posted 10 October 2013 - 02:58 PM

View PostDoktorVivi, on 10 October 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

While repair / rearm was flawed, this could be implemented by reducing the amount of ammo / ton every mech starts with in a match.

I think this is a great idea for the attack and defend maps. It would be a great balance if the defense could cut off supply lines and there-by affect the amount of ammo/ton of mechs on subsequent matches. It could also then open up side line matches where the attacking force had the opportunity to secure more supply.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users