Jump to content

What If Masc Were Not About Velocity, But Acceleration?


5 replies to this topic

Poll: MASC increases acceleration, not velocity (5 member(s) have cast votes)

like it?

  1. yes (3 votes [60.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

  2. no (2 votes [40.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 DI3T3R

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 11 August 2014 - 05:43 AM

The problem with MASC is, that it would make Mechs move so fast, that the server could no longer sync it.

My suggestion is straightforward: Just like the Targeting Computer, who was radically changed for MWO, MASC could be radically changed into something more applicable.
The new MASC would massively enhance the acceleration/deceleration of a Mech.

Light Mechs would head off like a bullet and Assault-Mechs would be more agile.

The downside could be as simple as 1 or 2 additional permanent heat-points or a negative quirk (e.g. slower turning when running curves).

#2 Draykin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ironclad
  • The Ironclad
  • 154 posts

Posted 11 August 2014 - 06:22 AM

While I feel that MASC might do well as a tool for modifying acceleration values, I also feel that it needs to keep spirit with the original concept. Many 'Mechs that are known to carry MASC would use it to excel at their roles because of the speed benefit, with the risk of MASC failure, and I don't quite see how simply making 'Mechs accelerate faster would necessarily make MASC be very worth it. Yes, an Atlas could get up to max speed faster, but after which it would make very little difference, as MASC does not help it get into Brawling range any faster, and does not help it in a Brawl. The same goes for Light 'Mechs. Yes, under your proposition, Lights would accelerate faster... but they already accelerate quickly, and can be tricky to handle because of this. MASC would provide even faster acceleration, meaning that Lights would become even more difficult to pilot.

Now, you must add in the factor that MASC has a chance to fail when used, meaning you don't want to keep it on forever. If I recall correctly, it was so severe in CBT as to cause a 'Mech to become permanently immobilized. MASC must have a penalty for use, and the penalty must be worth the benefit. Increased acceleration rate doesn't offer much to be met.

As a note, the term acceleration applies to both normal acceleration, and negative acceleration (deceleration).

#3 Mechteric

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 7,308 posts
  • LocationRTP, NC

Posted 11 August 2014 - 07:03 AM

I'd like both acceleration and top speed boosts, but the details of how they handle its negative affects there are many possibilities:

- increased heat only without dissipation
or
- after X amount of time starts to do a bit of damage to legs over time
or
- combination of the above two in smaller amounts

#4 9erRed

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • 1,566 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 11 August 2014 - 12:26 PM

Greetings all,

I do like the idea of acceleration being the 'start' of where MASC could lead to. But that might be more in line to having the 'supercharger' component than MASC.

Currently the Mech's we have in game now generate 0 heat from full speed.
- they are all listed as having a cruising speed as well as a top speed. (tech and records reference)
Consider making the cruising speed be a heat neutral setting and moving to 'max' speed generating a constant heat threshold that will not 'go away' till this speed is lowered. (this could be off set by increasing the heat sinks carried)

This could effect the 'simply mashing the throttle to full' every time a Pilot moves. And requiring a consideration of the weapons heat generated with the current engine output. (speed)
- At cruising speed the normal weapons firing will or should not be effected by any residual heat from the Mech's speed
- Pump it to Full Speed and now the Pilot must balance and consider these heat generators.

This would not be a 'ghost heat' but a clear indication on the heat scale of max engine output directed to movement. It may not be much, but with the number of Mech's that 'ride the heat line' with there weapons it will need to be addressed.

MASC could or should be considered similar to 'emergency war power' that military equipment can use, you can use it but at some risk. (there are very few units in this game that actually mount this system.)
- And that's how the Tech manuals list the use of MASC, over powering the movement components of the Mech it is equipped on, allowing for temporary excessive speed and movement. (But the bundles need to be at max heat before this system can be engaged.)
- So the OP's suggestion of starting/stopping speed increases directly countermines how the MASC was stated to function.

See MASC:
http://www.sarna.net...ignal_Circuitry
See Supercharger:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Supercharger

9erRed

Edited by 9erRed, 11 August 2014 - 12:28 PM.


#5 MacCaileanMor

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 45 posts

Posted 05 December 2014 - 08:24 PM

Why not just limit the mechs that can have masc. It would be nice if my yen lo wang had masc. Even with masc it would not go so fast that it would cause sync problems.

#6 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,558 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 05 December 2014 - 08:46 PM

No. MASC is supposed to be about velocity/top speed, that's the whole point of having it.

PGI needs to work out the issues they're facing so we don't have to "make something up" in order to include the word "MASC" in the game.

If we can't handle 190kph, how is it that other online games can perfectly handle 400kph-900kph jets/aerospace? Figure it out.

Implement MASC in the meantime with acceleration boosts and provide top speed boosts that cap at 171kph until we work out the issues so at least we can have those mechs in the game? Sure, but I'd rather see that time spent on fixing the engine/network instead.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users