116 replies to this topic

[Nothing Whatsoever]

The idea is worth a shot.

I'd still like to combine this type of tweak on providing extra heat with tweaks to the Heat System.

For starters, lets reduce the gifted 30 Capacity we have, down to 14 and transfer the 2xHeat Containment to boost dissipation, so dissipation gets a boost of 35% from its 15% with only 2xCool Run (SHS would sit at 0.135 and DHS would sit at 0.27 in engine, and 0.189 with external).

And this way Capacity only increases with Heat Sinks.

So with Capacity say we stick 2x cLPLs and 4x cERMLs without shaving armor below 441, a Timber would be able to mount 24 DHS. So, if externals DHS stay at their reduced 1.4 value then the Timber has a max capacity of 39.6 and would not be able to alpha its weapons, compared to its current 83.52 capacity with 24 DHS. (If External DHS would also provide the same boost as Engine DHS, then that would be a capacity of 48).

Then if necessary from there, there can then be extra heat to control damage further.

[LastPaladin]

"Ghost heat" is a concept so flawed it should have never seen the light of day in the first place, so any attempt to "fix" it, rather than getting rid of it as a game mechanic, is already fundamentally misguided.

[Lightfoot]

Because the weapons already produce extra heat when fired together. That's canon Battle Tech. Ghost heat is just there because MWO's mechs are too weak to damage and MWO has no hard heat cap. Like you can shoot 6xPPCs still and it doesn't make your mech blow up which it should. If they had a "do not cross" hard heat cap, a lot of pilots would blow themselves up, but you wouldn't need ghost heat except for the 2xAC20 stuff.

[stjobe]

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.

...firing six guns of differing calibres simultaneously, while running and jumping, putting all the bullets into the same hole on the target.

Yeah. Go on boys, we'll wait for the videos.

[MrJeffers]

Lily from animove, on 03 August 2015 - 04:09 AM, said:

just 30 fixed heattreshold is all thats needed.

Moenrg, on 03 August 2015 - 08:30 AM, said:

No Lily is right. The heat cap was always part of the mech balancing mechanism of battletech. Yes, more would have to be done including making doubles true doubles, reducing the weapon heat back closer to cannon levels, perhaps increasing the number of weapon module slots to 3, increasing the heat dissipation rate to match the current firing rates. Perhaps ever adjusting weapon damage. If ghost heat is really on the table, then I suggest we come up with a valid way to eliminate it. As crazy as it may seem, we could even reduce armor values back closer to TT values with a proper heat cap thus increasing the effectiveness of ammo dependent weapons.

PGI must soon realize that they painted themselves into a corner with current weapon balance (which, I should add is rather good considering tier one bt weapons were never meant to be balanced against tier two) but now they almost have no choice but to reduce later tier two (and eventually) tier three weapons. So we are in effect stuck at current weapon effectiveness forever. Something that reduces this games longevity.

But a heat cap should be tried (we do have a test server). Ghost heat is simply another bandaid required because of the design choice to remove the heat cap. Additionally, with a heat cap, PGI is welcome to freely copy a "house rule" we often used in our TT games, when we allowed changing mechs. A mech is free to mix single and double heat sinks in any build that has double heat sinks. We used this rule to allow IS mechs to get heat sinks in their legs while being able to use doubles elsewhere (it was mostly used by assaults and a few heavies). For MWO this could be implemented by allowing the upgrade to double heat sinks to be more of an unlock.

So lets try to get rid of ghost heat rather than modifying it...

The 30 point heat cap in MWO won't work any more than it would have worked in TT. TT doesn't work in real time - it's a ten second turn and you sink all the heat before you check the scale. Put another way, the scale in TT is the effects of spending more than 10 seconds at that heat level.

Example: TT Awesome 9M. 20 Double Heat sinks, and 3 ER-PPCs. It can fire all three of them (assuming doing nothing else) and the net heat gain per turn is 5 because you get to sink 40 heat before checking the scale. Using MWO's real time sink with a 30 point fixed scale firing all three would be instant melt down of 45 heat and probably self destruction before you ever get turned back on again.
This is why MWO heat sinks increase the threshold, because that is basically what they did in TT by virtue of the 10 second turn and sinking the heat before checking for penalties.
Dropping the heat cap to a fixed 30 would kill energy weapons and make ballistics rule again because both their burst damage and their sustained DPS would be much higher than energy weapons.

Edited by MrJeffers, 03 August 2015 - 02:22 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

MrJeffers, on 03 August 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

The 30 point heat cap in MWO won't work any more than it would have worked in TT. TT doesn't work in real time - it's a ten second turn and you sink all the heat before you check the scale. Put another way, the scale in TT is the effects of spending more than 10 seconds at that heat level.

Spoiler

Example: TT Awesome 9M. 20 Double Heat sinks, and 3 ER-PPCs. It can fire all three of them (assuming doing nothing else) and the net heat gain per turn is 5 because you get to sink 40 heat before checking the scale. Using MWO's real time sink with a 30 point fixed scale firing all three would be instant melt down of 45 heat and probably self destruction before you ever get turned back on again.
This is why MWO heat sinks increase the threshold, because that is basically what they did in TT by virtue of the 10 second turn and sinking the heat before checking for penalties.
Dropping the heat cap to a fixed 30 would kill energy weapons and make ballistics rule again because both their burst damage and their sustained DPS would be much higher than energy weapons.

Don't forget that if we do see a hard Cap at 30, then we'd also need to see increased Dissipation, and there are still Heat gen quirks to ease off on any edge cases.

Because Capacity would be more Dissipation over time, so that as long Dissipation can keep up with generated HPS, such systems can be made to work.

Where the tonnage requirements should basically be more or less be a wash between ammo less and ammo dependent builds.

[Mister Blastman]

Joseph Mallan, on 03 August 2015 - 04:29 AM, said:

Ghost Heat is stupid. I mean as stupid as it gets. You are at least using logic, But I am a Supporter of the Alpha Strike. And I only want it to have a CoF widening from the number of weapons fired on a single pull. Is that asking so much?

So make it simple. Alpha Strike = no convergence

It gives us a reason to take those nasty AC/20s. Want to nail one spot? Bring the big guns!

El Bandito, on 03 August 2015 - 03:56 AM, said:

I personally want a "power draw" system, where each weapon has certain power requirements, along with their heat and ammo requirements. And if the alpha exceeds the max power amount set by PGI, then the rest of the alpha is forced to chain-fire automatically. That way, it is easy to understand and use by the newbies.

Unlike the current convoluted mess that is GH.

The Tesla pods did this I'm pretty sure. It works well.

[darkchylde]

Ghost Heat has no place in battletech - nor does it make sense on what weapons or combinations of weapons are hampered by it. Time to adopt a proper heatsystem with fully functional double heatsinks.

[Duke Nedo]

darkchylde, on 03 August 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

Ghost Heat has no place in battletech - nor does it make sense on what weapons or combinations of weapons are hampered by it. Time to adopt a proper heatsystem with fully functional double heatsinks.

LastPaladin, on 03 August 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

"Ghost heat" is a concept so flawed it should have never seen the light of day in the first place, so any attempt to "fix" it, rather than getting rid of it as a game mechanic, is already fundamentally misguided.

That's a poor attitude though. There is nothing wrong with the concept as such, many games where you can design your ride/character/army or whatever use diminishing return when you're stacking (boating) bonuses. This is no different in essence, but the implementation is just horrible. It makes no sense to have to go to an external website and read a table to figure out what you can build.... just horrible. If you can redesign "ghostheat" into something more consistent and intuitive and make it cover all energy weapons (with fluff contributions from all heat generating weapons) it can work just fine. Nothing wrong or new with the concept. Imo, it's just the implementation that is just lazy as hell...

MrJeffers, on 03 August 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

The 30 point heat cap in MWO won't work any more than it would have worked in TT. TT doesn't work in real time - it's a ten second turn and you sink all the heat before you check the scale. Put another way, the scale in TT is the effects of spending more than 10 seconds at that heat level.

Example: TT Awesome 9M. 20 Double Heat sinks, and 3 ER-PPCs. It can fire all three of them (assuming doing nothing else) and the net heat gain per turn is 5 because you get to sink 40 heat before checking the scale. Using MWO's real time sink with a 30 point fixed scale firing all three would be instant melt down of 45 heat and probably self destruction before you ever get turned back on again.
This is why MWO heat sinks increase the threshold, because that is basically what they did in TT by virtue of the 10 second turn and sinking the heat before checking for penalties.
Dropping the heat cap to a fixed 30 would kill energy weapons and make ballistics rule again because both their burst damage and their sustained DPS would be much higher than energy weapons.

Exactly, these are good points. While ACs could use a small buff, going for a full sustained DPS system would probably be too much. The high threshold gives us a short grace period of burst DPS which at least I personally enjoy. It adds a layer of complexity to game play which is needed imo.

Praetor Knight, on 03 August 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

Don't forget that if we do see a hard Cap at 30, then we'd also need to see increased Dissipation, and there are still Heat gen quirks to ease off on any edge cases.

Because Capacity would be more Dissipation over time, so that as long Dissipation can keep up with generated HPS, such systems can be made to work.

Where the tonnage requirements should basically be more or less be a wash between ammo less and ammo dependent builds.

Also good points, but what you're saying is basically that all weapons would need rebalancing? If the main reason for PGI to increase the threshold was to allow for example 3x ERPPC to be fired at all, like in the example above, then they did it in order not to have to change all heat values from TT in the first place... if that is so, then I'd guess there is no chance they will ever go back on that one.

Also, I don't think it's the burst DPS that is bad for the game, it's the big alphas. Creeping towards lowered threshold/increased dissipation may be good for AC vs laser balance though, perhaps there is a good middle ground here that doesn't require lot's of rebalancing of weapons?

Edited by Duke Nedo, 03 August 2015 - 11:52 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Duke Nedo, on 03 August 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:

Also good points, but what you're saying is basically that all weapons would need rebalancing? If the main reason for PGI to increase the threshold was to allow for example 3x ERPPC to be fired at all, like in the example above, then they did it in order not to have to change all heat values from TT in the first place... if that is so, then I'd guess there is no chance they will ever go back on that one.

Also, I don't think it's the burst DPS that is bad for the game, it's the big alphas. Creeping towards lowered threshold/increased dissipation may be good for AC vs laser balance though, perhaps there is a good middle ground here that doesn't require lot's of rebalancing of weapons?

It depends on what the devs are willing to open up for tweaking. If they want to keep the damage numbers fixed (they have upped Lasers though) that is one fixed variable we are stuck with for example, so then cooldown, heat and beam duration would be other variables that should then be open to adjustments and so on.

If they do not want a fixed scale then, there can be an adjusted scale that simply tweaks what's already there, such as reducing the gifted 30 Capacity to say a value of 14 and then have Heat Containment modify Dissipation instead (and that would still only be a boost of 135%, where the average weapon currently has above 250% or more boost from its P&P values).

---

One of the main differences with MWO to the P&P game, is that multiple sections would be hit each turn and that the target must be immobilized in some manner to be able to aim weapons to a specific component. With MWO, every shot is aimed and we have the opportunity to keep hitting the same spot with less variance. So firing three ERPPCs in the original setting might have been firing them one after another, not all three at the same time to the same component, so aside from forcing weapons to be chain-fired, or adjusting base weapon values, a low and fixed cap with Heat Gen Quirks in mind and high Dissipation would then have players firing fewer weapons at once, but could then be able to fire high heat weapons more often and not to shutdown if they sustain a rhythm in firing.

So there are various ways to explore reducing big alphas and not needing to change that much, or maybe simply going back to square one could be a wildcard option!

So, I hope what I'm trying to describe so far makes some sense, and I can try to provide examples of what I mean in a future post, right now I need sleep!

[Prof RJ Gumby]

I would settle even for the most simplistic of fixes, if it would patch the big holes in the ghost heat that can be easily exploited.
I.e. The ghost heat 'weapon number cap' could be determined as follows: the game looks at the weapons you shot at once, takes the lowest gh cap among them as THE ghost heat, add ghost heat penalties to any weapon above the cap. The End.

Example? If you take the current alpha metawolf with 2LPLs and 4erml, the ghost heat of LPLs count. If alphaed: ghost heat cap for that alpha is 2. No ghost heat for LPLS (their cap, so they are counted first), ghost heat for ermls.
If you take your fancy bj with 6ml and 2mpl and alpha, 6ml have no ghost heat, 2mpl do.

Simplistic, but it would work and couldn't be abusable. I like when things work and are not abusable.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 04 August 2015 - 12:52 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Lugh, on 03 August 2015 - 07:07 AM, said:

I would, but I don't have the time energy or camera skills needs to capture all that

Then a picture of your final results would be a step in the right direction.

[Widowmaker1981]

Praetor Knight, on 03 August 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

Don't forget that if we do see a hard Cap at 30, then we'd also need to see increased Dissipation, and there are still Heat gen quirks to ease off on any edge cases.

Because Capacity would be more Dissipation over time, so that as long Dissipation can keep up with generated HPS, such systems can be made to work.

Where the tonnage requirements should basically be more or less be a wash between ammo less and ammo dependent builds.

If you turn energy weapons (lasers) into DPS weapons instead of the Alpha weapons they are now, why would anyone use them? You can sit there and DPS with your beams of light that cause no target disruption and eventually overheat you, or you can load up on ACs and DPS FASTER, while shaking the crap out of your target and not heating up at all. Why choose option 1?

Currently, people use lasers for Burst damage, because you can load a lot of alpha for comparatively low tonnage and, at a cost of a lot of heat, unload it and get back into cover to minimise return damage. Take that ability away, and there is no reason to use them over ballistics.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 04 August 2015 - 04:39 AM.

[Lugh]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 August 2015 - 02:14 AM, said:

Then a picture of your final results would be a step in the right direction.

You know, as well as I do, that will only be called fabricated, as the naysayers will disbelieve evidence even when witnessed real time, with their own eyes.

Edited by Lugh, 04 August 2015 - 04:36 AM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 August 2015 - 04:09 AM, said:

If you turn energy weapons (lasers) into DPS weapons instead of the Alpha weapons they are now, why would anyone use them? You can sit there and DPS with your beams of light that cause no target disruption and eventually overheat you, or you can load up on ACs and DPS FASTER, while shaking the crap out of your target and not heating up at all. Why choose option 1?

Currently, people use lasers for Burst damage, because you can load a lot of alpha for comparatively low tonnage and, at a cost of a lot of heat, unload it and get back into cover to minimise return damage. Take that ability away, and there is no reason to use them over ballistics.

Where did I say that about Lasers? But that's also a problem with that huge burst damage and go run and hide after shooting as you cool again. If that high damage was reduced some, but also made more sustainable, then it shouldn't reduce the utility of Lasers in relation to other weapons.

For example, if we have a hard cap to shutdown at 30 Heat, that still allows for four cMPLs to befired at once dealing 32 damage at 24 Heat plus any movement and environmental Heat. And that HPS on four is 6.23 a second, where currently not even 20 DHS at 3.91 Dissipation could keep pace with.

Which is why I think that Dissipation would need to see an increase if we keep current values. Like, for example, taking DHS to 0.31 each, would provide 6.2 Dissipation a second.

But if we can also tweak some weapon values here and there. Then maybe that cMPL could be 7 damage and 5 heat, where instead it would be possible to safely fire five together for 35 damage and 25 Heat, where the HPS is 6.49 in that case. So if we are looking at 20 DHS, then we would need Dissipation to see an increase to around ~6.49 a second, so having each DHS be 0.32 each would give a total of 6.4 Dissipation a second with this example.

Another example, the stock IFR-D, it would be able to alpha its four cMPLs at either 24 or 20 Heat for 32 or 28 damage. But with 12 DHS would have between 3.72 to 3.84 Dissipation (compared to its current 2.62), so it would either need to fire in smaller groups or wait a little longer to fire its weapons.

And a nice bonus for the Ferret is that with these Dissipation values, would make its single cERPPC closer to Heat Neutral with 12 DHS and the HPS being ~3.75 without boosts (Depending on Fast Fire, Modules and quirks, it could push that HPS above Dissipation, but even then would remain sustainable).

So the idea is to lower the cap on damage done on a single firing of grouped weapons and allow that lowered value to be more sustainable with increased Dissipation.

And this is only one idea, we could still keep a variable cap and see reduced capacity with improved dissipation over current MWO values and be able to achieve more or less the same thing.

[Joseph Mallan]

Lugh, on 04 August 2015 - 04:35 AM, said:

You know, as well as I do, that will only be called fabricated, as the naysayers will disbelieve evidence even when witnessed real time, with their own eyes.

I'm not a naysayer of first hand observation. I'm a good shot, just a few point away from qualifying for Sniper training. Which means I'm not great, but I can hit what I point at most times.

[Duke Nedo]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 August 2015 - 04:09 AM, said:

If you turn energy weapons (lasers) into DPS weapons instead of the Alpha weapons they are now, why would anyone use them? You can sit there and DPS with your beams of light that cause no target disruption and eventually overheat you, or you can load up on ACs and DPS FASTER, while shaking the crap out of your target and not heating up at all. Why choose option 1?

Currently, people use lasers for Burst damage, because you can load a lot of alpha for comparatively low tonnage and, at a cost of a lot of heat, unload it and get back into cover to minimise return damage. Take that ability away, and there is no reason to use them over ballistics.

There is always weight... I'd imagine one would bring as many lasers as one could alpha as fillers in any build. What I don't like with this hard cap at 30 thing is that it would almost remove the importance of burst dps. If dissipation dictate what you can fire you are not building any potential when moving in cover, you're only wasting time... so it kindof removes that dimension of tactical movement which would be a bad thing imo.

Praetor Knight, on 04 August 2015 - 08:21 AM, said:

Where did I say that about Lasers? But that's also a problem with that huge burst damage and go run and hide after shooting as you cool again. If that high damage was reduced some, but also made more sustainable, then it shouldn't reduce the utility of Lasers in relation to other weapons.

For example, if we have a hard cap to shutdown at 30 Heat, that still allows for four cMPLs to befired at once dealing 32 damage at 24 Heat plus any movement and environmental Heat. And that HPS on four is 6.23 a second, where currently not even 20 DHS at 3.91 Dissipation could keep pace with.

Which is why I think that Dissipation would need to see an increase if we keep current values. Like, for example, taking DHS to 0.31 each, would provide 6.2 Dissipation a second.

But if we can also tweak some weapon values here and there. Then maybe that cMPL could be 7 damage and 5 heat, where instead it would be possible to safely fire five together for 35 damage and 25 Heat, where the HPS is 6.49 in that case. So if we are looking at 20 DHS, then we would need Dissipation to see an increase to around ~6.49 a second, so having each DHS be 0.32 each would give a total of 6.4 Dissipation a second with this example.

Another example, the stock IFR-D, it would be able to alpha its four cMPLs at either 24 or 20 Heat for 32 or 28 damage. But with 12 DHS would have between 3.72 to 3.84 Dissipation (compared to its current 2.62), so it would either need to fire in smaller groups or wait a little longer to fire its weapons.

And a nice bonus for the Ferret is that with these Dissipation values, would make its single cERPPC closer to Heat Neutral with 12 DHS and the HPS being ~3.75 without boosts (Depending on Fast Fire, Modules and quirks, it could push that HPS above Dissipation, but even then would remain sustainable).

So the idea is to lower the cap on damage done on a single firing of grouped weapons and allow that lowered value to be more sustainable with increased Dissipation.

And this is only one idea, we could still keep a variable cap and see reduced capacity with improved dissipation over current MWO values and be able to achieve more or less the same thing.

I understand your arguments and having MWO play like that probably wouldn't scare me away... difficult to say if it would be more or less fun for me... but something I do know for certain is that it would be a huge game changer, for good or bad. Therefore I really really doubt that PGI would dare to do something like that this far out of beta for the core game. The core game is like the only thing keeping this game alive still....

[Quxudica]

Duke Nedo, on 03 August 2015 - 03:16 AM, said:

On vacation. It's raining... here goes.

Thinking about ghost heat in general, I have always wondered howcome it's not more "normalized". Why does 3x cLPL creat ghost heat but not 2x cLPL+6xcERML? That just doesn't compute...

What I am thinking of has been touched upon before, for example here (http://mwomercs.com/...-voltage-meter/), probably other Places but I don't have time to seach more carefully right now. I am sure this is not a New idea, just mashing up my take on it here. Not to replace ghost heat, but more to "normalize" it and make it more intuitive.

NOTE: This is Energy only, LRM/SRM heat and AC ghost heat is not regulated by this. Imo other systems would do that job better, like redesigning launcher tubes counts and game mechanics for missiles and perhaps recoil or something along these lines for ACs if needed at all. IMO high weight limits AC abuse sufficiently and I don't really have any problem at all with missile spam. Perhaps ghost spraed, lol?

This could be done in two fashions, but both requires a New metric. I would Call it "Energy Bandwidth" or "Effect capacity" or something like that. What it describes is actually the Ghost Heat Threshold With a nicer name.

1. The simple implementation

Just take the weapons fired Within the same 0.5s tick, like the engine does now, but instead of counting weapons, add up the heat generated. Some examples:

2x cLPL: 20 heat
3x cLPL: 30 heat
2x cLPL+2 cERML: 32 heat
2x CLPL+4 cERML: 44 heat
3x LPL: 21 heat
3x LPL+4x ML: 37 heat

Rationale: The intuitive exlanation would be that the mech can only efficiently handle a certain bandwidth of energy before it starts to accumulate heat in an exponential manner. I.e. up to the Energy Bandwith of the mech it builds linearly like non-ghost-heat does now, but passing that point, the curve goes exponential, giving you a "ghost heat". It would work exacly as it does now, but you could fire any combination of weapons and they would all contribute to the bandwidth.

HUD: PGI would have to add a bandwidth meter to the HUD to make this intuitive.

Balance: Here's a nice twist with this, PGI could use Energy Bandwidth as a balance parameter that is independent of Lore and Stock builds. As a "quirk", without actually being a quirk, some chassi could be made to tolerate higher alphas, like for example I am thinking Awesomes could be made to tolerate 3x PPC without inventing some curious exception rules to ghost heat. You'd just give it a higher Energy Bandwidth, like perhaps 32 instead of 28.

Classes: PGI could choose to give difference classes different thresholds.

Engines: Another alternative would be linking it to the engine installed. Not sure if its a good idea or not, but some Awesomes and Battlemasters would benefit, and DWF alpha would be hurt... just an option, probably not the best idea.

Exponential heat: Just to illustrate, the exponent would work something like this: Our test Timberwolf fires 2x cLPL and builds 20 heat. That is below the threshold of 28 and produces no ghost heat. If he also fires his 4 cMLs within 0.5s, he pushes up the sum to 44 heat within the same 0.5s tick and goes above the threshold. The engines uses an equation and calculates that the resulting heat is say 56 instead of 44. By using a single exponential of any combination of weapons you miss out on the ability to punish ghost heat more on some weapons than others, but it becomes much more intuitive.

Edit: something like this depending how you choose your equation. This is a simple y=x+((x-EB<0)?0:(x-y)^exp), or y=x+(above_threshold^exp) where you can choose threshold and exponent.



Predicted Implications:

- Large laser vomit alphas go down and TTK goes up.
- Ghost heat becomes more intuitive and a physical basis could be made up
- A new balance parameter is created that is not restricted by Lore or Stock builds
- Tuning is needed


2. The advanced implementation

This methods is a bit more "realistic" and something I'd like a lot, but I guess less likely to ever be implemented.

The idea would be to instead of using "heat" as input, it would instead use "effect" as input, i.e. heat/duration for lasers, heat/0.5s tick for flamers, and heat/cooldown for PPCs, and a charge effect for gauss while holding charge (this number should be quite big and just added to effect output).

This effect value would then be added up, but instead of using some arbitrary ticks of 0.5s, one would just keep track of all active beams and add up the effect the produce while active. To this value, one would add PPC and gauss recharge effects.

Values:
Name
C-ER LRG LASER 6,67
C-ER MED LASER 5,22
C-ER PPC 3,75
C-ER SML LASER 3,00
C-FLAMER 2,00
C-LRG PULSE LASER 8,93
C-MED PULSE LASER 7,06
C-SML PULSE LASER 4,00

ER LARGE LASER 6,40
ER PPC 3,75
FLAMER 2,00
LARGE LASER 7,00
LRG PULSE LASER 10,45
MED PULSE LASER 6,67
MEDIUM LASER 4,44
PPC 2,50
SMALL LASER 2,67
SML PULSE LASER 4,00

This would feel even more intuitive to me and would allow you to juggle the bandwidth even more depending on the beam durations.

Predicted implications:

- Same as above plus,
- PPC recharge and Gauss recharge can add some background effect
- It doesn't limit firing multiple PPCs which would need something added to it, but it does in a realistic way make it a bit more difficult to charge gauss while burning lasers. Will increase TTK a bit more since Gauss better be fired before lasers and not simultaneously.


That's a very crude draft, running out of time here. I am sure I am like the 32nd guy proposing something along these lines, so perhaps I should not consider it a suggestion as much as a question why we don't have something along these lines? There must be some major flaw I didn't see yet...

Kids awake, time to go.

The solution is the same as most of MWO's current issues: the entire heat system needs to be rebuilt. A much lower cap, faster dissipation, and penalties for staying hot for too long. The goal being to turn the game away from the arcady Alpha-strike centric experience it's become and back towards a more thoughtful form of gameplay. Just because a mech has 30 energy hardpoint's doesn't mean you have to fill every single one with a laser, firing mass volleys of weapons should be a periodic or even rare thing - not the go to standard of play. There should really also be more actually useful equipment we can bring instead of loading down our mechs with guns and having everything else be an afterthought.

[Lugh]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 August 2015 - 08:25 AM, said:

I'm not a naysayer of first hand observation. I'm a good shot, just a few point away from qualifying for Sniper training. Which means I'm not great, but I can hit what I point at most times.

I qualified for top marks first go. It was waaay back when the NRA was less shady. I asked for the badge I earned. The guy said, Nope you have to do that every other week for the next 26 to get the badge. I responded, So basically it's a pyramid scheme to keep money rolling in to your pockets even though you know and I know that I've been shooting that well since the first time you pointed me downrange(2-4weeks before you could test? I don't remember). He shrugged. I turned to my father and said, we're done here.

He just smiled and away we went. Once a year for a while we went back and did the still got it thing. But then the state I lived in started outlawing all the ammo we were shooting, where they didn't outright outlaw the gun itself. It was about then that I threw my hands in the air and gave up shooting as a hobby.

[Duke Nedo]

Quxudica, on 04 August 2015 - 10:37 AM, said:

The solution is the same as most of MWO's current issues: the entire heat system needs to be rebuilt. A much lower cap, faster dissipation, and penalties for staying hot for too long. The goal being to turn the game away from the arcady Alpha-strike centric experience it's become and back towards a more thoughtful form of gameplay. Just because a mech has 30 energy hardpoint's doesn't mean you have to fill every single one with a laser, firing mass volleys of weapons should be a periodic or even rare thing - not the go to standard of play. There should really also be more actually useful equipment we can bring instead of loading down our mechs with guns and having everything else be an afterthought.

Well, this suggestion is about how heat is built, using a more general form to apply the "stacking penalty" to boating than the current ghost heat does.

Would be nice with a better mechanic for what happens when the mech does get hot and stays hot, perhaps soon?