Got the game, haven't stopped playing

[Burzmali]

I finally got the game last week after looking at in EB every time I visited for the last few months. I have to say bravo to the developer(s) as this is one heck of a game, probably the first TBS mecha game to even have a feel of realism or strategy. That aside, it seems like the game is supported fairly well and I figured I toss my 2 cents in for the next time the game gets upgraded. These aren't criticism, just things that I've seen in other TBS games that seem appropriate.
Possible improvements:

1. Area of effect weapons. Even if a hex is 333m across, there is little to discourage stacking all of your units in a single hex. The AI has yet to use the tactic on me, and, at up to Novice level, will rush a stack of 3+ ATs with unit after unit. Example, cluster bombs. Mechanics: target a hex, attack roll based on UGM(w/IF is applicable) to hit hex, for each of X bomblet: if enemy ATs are present chance to hit enemy ATs is [(number of enemy ATs/10) + IF skill/(Range factor)], if successful, randomly choose enemy AT and location to allocate damage, if failed, if allied ATs are present chance to hit is (number of allied ATs/10) with affected AT and location determined randomly, if a bomblet affects does not hit an AT it's damage is applied to the hex eventually reducing cover. Pros: High 'rate' of fire for weight, quickly levels buildings, good range and can reduce cover quickly. Cons: Unable to concentrate fire, can hit allies, minimum range, and ineffective against enemies that spread out. Uses: Replaces an LRM rack on a UGM support AT to deal with opponents that like to crouch on tree covered mountain tops and shell you in safety.

2. Non-AT vehicles. I'm thinking trucks and defense towers for missions and campaigns. They'd be non-playable and with only one location. Requirements: They'd need images and such, and I don't know if you can script an object movement (for a convoy) but combat for defense towers shouldn't be that bad. The quick and dirty method would be to make them ATs with all but the CT disabled. Hopefully as long as the CT has a weapon the tower they won't be considered disabled (though I don't know if the cockpit can be moved to the CT), and, based on what I've read on this forum and experienced in-game, would continue fighting. Trucks could be handled the same way, but they would need events to shift them across the map. Ejection might be a problem, but I can only guess how that is coded so I won't speculate on how to deal with that.
[:)]

[Sleeping_Dragon]

Welcome Burzmali!

Always good to see a fresh face! If you like a good stradgy game, TOS will give you much more then your money's worth. It seems you've already figured that out [:)]


Some pointers though or some things you may not have encountered yet.

They're are some downsides to lumping all your titans in the same hex. Missed missle shots can go stray and hit other titans other then thier intended targets if other titans are in the same hex as the target titan. But that's a 'small' drawback. The biggest drawdack is an engine explosion... nasty, nasty, busniess and probably the leading cause of jock death, with only AC20/Tesla Bolt to the head giving it stiff compition in my experiences.

The AI will use different tactics as your AI opponent's rank increases. At lower ranks the AI does tend to do a lot of 'just run at you' more then at higher levels where the AI will more regularly use 'advanced' tactic like smokescreens, better use of cover, ambushes, firing in order to ignite your cover, etc... The upcoming patch will further improve the AI's ability to find a good range/location, stop, and gleefully pound the snot out of you.

[Thorgrim]

Hey there. Just a couple more observations.

AoE / Artillery weapons.
Yep, an old and frequent request. The concept is good, but would the weapon actually be useful? Would it be worth it? A weapon against a specific game condition (stacking) is IMO too conditional. A couple of proposals were analyzed for WS.
You could think of shells that detonate in the air effectively negating cover and hitting the upper body of the target(s). Messy. [;)]
Notice that in your pros and cons you almost described GM/UGMs with detail [:D]
The map editor has a new event that can be used to simulate artill strikes, orbital bombardents and the like. It basically deals a definable amount of damage to everything that is in a given hex and surrounding area. Pretty much like an engine explosion.

Vehicles / Static Defenses.
Non-playable stuff would be great, to create a more involving atmosphere. One of the problems like you pointed out would be images. And if you actually wanted them to take some part in the game (say destroying a convoy as victory condition), they'd have to become entities like buildings. But this atmosphere can also be created in the mission briefing, like Michael did in one of his campaigns that will be released with the next patch.
Defense towers are also a very old request. Eric even did some images for them. These can also be implemented with the editor with a bit of imagination. Problems with using titans as towers would be the cockpit cannot be in the CT (fixed location, head), a titan without legs cannot stand and therefore only arm- and head-mounted weapons can fire (which are disabled in your idea), and the heat reg or leg+torso being disabled would flag the titan as disabled.
I'm still hoping to see towers and walls implemented sometime in the future [:D]

[Burzmali]

Thanks for the welcome! I don't mean to pick on your design, but I've been a Battletech / Mekton / GURPS:Mecha / 'Insert Tabletop Mecha Game Here' fan for years, and since none of those systems are likely to ever have a electronic version that is half the game the TOS is, I guess I am just wedge in elements of those systems to make me feel more at home About the AoE weapons a la cluster bombs, the problem with stacks is that it takes the CC game away from the aggressor. If your EWF and Scanner skills are high, you can pick out the next opponent to be entering your hex, have his target counter charge (with the auto-breakmove) and cripple him with 4 to 1 odds, then rinse-wash-repeat for the next AT entering the hex. I'd imagine the only effective counter of a defensive stack, would be rushing in a stack (i.e. 4+ ATs rushing a hex in the same second) but as it is, that would take a painful amount of planning to pull off (and waiting while the neighboring stack takes you apart). I suggested cluster bombs the way I did, because it seemed the easiest from a pen-and-paper point of view and sounded like something I could code myself. Keep in mind that I mean that in the sense that if I had coded the whole thing I'd have a way to work that part in, as my programming abilities are very skewed in favor of certain simulation languages, I don't pretend to be able to understand code developed by actual programmers, but if you folks coded TOS in SIMAN I could probably 0wnz joo

Other things that may have been considered but discarded:

Weapon links: Linking symmetric or adjacent weapons so that there is one to-hit check, with damage it multiple locations for cannons and same location for Energy weapons. Probably would have to be another button on the attack mode panel, though it is full as it is.

Non ablative armor: Armor that never "falls off" due to enemy fire. For instance, 2 points of non-ablative armor would completely protect you from being worn down by MGs (outside of CC), but LLs would still cost you 7 points of armor. When the last of the ablative is destroyed the armor location is destroyed dropping that non-ablative armor as well.

Going prone: You can get knocked prone, but not go prone voluntarily. This one is really just my role-player side taking over, but I keep imagining a mission where you hide a squad of recons in a river and rise to a crouch in an ambush as a pair of mediums/heavies walk-by. Even so, there have been times that I would have like a AT fall prone simply to remove it from an enemies line of sight. Last night I had my stack of ATs crouched a behind a ridge valiantly trying to fend off a heavy (I was in lights). One AT is taking the brunt of the damage from a pair of PGs, and gets knocked over breaking LoS. The heavy changes targets and I raise the fallen AT to a crouch. Shortly thereafter, the heavy switches back to the damaged Slugger (I think) scoring 1 or 2 head shots. I debated ejecting, but my survival isn't too good, and the head shots had already wounded him pretty badly. Instead I wondered if I should stand and break move until he fell over. Fortunately, my Penetrator chipped off the heavy's LoT and the Slugger was saved, but still, it would have helped if I could have forced the Slugger prone.

Ambient temperature: Only because I am a stickler for realism, but if you had an ambient temperature (or temps per hex for that matter) you could determine the efficiency of heat regulators without needing the blanket -1.0C/sec in polar and +1.0C/sec in core. You'd need a little calculus to avoid having to refresh the temp and rate each second, but it wouldn't be too bad.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: Burzmali
About the AoE weapons a la cluster bombs, the problem with stacks is that it takes the CC game away from the aggressor. If your EWF and Scanner skills are high, you can pick out the next opponent to be entering your hex, have his target counter charge (with the auto-breakmove) and cripple him with 4 to 1 odds, then rinse-wash-repeat for the next AT entering the hex.

Only a very foolish aggressor would charge into a 4-to-1 party [;)] And keep on doing it after the first guy goes down.

I'd imagine the only effective counter of a defensive stack, would be rushing in a stack (i.e. 4+ ATs rushing a hex in the same second) but as it is, that would take a painful amount of planning to pull off (and waiting while the neighboring stack takes you apart).

Not really. Get your supports to rain down some lead on that stack while keeping your other titans out of harm's way. If they're out in the open, standing still, they're sitting ducks. If they're in woods, set them on fire.

Weapon links: Linking symmetric or adjacent weapons so that there is one to-hit check, with damage it multiple locations for cannons and same location for Energy weapons. Probably would have to be another button on the attack mode panel, though it is full as it is.

Like TICs? Discarded. Each weapon raises your heat the moment it is fired, so the next may be fired with an attack penalty. Alpha strikes would be a lot more dangerous, especially with energy weapons if you make that distinction. Energy weapons would rule. Besides, each weapon type has a different to-hit check due to the various modifiers, can't just lump them together in just one.

Non ablative armor: Armor that never "falls off" due to enemy fire. For instance, 2 points of non-ablative armor would completely protect you from being worn down by MGs (outside of CC), but LLs would still cost you 7 points of armor. When the last of the ablative is destroyed the armor location is destroyed dropping that non-ablative armor as well.

Like a 2nd layer of external armor? Hmm, too far-fetched IMO, and I don't think it works with the concept of APs.

Going prone: You can get knocked prone, but not go prone voluntarily. This one is really just my role-player side taking over, but I keep imagining a mission where you hide a squad of recons in a river and rise to a crouch in an ambush as a pair of mediums/heavies walk-by.

There is one mission like that [:D] They don't need to be prone.

Ambient temperature: Only because I am a stickler for realism, but if you had an ambient temperature (or temps per hex for that matter) you could determine the efficiency of heat regulators without needing the blanket -1.0C/sec in polar and +1.0C/sec in core. You'd need a little calculus to avoid having to refresh the temp and rate each second, but it wouldn't be too bad.

Not sure I follow. There is an ambient/environment temperature (those blanket values you mentioned), and there is a hex heat mod for each hex type. There are 2 indicators that show you your heat balance, leds and status page 1.

[Burzmali]

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

Only a very foolish aggressor would charge into a 4-to-1 party [;)] And keep on doing it after the first guy goes down.

Which is one of the main reasons stacking is a good strategy, the AI could get stuck with a CC AT that is essentially useless tonnage vs. a stack defense.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

Not really. Get your supports to rain down some lead on that stack while keeping your other titans out of harm's way. If they're out in the open, standing still, they're sitting ducks. If they're in woods, set them on fire.

I guess, it just seems a unbalanced in favor of the defender. Though if the map is Core or Biochem, you can't light up the cover. If it is polar, a fire is less of a threat. It just seems like those are a small price to pay to rip the teeth out of the CC game.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

Like TICs? Discarded. Each weapon raises your heat the moment it is fired, so the next may be fired with an attack penalty. Alpha strikes would be a lot more dangerous, especially with energy weapons if you make that distinction. Energy weapons would rule. Besides, each weapon type has a different to-hit check due to the various modifiers, can't just lump them together in just one.

So you can only link weapons of the same type. Basically you are trading individual shots that have a higher combined chance of hitting a tender shot, and the chance to knock down then hit, for fewer shots but with a higher knockdown rate and an advantage from heat changes. Seems balanced, the exact mechanics could be tweaked as need be.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

Like a 2nd layer of external armor? Hmm, too far-fetched IMO, and I don't think it works with the concept of APs.

It's just a thought. GURPS uses it as does DP9's games (I think). It is no farther-fetched than armor the falls off in sheets when hit with a laser [:'(]. As far a AP, it it would be more how shields handle explosions, the damage is reduced by the shields level before it is applied to armor. The alternate way to handle it, is to only reduce the armor by a fraction of damage. Of course it all depends on the exactly how damage is applied in the program.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

Not sure I follow. There is an ambient/environment temperature (those blanket values you mentioned), and there is a hex heat mod for each hex type. There are 2 indicators that show you your heat balance, leds and status page 1.

As I said, I'm being a stickler. Technically speaking, a heat exchanger would be a whole lot better venting heat when the substance being cooled is above the ambient. Once the temp falls below the ambient, the system loses effiency quickly, needing more and more energy to further cool the substance. Therefore, at 20C, an AT's heat regs might be able to vent 1.0C/sec, as the AT's temp rises, the rate the AT can vent heat rises too. However, if the ambient is very high, the AT is going to be running a redline much quicker, and will have to wait a long time for cooling back to 0C. Of course, the math to determine all that junk gets tricky and some intergration is necessary. Doing the same thing for each important hex just makes the whole shebang that much more tricky.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: Burzmali
Which is one of the main reasons stacking is a good strategy, the AI could get stuck with a CC AT that is essentially useless tonnage vs. a stack defense.

Not really. You have your CC titans too, they're sitting there, being useless. [;)] The titan selection of the AI is a balanced mix covering various roles, just like an "average" human would choose his team.

I guess, it just seems a unbalanced in favor of the defender. Though if the map is Core or Biochem, you can't light up the cover. If it is polar, a fire is less of a threat. It just seems like those are a small price to pay to rip the teeth out of the CC game.

Ah, but you can reduce the cover with missiles. That's one of their strengths (like the AoE weapon you mentioned). If they hit the titans, fine. If not, they reduce the cover. You don't actually "lose" anything. In Polar fire is less of a threat, but the woods will burn down anyway, though they're tougher to light.

So you can only link weapons of the same type. Basically you are trading individual shots that have a higher combined chance of hitting a tender shot, and the chance to knock down then hit, for fewer shots but with a higher knockdown rate and an advantage from heat changes. Seems balanced, the exact mechanics could be tweaked as need be.

I think you missed one important point. Heat. If you're at say 45C and fire 2 MLs, the 2nd will have a 5% penalty. If you fire them simultaneously, it won't. Now imagine firing 5 LLs. Or better TBs, called shots. You shutdown but kill your opponent in one shot.

It's just a thought. GURPS uses it as does DP9's games (I think). It is no farther-fetched than armor the falls off in sheets when hit with a laser [:'(]. As far a AP, it it would be more how shields handle explosions, the damage is reduced by the shields level before it is applied to armor. The alternate way to handle it, is to only reduce the armor by a fraction of damage. Of course it all depends on the exactly how damage is applied in the program.

Those systems are a little "dubious" IIRC [:D]
And no, the armor doesn't "fall off" in ToS. That's what I was saying with the AP comment. APs measure the amount of damage needed to *penetrate* armor, not to completely remove armor slabs. Notice the AP/mm relation.
Being like shields is precisely why I said it's too far-fetched. I don't see a physical explanation for such a "screen", nor do I imagine there being a material that would absorb "only" 2 "points of damage" per hit.

As I said, I'm being a stickler. Technically speaking, a heat exchanger would be a whole lot better venting heat when the substance being cooled is above the ambient. Once the temp falls below the ambient, the system loses effiency quickly, needing more and more energy to further cool the substance. Therefore, at 20C, an AT's heat regs might be able to vent 1.0C/sec, as the AT's temp rises, the rate the AT can vent heat rises too. However, if the ambient is very high, the AT is going to be running a redline much quicker, and will have to wait a long time for cooling back to 0C. Of course, the math to determine all that junk gets tricky and some intergration is necessary. Doing the same thing for each important hex just makes the whole shebang that much more tricky.

It doesn't necessarily need more energy, it needs more time. And energy in not really a problem in a titan. Remember that the HR needs one PU to operate. I think this is complicating what doesn't need to be complicated. At the time scale things happen, 10 or 20 secs above green hardly makes a difference.

[Burzmali]

ORIGINAL: Thorgim

Not really. You have your CC titans too, they're sitting there, being useless. The titan selection of the AI is a balanced mix covering various roles, just like an "average" human would choose his team.

Let's say that you are playing 4 recons stacked and the AI gets 2 recons and a light. If the light is a CC specialists, that's half the AI's tonnage that is useless against you. Also, since the player chooses ATs based on their own strategy, they wouldn't waste any tonnage on CC ATs if they plan to camp on forested mountaintop and wait for the AI to engage. Even the smartest AI doesn't get to choose ATs with a specific strategy in mind.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

Ah, but you can reduce the cover with missiles. That's one of their strengths (like the AoE weapon you mentioned). If they hit the titans, fine. If not, they reduce the cover. You don't actually "lose" anything. In Polar fire is less of a threat, but the woods will burn down anyway, though they're tougher to light.

As I said, I'm not complaining, I'm just a fan of diversity. I've always thought pure strategies (like mountaintop forest stacking) should have direct counters (i.e. a weapons set) that negate them should you prove unlucky. Honestly speaking, if the AI pulls a team sporting mostly GM and UGM, a stacking strategy is pretty much done for, but the amount of tonnage that most be devoted to thwarting a stack seems high.

At up to Regular, I have yet to lose an AT when I have managed find and setup in a stacked position before the AI engaged. That's with a team designed to engage at medium range and clean up the leftovers at a 2 hex distance.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

I think you missed one important point. Heat. If you're at say 45C and fire 2 MLs, the 2nd will have a 5% penalty. If you fire them simultaneously, it won't. Now imagine firing 5 LLs. Or better TBs, called shots. You shutdown but kill your opponent in one shot.

Yup, that would be an advantage to firing linked, the other being a better knockdown chance. Of course, if I had 5 TBs on my AT, I might hope the first 1 or 2 might knock the opponent over so I could try headshots with the other 3 (after about 5 seconds of cooling) and end the match. But if I fired linked, I could miss or tear off an arm instead and loss the match while shutdown. All linked weapons do is give you an alternative to firing separately, which would speed up combat if your heavy has 8 MGs or SL, and give a player who is falling behind a one shot to level the playing field in exchange for a chance of losing near immediately. If it was still unbalancing, links could get a to-hit penalty based on the number of weapons in the link, suffer higher heat penalties, or require PUs to maintain.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

Those systems are a little "dubious" IIRC
And no, the armor doesn't "fall off" in ToS. That's what I was saying with the AP comment. APs measure the amount of damage needed to *penetrate* armor, not to completely remove armor slabs. Notice the AP/mm relation.
Being like shields is precisely why I said it's too far-fetched. I don't see a physical explanation for such a "screen", nor do I imagine there being a material that would absorb "only" 2 "points of damage" per hit.

Try metal... You shoot though a piece of 1/8" thick sheet metal a couple times and each projectile will have noticeable less energy (maybe 2 'points' worth) on the other side. In reality, you can hit a M1A1 with a machine guy until the end of time without doing any real damage, the armor doesn't slowly ablate. Likewise, if I hit a target with enough force to punch a hole through the armor, why does the next shot go through the same hole? I only mentioned shields because the mechanic for handling damage reduction is attached to shields already (i.e. explosions)

The problem with APs is that once they are penetrated they are gone. If my AT has 9 AP less on an arm, and gets hit there with a LL, the arm is now essentially unarmored, it is the same as if it never had armor in the first place. I agree that that is not a bad system, I was just thinking of an alternative option being a fixed number of AP that never goes down (exact from BRG and such) with any overflow being applied to internals. For example, instead of 100 ablative AP, you could have 8 resistant AP, any damage you take less than 8 is ignored, and over 8 is reduced by 8 and applied to internals. It might add to survivablity and shrugging off 'small arms fire' but you stand the chance of any attack that exceeds the AP crippling a system in a single shot.

As for GURPS being 'dubious', pick up GURPS: Vehicles sometime. As far as design and movement rules, it will beat other system hands down. It might be near impossible to actually use in a pen-and-paper game, and its time system is too simplistic to use in a computer game (TOS's beats it hands down). But otherwise, realism it has in spades.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

It doesn't necessarily need more energy, it needs more time. And energy in not really a problem in a titan. Remember that the HR needs one PU to operate. I think this is complicating what doesn't need to be complicated. At the time scale things happen, 10 or 20 sec above green hardly makes a difference.

It's like this, realistically speaking if a HR can vent 1C/sec when its fluid is the same temperature as the ambient for 1 PU, it will need >1 PU to manage a 1C/sec vent when the fluid temperature is below the ambient, and <1 PU when the fluid temperature is above the ambient. If the HR always consumes 1 PU, it will vent <1C/sec when the fluid temp is below the ambient and >1C/sec when the temp is above the ambient.

In game terms, this would mean that in a normal map, your temp will behave roughly the same as it does now (assuming some values are tweaked to suit it) with the temp falling quickly out of red and slowly after it gets halfway down the green. On a core map temps would fall out of red reasonably quickly but stall quickly in yellow or blue. Arctic would have the needle plunge quickly across the board. As I've mentioned before, if the rate of decrease isn't

I'm not critizing the game, it is one of the best TBS I've ever played, and it is the best Mecha game (TBS or otherwise). I'm only seeing if the game could be broken free of it Battletech roots.

[Thorgrim]

Not going to argue on the stacking issue, it's a matter of point of view. Player vs player?

Same for linked fire. It doesn't give you one shot, it basically gives a tremendous edge to the first person to shoot.

As for the armor deal, heh, yep, metal. But regular armor *is* metal. And we're not talking modern armor or modern MGs. And APs represent an average damage absorbing capability, doesn't necessarily mean all hits hit the same spot. This is a game you know? [:D]
Are you sure shrugging off small weapons fire is a desirable thing in the game? Let's just throw away SLs and MGs then. [:)]
With dubious I meant the DP9 systems, though I never used it it looked too animé-ish to me. I tend to look at anything animé as not too realistic. I withdraw the comment as I don't have enough info, but I was joking, not actually criticizing the system.

Temp, there are actually 3 "layers" if you want to be rigorous. Environment, armor/"buffer", and HR/fluid. Want to get into so much detail? [;)] Again, it's a game.


Notice I'm not one of the programmers of the game, I just play it. [8D]

[Burzmali]

It's all about fine tuning, if linked fire gives a advantage to the first shooter, reduce the effective range. If resistant armor would negate SLs and MGs, make it heavy enough that only heavies and assualts can equip it. As for desireablity, I'm all about variablity, so the more outcomes you have to plan for the better. Sure a 10 MG salute might bounce off resistant AP, but against an abalative it might have a much more effieicent (DMG/TON SEC) than a weapon that could easily pop through resistant armor. I'll agree DP9 is much more anime than the ToS, but Battletech wasn't the last word on Mecha combat games [;)]. I'll drop the temperature debate. When I started reaching for my old Thermodynamics textbook I figured that I had thought about it hard enough. However, one quick set of equations and I'll stop.

Current system (by my estimates)

dT/dt = Dissipation rate of HR * Armor Modifier * Hex Modifier + Map factor + Tweaking bonus

Improved system

dT/dt = (Dissipation rate of HR * Ratio of Current Temp to Ambient Temp ^ x + Titan Surface Area Factor * Difference between current temp and ambient temp) * * Armor Modifier * Hex Modifier

where x is a factor that represents the interface the HR with the ambient where x = 0 represents no contact.

I even intergrated it, but I won't inflict too much math on you all today [;)]

[Sleeping_Dragon]

ORIGINAL: Burzmali
As I said, I'm not complaining, I'm just a fan of diversity. I've always thought pure strategies (like mountaintop forest stacking) should have direct counters (i.e. a weapons set) that negate them should you prove unlucky. Honestly speaking, if the AI pulls a team sporting mostly GM and UGM, a stacking strategy is pretty much done for, but the amount of tonnage that most be devoted to thwarting a stack seems high.

I don't think the situation is nearly that 'bad'. 'Camping' with the majority of your squad has enough drawbacks that a good player will not camp the majority of his squad in a single hex game-after-game, epecially at higher ranks. If your camping in cover, Terran, Savannah, and even Polar; the lighting of said cover is deadly and gives the advantage to the opponent (AI or human). Engine explosions as I've already mentioned is even worse, and it don't have to be one of your titans.. it's that 1 stupid CC light that made it too your hex 1 sec before you accidently take out its engine (or the human player that blows his own titan up on purpuse for the same effect). If the camping squad in question goes heavily for GMH, LRM, PC, and GCs then a good airdrop will slaughter them. I've had my share of Tentakels and Devastators die horribly to airdropped Axemen and Apparitions. Don't underestimate the AI at higher ranks, It WILL block your LOS with smoke, steam, or intervening burining cover to get close and it will commonly appear from the 'fog' in force, not one-by-one. A human and sometimes the AI (unless you wait like 5000secs) will not force the fight if the camping team has a awesome kill zone. It/they will hide and wait...standoff.

I'm definately not saying camping is not a good stratagy; it's very good in certian situations. If the terrian is right and the titans or right, it can be a bloodfest. It's just typically not common enough to warrent a true 'spoiler' weapon IMO. I think a lot of what you've seen so far in rank-based.... once the AI gets to ranks where they can get good to-hit values at longer ranges, things will change eswpecially if they outrange you. At the levels your at now, if the AI gets number advantage (say, it's recons/lights vs your lights/mediums) it can give a camped force a fit as it's hard to deal enough damage to the fast runnning/dodging targets to significantly reduce thier numbers before they start the dogpile... then it's the engine explosion thing... it's a situation where you'll typically gain more then you lose; but when you do lose, you lose big.

I'm not opposed to an AoE weapon, but I've yet seen a proposal for one that makes it a viable choice without it ending up being overpower.
________________________________________


As for Ablative armor, it's an interesting concept, but something that would probably have to be in the game design from the start. Retrofitting it and keeping game balance could be a nightmare, not to mention the amount of codework required.

_________________________________________

Cooling rates based off the ambient temp. is actually a cool idea in a ex-physics major kinda way[:D] But here it's a matter of "Is there any significant gameplay benefit?", which I think you alluded too.

[Burzmali]

It really depends, if you want their to be a benefit there can be. If you track temp by hex, you can use it to determine when a hex ignites. Other than that, you could fine tine the conditions of a campaign without editing the code, if you want to have map with the sun slowly rising on the horizon of mercury, with the ambient getting higher and higher till everyone pops, you can. Of course, if you did it by hex, you could have the terminator chasing ATs across the map [;)]

As to non-abalative armor and all that, most of the coding to implement it would probably pale compared to all the redesign needed to fit all that stuff in the menus [;)]

[Sleeping_Dragon]

ORIGINAL: Burzmali
Of course, if you did it by hex, you could have the terminator chasing ATs across the map [;)]

Already tried the moving terminator thing in the full editor[:D] It's very doable, in theory. Unfortunately the editor has a limit on the number of events that that can occur in a given mission, so a 'good' modeling of 'sunrise' on an airless moon wasn't feasably since a moving terminator eats up A lOT of events.[:(]

One of the things that was added 'behind the scenes' with the upcoming beta was an event accesable from the editor that can add/subtract heat to a titan in a given hex/area. By repeating the event every second (there's a 'repeat' function) it can effectively be used to simulate a 'different' heat value for a given hex/area. (I have some missions in mind that uses this event in this way, if I ever get around to doing them)

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: Burzmali
It's all about fine tuning, if linked fire gives a advantage to the first shooter, reduce the effective range.

On what grounds? Just for balance purposes?

If resistant armor would negate SLs and MGs, make it heavy enough that only heavies and assualts can equip it.

And what about missile racks, and mesons?

As for desireablity, I'm all about variablity, so the more outcomes you have to plan for the better. Sure a 10 MG salute might bounce off resistant AP, but against an abalative it might have a much more effieicent (DMG/TON SEC) than a weapon that could easily pop through resistant armor.

Just out of curiousity, what is the physical explanation for non-ablative armor to reduce damage from *any* weapon type? I mean, a laser damages armor in a very different way than an AC or missiles or a CC weapon or a flamer or a meson etc.
And wouldn't a 13 "point" layer negate just about everything? Unless it would be made of a very dense and very heavy material (a LOT more than regular armor types)...

I'll agree DP9 is much more anime than the ToS, but Battletech wasn't the last word on Mecha combat games [;)].

Nope, it wasn't, and ToS is here to prove it [;)] But I was talking in "realism" (as much as there can be in a game) terms.

I'll drop the temperature debate. When I started reaching for my old Thermodynamics textbook I figured that I had thought about it hard enough.

Well, I thought about reaching for my thermoelectric powerplants textbooks but there was no need to. If you think about it, why should me firing my TB in my RArm increase the heat of the surface of my LLeg? [;)] Game.

However, one quick set of equations and I'll stop.

Current system (by my estimates)

dT/dt = Dissipation rate of HR * Armor Modifier * Hex Modifier + Map factor + Tweaking bonus

The hex mod is added, not multiplied. The titan's base heat dissipation is calculated per location, and then totalled.
BTW, I did propose Larkin an "improved" venting system some time ago, related to hits from heat-causing weapons on locations with a heat regulator section. So I'm not arguing just for the sake of it. [8D]

Improved system

dT/dt = (Dissipation rate of HR * Ratio of Current Temp to Ambient Temp ^ x + Titan Surface Area Factor * Difference between current temp and ambient temp) * * Armor Modifier * Hex Modifier

where x is a factor that represents the interface the HR with the ambient where x = 0 represents no contact.

That would require defining temp ranges for each map type. That would be ok. But you do realise that 0C would screw your formula don't you? [;)] And neg values?
Not sure if the surface area factor is location size, but the value it originates seems huge for high temp diffs.
Hex mod cannot multiply, did you check its value range? Which includes zero BTW.
What about water/fluid hexes? Will you estimate the water's/lava's/acid's temperatures? And air, when titans are airborne? And mountaintops relative to 0m?

[Thorgrim]

Linked fire:
What happens when one of the linked weapons gets damaged (different to hit)?
And if some are in the arms and other not, and you want to fire when prone? And some run out of ammo and others don't? (easy checks)
Doesn't seem to make much of a difference for cannons (spread hits) except they lose the heat mod. Instability would be the same.
Will missile racks also be linkable? LRM12s and head hits?
Shield overload (double heat) looks like a problem to me.

Ambient temp:
If Core would be something like 150C, wouldn't this make ammo explosions so much more dangerous? Wouldn't it make restarting from shutdown a whole lot more complicated? Wouldn't it make NMs and FTs much more powerful? Wouldn't it make battles a pain even staying in heat green?

[LarkinVB]

Seems the suggestions have a bad work : fun ratio regardless of their realism.

[Burzmali]

Curses, I spent a good long time writing a response to have it eaten by an accidental refresh. [:@]

I guess the summary is: Anything can be added and justified if you want it to be, it just takes time to code and time to balance and time to provide a reasonable justification.

I was stealing ideas from GURPS and Mekton for my suggestions, both systems are more rigourus than ToS in options and justifications, but since neither needed to be coded, they could be.

Perhaps we should discuss this further Thorgrim, preferably over a battlefield with hundreds of tons of ATs at our commands [:D]

[Myrmidon]

Hi Burzmali,

Glad to see you found ToS. Its replay ability alone is worth at least twice the original cost of the game. [:)]

As a recovering "Stackoholic" [:(] I have just one thing to say; I too did not see a problem with stacking my Titans in the same hex and unleashing hot flaming death upon the jackrabbits that would charge my position in ones and twos, screaming like banshees. I usually managed to trip lead Titan up and blow his center torso just in time to catch another couple of them in the ensuing barbeque.

That tactic worked for quite a while and my squad, of six members, became older and wiser with each victory, well okay… not actually wiser, they really just became DEAD! It seems the AI Titans lulled me into a false sense of superiority. One fateful day, as I took possession of the only high ground on the map, with a spectacular view of the flat coverless killing fields between myself and the forest that the enemy Titans should be charging out of, in single file, within seconds. (Heehee) Imagine my surprise as coordinated fire erupted from the tree line, burning into my most inexperienced Jocks’ Titan. It seems the little squirrels were kneeling under the heavy cover of the trees, just outside my own effective range, and unloading all of their long-range weapons with wild abandon.

Well, within moments the rookie was on his back and thinking quite intently about his little red Eject button. Alas, it was already too late. The resulting fusion explosion scattered Titans like ninepins and cooked off ammo loads like a frick’n V-Day celebration. Quickly taking stock of the entire situation I surmised that I was pretty thoroughly screwed.

Overheated, shutdown, little or no ammo reserves; I decided to determine the quickest possible “Strategic Fallback” route so the survivors could run their puckered metal butts home to their mommies. That is when their two heavy-hitters stepped out of the woods, ninety degrees from my position relative to the gutless snipers that decimated my squad, and they were in close range… Six letters went out that day. At least the enemy squad wasn’t able to salvage enough scrap metal to make a paperweight.

Well then… Good luck with that.
Make sure your squads’ next-of-kin information files are up to date. [;)]

[Burzmali]

Yeah, it's becoming clear that GMHs and LRMs from hidden positions can really ruin your stacks day. Still though, if you get to a hill and can hand out the GMH and LRMs like candy too, you ahould still be able to clean house. I've given up on a pure stack strategy in favor of a support stack in a rolling assualt stack [8D]

[LarkinVB]

Stacks can work against the AI. Against a player its definatly a no no. Engine explosions are really nasty.