THIS thread describes the mechwarrior game I want to play.
If the devs choose to ignore this and I ever, for some reason, find myself with a "few" million bucks in the double or triple digit range, I'm gonna get the BT license and throw all my remaining money at you, Mustrum, so you can make the perfect MechWarrior game.
4
If Heat is supposed to matter, we need a low heat capacity and a heat scale with cumulative worsening penalties, instead of a low heat dissipation
Started by MustrumRidcully, Nov 03 2012 05:46 AM
40 replies to this topic
#22
Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:07 AM
RaNDoMPReCiSioN, on 03 November 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:
Or, perhaps, make it way too complicated for the average gamer. I like the ideas though.
They had similar effects in MW4 which some people decry as the 'dumbed down' game of MW - yet in MWO hailed as something stickign so close to the rules we have the most dumbed down heat system of all. Shut down or dont ... thats it ... sigh
#23
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 10,644 posts
Member
Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:04 AM
Here are some further thoughts based on the previous feedback
First - the heat scale in the first post is more of an illustrative example on how heat management can matter even when a mech was designed heat neutral. I may have gotten a bit carried away by generalizing the first example for it already, but that's me.
There are basically two components to the idea, as ExAstris correctly remarked, and think both need a more detailed approach.
1) Lowering the Heat Capacity.
2) Introducing a Heat Scale with cumulative penalties.
In this post, I discuss them in the reverse order:
1) The Heat Scale
I first want to outline a few "heat levels", without specifying "how hot" these levels are precisely - just the general idea.
Nominal Heat: This heat level causes no penalties.
Low Heat: This heat level causes the first degree of penalties.
Moderate Heat: This heat level causes the second degree of penalties.
High Heat: This heat level causes the third degree of penalties.
Serious Heat: This heat level causes the fourth degree of penalties.
Critical Heat: This heat level results in an automatic shutdown and the fifth degree of penalties.
Now, let's look a bit closer at the penalties we could inflict:
The table top had 5 types of penalties: Speed Reduction, Hit Penalties, Ammo Explosion, Shutdown and Internal Damage.
Speed Reduction is relatively straightforward and I think it can be imported in MW:O without issues.
Hit Penalties would theoretically require us to add some randomization on attacks. But "RNG" aspects in MW:O are frowned upon by many players, including me. So my choice here would be to reduce the arm and torso twist range and speed. This makes aiming a bit more difficult, and can limit your ability to defend yourself against maneuverable foes. I imagine a light mech outmaneuvering a heavy mech, and the defending mech overheating himself and worsening his chances to hunt the light mech. In addition to the torso/arm penalties, I would suggest a penalty to missile lock times.
Ammo Explosions we already have in MW:O, as we do have shutdown and internal damage.
So, here is my idea for the scale and the penalties:
In the original post, I based everything on a 4 second weapon cycle with a heat neutral weapon. As ExAstris noticed, this would be very harsh for strikers that are build on delivering alpha strikes. So my new heat capacity scale is build a bit differently. EmperorMyrf's idea of giving mechs a bit of "buffer" is implemented in the heat penalties I noticed above - now, it takes 5 seconds at a heat level to suffer the penalties.
If "d" is the dissipation of your mech, the heat scale is as follows:
(I use the mathematical interval notation. [x,y] would mean an interval from x to y including x and y, ]x,y[ would describe the interval from x to y excluding x and y, and so on)
Single Heat Sinks:
[0, 2d]: Nominal Heat.
]2d, 4d]: Low Heat
]4d, 6d]: Moderate Heat
]7d, 8d]: High Heat
]9d, 10d]: Serious Heat
]10d, infinity[: Critical Heat
Double Heat Sinks:
[0, 2d]: Nominal Heat
]2d, 3d]: Low Heat
]3d, 4d]: Moderate Heat
]4d, 5d]: High Heat
]5d, 7d]: Serious Heat
]7d, infinity[: Critical Heat
3) Examples
Let's go back to our previous heat neutral example, but add a second scenario:
2 Weapons, each producing 10 heat every 4 seconds. Heat Dissipation d = 5.
Such a mech would currently in MW:O have a heat capacity of 30 + 5 * 10 = 80.
Let's say this mech would be build to be hotter, and, say, have a 3rd weapon dealing 10 heat.
For references, we'll also see each weapon would deal x DPS.
So we have 6 scenarios:
Heat Neutral Build with Single Heat Sinks
Heat Neutral Build with Double Heat Sinks
Hot Build with Single Heat Sinks
Hot Build with Double Heat Sink
Single Heat Sinks Scale for a mech with dissipation d = 5:
[0,10]: Nominal Heat
]10,20]: Low Heat
]20,30]: Moderate Heat
]30,40]: High Heat
]40,50]: Serious Heat
]50, infinity]: Critical Heat
Heat Neutral Build:
Alpha Strike with his 2 weapons would bring this mech into low heat region. He would cool down to nominal heat within 2 seconds, so he wouldn't really suffer any penalties.
Over 20 seconds, this mech would deal 40x damage.
Hot Build:
An Alpha Strike with his 3 weapons would bring this mech into the moderate heat region. After 5 seconds, he would have dissipated 25 heat, bringing him down to 15. So he would suffer the low heat penalty for a few seconds.
The mech would overheat after 20 seconds if he keeps firing all his weapons.
Over 20 seconds, this mech would deal 60x damage. If he avoids shutting down and lowers himself to the rate of fire sustained by his heat dissipation, he would from now on deal the same damage as the heat neutral build.
Double Heat Sink Scale for a mech with dissipation d = 5:
[0-10: Nominal Heat
]10-15]: Low Heat
]15-20]: Moderate Heat
]20-25]: High Heat
]25-35]: Serious Heat
]35, infinity]: Critical Heat
Heat Neutral Build:
Alpha Strike with his 2 weapons would bring this mech into high heat region. He would cool down to nominal heat within 2 seconds, so he wouldn't really suffer any penalties.
After 14 seconds, this mech would have dealt 28x damage.
Hot Build:
An Alpha Strike with his 3 weapons would bring this mech into the serious heat region. he would cool down to low heat within 10 seconds, so he would suffer low heat penalties after the first salvo.
If he kept alpha striking, this mech would overheat after 14 seconds, dealing 42x damage.
So using this system, if you build a "striker" mech, you can get better results with single heat sinks, as the heat capacity carries you further than double heat sinks. Double Heat Sinks will force your mech to run cooler overall, so that it will be harder to benefit from the tonnage gained by DHS.
DHS may become particularly interesting for mechs that are build around using weapons for different weapon range groups that you don't expect to use together due to their different ranges, say a mech with 2 PPCs and 4 Medium Lasers, or a mech with LRMs and an AC20.
Single Heat Sinks would become particularly interesting for strikers/snipers that want to deliver burst damage and retreat afterwards (or stand about the smoking debris of a defeated, "cooler" running mech)
First - the heat scale in the first post is more of an illustrative example on how heat management can matter even when a mech was designed heat neutral. I may have gotten a bit carried away by generalizing the first example for it already, but that's me.
There are basically two components to the idea, as ExAstris correctly remarked, and think both need a more detailed approach.
1) Lowering the Heat Capacity.
2) Introducing a Heat Scale with cumulative penalties.
In this post, I discuss them in the reverse order:
1) The Heat Scale
I first want to outline a few "heat levels", without specifying "how hot" these levels are precisely - just the general idea.
Nominal Heat: This heat level causes no penalties.
Low Heat: This heat level causes the first degree of penalties.
Moderate Heat: This heat level causes the second degree of penalties.
High Heat: This heat level causes the third degree of penalties.
Serious Heat: This heat level causes the fourth degree of penalties.
Critical Heat: This heat level results in an automatic shutdown and the fifth degree of penalties.
Now, let's look a bit closer at the penalties we could inflict:
The table top had 5 types of penalties: Speed Reduction, Hit Penalties, Ammo Explosion, Shutdown and Internal Damage.
Speed Reduction is relatively straightforward and I think it can be imported in MW:O without issues.
Hit Penalties would theoretically require us to add some randomization on attacks. But "RNG" aspects in MW:O are frowned upon by many players, including me. So my choice here would be to reduce the arm and torso twist range and speed. This makes aiming a bit more difficult, and can limit your ability to defend yourself against maneuverable foes. I imagine a light mech outmaneuvering a heavy mech, and the defending mech overheating himself and worsening his chances to hunt the light mech. In addition to the torso/arm penalties, I would suggest a penalty to missile lock times.
Ammo Explosions we already have in MW:O, as we do have shutdown and internal damage.
So, here is my idea for the scale and the penalties:
- Nominal Heat: No Penalties
- Low Heat: 10 % speed loss
- Moderate Heat: 20 % speed loss, 10 % twist and arm movement range and speed loss. 10 % longer lock-on time for missiles.
- High Heat: 40 % speed loss, 20 % twist and arm momvement range and speed loss. 20 % longer lock on time for missiles. After 10 seconds at this heat level, a shutdown may occur (it can be overriden - an override resets the timer).
- Serious Heat: 50 % speed loss, 40 % twist and arm momvement range and speed loss, and 40 % longer lock on time for missiles. After 5 seconds at this heat level, a shutdown may occur. (Overridable). After 10 seconds at this heat level, ammo explosions will occur.
- Critical Heat: Automatic Shutdown. After 5 seconds at this heat level, ammo explosions will occur, and internal damage will be inflicted.
In the original post, I based everything on a 4 second weapon cycle with a heat neutral weapon. As ExAstris noticed, this would be very harsh for strikers that are build on delivering alpha strikes. So my new heat capacity scale is build a bit differently. EmperorMyrf's idea of giving mechs a bit of "buffer" is implemented in the heat penalties I noticed above - now, it takes 5 seconds at a heat level to suffer the penalties.
If "d" is the dissipation of your mech, the heat scale is as follows:
(I use the mathematical interval notation. [x,y] would mean an interval from x to y including x and y, ]x,y[ would describe the interval from x to y excluding x and y, and so on)
Single Heat Sinks:
[0, 2d]: Nominal Heat.
]2d, 4d]: Low Heat
]4d, 6d]: Moderate Heat
]7d, 8d]: High Heat
]9d, 10d]: Serious Heat
]10d, infinity[: Critical Heat
Double Heat Sinks:
[0, 2d]: Nominal Heat
]2d, 3d]: Low Heat
]3d, 4d]: Moderate Heat
]4d, 5d]: High Heat
]5d, 7d]: Serious Heat
]7d, infinity[: Critical Heat
3) Examples
Let's go back to our previous heat neutral example, but add a second scenario:
2 Weapons, each producing 10 heat every 4 seconds. Heat Dissipation d = 5.
Such a mech would currently in MW:O have a heat capacity of 30 + 5 * 10 = 80.
Let's say this mech would be build to be hotter, and, say, have a 3rd weapon dealing 10 heat.
For references, we'll also see each weapon would deal x DPS.
So we have 6 scenarios:
Heat Neutral Build with Single Heat Sinks
Heat Neutral Build with Double Heat Sinks
Hot Build with Single Heat Sinks
Hot Build with Double Heat Sink
Single Heat Sinks Scale for a mech with dissipation d = 5:
[0,10]: Nominal Heat
]10,20]: Low Heat
]20,30]: Moderate Heat
]30,40]: High Heat
]40,50]: Serious Heat
]50, infinity]: Critical Heat
Heat Neutral Build:
Alpha Strike with his 2 weapons would bring this mech into low heat region. He would cool down to nominal heat within 2 seconds, so he wouldn't really suffer any penalties.
Over 20 seconds, this mech would deal 40x damage.
Hot Build:
An Alpha Strike with his 3 weapons would bring this mech into the moderate heat region. After 5 seconds, he would have dissipated 25 heat, bringing him down to 15. So he would suffer the low heat penalty for a few seconds.
The mech would overheat after 20 seconds if he keeps firing all his weapons.
Over 20 seconds, this mech would deal 60x damage. If he avoids shutting down and lowers himself to the rate of fire sustained by his heat dissipation, he would from now on deal the same damage as the heat neutral build.
Double Heat Sink Scale for a mech with dissipation d = 5:
[0-10: Nominal Heat
]10-15]: Low Heat
]15-20]: Moderate Heat
]20-25]: High Heat
]25-35]: Serious Heat
]35, infinity]: Critical Heat
Heat Neutral Build:
Alpha Strike with his 2 weapons would bring this mech into high heat region. He would cool down to nominal heat within 2 seconds, so he wouldn't really suffer any penalties.
After 14 seconds, this mech would have dealt 28x damage.
Hot Build:
An Alpha Strike with his 3 weapons would bring this mech into the serious heat region. he would cool down to low heat within 10 seconds, so he would suffer low heat penalties after the first salvo.
If he kept alpha striking, this mech would overheat after 14 seconds, dealing 42x damage.
So using this system, if you build a "striker" mech, you can get better results with single heat sinks, as the heat capacity carries you further than double heat sinks. Double Heat Sinks will force your mech to run cooler overall, so that it will be harder to benefit from the tonnage gained by DHS.
DHS may become particularly interesting for mechs that are build around using weapons for different weapon range groups that you don't expect to use together due to their different ranges, say a mech with 2 PPCs and 4 Medium Lasers, or a mech with LRMs and an AC20.
Single Heat Sinks would become particularly interesting for strikers/snipers that want to deliver burst damage and retreat afterwards (or stand about the smoking debris of a defeated, "cooler" running mech)
#24
-
-
- 427 posts
Member
Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:13 PM
MustrumRidcully, on 04 November 2012 - 02:51 AM, said:
Just as short note: While heat matters in the current system, it also creates vast imbalances. The devs do not seem to find a way that works to remove the imbalances without removing the important of heat managament. I see it necessary to point out
1) The game is imbalanced due to how heat affects higher heat weapons too strong
2) There are ways to remove these imbalances by lowering heat generation or increasing heat dissipation
3) There are ways to do it while keeping heat very important to manage.
1) The game is imbalanced due to how heat affects higher heat weapons too strong
2) There are ways to remove these imbalances by lowering heat generation or increasing heat dissipation
3) There are ways to do it while keeping heat very important to manage.
I'm not disagreeing that there could be some work done on the balancing front. But it seems fairly clear to me that lowering the heat cap actually magnifies the heat related imbalances in the game. Take the AC20 vs Gauss Rifle for example: in the current system, the 20 can be better for the first part of a fight because its increased heat can be dumped into the mech's free heat reserve without penalty, giving you more dps (5 more damage per shot, same cycle time) to work with until you hit your heat cap, while the GR does less dps, it barely contributes to your heat at all, making it better for extended brawls. With a vastly lowered heat cap, the AC20 puts you in the penalty box immediately (assuming you're also using secondary weapons), while the gauss just puts free dps on top of your other weapons.
So, if your point 1) is true now, it will only be magnified in a low-cap world. Number 2) can be done on an per weapon basis to obtain balance, and revamping the denominators for all mechs will require re-evaluation of every weapon's numerator value anyways. And as noted before on the topic of number 3), heat already is very important to manage, it just doesn't have an immediate and escalating scale of problems, it rather opts for a buffer with a harsh penalty box at the end of the road (shutdown).
MustrumRidcully, on 04 November 2012 - 02:51 AM, said:
The question is - are we disagreeing fundamentally, or could we actually haggle over the price?
My main point here was to illustrate that changing the heat capacity can make heat management relevant even if you have a high heat dissipation.
The Devs seem to be very concerned that DHS for example make mechs "too cool" so that heat management doesn't matter anymore. (They don't seem to be aware that a good build will utilize the additional dissipation so he can deal more damage and stay hot, because a heat neutral build is sacrificing burst damage that could save his life for the purely theoretical advantage of being able to fire non-stop for 15+ minutes.)
My main point here was to illustrate that changing the heat capacity can make heat management relevant even if you have a high heat dissipation.
The Devs seem to be very concerned that DHS for example make mechs "too cool" so that heat management doesn't matter anymore. (They don't seem to be aware that a good build will utilize the additional dissipation so he can deal more damage and stay hot, because a heat neutral build is sacrificing burst damage that could save his life for the purely theoretical advantage of being able to fire non-stop for 15+ minutes.)
I think there are deeper issues at work with the combination of increased dissipation and a lower heat capacity. Consider the timescale this is happening on. Currently, you can get yourself into a heat-bind that lasts for the entire fight, it puts an effective limit on your output dps, and puts you at a severe defensive disadvantage whenever you shutdown. You can avoid this by disengaging and recovering your heat so that you can return to the fight and deliver more burst. Currently, full heat recovery takes anywhere from 15-40 seconds depending on the build. Some light mechs can effectively disengage in 5 seconds, but some assaults take a full 10 seconds just to turn around, let alone leave the enemy's field of fire. Both increasing the dissipation and lowering the heat cap reduce the total heat recovery time, which makes it harder to retreat for heat purposes. No sooner than that assault mech has turned around and walked 20m has he already recovered all of his heat, and now he's just taking fire to his backside instead of keeping up the pressure on the front line. Similarly, the role of burst damage and the striker archtype both get phased out of existence the higher the dissipation and the lower the heat cap precisely because this interval of time shrinks.
This lowering of the viability of burst damage, strikers, and tactical retreats for heat recovery, is just a systemic effect of any system that allows for higher dissipation and/or a lower heat cap. It isn't specific to your mathematical rendering of it, its just a necessary effect. One I don't find particularly welcome given the pace of MWO.
And I don't think the Dev's concern with DHS being supremely efficient has anything to do with wether people will build heat neutral or hot designs as that is already a design decision people have to make. The concern with DHS is that they provide mechs with too much dissipation overall (which is precisely one of your suggestions). It changes the pace of the game (in exactly the way I am concerned about) by making the heat-recovery time of a mech way to short to be significant in the pilot's decision making. i.e. it removes strikers and tactical heat retreats from the game.
MustrumRidcully, on 04 November 2012 - 02:51 AM, said:
Without heat penalties, and with a high heat capacity as we have it right now, alpha strikes builds are still generally the best. And that seems to me the antithesis of the idea of "heat management matters". The only thing heat management in MW:O seems to be about is "stop firing before you shutdown". The lack of heat penalties means there are no other trade-offs to consider and evaluate.
So here I'm going to read into this a bit, so forgive me if I put too many words in your mouth. But your real problem isn't with the dissipation rate or the heat cap, its with repeated alpha strikes being the go-to attack method and the heat scale only possessing one penalty (well, two if you count ammo explosions).
If the group-fire-only style combat and the uni-penalty heat scale are what bothers you, then you need not change the heat cap or the base dissipation rates to encourage people away from those. I think you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater with this system.
Now, as for these two notions, making chain-fire an option for more than just LRMs, and having a multi-penalty heat-scale, there might be room for those in MWO, and I have a few ideas on that subject myself. But it should probably be in a different thread.
Also, in your second post, elaborating on your position, you do note that a SHS build with a given dissipation and a DHS build with that same dissipation would have different max heat thresholds.
It would be interesting to see a magnification of this relation to give SHS and DHS the sort of flavor you allude to in that post. DHS would do as they currently do (as of Nov 6 anyways) and give you 1.4 dissipation each and +1x to your heat cap. However, we could change SHS so that they still only give you 1.0 dissipation each, but they increase your heat cap by even more, say 2-2.5x each. DHS will be a great option for mechs that need a steady stream of dissipation (lights, LRM boats, some brawlers), while SHS would be a great option for burst damage machines (strikers, some snipers, some brawlers).
But that is really another independent suggestions attempting to make SHS more distinct from DHS and useful on a few more mechs than just the assaults that don't have the crit space for DHS.
Edited by ExAstris, 04 November 2012 - 01:42 PM.
#25
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 10,644 posts
Member
Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:19 PM
Quote
Also, in your second post, elaborating on your position, you do note that a SHS build with a given dissipation and a DHS build with that same dissipation would have different max heat thresholds. This is actually the way the game currently works as you end up needing more SHS to get the same dissipation as a lower number of DHS, and your max heat tolerance is based on the pure number of HS, regardless of whether they are double or not.
No, it does not. At least not yet. Currently, DHS are supposed to add +2 per sink to the capacity. It seems soon they'll add 1.4 (the same they add to dissipation, basically) - but the idea that DHS would lead to a lower heat capacity has not yet reached the devs. At least not for immediate implementation.
As far as we know. I mean, a week ago we thought we'd get double heat sinks, we're now getting SQRT(2) heat sinks.
A few months ago I thought this would be a Battletech game that was based more "stock" mech friendly, supporting typical Battletech mechs rather than custom designs that mostly downgrade weapons.
Edited by MustrumRidcully, 04 November 2012 - 01:20 PM.
#26
-
-
- 427 posts
Member
Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:35 PM
MustrumRidcully, on 04 November 2012 - 01:19 PM, said:
No, it does not. At least not yet. Currently, DHS are supposed to add +2 per sink to the capacity. It seems soon they'll add 1.4 (the same they add to dissipation, basically) - but the idea that DHS would lead to a lower heat capacity has not yet reached the devs. At least not for immediate implementation.
Ah, I believe I misread the EHS bug for DHS operating at 1.0 to include their heat cap increase as being 1.0 as well, but that was not stated in the release, thus I seem to be in error on that. Though I could find no confirmation that their heat cap increase will be 1.4 post-patch, only their heat dissipation, though its not a wild assumption to suppose it would be.
#27
-
-
- The Howl
- 740 posts
Member
- LocationMinnesota, USA
Posted 04 November 2012 - 09:22 PM
ExAstris, on 04 November 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:
It would be interesting to see a magnification of this relation to give SHS and DHS the sort of flavor you allude to in that post. DHS would do as they currently do (as of Nov 6 anyways) and give you 1.4 dissipation each and +1x to your heat cap. However, we could change SHS so that they still only give you 1.0 dissipation each, but they increase your heat cap by even more, say 2-2.5x each. DHS will be a great option for mechs that need a steady stream of dissipation (lights, LRM boats, some brawlers), while SHS would be a great option for burst damage machines (strikers, some snipers, some brawlers).
But that is really another independent suggestions attempting to make SHS more distinct from DHS and useful on a few more mechs than just the assaults that don't have the crit space for DHS.
But that is really another independent suggestions attempting to make SHS more distinct from DHS and useful on a few more mechs than just the assaults that don't have the crit space for DHS.
I like this idea, but I feel it should be saved for clan DHS. Of all things clan, DHSs stand out as being better in all fields and then some, so it would be nice to at least have some sort of mechanic to make the originals not completely obsolete.
#28
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 10,644 posts
Member
Posted 04 November 2012 - 11:04 PM
EmperorMyrf, on 04 November 2012 - 09:22 PM, said:
I like this idea, but I feel it should be saved for clan DHS. Of all things clan, DHSs stand out as being better in all fields and then some, so it would be nice to at least have some sort of mechanic to make the originals not completely obsolete.
I really don't know what the devs are planning for the Clans here.
They are already "nerfing" Level 2 Tech. At least, when it suits them - Double Heat Sinks are nerfed, but Gauss Rifles are not. There is no real consistency here. Except maybe "if it produces more heat or dissipates less, it's a good change". Could very well be people will jump in their Mad Cats 2 years from now, overheat in 4.25 seconds and then get headshotted by a Gauss Kitty.
As someone that dislikes the power creep especially in regards to clan tech, it may even feel satisfying for a while. Except that's not the way to do create balance, by making all stock configs useless.
Edited by MustrumRidcully, 04 November 2012 - 11:05 PM.
#29
-
-
- 1,222 posts
Member
Posted 05 November 2012 - 12:00 AM
Consider this part of the choir preached to.
I do want there to be a buffer of some form though. An AWS-8Q chainfiring shouldn't really ever be penalised unless they chain all three PPCs for quite some time. Chaining two should never suffer a penalty. Fire support assaults are suffering in the current heat system, and change should allieviate that.
I do want there to be a buffer of some form though. An AWS-8Q chainfiring shouldn't really ever be penalised unless they chain all three PPCs for quite some time. Chaining two should never suffer a penalty. Fire support assaults are suffering in the current heat system, and change should allieviate that.
#30
-
-
- The Howl
- 740 posts
Member
- LocationMinnesota, USA
Posted 05 November 2012 - 05:33 AM
MustrumRidcully, on 04 November 2012 - 11:04 PM, said:
I really don't know what the devs are planning for the Clans here.
They are already "nerfing" Level 2 Tech. At least, when it suits them - Double Heat Sinks are nerfed, but Gauss Rifles are not. There is no real consistency here. Except maybe "if it produces more heat or dissipates less, it's a good change". Could very well be people will jump in their Mad Cats 2 years from now, overheat in 4.25 seconds and then get headshotted by a Gauss Kitty.
As someone that dislikes the power creep especially in regards to clan tech, it may even feel satisfying for a while. Except that's not the way to do create balance, by making all stock configs useless.
They are already "nerfing" Level 2 Tech. At least, when it suits them - Double Heat Sinks are nerfed, but Gauss Rifles are not. There is no real consistency here. Except maybe "if it produces more heat or dissipates less, it's a good change". Could very well be people will jump in their Mad Cats 2 years from now, overheat in 4.25 seconds and then get headshotted by a Gauss Kitty.
As someone that dislikes the power creep especially in regards to clan tech, it may even feel satisfying for a while. Except that's not the way to do create balance, by making all stock configs useless.
I'll hold my tongue (fingers) on their balance goal until I actually see what it is, been super stoked for this supposed balancing pass coming soon. I'd like to think they're not done with the GR, or anything else for that matter just yet.
But yes, clan power creep is a very large threat to balance. I've mentioned this before, but I really hope clan tech has a "high risk high reward" behavior. Difficult to use, but you'll be a monster if you can use it correctly. Having clan DHSs bump up the heat capacity by less would be a good example of that. Actually, I'd be ok with them raising it by even less, like 0.5/DHS. Hopefully it'd be enough to make sure that Nova Prime alpha strikes are not commonplace (though I'd like to see some work done with convergence to combat that, but that's another post).
#31
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 10,644 posts
Member
Posted 05 November 2012 - 05:51 AM
I could see two routes
1) All Level 2 and Clan Tech gets "nerfed" in ways that it's comparable to Level with Level 1 Tech. That includes the Gauss Rifle, Double Heat Sinks and the ER PPC. It will also make them "work" without the power-ups of Level 2 or Clan Tech, of course - the Clan ER PPC may trade in some damage so it can also produce less heat and be more manageable, for example.
2) Keep Clan and IS segregated. It's either IS vs IS, or Clan vs IS (and rarely Clan vs Clan?). The match-maker gives the Clan side a drawback (for example, smaller team size, or counting the tonnage of all clan mechs as +50 %.
Or, of course
3) Make it up as you go, sometimes it works, sometimes it leads to horrible imbalances, but no one cares unless it hurts the bottom line.
1) All Level 2 and Clan Tech gets "nerfed" in ways that it's comparable to Level with Level 1 Tech. That includes the Gauss Rifle, Double Heat Sinks and the ER PPC. It will also make them "work" without the power-ups of Level 2 or Clan Tech, of course - the Clan ER PPC may trade in some damage so it can also produce less heat and be more manageable, for example.
2) Keep Clan and IS segregated. It's either IS vs IS, or Clan vs IS (and rarely Clan vs Clan?). The match-maker gives the Clan side a drawback (for example, smaller team size, or counting the tonnage of all clan mechs as +50 %.
Or, of course
3) Make it up as you go, sometimes it works, sometimes it leads to horrible imbalances, but no one cares unless it hurts the bottom line.
Edited by MustrumRidcully, 05 November 2012 - 05:51 AM.
#32
-
-
- Stone Cold
- 916 posts
Member
- LocationSochi
Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:06 AM
interesting ideas but... gauss for example cannot overheat a mech no matter how hard one try.
this also will be too complex for average player.
this also will be too complex for average player.
#33
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 3,272 posts
Member
- LocationKing Of Flower Beds
Posted 05 November 2012 - 06:46 PM
The average player must adapt... being stupid is no excuse. Also we are not dealing with pen nor paper here. Effects will be felt automatically being programmed into the game there will be no calculation players side. It is the same as when one learns that pins and fingertips dont mix or that chili pepper should never go into the eyes. If the average player can't put two and two together mankind is in deep trouble.
Edited by ManDaisy, 05 November 2012 - 06:50 PM.
#34
-
-
- 2,818 posts
Member
Posted 05 November 2012 - 07:11 PM
I throughly agree with the OP. If PGI wanted heat to matter, they would implement the other negative effects.
While I do agree with the numbers given or their penalties, I think they *must* be implemented to make the heat management more important.
In doing this, using the same weapon setup, the Gauss Rifle should be modified to be firing at 8s as to not be just completely broken within the system. It severs the tie from heat with a long CD. And in doing this, you will begin to see why SHS/DHS with the current RoF is such an important issue.
While I do agree with the numbers given or their penalties, I think they *must* be implemented to make the heat management more important.
In doing this, using the same weapon setup, the Gauss Rifle should be modified to be firing at 8s as to not be just completely broken within the system. It severs the tie from heat with a long CD. And in doing this, you will begin to see why SHS/DHS with the current RoF is such an important issue.
#35
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 10,644 posts
Member
Posted 08 November 2012 - 12:30 AM
Kurayami, on 05 November 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:
interesting ideas but... gauss for example cannot overheat a mech no matter how hard one try.
this also will be too complex for average player.
this also will be too complex for average player.
I don't really believe it would be all that complex - it is ultimately happening in the background, and it's something a player might slowly pick up as he learns about heat management. it would be a good idea to focus the trial mechs on relatively cool running mechs, of course, so the don' get overwhelmed by all of it. But then... Currently, they trial mechs are the hottest mechs around basically...
#36
-
-
- 1,222 posts
Member
Posted 08 November 2012 - 02:42 AM
MustrumRidcully, on 08 November 2012 - 12:30 AM, said:
But then... Currently, they trial mechs are the hottest mechs around basically...
Something that has been brought up many times before I might add.
This is why my Mech XP overhaul suggests making heat dissipation one of the free abilities given to new accounts.
#37
-
-
- Urban Commando
- 3,437 posts
Member
- LocationPoland
Posted 31 January 2013 - 02:29 AM
The quickest way of killing an opponent in MWO is to place all the shots in the right place. The fewer shots needed, the easier. That`s why alpha striking is the best strategy. There is no incentive not to. If the next salvo is going to overheat you, it`s better to wait a bit than to use only half of your weapons.
Sometimes when I see a damaged heavy mech trying to hide behind a hill, I rush him with my Jenner and fire 4xML+2xSRM4 for 40 damage total, often killing him in one salvo. Then I make a quick turn and run back to my team at 142 kph. On the other hand an Awesome can shoot his PPCs a couple of times and then his DPS takes a dive. In fact, a Jenner with 4xML+2xSRM4 is capable of dealing more damage during 15 minutes, than an Awesome with only 3 PPCs.
Another example: A Stalker with 6 PPC and 17 DHS might seem like a powerful enemy, but it will lose in a duel against CPLT-C1 armed with 3xLL and 18 DHS, because it is faster and more heat efficient.
The high heat-low dissipation system buffs fast mechs, that can run away and hide, only to return for another alpha strike.
Increasing the heat dissipation while reducing heat capacity will give more firepower to heavier mechs.
Sometimes when I see a damaged heavy mech trying to hide behind a hill, I rush him with my Jenner and fire 4xML+2xSRM4 for 40 damage total, often killing him in one salvo. Then I make a quick turn and run back to my team at 142 kph. On the other hand an Awesome can shoot his PPCs a couple of times and then his DPS takes a dive. In fact, a Jenner with 4xML+2xSRM4 is capable of dealing more damage during 15 minutes, than an Awesome with only 3 PPCs.
Another example: A Stalker with 6 PPC and 17 DHS might seem like a powerful enemy, but it will lose in a duel against CPLT-C1 armed with 3xLL and 18 DHS, because it is faster and more heat efficient.
The high heat-low dissipation system buffs fast mechs, that can run away and hide, only to return for another alpha strike.
Increasing the heat dissipation while reducing heat capacity will give more firepower to heavier mechs.
Edited by Kmieciu, 31 January 2013 - 02:29 AM.
#38
-
-
- Knight Errant
- 597 posts
Member
Posted 31 January 2013 - 02:39 AM
I feel that the current heat system is fine, and a change to higher dissipation/lower max heat will remove the use of hit and run tactics.
However, worse-working electronics and similar when at higher heat levels sound EXCELLENT.
EDIT: Maybe that's also a way to balance ECM - at 75% heat or something it stops working.
However, worse-working electronics and similar when at higher heat levels sound EXCELLENT.
EDIT: Maybe that's also a way to balance ECM - at 75% heat or something it stops working.
Edited by Stringburka, 31 January 2013 - 02:39 AM.
#39
-
-
- Knight Errant
- 597 posts
Member
Posted 31 January 2013 - 02:46 AM
Kmieciu, on 31 January 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:
In fact, a Jenner with 4xML+2xSRM4 is capable of dealing more damage during 15 minutes, than an Awesome with only 3 PPCs.
On the other hand, the awesome has pinpoint accuracy, can shoot from a kilometer away and all it's shots will land in one place. Can't say that for a jenner. So that's more to do with PPC's not being balanced for high DPS but for long-distance accuracy. Saying a melee striker should deal more damage in the long run than a long-distance sniper makes sense.
Now, look at an ML/LL-boating Awesome and the situation is different...
Kmieciu, on 31 January 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:
Another example: A Stalker with 6 PPC and 17 DHS might seem like a powerful enemy, but it will lose in a duel against CPLT-C1 armed with 3xLL and 18 DHS, because it is faster and more heat efficient.
That depends a lot on the area. On caustic valley or snow forest I'd vote for the Stalker, in river city or summer forest I'd vote for the Cat. Now, put two such Cats against a stalker and a Cat and I'd vote for team Stalker every time.
Large mechs need backup.
#40
-
-
- Urban Commando
- 3,437 posts
Member
- LocationPoland
Posted 31 January 2013 - 03:40 AM
PPCs are massively underpowered. If you put SRMs and Medium Lasers on a Stalker, you`ll gonna destroy that LL Cat with ease.
Even caustic and snow forest has enough cover to rush the enemy without the fear of long range fire. You can even use the edge of the caldera to ambush somebody and unleash hell.
Even caustic and snow forest has enough cover to rush the enemy without the fear of long range fire. You can even use the edge of the caldera to ambush somebody and unleash hell.
12 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 12 guests, 0 anonymous users
