314 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Bront, on 13 February 2015 - 10:18 PM, said:

Yeah, I noticed this as well. They didn't really push it back as much as simply make sure 3 LLs doesn't generate the extra heat. Makes it hard to test.

The quickest comparison here is this.

3 LL with ghost heat is the same as running 1 PPC + 1 ERPPC.

3LL w/o ghost heat is a little bit hotter than running 2 PPCs.

The math is pretty straightforward here.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Bront, on 13 February 2015 - 10:18 PM, said:

They didn't really push it back as much as simply make sure 3 LLs doesn't generate the extra heat.

That IS what they said they did.

Paul Inouye, on 13 February 2015 - 05:47 PM, said:

* The multiplier for heat scale has not changed. Firing 4 of these weapons simultaneously will incur a higher than expected heat spike. You will be penalized for firing 2 extra weapons.. not just 1.

[Tarogato]

Shar Wolf, on 13 February 2015 - 10:27 PM, said:

That IS what they said they did. *quotes Paul*

Yes, it is, but it wasn't clear to me, nor apparently other people. But the way you described it, Shar, makes it abundantly clear, so thank you.

("... a higher than expected heat spike." = ambiguous. How much higher? Higher compared to what? As "higher" as before? Or less higher than before, but still higher than non-ghost heat? That's where the confusion was for me.)

[Strykewolf]

Not really needed. Fixing underlying problems, is.

[Navid A1]

hmm... finally a change that makes sense..

wait...

PGI? .... changes making sense?.... madness!

[Wintersdark]

Deathlike, on 13 February 2015 - 10:07 PM, said:

It's not that they had to do it. It should have been done long before today.

Yeah, but you can say that about anything; it's not even worth saying really. At least it's done now.

[CHH Badkarma]

Paul Inouye, on 13 February 2015 - 05:47 PM, said:

Please be advised, this is temporary testing on a large scale, the effect of reduction of heat scale on weapons as we look at how the game sits now that Clan tech has been added to the game.

-Paul

Cause you know, clan tech has only been in game what, eight months? I wonder what your agenda is paul.

*takes your pitch forks from you and burns them

Edited by CHH Badkarma, 13 February 2015 - 11:48 PM.

[Punk Oblivion]

Another ghost heat change! Woot! Although this does not really affect any of my usual builds. I typically have either 2 or 4 LL's/LPL's on a build.

Though maybe I will test out 6 LL on my Banshee O.o

[Bront]

Shar Wolf, on 13 February 2015 - 10:27 PM, said:

That IS what they said they did.

Wasn't exactly clear, and it's usefulness is limited. It was nice for my Misery.

3 is what I thought it should be from the start. Hope they keep it.

[Surn]

Thank you.

[Bront]

Punk Oblivion, on 14 February 2015 - 12:01 AM, said:

Another ghost heat change! Woot! Although this does not really affect any of my usual builds. I typically have either 2 or 4 LL's/LPL's on a build.

Though maybe I will test out 6 LL on my Banshee O.o

Or the new trial build.

Edit: Er, Champion. Not trial.

Edited by Bront, 14 February 2015 - 12:03 AM.

[Punk Oblivion]

Punk Oblivion, on 14 February 2015 - 12:01 AM, said:

Another ghost heat change! Woot! Although this does not really affect any of my usual builds. I typically have either 2 or 4 LL's/LPL's on a build.

Though maybe I will test out 6 LL on my Banshee O.o

I lied! Ny Cn9-AL has 3 LL! Woot I too have a happy mech!

Bront, on 14 February 2015 - 12:02 AM, said:

Or the new trial build.

Edit: Er, Champion. Not trial.

Except the new champion banshee is not available as a trial yet

I set up my banshee-3M with a standard 325 and 6 LL. going to turn turn on heat override and leroy jenkins this Sh*t!

[Sarlic]

Thanks for the (asked and welcome) change.

Bit off-topic:
*Yawn* for the people only running lasers and intentionally dropping HPs...I just love to see more cheesy and wubby builds.

What happened to pure customizing gents, a great varierty in ranges and actually filling all the HPs in?

Edited by Sarlic, 14 February 2015 - 12:28 AM.

[LiGhtningFF13]

The cooling system will always be a construction area!

[Kjudoon]

Sarlic, on 14 February 2015 - 12:25 AM, said:

Thanks for the (asked and welcome) change.

Bit off-topic:
*Yawn* for the people only running lasers and intentionally dropping HPs...I just love to see more cheesy and wubby builds.

What happened to pure customizing gents, a great varierty in ranges and actually filling all the HPs in?

Died from malnutrition to role warfare brought on by map size strangulation.

[Kodyn]

For my part Sarlic, except on some assaults, I tend to boat weapons, simply because I get crap FPS 75-80% of the time, so having less to micro manage and deal with button/weapon group-wise helps.

I know a lot of other people do it for the high alpha, since everyone else also has a high alpha, so to compete, you need a mech that can unleash hell in one shot, turn and cool, then rinse and repeat. This is made easier when all your weapons have the same range, cooldown, etc. It's min-maxing, but there are valid reasons for it, and most games funnel you into that corner no matter what they try to do for balance. If you want to compete and make money, you tend to have to min-max to at least some extent.

On a completely unrelated note, anyone else having their Cool Shots greyed out and not working for some matches? I've had it at least once on drops since the change, but keep forgetting to check how often, been getting cool maps. But I did see others in game chat mentioning malfunctioning Cool Shots as well.

[Domenoth]

Praetor Knight, on 13 February 2015 - 09:56 PM, said:

It depends on how it is coded. It can simply be a change to the number of weapons it takes in said linked group, before penalties are applied.

So one or two variable changes would be the least needed to test such a change out. I can go more in-depth into what I've looked at, if asked.

If Paul said "we're bumping up Heat Scale from 2 up to 3" and left it at that, I'd agree. But he went on to say firing 4 accrues a penalty of 2 above the max.

Math:

• Current LL multiplier = 2.8
  
• Base Heat for Large Laser = 7
  
• Current Max Free Alpha = 2
  
• Heat Scale for 3 LL = 7 * 2.8 * (.18) = 3.53
  
• Expected Current Heat Scale for 4 LL = 7 * 2.8 * (.18 + .30) = 9.41
  
• Expected Heat Scale for 4 LL with Max Free Alpha set to 3 = 7 * 2.8 * (.30) = 5.88
  
• Test Heat Scale (per Paul's Comment) = Current Heat Scale for 4 LL

Test Heat Scale	=?=	Expected Heat Scale
9.41	=?=	5.88
Test Heat Scale	=/=	Expected Heat Scale

Just changing Max Free Alpha from the equation in heat scale the maths does not yield the result Paul gave. Therefore, the Heat Scale equation has changed.

Is my logic flawed? Please point out where. Please show me the "one or two variable changes" in the Heat Scale equation that result in no Heat Scale at 3 Large Lasers, but 9.41 with 4 Large Lasers.

I'm saying this is change at the code level and that is a good thing. This is not simply changing a 2 to a 3 in a spreadsheet. The code behind the scenes has a new variable not present in the heat scale the maths equation.

Edit:
Realized I put the "Expected" label on the wrong 4 LL entry.

Edited by Domenoth, 16 February 2015 - 01:02 PM.

[Reno Blade]

Paul Inouye, on 13 February 2015 - 05:47 PM, said:

Effective immediately...

The following Inner Sphere Large Laser systems can now fire 3 weapons simultaneously without incurring heat scale (Previous value was 2):

Inner Sphere Large Laser
Inner Sphere Large Pulse Laser
Inner Sphere ER Large Laser

Notes:

* The multiplier for heat scale has not changed. Firing 4 of these weapons simultaneously will incur a higher than expected heat spike. You will be penalized for firing 2 extra weapons.. not just 1.
...
-Paul

On one hand I am hesitant like JMan5, because this means mechs that can fit 3 of these (mostly heavy and assaults) will have a advantage in alpha strike size again now. Where you had to spread your lasers in pairs of 2, now you can pair then with 3? (6 LLaser Stalker/BM).

On the other hand, it's good to balance against the Clan Laser vomit builds (5ERML + 2LPulse is quite a big alpha).

Now further down for the heatscale math of 3 vs 4 ....

Domenoth, on 14 February 2015 - 01:14 AM, said:

If Paul said "we're bumping up Heat Scale from 2 up to 3" and left it at that, I'd agree. But he went on to say firing 4 accrues a penalty of 2 above the max.

Math:

• Current LL multiplier = 2.8
  
• Base Heat for Large Laser = 7
  
• Current Max Free Alpha = 2
  
• Heat Scale for 3 LL = 7 * 2.8 * (.18) = 3.53
  
• Expected Heat Scale for 4 LL = 7 * 2.8 * (.18 + .30) = 9.41
  
• Heat Scale for 4 LL with Max Free Alpha set to 3 = 7 * 2.8 * (.30) = 5.88
  
• Test Heat Scale (per Paul's Comment) = Current Heat Scale for 4 LL

Just changing Max Free Alpha from the equation in heat scale the maths does not yield the result Paul gave. Therefore, the Heat Scale equation has changed.

Is my logic flawed? Please point out where. Please show me the "one or two variable changes" in the Heat Scale equation that result in no Heat Scale at 3 Large Lasers, but 9.41 with 4 Large Lasers.

I'm saying this is change at the code level and that is a good thing. This is not simply changing a 2 to a 3 in a spreadsheet. The code behind the scenes has a new variable not present in the heat scale the maths equation.

I'm also perplexed that the code/formular allowed this.
Here is how I understood it:
Large Laser heat scale [ghost]

The penalty for 3 is now inactive (yellow area and arrow), so the 3LL do only 21 heat instead of 21 +3.528
but the penalty is still added to the total penalty of the 4LLaser 28 + 5.88 (4th laser) + 3.528 (3rd laser)
So instead of the expected 33.88 heat total for 4 LLaser, you still get the old value of 37.408 heat (See orange area and arrow).

[ShinVector]

Domenoth, on 14 February 2015 - 01:14 AM, said:

If Paul said "we're bumping up Heat Scale from 2 up to 3" and left it at that, I'd agree. But he went on to say firing 4 accrues a penalty of 2 above the max.

Hi Guys.... I think what is done with the heat scale is just a temporary thing ??
As in when changing the rules from the servers they made it so, that you can fire 3 lasers without heat penalty.
But they could not the soft change the rule of firing 4 LL meant additional 1LL heat scale ?

Edited by ShinVector, 14 February 2015 - 02:44 AM.

[Domenoth]

ShinVector, on 14 February 2015 - 02:36 AM, said:

Hi Guys.... I think what is done with the heat scale is just a temporary thing ??
As in when changing the rules from the servers they made it so, that you can fire 3 lasers without heat penalty.
But they could not the soft change they firing 4 LL meant additional 1LL heat scale ?

I suppose that's possible. But that feels like a much harder change to make. That is, unless Heat Scale isn't calculated on the fly based on what weapons are fired at any given time, if there is some master table of all weapons and all combinations that can be fired together and Heat Scale is just a lookup into that gigantic table:

1 SRM 6	2 SRM 6's	3 SRM 6's	...
1 SRM 4	2 SRM 4's	3 SRM 4's	...
1 SRM 4 and 1 SRM 6	2 SRM 4's and 1 SRM 6	2 SRM 4's and 2 SRM 6's	...

If that's the case then maybe they did just change a few cells in the table.

Either way, if the Large Laser change stays the way it is in the test, then a change has been made to the formula in the form of an exception to the rule at the very least. And if one exception is made, that suggests that more can be made as well.