26 replies to this topic

[Felicitatem Parco]

Ghost Heat was supposed to target weapon groups that all had the same exact trajectory and the same firing solution. This was meant to curb the simplicity of getting all your firepower into the same place with a single mouse click. That's why it did not link ballistics and lasers, for example, because you have to lead ballistics and they don't hit the same place the lasers would hit -> no penalty needed to prevent insta-coring on moving or small targets.

The new energy/power draw system is not designed to stop these TTK-reducing builds... it harshly punishes mixed builds.


It does not discriminate between builds that load all their damage into a single firing solution with identical shot trajectories, or a mix of SRMs, AC, and lasers all with different aiming requirements and projectile velocities.

I guess all I am saying is that Power Draw does not attempt to solve the "problem" that Ghost Heat was intended to mitigate. All P.D. does is encourage boating of simar weapons, and discourage mixed loadouts.

Ghost Heat was meant to punish loadouts that took the most advantage of convergence - weapons with identical firing properties. Now, the new system does not focus on preventing single-point-of-impact loadouts, but rather treats all loadouts as if they are equally-guilty of causing low TTK.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 19 August 2016 - 03:45 PM.

[SuomiWarder]

I think the intent of the "energy draw" system to reduce the hitting power and time between uses of full alphas regardless of the weapons included. I would have to try the public server to see what energy values are assigned to what weapons before saying that mixed builds are any worse off under "power draw".

[FupDup]

Ghost Power was made to account for Ghost Heat's loophole combinations like PPCs + Gauss, PPCs + ACs, or LPL + [ER]ML.

In the process though it does certainly have some "collateral damage."

Edited by FupDup, 19 August 2016 - 02:11 PM.

[Gamuray]

Congratulations sir. You have correctly pinned the tail on the donkey and hit the nail on the head as well. I was thinking about posting about the issue as well since this is a thing:

10 IS medium lasers -> +5 heat
1 lrm 20, 1 ac20, 3 medium lasers -> +5 heat

Small penalty, I know, but you can imagine it with a larger scale too. Both get the same penalty, but 10 medium lasers is going to put all the damage in one spot, whereas the mixed build? Nope, spread. Spread EVERYWHERE. But it gets the same penalty... why the heck? Big alpha or not, that's not going to hurt as much as 10 mediums! Big alphas aren't an issue when the thing spreads over the entire enemy mech and misses partially too!



Which is why I say do away with convergence so that weapons don't shoot diagonal out of their "barrel". Have them shoot straight. Then your big alphas can still be fired, but won't all hit at one spot... then it becomes "Do I shoot everything at once, probably miss some and hope that it finishes the enemy off, or do I fire that, then that, then that to make sure everything hits where it needs to?"

Edited by Gamuray, 19 August 2016 - 02:14 PM.

[Mystere]

Gamuray, on 19 August 2016 - 02:10 PM, said:

Which is why I say do away with convergence so that weapons don't shoot diagonal out of their "barrel". Have them shoot straight. Then your big alphas can still be fired, but won't all hit at one spot... then it becomes "Do I shoot everything at once, probably miss some and hope that it finishes the enemy off, or do I fire that, then that, then that to make sure everything hits where it needs to?"

For emphasis.

[MoonUnitBeta]

I couldn't care less if a mech has 10m.pulse or 2 ppcs and 2AC20's.

I just don't want the power of 3 Suns plowing into my crotchel area in two seconds.

I couldn't care less about weapon diversity.

[smokytehbear]

MoonUnitBeta, on 19 August 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

I couldn't care less if a mech has 10m.pulse or 2 ppcs and 2AC20's.

I just don't want the power of 3 Suns plowing into my crotchel area in two seconds.

I couldn't care less about weapon diversity.

You do realize the whole message of the thread is that it doesn't accomplish that right?

The power draw system doesn't change TTK. It just turns everything into a single weapon boat that kills you just as fast as multi-weapon non-boats used to.

[MoonUnitBeta]

smokytehbear, on 19 August 2016 - 02:26 PM, said:

You do realize the whole message of the thread is that it doesn't accomplish that right?

The power draw system doesn't change TTK. It just turns everything into a single weapon boat that kills you just as fast as multi-weapon non-boats used to.

I do realize that, thank you. You know what I want. I'm hoping PGI reads it, because they need it spelled out.

[Gamuray]

MoonUnitBeta, on 19 August 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

I couldn't care less if a mech has 10m.pulse or 2 ppcs and 2AC20's.

I just don't want the power of 3 Suns plowing into my crotchel area in two seconds.

I couldn't care less about weapon diversity.

Those are both full direct fire similar group weapons... all laser is all laser... 2ppc 2ac20 is all projectile... I'm talking when you have an actually mixed loadout. Lasers, ballistics, missiles... all with different travel times, spreads, duration, and damage profiles... those will spread all over your mech and not "the power of 3 Suns plowing into my crotchel area in two seconds". But still gets penalized.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Gamuray, on 19 August 2016 - 02:36 PM, said:

Those are both full direct fire similar group weapons... all laser is all laser... 2ppc 2ac20 is all projectile... I'm talking when you have an actually mixed loadout. Lasers, ballistics, missiles... all with different travel times, spreads, duration, and damage profiles... those will spread all over your mech and not "the power of 3 Suns plowing into my crotchel area in two seconds". But still gets penalized.

I didn't think my two second example i created off the top of my head was going to be taken so literally. The point is understood. You just need to accept that weapons can and always will be synergized. But yeah, have fun balancing that though.

[Davers]

Why bother with synergizing weapons when you can just take 5-7 LPL?

I knew that there was something wrong with the stated intent of increasing ttk when they made firing 3 PPCs cost 12 less heat.
Why doesn't PGI understand their own game? Haven't they been working on it for like 4 years?

[Gamuray]

MoonUnitBeta, on 19 August 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

I didn't think my two second example i created off the top of my head was going to be taken so literally. The point is understood. You just need to accept that weapons can and always will be synergized. But yeah, have fun balancing that though.

*cough cough* No convergence means synergy nopes everywhere. Because your weapons won't hit the same spot! #noconvergenceisnotabandaidsolution

[Felicitatem Parco]

Gamuray, on 19 August 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:

*cough cough* No convergence means synergy nopes everywhere. Because your weapons won't hit the same spot! #noconvergenceisnotabandaidsolution

Ghost Heat was meant to punish loadouts that took the most advantage of convergence - weapons with identical firing properties. Now, the new system does not focus on preventing single-point-of-impact loadouts, but rather treats all loadouts as if they are equally-guilty of causing low TTK.

They missed the target.

[smokytehbear]

Davers, on 19 August 2016 - 02:54 PM, said:

Why bother with synergizing weapons when you can just take 5-7 LPL?

I knew that there was something wrong with the stated intent of increasing ttk when they made firing 3 PPCs cost 12 less heat.
Why doesn't PGI understand their own game? Haven't they been working on it for like 4 years?

I don't know. We'll probably never know. If I had to hazard a guess though, it's because they don't play it. I've played thousands of matches, took my sweet time to get to tier 2 so I hung out at all the different places in between plenty. I've run into one PGI tag ever in all that time. Considering I recognize that I've played with about half a lobby before in any given game, you would think with a playerbase that small you'd see more of them. Unless of course, they're just not playing.

In any case, it's not too late to smash this latest idiotic idea they've churned out. Just have to go with their preferred system of feedback (listening to people that shout loudest) and devolve ourselves into common e-trolls and hound all the threads that seem to think it's a good idea. Sigh, for the greater good I suppose?

[Gamuray]

smokytehbear, on 19 August 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

In any case, it's not too late to smash this latest idiotic idea they've churned out. Just have to go with their preferred system of feedback (listening to people that shout loudest) and devolve ourselves into common e-trolls and hound all the threads that seem to think it's a good idea. Sigh, for the greater good I suppose?

Hm, I suppose so. Especially since Russ's latest retweet was "Derrick: "@russ_bullock really shockingly positive overall response to ED so far. For our community, it's really something surprising. Good work!"

It seems the people playing all the boat builds are happy... but we who realize the penalties apply to completely unsynchronized loadouts... we KNOW. So I guess we do need to be more vocal... hence why I directly tweeted Russ that "ED affects 1 ac20, 1 lrm20, and 1 LPL the same as 4 LPL and a mlas. One is more effective though" I hope he understands what I mean, because dang character cap made it difficult to get the point across.

[smokytehbear]

Gamuray, on 19 August 2016 - 03:16 PM, said:

Hm, I suppose so. Especially since Russ's latest retweet was "Derrick: "@russ_bullock really shockingly positive overall response to ED so far. For our community, it's really something surprising. Good work!"

It seems the people playing all the boat builds are happy... but we who realize the penalties apply to completely unsynchronized loadouts... we KNOW. So I guess we do need to be more vocal... hence why I directly tweeted Russ that "ED affects 1 ac20, 1 lrm20, and 1 LPL the same as 4 LPL and a mlas. One is more effective though" I hope he understands what I mean, because dang character cap made it difficult to get the point across.

Of course that's the thing he'd retweet. Confirmation bias and all. Retweet... oh yeah that's right, our game's CEO uses twitter for his analytics and outreach, not the official forums dedicated to discussing the game. Easier to distance yourself from naysayers that way I guess, and there sure isn't a shortage of those when you come out with Long Tom, minimap 2.0, and then this all in a row.


Why am I even still playing this game...

[Felicitatem Parco]

smokytehbear, on 19 August 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

Why am I even still playing this game...

Customizable big stompy explodey BattleMechs with lasers, guns, missiles, and damage compartmentalization?

[Davers]

smokytehbear, on 19 August 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

Of course that's the thing he'd retweet. Confirmation bias and all. Retweet... oh yeah that's right, our game's CEO uses twitter for his analytics and outreach, not the official forums dedicated to discussing the game. Easier to distance yourself from naysayers that way I guess, and there sure isn't a shortage of those when you come out with Long Tom, minimap 2.0, and then this all in a row.


Why am I even still playing this game...

You know, I came back and played more games in the past week than I have played in the past year. It was kinda fun, and I was even thinking about dropping the $27 I need to get the 2 IS Loyalty mechs. Thank goodness they didn't wait for next week to do this test or I would have spent the money.

I am just getting really tired of waiting for PGI to get something right.

[Gentleman Reaper]

Again, I fail to understand what they've done wrong here. Yes, balance is off thanks to grouped projectile weapons, but power draw is at it's base state right now. Russ stated that they would be reiterating weapon balancing throughout the PTS's length, so it makes no sense to me why people think they should already scrap it.

[Elizander]

Prosperity Park, on 19 August 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

Ghost Heat was meant to punish loadouts that took the most advantage of convergence - weapons with identical firing properties. Now, the new system does not focus on preventing single-point-of-impact loadouts, but rather treats all loadouts as if they are equally-guilty of causing low TTK.

They missed the target.

Just thinking of how it doubles Atlas face-time and how ineffective Atlas damage already is. I mean sure, we can just roll with 3x LPL Atlas or 2x LPL+LBX10+Medium Laser (35 Alpha, whoa!) just to play within energy draw, but I'm also reading that the heat penalties aren't that bad either so we might as well just continue with Alpha warrior?

Does 2x LBX10 + 2x LPL ( AS7-D-DC ) even hurt in terms of heat?

Gentleman Reaper, on 19 August 2016 - 03:47 PM, said:

Again, I fail to understand what they've done wrong here. Yes, balance is off thanks to grouped projectile weapons, but power draw is at it's base state right now. Russ stated that they would be reiterating weapon balancing throughout the PTS's length, so it makes no sense to me why people think they should already scrap it.

I do feel that people need to go in the feedback section and add their opinions to posts not their own as well.