Jump to content

Give Lore Damage/heat A Test Server Chance

Balance

259 replies to this topic

#21 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 04:24 PM

View PostShifty McSwift, on 19 October 2017 - 02:52 PM, said:


Those cooldowns are good except for that difference between ISERML and CERML, surely that would need to be narrowed a bit (add .75 seconds to ISERML, and reduce clanerml by .5 seconds)? IDK, I would just want that pulse vs normal laser cooldown rate to be substantially distinct, and I think that near 2.5 seconds for medium pulse is perfect.


I see your point there, but I'd rather just change the mechanics of pulse lasers entirely. PGI wants pulse to be DPS lasers? Then turn them into continuous strobes, e.g. a LPL can fire pulses at a rate of 8 times per second and each pulse does 1 damage for 0.85 heat, and you can fire for as long as you have the heat capacity to keep it going. Meanwhile, standard lasers are what we have now, single shot beams that focus more on a single surge of damage with a sizable gap between shots.

Really, the only reason to stick to the TT values is to ease your workload. You let TT fix the values for size, weight, damage, and heat, and you only have to worry about cool-down, duration, ghost groupings, and the supporting infrastructure (e.g. heatsinks). It can work, I just don't know if I'd enjoy the interactions the resulting values would create.

#22 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 04:48 PM

I would consider a continuous strobe to be a nerf rather than a buff, since you need a lot of face time to do significant damage.


My IS-LPL has the DPS of 7xC-ERML. What's the gap based on today's MWO?

Edited by Nightbird, 19 October 2017 - 04:52 PM.


#23 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 19 October 2017 - 04:52 PM

View PostNightbird, on 19 October 2017 - 04:48 PM, said:

I would consider a continuous strobe to be a nerf rather than a buff, since you need a lot of face time to do significant damage.

Naturally, some kind of increase to DPS and/or reduction to HPS would have to accompany a continuous-fire pulse laser rework.

#24 Shifty McSwift

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 05:03 PM

View PostYeonne Greene, on 19 October 2017 - 04:24 PM, said:


I see your point there, but I'd rather just change the mechanics of pulse lasers entirely. PGI wants pulse to be DPS lasers? Then turn them into continuous strobes, e.g. a LPL can fire pulses at a rate of 8 times per second and each pulse does 1 damage for 0.85 heat, and you can fire for as long as you have the heat capacity to keep it going. Meanwhile, standard lasers are what we have now, single shot beams that focus more on a single surge of damage with a sizable gap between shots.

Really, the only reason to stick to the TT values is to ease your workload. You let TT fix the values for size, weight, damage, and heat, and you only have to worry about cool-down, duration, ghost groupings, and the supporting infrastructure (e.g. heatsinks). It can work, I just don't know if I'd enjoy the interactions the resulting values would create.


Hmm, perhaps, but one of the main reasons I like that ~2.5 cooldown time is that it allows a player to properly exercise twisting between volleys, without feeling the need to face tank or face hug for the best DPS out of the gun. Which would make those timing differences between assault and medium twist speeds in general the focus there, and in general make them great brawling weapons.

A 1 second cooldown is nice for a light to be able to swing about between volleys for example, but is no way enough time for an assault to twist between volleys, so for them it becomes a face tank sort of weapon.

Edited by Shifty McSwift, 19 October 2017 - 05:04 PM.


#25 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 05:58 PM

I see a 1 sec cool down as an opportunistic weapon. For you, it is always ready to fire. For your enemy, it's never safe to twist back. If the situation calls for it, you keep discharging your weapon. If your opponent shoots, twist and spread damage, and then safely twist back when you know they have a 2.5-3.5sec cooldown.

#26 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 07:57 PM

View PostNightbird, on 19 October 2017 - 04:48 PM, said:

I would consider a continuous strobe to be a nerf rather than a buff, since you need a lot of face time to do significant damage.


Depends on the damage rate and heat generation rate. The advantage of continuous damage is that your opponent has to buck up and eat it if they want to shoot back, else retreat to cover. With the right balance between heat and damage, a strobe could be very good on a push 'Mech using some form of ballistic weaponry like UAC/2 or 5, maybe even RAC/2 and 5 if they get their own mechanical changes.

Quote

My IS-LPL has the DPS of 7xC-ERML. What's the gap based on today's MWO?


The gap is 4.2 DPS.

View PostShifty McSwift, on 19 October 2017 - 05:03 PM, said:


Hmm, perhaps, but one of the main reasons I like that ~2.5 cooldown time is that it allows a player to properly exercise twisting between volleys, without feeling the need to face tank or face hug for the best DPS out of the gun. Which would make those timing differences between assault and medium twist speeds in general the focus there, and in general make them great brawling weapons.

A 1 second cooldown is nice for a light to be able to swing about between volleys for example, but is no way enough time for an assault to twist between volleys, so for them it becomes a face tank sort of weapon.


Sure, but that's a role that the standard lasers could be tweaked for.

#27 Ibrandul Mike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Referee
  • The Referee
  • 1,913 posts

Posted 20 October 2017 - 03:19 AM

View PostShifty McSwift, on 19 October 2017 - 02:34 PM, said:


I took note of those cooldowns, as they seem much more in line with the expectations I had with certain patches, though the c-erml cooldown seems very high... Is this some kind of secret hint at things to come? Or am I just reading into this too much.


You are just reading into it too much. There weren't screenshots of the spreadsheet at that time, so I just took the table given by the OP and made a table in the forums out of it.
And sorry to destroy that dream... but Volunteer Moderator generally are not in the loop for changes :(

#28 Shifty McSwift

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts

Posted 20 October 2017 - 04:02 AM

View PostIbrandul Mike, on 20 October 2017 - 03:19 AM, said:


You are just reading into it too much. There weren't screenshots of the spreadsheet at that time, so I just took the table given by the OP and made a table in the forums out of it.
And sorry to destroy that dream... but Volunteer Moderator generally are not in the loop for changes Posted Image


Ah, I hadn't seen the OP values as the way they were originally typed made my eyes sore (readable now), I see now you copied the stats there, not from elsewhere.

#29 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 20 October 2017 - 06:26 AM

Another balancing point example: 6xIS-ERML vs 6xC-ERML:

In MWO, they have the same D/H, Clan version has 40% more alpha damage, 20% better DPS and DPS/ton. Straight upgrade.

In my suggested values, Clan has 40% more D/H, and 40% more alpha, but has to offset alpha if want to avoid ghost heat. If trading, Clan version still better, but in a slugging match IS races ahead with 50% better DPS and with better duration can focus damage better and twist to spread more damage. This advantage only lasts a few rounds due to the IS version being much hotter, then the Clan version leads again having better heat efficiency in an endurance match.

Basically, opening volley advantage Clan, next few rounds advantage IS, overtime advantage Clan. Perfect? Probably not, but better IMO than current balance.

#30 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 20 October 2017 - 11:01 PM

First post updated with some ballistic weapons. Are they more or less balanced than today?

I also changed the presentation style, let me know if you like this more.

Edited by Nightbird, 20 October 2017 - 11:02 PM.


#31 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 08:00 AM

Fixed a bunch of typos and math issues identified in the 10 class of weapons.

#32 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 08:38 AM

View PostNightbird, on 18 October 2017 - 07:16 PM, said:

Currently MWO's weapon damage and heat values deviate significantly from Battletech lore. This was done with the best of intentions for balance reasons, however I wonder if more dramatic tweaks to other parameters (cooldown, duration, velocity, etc) can lead to fair trade-offs between IS and Clan tech, leading to a unique piloting experience for both sides. This is different from our current direction of the same builds and combat strategies, except better with Clan tech. In other words, the goal is BOTH better game play balance & better lore adherence.

There's a number of things that could be contested in the actual lore although this is entirely true when comparing the lore as given in any specific year due to retcons, company changes, as well as interpretation (and the fact that the Clans are actually more accurate with their weapons in general compared to the IS even without the mounted 'aim assist' targeting computers.)

This said there are some interesting concepts in the explanations of the comparison. I may actually use some of the concepts in the Hypothetical thread as well as in the upcoming animations.

---

Some ideas worth sharing from the hypothetical thread and other places when given the concept of a literal lore-and-tabletop translation into a realtime simulation...

Laser damage per TacOps (more damage up close, less damage at the weapon's 'long range' [MWO's maximum full damage range]).
Tidbit more from lore Lasers affected by air particles (heavy smoke/fire, blizzard and sandstorms will cause decreased laser weapon performance in general. Includes smoke and heat emissions caused by combining many lasers at once fired at the exact same spot (causing the preference to spread lasers out to a general area.) Lack of atmosphere significantly increases laser performance in terms of both range and damage but in space it is much more difficult to expel heat.

(Keep in mind, the translation also intends to keep damage 1:1 and armor 1:1 from the source material while defining a weapon class as stats 'within 5 or 10 seconds', as such lasers are split into several shots over time = one rating of damage, Clans are superior in damage rating but require more shots and hits than IS equivalents;
also standard lasers are divided [per 1980s written lore though it has no tabletop effect] into 'zap' and 'peeeeew' categories aka 0.1-0.4 second 'Halo Laser / Battletech PC Game' types [brief delay in firing for a powering up sound and a heavy hitting quick beam] and Star Trek Phasers [A sustained beam of 1 to 2 seconds]
This also assists in the creation and realization of the weapon variants in Battletech lore, of which of just standard Inner Sphere Medium Laser there are over 66 unique models that do roughly 5 damage for 3 heat with 1 ton. If each of these is purely unique compared to the 80+ models out there, then they require firing patterns).

In summary, the IS lasers could have its damage divided into fewer shots to get its results while the Clans may be required to make more frequent hits in a similar amount of time to get their damage.

I'd get into more but I'm not sure how many cares are given here.

Again, praise for the attempt to explain the design mentalities, some of which I may use in places where the lore I go by is either lacking or craptastic.
---
This continues into mention of the hypothetical thread and the concept..
Spoiler

Edited by Koniving, 21 October 2017 - 11:41 AM.


#33 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 09:00 AM

How did I miss this thread?

I was doing something similar and came up with a few key factors.

You can balance IS bigger size/tonnage by giving them better DPS and lower heat, etc. Weapons you can balance a number of ways. However the engines and tonnage available differences and slots available just kill it. With lots of hardpoints plus small/light weight equipment you can do things like 8mpl on a 50 ton mech and the DHS to cool it, which the IS just flat out can't do effectively.

The reality is that IS weapons, engines, DHS, endo/ff have to be significantly better. Otherwise even if you balance weapon stats Clans can bring more in the same tonnage of mech.

#34 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,518 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 11:44 AM

View PostMischiefSC, on 21 October 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

The reality is that IS weapons, engines, DHS, endo/ff have to be significantly better. Otherwise even if you balance weapon stats Clans can bring more in the same tonnage of mech.


My suggestions are in line with this, in that I've made IS weapons of the same type but larger and heavier "better" than their clan equivalents, but the tonnage difference allows a Clan warrior to add more weapons to offset this.

What I tried hard to do is make 'better' situational. For example, IS UACs are better than Clan UACs at optimal range, but the advantage is negligible at a closer engagement distance.

Edited by Nightbird, 21 October 2017 - 11:46 AM.


#35 davoodoo

    Member

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

Posted 21 October 2017 - 12:10 PM

View PostVonBruinwald, on 19 October 2017 - 07:24 AM, said:


Alternatively, you could just remove the clans; balance achieved!

Nowhere near close.

You have useless mechs, useless weapons, silly quirkening, gh breaking loadouts and so on.

Edited by davoodoo, 21 October 2017 - 12:11 PM.


#36 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 12:19 PM

View PostMischiefSC, on 21 October 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

Otherwise even if you balance weapon stats Clans can bring more in the same tonnage of mech.


The fact that tweaking weapon stats alone won't really achieve balance is very true.

There are other aspects one can address.
For example Clan weapons are meant to be impeded by the fact that mechs have a very limited thermal threshold. 30 units is very restricting to alpha strikes. Clan DHS help them with DPS. IS low heat helps them with DPS though their heatsinks can't be stacked as thoroughly as Clan DHS.

But it goes a bit farther. Overriding in lore has nothing to do with shutdowns. At 80% heat, weapons tend to lock out in order to prevent you from hitting the point of shutting down. The IS override the weapons lockout all the time. Very common tactic. The Clans do not. While the Clans do generally have better stuff and it is often made out of better, lighter materials and engineered in superior ways, the fact is the Clans have very finite resources, after all they have significantly less than 100 planets, while the Inner Sphere has over 800,000 planets many of which are constantly being hit for resources. Thus risking damage to the weapon systems or the mech is generally not done just to get in an extra shot.

When they do shut down, mechs aren't out for a fraction of a second for a tiny slap on the wrist, it is a very disgraceful display of complete helplessness. Mechs don't stand in place and slouch, their muscular structures actually seize and lock in place, in whatever position they happen to be in (even mid stride) and the shutdown is sudden and with little warning beyond the heat warning at 80% and weapon lockout. At that point it isn't a slap on the wrist but a sledgehammer to the face as the mech can then be completely at the mercy of kinetic fire or its own posture and fall over for additional damage. It is also a situation that lasts until the heat is brought down to 46.667% heat. For some alpha strikes that often happen in MWO, that would mean shutting down and waiting several minutes. For example the Dire Star might be waiting 8 minutes unable to boot. 3 PPCs at once... 3 LPL + 6 ER ML? Yeah laser vomit would be gone, in favor of spamming lasers in volleys of two or three at a time.

Or another factor... Engines themselves. We know that MWO has engine health from the repair and rearm days. This is currently ticked to work but being at 0 health does nothing beyond removing the engine from the crit roll pool. What if it did? What if each slot consumed had its own health (or say the side torso had X health, the CT had X, and any combination of damage that hits a certain amount causes engine death. Xl engine slot size is intended to show fragility. Lets play with that a bit ignoring a certain obvious issue in that the XL engine for the IS happens to be at the bottom of the barrel. What if the Clan XL engine had a health of X The IS xl engine had a health of X+20% but that health could be destroyed in a single side torso. The IS Light Engine has X+10%. The Clan and IS STD engine has a health of X+50%.

There are other things that could be addressed.
The Clans do not believe in cowardly acts such as indirect fire. LRM difference? The old lore is they never fire indirectly and so missiles are always fired straight at the target. The IS LRMs are fired up and over (almost always) and thus the 180m accurate range penalty.
The trade off: Clan LRMs fire directly at target, do not arc, cannot fire on targets out of line of sight. No minimum range and no damage reducing ********. IS LRMs fire up and over (no matter what) and due to poor turning are unable to effectively fire at targets sub 180 meters. It is possible to run underneath IS LRMs if you are fast enough and either close enough or have enough time.
The more recent lore is the IS has a safety system, but could hotload their missiles by arming them in the tubes. Making hits at less than 180 meters without hotloading requires them to set the detonation range before firing which is NOT an easy process and can be off.
Clans are always hotloaded.
The issue with hotloaded LRMs is if the launcher is damaged in any way (more significant with through armor crits), the entire salvo of missiles will detonate inside the launcher.
Thus: IS has a minimum damage range of 180 meters. The setting system won't happen, but a toggle for hotloading can happen. Hotloading leaves the weapon system vulnerable similar to a Gauss Rifle. Any damage to the launcher instantly destroys it and detonates a single volley of ammo. The Clans are always hotloaded.

Honestly the Clan/IS balance as far as laser vomit seemed best when the IS had untouched double heatsinks, and Clans had significant threshold (heat cap) reductions with only slight cooling buffs to compensate. So tinkering with that may yield some interesting results.

Edited by Koniving, 21 October 2017 - 12:21 PM.


#37 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 12:26 PM

Koniving, crits do not work as a balancing tool. Invisible health pools that are at the complete mercy of RNG are nothing except frustrating to manage for the player. Nobody is going to like keeling over and dying when their side torso still displayed yellow internals.

#38 davoodoo

    Member

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

Posted 21 October 2017 - 12:31 PM

View PostFupDup, on 19 October 2017 - 02:18 PM, said:

12-heat ERLLs, particularly on the IS side, are an instant lolno.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...608303d5fade46e
2 heat per turn

View PostKoniving, on 21 October 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

For example the Dire Star might be waiting 8 minutes unable to boot. 3 PPCs at once... 3 LPL + 6 ER ML? Yeah laser vomit would be gone, in favor of spamming lasers in volleys of two or three at a time.

I find it rather interesting.
8 minutes you say??

even assuming minimal of 10 engine dhs or 2 heat/s

so to bring it from nothing to 8 minutes shutdown it would require you to fire 480+14=494 heat or 33 erppcs, not that it would result in meltdown.

Edited by davoodoo, 21 October 2017 - 12:49 PM.


#39 Shifty McSwift

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 12:37 PM

View PostKoniving, on 21 October 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

There are other things that could be addressed.
The Clans do not believe in cowardly acts such as indirect fire. LRM difference? The old lore is they never fire indirectly and so missiles are always fired straight at the target. The IS LRMs are fired up and over (almost always) and thus the 180m accurate range penalty.
The trade off: Clan LRMs fire directly at target, do not arc, cannot fire on targets out of line of sight. No minimum range and no damage reducing ********. IS LRMs fire up and over (no matter what) and due to poor turning are unable to effectively fire at targets sub 180 meters. It is possible to run underneath IS LRMs if you are fast enough and either close enough or have enough time.
The more recent lore is the IS has a safety system, but could hotload their missiles by arming them in the tubes. Making hits at less than 180 meters without hotloading requires them to set the detonation range before firing which is NOT an easy process and can be off.
Clans are always hotloaded.
The issue with hotloaded LRMs is if the launcher is damaged in any way (more significant with through armor crits), the entire salvo of missiles will detonate inside the launcher.
Thus: IS has a minimum damage range of 180 meters. The setting system won't happen, but a toggle for hotloading can happen. Hotloading leaves the weapon system vulnerable similar to a Gauss Rifle. Any damage to the launcher instantly destroys it and detonates a single volley of ammo. The Clans are always hotloaded.


That is a very interesting thought on how to apply that clan honor disadvantage idea to at least missile systems through their functionality, and I quite like that notion of IS missiles min range being about the arc, instead of missiles hilariously bouncing off mechs like nerf darts, they just land at 180m (possibly hitting other mechs).

#40 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 12:38 PM

I wouldn't go with crits. You need two fresh mechs going toe to toe have comparable odds of winning. Alpha damage > DPS, so if IS has a DPS edge it needs to be significant. If I have had to eat 40 pts more total damage closing with a Clan mech I need to make that up literally inside 4 seconds when I corner him or it's an irrelevant advantage.

If Clans can alpha at 60 pts IS needs to be doing about 50 with a significantly shorter burn and then a full 20% DPS advantage. Otherwise you're dead before you can catch up. Conversely giving IS a bigger small laser/SRM alpha and Clans better small laser/SRM DPS is good too. You want some places where roles switch or the sides get stale.





12 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 12 guests, 0 anonymous users