Jump to content

So When Will Alpha Strikes Be Addressed (Nerfed)?


146 replies to this topic

#121 Cy Mitchell

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Privateer
  • The Privateer
  • 2,688 posts

Posted 04 June 2016 - 07:22 AM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 03 June 2016 - 11:13 PM, said:


If heat weren't a thing, then I would advocate power draw all the way, like some other shooters that don't have something like heat. But that isn't MechWarrior to me at all, if anything that sounds more like MechAssault than MechWarrior.



An additional mechanic to limit Alphas would not be necessary if heat had the proper effects in MWO. As heat goes up there is supposed to be progressive degrading of the Mech systems and the pilot is supposed to become impaired. Adding slowed movement, impaired agility and torso twisting, degraded targeting and sensor and possible weapon/component damage to the present heat scale mechanics would handle energy Alphas. Adding a reload mechanic to ballistics and missiles along with the present heat scale would handle non-energy Alphas.

As it stands now there are almost no ramifications for repeated Alphas until you exceed the heat limitations long enough to shut down. That is just wrong.

#122 SpiralFace

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 1,151 posts
  • LocationAlshain

Posted 04 June 2016 - 08:17 AM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 03 June 2016 - 11:13 PM, said:


I have never heard terms like "power draw" until people started begging PGI for alpha limiters. There is no energy draw limit in BattleTech, there is only heat. You are literally making up the mechanic that "You can't have enough energy to fire all your weapons and then move back into cover", that has NEVER been a thing, ever.

If heat weren't a thing, then I would advocate power draw all the way, like some other shooters that don't have something like heat. But that isn't MechWarrior to me at all, if anything that sounds more like MechAssault than MechWarrior.


Not true.

BATTLETECH is a game of abstraction that I think people take WAY too literally. Battletech depicts the "rough equivalent" of what a weapon can do over a 10 second period of time to another mech. But there is plenty of fiction within the universe that directly conveys limited reactor energy. Mostly from the novels as well as "advanced" rules (which I believe did have separate rules for alpha strikes at one point through something like max tech.)

But its generally accepted in BT that mechs firing weapons all in a turn is NOT them firing all their weapons simultaneously, but an abstraction of them firing them over a 10 second period of time.

Simultaneous fire does indeed overload the fusion reactor in the fiction and causes various effects dependent on the story / unit in question.

The most clear cut example I know (because I just read it recently,) was the Battlecorps short story "Sniper" which depicted a gunner of a Schrek PPC carrier tank crew and his battles in the Schrek. A major touching point of the story is that firing all 3 of the PPC's on the Schrek ends up drawing so much power from the fusion reactor, that the tank completely looses engine power for mobility functions of the tank. As the tank prioritizes the weapon's over basic mobility. Which constantly causes his driver to curse and argue with the gunner because after firing the PPC's simultaneously, they are essentially dead in the water for a bit while the reactor gathers more energy.

Other books have mechs that alpha strike generate insane amounts of heat simultaneously. While the DIRECT effects of the limits of the fusion reactor energy generation are never explicitly explained. There IS a general precedence within the universe that firing all weapons in one go is NOT something that fusion powered warmachines have the capability of doing without consequence.

Koving or someone else will have to find the direct "rules" that I think where made for alpha strikes themselves, But its pretty clear cut in all examples of the fiction and even Battletech itself, that what happens over a Battletech turn is an ABSTRACTION of the events that transpire over a 10 second period of time. Nothing more.

#123 RussianWolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationWV

Posted 04 June 2016 - 08:24 AM

View Postdervishx5, on 03 June 2016 - 06:00 AM, said:

This isn't Battletech, it's Mechwarrior.

The sooner people can come to terms with this concept the better for everyone.

Looks at to of page.

Quote

Mechwarrior Online: A Battletech Game


Oo

#124 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 04 June 2016 - 08:29 AM

View PostYeonne Greene, on 03 June 2016 - 07:28 PM, said:


I've actually been re-writing some of the BattleTech fluff on my own time. In it, I describe 'Mechs as being useful only because they can wield the same weapons as conventional vehicles on a platform with the same dexterity that a human would wield, which makes them force-multipliers when piloted with well-trained and well-practiced pilots.


I have one for this, too. Am on Android however on a lunch at work. Short-handed... Between the days of the first mechs and the height of the Star League, mechs were capable of virtually everything an average man in his forties could do (so no extreme bending/barrel rolls/airborne cartwheels). Gluing to cover, climbing buildings, handstands and walking on hands under controlled conditions, melee combat, mechanized boxing and some martial arts (some! Not all). As well as lifting vehicles and mechs 35-50 tons lighter than itself provided they weren't terribly bulky.

For basic references, mechs could do anything that can be done in the Armored Trooper Votoms anime (the 80s one) until 6 decades after Kerensky's Exodus. [6 decades is a rough guess]. (Short of the 'compressed air turns', though something similar supposedly can be done with jumpjets but not to that extreme as during the fights with the vat-born super soldiers called P(erfect).S(oldier).
From everything in the tech manual, mech warrior RPG handbooks one and two, 7 novels and a few other sources... their post- 3025 abilities are along the lines of what you can see in the following two animes:
08th MS Team (fundamental; the non-gundam mechs that it focuses on).
Patrol Labor (every single thing done here can be done; even the hand cannon has some light references in the Phoenix Hawk. All things done here are covered by Dark Ages, Tech Manual, and Maximum Tech rules; even the sniping tidbit have official rules covering it between match and City tech).

Careful climbing buildings though. Lots of ways that can go wrong. Had a kintaro fall through a building after climbing to chase a jetting Griffin.

Edit: Source for rough estimate as to when the abilities of mechs change; the introduction to Mechwarrior RPG, First Edition under the title: "A History of Human Space, 2001 - 3025." and subsection "The Succession Wars."
Sample.
Posted Image
As the story continues, it goes on to describe how the first couple of Succession Wars had thrown out all of the Ares Conventions (to which they NEVER returned to; a new set of conventions came up eventually). Slaughtering men, women and children in the streets. No target was off limits. Jumpships, dropships, civilian centers, orphanages, anything and everything was a viable target including wildlife to create food shortages in attempts to starve out planets. Even nukes were used, some whole planets completely destroyed and uninhabitable.
It wasn't until about the Third Succession War that a reduction in destruction really took hold; "At first the decrease in destruction and bloodshed appeared as more of a function of each army's reduced resources than a philosophical change in tactics."
"...each of the houses realized it could ill afford further losses of vital resources. Gradually an informal set of rules were evolved, similar to the Ares Conventions."
Those rules dictate what is off limits; Jumpships are chief among these which is why Jumpships are not attacked before Dropships are deployed nor are Jumpships ever engaged.

By the end of it all, there were some factories that continued to produce things that no one left alive really knew 'how it worked or why'. Some of the old Star League Mechs with their old fashioned cockpits and unusual controls are among these. For example, the Thunderbolt has two joysticks in the cockpit; one for each hand and independently control a separate crosshair with a targeting system that can simultaineously target and engage two targets. What it fails to mention is if this includes the torso mounted lasers, as only the arm weapons and missiles have ever been mentioned in any application of this trait.

"When hand actuators are present on a ’Mech, most of their
actions require little input from the MechWarrior. As I’ll describe
later, ’Mechs generally have enough intelligence to recognize a
simple “grab command” as aimed by a control stick and crosshairs,
and can thus pick up improvised clubs or cargo without
detailed input from the MechWarrior. Punching is trivial: click the
punch mode switch, aim the crosshairs, and pull the punch trigger.
Ditto for using clubs and hatchets. For fine hand manipulations,
sensors built into the gloves of MechWarriors or separate
waldo gloves can allow a ’Mech to mimic the gestures of its
MechWarriors, at least when the glove sensors are activated."
"Of course, BattleMechs can do more than just turn left or right,
or move backwards and forwards. Talented MechWarriors have
gotten assault ’Mechs to skip sideways to avoid missiles, executed
handstands under carefully controlled conditions, and otherwise
tapped some of the often-unused potential of a BattleMech’s
limbs for complicated movements. For now, you’re just getting
the two-kroner overview.
More complicated movements involve more complicated
combinations of controls. The steering pedals don’t just push
back and forth. They can also tilt and twist. Throttle control levers
and fi re control can also provide steering and movement input.
And while neurohelmets primarily serve to correct balance, they
can help clarify the MechWarrior’s intent to the BattleMech."

If you go on to the Diagonostic Interpretation Computer, you will learn that when moving, Battlemechs automatically 'avoid dangerous' obstacles such as tree branches (yep, evidently branches are dangerous; considering the damage using one as a club does which is about as much as punching, yeah), street lamps and buildings. Mechs will even avoid making contact with things such as walls, even with a command such as shooting with arm weapons that would have the arms touch the walls -- unless the Diagonistic Interpretation Computer reading the Neurohelmet detects that the pilot intends for this to happen, in which this override's the mech's desire to avoid contact that may damage itself or other things, thrusting its arms through the walls to fire up until the pilot releases the trigger.

-- now this I find interesting, because of two reasons. Mechs are automatically inclined to try and evade all threats, including enemy fire with two specific restrictions. The first restriction is that evading cannot interfere with the pilot's intentions so if the pilot wants to go forward and evasion requires a conflict with this intention the mech will not attempt it [example, enemies are shooting in front of you, the obvious evasion is stop going forward but pilot wants to go forward]. The second restriction is that the pilot must be conscious. If the pilot is not conscious, intention cannot be read and therefore the DI Computer is at a catch 22.

That brings me to the other reason I find this interesting. Consider that Battletech has "To Hit" dice rolls for every situation involving weapon fire against a pilot of any status; conscious, unconcious, aware, unaware. Yet, specifically "Aim" and targeting specific components is only permitted if the target is Immobile (shut down, no locomotion as in no legs) OR Unconscious. Exclusively those two general conditions are permit 'aiming'. Why? This is because under ANY other condition, the mech has the chance to attempt an evasion, deflection (spread damage; throw arm in way or torso twist; which is why you can hit rear torsos despite being in front of the enemy in tabletop), etc. It is only permitted to choose where to aim if the mech is unable to evade or if the pilot is unconscious in which case the DI Computer has a catch 22 and thus cannot act; the dice roll at any other time accounts for all possible defensive measures the mech may attempt.



Of interesting note, during the Star League Era which Mechwarrior RPG refers to as "The Good Years," Tech Manual makes reference under the Cockpit section, that some old Star League era mechs still feature joystick-less controls where pilots can fire weapons by making a 'trigger' movement with his index finger and aim by simply eyeing something in his view with 'intent'.
Clan pilots using E. I. implants are capable of controlling their mechs by remote, without any tangible control interface, by being within a certain proximity. Clan pilots who have this level of control over their mechs, comparable though clearly surpassing old Star League Era interfaces and the old neural helms with their side effects... feel pain when their mechs are damaged and may actually die when their mech is destroyed.

Of further interesting notes:
First Battletech author William H Keith Jr. pictured the 55 ton Shadowhawk as being a similar size as an Armored Trooper.
Posted Image
Posted Image

Illustration by William H Keith Jr.
Posted Image
Comparison:
Posted Image
Right most is MWO's Shadowhawk.
Left most is a tank from Crysis, which MWO uses Crysis for the scale of its pilot to be a "1:1 scale."

Edited by Koniving, 04 June 2016 - 05:37 PM.


#125 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 04 June 2016 - 10:06 AM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 03 June 2016 - 11:13 PM, said:


I have never heard terms like "power draw" until people started begging PGI for alpha limiters. There is no energy draw limit in BattleTech, there is only heat. You are literally making up the mechanic that "You can't have enough energy to fire all your weapons and then move back into cover", that has NEVER been a thing, ever.

If heat weren't a thing, then I would advocate power draw all the way, like some other shooters that don't have something like heat. But that isn't MechWarrior to me at all, if anything that sounds more like MechAssault than MechWarrior.

"A fragment of something he'd heard suddenly hurtled forward into Phelan's consciousness, and it was as though a blindfold had been torn from his eyes. "Vlad isn't in control. Natasha warned me about the power requirements for a Gauss rifle. Vlad hit the triggers for everything in his first shot. He's got the Gauss rifles set up as his primary weapons, so they get first crack at the power from his fusion engines!"

-Blood Legacy, Michael Stackpole (1990)
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Blood_Legacy

Concept has been out there for quite some time. But since weapon fire is an abstract over 10 second time in TT, it's not really imperative.

#126 wanderer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 11,152 posts
  • LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.

Posted 04 June 2016 - 10:54 AM

View PostFupDup, on 03 June 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Your heat won't get that high if you install more heatsinks in TT. You can actually make mechs that can constantly fire everything they have and never reach the lowest penalty.

MWO forces almost all mechs to overheat no matter how few guns and how many heatsinks you have. The exception is boating certain ballistics like Gauss or AC/5.

TT's heat scale is easier to work around and more forgiving than MWO. TT lets you pack more guns and fewer heatsinks while having higher heat sustainability than MWO does.


Standard TT leaves a lot out. All weapons fire at the same ROF. Heat sinks get to apply 10 seconds worth of cooling before negatives apply, because the timescale is in 10 second skips.

Solaris scale (2.5) is considerably different- even heat-neutral builds in 10sec scale will overheat easily when pushed for meaningful amounts of combat time. MWO is an even smaller scale by those measurements- if heat actually had effects on 'Mechs at the levels it does in TT, it'd be considerably altering gameplay.

#127 wanderer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 11,152 posts
  • LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.

Posted 04 June 2016 - 11:04 AM

View PostLordKnightFandragon, on 03 June 2016 - 07:05 PM, said:



Yeah, really. Tanks are just as bad ***, if not more so then battlemechs. Smaller targets means harder to hit, harder to hit+ tons more armor = really bad ***. I wouldnt wanna run into an Alacorn or a Von Luckner, Shreck or any tank, thye are bad as hell.


A vehicle has it's weak points, mind you.

It's a helluva lot easier to mobility kill a tank in Battletech than a 'Mech, and they're considerably more vulnerable to critical damage (even through-armor) than a 'Mech is. Even the utterly-maligned LB-X does better against a target that usually only has 1-2 armor facings towards the gun at a time, and given a tank's odds of being critted in various ways from damage that would just scrape armor off a 'Mech, you can inflict significant harm in even a single shot insufficient to do more than ding a light 'Mech.

And as far as Paul's "power draw" janky BS, we already have a limiting system. It's called heat, and Paul has created an horribly primitive version of it and only managed to make it worse since. The problem is all of your guns unerringly finding the same spot, effectively reducing a 'Mechs lifespan tremendously due to being able to very reasonably killshot a 'Mech in two salvos if you simply take weapons that 1) all point the same way and 2) don't push you over 100% heat in two salvos.

A mix of oversimplifying (indeed, outright breaking) some game mechanics and insanely arbitrary and complex mechanics (ghost heat vs. an actual overheat system) is the ugly coat of paint MWO has slapped on the game.

#128 Quicksilver Aberration

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nightmare
  • The Nightmare
  • 11,871 posts
  • LocationKansas City, MO

Posted 04 June 2016 - 11:05 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 04 June 2016 - 10:06 AM, said:

Concept has been out there for quite some time.

Just like good ol' Stackpoles :D.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 04 June 2016 - 11:05 AM.


#129 Gyrok

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 5,879 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeriphery of the Inner Sphere, moving toward the core worlds with each passing day.

Posted 04 June 2016 - 11:23 AM

View PostQuicksilver Kalasa, on 04 June 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:

Just like good ol' Stackpoles Posted Image.


Why can my jump jets not kill a pilot through the cockpit a la Joanna and Natasha Kerensky???

#130 EgoSlayer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 1,909 posts
  • Location[REDACTED]

Posted 04 June 2016 - 11:24 AM

View PostRussianWolf, on 04 June 2016 - 08:24 AM, said:

Looks at to of page.



Oo


All MechWarrior is Battletech, but not all Battletech is Mechwarrior.

#131 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 04 June 2016 - 11:43 AM

View PostQuicksilver Kalasa, on 04 June 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:

Just like good ol' Stackpoles Posted Image.

except this one makes some degree of sense...since counter to belief...reactors only generate some much usable power at a given moment. Mind you most high energy weapons I would assume to use some form of capacitor bank, but recharging them would not be instant.

Heck the new Gerald Ford super carrier has magnetic catapults it's reactors can't generate enough power for......
http://www.bostonglo...K6yJ/story.html

*shrug*

#132 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 04 June 2016 - 02:57 PM

View PostHit the Deck, on 03 June 2016 - 08:36 PM, said:

That's interesting because what you said is similar to what this article states: http://breakingdefen...ns-faster-than/

It says that the military develops robots so they can have the ability to send them to climb over obstacles.

Indeed. Related:


In Megamek, there is a "Climb" mode using tabletop rules; you can use them to climb steep cliffs and buildings.
It requires two hand actuators, or at least I have only been brave enough to try with two hand actuators.

Then again I had a Blackhawk (Nova) which lost an arm and a leg when the side torso was destroyed, and spent the next 3+ minutes bunny hopping on one leg while my heatsinks continued to melt, using my ER MLs at 1/5th power in order to give myself the best chances of hitting the enemy as my heat climbed faster than I could hope to sink it. Firing 6 ER ML at 1/5th the power and heat for 1/5th the damage to have 6 chances of hitting over a single ER ML at full power for full heat with one chance to hit or miss seemed much better. My pilot suffered from exhaustion, getting worse by the second between heat penalties and operational exhaustion. Finally, as I ran out of places to go and arrived in a field surrounded by trees to face the Battlemaster persuing me, as I was about to make my final stand -- my pilot passed out from exhaustion. With one leap every 10 seconds, 30 of which I didn't jump, that's about 2 and a half minutes of bunny hopping where my pilot only failed the landing twice,only to carefully stand and continue.

So who knows what a mech with a single hand actuator could do.

Though I have a rough idea now that I think about it; while doing a 'campaign' for testing out a custom civilian AI and vehicles for Megamek to simulate traffic and pedestrians, one 'training mission' of navigation through the city involved heavy rains. Crossing a parking lot from one side of a shopping center to another, a pilot who did great at navigating inside a 3 story space (Security Mechs; industrial mechs), the parking lot proved a problem. The mech slipped. The resulting skid of 30 meters was followed by another 30 meters then another. Lost the right arm and a searchlight. The final skid smashed my mech through the wall of a coffee shop where I then sunk into the basement floor.
In the next 10 seconds, the pilot -- who had above average gunnery skill and below average piloting ability, was able to get the mech out of the basement, out of the building and back on the mech's feet without causing further (reportable) damage to the mech or the building.

Edited by Koniving, 04 June 2016 - 03:07 PM.


#133 EgoSlayer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 1,909 posts
  • Location[REDACTED]

Posted 04 June 2016 - 07:53 PM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 04 June 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

except this one makes some degree of sense...since counter to belief...reactors only generate some much usable power at a given moment. Mind you most high energy weapons I would assume to use some form of capacitor bank, but recharging them would not be instant.

Heck the new Gerald Ford super carrier has magnetic catapults it's reactors can't generate enough power for......
http://www.bostonglo...K6yJ/story.html

*shrug*


Sorry, but that isn't really what that says. It says the new ship is 40% new systems that require more power than the Nimitz class carriers it's replacing

Quote

About 60 percent of the ship, which like its predecessors will be nuclear powered, is based on the Nimitz design, while the remaining 40 percent consists of entirely new components — including a larger flight deck and high-tech systems. It is many of those new technologies that are encountering serious problems, Pentagon leaders have been told.
...[electromagnetic aircraft launch system]
Land-based tests of the system in New Jersey have demonstrated a reliability rate of only 240 launches without a failure, when it should be above 1,250 launches without failure at this stage of the Gerald Ford’s development.
...
Admiral Moore did not address directly the Pentagon’s concerns about the new launch and recovery systems but said the technology was not so futuristic that problems cannot be solved.
“This isn’t like a laser or a proton torpedo,” he said, noting that similar power systems are used to run roller coasters at amusement parks.

But he acknowledged the amount of electric power the Navy needs to generate to launch and recover hundreds of planes each day on the deck of an aircraft carrier at sea is unique.

“On the scale we are talking about, we haven’t done this before,” he said.


The issue is the reliability, not the power requirements. The launch system wasn't possible as a retrofit on the Nimitz class because the reactors there are twin 100 megawatt generators which couldn't deliver the power needed fast enough. The Ford has twin 300 megawatt generators that provides the power for the launchers and still has surplus capacity for expansion.

Likewise, the fusion engines in the battlemechs should be in those hundreds of megawatt ranges, I can find a number of references to people saying engine size = output in megawatts (MW) but no official source.

Some mathematicians here have figured out it takes about ~162-200 Megajoules of energy to fire a Gauss, or 50MW.
http://mwomercs.com/...explosions-why/

So really, pretty much every battlemech should have an energy surplus. Except a stock engine Urbie with a Gauss.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 04 June 2016 - 07:59 PM.


#134 DrxAbstract

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Butcher
  • The Butcher
  • 1,672 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 04 June 2016 - 09:25 PM

View PostLuca M Pryde, on 03 June 2016 - 05:51 AM, said:

Its not realistic. Where are you getting the all the energy from?

Oh god, you're one of those people... Look, you don't justify arguments with realism in a video game, ever. Secondly, 'Mechs are powered by FUSION REACTORS; The only thing limiting their potential energy output is the cooling system's ability to dissipate the waste heat and that's it. THAT. IS. IT.

Quote

Also the lower your ping, the more devastating it is.

Yeah that's... not how ping works with HSR.

Quote

Ghost heat breaks the game for some mechs when you do as well.

Breaks the game... It doesn't mean what you think it does.

Quote

It isn't really battletech as we know it. Well it is already pretty far considering IS makes can even fight one on one with clan mechs.

Everyone knows this that knows Battletech.

Correct: It's not BattleTech, it's Mechwarrior. Despite being based on the same fictional universe, they have never been the same thing. BattleTech =/= Mechwarrior.

Alpha Strikes by themselves are not an issue. The ability to hammer them out repeatedly is, and PGI has already made a statement concerning this subject if you bothered to do a little research.

#135 Andi Nagasia

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,982 posts

Posted 04 June 2016 - 10:58 PM

the Power Draw System is supposed to Help solve this Problem,

it appears to be Alpha / Heat Driven,
if (Alpha > 35) Then (Alpha -35) x A^2,

in this way Every Damage over 35 will cause an influx of more heat,
this 35 resets like Ghost Heat every 0.5 seconds,

anyway thats how its thoughts to work,
and yes its all weapons not just Energy weapons,

#136 Johnny Z

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 9,942 posts
  • LocationDueling on Solaris

Posted 05 June 2016 - 01:41 AM

This is another Alpha strike topic. Its true the top end alpha strikes shouldn't be in game at all.

View PostAce Selin, on 03 June 2016 - 05:30 AM, said:

Beta & Charlie strikes worry me more to be honest. Alpha strikes i can deal with usually.


A witty reply but so wrong. With players using focus fire huge alpha strikes rule out the need for beta etc. That's what many who want this to be a Battletech game and say its not are referring to. The extremely low TTK at times.

Anyway this entire topic was decided long ago. By the players and the guys doing balance for this game. Alpha strikes are getting nerfed, somehow and some way.

Personally? Alpha strikes are not to bad for the most part. I am looking forward to some sort of top end alpha strike balance though.

Edited by Johnny Z, 05 June 2016 - 01:44 AM.


#137 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 05 June 2016 - 05:46 AM

Power draw, lowering heat caps, or adding additional heat effects will only limit the size of the strike. Firing weapons with similar characteristics simutaniously will always be superior to chainfire.

#138 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2016 - 08:08 AM

View PostDrxAbstract, on 04 June 2016 - 09:25 PM, said:

Oh god, you're one of those people... Look, you don't justify arguments with realism in a video game, ever. Secondly, 'Mechs are powered by FUSION REACTORS; The only thing limiting their potential energy output is the cooling system's ability to dissipate the waste heat and that's it. THAT. IS. IT.


Not technically true.

Also limiting output are how long it takes your chamber walls to break down under neutron flux, how much fuel you have, how fast you can actually use that fuel, the maximum flow-rate through your turbines, the max RPM of your turbines, how much power your transfer systems can handle...lots of things.

Also, using reality to ground fiction usually results in some of the best fiction. More important, though, is that all of your internal rules and mechanics are consistent, and that's an area where BattleTech fails spectacularly.

#139 DrxAbstract

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Butcher
  • The Butcher
  • 1,672 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 05 June 2016 - 01:02 PM

View PostYeonne Greene, on 05 June 2016 - 08:08 AM, said:


Not technically true.

Also limiting output are how long it takes your chamber walls to break down under neutron flux, how much fuel you have, how fast you can actually use that fuel, the maximum flow-rate through your turbines, the max RPM of your turbines, how much power your transfer systems can handle...lots of things.

Also, using reality to ground fiction usually results in some of the best fiction. More important, though, is that all of your internal rules and mechanics are consistent, and that's an area where BattleTech fails spectacularly.


Neutron flux is a necessary considered element for Fission reactions, not Fusion. By comparison, it's essential for fission reactions while being a byproduct in fusion reactions, the latter of which producing minuscule amounts even at a magnitude of a stellar body (Star). There are also no turbines in Fusion reactors because they're not glorified nuclear-powered steam engines, like the Fission Reactors we use today. Fusion Reactors generate electricity, quite basically, the way a dynamo does: by manipulating the electromagnetic spectrum with plasma rather than copper coils. Fuel consumption is determined by how large you want the reaction to be and how sturdily the shielding and containment is (This is even referenced in BattleTech).

In Fission Reactors, heat is the driving power. In Fusion Reactors, heat is a byproduct. None of what you said applies to Fusion Reactors, which is what Mechs use.

And I didn't say having a basis in reality was adverse to games. I said using reality to argue your opinions in a video game is pointless... Especially when it's suggested the power source isn't 'realistically' capable of handling the output levels when:

A. That power source doesn't exist in man-made form in reality to make such conclusions one way or another.

B. That person clearly has little-to-no understanding of said power source within the fictional world itself.

C. People continue confusing Fission with Fusion.

#140 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2016 - 01:57 PM

View PostDrxAbstract, on 05 June 2016 - 01:02 PM, said:


Neutron flux is a necessary considered element for Fission reactions, not Fusion.


Wrong.

Fusion reactions generate something on the order of 100x the neutron flux as fission. It's even on the Wikipedia description for fusion power. That flux results in the transmutation and subsequent degradation of the chamber walls in a given fusion vessel. It is currently one of the hardest problems to solve, because even if you get a significant net-positive power from fusion the replacement intervals for the vessel make fusion economically sketchy.

I'm not talking out of my ***. Do not assume that I am. Perhaps you should be the one doing your homework before spouting bullsh*t.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 05 June 2016 - 02:00 PM.






7 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users