337 replies to this topic

[K19]

Lot work to do... this joke fix mech 1º next map next guns next heat ... large er laser same tns large laser this real bad joke much much stf to fix not heat planelty

[Wintersdark]

Gas Guzzler, on 18 August 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

Except for the fact that spread weapons and ER PPCs have different energy ratings, and you have to wait 1.5 seconds between 30 damage shots.

And then guess on the bar how much energy you have left.

well, not really. Exceeding the bar by a bit generates a trivially small amount of heat. 4 ppc's or 2ppc/ac20 generate 5 points of Ghost Heat under this system.

Unlike ghost heat, then, firing again a bit early isn't severely punished.

This system is both clearly defined and more forgiving than ghost heat.

[JonDoeIowa]

Team Chevy86, on 18 August 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

This looks really good, not going to lie. Much more intuitive than Ghost Heat

4v4 and no MM on the PTS will help, but I'm still finding it hard to imagine people will go through the trouble to download and install the PTS. You guys need to put in some incentive to play it... Eg; All c-bill 'earned' give a %50 boost on the PTS and will be injected into Live accounts at the end of the test

[color=#959595]I look forward to testing this one.[/color]

[color=#959595]As you at PGI stated in a previous Town Hall, the issue is getting enough people to test it.[/color]

[color=#959595]One issue may be that the players are not earning anything while playing the test server.[/color]

[color=#959595]What I propose is to create an EVENT like you have been with personal challenges on the test server. Offer C-bill payments for each match played, and say every 10 patches a MC or Premium time reward. This can be done just like the personal events. As you complete more and more the items are simply injected to your main server account.[/color]

[color=#959595]Just a thought but it may help. [/color]

[braveheart95]

Hmm waiting for victims...err opponents...

[Steve Pryde]

So triple IS ppc new meta?

[Marquis De Lafayette]

I can hear the tapping of calculators everywhere across the inner sphere.... As we all figure out what this will do to our favorite builds and all our weapon groupings. Well, should be fun to adapt to.

[DevlinCognito]

So if I have this straight, each weapon needs a certain amount of 'energy' to fire. Lets call it ... 'heat', and the energy is built up at a set rate lets call that set rate, I dont know ... 'heat dissipation', now if your 'heat dissipation' cant keep up with how much 'heat' you've built up, you shutdown? Right?

Sounds familiar yet somehow different ...

PGI, please PLEASE stop trying to re-invent the wheel here. Since Open Beta people have asked/begged and pleaded for you to cut the heat scale in half/have the max of 30 and increase heat dissipation, but first there came Ghost Heat and people simply found a way to negate it while keeping their large Alphas, now another convoluted system. Can you please at least try it in your PTS? Give us a weekend of having the heat scale cut in half, show us why it wouldnt work and stop trying to convulute an already new player unfriendly game.

[WVAnonymous]

Looks like my 5 LRM5+Artemis Stalker 5M will be the new meta. Cool.

[045]

I'm really curious to try this out though I suspect it might be too complicated for many players. I really worry about making the game too complex that we lower our player population too much. I love complexity, but this might go too far. Guess that's why we're testing it haha.

I saw an earlier post with he idea of adding reticle shake when firing BIG alpha strikes. I think that idea has a lot of merit and could also pave the way for how Heavy Lasers could work in the future (anything that gets me closer to a Blood Asp haha). I would really like to see a PTS done on that as well as it wouldn't redefine the game as drastically.

Perhaps energy draw should focus more on how many of a specific weapon type (lasers, or autocannons) a mech can fire at a time. Try to tone down boating except on certain mechs that are designed for it via quirks and lore (Nova, Komodo, Kodiak, etc.) I don't have a clear idea on specifics yet, or if this is what energy draw is encouraging already. Just my modus operandi: Do things, hope it works out, take credit later, pretend it was a plan.

[exiledangel]

so brawling while become obsolete on this system

[Pilotshark]

This system looks great!

Hopefully it will address some of the metamech cookie-cutter alphastrikevomit and finally require a bit more strategy than is presently employed with the unfortunately default no-convergence armlock and throttledecay.

Things are looking up for making the game a little less a "Call of Duty/Battlefield" game and more "Mechwarrior" BattleTech game.

Looking forward to the changes if they are as I understand them to be.

Kudos MWO Team!

Pilotshark

[Dunereaper]

I like this system...I really freak'n like this system!

[Tiantara]

- Ok, i read the post and have a really bad feelings about it.
1. Energy bar must be at least 40 point and show not level but some short bars. Filled with color and empty, when got used. At least that make that GUI part useful. Just blinking GUI part - not good.

2. I see here some strange thing. Yes, energy weapon use energy and that energy not endless, when you take it all you can't shoot and wait. Also we have cooldown of weapon to... wait. And also many mech have two groups of weapon in balance - ballistic and laser. And there comes something funny. If lasers use energy, so what energy use ballistic weapon in that case? Why single energy bar separated between two different weapon groups? Leave ballistic aside. We have low ammo and high risk to become "dynamite stick on a feet". Few lucky hits and you loose part of mech with all components because of ammo explosion. And even c.a.s.e. won't help as it mentioned in details. (I don't say about most worst thing when weapon got wrecked when armor nearly whole on some of mechs in first 1 min of battle).

3. Most builds based on 1-2 groups and ranges. Like - whole big alpha (biggest and safe from heat-shock = 62, but differs from mech to mech) divided on some long-range weapon and some short or medium (20-30 long safe for heat, 20-35 to medium or short). If pilot shoot distand target and miss - he use nearly all energy points and stuck weaponless if got suddenly attacked in close range. In most situation that = instant death. Capping all mech to only available dmg = 30, same as make all mech mediums, with same builds, with same tactics.

4. That system also needs rechecking armor points and in some cases - to bigger value (to protect weapon from surprising wrecking). What worse - also that system makes useless most of hardpoints in at least 60% of currently presented mech. As I can see...

5. And you have also one problem... More and more maps created only for longrange weapon. Forcing make build based on longrange already make short weapon collect dust in hangar. Now we can get a situation, when no-one go to fight being afraid to have no energy to self-protect in sudden close combat and all battles become longer and less dynamic than now.

I'll wait result of test and hope that everything would be ok... but... conception pretty rough and need many adjustments.

[Fiona Marshe]

After this test round, I would hope the values are changed to:
Missiles = 0.5
Ballistics = 0.75
Energy = 1.0

Special adjustments to LBX/CERPPC from those values.

The 6 PPC Stalker might make a comeback ( in 2x3 groups)

Edited by Fiona Marshe, 18 August 2016 - 04:32 PM.

[Hobbles v]

This is a massive waste of development time, the actual mech combat in this game is the games biggest strength.

Why not instead work on actual CONTENT, things that make the game more interesting, instead of having the whole community re-learn how to play the game on the same old maps and same old non-immersive modes.

Even if this system works out well (only testing will tell) this is still a massive waste of development time.

[Nightmare1]

Well, this will be interesting. I'm not happy about the increased heat to my ACs or the fact that the ACs will draw an equal amount of energy to their damage. What will that do to my HBK-4G? Niche Mechs like that are going to get hit hard, I think.

I also disagree with the heavy handed nerf to the Cooldown Modules. Considering the amount of time required to grind out the GXP needed to invest in them, and then the expensive amount of C-bills they burn, I feel gypped. Getting cut back from 18% down to 5% is a precipitous drop; I'd like my GXP and C-bills back! I'd rather use the GXP to Elite Mechs and the C-bills to purchase more range modules instead. After all, 5% off of 6 second is only a third of a second; if you have weapons cycling at less than that, it isn't worth buying the Cooldown modules. Better to stay at range and pick at your foes.

Also, why on earth does a Locust have the same energy reserve of an Atlas? Shouldn't the size/weight class of a Mech, as well as the engine rating, effect the amount of power draw? In my opinion, bigger Mechs with bigger engines should be able to have higher power limits. Otherwise, why drive the Atlas? Lights are nearly unaffected by this power draw system, while Mediums and up are getting their teeth kicked in.

Lastly, can we get a more clear definition of what happens when you exceed your 30 point energy draw? What I'm getting out of the OP, is that you have a randomized chance to shut down if you exceed 30 points. Is that it? Will we still be dealing damage to our internals with override?

[Crixus187]

You meam to tell me that a locust and an atlas will have the same power draw? even tho the power plant in an atlas is bigger, heavier and stronger then the locust? smh

this. is. ridiculous.

if you want to add a layer of simulation to this game, maybe you people should pick up a novel or two and take notes. make ECM and AMS have power draws too. the power out put of my atlas should be double or maybe even triple of the locust.

I think I will be looking at other games to play

[Rydiak Randborir]

Crixus187, on 18 August 2016 - 04:43 PM, said:

You meam to tell me that a locust and an atlas will have the same power draw? even tho the power plant in an atlas is bigger, heavier and stronger then the locust? smh

this. is. ridiculous.

if you want to add a layer of simulation to this game, maybe you people should pick up a novel or two and take notes. make ECM and AMS have power draws too. the power out put of my atlas should be double or maybe even triple of the locust.

I think I will be looking at other games to play

You mean to tell me that you don't realize this is a systems test, and that energy pools for individual mechs can be tweaked later as necessary?

[Kael Posavatz]

Can someone explain the logic of getting people over to the test server to, you know, test this by having an event on the main server?

[Slow and Decrepit]

DevlinCognito, on 18 August 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

So if I have this straight, each weapon needs a certain amount of 'energy' to fire. Lets call it ... 'heat', and the energy is built up at a set rate lets call that set rate, I dont know ... 'heat dissipation', now if your 'heat dissipation' cant keep up with how much 'heat' you've built up, you shutdown? Right?

Sounds familiar yet somehow different ...

PGI, please PLEASE stop trying to re-invent the wheel here. Since Open Beta people have asked/begged and pleaded for you to cut the heat scale in half/have the max of 30 and increase heat dissipation, but first there came Ghost Heat and people simply found a way to negate it while keeping their large Alphas, now another convoluted system. Can you please at least try it in your PTS? Give us a weekend of having the heat scale cut in half, show us why it wouldnt work and stop trying to convulute an already new player unfriendly game.

What do you think this is? Or did I miss something?