38 replies to this topic

[Revis Volek]

I'm having a really hard time finding this POLL the Op speaks of as well....

Care to enlighten us with some concrete evidence? I dont even remember this being presented to us this way.

[FupDup]

Revis Volek, on 02 March 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

I'm having a really hard time finding this POLL the Op speaks of as well....

Care to enlighten us with some concrete evidence? I dont even remember this being presented to us this way.

I think the post he's referring to was this one from July 2014: http://mwomercs.com/...ctive-feedback/

[Sandpit]

FupDup, on 02 March 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

I think the post he's referring to was this one from July 2014: http://mwomercs.com/...ctive-feedback/

You mean the poll posted about 2 years after ghost heat was implemented?

[FupDup]

Sandpit, on 02 March 2016 - 11:56 AM, said:

You mean the poll posted about 2 years after ghost heat was implemented?

Apparently.

Prosperity Park mentioned PPC/Gauss limiting, and that thread I dug up seems to be the only fit.

[Lukoi Banacek]

I was not part of that "we."

A third category, power draw capacity has always been what I advocated for.

I dont honestly remember anyone I play(ed) ever asking for the ghost heat system. Hard caps sure. Hardpoint sizing limits sure. But nothing like the stacking ghost heat system we have now.

That being said, whether the masses voted yes to ghost heat or not, I am just glad to see the mechanic changed to something that will hopefully help the game.

[Mead]

This OP appears to be a simple case of poop-n-scoot. Moving on..

[Sandpit]

Mead, on 02 March 2016 - 11:33 AM, said:

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..?

I don't see how that could realistically be implemented. That's way too complicated of a system in my opinion

FupDup, on 02 March 2016 - 11:57 AM, said:

Apparently.

Prosperity Park mentioned PPC/Gauss limiting, and that thread I dug up seems to be the only fit.

I can't ever remember anything like he's describing and I remember the very first day Ghost Heat was implemented. We had to dig around on the forums and bug PGI just so we could have an explanation on how the dam thing worked so we could avoid overheating.

It wasn't even in the patch notes, there was never ANY kind of discussion or notice to this system that I can recall

[Aresye]

In the OP's defense, PGI has cleaned up a lot of things that could have bit them in the rear, so sometimes you simply won't find something that did in fact happen.

For example, Russ stating the server tick rate was at 32. You can find posts on unit's forums quoting Russ saying that after the data migration, but you won't find a single trace of that here on the forums.

[Sandpit]

Aresye, on 02 March 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

In the OP's defense, PGI has cleaned up a lot of things that could have bit them in the rear, so sometimes you simply won't find something that did in fact happen.

For example, Russ stating the server tick rate was at 32. You can find posts on unit's forums quoting Russ saying that after the data migration, but you won't find a single trace of that here on the forums.

In this particular case he's wrong though. That's not how the implementation of ghost heat went.

[Screech]

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

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

Think they will also implement GPD to cover ACs and LRMS. What is GPD? Ghost Power Draw.

[EasyPickings]

The way it works in TT:


More on this here.

Edited by EasyPickings, 02 March 2016 - 01:55 PM.

[LordNothing]

i dont think they specifically said they were going with power draw. in fact they seemed to shy away from saying anything about the new system at all. most of the ideas on the board as of late have either been cof mechanics, or universal ghost heat based on damage output of individual alphas/groups, or red line penalties like slowdown. they may go with one of those or they may go with something of their own design.

[Tyler Valentine]

LordNothing, on 02 March 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

i dont think they specifically said they were going with power draw. in fact they seemed to shy away from saying anything about the new system at all. most of the ideas on the board as of late have either been cof mechanics, or universal ghost heat based on damage output of individual alphas/groups, or red line penalties like slowdown. they may go with one of those or they may go with something of their own design.

I get the feeling they 'announce' things. Judge our reaction to it. Take the best ideas from the forum and then start programming, pretending it was their idea all along. The give away is they always do our ideas just slightly... wrong.



...so salty today Valentine...

[wanderer]

As it stands, it's literally ghost heat under another name and layer of spooky math.

Ooh, fire enough weapons and extra heat, yaaaaay- wait, that's how it was.

This fixes nothing. Give us actual heat penalties. Fix perfect convergence.

[Coralld]

The Ghost Heat mechanic idea did indeed come from the community but PGI did not put out a poll to decide what balance mechanic we could choose from.

Edited by Coralld, 02 March 2016 - 03:37 PM.

[Queen of England]

EasyPickings, on 02 March 2016 - 12:43 PM, said:

The way it works in TT:


More on this here.

No, it isn't. That chart is from a conversion of MechWarrior into the d20 RPG system.

This is the actual heat scale:


People also tend to misunderstand what this scale means on this forum, as well, so, here's an example. I'm piloting the Timber Wolf C(C). It has two Large Pulse Lasers and three ER Medium Lasers, and I fire off an alpha strike. In table top, the LPL generates 10 heat and the ERML generates 5, so my total heat generated from weapons fire is 35 (10+10+5+5+5). I have 25 double heat sinks, which dissipate 50 heat. At the end of the round, I add up the heat from my weapons fire (35) and the heat from my movement (0-3), and subtract my dissipation (50) from that number. In this example, this means I have 0 heat and suffer no penalties.

Edited by Queen of England, 02 March 2016 - 03:52 PM.

[Tarogato]

IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW.

Probably Paul: "But you guys voted for ghost heat. So ... that's what you want right? Nope, not changing it, you already voted."

[RedDragon]

It went more or less like that: Players advocated to finally make some changes to the heat scale (lower threshold, faster cooling, there are endless threads about it) and provided data and all as to why that would be a good idea. And some loneley looney said something about Ghost Heat. And when Paul finally threw his balancing dart at the wall full of ideas as he always does, he sadly missed the 90% that were for a proper heat sale and hit Ghost Heat, which no one really wanted.
And now they are doing the exact same nonsense again, and I'm really suspecting at this point it's just because they don't want to admit that a proper heat scale would fix most of the problems with this game.

[TLBFestus]

I have no recall of this. None.

You are right about one thing though, Paul doesn't get enough credit, but then again he hasn't earned it.