47 replies to this topic

[Scanz]

decrease all lasers weapon dmg by 1 and heat penaltys 4->3 7->6 etc
it would give:

1) nerf lasers alphas
2) mech lifetime increased
3) game time increased
4) ballistic get some advantage
5) fix flamers (see another topic)
6) profit

Edited by Scanz, 22 November 2015 - 11:38 AM.

[keith]

u can't. it will just be a cycle of nerfing. no lasers ppl will just go to pinpoint weps. which ever is best, be it ppc, ac 5,10 or 20, or guass. then they will remain top dog for X amount of time. then cycle of nerfing will hit next best wep.

[BearFlag]

I assume we're talking about the oft noted problems with lasers: pin-point damage, long range laser alphas, too frequent alpha'ing. Not many are fond of 700 meter, boated ERL or C-ERL alpha strikes that do full damage.

The OP's suggestion would certainly mitigate a bit, but the problem seems to get worse as each new generation of mechs is released (with oodles of energy hard points).

There have been all kinds of ideas to deal with it - some of which are topics in their own right. Heat management, Cone of Fire, heat caused 'inaccuracy' are among them, enforced chain-firing, etc. There was even a proposal to make lasers have a minimum range.

The problem involves more than one system, but the glaring one that everyone misses is the laser damage chart. Laser do full damage to half ("optimal") range and then diminish linearly. Until recently, this chart was sacrosanct and unchangeable. But PGI opened a can of worms with PTS 3 with arbitrary (target lock nerf), weapon specific and Clan specific nerfs. The changes turned the clean, if unrealistic, chart into a mess.

I think they were looking at the right chart but afraid to do what needs to be done. Get rid of "optimal" range and use a strict linear drop off of laser damage. This is a huge nerf; small and medium lasers might need a boost. But it addresses some of the problems directly and some indirectly.

Pin pointing at close range will still be devastating. But at longer ranges, damage is reduced. Long lasers could still do damage at great distance, even alpha if they want, it'll just be less damage.

Combined with other ideas lasers can be toned down systematically rather than haphazardly.

[Scanz]

keith, on 22 November 2015 - 03:01 PM, said:

u can't. it will just be a cycle of nerfing. no lasers ppl will just go to pinpoint weps. which ever is best, be it ppc, ac 5,10 or 20, or guass. then they will remain top dog for X amount of time. then cycle of nerfing will hit next best wep.

maybe we need nerf all weapons. cuz if ECM is gone = LRM problem , ballistics mech will pwng too. Life time untill death is short. MWO is not Hawken (

[Prof RJ Gumby]

keith, on 22 November 2015 - 03:01 PM, said:

u can't. it will just be a cycle of nerfing. no lasers ppl will just go to pinpoint weps. which ever is best, be it ppc, ac 5,10 or 20, or guass. then they will remain top dog for X amount of time. then cycle of nerfing will hit next best wep.

What if a certain nerf to lasers, whatever nerf that would be, by some miracle or pure luck, will turn out to NOT be an overnerf and lasers will end up not being useless, but just similar in effectiveness to auto cannons and PPCs/Gauss? Like, you know, this weapon is better in this and that weapon is better in that, pick what you prefer/basing on what do you want to do in battle?

Hard to imagine I know, but hey, it happened in other games, let's just believe it could happen in MWO too.

[DivineEvil]

It's a wrong approach. Lasers themselves and their stats are fine. The problem is non-optimised, or even a bit broken heat management values. There are three general methods of fixing the issue:

• Adding base heat dissipation. There would be both base capacity and dissipation, and heatsinks would also increase both values. It would only make brawling in line with alpha-strike snapshooting, allowing loadouts with little to no heatsinks using ballistics and missiles to continuously engage laser-vomit. Unfavorable method because it would not solve laser-vomit abuse itself, would not make heatsinks more viable and would further reduce TTK.
  
• Removing heat-capacity bonus from heatsinks. Static 30 base heat capacity would strictly limit the number of heat-based weapons that can be fired before overheating, while heatsinks would only going to determine dissipation rates. Unfavorable method, because it would reduce the customization options and make heatsinks less viable.
  
• Removing 30 base heat capacity. Heatsinks alone would determine the heat management. Number of heatsinks would determine both capacity and dissipation, dynamically determining the alpha-strike limits and allowing any mech to completely cool-off in 10 seconds, not counting for heatisink variables. Favorable method, because it would solve the laser-vomit and extreme laser-boating but wouldn't eliminate the alpha-strikes entirely, would increase heatsink's viability and customization value and would increase TTK, all at the same time.

It's assumed that to some degree these changes might allow for removal of Ghost Heat and reviving the original DHS efficiency and buffing SHS base efficiencies.

[GweNTLeR]

Just decrease laser optimal range for lasers by ~10-20% and make maximum range multy 1.5 instead of 2. This will make ppc's missiles and other stuff a better choice and remove alpha vomit

[DivineEvil]

GweNTLeR, on 23 November 2015 - 04:12 AM, said:

Just decrease laser optimal range for lasers by ~10-20% and make maximum range multy 1.5 instead of 2. This will make ppc's missiles and other stuff a better choice and remove alpha vomit

It would not remove the alpha-vomit most certainly.

If anything, I'd argue for rolling pulse lasers range back to it's original values, while increasing their base cooldown rates, just to make them more definite med/close range weapons.

[GweNTLeR]

DivineEvil, on 23 November 2015 - 06:09 AM, said:

It would not remove the alpha-vomit most certainly.

If anything, I'd argue for rolling pulse lasers range back to it's original values, while increasing their base cooldown rates, just to make them more definite med/close range weapons.

Yes,it would. Here is why:
1)Alpha vomit is used mostly on clantech.
2)Clantech vomit builds almost always consists of 2xERLL/LPL + NxERML/MPL
3)With my suggestions, effective vomit range will drop to ~450meters(maaybe even less),since ERML/MPL will not be able to strike effectively further
4)And here we have AC5 mechs/ppc mechs/lrm mechs really shining on that range,since they have some range(and,hence,damage) advantage now
Still, Large/medium/small lasers will remain useful at _their_own_ range.The only difference will be the impossibility to use them in convergence.

[Scanz]

create a dmg or accuracy penaltys when heat over 70% for clans and 80% for IS .
HUD blinking like in MW4

Quote

Just decrease laser optimal range for lasers by ~10-20% and make maximum range multy 1.5 instead of 2. This will make ppc's missiles and other stuff a better choice and remove alpha vomit

Laser come to close
and its a advantage clan technology

[Jman5]

Somethings gotta give for the low-ton lasers because they're just too efficient. Particularly the Clan ones. Personally, I'm with OP. I would just lop off 1 damage on each laser and call it a day. It reduces damage on a laser boat by 5 or 6. This wouldn't kill it, but it does make the alpha strike a little more reasonable and survivable.

[Kaeb Odellas]

DivineEvil, on 23 November 2015 - 01:27 AM, said:

It's a wrong approach. Lasers themselves and their stats are fine. The problem is non-optimised, or even a bit broken heat management values. There are three general methods of fixing the issue:

• Adding base heat dissipation. There would be both base capacity and dissipation, and heatsinks would also increase both values. It would only make brawling in line with alpha-strike snapshooting, allowing loadouts with little to no heatsinks using ballistics and missiles to continuously engage laser-vomit. Unfavorable method because it would not solve laser-vomit abuse itself, would not make heatsinks more viable and would further reduce TTK.
  
• Removing heat-capacity bonus from heatsinks. Static 30 base heat capacity would strictly limit the number of heat-based weapons that can be fired before overheating, while heatsinks would only going to determine dissipation rates. Unfavorable method, because it would reduce the customization options and make heatsinks less viable.
  
• Removing 30 base heat capacity. Heatsinks alone would determine the heat management. Number of heatsinks would determine both capacity and dissipation, dynamically determining the alpha-strike limits and allowing any mech to completely cool-off in 10 seconds, not counting for heatisink variables. Favorable method, because it would solve the laser-vomit and extreme laser-boating but wouldn't eliminate the alpha-strikes entirely, would increase heatsink's viability and customization value and would increase TTK, all at the same time.

It's assumed that to some degree these changes might allow for removal of Ghost Heat and reviving the original DHS efficiency and buffing SHS base efficiencies.

Removing the base 30 heat cap would be absolutely ruinous to anything but Gauss and AC5 builds unless you massively buff all heat sinks.

[Lily from animove]

Kaeb Odellas, on 24 November 2015 - 06:33 PM, said:

Removing the base 30 heat cap would be absolutely ruinous to anything but Gauss and AC5 builds unless you massively buff all heat sinks.

No it would not. gaus are superheavy but rather low dps. And cannot boated like hell. AC 5 dakkawolves would stay an issue, but lets be honest, the fact that 6 AC 5's do NOT overheat at all is something that is broken within itself.
30heatcap woudl force people to use mixed builds able to squeeze out the best dps comapred to the range they are in. because most weapons would reach this cap rather quickly.

Jman5, on 23 November 2015 - 11:07 AM, said:

Somethings gotta give for the low-ton lasers because they're just too efficient. Particularly the Clan ones. Personally, I'm with OP. I would just lop off 1 damage on each laser and call it a day. It reduces damage on a laser boat by 5 or 6. This wouldn't kill it, but it does make the alpha strike a little more reasonable and survivable.

This is what i said right at the beginnign fo clan introduction, but instead they heated up the lasers, which of course did hurt the smaller mechs more than the large ones having enough DHS.
lowering damage would mean every mech thats small and has a low amount of weapons will have more similar dps, because he cna fire all his guns more often, while the large mech would reach heatcap quite fast. But currently too many mechs can alpha to death of the opponent, which litereally means they don't have a real heatcap limiting within some encounters. heatcaps can help to reduce the dammage bursts without lowering the general dps by altering the gameplay form "pop srtike, hide cooldown and redo" into a constant firefight where aim and the right weapon choice and circle will be the factors of how the encounter turns out. Currently its more about who burst suprises the other opponent more often.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Lily from animove, on 25 November 2015 - 04:21 AM, said:

No it would not. gaus are superheavy but rather low dps. And cannot boated like hell. AC 5 dakkawolves would stay an issue, but lets be honest, the fact that 6 AC 5's do NOT overheat at all is something that is broken within itself.
30heatcap woudl force people to use mixed builds able to squeeze out the best dps comapred to the range they are in. because most weapons would reach this cap rather quickly.

I wasn't talking about having a 30 heatcap (though that would still suck) I was talking about his suggestion to remove the base 30 points of heat and rely solely on installed heatsinks. Most mechs would struggle to even reach a 30 heatcap under that design.

And you really think a 30 heatcap wouldn't break absolutely every energy build in the game? What about mechs that only have energy hardpoints? The Black Knights? The Grasshoppers? Most Thunderbolts? Awesomes? Nova Primes and Hunchback 4P?

[DivineEvil]

Kaeb Odellas, on 25 November 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

I wasn't talking about having a 30 heatcap (though that would still suck) I was talking about his suggestion to remove the base 30 points of heat and rely solely on installed heatsinks. Most mechs would struggle to even reach a 30 heatcap under that design.

So what? 30 heat cap by itself allows to fire 7 medium lasers or 5 C-ERMLs without overheating. Besides, I've mentioned that the removal of base hat cap would also allow to remove ghost heat and to restore DHS, which precisely means getting them back to 2.0 efficiency anywhere you place them, as it used to be. If there would be the case of combat becoming too slow, then there is a obvious solution that had to be brought in the first place - replacing 30 base heat cap with 2-3 base heat dissipation per second. That would make combat more dynamic and agressive, while still keeping the alpha-strike in appropriate place.

Quote

And you really think a 30 heatcap wouldn't break absolutely every energy build in the game? What about mechs that only have energy hardpoints? The Black Knights? The Grasshoppers? Most Thunderbolts? Awesomes? Nova Primes and Hunchback 4P?

Energy-based mechs were originally concieved for the idea of universal endurance. That is the reason why all of them are initially built with the variety of different Energy weapons, with different heat and range profiles, that can be used in the variety of situations, indefinitely. Removing heat cap will not break these energy mechs, - they are already broken, but in another way - and removal of base heat while buffing DHS (and probably buffing all SHS to 1.4 also) simply will put them in place.

Base heat cap is not affecting the energy mechs alone, though. The entire combat dynamics are broken because of it. Lack of any heat dissipation adjustments (held against the 250+% increase in weapon cooldowns) together with nerfed DHS, makes continuous skirmishing and brawling unviable, while bloated heat capacity, as result of combined base and heatsink heat cap bonuses, allows for laser-vomit builds to prosper and dominate. With any of energy mechs you are encouraged to boat as many of the same weapons as possible, to unleash one laser-barfs after another, bringing some ridiculous amounts of FLD, but after several of such shots you're virtually forced to withdraw for roughly 30 seconds in order to cool off, which is big, considering the match time limits.

Same is true for missile and ballistic equipped mechs - they're restricted by their spending of tonnage on heavier, larger and fragile weapons and explosive ammunition, unable to spare much on heatsinks, and sometimes cannot afford prolonged combat, but are unbound in the firepower they can unleash while base heat cap still holds. UAC boats can get overheat and AC/40 mechs can get overheat, but they do too much damage before they would. SRMs and AC/2s overheat mechs all the time, and no sacrifices for heatsinks are enough to make them competetive. Flamers are also pathetic due to the amount of heat cap the target possess.

Overall, base heat cap was the initial reason behind the issues of combat dynamics. Nerfed DHS, bumping heat on particular weapons and implementing Ghost Heat, all were the misses and made the original issue even worse.

Edited by DivineEvil, 25 November 2015 - 03:24 PM.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

I'm with DivineEvil on this one.

Heat is broken. The whole "base heat with add-ons" scheme is unfortunate.

There are a number of ways to address heat that would be acceptable. I tend to like DivinEvil's idea to remove base heat and let heatsinks dominate (it has the advantage of requiring tonnage and creating meaningful player choice).

[Lily from animove]

Kaeb Odellas, on 25 November 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

I wasn't talking about having a 30 heatcap (though that would still suck) I was talking about his suggestion to remove the base 30 points of heat and rely solely on installed heatsinks. Most mechs would struggle to even reach a 30 heatcap under that design.

And you really think a 30 heatcap wouldn't break absolutely every energy build in the game? What about mechs that only have energy hardpoints? The Black Knights? The Grasshoppers? Most Thunderbolts? Awesomes? Nova Primes and Hunchback 4P?

30 hetacap woudl break energy builds as they currently exist, because it would alter the way how mechs will be deisgned and used.

HBK, would probbaly house a large laser 2 or 3 meds rest smalls. because lasers are more heatefficient the smaller they are. and this menas the HBK would choose to fire the lasers which are currently neede din the situation and not just "FIRE ALL THE LAZ0RS 3x" gameplay.

play MW3, build a NVA prime, true dubs. it palys different, and with correct heatsink instead of this 1.5 stuff and too huge heattreshold people woud alpha less and chain or volley fire more often in smaller salves and load lasers for various ranges.

Why do you think that PGI increased nearly all clanlasers heat from their initial TT values as they implemented them into the test server? Because they could be spammed WAY too often (especially CER-mediums). And this was not because the heat of these lasers was too low, it was beause of the heattreshold being to huge. Poeple used NVA's firing 6 CERML and 6CERSL at ONCE. because they were not in a ghostheat group. SO PGI put them there. a 30 heattreshold would not even make this encessary, because 30 heat limits extremely what you can fire at ONCE. Even with the lower TT values.

Edited by Lily from animove, 26 November 2015 - 01:40 AM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

DivineEvil, on 25 November 2015 - 03:17 PM, said:

So what? 30 heat cap by itself allows to fire 7 medium lasers or 5 C-ERMLs without overheating. Besides, I've mentioned that the removal of base hat cap would also allow to remove ghost heat and to restore DHS, which precisely means getting them back to 2.0 efficiency anywhere you place them, as it used to be. If there would be the case of combat becoming too slow, then there is a obvious solution that had to be brought in the first place - replacing 30 base heat cap with 2-3 base heat dissipation per second. That would make combat more dynamic and agressive, while still keeping the alpha-strike in appropriate place.


Energy-based mechs were originally concieved for the idea of universal endurance. That is the reason why all of them are initially built with the variety of different Energy weapons, with different heat and range profiles, that can be used in the variety of situations, indefinitely. Removing heat cap will not break these energy mechs, - they are already broken, but in another way - and removal of base heat while buffing DHS (and probably buffing all SHS to 1.4 also) simply will put them in place.

Base heat cap is not affecting the energy mechs alone, though. The entire combat dynamics are broken because of it. Lack of any heat dissipation adjustments (held against the 250+% increase in weapon cooldowns) together with nerfed DHS, makes continuous skirmishing and brawling unviable, while bloated heat capacity, as result of combined base and heatsink heat cap bonuses, allows for laser-vomit builds to prosper and dominate. With any of energy mechs you are encouraged to boat as many of the same weapons as possible, to unleash one laser-barfs after another, bringing some ridiculous amounts of FLD, but after several of such shots you're virtually forced to withdraw for roughly 30 seconds in order to cool off, which is big, considering the match time limits.

Same is true for missile and ballistic equipped mechs - they're restricted by their spending of tonnage on heavier, larger and fragile weapons and explosive ammunition, unable to spare much on heatsinks, and sometimes cannot afford prolonged combat, but are unbound in the firepower they can unleash while base heat cap still holds. UAC boats can get overheat and AC/40 mechs can get overheat, but they do too much damage before they would. SRMs and AC/2s overheat mechs all the time, and no sacrifices for heatsinks are enough to make them competetive. Flamers are also pathetic due to the amount of heat cap the target possess.

Overall, base heat cap was the initial reason behind the issues of combat dynamics. Nerfed DHS, bumping heat on particular weapons and implementing Ghost Heat, all were the misses and made the original issue even worse.

TruDubs would only give you a 30 point heat cap if you carry 15 DHS. Most IS lights and mediums would be hard pressed to fit that many in a build unless they can fit in a big XL engine. Removing the base 30 especially screws over the smaller lights that have to depend on energy weapons and can only squeeze in the minimum 10 heatsinks.

Laservomit builds aren't OP because of the heat cap. They're OP because of instant pinpoint convergence. Laservomit would still be potent in a low heatcap, high dissipation game, only instead of being massive peek-and-hide alpha monsters, they'd be powerful sustained-fire brawlers.

Further, PGI messed with heat capacity because of the way it works in tabletop. Heat is dissipated in the same turn as weapons are fired, so a mech with 30 heatsinks (or 15 dubs) can fire 2 ERPPCs in one turn and end the turn with zero heat and suffer no heat penalties because each turn is 10 seconds. If we translated the heat penalty scale from tabletop and stuck to the 30 point heat scale, each time you fire an ERPPC you'd suffer movement and accuracy penalties

And flamers aren't pathetic because of the heat cap. They're pathetic because the devs couldn't figure out a way to make them useful without making them open to abuse. 9 Flamer hunchbacks were a thing, and it was not fun to boil to death in your mech and have absolutely nothing you could do about it.


EDIT: I agree that the heat system is pretty messed up, but doing away with base heat altogether is not the answer. Giving different mechs different base heat capacities would be an interesting avenue for balancing mechs, however.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 26 November 2015 - 01:52 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Kaeb Odellas, on 26 November 2015 - 01:40 AM, said:

TruDubs would only give you a 30 point heat cap if you carry 15 DHS. Most IS lights and mediums would be hard pressed to fit that many in a build unless they can fit in a big XL engine. Removing the base 30 especially screws over the smaller lights that have to depend on energy weapons and can only squeeze in the minimum 10 heatsinks.

Laservomit builds aren't OP because of the heat cap. They're OP because of instant pinpoint convergence. Laservomit would still be potent in a low heatcap, high dissipation game, only instead of being massive peek-and-hide alpha monsters, they'd be powerful sustained-fire brawlers.

And flamers aren't pathetic because of the heat cap. They're pathetic because the devs couldn't figure out a way to make them useful without making them open to abuse. 9 Flamer hunchbacks were a thing, and it was not fun to boil to death in your mech and have absolutely nothing you could do about it.


EDIT: I agree that the heat system is pretty messed up, but doing away with base heat altogether is not the answer. Giving different mechs different base heat capacities would be an interesting avenue for balancing mechs, however.

No what we want is fixed 30 heattreshold and heatsinks NOT affecting the heatcap, heatsinks just sink heat and nothing else.

and yes laservomit IS OP because of its spammability. With 30 ehatcap you cna fire a group once follwed wiht break, ro you keep steady laserfire. but in all fo these cases it allows to twist away more damage or distribute it. but being able to fire a volley of 12CERML within 1.7 seconds makes it basically hard for the one receiving to "dodge" or twist damage. When he gets ambushed. And thats why laservomit is populat, huge laods fo damage, pop out, fire pop back. hardly retailiation.Or take a 8CERML 2 gauss direwold, peek fire all the massive dps, and see a section blow off from most mechs. Hilarious thats ucha mech does not blow up by overheating as it should be.

[Sigmar Sich]

About heatsinks and heatcapacity, i once had a suggestion,
In short - base heatcapacity cut to 10, all heatsinks have +1 heatcapacity, and SHS have 1 dissipation rate, DHS have 2.
This lowers overall heatcapacity of mech, but not killing builds with minimum heatsinks. And slightly boosts SHS, for big heatcapacity, if used in numbers.
Some time ago, i had idea, maybe base mech heatcapacity should be individual for every mech? Depending on relative size. For example Nova would have more base heatcapacity than Stormcrow, or Thunderbolt > Grasshopper. A little quirk for mechs with worse hitboxes