35 replies to this topic

[Aethon]

No offense, OP, but this seems to me like an over-engineered band-aid being slapped on top of another.

Interesting line of thought, though, and I cannot say I have anything better to suggest at this time.

[Satan n stuff]

Christof Romulus, on 28 February 2015 - 04:58 AM, said:

Look, we had more than enough ghost systems in the game before ghost heat arrived, which was none. But now that we're here, let's just go all-in.

I take it you're not aware of heat retention then?

[ROSS-128]

That just sounds like a horrible idea. You're encouraging people to group fire weapons that cannot hit together.

Grouping lasers, ballistics, and missiles into a single alpha simply doesn't work because they all have different velocities. If I point directly at my target so the lasers can hit, the ballistics and missiles will miss. If I lead enough to hit with my ballistics, the lasers and missiles will miss. If I lead enough to hit with my missiles, the ballistics and lasers will miss.

It's just wasting heat/ammo. We put those in different groups for a reason. For example, on my BNC-3E, lead a shot with the ACs first (group 1), then let them walk into my crosshair for the lasers (group 2).

All it would achieve is making mechs with certain hardpoint arrangements capable of cheesing the system, such as the example of having a single MG that serves no purpose except to cool their lasers down. Or sticking a single SRM-2 and single MG on the BNC-3S, just to cheese "ghost cooling".

[JediPanther]

Remove the problems of both ghost heat and weapon convergance and ideas like this would not be needed.

[KraftySOT]

All these suggestions make TTK cry.

[Sug]

They should just remake ghostheat with an all female cast.

[Christof Romulus]

RedDragon, on 28 February 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

So in effect if I add an MG or an SRM2 to my 3xPPC build, it will be even more efficient?
This game doesn't need more band-aid fixes, it needs a complete overhaul of the underlying mechanics that have been broken since Beta, namely the flawed heat system and missing convergence.

Someone didn't read my post.

Quote

But Christof, you might say, "people will bring small lasers to fire their LRMs!", or "what about machine guns and any weapons?!" Meh, untie LRMs and machine guns from ghost cooling. Problem solved.

I literally answered you before you even asked.

Edited by Christof Romulus, 28 February 2015 - 12:05 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

My thoughts:

• It's kinda funny how the MWO community always prefer buffs to nerfs. TTK is incredibly low right, but people are still asking for buffs rather than nerfs. People seem to forget that when you're buffing one element, you're indirectly nerfing others. If this thread had been about more penalties for boating, I think the feedback would be far more negative.
  
• While I agree with the spirit of your idea, I think it's better to fundamentally change the weapon system for MWO, instead of adding band-aid solutions like this. For one thing, ghost cooling and ghost heat makes the game more complex and harder for players to understand. Instead of crunching numbers, you end up with a system so complex that you basically just have to find good builds through trial and error. This sounds great, but a lot of MWO players do enjoy crunching numbers and tinkering in the mechlab. Meanwhile, the mechlab is less and less useful with all the quirks and ghost heat that come into play.
  
• The best penalty for boating is to change the game to the point where boating is a tactical disadvantage. In other games, this is accomplished either by range (e.g. only carrying long range weapons leaves you at a disadvantage at short range) or by weapon type (e.g. only carrying shield-stripping weapons makes you less effective at dealing damage once you've stripped the shields). In MWO, a large laser is equally good against all targets, at all ranges, whether they have full armour or no armour, whether they have extra armour strength or extra internal strength. Thus, boating large lasers is a very viable option.
  
• Russ seems pretty happy with what they have right now, so keep in mind that this is all academic.

Personally, my solution would be to avoid boating by making armour vs internal structure a bigger factor. This would tie in nicely with the fact thatt FF armour is almost useless for most builds right now. If FF armour gave you an armour bonus, while Endo gave you an internal structure bonus, and different weapons had different effectiveness against armour and internal structure, then boating would be less common. For example, if explosive weapons were terrible at piercing armour, but super effective against stripped targets, then I think SRM-boating would be far less common. Meanwhile, if lasers were considered anti-armour weapons, then you would see fewer laser boats.

You could argue that this wouldn't really have an effect in the group queue, because people would still be boating and just letting laser boats strip targets while letting other mechs clean up. I have two counter-arguments to that:

• This would actually be a kind of role warfare which would require very good teamplay.
  
• It might still be a bit too risky to only bring boats, because you may end up as screwed if all you anti-armour mechs are targeted first and you're stuck with SRM boats that don't strip armour very well.

My solution also has the merit of being easier to understand, unless you apply some very complex formula to calculate how much damage weapons do to armour vs internals.

[Lightfoot]

I kill boats with non-boats. Killed PPC+Gauss mechs in pre-desync days without PPC+Gauss. It's tactics and thinking that are OP. Good pilots adapt and beat the nerfs.

[Christof Romulus]

SuckyJack, on 28 February 2015 - 07:32 AM, said:

The problem I see is that it kinda goes back to supporting the old PPC/Ballistic meta combo. Also, do you have to be firing a different weapon or a different weapon type?

Will firing an ERLL and an LL together produce ghost cooling? ML and LL together? MPL and ML together?

I don't have a problem with boating, I just have a problem with mechanics that stifle build diversity. And say what you will about the negative side of quirks, they have produced a lot more diversity in the mechs and builds we see today than before.

(Before you go ahead and say TDR-9S spam in CW, the TDR is really easy to fit into a drop deck and quirks made it more effective. There are heavier mechs that do outperform it but those mechs require more sacrifices to fit into a drop deck. Variable drop deck tonnage limits will either make the TDR series require more sacrifices or make heavier mechs easier to field.)

Different weapon types.

Using an ERLL and a LL would not trigger the system, simply because they're both energy weapons. nor would a MPL and ML, etc.

As for your comment about mech diversity I disagree, and I'll do it without the thunderbolt:

DRG-1n
WVR-6k

The mechs are always the same. It will not shock you when you see these mechs boating their respective weapons. There are more, too - LRM Awesomes, Stalkers of all types, Boom Jagers... having the mechs on the field is a kind of diversity, but when they are all clones, it isn't really that diverse since they are all using the same loadout.

[5LeafClover]

Ghost heat should just mostly not exist.

Where it is really needed, there should be a milder penalty applied, simply based on the number of weapons of a type carried. That way the penalty occurs every time it's fired, instead of fiddling about with 0.5s time windows and circumventing it with clever macros.

This would be an incentive for mixed loadouts and more moderate boats (lower alpha, more stamina) with more team support equipment (BAP, AMS etc).

[Christof Romulus]

Alistair Winter, on 28 February 2015 - 12:55 PM, said:

My thoughts:

• It's kinda funny how the MWO community always prefer buffs to nerfs. TTK is incredibly low right, but people are still asking for buffs rather than nerfs. People seem to forget that when you're buffing one element, you're indirectly nerfing others. If this thread had been about more penalties for boating, I think the feedback would be far more negative.
  
• While I agree with the spirit of your idea, I think it's better to fundamentally change the weapon system for MWO, instead of adding band-aid solutions like this. For one thing, ghost cooling and ghost heat makes the game more complex and harder for players to understand. Instead of crunching numbers, you end up with a system so complex that you basically just have to find good builds through trial and error. This sounds great, but a lot of MWO players do enjoy crunching numbers and tinkering in the mechlab. Meanwhile, the mechlab is less and less useful with all the quirks and ghost heat that come into play.
  
• The best penalty for boating is to change the game to the point where boating is a tactical disadvantage. In other games, this is accomplished either by range (e.g. only carrying long range weapons leaves you at a disadvantage at short range) or by weapon type (e.g. only carrying shield-stripping weapons makes you less effective at dealing damage once you've stripped the shields). In MWO, a large laser is equally good against all targets, at all ranges, whether they have full armour or no armour, whether they have extra armour strength or extra internal strength. Thus, boating large lasers is a very viable option.
  
• Russ seems pretty happy with what they have right now, so keep in mind that this is all academic.

Personally, my solution would be to avoid boating by making armour vs internal structure a bigger factor. This would tie in nicely with the fact thatt FF armour is almost useless for most builds right now. If FF armour gave you an armour bonus, while Endo gave you an internal structure bonus, and different weapons had different effectiveness against armour and internal structure, then boating would be less common. For example, if explosive weapons were terrible at piercing armour, but super effective against stripped targets, then I think SRM-boating would be far less common. Meanwhile, if lasers were considered anti-armour weapons, then you would see fewer laser boats.


You could argue that this wouldn't really have an effect in the group queue, because people would still be boating and just letting laser boats strip targets while letting other mechs clean up. I have two counter-arguments to that:

• This would actually be a kind of role warfare which would require very good teamplay.
  
• It might still be a bit too risky to only bring boats, because you may end up as screwed if all you anti-armour mechs are targeted first and you're stuck with SRM boats that don't strip armour very well.

My solution also has the merit of being easier to understand, unless you apply some very complex formula to calculate how much damage weapons do to armour vs internals.

Let me preface my response with the following:
I genuinely like your idea. Indeed, in the Mechwarrior timeline they do in fact create armor that reduces damage from certain damage types so this isn't unheard of:
http://www.sarna.net...eflective_Armor
http://www.sarna.net.../Reactive_Armor

The issue here is, how is this not an extremely drastic change to the game that we play? I get that it's basically rock paper scissors (though we only have armor and internal structure), but this won't prevent boating.

If LRMs are good against armor and do poorly against internal structure, people are just going to bring more LRMs (though it is likely that current LRM builds account for this and already are heavily stacked in the amount of ammunition brought to the field).

Conversely, if lasers were only good against internal structure, people are still going to bring all the lasers they have now, they just will have to shoot twice as many times for the same result.

While this rework would be interesting, and as I said I would enjoy it, there are simply some mechs that don't have more than one weapon type available - Energy, Ballistic, or Misisle. This would drastically affect these mechs in their viability, only being effective against certain defenses - and moreover if you create an energy, missile, or ballistic weapon that is good against one defense type or the other, then people will just boat both (like they do now).

My post isn't about reworking all of Mechwarrior Online from the ground up, it's just about generating up to 7 less heat.

[Alistair Winter]

Christof Romulus, on 02 March 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

Let me preface my response with the following:
I genuinely like your idea. Indeed, in the Mechwarrior timeline they do in fact create armor that reduces damage from certain damage types so this isn't unheard of:
http://www.sarna.net...eflective_Armor
http://www.sarna.net.../Reactive_Armor

I remember that from MW2:Mercs. Good times

Christof Romulus, on 02 March 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

The issue here is, how is this not an extremely drastic change to the game that we play?

MWO has fundamental issues that shape the way the game is played. Band-aid solutions like ghost heat have not been effective in solving those problems, really. I fear ghost cooling would be similar to ghost heat - a small benefit, at the cost of an increasingly arbitrary and unintuitive system.

Christof Romulus, on 02 March 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

I get that it's basically rock paper scissors (though we only have armor and internal structure), but this won't prevent boating.
If LRMs are good against armor and do poorly against internal structure, people are just going to bring more LRMs (though it is likely that current LRM builds account for this and already are heavily stacked in the amount of ammunition brought to the field).
Conversely, if lasers were only good against internal structure, people are still going to bring all the lasers they have now, they just will have to shoot twice as many times for the same result.

You're ignoring the endless possibilities from adjusting the variables. If a medium laser is ten times as effective for stripping armour as an SRM6, then people won't simply boat SRM6's to get through the armour. It won't be cost effective. You'll see Stormcrows bring a medium laser or two in order to help crack targets open for their 4xSRM6 payload.

Christof Romulus, on 02 March 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

While this rework would be interesting, and as I said I would enjoy it, there are simply some mechs that don't have more than one weapon type available - Energy, Ballistic, or Misisle. This would drastically affect these mechs in their viability, only being effective against certain defenses - and moreover if you create an energy, missile, or ballistic weapon that is good against one defense type or the other, then people will just boat both (like they do now).

For energy weapons, you could make PPCs anti-internals and lasers anti-armour.
For ballistics, you could make ACs and gauss anti-armour and LBX and MGs anti-internals.
For missiles, I'd rather see both SRMs, SSRMs and LRMs as anti-internals, but you could give them an armour penetration bonus against targets that have been marked by NARC or TAG.

Now, some canon builds would struggle from having only anti-armour or anti-internal weaponry. This could be partially remedied by giving them some special quirks, but I also think MWO should be open for specialists. The whole fun of playing a specialist vehicle, in any game, is the challenge of making the most of your advantages while negating your disadvantages through skill. If you're a sniper, you avoid close combat. Specialists are only effective when they have the protection of generalists, and specialist boating mechs would have to rely on teammates. But that's ok in my book. There aren't really that many dedicated laserboats, PPC boats or LRM boats in Battletech anyway. Most stock mechs come with a variety of weapons.

Christof Romulus, on 02 March 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

My post isn't about reworking all of Mechwarrior Online from the ground up, it's just about generating up to 7 less heat.

I know, but in my mind, this is just like when PGI introduced a bunch of soft counters to ECM, like TAG, NARC and PPCs. Ultimately, it didn't fix the fundamental problem of the ECM Magic Jesus Box. And your proposition has some merit, but I don't think it would have a big effect. You may as well just increase ghost heat, for the sake of simplicity.

[Random Carnage]

I support anything that reduces heat. If a ******** mechanic gives us ghost heat, and another ******** mechanic reduces this agian, bring it.

[Roadbuster]

I support every idea which leads to more loadout variation.

[Bacl]

I dont want to be a the party rasher here but there is nothing wrong with boating, boating will focus and make you a specialized unit in 1 way, in other words you become a one trick poney. Its a legit approach but on its own got very limited application. Also a lot of mech by design are designed to boat, Stalker, Awesomes, Quickdraws and the list goes one.

For instance well take the infamous 4 PPC Stalker, today i realise that a lot of new players never played against these so i will try to explain my point. That thing was a monster in medium to long range ( ghost heat didnt exist at the time) but even then a light mech going around and poking that Stalker in point blank completely neutralized it. 4PPC Stalker was a sniper mech, anything coming in his face would easily kill him, even at the time the PPC had 90 minimum range and those brave (hmm herm) to run 4 ERPPC instead were too heat inneficient to do so.

Boating missiles, well... ECM ( enough said)

Lasers yeah you could do some damage but same as today they are damage over time so rotating torso mitigated and still mitigate damage.

AC,and GR ( AC IS version), hard to boat, only in the heaviest chassis you can find multiple instances of the heaviest guns, they rock! A AC40 Jager (pre ghost heat) had a small range so he had to cross the map to reach ya, when it did however.... GR are the best weapons in the game fr 3 reasons, they hit hard, no minimum to long range, no heat.

Pit a 4PPC stalker vs a Boom Jag, Stalker will have the advantage up to 270, the jag will take hits if he doesnt use cover but when he will be able to cover the distance the stalker is toast. Lets throw in an 8 ML Awesome 8Q boater that also do 40 damage alpha, what happens to him? He is damage over time and range niche is between the 2, Stalker has the advantage in longer range while the Jag is closer range.

Boating never been the problem, the weapon balance is, we used to have a meta weapon every few patches because the devs were nerfing one then the players jumped to the next best thing, from the PPC came the Lrmageddon, then the AC domination, the PPC Gauss combo and the latest coupled with the god damn poptarters ( i reallly dont miss this one tho).

Boating is fine but assume having weakness either in range, heat, ammo or whatever. The players on the other side know how to counter. The QQers on the forums about " this loadout is OP or nerf this or that" ( yes i been part of some manifestations myself) killed the game for me because they stripped the freedom of building the mech i wanted.

In my 4PPC Stalker if someone was coming in my face i asked for help then done, i can keep do what i oriented all the ressources on my mech to do, snipe. No one to support me well the joke is on me.