174 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

OneEyed Jack, on 07 February 2014 - 02:30 PM, said:

You are simply wrong. This is a system in which there are whole worlds of difference between understanding it and not understanding it. The sustained fire rate of weapons is massively impacted by GH, and if new/uninformed players only know that the mech is getting hot, but don't understand why it's getting hot, then they don't know how to change their actions to improve performance. A game like this requires maximization of potential to compete, and you're blatantly offering up the opinion that those not "in the know" should be held back from that.

Get your head out of your arse.

No, no it's not. How about stop being a dbag just because someone doesn't agree with you?

You don't need to know that it was implemented "because"
What you need to know is that this is what it affects and how to avoid it.

You might WANT more information but you don't NEED it in order to understand what it affects and how to avoid it. Period. What he's saying is you don't need detailed code nuances to understand
These weapons fired in quick succession induce a heat penalty
To avoid that penalty chain fire and wait .5 seconds before firing the next weapon of the same type

That's all a player needs to know. Just because you want more information doesn't mean it's needed to understand it.

[FactorlanP]

What needs to happen is that when somebody is in the mechlab, if they have a configuration that CAN cause Ghost Heat, there needs to be a pop up warning that says something to the effect:

You have 3 PPCs equipped. If you fire all 3 PPCs together or within 0.5seconds of each other you will incur Additional Heat.

Simple as that. Of course the same warning should pop up when you are buying a mech that can generate Ghost Heat.

[3rdworld]

The weapon stats should convey the heat penalty in some way. And then there should be a "help" section that explains it in detail.

New players already have a tough enough time with this game. The last thing it needs are hidden game changing mechanics.

[Victor Morson]

FactorlanP, on 07 February 2014 - 02:39 PM, said:

What needs to happen is that when somebody is in the mechlab, if they have a configuration that CAN cause Ghost Heat, there needs to be a pop up warning that says something to the effect:

You have 3 PPCs equipped. If you fire all 3 PPCs together or within 0.5seconds of each other you will incur Additional Heat.

Simple as that. Of course the same warning should pop up when you are buying a mech that can generate Ghost Heat.

Precisely. This is all that's needed.

It would even be better if it stated: "By firing these weapons in a 0.5 time frame you will incur ## additional heat."

Then in game, all that's needed is a simple light on your reticule that changes color when it's safe to fire.

That's all!

[Roland]

DaZur, on 07 February 2014 - 12:51 PM, said:

No.

I've addressed this elsewhere but the reality is virtually every single game that relies upon "data" to drive it's functional game-play mechanics, also manipulates that data in the name of influencing balance and or obtaining specific nuances out of play mechanics.

In the absence of knowledge of "ghost-heat" for most new players it's simply accepted as a nuances that needs to be learned and dealt with, in much the same way a virtual aircraft pilot learns to handle stall characteristics of a given aircraft.

"We" who have been around for a long enough time to see what we had before versus post Ghost Heat implementation appreciate the impact because we are intimately close to it... can see it, feel it... In particular because we know it's there.

Are you actually saying that it SHOULDN'T be documented?

Derp?

[Victor Morson]

Trauglodyte, on 07 February 2014 - 02:31 PM, said:

Maybe a video? The chart(s) that they provided were a mess. But, you could take 5 min and explain it all.

What they need to do is take the Ghost Heat information chart from Smurfy's and put it in a HELP tab on UI 2.0.

Which could also include some nice SCREEN SHOT & TEXT (not asking for tons of coding here) guides to various parts of Mechlab and 'mech design rules.

Easy to access, something new players will read, etc.

Obviously in addition to listing the weapons max # before heat scaling right in the weapons information pane.

It feels like Ghost Heat is something that's unpopular, so they want to hide it away from people while still punishing them severely for violating it, right now; it's worse given there are no hard and fast rules for it, too. 2 AC20s will fry you, 5 Streaks won't even be noticed.

Edited by Victor Morson, 07 February 2014 - 02:47 PM.

[DaZur]

FactorlanP, on 07 February 2014 - 02:39 PM, said:

What needs to happen is that when somebody is in the mechlab, if they have a configuration that CAN cause Ghost Heat, there needs to be a pop up warning that says something to the effect:

You have 3 PPCs equipped. If you fire all 3 PPCs together or within 0.5seconds of each other you will incur Additional Heat.

Simple as that. Of course the same warning should pop up when you are buying a mech that can generate Ghost Heat.

That would be perfectly acceptable and elegantly and simplistically educate the player with as much information necessary...

Roland, on 07 February 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Are you actually saying that it SHOULDN'T be documented?

Derp?

Boy you guys are experts in reading far more into comments than what's there...

[FactorlanP]

DaZur, on 07 February 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

That would be perfectly acceptable and elegantly and simplistically educate the player with as much information necessary...

Thank you.

Now if only PGI would start doing things like this...

And for the record... I personally feel that Videos/Tutorials explaining most things are virtually worthless unless a new player is FORCED to watch them before they can play. (Directed at nobody in particular)

Edited by FactorlanP, 07 February 2014 - 02:55 PM.

[TehSBGX]

Ghost heat seriously needs some way to be shown in the UI, honestly it's one of the most important things that could of been included in UI 2.0. For UI that seems to be intended for easy use, it's kinda weird ghost heat got left out.

[Victor Morson]

TehSBGX, on 07 February 2014 - 02:59 PM, said:

Ghost heat seriously needs some way to be shown in the UI, honestly it's one of the most important things that could of been included in UI 2.0. For UI that seems to be intended for easy use, it's kinda weird ghost heat got left out.

Again it feels like they want the system but don't want to hear complaints, so they put it in and then try to hide the fact they did everywhere they can, so people have no idea why their builds are failing unless they come onto the forums.

This comes up ALL the time.

Plus on the other end of the spectrum at the hardcore play, I would probably be way, way more inclined to run "risk" builds if there was some kind of UI that could inform me when I can fire a shot without committing suicide. All I need is a light on my reticule or something, seriously. Or something that says DANGER on the weapon groups until it's safe to fire.

Edited by Victor Morson, 07 February 2014 - 03:33 PM.

[Sandpit]

FactorlanP, on 07 February 2014 - 02:39 PM, said:

What needs to happen is that when somebody is in the mechlab, if they have a configuration that CAN cause Ghost Heat, there needs to be a pop up warning that says something to the effect:

You have 3 PPCs equipped. If you fire all 3 PPCs together or within 0.5seconds of each other you will incur Additional Heat.

Simple as that. Of course the same warning should pop up when you are buying a mech that can generate Ghost Heat.

+1
Probably the best suggestion I've ever seen regarding ghost heat

[FactorlanP]

Sandpit, on 07 February 2014 - 03:46 PM, said:

+1
Probably the best suggestion I've ever seen regarding ghost heat

By all means, feel free to tweet it to somebody. I don't think they listen to me, since I don't tweet.

[Sandpit]

FactorlanP, on 07 February 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

By all means, feel free to tweet it to somebody. I don't think they listen to me, since I don't tweet.

I don't ahve any special connections but I'll tweet it out to Russ and Paul, maybe they'll like it (hopefully )

[Roland]

DaZur, on 07 February 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

Boy you guys are experts in reading far more into comments than what's there...

Dude, when it was suggested that ghost heat be documented, your answer was "No."

Not sure what else needs to be read into it to come to the conclusion that you thought that it shouldn't be documented.

I mean, I have to assume that's not what you meant, because it would be a profoundly stupid position to take.. but that's what your original response said.

[Sandpit]

Roland, on 07 February 2014 - 03:58 PM, said:

Dude, when it was suggested that ghost heat be documented, your answer was "No."

Not sure what else needs to be read into it to come to the conclusion that you thought that it shouldn't be documented.

I mean, I have to assume that's not what you meant, because it would be a profoundly stupid position to take.. but that's what your original response said.

I think you misunderstood a bit (and I tried to clarify that earlier)

DaZur, on 07 February 2014 - 12:51 PM, said:

No.

I've addressed this elsewhere but the reality is virtually every single game that relies upon "data" to drive it's functional game-play mechanics, also manipulates that data in the name of influencing balance and or obtaining specific nuances out of play mechanics.

In the absence of knowledge of "ghost-heat" for most new players it's simply accepted as a nuances that needs to be learned and dealt with, in much the same way a virtual aircraft pilot learns to handle stall characteristics of a given aircraft.

"We" who have been around for a long enough time to see what we had before versus post Ghost Heat implementation appreciate the impact because we are intimately close to it... can see it, feel it... In particular because we know it's there.

Not saying no to documentation in tutorials or some such. Saying "no" to detailed information regarding the implemenation, coding, etc.
All players need to know is that xx weapons fired at same time get xx heat penalty
wait .5 seconds before firing weapon of same type again to avoid penalty.

That's all a player needs to know. They don't need to know history, detailed mathematical algorithms, or it's hotly contested implementation. They simply need to know what it is, what causes it, and how to avoid it.

[wanderer]

Even putting it into the "loading" tips would help.

"Warning! Firing more than two weapons of the same kind at once will incur additional heat. Firing them a half-second apart or more will avoid this heat penalty. Try using chain fire to help prevent this."

[FactorlanP]

Sandpit, on 07 February 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

I don't ahve any special connections but I'll tweet it out to Russ and Paul, maybe they'll like it (hopefully )

I didn't think you had connections... I just knew from previous posts of yours that you're a twitter guy. I am not, and will never be a twitter guy. Unfortunately, twitter seems to be the best way to communicate with our Devs.

It's very unfortunate in my opinion.

But, like you, I hope that the idea will get through to them and they will do something positive with it.

[lsp]

DaZur, on 07 February 2014 - 12:51 PM, said:

No.

I've addressed this elsewhere but the reality is virtually every single game that relies upon "data" to drive it's functional game-play mechanics, also manipulates that data in the name of influencing balance and or obtaining specific nuances out of play mechanics.

In the absence of knowledge of "ghost-heat" for most new players it's simply accepted as a nuances that needs to be learned and dealt with, in much the same way a virtual aircraft pilot learns to handle stall characteristics of a given aircraft.

"We" who have been around for a long enough time to see what we had before versus post Ghost Heat implementation appreciate the impact because we are intimately close to it... can see it, feel it... In particular because we know it's there.

I've been around since friends and family closed beta, and I can say it was a better game without it.

[Sandpit]

FactorlanP, on 07 February 2014 - 04:34 PM, said:

I didn't think you had connections... I just knew from previous posts of yours that you're a twitter guy. I am not, and will never be a twitter guy. Unfortunately, twitter seems to be the best way to communicate with our Devs.

It's very unfortunate in my opinion.

But, like you, I hope that the idea will get through to them and they will do something positive with it.

I don't know that it's the "best" way but it's definitely the easiest. The devs can be selective on block lists to reduce trolls on their twitter accounts which leads to less time weeding through nonsense. I wish they communicated more here on the forums but after the last post regarding a balance adjustment by Paul and watching the usual suspects rage and pick it apart it reinforced my understanding of why they don't.

lsp, on 07 February 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

I've been around since friends and family closed beta, and I can say it was a better game without it.

That's subjective though. Some will agree and some won't.

[Mudhutwarrior]

Sandpit, on 07 February 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

No, no it's not. How about stop being a dbag just because someone doesn't agree with you?

You don't need to know that it was implemented "because"
What you need to know is that this is what it affects and how to avoid it.

You might WANT more information but you don't NEED it in order to understand what it affects and how to avoid it. Period. What he's saying is you don't need detailed code nuances to understand
These weapons fired in quick succession induce a heat penalty
To avoid that penalty chain fire and wait .5 seconds before firing the next weapon of the same type

That's all a player needs to know. Just because you want more information doesn't mean it's needed to understand it.

Brought to you by the NSA.