281 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Kaeb Odellas, on 27 February 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

So you're saying singles should be viable? Great! We agree on that! So our only argument here is the implementation.

Yes. And double sinks should be twice as effective as singles.

[RetroActive]

I agree with OP. We should just make SHS equal to DHS because we don't want anything to be better than anything else.

While we're at it, let's make all weapons do 1 point of damage, but they can keep their current graphical effect for differentiation. We need to make sure that this 1 damage is spread out in some sort of cone of fire, though, since we wouldn't want one section of an enemies mech to get too much of a boo boo.

And you know what? It's really not fair that new players don't have access to what more tenured players have access to. PGI should just give everyone every mech and 50 of every weapon/module from the get-go. All mech efficiencies should be unlocked right away because it's not fair that someone with a new Highlander is at a disadvantage to those who have mastered their Highlanders.

[Spleenslitta]

I had a thought for how SHS can become balanced with DHS at my workplace. But before i say anything about it i wish to just make a simple polite request.
Please stop putting up comments with no constructive content. Let's discuss this in a normal way without verbaly attacking each other.
Please show players who are new to MWO that it is truly a thinking mans (and women of course) game by being constructive in your posts.
Well then on to business.


How about this ability to make SHS balanced with DHS?- SHS could be linked to a weapon chosen by the player.
When an SHS is linked to a weapon it nullifies instantly or cools a certain amount of heat that is even better than DHS.
But it comes with certain limitations which i describe below.

-It cannot affect any other weapons or heat generated from other sources than the one it is linked to.
That heat has to be handled by the SHS in the engine and those SHS that aren't linked to weapons.

-These linked SHS cannot under any circumstances be those that come with the engine.

-A linked SHS must be in the same body location as the weapon it is linked to.

-To stop players from firing hot weapons with linked SHS all the time you cannot link more than 1 SHS to a single weapon.
Or maybe you can only link 1 SHS per crit slot a weapon takes up with a maximum of 3. Or maybe just 2.
That depends a lot on how much better cooling you get from a linked SHS.

-It costs c-bills to make a link between a weapon and an SHS. How much? Who knows?

-A linked SHS doesn't have any influence on the heat that comes from being fried by a flamer from an enemy mech or when you step into a pool of lava.

Should the linked SHS completly nullify a certain amount of heat instantly since it's tightly mounted on a weapon or should it just cool it down?
Who knows?

How much better cooling should a linked SHS have in comparison to a DHS? Who knows?
All i know is that it is better left to someone with better math skills than me.

In any case this setup should make the DHS the superior alternative to those that mount many hot weapons or just many weapons in general.
But SHS might be a better alternative to those that mount one or maybe (that's a big maybe) two hot weapons.

In any case. I would like some feedback on this idea. You don't like it? Explain why.
Have anything to add? Maybe another limitation to the SHS link?

Edited by Spleenslitta, 27 February 2014 - 11:02 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

This game was fun when everyone had to use single heatsinks and there were no doubles. Then doubles came. We paid to upgrade. Singles are obsolete. That's life. We deal with it.

Guess what?



Nor should they.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 27 February 2014 - 11:02 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Why don't I just start with full plate armor and a Magic sword in RPG MMOs?

Incorrect analogy. RPG MMOs have scaled difficulty. You can get away with using cloth armor and rusty swords because the difficulty is lower at the beginning of the game. And as the difficulty increases youre given better equipment to help keep up.

Conversely in MWO you start out facing other players that are running meta highlanders with DHS. That's why SHS are never competitive. Theyre not even progression. Theyre obsolete from the start and upgrading to DHS is compulsory. The MMO RPG equivalent to that would be doing max level raids while wearing starter gear.

SHS should either be completely removed from the game or they should be buffed just enough that certain niche builds might benefit more from SHS than DHS. Id say buffing internal SHS to 1.5 or 1.6 would accomplish that. The latter of the two options probably being the easiest to implement.

Edited by Khobai, 27 February 2014 - 11:15 AM.

[Purlana]

Khobai, on 27 February 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

Incorrect analogy. RPG MMOs have scaled difficulty. You can get away with using cloth armor and rusty swords because the difficulty is lower at the beginning of the game. And as the difficulty increases youre given better equipment to help keep up.

Conversely in MWO you start out facing other players that are running meta highlanders with DHS. That is why SHS are never competitive. Theyre not even progression. Theyre just obsolete from the start and upgrading to DHS is compulsory. The MMO RPG equivalent to that would be doing max level raids while wearing starter gear.

What if the RPG MMO has PvP?

Edited by Purlana, 27 February 2014 - 11:10 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 27 February 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

Incorrect analogy. RPG MMOs have scaled difficulty. You can get away with using cloth armor and rusty swords because the difficulty is lower at the beginning of the game. And as the difficulty increases youre given better equipment to help keep up.

Conversely in MWO you start out facing other players that are running meta highlanders with DHS. That's why SHS are never competitive. Theyre not even progression. Theyre obsolete from the start and upgrading to DHS is compulsory. The MMO RPG equivalent to that would be doing max level raids while wearing starter gear.

SHS should either be completely removed from the game or they should be buffed just enough that certain niche builds might benefit more from SHS than DHS. Id say buffing internal SHS to 1.5 or 1.6 would accomplish that. The latter of the two options probably being the easiest to implement.

Fair enough sir.

[Bobzilla]

FupDup, on 27 February 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

I'll try this again. When you unlock speed tweak, you don't need to unequip regular speed from your mech. It simply adds on effectiveness to your existing mech. When you buy dubs, you need to remove all of your existing singles. Also, singles and doubles are considered two different items in the mechlab. Mechs with speed tweak and mechs without speed tweak, however, are not separate items. They are the same mech, just with a +10% speed attribute added to it.


For buying doubles to be truly analogous to unlocking speed tweak, the upgrade would simply add +100% capacity and +100% dissipation attributes to the single heat sinks already mounted on your mech. But, the upgrade doesn't work that way. It's replacing it with an entirely different piece of equipment.

Ill try this again as well, 2 mechs, one with DHS upgrade and one without. What is the difference between the 2 mechs? One paid 1.5 mil cbills for additional heat bonuses. That is the only difference between the two. Same with the speed tweek example, they are both the same mech but one has bought a bonus. These mechs aren't separate items. Why would you balance the one with SHS to the one with DHS. You wouldn't and couldn't because that would no longer make it an upgrade. Take off the cost of the 1.5 mil cbills and then it would make sense to balance them.

[Khobai]

Quote

What if the RPG MMO has PvP?

Then its exactly the same as MWO. Players with bad gear (SHS) cant compete with players with good gear (DHS).

[FupDup]

Bobzilla, on 27 February 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

Ill try this again as well, 2 mechs, one with DHS upgrade and one without. What is the difference between the 2 mechs? One paid 1.5 mil cbills for additional heat bonuses. That is the only difference between the two. Same with the speed tweek example, they are both the same mech but one has bought a bonus. These mechs aren't separate items. Why would you balance the one with SHS to the one with DHS. You wouldn't and couldn't because that would no longer make it an upgrade. Take off the cost of the 1.5 mil cbills and then it would make sense to balance them.

The mechs themselves aren't the separate items, but the heatsinks are. You can't go through your inventory and find "Speed Tweak Engine" versus "Non-Tweaked Engine." Open up the Smurfys online mechlab or go in-game (in-game is a bit annoying with UI 2.0 though, so Smurfys is recommended), and you will see that a double heat sink and a standard heat sink are two totally different items.

You can also switch between them on a single mech if you really want to (although doing so serves no real purpose, but that's besides the point). Once you get the speed tweak or w/e XP unlock, it's permanent.

To repeat myself from earlier, the only way comparing SHS/DHS to XP unlocks would be accurate is if you had to use XP to add +100% cooling and +100% capacity to all existing single heat sinks on your mech, without needing to remove any of them, and without using a separate inventory item.

Edited by FupDup, 27 February 2014 - 11:23 AM.

[Deathlike]

FupDup, on 27 February 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

To repeat myself from earlier, the only way comparing SHS/DHS to XP unlocks would be accurate is if you had to use XP to add +100% cooling and +100% capacity to all existing single heat sinks on your mech, without needing to remove any of them, and without using a separate inventory item.

I would hate such a change if that were implemented (not that I don't have gobs of GXP laying around doing nothing).

HIDE THIS IDEA FROM PAUL NAO!

[Kaeb Odellas]

RetroActive, on 27 February 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

I agree with OP. We should just make SHS equal to DHS because we don't want anything to be better than anything else.

While we're at it, let's make all weapons do 1 point of damage, but they can keep their current graphical effect for differentiation. We need to make sure that this 1 damage is spread out in some sort of cone of fire, though, since we wouldn't want one section of an enemies mech to get too much of a boo boo.

And you know what? It's really not fair that new players don't have access to what more tenured players have access to. PGI should just give everyone every mech and 50 of every weapon/module from the get-go. All mech efficiencies should be unlocked right away because it's not fair that someone with a new Highlander is at a disadvantage to those who have mastered their Highlanders.

This is an aggressively dumb post. Please try to keep up with the thread before posting. Here, let me catch you up on some things that everyone else here understands that you you apparently do not.

-No one is arguing that everything should be the same.
-No one is arguing that progression should not exist.
-Making SHS viable does not mean making them identical to DHS.
-DHS is not progression.

Please feel free to read the rest of the thread if you have any questions. That way, you're not off in the corner arguing with no one about nothing, and can freely and constructively contribute to the conversation.

[Dramborleg]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 February 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

Why don't I just start with full plate armor and a Magic sword in RPG MMOs?

Because MMORPGs aren't meant to be competitively multiplayer but instead primarily cooperatively multiplayer and also because most such games are flawed in their design. Their core gameplay isn't meant to be fun. The goal of the game is not to be an enjoyable and stimulating experience to the user. The goal is to use an arbitrary counter to create the illusion of achievement and advancement so that the publisher can keep chugging those delicious subscription fees/microtransactions. MWO is not and should not be an MMORPG. A player should achieve better results in-game because they learn the subtleties of the game's mechanics and because they improve their technical skill, not because they play 100 matches and unlock the BFG. Gameplay unlocks have a valid purpose in giving the player a goal to shoot for (although for the most part playing the game should be its own reward), but they should strive to provide different options, not better ones.

[Dramborleg]

RetroActive, on 27 February 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

And you know what? It's really not fair that new players don't have access to what more tenured players have access to. PGI should just give everyone every mech and 50 of every weapon/module from the get-go. All mech efficiencies should be unlocked right away because it's not fair that someone with a new Highlander is at a disadvantage to those who have mastered their Highlanders.

This is accurate though. There's no reason it shouldn't be like this except people with short attention spans would get bored because they're not getting a new goodie every four hours, and also PGI would be forced to introduce real balance because everyone would be able to run "cheese" builds and there would be little variation. "Mastering" a mech is a hilarious misnomer because, of course, they haven't really necessarily mastered it, they've just played it for longer. They could be just as crap with their highlander as a newbie, but they still get an advantage because they've played poorly for 30 hours instead of 1.

[Joseph Mallan]

Dramborleg, on 27 February 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

Because MMORPGs aren't meant to be competitively multiplayer but instead primarily cooperatively multiplayer and also because most such games are flawed in their design. Their core gameplay isn't meant to be fun. The goal of the game is not to be an enjoyable and stimulating experience to the user. The goal is to use an arbitrary counter to create the illusion of achievement and advancement so that the publisher can keep chugging those delicious subscription fees/microtransactions. MWO is not and should not be an MMORPG. A player should achieve better results in-game because they learn the subtleties of the game's mechanics and because they improve their technical skill, not because they play 100 matches and unlock the BFG. Gameplay unlocks have a valid purpose in giving the player a goal to shoot for (although for the most part playing the game should be its own reward), but they should strive to provide different options, not better ones.

Man so the same game play that started on TT D&D is evil money grabs?

And I thought I was cynical!

[Mason Grimm]

There has been some serious off-topic fun up in here. Can we stay on topic?

[Spleenslitta]

Mason Grimm, on 27 February 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

There has been some serious off-topic fun up in here. Can we stay on topic?

Thanks for the fire support Mason.

Is there anyone who read my post #143 on this page 8? Maybe the textwall frigthened you.
But please give it a go. It might actually work to make things balanced in a believable way.

Please make constructive comments/arguments. You don't think it is balanced? Please state why it isn't properly balanced.

[Mcgral18]

Well, 1.0 dissipation SHS will never be a choice since weapons are all firing over 3 times their TT values, doing over 3X their TT damage and heat. This lead to doubled armor and piss poor heat systems, followed by ghost heat.

If we ever want acceptable SHS, we'd have to redo all the weapon values back to their TT settings, divide their damage and heat by their recycle and add whatever ammo ratio. But we get 3x damage and 6 ton AC20s, and while it's nice how fast they kill things it certainly isn't TT or Battletech, it's CoD with robots.

Anyhow, SHS will continue to be useless and TT SHS will be better than MWO DHS because of the rising heat cap, piss poor dissipation VS heat generated and PGI.

[Spleenslitta]

Mcgral18, on 27 February 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

Well, 1.0 dissipation SHS will never be a choice since weapons are all firing over 3 times their TT values, doing over 3X their TT damage and heat. This lead to doubled armor and piss poor heat systems, followed by ghost heat.

If we ever want acceptable SHS, we'd have to redo all the weapon values back to their TT settings, divide their damage and heat by their recycle and add whatever ammo ratio. But we get 3x damage and 6 ton AC20s, and while it's nice how fast they kill things it certainly isn't TT or Battletech, it's CoD with robots.

Anyhow, SHS will continue to be useless and TT SHS will be better than MWO DHS because of the rising heat cap, piss poor dissipation VS heat generated and PGI.

I can see that, but what i wrote in my post #143 might bypass that completly. It's a way to keep our current weapon heat stats and make SHS better balanced with DHS.
This suggestion has plenty of drawbacks for the single heatsinks while providing them with an advantage over double heatsinks.

Please take a look if you can gather the courage to climb the textwall.

[wanderer]

*sighs*

"SHS aren't viable in a DHS game, we should make them that way!"

No, you shouldn't. By TRO 3055, 70% of the new designs were DHS stock- and virtually all of the SHS ones were lights- mediums and up were getting DHS strapped into them as a matter of engineering doctrine, as they needed all the cooling they could get.

By 3075, it's up to over 95% of them- and the one notable example is a Clan light used to train new pilots that explictly mounts SHS to help train them in heat management. The SHS in 3050 is already doomed to the second-rate scrap heap, and shouldn't even be bothered with in the long run- it's replacement will end up being the compact heat sink, starting in the late 3050's with a similar cooling profile but able to squeeze twice as many into the same space as a single SHS takes up.