286 replies to this topic

[Pjwned]

Not sure I'm a big fan of the idea overall, but I can only imagine it's better than the arbitrary ghost heat crap we have now.

[Duke Nedo]

1453 R, on 02 March 2016 - 06:14 PM, said:

Why are people so convinced that a 30-point heat scale and triple dissipation, or whatever numerical idiocy I keep seeing referenced in here, will fix a damn thing?

At that point you're basically just eliminating the regular heat bar entirely and replacing it straight-up with the quick-recharging 'Power Draw' system. There's no upper heat limit constraining 'Mechs able to game their way around the low heat dissipation cap - whatever manner of awkward ripple-fire 20dps SRM boats end up emerging after the change would have absolutely no opposition of any sort. You'd simply replace one unbalanced, difficult-to-adjust meta with another one - and I guarantee that three months later you'd all be pining for the days when energy weapons could actually be fired without requiring shutdown override.

Like Wintersdark said - it's not even remotely so cut-and-dried as THIS NONSENSE:


Makes it seem. "Fixing the heat scale" is easy to say. Actually making it work? That could be difficult.

Thanks, this is what I've tried to say so many times too. I know it's a popular opinion, but it just doesn't do the job. Just look a one simple example:

If we agree that firing a 20 fld alpha should be allowed without gamebreaking penalties, then firing 2x ERPPC - 20 damage @ 30 heat must be allowed. For the same 30 heat, we can fire:

- 15 SPLs = 60 damage in 0.5 secs
- 7.5 MPLs = 7 MPLs = 42 damage in 0.6 secs (and probably 8 too, which is 48 damage @ 32 heat)
- 4x LPLs = 44 damage in 0.67 secs
- 3x cLPLs = 39 damage in 1.12 secs
- 10 cSPLs = 60 damage in 0.6 secs

etc, and that is only considering E boating. See, single weapon boating alphas with a hard heat cap of 30 went UP, not down.

In order for a "proper heat scale" to actually work you'd need to rebalance all weapons, and if that's on the table, then the change to the heat scale really didn't have anything to do with it because you could fix big alphas by just rebalancing weapons.

That said, I want a better heat scale in the game, but not as a solution to big alphas, but for immersion and as an enhancement to game play depth. It's just not the magic bullet to fix big alphas, it's a very blunt tool.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 02 March 2016 - 11:41 PM.

[Pjwned]

1453 R, on 02 March 2016 - 06:14 PM, said:

Why are people so convinced that a 30-point heat scale and triple dissipation, or whatever numerical idiocy I keep seeing referenced in here, will fix a damn thing?

At that point you're basically just eliminating the regular heat bar entirely and replacing it straight-up with the quick-recharging 'Power Draw' system. There's no upper heat limit constraining 'Mechs able to game their way around the low heat dissipation cap - whatever manner of awkward ripple-fire 20dps SRM boats end up emerging after the change would have absolutely no opposition of any sort. You'd simply replace one unbalanced, difficult-to-adjust meta with another one - and I guarantee that three months later you'd all be pining for the days when energy weapons could actually be fired without requiring shutdown override.

Like Wintersdark said - it's not even remotely so cut-and-dried as THIS NONSENSE:


Makes it seem. "Fixing the heat scale" is easy to say. Actually making it work? That could be difficult.

In the past I've agreed with the idea of lowering the heat threshold and increasing dissipation in order to add a real heat scale, but the problem with doing this strictly without first changing things up is that heat generation is handled a lot differently in MWO than it is in TT.

Let's take a stock Warhawk for example. It has 4 C-ER PPCs equipped, and assuming it starts at 0 heat and there aren't other heat penalties applied (moving, engine damage, whatever else) it can fire those 4 ER PPCs once and not shut down because it will be left with 20 (out of 30) heat due to having 20 DHS which dissipates 40 heat. Of course, it needs to deal with various penalties for the heat going that high, and it can't fire very many weapons next turn without some real problems occurring, but at least it can do that and not shut down let alone be egregiously over the heat cap.

In MWO however, If you fire those 4 C-ER PPCs at once with a heat cap of 30, your mech shuts down instantly because all of a sudden you deal with generating 60 heat at once, and if there was also a real heat scale with actual penalties for having too much heat then it would be even worse. This is obviously drastically different from TT and makes it very punishing to fire high heat weapons, i.e energy weapons.

If we want to change the heat scale in MWO and reduce the heat cap to 30 to be more like TT then we need to also change heat generation to be more like TT, such as by making weapons generate heat over a period of time rather than instantly or by changing how heatsinks behave to make them store heat (somewhat like increasing heat capacity but not quite the same) or whatever other solution there might be.

Edited by Pjwned, 03 March 2016 - 12:39 AM.

[Vanguard319]

It might work if you can balance out power draw with power usage. I would expect a Warhawk prime or Nova prime to have enough power for one alpha, but they wouldn't have much power left to fire many weapons afterward due to the massive draw. of course, recharging that pool for another alpha would take time.

On the other hand, I would expect a Summoner D to have plenty of power for it's lasers, due to having fewer energy weapons overall, and a large engine to generate that power, I would expect a few alphas out of the stock config, and excellent power management when alternating between large and medium lasers based on range

[Johnny Z]

cdlord, on 02 March 2016 - 05:32 PM, said:

So much this!

I have a better idea, when a mech fires to many weapons it over heats and shuts down! Send the cheque in the mail.

But seriously table top had limits this game simply CANT have. Because, NEWS FLASH, its real time.

An energy pool would truly limit alphas and allow unused hard points and tonnage for different ranged weapons or equipment.

If they make speed a part of the equation then a mech slowing down would give more power to weapons...

How heat would work into this I have no idea. But this would move Battletech into this century.

Edited by Johnny Z, 03 March 2016 - 04:42 AM.

[Lily from animove]

1453 R, on 02 March 2016 - 06:14 PM, said:

Why are people so convinced that a 30-point heat scale and triple dissipation, or whatever numerical idiocy I keep seeing referenced in here, will fix a damn thing?

At that point you're basically just eliminating the regular heat bar entirely and replacing it straight-up with the quick-recharging 'Power Draw' system. There's no upper heat limit constraining 'Mechs able to game their way around the low heat dissipation cap - whatever manner of awkward ripple-fire 20dps SRM boats end up emerging after the change would have absolutely no opposition of any sort. You'd simply replace one unbalanced, difficult-to-adjust meta with another one - and I guarantee that three months later you'd all be pining for the days when energy weapons could actually be fired without requiring shutdown override.

Like Wintersdark said - it's not even remotely so cut-and-dried as THIS NONSENSE:


Makes it seem. "Fixing the heat scale" is easy to say. Actually making it work? That could be difficult.

No isn't difficult, adjust ehta for wepaons beign too cool, lower heatscale to prevent 70+ alphas. it is NOT hard. look at MW3 30 heat in the treshold, and you couldn't pew pew around like in MWO: heatscale down, heatdissipation up, this makes us shoot still a lot, but less alpha. Then adjust ehat probably on gauss and give it like 5. which still si rather cool, and you prevent stupid alphastrikes.

Pjwned, on 03 March 2016 - 12:31 AM, said:

In the past I've agreed with the idea of lowering the heat threshold and increasing dissipation in order to add a real heat scale, but the problem with doing this strictly without first changing things up is that heat generation is handled a lot differently in MWO than it is in TT.

In MWO however, If you fire those 4 C-ER PPCs at once with a heat cap of 30, your mech shuts down instantly because all of a sudden you deal with generating 60 heat at once, and if there was also a real heat scale with actual penalties for having too much heat then it would be even worse. This is obviously drastically different from TT and makes it very punishing to fire high heat weapons, i.e energy weapons.

This is WRONG.

in TT your turn is 10seconds. so firing these 4 C-ER-PPC's does not happen AT ONCE: it happens during these 10 seconds. Your turn just sums up what happened AFTER those 10 seconds ends. which means,

heat from firing the peps + cooling. since MWO isn't turnbased its clustered to realtime. But this is what and why MWO failed to properly balance TT to the RT-shooter.

Our wepaons in MWO cycle faster than TT (way below 10seconds). And the higher heattreshold allows us to fire way more often. calculate with the current MWO PPC vlues how often your warhawk of 4PPC's actually could shoot in MWO, to understand that transferred back to TT you actually have 10CERPPC's equipped. And other wepaons have even less cooldown.
Together with the ehatscale WAY above TT values we can push out a load more damage than TT ever intented. Ontop of the too accurate aim we have this made original TT armor not being enough to prevent mechs from instapoppoing. And so PGI had to upgrade armor by factor 2. If now PGI would readjust heat to use heat as a forcing method to limit what we can shoot within 10 seconds then we would be bakc to a better state. And when PGI limits what you can fire at ONCE then the alpha issue is gone.

with 30 heattreshold, a WH could only fire 2 PEPS at once. then with 20DHS he would cooldown 40heat. within the next 10 seconds. (given we had true TT values) which means after firing 2 peps the next 2 peps would be fired after 7.5 seconds.
BUT, the problematic lowered rates of fire MWO has chosne would show you that with this cooling only 2 CERPPC's would be sufficient, because their ROF is 4 seconds. That emans to make a 4 CERPPC Warhawk work with all weapons, the game would need ROF's beyong the cooling so basically 10 seconds would be a good spot again. But I guess for too many palyers this would be a "too low" firerate and caled boring. But the current firerates make us virtually laod more than 2x as much wepaons with a heastcale soemtimes more than 2x. Which in the end makes us fire more than 4x as much as TT ever was designed to do.

Not all TT values fit to the FPS nature of MWO. But the way PGI reshaped these values are the cause of the high alpha nature we have. And "ghost heat" was a measuremant to fix 2 mechanics of this bad transition

the PPdamage, which the dice prevented, and the "too high" heatscale the TT never had. But this only applied ot soem assorted wepaons. Now when PGI wants to truly!!! end these two issues they need lower the heatscale. because it will make us use smaller alphas, and chainfire more often which also solves a big part of the PP damage by allwoing peopel to twist away between constant sterams of fire.

But a big part of this community and unfortunately also PGI isn't able to properly transport this abstraction of the TT to the FPS game. because they don't understand what mechanics the realtime transition needs to simulate this abstracted model correctly.

Edited by Lily from animove, 03 March 2016 - 04:58 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Look at my reply above, wouldn't it be cool if speed and weapons power draw were all worked in or what? Maybe even AMS and ECM etc.

Ghost heat gone for good, building a mech would be about managing the power plants capabilities. In multiple ways, not just staying under a heat cap.

The best part an entirely new balance problem added! ECM doesn't draw enough power! and things like that.

Who knows maybe they will add power settings, all power to engines and things like that.

I'm not kidding though, maybe it would be cool. But this ghost heat limiting high alphas and weapon boating isn't working that is for sure. Well maybe it is, tough call.

If they go Aerotech ever it absolutely must use the reactor pool system, without any doubt.

Edited by Johnny Z, 03 March 2016 - 04:54 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 04:40 AM, said:

No isn't difficult, adjust ehta for wepaons beign too cool, lower heatscale to prevent 70+ alphas. it is NOT hard. look at MW3 30 heat in the treshold, and you couldn't pew pew around like in MWO: heatscale down, heatdissipation up, this makes us shoot still a lot, but less alpha. Then adjust ehat probably on gauss and give it like 5. which still si rather cool, and you prevent stupid alphastrikes.



This is WRONG.

in TT your turn is 10seconds. so firing these 4 C-ER-PPC's does not happen AT ONCE: it happens during these 10 seconds. Your turn just sums up what happened AFTER those 10 secodns ends. whcih means,

heat from firing the peps + cooling. since MWO isn't turnbased its clustered to realtime. But this is what and why MWO failed to properly balance TT to the RT-shooter.

Our wepaons in MWO cycle faster than TT (way below 10seconds). And the higher heattreshold allows us to fire way more often. calculate with the current MWO PPC vlues how often your warhawk of 4PPC's actually could shoot in MWO, to understand that transferred back to TT you actually have 10CERPPC's equipped. And other wepaons have even less cooldown.
Together with the ehatscale WAY above TT values we can push out a load more damage than TT ever intented. Ontop of the too accurate aim we have this made original TT armor not being enough to prevent mechs from instapoppoing. And so PGI had to upgrade armor by factor 2. If now PGI would readjust heat to use heat as a forcing method to limit what we can shoot within 10 seconds then we would be bakc to a better state. And when PGI limits what you can fire at ONCE then the alpha issue is gone.

with 30 heattreshold, a WH could only fire 2 PEPS at once. then with 20DHS he would cooldown 40heat. within the next 10 seconds. (given we had true TT values) which means after firing 2 peps the next 2 peps would be fired after 7.5 seconds.
BUT, the problematic lowered rates of fire MWO has chosne would show you that with this cooling only 2 CERPPC's would be sufficient, because their ROF is 4 seconds. That emans to make a 4 CERPPC Warhawk work with all weapons, the game would need ROF's beyong the cooling so basically 10 seconds would be a good spot again. But I guess for too many palyers this would be a "too low" firerate and caled boring. But the current firerates make us virtually laod more than 2x as much wepaons with a heastcale soemtimes more than 2x. Which in the end makes us fire more than 4x as much as TT ever was designed to do.

Not all TT values fit to the FPS nature of MWO. But the way PGI reshaped these values are the cause of the high alpha nature we have. And "ghost heat" was a measuremant to fix 2 mechanics of this bad transition

the PPdamage, which the dice prevented, and the "too high" heatscale the TT never had. But this only applied ot soem assorted wepaons. Now when PGI wants to truly!!! end these two issues they need lower the heatscale. because it will make us use smaller alphas, and chainfire more often which also solves a big part of the PP damage by allwoing peopel to twist away between constant sterams of fire.

But a big part of this community and unfortunately also PGI isn't able to properly transport this abstraction of the TT to the FPS game. because they don't understand what mechanics the realtime transition needs to simulate this abstracted model correctly.

The first part of this seems like it would work.

[Widowmaker1981]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 04:40 AM, said:

This is WRONG.

in TT your turn is 10seconds. so firing these 4 C-ER-PPC's does not happen AT ONCE: it happens during these 10 seconds. Your turn just sums up what happened AFTER those 10 seconds ends.

No. If we are talking about Classic Battletech, then those 4 C-ERPPCs are effectively alpha'd, in all gameplay terms that matter. No one had a chance to move their mech or return fire after you shot the first PPC and before you shot the second one, did they? No, they did not. Every target who was exposed and available for shooting at the time the first PPC was shot is still equally available for the last PPC shot. In MWO, if you fire one after another, the target could pop out only for enough time for one quick snapshot, and only be exposed to being hit by one weapon, as opposed to the same move in TT being exposed to either none, or all - see the difference?

You could argue that this game is a lot more based on Solaris rules, which makes the above not valid, but it also makes your argument not valid at the same time.

[Duke Nedo]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 04:40 AM, said:

....But a big part of this community and unfortunately also PGI isn't able to properly transport this abstraction of the TT to the FPS game. because they don't understand what mechanics the realtime transition needs to simulate this abstracted model correctly.

Seriously, that's not it. Do you even look at the numbers? Heat sucks as the only alpha-delimiter.

Let me ask you, what should the hard heat limit be that will prevent big alphas?

Give us that number, then list how many:
* ER-PPCs you can fire without shutting down?
* Hiw many PPCs?
* How many LPLs?
* How many MPLs?
* How many SPLs?
* How many AC20s?
* How many goose waffles?

I am interested what that magic number is.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 03 March 2016 - 05:27 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Johnny Z, on 03 March 2016 - 04:57 AM, said:

The first part of this seems like it would work.

And interesting "adjustment" of the TT rules into realtime would be doing with heat what PGI did with cooling. transport it over time. So when firing a PPC, heat will not be 15 instant, instead it will distributed over the 4 seconds of its cooldown.

then we can apply heat penalties, because you ony built up heta if you fire more than you dissipate. So when soemone fires 4 CERPPC's in quick successions he will have a high up building heat. which if not dispersable properly can generate big problems.

However it would not totally prevent alphastriking of high alphas. It would only heavily penalise it (with possible detructive consequences) in the fe seconds after the shots and however long it takes to disperse the excess heat.

Widowmaker1981, on 03 March 2016 - 05:14 AM, said:

No. If we are talking about Classic Battletech, then those 4 C-ERPPCs are effectively alpha'd, in all gameplay terms that matter. No one had a chance to move their mech or return fire after you shot the first PPC and before you shot the second one, did they? No, they did not.

That is because of the abstration of a turnbased system, thats why. Because otherwise if you would add this into you would have a game lasting 2 days for all the tiny microsteps needed. But you are a nice example of people who have trouble to understand the abtsraction of complex systems into simpler abstracted models. How can it be when 2 PPC's in the same arm cna hit a left leg and a right arm the way they are aligned at the WHK? because if fired simultaneously they NEVER would be able to. The reason why they do this is the abstraction of exactly not what you described. Abstraction takes out unecessary stuff and simplifies them with modifiers.

Duke Nedo, on 03 March 2016 - 05:26 AM, said:

Seriously, that's not it. Do you even look at the numbers? Heat sucks as the only alpha-delimiter.

Let me ask you, what should the hard heat limit be that will prevent big alphas?

Give us that number, then list how many:
* ER-PPCs you can fire without shutting down?
* Hiw many PPCs?
* How many LPLs?
* How many MPLs?
* How many SPLs?
* How many AC20s?
* How many goose waffles?

I am interested what that magic number is.

we could start with 30 heat. How many of each wepaons? that depends on what you want. or balance needs. After this you cna simply adjust heatvalues as well. DO you want to allow 2gauss and 1 PPC or not?

But with currently 40-60 heattreshold nearly ANYTHING goes, because it virtually has no limit without ghostheat unless you create are direstar.

30 heat means notthing more than 2 PPC's (but woudl require to prevent runnign heating up the mech). But even with ehating up form walkign you cna shoot 2 ERPPC' in quick succession.

Then you tets this stuff for a while and see whcih combination appear that are considered as "problematic" and you either up the heat of some components involved in thes eproblems, or you downscale heat a bit more.

The real question is at which size do you consider an alpha as "OK", then you just take a look around which combinations exceed these value.

Edited by Lily from animove, 03 March 2016 - 05:43 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

1453 R, on 02 March 2016 - 06:14 PM, said:

Why are people so convinced that a 30-point heat scale and triple dissipation, or whatever numerical idiocy I keep seeing referenced in here, will fix a damn thing?

At that point you're basically just eliminating the regular heat bar entirely and replacing it straight-up with the quick-recharging 'Power Draw' system. There's no upper heat limit constraining 'Mechs able to game their way around the low heat dissipation cap - whatever manner of awkward ripple-fire 20dps SRM boats end up emerging after the change would have absolutely no opposition of any sort. You'd simply replace one unbalanced, difficult-to-adjust meta with another one - and I guarantee that three months later you'd all be pining for the days when energy weapons could actually be fired without requiring shutdown override.

Like Wintersdark said - it's not even remotely so cut-and-dried as THIS NONSENSE:


Makes it seem. "Fixing the heat scale" is easy to say. Actually making it work? That could be difficult.

Any more difficult or non-working than the other half-measures they've taken?

[LORD ORION]

Terrible idea,

It will put even more focus on hard point location superiority.

[Johnny Z]

Duke Nedo, on 03 March 2016 - 05:26 AM, said:

Seriously, that's not it. Do you even look at the numbers? Heat sucks as the only alpha-delimiter.

Let me ask you, what should the hard heat limit be that will prevent big alphas?

Give us that number, then list how many:
* ER-PPCs you can fire without shutting down?
* Hiw many PPCs?
* How many LPLs?
* How many MPLs?
* How many SPLs?
* How many AC20s?
* How many goose waffles?

I am interested what that magic number is.

Great question. The magic number is had from building a sim then fine tuning it. In game is really good right now. Aside from a few problems its in a good spot. I am not even sure a total overhaul is needed.

The heat system will work for sure to some degree.

A energy pool would change this game entirely. More towards stock load outs with multiple ranges and weapon systems. It depends if this is a good idea or not. From appearances lowering the heat cap would do the same thing. But this isn't very sim like really. Where as an energy pool would most definitely be very sim and could also be used for Aerotech...

If it were up to me I would say lower the heat cap or leave it as is with refinements and start on Aerotech with an energy pool. If it works great with Aerotech, or rather when it does, then it could be brought to the mechs, if it made sense. Win win.

In first for Aerotech closed beta!

Edited by Johnny Z, 03 March 2016 - 05:55 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Johnny Z, on 03 March 2016 - 05:49 AM, said:

Great question. The magic number is had from building a sim then fine tuning it. In game is really good right now. Aside from a few problems its in a good spot. I am not even sure a total overhaul is needed.

The heat system will work for sure to some degree.

The problem is the current system has too many "exceptions", because it is already flawed by design. PGI tried fixing a few holes with the ghostheta yet it still ahs plenty of problems due to the deisgn mistakes.

Therefore its better do design a system with less holes thats a good design. When only a VERY FEW exceptions still violate the system then you can make special rules to fix them.

But now we have a flawed system, and russ wanst to sue the same system, copy, rename and slap it ontop of the current system. And this will eman we have 2 flawed systems which probably will due to thhe nature of beign so flawed generate a TON of hoels and problems.

That isn't actually the proper way to fix things.

The current flaws are the 3 ones the TT never had:

Too low RoF
Too high heat scale
Too accurate gamers
Alpha PP strikes are actually not an own problem, they are a combination of high heatscale + player accuracy. Fxing one of both also fixes the alphastrike issue


heat can limit the amount of wepaons fired and therefore may make RoF and high Alphas already beign solved. But it requires changign this system.

Player accuracy cna only be changed by a cone fo fire or convergence. In a latency based online game, convergence is a bad idea, too man tehcnical flaws. Only a cone of fie would be a working mechanic to simulate this behavior.

Edited by Lily from animove, 03 March 2016 - 06:00 AM.

[Lugh]

Duke Nedo, on 02 March 2016 - 11:39 PM, said:

Thanks, this is what I've tried to say so many times too. I know it's a popular opinion, but it just doesn't do the job. Just look a one simple example:

If we agree that firing a 20 fld alpha should be allowed without gamebreaking penalties, then firing 2x ERPPC - 20 damage @ 30 heat must be allowed. For the same 30 heat, we can fire:

- 15 SPLs = 60 damage in 0.5 secs (sorry charlie tuna the only mechs that can mount even 12 spls can't fire all of them at once they are clan mechs and and even today exploded themselves in one alpha because its 45 heat not 30 and 90 damage not 60) Happy to learn of the mystic 15spl IS build though.
- 7.5 MPLs = 7 MPLs = 42 damage in 0.6 secs (and probably 8 too, which is 48 damage @ 32 heat) Booyah Gogo TBOLT andB KNGHT
- 4x LPLs = 44 damage in 0.67 secs Gogo STK 4n STK everything! Bring all the STK Everyone loves Steak right?
- 3x cLPLs = 39 damage in 1.12 secs
- 10 cSPLs = 60 damage in 0.6 secs .75secs

etc, and that is only considering E boating. See, single weapon boating alphas with a hard heat cap of 30 went UP, not down.

In order for a "proper heat scale" to actually work you'd need to rebalance all weapons, and if that's on the table, then the change to the heat scale really didn't have anything to do with it because you could fix big alphas by just rebalancing weapons.

That said, I want a better heat scale in the game, but not as a solution to big alphas, but for immersion and as an enhancement to game play depth. It's just not the magic bullet to fix big alphas, it's a very blunt tool.

Fixed some errors. And still want to know what you are able to fit 15 IS spl on....

[Widowmaker1981]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 05:28 AM, said:

That is because of the abstration of a turnbased system, thats why. Because otherwise if you would add this into you would have a game lasting 2 days for all the tiny microsteps needed. But you are a nice example of people who have trouble to understand the abtsraction of complex systems into simpler abstracted models. How can it be when 2 PPC's in the same arm cna hit a left leg and a right arm the way they are aligned at the WHK? because if fired simultaneously they NEVER would be able to. The reason why they do this is the abstraction of exactly not what you described. Abstraction takes out unecessary stuff and simplifies them with modifiers.

My point is, in the actual game, you don't get targets vanishing before you can fire all your guns at them. In order to get the same 'feel' here, you need to be able to alpha. That 10 second value in TT is just fluff, it has no impact. You could change that to 0.1 seconds, or 17 years, and it wouldn't actually change the gameplay at all.

I don't think we should care at all about TT rules, for the record. The instant you give people the ability to aim at specific components, you stray a goddamn long way from the TT armour and damage models, and since all balance is interlinked, you need to start again. And since random hit tables would be really, really bad in a FPS... for balance, Corerule ignore.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 03 March 2016 - 06:07 AM.

[Lugh]

LORD ORION, on 03 March 2016 - 05:46 AM, said:

Terrible idea,

It will put even more focus on hard point location superiority.

You really need to learn this now. And drop it. NOTHING trumps good hard point allocation or high held arms.

[Johnny Z]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 05:56 AM, said:

The problem is the current system has too many "exceptions", because it is already flawed by design. PGI tried fixing a few holes with the ghostheta yet it still ahs plenty of problems due to the deisgn mistakes.

Therefore its better do design a system with less holes thats a good design. When only a VERY FEW exceptions still violate the system then you can make special rules to fix them.

But now we have a flawed system, and russ wanst to sue the same system, copy, rename and slap it ontop of the current system. And this will eman we have 2 flawed systems which probably will due to thhe nature of beign so flawed generate a TON of hoels and problems.

That isn't actually the proper way to fix things.

The current flaws are the 3 ones the TT never had:

Too low RoF
Too high heat scale
Too accurate gamers
Alpha PP strikes are actually not an own problem, they are a combination of high heatscale + player accuracy. Fxing one of both also fixes the alphastrike issue


heat can limit the amount of wepaons fired and therefore may make RoF and high Alphas already beign solved. But it requires changign this system.

Player accuracy cna only be changed by a cone fo fire or convergence. In a latency based online game, convergence is a bad idea, too man tehcnical flaws. Only a cone of fie would be a working mechanic to simulate this behavior.

COF is just bad. A player can aim as good as a bot, bots big advantage is it doesn't aim it actually attaches to the target. Players cannot correct recoil or cof problems nearly as well. Bots big advantage vrs players is this and "aiming" before the target is visible and firing just as it becomes visible.

I am playing another not well known but very modern game against a lot of bots lately and their behavior is such. This game has recoil but no cof and the bots are nearly eliminating recoil.

Edited by Johnny Z, 03 March 2016 - 06:16 AM.

[sycocys]

Unless they are willing to do a heat scale system with TT equivilent penalties, replacing ghost heat with - Power draw -> ghost heat - is pretty pointless.

They aren't removing ghost heat at all, just putting a buffer in front of it.