32 replies to this topic

[MauttyKoray]

So, with the new Override mechanic and using it, I feel that reducing the heat cap by 1/2 and rebalancing the Heat Sinks would be a good idea.

1. It would eliminate the high alpha builds as you couldn't shoot all those weapons at once.

2. It would promote varied builds, as you could shoot more often but fewer weapons at the same time.

3. It would allow armor to be reduced if necessary, which would then promote Lance on Lance combat instead of 12v12 deathballs.

It would obviously require internal testing first, but I feel it would improve the gameplay a lot and take care of the massive pinpoint damage build issues we're having now that nothing (even ghost heat) has been able to fix so far.
-----------------------------

As for LOS targeting I believe that the 'free' C3 system needs to be toned down as they make lock on weapons silly and too useful, especially if the reduced heat/armor I suggest above would come into effect. (LRMs would be silly ridiculous)

Option 1
Allow the 'target data' to be shared, keeping the role of information warfare, but restrict lock-on ability to only be used when target is TAG'ed, NARC'ed, spotted by UAV, or in direct LOS of player. (Alt. Make shared targets only possible between teammates within a certain distance, just like a real C3 unit.)

Option 2
Remove targets sharing in HUD unless target is TAG'ed, NARC'ed, spotted by UAV, or in LOS of the player. Currently information warfare doesn't exist, as everybody knows where the enemies are due to shared targets and 12v12 deathballs.

[Davers]

Really? I found the new Override mechanic was a great way to end the match early. I think I died once from firing 2 medium lasers over the threshold.

[MauttyKoray]

I thought it reflected the table top's '% chance for engine to explode' mechanic very well. Could just be me though.

However, this topic isn't about the override function, please return to the topic indicated in OP.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 01 February 2015 - 05:20 PM.

[Navid A1]

The new override function is the insta-death button... there is no taking damage... you just pop.! even at 101% or 102%.

I think the damage-time slope is pretty damn high at the moment.

Edited by Navid A1, 01 February 2015 - 05:10 PM.

[MauttyKoray]

Navid A1, on 01 February 2015 - 05:10 PM, said:

The new override function is the insta-death button... there is no taking damage... you just pop.! even at 101% or 102%.

I think the damage-time slope is pretty damn high at the moment.

1. This isn't a topic about the Override function, please stay on topic.
2. So you're saying that overriding a safety function on your mech shouldn't be catastrophic or highly detrimental?

[Gamuray]

BACK on topic.... This is the sorta thing that I and a few others have desired for a long time.. Replace ghost heat with a system that was already available and was much more effective at keeping alpha's down and DPS the same/better. However, SO many people are against realism where possible in a mech simulator... for generally unknown or unsupported reasons... Most against it say it won't work because MWO isn't a board game.. despite never actually testing the system.

I'm all for it man. Doubt anyone will reduce more armor, and doubt deathballing will stop, but it'll put a stop to laser vomit, while not making such builds less useful, since they will actually be able to pump more DPS, but not all at once.


[By no means should any of my comments be used to assume I am against certain play styles or builds.]

Edited by Gamuray, 01 February 2015 - 05:37 PM.

[Naduk]

i would like to see single heat sinks be more relevant

perhaps changes suggested by OP could be applied to only single sinks

give them a faster cooling rate that increases with each HSink but does not increase max cooling threshold

leave double heat sinks as they are now, cool slower but capture more heat before over heating

this would make players make a choice between shooting many times or many guns
it would allow for DPS style builds to come to life and play how their designs intend
while retaining the alpha strike builds play styles as well

[Davers]

MauttyKoray, on 01 February 2015 - 04:59 PM, said:

I thought it reflected the table top's '% chance for engine to explode' mechanic very well. Could just be me though.

However, this topic isn't about the override function, please return to the topic indicated in OP.

Then you should re-edit your post and take out your first line.

MauttyKoray, on 01 February 2015 - 04:49 PM, said:

So, with the new Override mechanic and using it, I feel that reducing the heat cap by 1/2 and rebalancing the Heat Sinks would be a good idea.

You seem to be implying that these changes are needed because of the new Override mechanic.

[MauttyKoray]

Davers, on 01 February 2015 - 05:40 PM, said:

Then you should re-edit your post and take out your first line.


You seem to be implying that these changes are needed because of the new Override mechanic.

The new override mechanic, after using it while in my Nova (I normally do well with it but decided to try the toggle to 'push the limit' over several matches), is what brought me to this thought... so no I will not edit it as it fits and is the reason of why behind the what.

BACK ON TOPIC:
Someone had suggested this idea before and if DHS gave the 2.0 efficiency that they would normally, giving SHS the ability to marginally raise the heat cap roof would give SHS a property that DHS did not have.

Summary:
-DHS would be 2.0 while SHS would be 1.0. DHS would be more efficient at quickly cooling mechs.

- SHS would boost heat cap slightly, meaning you could fire more in a short time but have to wait longer to cool down (again, MARGINALLY HIGHER). This could potentially be better for hit and run or LRM boats, while DHS would be better for brawlers or those who want consistent fire.

[Davers]

1. It would make ballistics king of the battlefield. It would cripple Clan mechs, like the Nova.

2. It would not make varied builds, players would just shift to more heat efficient builds. Which is much less variety than what we have now.

3. Reducing armour will not change how effective the death ball is. The only way to break up the death ball is to add secondary objectives that need to be done and are important. Think of the Jungle in LoL. Without the Jungle, you would have 3 attack lanes and the best strategy would be to pile all into one lane and push. This is exactly what we have in MWO.

Any nerfs in LoS targeting has to come with a buff to LRM direct fire. LRMs are without question the worst damage/ammo weapon in the game.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I'm all for raising Dissipation and decreasing Capacity.

Armor though needs to be balanced against weapon damage output, so to lower armor we'd need to lower base weapon stats also.

I'd like to see changes to locks and add that for SRMs. I'd be fine with missiles following the crosshair until they hit something or reach their max range as an alternative (and one that bypasses ECM, so that missiles can fire on ECM protected mechs in LOS).

Then we can have the existing counters remain in place for indirect Locks out of TAG and NARC for starters, with the possibility of missiles being fire and forget with that setup, but this would need testing.

---

Davers, on 01 February 2015 - 06:10 PM, said:

1. It would make ballistics king of the battlefield. It would cripple Clan mechs, like the Nova.

2. It would not make varied builds, players would just shift to more heat efficient builds. Which is much less variety than what we have now.

Not if dissipation is raised (doubled or 2.5x to match current weapon rate of fire).

Then with dissipation is improved and capacity reduced, we are likely to see shifts in loadouts. I also wouldn't mind exploring ammo per ton buffs, so that ammo counts are doubled across the board from original values.

Quote

3. Reducing armour will not change how effective the death ball is. The only way to break up the death ball is to add secondary objectives that need to be done and are important. Think of the Jungle in LoL. Without the Jungle, you would have 3 attack lanes and the best strategy would be to pile all into one lane and push. This is exactly what we have in MWO.

Any nerfs in LoS targeting has to come with a buff to LRM direct fire. LRMs are without question the worst damage/ammo weapon in the game.

If we adjust weapons damage output, then I can see adjusting armor, so any changes most likely would not be able to address death balls anyway.

As for death balls, if each mech fires a smaller alpha, the mech being hit could have more opportunities to move at least. Current issues is having mechs that each can easily fire 40+ damage each, twice within ~5 seconds, and if they are focusing on the same mech, that mech getting hit won't survive long if at all.

So having each mech able to deal closer to 20+ would be better even with death balls being a tactic commonly used.

And I'd love to see buffs to LRMs if their targeting can be restricted to LOS, where missile speed being one of the first areas I'd look at.

[MauttyKoray]

Praetor Knight, on 01 February 2015 - 06:47 PM, said:

I'm all for raising Dissipation and decreasing Capacity.

Armor though needs to be balanced against weapon damage output, so to lower armor we'd need to lower base weapon stats also.

Keep in mind that while armor would be reduced (not saying stock, but less so than now) the weapons would also be doing less damage all at once, making spreading damage, using cover, and the TTK effectively less at the current armor value.

Praetor Knight, on 01 February 2015 - 06:47 PM, said:

Then with dissipation is improved and capacity reduced, we are likely to see shifts in loadouts. I also wouldn't mind exploring ammo per ton buffs, so that ammo counts are doubled across the board from original values.

Agreed, with dissipation increase, more lasers could be fired over time, but not all at once. It would reduce 'alpha'
spam, but allow lasers to be damage for heat trade off with no ammo limitation. Ammo is actually doubled from the original values right now (at least on ballistics, I believe LRMs got a 50% boost too), however the point here is that the damage from these weapons would be more significant, lowered ammo counts would mean each shot is more effective, but also more precious and require good aim instead of the spray and pray of current ballistics in a CoD-like fashion.

Praetor Knight, on 01 February 2015 - 06:47 PM, said:

If we adjust weapons damage output, then I can see adjusting armor, so any changes most likely would not be able to address death balls anyway.

As for death balls, if each mech fires a smaller alpha, the mech being hit could have more opportunities to move at least. Current issues is having mechs that each can easily fire 40+ damage each, twice within ~5 seconds, and if they are focusing on the same mech, that mech getting hit won't survive long if at all.

So having each mech able to deal closer to 20+ would be better even with death balls being a tactic commonly used.

Yes, and my point was that with the lowered armor Lance vs Lance or even Mech vs Mech would actually be viable now as you could inflict significant damage on one another with fewer weapons (being balance with firing fewer but more often) resulting in more intense, skill based battles and less on who has the biggest alpha strike, more on who has coordination, positioning, personal skill, and tactical sense (as it should be).

Praetor Knight, on 01 February 2015 - 06:47 PM, said:

And I'd love to see buffs to LRMs if their targeting can be restricted to LOS, where missile speed being one of the first areas I'd look at.

LRMs were never meant to be able to target things without NARC/TAG (in this game also UAV) assistance, hence why they've had such an odd and imbalanced place.

[ThrashInc]

I pop override as soon as the match starts, it doesn't really blow up all that often and I consistently go over 100%.

[LordKnightFandragon]

GundamStompyRobotChurchy, on 01 February 2015 - 07:15 PM, said:

I pop override as soon as the match starts, it doesn't really blow up all that often and I consistently go over 100%.

Makes me wonder why we dont just have an infinite heatscale.....they let us use the "oh ****" type of mechanic and keep it on forever, rather then using it in a few instances where we really need the extra damage and dont care about the damage to us. Which is really hte point of an Alpha Strike, its should be a last ditch effort thing, not the primary mechanic and firing method in the game.

I have read a few books of Mechwarrior, Ghost Knight I think, about Mason Dunne, and the Fortress Republic one, the opening battle scene in Fortress Republic, it explains Julian over riding his mech to rapid fire his PPCs on the Templar, but prolly his ideal firing method is a few PPC blasts, wait, fire some more. The book makes it sound like its quite the miserable little oven in there, having rapid fired that many PPCs and even has his buddy looking at his mech as White hot on Thermals.....surely that should not be how the mech stays at all times.....but in MWo, that is exactly how we are at all times.......we never have to cool off, but rather just stay at 99% heat, and I guess now, we can perma override until we blow up...

How long until that self destruct mechanic is removed from MWO as well?

[Nothing Whatsoever]

MauttyKoray, on 01 February 2015 - 07:05 PM, said:

Keep in mind that while armor would be reduced (not saying stock, but less so than now) the weapons would also be doing less damage all at once, making spreading damage, using cover, and the TTK effectively less at the current armor value.

What I've looked at is not just with stacking weapons, but also base stats.

For example, if we try to use 10 seconds of real-time is what one turn was then say an AC/2 would only deal 2 damage over that period of time. In MWO an AC/2 can potentially deal 28 damage (and it generates a lot more heat in the process), which is around a 1388% increase. Now the weapon does need a buff from its original stats, but we could see some changes to the weapon to bring it more in line with other weapons, along with considering other types of changes for MWO.

Another example is the IS ML. Say we keep the 0.90 beam and 3.00 cooldown; for it to deal double damage compared to the original then it should have it's damage reduced to 3.90 damage and 2.34 heat for example. Where right now at 5 damage and 4 heat it has a boost of 256% for damage and 342% for heat.

Quote

Ammo is actually doubled from the original values right now (at least on ballistics, I believe LRMs got a 50% boost too),

Ammo is actually not doubled in MWO:
AC/2s originally dealt 90 damage per ton, MWO its at 150
Gauss dealt 120 damage per ton, MWO its at 150
the rest of the ACs dealt 100 damage per ton, AC/5 and 10 went to 150, with AC/20s at 140
MGs were at 400 damage per ton, reduced to 160 in MWO
LRMs at 120, raised to 180 in MWO
and SRMs at 200, unchanged in MWO.

Quote

however the point here is that the damage from these weapons would be more significant, lowered ammo counts would mean each shot is more effective, but also more precious and require good aim instead of the spray and pray of current ballistics in a CoD-like fashion.

This can be with trade-offs in cooldown, and damage and heat per projectile to ammo counts.

For example, an idea I've had was to have weapons with longer range have longer cooldowns.

A weapon like the AC/2 brings in issues, but I'd consider having it deal 4.5 damage a projectile, 3.75 cooldown, Heat of 1.13, DPS at 1.20 and HPS at 0.30 and 40 shots per ton which is 180 damage a ton, and its boosted 600% from its original values. These values makes it more of a sniper weapon and makes it more useful while not out classing the Gauss on a one on one comparions, but has AC/2 as an option to take on certain mechs.

Where a mech would need to mount 3 AC/2 to deal 13.5 damage at 18 tons compared to 1 Gauss that can stay at its current stats of 15 damage for 15 tons.

The numbers can easily be adjusted as necessary (such as reducing damage per projectile and so on), I'm just providing one example with the AC/2 for what I've been brainstorming.

[Serpieri]

MauttyKoray, on 01 February 2015 - 04:49 PM, said:

So, with the new Override mechanic and using it, I feel that reducing the heat cap by 1/2 and rebalancing the Heat Sinks would be a good idea.

1. It would eliminate the high alpha builds as you couldn't shoot all those weapons at once.

2. It would promote varied builds, as you could shoot more often but fewer weapons at the same time.

3. It would allow armor to be reduced if necessary, which would then promote Lance on Lance combat instead of 12v12 deathballs.

It would obviously require internal testing first, but I feel it would improve the gameplay a lot and take care of the massive pinpoint damage build issues we're having now that nothing (even ghost heat) has been able to fix so far.
-----------------------------

As for LOS targeting I believe that the 'free' C3 system needs to be toned down as they make lock on weapons silly and too useful, especially if the reduced heat/armor I suggest above would come into effect. (LRMs would be silly ridiculous)

Option 1
Allow the 'target data' to be shared, keeping the role of information warfare, but restrict lock-on ability to only be used when target is TAG'ed, NARC'ed, spotted by UAV, or in direct LOS of player. (Alt. Make shared targets only possible between teammates within a certain distance, just like a real C3 unit.)

Option 2
Remove targets sharing in HUD unless target is TAG'ed, NARC'ed, spotted by UAV, or in LOS of the player. Currently information warfare doesn't exist, as everybody knows where the enemies are due to shared targets and 12v12 deathballs.

1/2. Best way to eliminate high alphas is to restrict the size of the hardpoints - you can then control how much damage can be outputted at long range, medium range, short range - a proper heat mechanic on top of this and you can further control how many times a mech can fire everything when at the optimal fire range for all three classes. It would also give mechs purpose - like the Awesome being one of the few mechs that can wield 3PPC's making it a great long range firing platform.

3. Armor needs to remain where it is until pin point FLD is addressed.

A real C3 system would be great for Inner Sphere players - showing the clans that us so called Barbarians value teamwork over ones self.

Edited by Serpieri, 01 February 2015 - 07:53 PM.

[MauttyKoray]

Indeed I don't have the exact numbers, or balances, but my point is that we have these huge bloated systems and PGI is trying to balance down the TTK...which won't work without either 1) Inflating armor/reducing weapon effectiveness, which will just once again promote alpha boat builds. or 2) reduce these inflated systems and level the playing field between mechs allowing those that don't alpha boat the chance to be effective in the game, not just a dozen or so 'alpha viable chassis'.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 01 February 2015 - 10:07 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Davers, on 01 February 2015 - 06:10 PM, said:

1. It would make ballistics king of the battlefield. It would cripple Clan mechs, like the Nova.

2. It would not make varied builds, players would just shift to more heat efficient builds. Which is much less variety than what we have now.

3. Reducing armour will not change how effective the death ball is. The only way to break up the death ball is to add secondary objectives that need to be done and are important. Think of the Jungle in LoL. Without the Jungle, you would have 3 attack lanes and the best strategy would be to pile all into one lane and push. This is exactly what we have in MWO.

Any nerfs in LoS targeting has to come with a buff to LRM direct fire. LRMs are without question the worst damage/ammo weapon in the game.

Yeah, but along with a lower heat cap, lower the ammo cap of guns back to 1x. Then, with double the armor and 1x the ammo, lets see how long your AC20 Crab is even able to fire. You would be thinking about either not taking the Cannons at all, or atleast packing in a few lasers as back up. So, yeah, your right. People would go with more heat efficient builds, but they would also go with more diversified builds.

To fix the PPFLD issue, you cant change just one feature.

Lower the heat cap, lower the ammo cap. Dont touch the armor, its fine the way it is. Lowering the heat cap to deal less dmg then lowering the armor, were basically going nowhere then. If the general idea is to increase TTK, just lowering heat cap and lowering ammo cap would be 1 step in the right direction.

The game has been PPFLD lolphas for so long, people cant get the idea of not doing it out their heads. So any idea or plan that would deviate from it, people cant imagine working. But if we had 1x ammo, but 50pt heat, you would be firing slower overall....it would help the PPFLD issue. That or you would see alot of people blowing themselves up, or running out of ammo..players would learn.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 01 February 2015 - 11:35 PM.

[Davers]

LordKnightFandragon, on 01 February 2015 - 11:34 PM, said:

Yeah, but along with a lower heat cap, lower the ammo cap of guns back to 1x. Then, with double the armor and 1x the ammo, lets see how long your AC20 Crab is even able to fire. You would be thinking about either not taking the Cannons at all, or atleast packing in a few lasers as back up. So, yeah, your right. People would go with more heat efficient builds, but they would also go with more diversified builds.

To fix the PPFLD issue, you cant change just one feature.

Lower the heat cap, lower the ammo cap. Dont touch the armor, its fine the way it is. Lowering the heat cap to deal less dmg then lowering the armor, were basically going nowhere then. If the general idea is to increase TTK, just lowering heat cap and lowering ammo cap would be 1 step in the right direction.

The game has been PPFLD lolphas for so long, people cant get the idea of not doing it out their heads. So any idea or plan that would deviate from it, people cant imagine working. But if we had 1x ammo, but 50pt heat, you would be firing slower overall....it would help the PPFLD issue. That or you would see alot of people blowing themselves up, or running out of ammo..players would learn.

Now you have gotten completely off the OP's idea, which was to decrease armor.

I wouldn't mind having ballistic ammo brought back to TT levels. But I am pretty sure that cutting the heat cap in half would severely punish Clan mechs.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Davers, on 01 February 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:

Now you have gotten completely off the OP's idea, which was to decrease armor.

I wouldn't mind having ballistic ammo brought back to TT levels. But I am pretty sure that cutting the heat cap in half would severely punish Clan mechs.

LOL, punish clan mechs? Oh that is funny. Not if PGI did it right.

You increase DHS to 2.0s, buff SHS to 1.4 or 1.5s, then atleast they give some point to having and dont just obsolete them entirely.

Then, you decrease clan beam times by about 0.35-0.5s a piece. CLL from 1.5 to 1.2. CML from 0.85? to 0.5 or so. Take the CERPPC and make it a 15/15, buff velocity by 200m/s, increase CD to 4.5 or 5s. Call that good. CUAC, 2 shots per burst. If you want to double rate you fire then wait 1s, fire again, or simply wait the full time to CD.

If PGI really did it right, a lower heat scale would just make the game better. You mentioned stopping the deathball in the other post I quoted. You know how to stop the deathball? You make it safe to do so. Right now, people deathball, not because of teamwork, or any lack of gameplay, but simply because to not Deathball means you get melted instantly by the enemy deathball. Really, its just a deathball for hopes that when the enemy deathball fires at you, your own deathball will fire back at them and buy you time to retreat.

You stop the Deathball by making being alone or in pairs safer. If you wander off with 2 mechs and encounter maybe 2 or 3, and each mech can only safely and realistically fire 2-3 guns at a time, then have to cool off for a time, it makes it easier to move around, it opens up better flank opportunities, it allows lights to scout better without being melted. It would let a medium break off the deathball, walk around a flank a few hunderds meteres out of route and arrive there with relative safety.

Right now, you break off from the deathball, your blown apart in a matter of seconds, no chance to move, cover, fire back or anything. All you can do is twist the damage away until you die. There is no escaping. I almost equate this game's high ass Damage lolphas to Planetside 2's screen shake. When you got shot with screen shake, you couldnt fire back, you couldnt really move, nothing, you could just take it till you died.....it made the game very annoying and boring.


So, ultimately, keep armor the same, lower heat scale, tweak the heatsinks, 1x ammo on cannons and missiles. make it where Energy weapons are a bit hot to use, but deadly enough in their own right. It would stop the laser vomit if firing 10 ML was to damn hot and blew you up. If you had to pace your fire...it would only be good. Lolphas are the issue with this game, almost above all else.