124 replies to this topic

[cazidin]

Greetings Mechwarriors. Today I have a simple theory. A MechWarrior Theory!

As you may recall, PGI proposed a Power Draw mechanic to limit players from combining PPC and Gauss Rifles and firing both simultaneously. You could only charge/fire 1 Gauss + 1 Gauss or 1 PPC with a 0.5-1 second delay before you could fire another PPC or Gauss Rifle.

If they implement a similar mechanic to replace Ghost Heat would it effect every laser and Gauss Rifles? For example, you could only fire 2 Large Lasers and 1-2 Medium Lasers for a total of 23-28 damage.

This would prevent large energy alpha strikes AND one couldn't easily circumvent this limitation by mixing large and medium lasers as many do now.

I doubt power draw would affect Ballistic, *with the exception of Gauss Rifles,) or Missile weapons because the former have small Ghost Heat penalties as it is and the later is either already considered an ineffective support weapon that requires lock-on (LRMs) or has short range and spread (SRMS)

What do you all think? Would you support this change? Would you change anything if it were implemented as presented? Would you call it "Ghost Power" or "Ghost Draw"? Will this kill the Laser Meta or just kill the Alpha Strike meta?

[Trauglodyte]

Power draw is going to be relative to the damage output of the weapon while also being tailored to the type of weapon. Energy weapons, of course, will have the heaviest draw. BUT, the Gauss Rifle will probably be equivalent to, or greater, than the ER PPC. The concept is to limit the massive alphas available in game thus forcing players to group their weapons and create builds through which you use different groups for different ranges. Alphas should only be used in the time of dire needs. I'm hopeful for the system but I think that PGI is leaving out one very important thing:

- heat penalties

A great many of us have been asking for such a system for a long time. Having a heat scale as great as it is does wonders for the game by making combat last longer. BUT, the system also doesn't punish people for actually failing to manage their heat. TT had things like reduced speed, possible pilot knock outs, ammo explosions, etc. MWO doesn't have any of that. I think something that might be good would be:

1- no penalties from 0-50% on the scale
2- loss of all efficiencies when heat scale reaches 51%
3- reduction in speed and agility at the rate of 0.5% per 1% of heat beyond 50% (i.e., you'd be at -24.5% at 99% heat)
4- each 1% of heat beyond 50% results in pushing your convergence back 10% (i.e., at 60% heat, if your range finder indicated 200m, it would be 400m); this isn't COF
5- internal damage from overheating set to 1 damage per second; all damage goes to the head to simulate pilot death

[Malcolm Vordermark]

The way I understand it, each weapon will have a certain power draw, exceeding a certain limit will generate additional heat.

It will probably still be called ghost heat since heat is the penalty. It will be "ghost <something>" at the least.

Will it kill laser/alpha meta? Depends on what kind of alpha is sustainable after the change. If were back down to 30 I wouldn't be surprised to see dakka builds as a way to get around the system.

[Khobai]

um its still ghost heat

just every weapon is linked in the same ghost heat group basically

[GRiPSViGiL]

Trauglodyte, on 06 March 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

The concept is to limit the massive alphas available in game thus forcing players to group their weapons and create builds through which you use different groups for different ranges.

This is pretty much how I manage my heat in the first place so I don't think power draw will change much of how I play. We will see though.

[Sable]

Actually PGI did not mention any specifics on their ghost heat replacement, everyone assumes it's a power draw system but there has been on confirmation. So this thread is completely pointless.

Also this really only effects the metawhore gameplay. I for one will not feel it's effects at all. I already used mixed loadouts and different weapons for different ranges.

Edited by Sable, 06 March 2016 - 09:38 AM.

[El Bandito]

Forced Chain Fire on alphas exceeding the limit. That's what I push for.

[cazidin]

Trauglodyte, on 06 March 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

Power draw is going to be relative to the damage output of the weapon while also being tailored to the type of weapon. Energy weapons, of course, will have the heaviest draw. BUT, the Gauss Rifle will probably be equivalent to, or greater, than the ER PPC. The concept is to limit the massive alphas available in game thus forcing players to group their weapons and create builds through which you use different groups for different ranges. Alphas should only be used in the time of dire needs. I'm hopeful for the system but I think that PGI is leaving out one very important thing:

- heat penalties

A great many of us have been asking for such a system for a long time. Having a heat scale as great as it is does wonders for the game by making combat last longer. BUT, the system also doesn't punish people for actually failing to manage their heat. TT had things like reduced speed, possible pilot knock outs, ammo explosions, etc. MWO doesn't have any of that. I think something that might be good would be:

1- no penalties from 0-50% on the scale
2- loss of all efficiencies when heat scale reaches 51%
3- reduction in speed and agility at the rate of 0.5% per 1% of heat beyond 50% (i.e., you'd be at -24.5% at 99% heat)
4- each 1% of heat beyond 50% results in pushing your convergence back 10% (i.e., at 60% heat, if your range finder indicated 200m, it would be 400m); this isn't COF
5- internal damage from overheating set to 1 damage per second; all damage goes to the head to simulate pilot death

If PGI were to implement penalties for being at high heat, I imagine it'd either be at 60% or 80% and the penalty would be similar JJ/Masc COF. It's simple, effective and well within PGI's programming.

Khobai, on 06 March 2016 - 09:20 AM, said:

um its still ghost heat

just every weapon is linked in the same ghost heat group basically

Ghost Heat II then? I don't see why Ballistics or Missiles would draw much power. Like I said before, the former has a very small heat penalty with the exception of AC20s and the latter has a reasonably high cap for LRMs and SRMs. If it's strictly damaged based then SRMS are at a severe disadvantage.

Sable, on 06 March 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:

Actually PGI did not mention any specifics on their ghost heat replacement, everyone assumes it's a power draw system but there has been on confirmation. So this thread is completely pointless.

Also this really only effects the metawhore gameplay. I for one will not feel it's effects at all. I already used mixed loadouts and different weapons for different ranges.

Russ said that the prototype of what they're thinking of is basically power draw. While it could turn out to be something completely new and totally different I'd like to extrapolate with what little data is available and who knows? Maybe my theory will be proven correct.

[Nightmare1]

cazidin, on 06 March 2016 - 08:35 AM, said:

I doubt power draw would affect Ballistic, *with the exception of Gauss Rifles,) or Missile weapons because the former have small Ghost Heat penalties as it is and the later is either already considered an ineffective support weapon that requires lock-on (LRMs) or has short range and spread (SRMS)

The better reason, is that neither ballistics nor missiles (with the exception of Gauss, obviously) pull power from the reactor plant. They are self contained with their own propellant/delivery systems, warheads, etc. Hence, they have ammo. So, there's zero reason for either weapon type to draw power from a reactor or to influence power draw at all.

What I think we should have is the following:

Power draw allows you to fire 6 MLs together, just like Ghost Heat currently does. Above that, you over draw your power and freeze up.

Firing two Gauss is do-able, but will freeze you up too, just like in the Blood of Kerensky Trilogy when Vlad and Phelan duel each other.

In short, Power Draw can't be so limiting that it kills energy weapons or energy Mechs. However, it shouldn't allow massive alphas either. Above all though, it shouldn't affect ballistics or missiles. They already are at enough of a disadvantage due to hit-reg, ammo, velocity/travel time, tonnage, etc.

If PGI makes it so that my AC/20 HBK has to draw power from the reactor plant to fire its ballistic shoulder, I'm gonna be one unhappy camper.

[Gyrok]

Nightmare1, on 06 March 2016 - 11:38 AM, said:

If PGI makes it so that my AC/20 HBK has to draw power from the reactor plant to fire its ballistic shoulder, I'm gonna be one unhappy camper.

Expect *EVERYTHING* to draw on this new mechanic.

Frankly...I am not at all excited, and I fear that this may drive more players away than it makes happy.

Just FYI, back in open beta, an option like this was voted down because people just wanted a heat penalty...hence we got ghost heat. It may not be well explained, but it does what it needs to I suppose. If we are going to remove ghost heat, I am more in favor of actually balancing weapons so that heat alone is a sufficient deterrent.

[Nightmare1]

Gyrok, on 06 March 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

Expect *EVERYTHING* to draw on this new mechanic.

Frankly...I am not at all excited, and I fear that this may drive more players away than it makes happy.

Just FYI, back in open beta, an option like this was voted down because people just wanted a heat penalty...hence we got ghost heat. It may not be well explained, but it does what it needs to I suppose. If we are going to remove ghost heat, I am more in favor of actually balancing weapons so that heat alone is a sufficient deterrent.

Yeah, I remember that vote back in Beta. I'll also admit that I'm very leery of this new Power Draw system. If done properly, it could be amazing, but I don't hold out much hope.

I'm just praying that PGI doesn't make ballistics and missiles have power draw, 'cause that'd be about as stupid as snake mittens.

[TexAce]

Gyrok, on 06 March 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

Just FYI, back in open beta, an option like this was voted down because people just wanted a heat penalty...hence we got ghost heat. It may not be well explained, but it does what it needs to I suppose. If we are going to remove ghost heat, I am more in favor of actually balancing weapons so that heat alone is a sufficient deterrent.

There was NEVER an official voting.

Stop spreading this urban myth.

[cazidin]

Gyrok, on 06 March 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

Expect *EVERYTHING* to draw on this new mechanic.

Frankly...I am not at all excited, and I fear that this may drive more players away than it makes happy.

Just FYI, back in open beta, an option like this was voted down because people just wanted a heat penalty...hence we got ghost heat. It may not be well explained, but it does what it needs to I suppose. If we are going to remove ghost heat, I am more in favor of actually balancing weapons so that heat alone is a sufficient deterrent.

The only ballistic weapon that I can see drawing from this new power system would be the AC20 and even then it's a much greater stretch than the Gauss Rifle. If PGI wanted to "balance" boating Ballistic weapons then I guess recoil would be an OK system.

PGI could also subtly code in a hard limit for AC20s.

[Imperius]

TexAce, on 06 March 2016 - 11:46 AM, said:

There was NEVER an official voting.

Stop spreading this urban myth.

People on these forums love to spread myths like there is a timeline for mechs Don't know how many ways and times Russ has to say Timeline minor concern when deciding on mechs to sell...

[MauttyKoray]

Khobai, on 06 March 2016 - 09:20 AM, said:

um its still ghost heat

just every weapon is linked in the same ghost heat group basically

Yes and no.

This system is basically a penalty from having to use more energy. If we think of it in terms that if you go above the 'power draw' cap, then the reactor is being pushed past its normal performance to generate additional energy, thus generating extra heat (the generator always creates heat, as well as when you move, which is why shutting down cools you off faster) it makes sense. Its a far better system than the weapon grouping 'ghost heat' as well.

However, even ballistics and missiles will have power draw (though I would assume low) as energy is still required to operate the loading mechanisms and whatever else they decide. Unfortunately to balance it they'll probably have more power draw than would be normal...

Edited by MauttyKoray, 06 March 2016 - 12:26 PM.

[C E Dwyer]

Idle speculation.

I doubt if even P.G.I know exactly what they're doing with this, so people throwing their idea's around is only going to cause a cry wolf situation, as people half read posts, and deside that because an uniformed person, has said something here, or on twitch, its gospel and written in stone.

[Slow and Decrepit]

In the beginning, there was two transistors...

Edited by beleneagle, 06 March 2016 - 05:56 PM.

[cazidin]

MauttyKoray, on 06 March 2016 - 12:20 PM, said:

Yes and no.

This system is basically a penalty from having to use more energy. If we think of it in terms that if you go above the 'power draw' cap, then the reactor is being pushed past its normal performance to generate additional energy, thus generating extra heat (the generator always creates heat, as well as when you move, which is why shutting down cools you off faster) it makes sense. Its a far better system than the weapon grouping 'ghost heat' as well.

However, even ballistics and missiles will have power draw (though I would assume low) as energy is still required to operate the loading mechanisms and whatever else they decide. Unfortunately to balance it they'll probably have more power draw than would be normal...

It's partly better because all energy weapons will be in the same group. We won't see a mix of LPL and medium lasers generating a 52-58 point alpha strike. I honestly would hope that Ballistics, with the exception of the Gauss Rifle and maybe AC20 draw heavily if at all on power but you may be right.

Cathy, on 06 March 2016 - 12:35 PM, said:

Idle speculation.

I doubt if even P.G.I know exactly what they're doing with this, so people throwing their idea's around is only going to cause a cry wolf situation, as people half read posts, and deside that because an uniformed person, has said something here, or on twitch, its gospel and written in stone.

Am I the only one who thinks it's arrogant to use the phrase "Idle speculation?"

Yes, PGI is still in the prototype stage atm but it's fun to speculate about how their new system will turn out, is it not? I very clearly state that this a theory based on what little information is available. Must I add a legal disclaimer that it possibly won't turn out exactly as I say?

[Weyen]

cazidin, on 06 March 2016 - 12:01 PM, said:

The only ballistic weapon that I can see drawing from this new power system would be the AC20 and even then it's a much greater stretch than the Gauss Rifle. If PGI wanted to "balance" boating Ballistic weapons then I guess recoil would be an OK system.

PGI could also subtly code in a hard limit for AC20s.

It makes no sense from a realistic point of view, but from a gameplay point of view they'll HAVE to give ballistics and missiles a significant power draw or it won't do anything except stop people from mixing ER and pulse lasers to evade ghost heat. If they want to stop huge alphas across all weapon types that means this fix has to impact all weapon types.

If it's explicitly designed to prevent huge alphas then presumably the limiting factor (power consumption or whatever they decide to call it) would be a function of the weapon's damage, so an AC10 would have to have approximately the same limitations as a large laser. That would let them explicitly decide how big the maximum alpha would be (the maximum capacity of the "battery") and how often they can use it (the recharge rate) and they wouldn't have to worry about people coming up with weird 6 x SRM6 builds explicitly to bypass the system the way people currently do with ghost heat.

[Trauglodyte]

I think that, ultimately, what you're going to see is a power limit based on the size of the engine. It makes sense. From there, they'll do some sort of formula that is essentially damage * X, whatever they want X to be. At that point, you'll be able to spreadsheet it that, "Hey, I have a safe engine load of 20 kilowatts (example) which affords me the ability to fire 5 Medium Lasers, 1 Large Laser and a Medium Laser, etc. etc." At that point, you'd know that, with those weapons, you'll build up a specific amount of heat designated by in game information and, should you add to it, you'll end up building up an additional amount of heat. The higher the heat, the slower the engine recharge which, as a result, would make you pretty cooked while not being able to fire your weapons as quickly. Ammo based weapons will still have power draw because you've got to manage moving the weapon within the chassis, due to them all being on gimbals, along with an ammo feed system that has to draw munition banks from different parts of the mech. That power usage would be extremely low versus energy weapons because, after all, how much energy does it take to shift the angle on a barrel and such?

This is a all speculation but I find it to be a very good thing because now, not only do we have weapons that are balanced by weight, size, and range but we now have weapons being balanced by additional engine draw. That was supposed to be a part of the equation with the original Ghost Heat but it never worked out like that. Now, this isn't going to be perfect because people will just start complaining about a possible Missile/AC god mode meta. But, how many mechs have ballistic/missile mounts, compared to energy mounts, and how heavy are the weapons that they're going to take? The more ACs, the slower you go, the more limited your range and synergy, etc. etc. The Gauss/PPC meta won't come back because, again, massive power draw from those two weapons. UACs have always been viable but they're finicky and you can only boat so many. AC2s won't ever be meta and AC5s, while nice, only do so much. SRMs are good but, now you're talking about going to a knife fight.

I'm liking it more and more. Then again, only if it plays out like I hope. BUT, we still need heat penalties to go with it. Baby steps...