65 replies to this topic

[Roland]

Removal of ghost heat and implementation of a different system would require admission of error, which I do not think we've seen thus far in the development of this game.

[Lyoto Machida]

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

I have to admit Ive never seen a problem with ghost heat. I think it needs to be altered a little bit. tweaked perhaps but ive noticed alot of changes ive liked in the game since its implementation.

What changes, pray tell, have ghost heat brought about in the game? I'm talking about positive changes here...

[Varent]

Lyoto Machida, on 16 December 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

What changes, pray tell, have ghost heat brought about in the game? I'm talking about positive changes here...

no more super high alpha builds. longer extended more paced games. True brawls that dont just end in three shots.

You dont see people relying on just one weapon anymore. People build more complex builds.

Im waiting to see one truly good thing that would come with removing ghost heat?

So far ive managed to use every single weapon in the game effectively with ghost heat implimented... so....

[FupDup]

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 07:40 PM, said:

You dont see people relying on just one weapon anymore. People build more complex builds.

Alpha-striking constantly with 2 PPCs and 1 AC/20 or 2 AC/5 is not "complex."

[Varent]

FupDup, on 16 December 2013 - 07:43 PM, said:

Alpha-striking constantly with 2 PPCs and 1 AC/20 or 2 AC/5 is not "complex."

and I'm still waiting to see how removing ghost heat would change this? Everyone complains about it yet the argument devolves into "Because I want to run my 4 ppc, 4 ac2, 4 etc etc etc.... I would love to know in detail how someone feels removing ghost heat would improve the balance and feel of this game.

FupDup, on 16 December 2013 - 07:43 PM, said:

Alpha-striking constantly with 2 PPCs and 1 AC/20 or 2 AC/5 is not "complex."

And that said, its a hell of alot more complex and alot better then 4 ppc.

[Deathlike]

Unfortunately, this suggestion requires Paul being fired.

That isn't happening AFAIK.

[Bobdolemite]

Sandpit, on 16 December 2013 - 05:11 PM, said:

Wow....

I didn't call this one. I SHOULD have seen it, but I didn't....

Lets use the clan pack fiasco to rehash old agendas so PGI can "prove" they care and listen to the community by giving in to bad ideas that have been suggested in the past and not implemented. Well played OP, well played.

Fixed that for you you can stop putting on your conspiracy coat...

regardless of the current debacle this issue stands out as an important one, among a handful of other issues mentioned further up (and in many other posts)

The sentiment still stands, addressing longstanding balance issues would be a great way out of this hole.... but im starting to think the hole is all in my head and that I should just start drinking some whiskey..... I got extra glasses

[FupDup]

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

and I'm still waiting to see how removing ghost heat would change this? Everyone complains about it yet the argument devolves into "Because I want to run my 4 ppc, 4 ac2, 4 etc etc etc.... I would love to know in detail how someone feels removing ghost heat would improve the balance and feel of this game.

Well, it would help LL, SRM, and LRM focused mechs stand a better chance at competing against those aforementioned PPC + AC FoTM builds. Other than that it's mostly just removing a rather poorly thought feature from the game, which is an improvement in and of itself even if the impact is minimal.

By the way, don't be afraid of 4 AC/2 mechs. Their damage per alpha strike is utterly terrible, they run hot as a volcano even without ghost heat, and they have to stay constantly exposed to use their DPS. It's not that great of a build. As for quad-PPC, those now have reduced projectile speed, increased base heat per PPC, and do zero damage within 90 meters. Not nearly as crazy-OP as they used to be back in the old days.

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

And that said, its a hell of alot more complex and alot better then 4 ppc.

Meta builds are never complex. They're literally easy enough for a cave man or chimpanzee to build them and do well with. As for "better," they are certainly "better" in some ways because they have slightly higher DPS, exponentially greater heat efficiency, and much better close-combat capabilities.

Edited by FupDup, 16 December 2013 - 07:51 PM.

[HATER 1]

Ghost heat is a band-aid for convergence and a broken hardpoint system. If they pull that band-aid off, they might have to do real simulator type stuff, like cone of accuracy and battle computer limitations.

I mean, it would be inconvenient for them to examine how real weapons, best selling games, and TT games kind of mesh, and most people hate the challenge of uncertainty.

Edited by HATER 1, 16 December 2013 - 08:05 PM.

[Varent]

FupDup, on 16 December 2013 - 07:49 PM, said:

Well, it would help LL, SRM, and LRM focused mechs stand a better chance at competing against those aforementioned PPC + AC FoTM builds. Other than that it's mostly just removing a rather poorly thought feature from the game, which is an improvement in and of itself even if the impact is minimal.

By the way, don't be afraid of 4 AC/2 mechs. Their damage per alpha strike is utterly terrible, they run hot as a volcano even without ghost heat, and they have to stay constantly exposed to use their DPS. It's not that great of a build. As for quad-PPC, those now have reduced projectile speed, increased base heat per PPC, and do zero damage within 90 meters. Not nearly as crazy-OP as they used to be back in the old days.



Meta builds are never complex. They're literally easy enough for a cave man or chimpanzee to build them and do well with. As for "better," they are certainly "better" in some ways because they have slightly higher DPS, exponentially greater heat efficiency, and much better close-combat capabilities.

This still does nothing to address how removing ghost heat would improve the game. Where as I've already stated how its implementation has helped things.

[FupDup]

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 07:57 PM, said:

This still does nothing to address how removing ghost heat would improve the game. Where as I've already stated how its implementation has helped things.

Yes it does address how removal of GH would improve things:

FupDup, on 16 December 2013 - 07:49 PM, said:

Well, it would help LL, SRM, and LRM focused mechs stand a better chance at competing against those aforementioned PPC + AC FoTM builds.

Does allowing more builds to compete against the FoTM not improve the game?

Edited by FupDup, 16 December 2013 - 07:59 PM.

[Varent]

Ive yet to find any issues with those builds? I will say there is an issue with SRM hit detection but that has little to do with ghost heat. All my brawler builds use a pretty good mix of weapons and I tend to average 500+ and multiple kills.

[DeadlyFred]

There are better ways to "help things" than a hokey and completely arbitrary system astride and existing mechanic. The idea of decreasing total heat while increasing dissipation is a good place to start. The current system is {Scrap} either way, even without ghost heat. Especially on the "hot" maps.

[FupDup]

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

Ive yet to find any issues with those builds? I will say there is an issue with SRM hit detection but that has little to do with ghost heat. All my brawler builds use a pretty good mix of weapons and I tend to average 500+ and multiple kills.

I blow up robots with more than one weapon group as well, but that's not the point.

Right now, one of the core pillars of design in Mechwarrior: Online is being able to deal a lot of damage to a very specific component on an enemy mech, within a very short period of time. Ghost heat's penalty causes builds focused around LLs, SRMs, and LRMs to take a longer time to fire off all of their weapons (in order to avoid the penalty), while non-penalized builds are able to simply alpha-strike everything in one click without penalty, and take cover/torso twist while they reload/cool down. With GH removed, those aforementioned builds would not need to artificially expose themselves longer than their prey, which improves their effectiveness in battle.

[Kaldor]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 16 December 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

remove ghost heat and watch the dual ac/20 quad PPC meta return in its full glory.

As others said, dual AC20 builds never went away. The real fix for dual AC20 builds is changing the fall off for weapon damage so they dont have a max range of 810m and are more effective than an AC10 at 540m. Part of another discussion...

With PPCs at 10 heat, and a 30 heat cap, quad PPC builds wont happen, at least not alpha striking with all 4 at once. You might see 2 and then 2 2-3 seconds later. Which in that case it wouldnt even be worth running 4 PPCs, but 2 and a mix of lasers.

I hate ghost heat. I want to see it die. However, as a balancing tool it has some possibilities, but only to control out of hand builds that have the potential to be massively unbalancing.

[Varent]

DeadlyFred, on 16 December 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

There are better ways to "help things" than a hokey and completely arbitrary system astride and existing mechanic. The idea of decreasing total heat while increasing dissipation is a good place to start. The current system is {Scrap} either way, even without ghost heat. Especially on the "hot" maps.

See these are the statements that irk me... its 'scrap' because....?

I see alot of people throw around thoughts that the heat system is bad, ghost heat is bad etc... but no one gives good reasons why except THEY dont like it.... which basically amounts to your not having fun or able to use a build you want to use or do the exact things you want to do....

I have trouble taking statements seriously that arent backed by facts on how they will improve the game overall for everyone. Mostly this whole thread basically seems like an opinion which is probly most channeled by people being upset that they cant use the build THEY want to use.

My suggestion is try to adapt and learn to use new builds and try new things. Its already been shown that people work within this system well, can make builds, can play around easily and do tons of damage. So whats the problem exactly?

[Varent]

FupDup, on 16 December 2013 - 08:05 PM, said:

I blow up robots with more than one weapon group as well, but that's not the point.

Right now, one of the core pillars of design in Mechwarrior: Online is being able to deal a lot of damage to a very specific component on an enemy mech, within a very short period of time. Ghost heat's penalty causes builds focused around LLs, SRMs, and LRMs to take a longer time to fire off all of their weapons (in order to avoid the penalty), while non-penalized builds are able to simply alpha-strike everything in one click without penalty, and take cover/torso twist while they reload/cool down. With GH removed, those aforementioned builds would not need to artificially expose themselves longer than their prey, which improves their effectiveness in battle.

See now there is a well stated opinion.

In a stand up fight I can see how this would make sense however I would say this would be more of an argument of tweaking ghost heat and not removing it. I will say the Large Lasers and Srms could probly be expanded to 3 and 3 without there being a major issue.

I would argue that diversity of weapon groups could prevent this as well? There will always be a case of certain builds having advantages over others, sort of like rock paper scissors.

[YueFei]

Huntsman, on 16 December 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

Yes, remove ghost heat, allow me to deal 84 points of damage in 1 shot with the stock variant of the 50 ton Nova. I look forward to that...

If heat capacity is hard-capped at 30, a Nova firing even 6 of its Medium Lasers together while running would instantly shutdown. If it were to fire all 12 at the same time, it would hit 200% heat and instantly explode.

Ghost heat isn't needed, just a sensible heat capacity.

[Bobdolemite]

The interesting part about this is most of the people posting played without Ghost Heat (not that long ago either) and can attest to the fact that there were many viable builds on the field, and many mechs to sport them.

The problems started with the HSR fixes (which IMO were good) coupled with the buffs to PPC (questionable given HSR hadnt had time to skink in), after that the game sat for a few months until almost everyone was running PPC's and gauss... then the JJ nerfs then....... on and on.

its like they had it almost right just before the ppc 'buffs" then went off the rails and never returned to the issue again, instead fixing thing after thing to compensate for the bigger and bigger pinpoint alpha meta that evolved. All the while getting more complex / less reasonable.

Its sort of like what happened with missiles, they overnerfed even before GH considerations in a kneejerk reaction to the splash damage debacle. Then after GH was implemented they failed to really account for the way the original nerfs coupled with penalties would affect launchers. And what we get is the 6 x lrm 5 CPLT-A1 (come on people seriously? when this works we have a problem)

The more complicated the system is the more difficult and intensive it becomes to make any balance changes. Currently there are layers of problems for each of the mentioned balance issues on the table even SRM's (post LRmpocalype OK, pre spread patch OK, post patch not so much... then later some potential HSR issues on top)

Theres a history of glossing over major balance issues and creating bandaids, then sticking more on top of that. Understanding this brings the realization that the goals are relatively clear: focus on HSR issues / Missile rewind (of which SRM are not the only victim) and seriously look at overhauling the heat system from the generation / dissipation up to overheat penalties, and then step back to see what else "might" need to be balanced.

Edited by Bobdolemite, 16 December 2013 - 08:22 PM.

[FupDup]

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 08:11 PM, said:

See now there is a well stated opinion.

In a stand up fight I can see how this would make sense however I would say this would be more of an argument of tweaking ghost heat and not removing it. I will say the Large Lasers and Srms could probly be expanded to 3 and 3 without there being a major issue.

But what's the point in having GH at all? LL spam can be kept in check by the beam duration mechanic (spreads damage, makes shooter stay exposed) and the base heat of the lasers getting fairly high once you get to 4+ (for instance, I played some matches with a 4LL Catapult K2 back when PPCs were at 8 heat, and it ran pretty hot). SRMs are kept in check primarily by their hardcapped 270m range, which allows mechs with range greater than them to pound them with impunity. The spread-damage nature of SRMs also helps with this.

Varent, on 16 December 2013 - 08:11 PM, said:

I would argue that diversity of weapon groups could prevent this as well? There will always be a case of certain builds having advantages over others, sort of like rock paper scissors.

That can/should be solved by direct tweaks to the weapons themselves (i.e. buff the underperformers, maybe nerf some overperformers if necessary), rather than weird systems working behind the scenes.

Edited by FupDup, 16 December 2013 - 08:29 PM.