1094 replies to this topic

[wanderer]

Quote

Not if you make or use heat neutral mechs

Which, amusingly enough is almost impossible outside of 10-second scale.

At 2.5 sec/turn scale (Solaris), a 'Mech with 10 DHS is no longer heat-neutral unless they're firing the equivalent of 5 heat points worth of weapons in 10 sec/turn scale. And that assumes you didn't move an inch. That's not even a pair of medium lasers, never mind what you can squeeze into 20 heat worth of firepower normally.

MWO is very much more along 2.5 sec/turn scaling in terms of heat neutrality.

[wanderer]

Quote

TL;DR
Things that move easier (more engine rating per ton) suffer smaller penalties for the same speed as something heavier with a larger engine. (Ease of movement.)
However, simultaneously, things that need higher throttle to achieve greater movement are not punished as severely.

Honestly how it should be. Targeting modifiers for firing movement in TT are "Walk, Run, Jump", not "distanced moved".

[Quicksilver Aberration]

wanderer, on 10 February 2016 - 02:54 PM, said:

Which, amusingly enough is almost impossible outside of 10-second scale.

True, but that is the core rule set so it is common for a mech to be heat neutral within TT, though not always the best case.

wanderer, on 10 February 2016 - 02:54 PM, said:

MWO is very much more along 2.5 sec/turn scaling in terms of heat neutrality.

Yes, because they wanted heat management to be a thing, which means there has to be a safe threshold where you incur no penalties from high heat, and the heat caps have to be high enough to be reasonable for energy boats.

[Metus regem]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 February 2016 - 02:36 PM, said:

You calculated the wrong way.

An AC40 to the leg of a Nova in this game leaves it with 8 armor left if it is maxed or 1/6th of its max armor left.
An AC20 to the leg of a Nova in TT leaves it with 4 armor left if it is maxed which is 1/6th of its max armor left.

Double the armor/structure means it takes double the damage to put as much of a dent in it.

I think you've got it backwards, an AC 20 here, does 20 damage, just as much as an AC 20 in table top. So by your example of using an AC 40 (two 20's) that Nova is now crippled by missing a leg, with 8 damage transfer to the ST that was attached there...

And for the record, a TT Nova as 20 armour and 12 internals in the legs, not something that gets changed like here....

But if we use your numbers, we are halving the fire power going from here to TT. In the example I used with the Nova's fire power, both of those number are right from both here and TT. So in other words if a mech mounts AC 40 here, it can do it in TT, but in TT that AC 40 is drastically more devastating than it is here...

[Mystere]

Dakota1000, on 10 February 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

Yes, I know all about the TT, but this isn't TT. This is a PC adaptation. You know there is pinpointing in the other PC battletech games and every shot is decided by exactly where you aim?

Just because the older games did it terribly (probably due to CPU limitations then) does not mean it should be done just as terribly too today.

[wanderer]

The reason MWO is very much more along 2.5 sec/scale is because MWO is basically realtime.

"Standard" TT simplifies heat to only having triggers at the end of every ten seconds. It also utterly removes rate of fire as a consideration.

Should we have all weapons carry identical cooldown regardless of size or type? Note that at 2.5 sec, people rarely are in the "safe" range of the heat scale in TT- they usually have at least some negative-effect level of overheat and/or have just spent time cooling down between firings. We have zero negative effects at 1 second "turns" right now, even if we only applied heat effects at 1 sec checks...unless you literally overburn the 'Mech to the point of it melting.

Heat management is barely of note at this point, as it goes from "whelp, nothing" to random Stark Fists of Removal punching your robot.

[Mystere]

Hotthedd, on 10 February 2016 - 02:40 PM, said:

I get the reason the people against this idea keep using the word "random". "Random" causes a knee-jerk reaction equivalent to suggesting impaling puppies, and helps to sway opinion. That is why terms such as probability are construed as "random", even if they are not.

It's the:

Mystere, on 10 February 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

CoF --> Random Numbers --> 100% wild misses --> The Devil/Lucifer/Satan

logic being applied.

[wanderer]

Quote

Just because the older games did it terribly (probably due to CPU limitations then) does not mean it should be done just as terribly too today.

And if you really want to be silly,the first Battletech game was actually Crescent Hawk's Inception, which beat out MechWarrior by a year.

It used random hit tables.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Metus regem, on 10 February 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

I think you've got it backwards, an AC 20 here, does 20 damage, just as much as an AC 20 in table top. So by your example of using an AC 40 (two 20's) that Nova is now crippled by missing a leg, with 8 damage transfer to the ST that was attached there...

No, I don't have it backwards, I think there is just a misunderstanding going on here.

In MWO, an AC40 deals 40 damage, but because of the double armor/structure, proportionally an AC40 does as much damage as a single AC20 in TT. The keyword here being proportional. The AC40 alpha takes as much weight of armor off a mech in MWO as a single AC20 shot does in TT.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 10 February 2016 - 03:12 PM.

[Mystere]

wanderer, on 10 February 2016 - 03:10 PM, said:

And if you really want to be silly,the first Battletech game was actually Crescent Hawk's Inception, which beat out MechWarrior by a year.

It used random hit tables.

Why else do you think people do not mention that?

Edited by Mystere, 10 February 2016 - 03:14 PM.

[Metus regem]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 February 2016 - 03:11 PM, said:

No, I don't have it backwards, I think there is just a misunderstanding going on here.

In MWO, an AC40 deals 40 damage, but because of the double armor/structure, proportionally an AC40 does as much damage as a single AC20 in TT. The keyword here being proportional. The AC40 alpha takes as much weight of armor off a mech in MWO as a single AC20 shot does in TT.

Of that you are correct, but in MWO we often have tripe the rate of fire or more depending on the weapon that TT does, that makes having double the armour and structure almost moot. If we had a way to randomize hit locations on our mechs, even just a little bit, and by a little bit I mean at 500m we would have the STs+CT of an Atlas under our aiming point, we might find that the games get better by lasting just a bit longer.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Metus regem, on 10 February 2016 - 03:18 PM, said:

Of that you are correct, but in MWO we often have tripe the rate of fire or more depending on the weapon that TT does

We also don't have the dissipation to match, which means heat is still a viable limiter of both meaningful burst damage and DPS in general.

[TexAce]

Metus regem, on 10 February 2016 - 03:18 PM, said:

Of that you are correct, but in MWO we often have tripe the rate of fire or more depending on the weapon that TT does, that makes having double the armour and structure almost moot. If we had a way to randomize hit locations on our mechs, even just a little bit, and by a little bit I mean at 500m we would have the STs+CT of an Atlas under our aiming point, we might find that the games get better by lasting just a bit longer.

[Off-Topic] I remember proposing another idea how to lower TTK but keep it nearly the same as of now. Unlimit max armor per location. So basically you would have a max armor you could put on the mech like as now, but you could distribute it as you like. 200 armor on CT? If you wish. All armor distributed only on CT and STs? If you wish so. [/Off-Topic]

[pyrocomp]

TexAce, on 10 February 2016 - 03:22 PM, said:

[Off-Topic] I remember proposing another idea how to lower TTK but keep it nearly the same as of now. Unlimit max armor per location. So basically you would have a max armor you could put on the mech like as now, but you could distribute it as you like. 200 armor on CT? If you wish. All armor distributed only on CT and STs? If you wish so. [/Off-Topic]

Or better just unlock the armor altogether (at double weight cost of extra armor and some critical slots cost) and see where it settles to get better picture. But this requires to get through laser-vomit before that.

[SideSt3p]

I dig it. I've been talking about this since Alpha and I think it would go a long way towards slowing down the game pace and making the game feel more epic.

[Kuritaclan]

pyrocomp, on 10 February 2016 - 03:26 PM, said:

Or better just unlock the armor altogether (at double weight cost of extra armor and some critical slots cost) and see where it settles to get better picture. But this requires to get through laser-vomit before that.

Something that was suggested often ad up 1 slot and scaleable up to a 1 ton armor add ins. And see where it goes. But until now it was rejected. Perhaps it could also start to break the game. I'm looking at U heat neutral Gauss whatever no need for more DHS Mechs.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 10 February 2016 - 03:45 PM.

[wanderer]

I've said it again and again- there's already a timeline-friendly armor that allows literally double the armor tonnage maximums we have now. All PGI has to do is implement hardened armor. It's a game-changer.

[pyrocomp]

Kuritaclan, on 10 February 2016 - 03:44 PM, said:

Something that was suggested often ad up 1 slot and scaleable up to a 1 ton armor add ins. And see where it goes. But until now it was rejected. Perhaps it could also start to break the game. I'm looking at U heat neutral Gauss whatever no need for more DHS Mechs.

For heat, IMHO, the mech should be split into heat exchanging components (not so high rates). The heat points pool will also be split (proportionality is anothe question). Heat dissipation only via heat sinks (and engine, more's to the XLs ). Effectively lowers heatcap before getting damage from overheating a component. No GH needed, no random damage from the heat. DHS from this point can be truly done double. SHS can add to the pool as proposed many times. Any way, as above, it is a more complex mech model (not in terms of polygons, but in terms of it's numerical model). Right now the mech is just a single volume fridge. Literally. One temperarture gauge, destructible shelfs (and whatever lies on them) and fatal when the door falls out or compressor stops. Too simple for a 'giant stompy robot'.

[LordKnightFandragon]

FupDup, on 10 February 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

>Implying that cones are the only way to accomplish that goal

THe true fix is far beyond 1 mechanic. But PGI would just have to actually experiment a little bit. Make some changes, run it on the PTS for awhile, let us learn it and feel for it.

Heat scale fixes, some sort of deviation or Cof to break up the PP accuracy. There are many things beyond just nerfing damage and increasing velocity/burn times that could be done.

What it is now is just ******** though....

[Hotthedd]

Mystere, on 10 February 2016 - 03:09 PM, said:

It's the:



logic being applied.

Ah, the old slippery slope!