Jump to content

Updates To Energy Draw Pts 12-Sep-2016


125 replies to this topic

#1 InnerSphereNews

    Member

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,356 posts

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:31 AM



Greetings MechWarriors,

The Energy Draw Public Test Server has been updated with a number of value adjustments based on feedback, discussions, and additional testing.
As highlighted in the original Energy Draw PTS post we want to stress that the values and features you'll see in this PTS, including any updates to it, are all subject to feedback and change. The Energy Draw system will not be placed onto the Live servers until it is determined to represent an improvement over the existing Heat Scale mechanics already present on the Live servers.

~ Previous Energy PTS details and updates ~

Heat Sink Changes

We feel that there is merit in testing - as part of the Energy Draw system - some often-requested pieces of feedback toward placing heavier restrictions on Heat Thresholds, and unifying the previously distinct Engine Heat Sink and External Heat Sink values. This test comes with certain caveats, however.

The first caveat is that we have run the numbers on the often-requested "flat 30" Heat Threshold value, and have subsequently concluded that this value would be too restrictive - even with full Double Heat Sink Dissipation rates - to be practical for builds heavily focused around Energy weaponry.
Heat Sinks will therefore still add to the total Heat Sink Threshold, but Double Heat Sinks will now only add 1 Threshold per Heat Sink. This will put the Total Heat Threshold at levels which long-time players will be familiar with from the days before Double Heat Sinks were introduced.
Single Heat Sinks will keep their current threshold values, but will unify their Dissipation Rates between Engine and External Heat Sinks. While this will give them a higher Heat Capacity, they will not have the Dissipation efficiency of Double Heat Sinks.
We will closely monitor these changes, and make further adjustments as needed.

The second caveat is that these changes, as currently structure in this PTS build, will not be a replacement for the Energy Draw system. We discussed that potential internally, and ultimately the Threshold change alone does not directly address the design goals intended with the implementation of the Energy Draw system.

Single Heat Sinks

• External Heat Sink Dissipation Rate: 0.12
• Engine Heat Sink Dissipation Rate: 0.12
• Heat Capacity: 1.2

Double Heat Sinks (Inner Sphere and Clan)

External Heat Sink Dissipation Rate: 0.17
Engine Heat Sink Dissipation Rate: 0.17
• Heat Capacity: 1

Skill Tree Changes

We are reducing the values for the following Skill Tree Efficiencies to assist with getting a better baseline reading on the above changes to Heat Sinks. These are not the final values.

• Cool Run decreased to 2.5% (from 7.5%).
• Heat Containment decreased to 2.5% (from 10%).

Weapon Changes

Gauss Rifles
With the heaver restrictions on Heat Thresholds in this update, we are re-introducing the Charge mechanic for Gauss Rifles and bringing the Energy Consumption values down to their original 1:1 values.

• Charge mechanic has been restored.
• Energy Consumption decreased to 15 (from 18).
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 6 (from 6.71).

PPCs
After reviewing the previous PTS testing data and evaluating the overall goals we wished to accomplish with Energy Draw, we feel that the previous PTS values for the Clan ERPPC presented too great a difference when compared against other weapons of similar weight, even with the drastic reduction to the Cooldown Duration of the Clan ERPPC. Restoring Splash Damage to the Clan ERPPC allows us to better justify a further reduction to its Cooldown Duration and Energy Consumption values, for roughly comparable Damage output.

For PPC weaponry in general we feel that we also had an opportunity to improve the Anti-ECM effect of PPC impacts, in an effort to provide the weapon with some additional utility.

Clan ERPPC
• Damage decreased to 10 (from 15).
• Splash Damage has been restored.
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 5 (from 6.8).
• Anti-ECM effect increased to 6s (from 4s).
• Energy Consumption decreased to 13.5 (from 15).

PPC
• Anti-ECM effect increased to 6s (from 4s).

ERPPC
• Anti-ECM effect increased to 10s (from 4s).

Lasers
Up until now, Lasers have been designed with the same Cooldown Duration values across the entire Laser size class, while Beam Duration has generally been the primary attribute that distinguishes the different Laser classes.

We feel that previous implementation left little room for adjusting the different Laser weapons without introducing undesirable results. We feel a better solution here is to unlock the Cooldown Duration attribute for different Laser types, allowing this attribute to better distinguish Lasers from each other and to give us greater flexibility in balancing Clan Lasers against Inner Sphere Lasers.

For this implementation we are tuning Laser weaponry under the following design directives:

Standard Lasers: Baseline lasers, which all other Laser types pivot around.
ER Lasers: Keep the same Beam Duration as Standard Lasers, but with longer Cooldown Durations to adhere to the previously-stated design goals regarding Cooldown differences between close and longer ranged weaponry.
Pulse Lasers: Beam Duration and Cooldown Duration will be lower than Standard Laser and ER Laser values, but some general tuning has been performed to shift Pulse Lasers into a slightly more DPS-focused role.
Clan Lasers: Will typically have longer Beam Durations compared to their IS counterparts to account for their greater Damage and Range values.

Large Laser
• Beam Duration decreased to 1.1 (from 1.15)

ER Large Laser
Beam Duration decreased to 1.1 (from 1.3)
• Cooldown Duration increased to 3.9 (from 3.74)

Small Pulse Laser
Beam Duration increased to 0.6 (from 0.5)
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 2.4 (from 2.59)

Medium Pulse Laser
Beam Duration increased to 0.7 (from 0.6)
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 3.3 (from 3.45)

Large Pulse Laser
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 3.5 (from 3.74)

Clan ER Small Laser
• Cooldown Duration increased to 2.8 (from 2.59)

Clan ER Medium Laser
• Cooldown Duration increased to 3.7 (from 3.45)
• Max Range decreased to 749 (from 770)

Clan ER Large Laser
Beam Duration decreased to 1.25 (from 1.35)
• Cooldown Duration increased to 3.9 (from 3.74)

Clan Small Pulse Laser
Beam Duration increased to 0.85 (from 0.75)
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 2.5 (from 2.59)

Clan Medium Pulse Laser
Beam Duration increased to 0.9 (from 0.85)
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 3.3 (from 3.45)

Clan Large Pulse Laser
• Cooldown Duration decreased to 3.5 (from 3.74)

LRMs
While our current PTS data has relatively limited information regarding the effectiveness of LRMs in the PTS environment, we have seen the feedback regarding a desire to generally improve the LRM dynamics within the PTS for testing and experimentation. We know that some normalization of the LRM class of weaponry has been a long time coming, so we examined a few methods by which we can better balance the different LRMs in relation to each other.

LRM 5
• Inner Sphere LRM 5 Cooldown Duration increased to 4 (from 3.74)
• Clan Cooldown LRM 5 Duration increased to 4.3 (from 3.74)
• Inner Sphere and Clan LRM 5 Spread increased to 4.2 (from 3)

LRM 10
• Inner Sphere LRM 10 Cooldown Duration increased to 4.3 (from 4.6)
• Clan LRM 10 Cooldown Duration decreased to 4.6 (from 5.18)
• Inner Sphere and Clan LRM 10 Heat decreased to 3.33 (from 4)

LRM 15
• Inner Sphere Cooldown Duration decreased to 4.6 (from 5.46)
• Clan Cooldown Duration decreased to 4.9 (from 6.33)

LRM 20
• Inner Sphere LRM 20 Cooldown Duration decreased to 5 (from 5.46)
• Clan LRM 20 Cooldown Duration decreased to 5.3 (from 7.48)
• Inner Sphere and Clan LRM 20 Heat decreased to 5.5 (from 6)
• Inner Sphere and Clan LRM 20 Spread decreased to 5.2 (from 6.2)

Ultra AutoCannons

Our initial Design for adjusting U-AC behavior called for distinct Jam Duration values across the U-AC line, centered around adjustments to the Clan U-AC/10 we pushed in the last patch on September 1st, but due to a communication mix-up the implementation of the Jam Duration changes ended up as a Global increase to 8s for all of the U-AC weaponry.
In this update we've fixed that Global 8s Jam Duration and have implemented the intended per-weapon Duration. As the Clan U-AC/10 is the reference point against which the other U-ACs are balanced, the Clan U-AC/10 keeps the 8s Jam Duration.

Inner Sphere U-AC/5
• Jam Chance increased to 15% (from 12%)
• Jam Duration reduced to 5.5s (from 8s)

Clan U-AC/2
• Jam Chance increased to 17% (from 7%)
• Jam Duration reduced to 2.3s (from 8s)

Clan U-AC/5
• Jam Chance increased to 17% (from 15%)
• Jam Duration reduced to 6.5s (from 8s)

Clan U-AC/20
• Jam Chance decreased to 17% (from 20%)
• Jam Duration increased to 10s (from 8s)


#2 Itachi The Prodigy

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Clan Exemplar
  • Clan Exemplar
  • 29 posts
  • Locationinside your wife...

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:48 AM

Another step backward thanks PGI for reintroducing Ghost heat 2.2

#3 S C A R

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 135 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationRussia

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:48 AM

I wish PGI'd remove Gauss crit chance. With charge mechanic it is already a skill weapon.

#4 Lizardman from Hollywood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 129 posts

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:59 AM

The real eye opener was the decrease in spread of the lrm20 to just 1 meter more than the lrm5.

Yes, yes. The salt must flow.

#5 Aramoro999

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Star Captain
  • Star Captain
  • 214 posts

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:13 AM

They had to put the gauss charge back.

how could we ever live without such a great game mechanic...

Edited by Aramoro999, 12 September 2016 - 10:18 AM.


#6 xe N on

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,335 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:15 AM

View PostS C A R, on 12 September 2016 - 09:48 AM, said:

I wish PGI'd remove Gauss crit chance. With charge mechanic it is already a skill weapon.


It's not. You can simply macro the Gauss. Therefore the whole charge thing was always a bad idea anyways.

Edited by xe N on, 12 September 2016 - 10:15 AM.


#7 Levi Porphyrogenitus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 4,763 posts
  • LocationAurora, Indiana, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:22 AM

I'm glad they're finally looking at tweaking the underlying heat/dissipation relationship, but I think they missed one of the keys to making a hard 30 or hard 40 limit work: increased dissipation rates.

Why increase dissipation? TT was balanced around a 10s window. HS dissipated 1 heat per 10s interval, and DHS dissipated 2. Weapons cycled their damage value over the course of those same 10s, and consequently generated their heat value over that same time period.

In MWO, weapons are almost all between 2x and 3x faster cycling, putting out both 2-3x damage and 2-3x heat over 10s. Yet, HS remain stuck on the 10s cooling period. PGI should try a hard 40 heat cap with SHS at -0.20 h/s and (c)DHS at -0.40 h/s.

Naturally, Cool Run and Heat Containment should be disabled for the test, to ensure a baseline set of data for further tweaks. Ideally, those two efficiencies would be removed as part of the skill tree rework, since they're hands-down the most powerful, even with relatively tame values. Alternatively, Heat Containment could be retained with a base 30 heat cap, with the value tweaked to end at a base 40 after doubling the efficiency, though this is certainly not my favored path.

Edit: Quirks offer another targeted solution to a hard cap. Mechs like the Awesome could get PPC heat generation quirks that would allow them to fire their entire payload without automatically shutting down, though they'd of course have to be at idle heat temps to pull it off.

Edited by Levi Porphyrogenitus, 12 September 2016 - 10:24 AM.


#8 TheLuc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 746 posts

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:22 AM

Guys, what ever we might say its Russ`s game not ours and happens it has the Battletech name attach to it, he also told many years ago that the game will not have a final version but more as a on going beta that will never end. Just like he told that the new Mechs would pop up monthly ( cash cow ) so what ever we say or do in the game, we are stuck with his vision of the franchise and pleasing the true fans from 84 till now just forget bout that, balance, lore, well everything Battletech.

Dont worry there is HBS Battletech coming out ( sorry clanners, but might be for later tho )and Heavy Gear Assault as a beta already offers more than MWO which is playable now for 20 bucks.

so now options are popping out better than Hawken or MWO, just a matter of time.

#9 AnTi90d

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,229 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • Locationhttps://voat.co/

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:23 AM

I like the heat threshold changes.

.. that's about it.

Lowering ER laser duration is going to make peek/poke sniping even more annoying.

I still despise the whole Energy Draw mechanic and prefer Ghost Heat.

ED screws mixed builds over, who aren't very powerful because they don't have perfect convergence.. because of discouraging mixed builds, thus it encourages boating.

GH discourages boating and thus encourages mixed builds.

No iteration of ED can or will ever encourage mixed builds. It's an inferior system to what we have live. It sounds OK from a design perspective until you think in terms of mixed-VS-boat.

-----

I'd rather see the lower heat cap tested with the current or a tweaked Ghost Heat.

#10 Fobhopper

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Patron Saint
  • The Patron Saint
  • 341 posts
  • LocationClan Nova Cat agent working for Davion

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:25 AM

If you are going to removed the auto-charge on the guass rifle, then removed the increased crit chance of it unless its currently charging/charged. The increased liability of the weapon should only be in effect when the weapon is charge, otherwise to have the weapon so easily critable when the weapon isnt actively charged doesnt make sense. Its literally just a bunch of electromagnets that dont do anything when they have no charge. The 'slug' is inert, the coils are are not in their 'fragile' state unless there is a current, and thus should not be so critable if the isnt holding a charge.

Also I am glad to hear the LRM's are getting some tightening up of mechanics and missile spread. In the laser meta they are pretty much ignored because the missile spread per larger groups, not to mention the inherent liability in targeting makes them not a very sought after weapon in competitive play. And for those of you who want to whine about LURMAGEDDON, equip a damn AMS or ECM. If you are standing out in the rain you only have yourself to blame. Lasers require less skill to use and to much better effect in comparison.

And I have no issue with the UAC jam changes. As a pilot who primarily prefers AC weapons over lasers, while I hate to have a jam, I hate having my weapons jammed for nearly a lifetime during a brawl. Being able to bring my weapons to bear faster is good news in my book. The increased jam chance is just the price of improved dps over standard AC weapons.

As for lasers, I am fine with any changes as long as it tries to break the overbearing laser meta. I am tired of all the direstars and wubshee apha's that completely tear apart mech side torso's in a single volley. Honestly I am more for increased CD timers on all laser weapons in general.

#11 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Silver Champ
  • CS 2019 Silver Champ
  • 4,561 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:28 AM

I admit that some of the changes have potential. I'm eager to test lower heat threshold, and LRMs.

But PGI, please understand that having all weapons of all types drawing from the same pool is the nail in the coffin for balanced builds

For example a mech with 2 ERLLs and 2 LRM15 is penalised for doing an alpha... which is absurd!

As long as all weapons draw from the same pool... it will always be "boat the best weapon that does X damage.

#12 Pelmeshek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,227 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationRussia

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:32 AM

Yay, shs time!

Also can shot in PTS 2 alpha w/o any problem, 3 with coolshot.

#13 Reno Blade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 3,394 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:34 AM

very nice changes on paper.
laser and lrm normalization and rollback for gauss, ppc and ac jam.
all good points, even though i prefere strong weapons with long cd and high draw (ppc, gauss, LL) to make them better in smaller groups than boated.

i'd reduce all pulse laser cd by 30-50% and keep the other current stats. so for ml vs mp you get 1t vs 2t but gain 2x the dps (and 2x hps).

uac jam could be something below 10s with cd, but its a big risk for big calibers now.

I guess 30 cap and a lot faster dissipation (as some ppl ask for 3x dissipation with 30 cap) just wont work.
on the other hand, this would look very similar to the Energy bar:
very fast up and down movement of the heat.

i prefere to have slow heat bar with some TT side effects and keeping the fast refil to the energy bar.
a heat bar that fast would just make this game a fast CS fps shooter with heat as very quick reload of your alphastrike weapon.

Edited by Reno Blade, 12 September 2016 - 11:15 AM.


#14 Felicitatem Parco

    Professor of Memetics

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 13,522 posts
  • LocationIs Being Obscured By ECM

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:35 AM

An uncharged Gauss Rifle cannot explode because the capacitors are not charged. Just saying.

#15 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:40 AM

I'm really happy to see the LRM20 spread decrease, and VERY interested in the heatcap decrease. While increased dissipation should go along with that, I'll still take this as a very interesting thing to test.

UAV jam time changes are extremely welcome. Long jams on long cooldown weapons makes sense,but it disproportionately nerfs rapid cooldown weapons as they lose more firing opportunities and thus see a much higher DPS reduction via jamming, which is bizarre for the weapons that are more DPS oriented. Glad to see this.

Laser changes: interesting, but minor. I like the direction but don't think they'll have a huge impact. That's not really a problem, though, as lasers aren't broken.

Shorter durations on >1s lasers is good. Long burns end up with very negative gameplay experiences, and aren't a good balance knob as a result. As durations increase, particularly at low and mid level play, friendly fire shoot up, while effective damage drops in a fairly exponential curve (under 1s, spread tends to be fairly minor if the target isn't already moving due to human response speed, but basically all damage after 1s is always spread.)

Will definitely give this PTS a good run.

#16 Quardak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,301 posts
  • LocationRaumsystem Kitzingen

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:46 AM

Plays nice on testing grounds...

You have to make a decision: High Damage in short Time or DPS over longer Time:

Jenner Oxide:
4xSRM-4 / 10 D-HS / Caustic Valley : 5 Salvos till Shutdown / Reached in 13 sec.
(80 missiles delivered 6,2/sec)
Cooldown to 0 Heat : 33 sec.

3xSRM-4 / 13 D-HS / Caustic Valley : 12 Salvos till Shutdown / Reached in 27 sec.
(144 Missiles delivered 5,3/sec)
Cooldown to 0 Heat: 22 sec.

4xSRM-4 / 10 S-HS / Caustic Valley : 5 Salvos till Shutdown / Reached in 13 sec.
(144 Missiles delivered 6,2/sec)
Cooldown to 0 Heat: 45 sec.

3xSRM-4 / 13 S-HS / Caustic Valley : 8 Salvos till Shutdown / Reached in 18 sec.
(96 Missiles delivered 5,3/sec)
Cooldown to 0 Heat: 33 sec.

Edited by Quardak, 12 September 2016 - 11:19 AM.


#17 Night Thastus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 823 posts

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:54 AM

The UAC/20 is really a sad weapon at this point.

Disadvantages:
  • Heaviest AC
  • Can't be boated (due to energy draw, or ghost heat currently)
  • Bulkiest AC
  • Chews through ammo the fastest. (Meaning even more tonnage)
  • High heat
  • High jam chance
  • High jam percentage
  • Highest number of shells, and thus most spread damage
  • Shortest range
I mean, seriously. No-one uses the UAC/20 in high-tier play or in comp, because it's garbage. Now it's even worse in the ED system.


I just can't fathom why.

:/

EDIT: Guass charge is a real bummer, by the way. It makes single-guass builds basically useless. It's always been that way. Real shame that's being brought back. Too much risk/reward with charge to make a single one worth it. Want to make it have long cooldown or high draw? Fine. But take away that charge mechanic, *please* so some single-gauss builds are usable again. :(

Edited by Night Thastus, 12 September 2016 - 12:02 PM.


#18 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 25,847 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 12 September 2016 - 11:02 AM

Let's see...

Heat capacity nerfed while also nerfing dissipation: Why? Lasers were already being outclassed by PPFLD in the Power Draw PTS system. Nerfing capacity but increasing dissipation would have made some sense, but nerfing both does not.

Pulse Lasers as DPS: Giving them longer durations does not make them DPS-focused. The way to make them DPS-focused is to drastically lower their cooldown time, alpha strike damage, and heat. Their DPS is basically the same after your changes, but with longer burn times.

Clan ERPPCs: Just remove the "splash" so that they don't have their power draw unfairly high. Using ECM-EMP duration as a balancing mechanism for them is gimmicky and not usually impactful.

Gauss: This one I actually agree with.

LRMs: Why did you nerf the LRM5? Nerfing LRM launchers does not make LRMs more viable. The buffs to some of the bigger launchers are okay though.

Ultra ACs: It's good that you're finally using separate jam time values per gun. However, you didn't have to jack up the jam chances to such extreme levels. You also basically killed the Clan Ultra 20 with a 10-second jam time.


Three steps forward and a whole lot of steps backward.

Edited by FupDup, 12 September 2016 - 11:06 AM.


#19 Herr Vorragend

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 579 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 12 September 2016 - 11:02 AM

Remove the Gauss-Charge. Argh!
This mechanic has to go.

I can't believe it.

#20 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 25,847 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 12 September 2016 - 11:12 AM

View PostNight Thastus, on 12 September 2016 - 10:54 AM, said:

The UAC/20 is really a sad weapon at this point.

Disadvantages:
  • Heaviest AC
  • Can't be boated (due to energy draw, or ghost heat currently)
  • Bulkiest AC
  • Chews through ammo the fastest. (Meaning even more tonnage)
  • High heat
  • High jam chance
  • High jam percentage
  • Highest number of shells, and thus most spread damage
  • Shortest range
I mean, seriously. No-one uses the UAC/20 in high-tier play or in comp, because it's garbage. Now it's even *worse* in the ED system.


I just can't fathom why.

:/

While I agree with your argument overall, the Ultra 20 is actually not the heaviest or bulkiest AC. Those awards go to the IS AC/20.

#OCD :P





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users