1107 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Shumabot, on 28 March 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

If I have the same mech, the same skill, and doubles I am going to beat you 100% of the time. Your argument is nonsense.

No you are not. I can think of a few Missile builds that can beat a comparable Double build 50% of the time. Same speed, same weapons, double sinks, the only difference, you will not win every time. Guaranteed.

[Shumabot]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 March 2013 - 03:57 PM, said:

No you are not. I can think of a few Missile builds that can beat a comparable Double build 50% of the time. Same speed, same weapons, double sinks, the only difference, you will not win every time. Guaranteed.

You well and truly don't understand math.

[Josef Nader]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 March 2013 - 03:57 PM, said:

No you are not. I can think of a few Missile builds that can beat a comparable Double build 50% of the time. Same speed, same weapons, double sinks, the only difference, you will not win every time. Guaranteed.

Yeah, I'm with Shuma on this one.

If the only variable between two mechs (including pilots) is whether or not one has doubles or not, the one with doubles will always win. Even if it only gives you an extra shot every two minutes of continuous firing, that's still a notable advantage if all other variables have been isolated.

[Bishop Steiner]

@Joseph Mallon,

You can't talk sense to the senseless. You are facing a leet forum mechwarrior legend here who can beat you 100% of the time in smurfys, while you and I tend to worry more about winning in the actual game. Just makes me look forward to getting back to my desktop next month, to sqvor the anger and gnashing of their teeth everytime I wipe the map with them in my suboptimal build.

Assuming of course they can find time away from smurfys and the forums to actually play the game.

Lol.

[Joseph Mallan]

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.

The misconception is not the builders though. If they want singles and can make it work, get kills, have fun, who are we to tell them they should not play the way that works for them? It is awful smug to think you know what someone else wants to run.

Also at what point does your idea of better become overkill?

[Shumabot]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 March 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

The misconception is not the builders though. If they want singles and can make it work, get kills, have fun, who are we to tell them they should not play the way that works for them? It is awful smug to think you know what someone else wants to run.

Also at what point does your idea of better become overkill?

Shifting sands much?

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

@Joseph Mallon,

You can't talk sense to the senseless. You are facing a leet forum mechwarrior legend here who can beat you 100% of the time in smurfys, while you and I tend to worry more about winning in the actual game. Just makes me look forward to getting back to my desktop next month, to sqvor the anger and gnashing of their teeth everytime I wipe the map with them in my suboptimal build.

Assuming of course they can find time away from smurfys and the forums to actually play the game.

Lol.

Also assuming they remove elo from the game, otherwise you're going to live in your steering wheel underhive for the rest of time. I'm sure you'll do great against the Phracts without JJs and the LBX wielding dragons.

Edited by Shumabot, 28 March 2013 - 04:19 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

maybe buff singles to make trial mechs less of a joke or allow singles and doubles on the same builds

[Josef Nader]

You're still completely missing the point.

Builds can work with singles, but singles are not -necessary- to make any build work. There is no build in the game that is made BETTER by the inclusion of single heatsinks. Builds -can- work with single heat sinks, and there's nothing wrong with running a suboptimal build (if I had a nickle for every time a build I posted over on the ELP forums gave Protection an anyurism, I'd be a rich man). However, that's completely missing the point of this thread.

As it stands, right now, the single best upgrade you can put on any mech is double heat sinks. You save yourself tonnage and significantly improve your heat efficiency for absolutely zero cost (aside from the 1.5 mil entry fee). There is absolutely ZERO gameplay reason to keep single heat sinks on a mech. The first thing I do after buying a new chassis is slap doubles on it, before I even know what build I'm going for, because no matter what build I do doubles will always, always, always be better. I might come up with a build that doesn't NEED 20 single heat sinks worth of cooling (shoot, it might not even need 10 single heat sinks worth of cooling), but my point is that there is no reason not to slap those doubles in there the minute you get the mech.

If you read the OP, both Protection and I are pushing for more interesting choices. Right now, there is only one choice: is it worth dropping 1.5 mil on this chassis? If you're using even one single heat sink outside of the 10 that come with your engine, you're better off with doubles. That's one ton and one crit you could be using for something else.

What you're saying is essentially, "I don't want to invest money in a real baseball bat, so I'm going to use an old broomstick as a stand-in. I can still hit the baseball with the old broomstick, and I can have fun with the old broomstick, so this means that given the choice between a real bat and a broomstick I should seriously weigh my options."

It's preposterous. Doubles are a straight upgrade and singles have no reason to exist right now. I want them to have a reason to exist. Is that so bonkers?

Edited by Josef Nader, 28 March 2013 - 04:26 PM.

[Shumabot]

I'm dead serious, people have been trying to drill that into them for 50 pages. You're wasting your time. They like the fact that it's a straight up upgrade, they think new players are selfish or lazy and don't care that this game can't attract new blood, and they refuse any change that looks like it might not be based on TT values.

Edited by Shumabot, 28 March 2013 - 04:29 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

@Nader,

Firstly none of my comments are meant as an attack on you. While not in agreement, you have not descended to rants and throwing a tantrum to "make your points".

I would however point out most of Protections OP was hyperbolic and NOT suggestive to alternatives, but essentially a "my way is the only way demand". Shumabot has in general contributed less, by flyinoff the handle and attcking ANY person of divergent opinion.

Now at various points, some alternatives have indeed been mentioned, with varying degree of merit. But in the 1000 posts on here, Joseph Mallon, Tetsunie and myself have recommended many alternatives, and spent more time trying to promote debate and conversation, whilst Shumabot, Protection and Thirdstar gave been content to argue, belittle and attack anyone who doesn't build to THEIR smurfy specs, rather than in any way actually encourage a meaningful dialog.

so at this point I and many people on here no longer see much merit in attempting actual conversation with such obstinancy.

[TruePoindexter]

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/ )

I've thought about it for awhile and after messing around with the trial Trebuchet 7M which comes with DHS I find that I agree. There are a few builds that benefit specifically from SHS over DHS but these are in the minority. I think if mechs by default came with the DHS upgrade and instead you had to buy the SHS downgrade for those specific cases it would help a lot.

EDIT: I can't recreate those SHS specific builds but I might be remembering them wrong or hallucinating. Either way there were all of one or two of them and frankly they weren't very good to begin with DHS should be the norm.

Edited by TruePoindexter, 28 March 2013 - 04:51 PM.

[Shumabot]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

@Nader,

Firstly none of my comments are meant as an attack on you. While not in agreement, you have not descended to rants and throwing a tantrum to "make your points".

I would however point out most of Protections OP was hyperbolic and NOT suggestive to alternatives, but essentially a "my way is the only way demand". Shumabot has in general contributed less, by flyinoff the handle and attcking ANY person of divergent opinion.

Now at various points, some alternatives have indeed been mentioned, with varying degree of merit. But in the 1000 posts on here, Joseph Mallon, Tetsunie and myself have recommended many alternatives, and spent more time trying to promote debate and conversation, whilst Shumabot, Protection and Thirdstar gave been content to argue, belittle and attack anyone who doesn't build to THEIR smurfy specs, rather than in any way actually encourage a meaningful dialog.

so at this point I and many people on here no longer see much merit in attempting actual conversation with such obstinancy.

Quote

Anything we say is reasonable and truthful soul searching to find a compromise, anyone that disagrees with us is barbaric trolls at our gates

If your arguments weren't childish nonsense people wouldn't constantly mock you for them. That you think you're some sort of white night of civility is laughable.

Edited by Shumabot, 28 March 2013 - 04:40 PM.

[Just wanna play]

just want to point out, in a mech that wants defense and firepower, and doesn't care about speed, standards can be better then doubles, since doubles biggest strength is doubling the effectiveness in engines, and only taking up the space of 1 std hs in extra engine slts, while the smaller the engine, the better heat sink per ton ratio it offers, now if only i can figure out a build that would use std hs, had a hero phract design with ac/20 and dual uacs that used them, forgot it tho

wait protection, you started this thread?? but you say that light mech in the **** my ride forum that was better with std hs! let me find it again

[Shumabot]

Just wanna play, on 28 March 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

just want to point out, in a mech that wants defense and firepower, and doesn't care about speed, standards can be better then doubles, since doubles biggest strength is doubling the effectiveness in engines, and only taking up the space of 1 std hs in extra engine slts, while the smaller the engine, the better heat sink per ton ratio it offers, now if only i can figure out a build that would use std hs, had a hero phract design with ac/20 and dual uacs that used them, forgot it tho

wait protection, you started this thread?? but you say that light mech in the **** my ride forum that was better with std hs! let me find it again

If it was a commando, don't bother. That's the games only mech that can't fit an engine with 10 internals, thus forcing it to dedicate 6-12 slots outside its engine for dubs. Something a commando can't do since it's so space starved already. It's the games only mech that isn't purely superior with doubles.

[Sifright]

Just wanna play, on 28 March 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

just want to point out, in a mech that wants defense and firepower, and doesn't care about speed, standards can be better then doubles, since doubles biggest strength is doubling the effectiveness in engines, and only taking up the space of 1 std hs in extra engine slts, while the smaller the engine, the better heat sink per ton ratio it offers, now if only i can figure out a build that would use std hs, had a hero phract design with ac/20 and dual uacs that used them, forgot it tho

wait protection, you started this thread?? but you say that light mech in the **** my ride forum that was better with std hs! let me find it again

*face palm*

[Protection]

Just wanna play, on 28 March 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

just want to point out, in a mech that wants defense and firepower, and doesn't care about speed, standards can be better then doubles, since doubles biggest strength is doubling the effectiveness in engines, and only taking up the space of 1 std hs in extra engine slts, while the smaller the engine, the better heat sink per ton ratio it offers, now if only i can figure out a build that would use std hs, had a hero phract design with ac/20 and dual uacs that used them, forgot it tho

wait protection, you started this thread?? but you say that light mech in the **** my ride forum that was better with std hs! let me find it again

Light mechs with sub 250 engines, yes, as has been covered from pages 12 through 40 in the thread here.

[Sifright]

Shumabot, on 28 March 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

If it was a commando, don't bother. That's the games only mech that can't fit an engine with 10 internals, thus forcing it to dedicate 6-12 slots outside its engine for dubs. Something a commando can't do since it's so space starved already. It's the games only mech that isn't purely superior with doubles.

Flea is coming as well, Flea is going to be utter garbage no matter the setup though so *shrug*

[Roadbeer]

Boy, this thread just keeps going, don't it?

[Josef Nader]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 March 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

I would however point out most of Protections OP was hyperbolic and NOT suggestive to alternatives, but essentially a "my way is the only way demand". Shumabot has in general contributed less, by flyinoff the handle and attcking ANY person of divergent opinion.

He linked his alternative and solution (again, which is one I agree with) at the bottom of the OP

I haven't read through the whole 50 page of this juggernaut, but arguing that singles have a place in the game because there are builds that exist that don't need 10 heatsinks worth of cooling is not a valid argument.

So far, the only builds that NEED singles are Endo/Ferro/XL 'mandos, and even then they're usually better served by finding some space for the doubles one way or another. Singles need to offer a meaningful choice if they're going to be in the game. It's the same thing applied to flamers and machine guns. If these things don't provide meaningful choices in one form or another, they're a waste of design time.

[Just wanna play]

Protection, on 28 March 2013 - 04:45 PM, said:

Light mechs with sub 250 engines, yes, as has been covered from pages 12 through 40 in the thread here.

Sifright, on 28 March 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

*face palm*

i wasn't talking about lights -__- if you have spare tonnage and no more critical slots because of doubles, you can always switch to singles and put in a smaller engine, i saw a 6 ppc stalker that was slower but way cooler running with standards, so again, if you dont care about mobility, doubles aren't always the best, and again, theres my ac/20 and dual uac phract, and why take out the possibility to make such fun mechs, not everyone makes a mech becuase it is as effective as possible, some just make mechs for fun, i also once made a mech that was cooler with doubles, but didn't have the 10 hs minimum, so i had to use standards
you can also put standards in the legs, which can make up to 4 of them as good as true double heat sinks

i also don't see why you guys call trial mechs heat death traps, i use them, they are just fine for me, especially that 4n stalker, although that jenner with .88 heat was a little hot