Jump to content

[V3.1] Adapting Ed To Introduce The Tt Heat System


106 replies to this topic

#1 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 25 August 2016 - 05:17 PM

Through many discussions of the failings of both the GH and the ED systems, and what causes them to not work well for MWO, it was asked of me, "if not GH or ED, then what?"

While MWO copies most of its game mechanics - from basic gameplay themes to build processes to weapon stats - directly from the Battletech tabletop game, PGI has chosen a simplified version of the table top heat system that excludes some of its more fundemental components. While many design components of the TT heat system are intact, many would agree that it's where MWO deviates from the TT heat system that are the causes of most of MWO's combat ills.

The reasoning is simple, of course... everything in Battletech is designed to work together. Introducing BT weapons into the game with their stats fairly faithfully translated to MWO while abandoning the heat system designed to keep those weapons in check has been the root of many a problem in the history of MWO. However, as a community, we've been unable to find a way to recreate the mechanics of the TT heat system within MWO in a way that will function true to the source but still adapt to the specific needs of MWO. Until now.

I think we just figured out that a nearly direct conversion of the TT heat system will actually work for MWO utilizing the meter mechanic established with Energy Draw.

Below I'll outline how such a system would function in MWO.

Overview in Brief

A TT-adapted heat system for MWO would utilize the dual-bar mechanic introduced with the Energy Draw system.

In this case, the "energy draw" bar would concern itself over heat used, rather than damage dealt. It would swap functions with the MWO heat bar. Where the ED bar has a fixed value of 30pts, and the heat scale represents the heat capacity of the mech (a variable amount), the former ED bar would become the Heat Capacity scale (with the variable capacity amount), and the former heat scale bar would become a 30pt penalty bar.

The new Heat Capacity scale would fill up whenever a player used any heat - through actions such as moving or firing weapons, or through above-average ambient temperatures. This bar would dissipate at similar rates as the MWO heat scale does currently.

Whenever a player exceeds the available heat capacity of his mech, the excess heat is added to the heat penalty scale instead. Any amount of heat held on the penalty scale will face varying degrees of penalties - with those penalties increasing the more heat a mech carries - and can include movement penalties, loss of sensor/HUD functionality, shutdown, and internal critical damage.

The heat penalty bar dissipates at a variable rate as compared to the heat capacity scale, with a dissipation rate determined by the unused portion of the mech's heat capacity. The dissipation rate is thus slower when a mech is at high cap, and faster when a mech is at low cap.

Under these mechanics, while the absolute heat capacity and dissipation rates are fundamentally the same as in the current MWO heat system, the function of the penalty bar and its associate mechanics actually present a duality between a high-cap/low dissipation system and a low-cap/high dissipation system depending on a player's action. Thus, the TT-adapted system acts to lower effective damage output without actually interfering with HOW that damage is applied, while simultaneously offering penalty paths to players who abuse the system, and a reward path to players who are able to better control their heat.

Aside from the heat penalty mechanics themselves, all necessary work needed to introduce the TT heat system has already been accomplished by the PGI dev staff. Current design mechanics merely need minor adjustment to accomodate the TT system, and it is my belief that this work could be accomplished and be reestablished on the PTS within a day.

System Background and Key Differences

Both the MWO and TT heat system are based around a concept of a build-centric heat capacity and a rate at which heat incurred is dissipated. While MWO takes a round-about way of getting there - through a series of adjustments to heat sink modifiers and several layers of skill modifiers, etc - for all intents and purposes MWO uses a base methodology for determining heat capacity and dissipation rate that produces the same results (within a few percent) as the more simplified TT version.

Distilled to its essense, the heat capacity of a mech is determined by the total number of heat sinks on the mech, with a modifier of x2 for double heat sinks. The dissipation rate is 1/10th of the heat capacity per second (full capacity dissipated over a 10-second span).

The key difference between the TT and MWO heat systems is in their handling of TT's second heat component - the heat penalty scale (often just referred to as "heat scale"). This is a 30pt scale into which "overflow" heat is put, and the value of which is penalized through several means - the higher the value, the greater the punishment - that include movement reductions, ammunition explosions, pilot injury, and eventual shutdown of the mech.

Obviously, in MWO, there is no second scale, and the 30pts of this scale is merely added on top of the base heat capacity of the mech. This greatly increases the available heat capacity for all mechs, and comes penalty free.

In TT (assuming a real-time equivalent), heat from the penalty scale would dissipate at variable rates, equivalent to 1/10th of the unused portion of a mech's heat scale. This can mean that the scale will dissipate at the full rate (if the mech has not used any heat in the last 10 seconds) or as little as zero (if the mech is sitting at max heat capacity). This amount of heat dissipates simultaneously with the base heat bar.

If a player is keeping his mech's heat capacity at or near its max level, the dissipation rate for the penalty scale would be reduced to at or near zero, thus preventing the mech from shedding its accumulated penalties, and keeping it in constant danger of accumulating more, up to and including shutdown.

At essense, in MWO, a mech has a much larger "energy tank" - which comprises the capacity of both of TT's smaller tanks - and the player can use every bit of the available capacity in that tank at his whim. The tank will merely refill at a given rate, and the player can continue to use any of the refilled capacity whenever enough becomes available.

The table top system has two tanks, a primary tank (heat capacity) and a reserve tank (penalty scale) - with the same total capacity as the single MWO tank. The reserve tank has the same capacity for all mechs, while the primary one can vary.

The player may readily draw whatever capacity he wishes from the primary tank, and like the MWO single tank, this one will refill at a given rate. If, however, he dips into the reserve tank at any point, he will face various penalties for it. Unlike the primary tank, the reserve tank will not simply refill at the same given rate. It will only refill at a rate mirroring the portion of his primary tank's capacity that's already been re-filled. If he keeps drawing every last drop from the primary tank, the reserve tank will never refill, and he'll continue to get penalized for it.

Core Mechanics In Depth

This system is a full replacement of the core heat scale system in MWO. It is intended to function without either Ghost Heat or Energy Draw. However, a system that performs the weapon-limiting functions of Ghost Heat, without interference with the balance of the heat system, may still be desirable.

In adapting the TT heat system to MWO we will essentially need two different components to the overall heat system, represented by two paired meters. The existing heat scale meter, which is currently used to show the heat gained and lost during the usage of a mech will now represent the Battletech Heat Penalty Scale. This meter will account for the heat accumulated in the chassis of a mech that has not been able to be dissipated by the mech's heat sinks. A core component of both the BT heat system and my proposed system is that heat accumulated in this scale will result in practical penalties to the mech, up to and including forced shut down and catastropic core detonation. Like in TT, this scale will be set to 30 points.

The existing Energy Draw meter would become a scale representing the heat capacity (HC) of your mech and its status. The total heat capacity of a mech will be defined by its total number of heat sinks, with a modifier for type. This would replace 30pts of given percentages of a weapon's damage fired that this meter currently uses. The minimum value of this scale would be 10, with a minimum number of heat sinks per mech of 10, and a standard modifier for single heat sinks of 1. There is currently no maximum value proposed, but the upper limit of scale possibilities would include a possible capacity modifier of 2 for double heat sinks (true-dubs) for as many sinks as a mech can mount. Thus, the heat capacity of a mech is determined almost entirely by that mech's build.

Every action a mech can take will impact heat capacity, just as those actions currently effect the MWO heat scale. Moving would draw away a certain amount of heat capacity from the sinks, and using jump jets would take more. The native temperature of the environment can effect capacity as well - with cooler maps adding capacity and warmer maps lowering it. As with the existing system, standing in water will add capacity as well. But the primary means of effecting heat capacity (HC) is by firing weapons.

Every time a weapon is fired, the heat rating of that weapon would be drawn against the heat capacity (ED meter) of the mech. If the total heat capacity of the mech is exceeded at any point, the excess heat is added to the heat scale meter instead. In this way, the system functions largely the same as the Energy Draw system, except the system replaces the damage from weapons fired with the heat of those weapons. Further, the heat of those weapons is NOT added to the heat scale directly. Only the amount incurred over the heat capacity of the mech is put on the heat scale as a "penalty."

The heat capacity (ED) meter will automatically return to its minimum state after a certain period of time, just as this meter works now. The rate at which you dissipate heat from the heat capacity meter would be set to represent how long a "turn" in table top is... an arbitrary amount that corresponds to how long it feels like it should take to get rid of a set amount of heat. I currently propose about 1/10th of the mech's heat scale (0.1pts per heat sink, with a x2 modifier for doubles) per second of heat dissipated from the meter. Example: A mech with a heat capacity of 20 would dissipate 2 heat per second. Under this current tuning value, mechs will dissipate their max heat capacity in 10 seconds.

This is exactly equivalent to the TT heat system, and is functionally equivalent to the current MWO heat system within a few percent average for all mechs.

The amount of heat accumulated in your heat penalty scale will NOT dissipate automatically at a fixed rate as it does in the current heat scale in the game. Dissipation of this scale will depend on there being unused heat sink capacity. It will start to lower automatically only when your HC meter is not maxed.

Here I deviate from the TT system with a change that I feel better fits MWO and a real-time system. Translated faithfully, the TT penalty bar would dissipate at the rate of 1/10th (0.1pts per sink with a x2 modifier for doubles) of the unused capacity per second. Example, a mech with a heat capacity of 20 and having used all 20pts will reset their penalty scale at a rate of 0pts/sec. At half capacity - 10pts - the scale will reset at 1pt/sec, and with no heat capacity used it will reset at 2pts/sec.

I have chosen, instead, to implement a dissipation rate that - like the 30-point scale itself - is the same for all mechs. Instead of being the 1/10th unused heat cap per second as above, the rate will be the percentage of unused cap times a base rate of 3pts/sec for all mechs.

For instance, if a mech has a heat cap of 20, but it is currently at 15pts of heat, it has 5 unused cap, or 25%. 0.25x3=0.75pts dissipated from the penalty bar per second. The system is otherwise, functionally, the same.

I have several rationales for this deviation from TT. First is that a fixed dissipation rate for the penalty bar across all mechs makes more sense for the fixed penalty scale. This will allow both the heat cap bar and the penalty bar to dissipate at a predictable rate for every mech. Just as the standard cap bar will dissipate entirely over 10 seconds for every mech, the penalty bar will now dissipate from shutdown to zero penalties (with complete output stoppage) in 15 seconds for all mechs. This will allow the penalty system to have supreme predictability and tunability for all mechs.

The second major reason is to provide better balance across all cap ranges. Under the faithful TT system, I fear that high-cap mechs will spend less time under penalties than low-cap mechs - a by-product of higher dissipation over a fixed range - and thus this makes the system more fair.

Heat Scale Penalties

Maintaining high heat load against the heat capacity meter will reduce your ability to remove heat from your heat penalty scale.

Where the HC (ED) meter value is determined by the build of the mech, the heat scale value itself will be set at 30pts visible maximum at which a mech will automatically shut down. The scale will actually be larger in the background to account for any penalty heat accumulated beyond 30pts for the purposes of more severe penalties beyond merely shutting down - up to and including engine detonation and resulting suicide. This number and the resulting scale can be adjusted for balance.

Accumulating points on the heat scale will result in various penalties. We cannot copy the scale or penalties directly from table top - as many of those penalties do not make sense in the context of MWO, but we can use some of the ideas. Some examples...

1-29) The following penalty phases apply movement penalties... top speed, acel, decel, turning. Carrying a small amount of heat will make you slower and less maneuverable - and thus more vulnerable and less capable of quick strikes. The penalties are designed to ramp up and become more severe the higher you go. Thus a little excess heat is punished little, while a lot sees more severe penalties. Suggested penalties to speed and maneuverability are 2.5% for a range of 1-5 heat, 5% for 6-10, 7.5% for 11-15, 10% for 16-20, 15% for 21-25, and 20% for 26 and up.

As we move up the scale, we will also include losses of sensor and HUD functionality - which can include HUD fade and "fizzle" at lower levels, to loss of targeting data and inability to lock targets at higher levels, and may even include visible pilot heat effects (blurred/loss of vision). As with movement penalties above, these penalties are intended to scale with the degree of heat excess, and are designed to make it more difficult for a pilot to manage his mech and actively engage the enemy. These restrictions may make it especially difficult to engage at long range and may even negate the use use of lock-on weapons.

Movement penalties will heavily impact builds and playstyles that favor quick speed and direction changes (like peek-and-poke, etc), while HUD and sensor penalties will heavily impact long-range and support builds (PPFLD, snipers, LRMs, etc).

30+) Once you get to 30 and above accumulated heat, you shut down automatically. You cannot restart until you dissipate enough heat to be below the shutdown bar, but will have a minimum shutdown period which will be the same for all mechs. Any time a mech shuts down, some level of damage will be applied internally - the type and intensity of the damage determined by the degree to which the absolute heat cap was exceeded. The ultimate penalty for excessive heat accumulation will be a core detonation and resulting suicide.

It may be possible to simulate some of the damaging penalties from TT by applying internal damage to the cockpit rather than CT. Small amounts of damage could be applied at a rate commiserate with the degree of penalty. Extended time spent under penalties in a match could eventually result in destruction of the cockpit, simulating pilot and systems damage. This is perhaps a better alternative to the current implementation.

Advantages over existing systems

Firstly, as this is intended to be a core system, it is designed to function without any interference from band-aid systems such as GH or ED as a means to provide balance. It simply performs the role of combat pacing as designed.

Most variables effecting the system are also part of core mechanics, such as the mech build mechanics and weapon design mechanics. Tuning of these systems will serve the greatest part of fine-tuning the function of the system. Both GH and ED are designed to work on top of existing systems, acting, essentially, on a check of the function of those systems, which leads to their many flaws.

Variables within the system itself that require balancing are minimal. These include the modifiers for heat capacity of different kinds of sinks, the dissipation rates for the capacity and heat scale meters, and the total value and deliniation of penalty brackets for the heat scale meter.

Thanks to ED, nearly all systems needed to make this one function are already in the game. The exception, of course, is the penalty system. Several other current systems could be adapted to provide the capability to penalize movement, sensors, etc, though they may not exist in that capacity currently.

The system is more simple and easier to understand than either GH or ED. It requires no additional information than what already exists in the live server. The heat capacity of your mech would be readily known from the mechlab, and the function of the system is easier to explain than GH or ED. As the system only concerns itself with heat, it is not necessary to consider other factors when building or playing.

This system is designed to be self-limiting in the same way that mech builds are already self-limiting. The system brings both the weapon and heat scale systems in line with each other, as they were in tabletop.

It will actually take into consideration the build of the mech in determining how it will be reigned in and penalized if necessary. The heat rating of a mech should now correspond neatly to how it will perform under this system.

The system doesn't care which weapons you use. The system only cares if you're exceeding the intended output of the build. It should treat all builds equally by adapting to each uniquely. This should lead to the maximum possible build variety, with a wide range of playstyles being viable. Build what you want, play how you want to play.

The system will discourage but not directly limit the viability of alpha strikes, boating, etc. Boating will not necessarily be the most ideal path to victory, as it has been in the past - it's merely one of many paths. Alphas will be viable and successful where it is deemed appropriate, but exceptional alphas will see severe penalties that may take considerable care to overcome.

Both absolute heat cap and heat dissipation rates are slightly reduced from the live server, and these values are normalized for all mechs. This produces an overall setting for cap and dissipation that is closer to the current MWO average across all mechs. This means the system functions within the current balance levels of the live game and should not require a weapon rebalance or mech quirk pass.

Due to the introduction of penalties, the effective heat cap for mechs is reduced by 30pts for all mechs. Players can choose to use more than their installed heat capacity, but will face penalties that make this a considered choice with various risks and rewards.

Base dissipation rates are are also normalized across all mechs. This rate will be lower than on Live for most mechs. However, the total effective dissipation rate is variable and is often higher - nearly reaching double dissipation when a mech is at zero total heat. While the penalty system punishes players from pushing the boundries of their heat cap with actual combat-affecting penalties and difficulty eliminating them while still fighting, it greatly rewards them for maintaining control over their heat cap and self-limiting damage output.

Effective damage output is also reduced across the board (more correctly spread out), due to an increased need to avoid firing and incurring penalties. The system does not use a heavy hand to force players not to alpha or fire massive bursts of damage, but encourages a reduction of fire both through penalties/reduced dissipation and through high dissipation under long-term cool-off periods.

The penalty system is both more immersive and has more practical and viscerally-punishing results than merely adding a bit more heat here and there. Carrying heat on the penalty scale will reduce a mech's ability to engage the enemy or get out of trouble, and thus will provide both practical and psychological incentive to limit one's firepower output.

The core similarities for heat cap and dissipation rates to existing mechanics means that the system can slot directly into the live servers without a disruption in play. This will not require a fundamental reevaluation of builds or the necessity of relearning heat mechanics for players. The transition to TT heat would be much easier than was the case for GH and would be the case for ED.

The TT Heat system and Skills

Under the proposed system, I would modify the current skill system to reduce an inherent nerf rather than add a buff. This means that the best a mech could ever be is what the base values provide.

For instance, all mechs would start with a natural 15% reduction in their heat cap. Adding basic skills would remove 7.5% of the nerf, thus leaving the mech at -7.5%. Getting skills to Elite level would remove the rest of the nerf, and leave the mech at the full heat scale.

This is an easier method to balance than the current implementation, and ensures that any carefully balanced systems and stats do not get inadvertently altered when a mech skills up.

Replacing Ghost Heat with Variable Cooldowns

The proposed TT heat system does not address the component of GH that concerns boating of similar weapon types. If it is still determined after implementing this system that a method of discouraging boating and encouraging mixed builds is still necessary, I have an alternate proposal for GH.

Under this variable cooldown system, each weapon will receive a reduction in cooldown time over the current system. For each additional weapon of the same type a player mounts, the cooldown time for all of those weapons will be increased slightly. The more you mount, the slower you can fire.

This method is preferable to Ghost Heat because it does not play havoc with the base heat system, nor does it penalize mechs that MUST boat to be effective. At essense, this only serves to reduce a boating mech's burst damage potential, while not having any effect on their total damage over time. This encourages mixing weapons for improved burst potential without actually harming boated builds.

Options for Single Heat Sinks

In both TT and MWO, double heat sinks have subplanted single heat sinks as the defacto type of sink, and the base heat system and level of balance for both systems is designed around the dynamic doubles provides. We're holding on to this premise under the proposed system. This does, however, allow for an opportunity to tune single heat sinks in a way that allows them to cover gaps that double heat sinks cause, or to use them as special application items.

Unlike doubles as proposed above, balancing and repurposing single heat sinks can and likely should be accomplished by making their implementation more complicated than a straight 1-for-1 cap and disspation value.

For instance, here we could set the engine sink value of all singles at 1.5x heat point modifier, while externals remain 1.0x only. We could also, then set their dissipation rate to 1.5x or even 2x as seems appropriate. The goal here would be to turn singles into a low-cap, high dissipation alternative for mechs with lower cap needs.

The exact values used will have to be proven out via testing, but our design considerations should be to make a stock Awesome (usually 28 SHS) be viable, and perhaps even superior, it its stock configuration, while also allowing various lights an alternate path to controlling heat output.

I haven't tested this nearly as much as the base proposed system, but some combination of increased engine sink cap and increased total dissipation seems to do the trick.


Testing the system

Here I intend to test and compare various builds and playstyles to see exactly how they pan out under the system as I've described and see if any numbers need to be adjusted.

Ideally, I'd like to test builds from all spectrums, and especially those builds known to challenge the base heat system in MWO and its two band-aids.

I'm reserving this space to do that, but I don't think I'll get to it just now.

However, I encourage the community to post your builds (preferrably with the build charts from Smurfy Mechlab) and do some of the calculations yourself. It should be pretty simple math. There's really not much to it. Assume that lasers and other duration weapons use all heat capacity on the initial firing of the weapon.

Rationale for Current Values

Current values expressed above are designed to more closely match TT and MWO's existing system directly, specifically with respect to heat dissipation. Maintaining this rate of dissipation allows the system to slot right into MWO without needing any rebalancing or requirking, which reduces the workload and eases the pain of transition to almost nothing.

In testing various builds, maintaining close adherence to TT values tends to produce the best balance results... which really isn't surprising. As such, I see no need to make adjustments to either the heat cap or dissipation rates beyond a simple direct translation. This also adds greater simplicity and more consistency than in MWO's current system.

Keeping close to the values MWO uses on the Live server also preserves the current base combat pacing and balancing, and this level of parity is helpful in comparing the results directly to the live servers and judging their impact on a 1-to-1 basis. This will yield the best possible data for comparison.

The base numbers should be incredibly functional as-is, but there is great opportunity to dial in the various penalties and pacing mechanics to best fit the overall want of players.

Thanks for all the feedback so far, and keep testing.

Current Values for testing

Heat Capactiy Value = Number of Heatsinks installed on the mech (including the initial 10 required) with a modifier of x1 for single sinks, and x2 for doubles. If a mech has 10 engine sinks, and 4 additional installed, and is using DHS, this will result in a heat capacity of 28.

Moving, firing weapons, and environmental effects will apply heat against this heat capacity value. Any heat incurred over this amount will be added to the heat penalty scale instead. This value will decrease automatically by the rate below.

Heat Dissipation Rate = 0.1pts of heat per single heat sink per second (or 1/10th of the heat capacity). x2 for DHS. This rate will reduce the amount of heat accumulated in the heat capacity meter by the amount specified. If a mech has a heat capacity of 20pts, the mech will recover 2pts of heat per second. All mechs will recover their full bar within 10 seconds at this rate.

Heat Penalty Scale = 30+pts
Heat Penalty Shutdown = 30pts
Heat Penalty Explosion = undetermined

Penalty Dissipation Rate = (Current Heat Capacity Value / Total heat capacity) x3.0 (pts/sec). The rate at which your heat penalty bar will reduce is the percentage of your unused heat capacity times a base value of 3pts/sec. This means the more heat you're using, the slower your penalties will reset. If a mech has a heat capacity of 20pts, and is currently using 10pts, the penalty scale will recover at 1.5pt/sec. At zero cap, it will reduce at 3.0pts/sec, and at full cap it will reduce at 0pts/sec.

Edited by ScarecrowES, 22 September 2016 - 04:55 PM.


#2 Davers

    Member

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

Posted 25 August 2016 - 06:21 PM

So with 15 DHS I can fire 3 ppcs every 3 seconds and not build up any heat?

#3 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 25 August 2016 - 06:51 PM

Not quite... standard IS PPC cooldown is 4 seconds. But... Perhaps if you were standing still on a cool map, yes. If the system were using true-dubs at their full 2x capacity and the initial values I expressed for dissipation.

But you'd also be in an Inner Sphere mech with at least 26 tons of free weight for equipment and enough crit space to mount it all. That's going to require a fairly large mech. And that's not particularly powerful for a mech that size.

However... if you feel 30 damage at medium range every 4 seconds is objectionable, which variable or variables would you prefer to change.

We could have our current 1.5x doubles. 22.5 heat capacity means exceeding by 7.5 points of heat. That seems excessive for a mech that big and damage that low. Perhaps 1.75x doubles?

Or maybe slight reduction in dissipation? 7.5 per second instead?

Looking at live servers now... 3xPPC is roughly 30 heat for 30 damage. Looking at builds that are large enough to run this with XL engine... 60 tons minimum. 65 tons with standard engine. Also, rating almost 1.4 on heat management. This would run extremely cool even WITH ghost heat on the live server. 1.5 without, maybe. You could more or less fire these all day now. Wouldn't take much adjustment of my initial numbers to bring this in line with live servers without needing ghost heat.

Edited by ScarecrowES, 25 August 2016 - 07:56 PM.


#4 Davers

    Member

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

Posted 25 August 2016 - 08:08 PM

View PostScarecrowES, on 25 August 2016 - 06:51 PM, said:


However... if you feel 30 damage at medium range every 4 seconds is objectionable, which variable or variables would you prefer to change.




I actually think having a Kodiak double tapping for 80 damage every 4 seconds without heat to be slightly more unreasonable. :)

#5 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 25 August 2016 - 08:33 PM

View PostDavers, on 25 August 2016 - 08:08 PM, said:

I actually think having a Kodiak double tapping for 80 damage every 4 seconds without heat to be slightly more unreasonable. :)


Like I said... initial numbers.

Thinking heat capacity is fine... the cap seems reasonable for the builds. So likely lower dissipation rates...

Still Kodiak with only quad uac10 runs very very cool on live with ghost heat. 12xDHS for 24 cap with true-dubs is 80 damage on double tap for 24 heat. 1.54 heat management on Live WITH gh. Easily 1.65 without. You'd almost never shut down on live either if GH didn't force you to.

Since you carry SOME heat by just walking, each tap would add some heat to heat scale under my system even with the forgiving initial numbers.

These results indicate that the initial set is not far off from, minimum, providing the balance on the live servers without GH.

I'm thinking dissipation at 7.5 or 8 would be enough. Remember that in my proposal you shut down with only 20 accumulated heat.

#6 Davers

    Member

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

Posted 25 August 2016 - 08:47 PM

View PostScarecrowES, on 25 August 2016 - 08:33 PM, said:

Like I said... initial numbers.

Thinking heat capacity is fine... the cap seems reasonable for the builds. So likely lower dissipation rates...

Still Kodiak with only quad uac10 runs very very cool on live with ghost heat. 12xDHS for 24 cap with true-dubs is 80 damage on double tap for 24 heat. 1.54 heat management on Live WITH gh. Easily 1.65 without. You'd almost never shut down on live either if GH didn't force you to.

Since you carry SOME heat by just walking, each tap would add some heat to heat scale under my system even with the forgiving initial numbers.

These results indicate that the initial set is not far off from, minimum, providing the balance on the live servers without GH.

I'm thinking dissipation at 7.5 or 8 would be enough. Remember that in my proposal you shut down with only 20 accumulated heat.

The Kodiak build I was looking at had 16 DHS, not 12 (it was the first one I found on Smurfy's). So if quad UAC10s is a viable build for the Clans, what is a similar viable build for IS? How can the IS throw out 80 damage every few seconds to match it? And is this somehow contributing to longer TTK, or less? So far we have large, repeatable, alpha strikes. Is this what you were going for?

Since I am dissipating 8-10 heat every second, I am sure I can handle the .2 from running (using TT numbers).

#7 Alistair Winter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 10,823 posts
  • LocationBergen, Norway, FRR

Posted 25 August 2016 - 08:59 PM

I like the concept, although I haven't tested it on paper with different builds.

No extra ghost energy for the gauss rifle, right?

#8 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:27 PM

View PostDavers, on 25 August 2016 - 08:47 PM, said:

The Kodiak build I was looking at had 16 DHS, not 12 (it was the first one I found on Smurfy's). So if quad UAC10s is a viable build for the Clans, what is a similar viable build for IS? How can the IS throw out 80 damage every few seconds to match it? And is this somehow contributing to longer TTK, or less? So far we have large, repeatable, alpha strikes. Is this what you were going for?

Since I am dissipating 8-10 heat every second, I am sure I can handle the .2 from running (using TT numbers).


Like the initial plan for ED, the goal is not to eliminate alphas outright just keep them in check.

40pts of damage on a 100 mech isn't much... the 80 with double tap seems like a lot, but still not nearly as effective as point damage. Luckily point damage is extremely limited on the Kodiak. My 2xUAC5, 2xUAC10, 4xSPL version has higher output and still skirts ED. That build is actually punished MORE in my system than ED or GH.

Realistically, 30 damage is way too low a limit for a 100-ton mech. That's a big mistake in ED. And the 4xUAC10 Kodiak isn't the boogeyman. It's a burst build, only effective in short spans. Looks like that's how it plays out in my system too with slightly lower dissipation.

Also, like a lot of people, I'm not concerned about TTK. ED hasn't really had a positive effect in that area in 4v4, and many never saw it as a problem in the first place.



#9 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:35 PM

View PostAlistair Winter, on 25 August 2016 - 08:59 PM, said:

I like the concept, although I haven't tested it on paper with different builds.

No extra ghost energy for the gauss rifle, right?


No. I want to do something different with the Gauss. We either need to break with TT and change the stats on the weapon to where it makes sense for MWO, or we need to change the mechanics. Or both.

It can't just me a long range ac15.

I've thought about limiting a no-charge snap shot to 270m, adding back the charge mechanic to increase range. The longer you charge, the farther it flies. Compromise between the charge and no-charge version.

I think I might like to see the TT's 90m min range put on too. Make the weapon a mid-long range weapon with increased skill gap at long ranges. Lots of risk/reward there.

Still that's more how to make the weapon balanced, not how to make it work in a restricted heat system.

Not sure which direction to go there. Keep heat low on snapshot, now that it's 270m with min range, but add LOTS of heat when charged, to penalize long range use? This sounds like a balanced way to do it.

#10 Davers

    Member

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

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:47 PM

View PostScarecrowES, on 25 August 2016 - 09:27 PM, said:

Like the initial plan for ED, the goal is not to eliminate alphas outright just keep them in check.

40pts of damage on a 100 mech isn't much... the 80 with double tap seems like a lot, but still not nearly as effective as point damage. Luckily point damage is extremely limited on the Kodiak. My 2xUAC5, 2xUAC10, 4xSPL version has higher output and still skirts ED. That build is actually punished MORE in my system than ED or GH.

Realistically, 30 damage is way too low a limit for a 100-ton mech. That's a big mistake in ED. And the 4xUAC10 Kodiak isn't the boogeyman. It's a burst build, only effective in short spans. Looks like that's how it plays out in my system too with slightly lower dissipation.

Also, like a lot of people, I'm not concerned about TTK. ED hasn't really had a positive effect in that area in 4v4, and many never saw it as a problem in the first place.

You say 40 alpha isn't much. What is the largest alpha you can get on your system and still be what you consider viable? Stock Kodiak 5 could do a 93 point alpha and only shut down, a 78 point alpha for 9 heat, or a cool running 65 alpha for no heat.

Honestly, I'm not really sure about an alpha that can take out a XL medium mech without getting any heat. It doesn't seem very fair or fun.

#11 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 25 August 2016 - 10:04 PM

View PostDavers, on 25 August 2016 - 09:47 PM, said:

You say 40 alpha isn't much. What is the largest alpha you can get on your system and still be what you consider viable? Stock Kodiak 5 could do a 93 point alpha and only shut down, a 78 point alpha for 9 heat, or a cool running 65 alpha for no heat.

Honestly, I'm not really sure about an alpha that can take out a XL medium mech without getting any heat. It doesn't seem very fair or fun.


As far as how high alphas can go... not sure. It will vary build to build, that's for sure, but there WILL be an upper limit in there that strikes a balance between firepower and cooling. A point at which the amount of firepower you have to cut back to remain cool negates the need for additional cooling.

The builds you've mentioned so far are very cool-running builds... cooler than is typically seen as the balance point for those types. 1.2 to 1.3 is seen as ideal for match sustainability, and both of those builds run cooler than that on live while triggering ghost heat.

So those extremely cool-running, and thus power-sacrificing builds run right at heat-neutral on my initial tuning. Penalties mostly caused by movement and the environment.

So a slight reduction in dissipation will see both of those builds drop into regular overages and carrying some balance on the heat scale. This means an initial alpha is possible, but takes some control to be repeated, and that's ideal.

Still... good sign that the mid-tier build... the one with good balance of firepower and cooling is the one coming out neutral. Means we're on the right track. The most strictly controlled builds under GH are the ones automatically favored under mine. Should yield balance as good as the live server right now.

#12 invernomuto

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,065 posts
  • LocationItaly

Posted 25 August 2016 - 11:54 PM

Two points:
  • IMHO, it's nearly impossibile that at this stage of development PGI drop ED for this system. Lets try to be realistic here...
  • Having dynamic penalities tied to heat scales to me sounds not so "simple" to implement (it's a sort of dynamic negative quirks for all mechs that activate when heat hits certain levels);
However, I like your system, it has problem with low heat - high damage weapons (like gauss) but it seems sound and more consistent with the TT game.
I suggest also having diminishing return on heat capacity when adding heat sinks: E.g.,
10 Heat Capacity for all mech (minumum)
each first "X" SHS grant 1 to heat capacity, when you exceed "X" each SHS they grant 0.5 (or lower)
each first "X" DHS grant 2 to heat capacity, when you exceed "X" each DHS they grant 1.5 (or lower)

My 2 cents.

#13 davoodoo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 2,496 posts

Posted 26 August 2016 - 02:19 AM

View Postinvernomuto, on 25 August 2016 - 11:54 PM, said:

each first "X" DHS grant 2 to heat capacity, when you exceed "X" each DHS they grant 1.5 (or lower)

This is how it works now...
10 engine dhs are truedubs though not adjusted for reduced weapon cooldowns rest are 1.5...

And yeah i care little of what pgi wants to realistically do cause i myself wont be able to realistically bring myself to play this travesty...

Edited by davoodoo, 26 August 2016 - 02:24 AM.


#14 RAM

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Resolute
  • The Resolute
  • 2,018 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 26 August 2016 - 05:36 AM

Rather than static numbers, could even do a decreasing effectiveness:

10 + 10/(10+X)...

So each additional (d)HS is a little less effective than the one(s) before it.


RAM
ELH

#15 invernomuto

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,065 posts
  • LocationItaly

Posted 26 August 2016 - 06:03 AM

View PostRAM, on 26 August 2016 - 05:36 AM, said:

Rather than static numbers, could even do a decreasing effectiveness: 10 + 10/(10+X)... So each additional (d)HS is a little less effective than the one(s) before it. RAM ELH


Yes, that's the idea. Having a system that discourage "extreme" builds with diminishing returns on heat sinks capacity.

#16 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 26 August 2016 - 10:44 AM

Well... as was mentioned, currently in the live game your first 10 sinks are true-dubs (2x heat capacity) and the rest are 1.5. This lowers the heat capacity a bit for all mechs. Requires testing to see what it effects and how in my system.

Luckily, in my system there are very few variables to work with, and the two with the greatest effect are heat capacity (heat sink number and modifiers) and dissipation rates (how quickly you cool bag down). I'm going to have to sit down and actually go through builds myself when I have a chance to get a good number set going.

Davers mentions 2 builds above... 3xPPC with 15xDHS, and the Kodiak-3 with 4x cUAC/10 (I ran this with 375XL and 12xDHS).

Both builds run extremely cool on the live servers even though both incur the wrath of ghost heat. If not for GH, these builds could fire with near impunity even on the live servers. Interesting to note that the number of heatsinks loaded for each build neatly corresponds to their actual heat draw. 3x PPC uses just shy of 30 heat (28.5) and loads 30pts worth of heat capacity. The Kodiak-3 uses 24 heat with a double tap, and loads 24pts worth of heat capacity.

Looking at my own builds that I tend to use, my heat management ratings tend to stay between 1.2-1.3, and their heat capacity and heat usage tend to correspond neatly together. What this tells me is that heat capacity modifiers of a full 2 for DHS is actually probably fine the way it is for my system. This is giving you the full capacity to fire all the weapons you've loaded, so long as you build in enough heat capacity to handle them.

I think that means the secret is in dissipation. Reducing dissipation a little means that firing at a full rate will cause your heat capacity to rise, which is what the system intends. This needs to be tuned so that the heat scale can be controlled, but not abused. So that it rises, but not too quickly.

But understand that the heat scale meter is intended to be a penalty system - both in TT and here - if you abuse your heat capacity, you'll pay for it. Otherwise you may never need incur penalties at all. It's quite different from the live game where you're running around with heat on the scale pretty much all the time.

It WILL be possible to run heat-neutral with a cold build and good fire control, just like it is even on the live server.

Edited by ScarecrowES, 26 August 2016 - 11:05 AM.


#17 Quicksilver Aberration

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nightmare
  • The Nightmare
  • 11,530 posts
  • LocationKansas City, MO

Posted 26 August 2016 - 10:55 AM

I think the penalties ramp up a little too fast than is necessary, dissipation should also not go to true dubs, as this allows solid sized alphas to be repeatable and DPS builds suffer NO heat build up.

Capacity should be used to control what size of alpha you are limited to, dissipation should be used to control how often it can be repeated.

If I'm understanding this right, you essentially have 35 heat without penalty correct (30 + the 1-5 safe zone)? If that is the case, I think just the auto-shutdown and catastrophic penalties need to be pushed back.

A slight note, but the heat spread mechanic could also be introduced. MW4 had this mechanic unbeknown to many, the way it worked is I believe it delivered a hardcoded amount of 50% of the heat the weapon is supposed to generate immediately, then the rest of the heat would be spread out evenly over a certain time period that varied between weapons (some just generated all of their heat at once though). This allows certain weapons to still retain heat to limit DPS, but allow for larger alphas while still being manageable (and incurring penalties for longer should you happen to cross thresholds).

View PostScarecrowES, on 25 August 2016 - 09:35 PM, said:

I think I might like to see the TT's 90m min range put on too. Make the weapon a mid-long range weapon with increased skill gap at long ranges. Lots of risk/reward there.

For the love of god no, minimum range as it currently works, is a terrible mechanic and needs to disappear. Adding heat to the weapon and maybe a decent cooldown nerf is all that is needed to undo all the various bandaids that got applied to this weapon (fragility, charge-up, etc).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 26 August 2016 - 10:58 AM.


#18 AWOL 01

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 347 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 26 August 2016 - 11:28 AM

Just FYI, in TT a turn is 10 seconds. If a heat sink gets rid of 1 heat per turn, that means a single heat sink gets rid of 0.1 heat per second, and a double heat sink gets rid of 0.2 heat per second.

#19 davoodoo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 2,496 posts

Posted 26 August 2016 - 11:42 AM

View PostAWOL 01, on 26 August 2016 - 11:28 AM, said:

Just FYI, in TT a turn is 10 seconds. If a heat sink gets rid of 1 heat per turn, that means a single heat sink gets rid of 0.1 heat per second, and a double heat sink gets rid of 0.2 heat per second.

yes and every weapon in tt deals dmg once per 10 seconds unless its uac or rac.

So logically if weapons got 5s cd, then you double effectiveness of heat sinks.

Edited by davoodoo, 26 August 2016 - 11:47 AM.


#20 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 26 August 2016 - 11:52 AM

View PostQuicksilver Kalasa, on 26 August 2016 - 10:55 AM, said:

I think the penalties ramp up a little too fast than is necessary, dissipation should also not go to true dubs, as this allows solid sized alphas to be repeatable and DPS builds suffer NO heat build up.

Capacity should be used to control what size of alpha you are limited to, dissipation should be used to control how often it can be repeated.

If I'm understanding this right, you essentially have 35 heat without penalty correct (30 + the 1-5 safe zone)? If that is the case, I think just the auto-shutdown and catastrophic penalties need to be pushed back.

A slight note, but the heat spread mechanic could also be introduced. MW4 had this mechanic unbeknown to many, the way it worked is I believe it delivered a hardcoded amount of 50% of the heat the weapon is supposed to generate immediately, then the rest of the heat would be spread out evenly over a certain time period that varied between weapons (some just generated all of their heat at once though). This allows certain weapons to still retain heat to limit DPS, but allow for larger alphas while still being manageable (and incurring penalties for longer should you happen to cross thresholds).


For the love of god no, minimum range as it currently works, is a terrible mechanic and needs to disappear. Adding heat to the weapon and maybe a decent cooldown nerf is all that is needed to undo all the various bandaids that got applied to this weapon (fragility, charge-up, etc).


I love that you get exactly what the system is designed to do... capacity determines alpha capability and dissipation is DoT, with heat scale putting a check on the duration of that DoT.

I'm not sure if I did a good-enough job explaining that in the OP and will need to amend it.

To the point about gauss, quickly, I don't like hard minimum ranges as you see in MWO. Makes no sense... for me I'd put soft minumums on the few weapons that have it - more like Clan LRMs. Damage drops the more you go below minumum range to nothing at 0m. But that's just one idea of how to define what gauss's role is actually supposed to be. I do actually like the quick-snap chargeless mechanic, but don't like that you can use it at long ranges. And I think that gauss being too good close-in is taking a role away from AC/20s. Those should be the premier short range autocannons, and adding back TT min range to gauss makes sure of that without otherwise harming the weapon. Just a thought... by no means a full recommendation.

Now that you mention the "safe zone," I'm not positive this is absolutely necessary as long as penalties at the lower end of the scale are extremely minor. Say 1-5= 5% movement penalty, 6-10= 10% movement penalty, 11-15= 15% movement penalty, 16-20= 20% movement penalty. Or something to that effect. 5% isn't much. I doubt people would even notice the 10% much until they were trying to peek and poke and found they couldn't get back into cover nearly fast enough. I'll change my recommendations to remove the "safe zone."

In terms of what "heat" you have, your heat capacity is determined by your sinks. Minimum 10 single heat sinks puts your capacity at 10. If you're in a 4xERPPC Warhawk using 24xDHS, your capacity would be 48 (assuming 2x capacity for DHS).

If you fired all 4 ERPPCs at once (15-heat each x4 = 60 heat) you'd exceed your heat capacity by 12 points, so you'd max your heat bar and incur 12 points of heat on your penalty scale. You'd be seeing some significant heat penalties at that point... harsh movement penalties, sensor issues, etc.

With the current recommended 10pts/sec dissipation rate, it would take 4.8 seconds to fully recover your heat bar, and with the rate of heat scale dissipation of 1/10 heat capacity, it's about 5 seconds to recover the heat scale. ERPPC cycle time is 4 seconds, which means you recover fully in right around 1 second beyond the cycle. I don't like those numbers. Not punishing enough.

The actual heat capacity and penalty works as expected, but dissipation is not doing it's job, I think. A dissipation rate of 8pts/second means it takes 6 seconds to recover the bar. That sounds better to me. You have to wait an additional 2 seconds to recover, which is 50% longer than the cycle time of the weapons you're using. That's a good delay.

If you were to alpha again as soon as the cooldown was up, you'll have recovered 32pts of heat, and added 60 again, for a penalty of 28 heat. If we're still carrying at least 3pts of the original 12 penalty, that's a core explosion and you're dead. But under the current setup, that 12 penalty would be gone after 5 seconds... my maths say that after 4 seconds you should have recovered 6.4 of the 12 heat. So firing 2 4xERPPC alphas back to back is an instant explosion. That seems a bit extreme, but I think this is the way it is with Ghost heat too, right?

Firing 2xERPPC when the weapons come off cooldown will add 30pts of heat, but you've recovered 32 (8pts/sec x 4seconds), so you can alpha the full 4, and then are limited to merely firing 2 at a time. That feels pretty good.

So, hmmm. You might be right. This is probably one of the most punishing builds for exceeding capacity that I can come up with and it seems the penalties are slightly too harsh, as you say. But this will require more testing. On the original ED, firing 4xERPPC on the Warhawk brought you up to 70% heat... 2 alphas was a shutdown but not an explosion. Do we feel as though 2 alphas to a shutdown, but NOT a more severe penalty, is acceptable? Does it need to shut down sooner and have worse consequences later?





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users