237 replies to this topic

[M4rtyr]

OMG guys... now you are all talking like a big factor to NPE is heat sinks... no its not.

Weapons and heat rebalancing. SHS would be perfectly fine -IF- ballistic heavy loadouts were viable because you don't need lots of heat disipation with them. However because they both generate too much heat as is and are generally inferior to lasers everyone goes with lasers and hence needs DHS for best performance.

You are all looking at symptoms of a problem and not the problem itself.

[FupDup]

M4rtyr, on 07 August 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

OMG guys... now you are all talking like a big factor to NPE is heat sinks... no its not.

Weapons and heat rebalancing. SHS would be perfectly fine -IF- ballistic heavy loadouts were viable because you don't need lots of heat disipation with them. However because they both generate too much heat as is and are generally inferior to lasers everyone goes with lasers and hence needs DHS for best performance.

You are all looking at symptoms of a problem and not the problem itself.

Even in a ballistic-based world, using subs would still be less effective than using dubs.

[NocturnalBeast]

M4rtyr, on 07 August 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

OMG guys... now you are all talking like a big factor to NPE is heat sinks... no its not.

Weapons and heat rebalancing. SHS would be perfectly fine -IF- ballistic heavy loadouts were viable because you don't need lots of heat disipation with them. However because they both generate too much heat as is and are generally inferior to lasers everyone goes with lasers and hence needs DHS for best performance.

You are all looking at symptoms of a problem and not the problem itself.

Just get rid of ghost heat and put all weapons and HS back to TT values and create a true, TT based BV matchmaker.

[M4rtyr]

FupDup, on 07 August 2015 - 11:17 AM, said:

Even in a ballistic-based world, using subs would still be less effective than using dubs.

Well yeah, but only because by the very point they are supposed to be better and you've never need to use DHS external to the engine.

But you wouldn't even need to worry about grinding to pay for the DHS and so not have to worry about them to begin with if heat and ballistics worked right. If you ask me, that is far better for NPE because everything works better and they don't have to make that extra grind.

But if for some reason you have a mech that runs hot, say missles, but the primary weapons are ballistics, then SHS have the advange of using fewer crits which will be at a premium for any loadout heavy on ballistics while providing enough disipation to be worth it.

SHS have their roles... but PGI's balance and mechanics have made those roles moot.

Ed Steele, on 07 August 2015 - 11:23 AM, said:

Just get rid of ghost heat and put all weapons and HS back to TT values and create a true, TT based BV matchmaker.

BV would indeed be nice, but they'd probably get those calculations wrong too. *sigh*

[Mcgral18]

Ed Steele, on 07 August 2015 - 11:23 AM, said:

Just get rid of ghost heat and put all weapons and HS back to TT values and create a true, TT based BV matchmaker.

You know that's never going to happen.


Simple solution was provided, because it's easy to implement. 2 minutes to edit and Math, and you're done. Not a couple hours adjusting everything, then days of testing, then rebalancing, then testing.

[Mcgral18]

Ultimatum X, on 07 August 2015 - 11:04 AM, said:

Actually, I think that could be an interesting direction.

The key would be that DHS become 2.0, but then the heat dissipation skills in the mech skill system get removed.


In a way, that would actually be a huge boost to NPE - because not having those heat skills is one of the larger gaps between performance of vets and new players, but also vets playing new mechs.

Let's Math. 25 heatsink Timby build?

Currently (with 15% and 20% bonuses) has a heat cap of 85.2 and dissipation of 4.715H/s


With 10 internal 1.5s and 15 external 2.0s without efficiencies it has a heat cap of:
30+15+30=75

Dissipation of:
1.5+3=4.5

Slightly worse.


I guess if you remove efficiencies, the top end things would run slightly hotter...but it affects lighter mechs most, who take just 10 TrueDubs and little of anything else.

Not the greatest fan, but it should work.

[M4rtyr]

Mcgral18, on 07 August 2015 - 11:32 AM, said:

You know that's never going to happen.


Simple solution was provided, because it's easy to implement. 2 minutes to edit and Math, and you're done. Not a couple hours adjusting everything, then days of testing, then rebalancing, then testing.

A bandaid is never a simple solution...

MWO starts beta, mechs crumble in seconds...

Bandaid: Double armor

Ooops, now we need to fiddle with weapons and damage.

Buff... Nerf... Nerf... Buff... Nerf... Buff... Buff...

They've done enough of that.

[Hotthedd]

AssaultPig, on 07 August 2015 - 11:11 AM, said:

The stuff about hewing to the TT rules is really dumb. This is a real time game where we aim for ourselves; you are never going to be able to 'simulate' turn based gameplay and dice rolling in that environment.

Actually, since TT used turns and dice rolling to "simulate" mech vs. mech combat, it would really be quite simple to take those numbers and make it work, and get rid of instant pinpoint precision to "simulate" the difficulty of aiming those giant weapons.

It actually IS very simple. Unfortunately people do not want a game that is too challenging, as it exposes those who really are not as good as their mother tells them they are.

[NocturnalBeast]

Hotthedd, on 07 August 2015 - 01:00 PM, said:

Actually, since TT used turns and dice rolling to "simulate" mech vs. mech combat, it would really be quite simple to take those numbers and make it work, and get rid of instant pinpoint precision to "simulate" the difficulty of aiming those giant weapons.

It actually IS very simple. Unfortunately people do not want a game that is too challenging, as it exposes those who really are not as good as their mother tells them they are.

I agree with everything except the aiming part. If you replace player controlled accuracy with RNG controlled accuracy you are removing skill from the equation.

[M4rtyr]

Ed Steele, on 07 August 2015 - 01:06 PM, said:

I agree with everything except the aiming part. If you replace player controlled accuracy with RNG controlled accuracy you are removing skill from the equation.

Depends on the degree of it... There is a degree of random shot placement in most tactical shooters and it's managable, if not totally negated, by player skill. Same thing here, just like in TT you did all kinds of things to manage your to-hit numbers you would manage you cone of fire in MWO.

It really isn't that hard at all, the original design leds itself to realtime transition much better than most TT games.

[NocturnalBeast]

This thread has made me realize that I put money into MWO expecting that the game to be what I thought it would be but, in order for PGI to keep the game profitable, they will need to continually change things to attract more people, which will make it into something other than what I wanted /expected MWO to be. I will move on and hope that BATTLETECH willl be more true to it's namesake.

[Night Thastus]

Why the heck do people make threads like this?

In the lore, single heatsinks were garbage. They outright were worse then Doubles. If you had the money/time/technology, you upgraded to doubles. Simple. There are only a couple cases where you wouldn't.

Yeah, singles suck. They do, however, have a much smaller profile, and thus get critted less. Not that it matters, but there you go.

Stop caring about singles. They were never intended to "compete" with doubles. They were worse, are worse, and should always be worse.

[Mcgral18]

Night Thastus, on 07 August 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Why the heck do people make threads like this?

In the lore, single heatsinks were garbage. They outright were worse then Doubles. If you had the money/time/technology, you upgraded to doubles. Simple. There are only a couple cases where you wouldn't.

Yeah, singles suck. They do, however, have a much smaller profile, and thus get critted less. Not that it matters, but there you go.

Stop caring about singles. They were never intended to "compete" with doubles. They were worse, are worse, and should always be worse.

Because some people care about the game getting a larger, sustainable, player base.


PGI killed the Battletech aspects, but we could at least keep shooty stompy robots with a better playerbase.

Edited by Mcgral18, 07 August 2015 - 01:30 PM.

[M4rtyr]

Night Thastus, on 07 August 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Why the heck do people make threads like this?

In the lore, single heatsinks were garbage. They outright were worse then Doubles. If you had the money/time/technology, you upgraded to doubles. Simple. There are only a couple cases where you wouldn't.

Yeah, singles suck. They do, however, have a much smaller profile, and thus get critted less. Not that it matters, but there you go.

Stop caring about singles. They were never intended to "compete" with doubles. They were worse, are worse, and should always be worse.

Except in the lore it wasn't that easy to just up and upgrade. Sure it was the thing to do for min-maxing.. but Btech wasn't designed to be a min/max game. Sure you could wip up and design for a mech you wanted given the rule sets, but in the true lore of the game it was about working with imperfect equipment (for IS), or honorable limitations (when Clans were added).

But again, SHS were perfectly fine for ballistics users.

[AssaultPig]

Night Thastus, on 07 August 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Why the heck do people make threads like this?

In the lore, single heatsinks were garbage. They outright were worse then Doubles. If you had the money/time/technology, you upgraded to doubles. Simple. There are only a couple cases where you wouldn't.

Yeah, singles suck. They do, however, have a much smaller profile, and thus get critted less. Not that it matters, but there you go.

Stop caring about singles. They were never intended to "compete" with doubles. They were worse, are worse, and should always be worse.

see, this is another case of importing the tabletop ruleset leading to a stupid outcome

in the tabletop SHS are cheaper and/or are relics of a particular era, which maybe keeps them somewhat relevant to the overall game/world. In MWO neither of those concerns matter to us so the cost is just a pointless cbill charge attached to every new mech. If nothing else, DHS should just be the out of the box default for all mechs.

If there are options in game, the options should be actual choices that actually mean something. There shouldn't be 'trap' options, and if there are they certainly should not be the ones offered exclusively to new players. This is just stupid design.

[AssaultPig]

Hotthedd, on 07 August 2015 - 01:00 PM, said:

Actually, since TT used turns and dice rolling to "simulate" mech vs. mech combat, it would really be quite simple to take those numbers and make it work, and get rid of instant pinpoint precision to "simulate" the difficulty of aiming those giant weapons.

It actually IS very simple. Unfortunately people do not want a game that is too challenging, as it exposes those who really are not as good as their mother tells them they are.

most of the problems this game has had over the course of time are the result of trying to adapt a strict TT ruleset to a real-time game. Jump-sniping is the best example; it doesn't happen in TT because the structure of turns doesn't allow for it. Meanwhile in MWO it was the dominant build/strategy for a year. 6PPC stalkers aren't an issue in tabletop because 1) they'd be prohibitively expensive and 2) because of how hits are rolled, but in MWO stuff like that was a big enough deal that we needed ghost heat to deal with it. And so on.

[M4rtyr]

AssaultPig, on 07 August 2015 - 01:57 PM, said:

see, this is another case of importing the tabletop ruleset leading to a stupid outcome

in the tabletop SHS are cheaper and/or are relics of a particular era, which maybe keeps them somewhat relevant to the overall game/world. In MWO neither of those concerns matter to us so the cost is just a pointless cbill charge attached to every new mech. If nothing else, DHS should just be the out of the box default for all mechs.

If there are options in game, the options should be actual choices that actually mean something. There shouldn't be 'trap' options, and if there are they certainly should not be the ones offered exclusively to new players. This is just stupid design.

Blah... don't agree at all.

If MWO actually used BV and things were much more balanced then you would see very good reason to opt for SHS over DHS. They aren't a progression gate, because mechs don't have progression, only the pilots do. You might be able to get a bigger or more effective mech but that's not equal to what true progression games do.

Umm, a 6PPC Stalker isn't an issue in TT because IS mechs aren't supposed to have modular designs, soo yeeaahh.

The TT rules translate really well, IF they translate them correctly.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

M4rtyr, on 07 August 2015 - 02:26 PM, said:

If MWO actually used BV

BV doesn't balance SHS and DHS because heat efficiency doesn't affect BV.

[FupDup]

^^The 6 PPC Stalker is a bad example because trying to build that with IS tech is not gonna end well, even with TT's better heat efficiency.

However, there is something much deadlier. The 4 Clan ERPPC Hellstar is faster, more armored, and just as powerful as the 6 PPC Stalker, while being able to cram in enough Clan DHS to keep them all heat neutral.

http://bte.battletec...te/pdf/1481.pdf

Be afraid, be very afraid...



Also, in MWO, the 4 PPC and 2 PPC + 2 ERPPC Stalkers were superior to the 6 PPC Stalker because those versions could fire more than 1 shot before exploding.

Edited by FupDup, 07 August 2015 - 02:36 PM.

[M4rtyr]

WM Quicksilver, on 07 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

BV doesn't balance SHS and DHS because heat efficiency doesn't affect BV.

*sigh*

DHS are better equipment, meaning higher BV, its like a PPC v ERPPC... ERPPC has higher BV.

FupDup, on 07 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

^^The 6 PPC Stalker is a bad example because trying to build that with IS tech is not gonna end well, even with TT's better heat efficiency.

However, there is something much deadlier. The 4 Clan ERPPC Hellstar is faster, more armored, and just as powerful as the 6 PPC Stalker, while being able to cram in enough Clan DHS to keep them all heat neutral.

http://bte.battletec...te/pdf/1481.pdf

Be afraid, be very afraid...



Also, in MWO, the 4 PPC and 2 PPC + 2 ERPPC Stalkers were superior to the 6 PPC Stalker because those versions could fire more than 1 shot before exploding.

Perfect example why I never played tech past 3055... it's all the cheesiest crap you can get.