35 replies to this topic

[autogyro]

Just wondering if we could get some discussion over how normal lasers are treated differently with pulse lasers.

In MW2 pulse lasers were able to be held down to do greater damage, whereas in MW4 pulse lasers seemed pretty much identical to standard lasers except they visually were pulses of laser light.

What sort of mechanic are people interested in? I think lasers should stay hitscan but I prefer the continuous damage effect of the MW2 pulse lasers which from what i gather is similar to the treatment in MWLL.

Edited by autogyro, 26 January 2012 - 06:23 PM.

[Patrio Sioux Daltum]

I hope they're MW2 pulse lasers. MW4 ones were just amped(Ha!) up lasers and didn't really feel like they pulsed.

[Volkite]

In the Tabletop, Pulse Lasers are described as firing a stuttered beam rather than a constant shot. In another thread, it was made mention that a Laser should probably have a firing time, similar to how nonpulse lasers worked in MW3; and that they'd be firing constantly until that time ended. This would mitigate the damage they dealt against moving targets unless the one firing them was a good steady aim and managed to keep the crosshair over the same area.

Pulse Lasers, with their 'rapid fire' approach, do the initial 'impact' of their blast repeatedly. I'm not sure how it was handwaved away as to doing more damage per hit this way, but it allows for one thing that a standard Laser does not: gauging where you're firing.
Tabletop: Every 10 seconds a Medium laser deals 5 damage for 3 heat out to 270m. A Medium Pulse deals 6 damage for 4 heat out to 180m.
If there was, say, 8 shots from the Pulse laser for each 1 shot to the normal Laser (taking less time to recharge thanks to less time firing) each shot fired would only give .5 heat and deal .75 of a damage, but with each missed shot you're wasting less thanks to the shutting down of the beam quickly so you can recalibrate before firing again and near IMMEDIATELY begin again.

Normal lasers, firing for all 5 damage in that 3 heat lump will miss and have to wait until recharged. If you want either to hit, then you have to keep the crosshair on the enemy (coupled with the lower-velocity weapons, this makes a bit of a disparity in aiming, which makes sense). Maybe Make the Medium Laser itself deal 2.5 and generate 1.5 heat and fire twice as often as the Large? Who knows?
Point is, Pulse Lasers are a more accurate weapon that weigh more as a result. They do less damage per hit but generate so much less heat, thanks to a rapid-fire beam.
The graphic itself should just be a normal laser though, not like they did with MW4.

Edited by Merovigian, 26 January 2012 - 06:59 PM.

[Dlardrageth]

Merovigian, on 26 January 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

In the Tabletop, Pulse Lasers are described as firing a stuttered beam rather than a constant shot.

They are? Interesting, let's see...

"Pulse lasers differ from traditional laser weaponry, in that instead of firing one powerful beam, they maintain several laser beams fired off in quick succession. While offering an overall increased rate of fire, the heat output also increases accordingly."

Since when are "several laser beams" the same as your "stuttered beam"? But leaving the somewhat awkward semantic discrepancy aside here, in the tabletop it makes IMO perfect sense to have multiple beams fired as pulse lasers do have a native to-hit-bonus. It is pretty obvious that you have a better chance of hitting with an (even slightly) dispersed salvo than with one beam.

Quote

Pulse Lasers, with their 'rapid fire' approach, do the initial 'impact' of their blast repeatedly. I'm not sure how it was handwaved away as to doing more damage per hit this way, but it allows for one thing that a standard Laser does not: gauging where you're firing.

Incidentally, that is not what I remember. Let me quote Sarna.net again:

"Pulse lasers increase damage because they allow vaporized armor to dissipate from the location of damage. This allows subsequent pulses to reach the target area without being diffused by the vapor."

Not sure how that would lead to the theory of pulse lasers allowing for gauging as opposed to standard ones. But maybe I just missed a point there? Because what I read from the canon sounds like you fire your pulse laser "salvo" the same way as a standard laser, you just end up with a somewhat different impact effect. Take the real life weapons with fixed settings for 3-shot-bursts as an analogy, if you want. It is an extra feature to allow for situationally more effective shooting than using single-shot. Or fully automatic fire and risking to waste a lot of ammo.

Quote

The graphic itself should just be a normal laser though, not like they did with MW4.

I have to completely disagree here, sorry. Why change something away from the canon unnecessarily? What would be the benefit of having graphics that are averse to the canon info we got and just cause questions about it? It is quite obvious that the CBT canon does not support the "stuttered beam" theory. Why in Blake's name would "several laser beams" all of sudden look exactly like one normal laser beam? That doesn't make any sense IMHO. For a BT-based game.

[IceSerpent]

In MW4 pulse lasers were very different from normal lasers - normal laser was a "single shot" weapon (fire, wait for recharge, fire again), while pulse laser had much quicker recharge rate (and much lower damage per shot), so it worked more like a somewhat slow machine gun.

I'd like both types to be "single shot" weapons (no continuous beams please) with pulse laser doing more damage at the expense of increased heat and weight.

[tunabreath]

@Dlardrageth
From a gameplay perspective, there really isn't a difference between multiple beams rapidly firing in succession from one source, or a single beam stuttered in rapid succession from one source. The hardpoint representation of the weapon may be visually different, but the effect on target is the same.


I think the best representation would be to have it identical to the standard laser (or slightly less damage/heat) and simply having a higher rate of fire. This takes care of increased effective damage (per second), increased heat (per second), and also increased accuracy though faster aim correction without waiting for a relatively lengthy cooldown/recharge/reload period.

A high rate flashy weapon would be a lot more interesting to look at than a sustained beam too, in my opinion. I'm not huge on the salvo style pulses like the sound from MW4. I think just treating it like a laser machinegun is truer to the TT intent.

One big gameplay concern I have, depending on how lasers are represented in general, is making sure that a single pulse from a pulse laser is immediately recognizable, and not easily confused with a shot from a similar power standard laser. As long as it isn't that cheesey pulsed graphic from MW4...

[Dlardrageth]

I think a bunch of laser bolts might be the best graphical adaption. Like every shot from a pulse laser unleashing 3 or 4 bolts instead of the continous stream of a conventional laser. Sounds most realistic to me and most true to canon. I mean it specifically states "several laser beams", so why stray from that?

Sound is a different matter admittedly. While I could live with the MW:LL Pulse Laser graphics, I kinda dislike the sound adaption for pulse lasers there.

[Agent CraZy DiP]

This has become a topic of splitting hairs. Just saying...

[Dlardrageth]

Agent CraZy DiP, on 27 January 2012 - 02:48 AM, said:

This has become a topic of splitting hairs. Just saying...

Yep, totally agree, who cares about graphics in a computer game, what a totally hair-splitting idea. Why don't we instead suggest the devs remove all graphical weapon effects and we just get a text line telling us "Your pulse laser hit play XY for 12.3 points of damage!" I bet that would make MWO totally popular and ultra-postmodernistic...

I, for one, would like a laser being fired to look and sound somewhat realistic. If you don't care at all about the visual and acoustical component of a game, you might as well play a nice match of... boardgame chess.

[Agent CraZy DiP]

I'm saying splitting hairs cause I trust the devs will make the lasers approriate without us ramming our opions down their throats. I trust the Devs will make the game visually appealing and acoustically sound (pardon the pun).

User 1: "I want Blue Lasers!"

User 2: "Lasers should definetly be Red obviously!"

At this point you've veared from the main purpose or meat of the topic. How will the lasers effect game play over all.

Also, your sarcasm isn't appreciated by me. You're crude.

[Strum Wealh]

To add to Dlardrageth's post:

Quote

The pulse laser uses rapid-cycling, high-energy pulses to generate multiple laser beams, creating an effect comparable to machine-gun fire. But because the staggered pulses give the protective ablation products from combat armor a chance to disperse—to expose fresh armor to subsequent pulses—the result is a burst of fire that is more effective and accurate.

Originally developed by the Terran Hegemony, pulse lasers run cooler than ER lasers and pack a little more punch than standard lasers, but have a shorter effective range than either type. These weapons were popular on faster hunter/killer designs, which could close faster and benefit from the ability to land solid damage even on the fly.

(from Tech Manual, pg. 226)

The novels consistently describe pulse laser (across sizes) fire as "emerald darts", in contrast to Standard and ER Laser fire being described as "shafts" or "lances" (generally "ruby", in contrast to the "emerald" of pulse laser fire).

The IRL equivalent would operate similarly to the (10 kW, 25-28 pulses per second) laser used in the proposed "lightcraft" laser propulsion system (see here for explanation and laser specs, here for explanation and slow-motion video, and here for full-speed video).

So, perhaps strangely , the pulse laser visual depiction used in MW4 is actually closest to the established BT canon...
(By contrast, the depiction used in MW:LL is closer to what I would think actual pulse laser fire would look like (assuming there was enough sand/dust/vapor/etc to make the beam visible).)

----------

Mechanics-wise, I would like to see four main things with regard to MWO's rendition and usage of lasers:

1.) Laser damage not being "front-loaded" - "beam lasers" (Standard, ER, etc) should do damage over time for the duration of the beam (which should be relatively long - 1.0 to 1.5 seconds or so), while the damage of a pulse laser salvo is divided among the pulses/"darts" in the salvo with each pulse/"dart" being treated as an independent projectile.

2.) Canon-esque average damage outputs as a function of time:
IS Small Laser: 3 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.3 damage per second
IS Medium Laser: 5 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.5 damage per second
IS Large Laser: 8 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.8 damage per second

IS ER Small Laser (when available, 3058): 3 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.3 damage per second
IS ER Medium Laser (when available, 3058): 5 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.5 damage per second
IS ER Large Laser: 8 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.8 damage per second

Clan ER Small Laser: 5 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.5 damage per second
Clan ER Medium Laser: 7 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.7 damage per second
Clan ER Large Laser: 10 damage per 10-second period -> average of 1.0 damage per second

IS Small Pulse Laser: 3 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.3 damage per second
IS Medium Pulse Laser: 6 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.6 damage per second
IS Large Pulse Laser: 9 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.9 damage per second

Clan Small Pulse Laser: 3 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.3 damage per second
Clan Medium Pulse Laser: 7 damage per 10-second period -> average of 0.7 damage per second
Clan Large Pulse Laser: 10 damage per 10-second period -> average of 1.0 damage per second

IMO, ROF can be whatever, so long as the average damage per second for the weapons is approximately equal to the canon values.

3.) Heat production being a function of ROF and duration of fire, with canon-esque heat values used as the basis of average heat per salvo:
IS Small Laser: 1 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.1 heat per second
IS Medium Laser: 3 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.3 heat per second
IS Large Laser: 8 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.8 heat per second

IS ER Small Laser (when available, 3058): 2 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.2 heat per second
IS ER Medium Laser (when available, 3058): 5 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.5 heat per second
IS ER Large Laser: 12 heat per 10-second period -> average of 1.2 heat per second

Clan ER Small Laser: 2 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.2 heat per second
Clan ER Medium Laser: 5 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.5 heat per second
Clan ER Large Laser: 12 heat per 10-second period -> average of 1.2 heat per second

IS Small Pulse Laser: 2 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.2 heat per second
IS Medium Pulse Laser: 4 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.4 heat per second
IS Large Pulse Laser: 10 heat per 10-second period -> average of 1.0 heat per second

Clan Small Pulse Laser: 2 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.2 heat per second
Clan Medium Pulse Laser: 4 heat per 10-second period -> average of 0.4 heat per second
Clan Large Pulse Laser: 10 heat per 10-second period -> average of 1.0 heat per second

4.) Heat dissipation being a function the number of heat sinks equipped, with heat sink effectiveness using canon-esque effectiveness as a base value (with actual effectiveness dependent on such factors as temperature of the external environment, whether any given heat sink is submerged, and so on):
IS/Clan Standard Heat Sink: -1 heat per 10-second period -> average of -0.1 heat per second
IS/Clan Double Heat Sink: -2 heat per 10-second period -> average of -0.2 heat per second

I think the above would keep the effectiveness of lasers balanced with regard to the other weapon types as well as with regard to the canon armor values (assuming the Devs are going with canon armor values, or something close enough).

Your thoughts?

Edited by Strum Wealh, 27 January 2012 - 05:35 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

So your proposing the compression of the damage and heat values into the 1.0 - 1.5 seconds timeframe for all the listed weapons?

I assume that each weapons beam "on time" would be adjusted accordingly as some have differing Heat gains vs Damage output over the same time frames? The Large Laser Damage and Heat per/s match up nicely.

As in - IS Large Laser: 8 damage per 10-second period -> average of 80% of the total damage output per second provides .8/s x 1.25s = 8 damage.

and IS Large Laser: 8 heat per 10-second period -> average of 80% heat produced per second provides .8/s x 1.25s = 8 Heat.


vs the IS Medium Laser: 5 damage per 10-second period -> average of 50% damage per second provides .5/s x 2/s = 5 damage.

and IS Medium Laser: 3 heat per 10-second period -> average of 30% heat per second provides .3/s x 3.34/s = 3 Heat.

So which "on time" would is used to best bring both values into line while not having to have the target painted for to long to acheive the damage wanted, vs Heat generated?

I hope I didn't miss your point totally...

Edited by MaddMaxx, 27 January 2012 - 08:01 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

MaddMaxx, on 27 January 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

So your proposing the compression of the damage and heat values into the 1.0 - 1.5 seconds timeframe for all the listed weapons?

I assume that each weapons beam "on time" would be adjusted accordingly as some have differing Heat gains vs Damage output over the same time frames? The Large Laser Damage and Heat per/s match up nicely.

As in - IS Large Laser: 8 damage per 10-second period -> average of 80% of the total damage output per second provides .8/s x 1.25s = 8 damage.

and IS Large Laser: 8 heat per 10-second period -> average of 80% heat produced per second provides .8/s x 1.25s = 8 Heat.


vs the IS Medium Laser: 5 damage per 10-second period -> average of 50% damage per second provides .5/s x 2/s = 5 damage.

and IS Medium Laser: 3 heat per 10-second period -> average of 30% heat per second provides .3/s x 3.34/s = 3 Heat.

So which "on time" would is used to best bring both values into line while not having to have the target painted for to long to acheive the damage wanted, vs Heat generated?

I hope I didn't miss your point totally...

There are no percentages involved in my statement.

IS Medium Laser: 5 units of damage (listed per-turn damage dealt to a target by the weapon) per 10-second period (duration of 1 TT turn) -> average of 0.5 units of damage per second (real-time DPS to simulate TT-level damage)

IS Medium Laser: 3 units of heat (listed per-turn heat dealt to a 'Mech by firing the weapon) per 10-second period (duration of 1 TT turn) -> average of 0.3 units of heat per second (real-time heat production to simulate TT-level heating)

Possible ROFs for IS Medium Laser:

• 
  
  1.0-second-duration beams at 1.5-second intervals with 0.75 units of damage and 0.45 units of heat per beam
  
• 
  
  1.0-to-1.5-second-duration beams at 2-second intervals with 1 unit of damage and 0.6 units of heat per beam
  
• 
  
  1.0-to-1.5-second-duration beams at 2.5-second intervals with 1.25 units of damage and 0.75 units of heat per beam
  
• 
  
  1.0-to-1.5-second-duration beams at 5-second intervals with 2.5 units of damage and 1.5 units of heat per beam
  
• 
  
  1.0-to-1.5-second-duration beams at 10-second intervals with 5 units of damage and 3 units of heat per beam

All of the combinations work out to the same values for damage and heat per unit time as listed in the TT rules.

I hope that clears things up.



EDIT: fixed mathematical error...

Edited by Strum Wealh, 27 January 2012 - 11:04 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

Quote

"1.0-to-1.5-second-duration beams at 1-second intervals with 0.5 units of damage and 0.3 units of heat per beam"

Justy to clarify. I hold the trigger for 1 sceond, I get (.5 units?) of damage and (.3 units?) of Heat and can pull the trigger again 1 second later?

or is it as I hold it down, I generate Damage and Heat at those rates every second it is on the Target?

Edited by MaddMaxx, 27 January 2012 - 08:39 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

MaddMaxx, on 27 January 2012 - 08:37 AM, said:

Quote

"1.0-to-1.5-second-duration beams at 1-second intervals with 0.5 units of damage and 0.3 units of heat per beam"

Justy to clarify. I hold the trigger for 1 sceond, I get (.5 units?) of damage and (.3 units?) of Heat and can pull the trigger again 1 second later?

or is it as I hold it down, I generate Damage and Heat at those rates every second it is on the Target?

Firstly, that one is a mathematical error on my part - one obviously cannot fire a 1.5-second beam at 1-second intervals.
<- is ashamed, then goes to edit the post...

I was referring to having the proposed rates be those of the weapon as though one were holding the trigger - that is, the recycle rate of the laser itself.

Or, as you put it, "as I hold it down, I generate Damage and Heat at those rates every second it is on the Target".

[Maverick Howell]

i liked how in mw 3 the lazer stayed constant for a period of time then had to cool down.

[MaddMaxx]

Strum Wealh, on 27 January 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

Firstly, that one is a mathematical error on my part - one obviously cannot fire a 1.5-second beam at 1-second intervals.
<- is ashamed, then goes to edit the post...

I was referring to having the proposed rates be those of the weapon as though one were holding the trigger - that is, the recycle rate of the laser itself.

Or, as you put it, "as I hold it down, I generate Damage and Heat at those rates every second it is on the Target".

I do like the "Hold Trigger" with the Damage is applied over time but so goes the Heat level. Why not allow the Pilot to hold the trigger down as long as they want.

If holding it for 10 seconds shuts the Mech down due to Heat so be it, but the damage applied would be substantial (assuming you kept the Beam on the target the whole time.

The cool down time would assure a long wait before firing for another long burst.

[Dlardrageth]

@Tunabreath:
Not automatically a difference - unless you factor speed scaling in. If the speed scaling is done in a way that would necessitate to keep the beam "on target" to apply full damage, then it might. Because in that case even the slight difference between doing a hit-calculation for a couple of laser "bursts" or for a continous beam staying on target might yield different results. Due to target movement and evasion. Hard to say anything definitive though about speed scaling, as we know next to nothing about it yet. Well, apart from MWO not being round-based, heh.

Maverick Howell, on 27 January 2012 - 11:58 AM, said:

i liked how in mw 3 the lazer stayed constant for a period of time then had to cool down.

Well,if you implement e.g. a burst-fire mode for pulse lasers that wouldn't actually change except for the graphical part perhaps. Despite what the actual in-game graphics show or don't show, you could still have a balanced mechanism for damage application. Or, more specifically referring to Strum's post, it doesn't really matter how the exact mechanics work for the graphical depiction. Noone is going to stand there with a stopwatch and check if the fire ratio might be a second off or not. So being half a second off int iming between damage effect and grphical effect shouldn't matter much.

Thus you could of course give normal lasers the exact same graphical effect as pulse lasers (or even none at all?). Or try for a somewhat realistic one without having to fundamentally change the game mechanics necessarily. Accordingly, IMNSHO, there is no reason to go for a graphical model that has no real merits/roots in the canon of BT. Especially as "the continuous damage effect of the MW2 pulse lasers" as the OP put it, is more a theorethical thing. It may appear to the eye that way, but that doesn't mean it mirrors the real damage application/modeling.

Agent CraZy DiP, on 27 January 2012 - 02:48 AM, said:

This has become a topic of splitting hairs. Just saying...

Ya, very cool blanket statement which was totally OT (ironically, see your next post, penultimate line). And utterly useful to the discussion, and, negating the last possible redeeming factor, not even remotely funny.

Agent CraZy DiP, on 27 January 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

I'm saying splitting hairs cause I trust the devs will make the lasers approriate without us ramming our opions down their throats.

No idea where you got the "ramming" part from. You sure you actually read this thread, before making your major contribution in the post I quoted above? Or were you just attempting to troll some?

Quote

I trust the Devs will make the game visually appealing and acoustically sound (pardon the pun).

User 1: "I want Blue Lasers!"

User 2: "Lasers should definetly be Red obviously!"

Nice attempt at a strawman here, too bad the discussion never really was about colors of laser beams.

Quote

At this point you've veared from the main purpose or meat of the topic. How will the lasers effect game play over all.

Unlike your post, you mean? So far your contribution to this thread has been borderline trolling at best. Classical case of pot <-> kettle.

And if you cannot see how different firing mechanisms, either a continous beam or a salvo of multiple short beams will affect damage application and thus game play differently, I think we're at a loss how to discuss with you any further. It is a bit like asking if firing, say, an AR in single-shot mode makes a difference to firing it in burst mode (referenced in earlier post). Or maybe you should actually read some real posts in this thread before making a trollpost?

Quote

Also, your sarcasm isn't appreciated by me. You're crude.

Neither is your trolling appreciated. But hey, let's not get into name-calling, right, because you don't want to be "veared from the main purpose or meat of the topic", right? Guess I'll report you for trolling the thread nevertheless, don't feel like getting derailed from the topic more by you when you have nothing useful to contribute to the discussion apparently.

[Liam]

To me pulse lasers are almost the same (DPS wise per t) as standard lasers firing not one but many pulses in a raw.

[Yeach]

I thought in TT, pulse lasers gave a +2 to Hit for increased accuracy?

So... if you made pulse lasers instantaenous and laser have travel time....