198 replies to this topic

[Lily from animove]

Voivode, on 21 January 2015 - 09:11 AM, said:

Rather than a rework of the heat system (Cleghorn6 has a good point of the system being difficult to comprehend if you aren't a tabletop buff and are trying out the game). I'd like to see something else done to minimize the PPFLD in a way that allows ghost heat to be removed.

1) IS autocannons need the split shot treatment. However, the difficult balance of IS vs Clan also depends on IS autocannons being better than Clan autocannons while also being heavier and bulkier. So leave the ISAC2 as is, ISAC5 split into two shots, same for ISAC10, split the ISAC20 in three. That way they are no longer PPFLD but the IS version retains a balancing advantage in the way it deals damage while being heavier/bulkier than Clan versions.

2) This leaves the only PPFLD weapons as Gauss and PPC/ERPPC. This is fine to have. Simply inflate the cooldowns of these two weapons systems. An 8 second cooldown for gauss (perhaps with adjustments to the charge up or outright removal of it) and a 6 second cooldown for PPC/ERPPC (with a significant increase in projectile speed) would be reasonable thing to do.

The above items are simpler for non-hardcore TT players. Perhaps even combine these with a moderate drop in shutdown heat threshold so that alpha striking in general becomes less attractive. Anyways, that's my two cents.

it would reduce the amount of PPFLD shots but then people would still shoot 2 ERPPC + 2 gauss every 8 seconds. so the PPFLD is still there. in the fixed 30 heattreshold is exactly preventing this, because 2 erPPC reahc the max, prevent a shutdown, but with the gauss combined, you do shut down. use only PPC? yes 2 gauss and 2 PPC possible, but then PPC has a deadrange at close and is shorter in range on long.

[nehebkau]

Kuun, on 21 January 2015 - 07:24 AM, said:

In TT there were heat-scale effects:

the only thing this will get you is a game were everyone is sniping or firing LRMs. Shooting off their max-heat alpha then hiding until they cool off.

[Alistair Winter]

Thragen, on 21 January 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

#2 Giving DHS and SHS different functions. For example, DHS would be restored to true dubs (double the effect of single heat sinks instead of 1.4x) with a lower heat treshold, while SHS would have a significantly larger treshold. You would choose SHS or DPS based on your build and playing style.
A: I am against this idea because it would probably be very confusing to the casual player base.

If this is to be the thinking man's shooter, I don't see why this would be so confusing. Just put a description in the UI. It's not a complicated concept, it's only hard to understand if you don't have the information available.

Thragen, on 21 January 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

#4 Substantially bigger penalties for overheating. Far greater damage to internal components and far greater risks of cooking ammo, leading to internal explosions.
A: I am not sure about this one. If I had to choose, I would probably come out against this one because these new consequences will depend on some random number generator.

Again, I would say it doesn't have to. Let's say you overheat by 1 heat points. Apply 1 damage to all components, but 2 damage to any component with an engine in it (i.e. CT for STD engines, CT+ST for XL engines). If you overheat by 5 points, it does 5 damage to components, but 10 damage to engine-holding components.

The numbers are just taken out of thin air, obviously. I'm just illustrating that it doesn't have to be random.

Thragen, on 21 January 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

A: I am willing to try some of this out but I reserve the right to at some point say enough is enough. I am not sure where that point is without trying some of these penalties out first hand.

You can reserve the right as much as you want. This whole discussion is purely academic, as PGI will never try any of this anyway.

Thragen, on 21 January 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

As a BT fan, there was never any doubt that I was going to try this game out. But, when this game was first advertised, it's tag line of "A thinking man's shooter... is what really appealed to me the most!!! I think we need to put quick "thinking" back into the game.
As a player in my mech, the decision to take action should require thought:
-- Do I have enough threshold to fire?
-- Will my new threshold subject me to penalties I can or can't deal with?
-- Will I cool off in time to fire again and finish off the mech I am engaged with?
-- Do I need to manuver / evade / torso twist ( pilot skills should matter more )?

I absolutely agree with this. Not only should the player be faced with more decision-making throughout the match, but I also think the game controls need to be more complicated, to reward players who are good at multitasking. Right now, MWO plays very much like any FPS. Yeah, we have a torso, but most modern FPS games do allow you to move your upper body to some degree. 95% of the action is controlled by WASD, Space and Mouse 1 / Mouse 2. Sometimes you press R and H, but that's pretty much it.

Playing MW2, you basically needed the multitasking skills of an astronaut, compared to most other games of its generation. You had six different buttons for the jump jets alone!

[Hotthedd]

nehebkau, on 21 January 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

the only thing this will get you is a game were everyone is sniping or firing LRMs. Shooting off their max-heat alpha then hiding until they cool off.

I disagree. I think that this would encourage DPS over high alpha (increasing TTK). I'm sure some people will try the style of play you prophesize, but will find out that won't be the most effective.

Use that table, but remove the "avoid on 8+, rng stuff" Ammo cooks off at 28 (on that scale) Engine shuts down at 30.

[Alistair Winter]

nehebkau, on 21 January 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

the only thing this will get you is a game were everyone is sniping or firing LRMs. Shooting off their max-heat alpha then hiding until they cool off.

That does not follow. It's certainly a danger, if poorly implemented. But it's not a certain, unavoidable consequence. Sniping builds are kept in check by low DPS. High heat for PPCs, high cooldown for gauss. LRMs have minimum range, and also do less damage in a brawl.

This isn't even a matter of discussion or personal opinion. What you said is unequivocably false, unless you assume that PGI wouldn't balance the weapons to match the dangers of overheating. And why would anyone assume that?

[Thragen]

Alistair Winter, on 21 January 2015 - 09:24 AM, said:

If this is to be the thinking man's shooter, I don't see why this would be so confusing. Just put a description in the UI. It's not a complicated concept, it's only hard to understand if you don't have the information available.

PGI's track record on this isn't good. Much of how the game works isn't accessible through the UI. You have to read sites / forums. PGI really needs to treat the lack of info in the UI as an opportunity to improve the user experience.

[nehebkau]

Alistair Winter, on 21 January 2015 - 09:29 AM, said:

That does not follow. It's certainly a danger, if poorly implemented. But it's not a certain, unavoidable consequence. Sniping builds are kept in check by low DPS. High heat for PPCs, high cooldown for gauss. LRMs have minimum range, and also do less damage in a brawl.

This isn't even a matter of discussion or personal opinion. What you said is unequivocably false, unless you assume that PGI wouldn't balance the weapons to match the dangers of overheating. And why would anyone assume that?

Oh so now they need to change all the heat, recharge, damage values of all the weapons -- GAME redesign anyone? I don't understand why people can't think outside the box -- constantly referring to TT is usually not helpful. The mechanics of a dice-based turn-based game are completely different than what we have now and we need to think differently about the game.

Edited by nehebkau, 21 January 2015 - 09:41 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

nehebkau, on 21 January 2015 - 09:33 AM, said:

Oh so now they need to change all the heat, recharge, damage values of all the weapons -- GAME redesign anyone?

Yes, and that's basically the premise of the thread. There's probably no easy fix to the problems described in the OP, unfortunately. As others have said, PGI made some initial mistakes for gameplay balance and then kept building on a flawed framework, adding band-aid solutions such as Ghost Heat to keep the whole game from collapsing.

In order to fix it, it would be a major overhaul.

Thragen, on 21 January 2015 - 09:33 AM, said:

PGI's track record on this isn't good. Much of how the game works isn't accessible through the UI. You have to read sites / forums. PGI really needs to treat the lack of info in the UI as an opportunity to improve the user experience.

I agree. Although I am cautiously optimistic and I think there's a 5-10% chance they will partially fix this aspect of the UI when they release the so-called UI 3.0, which is basically just UI 2.1.

[cSand]

I would be happy with a change thatgave SHS a reason to be used.... also I'm all for making heat management more punishing. BRING ON THE HARD MODE

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Id like to see a lower heat ceiling and a higher dissipation rate.
Makes Alpha Striking a lot more risky and encourages firing weapon groups

They would likely have to rebalance Clan mechs pretty hard afterwards though, because they would be absolutely terrible. Unless Clans have a higher heat ceiling and a lower dissipation rate, (essentially Clans stay the same way they are now and IS mechs change to the new system)which actually could be good to diversify IS mechs from Clan mechs

Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 21 January 2015 - 09:46 AM.

[stjobe]

YES.

I've argued for this in so many posts I've lost count; for this to be "a BattleTech game" it needs to have heat penalties. Half the (TT) game is learning how to ride the heat scale (as opposed to MWO, where it's just learning how many times you can alpha in a row).

And the best part? All the needed mechanics for proper TT-style heat penalties are already in-game:
* Movement penalties already apply when a leg gets damaged
* To-hit penalties already apply when jumping (reticule shake)
* Forced shutdowns already exist, along with an override mechanic
* Ammo explosions exist, and do happen occasionally
* Also, overheat damage already exists

A re-working of the heat system is needed, and as you can see they already have a lot of the parts they need.

[Almond Brown]

Kuun, on 21 January 2015 - 07:24 AM, said:

In TT there were heat-scale effects:



Why did Paul have to go and invent a bunch of asinine bullcrap instead of just going with something like what's in BattleTech TT already?

A clever person would look at all the interesting negative effects a mech could suffer as heat increases (slower movement, failing/flickering HUD, slower weapon recycle time, ammo explosions, widening cone of fire effect that compromises accuracy, etc etc etc) and then put them on the heat effect scale to prevent the high-heat alpha meta we have now. We could then have true Double Heat Sinks, as well.

But perhaps being clever is too difficult for some...

Let's just say if MWO had 10s turns, rolled dice and applied its Heat affects AFTER the total HS dissipation values were subtracted, then that might actually work. But MWO isn't a Board Game. It is an RT game.

Thus: Perhaps understanding the conversion mechanism required is too difficult for some...

P.S. To the OP.

Yes.

Substantially bigger penalties for overheating. Far greater damage to internal components and far greater risks of cooking ammo, leading to internal explosions. Longer Shutdown times. Adding any slow, debilitating effects should remain the domain of the enemy and not due to Heat.

Edited by Almond Brown, 21 January 2015 - 09:51 AM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Yes, PGI should reinvent their heat scale.

Hard cap, heatsinks only increasing the speed which we cool off, not the cap we can get to. 40-50 points would be a good spot. It would allow us to alpha a little, but only once, maybe twice if its a small alpha. It would limit people being able to fire off heaps of really hot weapons.

Ballistics would still be good as they gain little heat. So, idk what we could do there to keep it from just becoming cannonwarrior online....but meh.

THen add heat penalties at various points along the way.

If we have a 50 point heat scale, lets say
0-25 is a free zone, no penalities
26-30: we suffer 10% less acceleration and overall mobility
35-40: Targeting systems fail, we cant get locks on targets and are un able to R mechs
41-45ECM/BAP/AMS/TAG/NARC and other electronic devices begin to fail and do not work.
46-49: We suffer 0.5 point of core damage per second we remain above 46 heat.
50+: We shut down, suffering 1 point of core damage per second we remain above 50 heat. We cannot turn back on until our mech has reached the 25 point free zone.

All effects are accumulative.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 21 January 2015 - 09:49 AM.

[Hobo Dan]

I am all for looking at solutions that encourage less alpha strikes and more weapons groups/back up weapon usage. Making Time to Kill slightly longer and making PP alphas less common and more risky.

If a new heat scale can accomplish this, let’s have a look. If convergence can accomplish this, let’s have a look.

Part of me thinks the KISS (keep it simple stupid) theory may be the best solution. Make all ACs burst fire and make PPCs and Gauss cool downs longer.

[Hotthedd]

LordKnightFandragon, on 21 January 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

Ballistics would still be good as they gain little heat. So, idk what we could do there to keep it from just becoming cannonwarrior online....but meh.

Re-adjust ammo/ton to TT levels.

[FupDup]

Lower heat threshold combined with drastically faster dissipation is something I'd like to try out.


As for heat penalties, those we have to careful on. When people quote how TT's penalties worked, what they forget is that TT didn't calculate heat in real-time. TT calculated your heat in a "frontloaded" manner. That is, all of your weapon heat from that turn was added to your heat dissipation for that turn, to determine where you ended up on the scale.

Your heat would never immediately jump up, because your dissipation was calculated instantly instead of spread out over time. This allowed players to actually build their mech to not overheat if they wanted to, at the downside of needing more tonnage and critslots for heatsinks.

For example, in TT you could fire a Clan ERPPC on a mech with just 10 DHS and never generate any heat whatsoever. A mech with 4 ERPPCs and 30 DHS would also be almost completely heat-neutral and never suffer a heat penalty if played correctly. Even 10 SHS could infinitely sustain a single PPC with no penalties (unless you walked/ran several turns in a row).

But in real time, our heatsinks don't get to work like that. We generate our heat in large spikes and have to wait for the heat bar to slowly and gradually go back down. If TT heatsinks worked like that, firing a single PPC would instantly give you a movement and accuracy penalty, even if you started at zero heat and weren't even moving, on a cold map.


So penalties have to be a lot "softer" than TT, because our heat system isn't as lenient due to not "frontloading" the dissipation like a turn-based environment does. If the threshold is low enough, you'd reach the top so quickly that we might not even need penalties in the first place (insta shutdown would be a penalty in and of itself...). We have to be careful not to trigger a Gauss meta here...

[SerratedBlaze]

Yes, the system should be looked at and possibly overhauled just before steam release.

Lower threshold higher dissipation has been the go to for a long time, and I think the less seen stigma about it is gauss heat hyper efficiency and the fact that so much of the player base likes to alpha. I have seen the awesome needs gh on ppc removed cuz it has them stock threads so many times and thought, isn't chainfireing 3ppc still 1 turn in TT?

The mentality is why bring 2 if they aren't fired together, I am somewhat guilty of this too, we all want to optimize at least a little right? Something needs to be done to make everyone ok with dps over alpha, and the low cap high dissipation thing will probably work wonders if gauss is prohibited from firing two simultaneously.

And super yes to making shs useful. internal sinks need to be the same for either type at the least.

[Senor Cataclysmo]

FupDup, on 21 January 2015 - 09:56 AM, said:

Lower heat threshold combined with drastically faster dissipation is something I'd like to try out.


As for heat penalties, those we have to careful on. When people quote how TT's penalties worked, what they forget is that TT didn't calculate heat in real-time. TT calculated your heat in a "frontloaded" manner. That is, all of your weapon heat from that turn was added to your heat dissipation for that turn, to determine where you ended up on the scale.

Your heat would never immediately jump up, because your dissipation was calculated instantly instead of spread out over time. This allowed players to actually build their mech to not overheat if they wanted to, at the downside of needing more tonnage and critslots for heatsinks.

For example, in TT you could fire a Clan ERPPC on a mech with just 10 DHS and never generate any heat whatsoever. A mech with 4 ERPPCs and 30 DHS would also be almost completely heat-neutral and never suffer a heat penalty if played correctly. Even 10 SHS could infinitely sustain a single PPC with no penalties (unless you walked/ran several turns in a row).

But in real time, our heatsinks don't get to work like that. We generate our heat in large spikes and have to wait for the heat bar to slowly and gradually go back down. If TT heatsinks worked like that, firing a single PPC would instantly give you a movement and accuracy penalty, even if you started at zero heat and weren't even moving, on a cold map.


So penalties have to be a lot "softer" than TT, because our heat system isn't as lenient due to not "frontloading" the dissipation like a turn-based environment does. If the threshold is low enough, you'd reach the top so quickly that we might not even need penalties in the first place (insta shutdown would be a penalty in and of itself...). We have to be careful not to trigger a Gauss meta here...

I was thinking about this.

Why not make the MWO heat system 'front loaded' like that? Say firing a group of weapons generates 30 heat. You can dissipate 20 heat with the amount of heat sinks you have, so the heat bar in your HUD only rises to 10 then drops off at a fixed rate.

You sink your heat immediately to the capacity of your heat sinks, and the heat piled on top of that is what incurs ill effects. You could tie the heat based pilot skills to the rate you cool down, rather than heat generation/dissipation.

[Jman5]

Quote

Do The Majority Of Players Want To Change Mwo's Heat Mechanic?

No. There are a thousand and one different things I want to see worked on before we even consider revamping the heat system and completely rejiggering balance around that. The heat system works well enough and that's good enough for me.

[Brody319]

I think the heat system should be reworked
The system I have in mind is having "heat milestones". if the weapons fire cross a heat milestone it generates more heat.

So if the heat milestone is 30. You can fire ANY combination of lasers, ballistics, and missiles as long as they don't generate 30 heat you suffer no penalties. So you could fire say 3 PPCs. or a PPC and a few medium pulse lasers, ect, and suffer no heat penalties, but firing a combination of weapons that generate more than 30 heat would result in ghost heat.

Then you would have additional milestones that generate progressively more heat. so at the first milestone between 30-40 you could generate 10 extra heat, and at the second milestone between 40-50, you generate 20 extra heat.