532 replies to this topic

[Stormwolf]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 02:00 AM, said:

I...I get that's what happened in the TT. But the entire point was that this aspect of the TT should be ignored. Autocannons shouldn't become obsolete.



That DPS is useless when it's all over the place. I do much better with an AC/20 than multiple smaller ACs because I like having single strong burst shots. I can't keep firing at the same spot over and over again.

But they did get obsolete, this is the same as what happend when the Clans got their advanced tech in the Golden Century. Components like regular lasers, single heatsinks and autocannons have been extinct for more then 100 ~ 200 years. Hell, even some mechs that are far more advanced then what the IS can build went extinct:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Woodsman

This isn't some TT rule, it's simply the canon of the BT/Mechwarrior universe.

[Krivvan]

Stormwolf, on 06 November 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

But they did get obsolete, this is the same as what happend when the Clans got their advanced tech in the Golden Century. Components like regular lasers, single heatsinks and autocannons have been extinct for more then 100 ~ 200 years. Hell, even some mechs that are far more advanced then what the IS can build went extinct:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Woodsman

This isn't some TT rule, it's simply the canon of the BT/Mechwarrior universe.

And it also isn't canon that the majority of IS mechs were custom. Some parts of the canon are ignored in favour of gameplay.

[Sean von Steinike]

I wonder if the D&D Online or NeverWinter Nights forums have people whining that the old red box basic D&D rules are not used?

[Devils Advocate]

I'm pretty sure adjustments to LRMs and Gauss Rifles would take care of this whole issue. I'd rather people had to worry about heat if they want to use the 'safe' weapons that can tag other mechs from a thousand meters away, and if every build had something to worry about it'd be balanced out. Right now it just isn't, and until that gets corrected it's going to keep feeling really dumb to bring an ERPPC or an ERLL into battle. I'm going to try to make them work anyway because I can't stand the gauss rifle right now but only time will tell if they readjust the double heat sinks so that they don't nerf every energy build on the market.

[Slanski]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

Why is reducing damage preferable to increasing heat? Reducing the ER PPC's damage completely negates its entire strength as a PPC moreso than increasing heat. Increasing heat doesn't impact its effectiveness as a sniping weapon nearly as much.

Heat only balances by limiting how many times you can fire it. It doesn't limit the effectiveness of each time you fire it. If you don't fire the weapon often then heat is much more preferable than a loss of damage or anything else. That's why heat is personally the least important factor for me when looking at weapons.

You're right there Krivvan. But currently the cost/loadout/heat balance is severely off. The idea of PGI I like (make heat an option and a decision for the player to push his mech beyond its limits). It's just that certain weapon systems currently can push the envelope without incurring similar penalties, reducing viable variety. Also it's bloody hard to disengage on my maps so enemies find it easy to force you into protracted fights where sustained DPS very quickly dominates burst.

[Stormwolf]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

And it also isn't canon that the majority of IS mechs were custom. Some parts of the canon are ignored in favour of gameplay.

That has more to do with fan outrage that would follow if people can't min max their rides. I personally love stock builds, but my gameplay experience gets ruined by all the cheesy builds, so I wouldn't say that this is something that makes the game better for me.

Still hoping for a stock only mode so I can play something that atleast resembles the setting.

[HarlekinEO]

First of all, thank you topic starter.

Now I understand why the Standard AWS-9M doesnt work on Battlefield...

I bought my first Mech AWS-9M, since I like Awesomes pretty much. But I recognised, that he is unplayable. The first thing I did, was reducing the ammount of ER-PPKs, but it still did 28% Heating with 2 ER-PPKs each strike and the heating reduce was low. Also these ER-PPKs are hard to use in combats due to there delayed-firetype. So there are 2 heavy disadvantages to bear. If you dont hit, you will suffer twice.
I dont understand why this was made, since I didnt recognised that the ER-PPKs were high Damage Dealers at all.

This issue should reworked.

[Slanski]

A key issue in playtesting is:

Developers tend to play the game as they envisioned it. Gamers play to break it and find competative advantage.

Look at the Devs to see how it should look like, look to the gamers to see what Frankenstein the competative crowd will make of the incentives and opportunities you give them.

[MustrumRidcully]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

Why is reducing damage preferable to increasing heat? Reducing the ER PPC's damage completely negates its entire strength as a PPC moreso than increasing heat. Increasing heat doesn't impact its effectiveness as a sniping weapon nearly as much.

Heat only balances by limiting how many times you can fire it. It doesn't limit the effectiveness of each time you fire it. If you don't fire the weapon often then heat is much more preferable than a loss of damage or anything else. That's why heat is personally the least important factor for me when looking at weapons.

Why it is preferrable? Because that makes the mech play more like it was in the table top. The Awesome's typical MO was to launch barrage after barrage of PPC fire. That's why it deserved the name. It is not a sniper mech. If you worsen the heat generation to dissipation ratio, the Awesome would need to beplayed as a sniper mech, not a direct fire support mech - and sniper mechs become too hot to function reasonable.

Sean von Steinike, on 06 November 2012 - 02:07 AM, said:

I wonder if the D&D Online or NeverWinter Nights forums have people whining that the old red box basic D&D rules are not used?

Certainly. Some people will hate the new Neverwinter MMO because it's based on the 4th Edition ruleset rather than the superior 3E/2E with skills & powers/2E without skills & powers/1E/OD&D/Chainmail ruleset.

Mustrum "4E FOR4V4R" Ridcully

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 06 November 2012 - 02:58 AM.

[Khobai]

I dont fear change. But PGI needs to stop giving us stock mechs that dont work. If youre going to radically change the heat system at least give us new stock mech designs that actually work under the new heat system.

[Mordenkainen]

Helmer, on 05 November 2012 - 08:10 PM, said:

When developing MWO PGI started with the exact TableTop stats . As someone who has been testing since the early Friends and Family stages, I felt that the game (with a 1 - 1 TT translation) was simply not fun.
Small lasers on a fast moving 'mech was an instant win button, LRMs were grossly ineffective, and Autocannons were next to useless.

Although I can respect the opinion that perhaps PGI has strayed too far from the TT values, I feel that almost every single change has been for the better. Things are still in a state of balancing and fluctuation. Adherence to the original TT rules is great, however, there comes a time when the TT fail in a First Person setting such as this.
The TT rules were very complex for a TT game, however, they represent , in some cases, abstract values and concepts that are not needed in a environment such as this. The rules do not scale well and must be adapted.


Again, I can respect your opinion, I hope you can understand that perhaps not everyone will agree with you.


Cheers.

As a former TT player and player of every BT variant of the game on PC and console not everything will translate to the Virtual Game world. Simple math/physics and plain ole common sense wont let them so be happy with what ya got role with the punches test the beta as were supposed to.
What the game looks and plays like 6 months form now may be a totally different animal. How do i know this easy i've been gaming since 1979 and beta and alpha testing since 1999 a lot changes so stop getting your panties ina bunch and enjoy the game for what it is.

PS Helmer solid response mate!!!

Edited by Mordenkainen, 06 November 2012 - 03:05 AM.

[Slanski]

I think what we agree on is that MWO balances weapons through their loadout costs and heat generation. BV (Battle Value) would just be a crutch to overcome gaps in the balancing. PGI's goal should be to balance DPS/HPS against weight and crit slot values known from TT so we can play recognizable designs with the effects we expect from them.

Currently powergamers will design mechs that look nothing like canon and outperform known designs drastically. As the goal should be battle tech like loadouts obviously balance is severely off. DHS issues is just a consequence and not the source of the disparities in weapon DPS/HPS and DPS/ton and HPS/ton.

[Morang]

Slanski, on 06 November 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

As the goal should be battle tech like loadouts

Totally wrong. It's not the goal of developers. Their goal is to make BT-like loadouts suck, call them "trials" (and use BT canon to defend their loadouts) and force people to either grind in totally canon, but sucking mech, or pay them - to be able to boat heat sinks in most ugly and uncanonical way. to make your mech effective.

[van Uber]

Stormwolf, on 06 November 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

But they did get obsolete, this is the same as what happend when the Clans got their advanced tech in the Golden Century. Components like regular lasers, single heatsinks and autocannons have been extinct for more then 100 ~ 200 years. Hell, even some mechs that are far more advanced then what the IS can build went extinct:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Woodsman

This isn't some TT rule, it's simply the canon of the BT/Mechwarrior universe.

We get that Lore dictates the diminishing use of SHS. Does this mean it absolutely has to be translated into MWO? No, even though Lore describes a natural evolution of technology it does not translate into fun game mechanics and therefore it should be skipped.

Again: fun takes precedence over Lore and/or TT rules.

[Stormwolf]

van Uber, on 06 November 2012 - 03:29 AM, said:

We get that Lore dictates the diminishing use of SHS. Does this mean it absolutely has to be translated into MWO? No, even though Lore describes a natural evolution of technology it does not translate into fun game mechanics and therefore it should be skipped.

Again: fun takes precedence over Lore and/or TT rules.

I really don't see how SHS = fun.

SHS will only thrive in a 3025/3039 type setting.

[MustrumRidcully]

van Uber, on 06 November 2012 - 03:29 AM, said:

We get that Lore dictates the diminishing use of SHS. Does this mean it absolutely has to be translated into MWO? No, even though Lore describes a natural evolution of technology it does not translate into fun game mechanics and therefore it should be skipped.

Again: fun takes precedence over Lore and/or TT rules.

If sticking to Lore or TT rules makes trial mechs more fun, do that. If ignoring them leads ot more fun, do that.
But don't create your own system that takes some concepts of lore or TT and some according your own preferences, but makes trial mechs not fun either.

Stock configurations are offered as default in MW:O. The game should make these mechs reasonable builds. I that requires changing the stock configs, do that. If that requires adjusting weapons or the heat system, do that. But don't stay married to an imbalanced mess that makes these stock configurations nonsensical.

[Wingbreaker]

Sean von Steinike, on 06 November 2012 - 02:07 AM, said:

I wonder if the D&D Online or NeverWinter Nights forums have people whining that the old red box basic D&D rules are not used?

They did. Oh god, they did. "D&D can't be used in real time!!!"

[Mister Zeus]

Keep in mind that there are other advantages to double heat sinks than simply disspiating more heat (2x or 1.4x) than a single heat sink.

1.) Mounting 20 double heat sinks in order to accomplish what 28 single heat sinks does still nets you 8 extra tons to work with. Say hello to backup weapons on the Awesome 9M so now it is actually much more effective at close range than the stock 8Q.
2.) As noted in the Nov. 6 patch commentary, Single Heat sinks increase maximum heat scale by 1 per single heat sink, while double heat sinks increase maximum heat scale by 2 per double heat sink. 20 double heat sinks thus increase maximum heat scale by 40, while 28 single heat sinks only increase it by 28. Thus, the Awesome 9M not only has 8 addition tons to play with from above, but it also can take more heat points before shut down (and thus gains more from Heat Containment than the 8Q).
3.) Engine heat sinks. A cool running mech mounting only DHS in the engine gets the best of both worlds. Heat dissipation increases by 40%, maximum heat scale gets twice the boost, and you don't end up using up any additional space to do so. Remember, the 9M is mounting a 320XL engine, that can hold 12 DHS out of the 20 DHS on it, so it ends up using up 24 (8*3) crit spaces for heat sinks, while the 8Q's 240 engine can only hold 9 of it's 28 heat sinks, leaving 19 crit spaces for heat sinks. A whole whopping 5 crit spaces extra are needed over the 8Q.


Now, on to my personal experiences. The first mech I built up in this most recent reset was an 8Q. I upgraded it to double heat sinks and ERPPCs as soon as I could, at first settling on 3 ERPPCs and 2 Large Lasers (in the right arm) as backup close range weapons.

She's only carrying 17 DHS at this time, but I can easily fire all 3 ERPPCs 2-3 times in rapid chain fire succession before I have to pace my fire. The amount of time I have to spend adjusting aim at a moving target more than allows me to keep my heat in check. The additional range of the ERPPC over the standard models also gives me a huge advantage on the battlefield, ripping LRM boats and Gauss-apults out of their comfort zone as they start taking hard hitting long range fire beyond the range of their weapons. I also upgraded its engine to a 275, thus carrying 2 extra heat sinks over the standard 8Q in the engine. Since they are now double, that works out great for me, and my 8Q now has endo-steel as well to fill out the legs, CT, and head slots as well as the odd slots in the arms and the right torso.

Does she ever have heating problems? Yes, just like a standard 8Q would if rushed by an enemy in close range and forced to fight at a pace not set by the Awesome. But that's why I carry my secondary weapons. I can engage at close range at near redline heat capacity, but still constantly chain fire my twin large lasers. The 9M can do the same with its pulse lasers and Streak SRM-2s.

What I'm hearing from the OP is that they are using the mythical "ineffectiveness" of the 9M as a reason to get DHS, which I and many others like me judged were broken as all holy hell in CBT, up to their CBT power level. As others have pointed out in this thread already, this will shatter the holy trinity of weapons that CBT originally introduced and you will see the same builds that plagued the majority of Inner Sphere mech design through 3050 TRO and beyond.

Example: Look at the 3050 TRO and find one mech other than the Hunchback that still retains its AC/20 instead of replacing it with a Gauss Rifle. Now look in the 3055 TRO and find a mech with an AC/20 other than the Thunder that doesn't instead have a Gauss Rifle and ERPPC combo with standard 10 DHS, or 2 ERPPCs, Gauss Rifle, and only 15 DHS.

It is painfully obvious to me, and I believe the developers at PGI, that such designs ruined the spirit of the weapon holy trinity, replacing the balance of high heat weapons and low heat ballistics, with high heat weapons, a handful of double heat sinks, and the magically delicious gauss rifle which broke all the rules. Thankfully PGI didn't see fit to increase the Gauss Rifle's ammo by 50% like it did for the majority of other weapons, or we'd see even more of the damn things.

Long story short, DHS were broken in CBT, PGI is fixing them to better balance this game. 1.4 heat dissipation might be too low. Be patient and focus on how the game plays rather than the nuts and bolts CBT construction rules that we all know and love from our childhood.

[IS GunGrave]

Rifter, on 05 November 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:

Thank god someone gets it.

I understand it too, I played everything. One of the reasons why I do not post that frequently is the fact I dont wanna look like I am crying... But 1.4 is just terrible, a true clan mech would indeed eat phase 1 IS mechs for lunch...

PS. <3 Daishi

[Stormwolf]

IS GunGrave, on 06 November 2012 - 04:32 AM, said:

I understand it too, I played everything. One of the reasons why I do not post that frequently is the fact I dont wanna look like I am crying... But 1.4 is just terrible, a true clan mech would indeed eat phase 1 IS mechs for lunch...

PS. <3 Daishi

Unless it's a Hellbringer/Loki, the primary build can't properly fire its weapons without overheating. This specific design is already boned even with DHS that have a 2.0 rating.