252 replies to this topic

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Random Carnage, on 26 February 2016 - 08:48 PM, said:

Why should logic get checked at the door? Yes, a certain suspension of belief is called for, but there is room to have systems based on real physical laws without compromising the fictional aspect of a game.

First off, let me apologize for how flippant my first reply to you was. I was preoccupied with A being hungry, B making dinner, and C being hungry, so I failed to put as much thought into my comment as I should.

Second, it seems we agree that this MW could more realistic than it is, and would be probably be better if it really was more realistic.

Lastly, I agree also that the new heat system will probably not be more realistic than what we have. PGI obviously lacks both the will and the way to make realism happen. So I personally only hope - minimally so - that the new heat system is better, not worse.

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 26 February 2016 - 09:15 PM.

[WarHippy]

Sandpit, on 26 February 2016 - 08:59 PM, said:

Ok,

so a new heat system that very much goes into deterring alphas.

Russ specifically stated that he hates how alphas are used. He wanted to come up with something that managed them and also took into account the amount of damage those alphas do. So a larger alpha will have a longer period of time in being able to do that again whereas a 30 point alpha might have xx time before being able to perform again and a 50 point alpha would take longer

He was very much continuously saying heat scale and heat so I don't think it's anything like a power control or anything

Hmm... Sounds kind of like what I was suggesting. Instead of ghost heat when you fire an alpha strike or any combination of weapons that does more than 35 damage you would have a longer cool down for all weapons fired in that grouping. Basically large burst slower rate of fire, but you can fire smaller groups for higher dps just with chain/stagger fire that breaks up the damage some.

Either way I think a summer release is probably way too soon. It needs to be tested heavily on the test server for a significant amount of time before a change this large touches the live servers.

[Khosumi]

Sir Roland MXIII, on 26 February 2016 - 08:45 PM, said:

Over react much? I was referring to the fact that logic is and always has been something that's fairly non existent when you have walking tanks, and that's just this IP. So my point was really, arguing a lack of logic in this system vs a new heat system seems a little baffling thing to worry about, when logic gets checked at the door when you have tanks with legs.

May I present exhibit A:


What tells me that in the year 3052 we can't have tanks with legs?

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 26 February 2016 - 09:08 PM, said:

I'll believe it when I see it.

When the bar of a terrible concept (Ghost Heat) is set to being compared to the "next best thing" (which could end up being Ghost Heat rebranded), I have concerns.

It begins with Paul.

All I can say is that it sounded like he was really talking about an entirely new heat system. It was just the wording he used on a few things

[Sandpit]

WarHippy, on 26 February 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

Hmm... Sounds kind of like what I was suggesting. Instead of ghost heat when you fire an alpha strike or any combination of weapons that does more than 35 damage you would have a longer cool down for all weapons fired in that grouping. Basically large burst slower rate of fire, but you can fire smaller groups for higher dps just with chain/stagger fire that breaks up the damage some.

Either way I think a summer release is probably way too soon. It needs to be tested heavily on the test server for a significant amount of time before a change this large touches the live servers.

eh, he just kept talking about heat though. He was constantly talking about heat scale, that's why I don't think it's going to be outside of an entirely new heat scale with some penalties along with maybe a heat penalty based on damage output. It just depends on which way they go I guess.

Regardless, to me, it means that PGI is capable and willing to revamp some major issues in the game.

[Dingo Battler]

WarHippy, on 26 February 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

Hmm... Sounds kind of like what I was suggesting. Instead of ghost heat when you fire an alpha strike or any combination of weapons that does more than 35 damage you would have a longer cool down for all weapons fired in that grouping. Basically large burst slower rate of fire, but you can fire smaller groups for higher dps just with chain/stagger fire that breaks up the damage some.

Either way I think a summer release is probably way too soon. It needs to be tested heavily on the test server for a significant amount of time before a change this large touches the live servers.

All that'll do is increase peeking. I'd take my 2xlpl 2xgauss dwf, hide behind some Ridge and alpha people to death. In fact, I'd take 4xlpl instead, since I can afford to reach higher heat, and there's no ghost heat now.

My brawler kgc will never see play. It has a 78dmg alpha, at a max range of 250m. Why take it? One shot and I'll die to peeking pokers.

This'll cause the death of brawlers.

[Lozruet Gravemind]

WarHippy, on 26 February 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

Hmm... Sounds kind of like what I was suggesting. Instead of ghost heat when you fire an alpha strike or any combination of weapons that does more than 35 damage you would have a longer cool down for all weapons fired in that grouping. Basically large burst slower rate of fire, but you can fire smaller groups for higher dps just with chain/stagger fire that breaks up the damage some.

Either way I think a summer release is probably way too soon. It needs to be tested heavily on the test server for a significant amount of time before a change this large touches the live servers.

Yeah. Paul said it was 95% done in the DESIGN phase, meaning they are just finishing up how everything would work on paper. It hasnt been put together in code OR tested internally yet. Pauls said a Summer time frame for maybe TESTING this system on the PTS. So Id put early Fall to maybe late Fall for a formal Live launch if it gets to the Live server.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Ethak, on 26 February 2016 - 09:20 PM, said:

What tells me that in the year 3052 we can't have tanks with legs?

The things that tell you that you can are pure ignorance of how armoured vehicle combat works, what principles and physics are involved. This is all totally off topic so I'll be brief and only say this once.

Modern tanks are built with a few things in mind that are completely impossible with mechs. Firstly, frontal profile - the smaller the frontal profile of a tank, the more difficult it becomes to hit. This is achieved by using a low profile and minimal width. Tank combat makes every effort for the tank to perform optimally while using the frontal profile, hence why flanking is crucial.

Modern tanks are also better capable of absorbing the kinetic energy of incoming fire, and deflecting it, due to their stability, achieved by having a large footprint - sqaure measurement of choice in contact with the ground at all times. Mechs will always have a lower footprint, and thus less stability, due to legs and feet. Also the mech would have to actively brace to artificially increase footprint via spreading the feet apart - tanks don't have to do this actively, they are at all times as braced as they can be, barring battlefield terrain / situations.

Modern tanks are also extremely dense, which again aids them in absorbing and deflecting incoming fire. Mechs lack this density, their mass is very spread out in comparison, reducing ability to absorb and deflect enemy fire.

All of the above taken together adds up to mechs vs tanks:
Mechs are easier to hit with huge frontal profiles.
Mechs are less stable and more prone to being knocked over or imbalanced.
Mechs are less able to absorb and deflect incoming enemy fire.

Lastly, mechs are also unstable weapon platforms, and realistically speaking would not be able to devote as much of the interior to weaponry as depicted in BT/MW. So not only would they have less weaponry and / or less powerful weapons, they also would never be as accurate as tanks already are. Even advanced weaponry wouldn't change this as tanks built-in stability and low frontal profile would mean they're still a superior platform to a mech.

These are the main points of research done by the military and civilian think tanks every time this question comes up - as cool as mechs are in fiction, they will only ever be fiction.

Apologies for being off topic and for how not-brief that ended up being, won't happen again.

[Sandpit]

KBurn85, on 26 February 2016 - 09:34 PM, said:

All that'll do is increase peeking. I'd take my 2xlpl 2xgauss dwf, hide behind some Ridge and alpha people to death. In fact, I'd take 4xlpl instead, since I can afford to reach higher heat, and there's no ghost heat now.

My brawler kgc will never see play. It has a 78dmg alpha, at a max range of 250m. Why take it? One shot and I'll die to peeking pokers.

This'll cause the death of brawlers.

No way, the reason you have so much peeking is because when you do go over that hill you're melted by high alphas

Lozruet Gravemind, on 26 February 2016 - 09:34 PM, said:

Yeah. Paul said it was 95% done in the DESIGN phase, meaning they are just finishing up how everything would work on paper. It hasnt been put together in code OR tested internally yet. Pauls said a Summer time frame for maybe TESTING this system on the PTS. So Id put early Fall to maybe late Fall for a formal Live launch if it gets to the Live server.

They are almost ready to implement on internal servers, if it works then they move to private testing, then beta, then live by June. And it was Russ, not Paul

[MechaBattler]

Can't wait for all of the diaper filling when they reveal what it is.

A part of me hopes they do a heat scale with penalties. But PGI has a way of taking a completely random turn with their ideas.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Sandpit, on 26 February 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

No way, the reason you have so much peeking is because when you do go over that hill you're melted by high alphas

Peekers still get melted by high alphas, just not as easily. It's basically just like clay target shooting, as they peek over, you yell PULL and blow the target away with alpha.

Sandpit, on 26 February 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

They are almost ready to implement on internal servers, if it works then they move to private testing, then beta, then live by June. And it was Russ, not Paul

I don't know man, maybe? Seems wishful to me, PGI hasn't really been the best at doing system overhauls quickly - I mean, for example, how long has CW beta been now? So, yeah, summer seems very, very doubtful.

EDIT because apparently sk eet is a bad word? <shrug>

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 26 February 2016 - 09:46 PM.

[MauttyKoray]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 February 2016 - 08:33 PM, said:

Power Draw Capacity.

This, I always read stuff in books about power draw, PPCs firing and the energy weapons needing to cycle and such.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Sandpit, on 26 February 2016 - 09:07 PM, said:

nowhere did I or Russ imply spamming alphas, it was an example to give an idea of how it would affect different size alphas. Let's keep the hyperbole in check please

Cool, let's argue semantics instead of addressing the point.

Edit: Oh crap, forgot my cool guy emoji

MauttyKoray, on 26 February 2016 - 09:46 PM, said:

This, I always read stuff in books about power draw, PPCs firing and the energy weapons needing to cycle and such.

Now this would actually be balanced across all classes.

Bigger engine = Can fire more often. Want to carry a lot of big weapons but be limited in firing speed? Or bring a huge engine and fire less weapons more often.

You know, an actual trade off.

Edit: But honestly, at least they're trying to address it... so that's nice.

Edited by The Atlas Overlord, 26 February 2016 - 09:55 PM.

[MischiefSC]

I canceled my Unseen Preorders over irritation with the glacial progress (and lack of progress) with CW.

If the new heat scale thing is awesome I'll pick up the whole set, even if the Marauder is out for cbills. Heroes and all.

You want to vote as a consumer you do it with your wallet and you make it as clear as possible. I'll nab the Mad/Wham/Rifle/Archer/Phoenix Hawk set and I'll do it in a single sitting.

IF it's awesome and does what has been asked for.

I'll even quit talking **** about PGI on the forums for a while.

It's so stupid. I really, really want to be PGIs biggest fan. I want to love the game. Every time I try to go all Rhianna they go all Chris Brown.

[pbiggz]

THE GHOST HEAT IS DEAD

LONG LIVE THE GHOST HEAT

[FupDup]

The Atlas Overlord, on 26 February 2016 - 09:51 PM, said:

Now this would actually be balanced across all classes.

Bigger engine = Can fire more often. Want to carry a lot of big weapons but be limited in firing speed? Or bring a huge engine and fire less weapons more often.

You know, an actual trade off.

Given that any mech which is XL-viable already races towards big engines for speed, agility, and heatsink slots, this only serves to add even more incentive to use giant engines and poops on mechs that are stuck with low engine caps.

Verdict: Please no.

[Khosumi]

Sir Roland MXIII, on 26 February 2016 - 09:36 PM, said:

The things that tell you that you can are pure ignorance of how armoured vehicle combat works, what principles and physics are involved. This is all totally off topic so I'll be brief and only say this once.

Stopped reading after that. You dare call me ignorant, however you are completely ignorant of what I know or don't know. You are basing your techs on current techs. You and I have no idea what could come out in the next 100 years, let alone a thousand.

I cordially invite you to remove those words.

[5th Fedcom Rat]

Sandpit, on 26 February 2016 - 09:07 PM, said:

One thing he stated was that he didn't like the way the game played out many times now as you round a corner or crest a hill and just melt from a steady stream of alphas.

It's past time they realized that the main reason why this happens is the 12 v 12 matches. It was not as much of an issue back in 8 v 8, even though we had no ghost heat or other alpha preventing system in place.

The larger you make the battles (between companies rather than lances), the less each individual unit matters to the outcome of the match and the faster any one unit (player) is going to die when battle is joined. This is an immutable fact completely independent of alphas.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

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

Stopped reading after that. You dare call me ignorant, however you are completely ignorant of what I know or don't know. You are basing your techs on current techs. You and I have no idea what could come out in the next 100 years, let alone a thousand.

I cordially invite you to remove those words.

Why should I? Ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of, it's easily fixed - so long as you don't let your ego keep you that way. I cordially invite you to not let your ego get the better of you and read what I wrote.

[MauttyKoray]

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

Given that any mech which is XL-viable already races towards big engines for speed, agility, and heatsink slots, this only serves to add even more incentive to use giant engines and poops on mechs that are stuck with low engine caps.

Verdict: Please no.

Pretty sure the pool to draw from is also dependent on the mech's size due to higher engines = more power, but end up not achieving as high of speeds on say heavy/assault instead of lights.