1107 replies to this topic

[Thirdstar]

Oh god, the Forums have corrupted Mustrum. He's starting to sound like me

[Protection]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 March 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

But holy hell, does this have nothing to do with the topic.

[Bishop Steiner]

I Seriously can't see why my life, comment and such are so much a draw to you either, Thirdstar, but it is what it is.

And sorry that my sensibilities and choices if humor and sarcasm don't agree with yours, but such is life. Again, you do a great job of proving my basic point though, you tend to be more in agreement with Vas, so his antics are agreeable to you, whereas many think him a nuisance and clown. (I tend to think of him as entertainment, much in the manner of an over the top pro wrestler, so contrary to your opinion, I actually have zero rancor toward him, though I only seldom agree with him).

You and I do not agree, so similar antics on my part, are buffoonery and otherwise abhorrent. And yet I have many people who agree with me, or whom I respect, even if I often disagree, like Lefty Lucy, whom I often forum clash with, but greatly enjoy dropping with. And there are a small handful of people in here, whom for various reasons, I feel zero respect for, and when I deign to notice them at all, no, it won't be will gentle words.

Regardless, you continue to insist on one view, I continue to insist otherwise, we continue to disagree, and nothing changes. Why? Because we have already prejudged one another through past interaction, and nothing seems inclined to change that. Oddly, in the last 3-4 pages, I make one single condescending post, and of course, which is the one you focus on? Not any if the constructive debates, or even posts where I agreed with someone, even if I dislike them. So meditate on that. Or continue to believe I am the Great *****. *shrugs* I've certainly been called worse, and generally don't spend too much time worrying about what people on a game forum think. I have only spent this long on the subject, because you opened a line of communication. Seems like it's one destined to fail, but there it is.

Idiocy, sagaciousness,humor, dumbassery, are all in the eye of the beholder.

[anonymous175]

[KitK]

I am truely surprised this thread hasn't gone to K-town or been shut down. And I can't figure out why I've read as much as I have. I guess it's hard to take one's eyes off of a train wreak. But I am back because I have and example of a use for a single heatsink.

I have, right now, about 700,000 C-bills, and I recently started leveling an Awesome 8T. I would like to level the 8R next. I'll be ready to start leveling the 8R about the time I get enough XP for Speed Tweak on my 8T. As it stands, given my actual XP and C-bills per match, I estimate I'll be a solid 3 million C-Bills short of buying my 8R. If I build out my 8T the way I want to with DHS it will cost me 1.5 mill that I don't have yet and kind of want to use to buy the 8R sooner. How much sooner? About 21 matches sooner, which is about 2-3 nights of play time for me. So, do I have a use for SHS and a decision to make regarding them? Yes, I do. Then later, when I'm rich and famous, I can add DHS to my 8T and 8R. But until then I can save myself a small chunk of time.

So, please leave the SHS alone even though DHS are simply better in every way and even though new players have some difficulty handling them. -Thanks

[Bishop Steiner]

@Thirdstar,

Probably correct about those ToS, though in cases where outright fraud can be proven, they hold little legal weight (usually). Besides.... If you know anything about the IRL legal life and history of Battletech/Mechwarrior, you know just how snakebit they are when it comes to going to Court, lol.

@Mustrum, well, the obesity thing is actually being tracked by the CDC and John Hopkins, actually, with Heart Disease, I believe being the number one killer in the USA, but since I really am on a cellphone, at the beach in Mexico, you gonna have to look that up on your own. Though it was mostly a tongue in cheek quasi sermon. Though, there is some basis for truth in it. I spend way too much time reading psychiatry and medical journals. But as you said...indeed, what the holy hell does this have to do with mechwarrior?

[Shumabot]

XphR, on 26 March 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:

Does it not?

It does not.

[Thirdstar]

KitK, on 26 March 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

So, please leave the SHS alone even though DHS are simply better in every way and even though new players have some difficulty handling them. -Thanks

I really should get to sleep but again, how would you like it if instead SHS got some small buff. Something to make it not totally suck vs DHS? Would that not be a better state of affairs?

[Shumabot]

Thirdstar, on 26 March 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

I really should get to sleep but again, how would you like it if instead SHS got some small buff. Something to make it not totally suck vs DHS? Would that not be a better state of affairs?

Realistically DHS need a significant nerf and the heat system needs to be readjusted to compensate. The games DPS outstrips armor performance in unpleasant ways already and most good mech builds can kill/severely maul most others before they overheat, making heat performance an issue of capacity, not handling.

The game needs faster cooloff but lower heat ceilings as a start if it wants heat management to be a meaningful mechanic.

Edited by Shumabot, 26 March 2013 - 02:30 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Bloody hell.....

"S a t a n" is blocked by the bloody word filter now too? Is Canada really becoming that much like the People's Republic of California, that it filters that? Gonna call BS and discrimination if it lets me type "Jesus" or "Buddha" without incident.

[Tesunie]

Protection, on 26 March 2013 - 12:10 PM, said:

I work towards things in my jobs, my crafts, my other hobbies. Gaming used to be one thing where you could buy a game and have all the pieces available to you. Now, to artificially increase playtime and longevity, games now have long arbitrary grinds that prevent you from accessing content until you've put X number of hours in.

MW4, MW3, MW2 were all quite nice in that respect -- if Timmy just got the game and wanted to hop in a Mad Cat, he was free to do. He'd get to be on a level playing field with the other players who also could choose from any of the mechs and equipment.

Unless you played campaign mode, which we are all basically playing campaign mode on for this game. In campaign mode, I had to work at getting my favorite mechs for MW3 and 4. This game isn't online only mode from other MW titles, but is in fact more like a campaign online mode.

Thirdstar, on 26 March 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

And that's perfectly fine, I would never begrudge anyone's fun.

But that's not the topic of this thread. The topic of this thread IS centered on min-maxing and optimal builds. Because that's the most objective way to compare systems like SHS and DHS.

By removing single heat sinks from the game (the title of the thread, so it is the topic of the thread) would ruin a lot of peoples fun. Some of us like having lower tech as an option. It adds flavor to the game. Some of us would even enjoy a stock mech only option if it was available. Why? Because we like the more of the game and want to play more lore based designs.

You are also taking to someone who plays a near stalk Centurion and has fun with it. I added double heat sinks into it to keep it competitive, but the weapons are the same. And I also run a Dragon with 2 LRM5s, an LBXAC10, and an ERPPC.

So, to sum up, you don't want to deny fun, but you want to deny single heat sinks just because they aren't as good as double? Min max is not the only way to compare items, there are also other factors. Maybe I enjoy running a mech closer to stock? Maybe I enjoy having a less heat efficient mech? Maybe I don't like the sounds of a mech that can kill in a single shot? This isn't just a giant robot game. This is a battle tech game with lots of lore, history and other items to be considered. I'd prefer engines to have less options, frames of mechs to not get upgraded, and other items that wouldn't see alterations in lore to not be done. But, in the interest in fun, I wouldn't want to change that customizing system on people for the sake of lore either.

[Thirdstar]

Shumabot, on 26 March 2013 - 02:29 PM, said:

Realistically DHS need a significant nerf and the heat system needs to be readjusted to compensate. The games DPS outstrips armor performance in unpleasant ways already and most good mech builds can kill/severely maul most others before they overheat, making heat performance an issue of capacity, not handling.

The game needs faster cooloff but lower heat ceilings as a start if it wants heat management to be a meaningful mechanic.

Modifying the 'pace' of the game is tricky. Which is what such a change would do.

I actually agree that doubling armor wasn't enough (because they also increased fire rate) and I shudder to think what will happen when Clantech is introduced.

Mustrum has some excellent ideas upthread.

[XphR]

Shumabot, on 26 March 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

It does not.

You sir are either incorrect or my view of telecommunications is vastly differing from your own.

[Thirdstar]

Tesunie, on 26 March 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

the title of the thread, so it is the topic of the thread

The title of the thread is a hyperbolic attempt to bring attention to the issues with SHS and DHS. If you had actually read the thread, you would know this.

[Bishop Steiner]

So...... (no rancor here)

Resorting to hyperbole is OK in this instance, because you agree with the premise?*?!?!?

But wrong when I likewise use it for affect?

I feel slighted, and lessened. And need another beer. This scuba diving and laying in the sun all day is thirsty business....

[Jakob Knight]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 March 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

Redo the math with the following information:
The first 10 in-engine double heat sinks give you +2 heat capacity and +0.2 dissipation/sec.
Out-of-Engine heat sinks give you +1.4 heat capacity and +0.14 dissipation/sec
Standard sinks always give +1 heat capacity and +0.1 dissipation/sec

After you've redone the math, write PGI an e-mail that their byzantine heat system is confusing and tricks player into believing wrong things about the game.

*sighs heavily*

I decided to go ahead and actually run the experiment, since you have decided you cannot be wrong. I did say I was being generous.

AWS-8R. Initial setup: 27 Single Heatsinks. Total heat efficiency: 1.25. Changeover to 15 Double Heatsinks (maximum possible on the mech with identical build). Total heat efficiency: 1.25. Result: 1.5 million cbill cost, much wasted tonnage due to lack of hardpoints and crits to utilize.

With the above, I could easily drop two tons of ammo, and this would produce +2 heat dissipation with single heatsinks, but only +1.4 heat dissipation because I could only fit one double heatsink due to critical slot limits. Double heatsinks are -not- an upgrade in this case, as the heat dissipation was -not- improved, even though I spent 1.5 mil C-bills on an 'improvement', and in fact additional heat sinks from this point begin to -penalize- the mech if it takes double heatsinks.

This experiment was run in order to educate you that mech engineering is more than simple math. It is also a dynamic between space, capability, and available resources. Simply looking at the heat sinks will not tell you if double or single heatsinks are more useful for a particular build...you have to take into account everything. Single heatsinks have their place, and double heatsinks are -not- always better.

This is not opinion. This is cold, hard fact from actual actions taken in the game.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 26 March 2013 - 03:18 PM.

[Mackman]

Jakob Knight, on 26 March 2013 - 03:08 PM, said:

*sighs heavily*

I decided to go ahead and actually run the experiment, since you have decided you cannot be wrong. I did say I was being generous.

AWS-8R. Initial setup: 27 Single Heatsinks. Total heat efficiency: 1.25. Changeover to 15 Double Heatsinks (maximum possible on the mech with identical build). Total heat efficiency: 1.25. Result: 1.5 million cbill cost, much wasted tonnage due to lack of hardpoints and crits to utilize.

With the above, I could easily drop two tons of ammo, and this would produce +2 heat dissipation with single heatsinks, but only +1.4 heat dissipation because I could only fit one double heatsink due to critical slot limits. Double heatsinks are -not- an upgrade in this case, as the heat dissipation was -not- improved, even though I spent 1.5 mil C-bills on an 'improvement', and in fact additional heat sinks from this point begin to -penalize- the mech if it takes double heatsinks.

This experiment was run in order to educate you that mech engineering is more than simple math. It is also a dynamic between space, capability, and available resources. Simply looking at the heat sinks will not tell you if double or single heatsinks are more useful for a particular build...you have to take into account everything. Single heatsinks have their place, and double heatsinks are -not- always better.

This is not opinion. This is cold, hard fact from actual actions taken in the game.

And... what did you do with the EXTRA 12 tons? Did you use it to upgrade your engine? Add more armor? Post your actual smurfy build, and it's almost certain that DHS will make your mech faster, more durable, more heat efficeint, or all of the above.

[Tesunie]

Protection, on 22 March 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

After watching another poor PUG die in the heat-death-traps (often called Trial mechs) while playing today, it occurred to me -- why are single heatsinks even in the game at all?


There is no reason for them to even exist. Double heatsinks are an absolute upgrade. They are basically a mandatory part of any functional design in the game.

The only mechs that benefit, at all, from the existence of single heatsinks are Urbanmech-esque joke light mechs that use up all their critical slots and try to run a 150XL Engine, or Atlas/Stalker builds that decide to run 40+ heatsinks, wasting twenty plus tons that would otherwise be spent on weapons in a good build. We can live without these joke builds.

And this is what kills stock mechs - more than anything else. The weapon loadouts are often terrible, and they are poorly optimized, but it's the lack of effective heat dissipation that makes most trial mechs so utterly terrible.

So why not simply remove single heatsinks from the game? If double heatsinks are going to be an absolute upgrade, then why not simply spare players the frustration and make it so that double heatsinks are the only type of heatsink (which would solve the whole "not really double" thing as well).

All stock mechs now come with double heatsinks instead of single heatsinks - making them much more viable for PUGs to learn the game in, and standardizes an extraneous game element that has no place or purpose any longer (except to mimic tabletop designs).

So let's just make Double Heatsinks the only type of heatsink, and throw away Single Heatsinks forever.




(Alternatively, I did. long ago, make a suggestion about how to make single heatsinks a viable option and the decision between singles and doubles interesting, but it went largely ignored:
http://mwomercs.com/...ps-trial-mechs/ )

Gee. Sounds like it was a thread calling for the complete removal of single heat sinks. So...

Thirdstar, on 26 March 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

The title of the thread is a hyperbolic attempt to bring attention to the issues with SHS and DHS. If you had actually read the thread, you would know this.

I guess I am on topic form the original post perspective. I didn't read all 36 pages of the conversation. I just needed to simply say I have mech designs that are highly effective with single heat sinks. Could double improve them? Sure. But singles work fine.

Also, you needed a reason to have single heat sinks in the game? Something they can do better than double heat sinks? Here it is. Crit buffers. A single heat sink takes up one crit slot, and one crit chance. You can fit several of them into a mech to protect, say, ammo or weapons. Double heat sinks take up three crit slots to place, but only one crit chance (from my understanding of the crit system). Thus, single heat sinks can be used as a crit buffer to protect gear you don't want destroyed, like a Gauss Rifle or ammo.
Also, single heat sinks can be placed into the legs to improve cooling while in water. Double heat sinks can not be fit in a leg, so it can never gain this bonus (Unless you mech is up to it's neck in water). Just some more food for thought.

Jakob Knight, on 26 March 2013 - 03:08 PM, said:

*sighs heavily*

I decided to go ahead and actually run the experiment, since you have decided you cannot be wrong. I did say I was being generous.

AWS-8R. Initial setup: 27 Single Heatsinks. Total heat efficiency: 1.25. Changeover to 15 Double Heatsinks (maximum possible on the mech with identical build). Total heat efficiency: 1.25. Result: 1.5 million cbill cost, much wasted tonnage due to lack of hardpoints and crits to utilize.

With the above, I could easily drop two tons of ammo, and this would produce +2 heat dissipation with single heatsinks, but only +1.4 heat dissipation because I could only fit one double heatsink due to critical slot limits. Double heatsinks are -not- an upgrade in this case, as the heat dissipation was -not- improved, even though I spent 1.5 mil C-bills on an 'improvement', and in fact additional heat sinks from this point begin to -penalize- the mech if it takes double heatsinks.

This experiment was run in order to educate you that mech engineering is more than simple math. It is also a dynamic between space, capability, and available resources. Simply looking at the heat sinks will not tell you if double or single heatsinks are more useful for a particular build...you have to take into account everything. Single heatsinks have their place, and double heatsinks are -not- always better.

This is not opinion. This is cold, hard fact from actual actions taken in the game.

That's about what I found out with my 4 PPC stalker. All I got from it was a .04 increase to heat dissipation and a larger engine. I don't need speed on my PPC mech, as I am staying at long range and counting on my team to keep pests from getting too close, or my own damage counters to keep them from getting too close.



As for my Stalker build in question: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...d0721f2c3140e34

Sure, I could downgrade Endo for DHS, but I don't have the C-bills to do so. However, even without DHS, extra LRMs and such, this design is very effective. It's great for posing as an LRM boat, and then pin point frying anything with the 6 lasers. I have enough LRMs for my taste for long range combat and support, and enough close in fire power to make people think twice before closing in, or make them regret charging into me without a thought.

Could I pay 1,721,500 C-bills to remove Endo and add in DHS? Then I might be able to change a couple LRM5s into LRM10s (which shoot slower but build up less heat than 2 LRM5s, and have 1 ton less efficiency), or maybe even add in Artemis into my already LRM5 system, if not even combine the two ideas together.

It COULD look like something on these lines: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...34b02109eb23103

I placed the LRMs in the arms for the tube limit. The torso launchers are only 6 tube launchers. I actually end up bringing damage up a bit, but end up over all dropping my heat by 1%. And I'm forced into throwing ammo in the legs (very un-lore like) and even into the CT, instead of to the buffered arms. The arms that, I find, normally don't get blown off unless I lose a side. Ammo normally doesn't blow there, so I don't recall ever dieing from an ammo explosion. So, I increased the risk, got a little more fire power, and for what? Just to cost me more than my original set up? And if R&R was placed back in any time, I'd be paying more for repairs now than with my older setup.

So, yes. DHSs do provide benifits and are better in most cases compared to SHSs. However, in the case of my Stalker, it doesn't feel right, and overall, the original version is just as good. Thus, I propose, for the cost, SHS are just as playable in my Stalker as DHS. Same went with my PPC stalker. DHS where more effective, and effective enough for me to change it (to check it out). However, it wasn't make or break with it. All it did was make my Stalker move faster than it did before, which was optional in a sniping build ment to engage at long ranges.

[gamingogre]

Why does everyone keep saying DHS is worth twice the SHS. IT'S ONLY 1.4! Your math is all wrong. Besides, if you see the game as being balanced from the DHS point of view, then the SHS is actually getting a boost from TT stats.

[Kattspya]

gamingogre, on 26 March 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

Why does everyone keep saying DHS is worth twice the SHS. IT'S ONLY 1.4! Your math is all wrong. Besides, if you see the game as being balanced from the DHS point of view, then the SHS is actually getting a boost from TT stats.

Who said that except for engine sinks which are at 2?