26 replies to this topic

[TLBFestus]

I haven't had the chance yet to try it, but have managed to do a lot of reading about how the new Energy Draw System is going on the PTS, so bear with me.

If you were going to issue PGI a score out of 10 for their PTS effort, what would it be after trying it? What kind of score were you expecting to give it? Also, in TWO lines or less (no small fonts plz) what simple changes would you suggest. Try to keep the same format if you can be bothered.

Keeping in mind that I haven't tried it yet, but from all my reading says that I'd say this;

Quote

Expected Score: 2-3/10 (come on, it's PGI)

Actual Score: 5-6/10

Recc'd Changes:

Lower energy cap (down from 30 to say, 25) and longer Energy Refill Rate ( say, 15 points per second)

That's the feeling I get from my perusal of the boards and other sources. I promise to hop on the PTS soon and see for myself.

On a side note, WTF were they thinking putting an event on at the same time as they were trying to convince people to use the PTS?

THAT was classic PGI.

Edited by TLBFestus, 19 August 2016 - 07:13 PM.

[Gentleman Reaper]

I'd say 7-7.5/10. The core of the system works exactly like I imagined it, There's just needs to be adjustment to individual weapons' energy generation as well to the heat penalties for exceeding the energy threshold, which is far more lenient than ghost heat was, although Russ said on twitter that we would be seeing regular balancing throughout the PTS.

I think that energy draw might be the tool needed to balance Clan tech without making it feel less powerful. Imagine if on Clan XLs a torso loss would give you a huge energy regen penalty, so you lose the ability to make big alphas as well as being forced to fire more slowly. I have a good feeling about this system, and I don't understand the hate that some people are giving it.

[Chuck Jager]

So I give Pgi a modified 9 if they are basically letting the player base make the call on how to go forward with the tough decision on balancing range and PPD vs spread in relationship to raw damage.

"As stated in another post, I think PGI is starting simple and will let the players call for the obvious more complex number adjusting like range and ppd that will need to be added to certain weapons. This way when folks are now saying this is "STUPID" they are basically saying "we need more complex solutions for a complex problem. I give PGI permission to do this".

It looks like PGI has made the next step forward. Do not shoot somebody, because you can go to jail. Just give them a gun and let them shoot themselves. Way oversimplified because, I ain't dissin on PGI ATM. "

[Johnny Z]

10/10 needs update.

[Wintersdark]

Expected: 3/10 - PGI has a strong and storied history of severely f*(king this stuff up, and I had very low expectations
Actual: 8/10 - Very solid system that could use some minor tweaking; arguably PGI's best work to date (which is both good and sad)

Changes I'd suggest, in two lines or less:

Reduce lasers to .85 EnergyPerDamage (35pt alpha), reduce SRM's to .6 EPD heat (4xSRM6 w/o penalty).
Add a HUD icon indicating when you're over energy limits and colored to show roughly by how much.

---

I will say: Don't make decisions about how fast energy should return or where the limits should be until you test, because (and I mean no offense here, it shocked the hell out of me too when I started testing it) you're just not going to anticipate what it's like.

As a founder, you've been around from the start, so you remember pre-ghost heat play.

This is very much like that, except heavy alphas have a heat efficiency cost. It's much more minor than ghost heat, and that's by design. It actually has very little impact at all on regular play, and it's great that it's like that. If you push past the limits by a little bit, it doesn't actually do much of note, and that makes the system more forgiving and "playable", where you can take a granular, tactical approach to how much extra heat you generate vs. how much burst you do.

Unless you're someone who loved Ghost Heat to bits and wanted more of it, in which case ED is terrible.

TLBFestus, on 19 August 2016 - 07:10 PM, said:

On a side note, WTF were they thinking putting an event on at the same time as they were trying to convince people to use the PTS?

THAT was classic PGI.

Sadly, yes. It hurts my head.

"We have lots of time to test, there's no problem, it can run as long as we want" - except that people tend to stop playing on the PTS after a couple days, because after you've tested stuff there's little reason. Run it on an event weekend, and you get half the folks you normally would in the PTS (other half are in the event) - they have half the population to play with, then they stop, just in time for the other half to start.... and THEY have half pop too.

*sighs* Ah whatever. Classic PGI.

But seriously, ED is, by PGI standards, extremely good work.

Decent, functional UI, no gross loopholes... It's kind of shocking.

[Ultimax]

Lowering the Energy Pool & Recharge rate are completely unnecessary.


If you can't handle this game with 30 to 40 point alphas, reduced CD across the board for all weapons, reduced CD for AC 5/UAC 5/CUAC 5/CLB 5, and nearly 7 second CD for Gauss - then maybe FPS games are not for you.

[Wintersdark]

Ultimax, on 19 August 2016 - 09:18 PM, said:

Lowering the Energy Pool & Recharge rate are completely unnecessary.


If you can't handle this game with 30 to 40 point alphas, reduced CD across the board for all weapons, reduced CD for AC 5/UAC 5/CUAC 5/CLB 5, and nearly 7 second CD for Gauss - then maybe FPS games are not for you.

Yeah. The game is fine, and was fine before ghost heat with the arguable exception of some very high alpha builds then too. Regular play though is definitely ok, and while I'd even like longer TTK using ED to force it by applying harsher penalties and lower limits is terrible.

The cooldown increases that already happened on the PTS make a huge difference as it stands.

[LordNothing]

i generally think it needs a retweak pass. i fully expect to see further tests in the coming months.

[MauttyKoray]

Wintersdark, on 19 August 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

Expected: 3/10 - PGI has a strong and storied history of severely f*(king this stuff up, and I had very low expectations
Actual: 8/10 - Very solid system that could use some minor tweaking; arguably PGI's best work to date (which is both good and sad)

Changes I'd suggest, in two lines or less:

Reduce lasers to .85 EnergyPerDamage (35pt alpha), reduce SRM's to .6 EPD heat (4xSRM6 w/o penalty).
Add a HUD icon indicating when you're over energy limits and colored to show roughly by how much.

---

I will say: Don't make decisions about how fast energy should return or where the limits should be until you test, because (and I mean no offense here, it shocked the hell out of me too when I started testing it) you're just not going to anticipate what it's like.

As a founder, you've been around from the start, so you remember pre-ghost heat play.

This is very much like that, except heavy alphas have a heat efficiency cost. It's much more minor than ghost heat, and that's by design. It actually has very little impact at all on regular play, and it's great that it's like that. If you push past the limits by a little bit, it doesn't actually do much of note, and that makes the system more forgiving and "playable", where you can take a granular, tactical approach to how much extra heat you generate vs. how much burst you do.

Unless you're someone who loved Ghost Heat to bits and wanted more of it, in which case ED is terrible.



Sadly, yes. It hurts my head.

"We have lots of time to test, there's no problem, it can run as long as we want" - except that people tend to stop playing on the PTS after a couple days, because after you've tested stuff there's little reason. Run it on an event weekend, and you get half the folks you normally would in the PTS (other half are in the event) - they have half the population to play with, then they stop, just in time for the other half to start.... and THEY have half pop too.

*sighs* Ah whatever. Classic PGI.

But seriously, ED is, by PGI standards, extremely good work.

Decent, functional UI, no gross loopholes... It's kind of shocking.

1. I feel like the recharge needs to be a little slower, I repeat, a 'little' slower. Tweak to feel obviously, not just an arbitrary number. It just feels kinda 'nearly' instant and thus you just have to oh so barely stagger your fire in an amount so small that its negligible. That or the energy pool needs to be slightly smaller. Plus a slightly harsher heat penalty in combination with either of those two. Or a balance of all 3, not sure.

2. Individual weapon balance/draw numbers will need to be tweaked to feel. I can't personally give any numbers due to lack of playtime on the PTS.

3. There need to be 'windows' to play, maybe have 2-3 on a single weekend with block of a few hours each for each major play time to test it.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 19 August 2016 - 10:37 PM.

[Ultimax]

MauttyKoray, on 19 August 2016 - 10:30 PM, said:

1. I feel like the recharge needs to be a little slower, I repeat, a 'little' slower. Tweak to feel obviously, not just an arbitrary number. It just feels kinda 'nearly' instant and thus you just have to oh so barely stagger your fire in an amount so small that its negligible.

It's supposed to be nearly instant, that is the point.

The goal is to curb BIG ALPHAS not DPS.

Edited by Ultimax, 19 August 2016 - 10:34 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Ultimax, on 19 August 2016 - 10:33 PM, said:

It's supposed to be nearly instant, that is the point.

The goal is to curb BIG ALPHAS not DPS.

This.

I questioned Russ about it when the PTS started myself, and this was what Russ himself said.

The goal was just too spread out your fire, but not limit it. Heat is the limiting factor to volume of fire, Energy Draw is there to encourage(and specifically not force) you to spread it. And spread here just means to break convergence; even half second breaks (all ghost heat required) are good enough for that. ED takes much longer already, 1.5s after 30 damage, and more if you hit harder.

[oldradagast]

So, it sounds like the energy draw system really does have solid potential and is off to a good start. It also sounds like PGI is really interested in player feedback on this.

If that's all true, I'm rather happy with it all so far. I really hopes this works and improves the game and - perhaps even more importantly - leads to a better relationship between PGI and the player base in the future, as well as better coordination of testing new ideas and listening to feedback.

[El Bandito]

Ultimax, on 19 August 2016 - 10:33 PM, said:

It's supposed to be nearly instant, that is the point.

The goal is to curb BIG ALPHAS not DPS.

Energy Draw is better than GH precisely because it limits overspecialized DPS builds on top of big Alphas.

Edited by El Bandito, 20 August 2016 - 05:55 AM.

[pyrocomp]

Big Alphas are a total miss.
Here, compare GH heat penalties versus current ED heat penalties. Look at it and tell me who and how at PGI got the numbers for a first try.

To get to worst long range offenders the heat penalty for the energy overdraw should go way to 2.5 and for PPCs to damage to energy conversion ratio should go to 1.25 (not 1 as for PPC and ERPPC and 0.9 of cERPPC).

Missiles are left out as they have their own long standing issues of heavier racks being useless.

[orcrist86]

The system and the mechanics are solid, they need tweaking. This is a way better solution than ghost heat and I expect the following:

Lowered recharge rate
Varied recharge capacity by weight class
Increased ED penalties for high damage weapons and weapons systems that get boated
increased ED use rate on SRMS
The potential for ED related quirks per chasis variant

[draiocht]

[mod]This thread has been moved to Energy Draw Public Test.[/mod]

[FannyBoss]

TLBFestus, on 19 August 2016 - 07:10 PM, said:

I haven't had the chance yet to try it

K Thx.

[Wintersdark]

LordNothing, on 19 August 2016 - 10:10 PM, said:

i generally think it needs a retweak pass. i fully expect to see further tests in the coming months.

Definitely needs some number tweaks, but not major ones, no arguments there.

But the core system? It's kind of creepy that it works as well as it does. I mean, this is PGI. The first test pass. And it's... ok? Kind of scary.

[Wintersdark]

pyrocomp, on 20 August 2016 - 05:54 AM, said:

Big Alphas are a total miss.
Here, compare GH heat penalties versus current ED heat penalties. Look at it and tell me who and how at PGI got the numbers for a first try.

To get to worst long range offenders the heat penalty for the energy overdraw should go way to 2.5 and for PPCs to damage to energy conversion ratio should go to 1.25 (not 1 as for PPC and ERPPC and 0.9 of cERPPC).

Missiles are left out as they have their own long standing issues of heavier racks being useless.

I will say that targeting ghost heat penalties would be stupid, because many of Ghost Heat's penalties where absurdly high; essentially hard caps.

Higher penalties on some long range weaponry would probably be a good thing, but the penalties do need to remain low enough that choosing to exceed the limit is a tactical choice and and interesting one at that.

Ghost Heat... It's never an interesting choice. So while Ghost Heat isn't technically hard caps, it might as well be. Soft caps are much more interesting; you SHOULD be able to choose in combat if you want to sacrifice efficiency for burst. If penalties are too high, then that choice isn't interesting anymore.

But, yeah, currently the biggest flaw with the system is that comparatively, short ranged weapons cost too much energy vs. long range weaponry, and some DOT/Spread weaponry is costed the same as PPFLD weaponry.

[TLBFestus]

Ultimax, on 19 August 2016 - 09:18 PM, said:

Lowering the Energy Pool & Recharge rate are completely unnecessary.


If you can't handle this game with 30 to 40 point alphas, reduced CD across the board for all weapons, reduced CD for AC 5/UAC 5/CUAC 5/CLB 5, and nearly 7 second CD for Gauss - then maybe FPS games are not for you.

I respect what you are saying, but that's an opinion not a fact. Same as the numbers I threw out there.

MauttyKoray, on 19 August 2016 - 10:30 PM, said:

1. I feel like the recharge needs to be a little slower, I repeat, a 'little' slower. Tweak to feel obviously, not just an arbitrary number. It just feels kinda 'nearly' instant and thus you just have to oh so barely stagger your fire in an amount so small that its negligible. That or the energy pool needs to be slightly smaller. Plus a slightly harsher heat penalty in combination with either of those two. Or a balance of all 3, not sure.

2. Individual weapon balance/draw numbers will need to be tweaked to feel. I can't personally give any numbers due to lack of playtime on the PTS.

3. There need to be 'windows' to play, maybe have 2-3 on a single weekend with block of a few hours each for each major play time to test it.

orcrist86, on 20 August 2016 - 06:05 AM, said:

The system and the mechanics are solid, they need tweaking. This is a way better solution than ghost heat and I expect the following:

Lowered recharge rate
Varied recharge capacity by weight class
Increased ED penalties for high damage weapons and weapons systems that get boated
increased ED use rate on SRMS
The potential for ED related quirks per chasis variant

Yes, the basic thing here is that it needs tweaking. They aren't going to get it all right the first, second or even 3rd pass. They should run through multiple versions of the PTS adjusting the numbers (not just the ones I posted) until they dial things in.

Of course PGI has a tendency to be pretty ham-handed doing this sort of thing in the past.

FannyBoss, on 20 August 2016 - 08:37 AM, said:

K Thx.

That's the spirit cus no one ever learned anything from "reading"!

Edited by TLBFestus, 20 August 2016 - 08:52 AM.