244 replies to this topic

[Seanamal]

Tabrias07, on 05 March 2013 - 11:02 AM, said:

There's no point in even attaching a cbill cost to them when it's that cheap. These will be even more of a mandatory upgrade than double heatsinks. Every mech will carry this, every game.

Really?
My Raven won't. I prefer a pile of sensor and targeting modules to gather better intel.
My Gausscat won't EVER need coolant so don't need either.
My DDC might make use of an arty or airstrike, but my heat management is good enough that I won't need coolant.

If I ran a splat cat or stalker ppc boat I would want coolant, but would probably go for 2 cbills over one mc. Just because this stuff is useful don't mean it's useful to everyone.

[Bryan Ekman]

benth, on 05 March 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

Clearly your colleague believes that coolant flush invalidates strategy.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions! Even here at PGI we don't always agree with each other! Just like the lot of you!

[Broceratops]

Monky, on 05 March 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

20% will get you from 100% to 80%, so you're still in cookoff/alpha overheat range.

What situation are you running through your head where shaving off 15% or 20% heat is better than 35% in any practical combat?

if i just need 1 more hit on a guy to kill him, 15 or 20% will do it, plus I will still have another 15 or 20% flush. if i use my 35%, the additional is wasted because i dont need to fire right away again anyway because the guy is dead. the ability to break up the usage is always going to be more versatile.

the only argument that the MC one is better is if modules are limited ... which they are ... but right now there aren't very many good modules anyway so until they put in the next wave of consumables, EVERYONE should be using the cbill one if they're going to use any sort of coolant flush

[hammerreborn]

Monky, on 05 March 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

20% will get you from 100% to 80%, so you're still in cookoff/alpha overheat range.

What situation are you running through your head where shaving off 15% or 20% heat is better than 35% in any practical combat?

When you only need 5-10% of a srm salvo to get the kill, and there are no other enemies in sight? Not everyone has 40% heat alphas you know...

[Yokaiko]

Bilbo, on 05 March 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

The situation where you use it before you reach 100 percent?

Or override that 10% can save the mech pretty often.

[Norris J Packard]

Bryan Ekman, on 05 March 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

This is slightly inaccurate. See above post and my comments on strategy.

Bryan, I am going to be honest here, I don't have nearly as much of a problem with the pricing or module splitting scenarios as most everyone else.

My problem lies in the Coolant Flush's ability to knock a percentage off, instead of simply being a dissipation bonus.

And the fact that I firmly believe that offensive (i.e. damage) consumable modules should be usable only if you have a Command Module equipped, and furthermore that the Command Module should be limited to particular variants.

I know this would take some reworking, but it would serve to strengthen weaker variants if you disbarred ECM carrying Mechs from taking the Command Module (which would mean the D-DC would need to give up ECM), and so on.

This really does make a lot more sense to me than 8 Mechs on each team just being able to call in UAV's, and Artillery Strikes, and Missiles and so on.

[Super Mono]

Broceratops, on 05 March 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

the only argument that the MC one is better is if modules are limited ... which they are ... but right now there aren't very many good modules anyway so until they put in the next wave of consumables, EVERYONE should be using the cbill one if they're going to use any sort of coolant flush

And so we start our descent down the slippery slope.

[Adridos]

Broceratops, on 05 March 2013 - 11:02 AM, said:

do you guys realize that having two smaller flushes is often better than having 1 big flush, as you can ration it out as needed? and 15-20% reduction in heat is enough to get that final alpha in most of the time, so 35% in one shot is overkill.

Depends upon the build itself.

If we'e talking about a build that really needs coolant, say a 6ppc Stalker, there is really no reason not to flush it all at at once after firing your first shot, becuase even if you flushed less, just enough to fit another alpha in and then flushed the second coolant, you'd be at the exactly same place, heat-wise, as if youflushed all of it at once.

Unless you flush coolant under 35 % of your cooling capacity (which is the lower half of the heat bar), you gain nothing by a progressive flush.

[liku]

Bryan Ekman, on 05 March 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Small Coolant Flush

• 1 module slot.
  
• 1 use per match.
  
• Consumed when used.
  
• 15% of total heat sink efficiency is cooled when used.
  
• 5,000 CB per use.
  
• Only one can be equipped.

Medium Coolant Flush

• 1 module slot.
  
• 1 use per match.
  
• Consumed when used.
  
• 20% of total heat sink efficiency is cooled when used.
  
• 7,500 CB per use.
  
• Only one can be equipped.

Large Coolant Flush

• 1 module slot.
  
• 1 use per match.
  
• Consumed when used.
  
• 35% of total heat sink efficiency is cooled when used.
  
• 25 per use.
  
• Only one can be equipped.
  
• Can't be equipped if Small or Medium Cooling flush are currently equipped.

We're still tuning the details, but this is currently in test. Paul is updating the CC post and will added the Arty/Air Strike details.

Thanks so much for the update.

It's so good to see you have changed and are listening an interacting with us. thanks and keep the good work!

[/off topics]

the price seems to be very very affordable... 5 k or 7.5k cbills!

[Budor]

Broceratops, on 05 March 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

... but right now there aren't very many good modules anyway so until they put in the next wave of consumables, EVERYONE should be using the cbill one if they're going to use any sort of coolant flush

And you think they will revisit the already installed p2w system and f2p it just because its suddenly mandatory to buy the MC modules once they install more good ones?

[Strelitzia]

Bryan Ekman, on 05 March 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

You're welcome! I think most players will enjoy the added tactics and things to do within game. The arty/air strikes play into the scouting role, since they require line of sight targeting until the battlegrid control module comes online.

You can add air strikes without making it a consumable component that you buy outside of a match. Sure it's cheap, but it's clear the intention is to make players spend money on MC (which starts at about $7), to spend on either the consumable itself or premium time which is actually more efficient.

The ability themselves could be interesting, Airstrike, Artillery, and even Coolant Flush, and add much needed strategy to each match. But it has been tainted by a money making strategy so much that you've lost sight of the design goal.

Edited by Strelitzia, 05 March 2013 - 11:12 AM.

[hammerreborn]

Norris J Packard, on 05 March 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

Bryan, I am going to be honest here, I don't have nearly as much of a problem with the pricing or module splitting scenarios as most everyone else.

My problem lies in the Coolant Flush's ability to knock a percentage off, instead of simply being a dissipation bonus.

And the fact that I firmly believe that offensive (i.e. damage) consumable modules should be usable only if you have a Command Module equipped, and furthermore that the Command Module should be limited to particular variants.

I know this would take some reworking, but it would serve to strengthen weaker variants if you disbarred ECM carrying Mechs from taking the Command Module (which would mean the D-DC would need to give up ECM), and so on.

This really does make a lot more sense to me than 8 Mechs on each team just being able to call in UAV's, and Artillery Strikes, and Missiles and so on.

Line of sight appears to be required according to Bryans post above, so it's likely that it's going to be the scouts running it, not the assaults.

[SteelJaws]

Bryan, Maybe you could offer a Tier 2b, that costs more but stacks with a Tier 1, in the same module slot. But costs significantly more C-bills, so while you are getting 2 flushes for the C-bill version, if people are worried about losing a module slot they can pay more, to have it one, instead of two.

[Super Mono]

Was coolant flush being planned when double heat sinks were made 1.4 sinks?

[Tabrias07]

Please, change this to increase heat dissipation as norris has said, or make it literally "dump" your coolant, lowering your heat efficiency for the rest of the match.

Another question, were you considering implementing this when DHS were changed to 1.4?

[Monky]

Broceratops, on 05 March 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

if i just need 1 more hit on a guy to kill him, 15 or 20% will do it, plus I will still have another 15 or 20% flush. if i use my 35%, the additional is wasted because i dont need to fire right away again anyway because the guy is dead. the ability to break up the usage is always going to be more versatile.

the only argument that the MC one is better is if modules are limited ... which they are ... but right now there aren't very many good modules anyway so until they put in the next wave of consumables, EVERYONE should be using the cbill one if they're going to use any sort of coolant flush

So, what you're saying is, you need to fire that shot and not overheat, but will not have to dump the full amount of heat due to not having anyone else to shoot anyways......

Why not just fire and overheat?

You're not thinking any of this through. You use the dump to avoid shutdown because it's a clutch situation. If you don't need to have heat budget available, you don't need to blow a partial cooldown anyways.

Edited by Monky, 05 March 2013 - 11:14 AM.

[Bryan Ekman]

SteelJaws, on 05 March 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Bryan, Maybe you could offer a Tier 2b, that costs more but stacks with a Tier 1, in the same module slot. But costs significantly more C-bills, so while you are getting 2 flushes for the C-bill version, if people are worried about losing a module slot they can pay more, to have it one, instead of two.

We may consider that. Let's get the system out for now and see what happens.

Super Mono, on 05 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

Was coolant flush being planned when double heat sinks were made 1.4 sinks?

No.

[Parnage Winters]

So what's to stop someone from dropping in the mc tier3 of coolant and air/artillery strike vs the guy who pays c-bills for it and is stuck with the tier 2 or 1 or a combination of such.

[Yokaiko]

Monky, on 05 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

So, what you're saying is, you need to fire that shot and not overheat, but will not have to dump the heat due to not having anyone else to shoot anyways......

Why not just fire and overheat?

You're not thinking any of this through.

What if he has friends?

[Bilbo]

Monky, on 05 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

So, what you're saying is, you need to fire that shot and not overheat, but will not have to dump the heat due to not having anyone else to shoot anyways......

Why not just fire and overheat?

You're not thinking any of this through. You use the dump to avoid shutdown because it's a clutch situation. If you don't need to have heat budget available, you don't need to blow a partial cooldown anyways.

Just because you can't see them doesn't mean they aren't there. Also, snipers really like targets that aren't moving.