7 replies to this topic

[Colonel Zug]

I know, I know, apparently all I can do is complain about how they have screwed up the engineering mechanics of BattleTech. Designing a Light Mech is an exercise in frustration, sine they have totally ignored a basic premise in Mech design.

Here's the straight scoop from someone who has played this game since 1984 when it was called "BattleDroids". (In less than a year, it was renamed BattleTech because George Lucas claimed that he owned the term 'droid'.)

Every fusion engine mounted in a battlemech includes 10 heat sinks. They are considered integral to the engine, and are included in the weight of the engine.

However, they still possess mass, and a portion of these heat sinks will have to be allocated to critical spaces, dependent upon the engine's rating. The benchmark for this process is the 250 engine. A 250 engine can contain all 10 heat sinks without having to allocate any. The number of HS to be allocated or not allocated changes in increments of 25. Therefore, a 225-245 engine must allocate 1 heat sink to a critical slot; a 200-220 must allocate 2, etc.

Conversely, the larger the engine rating, the fewer heat sinks need be allocated, but anything over the initial 10 HS must be paid for in tonnage. For example, a 300-320 engine can include 11 heat sinks without being allocated, but you must spend 1 ton for the extra heat sinks. Likewise, a 325-345 can hold 12, but you gotta pay the two tons extra.

Simple, right?

Well, when they designed their Mech Lab, they only got it half right. Yes, if you drop a 375 engine in a mech, you can have 14 heat sinks included in the engine without having to allocate them, and pay 4 tons over the tonnage of the engine itself.
HOWEVER, they got it totally wrong in lighter engine. If you put in a 200 engine, you only get 8 heat sinks in it. This is cool, I now just have to allocate 2 HS to critical slots, because ALL mechs have a minimum of 10 free heat sinks. But the Mech Lab forces me to pay TWO EXTRA TONS to get those mandatory heat sinks!!! There goes my medium laser and two jump jets....My 25 ton Commando, in order to maintain it's designed speed of 97 kph, has to mount a 150 engine at 6.5 tons (which according to the BT construction rules engine tables actually weighs 5.5 tons, hehe) and these jerks are making me spend 4 EXTRA TONS for heat sinks, just to have my required 10 and have a "legal" mech!!!

This is highway robbery, and a total departure from the intent of the design process, I think the game was designed by IRS agents.

A friend of mine observed:
With 10 built in heat sinks lights would NEVER overheat. All the extra weight would go to speed.

Of course!!! That's the trade off.....the balance is built into the system. Yes, light mechs don't have the heat issues heavier mech do because they don't carry as many weapons, or as much armor.

That's what light mechs do: they run fast, run cool, and die quickly if they get hit

Remember the tank designer's century-old dilemma....the three-headed monster of Mobility, Armor, and Firepower.
If you want to excel at one, you must sacrifice elsewhere.
You wanna carry the big guns, you gotta pay the price in heat generation and lack of speed
You want the speed and heat management, you gotta pay the price in protection and firepower.

STOP MESSING WITH A GAME THAT HAS BEEN AROUND LONGER THAN HALF THE PLAYERS PLAYING IT!!!!!!


That's all I want to say.







Ogre Prince Mighty Zug <HoS> BOS
Colonel, LCAF (Ret)
Knight of Rahne
Bearer of The McKennsy Hammer

Edited by Colonel Zug, 10 March 2013 - 08:36 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Have you ever checked the weights of the engine in MW:O and compared them to the weights of the engine in Battletech?

[Colonel Zug]

Yes I have....I stated in my post that the 150 engine is one ton heavier than listed in the engine tables, and I have also noted that the 250 engine is one ton lighter than the tables....not sure what criteria they are using for the MWO engine tables, but one ton here or there, does not negate the fact that ALL mechs get 10 free heat sinks....the engine rating only determines how many must be allocated or not....you should not have to spend 4 extra tons to make a 150 equipped Commando legal.

[Zyllos]

MustrumRidcully, on 10 March 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

Have you ever checked the weights of the engine in MW:O and compared them to the weights of the engine in Battletech?

Colonel Zug, on 10 March 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

Yes I have....I stated in my post that the 150 engine is one ton heavier than listed in the engine tables, and I have also noted that the 250 engine is one ton lighter than the tables....not sure what criteria they are using for the MWO engine tables, but one ton here or there, does not negate the fact that ALL mechs get 10 free heat sinks....the engine rating only determines how many must be allocated or not....you should not have to spend 4 extra tons to make a 150 equipped Commando legal.

...Really?

A 150 STD weighs 4 tons less than it should. So once you equip the 4 needed outside the engine, it now weighs what it does in CBT.

CBT:
150 STD = 5.5t
Gyro for 150 STD = 2.0t
Support Equipment (Life Support, Sensors, ect) = 3.0t

MWO:
150 STD = 6.5t
4 Needed Heatsinks = 4.0t

Both:
10.5t for 10 heatsinks, gyro, and support equipment for a 150 STD engine.

It is just handled differently but it is correct. But when you get down into the very low weights, like a 100 STD and 175 XL, the system breaks down because the engine weight would need to be a negative tonnage to fit the system.

Edited by Zyllos, 10 March 2013 - 12:15 PM.

[EvangelionUnit]

Zyllos, on 10 March 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

...Really?

A 150 STD weighs 4 tons less than it should. So once you equip the 4 needed outside the engine, it now weighs what it does in CBT.

CBT:
150 STD = 5.5t
Gyro for 150 STD = 2.0t
Support Equipment (Life Support, Sensors, ect) = 3.0t

MWO:
150 STD = 6.5t
4 Needed Heatsinks = 4.0t

Both:
10.5t for 10 heatsinks, gyro, and support equipment for a 150 STD engine.

It is just handled differently but it is correct. But when you get down into the very low weights, like a 100 STD and 175 XL, the system breaks down because the engine weight would need to be a negative tonnage to fit the system.

you can't strip your mech down to zero, and i think in MWO the cockpit stuff and gyro have a weight on its own too, its not just the engine ...

Edited by EvangelionUnit, 10 March 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[Runenstahl]

MWO includes the weight of gyro and cockpit in the engine weight. This may sound weird, but the result fits the TT rules 1:1.

[Colonel Zug]

EvangelionUnit, on 10 March 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

you can't strip your mech down to zero, and i think in MWO the cockpit stuff and gyro have a weight on its own too, its not just the engine ...

DOH!!! Didn't take the time to look at the mass of a stripped down chassis....you are correct...strip all equipment, and a Commando weighs 2.5 tons...the Internal Structure. You're math is correct.... Gyro and Cockpit mass out at 5 tons....and the 4 sinks balance out.

My bad, nevermind

Edited by Colonel Zug, 11 March 2013 - 03:12 PM.

[Zyllos]

Colonel Zug, on 11 March 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

DOH!!! Didn't take the time to look at the mass of a stripped down chassis....you are correct...strip all equipment, and a Commando weighs 2.5 tons...the Internal Structure. You're math is correct.... Gyro and Cockpit mass out at 5 tons....and the 4 sinks balance out.

My bad, nevermind

That is ok.

But there is still an issue with very small engine ratings (besides the DHS issues of 0.2 and 0.14 dissipation rates). Their tonnage is higher following their formulas when compared with CBT.