215 replies to this topic

[Jack Shayu Walker]

You know even if PGI decides they don’t want to go back down to 40 heat, they could instead give the Clan Heavy Large Laser a duration and or cooldown buff and in exchange raise it’s heat such that it does push problem builds that use it over the line.

[Daurock]

Sjorpha, on 24 August 2018 - 06:12 AM, said:

1. 50 is too high to really adress any relevant high alpha builds, you can basically use the same laservomit metabuilds as on the live server.

2. Increasing dissipation equally for IS and Clan translates to an enormous buff to clan mechs because they can typically boat 24-27 cDHS while IS mechs are capped at 18-20. You need to make IS DHS a bit stronger than cDHS stronger to balance out this difference.

A more sensible PTS 2.1 would have been:
- Heat cap to 45 (or leave at 40)
- cDHS dissipation to 1.8

You also have a golden opportunity to finally give SHS a niche here, simply let SHS be the only heatsink type that increases the heat cap! That way you could have a real choice between boosted sustained DPS (with DHS) and boosted burst DPS (SHS)

It's nice that you are addressing agility but please make a proper graph of the agility between all mechs and make agility to weight progression sensible. If you have agility spikes on assaults that beats the agility on some mediums that isn't right and should be corrected.

It's fine to have different values for different mechs for flavour of course, but that should be differences within weight classes where one mech is better at twisting and another is better at accelerating and so forth. It shouldn't be so extreme as to make some mediums less agile than some assaults etc. That's just too inconsistent.

As much as i really want to believe that PGI can give IS and clan DHS a different values for dissipation, I'm not sure it's technically going to be possible. I have to think that they would have approached it at some time in the past if it was a technically easy thing to do, instead of going around on the fringes, like the heat skills in the tree, which they actually HAVE done in the past. If I had to guess, I wouldn't be surprised if the dissipation per sink number is hard-coded into the drop-down for SHS/DHS. (Much like the lock times are/were, causing the artemis fiasco currently going on.) No, I'm not a developer, but I am decent at reading tea leaves, and the fact that they've left it alone for so long is telling after some point.

As for agility - Agreed. It's just too strange to see a lot of assaults with the agility of a 50 tonner. To me, It doesn't make sense to buff the agility of any mech beyond the "average" mech 10 tons lighter. (or to nerf a mech beyond the average of a mech 10 tons heavier) If a mech is incapable of being balanced using that amount of extra agility, other means should be taken to boost Performance (Like added weapon or armor quirks)

Edited by Daurock, 24 August 2018 - 06:39 AM.

[dwwolf]

Do we really need more mobile heavies and assault mechs, other than a few selected niche chassis ( like victor, summoner, linebacker etc ) ?

[Navid A1]

Sjorpha, on 24 August 2018 - 06:12 AM, said:

1. 50 is too high to really adress any relevant high alpha builds, you can basically use the same laservomit metabuilds as on the live server and with more sustained DPS. Metabuilds like the 2HLL, 4cERML Hellbringer is stronger on the PTS than it is live. That's not right.

A common misconception is assuming that the PTS goal is to make high laser alphas impossible.
No.
The goal here is to make them unable to freely use that high alpha multiple times in a span of 20 seconds.
The the highest Clan laser alpha that can be fired right now remains around 70 which instantly pushes you to 95+% heat.
This is acceptable
In the graphs I posted. you see that a build is getting more damage after 80 seconds of constant firing, you have to ask yourself... is this how you play?
do you fire constantly for 80 seconds without even missing a millisecond, to always remain at 99% heat?

The answer is no!!!
The HBR in the PTS is not stronger since the time you need to fire constantly is about 20 seconds, and in that time span Live client is best, and PTS 2.1 is addressing it.

Sjorpha, on 24 August 2018 - 06:12 AM, said:

2. Increasing dissipation equally to 2.0 for IS and Clan translates to an enormous buff to clan mechs because they can typically boat 24-27 cDHS while IS mechs are capped at 18-20. You need to make IS DHS a bit stronger than cDHS stronger to balance out this difference. You already got that feedback by lots of people in PTS 2.0 so why isn't it addressed?

You are correct that IS DHS needs to be stronger than C-DHS.
You are wrong to think that this should be achieved by weakening the C-DHS

Sjorpha, on 24 August 2018 - 06:12 AM, said:

A more sensible PTS 2.1 would have been:
- Heat cap to 45 (or leave at 40)
- cDHS dissipation down to 1.8 or 1.7

Any heat cap lower than 50 and energy-based light mechs are removed form gameplay. 50 is the absolute minimum.
Also... regarding weaker clan DHS, see above.

[Shadowomega1]

FupDup, on 23 August 2018 - 05:55 PM, said:

Those aren't good examples. MW4 allowed huge alphas and MW3 had super dissipation that let you cool down quad Clan ERPPCs faster than they could generate heat (you would shut down for less than a second, then immediately start back up and have all your heat gone by the time the guns are reloaded).

Just got out of checking Mechwarrior 3, it takes 5 seconds to cool from 2 cERPPC with 10 engine 10 external DHS just like in the table top.

Only thing I got wrong is the cycle time of the cERPPC which is 5 to 6 seconds.

Navid A1, on 24 August 2018 - 06:35 AM, said:

A common misconception is assuming that the PTS goal is to make high laser alphas impossible.
No.
The goal here is to make them unable to freely use that high alpha multiple times in a span of 20 seconds.
The the highest Clan laser alpha that can be fired right now remains around 70 which instantly pushes you to 95+% heat.
This is acceptable
In the graphs I posted. you see that a build is getting more damage after 80 seconds of constant firing, you have to ask yourself... is this how you play?
do you fire constantly for 80 seconds without even missing a millisecond, to always remain at 99% heat?

The answer is no!!!
The HBR in the PTS is not stronger since the time you need to fire constantly is about 20 seconds, and in that time span Live client is best, and PTS 2.1 is addressing it.



You are correct that IS DHS needs to be stronger than C-DHS.
You are wrong to think that this should be achieved by weakening the C-DHS


Any heat cap lower than 50 and energy-based light mechs are removed form gameplay. 50 is the absolute minimum.
Also... regarding weaker clan DHS, see above.

Energy Mechs will be fine with 30 and skill nodes allowing up to 35 with the 0.2 DHS cooling rate. Only adjusting needed would be cycle times on ballistic weapons as most fire abit to fast.

As for IS DHS most IS mechs don't generate as much heat as those on the clan side. Also some of the best IS configs can on live get away with just 1 or 2 DHS. In fact my Annihilator currently gets away with just 10 in engine, and 1 external with what is in 2.0 DHS changes to 0.2 dissipation I can get rid of that 1 DHS and carry 1 extra ton of ammo.

Edited by Shadowomega1, 24 August 2018 - 07:40 AM.

[cougurt]

dwwolf, on 24 August 2018 - 06:35 AM, said:

Do we really need more mobile heavies and assault mechs, other than a few selected niche chassis ( like victor, summoner, linebacker etc ) ?

yes. they don't necessarily have to be as nimble as those mechs, but they at least need to be able to twist somewhat effectively. i'd be okay with the annihilator and dire wolf remaining more or less the same, though i think the dire should get a bit more armor and torso yaw.

lights and mediums shouldn't be left out though, most of them could use some agility buffs as well.

[Daurock]

Navid A1, on 24 August 2018 - 06:35 AM, said:

A common misconception is assuming that the PTS goal is to make high laser alphas impossible.

I would argue, that based on the 1.0 iteration of the PTS, and from their recent comments regarding the "boogeyman" clan alphas, and... well.. this, that toning down the biggest clan alphas is, and has been, exactly their goal, this entire time. It's pretty hard to mis-construe what they are saying when they say - "we will be addressing and reducing the 94 point damage and that, is not really up for debate." With a cap of 50, that alpha still doesn't change.

The bottom line is, they have, as of yet, still been unable to find a way that actually does that without absolutely !@#$ing on energy based medium and light clan mechs. Any energy loadout that a clan light or medium mech can use, a clan assault can use with a couple of gauss rifles tacked on, and so long as that fact remains, those huge alphas will remain.

Personally, I think we got closest in PTS 1.0, which only really needed some armor tweaks to medium and light clan chassis to get them on par with IS medium and light chassis, and a small boost to the non-alpha stats of clan lasers to the point where they weren't flatly worse than IS ones in every aspect. However, that's just an opinion, and one that obviously wasn't particularly popular.

Edited by Daurock, 24 August 2018 - 08:53 AM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

I hope that if this balancing method works out that we can get some CD buffs (or un-nerfs) on the cERPPC.

[Lolo van Trollinger]

extreme wait times in PT, a faction play event... i can easily make 2 millions per hour on the live server. those 10 matches cost more time then that. so basically no motivation, loosing c-bills on that PT thing. not worth going there with the event. lots of seal clubbing going on. $$$

looking at the changes by the paper i have to say they suck... havent tested it though.

[PobbestGob]

Daurock, on 24 August 2018 - 06:30 AM, said:

As much as i really want to believe that PGI can give IS and clan DHS a different values for dissipation, I'm not sure it's technically going to be possible. I have to think that they would have approached it at some time in the past if it was a technically easy thing to do, instead of going around on the fringes, like the heat skills in the tree, which they actually HAVE done in the past. If I had to guess, I wouldn't be surprised if the dissipation per sink number is hard-coded into the drop-down for SHS/DHS. (Much like the lock times are/were, causing the artemis fiasco currently going on.) No, I'm not a developer, but I am decent at reading tea leaves, and the fact that they've left it alone for so long is telling after some point.

Separate values are a possible and simple change, each heatsink type is a unique item in the code with its own numbers attached. Single sinks are shared between clan and IS though, so atm there are three types, SHS, DHS, c-DHS.

[SilentScreamer]

Navid A1, on 24 August 2018 - 06:35 AM, said:

Any heat cap lower than 50 and energy-based light mechs are removed form gameplay. 50 is the absolute minimum.

Your point regarding Light mechs is more a matter of build and playstyle than a universal truth. Varied combat tactics with Lights include: Boom&Zoom, Backstabber, Long-Range-Support, Brawler, Sniper (leave Squirrel, Spotter and Capping off the table as non-combat for now).

- Snipers and Boom&Zoom are meant to shoot a few times and move on. Doing the math of total damage and heat level over time does not really get you near the actual performance in-match because the mech should not be firing constantly at the same target.

- Brawlers and Backstabbers. I think this is where HeatDissapation vs HeatCap comes into play. Lights which do not have a lot of hardpoints, particularly energy hardpoints benefit from dissapation more than heat cap:
Ex: PIR with machine guns, Commando/MistLynx/JR7IIC with SRMs, Urbie/Raven with AC20
vs Energy Builds which use exclusively small or medium class lasers in high quantity want the higher cap, but also benefit from dissapation:
Ex: ACH/Wolfhound with Lasers
there are also mixed loadouts to consider:
Ex: ACH/Panther with SRMs and Lasers
The data I would seek on these builds on PTS compared to Live:
- DPS (both maximum and sustainable)
- Alpha Strike damage
- Time till Override/Shutdown
- Total Damage Dealt prior to Shutdown/Override
- Total Possible Damage based on munitions (for mechs with Ammo limitations)

I think the last stat is important to have on comparison. If a pilot is using an ammo dependent build, for game balance, better performance should be expected than an all energy build. Lights do not have tonnage to pack in 6 to 8 tons of munitions.

[Sable]

Daurock, on 24 August 2018 - 07:45 AM, said:

I would argue, that based on the 1.0 iteration of the PTS, and from their recent comments regarding the "boogeyman" clan alphas, and... well.. this, that toning down the biggest clan alphas is, and has been, exactly their goal, this entire time. It's pretty hard to mis-construe what they are saying when they say - "we will be addressing and reducing the 94 point damage and that, is not really up for debate." With a cap of 50, that alpha still doesn't change.

The bottom line is, they have, as of yet, still been unable to find a way that actually does that without absolutely !@#$ing on the medium and light side of clan mechs. Any energy loadout that a clan light or medium mech can use, a clan assault can use with a couple of gauss rifles tacked on, and so long as that fact remains, those huge alphas will remain.

Personally, I think we got closest in PTS 1.0, which only really needed some armor tweaks to medium and light clan chassis to get them on par with IS medium and light chassis, and a small boost to the non-alpha stats of clan lasers to the point where they weren't flatly worse than IS ones in every aspect. However, that's just an opinion, and one that obviously wasn't particularly popular.

I completely agree with Daurock that PGI's focus with possible heat scale changes are meant to address high alpha damage. And i think that PTS 2.0 with the heatscale at 40 was a lot closer to actually achieving that goal. If it wasn't for the fact that you can still stack skill tree heat modes to achieve an higher than 40 cap I would say the goal had been achieved. This is why i support a heat cap of 35 or at least lower than 40 so that when all the bonuses are taken into consideration you still won't be able to achieve the current problem alphas PGI is trying to address. Or at least make the hard cap of 40 actually a hard cap so you can't increase it with skilltree nodes.

Example - 6 cER Mediums = 6.3 heat X 6 = 37.8 heat before any bonus cooling or max heat scale. This would still be doable as an alpha but without being able to stack on top of it.

Edited by Sable, 24 August 2018 - 09:17 AM.

[Navid A1]

well, here is the truth.

You simply can not make 70 damage laser alphas impossible without steam rolling a large number of (mostly brawler) mechs that rely on the initial heat capacity.

Thats a fact.


And as far as my personal opinion goes... a mech being able to fire only one 70 alpha damage and then becoming heat-capped is perfectly fine.
That is called build diversity.
I hate this way of thinking that everything in the game should go towards 10 minutes of face-slapping with 20 alphas.

Edited by Navid A1, 24 August 2018 - 09:23 AM.

[Navid A1]

SilentScreamer, on 24 August 2018 - 08:30 AM, said:

Your point regarding Light mechs is more a matter of build and playstyle than a universal truth. Varied combat tactics with Lights include: Boom&Zoom, Backstabber, Long-Range-Support, Brawler, Sniper (leave Squirrel, Spotter and Capping off the table as non-combat for now).

- Snipers and Boom&Zoom are meant to shoot a few times and move on. Doing the math of total damage and heat level over time does not really get you near the actual performance in-match because the mech should not be firing constantly at the same target.

- Brawlers and Backstabbers. I think this is where HeatDissapation vs HeatCap comes into play. Lights which do not have a lot of hardpoints, particularly energy hardpoints benefit from dissapation more than heat cap:
Ex: PIR with machine guns, Commando/MistLynx/JR7IIC with SRMs, Urbie/Raven with AC20
vs Energy Builds which use exclusively small or medium class lasers in high quantity want the higher cap, but also benefit from dissapation:
Ex: ACH/Wolfhound with Lasers
there are also mixed loadouts to consider:
Ex: ACH/Panther with SRMs and Lasers
The data I would seek on these builds on PTS compared to Live:
- DPS (both maximum and sustainable)
- Alpha Strike damage
- Time till Override/Shutdown
- Total Damage Dealt prior to Shutdown/Override
- Total Possible Damage based on munitions (for mechs with Ammo limitations)

I think the last stat is important to have on comparison. If a pilot is using an ammo dependent build, for game balance, better performance should be expected than an all energy build. Lights do not have tonnage to pack in 6 to 8 tons of munitions.

You can write a long essay on combat tactics... but at the end of the day. Lights rely on their initial heat capacity to do any sort of fight, harassment and hit&run.
It is can also be proven mathematically, that lower heat capacity means less damage output in burst period engagements

At least thats my experience of piloting lights in the past 6 years... in solo, group, FP, and competitive tournaments.

I don't even know if you are serious when you make examples like AC20 ravens or SRM Cheetah/Panther

Edited by Navid A1, 24 August 2018 - 09:32 AM.

[dwwolf]

cougurt, on 24 August 2018 - 07:39 AM, said:

yes. they don't necessarily have to be as nimble as those mechs, but they at least need to be able to twist somewhat effectively. i'd be okay with the annihilator and dire wolf remaining more or less the same, though i think the dire should get a bit more armor and torso yaw.

lights and mediums shouldn't be left out though, most of them could use some agility buffs as well.

My pet peeve is there isnt enough differentation in the weight classes, mediums especially seem to fall in the fish nor fowl category too many times.
Heavies are mobile enough IMHO. they need some seperation from mediums.

Perhaps a bonus % given to the mobility tree would round out mediums more. By tying it to the skill tree, it would require some investment.

Lights generally are small enough to be bothersome, and arent totally shafted in the speed category.

Edited by dwwolf, 24 August 2018 - 09:34 AM.

[HenktheTank]

Hey PGI would it be possible to make teh PTS Skirmish or Dom only? it really makes no sense to play conquest in a 4v4

[Khobai]

FupDup, on 23 August 2018 - 02:21 PM, said:

The point is not to curb alpha striking as a playstyle, just very large energy weapon alpha strikes.

yeah but just lowering damage on CERML/CHLL has the same effect of reducing energy alphastrikes and without having to implement a ridiculous artificial heatcap.

Once again PGI is looking for a lazy catchall fix because they dont want to balance weapons properly. They dont want to put the work in to balance weapons on a case-by-case basis. So they hatched this absurd heatcap plan. Its no different from ghost heat or any of their other absurd plans to try and avoid doing actual work.

Edited by Khobai, 24 August 2018 - 10:07 AM.

[LordNothing]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 August 2018 - 02:31 AM, said:

Then I just stop using lasers and go all-in on ballistics and missiles.

oh, you mean fun weapons. i am ok with that.

Edited by LordNothing, 24 August 2018 - 10:09 AM.

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 24 August 2018 - 10:00 AM, said:

yeah but just lowering damage on CERML/CHLL has the same effect of reducing energy alphastrikes and without having to implement a ridiculous artificial heatcap.

Once again PGI is looking for a lazy catchall fix because they dont want to balance weapons properly. They dont want to put the work in to balance weapons on a case-by-case basis. So they hatched this absurd heatcap plan. Its no different from ghost heat or any of their other absurd plans to try and avoid doing actual work.

Bruh you're preaching to the choir here, I'm the guy who's been proposing a 6-damage CERML and 16-damage HLL for a long time.

[Khobai]

Yep. 6 damage CERML and 16 damage CHLL is all PGI needs to do.

And a substantial nerf to CGauss probably to balance the fact its only 12 tons.

We need targeted laser vomit/gauss vomit nerfs. What we dont need is this heatcap garbage that inadvertently screws up dozens of builds just to try and nerf one or two builds.