1263 replies to this topic

[Gamuray]

So, how about this, neither. Here's my idea, which simplifies the game instead of making it more complicated.

Remove the nerfs from other weapon systems to make them more viable. Then, this specific combo wouldn't b a problem, because the other weapons, which have already been heavily nerfed, will now be UP to the level as this combination. This then makes the ppc/guass combo on a level playing field with the other weapons, accomplishing the same goal as nerfing them, without adding complicated systems.

Of course, if the heat cap had been kept at the battletech 30, ghost heat and many other nerfs for alpha's wouldn't be necessary in the first place, because you'd overheat. To compensate for the low cap, double heat sinks could then be DOUBLE HEAT SINKS, not 1.4 heat sinks. Causing chain firing to be the go to tactic, but without implementing any non-explainable counters to high heat alpha's. Which would solve *most* of the things that have had to be nerfed. (ac20's, ppc boats, etc.)

[IraqiWalker]

Gamuray, on 20 August 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

DOUBLE HEAT SINKS, not 1.4 heat sinks. Causing chain firing to be the go to tactic, but without implementing any non-explainable counters to high heat alpha's. Which would solve *most* of the things that have had to be nerfed. (ac20's, ppc boats, etc.)

If you do the math on it. Our mechs with Elites, actually have DHS that do 2.3 heat per second, instead of 2.0, coupled with the increased heat threshold, our DHS are FAR better than TT DHS. Until you mount more than 18 DHS in your mech. 90% of all builds don't have more than 18 DHS in them.

[Gamuray]

Yes, elites on a 1.4 heat sink may give you 2.3, though that still is less than a 2.0 heat sink with elites. So, nonetheless, under the same circumstances, you'd still get better cooling with actual double heat sinks. Combine that with a lower heat cap now. What you have is people choosing then, specific weapons to fire with certain distances and circumstances. High heat weapons would not be useful except at long range due to them raising your heat to where you can't fire another weapon directly after it. This is the reason that many stock mechs have diverse loadouts, not every weapon could be fired in a situation, it could leave you vulnerable in multiple different ways.

All I'm trying to get at is that the whole situation where certain builds become overpowered could have been avoided if they had stuck to the original heat system a bit more. Then builds that are specialized would have more power in a long range situation as they do now (although alpha's with ppc's would be gone), but while being even more easy to exploit their weakness that they should have at close range.

This would even create the effect of being unable to fire another ppc for a set time, because you would HAVE to wait to cool down. With the higher heat cap though, you can hold all of the heat.

Edited by Gamuray, 21 August 2014 - 09:49 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

Gamuray, on 21 August 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

Yes, elites on a 1.4 heat sink may give you 2.3, though that still is less than a 2.0 heat sink with elites. So, nonetheless, under the same circumstances, you'd still get better cooling with actual double heat sinks. Combine that with a lower heat cap now. What you have is people choosing then, specific weapons to fire with certain distances and circumstances. High heat weapons would not be useful except at long range due to them raising your heat to where you can't fire another weapon directly after it. This is the reason that many stock mechs have diverse loadouts, not every weapon could be fired in a situation, it could leave you vulnerable in multiple different ways.

All I'm trying to get at is that the whole situation where certain builds become overpowered could have been avoided if they had stuck to the original heat system a bit more. Then builds that are specialized would have more power in a long range situation as they do now (although alpha's with ppc's would be gone), but while being even more easy to exploit their weakness that they should have at close range.

This would even create the effect of being unable to fire another ppc for a set time, because you would HAVE to wait to cool down. With the higher heat cap though, you can hold all of the heat.

I agree about sticking to the original heatsink system (though to be honest, even there increased thresholds were a thing if I recall correctly). The whole point of the elites system was to give you DHS. If you started with DHS, you had less motivation to grind a mech and master it for that direct benefit. I personally think they should switch DHS to 2.0, and remove the current mech skill system. Basics were fine, and I like them, but only 6 of them are worth keeping, as they show that your pilot is understanding how to pilot the mech better (the heat ones make no sense).

The entire skill system needs to be scrapped.

[Gamuray]

I completely agree with you in that the ones simulating "pilot experience" make sense and that the heat ones make no sense. They really could have been more creative with some of it. Creativity example: Less weapon flash/glare. (your pilot starts taking good care of their windshield). Heat vision and night vision could even have been made into options (maybe new pilots wouldn't remember that feature, or wouldn't think it's useful until they're been through a few battles).

But nonetheless, this forum I really about balancing the guass/ppc combo. (which in all honesty isn't op, it has obvious counters, just with the build trends now, not may people go short range.

Funny, it seems that if they had stuck to realistic nerfs and realistic ways to counter, it would actually balance the system.

Edited by Gamuray, 21 August 2014 - 04:04 PM.

[Mothykins]

Terciel1976, on 29 July 2014 - 03:59 PM, said:

Complications on top of complications?

A thorough revisit of all weapons based on projectile speeds, cycle times and heat is a better answer than a complicated band-aid (this) on top of a complicated band-aid (gauss charge) on top of a complicated band-aid (ghost heat) on top of...you get the idea. At least, I hope you do.

Seriously, change everything if you have to but this multi-layered counter-intuitive "solving" of one symptom at a time just points to how bad the disease is. All this will do is bring PPC/AC5(or 10) back ahead of PPC/Gauss and then you'll be no further ahead than where you are now. What then? Another complicated band-aid?

Agreement. Look at root causes, not symptoms. You don't treat the symptoms individually, you treat the disease.

This isn't even treating the symptom. This is the equivalent of stabbing someone in the foot so they forget that they got shot in the shoulder.

[Major Tannhauser]

What he said. Makes no sense to bring one 'solution' after another, and not adressing the root. The time invested into all this auxiliary stuff, and explain it (sometimes not ) to the Players, should be used to fix the wrong all-weapons-hit-where-i-aim-problem. Solve that and you bring the game to the real BT-Feeling. Cutting a halve second delay here, or make this projectile 100m/sec faster or hotter is a useless debate, it only dances around the main Problem.

[Cimarb]

Major Tannhauser, on 22 August 2014 - 02:17 AM, said:

...it only dances around the main Problem.

The "main problem" is debatable. I believe the main problem is front-loaded damage. You believe pinpoint is the main problem. Neither of us will be completely happy with a solution that fixes the other persons main problem, which is actually the main problem in MWO: opinion.

[Lightfoot]

My take is that slowing the PPC/ERPPCs into synchronous travel time with the AC10-UAC10 class of weapons releases mech builds which are worse than Gauss+ERPPC because most players can't make that one work with any accuracy, the AC10 versions do the same levels of damage with very high accuracy and no special twitchy skills.

Builds omitted.

Now I thought Ghost Heat and the Gauss Rifle desync were specifically aimed at blocking weapons with synchronous travel times or weapons of the same type from all hitting the same section at once. Creating the possibility of that damage hitting more than one section, but the above Dire Wolf is the same as the 6xPPC Stalker except that it doesn't shutdown from an alpha-strike.

My suggestion. Go with the Gauss can only be fired with one ppc/erppc and make the ppc/erppc 1200-1300 mps or something widely separated from the Gauss and AC10 speeds.

Edited by Lightfoot, 22 August 2014 - 03:20 PM.

[Gamuray]

Thing is, a stalker is SUPPOSED to overheat when firing that many high heat weapons, so they came up with a solution to it (Ghost heat) which was more complicated than need be. The Dire Wolf on the other hand is preforming the way it should with the specified loadout, with the exception that 2 ERPPC's should technically overheat you. It is supposed to have that much firepower, because that's its role. They are supposed to be deadly mechs. Their not even like any of the other assault mechs, where you still have a bit of maneuverability. They are completely focused on being mech destroyers.

Your suggestion may make it so they have to aim each individual kind of weapon separately, and that may solve the current 'issue', but more issues will pop up, and unless the root problem of all the weapon "unbalances" is fixed, the solutions will continue making the game more complicated than it needs to be.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Heat Capacity still needs to be addressed IMHO.

I'd like to start from a base of 30 stock, and go from there.

[Major Tannhauser]

Sorry Cimarb, but ist not about opinion.
Frontloaded damage can be done with nearly every weapon: fit a lot of srms or med lasers and you have the same massive punch in the face ™ , without a single ac.
The problem is not the damage of multiple ac/gauss/ppc in one alpha strike, its the concentration to one single section.

But maybe our definition about 'frontloaded' is different.

Oh, and dont forget to watch this girl for some really grazy alpha:

[Gorgo7]

Major Tannhauser, on 23 August 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

Sorry Cimarb, but ist not about opinion.
Frontloaded damage can be done with nearly every weapon: fit a lot of srms or med lasers and you have the same massive punch in the face ™ , without a single ac.
The problem is not the damage of multiple ac/gauss/ppc in one alpha strike, its the concentration to one single section.

But maybe our definition about 'frontloaded' is different.

Oh, and dont forget to watch this girl for some really grazy alpha:

Interesting video, what's your point?
Everytime he alpha'd he killed himself soon after from heat damage. Notice the editing.

[IraqiWalker]

The Noisey Cricket MK.III is a joke build, much like the 7ERPPC Battlemaster before it (Noisey Cricket MK.II) it's a suicidal fun build. I've been running it on my DWF-B for months now.

[Reno Blade]

Major Tannhauser, on 23 August 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

Sorry Cimarb, but ist not about opinion.
Frontloaded damage can be done with nearly every weapon: fit a lot of srms or med lasers and you have the same massive punch in the face ™ , without a single ac.
The problem is not the damage of multiple ac/gauss/ppc in one alpha strike, its the concentration to one single section.

But maybe our definition about 'frontloaded' is different.

Front loaded means:
you deliver all damage in the moment the weapon projectile hit the target.
Lasers spread their damage over the time of the beam duration and are not considered front loaded.
As they are a hitscan weapon they are pinpoint accurate.

SRMs, LBX, PPC, Gauss and isACs are front loaded.
A volley of front loaded weapons does not require you to starte or your target.
This gives you a lot less exposure = better survivability
This gives your target no chance to spread the damage by twisting = a lot less survivability for your target.

That is the reason why FDL weapons are considered better than laser.

Now add pinpoint to a weapon, aka no spread like LBX, SRM, Laser or clan UACs, and you just doubled the effect.
Thats the reason why PPC, Gauss and isACs are better than lasers, LBX, SRM/LRM and cUACs.
With the use of fast mechs and the low tonnage for SRMs, brawling with SRM builds got quite brutal with Artemis, that reduces the spread of the volley and brings them even closer to other front loaded-pinpoint weapons like PPC or isAC20.

I hope this helps to understand the gap between the usefullness of certain weapons in certain (most) circumstances.

Edited by Reno Blade, 23 August 2014 - 08:23 AM.

[Cimarb]

Major Tannhauser, on 23 August 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

Sorry Cimarb, but ist not about opinion.
Frontloaded damage can be done with nearly every weapon: fit a lot of srms or med lasers and you have the same massive punch in the face ™ , without a single ac.
The problem is not the damage of multiple ac/gauss/ppc in one alpha strike, its the concentration to one single section.

But maybe our definition about 'frontloaded' is different.

It most definitely is different, by the looks of it. Front-loaded damage is all the damage done at the same time. Pinpoint is all the damage done at the same point. SRMs are front-loaded, but not pinpoint. Lasers are pinpoint, but not front-loaded.

Front-loaded, pinpoint damage (PPFLD) is the biggest offender, as it combines the two into the most lethal combination. This would include PPCs, ERPPCs, cERPPCs to a point, Gauss, and all IS ACs (5-20, at least, as AC2 is marginal). i.e. the "meta"

Then, you have pinpoint-only weapons, such as lasers (normal and pulse) and arguably MGs/AC2s. These weapons do all of their damage to a single point, but spread damage over time.

Lastly, there is front-loaded-only weapons, such as LRMs, SRMs, LBX, arguably MGs, etc. These weapons do their damage "at once", but spread it all over the target.

For me, the ability to put all your damage into a single spot matters little, as long as the target can spread that damage somehow. For pinpoint-only weapons, you can do that easily by moving, torso twisting, etc. For front-load-only weapons, the target cannot do much, but it is spread by default. Only when it is the combined PPFLD are you almost incapable of defending yourself from it.

Removing PP would help, but you still have a problem with 10+ points of damage hitting a single component, regardless of the target's skill.

Minimizing FLD, though, means that the target's skill has much more impact on the placement of the damage. The only time the target would have to worry about concentrated damage is if they stood still, which would mean they deserved the concentrated damage anyways. This can be seen with the Clan UACs, as no one (sane) is complaining about them.

[YueFei]

Major Tannhauser, on 23 August 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

Sorry Cimarb, but ist not about opinion.
Frontloaded damage can be done with nearly every weapon: fit a lot of srms or med lasers and you have the same massive punch in the face ™ , without a single ac.
The problem is not the damage of multiple ac/gauss/ppc in one alpha strike, its the concentration to one single section.

But maybe our definition about 'frontloaded' is different.

Oh, and dont forget to watch this girl for some really grazy alpha:

You're not using the same definitions as everyone else if you think lasers are front-loaded.

Lasers are Damage-Over-Time (DoT), but Pin-Point (PP). They are also hit-scan. The damage potential is not released instantly, but over a period of time, such as 1 second for the Medium Laser. This means your damage output can be interrupted by the target taking cover before your beam duration finishes, or twisting/turning/jumping to spread the damage around.

SRMs are for the most part Front-Loaded-Damage (FLD), but Spread (not pin-point). I mean, there's cases where your volley might be broken into different waves of missiles due to tube limits, but for the most part, all damage potential is released the instant you pull the trigger. They are not hit-scan, they have a travel time.

Something like the PPC is PP FLD (pin-point *and* front-loaded-damage).

Hitscan vs Travel-Time.
Pin-point vs Spread.
Front-Loaded vs Damage-Over-Time.

[IraqiWalker]

Cimarb, on 23 August 2014 - 08:20 AM, said:

It most definitely is different, by the looks of it. Front-loaded damage is all the damage done at the same time. Pinpoint is all the damage done at the same point. SRMs are front-loaded, but not pinpoint. Lasers are pinpoint, but not front-loaded.

Front-loaded, pinpoint damage (PPFLD) is the biggest offender, as it combines the two into the most lethal combination. This would include PPCs, ERPPCs, cERPPCs to a point, Gauss, and all IS ACs (5-20, at least, as AC2 is marginal). i.e. the "meta"

Then, you have pinpoint-only weapons, such as lasers (normal and pulse) and arguably MGs/AC2s. These weapons do all of their damage to a single point, but spread damage over time.

Lastly, there is front-loaded-only weapons, such as LRMs, SRMs, LBX, arguably MGs, etc. These weapons do their damage "at once", but spread it all over the target.

For me, the ability to put all your damage into a single spot matters little, as long as the target can spread that damage somehow. For pinpoint-only weapons, you can do that easily by moving, torso twisting, etc. For front-load-only weapons, the target cannot do much, but it is spread by default. Only when it is the combined PPFLD are you almost incapable of defending yourself from it.

Removing PP would help, but you still have a problem with 10+ points of damage hitting a single component, regardless of the target's skill.

Minimizing FLD, though, means that the target's skill has much more impact on the placement of the damage. The only time the target would have to worry about concentrated damage is if they stood still, which would mean they deserved the concentrated damage anyways. This can be seen with the Clan UACs, as no one (sane) is complaining about them.

I'm gonna watch how this argument develops, but just one point should be mentioned:

MGs are not pinpoint. They actually operate exactly like flamers spewing a template that deals damage to all locations under it. If they were pinpoint, they would be infinitely more fun to use.

[Major Tannhauser]

Gorgo7 there is no point in the vid, its just for fun (listen to her voice). Why so serious?

I see what you ppl mean (frontloaded here in military means the volley you can fire without reload).

Give some weapons hard wired delays limit the ways, how ppl can play. If one want to risk overheat/firing a lot of heavy weapons together/being defensless for the next seconds, he should have this option. Its part of BT since the beginning.
It simply should be very lucky, to bring all this damage at one point and wreck a heavy+ with that.

WoT is a nice example how a fire spread can work. A good player is still a good player, even when not all his shoots land on the place, where he aims.
In MWO you have several guns/mech, but no need to calculate ballistic curves or pentration from different angles. I have no clue about programming, but a friend says, its doable much more easy than in WoT.

Look unbiased what all the different suggestions do on the long run. What problems are solved or diminished to a not longer relevant level? How you think the players adapt to which changes (or have a chance to work around)? What new problems can emerge from.

I will be happy with every solution that works, it must not be a fire spread.
But it should work (for all current and in the future implemented weapons), and dont need further 'ghost heat things'.

Sorry for my 'english' again

Edited by Major Tannhauser, 24 August 2014 - 04:28 AM.

[Koinzell Steiner]

Vanguard319, on 29 July 2014 - 03:49 PM, said:

I guess Paul never got the lesson of Occam's Razor. Instead of creating these overly convoluted weapon nerfs that ultimately will only hurt the game, when the best solution can be found in the TT rules? Translate the to-hit mods into an fps-style bloom system. I would suggest that Paul consider actually reading this before he gives us another nerf we're all going to hate.

That link is the best suggestion so far (I'm currently still on page 2, and still continue to read buy I just have to bump it). I think that will make the gameplay more interesting, its similar like what they do in World of Tank and obvious that firing while moving is harder, not impossible but harder, hence we don't need all of these complex nerfing and firing mechanism. I play world of tank and many player able to fire while moving quite accurately but takes time to learn. Currently I think mwo is moving down the path of wow. Nerf here and there and at the end less people will play.

And for my own opinion, people firing multiple high dmg weapon has never been a problem for me to face. Heck at long range its just a matter of finding huge obstacle (bigger n fatter teammates work just fine ) to avoid most weapon. And for medium to brawling range, I like it when the enemy pulled an alpha on me, most of the time they'll shut down anyway or at least limit their next action.

As for the ppc speed, its already been slowed enough last year, heck even the original ppc speed has never been a problem for me. As for medium to close brawling range, everything is almost instantaneous anyway.

Yeah so at this point, the link above is actually one of the best suggestion rather than making thing that are already fine more complicated.

in case the link in the quote does not work, the post is on the first page of this thread by Vanguard319.