116 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Just no Ghost Heat!

[Zandel Corrin]

TT heat works cause all weapons have that 10 sec RoF, it's the reason bigger guns were better cause RoF was not an issue.

With MWO it's different so they need a different system. TT heat rules could work but would make the game very slow paced for combat as all mechs would basically be overheating all the time unless you waited the full 10 secs between firing.

PPC is 4 sec CD in MWO and 10 sec CD in TT. It's 10 heat in TT over 10 sec but it's 25 heat over 10 sec in MWO cause of RoF factor.

Players will not want to wait 10 sec between shooting and the Meta that would come from that would be stupid pop snipe builds.

Having said that I do think the current heat system is broken, but how to fix it is beyond me.

Changing armour is not an option since it's already much lower then it needs to be. We can all pinpoint targets on mechs with no real effort as opposed to TTs random hit locations that I actually think armour levels still need to be raised more.

[Widowmaker1981]

Lugh, on 05 August 2015 - 05:22 AM, said:

BS. You can totally apply the same metrics in BOTH circumstances. The problem is that it requires you to be good at math. And PGI has demonstrated that they don't even wish to adhere to the simple math of the TT rules.

Snake Eyes is 2.9% of all 2d6 rolls. And yet the jam chance on UACs is 25%?!!? Hello? WTF?

Did it occur to you that in TT when a UAC jams, it is forever, the weapon is effectively destroyed (which would be a piss-poor mechanic in a fps), whereas in MWO it only jams for 5 seconds? And as such, it makes sense for the chance to be higher, since the penalty is lower?

NO IT MUST ALL BE COPIED VERBATIM DAMMIT

[Zandel Corrin]

Lugh, on 05 August 2015 - 05:22 AM, said:

BS. You can totally apply the same metrics in BOTH circumstances. The problem is that it requires you to be good at math. And PGI has demonstrated that they don't even wish to adhere to the simple math of the TT rules.

Snake Eyes is 2.9% of all 2d6 rolls. And yet the jam chance on UACs is 25%?!!? Hello? WTF?

This is true but UACs do not work the same in MWO as they did in TT. In TT that 2.9% chance to jam was if you fired 2 shots in that 10 sec turn, in MWO you fire way more then 2 per 10 sec so the chance is higher.

[Joseph Mallan]

Widowmaker1981, on 05 August 2015 - 05:35 AM, said:

Did it occur to you that in TT when a UAC jams, it is forever, the weapon is effectively destroyed (which would be a piss-poor mechanic in a fps), whereas in MWO it only jams for 5 seconds? And as such, it makes sense for the chance to be higher, since the penalty is lower?

NO IT MUST ALL BE COPIED VERBATIM DAMMIT

Unless you choose to use the rules for unjamming. Which requires not firing weapons for one turn.

[Duke Nedo]

Seriously guys.

In TT, time is a "constant", 1 turn. All weapons fire once per turn, correct me if I'm wrong, I didn't play TT. (I did play other TT games though so I feel you!)

In MWO time is a variable.

Different weapons have different rates of fire. RATES! In TT all weapons have the same rate of fire, therefore you can do simple subtractions and figure out what a certain number of DHS can sustain. In MWO all weapons create heat at different rates per shot, therefore you cannot just add and subtract heat from DHS-capacty. You have to generate heat and dissipate it over time. THAT is what we have now.

I am not sure if I can explain it more without insulting anyone.

Calculating some kind of average will assume everyone fires continuously, and therefore doesn't work. If you don't shoot you should not generate heat. Therefore heat must build per shot at a rate determined by how often you pull the trigger. Heat dissipation is constant per unit of time and always active. What we have now.

Seriously.

[Lugh]

Widowmaker1981, on 05 August 2015 - 05:35 AM, said:

Did it occur to you that in TT when a UAC jams, it is forever, the weapon is effectively destroyed (which would be a piss-poor mechanic in a fps), whereas in MWO it only jams for 5 seconds? And as such, it makes sense for the chance to be higher, since the penalty is lower?

NO IT MUST ALL BE COPIED VERBATIM DAMMIT

Considering that 'forever' is until the end of the match I'd rather have that. 10x the Jam chance just because you don't want your first world problem cry babies bawling about it being forever jammed is a BAD, VERY BAD penalty.

As in TT the total time elapsed from Engagement to victory is often less than 60 seconds real time.

Edited by Lugh, 05 August 2015 - 05:48 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Duke Nedo, on 05 August 2015 - 05:40 AM, said:

Seriously guys.

In TT, time is a "constant", 1 turn. All weapons fire once per turn, correct me if I'm wrong, I didn't play TT. (I did play other TT games though so I feel you!)

In MWO time is a variable.

Different weapons have different rates of fire. RATES! In TT all weapons have the same rate of fire, therefore you can do simple subtractions and figure out what a certain number of DHS can sustain. In MWO all weapons create heat at different rates per shot, therefore you cannot just add and subtract heat from DHS-capacty. You have to generate heat and dissipate it over time. THAT is what we have now.

I am not sure if I can explain it more without insulting anyone.

Calculating some kind of average will assume everyone fires continuously, and therefore doesn't work. If you don't shoot you should not generate heat. Therefore heat must build per shot at a rate determined by how often you pull the trigger. Heat dissipation is constant per unit of time and always active. What we have now.

Seriously.

Really. I have 10 (20) heart sinks. I Fire one PPC (10)and and an AC20(6) That is 4 under the sinks I have available to get rid of heat. Sinks can vent in say 4 seconds. So my heat would be gone before I fired them a second time. Its not that hard to follow. Faster cycling weapons would stack heat faster For instance Medium lasers can fire every 3 seconds. So heat would build up if you fired them to often.

[Duke Nedo]

Joseph Mallan, on 05 August 2015 - 05:48 AM, said:

Really. I have 10 (20) heart sinks. I Fire one PPC (10)and and an AC20(6) That is 4 under the sinks I have available to get rid of heat. Sinks can vent in say 4 seconds. So my heat would be gone before I fired them a second time. Its not that hard to follow. Faster cycling weapons would stack heat faster For instance Medium lasers can fire every 3 seconds. So heat would build up if you fired them to often.

You're subtracting a value from a rate if you subtract 16 heat for shooting once from 20 heat per 4 seconds. You can't do that man...

Edit: You have to have the same units if you're going to subtract. For example, 20 heat/turn - 16 heat/turn = 4 heat/turn. Or 20 heat/s - 16 heat/s = 4 heat/s. You can't do 20 heat/s - 16 heat.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 05 August 2015 - 06:23 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Duke Nedo, on 05 August 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

You're subtracting a value from a rate if you subtract 16 heat for shooting once from 20 heat per 4 seconds. You can't do that man...

I can to. You just read it. man some folks got some kinda complex! Tell me what I can/can't do. Seriously? Last time I checked My dad's name ain't Nedo, and as I'm almost 50... Do try to stop me!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 05 August 2015 - 06:23 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Duke Nedo, on 05 August 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

You're subtracting a value from a rate if you subtract 16 heat for shooting once from 20 heat per 4 seconds. You can't do that man...

Yeah man, id do yourself a favour and give up before you hurt yourself smashing your face into a wall. You and I both get this, but... yeah. Im not sure whats so hard to grasp lol.

[Zandel Corrin]

Joseph Mallan, on 05 August 2015 - 05:48 AM, said:

Really. I have 10 (20) heart sinks. I Fire one PPC (10)and and an AC20(6) That is 4 under the sinks I have available to get rid of heat. Sinks can vent in say 4 seconds. So my heat would be gone before I fired them a second time. Its not that hard to follow. Faster cycling weapons would stack heat faster For instance Medium lasers can fire every 3 seconds. So heat would build up if you fired them to often.

Correction you vent 20 heat in a 10 sec turn that is 2 heat per sec, so that PPC that gens 10 heat every 4 sec builds up 2 excess heat every time after the 1st if you fire it at max RoF, that AC20 tho is 6 heat and 4 sec as well so you gain 2 heat there meaning if you fire both at max ROF with thise DHS you should gen no heat unless you move / jump / fire anything else. Time matters.

[Duke Nedo]

Joseph Mallan, on 05 August 2015 - 06:23 AM, said:

I can to. You just read it. man some folks got some kinda complex! Tell me what I can/can't do. Seriously? Last time I checked My dad's name ain't Nedo, and as I'm almost 50... Do try to stop me!

Who needs math anyways. I hope my kids won't give me that when I try to help them with their homework, lol.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 05 August 2015 - 06:27 AM.

[Veev]

Lugh, on 03 August 2015 - 09:43 AM, said:

they HAD convergence handled artificially and the crying of the can't pilot light players in particular and corner peekers that couldn't be bothered to wait .25 seconds for the crosshair to contract before firing, Set the Beta boards on fire.

The artifact of this system is still in place 'pinpoint' before pinpoint you might have to wait .45 seconds before all lined up. It also did wondrous things like shooting some lasers straight up because you had a hill in your way.

It was sincerely disliked by all.

http://mwomercs.com/...listic-weapons/
http://mwomercs.com/...un-convergence/

It needed tweaking, not removing.

"

• First and foremost: you have to lead your target, which means your crosshair will always be ahead of your target, which means your weapons will never actually converge on your target. Instead, they are going to converge at one of the varying distances that violently spin in the background during a circle strafe fight
  
• When you click fire, there is a long, inconsistent delay before the projectile actually leaves your weapon
  
• The delay isn't too bad, except that when the projectile does finally leave the weapon, it heads towards the location that you originally clicked on, not where you are currently aiming (most of the time, anyways)
  
• Between that Click->Fire delay, your target, mech, arms, crosshairs, convergence point, and everything else in the world (relative to you) will have moved -- all the angles will be different"

Further you examine this posters complaint and it highlights one of the problems prevalent at the time, I have not tested to see if it has changed or not, but with old ballistics you could shoot your gun and spin to track the target and the shot would appear where you were instead of where you are aiming currently. This had nothing to do with convergence. IT was one of the things that lead me to take a hiatus.
This mechanic was sound. The whiners can complain, but it fixed a lot of problems and made the game more like a sim and competitive shooters at the same time. If you really want to add skill to the equation you can give different shapes for each weapon and their own spot on the hud that shows where they currently are in the equation. Good players can learn to time the convergence of individual weapons to achieve pin point accuracy on the fly.
Now I want to hear the "skill" players complain about raising the skill ceiling by about 10X what it currently is with every weapon pin point accurate.
Further I did a quick test and it appears that they removed the stupid firing delays on ballistics and SRMS. That would have fixed most of the problems with convergence back then.
TDLR: Convergence is good. It raises the skill ceiling by a lot. A broken game mechanic is what made convergence bad not convergence itself.


*Edit*http://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/186314-convergence-the-real-solution-to-ppfld/

Edited by Veev, 05 August 2015 - 08:14 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Duke Nedo, on 05 August 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

Who needs math anyways. I hope my kids won't give me that when I try to help them with their homework, lol.

I'm a Toolmaker. I need Some advanced math. Most folks, everyday life... don't need more than what's taught in Elementary, maybe early middle school. Prove me wrong. I have forgotten more math than my kids will likely ever need.

I do more Algebra in CBT than I do at work!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 05 August 2015 - 08:08 AM.

[FatYak]

Joseph Mallan, on 03 August 2015 - 04:46 AM, said:

Yeah Cause those who think they have skill should always hit what they aim at. I want those folks to go shoot some real weapons and see how much skill they really have. Then come back with proof they are sniper quality shooters.

i'm much better with a real firearm than my mecha!

[Joseph Mallan]

FatYak, on 05 August 2015 - 08:08 AM, said:

i'm much better with a real firearm than my mecha!

I'm not 100% sure I am. Never had to shoot at a moving building in real life. But I can shoot a human head sized target at 500m.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

One way to translate the P&P values to real time is use the over 10 seconds metric to produce the values. So say just to see how it would work what if we kept values to 100% to the originals, but utilize MWOs Cooldowns (and Ammo Counts would naturally be adjusted accordingly to keep either the original or MWOs damage per ton).

So PPCs dealing 10 damage a turn at a 4.00 base cooldown that gives us:
4.00 Damage / 4.00 Heat

A stock AWS-8Q with 28 SHS would need to handle close to 12 Heat from firing all three PPCs at once.

So each SHS could have a capacity of 0.4 for a total of 11.2 Heat with 28 SHS. So the Heat Scale would register an excess of 0.8 which would equal 2 in the P&P game. And the scale would register waste heat up to 5.6 to the first roll for shutting down.

Since it should be 0.4 real time would equal 1.0 from the P&P value.

Next the other factor that is important is the Dissipation. At 0.1 28 SHS Dissipate 2.8 Heat a second and firing three PPCs generates 3.00 HPS.

So these would basically mimic the original Heat System in a real-time environment and would work with original armor and structure values.

---

If we want to see values doubled then we would simply double them. So

A PPC is then 8 Damage / 8 Heat

SHS then provide 0.8 each for Capacity and 0.2 each for Dissipation

And the excess Heat would scale at 0.8 so to 14 originally for shutdown would be 11.2

In this case 28 SHS provide 22.4 Capacity for what the HS handle with a max of 33.6 to the first shutdown possibility. Three PPCs would then generate 24 Heat when fired together with an HPS of 6.00. and 28 SHS would provide 5.6 Dissipation.

---

And so if we raise values to 250% then

A PPC is 10 Damage / 10 Heat

SHS provide 1.0 Capacity each and should then be 0.25 Dissipation

And so excess Heat would climb 1.0 to the first shutdown opportunity at 14.

So we would see 28 Capacity from 28 SHS to a max of 42 for that shutdown. So three PPCs would generate 30 heat, at an HPS of 7.5. Then 28 SHS would dissipate 7.00 Heat a second.

So Armor and Structure quirks could possibly get replaced with upping Armor and Structure by a total of 250% where they are currently 200% from original values.

[Duke Nedo]

Joseph Mallan, on 05 August 2015 - 08:05 AM, said:

I'm a Toolmaker. I need Some advanced math. Most folks, everyday life... don't need more than what's taught in Elementary, maybe early middle school. Prove me wrong. I have forgotten more math than my kids will likely ever need.

I do more Algebra in CBT than I do at work!

Erm, not sure how that came out in english, I didn't mean anything in particular with it. Just letting it go sort of.

The most similar to TT would be to use a much lower capacity and much higher dissipation like lots suggested earlier in this thread. Then you'll be in the steady-state regime all the time. The high capacity/low dissipation we have now allows us to have higher burst dps for some time before we need to calm down in a lower dps steady-state. I actually think I prefer the latter, that burst gives some extra depth to game play imo.

That said...

Changing the dissipation:capacity ratio doesn't really have anything to do with ghost heat... you'd have to turn it down to rock bottom before preventing people from alphaing... but it seems like noone want to discuss this part....

[Black Arachne]

Widowmaker1981, on 05 August 2015 - 01:52 AM, said:

I give up. Cant fix stupid.

Are you normally this dense? or just close minded?