Jump to content

Some Math On Coolant Flush


16 replies to this topic

#1 Texugo87

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 179 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:00 PM

Please keep arguments for or against the coolant flush module generally, or discussions of it's proposed implementation (mc vs cb versions) out of this thread. My intention is for this post to be first and foremost educational/informative, secondly to discuss how the mechanic of a one shot flush dovetails into the current heat system and game play. I have my own opinions on the system, and ideas for how if might be better implemented, but i will save those for elsewhere- I ask that you do as well.

First off, its unclear whether the flush module will dump a % of your current heat, or of you total heat capacity. it doesn't particularly matter in the scenarios I will model below, as I approached them from an absolutely-best-case standpoint. always dumping as close to max heat as possible. % of current heat would make the flush more difficult to use to it's absolute maximum effect:

Assume 10 single heatsinks and we'll use the 20% flush. You have a heat capacity of 40h, and a dissipation rate of 1h/s. If it is based off of heat capacity you would dump 8h regardless of your temp, if it as based on heat level, flushing the instant you reached 40h would leave you at 32 (8h decrease), flushing at 20h would leave you at 16h (only a 4h decrease).

It is also unknown how flushing will scale with number of heatsinks. I've assumed linearly, as many on the forum have, though information in Paul's post doesn't necessarily support this, and could support it always being based off 10 heatsinks just as easily.

Scenario 1:
Jenner F, 4 medium lasers, 10 single heat sinks.
Heat Cap: 40h
Disp. Rate: 1h/s
Alpha heat: 16h
Discharge time: 1s
Recycle time: 4s

Important note, net heat gain from alpha is 15h as you dissipate 1h in the time the lasers take to fire. Lasers can be fired every 5s (discharge+recycle time)

I am not taking into account engine heat, nor an ambient temperature other than whatever the reference temperature is. Basically the the Jenner is sitting still at whatever the game thinks room temperature is. It only fires alpha strikes.

Starting at 0h our Jenner can Alpha 6 times in 60 seconds without overheating. It can fire the first 3 Alphas as fast as possible, then must pay attention to heat management after that, slowing to 16 seconds between pulls of the trigger. This is without using coolant flush.

If our Jenner uses the coolant flush after it's third alpha, it will be able to alpha again immediately. However, the first Jenner will get it's 4th shot off before the second gets it's 5th. The second Jenner will be able to do 7 alphas in the 60 second span with near 0 margin of error, firing its 7th at 59 seconds.

A third Jenner that has the 15%+20% flushes can accomplish the same thing as the second Jenner with the 35%. If they are based on current heat, not heat cap they can offer a slight advantage as the pilot can get closer to his heat cap before triggering the second. They likely offer a tactical advantage as they can be used at different times, and could be used to take advantage of an overheated or inattentive opponent, or could be dumped together for maximum effect.

(I forget if the f actually has 2 module slots or not..., my bad if it doesn't, change jenner f to jenner D and lets just say he didn't use his SRMs)

The first Jenner would be able to fire a 7th alpha right at 60 seconds exactly, but would overheat doing so. The first Jenner would be able to alpha 7 times in 60 seconds if it carried 12 heatsinks.

The main advantage of the flush module in this scenario is the 4th alpha right off the bat, allowing for a greater blitz attack. However, once it's gone, it's gone, it offers an advantage for 1 quick engagement.

I then ran a similar comparison for a 4 ppc stalker, with a 275 and 21 double heatsinks. again it offered 1 extra alpha over 60 seconds, and 1 more at the beginning of the battle. The non flushing stalker can fire 2 alphas, then wait to cool down for a third, then wait, etc. The flushing stalker can fire 3, especially if the flush works off heat cap. However, if it works of current heat, the second stalker would be better to fire twice, wait, fire a third time, flush, then fire a 4th time immediately.

A 4ppc stalker with the 20% module only would have the same performance in a 60 second window as the 35%, just having to wait 2 seconds longer for its 4th shot and delaying the remaining shots by the same.

The 6ppc stalker is inferior to the 4 in anything beyond a single alpha, the higher heat cap of the 4ppc is superior for flushing. The higher dissipation rate of the 4ppc allows it to do more damage in 3 s than the 6 can in 1 alpha. I couldn't make any realistic builds that worked well even with the flush for this scenario. The 6ppc shines in one shot damage, and the flush mechanic doesn't help it much there, it simply allows it to wait not as long for its second shot once, but doesn't make much a different over 60 seconds.

The above is based on absolutely ideal situations, mistakes in heat management, aim, or timing could easily negate any advantage the flush would give you. It is also unknown whether the flush would carry any downside with it, such as a decrease in heat capacity post flush, temporary loss of visibility from steam, or anything else the dev's could think up.

Finally, again assuming flush scales linearly and that it will be based off absolute heat capacity, here are the heat reduction figures for a 35% flush vs number and type of heat sinks. [] denotes the time it would take to dissipate the same amount of heat without flushing.

10 single: 14h [14s]
15 single: 15.75h [10.5s]
20 single: 17.5h [8.75s]
10 double (10 engine): 17.5h [8.75s]
15 double: 19.95h [7.39s]
20 double: 22.4h [6.59s]

As you can see more heatsinks don't get you a lot more. 10 singles vs 20 doubles barely gives the ability to fire 2 more medium lasers, probably one 1 factoring in engine heat, jumpjets, etc. Additionally with more heat sinks flushing becomes less desirable as your dissipation rate increases much much quickly than your heat capacity upon which flush value is (possibly) based. Anything that mounts double heat sinks already dissipates as much heat as a flush does in a little more than it takes for your weapons to cycle, some twisting to spread damage, and you to line up a good shot (at least in my experience).

If I had more time i would post my tables and graphs which more clearly illustrate the scenarios I modeled, maybe I will later.

TL;DR / Conclussion
Coolant flush will give you an advantage, but it isn't as big as I thought it would be going into this. In a single engagement, spamming alpha strikes as fast as you can it gives you an edge. That edge lasts only for that engagement, and once you start considering actual game play, pilot skill, and other variables that edge starts to diminish.

As most "cheese builds" are based around single strike damage, flushing won't enhance them much.

I've never had that one extra alphastrike i get over-riding shutdown before I die get me anything much, so I really don't think the 1 extra strike flushing allows will be overly game changing. Even in the case of the 4 ppc Stalker 160 damage in 18 seconds without flush vs 160 damage in 12 seconds with flush isn't a big practical difference, especially when you can only do it once.

That said, in the right situation, when the stars align, with the right build, and a good pilot, it may just allow you to ruin someone's day when you wouldn't have otherwise been able to. Most of the time I don't think it will make a big enough difference to swing battles.

TL;DR Redux

Double heat sinks, a couple extra heat sinks, water, heat management, aim, shoot placement, pilot skill, trigger discipline, etc are all greater than a 35% flush.

Flush will be a relatively bigger advantage for a lightly armed mech with 10 single heat sinks than a heavily armed mech with 20 double heat sinks.

I don't think the mechanic of flushes will be game breaking, or even all that game altering. They certainly do not seem like they will become required equipment from the numbers I worked out. Depending on cost I probably wouldn't carry them as I'm already adequate at heat management.

(if you aren't good at heat management you can get one more shot off before you overheat/blow up from hitting the override too many times, probably not a big deal)

Edited by cjmurphy87, 04 March 2013 - 08:47 PM.


#2 Padic

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 391 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:22 PM

View PostM A L I C E, on 04 March 2013 - 08:05 PM, said:

It's still completely P2W.


rofl? I think rofl. I'm not sure. But I think.

#3 Kousagi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 676 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:23 PM

My guess is that its based on Max heat thresh hold, since in the CC post it said the amount flushed is affected by the amount of heat sinks you have. Only way that can happen is by max heat, not current heat. Though a advantage is a advantage, no matter how small. Its not like its hero mechs, where they don't gain anything over normal ones, other then 30% more cbills....

Flushs will be used in a clutch manner, where that one shot is the deciding factor of the whole fight... These instances will be few, so...

Edited by Kousagi, 04 March 2013 - 08:25 PM.


#4 Monky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,219 posts
  • LocationHypothetical Warrior

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:26 PM

So what you're saying is, my 6 PPC stalker can get off another alpha before i shutdown. 9 second atlas murder from the front, here I come.

And my A1 SRM fastcat? It can fire a whole 2 more alphas and get another kill without shutting down?

Edited by Monky, 04 March 2013 - 08:28 PM.


#5 Protection

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,754 posts
  • LocationVancouver

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:30 PM

It doesn't change the fact that there are now tiers of modules, and the highest best tier is only for paying players.

That is paying for power that free players can never have. That is the definition of pay2win.

#6 MoonUnitBeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Messenger
  • The Messenger
  • 4,560 posts
  • LocationCanada ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:33 PM

Looks like no one read the first paragraph.

View Postcjmurphy87, on 04 March 2013 - 08:00 PM, said:

First off, its unclear whether the flush module will dump a % of your current heat, or of you total heat capacity. it doesn't particularly matter in the scenarios I will model below, as I approached them from an absolutely-best-case standpoint. always dumping as close to max heat as possible. % of current heat would make the flush more difficult to use to it's absolute maximum effect:


#7 Vermaxx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 3,012 posts
  • LocationBuenos Aires

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:38 PM

The highest tier is also the ONLY ONE that will work without master in mechs that default to one module slot.

In other words, some people cannot do anything BUT pay to win until they invest a serious amount of time into the game.

#8 DrBlue62

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 154 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:39 PM

A way to make the coolant balanced in regards to MC vs Cbills is to give each Cbill bought coolant module two (four individual) uses. This will make the Cbill coolant competitive against the MC bought coolant. However some sort of time limit in between coolant flush uses would need to be set into place to keep it from being too powerful and even then it still might too large of an advantage as it would allow the user to disregard the heat mechanism twice to a certain extent.

Edited by DrBlue62, 04 March 2013 - 08:42 PM.


#9 Texugo87

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 179 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:45 PM

I wasn't interested in making a case for it being pay to win or not. There are many other threads about that. 1+2 are different than 3, they have different functionality that could be an advantage or a disadvantage in different situations. My intention was to discuss the proposed systems impact on game play. I wanted to quantify the advantage of the system as a whole, not discuss whether that advantage was equally available to different groups of players, as that is being done to death in other threads.

From Paul's post I didn't think it was very clear how much the flush system could change game play, so I worked it out and then decided to share my conclussion.

#10 p00k

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,661 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:46 PM

View Postcjmurphy87, on 04 March 2013 - 08:00 PM, said:

First off, its unclear whether the flush module will dump a % of your current heat, or of you total heat capacity. it doesn't particularly matter in the scenarios I will model below, as I approached them from an absolutely-best-case standpoint. always dumping as close to max heat as possible. % of current heat would make the flush more difficult to use to it's absolute maximum effect:


View PostMoonUnitBeta, on 04 March 2013 - 08:33 PM, said:

Looks like no one read the first paragraph.


it's actually the second paragraph, but it's also incorrect

Paul Inouye said:

Eeesh. Saw some numbers people were throwing around and this needs clarification now....


CB Coolant Flush Tier 1 = 15% cooling of TOTAL heat on your Mech.
CB Coolant Flush Tier 2 = 20% cooling of TOTAL heat on your Mech.
TOTAL cooling of your Mech is 35%.

MC Coolant Flush = 35% cooling of TOTAL heat on your Mech.

Look at it this way, you get the SAME TOTAL heat dissipation on BOTH purchase methods. The C-bill one gives you the opportunity to dump twice in 1 match at the cost of a module slot.


of course paul conveniently glosses over the fact that the MC one only requires sacrificing one module slot instead of two for the cb version

Edited by p00k, 04 March 2013 - 08:49 PM.


#11 Commander Kobold

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Territorial
  • 1,429 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 04 March 2013 - 08:49 PM

P2W no, pay for advanatge yes. (since all these things can only be used once

#12 FromHell2k

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 734 posts
  • LocationGerm0ney

Posted 04 March 2013 - 09:00 PM

View PostVermaxx, on 04 March 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

The highest tier is also the ONLY ONE that will work without master in mechs that default to one module slot.

In other words, some people cannot do anything BUT pay to win until they invest a serious amount of time into the game.


Nope.. Starting to love self-quote...

View PostFromHell2k, on 04 March 2013 - 08:39 PM, said:

It's simple as that >



Ninja-infecting a great game with P2W works for games that are made for 14yrs old s*ckers. Our playerbase is far away from beeing that stupid (well, there are the goons...). NVM, our overzealous god-mods should rename this thread to "We've declared P2W". For the ppl. (which I already noticed).. Maybe you're a founder, want this P2W-crap and paid some bucks.. Well, I've also paid a pretty high amount, but too late for beeing a founder, soooo? ****?.

B2T, without rage-level 1337/10...

Why is this consumeable module P2W?
You can get 15% and a 20% consumable for CBills. These consumables using a module slot each. Now there is the MC variant of it which is 35% at it's efficency, but it only uses one slot. So, P2W= 1 Slot instead of 2.

Doesn't sound that bad?
Of course it does! Some mechs only got 2 module slots, so you're technicaly screwed. PGI said modules are high-end content. I never pilot one of my mechs without useing modules. Sensor Range, Target Info Gathering.. Beside that, they want to bring us air-strikes and that nice stuff.

Hööööööh?
Simple, they've already said that this thing will be consumables, too. Sooo... Who's got the bigger balls? Both mechs got 3 slots...

CB: Tier 2 Flush, Tier 2 Air, Tier 2 Arty
MC: Tier 3, Tier 3, Tier 3

You're screwed man.

As for example, Tier 2 and Tier 3 flush-crap. Tier 2=20%, Tier 3=35%. The effect equals 175% of Tier 2. Now you've got something to swallow. I don't wanna know how air strikes look like. I never will, quitting MWO cause of this crap anyway.


#13 Texugo87

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 179 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 09:08 PM

He says "total heat", which I think can be interpreted as either "total heat capacity", or possibly "total heat level" meaning your current heat. Unless I missed somewhere were he spelled it out more clearly.

#14 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 04 March 2013 - 09:17 PM

View PostOmni 13, on 04 March 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

P2W no, pay for advantage yes.

...That's pretty much the dictionary-definition of P2W.

#15 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 04 March 2013 - 09:27 PM

Maybe it's just me, or couldn't they simply give you a c-bills option to just merge the two coolant (c-bills based) modules? It wouldn't be the best way to go, but even I don't quite see how the coolant system would all work out in the first place.

Edited by Deathlike, 04 March 2013 - 09:27 PM.


#16 Zaptruder

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 716 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 09:40 PM

On one hand, this coolant thing really won't amount to much.

On the other hand, the community *should* make as much noise here as possible before we give them the impression that we're ok with P2W gameplay.

This crap is really just the initial probe of how tolerant the community is for this. The psychopathic moneymen that don't care a whit about the game itself *will* insist upon the developers to add more features and functions like this should this prove to be economically 'viable'. (Without caring a whit for the long term reprecussions it'll have of course).

#17 Elizander

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,540 posts
  • LocationPhilippines

Posted 04 March 2013 - 09:56 PM

It is pretty simple as stated by Paul.

Both will reduce heat totals by 35%. The non-MC coolant has the disadvantage of needing 2 module slots, but it also has the advantage of allowing you to split your coolant usage between a 15% and 20% use. The MC version will do a flat 35% in one go, costing only 1 module slot and cannot be split.

The only question would be the cost for the said coolant flush modules with regards to players that do not have premium time and/or hero mechs. If these things cost 100k or more per use then it might as well be not available for free players. If it's around 20-25k then that is a manageable cost, but an additional sink for those who are saving up.

Normal modules can still be used in place of these, I think?

If it's total heat, then having more heat sinks will be good because you'll get more heat flushed out that way. I just hope it is not insta-flush.

A way to differentiate them further for balance (if needed) is to make the MC coolant flush slower than the c-bill versions (space saved for slower heat dissipation).

Edited by Elizander, 04 March 2013 - 10:03 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users