13 replies to this topic

[Greyhart]

We have three types of weapons in this game lasers, ballistics and missiles.

In other games they make the weapon types distinctive and take account of how damage is applied so a sword swings faster than a hammer but the hammer does more damage per hit and a bow does damage at range but won’t do it as fast as a melee weapon. They all work out with a DPS of about the same but the advantages and disadvantages of the damage delivery are factored into them.

In the TT there was of course no issue with damage delivery as it was an abstract concept and all done in set periods of time. However in a computer game the damage delivery system is relevant is it a single bullet or a stream of energy?

As I see it lasers are a point and click weapon. There is no leading the target required. Ballistics and missiles (srms) both require leading the target.

there is no ammo with lasers but there is heat. But other than those characteristics there is little difference in how the weapon is played. Given that lasers trump ballistics because of the ability to place the damage easier and the savings on tonnage and space due to not needing ammo.

It seems to me that lasers should be the king of sustained combat but limited in the burst damage (this is what I thought the heat mechanic was about). Whereas ballistics should be a mix of sustained and burst damage. Missiles should hit big in one shot but long cool down.

It appears to me that what needs to be done is decide (on a general basis) on what the character of lasers, ballistics and missiles should be and then design the damage and delivery system to match.

Any thoughts on this?
TL:DR
Generally speaking (without recourse to damage numbers etc) what should be the difference between ballistics, lasers and missiles and how they deliver the damage.

edit

stupid copy and paste

Edited by Greyhart, 02 November 2015 - 04:16 AM.

[sycocys]

Thoughts - it is very hard to decipher what you are trying to get at with that terrible formatting.

[Greyhart]

sorry copy and paste seemed to have taken some extra data.

really what should b the general game play characteristics of the weapons.

[Khobai]

The problem with giving weapons significantly different characteristics is that it only further encourages boating one type of weapon.

To encourage mixed loadouts you need to make sure theres synergies between different weapons (i.e. lasers and gauss have good synergy). But at the same time each type of weapon should also have its own distinct advantages/disadvantages. For the most part thats true of energy and ballistic weapons. But missile weapons (especially SRMs which just feel like a ballistic weapon because they dont lock-on like they should) currently suffer.

As far as energy weapons go... Overall im pretty happy with the laser nerfs coming down the pipeline. But I think PPCs need a HUD disruption ability that turns off sensors for 1 second or so after being hit by one. ERPPCs also need faster velocity.

Edited by Khobai, 02 November 2015 - 05:20 AM.

[Raggedyman]

If I may, I think the problem is not with the weapons being indistinct but with the heat mechanic (which impacts how each weapon group is used) is a binary on/off mechanic. If that got fixed to give a wider range of effects/not just be a DPS interrupt then you would get real distinction in the weapon types, because the lore based differences have heat as such a larger consideration.

[Khobai]

Quote

If I may, I think the problem is not with the weapons being indistinct but with the heat mechanic (which impacts how each weapon group is used) is a binary on/off mechanic. If that got fixed to give a wider range of effects/not just be a DPS interrupt then you would get real distinction in the weapon types, because the lore based differences have heat as such a larger consideration.

that would just result in dual gauss+lasers on everything. because dual gauss gives you high pinpoint damage without any heat penalties. while anyone using any other weapons would be suffering heat penalties.

why use weapons that generate heat and give you heat penalties when you can just use gauss and not suffer penalties and still do high pinpoint damage at long range? and youll still have 3-4 lasers as backup for when suffering heat penalties isnt an issue.

penalizing high heat weapons is not a good solution. it heavily biases the game towards gauss. Even if you nerf gauss into the ground then people will just switch to the next best lowheat ballistic weapon (AC5s?). And youre nerfing in circles again...

what mostly effects how weapon groups are used is convergence. thats what needs to be addressed. laser vomit wouldnt be nearly as effective if you couldnt puke all that damage into one location. in battletech if you had a bunch of lasers you couldnt just choose to fire them all at one location, the random hit locations split them up, and that damage splitting is the whole reason 1 ton lasers were balanced. But allowing lasers to all converge on one location fundamentally changes that balance and makes them worth much more than 1 ton.

Edited by Khobai, 02 November 2015 - 05:36 AM.

[Raggedyman]

Khobai, on 02 November 2015 - 05:25 AM, said:

that would just result in dual gauss+lasers on everything. because dual gauss gives you high pinpoint damage without any heat penalties. while anyone using any other weapons would be suffering heat penalties.

why use weapons that generate heat and give you heat penalties when you can just use gauss and not suffer penalties and still do high pinpoint damage at long range? and youll still have 3-4 lasers as backup for when suffering heat penalties isnt an issue.

penalizing high heat weapons is not a good solution. it heavily biases the game towards gauss. if you nerf gauss then people will just switch to the next best lowheat ballistic weapon (AC5s?). And youre nerfing in circles again...

because Gauss has limited ammo and the weapons take up a bunch of slots? (on top of the charge up mechanic)


I totally get how any change would bring in a new meta, and I don't want to kick off a new nerf circle for the hell of it. I'm just suggesting that the weapon expectations of what each group can do is based on a design that has been drawn through from TT game where heat had a lot more variance in it's penalties so had more decisions to be made/gave each weapon type more depth. By reducing heat to "you're fine" or "you need a timeout" that depth is gone, so distinction between weapon types is harder and boating is easier. For example I have never seen anyone packing fallback weapons for when their heatsinks are blown out, but that used to happen in TT all the time and it made big-gun boating way harder.

Any change needs to be done with care to avoid the problems you correctly identified, I just think that the variable effect would get things back onto the design path that is currently having to be hammered around because of their absence.

Edited by Raggedyman, 02 November 2015 - 05:41 AM.

[Greyhart]

The way I see it.

Lasers should be for the long game. Alphaing or firing more than 2 or 3 would have heat penalties and would therefore be a bad idea. but you could sustain damage over time if you properly chain fire and manage heat. perhaps lasers might do higher damage to amour but lower damage to internals

Ballistics should be about the burst damage a lot of damage in a short period but no way to sustain it. to balance this the damage should be spread over more than one part so you can't do high pinpoint damage to a single part i.e. 50% of the damage is transferred to the adjoining section. Ballistics could have lower damage to armour but high damage to internals.

missiles would obviously spread the damage as now but would not fire as often as ballistics so large burst damage but well spread and long cool down. equally good on internals as armour.

[sycocys]

The lower heat cap should solve most of that except guass - if its actually going to get pushed through.

The module system kind of fuxored everything as well.

[DivineEvil]

You do realize that everything is already has been designed, right?

Remove Base Heat Capacity, leave only the one given by heatsinks.
Unnerf Double Heatsinks.
Buff Single Heatsinks.
Remove Ghost Heat.

Nothing else is required.

Edited by DivineEvil, 02 November 2015 - 06:36 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

because Gauss has limited ammo and the weapons take up a bunch of slots? (on top of the charge up mechanic

not really. clan gauss is very compact. only 6 slots and 12 tons. plus you get built in case as clans and dont have to worry about gauss explosion destroying your engine. clan gauss is pretty much the ultimate ballistic weapon.

[H Seldon]

I know this goes against TT, but make gauss generate more heat. ACs should run really cool, their propellant is in the shell. Gauss rounds on the other hand require external energy. Make them run a little less hot than PPCs.

Yes, I know this would be very unpopular...

[sycocys]

Should also require that ammo be loaded in an adjacent part at the furthest away, this silliness with ammo being fed from the legs...

[Greyhart]

problems with gauss are solved by the spread mechanic of ballistics.

S gauss would have a high spread percentage say 50% s a shot by 2 gauss would only do 20 damage to the aimed at section but the remaining 20 would be spread to the adjoining parts of the mech.

The heat system would limit lasers to about 20 points of damage on a single attack and more would result in movement penalties and other penalties.