69 replies to this topic

[Totem1]

I agree that the deathball has certainly ruined a number of games for me... run around a corner in a scout light to be instagibbed just for trying to spot where the enemy is and so on. My suggestion about exploding mechs was rebuffed by suggesting that locusts would become reactor bombs which I can see in a way but I wasn't necessarily saying every killed mech would go critical (though a chance of it happening like a special critical hit and/or if an ammo explosion happened). If I thought I would get some damage from a nearby mech if it exploded I would give it a little more room..no matter how much damage.
Secondly (and more importantly) this thread has led to some interesting options like tickets and multiple objectives, supply lines, mobile hq's, different artillery options, smoke, emp, which I think imho would provide some really nice potential for the use of tactics... now there is a word!

I actually quite like the added heat idea for being too close to another mech.

Edited by Totem1, 05 October 2015 - 11:39 AM.

[Veev]

Burktross, on 05 October 2015 - 11:32 AM, said:

If you're going off TT, then that'd be 30 meters.

Even in these confines, any ambient heat greater than 10% is going to just be plain annoying. At that point, we might aswell start having your own heat interfere with Thermal Sensors.
(read: not fun)

And if we have 4 or 5 of them standing around that close it should have an impact. 10% extra per mech past 4 within 90 meters. So if you have 5 mechs that close it equals a 10% reduction in cooling efficiency and 7 mechs would be a 30% reduction in efficiency. It means you need to have better situational awareness. It also makes you want to spread out a little bit more. I would love to see 12 mechs standing around that close to each other. A sweet 80% reduction in cooling efficiency.

[Khobai]

yeah no we dont need proximity ghost heat for being close to other mechs. thats a really dumb idea.

theres better ways to stop deathballing outright without implementing stupid ghost penalties

[Burktross]

Veev, on 05 October 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

And if we have 4 or 5 of them standing around that close it should have an impact. 10% extra per mech past 4 within 90 meters. So if you have 5 mechs that close it equals a 10% reduction in cooling efficiency and 7 mechs would be a 30% reduction in efficiency. It means you need to have better situational awareness. It also makes you want to spread out a little bit more. I would love to see 12 mechs standing around that close to each other. A sweet 80% reduction in cooling efficiency.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 05 October 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

Reduce the damage to 30 so artillery can no longer headshot mechs.

I still disagree. The fear factor just isn't the same without that possibility, no matter how low the actual probability is. Merely increasing the radius helps decrease the probability of a direct hit without significantly decreasing the fear factor itself.

Another not so obvious answer to the death ball is to have PPC hits affect the HUD for significant duration:

• lose targeting
  
• disable sensors
  
• disrupt vision
  
• massively increase heat and/or heat generation
  
• massively reduce heat dissipation

[Veev]

Burktross, on 05 October 2015 - 12:21 PM, said:

I take it reading comprehension was not one of your strong suits. I said reduced cooling efficiency, not causing your heat to increase nor lowering the heat threshold.

[nehebkau]

The way strikes should work in breaking up death balls is:

1. WAY more damage.
2. WAY longer duration
3. WAY BIGGER Circle of damage
4. WAY longer reuse timer.

Think of it this way... The smoke drops and keeps smoking for 3 minutes and you have about 30 seconds before the first shell drops. Then, for the next 3 minutes a shell drops randomly in the area every 5 seconds causing huge damage to anything still in the area of that particular impact. It would take an additional 2 minutes for the artillery strike to be available after the last shell has dropped. The key thing is making the damage very painful to a mech that is hit -- lethal to a light mech (which should be able to get out of the way) and painful to an assault.

The result would be LESS damage, over all, to mechs from artillery strikes but more damage to the stupid players who stay in the area of an arty strike. It would relegate an area that is under bombardment as a no-go zone, which could be used for cutting off retreat or an advance of an enemy for a period of time. It would mean less overall artillery strikes in game. In essence it makes artillery what it really is, inaccurate, devastating, situational and tactical weapon of war.

How would this look in game? Well on Assault it would probably make a base unapproachable for 3 minutes to light and medium mechs. It would lock-down a resource point on conquest for a period of time -- which could slightly change the game play if you need to hold onto a node or prevent a node from being taken. On skirmish -- it would only be of use in cutting off enemies. In CW, it could stop an enemy from entering a gate or force an enemy off of an advantageous position for a period of time.

Edited by nehebkau, 06 October 2015 - 06:11 AM.

[Burktross]

Veev, on 05 October 2015 - 08:45 PM, said:

I take it reading comprehension was not one of your strong suits. I said reduced cooling efficiency, not causing your heat to increase nor lowering the heat threshold.

If I had saved that image's .pdn, you would being seeing "GTFO NOOB I NEED TO COOL OFF" and "GOD DAMMIT LET ME FIRE MORE MEDIUM LASERS" in place of THANKS FOR OVERHEATING ME, but everything else still stands.

[Khobai]

Quote

I still disagree. The fear factor just isn't the same without that possibility

it only takes up a consumable slot

it should not be able to kill mechs no matter what you think.

thats not balanced for a consumable