38 replies to this topic

[Felicitatem Parco]

This is one of them...'

In a rant, I confused the Gauss Charge poll with another posting from a year earlier...

So, yay for inebriation :-)

Edited by Prosperity Park, 02 March 2016 - 05:20 PM.

[FupDup]

I don't remember the linked PPC/Gauss thing being presented in the same was the forum suggestions for "Power Draw™" systems describe things.

[sycocys]

Where did they say that's what they chose to do?

And why haven't they implemented a heat scale system that actually penalizes performance rather than full power until you suicide?

[Mcgral18]

sauces are needed for things like this

[Hit the Deck]

Don't they want to kind of combine the two this time? If you are surpassing your reactor capacity/threshod, you get a heat penalty which comes from nowhere, i.e. Ghost Heat v.2.

[Mead]

What is all this "we" **** going on in here?

[Tyler Valentine]

Hit the Deck, on 02 March 2016 - 10:20 AM, said:

Don't they want to kind of combine the two this time? If you are surpassing your reactor capacity/threshod, you get a heat penalty which comes from nowhere, i.e. Ghost Heat v.2.

I really don't think this is confirmed. It sounded in the town hall like it would be a cooldown penalty not a heat penalty. I saw the twitter post where Russ 'said' it would be heat but really he just half agreed with the OP assessment. Seemed more like a minimally viable answer than confirmation.

[STEF_]

Never liked GH.
Always liked and like a system that uses less alpha, but the possibility to fire weapons in group, so more spreading, but less convergence of dmg to a single hitbox
Beside this would be a system similar to BT, in which we have chain fire only.

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 02 March 2016 - 10:30 AM.

[sycocys]

Tyler Valentine, on 02 March 2016 - 10:27 AM, said:

I really don't think this is confirmed. It sounded in the town hall like it would be a cooldown penalty not a heat penalty. I saw the twitter post where Russ 'said' it would be heat but really he just half agreed with the OP assessment. Seemed more like a minimally viable answer than confirmation.

So - Ghost Cooldown? Doesn't that just make alphas more usable since you will dissipate most of your used heat?

[Mcgral18]

For those who want to try and find the poll (no luck for me) Ghost Heat went live July 30th 2013
http://mwomercs.com/...july-30th-live/

Perhaps your GoogleFu is superior.

[Mead]

Any more Ghost mechanics and PGI is going to have to start finding new players with a ouija board.

[Gravitas]

I'm not trying to dismiss what you're saying OP, but I have no recollection of any poll asking for opinions on power draw vs. punitive system for multiple same-weapon firings. I would love to see that thread or record of it.

But even if an option was "B.) A heat penalty system that would punish people who fire too many of the same weapons at the same time." - that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be Ghost Heat as was implemented. I could interpret that same wording to indicate a heat scale with increasing penalties to firing/movement/etc, similar to how the heat scale was handled in TT. Maybe that's part of the problem, if that was the or close to the original wording of the poll option. Perhaps it was chosen because those who might have voted for that option had a different idea of what it meant vs. what Paul/PGI/et al decided it meant.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

I would like to point out that we were not in fact given a choice and that I've been advocating for a power draw system since closed beta.

I'm sure they'll screw it up some how though.

[Graugger]

1 Problem with power draw... LRMs / ACs don't really use power -.-

Going to have to have an excuse for that like multiple loaders drawing from the same ammo bin results in a slow down.

[0bsidion]

Mead, on 02 March 2016 - 10:24 AM, said:

What is all this "we" **** going on in here?

That was my thought too. I never voted to have either system, because quite frankly I think they're both sounding rather convoluted and unnecessary.

My vote would be hard cap the heat at 30 points. Each HS dissipates 0.017 heat a second. DHS do 0.034 a second. There's a check every 60 seconds, and if you're at 30+ heat when that check is made, you shut down. If you're at 10 heat, your crosshairs start jinking, if you're at 20+, more so and there's a chance for shutdown and maybe an ammo explosion.

Basically like TT. We can tweak the weapon heat values from there. Makes more sense than 'Ghost heat' and 'power draw' nonsense.

[CreativeAnarchy]

I prefer a power draw means. It just makes more sense to me.

We'll see when it gets implement though. Developers have a habit of putting in something that the players hadn't really though of.

Graugger, on 02 March 2016 - 10:56 AM, said:

1 Problem with power draw... LRMs / ACs don't really use power -.-

Going to have to have an excuse for that like multiple loaders drawing from the same ammo bin results in a slow down.

They could keep a heat penalty for these. They may not draw much power but their engines do generate a lot of heat when launched. All those rockets going off in one spot isn't exactly a very cold operation.

Edited by CreativeAnarchy, 02 March 2016 - 11:16 AM.

[Tyler Valentine]

sycocys, on 02 March 2016 - 10:34 AM, said:

So - Ghost Cooldown? Doesn't that just make alphas more usable since you will dissipate most of your used heat?

Yes... No... I don't know.

Just relaying my interpretation. I think a power draw system, a system where cooldowns increase as heat increases, or a true heat scale all have merit and could be implemented well. The weak link here is how PGI executes the new dynamic. I sound like a salty forum guy, but I've been playing long enough now to expect PGI to mess this up.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Graugger, on 02 March 2016 - 10:56 AM, said:

1 Problem with power draw... LRMs / ACs don't really use power -.-

Going to have to have an excuse for that like multiple loaders drawing from the same ammo bin results in a slow down.

They could crib the solution from my balance manifesto.

LRMS: Require an individual lock for each launcher.

To balance IS and clan LRMs, IS LRMs hit in 5 damage clusters.

Autocanons: add recoil similar to how you can't fire JJ and aim straight that increases as the number of autocanons fire and factors in movement. Have the effect be lessened for fully articulated arm mounted weapons.

[Sandpit]

Prosperity Park, on 02 March 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

Sometimes it's best to NOT use the forums for Design ideas, because Ghost Heat came from OUR REFUSAL to accept a power draw system when it was first proposed by PGI a very long time ago.

No it didn't

Ghost heat was implemented without any feedback, notice, communication, or any other such usage of the forums in the community. It was not a community generated idea.

It wasn't even put in the patch notes. It had to be "announced" after some of us noticed a huge heat spike from the day before and thought it was a dam bug.

Nowhere, ever did anyone say "We have this system we like called ghost heat".

[Mead]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 02 March 2016 - 11:30 AM, said:

LRMS: Require an individual lock for each launcher.

I swear I'm honestly trying to imagine how this would be functionally different from what we have now, and failing miserably. Would we have to press R for each launcher? Or a different key for each one? Or..?