31 replies to this topic

[Agent CraZy DiP]

@title... I see what you did there.

[Uri Brauer]

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:31 AM, said:

That's not true of every single mech available.

Exactly - so why would you buy a Trebuchet/Centurion/Dragon (etc) chassis when there's no variant which gives you these options?

Fastred, on 11 July 2012 - 05:35 AM, said:

I believe they have already addressed the laser boat issue by making lasers require time on target for full effect. As I understand it Lasers in MWO require time on target to do full damage completely changing the game.

This might be a good point - can't tell until I get to play. It may just mean that only the more skilled can exploit the laserboat's theoretical advantage. There's a risk that this would make LLs less useful, though.

Fastred, on 11 July 2012 - 05:35 AM, said:

Laser boats were effective because you only had to step off snap of one good shot and then hit your coolant and step back into cover in the mech warrior titles.

You're referring to 'coolant flush', which was a feature of MW4, I believe? I skipped that one. That feature just seems to have made the problem worse.

I'm basing my concerns based on the tabletop game primarily (which MWO devs have stated they want to keep close to, if they can). Personally, we've primarily played campaigns using only 3025 mechs (which were fairly well balanced, in the main - some duffers, but nothing overpowered). One recent campaign we ran used 2750 tech and guess what? DHS and laserboats for everyone! (Well, everyone else... I've always wanted a Swayback, so I built a battle-scarred one-armed mongrel with massed SSRM2s which came in at 40t and ran 5/8... but I digress).

Fastred, on 11 July 2012 - 05:35 AM, said:

Lasers have gone from an easy mode point and kill weapon and turned into something that will require a great deal of skill to use effectively.

On the flipside, they'll probably be more effective against fast-moving targets than single shot weapons. Sure, you'll blow that Commando to pieces if you can hit it with an AC/20 round... but are you willing to spend your limited ammo trying? Whereas you can wave the lasers around a bit and be sure to at least get some damage in.

Fastred, on 11 July 2012 - 05:35 AM, said:

I know speaking for myself if I see a laser boat trying to attack anyone on my team I am going to make keeping those lasers on target extremely difficult.

So you think they're so effective you need a 2:1 advantage?

Edited by Uri Brauer, 11 July 2012 - 12:47 PM.

[Reoh]

Uri Brauer, on 11 July 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

Exactly - so why would you buy a Trebuchet/Centurion/Dragon (etc) chassis when there's no variant which gives you these options?

The usual reasons:

• Swayback is too slow for scouting \ raiding.
  
• Swayback lacks Jump Jets \ mobility.
  
• Swayback is missing longe range direct fire \ missile support.
  
• Swayback is too poorly armored for an assault & tank role.
  
• People may just not like it, or have another favorite.
  
• FOTM builds prompt hard counter responses.

Along with everything else I mentioned (and a few more):

• Equipment requires a hardpoint, which limits the numbers\locations.
  
• Not all Chasis have energy hardpoint heavy variants.
  
• Pop-tart laser-sniping is affected by the changes to Mechlab & JumpJet restrictions.
  
• Lasers are Damge over Time, no longer burst damage.
  
• Lasers spike heat fast, then dissipate slowly unlike TT where you only add surplus heat.
  
• We don't know much about Pilot module slots and how those may affect loadouts.

[Xandre Blackheart]

SilentObserver, on 11 July 2012 - 12:22 AM, said:

But its not solved or mitigated. Because you can always pump up your engine rating to compensate. Switch to an XL engine and double the rating. now you have used the same number of critical slots but your mech much faster and running cooler.

DHS are a broken game mechanic. The fix is to make all the "free" heatsinks singles regardless of what the other heatsinks are. This make sure that if you want DHS you have to pay for them.

You do know bigger engines weigh more leaving less tonnage for heatsinks? And as for XL engines, they eat up a LOT of extra crit space in the left and right torsos?

You have yet to convince me it's an issue.

[Uri Brauer]

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Swayback is too slow for scouting \ raiding.

Flashback isn't.

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Swayback is missing longe range direct fire

Hunchhammer isn't.

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Swayback is too poorly armored for an assault & tank role.

Both my designs still have max armour for the weight.

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Equipment requires a hardpoint, which limits the numbers\locations.

HBK-4P has been seen in game footage, and has the hardpoints required.

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Not all Chasis have energy hardpoint heavy variants.

So we'll all be in Hunchbacks (haven't we been here before?)

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Pop-tart laser-sniping

...isn't something I've mentioned.

Reoh, on 11 July 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Lasers spike heat fast, then dissipate slowly unlike TT where you only add surplus heat.

...and all the other weapon types generate heat and have recycle times.
OK, kind of see where you're going here... but since the HBK-4P seems to be able to alpha strike fine, I can't see this being an issue.

Unless... DHS increased only rate of heat dissipation, but not the max heat you could hold at a time? Hmm... that might work.

[Reoh]

• You need a new chasis for each variant, there's no laserboat benefit if you're not in the Swayback or put all your tonnage into engines instead of energy weapons & heat sinks so the Flashback chasis is irrelevant to this particular discussion.
  
• No matter how "max armor" a Hunchback is, it'll never have the armor of an Atlas or any other larger mech.
  
• Swayback does have above average energy hardpoints, but about 1/2 to 1/3 as much as you could put in without them.
  
• Pop-tarting affected "how awful previous games were" in many players eyes, just thought I'd mention it.
  
• Non-energy weapons have significantly reduced heat to damage, so are troubled less by the heat spikes of alpha strikes.

As for DHS\HS, yes that's how they work. Your heat is applied without reduction instantly, you then dissipate it over 10seconds to be at the level you would be in the TT game. A swayback isn't going to have to worry about ammo explosions, but shutting down in the middle of a firefight is never a good thing.

I'm not arguing the Swayback won't pack a big punch up close, it's conceded. Just that it shouldn't be as bad overall as compared to previous Mechwarrior games. We'll all get to find out for ourselves soon enough I hope.

[Uri Brauer]

Carrying on from this thought:

Uri Brauer, on 11 July 2012 - 11:29 PM, said:

Unless... DHS increased only rate of heat dissipation, but not the max heat you could hold at a time?

To clarify, I'm wondering if number of heat sinks alone sets heat capacity, but the heat dissipation rate is doubled for DHS. This might mean that the Flashback (12 DHS) could fire the same number of ML as the HBK-4P (23 HS) in a minute, but critically it couldn't fire all 8 at once - they'd have to fire in salvos of 4 at a time. So it's goodbye alpha strike.

To lay it out in longer form - the 4P would have 23 heat capacity and dissipate 23 heat in (say) 10 seconds. Fire 8ML and you're on full heat (ish) and, in 10 seconds, you can fire your 8ML again.

In the Flashback, you'd have 12 heat capacity but dissipate 12 heat in 5 seconds. Fire 4ML and you're on full heat, and in 5 seconds you're back to zero and can fire the other 4. In another 5 seconds, you can start the cycle again.

(This then gets complicated by the question of recycle times... but for balance with TT, we'd have to assume 10 second recycle time and it all evens out).

Reoh, on 12 July 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

As for DHS\HS, yes that's how they work.

Any solid info to back that up? Don't assume that mechanics will match previous MW games.
It's an interesting theory, otherwise... but I do like it. Losing alpha strike capability will significantly decrease DHS value to players, I think.

Reoh, on 12 July 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

...there's no laserboat benefit if you ... put all your tonnage into engines instead of energy weapons & heat sinks so the Flashback chassis is irrelevant to this particular discussion.

I disagree - putting tonnage into engines so I can run round behind you and drop 8ML into your back armour seems beneficial to me!

Edited by Uri Brauer, 12 July 2012 - 03:12 PM.

[Graphite]

Reoh, on 12 July 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

As for DHS\HS, yes that's how they work. Your heat is applied without reduction instantly, you then dissipate it over 10seconds to be at the level you would be in the TT game.

Yep, this is the only sensible way to do it in real time.

I think this thread is just needless hand-wringing. Of course DHS let you improve designs. :-S
And no doubt the devs are VERY aware of people's concerns about laserboats. I have faith that they'll handle it in a reasonable manner, and it won't really be an issue. Lasers being DoT is already a good example of reducing their effectiveness.
And from the videos we can see that the RoF for ballistic weaponry has been amped up, to make it equally as attractive as energy weapons I guess. A good move.

Edited by Graphite, 13 July 2012 - 01:20 AM.

[JokerPW]

Isn't "Reflective Armor" a good way to prevent laser-boating ?
Honored question.
[]'s

[Uri Brauer]

For me, Reflective Armour falls into the category of 'rules that came along way after I stopped wasting money on every supplement FASA churned out'.

Dated 3058 by Sarna, so that's not due for 9 years (if they stick to the announced plans).

Edited by Uri Brauer, 25 July 2012 - 11:04 AM.

[JaxChris]

Laser boats have always been a strategy/option in table top using 3025 rules. If I want to lure you into a "Lightbringer" Dervish I have behind cover, why can't I? I did it plenty in TT. Medium mech's have always been capable of being fast, well armored laser boats that fill the battlefield. Assault mech's are meant to hold the back line, and Heavies should provide your wide range direct/indirect support. If you try to make every class size into a One Mech Fits All machine, you are missing the point of Battletech completely. Specialized machines for specific tasks that support your strategy.

If you're not ready to field the most potent Med Mech that your C-bill's can buy, then you better be thinking of sitting way back from the action in a Catapult. Since the game is not turn based, there will be a lot of in your face action -- and you need to be ready to face that. And if PGI restricts customization, they have missed the mark. They know they have to provide the widest range for potential variants that the rules allow, so that they don't disappoint so many people that have their favorite old custom variant sheets that they want to put into the game. Providing those means is what will make this game its' money, and not nerfing anything that someone is butt hurt for losing to. And remember, you are not an army of one. You will have team mates that you need to work with to achieve victory and cover each others six.

[Uri Brauer]

JaxChris, on 25 July 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

Laser boats have always been a strategy/option in table top using 3025 rules. If I want to lure you into a "Lightbringer" Dervish I have behind cover, why can't I?

Hmm. Probably because half the tech on that variant isn't available in 3025? And since it's not a canon variant, you probably won't be able to build a Dervish laserboat anyway.

The point is, some of us don't want to see nothing but HBK-4P laserboats in the game. That would be dull.

JaxChris, on 25 July 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

They know they have to provide the widest range for potential variants that the rules allow, so that they don't disappoint so many people that have their favorite old custom variant sheets that they want to put into the game.

No, they know that they have to balance the game so that weapon choice is interesting. That's why they've introduced hardpoint rules.