93 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Foo, did you play megamek?

[Tombstoner]

you don't need a faster heat dissipation with no cap for it to work. in fact i would loose the cap and extend out the heat dissipation time to 15 seconds and add in movement penalties. i would turn coolant flushes into dissipation boosts that last for 30 seconds. don't have them remove heat instantaneously or they will trivialize heat as a game mechanic.

[Fooooo]

Sandpit, on 08 November 2013 - 10:33 PM, said:

Foo, did you play megamek?

Nah not really. ( Don't know a whole lot about TT rules either, just what I have encountered in short / sparadic games of TT / megamek with a few friends who were really into it)

I have tried it out, although I couldnt live with the oldish display / graphics. I would love that (megamek) but in MW:Tactics style graphics.....if you get me.........(the 3d map etc etc)

Edited by Fooooo, 09 November 2013 - 07:47 AM.

[Cimarb]

Tombstoner, on 08 November 2013 - 10:41 PM, said:

you don't need a faster heat dissipation with no cap for it to work. in fact i would loose the cap and extend out the heat dissipation time to 15 seconds and add in movement penalties. i would turn coolant flushes into dissipation boosts that last for 30 seconds. don't have them remove heat instantaneously or they will trivialize heat as a game mechanic.

The heat scale should be based upon a {five} second cycle, since that will give a faster play experience but still allow all weapons to fire once within the cycle. Normalize all the weapons based upon that scale, then make heat sinks dissipate proportionately. Since weapons are firing roughly twice as fast as in TT, if you double the dissipation rate to compensate, you should get the same net effect. You will still be able to alpha and fire at the normal recycle rate for each individual weapon, but if since the weapons are based upon a five second cycle, doing so will lead to heat build up, just like it did in TT, and the heat penalties will offset the higher dps you put out during that time. Just like a shutdown, the hit penalty (screen haze or some other visual heat affect) and movement penalties last until you get your heat back down to a certain threshold (say five points lower on the scale than the penalty itself).

I agree that coolant flushes should be a temporary dissipation boost, as that will still be worth using, but not allow you to alpha spam through two shutdown cycles.

[Tombstoner]

faster my god man we die also most as fast as players in cs and MW... hey... that might be by design... damage output needs to go down. the game is suffering from massive rubber banding now. This is because they are "fixing" hit recognition. teh game needs to be slower to accommodate the net and system lag.

[Cimarb]

Tombstoner, on 09 November 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

faster my god man we die also most as fast as players in cs and MW... hey... that might be by design... damage output needs to go down. the game is suffering from massive rubber banding now. This is because they are "fixing" hit recognition. teh game needs to be slower to accommodate the net and system lag.

I didn't phrase that right. MWO is currently designed to give a faster play experience than TT (which is ten seconds between weapon fires, even for a machine gun). Making it a five second cycle is to retain that "feel", but normalize the heat.

Edited by Cimarb, 10 November 2013 - 08:33 AM.

[Tombstoner]

o yea the entire set of stats could have and should have been normalized with the adjusted fire rates. but that didn't happen.
so over all damae output per 10 seconds basically doubled with armor being left unchanged during the great 5 seconds life expectancy. armor and internals where doubled shortly after. but damage and heat should have been adjusted correctly in the first place. that way damage output would have been the same whether you have a 2,4,6,8 or 10 seconds fire interval.

for example a ppc is 10/10 damage heat adjusted correctly with a fire rate of 4 becomes 2.5/2.5 damage heat. thus PGI adjusted just about everything wrong in there first attempt to tune weapons.

Heat capacity only makes sense if you want to give the player time to think about using a cool shot. heat neutral mechs dont sell cool shots. Some have claimed that cool shots came later i claim that it was part of the initial design as a way to accommodate micro transactions. but the deves realized that it would trivalise heat as a game play mechanic. later added it back in. then faced player outrage that its pay to win. thus its got altered into what we have now.

Heat cap should be based on the size of the mech not the number of heat sinks. then add in mech specif bonuses like +20% heat cap for the awesome. or a 25 % bonus to sensor range for the raven.

Over all the game needs a complete overhaul. i expect this to happen once UI2.0 and CW are released and stable CW.

PGI knows this and its still full steam ahead into ice burg territory. what could go wrong.... rubber banding is bad due to fixing hit recognition and damage is still not being applied correctly. Months of work that's actually making the game worse not better.

I hate to say it but the game was in its best state ever... months ago when your on an island first became popular.

[stjobe]

Tombstoner, on 11 November 2013 - 06:55 AM, said:

Heat cap should be based on the size of the mech not the number of heat sinks.

Sure, for a stompy robot game that's fine. But it's not BattleTech. The number of heat sinks are what determines how much heat you can get rid of per given time period; that's how things work in the BattleTech Universe, and MWO is still part of that Universe.

Tombstoner, on 11 November 2013 - 06:55 AM, said:

then add in mech specif bonuses like +20% heat cap for the awesome. or a 25 % bonus to sensor range for the raven.

These kinds of quirks can, and probably should, be implemented either way.

Tombstoner, on 11 November 2013 - 06:55 AM, said:

Over all the game needs a complete overhaul. i expect this to happen once UI2.0 and CW are released and stable CW.

The heat system needs a complete overhaul, but that's not the whole game. And I don't expect it to happen at all - it's too much work and too much pride at stake.

[Tombstoner]

stjobe, on 11 November 2013 - 07:03 AM, said:

Sure, for a stompy robot game that's fine. But it's not BattleTech. The number of heat sinks are what determines how much heat you can get rid of per given time period; that's how things work in the BattleTech Universe, and MWO is still part of that Universe.


These kinds of quirks can, and probably should, be implemented either way.


The heat system needs a complete overhaul, but that's not the whole game. And I don't expect it to happen at all - it's too much work and too much pride at stake.

Pride is clearly at work affecting this games development. I think its safe to say we jumped the shark where its not battle tech is concerned at least a year ago. this game has deviated so far from BT it not funny. ghost heat. charge up times on gauss. ECM. Fire rates, heat cap + dissipation is not BT where are the movement heat modifiers? The devs are holding onto the wrong things from BT and changing things from BT that shouldn't. skill based targeting requires a complete departure from BT TT to make it work but that transformation didn't happen.

[Cimarb]

Tombstoner, on 11 November 2013 - 06:55 AM, said:

o yea the entire set of stats could have and should have been normalized with the adjusted fire rates. but that didn't happen.
so over all damae output per 10 seconds basically doubled with armor being left unchanged during the great 5 seconds life expectancy. armor and internals where doubled shortly after. but damage and heat should have been adjusted correctly in the first place. that way damage output would have been the same whether you have a 2,4,6,8 or 10 seconds fire interval.

for example a ppc is 10/10 damage heat adjusted correctly with a fire rate of 4 becomes 2.5/2.5 damage heat. thus PGI adjusted just about everything wrong in there first attempt to tune weapons.

Heat capacity only makes sense if you want to give the player time to think about using a cool shot. heat neutral mechs dont sell cool shots. Some have claimed that cool shots came later i claim that it was part of the initial design as a way to accommodate micro transactions. but the deves realized that it would trivalise heat as a game play mechanic. later added it back in. then faced player outrage that its pay to win. thus its got altered into what we have now.

Heat cap should be based on the size of the mech not the number of heat sinks. then add in mech specif bonuses like +20% heat cap for the awesome. or a 25 % bonus to sensor range for the raven.

Over all the game needs a complete overhaul. i expect this to happen once UI2.0 and CW are released and stable CW.

PGI knows this and its still full steam ahead into ice burg territory. what could go wrong.... rubber banding is bad due to fixing hit recognition and damage is still not being applied correctly. Months of work that's actually making the game worse not better.

I hate to say it but the game was in its best state ever... months ago when your on an island first became popular.

Well, I don't agree with all the negativity in your post, as the game is quite fun for me even in the existing heat system and it works quite well for how bad of a system it is based off of, but I do think we agree on how they SHOULD handle heat for the most part, lol.

I don't agree with the heat capacity being based off of tonnage, as that will only hurt mediums and lights - they would have to balance things around the assaults, who can carry a ton more weapons and heat sinks already.

Mech specific bonuses are definitely something that could be looked at, but +20% is way too much in my opinion - maybe a 5-10% bonus?

As you mentioned earlier, cool shots should be dissipation bonuses, not instant-cool, and I really think that would still help them sell under the new system too. I never use them myself, as I can't build a mech that overheats bad and expect one "free" cycle of burst to do enough for me to warrant its use.

Edited by Cimarb, 11 November 2013 - 07:41 AM.

[Sandpit]

Fooooo, on 09 November 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

Nah not really. ( Don't know a whole lot about TT rules either, just what I have encountered in short / sparadic games of TT / megamek with a few friends who were really into it)

I have tried it out, although I couldnt live with the oldish display / graphics. I would love that (megamek) but in MW:Tactics style graphics.....if you get me.........(the 3d map etc etc)

I was just curious because a gaming buddy of mine played under a similar username.

[Ludibrat]

Khobai, on 07 November 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

The heat system in battletech isnt penalization in a strict sense though. Its designed to be more of a tradeoff. Your mech can choose to suffer penalties in exchange for pushing the heat threshold. If it was just penalization, you wouldnt be getting anything in return, but youre getting the ability to fire weapons past the normal limit.

you re missing one huge fact in here...its not the same if you fire a small laser past heat limit or 4 ppc past heat limit....you re gonna be in shutdown for 20 sec after 4 ppcs go over the top...so its your choice how fast you wanna get destroyed..

In your second paragraph....you said you dont get penalties until you reach 100%....uhm...why would you get penalties before 100%?....thats not logical at all.....like every other machine it has temperatures it can handle and ones it cant....you should check the difference between heating and overheating....and in real life machines have tolerance to go even over 100% for a very short period of time without taking permanent dmg.....

it hink you just misunderstand what the scale in your cockpit is showing.....you talk about threshold exceeding and reaching 100%....see uhm...0% threshold....weapons not generating heat, ie. 30% weapons generating tolerable heat, 80% weapons still generating tolerable heat.....but 100% thats not tolerable anymore so thats when penalties should kick in........so why in god name would you put penalties on lets say 40% heat?....if its still tolerable....

i think you ppl dont understand that machines have a temperature and heat generation they can work in without losing its effectiveness.......

[stjobe]

Ludibrat, on 11 November 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

i think you ppl dont understand that machines have a temperature and heat generation they can work in without losing its effectiveness.......

I'll just repost this:


The blue boxes are the heat sink range (in TT, any heat within that range would dissipate completely), the green the "no penalties" range (in TT, that meant 0-5 residual heat), and the red is the temperature at which penaltes occur (5-30 residual heat in TT). Blue plus green is the "normal operating temperature" for a 'mech.

Please notice that the two scales match exactly in length between TT and MWO, but that in MWO heat penalties don't start until you hit 100% - in effect the "safe zone" is 25 points of heat larger in MWO.

If the TT penalty range was introduced to MWO, heat penalties would start at somewhere between 37.5 and 60% depending on how many heat sinks you had, and progressively get worse until the inevitable shutdown at 100%. These penalties could include
* Movement penalties - a drop in top speed
* Aiming penalties - shaking and flickering of HUD/reticle
* Risk of shutdown - but overridable, which could lead on to
* Risk of ammo explosion - small chance only if heat is overridden.

[Cimarb]

Ludibrat, on 11 November 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

In your second paragraph....you said you dont get penalties until you reach 100%....uhm...why would you get penalties before 100%?....thats not logical at all.....like every other machine it has temperatures it can handle and ones it cant....you should check the difference between heating and overheating....and in real life machines have tolerance to go even over 100% for a very short period of time without taking permanent dmg.....

it hink you just misunderstand what the scale in your cockpit is showing.....you talk about threshold exceeding and reaching 100%....see uhm...0% threshold....weapons not generating heat, ie. 30% weapons generating tolerable heat, 80% weapons still generating tolerable heat.....but 100% thats not tolerable anymore so thats when penalties should kick in........so why in god name would you put penalties on lets say 40% heat?....if its still tolerable....

i think you ppl dont understand that machines have a temperature and heat generation they can work in without losing its effectiveness.......

Just because 100% is the set shutdown point does not mean it is the "tolerable" and "not tolerable" point - it just means that is the point set at 100% because it is when you shutdown. The freezing point is not when something instantly freezes solid - it is when things begin to freeze/thaw. In a computer, things begin to go bad way before it actually seizes up completely. It will start running slower, more fragile components will fail, and so on, until it finally reached the breaking point and seized. Your body is the same way, getting slower and less reactive as it overheats, until it finally shuts down at "100%".

stjobe, on 11 November 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

I'll just repost this:


The blue boxes are the heat sink range (in TT, any heat within that range would dissipate completely), the green the "no penalties" range (in TT, that meant 0-5 residual heat), and the red is the temperature at which penaltes occur (5-30 residual heat in TT). Blue plus green is the "normal operating temperature" for a 'mech.

Please notice that the two scales match exactly in length between TT and MWO, but that in MWO heat penalties don't start until you hit 100% - in effect the "safe zone" is 25 points of heat larger in MWO.

If the TT penalty range was introduced to MWO, heat penalties would start at somewhere between 37.5 and 60% depending on how many heat sinks you had, and progressively get worse until the inevitable shutdown at 100%. These penalties could include
* Movement penalties - a drop in top speed
* Aiming penalties - shaking and flickering of HUD/reticle
* Risk of shutdown - but overridable, which could lead on to
* Risk of ammo explosion - small chance only if heat is overridden.

Exactly.