239 replies to this topic

[Heeden]

Budor, on 06 March 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

But no room for an air strike, or arty or cap or decay or anything they might add... How about me just unloading at another mech? Gone heat is gone. How about him being the lastone and i just stomped him with my 35% flush in 1 cd/keystroke

In other words, x is superior in situation a; y is superior in situation b.

[buttmonkey]

who even cares about coolant flush ffs. only bad players who cant manage their heat will actually use them, personally i will use my module slots for things like extended sensors and cap accelerator

[MaddMaxx]

MonkeyCheese, on 06 March 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

The problem is once we all walk down this MC only item road there is no going back, sure this coolant thing may seem small now but wait until the real paying for larger advantages comes.

I shall state it once again, pandoras box has been opened.

So wait a minute. When did they make the Flush Consumable ONLY an MC based purchase? Damn, I totally missed that update... At least be honest when you post ffs.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 06 March 2013 - 08:14 AM.

[EgoSlayer]

Glythe, on 06 March 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Let's not forget that 35% is if you have 10 heatsinks. What if you have 15 double heatsinks?

That is at least going to be 50% and could be even more!

Note that 1.5 * 35 = 52%.

And you're saying that isn't broken?

That's not how it works, the percentage is fixed. It always removes the same amount of heat on an individual mech, and that amount is based on the mech's total heat threshold/efficiency so the number of heat points removed will vary based on the number of heat sinks.

E.g. for simplicity a mech with a max heat threshold of 100, the 35% will always remove 35 points of heat from that mech, the 15% will always remove 15 points of heat, the 20% will remove 20 points. It's always based on the max threshold, so 15+20 = 35 no matter the situation. If the mech's threshold is 50 those numbers would be half, but the percentage is the same. It's also cheap, 5,000 or 7,500 c-bills.

http://mwomercs.com/...24#entry2006724

Edited by EgoSlayer, 06 March 2013 - 08:15 AM.

[Ghostrider0067]

buttmonkey, on 06 March 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

who even cares about coolant flush ffs. only bad players who cant manage their heat will actually use them, personally i will use my module slots for things like extended sensors and cap accelerator

That's an assumption and you know it. In the hands of a solid player, being able to shed that much heat in a matter of a second or two could be a huge advantage and turn the game in their favor. While what you say has some merit, to make the assertion that it's "only [for] bad players who cant manage their heat" is simply ridiculous.

[Livewyr]

General Taskeen, on 06 March 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

Riddle Me This Op

Why defend a non-canon Coolant Flush, and not actively defend adding the actual Coolant Pod (with real disadvantages)?

I don't care whether a Coolant Flush Consumable is advantageous or not, because it cheapens what MWO is trying to do by adding BT Tech and the customization of the Mech Lab. Its a lost opportunity to really add Coolant Pods with how they worked from BT, as no other Mech Warrior game has done before.

Coolant Pod, or not at all.

And judging by my post I made here, many people agree.

I'm not defending the Coolant Pod (if you look at my post in the official thread, I'd rather have not had it, or the consumables in general.)

What I am attacking the liberal use of a dangerous phrase "Pay-to-Win" where it does not necessarily apply.. as you can see from many threads:

"P2W" has become the slippery slope leading towards "gold rounds and gold mechs" and this tiny questionable candle-flame is being fanned into a forum inferno that can do a lot of (unnecessary) damage.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

Livewyr, on 06 March 2013 - 06:31 AM, said:

I have a little more faith in PGI than that.. think about it.. they could've just released an MC cooling pod and MC airstrike without Cbill alternatives.. nobody's putting a gun to their head. Clearly they thought ahead

"while we want to give MC purchase an incentive, there should be a Cbill alternative within the concept."

I don't think they're stupid, or trying to kill their game with P2W...

See this quote is funny considering how much you've been railing on ECM.

Have they acknowledged any of that? With all this going on do you really think they are going to fix it now?

What in their track record makes you believe in them so much?

Since you haven't answered.

[Sifright]

Livewyr, on 06 March 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

I'm not defending the Coolant Pod (if you look at my post in the official thread, I'd rather have not had it, or the consumables in general.)

What I am attacking the liberal use of a dangerous phrase "Pay-to-Win" where it does not necessarily apply.. as you can see from many threads:

"P2W" has become the slippery slope leading towards "gold rounds and gold mechs" and this tiny questionable candle-flame is being fanned into a forum inferno that can do a lot of (unnecessary) damage.

I'd argue it's the opposite being complacent and not complaining about the perceived direction this game is going will do a lot more harm because you can be damn sure if no one complained about this they will bring out more expensive mc only items that add more power. this is a very clear example of F2P game testing the waters with a minor p2w item.

Edited by Sifright, 06 March 2013 - 08:26 AM.

[vrok]

Also, the slippery slope already begun a long time ago. They were called hero mechs. That was the borderline case, but they at least have the same tonnage, heat and crit slot limitations, and some are actually really bad so it was kind of random and had to be judged on an individual basis. This consumables issue is when MWO steps out of the grey borderline area and into clear cut P2W territory.

The line must be drawn here.

Edited by vrok, 06 March 2013 - 08:29 AM.

[Ghostrider0067]

vrok, on 06 March 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

The line must be drawn here.

I count three lines: one curved and two straight...

[Stone Profit]

Roland, on 06 March 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

Gold ammo whose damage is only slightly higher than normal ammo, is still gold ammo.

Coolant flush is for those people who cant seem to understand how to manage heat. Are you one of those? (not an attack just a question) I likely wont even equip coolant flush. Who needs it when you know how to play?

EgoSlayer, on 06 March 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

That's not how it works, the percentage is fixed. It always removes the same amount of heat on an individual mech, and that amount is based on the mech's total heat threshold/efficiency so the number of heat points removed will vary based on the number of heat sinks.

E.g. for simplicity a mech with a max heat threshold of 100, the 35% will always remove 35 points of heat from that mech, the 15% will always remove 15 points of heat, the 20% will remove 20 points. It's always based on the max threshold, so 15+20 = 35 no matter the situation. If the mech's threshold is 50 those numbers would be half, but the percentage is the same. It's also cheap, 5,000 or 7,500 c-bills.

http://mwomercs.com/...24#entry2006724

Actually they said the amount of heat reduction does scale based on how many heat sinks you have. 35% is for a mech with 110 dhs, more hs = more flushing.

[Strig]

@Livewyr


Here is one example of the decisive advantage that the single 35% dump has over even the 20% ...

Stalkers have 1 module slot until you completely master them. The 6xPPC stalker as a common example (which one shots you half the time anyway if you've already taken damage) will only get one instance of cooling down by 35% or by 20% ...

Stalker 3F with 6xPPCs & 16 DHSs elited (2x Basics)

• Heat Cap: 70
  
• Heat Disipation/sec: 4.4
  
• Alpha Heat: 48
  
• Cooldown: 3s

With 35% Coolant flush (24.5 heat flush)

• Alpha 1 heat: 48
  
• Alpha 1 + 3s: 43.5
  
• Post Flush heat: 19
  
• Alpha 2 heat: 67
  
• Alpha 2 + 3s: 62.5
  
• Alpha 3 heat: 110.5 OVERHEAT (for approx. 9 seconds + startup)

With 20% Coolant flush (14 heat flush)

• Alpha 1 heat: 48
  
• Alpha 1 + 3s: 43.5
  
• Post Flush heat: 29.5
  
• Alpha 2 heat: 77.5 OVERHEAT (for approx. 2 seconds + startup)

Both stalkers get 2 alphas in (100% damage increase without delay ... I know, not really but I am not gonna work the percentages over the timeline) but the 35% Coolant Flush stalker gets another shot before shutdown. So you can reliably kill an Atlas with the 35% before shutting down. Or it just doesn't shutdown.

The 20% stalker, on the other hand shuts down after the second alpha with or without the coolant flush. Sure they don't shutdown as long with it ... but it should still be obvious that there is a HUGE ADVANTAGE in the 35% flush.

This is a huge advantage and this doesn't even take into account extra slots used for other modules/consumable which actually compounds the issue.

Edited by Strig, 06 March 2013 - 08:36 AM.

[General Taskeen]

Ghostrider0067, on 06 March 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

The problem is, canon is only going to go so far. PGI is going to ultimately twist and turn the game as they see fit and that most definitely includes money generating non-canon items such as the "coolant flush". PGI is a business... and businesses are out to make money any way they can. That's the bottom line and isn't going to change no matter how much bitching we, the fans and players, make about it.

That is the equivalent of saying, "A constitution will only get us so far, its just a piece of paper."

There are other ways to make money. You are defending CF with your statement by also accepting the cheapening of BT. The best selling point of MWO is its, thus far, fairly well done build rules built into its Mech Lab.

It would be the same if a Medium Laser was cheapened as an Item that takes up no space, has tiers, etc., like Coolant Flush.

[Mister Blastman]

Livewyr, on 06 March 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

That's that lame-duck argument I keep seeing.

No, it is not a lame-duck argument. In World of Tanks, clan vs clan gold ammo is commonly used in these engagements on the competitive scene.

Do you want to see the competitive scene here require a continuous MC investment by each player? Do you think that is fair?

I've competed in numerous leagues in numerous games and held numerous titles and can assure you at the very highest level it only takes a small difference to give one team or the other team a decisive edge. Just a tiny bit that seems meaningless in normal games can be the tipping point on the competitive scene.

We can NOT allow this game to go that direction. It is NOT in the spirit of Mechwarrior.

[Protection]

If it wasn't any sort of a balance problem, they why not let free players buy all the same modules and equipment that an MC player can purchase, entirely for C-Bills.

What is the argument for allowing and wanting MC only, game affecting, objectively superior, equipment?

[General Taskeen]

Ghostrider0067, on 06 March 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

I count three lines: one curved and two straight...

Picard Disagrees

Edited by General Taskeen, 06 March 2013 - 08:40 AM.

[Ghostrider0067]

General Taskeen, on 06 March 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

That is the equivalent of saying, "A constitution will only get us so far, its just a piece of paper."

There are other ways to make money. You are defending CF with your statement by also accepting the cheapening of BT. The best selling point of MWO is its, thus far, fairly well done build rules built into its Mech Lab.

It would be the same if a Medium Laser was cheapened as an Item that takes up no space, has tiers, etc., like Coolant Flush.

The Constitution analogy is somewhat lacking because even though it's just a piece of paper and the words carry meaning, it's all in how it's interpreted or accepted. The US Constitution means a hell of a lot given what's in it and despite it being just a paper, but that hasn't stopped people from ignoring it and/or getting around it.

Sure, there are ways for them to make money and it would be remiss of them to not explore any and all avenues possible. I cannot agree with the implementation of MC only purchases (to which there are none at this point) as that does lead to the dreaded P2W model unless those purchases are counterbalanced by credit purchases. I don't feel as though I'm cheapening anything but that's your perspective and I accept that. I do agree that MWO does have a nice feature in the customizable mechs in the lab, but that's about all they've got going for them to now. We'll see what the future holds.

[Rakashan]

Glythe, on 06 March 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Let's not forget that 35% is if you have 10 heatsinks. What if you have 15 double heatsinks?

That is at least going to be 50% and could be even more!

Note that 1.5 * 35 = 52%.

And you're saying that isn't broken?

You have failed to math in a big way.

Percentage - A number which represents a fraction of a whole. 35% of a big pie is a lot more than 35% of a small pie but it is still only 35% of the pie. It's more raw heat, but that's why people run builds with 20 heatsinks. So they can deal with more heat from more weapons.

Please, just delete your post so that it does not detract from the actual conversation.

[Livewyr]

Genuinely sorry, I hadn't noticed this before.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

Since you haven't answered.

I maintain faith because PGI has changed things that were broken before. (Missiles at one time were straight up and down death rockets that didn't require maintaining lock or anything...obviously that has changed substantially... and before that they had a max range of 640m.. and before that they all landed on the head of a mech for insta-gib.)

Sifright, on 06 March 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

I'd argue it's the opposite being complacent and not complaining about the perceived direction this game is going will do a lot more harm because you can be damn sure if no one complained about this they will bring out more expensive mc only items that add more power. this is a very clear example of F2P game testing the waters with a minor p2w item.

This same thing was said of Hero Mechs..yet seeing a hero mech doesn't effect me any differently than any other mech. I'd wager it doesn't effect most people or anyone..

One question though: If the YLW was a very clear case of P2W (which it wasn't, at all, we know that).. how is this such?

vrok, on 06 March 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

Also, the slippery slope already begun a long time ago. They were called hero mechs. That was the borderline case, but they at least have the same tonnage, heat and crit slot limitations, and some are actually really bad so it was kind of random and had to be judged on an individual basis. This consumables issue is when MWO steps out of the grey borderline area and into clear cut P2W territory.

The line must be drawn here.

They had little individual niches no other mechs enjoyed too (YLW= XL+AC20, Ilya = 3UAC5s.. etc) and yet.. they aren't winning battles.

This 15% difference in module isn't going to win any either.

Strig, on 06 March 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

@Livewyr


Here is one example of the decisive advantage that the single 35% dump has over even the 20% ...

Stalkers have 1 module slot until you completely master them. The 6xPPC stalker as a common example (which one shots you half the time anyway if you've already taken damage) will only get one instance of cooling down by 35% or by 20% ...

Stalker 3F with 6xPPCs & 16 DHSs elited (2x Basics)

• Heat Cap: 70
  
• Heat Disipation/sec: 4.4
  
• Alpha Heat: 48
  
• Cooldown: 3s

With 35% Coolant flush (24.5 heat flush)

• Alpha 1 heat: 48
  
• Alpha 1 + 3s: 43.5
  
• Post Flush heat: 19
  
• Alpha 2 heat: 67
  
• Alpha 2 + 3s: 62.5
  
• Alpha 3 heat: 110.5 OVERHEAT (for approx. 9 seconds + startup)

With 20% Coolant flush (14 heat flush)

• Alpha 1 heat: 48
  
• Alpha 1 + 3s: 43.5
  
• Post Flush heat: 29.5
  
• Alpha 2 heat: 77.5 OVERHEAT (for approx. 2 seconds + startup)

Both stalkers get 2 alphas in (100% damage increase without delay ... I know, not really but I am not gonna work the percentages over the timeline) but the 35% Coolant Flush stalker gets another shot before shutdown. So you can reliably kill an Atlas with the 35% before shutting down. Or it just doesn't shutdown.

The 20% stalker, on the other hand shuts down after the second alpha with or without the coolant flush. Sure they don't shutdown as long with it ... but it should still be obvious that there is a HUGE ADVANTAGE in the 35% flush.

This is a huge advantage and this doesn't even take into account extra slots used for other modules/consumable which actually compounds the issue.

Yes, in these cases it is an advantage.. but it begs three questions:
1: How often is that going to happen?
2: Is this case going to happen often enough to warrant the necessity of the 35% module versus 20%...
3: Is either module worth it compared to AirStrike? (playing like you only had one module slot period.. and IF they share the same module slots as the stuff we already have, is the coolant pod worth more than the Sensor range module?

One has to look at context.. not just numbers.

[vrok]

Livewyr, on 06 March 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

They had little individual niches no other mechs enjoyed too (YLW= XL+AC20, Ilya = 3UAC5s.. etc) and yet.. they aren't winning battles.

They have different hardpoints yes but that doesn't translate into a factual advantage, that's why hero mechs in general are a grey area and have to be judged on a case by case basis. However, they have both been deemed worse overall than at least one of their normal variants.

Livewyr, on 06 March 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

This 15% difference in module isn't going to win any either.

Pure speculation. You can't argue against facts with faith. It's an undeniable factual advantage, unlike the hero mech examples you gave. That's why hero mechs are the grey borderline area, and this is clear cut P2W.

Edited by vrok, 06 March 2013 - 09:00 AM.