237 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

M4rtyr, on 07 August 2015 - 02:40 PM, said:

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

The Hellstar can actually be built with invasion-era Clan tech, it's just that nobody made the design into a stock mech until much later.

Edited by FupDup, 07 August 2015 - 02:42 PM.

[Pjwned]

Hotthedd, on 07 August 2015 - 09:59 AM, said:

There ya go, Sparky! You might want to re-read your own posts to see what the response was to. Maybe its time for your Ritalin.

Not really much of a response because nothing I said even hinted at liking or playing Call of Duty while you're the one stamping your feet to defend MUH PROGRESSION, which you can get in various Korean MMORPGs if that's what you want.

Quote

Making SHS into something they are not, never were, and should not be is a bad idea and you should feel bad for supporting it.

Leaving SHS as useless is a bad idea and you should feel bad for supporting it.

Quote

There, have I been clear enough for you? This is a BattleTech based game. If you do not like it, go play a game you like. Just stop trying to screw with a universe many OTHER people like and support.

SHS in Battletech was inferior, but it at least had a reason to exist because it was cheap equipment. That doesn't have any value in this game though so it has no reason to exist, and even when DHS would still remain superior in most builds you just throw a fit about the status quo because grinding is apparently more important than balance.

Joseph Mallan, on 07 August 2015 - 10:02 AM, said:

Less useful is not useless.

Are you ever going to use SHS unless you're intentionally gimping your mech or you're forced to use it?

No? Then it's useless; keep grasping straws though.

Hotthedd, on 07 August 2015 - 10:32 AM, said:

I suppose for the "I want it all right NAO!" crowd, 200 to 300 minutes is about 200 minutes past their attention span...

Translation: I put meaning into my worthless grinding because I'm a special snowflake and if I acknowledge that it was worthless then all of my playtime would be pointless because without progression there's literally no point in playing video games.

Quote

LOL.

I chose CoD because it was an example given in Pjwned's argument. So, technically you rekt him.

I didn't bring up Call of Duty anywhere before you did, maybe get some reading comprehension and stop changing reality to fit your argument.

Ed Steele, on 07 August 2015 - 10:35 AM, said:

No, you leave it that way because this is "A BATTLETECH GAME" and single heatsinks are supposed to be older and inferior tech compared to double heatsinks in BATTLETECH. If you care nothing for BATTLETECH lore then why play this game.

This post sums up at least partly what I've been saying:

Boulangerie, on 07 August 2015 - 10:27 AM, said:

IMO game balance needs to provide viable options. I like how endo and ferro work because there are tradeoffs for using them. In TT, the SHS are actually balanced against DHS in two ways not actually applicable to MWO.

1. They cost less. if you were playing the RPG, money is a lot harder to come by, and some equipment might be harder to get our repair. MWO doesn't have repair costs, and as some have said 1.5 mil isn't that much in the grand scheme of things.

2. BV: your "army" had to have roughly the same BV as opponents if you are playing PVP. This takes into account all equipment on your mech and higher tech "costs" more BV. This is why clan tech has to field less mechs to stay even. MWO doesn't take into account any of the hardware when matching up forces, just relative player skills.

What I'm trying to get at is that DHS and SHS are fine and actually balanced on TT in different ways than performance. In MWO, they aren't actually balanced, it's a straight upgrade.

Whether you are ok with this in a strictly pvp game seems to be the main debate here.

This is a really great series of articles on game design, I'd read at least the first two, definitions and viable options.
http://www.sirlin.ne...t-1-definitions
sorry posting from phone and link might not work

Edited by Pjwned, 07 August 2015 - 04:32 PM.

[Deathlike]

I'm almost convinced that SHS "must be naturally expensive" or something to be sold and "pay back" for the cost/tax of the DHS upgrade in order to be useful because of people's reluctance for useless things to stay useless indefinitely.

I mean, the fate of the Command Console is still to be a 3 ton, head doorstop.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

M4rtyr, on 07 August 2015 - 02:40 PM, said:

*sigh*

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

No, DHS don't mean higher BV. Switch the AWS-8Q from SHS to DHS, and you get the same BV, when you actually adjust the number of DHS to account for the better cooling, you generally mount more weapons because of the freed up weight which is actually what causes the increase in BV. Hell, switching the AWS-8Q from SHS to DHS, and stripping a ton of armor allows you to mount a 320 STD engine and only be 70 BV higher.

So no, it is not like the PPV vs ERPPC, it is like Endo vs Standard internals.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 07 August 2015 - 04:42 PM.

[Pjwned]

Ed Steele, on 07 August 2015 - 11:03 AM, said:

I stuck it out through the first-person view bait-and-switch, and the underwhelming CW and all of the heavy-handed buffs / nerfs, but this may be the last straw. If somehow PGI is convinced to radically alter the rules just because of the possible new players not liking it, then I will seriously consider moving on and finding something else to play until BATTLETECH comes out.

It's not only for new players' benefit, it's also to encourage more build diversity by making SHS not useless, and even though it would help new players for sure DHS would still be superior on the majority of builds they would use.

Let's say you have an assault mech energy boat (not the only example by the way, but it's a good one) and you want to cram in as many heatsinks as possible because you have plenty of tonnage but not necessarily plenty of crit slots.

If you choose SHS as it is now then you're missing 10 tons worth of heatsinks and that's simply too much of a tradeoff to make it worthwhile in any build, as seen by this example earlier in the thread.

If you choose SHS with normalized engine heatsinks then you're no longer automatically screwed out of 10 tons worth of heatsinks, and thus there is a reason to use it ever in a game where it otherwise has no value whatsoever.

The fact remains that DHS is more efficient as far as tonnage, so you still usually want to use it over SHS when you can because obviously you want to put priority on tonnage over crit slots, but making SHS viable would make it an option for builds where DHS is impractical.

[wanderer]

I have no problem with leaving SHS as is...

...but put vehicles into the game. They have considerably different rules about heat, and only need heat sinks for energy weapons.

And reduce the frickin "DHS tax" considerably. For a modern 'Mech, they're essential equipment.

[Hotthedd]

AssaultPig, on 07 August 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

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.

This (instant perfect pinpoint convergence) was a DEPARTURE from tabletop, and THEREFORE a problem.

[Hotthedd]

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.

I never said anything about RNG.
Tons of viable suggestions have been made on this subject, and while we all have our favorites (mine is harmonics which can be mechlab adjusted) they are ALL better that what we have now.

[MauttyKoray]

Easy fix -

DHS - No heat cap increase but are given 'trudub' status of their 2.0 heat dissipation.

SHS - half the dissipation of DHS but give a little heat cap boost for each heat sink.

This would give each heat sink a defined role: DHS for continuous periods of exchanging fire and needing to stay cool, while SHS would allow for larger single strikes, hit and fade tactics, and a combination of the two for LRM/sniper support depending on the player's preference.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 07 August 2015 - 06:49 PM.

[AssaultPig]

Hotthedd, on 07 August 2015 - 05:36 PM, said:

This (instant perfect pinpoint convergence) was a DEPARTURE from tabletop, and THEREFORE a problem.

okay, but unless you're going to turn every weapon system into SSRMs it's something you have to deal with, not just wave your arms and go 'well hits rolled randomly in the tabletop!'

[NocturnalBeast]

AssaultPig, on 07 August 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:

okay, but unless you're going to turn every weapon system into SSRMs it's something you have to deal with, not just wave your arms and go 'well hits rolled randomly in the tabletop!'

Ok, so after a few beers I have decided that I am not quite done. This is a true statement, unfortunately pinpoint convergence is an unavoidable part of a skill based aiming system and the randomness of TT can not truly be simulated in an FPS without some sort of RNG system which is good for a turn-based game, but bad for an FPS.

[Hotthedd]

AssaultPig, on 07 August 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:

okay, but unless you're going to turn every weapon system into SSRMs it's something you have to deal with, not just wave your arms and go 'well hits rolled randomly in the tabletop!'

Not at all. The notion that the only choices are instant perfect convergence or random spread is a false dilemma.

There have been tons of suggestion threads solving the problem using neither.

Ed Steele, on 07 August 2015 - 11:57 PM, said:

Ok, so after a few beers I have decided that I am not quite done. This is a true statement, unfortunately pinpoint convergence is an unavoidable part of a skill based aiming system and the randomness of TT can not truly be simulated in an FPS without some sort of RNG system which is good for a turn-based game, but bad for an FPS.

Except that it CAN be done.

[Andi Nagasia]

Perhaps we are looking at this the Wrong way?
maybe Heat Sinks should offer Different Benefits

=Example=
Type,...Tons,...Crits,...HeatCap,...+toHeatCap,...HeatDissipation,...
SHS,.......1,........1,..........48,...............+2,.....................+1,......
DHS,.......1,......2-3,.........48,...............+1,.....................+2,......
Make SHS a better Choice for Wanting a High Heat Cap,
and DHS a better Choice for Wanting more Dissipation,
(Stats can be Tweaked for Balance)

[NocturnalBeast]

Andi Nagasia, on 08 August 2015 - 08:20 AM, said:

Perhaps we are looking at this the Wrong way?
maybe Heat Sinks should offer Different Benefits

=Example=
Type,...Tons,...Crits,...HeatCap,...+toHeatCap,...HeatDissipation,...
SHS,.......1,........1,..........48,...............+2,.....................+1,......
DHS,.......1,......2-3,.........48,...............+1,.....................+2,......
Make SHS a better Choice for Wanting a High Heat Cap,
and DHS a better Choice for Wanting more Dissipation,
(Stats can be Tweaked for Balance)

Ok, this would be a good idea for any game other than "A BATTLETECH GAME", but in BATTLETECH (and by extension MW), SHS should never be a better choice.

[Andi Nagasia]

Ed Steele, on 08 August 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

Ok, this would be a good idea for any game other than "A BATTLETECH GAME", but in BATTLETECH (and by extension MW), SHS should never be a better choice.

the idea is that since SHS are 1Ton & 1Slot they are more Condensed(Thicker),
so they should Hold more Heat before becoming Overcome by such Heat,

and Since DHS are 1Ton & 2-3Slots they are More Porous(Thinner more Veins),
so they should Displace more Heat than their move Condensed Counterparts,

remember DHS are only Defined as giving double SHS Heat Dissipation but Bulkier,
so this could be added and still fit within BattleTech from within a Lore standpoint,

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ed Steele, on 08 August 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

Ok, this would be a good idea for any game other than "A BATTLETECH GAME", but in BATTLETECH (and by extension MW), SHS should never be a better choice.

Yes, because what makes Battletech is SHS being worthless.

[Pjwned]

Ed Steele, on 08 August 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

Ok, this would be a good idea for any game other than "A BATTLETECH GAME", but in BATTLETECH (and by extension MW), SHS should never be a better choice.

Keep ignoring that even in Battletech it was at least somewhat of an actual choice because it was cheap equipment.

[Hotthedd]

Pjwned, on 08 August 2015 - 02:58 PM, said:

Keep ignoring that even in Battletech it was at least somewhat of an actual choice because it was cheap equipment.

True. They also took up fewer critical spaces, and could be put in the legs.

...just like MW:O

The problem in MW:O is that heat sinks also raise the heat cap. (unlike in TT) And this departure has led to many problems and band-****.

Edit: It is too funny that a.i.d.s. is censored.

Edited by Hotthedd, 08 August 2015 - 03:55 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

The problem in MW:O is that heat sinks also raise the heat cap. (unlike in TT) And this departure has led to many problems and band-****.

Even without raised heat cap, DHS are better than SHS in MWO, because heat neutral mechs are harder to create and much less effective (unless a Gauss boat).

[Pjwned]

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

True. They also took up fewer critical spaces, and could be put in the legs.

...just like MW:O

That's fine, except that never comes into play as an advantage in MWO because the engine heatsink advantage with DHS means you always have better cooling for less tonnage and crit slots.

Quote

The problem in MW:O is that heat sinks also raise the heat cap. (unlike in TT) And this departure has led to many problems and band-****.

Edit: It is too funny that a.i.d.s. is censored.

Okay, so what if heatsinks didn't raise the heat cap then? With heatsinks more or less taking their dissipation values from Battletech's "10 second turns" (which doesn't apply here, in more ways than one) with weapons obviously firing faster than every 10 seconds, there wouldn't be enough heat dissipation if nothing could increase the heat cap.

How are you going to fix this without increasing the heat cap at all unless you slow down every weapon to be ~3x as slow or something about as ridiculous?