263 replies to this topic

[shabowie]

Lanessar, on 11 December 2012 - 02:02 PM, said:

The only thing that could rival a PPC in TT was a Gauss rifle, which had it's own quirks (easily damaged, explodey). We're seeing the Gauss quirks now (and people aren't liking it), but nothing making the PPC stand out.

AC-10 comes closest, of first gen autocannon.

The heat system precludes the way a single PPC was used on many lighter mechs in a manner similar to single autocannon in MWO. You cant afford that spike of heat that will interfere in the more efficient operation of your medium lasers or SRMs or whatever.

Edited by shabowie, 11 December 2012 - 02:45 PM.

[LaserAngel]

Thontor, on 11 December 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

You do have to be careful though..
The heat doesn't have to be reduced much.

For example, if you cut the heat in half, suddenly you can fire 8 PPCs like you can fire 4 now.. Bad

I think the large laser is in a good spot with 7 heat... I was surprised at how useful they are now with DHS. My 2LL+Gauss Hunchback runs very cool. I wouldn't go that low with a weapon that does more damage, all front-loaded, like the PPC.

I would probably reduce the heat of the PPC and Large Pulse Laser by 1 point each. To 8 heat each.

And reduce the heat of the ER weapons by 2... To 11 for the ERPPC and 8 for the ER Large Laser.

Extended Range doesn't give near the advantage in MWO that it does in TT. So the cost in heat should not be as much either.

Quite right, ranged direct fire weapons don't have much of an advantage and most battles that aren't, INCOMING MISSILE, devolve quickly into sub-200m brawls. I take back my statement about not wanting to lower the heat on the PPCs.

Just remember that the PPC is currently at 9 heat, dropping it by 2 will place it at 7 heat and overlapping with the Large Laser. At 9 heat the PPC is just manageable right now with DHS.

Garth also mentioned lowering the burn time of the ER Large Laser to a possible 0.75 seconds.

Lanessar, on 11 December 2012 - 02:02 PM, said:

Not to get nitty gritty, but I think the thing making PPCs un-scary is inherent differences from TT to FPS. It was a hard-hitting weapon delivering 10 damage to a single location, and while it generated heat, it could be dispersed within a round using 5 DHS/10 SHS.

The only thing that could rival a PPC in TT was a Gauss rifle, which had it's own quirks (easily damaged, explodey). We're seeing the Gauss quirks now (and people aren't liking it), but nothing making the PPC stand out.

Additionally, and I'm not positive of this, but it does seem like there's a splash damage mechanic in play with the PPC - it's not 10 to a single point, but 6 to the target area, 2 to adjacent areas. Additionally, the PPC "bullet" being so slow doesn't help, nor does triple heat to an already high-heat item.

Just off the top of my head, if the PPC were tweaked in this fashion, I think it would see more use:

1. Deliver 10 points of damage to primary location, 1-2 points to splash locations (up to 3).
2. Adjust heat generation of the weapon downward slightly.
3. Adding the EMP effect the devs noted.
4. Speeding up the "bullet".

Devs have already mentioned 3 & 4, but honestly, I think it will require either 1 or 2 in order to become more used than the Gauss, even with the explodey changes.

I'm armchair quarterbacking this, mind you. I've used PPCs, but haven't done a full analysis on them.

We are getting a speed boost on the PPC to a whopping 2000 m/s. It wasn't that hard to aim before but no it's like lightning. (Figuratively) The EMP effects is duly noted but some other quirks add more flavor to the weapon.

[LaserAngel]

Thontor, on 11 December 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Which is why i said lower the PPC by 1 heat, not 2.. it should still generate slightly more heat than a Large Laser

My mistake. I wonder why I thought it was reduce the PPC to 7 heat.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Zyllos, on 03 December 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

Why was this question answered like this? It sounds like it means DHS will never be 2.0 for dissipation. Am I misreading this answer?

If this is true, this is a bad omen for the future of the heat system and weapon balance. There is SO many threads on why the current system is not properly working. Hopefully I either read this thread wrong or PGI will reconsider this.

Edit: As an FYI, PGI, DHS is technically suppose to replace SHS (reason why there are no Clan SHS).

Gods forbid we be allowed to


--BETA TEST---

It. That might make this a BETA and not a release

[Heeden]

Thontor, on 11 December 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Which is why i said lower the PPC by 1 heat, not 2.. it should still generate slightly more heat than a Large Laser

I prefer the idea of slower, heavier shots. Currently the large laser gives 1.29 damage-per-heat and 2.12 damage-per-second.
The PPC is 1.11 dph and 3.33 dps.

Increasing the PPC cooldown to 3.5 and damage to 12 would only increase the dps to 3.42 but give it a more fearsome punch as you find in the lore.

The (possible) down-side to balance is this would make the PPC slightly more dph efficient than the LLas, increasing heat to 10 would still be a slight buff at 1.2dph.

[MustrumRidcully]

Thontor, on 11 December 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Which is why i said lower the PPC by 1 heat, not 2.. it should still generate slightly more heat than a Large Laser

Maybe because my suggestion would be to reduce it by 2. Yes, it generates as much heat as a LL - but it also fires 1 second faster (3 second total recycle time vs 4.25 second total recycle time). So it would still be hotter (but also deal more damage)
But it also weighs more and has a minimum range. It all evens out. At least so says my mathematical analysis.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 12 December 2012 - 12:49 AM.

[Draco Harkins]

TruePoindexter, on 03 December 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

You test what they let you test. When I'm developing something for my clients I don't give them every bit and bob I may have worked on. I give them what I think represents a useful product for them to test/review.

Your point is invalid, i've been a beta tester for other games for years and i have "tested" NOTHING on MWO that could be considered testing, i had no acess to a report bug feature with propper protocols even in closed beta, i had no direct feedback from the developers to find this so called "balance" (yes i'm being ironic) that everyone screams about so much in the forums or didnt participate in more then one event to stress out the servers or look for game breaking features (that are still to be resolved) without worrying that a snotty kid will blow up my mech and insult my ancestors to the 11th line starting with my mother, while trying to find/break said bugs/exploits/mechanics. Not to mention that the TRUE exchange of information was drowned by the voices of less experienced and less mature individuals while true contributors were decided to be ignored.

This is not beta testing this is a social experiment to find out how much money they can squeeze out of the ignorant masses without antagonizing the hardcore fans of Battletech too much.

Edited by Draco Harkins, 12 December 2012 - 01:13 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Draco Harkins, on 12 December 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

Your point is invalid, i've been a beta tester for other games for years and i have "tested" NOTHING on MWO that could be considered testing, i had no acess to a report bug feature with propper protocols even in closed beta, i had no direct feedback from the developers to find this so called "balance" (yes i'm being ironic) that everyone screams about so much in the forums or didnt participate in more then one event to stress out the servers or look for game breaking features (that are still to be resolved) without worrying that a snotty kid will blow up my mech and insult my ancestors to the 11th line starting with my mother, while trying to find/break said bugs/exploits/mechanics. Not to mention that the TRUE exchange of information was drowned by the voices of less experienced and less mature individuals while true contributors were decided to be ignored.

This is not beta testing this is a social experiment to find out how much money they can squeeze out of the ignorant masses without antagonizing the hardcore fans of Battletech too much.

and how much same will put up with before they leave

[Javok]

FiveDigits, on 10 December 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

How can it "feel right" when Lights and Mediums operate under 2.0 Double Heatsinks (courtesy of their engines) while Heavies and Assaults run only half DHS and the other half 1.4 Crapsinks?
To add insult to injury all of them use the same Small and Medium Lasers that are out of line balance-wise.

But it's all good. The 3 Second Jenner bogeyman (which is using true DHS right now) got replaced by the 6 Medium Laser Cicada bogeyman.

What really saddens me is how at least some of you defend this travesty because "the devs know better".

There is an easy solution to this, make speed generate a lot more heat, you run fast? You run hot! Lights would have to actually use DHSs *and* manage their speed-generated heat and not spend the entire match running at top speed confident that they can spam their weapons all day without fear of overheating.

Basically the logic is as follows, the faster the mech the more friction and heat it would generate when moving its legs in order to reach high speeds, which would in turn curtail into its capacity to fire indefinitely forcing the pilot to actually manage its heat.

Light DHS imba problem solved!

[Khobai]

Quote

There is an easy solution to this,

yep make double heatsinks 2.0

its what everyone wants.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Khobai, on 12 December 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

yep make double heatsinks 2.0

its what everyone wants.

except the devs. They want ppl to shut the hell up and be grateful they let us test what they want in this beta test. Oh and take their word for it that 2.0 would break the game. We didnt need to test that

[Javok]

Khobai, on 12 December 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

yep make double heatsinks 2.0

its what everyone wants.

Yes and that is what I meant, 2.0 plus speed-related heat do address its impact on lights and the heavier mechs become far more viable.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Don't worry, I'm working on a solution to the problem that I'll post tomorrow in my series of threads that no one reads or cares about.

Edit: Pewpew!

Edited by Bluten, 13 December 2012 - 06:36 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Bluten, on 13 December 2012 - 06:28 AM, said:

Don't worry, I'm working on a solution to the problem that I'll post tomorrow in my series of threads that no one reads or cares about.

Edit: Pewpew!

I am looking forward to it!


Mustrum "I love not reading and not caring" Ridcully

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 13 December 2012 - 06:40 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

I know you are but what am I? we've degraded to 5 year olds

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 13 December 2012 - 07:55 AM.

[FerretGR]

Thontor, on 13 December 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

Bottom line, its pretty easy to figure out that with the current implementation of how heat sinks increase heat capacity, combined with how smaller energy weapons work (their heat, ability to use many, convergance, etc) that making all DHS 2.0 would seriously skew the balance of the game.

Garth's 6 ML Cicada would be able to do 50% more damage, at full rate of fire, before reaching full heat capacity. A massive buff.

I think this has been dealt with in the posts by many of the folks posting here. Check out MustrumRidcully's ideas, which include dealing with the ML issue when true 2.0 doubles are used. The bottom line is that working with DHS alone is not the answer. Either they need to be adjusted in tandem with the small energy weapons, or kept the same and have adjustments made to the large energy weapons.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

FerretGR, on 13 December 2012 - 08:46 AM, said:

I think this has been dealt with in the posts by many of the folks posting here. Check out MustrumRidcully's ideas, which include dealing with the ML issue when true 2.0 doubles are used. The bottom line is that working with DHS alone is not the answer. Either they need to be adjusted in tandem with the small energy weapons, or kept the same and have adjustments made to the large energy weapons.

I say; they put them in the game, let us test them and then adjust them. dont just go "take our word for it"
this is a beta... right???

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 12 December 2012 - 09:14 PM, said:

except the devs. They want ppl to shut the hell up and be grateful they let us test what they want in this beta test. Oh and take their word for it that 2.0 would break the game. We didnt need to test that

The sarcasm is strong with this one. cause yes WE did need to test that one. We are the paying customer and we should have a say in what does and doesn't break a game we are (or will be) paying for. the Axiom goes, "The Customer is always right" So we should test them at full strength and tell them what we feel. They are making the game for us and if we likes it we should haves its! My Precious!!

[MaddMaxx]

MustrumRidcully, on 11 December 2012 - 09:00 AM, said:

THey may lose their meaning in an individual, very specific match. But on average, I think, they will reflect the game realities pretty well and will be confirmed by trends in the game - weapon choices, win/loss statistics based on weapon loadouts, and so on.

I am not a great pilot. I may theoretically know what the best loadout is, but I will be beat by a player with a worse loadout than mine that just knows how to maneuver and aim better. But I wouldn't fight any better with a worse loadout, and the other player wouldn't fight worse with a better loadout. And if the other player would find his equal, the one with the better loadout would probably beat him more often then he would beat him.

Statistical models will never be able to predict every specific instance. But they can predict the overall, typical or average outcomes. And I do not believe my model is that far off from reality. If it was, you may have a point, I'd be obviously on the wrong track.

I just say this - When analyzing the math and the chart is more fun than the combat, there may be a problem with you - or the game.

Mustrum "I may have a problem" Ridcully.

Lest we forget. "Ignorance is Bliss!" And the Meek shall inherit the Charred remains of our planet...

[BlightFang]

Dual heat sinks are too powerful and don't keep their namesake. And single heat sinks are too weak. So... Lets compromise and split directly in half, removing both and introducing.... ONE AND A HALF HEAT SINKS! Abbreviated as OAAHHS. Each OAAHHS would take up 2 slots and cool for... you guessed it, ONE AND A HALF heat per 10 seconds - directly inbetween shs and dhs, it is the oaahhs.