286 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas fighting the good fight in this topic.

[Wonderdog]

If this gives a way to balance gauss while being able to drop the whole charge up mechanic... happy days.

Ghost heat sucks, but it's a necessary evil. If constraining how much fire-power can be insta-dumped into a target with one button push gets rid of it - again, happy days.

It all goes back to the "low threshold, high dissipation = natural control over alpha striking" mechanism thats been thrown at Russ & Co for years.

Instead of ghost heat, why not ghost cooldown instead? i.e. Increase the the cooldown time for weapons fired simulatneously, and make it super harsh. Chain fire those PPC's? no issues with cooldown, 4 seconds each as normal... alpha strike with 4 of them? Then suffer the cumulative cool down(16 seconds) on all 4 weapons.

Not perfect, but would have the desired effect (reducing pinpoint alphas to a last resort, rather than a primary mechanism of dealing effective sustained damage)

Would also give a meaningful way to perk underwhelming but canon mechs (Hunchback 4P with medium lasers, Masakari with 4 ERPPC's etc could have the ghost cooldown reduced by 25/50/75% or whatever).

Edited by Wonderdog, 02 March 2016 - 09:13 AM.

[Big Tin Man]

Wonderdog, on 02 March 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

It all goes back to the "low threshold, high dissipation = natural control over alpha striking" mechanism thats been thrown at Russ & Co for years.

Why not both? It limits high DPS builds and limits alphastrikewarrior online.

Wonderdog, on 02 March 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

Instead of ghost heat, why not ghost cooldown instead? i.e. Increase the the cooldown time for weapons fired simulatneously, and make it super harsh. Chain fire those PPC's? no issues with cooldown, 4 seconds each as normal... alpha strike with 4 of them? Then suffer the cumulative cool down(16 seconds) on all 4 weapons.

Not perfect, but would have the desired effect (reducing pinpoint alphas to a last resort, rather than a primary mechanism of dealing effective sustained damage)

I had also suggested this a while back as well. It would end up being somewhat complicated like ghost heat, and likely games in the same way with loadouts to avoid triggering ghost cooldowns. It also doesn't solve the corner poking/poptart situation where you can hide while you cooldown.

[FupDup]

cdlord, on 02 March 2016 - 08:08 AM, said:

I hope power production is directly tied to the engine size and power draw is only based on weapon/damage output. Keep it Simple.

Basing it on engine size would add even more inventive to use big XL engines, and would make mechs with low engine caps even weaker.

For example, an Arctic Cheetah would have more Power Production than a Kit Fox...that's stupid.

Please don't. Large engines give enough benefit as it is. They don't need ANY help in that department.

Edited by FupDup, 02 March 2016 - 09:27 AM.

[Wonderdog]

True, but 16 seconds (as an example) is a long time if the enemy know you're exposed because you either A> missed or B> thumped someone very obviously with your alpha... again, its a mechanism that wouldnt eliminate big alpha's entirely, but would put you in a very ropey tactical situation if you missed/didnt kill your target outright....

Combined with a lower threshold/higher dissipation heat system (without ghost heat), it would discourage the worst offenders (6 PPC stalkers should still blow up if they alpha strike!) - the combination of the two factors discourages in most cases, and prevents (in the most extreme cases) constant alpha strikes.

#Wonderdog

Edited by Wonderdog, 02 March 2016 - 09:29 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

FupDup, on 02 March 2016 - 09:26 AM, said:

Basing it on engine size would add even more inventive to use big XL engines, and would make mechs with low engine caps even weaker.

For example, an Arctic Cheetah would have more Power Production than a Kit Fox...that's stupid.

Please don't. Large engines give enough benefit as it is. They don't need ANY help in that department.

Well, it's a risk v reward thing. Sure you can go bigger engine, but that means less tonnage for gear. You can go XL to get the bigger engine and more tonnage albeit fewer crits and more vulnerability in that XL.

Testing required.

[FupDup]

cdlord, on 02 March 2016 - 09:30 AM, said:

Well, it's a risk v reward thing. Sure you can go bigger engine, but that means less tonnage for gear. You can go XL to get the bigger engine and more tonnage albeit fewer crits and more vulnerability in that XL.

Once again, Arctic Cheetah vs. Kit Fox.

One of those is clearly superior to the other, and I'll give you a hint: The better one of them isn't the one with the small engine.


Most of the "Meta" builds for both factions use big XL engines for these reasons:
A. Agility (spread/avoid damage)
B. Speed (self-explanatory)
C. Heat efficiency (mostly concerns lights and mediums with sub-250 engine caps, PoorDubs)
D. More critical slots for building (because engine DHS slots)

Big XL engines arguably give more reward than the risk they task in many cases, especially for the lower-end weight classes (lights in particular). Please stahp.

Final Verdict: Lolno.

Edited by FupDup, 02 March 2016 - 09:36 AM.

[Dethsphere]

How fast will they introduce a hotfix once someone figures out how to exploit the new system?

I say within the first hour.

[Mcgral18]

So, how are we speculating this will work?

A static cap for all mechs? Weight based static?
How often does this bar recharge? Gradually at x pts/s or fully restored every 0.5 seconds?

How significant would these heat penalties be? Like the current RGNeesus faceDuck at 100.1% heat? Or less than 20 randomly applied damage at the beginning of the scale? Of course, I guess that's override and not entirely related...
Heat applied gradually as the reactor replenishes? x H/s while it recharges?

Example, with a 50 reactor capacity

Gauss generates 1 heat, but 20 reactor drain.
cLPLs generate 10 heat and 15 reactor drain.

A Whale comes along with Dual Gauss and Dual LPLs, generating 22 heat, but 70 reactor drain.

For penalties...what are they?
1H/s while reactor drain >reactor output? That does nothing, aside from slow dissipation.
+ 20 heat outright? That's a hit, but not crippling, in this case. That would, however, stop the mounting of ERMLs to create a magnificent LOLpha due to prohibitive heat (assuming ERMLs are...what, 8 drain? 6 safe, with nothing else makes them alone a viable loadout)

As for other loadouts, such as Dakka, that kind of rules out the eliminated in a half second approach, because then they would fire forever and never be affected, unless they shared the same drain as lasers (which would be bad).
So, I guess that supports a gradual drain of the reactor fill, not unlike MASC, which Dakka could theoretically, eventually fill after X output.

Ac2s could safely be at 1, and you'd never really have to worry about those.
AC5 are a touch more deadly...but only en-masse. Not sure what a realistic value is.
Then there's the Ultra Double Tap. With the current code, not sure if they could assign the Double Tap round a higher drain value, but double the drain of a single round is still a fair price to pay.

Missiles should of course have low drain, due to their mechanics. 30 damage of ACs, Lasers and missiles are not equal, along with the range considerations.

There's also the argument of size, should the SRM6 have thrice the drain of the SRM2? Or promote the larger launcher? Of course, SRMs are a very poor example because SRM6+A is a wonderful choice. I guess this is more of a LRM5 VS LRM20 thought.

MGs should get none, and I'd argue Flamers too...but they do drain plasma from the reactor, and they are no longer Terribad. Still should not be high drain, due to sub 100M effectiveness.

I wonder how PGI will go about it.

Edited by Mcgral18, 02 March 2016 - 09:52 AM.

[Tyler Valentine]

Sure sounded like a cooldown penalty not a heat penalty in the town hall. We shall see...

[Duke Nedo]

Mcgral18, on 02 March 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:

So, how are we speculating this will work?

A static cap for all mechs? Weight based static?
How often does this bar recharge? Gradually at x pts/s or fully restored every 0.5 seconds?

How significant would these heat penalties be? Like the current RGNeesus faceDuck at 100.1% heat? Or less than 20 randomly applied damage at the beginning of the scale? Of course, I guess that's override and not entirely related...
Heat applied gradually as the reactor replenishes? x H/s while it recharges?

Example, with a 50 reactor capacity

Gauss generates 1 heat, but 20 reactor drain.
cLPLs generate 10 heat and 15 reactor drain.

A Whale comes along with Dual Gauss and Dual LPLs, generating 22 heat, but 70 reactor drain.

For penalties...what are they?
1H/s while reactor drain >reactor output? That does nothing, aside from slow dissipation.
+ 20 heat outright? That's a hit, but not crippling, in this case. That would, however, stop the mounting of ERMLs to create a magnificent LOLpha due to prohibitive heat (assuming ERMLs are...what, 8 drain? 6 safe, with nothing else makes them alone a viable loadout)

As for other loadouts, such as Dakka, that kind of rules out the eliminated in a half second approach, because then they would fire forever and never be affected, unless they shared the same drain as lasers (which would be bad).
So, I guess that supports a gradual drain of the reactor fill, not unlike MASC, which Dakka could theoretically, eventually fill after X output.

Ac2s could safely be at 1, and you'd never really have to worry about those.
AC5 are a touch more deadly...but only en-masse. Not sure what a realistic value is.
Then there's the Ultra Double Tap. With the current code, not sure if they could assign the Double Tap round a higher drain value, but double the drain of a single round is still a fair price to pay.

Missiles should of course have low drain, due to their mechanics. 30 damage of ACs, Lasers and missiles are not equal, along with the range considerations.

There's also the argument of size, should the SRM6 have thrice the drain of the SRM2? Or promote the larger launcher? Of course, SRMs are a very poor example because SRM6+A is a wonderful choice. I guess this is more of a LRM5 VS LRM20 thought.

MGs should get none, and I'd argue Flamers too...but they do drain plasma from the reactor, and they are no longer Terribad. Still should not be high drain, due to sub 100M effectiveness.

I wonder how PGI will go about it.

Sounds about fine!

Something that could be interesting would be if they built the Gauss charge mechanics into the system, so that you can keep it charged as long as you like, but it drains continuously while being kept charged...

Another unfinished thought could be if PPCs would drain while charging instead of when firing. Unfinished thought, but could be a way of helping PPC+laser builds over pure laser builds, and these mechs would still hit drain limit but after firing one volley. May be room for something like that considering the current state of PPCs.

Anyways, interesting times.

[Big Tin Man]

FupDup, on 02 March 2016 - 09:34 AM, said:

Once again, Arctic Cheetah vs. Kit Fox.

One of those is clearly superior to the other, and I'll give you a hint: The better one of them isn't the one with the small engine.


Most of the "Meta" builds for both factions use big XL engines for these reasons:
A. Agility (spread/avoid damage)
B. Speed (self-explanatory)
C. Heat efficiency (mostly concerns lights and mediums with sub-250 engine caps, PoorDubs)
D. More critical slots for building (because engine DHS slots)

Big XL engines arguably give more reward than the risk they task in many cases, especially for the lower-end weight classes (lights in particular). Please stahp.

Final Verdict: Lolno.

You forgot this. Current mech movement speed could consume energy. An ACH moving full speed could (in theory) be expending 50% of it's available energy in movement, while the Gimped fox would only use 2/3rd's of it (on a linear scale) or less if the speed/energy table.

I.e.
30 ton movement table (linear scale)
speed----energy required
0---0
10---1
20---2
...
100--10
...
140--14



30 ton movement table (increasing scale at 100 kph)
speed----energy required
0---0
10---1
20---2
...
100--10
110--12
120--14
130--16
140--18

This could be tricky to balance across the board, but may be possible.

[FupDup]

Big Tin Man, on 02 March 2016 - 10:09 AM, said:

You forgot this. Current mech movement speed could consume energy. An ACH moving full speed could (in theory) be expending 50% of it's available energy in movement, while the Gimped fox would only use 2/3rd's of it (on a linear scale) or less if the speed/energy table.

I.e.
30 ton movement table (linear scale)
speed----energy required
0---0
10---1
20---2
...
100--10
...
140--14



30 ton movement table (increasing scale at 100 kph)
speed----energy required
0---0
10---1
20---2
...
100--10
110--12
120--14
130--16
140--18

This could be tricky to balance across the board, but may be possible.

...Or just to make life (and balancing) easier, just ignore engine size in the whole process. That's a can of worms waiting to be opened up.

[Chimera_]

As someone who primarily uses mixed builds, this seems like it could be pretty good. Laser vomit is powerful, but another advantage is that it's the least "obvious" when you're taking damage. A few multicolored lasers that alpha your ct can do crazy dmg but not have much visual feedback on your end, as opposed to explosions and shake caused by ballistics and missiles.

I won't judge or speculate until we have much more information (or it's ingame), but it seems very promising if they balance it properly.

[Gas Guzzler]

El Bandito, on 02 March 2016 - 07:23 AM, said:

Since you wont be standing and shooting while LRMs are in the air, your DPS build will be distinctly inferior to that of high alpha peekaboo style

Situationally, yes. But you know, it is possible to leave cover and get ~5 seconds of dakka off before anyone can shift their focus to your and return fire. It happens, and salivation comes with it as you watch your target jump out of his shorts and start twisting madly and hiding in a hole.

[Gloris]

Fantastic.

Now there is 0 reason for me to grind any more mechs (MC Cbills Preorder, does not matter)
Because depending on how this system will look any mech could be complete garbage or totally OP and there is no way to predict what will happen, and the chances the bad ones will get buffs at a decent rate will be next to zero.

Now don't get me wrong, i don't want to only play OP, but there is a certain level of badness on a mech that makes is unfun. My first mech ever was an Awesome.. a mech that was never good and probably never will be

And no i do not trust PGI to balance it, they don't have the best trackrecord of brilliant balance decisions, so i suspect balancing a completely new system will take a few trys.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mcgral18, on 02 March 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:

So, how are we speculating this will work?

A static cap for all mechs? Weight based static?
How often does this bar recharge? Gradually at x pts/s or fully restored every 0.5 seconds?

How significant would these heat penalties be? Like the current RGNeesus faceDuck at 100.1% heat? Or less than 20 randomly applied damage at the beginning of the scale? Of course, I guess that's override and not entirely related...
Heat applied gradually as the reactor replenishes? x H/s while it recharges?

Example, with a 50 reactor capacity

Gauss generates 1 heat, but 20 reactor drain.
cLPLs generate 10 heat and 15 reactor drain.

A Whale comes along with Dual Gauss and Dual LPLs, generating 22 heat, but 70 reactor drain.

For penalties...what are they?
1H/s while reactor drain >reactor output? That does nothing, aside from slow dissipation.
+ 20 heat outright? That's a hit, but not crippling, in this case. That would, however, stop the mounting of ERMLs to create a magnificent LOLpha due to prohibitive heat (assuming ERMLs are...what, 8 drain? 6 safe, with nothing else makes them alone a viable loadout)

As for other loadouts, such as Dakka, that kind of rules out the eliminated in a half second approach, because then they would fire forever and never be affected, unless they shared the same drain as lasers (which would be bad).
So, I guess that supports a gradual drain of the reactor fill, not unlike MASC, which Dakka could theoretically, eventually fill after X output.

Ac2s could safely be at 1, and you'd never really have to worry about those.
AC5 are a touch more deadly...but only en-masse. Not sure what a realistic value is.
Then there's the Ultra Double Tap. With the current code, not sure if they could assign the Double Tap round a higher drain value, but double the drain of a single round is still a fair price to pay.

Missiles should of course have low drain, due to their mechanics. 30 damage of ACs, Lasers and missiles are not equal, along with the range considerations.

There's also the argument of size, should the SRM6 have thrice the drain of the SRM2? Or promote the larger launcher? Of course, SRMs are a very poor example because SRM6+A is a wonderful choice. I guess this is more of a LRM5 VS LRM20 thought.

MGs should get none, and I'd argue Flamers too...but they do drain plasma from the reactor, and they are no longer Terribad. Still should not be high drain, due to sub 100M effectiveness.

I wonder how PGI will go about it.

There are a lot of components and thus chances for PGI to screw this up, and it worries me. I'd much rather test out some of the heat suggestions on reddit to make heat the sole limiting factor like making heat sinks dissipate faster based on heat level (basically mechs that ride heat would be better compared to lolphas that incur +50% heat)

[LordKnightFandragon]

Lol, a step in the right direction for alphawarrior could also be UNinflating the hardpoints....

[Quicksilver Aberration]

LordKnightFandragon, on 02 March 2016 - 11:03 AM, said:

Lol, a step in the right direction for alphawarrior could also be UNinflating the hardpoints....

That would only break a few IS mechs, it wouldn't fix Clan mechs, and it wouldn't fix mechs like the Black Knight.

[CDLord HHGD]

FupDup, on 02 March 2016 - 09:34 AM, said:

Once again, Arctic Cheetah vs. Kit Fox.

One of those is clearly superior to the other, and I'll give you a hint: The better one of them isn't the one with the small engine.


Most of the "Meta" builds for both factions use big XL engines for these reasons:
A. Agility (spread/avoid damage)
B. Speed (self-explanatory)
C. Heat efficiency (mostly concerns lights and mediums with sub-250 engine caps, PoorDubs)
D. More critical slots for building (because engine DHS slots)

Big XL engines arguably give more reward than the risk they task in many cases, especially for the lower-end weight classes (lights in particular). Please stahp.

Final Verdict: Lolno.

You lost me at meta....

PGI's new mechanic is changing the dynamics of your line item C.

Anyone who plays a Kit Fox like an Arctic Cheetah is gonna have a bad time. Back when I was playing my Kit Fox, I was doing very well in it. Not playing it now because; A: I'm not a Clanner, B: it's mastered and I have other mechs to master now.

You mention meta, I see an exploit of a (poorly designed) system that PGI is always actively trying to nerf. None of my mechs or builds have ever been negatively affected by their changes to where I come on the forums and freak out.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 March 2016 - 11:14 AM, said:

That would only break a few IS mechs, it wouldn't fix Clan mechs, and it wouldn't fix mechs like the Black Knight.

Hardpoint inflation is a problem but you are correct, it wouldn't impact universally.

What about a "hardpoint equivalency" mechanic? Let's say the most hardpoints an IS mech has is 9. So if a mech has fewer than 9 hardpoints, it would get other buffs or tools to work with. This can be like quirks but is solely dependent on the number of hardpoints a mech has....