132 replies to this topic

[Imperius]

Greyhart, on 24 August 2016 - 03:45 AM, said:

I return to this thread and think why are we not testing CoF rather than ED or make CoF a consequence of going over the ED threshold.

Please move thread to K-town. Unless you want me to go full Mad Cat MK II

[Greyhart]

Imperius, on 24 August 2016 - 05:31 AM, said:

Please move thread to K-town. Unless you want me to go full Mad Cat MK II

The Mad cat MK II is not currently in the timeline. You going to attack with blueprints?

paper cuts are dangerous!

Edited by Greyhart, 24 August 2016 - 06:12 AM.

[Frankdark]

Love this idee and the conzept!!!

[Troutmonkey]

Greyhart, on 24 August 2016 - 03:45 AM, said:

I return to this thread and think why are we not testing CoF rather than ED or make CoF a consequence of going over the ED threshold.

Exactly what I was thinking. I "like" Energy Draw and think it will be much better than the current system, but I do believe that punishing accuracy will hit alpha strikes much harder than a bit of extra heat after the fact. That, and even with the extra UI layers PGI is adding reticle bloom is still much easier to understand as it's common practice in pretty much every shooter ever.

Imperius, on 24 August 2016 - 05:31 AM, said:

Please move thread to K-town. Unless you want me to go full Mad Cat MK II

Or you know, we could just report and send you an a forced vacation from the forums

[Wecx]

I think the point is that in a day somebody came up with an idea, while PGI has had YEARS and hasn't come up with anything.

[Rakshasa]

SkaerKrow, on 11 February 2016 - 12:02 PM, said:

This will never see the light of day in game, but you guys are free to live out your dreams on the forum. I do appreciate the OP's dedication to this idea, even if his side-kick is a bit obnoxious.

PGI themselves said something similar about 3PV. Never say never.

On the point of wandering weapons being "unrealistic", well...we've got giant robots, weapons with less range than modern firearms, 'Mechs that weigh so little it's ridiculous, pilots sat in the heads behind armoured glass instead of inside the centre of mass behind thick armour, and canon designs choosing to use ammo-limited weapons when unlimited-use energy equivalents exist, without the risk of exploding ammo, amongst others. Take your pick.

If you're really bothered about some kind of in-game justification for why the guns wobble, as well as Troutmonkey's targeting computer load mechanic you could also say, for example, that maybe 'Mechs, being stompy robots from the future, also engage in passive cybernetic warfare where their onboard computers are constantly trying to interfere with enemy targeting systems while protecting themselves from being screwed with. Normally it's a stalemate, but increased load means errors slip in and cause the targeting system to deviate. It doesn't matter. Personally I don't think it would even need something like that - 'Mechs in BattleTech are supposed to have glitches and bad calibration to deal with thanks to all the technical backsliding caused by a bunch of overprivileged sociopathic nobles risking the sum total of human progress in their quest to sit at the top of the smoking heap of wreckage left behind by the collapse of the Star League, So overloaded targeting computers works just fine by me.

Handwavium is a common narrative tool - all it needs is to be semi-believable, consistent, and something to hang the mechanics on. If it helps add balance and interest, I'll take a kilo of that over a ton of selective realism. Balance over lore, as someone said.

Edited by Rakshasa, 24 August 2016 - 05:30 PM.

[DAYLEET]

Rakshasa, on 24 August 2016 - 04:06 PM, said:

PGI themselves said something similar about 3PV. Never say never.

3PV was their idea.

[Rakshasa]

DAYLEET, on 24 August 2016 - 04:20 PM, said:

3PV was their idea.

Russ was initially dead-set against the idea though. There was concern it would provide too much of an advantage over cockpit view, but in the end they changed their mind with conditions - hence the little floating camera drone which follows the 'Mech about.

[Mystere]

Rakshasa, on 24 August 2016 - 04:29 PM, said:

Russ was initially dead-set against the idea though. There was concern it would provide too much of an advantage over cockpit view, but in the end they changed their mind with conditions - hence the little floating camera drone which follows the 'Mech about.

And they could have fully developed the drone idea. Instead, they ****** it up just like almost everything else, hugely in fear of the loud whiny masses of the "But they promised not to do it!" kind.

[Ratpoison]

Troutmonkey, on 24 August 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

Or you know, we could just report and send you an a forced vacation from the forums

Threatening forum reports like a true badass.

Good to see the supporters of this still have no class.

[Dirkdaring]

Troutmonkey, on 09 February 2016 - 06:24 AM, said:

Okay so I've gone full hog into try to show people exactly how I'd like the pinpoint alpha strike problem solved.

It's not a problem in the first place.

[Mystere]

Dirkdaring, on 31 August 2016 - 04:13 PM, said:

It's not a problem in the first place.

What problem is Ghost Heat and Energy Draw trying to solve, again?

I mean, why even have them at all?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 01 September 2016 - 08:33 AM, said:

I mean, why even have them at all?

That's a good question considering I don't think we need either.

[kapusta11]

Mystere, on 01 September 2016 - 08:33 AM, said:

What problem is Ghost Heat and Energy Draw trying to solve, again?

I mean, why even have them at all?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 September 2016 - 09:12 AM, said:

That's a good question considering I don't think we need either.

So... Battlemasters should be allowed to fire 5 LPLs / 5-6 ERLLs simultaneously? Or 4 PPCs? 4x UAC10 Kodiak is fine too?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

So... Battlemasters should be allowed to fire 5 LPLs / 5-6 ERLLs simultaneously? Or 4 PPCs? 4x UAC10 Kodiak is fine too?

5-6 ERLL would be nice just to see them potentially be useful outside of maps like Polar and Alpine, would allow them to potentially have longer durations to counter the power of stacking them.

4 PPC or 2 AC20 are fine because their counterparts can be better, 4 UAC10 would need a change in UACs like they should've had ages ago (longer bursts, faster velocity, makes aiming less troublesome for the user but allows a pilot to spread the damage easier). IS LPLs need a longer duration and have for a while now (just like cLPLs needed a bit of a range nerf for a while now).

The main problem with this game is most weapons aren't designed around combinations, and when they tend to match up, they are nerfed because none of their counterparts are viable, which makes that combination really strong. PPC/AC5/Gauss, Laser/Gauss, and LBX/Splat combinations are good examples of synergy (though in some cases like the LBX/Splat, one is supplemental rather than competitive sadly), this game doesn't encourage enough combinations thus why boating has been dominant.

Oh, also lowered heat caps (heat sinks should impact heat capacity overall) to encourage mixing low heat weapons with a bunch of energy weapons.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 01 September 2016 - 10:35 AM.

[kapusta11]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 September 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

5-6 ERLL would be nice just to see them potentially be useful outside of maps like Polar and Alpine, would allow them to potentially have longer durations to counter the power of stacking them.

4 PPC or 2 AC20 are fine because their counterparts can be better, 4 UAC10 would need a change in UACs like they should've had ages ago (longer bursts, faster velocity, makes aiming less troublesome for the user but allows a pilot to spread the damage easier). IS LPLs need a longer duration and have for a while now (just like cLPLs needed a bit of a range nerf for a while now).

The main problem with this game is most weapons aren't designed around combinations, and when they tend to match up, they are nerfed because none of their counterparts are which makes that combination really strong. PPC/AC5/Gauss, Laser/Gauss, and LBX/Splat combinations are good examples of synergy (though in some cases like the LBX/Splat, one is supplemental rather than competitive sadly), this game doesn't encourage enough combinations thus why boating has been dominant.

Oh, also lowered heat caps (heat sinks should impact heat capacity overall) to encourage mixing low heat weapons with a bunch of energy weapons.

Buy if you nerf weapons themselves (longer ERLL/LPL duration) lesser builds will suffer more. For example 6 ERLL Battlemaster will be 2x better than 3 ERLL medium while now it's more like 1.5x better due to burn time "increase" when you group fire. You'll end up with mechs that are times better/worse than the others, that's a recipe for disaster in a game where you have one mech and one life per match. Are 3 LPLs with .67 sec duration that weight 21 ton without additional heatsinks OP? Or 3 ERLLs with 1.25 sec duration? I think not but you suggest to nerf them. If anything, you can just buff ERLL duration right away to make above mentioned Battlemaster build viable outside of polar, I doubt that 3 ERLL mechs will suddenly become OP.

You said it yourself in the third paragraph. "Weapons are not designed around combinations" but they were, and that was the reason why the were nerfed, they were too good WHEN combined and not too good when they were not. Thats why nerf's like AC velocity nerfs of the past achived little, they don't affect the gap between combos and an instance of just a pair of weapons in question being used. It's the reason why ED sucks. It assigns draw values to the weapons themselves, it doesn't care whether you will combo them weapons of the same type or weapons that don't sync at all. There's even a thread suggesting 3 (3!) energy bars on PTS forum.

IIRC MW4 used the same approach, weapon stats were nerfed to the point where if you don't boat enough of them you might as well just not bring them at all.

Hopefully that makes sense cause at this point I'm not sure I'm making myself clear, sorry english is not my first language. Basically 1+1 should not be 2 because 2 is OP when compared to 1

For this reason, and I know how stupid this might sound but, I like GH, it actually encourages mixed loadout builds without making individual weapons worthless. And it could've done a much better job if PGI were willing to add linked penalty groups for problematic combos and then improve weapon sync between those weapons (same velocity for Gauss and ERPPCs or AC5s and normal PPCs, or, if we had new tech, SNPPCs and AC10s etc.)

And I don't like the idea of low heat cap. It will remove the difference between alpha and dps builds once you realize that hot builds reach "oh sh!t my dps is now ridiculously low" moment too soon and buff dissipation to compensate. Some mechs are just stuck with all energy loadouts. It's how TT worked btw. Laser and gun boats of the same strength were equally hot/cool once you factor in tonnage and crits that were spent on both loadouts. And with MWO's mech customization most mechs would've been completelly heat neutral.

Also, I'm not a very good light pilot but I think those who are won't like the idea of being hit by 40 FLD alpha.

Edited by kapusta11, 01 September 2016 - 11:44 AM.

[Mystere]

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

You said it yourself in the third paragraph. "Weapons are not designed around combinations" but they were, and that was the reason why the were nerfed, they were too good WHEN combined and not too good when they were not. Thats why nerf's like AC velocity nerfs of the past achived little, they don't affect the gap between combos and an instance of just a pair of weapons in question being used. It's the reason why ED sucks. It assigns draw values to the weapons themselves, it doesn't care whether you will combo them weapons of the same type or weapons that don't sync at all. There's even a thread suggesting 3 (3!) energy bars on PTS forum.

Frankly the 3-bar system suggested works for me. But it might be a tad bit too complicated for most -- including PGI.

Alternatively, PGI can make Ghost Heat simpler and more understandable by creating simpler grouping rules like (for example):

• Lasers/PPCs: Small:1 point; Mediums:2 points; Large/PPC:3 points --> 9 Points MAX (e.g. 3 Large Lasers MAX before GH)
  
• LRMS: LRM5:1; LRM10:1.5; LRM15:2; LRM20:3 --> 6 points MAX (e.g. 2 LRM20s MAX before GH)
  
• etc.

I think this is better than ED going down fully to weapon-specific draw values. We're talking about 50+ weapons here. Who's going to memorize all that.

Edited by Mystere, 01 September 2016 - 11:48 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

Buy if you nerf weapons themselves (longer ERLL/LPL duration) lesser builds will suffer more.

Look, we have to accept this is the way the game is played, single weapons used with other weapons that have no synergy is going to fall to the wayside without some convoluted system. The goal should be to create synergies that those single weapons are no longer worthless. Like the Gauss-Laser vomit builds that centered around a single Gauss rifle and a bunch of ERMLs.

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

For example 6 ERLL Battlemaster will be 2x better than 3 ERLL medium while now it's more like 1.5x better due to burn time "increase" when you group fire.

You are correct, before, the 5-6 ERLL Battlemaster really wasn't that strong compared to medium/heavies though so I don't find it as much of an issue.

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

Are 3 LPLs with .67 sec duration that weight 21 ton without additional heatsinks OP? Or 3 ERLLs with 1.25 sec duration? I think not but you suggest to nerf them.

Are 3 LPL/3 ERLL builds stronger than most mediums on the IS side (since those are what would run them) and then you have your answer, which is yes, laser vomit mediums that abused LPL/ERLLs were really strong before the HBK-IIC-A came about.

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

You said it yourself in the third paragraph. "Weapons are not designed around combinations" but they were, and that was the reason why the were nerfed, they were too good WHEN combined

WHY is that a problem though, the only reason they were TOO strong when combined was because they were the only combination that had any sort of synergy, that's why there are often so few combinations in the meta at one time because PGI focuses on nerfing that combination rather than creating more that could potentially be competitive.

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

IIRC MW4 used the same approach, weapon stats were nerfed to the point where if you don't boat enough of them you might as well just not bring them at all.

That's because the game was designed around group fire. The idea of firing a single medium laser and having it not be effective was just a silly idea, and still is unless we go to some forced chain fire gameplay medium. They are a 1 ton weapon trying to compete against weapons that are upwards of 5x their weight in a system that effectively tries to balance weapons by tonnage in some way.

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

And I don't like idea of low heat cap. It will remove the difference between alpha and dps builds once you realize that hot builds reach "oh sh!t my dps is now ridiculously low" moment too soon and buff dissipation to compensate.

Don't get me wrong, I want alphas and dps builds to coexist, but the most egregious alpha offenders of the past have been more plausible because of the insanely high heat caps (even compared to MW4) that allowed for things like the Space Whale. I'm not saying we need to go from 80+ heat caps to 30, but we do need to lower it a bit to force a little more pressure on what alphas oriented builds to consider lowering them for better sustainability.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 01 September 2016 - 11:48 AM.

[kapusta11]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 September 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

WHY is that a problem though, the only reason they were TOO strong when combined was because they were the only combination that had any sort of synergy, that's why there are often so few combinations in the meta at one time because PGI focuses on nerfing that combination rather than creating more that could potentially be competitive.

Because 4 UAC10 Kodiak becomes 2x better than 2 x UAC10 Hunchback. Who's going to decide on who will play what? A game should have at least a semblance of 1:1 class balance.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 September 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

Look, we have to accept this is the way the game is played, single weapons used with other weapons that have no synergy is going to fall to the wayside without some convoluted system. The goal should be to create synergies that those single weapons are no longer worthless. Like the Gauss-Laser vomit builds that centered around a single Gauss rifle and a bunch of ERMLs.

I wasn't talking about frankenmechs, the fact that they will never work is dictated by common sense and I'm all up for more synergies between weapons, although we'll probably need some new tech for that. My point was that heavies and assaults would become much stronger compared to mediums and lights, even stronger than they are now.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 September 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

Are 3 LPL/3 ERLL builds stronger than most mediums on the IS side (since those are what would run them) and then you have your answer, which is yes, laser vomit mediums that abused LPL/ERLLs were really strong before the HBK-IIC-A came about.

Yea, I know that 3 LPLs/ERLLs is or at least used to be a premier meduim mech loadout but is it OP enough, compared to everything else on the battlefield, to be nerfed? You see no point in GH but how will you keep assaults, that can simply boat more large lasers, from becoming OP compared to medium mechs by tweaking the very same lasers that those medium mechs use?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 September 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

That's because the game was designed around group fire. The idea of firing a single medium laser and having it not be effective was just a silly idea, and still is unless we go to some forced chain fire gameplay medium. They are a 1 ton weapon trying to compete against weapons that are upwards of 5x their weight in a system that effectively tries to balance weapons by tonnage in some way.

Exactly my point. I doubt that 2 UAC10 are effective enough when mechs with twice as much armor and twice as many guns run around unimpeded. Just and example.

You see. the removal of GH will change little for lights and mediums while it will make all the difference for heavier classes that are already more popular because they are better.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 September 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

Don't get me wrong, I want alphas and dps builds to coexist, but the most egregious alpha offenders of the past have been more plausible because of the insanely high heat caps (even compared to MW4) that allowed for things like the Space Whale. I'm not saying we need to go from 80+ heat caps to 30, but we do need to lower it a bit to force a little more pressure on what alphas oriented builds to consider lowering them for better sustainability.

The offenders are in the past so the problem then? Why lower heat cap when sustained dps builds already beat alpha strike ones unless you play way too passive?

Mystere, on 01 September 2016 - 11:45 AM, said:

Frankly the 3-bar system suggested works for me. But it might be a tad bit too complicated for most -- including PGI.

Alternatively, PGI can make Ghost Heat simpler and more understandable by creating simpler grouping rules like (for example):

• Lasers/PPCs: Small:1 point; Mediums:2 points; Large/PPC:3 points --> 9 Points MAX (e.g. 3 Large Lasers MAX before GH)
  
• LRMS: LRM5:1; LRM10:1.5; LRM15:2; LRM20:3 --> 6 points MAX (e.g. 2 LRM20s MAX before GH)
  
• etc.

I think this is better than ED going down fully to weapon-specific draw values. We're talking about 50+ weapons here. Who's going to memorize all that.

It would be just as unclear as GH. What you need to make Ghost Heat simpler and more understandable is an in-game spreadsheet with penalties and not some 3d party website. It's not as difficult as people make it out to be. Basically it's just a list of how many weapons you can fire simultaneously. The exact amount of heat penalty is generally not important as it it's not optimal to trigger one.

Honestly, I'd replace GH with CoF suggested by OP but keep weapon caps and linked penaltied the same, no status quo change, and then have a good laugh at people praising CoF and celebrating the "removal" of GH. At least CoF makes a little bit more sense than GH.

Edited by kapusta11, 01 September 2016 - 12:59 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

Because 4 UAC10 Kodiak becomes 2x better than 2 x UAC10 Hunchback. Who's going to decide on who will play what? A game should have at least a semblance of 1:1 class balance.

I wouldn't say twice as good, but I will say a 4 ERPPC Kodiak is not twice as good as a 2 ERPPC Hunchback, even if JJs are involved. Ballistic boats are always going to be better on assaults than mediums because of the tonnage required to even mount them, energy on the other hand tend to have diminishing returns on assaults compared to mediums due to the limit of DHS you can mount on a mech. Sure you do have 5 LPL or 6 ERLL assaults, but there are only two that can do it solely because of their fantastic mounts and XL safety, and that doesn't mean they will be king of the battlefield, sure they will be threatening, but even they were wary of the kiss of death Jenner IIC (which would be back with a vengeance without ghost heat).

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

I wasn't talking about frankenmechs, the fact that they will never work is dictated by common sense and I'm all up for more synergies between weapons, although we'll probably need some new tech for that. My point was that heavies and assaults would become much stronger compared to mediums and lights, even stronger than they are now.

It bends both ways because suddenly mediums being able to spam smaller lasers without penalty is an actual option which is what some of them rely on.

kapusta11, on 01 September 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

The offenders are in the past so the problem then? Why lower heat cap when sustained dps builds already beat alpha strike ones unless you play way too passive?

This is actually true, back when so many mechs had heat gen quirks and ERML were godlike weapons for the Clans, this would've been a good plan, but at this point it isn't needed since lasers boats got nerfed fairly hard with the undoing of heat gen quirks.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 01 September 2016 - 03:00 PM.