1107 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

I think you and I could discuss our LOVE of BV over beers!

That art was not stolen, it was licensed. but that is a different discussion. And the best thin g in the game from the 80s.

But for it being a weakling it is still being sold and I can not say that for many games that Are in fact dead. Heroes Unlimited, MW:DA, GammaWorld (IIRC)

PropagandaWar, on 28 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

ShadowRun vgame kickstarter brought in a hella lot of money.

I need to look into this one. Kinda like the idea not the anti hero aspect though.

[Shumabot]

PropagandaWar, on 28 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

ShadowRun vgame kickstarter brought in a hella lot of money.

A few months back a custom tileset for settlers of catan pulled in almost a million dollars. Just plastic tiles. Nearly a million dollars. Crowdfunding is bizarre.

[PropagandaWar]

@joseph: http://www.kickstart...adowrun-returns

[PropagandaWar]

Shumabot, on 28 March 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

A few months back a custom tileset for settlers of catan pulled in almost a million dollars. Just plastic tiles. Nearly a million dollars. Crowdfunding is bizarre.

Catan and Ticket to ride did great at grabbing the mainstream audience. I prefer games like Mageknight the Boardgame, Battle lore, Summoner Wars, Descent and Mage Wars. Also Fantasy Flight did a decent job with the StarWars franchise with the X-wing Miniature game.

[Protection]

John Norad, on 28 March 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Wow, this whole debate is kinda sad. From a game-design perspective.

How about proper balance instead of simply getting rid of something?

You could rework the whole heat system to make single heat sinks actually work.
You could factor the type of heatsink into a Combat/Battle value calculation.
You could make it an economic/repair consideration.

At least for me, getting rid of single heat sinks would mean to give up on a good and balanced game.

Might help to actually read some of my posts.

[Tesunie]

Protection, on 28 March 2013 - 11:45 AM, said:

Might help to actually read some of my posts.

No offence, but as I said before, your original post wasn't clear on what you really want to discuss (from what you have said when I started posting), your title doesn't either, and very few people will read past a few pages before responding to the title and original post of the thread. It isn't their fault if they respond to your title and original post, and not the close to 50 pages of chat.

Update the original post maybe? Your tittle is your catch point to get people reading, your original post should help direct the conversation into and onto the desired topic.

[Fiachdubh]

Eh no heat sinks do have a place in the game. If a mechs weapon load out is not heat intensive DHS are unnecessary and the slots can be used for other upgrades that will provide more benefit to the build. Not every mech is automatically better or worse just because it has SHS/DHS.

[jay35]

Fenix0742, on 22 March 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Nope, at best, you'd get double power from 4 heatsinks giving you 8 + 10 from the engine for 4 tons. DHS gives you 20 for 0 tons at all times, not just in the water. The math just isn't there to support it.

That's why I said they'd have to make them worthwhile first.

[Twisted Power]

Fiachdubh, on 28 March 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

Eh no heat sinks do have a place in the game. If a mechs weapon load out is not heat intensive DHS are unnecessary and the slots can be used for other upgrades that will provide more benefit to the build. Not every mech is automatically better or worse just because it has SHS/DHS.

If the build is not heat intensive then DHS are still better then SHS every time. The less heat intensive the build the more reason to have double heat sinks because then you only need the HS' located in the engine. There are no slots used when you have 10 HS's in your engine but your cooling doubles with DHS.

Edited by Twisted Power, 28 March 2013 - 12:13 PM.

[Protection]

Fiachdubh, on 28 March 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

Eh no heat sinks do have a place in the game. If a mechs weapon load out is not heat intensive DHS are unnecessary and the slots can be used for other upgrades that will provide more benefit to the build. Not every mech is automatically better or worse just because it has SHS/DHS.

This is a misconception. Unless you are running a small engine light mech, every single build is either equal (for the rare case of zero heat builds) or better off in every single way with double heatsinks. Every one.

[Vodrin Thales]

Protection, on 28 March 2013 - 12:35 PM, said:

This is a misconception. Unless you are running a small engine light mech, every single build is either equal (for the rare case of zero heat builds) or better off in every single way with double heatsinks. Every one.

Not true. Several assault builds become crit space limited far more than tonnage limited when you use endo steel. As such you can actually put more cooling capacity on the mech with SHS, even when you account for the boost in cooling from the engine heat sinks.

That said, all but a handful of builds are better with DHS.

[Protection]

Vodrin Thales, on 28 March 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

Not true. Several assault builds become crit space limited far more than tonnage limited when you use endo steel. As such you can actually put more cooling capacity on the mech with SHS, even when you account for the boost in cooling from the engine heat sinks.

That said, all but a handful of builds are better with DHS.

You get more tonnage savings by dropping the Endo Steel and taking double heatsinks. Those builds are poorly optimized and inefficient and can be made to have the same features with better cooling. Unless you are running 35+ Single heatsinks, but you are talking about joke builds at that point.

[Tesunie]

Thontor, on 28 March 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

Most likely you could drop Endo steel, get more cooling out of DHS, and still have weight left over.

True, but then you have some mechs like my Stalker which was made when I (not knowing yet and reading misinformation on the forums and being short on c-bills) thought that engine sinks for double where 1.4, did the math, and thought endo would save me more weight and save more c-bills. Now, I have a mech that still runs great with SHS, and really isn't worth they cost to remove endo, convert to DHS, buy the extra sinks not in the engine, etc. Personally, I love my a Stalker build as is and don't intend to change it at this time.

[Josef Nader]

Thontor, on 28 March 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

Most likely you could drop Endo steel, get more cooling out of DHS, and still have weight left over.

You need 10 tons of single heat sinks to match the free double heat sinks that come with your engine. If you have 10 tons and 10 crit slots to throw around, you can afford double heat sinks.

Singles = 10 tons and 10 crit slots for 20 cooling
Doubles = 0 tons and 0 crit slots for 20 cooling (as long as your engine is over a 250

Edited by Josef Nader, 28 March 2013 - 01:05 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

@PropogandaWar

Thanks for the kickstarter link. Definitely will give it a look.

[qki]

Vodrin Thales, on 28 March 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

Not true. Several assault builds become crit space limited far more than tonnage limited when you use endo steel. As such you can actually put more cooling capacity on the mech with SHS, even when you account for the boost in cooling from the engine heat sinks.

That said, all but a handful of builds are better with DHS.

We've been there mate.

[WardenWolf]

I can't remember if I've already posted in this thread or not, but my advice is to reduce the heat threshold (which is now 30+ the number of heatsinks you have, I believe). That allows for massive alpha strikes, which is where a lot of the problems with heat come from. Remove that, or scale it back, and then move the double heatsinks to their full 2x dissipation - that is what I would like to see.

Oh, and heat penalties beyond just shutting down would be good too. I don't think they need to be as complex as those in the BattleTech table top game, but some penalty for constantly being near 100% would be good, and then for going much over 100% (even if you also shutdown).

[qki]

Protection, on 28 March 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

You get more tonnage savings by dropping the Endo Steel and taking double heatsinks. Those builds are poorly optimized and inefficient and can be made to have the same features with better cooling. Unless you are running 35+ Single heatsinks, but you are talking about joke builds at that point.

Again - not really. The shs builds are not optimized, but neither are they inefficient (at least the ones I have in mind). The "optimal" DHS builds are, in this case, actually oversinked.

You can run that 'phract I posted earlier with singles, and never care to upgrade. On paper, DHS version looks better in every way. In practice, for the 3 times I took it out since the stat tracking update, 450 damage adds up to 6 kills - about 60-80 damage per kill, but that's assuming good aim and putting round after round, after laser beam in the CT.

In practice - that thing never overheats, nor runs out of ammo (7 tons is plenty) - a DHS upgrade offers minimal gain, since I already have more dissipation, than I need, and getting even more dissipation does very little to increase performance.


Point is - tactics are more important than actual mech loadout. Even if you don't have the dissipation of a DHS version, a simple gameplay decision to boom and zoom can more than make up for it (especially in case of light mechs), proving that you can do just fine with SHS.


But when is all this relevant? Most likely when you buy a mech only to level up your main variant, and sell it afterwards (not everyone has 46 mechbays available). In this case, you may be loathe to spend another 1.5 mil on a mech you're about to sell, and effectively lose 750k.

Some people in this thread, claim (falsely) that every mech MUST run DHS, and anything with SHS is not even remotely worth playing. That is a fallacy. The system doesn't need rebalancing. If, for whatever reason, you don't want to spend another 1500000 c-bills on double heatsinks, you can make a loadout using single heatsinks, and do just fine. Ultimately, you will probably want to upgrade (with very few exceptions, like the aforementioned mechs that really don't care for DHS), and that's fine.

SHS are not a death sentence, nor a "must have right now" upgrade to install first thing after buying a mech.


TL;DR

You'll most likely want DHS anyway, but mechs with singles are not as worthless as some people make them out to be, and you can still get results without DHS - ergo DHS are a meaningful upgrade, and not a "sales tax" on something that must be installed on every mech before you start playing with it, or you stand no chance of winning.

[Josef Nader]

Not sure what you're talking about. Mechs cost 1.5 million C-Bills more than they do in the chassis.

If you have even one heatsink outside your engine (and you aren't a light mech running a smaller than 250 engine that needs endo/ferro), you are better served by upgrading to doubles. It's that simple.

[Tesunie]

I think people are mixing optimal and efficient. Something can be efficient and yet not be optimal (best).

I think that is the root of this. Optimal means best it can be. Efficient means it gets the job done, and done well. Could an efficient build be more optimal? Sure. But it works and is efficient.