301 replies to this topic

[Gas Guzzler]

Duke Nedo, on 26 October 2016 - 11:09 PM, said:

Yes, you got that right, but I'd also like other mechanism to rein in boated ballistics and boated missiles like some creative use of recoil, convergence, missile spread and missile tubes. I have written that in other threads but didn't mention it here so sorry about that. Anyways, that probably wont happen.

About laser boating there are holes that almost lets you do that by combining LPLs with MLs and especially cLPLs with cERML (though a little less so after range reduction). It's close enough for us to call them laser boats after all. IMO, as long as you can do that you can just as well remove GH all together for all I care. Alpha-boats would be a bit more effective but not extremely much so I guess... in any case it could partly be mitigated by reducing the dps of long range weapons significantly relative to short range equivalents.

The point I am trying to make is that GH1 is a poorly integrated grouping full of holes that we exploit as much as we can to stay as close as possible to what we could do before GH1 was introduced. So, if it's now consensus that some kind of GH is needed to reduce alphas I think we should improve on it. A good implementation of ED could do that, but only a good implementation of it.

No, 450 meters is much shorter than 740. Also, you'll notice that those laser vomit builds are not the powerhouse they once were. They are heat capped quickly and situational. I definitely wouldn't consider those builds a problem that needs to be nerfed. Some mechs have the appeal of being able to boat lasers, and they should have their situational use rather than being nerfed to the ground by energy draw just because once in a while someone will be caught flat footed and take a big alpha from a heavy or assault. Clan laser vomit especially is not that hard to mitigate you just have to be on your toes. I don't think those laser vomit builds should be nerfed any more as they are already balanced and not over performing.

[Kin3ticX]

MFW

[Otto Cannon]

[Widowmaker1981]

DAYLEET, on 26 October 2016 - 08:03 PM, said:

What other choice do we have to severely limit both the Alpha and DPS for heavies and assault?

Serious question.

Doing that ruins assaults completely... think about it. If Heavy DPS is limited, then assaults cannot put out more dps than heavies, therefore all assaults can safely be sold, because there is now zero point to their existence (why bring a bigger, easier to hit, slower and less agile mech when it cant put out more firepower? Armour? don't make me laugh, im drinking tea and it will come out of my nose).

Id rather they didn't delete an entire weight class, personally - so im EXTREMELY happy to hear the whole idea is getting an abortion.

[Kin3ticX]

El Bandito, on 26 October 2016 - 07:38 PM, said:

Good, now they can nerf Kodiak-3. Gonna tweet to Russ again.



I absolutely think the increased 1.5 heat for class 5 ACs is dead on correct. PGI should keep it.

It concerns me that PGI is pre pricing in some kind of fix it mechanic to come along after they release something OP

[RestosIII]

Kin3ticX, on 26 October 2016 - 11:25 PM, said:

MFW

Too controversial, not enough smug anime girl. 6/10 on effort just because it has transparency.

But honestly, I am just glad we got updated on where ED went. I was genuinely worried that next patch they would just drop ED in our laps on the live server. I can sleep better at night now. 'says while posting on a forum at 4 AM'

[MrMadguy]

Gas Guzzler, on 26 October 2016 - 10:25 PM, said:

You need to think beyond two feet in front of you. ED massively nerfs heaps of mediocre builds, and leaves some top tier loadouts completely untouched or barely harms them. It literally promotes the boating of the same weapon, which is super boring. At least with GH you can be creative and mix weapon types if you are a heavy or assault and want to have appropriate firepower.

I dunno, may be implementation is bad, but the idea itself is right. The fact, that it doesn't work now, doesn't mean it's bad - it has room for further improvements. For example this system can take weapon range into account. So for example Lights won't be able to equip long range weapons, which is nonsense, cuz they won't be able to mount enough heat sinks to support them. Anyway, long range weapons should have drawbacks - brawlers should dominate above them at close range (inside 250-300m range), that isn't the case in MWO. Or another interesting features can be added - such as Reactor, Energy capacitors and even, who knows, Field generators.

I also want to say, that I have been suggesting such system and wondering, why MechWarrior game doesn't have it, since day one of playing MechWarrior games (not only MWO). That's simply because before MechWarrior I had played another game - Starsiege. And this game had such system. I'm not at home now, so I can't link video, but you may search for Starsiege videos on YouTube. This game had reactor, that was separate component, that of course had some wight. Each 'Mech system was drawing some energy from it's capacity. Penalty wasn't so drastic though - you were losing HUD, when reactor was running out of energy. But anyway, there was more room for balancing it this game. For example you were able to balance your capabilities between firepower, dps, range, defense (force field, cloak), scouting (better radar), speed (better engine), utility (ECM), etc.

Edited by MrMadguy, 26 October 2016 - 11:52 PM.

[RestosIII]

MrMadguy, on 26 October 2016 - 11:50 PM, said:

I dunno, may be implementation is bad, but the idea itself is right. The fact, that it doesn't work now, doesn't mean it's bad - it has room for further improvements. For example this system can take weapon range into account. So for example Lights won't be able to equip long range weapons, which is nonsense, cuz they won't be able to mount enough heat sinks to support them. Anyway, long range weapons should have drawbacks - brawlers should dominate above them at close range (inside 250-300m range), that isn't the case in MWO. Or another interesting features can be added - such as Reactor, Energy capacitors and even, who knows, Field generators.

I also want to say, that I have been suggesting such system and wondering, why MechWarrior game doesn't have it, since day one of playing MechWarrior games (not only MWO). That's simply because before MechWarrior I had played another game - Starsiege. And this game had such system. I'm not at home now, so I can't link video, but you may search for Starsiege videos on YouTube. This game had reactor, that was separate component, that of course had some wight. Each 'Mech system was drawing some energy from it's capacity. Penalty wasn't so drastic though - you were losing HUD, when reactor was running out of energy. But anyway, there was more room for balancing it this game. For example you were able to balance your capabilities between firepower, range, defense (force field, cloak), scouting (better radar), speed (better engine), utility (ECM), etc.

Hold up now. I'm sleep deprived and posting from a phone, but.. did you just imply that long range weaponry like LLas/PPCs/Gauss are equal at short range with heavy AC's and SRMs? Please fight a Splat Dog or brawler Atlas at close range. Eight now. I'm waiting.



Also, did you just say light mechs shouldn't have long range weaponry? If so: WHY. Why do you hate the poor underaged mechs?!?! They're bad enough already!

Disclaimer: If you were not claiming either of these, you will be entitled to a 50% off one-use coupon for any Diamond Shark product

Edited by RestosIII, 26 October 2016 - 11:59 PM.

[DAYLEET]

Widowmaker1981, on 26 October 2016 - 11:40 PM, said:

Doing that ruins assaults completely... think about it. If Heavy DPS is limited, then assaults cannot put out more dps than heavies, therefore all assaults can safely be sold, because there is now zero point to their existence (why bring a bigger, easier to hit, slower and less agile mech when it cant put out more firepower? Armour? don't make me laugh, im drinking tea and it will come out of my nose).

Id rather they didn't delete an entire weight class, personally - so im EXTREMELY happy to hear the whole idea is getting an abortion.

I included heavies in my post... But Alpha and dps need to be toned down and the worse offenders are the heavies and assault.

[Duke Nedo]

Gas Guzzler, on 26 October 2016 - 11:20 PM, said:

No, 450 meters is much shorter than 740. Also, you'll notice that those laser vomit builds are not the powerhouse they once were. They are heat capped quickly and situational. I definitely wouldn't consider those builds a problem that needs to be nerfed. Some mechs have the appeal of being able to boat lasers, and they should have their situational use rather than being nerfed to the ground by energy draw just because once in a while someone will be caught flat footed and take a big alpha from a heavy or assault. Clan laser vomit especially is not that hard to mitigate you just have to be on your toes. I don't think those laser vomit builds should be nerfed any more as they are already balanced and not over performing.

I did say almost. We use the loopholes for all they're worth, and I'd say in mid-range to close-range the GH has little impact as long as you have the hardpoints to support the loophole-builds. Current ghost heat mostly hurts hardpoints-starved mechs imo, (and of course the long-range laser alpha game).

I agree with what you're saying about balance really, but I don't think that invalidates a good implementation of ED. It's all in the implementation. The principle is, imo, sound and a step in the right direction as GH-systems go, but one needs to be very careful not to break things (inconsistently).

What I don't like about GH1 is that it's just based on currently possible boating builds and makes no sense what so ever to a new player. You have to go to a third party web site to find out what you can combine.

For example: For clans cERML, cERSL, cMPL and cSPL are capped at 6 because of gargoyles, novas and executioners, but for IS you can combine 6 ML with 6 MPL, because no mech has 12 E hardpoints. Just doesn't make sense. It's full of that. LBX has no GH because people don't usually boat them, but cAC10's have GH, but AC10's don't. Heh, just realized that cUAC5's are not linked with cAC5's like it is for 10's and 20'... lol. Have to try that when I get home from work, 6x c(U)AC5 without GH.

Scrapping the whole system instead of analyzing what is working as intended and what needs to be improved, is imo a step backwards, again.

[Mcgral18]

Rampage, on 26 October 2016 - 11:09 PM, said:

No, take the over performing Mechs and tap them down a bit. Power creep is a thing. TTK is short enough already.

Both are needed, because you aren't getting the KDK-3 to Vindicator levels of power

[MrMadguy]

RestosIII, on 26 October 2016 - 11:56 PM, said:

Hold up now. I'm sleep deprived and posting from a phone, but.. did you just imply that long range weaponry like LLas/PPCs/Gauss are equal at short range with heavy AC's and SRMs? Please fight a Splat Dog or brawler Atlas at close range. Eight now. I'm waiting.



Also, did you just say light mechs shouldn't have long range weaponry? If so: WHY. Why do you hate the poor underaged mechs?!?! They're bad enough already!

Disclaimer: If you were not claiming either of these, you will be entitled to a 50% off one-use coupon for any Diamond Shark product

I tried to say, that long range weapons should have some drawbacks. Such as much lower dps. And that Lights should have some drawbacks too - and range should be one of them. Cuz now things, like CER-LL-vomit, don't have any drawbacks, so brawlers can't even show their noses out of cover. Yeah, long range weapons should allow you to do some damage from safe distance, but brawlers should be able to counter them somehow - this damage should be "damage over time", not instant two-shot.

P.S. Starsiege. Yeah, game was crappy, but at least Dynamix know, how to design UI. Sorry for pictures - whole Internet don't have better ones, lol. No MechLab picture, sorry.

[Bud Crue]

I wouldn't have minded ED in the form of Ghost Heat or 2.0 or 2.1...I forget which...the version early on where it the current weapons based ghost heat was replaced with a more generally applicable ghost heat applied to alphas over 30 and everything else remained the same. That would have been fine. Players could adapt. No biggie.

But then when they started doing things like, mucking with ranges, gauss performance, damage values, SRM spread, modifying heat characteristics for no apparent rational reason, etc. It became clear that the "fix" was worse than the problem. I honestly have no idea what the goal or value of the later iterations of ED was for or directed at other than a possible desire to make the game mechanic as complex and abstract as possible. Maybe it was some sort of form of electronic performance art?

Anyway, I am glad that PGI called a halt to this boondoggle, however I encourage them to try again. But in the future try this: Do one thing at a time and do it slowly. Change only one variable at a time. It is how good system testing...any system testing...is done.

[Widowmaker1981]

DAYLEET, on 27 October 2016 - 12:14 AM, said:

I included heavies in my post... But Alpha and dps need to be toned down and the worse offenders are the heavies and assault.

If ED limits heavy DPS, then by definition it limits assault DPS to the same value as heavy DPS because nothing in the system differentiates between mechs or weight classes. Thus my point that Assaults would become pointless, due to no longer having any reason to exist.

If you need to increase TTK (i dont think we do, but still) then the way to do it is by reducing weapon damage, because that doesnt screw an entire weightclass. Assaults have to be able to output more firepower than heavies.

[The6thMessenger]

They'd probably push ED still. While i hope not to get it at all, at least they'd do something to make it better if they're going to do it at all.

[Duke Nedo]

Widowmaker1981, on 27 October 2016 - 03:24 AM, said:

If ED limits heavy DPS, then by definition it limits assault DPS to the same value as heavy DPS because nothing in the system differentiates between mechs or weight classes. Thus my point that Assaults would become pointless, due to no longer having any reason to exist.

If you need to increase TTK (i dont think we do, but still) then the way to do it is by reducing weapon damage, because that doesnt screw an entire weightclass. Assaults have to be able to output more firepower than heavies.

I would have assumed that PGI would give a higher ED capacity to bigger mechs, anything else would make no sense at all like you say there... a flat ED-roof would never work, at all. I would also like all mechs to have their ED capacity set individually to help some poor chassi. For example Awesomes could have an ED capacity that is larger than the other 80-85-tonners because Brick.

Perhaps I am naive, but I would totally expect these values to be tweaked.

[BattleBunny]

If PGI implements anything that makes major changes to the gameplay at this stage some people will adapt while others will leave.

At this stage in the game, with the dwindling player base as it is, this game CANNOT AFFORD to lose more players.

With that in mind I think any change to core mechanics is a bad thing.

So.
Now.
Can we have new maps or gamemode or maybe a new weapon system or something? You know. Content?

[Widowmaker1981]

Duke Nedo, on 27 October 2016 - 03:40 AM, said:

I would have assumed that PGI would give a higher ED capacity to bigger mechs, anything else would make no sense at all like you say there... a flat ED-roof would never work, at all. I would also like all mechs to have their ED capacity set individually to help some poor chassi. For example Awesomes could have an ED capacity that is larger than the other 80-85-tonners because Brick.

Perhaps I am naive, but I would totally expect these values to be tweaked.

That would solve that particular issue, but there has never been any talk from PGI on that front and its been a flat value on every edition of the PTS, so i do not share your optimism there.

Also doesnt solve the other issues that ED promotes boating and destroys loads of builds that do not need to be destroyed.

The fact is that the idea of linking every weapon type together in a penalty system is a BAD CONCEPT.

[LordNothing]

on one hand yay, on the other hand meh.

i didnt hate energy draw, what i hated was all the other crap it dragged down with it. they should have stuck with the meat of the mechanic instead of roll a bunch of sweeping balance changes into it. 30 point alpha was a good mark, but the recharge was too quick. it should have been based on the cycle time of 30 damage in medium lasers. it should have takeb 3 or 4 seconds to refill the bar. take it a step further for my similar 3bar concept it starts becoming both deep and intuitive. that they shot it down for now, great, it needs work.

as for the meh, i hate to see pgi piss away resources like that, weeks of testing for naught. they need to stop letting russ design all the subsustems for the game. stop handing beer soaked napkins with broken flowcharts on them to your script kiddies can implement them poorly. get some real design talent, not someone with a bunch of fluff on their resume (and certainly not russ). so back to the drawing board with ye. but they are wasting precious time, with 3 or so years on their license the clock is ticking and they dont have the momentum to get all their current plans in on time. we dont have the time for any more failures.

Edited by LordNothing, 27 October 2016 - 03:50 AM.

[Stone Wall]

Any balance/content is placed on hold so they can release 3 Mech Packs a month.