64 replies to this topic

[Bhael Fire]

General Taskeen, on 31 May 2013 - 03:07 PM, said:

Random Chance is not determined by skill. You have to "guess" when it would happen if there is any arbitrary chance applied. If there is a 5% chance at any one moment, then it will happen at any one moment, although more unlikely than say 50%.

Well, as I suggested, there would be no chance of malfunction for the first 10 seconds. After that you're taking a risk. The skill comes from timing and knowing when to risk a malfunction based on the circumstances.

However, I'd be fine if they used heat to balance MASC. I'd just prefer if there were more risk in using it.

[aniviron]

Making it lock up/cripple/destroy the mech for the remainder of the match would be foolish. No other system has a chance to do this; the risk/reward is way out of proportion, and nobody will use it if the exchange for running fast for ten seconds is a chance to just die.

"oh but it worked fine in tt." Yes, well, this isn't tabletop. Instead of having command of a dozen mechs that you're not really responsible for besides deciding their tactics, you have one mech, and if you die, you spend ten minutes sitting out. Instead of shrugging and figuring you can throw your last few mechs at the enemy to win, if you die, you are out of the game. This means the risk factor has risen dramatically because of the different position the player occupies vs. tt, but the reward has not increased.

[Bhael Fire]

aniviron, on 01 June 2013 - 06:36 PM, said:

Making it lock up/cripple/destroy the mech for the remainder of the match would be foolish. No other system has a chance to do this; the risk/reward is way out of proportion, and nobody will use it if the exchange for running fast for ten seconds is a chance to just die.

I agree. That's why I suggested a temporary lockup; for example, 20-30 seconds or so (maybe less).
It would have no chance to malfunction from 0-10 seconds of use. After that, each second adds a 5% chance of malfunction. So basically, it would be safe to use up to 10 seconds at a time, but for each second you keep it engaged after that, you are risking locking up your legs for 30 seconds (or maybe even less if that proves to be too long).

Also, maybe it can generate a lot of heat exponentially after the 10 second period to give an indicator of how much risk you are of locking up and/or overheating.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 01 June 2013 - 09:43 PM.

[Corvus Antaka]

double the heat for everything you do when its on. maybe 3 times. should deal with it easily enough. or have it build heat as it runs.

[Galenit]

Have not voted, dont like the options/no multiple.

Heat should be added every second in the strength of the time it runs.
1 heat in the first sec., 2 in the second sec., then 3, 4, 5, after 5 seconds using masc you have build up 15 heat, using it for 10 secs. gives you 10+9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1=55 heat over the 10 seconds.

The heat buildup could maybe a little more, depends on the average heat dissipation of mechs. It should be noticable after 5 seconds and prevent save weapon usage after 10 seconds (build up enough heat that you overheat if you use more then a ml after 10 seconds of masc usage).


For every second you use it, you should have a chance in the high of the time you used it to freeze the legs for the time you used it.
After 1 sec. you have a chance of 1% to freeze your legs for 1 second, after 10 seconds you have a chance of 10% to freeze the legs for 10 seconds.

Damage to the leginternals should be applyed with the same function used for freezing.
That means for 10 seconds of masc usage you have a chance of 10 % to gain 10 damage on every legs internals.

The chances for freeze and damage should be calculated independently from each other. Sometimes you get nothing from both, sometime one or the other and with bad luck both.

Hope you understand what i mean, its not that easy to explain such things in a not native language.

Edited by Galenit, 04 June 2013 - 02:36 AM.

[-Seneschal-]

Decision makers please note the rather serious issue here: If you were to ask whether MASC should generate heat or damage, and not split the damage vote between two-three levels of the survey, you would likely find that people prefer that it deal soem sort of damage.

[Lord of All]

Poll is flawed. Assumes...

[Rabid Dutchman]

I don't especially care either way what the penalties for using MASC, as long as the leg animations sync up with the speed the Mech is going lol

If I had to make a choice though I'd go for damage to internals, specifically the legs. One of the best ways to down a Light Mech is to cripple its legs, so the trade off would be increased speed v increased vulnerability late game

[aniviron]

Bhael Fire, on 01 June 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

I agree. That's why I suggested a temporary lockup; for example, 20-30 seconds or so (maybe less).
It would have no chance to malfunction from 0-10 seconds of use. After that, each second adds a 5% chance of malfunction. So basically, it would be safe to use up to 10 seconds at a time, but for each second you keep it engaged after that, you are risking locking up your legs for 30 seconds (or maybe even less if that proves to be too long).

Also, maybe it can generate a lot of heat exponentially after the 10 second period to give an indicator of how much risk you are of locking up and/or overheating.

Temporary lock up might as well be death. How often do you see one-legged mechs survive for more than a few seconds in combat? If they make it out of combat somehow, they limp away, targeted and hunted by the teammates of the person who managed not to kill the one legged mech, somehow. A 20-30 second lockup might as well just destroy the engine to save you some time and frustration.

[MouseNo4]

The way i see this is like no risk the first time its used, but has a cooldown of say 25% of a standard match length. For example, lets say the average match lasts for 8 minutes. 25% of that is 2 minutes.

0% chance to totally cripple the mech when completely off cooldown. But, just like Ultra AC, it can be used again before its cooldown is up, with the risk of totally crippling the mech. I stress - CRIPPLING THE MECH - otherwise, it will just be spammed and players will shrug off the damage received/heat built up or even tripping over as ''just part of the way it works''. When used during its cooldown period it should have a 25% chance to totally cripple the mech. Using a third time when under the second use's cooldown it should rocket up to 50% and so on.

Effectively, if only used when off cooldown, it functions as a standard 10 second boost to speed (lets say one third of maximum speed), every 2 minutes.

[Abledime]

imagine MACS can be used for 15 seconds without risk of damage and 20 seconds use gives massive damage, with a cool down of say 5 seconds per second used.

Give it a usage bar,once the bar is say 75% (15 seconds) the leg internals take 0.05 times the amount of percent above 75% damage per second

so running at 76% gives 0.05 damage per second (0.05x1)
90% gives 1 damage per second (0.05x20)
and 100% gives 1.25 damage per second (0.05x25)
therefore the longer its used above 75% the more damage the legs take. if its used for longer than say 25 seconds the legs would be ruined on most mecks

running for 25 seconds with MACS would cause 10 pints of internal damage to each leg

Edited by Abledime, 05 June 2013 - 08:07 AM.

[Asmosis]

Should have a chance of falling over + heat build up. I don't think damage is necessary, UNLESS you override shutdown to keep running that is

alternatively it could just use the same system as jumpjets, you could even make them mutually exclusive (although i'd love to see both going).

Edited by Asmosis, 05 June 2013 - 04:17 AM.

[Skoaljaw]

I'm curious to see how PGI is gonna handle the MASC thing.

[Boyka]

I think an hibryd solution heat/damage may be interesting.

Image a Spider, the max engine rate is 255, max run speed is 151.5 (with unlocked speed tweak).

If you mount 100 rate engine (54 Kmh max speed) and double speed with MASC there's no reason of internal damages becouse this chassis can run at 151.5 at least. Well, you can experience leg damage only if you overheat mech with extended use of MASC.
On the other hand if you mount 255 rate engine and double your speed, legs can't resist the effort, damage and heat are the conseguences.

My advice is: heat when you use MASC and an increased damage when you use great speed for a long time.
There must be a threshold too, generally vehicles can travel at higher speed than maximum speed declared, limitation is for greater security, so mech must not be damaged until thresold is not reached, for example 10% or 20% more maximum declared chassis speed.

These are my 2 cents.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Its most likely it will work with the new geometry incline system they are introducing, IE after being on so long it will be like you have begun ascending a progressively steeper incline which would cause you to begin losing speed instead of gaining it, and eventually you'll come to a dead stop.

From there its just a matter of figuring out what a reasonable cool down time is between uses/dead stops.

(And ten minutes later someone creates a mascon/mascoff timed macro to get the most out of it with out locking up.)

Edited by Xeno Phalcon, 29 June 2013 - 04:53 AM.

[Cybermech]

MWLL version of MASC is the main reason I'm fearing it being implemented.
It made things go so fast and you think the lights got the most out of it.
Not true at all, those heavies and assaults that could use them were crazy OP.
Once bigger mechs can go speeds of lights and mediums the game becomes something different.
Your removing the weakness's the slower mechs have and thus game play becomes more.. meh!!

Edited by Cybermech, 29 June 2013 - 05:16 AM.

[Tice Daurus]

I'm for 'completely cripple' a mech for the entire match, after which the mech needs to pay for repairs to get the mech back up and running again via C-bills.

[Lord of All]

Tice Daurus, on 29 June 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

I'm for 'completely cripple' a mech for the entire match, after which the mech needs to pay for repairs to get the mech back up and running again via C-bills.

That or there is no MASC Whatsoever. But Poll is skewed and forcing an agreement.

Nice try OP.

Edited by Lord of All, 29 June 2013 - 12:19 PM.

[ManDaisy]

How about heat and a jam like the ultra ac 5... except a jam would slow you to 10 kph?

[hammerreborn]

Curly Fride, on 28 October 2012 - 11:07 PM, said:

I'm surprised nobody has thought of adding the factor of
REPAIRING THE DAMAGED MYOMER BUNDLES!
Speaking logically, a device that's used to push something beyond its safety limit is gonna break something. It might not be now, it might be after that fourth sortie without maintenance, you shift your Jenny out of park and something snaps in the left hip. Speaking personally, this is how I think it should work, which balances out each idea.
1. Upon activation, there is an instant increase in base heat, maybe the equivalent of taking three to five heatsinks offline, depending on the class.
2. The longer you have MASC active, the more heat is generated. For the first five seconds, no additional heat is generated, but after that, heat starts to rise at about on the level of firing a medium laser every two seconds.
3. Your mech becomes more sensitive to the terrain and is more likely to stumble during a shift in elevation or during a turn. If you try to shift from flat terrain to a hillside, you'll probably end up with dirt in your face.
4. MOST IMPORTANTLY mechs that use MASC have to replace the myomer bundles that were damaged. This gets more expensive for the longer durations that MASC is used. It's feasible to use MASC in 10-15 second bursts with minimal increase in normal repair costs, but if you try to outrun someone for more than 60 seconds, you're gonna have to sell a weapon or two to get your mech fixed.
5. After a certain amount of time of heavy usage without repair, the myomer bundles fail, forcing your mech to limp along at walking speed when at full throttle.

What I'm getting at here is that we have the whole c-bills mechanic in the game, it can be used as a risk/reward/punishment factor in this given situation.

You can do this when ppcs and entire systems of stalkers need to be repaired because they melt down from overheating and shutting down every 4 seconds....

Bhael Fire, on 31 May 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

That's just too much of a sure thing and therefore easily abused. Anyone can watch their heat level and disengage MASC before it pops.

The risky nature of MASC is what makes it work. If it's a no-brainer like just watching your heat, then there's really no reason NOT to employ MASC (unless it just stupidly bulky).

In other words, it takes more skill to know when you're pushing your luck than it does to watch a temperature gauge.

For example, something like this:

0-10 seconds = 0% chance of malfunction.Then for each second after 10, the chance of malfunction increases by 5%.

That way, the pilot must use skill and internal timing to determine if they are past the window of operational safety and use their best judgment if it's worth pushing it past that point. This is a lot more interesting and provides better game play rather than simply watching a heat gauge and pushing the off button when the 'mech tells you to.

Bhael Fire, on 01 June 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

Well, as I suggested, there would be no chance of malfunction for the first 10 seconds. After that you're taking a risk. The skill comes from timing and knowing when to risk a malfunction based on the circumstances.

However, I'd be fine if they used heat to balance MASC. I'd just prefer if there were more risk in using it.

In these posts we have arguments against using heat scale for penalties because they "are a sure thing" and then advocating for a 10s free mode...

/facepalm