Ghost73

Member Since 15 Dec 2011
Offline Last Active Jan 30 2013 01:52 PM

In Topic: Determining Efficient Amount Of Heat Sinks

17 November 2012 - 08:28 AM

The firing rates in the game don't match the heat dissipation rates because they tend to fire more than once every 10 seconds, so you should not compare only the heat values to the heat dissipation of HSs. The firing rate of the weapon is just as important because that way you can figure the heat per second generated by the individual weapon. However, don't expect to be able to place enough heat sinks in a mech to be able to completely neutralize heat from a high heat weapon system, ever.

Also, when calculating the number of HSs you need for a weapon, you want to guesstimate the amount of damage you expect to fire from the weapon (not necessarily deal) in a typical engagement, where there are usually multiple engagements in a single match. If you expect long engagements, you'll want more HSs so you can fire your weapons for longer. If you expect short engagements, you trade less HSs for more firepower. The length of engagement depends on the role of your mech, but typically faster mechs such as strikers and scouts can expect shorter engagements because they can break off from a fight, but assaults, brawlers, and snipers will usually have longer engagements with enemies because of their limited mobility and the slugfest nature of their mechs.

Since weapon efficiency is really a calculation of the amount of damage you can deal in a given amount of time versus the weight of the system, HS are not the only thing besides the weapon itself that takes up mass. If the weapon you are using is ammo dependent, then you also have to consider the amount of damage you expect to fire during the course of the whole match.

The actual math for finding the efficiency of a given weapon system is pretty convoluted mostly because of the way the game deals with HS, namely HS not only increase dissipation but also heat capacity, which they fail to mention anywhere in game. Then there are other critieria and varibles for finding the exact efficiency of a weapon that are dependent on a lot of other factors that change from match to match. So at best you are going to find a decent estimate of the efficiency of the weapon, but there is no true value because as I said before its just to much to consider all at once.

In Topic: All Founders Getting In

26 July 2012 - 10:01 AM

Adamus Kane, on 26 July 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

[REDACTED]

You should be a little more careful about breaking NDA thar

In Topic: Would a GOL-1H GOLIATH make an interesting choice for the next Assault Mech?

26 July 2012 - 09:01 AM

Lykaon, on 26 July 2012 - 03:50 AM, said:

How would the Goliath function seeing what we know about how aiming works in MWo.

For those who don't know...

You aim the torso by pointing the arms so you have two targeting reticules one on the arms one for body mounted weapons.The arm reticule leads the torso so pointing the mech's arms right would have the torso swing right until both reticules aligned.

Goliath has no arms and no torso to twist.Would likely put it at a huge disadvantage.

I imagine it would function similar to the PAC tank in BF2142. With no torso to twist, the mouse would control the orientation/turning of the mech, while WASD (or what have you) would control forward/back and sideways movement.

If the quad chassis style could be implemented in the game, the Goliath would definitely mix up the gameplay. At the very least it would be something awesome to try out.

In Topic: MWO..... lets make a playlist!

26 May 2012 - 11:00 PM

Never gets old
CCR - Fortunate Son
http://youtu.be/ec0XKhAHR5

Something more modern...
http://youtu.be/02ygH6cbvqk

And some good electronic
The Prodigy - Invaders Must Die
http://youtu.be/gTw2YvutJRA

In Topic: So... NDA and beta invites

25 May 2012 - 09:36 PM

Sarah McCallum, on 25 May 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

I will happily sign whatever they put in front of me. NDA? *BAM* signed. Deed to my house? *BAM* Title to the car? *BAM* Rights to my left kidney? *BAM*

Hmmm, I would have preferred the right...