1258 replies to this topic

[Kaeb Odellas]

How about this:

Give PPCs a minimum .4 second charge time between the button press and the weapon actually firing, but have it automatically fire when it fully charges. This would make the PPC verydiffficult to simultaneously fire with the Gauss rifle, though not impossible. Vary the charge-time with heat levels (0.4s at 0, 0.8s at max heat) to make the weapon impossible to macro. KILL GHOST HEAT

To discourage boating, increase the charge time with each simultaneous PPC or Gauss charge (0.15 seconds to charge with each simultaneously charging weapon). You can apply this to the Gauss Rifle as well, to nerf double-Gauss builds. Give the PPC and Gauss each a visible charging effect on the weapon hardpoint to allow players to twist against them to mitigate damage. Adjust charge times, Gauss hold durations, and cooldowns to balance as needed.

[Buehgler]

Homeless Bill, on 29 July 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

Bottom line: the weapon lock mechanic is awkward, and there's no way to make it not awkward. And the alternative of changing PPC speed will just make it synergize with higher-calibre autocannons better, so people will switch to that. Sure, it negates the range, but the problem is still ultimately 30+ pinpoint damage to a single location.

I'm begging you to consider something like this. A hurricane of bandaids has done half of what a serious effort to tackle front-loaded damage could do, and you'd have the added benefit of having another way to balance over/under-performing variants.

If you're going to go with weapon lock, at least combine it with that sort of scale so that all weapons can be balanced accordingly. One-off mechanics like what's being proposed are really awkward.

You could argue that it's complicated, but how is it any more so than the combination of this arbitrary mechanic, Ghost Heat, the Gauss charge, and all the other jumpjet and PPC adjustments it's taken to get even this close? Please go comprehensive and get this over with.

I strongly believe that this type of additional mechanic would really get us out of what is going to be a never ending set of one-off complex mechanics to "fix" problems like the 2xPPC+Gauss. Short of really fixing things with the type of energy mechanic HB is advocating, the only other reasonable thing to do is to just tie the Gauss and PPC together in the ghost heat system. While certainly not as effective and generally functional as an energy mechanic, putting PPCs and Gauss in the same Ghost heat bin would seem like a much more straight forward way to achieve the short term goal without adding yet more special one-off mechanics that will just confuse players.

I strongly feel that changing particle speed on the PPC as drastically as was suggested in the OP is really just going overboard to break the weapon synchronization at the cost of really hurting PPCs as a long range weapon.

Edited by Buehgler, 30 July 2014 - 07:10 AM.

[DarthPeanut]

As I said back on page 4... I am in favor of not making changes like this. The gauss/ ppc builds are not without their weakness and I would rather fight them in game instead of nerfing things.

In an effort to be productive with a suggestion.

Simplest fix. This is one mech and configuration causing all this omg nerf forum rage, the Direwhale build. Revise the hard points or add fixed heat sinks that will limit their ability to boat certain weapons. Same way you solved this issue from the get go with all the clan mechs!

Edited by DarthPeanut, 30 July 2014 - 07:18 AM.

[Trip Hammer]

Ok, I'll throw an idea into the mix. Its one I've been mulling for a while and its similar to a couple of other ideas I've seen here.

• Have each engine produce W amount of energy that will fluctuate and be displayed like the heat scale
  
• Each Mech chassis uses X amount of energy for draw for operating
  
• Each form of movement uses Y amount of energy draw
  
• Each Weapon draws Z amount of energy.

This way a player would need to manage the energy draw as well as heat and if you have a build that incorporates lots of Energy weapons you might not have enough energy to fully charge all of your weapons, requiring you to stagger your weapon fire. Hell you could even have heat be a factor in the energy output of the engine, and possibly get rid of ghost heat with this.

I don't have any hard number for this idea, so I don't really know how hard it would be to implement. Nor am I going to say that this should be implemented, it just an idea.

[Calamus]

Reducing the PPC speeds so dramatically is a terrible idea.

By doing that you're killing the use of the PPC on its own. Don't screw over the people who use other PPC builds, without the Gauss Rifle. At 500m/s it will be a medium/close range weapon only. Considering the IS PPC has a minimum range, that will kill the PPC.

Charge delays, and firing delays to de-sync them will be just fine.

Honestly, I don't have a problem with them as they are. If you have the skill to sync them as they are, then I'll deal with you firing them at me.

[Jonny Taco]

I think paul forgot the most suggested and logical idea to "solve" this "issue"... Hard point size restrictions... But noo.... Lets create some half backed (more like fully baked) idea like ghost heat and overly complicated crap like posted in the OP.

[Trevelyas]

People who play this game to win understand one basic law that governs everything AT ALL LEVELS OF PLAY:
In a skirmish, the team whose EFFECTIVE DPS is higher will win.

In practice the law breaks down into the following rules:
1. You must minimize your exposure to the enemy.
2. When you are exposed, you (and your team) must deal more effective damage to the enemy than they do to you.
3. When following rule 2, assume the only person who can deal the requisite effective damage is yourself (special cooperative exceptions aside).

Regardless of how much people whine and complain about weapon systems, movement mechanics, and map design these rules WILL NEVER CHANGE.

Paul, if you remove my ability to follow rule 1 while following rules 2 and 3 by destroying all weapon combinations that let me frontload damage, then I'm just going to maximize my ability to follow the last 2 rules. How? By using weapons that let me damage the enemy during the long exposure you demand, but too far away for them to hurt me back (or to the same extent).
That means playing on teams where we are all boating clan ERLL and gauss.

Once you remove PPC+gauss combos from the game there will be no counter to my team composition (PPC+gauss also happens to be Innersphere's one and only counter to the clan's motif of long exposure engagement).
The end result of your balance proposals is the removal of legitimate, balanced weapon loadouts from the game entirely and the consequent relegation of virtually all Innersphere mechs (besides lights) to the scap pile once Clans arrive for C-bills.

Instead of removing weapon systems from the game, fix the real problems:
1. Target the Dire Wolf specifically by applying appropriate limits on its PPC+gauss loadouts.
2. Increase clan ERPPC arcing slightly.
3. Buff sustained DPS of short-ranged weapons to allow brawlers to capitalize on sniper's weakness.
4. Educate new players on the essential skill of shielding (aka torso twisting), via an in-game tutorial or pre-recorded video.

[Legacy Wing]

I understand the concern, but in reality it's awfully limited window of affected mechs. How many mechs in the game can even carry two PPCs and two Gauss rifles? I'll spare you your calculators: it's 1. A few more mechs can do twin PPC +1 Gauss, but it's still a pretty limited number and almost entirely confined to assault mechs.



I say this because the thing that really makes me scratch my head about this "solution" is the fact that they are even considering slowing down PPC bolts for everyone (by 50% no less) because of such a narrow window of problem units. You're considering screwing every PPC-wielding spider/cicada/adder/nova/stormcrow/quickdraw/etc. pilot because you don't like one combination of weapons, available to only a limited subset of mechs? Stupid.



Stupid enough, that I actually think it's a troll. I think Paul is trying to mitigate the community damage preemptively by implying that "hey, you guys should be grateful. We COULD have done THAT!" The PPC/Gauss fix is already in, you folks can count on it. No "community testing" required.



He over-complicates the description, though. All this really is: an expansion of the 2x gauss limitation they came out a few patches ago. The rule is simple: "No more than 2 at a time." Not sure why the long, bulleted list to explain something so simple, but there it is.



You know what I want? I want them to do what they should have done at the very first: call them both "heavy energy draw weapons" and limit the number of HEDWs that can be discharged within a certain period of time (like 2 in half-a-second). Then do us all a favor and TAKE THE DAMNED CHARGE OFF THE GAUSS RIFLE. Nobody has ever really liked it anyway; players who use gauss just learned to tolerate it. For good measure, they could reduce the heat from PPCs and ER PPCs to something manageable, so the poor Awesome can actually carry its default loadout.



Heck, they won't even need ghost-heat on PPCs anymore, cause that problem is already fixed the way it should have been originally. Like I said: Simple.

[DarthPeanut]

lartfor, on 30 July 2014 - 07:16 AM, said:

I think paul forgot the most suggested and logical idea to "solve" this "issue"... Hard point size restrictions... But noo.... Lets create some half backed (more like fully baked) idea like ghost heat and overly complicated crap like posted in the OP.

Right. They solved this from the get go with fixed heat sinks and hard point restrictions. Why reinvent the wheel with some kind of totally convoluted and overly complex mechanics.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

PhoenixFire55, on 30 July 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

Then why even have mechs that can have more than 3-4 weapons?

Says an LRM boat.

Are you dense?

Do you not understand how chain firing would INCREASE usage of multiple weapons types?

Here is what happens with enforced chain firing.

You might load up 2 PPC's for long range. You'll be able to fire one, then another while the latter cycles it's cool down.

You will also load some SRM's, due to forced chain firing, you don't have to worry that SRMs and PPC's use completely different delivery mechanisms. When someone gets close, you stop using the PPCs and start using the SRMs.

Then you might have a few mediums lasers which you can use while the SRMs are cooling down.

3 different weapons types, that don't work together at all in the current game. If you enforce chain firing, these weapons are all usable together and it requires MUCH more skill than currently.

If you enforce chain firing for LRMs, it makes them OBSCENELY more susceptible to AMS, but I guess you don't know enough to know that?

[Lala Satalin Deviluke]

I got brilliant solution...!

Spoiler

LEAVE IT ALONE!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Lala Satalin Deviluke, on 30 July 2014 - 07:26 AM, said:

I got brilliant solution...!

Spoiler

LEAVE IT ALONE!

That's not a solution, that's putting your head into the sand and ignoring the problem.

[Jonny Taco]

stjobe, on 29 July 2014 - 04:24 PM, said:

This is a MechWarrior game that uses the armour system from BattleTech tabletop, a system that isn't designed for pin-point accurate damage; it is designed for spread damage.

Except that this game IS NOT using the armor system from battle tech tabletop... This game has 2x the hp values specifically increased to deal with the fact that this game allows for skill rather than random slow blink dice rolling. Please stop saying this game is using the same armor system as the tt, as it's simply and unquestionably untrue.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

lartfor, on 30 July 2014 - 07:27 AM, said:

Except that this game IS NOT using the armor system from battle tech tabletop... This game has 2x the hp values specifically increased to deal with the fact that this game allows for skill rather than random slow blink dice rolling. Please stop saying this game is using the same armor system as the tt, as it's simply and unquestionably untrue.

Actually it is using the armor system and the hit box system from TT, and even with doubled armor values still doesn't work.

[C E Dwyer]

If I had to chose one, I'd pick the staggered firing, rather than reduce the speed of PPC.

But it still remains a twitcher game.

I'd rather see something representing the weak targeting systems of the real battle tech universe, but we all know how popular a cone fire system that reduces size with pilot skill and range is with the twitch crowd

Can't possibly have something canon, that might impact the e-sport crowd

Edited by Cathy, 30 July 2014 - 07:31 AM.

[Dirus Nigh]

The two mechanics suggested by Paul are not good idea. As others have said they would add more intuitive clunky hoops to jump though. The weapons in the game need to fire when the player needs them to fire. Not when they go through a clunky mini game.

PGI should readdress the suggestions made by players considering weapon convergence and heat. A weapon convergence system similar to battlefield and Arma would help salve the pin point front loaded damage issue. A heat system that had dynamic consequence depending on heat levels will have a more fluid and understandable impact on high alpha firing.

The tacked on and completely arbitrary systems of ghost heat, charge mechanics, and desyncing weapons is cumbersome and short sighted. I and most of the players of MWO understand that created a more dynamic convergence and heat system will take time. that is perfectly fine. It is better to take the time to create a good system that can be adjusted, than to tack on quick fix narrow solutions that complicate the game as a whole.

In essence ghost heat, charge times, and individually targeted desyncing mechanics come across as PGI just not liking some thing a player created, when all that player did was use the system the way they were told they could use the system. You created a very good mech construction system that has a lot of room for creativity. Then you hit them will a rolled up news paper when they create some thing that other players or PGI does not like.

Zyllos, on 29 July 2014 - 04:06 PM, said:

From the responses I got from my comment, it seems that torso twisting is over powered.

Too many players don't understand the entire armor system was built with the idea that weapons do not hit single locations when fired together. Hence why torso twisting + FLD is considered the "right" way to play by some players.

spoiler for length and strays from thread topic.

Spoiler

Its seams from this post and your previous one you do not understand how a table top turn based game, such as Battletech, D&D, or Shadowrun is trying to translate real world actions into being represented by single, or small set, of die rolls.

For example the range, terrain, and speed modifier (both target and firing unit) are translating the physical motion of the mechs moving and keeping the weapons on target at ranges. After all in game the mech is bobbing up, down, and side to side, depending on the conditions of the terrain and actual direction of the pilot. The pilot would only move in a strait line if terrain forced him to do so. They would bob and weave as best they could to make it hard to hit.

The arms and legs of the mech are pumping like a man when they run, while the torso and head are moving with that motion. On top of that the pilot would be actively moving the torso and arms to bring its guns to bare on a target, or to turn and shield a side that has exposed internals. This right here is why the battletech hit location chart works the way it does. Its not because the mechs weapon systems are so inaccurate that two weapons side by side on the same location would hit two widely different spots on the target. It is because that target is moving, the firing unit is moving, and the individual shots are hitting the target at slightly different angles and times.

FASA made a table top turned based game. They wanted to translate all those factors into the smallest number of dice rolls as possible. To keep game flowing at a quick pace, they chose two rolls. A to hit roll, and a hit location roll.

PGI, as well as activision and Microprose, are, and have made a real time translation out of the concepts in Battletech. The players physical ability to track a target in motion, and at range, are strait up a pilots gunnery stat, range modifier, to hit roll, and hit location roll all happening at once.

[Calamus]

lartfor, on 30 July 2014 - 07:16 AM, said:

I think paul forgot the most suggested and logical idea to "solve" this "issue"... Hard point size restrictions... But noo.... Lets create some half backed (more like fully baked) idea like ghost heat and overly complicated crap like posted in the OP.

Now THIS is the truth! This would solve the PPC Gauss problem, it would solve the Light mech PPC problem, and a host of other build problems. I support this idea!

[Bilbo]

Trevelyas, on 30 July 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

People who play this game to win understand one basic law that governs everything AT ALL LEVELS OF PLAY:
In a skirmish, the team whose EFFECTIVE DPS is higher will win.

In practice the law breaks down into the following rules:
1. You must minimize your exposure to the enemy.
2. When you are exposed, you (and your team) must deal more effective damage to the enemy than they do to you.
3. When following rule 2, assume the only person who can deal the requisite effective damage is yourself (special cooperative exceptions aside).

Regardless of how much people whine and complain about weapon systems, movement mechanics, and map design these rules WILL NEVER CHANGE.

Paul, if you remove my ability to follow rule 1 while following rules 2 and 3 by destroying all weapon combinations that let me frontload damage, then I'm just going to maximize my ability to follow the last 2 rules. How? By using weapons that let me damage the enemy during the long exposure you demand, but too far away for them to hurt me back (or to the same extent).
That means playing on teams where we are all boating clan ERLL and gauss.

Once you remove PPC+gauss combos from the game there will be no counter to my team composition (PPC+gauss also happens to be Innersphere's one and only counter to the clan's motif of long exposure engagement).
The end result of your balance proposals is the removal of legitimate, balanced weapon loadouts from the game entirely and the consequent relegation of virtually all Innersphere mechs (besides lights) to the scap pile once Clans arrive for C-bills.

Instead of removing weapon systems from the game, fix the real problems:
1. Target the Dire Wolf specifically by applying appropriate limits on its PPC+gauss loadouts.
2. Increase clan ERPPC arcing slightly.
3. Buff sustained DPS of short-ranged weapons to allow brawlers to capitalize on sniper's weakness.
4. Educate new players on the essential skill of shielding (aka torso twisting), via an in-game tutorial or pre-recorded video.

You think it's more difficult to close on a position guarded by a group of people using DOT weapons rather than PPFLD? In my experience, the opposite is true.

[Yokaiko]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 30 July 2014 - 07:27 AM, said:

That's not a solution, that's putting your head into the sand and ignoring the problem.

Because its not a frigging problem.

[Livewyr]

All this talk.. for a solution so simple:

6-7 Cooldown PPCs...

bring them if you so desire, but in close range you have but two choices:

A: Hope you brought backup weapons.
B: Cry.