38 replies to this topic

[Asmudius Heng]

Roland, on 19 February 2014 - 09:28 PM, said:

I'm going to suggest something really crazy here:

Don't do ghost anything. Making stupidly opaque game mechanics is bad design. It leads to bad gameplay. It makes new players hate it.

If you want to limit the number of weapons a player can simultaneously fire, THEN JUST DO IT.

You don't want to let someone fire more than 2 PPC's? Then don't let them fire more than two PPC's. Limit weapon grouping, and limit the ability to simultaneously fire multiple weapon groups.

Stop making a bunch of stupid junk that dances around what you are trying to do, and just do it straight up. Then the rules are clear to players, which is better... It'll also make it less likely that folks will just work around your indirect nonsense, which is exactly what the playerbase has continually done in response to ghost heat and various weapon nerfs.

ENFORCE CHAIN FIRE MODE!!!

The tears would be hilarious but i would love to see how that pans out

[PhoenixFire55]

Just no. There are better ways to fix it.

[Sh4nk0h0l1c]

Well Phoenix,

why don't you tell us about those "better ways" to fix it ???

[Moromillas]

Sh4nk0h0l1c, on 20 February 2014 - 01:55 AM, said:

Well Phoenix,

why don't you tell us about those "better ways" to fix it ???

Increase the scope of what ghost heat will penalise. E.g. 2PPC's and AC's having the same alpha as 4PPC's.
Increase the penalty of ghost heat if it's found to be lackluster.
Making AC's fire multiple smaller shots over time to spread damage, instead of one large shot.

[Sgt Helmet]

I'd say this issue is more due to heat threshold and dissipation over anything else. This has been discussed here many times.

So:
1 Heatsink = +1 to threshold. So 2xPPC would require 20 heatsinks. And engine heatsinks would be effective in this case if you were stationary. So moving full speed would need all engine heatsinks. Jumping would also add heat, say 1 heat per second. So staying active after 5sec poptart action would require 25-35 heat sinks.

Example HGN poptart for stationary poptarting with whooping 25 alpha:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3f48c73aa4e8116

Dissipation = 1 heat over 4seconds (roughly the current weapon CD), so you could basically alpha every every time, but you wouldn't be able to wield such alphas as currently, so it wouldn't be issue.

Suddenly all the stock variants are starting to make a lot of sense...

And I think alpha / convergence issue would change to something else.

Edited by Sgt Helmet, 20 February 2014 - 03:55 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Roadbeer, on 19 February 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

Sure, if you quote me correctly, "Roadbeer doesn't have a problem with pinpoint accuracy, and believes that if an M1A1 Abrams traveling at 40MPH can hit a moving target in 2000, then it stands to reason that 1050 years in the future, weapon systems would be even more accurate"

Not wanting to chime in here to fuel the flames, and while the genre is 1050 years in the future, it was conceptualized with 1980's tech and in the genre, the various powers have beat each other back into the stone age in some cases..... Just think of this as Vietnam with big stompy robots, not Star Trek...... I have no doubt that a "company" of modern M1A1's could rip a company of mechs apart, all else being equal....

[Joseph Mallan]

Roadbeer, on 19 February 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

I don't actually see it as a problem. Technologically, we have that licked in the real world now.

I'm of the school that 80% of the balance issues could be resolved with a return of rearming mechs. You wouldn't see the recockulous amounts of ammo being carried, if their holding down the fire button had financial repercussions after the match.

The remainder I think could be resolved by going back to the convergence that we had back in CB, and making heat sinks a bit more fragile.

I agree with you a lot Road, But to date I have not seen a battleship broadside accurately hit a 7' target with CBT style convergence. Till I get to see this... I stick to my experience when it comes to convergence.

[Coralld]

Sh4nk0h0l1c, on 20 February 2014 - 01:55 AM, said:

Well Phoenix,

why don't you tell us about those "better ways" to fix it ???

I have been in enough arguments with Phoenix to know what the answer to that question and its always "We need to fix convergence" and then he doesn't provide any solution. Which makes talking about balance very aggravating.

Edited by Coralld, 20 February 2014 - 08:21 AM.

[HammerSwarm]

Prosperity Park, on 19 February 2014 - 05:49 PM, said:

Feature Suggestion: Ghost Cone of Fire

Function: Reduce the occurrence/intensity of long-range pinpoint damage derived from Boating large numbers of identical weapons.


Suggested Execution:

• Firing too many of a weapon within a window of time causes the player to experience an exponentially-scaling cone of fire [using the "Jump Jet reticule shake" mechanic]
  
• Firing X PPCs within a 0.5 second window results in pinpoint-accuracy
  
• Firing X+1 PPCs within a 0.5 second window causes the +1th PPC to fire quite inaccurately.
  
• Firing X+2 PPCs within 0.5 seconds causes the +1th PPC to veer significantly off target, and the +2nd PPC would veer waaaaaay off target.
  
• Firing too many Lasers within the 0.5 second window would cause laser beams to start poking out in every which-way, resulting in diffused damage-application.
  
• Firing too many SRMs within 0.5 seconds would send successive volleys off-course.
  
• Firing too many LRMs within 0.5 Seconds would... um... I don't know if there is an in-game Mechanic for PGI to utilize in order to make missile flight patterns more spread out on-the-fly because this isn't covered by the JJ reticule shake mechanic... Same with Streak SRMs...

So, yeah, other than LRMs and StreakSRMs, I suggest that we try a Ghost Cone-of-Fire Mechanism to replace Ghost Heat since PGI has already programmed a reticule inaccuracy function that can be utilized.

This is the first time I have seen a progressive inaccuracy mechanic proposed. Let me give you my thoughts honestly about your proposal.

I like the idea that only the over the limit one would fire inaccurately, this would effectively cap the number of XXX weapon you could fire at once while still allowing you to do so, for snipers. The idea falls apart for me in brawling and close up situations. because 6 ppcs at 91 meters would basically be a shot gun and would be no deterrent to use of 6 PPC shotguns.

I feel as though this system is similar to ghost heat in that it is trying to apply an action points system over the top of the mana points system already in place.

This is to limit the number of specific actions which can be taken in a time period before facing a positive punishment.

In ghost heat you still get to shoot X_g + Y_g guns but you are punished with additional heat (X_g + Y_g = X_h + Y_h + Z_h). In your system you still get to shoot X_g + Y_g guns, but your Y_g guns aren't effective and you get all the heat of all guns fired(X_g = X_h + Y_h). So basically you're just changing the way ghost heat works. Your system still creates a disproportionate amount of heat to damage done.

The problem of the Ghost systems is that the output of Damage and the Heat created is not equal. This is why the system isn't intuitive. Your system is better than PGI's because it's at least apparent to the player that not all of their shots are hitting where as GH is a back end calculation you have no feedback for.

However if the goal is to cap the number of shots fired, why not just cap the number of shots fired?

ProsPark I'd like to see you design a system where by all of the weapons are in the same pool and you can set the maximum action points at a level that will achieve the maximum alpha the devs are comfortable with ~30(3 LL, 2 PPC) and DPS they are okay with ~12(3 AC 2s) with no ghost mechanics.

[Sybreed]

Joseph Mallan, on 20 February 2014 - 05:56 AM, said:

I agree with you a lot Road, But to date I have not seen a battleship broadside accurately hit a 7' target with CBT style convergence. Till I get to see this... I stick to my experience when it comes to convergence.

well it is quite obvious the crew on that ship doesn't have the skill of the average MWO player.

[Davers]

I feel that hurting alpha strikes and weapon accuracy will only really help light mechs and not make too much of a difference to heavier mechs.

[CeeKay Boques]

Prosperity Park, on 19 February 2014 - 06:01 PM, said:

My idea is basically like synthetic recoil.

Why not real recoil? Oh Gyros. Hmmm... add module, back to how it is now. I like it. Organic not synthetic recoil imo.

[HammerSwarm]

Davers, on 20 February 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

I feel that hurting alpha strikes and weapon accuracy will only really help light mechs and not make too much of a difference to heavier mechs.

I dislike this notion. It hurts everyone equally.

My Shadow hawks only have 40 front facing armor on their shoulders. So one shot connecting dual A/C 20s to my shoulder puts me in no-more-armors-ville. A shot to my back is taking my pristine component and dropping it off my mech. I very much would appreciate a Desync of large alphas because it's frustrating to lose half my weapons or die on the first shot to an area. It could be worse I know the PPC/Gauss Meta or 6/ppc meta that preceded ghost heat were worse we're still not really making progress on stopping these ultra high alphas.

I guess this is a larger talk about how soft we want these large mechs to be, I want my medium to feel durable and an atlas to seem daunting. Right now the only armor I trust is not being shot (a.k.a. Speed).

Edited by HammerSwarm, 20 February 2014 - 12:41 PM.

[Davers]

HammerSwarm, on 20 February 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

Right now the only armor I trust is not being shot (a.k.a. Speed).

So a light would combine the current 'speed armor' with the added 'armor' of desynched weapon convergence. What would be a slightly off target hit on an Atlas would be an outright miss on a light.

When I play medium mechs I rely on my ability to accurately place my shots to disable both heavier and lighter mechs. Take that away and what do we end up with? The equivalent of fighting with SSRMs every fight?

[cSand]

HammerSwarm, on 20 February 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

Your system is better than PGI's because it's at least apparent to the player that not all of their shots are hitting where as GH is a back end calculation you have no feedback for.

Except the heat gauge

And how do we react? That's right, by managing our heat.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Quote

This is the first time I have seen a progressive inaccuracy mechanic proposed. Let me give you my thoughts honestly about your proposal.

I like the idea that only the over the limit one would fire inaccurately, this would effectively cap the number of XXX weapon you could fire at once while still allowing you to do so, for snipers. The idea falls apart for me in brawling and close up situations. because 6 ppcs at 91 meters would basically be a shot gun and would be no deterrent to use of 6 PPC shotguns.

The whole concept of Ghost Heat was designed specifically for the purpose of reducing the incidence rate of pinpoint damage application that results from using a large number of weapons with the same firing properties (i.e. using the same gun x3 makes the application of pinpoint damage easier than having to aim 3 different types of guns with varying projectile velocities and firing rates). This was intended to be addressed at all ranges and so heat was used as the primary penalty.

In my suggestion, you can fire an inaccurate "shotgun-style" blast of PPCs at 200meters but 2 PPCs will hit where you aim, the third will hit the enemy somewhere on their body, and the others will go astray... this is the same as boating a variety of weapons with different firing characteristics. I would rather use a mix of weapons that shoot where I aim them if I have to Alpha Strike, knowing that they will at least not go flying off tangentially.

I can't say that my scheme would be rendered moot while brawling because the whole point of Ghost heat was to discourage single-point alpha striking, which my scheme effectively achieves.

Quote

However if the goal is to cap the number of shots fired, why not just cap the number of shots fired?

Because that's not the goal

cSand, on 19 February 2014 - 09:36 PM, said:

You know, people have made jokes in the past about nerfing skill, but I've never actually seen it presented seriously. And here it is, in writing You should get a medal or something

Yup. Nobody else has EVER presented cone-of-fire or weapons-convergence suggestions that make instant pinpoint alpha striking harder. You, Sir, are an excellent source of historical reference.

Oh...

wait...

Now I distinctly remember reading other peoples' posts about how instant weapons convergence should be removed... and how Cone of Fire would be a possible way to mitigate pinpoint-sniping... and how other skill-nerfing changes should be made to the game in order to buffer the Call of Duty twitch factor that some people use as their only definition of "skill."

Sorry, I guess I have to take that back about being a good source of reference.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 20 February 2014 - 06:23 PM.

[HammerSwarm]

Davers, on 20 February 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

So a light would combine the current 'speed armor' with the added 'armor' of desynched weapon convergence. What would be a slightly off target hit on an Atlas would be an outright miss on a light.

When I play medium mechs I rely on my ability to accurately place my shots to disable both heavier and lighter mechs. Take that away and what do we end up with? The equivalent of fighting with SSRMs every fight?

I'll be the first to admit that I am not the game's best shot. I pilot mediums alot, etc. etc. also and what I was saying is that with super pinpoint alphas I just feel like all mechs are a bit squishy, the dreaded time to death discussion. I honestly am not 100% sure what the solution is but I know what I don't like about the current game and that's going from fairly intact to watching my team for 10 minutes because I was destroyed by an ultra high alpha. It's not fun and it's not how the game TT game worked.

I'm fine with dying and sometimes your dying while your lance retreats gives an odd satisfaction like 'I saved those guys from this ambush'. Similarly to getting headshot by AC 40s from the sky while capping a base in conquest because they can get the smoke on top of the resource gatherer and I am standing on the ground watching the horizon not the sky it's frustrating.

Love the game, glad it exists, I'm just trying to be constructive and share my thoughts about what I don't like.

[Davers]

HammerSwarm, on 21 February 2014 - 05:58 AM, said:

I'll be the first to admit that I am not the game's best shot. I pilot mediums alot, etc. etc. also and what I was saying is that with super pinpoint alphas I just feel like all mechs are a bit squishy, the dreaded time to death discussion. I honestly am not 100% sure what the solution is but I know what I don't like about the current game and that's going from fairly intact to watching my team for 10 minutes because I was destroyed by an ultra high alpha. It's not fun and it's not how the game TT game worked.

I'm fine with dying and sometimes your dying while your lance retreats gives an odd satisfaction like 'I saved those guys from this ambush'. Similarly to getting headshot by AC 40s from the sky while capping a base in conquest because they can get the smoke on top of the resource gatherer and I am standing on the ground watching the horizon not the sky it's frustrating.

Love the game, glad it exists, I'm just trying to be constructive and share my thoughts about what I don't like.

I can't even count the number of times I killed/was killed in an untouched Enforcer/Hunchback/Centurion with one medium laser shot to the back in TT sparking off an ammo explosion. How many matches start off with "Turn 1, my assault mech dumps his machine gun ammo"? Mechs are very squishy in TT. An epic 30 turn battle is only 5 minutes in 'game time'. Most matches in MW:O are like 60 turn games.

Do I like running into AC/40 mechs? Not really. But if I want to be able to core a mech through the side torso, sweep a Jenner's legs, or take the arms off a Victor, I have to be willing to accept that others can target my components as well.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sybreed, on 20 February 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

well it is quite obvious the crew on that ship doesn't have the skill of the average MWO player.

totally agree,, they are much better than the lot of us... Except the other Naval gunners that play MW:O