251 replies to this topic

[Metachanic]

Technical clarification on the way ghost heat limits and linking work.

Gauss rifles and PPCs currently linked for ghost heat purposes (gauss rifles count as PPCs, and vice versa), with a weapon limit of two. It is possible to arrange the limits and links to allow any of the following;

Unlink Gauss and PPCs, set limit to 2. Allows any number of Gauss + dual PPCs, but not triple PPCs.

Maintain Gauss and PPC link, set limit to 3. Allows single Gauss + dual PPCs, triple PPCs, but not dual Gauss + dual PPCs.

It is NOT possible, as far as we understand, to allow dual PPCs + single Gauss, but exclude dual Gauss + single PPC, (edit) without adding ghost heat to dual Gauss by itself.

Edited by Metachanic, 11 February 2018 - 03:47 PM.

[Deathlike]

I want it back. It needs to be an option.

Back when it was in heavy use, the problem then with respect to balance was that it was the BEST WAY TO WIN due to EVERYTHING ELSE, including LASER VOMIT was not simply not as good at the time.

There's also this subset of people that claims "it was easy" to do, but when challenged to do it, they were not likely to perform it. Like all things in life or in a game, you have to actually practice it. Some people need to actually do the things that claim "this is easy" when the reality is that they demonstrably can't... in some cases failing miserably at stationary targets.

It's only a debate if we have people that don't know/care/want to care that complain about it.

Edited by Deathlike, 11 February 2018 - 12:09 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Metachanic, on 11 February 2018 - 12:08 PM, said:

It is NOT possible, as far as we understand, to allow dual PPCs + single Gauss, but exclude dual Gauss + single PPC.

Yes it is.

In the simplest terms, ghost heat always punishes based on the smallest group and the highest penalty.

If you de-link PPCs and Gauss, limit Gauss to 1 before penalty but with a massive heat-spike for firing two, then you've enabled 1 Gauss + 2 PPC without enabling 2 Gauss + any PPC

I wouldn't say this is a desirable solution, but it is technically doable.

[Deathlike]

Yeonne Greene, on 11 February 2018 - 12:13 PM, said:

Yes it is.

In the simplest terms, ghost heat always punishes based on the smallest group and the highest penalty.

If you de-link PPCs and Gauss, limit Gauss to 1 before penalty but with a massive heat-spike for firing two, then you've enabled 1 Gauss + 2 PPC without enabling 2 Gauss + any PPC

I wouldn't say this is a desirable solution, but it is technically doable.

Coding properly is Lostech. With that said, PGI's kludge solution may work the way as they described it to be.

[Johnathan Tanner]

Yeonne Greene, on 11 February 2018 - 11:37 AM, said:

There is one more solution for YES:

4. 1x Gauss + 2xPPC is allowed. 3x PPC is not allowed. 2x Gauss is not allowed (either ridiculously steep penalty or charge block). 2x Gauss + 2x PPC is not allowed (because 2x Gauss is not allowed).

Incidentally, this solution also nerfs gigantic Gauss-Vomit alphas from the Clan side; the MCII-DS would be limited to only 75 using HLL, 63 using ERLL. It would also, however, nerf the IS versions of the same, e.g. Nightstar can't do 63 but is now stuck doing 52. But the Banshee can still get to 67.

Im not to sure about GH on 2 gauss by its self. Ignoring that increasing charge time within these parameters sounds alot like energy draw.

I feel like option #4 hurts build diversity as much as it helps but I think the big loser would be the IS which cant boat as much fire power due to hard points low mounts and weight of equipment. I dont think we should hurt the 2 gauss jaeger, The catapult k2 and the 4erml 2 gauss warhammer, Just to curb the deathstrikes.

I do very much support 2 ppc-1 gauss/2 gauss-1 ppc.

[Fleeb the Mad]

I vote no.

The main reason is that present ghost heat groups are not made up for competing with 45-point trigger pulls. I personally don't want to empower long range gameplay even more than it presently is by changing ghost heat groupings on all the associated weapons to make it a balanced solution.

Two Gauss, two cER PPC, 3 ERLLas and then 2 cERLLas and 2 ER PPC all top out at 30 damage or (significantly) less. There is only one set of these that are effective when used together and that's Gauss + PPC. No matter which flavor of combination you choose, it's a 45 damage front-loaded hit that's far and above what the other ghost heat combinations are balanced for.

Including Gauss + 2 PPC, 2 Gauss + PPC or 2 Gauss + 2 PPC necessitates changing all of the above to provide more competitive options. If you do not, then long range gameplay returns to being a Gauss + PPC snipe fest as it was before the energy rebalance, as it's a one-sidedly better combination on most mechs. It's also rather biased in favor of Clan machines which have a far easier time coming up with the payload and heat sink needs.

I'm against this personally because long range dominated gameplay is frankly static and uninteresting. All solutions to that particular problem involve power creep by making mid and short range options more powerful. Much more powerful than they presently are if long range receives a substantial buff. Creating a perpetual buffing cycle will just take us right back to where we already were, with TTK problems and no obvious solutions except widespread nerfing.

Honestly, it's simpler for everybody to just leave it gone.

[Dogstar]

There's an easy fix to all this gauss+ppc vs laservomit that people just won't consider.

Limit damage output to 30 per second

Don't allow weapon groups to be created that come to more than 30 damage, don't allow any more weapons to be fired for a whole second once 30 points has been fired.

Applies to all weapons, all the time. Very simple to understand for even the biggest potato. Very simple to work with for even the most skilled player. Fair.

Completely unacceptable to this community...

Edited by Dogstar, 11 February 2018 - 12:35 PM.

[Nema Nabojiv]

3 of any kind sounds like a good solution to see where it goes and how will it affect the meta. Still weaker than it was before GH for those who think it is a bad thing.

[Y E O N N E]

Deathlike, on 11 February 2018 - 12:16 PM, said:

Coding properly is Lostech. With that said, PGI's kludge solution may work the way as they described it to be.

What I proposed doesn't require any new coding. It's working exactly within what's already in the game, all they have to do is change what's grouped with what and what the heat penalties are, which they've demonstrated they can still do.

Dogstar, on 11 February 2018 - 12:19 PM, said:

There's an easy fix to all this gauss+ppc vs laservomit that people just won't consider.

Limit damage output to 30 per second

Don't allow weapon groups to be created that come to more than 30 damage, don't allow any more weapons to be fired for a whole second once 30 points has been fired.

Applies to all weapons, all the time. Very simple to understand for even the biggest potato. Very simple to work with for even the most skilled player. Fair.

It has to be 35-40 or there's no point, because that still prevents 2 PPC + 1 Gauss, which is what some of us want back.

Johnathan Tanner, on 11 February 2018 - 12:17 PM, said:

Im not to sure about GH on 2 gauss by its self. Ignoring that increasing charge time within these parameters sounds alot like energy draw.

I feel like option #4 hurts build diversity as much as it helps but I think the big loser would be the IS which cant boat as much fire power due to hard points low mounts and weight of equipment. I dont think we should hurt the 2 gauss jaeger, The catapult k2 and the 4erml 2 gauss warhammer, Just to curb the deathstrikes.

I do very much support 2 ppc-1 gauss/2 gauss-1 ppc.

Increasing charge time? Where was that mentioned? And that was not at all a part of Energy Draw.

And yes, Option 4 does hurt as much as it helps. That's why I don't like it. I'm just putting it forth for the sake of transparency.

[Seranov]

Honestly, I never even noticed folks using GaussPPC before ghost heat was added for them (and I was low T3 when it was, iirc, so there should have been SOME folks doing it) so I can't say it really bothered me. It IS pretty frustrating to get whacked for a ton of damage from 600m away, but that can be fixed with judicious use of cover.

I don't really feel strongly about it either way, but I do know that the Gauss Vomit/Laser Vomit stuff that is so prevalent today doesn't really bother me too much, either. I'm more frustrated that it's so difficult to get into short range to brawl, rather than that medium or long range weapons do too much damage. That's a different conversation entirely, though, so pretend I didn't mention it.

[CainenEX]

I have placed my vote for the return of Gauss PPC but please note it would be only for the x3 cerppc version. Thank you for putting this together.

[Johnathan Tanner]

Yeonne Greene, on 11 February 2018 - 12:26 PM, said:

Increasing charge time? Where was that mentioned? And that was not at all a part of Energy Draw.

Apologies I misread.

[Dogstar]

Yeonne Greene, on 11 February 2018 - 12:26 PM, said:

It has to be 35-40 or there's no point, because that still prevents 2 PPC + 1 Gauss, which is what some of us want back.

Could you not just fire them one after the other?! After all it's meant to be a weapon combo for skilled players so why on earth are they complaining about having to aim for a whole second - or is it because they're too scared to expose themselves so they're only interested in the most OP weapon combo? After all any idiot can use laser vomit and do well - look at me as an example.

That said I'm sure most people would be willing to accommodate a 40 point limit per second - although at that point we're right back to where we are now so why bother?

Scratch that, it _has_ to be a 30 damage per second limit. 40 damage per second makes 60-80pt laser vomit alphas that re such a pain right now perfectly viable whereas 30 dps limit means that a 1.5 sec burn laser alpha would be limited to 45 points. 30 dps prevents ridiculous random out of the blue headshots too.

I'm sorry if it caps skilled players damage output but I'm sure they'll be able to cope.

tldr: a flat _no_ to removing gauss+ppc limits

Edited by Dogstar, 11 February 2018 - 01:05 PM.

[Deathlike]

Yeonne Greene, on 11 February 2018 - 12:26 PM, said:

What I proposed doesn't require any new coding. It's working exactly within what's already in the game, all they have to do is change what's grouped with what and what the heat penalties are, which they've demonstrated they can still do.

Again, you're dependent on PGI getting it right. Since Ghost Heat on AC2s (now not a thing due to AC2s never being a real thing in the first place), it is demonstrably obvious that they couldn't do it correctly. In that instance, all firings of the AC2 would be considered +1 (AC2) weapon, instead of separate instances of firing (it's really a weapon's total # check instead of when it is fired - though it's a little more complicated) with that .5 second window.

I'm not saying "it's not doable" at all. I'm saying PGI is not capable of doing it correctly. This is a very fine distinction.

Edited by Deathlike, 11 February 2018 - 12:47 PM.

[FireStoat]

Edit - I was against the idea, but you know what? I am tired of Heavy Gauss Cyclops mechs walking around and just owning things because PGI has ghost heat limits in place for other pinpoint weapons but decided this one was okay.

I'm fine with 3 PPC's being fired, 2 PPC + 1 gauss, or 2 gauss + 1 PPC, AND I would like to see AC 20's of all kinds be able to fire without ghost heat in pairs, AND I would like to see up to 3 AC 10's of all kinds be able to fire at once without ghost heat.

If Heavy Gauss is going to stay the way it is, hell with it. PGI's opened up a door that they should really look over a second time.

Edited by FireStoat, 11 February 2018 - 01:07 PM.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

Personally I say no to return of Gauss+PPC. 1GR+1PPC is 25 damage-30 damage which is acceptable but nobody would do that, but if that isn't allowed it should be, this also tells you how much I use those two systems together.
So why should something like 1GR+1PPC be allowed by not 2GR+1PPC or 2GR+2PPC? Because the ability to put so much damage in one spot is bad for the game, more so with the range it can be done at nullifies traditional ways to counter play in a shooter. Which would be quickly move in and crush the enemy using it.

So why should 1GR+1PPC be fine, because it does at most 30 damage. 30 damage is, while a large punch and enough to breach on lights, and bad armor lay out potato player mediums, won't do the 40-45-60 damage that larger combination of GR+PPC can do. Now I believe cERPPC's still do splash so their pin point damage is still 10, so 2xGR+2xcERPPC would be 15+15+10+10, but that is still 50 damage you can't twist through, no amount of skill can protect you from that. It is instead "wait for a friendly to get hit with it then move" sort of situation. With lasers, LB's, UAC's, RAC's, SRM's and missiles you can twist through the damage, with GR+PPC it will hit at nearly the same time and the same spot as a result from often a point where retaliation will be moot unless you have the same weapon system and fire near the same time.

PPC's of all types should be linked so they only ghost heat if you push out more than 30 Pin Point damage. This would mean 3xcERPPC's at once, 2xHeavy PPC's, 3xERPPC, 3xPPC, 6xLightPPC, 3xSNPPC, or any combination of those IS weapons that add up to 30 pin point damage, instead of the current hard limit of two. This allows for PPC's to work on par with twin gauss damage wise, though their heat is, well, terrible, and Light PPC's need to be addressed with a shorter cool down to make them more worth while for their damage to tonnage to burn time ratio. But that is a separate topic.

TL;DR, 2GR+nPPC, and GR+(1+n)PPC builds are unhealthy for the game due to their ability to put out damage without the ability for retaliation and the ability to strip the armor off of a 65 ton mech's side torso in one shot (without quirks or survival tree obviously) and most of the CT of a 50 ton mech.

[Deathlike]

FireStoat, on 11 February 2018 - 12:59 PM, said:

Against. My reason is rooted in having played a fair amount of Group Quick Drops and constantly facing Gauss + PPC in multiple coordinated enemy mechs that would fire at nearly the same time so that one of your friendly mechs is popped basically for free at long range.
If you go back and look at older Youtube videos posted by Faction War players as well, you'll see this all over, both in simple group drops as well as FW deck drops.

The weapon combo simply rewarded skilled players who put the practice in. Is this such a horrible thing? In my gut I'd say 'not really', but it IS a horrible thing when it's all skilled players were taking to the exclusion of all other weapon systems and mech types.

If PGI can return Gauss + PPC combo fire in such a manner that it doesn't sideline missiles, laser vomit, and ballistics like we had before, then sure. I can't trust either PGI or the community to do that well however.

When a group is timid, they allow everything and anything to work effectively (this includes LRMs). It's the fundamental mechanic for winning and losing.

With a heavy poptart driven team, the correct answer is to close in thru cover, as if to brawl. Poptarting on its own is generally unsustainable due to heat considerations and very often a poptart isn't even capable of holding off that w/o considerable amounts of teamwork and kiting.


The thing is that people do not practice the basic counters to something like poptarting - which allow smarter teams to win w/o being challenged. Obviously, this is very heavily map dependent.

This is an education/practice/learn to play type of thing that does not regularly occur in this brown sea.

Edited by Deathlike, 11 February 2018 - 01:05 PM.

[Purusee]

I am in favor of gauss/ppc returning.
BUT, I must also admit, I did not even play during the times it was prevalent. So I don't know from direct experience as to how devastating within, or harmful to the game it was.

What I do know, however, is how heavily dominated most games seem by mechs with (mostly Clan) Laser weaponry.
Add to that a dose of Gauss, and you have what most in this thread compare the gauss/ppc combo with.
I also know that the former requires a few moments of "face time" more than the latter, which is an instant release of a bunch of damage.

To cut this short, and to not tangle myself in explanations of things most here already know:

I am curious about how this'd affect the current game, in its current state.
I am aware that people would rather return mechs to their former mobility and movement capabilities first, but I also know that I want to experience what people used to struggle with, and to see if I am capable of doing the same.
BUT, I would, as long as the mobility is as-is, prefer not to completely remove the linking of Gauss/PPC, but lift its restriction a bit. Just to test the current waters, and to see if it will return the game to a state many veterans despise so much.

[Spheroid]

I say bring it back. As I.S. I think brawling on Caustic would be more entertaining facing 12 Night Gyrs instead of 12 Linebackers or Orion IICs.

Some additional thoughts:

No ghostheat on 3xPPC/ERPPC
keep ghostheat on three or more cERPPC
Remove ghostheat on 2x Gauss + 2x ERPPC for I.S.
Remove ghostheat on 1x Gauss +2x cERPPC or 2x Gauss 1xcERPPC
Keep ghostheat on Clan pinpoint weapons that deliever 60 or more linked damage

Edited by Spheroid, 11 February 2018 - 01:34 PM.

[Draconis March]

In the context of the current laservomit snoozefest meta, Gauss PPC would be a good counter, rewarding positioning and aim even more. There needs to be more than one viable playstyle. Brawling also needs to be more viable, and would be more appealing by proxy if Gauss PPC returned.

CainenEX, on 11 February 2018 - 12:27 PM, said:

I have placed my vote for the return of Gauss PPC but please note it would be only for the x3 cerppc version. Thank you for putting this together.

So... IS gets shafted? Why?

Edited by Draconis March, 11 February 2018 - 01:23 PM.