1107 replies to this topic

[Wildstreak]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

Stop speaking for other people. You don't represent them and your inference that everyone wants a broken tiered system of pay for performance is patently wrong.

Yet, you have done the same thing among your many mistakes such as claiming you know what 15 other people in any game think.

[Protection]

Terran123rd, on 25 March 2013 - 05:51 PM, said:

Alright. Then I'll save him the trouble of speaking for me (though he is doing an excellent job). I want single heat sinks. Not only is more choice good, I've come across several occasions where singles were the better choice.

Please, share one example.

[Shumabot]

Merchant, on 25 March 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

Yet, you have done the same thing among your many mistakes such as claiming you know what 15 other people in any game think.

No, I claim to that I don't care what they think. I claim to know what is better for them than they do. That is fundamentally different from knowing what they think.

[Bishop Steiner]

@Mercules,
Stop talking sense please.  It only makes the meet uberpro-gamers uncomfortable.
@Shumabot,
Yeah, but it's perfectly OK for you to speak for everyone else regarding whether they are allowed to drive a particular build, because YOU don't think it's good.  Friggin hypocrite.  You wanna micromanage what everyone drops in, shut up and go queue up in 8man.  Unless the competition is too stiff for you.  Otherwise, grin and bear it, princess.Best part is all the excuses you make at every opportunity you've been given to put up or shut up. Typical candyazz "leet" forumwarrior.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 25 March 2013 - 06:56 PM.

[Atheus]

Wow, that was one long *** read. It's like Protection, Shumabot, and Mustrum Ridiculi vs. the entire population of idiots in here. My sympathies.

My summary: People who think SHS are useful either don't understand how heat sinks in this game work, are bad at math, suffer from some sort of idiocy or really want 3 tons of SSRM ammo on their commando. Suffice it to say anyone from PGI who has read this thread should understand well enough that SHS are utterly obsolete and that continuing to put trial mechs employing them based on heat values from a DIFFERENT game — is significantly harming the new player experience.

To elaborate - the main harm of SHS is the trial mechs. Everyone who has analyzed how this game works well enough to understand the heat system has played long enough to recognize the value of the upgrade, and acquire the capital needed to obtain it. Thus the only people who are harmed by the existence of SHS's are the ignorant veterans, and new players who have no choice in the matter due to being in the trial mech grind phase, or other economic concerns.

I could not care less about the ignorant veterans, but I do care about new players being dumped into the fray in the crappiest mechs in the game which annoyingly overheat just as soon as a fight starts to get exciting. Anyone coming in here saying that SHS are useful and should stay just how they are clearly do not give even a tiny poop about making the new player experience pleasant for anyone but masochists.

Regarding the player designed trial mech that will soon be available (likely the Dragon 5N with 2xLL + Gauss): what will be the effect of this? I have that exact build, and it is a very effective killer. It's going to be the only trial mech worth a damn — in fact I'd easily pit that dragon against the other 3 trial mechs and expect it to win with minor injuries. So, great! One batch of incoming players will have access to a mech that is competitive against existing players mechs, never mind their skill deficit. Will they be more likely to stay? Probably, but as soon as they buy their own mech they are probably going to wonder why they suddenly suck terribly at the game. They will need to get a bachelor's degree in MWO thermals (a program which apparently some founders still have not graduated) before they can get their mech operating at a reasonable level of performance.

The system is just too damned complex, and requires all sorts of specialized knowledge of bizarre development decisions (2.0/1.4, how many heat sinks fit in a certain engine, etc) in addition to the basic math skill that apparently many lack from the get-go. I do not know whether SHS need to be removed completely, but the heat sink system and its in-game documentation need some serious attention with the intent to simplify and clarify. Rename things with misleading names, and change values to ensure new players aren't out there with the equivalent of sling-shots on a battlefield filled with machine guns.

Edit: Run-on sentences from hell fixed.

Edited by Atheus, 25 March 2013 - 09:22 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Cool story bro. So cuz u don't like something, removing it is the only answer.

Of course, anyone with a small modicum of objectivity could see where this is dumb, and also comprehend Mercules point about the harm done to the underlying meta by removing RnR, but again, that would require the ability to be objective. You know, I don't think the LB-X is competitive, let's yank it, along with machine guns and flamers. Actually, once Clan weapons arrive, lets yank ALL inner sphere weapons, as they are clear downgrades and serve no purpose. Hell, what am I talking about? Let's just cut to the chase and remove everything inner sphere NOW, and make this a pure Clan tech game. After all, I can't let someone gimp my team by driving an Atlas when he could be in a Warhawk... No wait, that leaves 15 tons on the table, snake that a Dire Wolf.

effing bunch of geniuses.

[Atheus]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 March 2013 - 08:14 PM, said:

Cool story bro. So cuz u don't like something, removing it is the only answer.

Of course, anyone with a small modicum of objectivity could see where this is dumb, and also comprehend Mercules point about the harm done to the underlying meta by removing RnR, but again, that would require the ability to be objective. You know, I don't think the LB-X is competitive, let's yank it, along with machine guns and flamers. Actually, once Clan weapons arrive, lets yank ALL inner sphere weapons, as they are clear downgrades and serve no purpose. Hell, what am I talking about? Let's just cut to the chase and remove everything inner sphere NOW, and make this a pure Clan tech game. After all, I can't let someone gimp my team by driving an Atlas when he could be in a Warhawk... No wait, that leaves 15 tons on the table, snake that a Dire Wolf.

effing bunch of geniuses.

LB-X does kind of suck, but not to the extent that it's ruining the game for new players. Nor are machine guns. I have no idea how they're going to balance clan tech, but if they do a terrible job of it, further diminishing the game's ability to appeal to new players, then continue on to muse about adding third person view because of poor new player retention, you can be sure I'll have something to say about it.

Edited by Atheus, 25 March 2013 - 08:26 PM.

[Shumabot]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 March 2013 - 08:14 PM, said:

Cool story bro. So cuz u don't like something, removing it is the only answer.

Of course, anyone with a small modicum of objectivity could see where this is dumb, and also comprehend Mercules point about the harm done to the underlying meta by removing RnR, but again, that would require the ability to be objective. You know, I don't think the LB-X is competitive, let's yank it, along with machine guns and flamers. Actually, once Clan weapons arrive, lets yank ALL inner sphere weapons, as they are clear downgrades and serve no purpose. Hell, what am I talking about? Let's just cut to the chase and remove everything inner sphere NOW, and make this a pure Clan tech game. After all, I can't let someone gimp my team by driving an Atlas when he could be in a Warhawk... No wait, that leaves 15 tons on the table, snake that a Dire Wolf.

effing bunch of geniuses.

[MustrumRidcully]

Joseph Mallan, on 25 March 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

At higher levels of Play you should be able to afford the Doubles anyway. (unless I misunderstand your meaning of higher level of play)

People want the option of singles. Removing them because some folks only like dubs. Well that is just as selfish as my saying we can get rid of MGs cause I never use em.

I disagree that this is selfish.

Underpowered, subpar equipment is equivalen to a noobie trap.

A new player comes into the game, things MGs sound cool, I make a 4 MG Spider, that will rock!
And he ends wasting his first C-Bills on subpar equipment and is then frustrated by his consistent poor performance. Eventually he learns that MGs are generally considered underpowered and weak, and he is angry that he was duped into buying this gear.

There would be two ways to improve the situation:
1) No MGs at all. The player will not be tricked into buying something inferior, and he will take something that can work and he just has to master it, eventually becoming succesful and happy.
2) Balance the MG so it's worth its weight, crit slots and hard points. The player that wanted to use MGs will have a decent weapon and he can now learn to master it and eventually become succesful, increasing his enjoyment of the game.

[Vassago Rain]

Mercules, on 25 March 2013 - 02:22 PM, said:

So what happens when the Clan Ultra AC/10 comes along, lighter and taking up less slots. It's nothing but an upgrade with no drawback(since there is no Repair & Reload where you could lose it or it might be expensive) to using one over the IS AC/10. Clan LRMs outpace IS by a LONG way. Shall we just remove IS when Clan get introduced?

No, you HAVE to have a value system that weights everything based on it's function in the game and match according to that. With that in place Single Heat Sink mechs will have a place being the lower value mech that alternately lets you bring a higher level mech to the party. Otherwise, yes, Battletech and thus Mechwarrior are unbalanced with major upgrades that make no sense not to take when you can customize.

I got some bad news for you, son.

BT has been unbalanced and held together by duct tape for the past 17 years, at the very least. The whole point of LBX, RACs, and UACs is to completely replace the terrible ACs.

[qki]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

I could do better in my sleep, and straight resource driven upgrades in a competitive multiplayer game that doesn't matchmake based on resource investment is an awful design. This is like talking about algebra with someone who can't do addition.

Oh, and if you upgraded to doubles you would get the equivalent of 10 free heat sinks in your engine and regain 10 tons of space. Your mech is bad and you are bad at this game.

No, you couldn't. A couple of things tipped me off.

First - you fail to realise that if there is a design flaw here, it's double, not single heatsinks. From a purely design perspective, single heatsinks are better. You start with 10, and you really need to put some tonnage into your heatsinks, even if your mech is "only" generating 16-17 heat per round. With doubles, you start with 20, and some problems disappear right there.


And drop your elitist attitude son - I rarely take that atlas out, playing lights most of the time, but last game I got 5 kills with it, and no heat problems.

Understand it already - with only a few weapon systems, you can easily manage heat WITHOUT double heatsinks. Sure, they are an upgrade, but if anything - that's a reason to keep SHS in the game. It's not like any mech that has single heatsinks is instantly invalid. If you think that, then you just suck at playing this game.

[XphR]

I like to put them in my feet... I guess I have to get bigger feet so my ridiculous shss wont look so awkward...

How can so many people be doing it wrong?
It has a little something to do with things being able to be done so many more ways that one. Personal and situational preferences, two tiny variables that shift realities further apart than some can see and others still can bare to admit.

[Protection]

XphR, on 26 March 2013 - 01:37 AM, said:

I like to put them in my feet... I guess I have to get bigger feet so my ridiculous shss wont look so awkward...

How can so many people be doing it wrong?
It has a little something to do with things being able to be done so many more ways that one. Personal and situational preferences, two tiny variables that shift realities further apart than some can see and others still can bare to admit.

No that's the problem - it is not player preference. It is a one dimensional strict upgrade. There is no design in which single heatsinks are more optimal.

XL Engines come with trade-offs -- massive fragility for lots of tonnage. Endo Steel and Ferro Fibrous cost you critical slots (although i have issues here, but that's for another thread). Double heatsinks are a net gain across the board (and many idiots are unable to realize this) -- all optimized builds benefit from them in every way. This thread is dozens of replies failing to understand that. Many of those that do, are fine with this idea of flat, boring, strict, one directional upgrades.

Being a strict, one dimensional upgrade means that it isn't an upgrade at all - it's a 1.5 million C-Bill sales tax on every new mech I purchase. A waste of time and mouse-clicks.

If elements like this are "good for the game" and 'strict upgrades are fun" then we might as well give players level 1, 2 and 3 PPCs - where you have to spend more C-Bills to unlock the more powerful versions of this classic weapon. If strict upgrades are good, then shouldn't there be more of them.

Except this is a PvP game. It doesn't need level up, Warcraft style elements of progression - it needs item balance and meaningful player choices for diversity. New players shouldn't be blocked out of effective optimal equipment, and, because it is PvP only, even free, new players deserve equal footing.

[qki]

Protection, on 25 March 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

So you use something like this: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...989e06afac5cf0c


So what you are saying is that you suck at mech design and are incompetent.

Optimized your design to be much less terribad: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...a7f05a6af29477d

No, n00b - I use this:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4b5630f003be786

So what you are saying, is that you suck at guessing other people's minds, and you are incompetent.


In practice - I never have heat problems with sustained fire, and standing in the water I get better cooling, than your "optimized" design. Which is irrelevant really, because you just threw away a few million c-bills on useless upgrades - 4 kp/h that doesn't make a difference (unless you suck and need every last bit of speed to make up for your own mistakes), and cooling that I never use. Also - forgot the AMS, and case, and your ammo/heatsink placeent sucks major balls.

Protection, on 26 March 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

No that's the problem - it is not player preference. It is a one dimensional strict upgrade. There is no design in which single heatsinks are more optimal.

XL Engines come with trade-offs -- massive fragility for lots of tonnage. Endo Steel and Ferro Fibrous cost you critical slots (although i have issues here, but that's for another thread). Double heatsinks are a net gain across the board (and many idiots are unable to realize this) -- all optimized builds benefit from them in every way. This thread is dozens of replies failing to understand that. Many of those that do, are fine with this idea of flat, boring, strict, one directional upgrades.

Being a strict, one dimensional upgrade means that it isn't an upgrade at all - it's a 1.5 million C-Bill sales tax on every new mech I purchase. A waste of time and mouse-clicks.

If elements like this are "good for the game" and 'strict upgrades are fun" then we might as well give players level 1, 2 and 3 PPCs - where you have to spend more C-Bills to unlock the more powerful versions of this classic weapon. If strict upgrades are good, then shouldn't there be more of them.

Except this is a PvP game. It doesn't need level up, Warcraft style elements of progression - it needs item balance and meaningful player choices for diversity. New players shouldn't be blocked out of effective optimal equipment, and, because it is PvP only, even free, new players deserve equal footing.

COM-2D has a finger up your butt on this.

[Protection]

qki, on 26 March 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

No, n00b - I use this:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4b5630f003be786

So what you are saying, is that you suck at guessing other people's minds, and you are incompetent.


In practice - I never have heat problems with sustained fire, and standing in the water I get better cooling, than your "optimized" design. Which is irrelevant really, because you just threw away a few million c-bills on useless upgrades - 4 kp/h that doesn't make a difference (unless you suck and need every last bit of speed to make up for your own mistakes), and cooling that I never use. Also - forgot the AMS, and case, and your ammo/heatsink placeent sucks major balls.




COM-2D has a finger up your butt on this.

LOL, that's even worse. You're even dumber than I thought.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...65db40f3c87956e

100% improved with double heatsinks,

You're welcome for fixing your terribad build.

Now take your suck and get out of my threadnaught.

[XphR]

How can you tell me its not player preference if it is my preference to carry them in my feet and I am a player? Mind you, it is, I do and I am.

I put them in my feet and I stand in water when the opportunity presents itself. Does it help me 100% of the time? No. Do I expect it to? No. Do I take advantage of it when I can? Yes, in fact.. I even appreciate the option. If they were removed as per your will I as a player would no longer have the option to cool my feetsinks? Because they are inferior to the point of removal in your eyes, yet I see a use(albeit liquid depth temperature and availability dependent) for them that your option does not encompass.

[qki]

Protection, on 26 March 2013 - 02:02 AM, said:

LOL, that's even worse. You're even dumber than I thought.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...65db40f3c87956e

100% improved with double heatsinks,

You're welcome for fixing your terribad build.

Now take your suck and get out of my threadnaught.

No HS in legs

"fixed"

right. !00% better? No. 100% more redundant. Also - more vulnerable to critical hits and a marked drop in cooling evviciency when taking damage.

And stop lying by using the verb to think in first person, kay? Go buttsex your ponies or something, leave playing to people who actually know a thing or two about it.

"b b buut... optimized?" Don't make me laugh kid - you're so stuck on somethink that hardly makes a difference, but it's "optimial". So what? Name one (one is enough) situation, where your "optimal" build is better than mine. Hint - cooling is not it - besies being more expensive, this has absolutely no advantage due to extra heatsinks, despite what the smurf says. In practice, sustained fire never overheats the mech anyway.

Edited by qki, 26 March 2013 - 02:35 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

qki, on 26 March 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:

No HS in legs

"fixed"

right. !00% better? No. 100% more redundant. Also - more vulnerable to critical hits and a marked drop in cooling evviciency when taking damage.

Do you play on a different server then I do?
Because I don't remember having a Waterworld map in this game.

And more vulnerable to critical hits? Seriously?
You must be playing on a different server, a server where critical hits take out items all the time, rather than "rarely".

The worst case for critical hits on your mech is the Gauss Rifle.
The Gauss Rifle occupies 7 crit slots. You have all crit slots filled in your Gauss Rifle torso. That means there is an 58% chance for your Gauss Rifle to take damage. IT doesn't matter if you fill the side torso with standard or double heat sinks or not, this chance doesn't get improved.
The chance for an individual DHS to be hit is 25 %. If a single DHS is destroyed before your GR is destroyed, the chance of getting your Gauss Rifle hit is 77 %.

But - the DHS needs to take 10 damage before it gets destroyed. If the enemy maximally spreads his damage, that means yoru Gauss Rifle is still destroyed considerably before any of the other items in your torso are destroyed.

The only way it becomes an issue if you are critted by weapons that spread their damage a lot less. Which probably means AC/10, AC/20, PPC or Gauss Rifle. For your Gauss Rifle, it unfortunately also means the AC/5 and Ultra AC/5. In neither case it will likely make a big difference on whether you lose 3 crit slots or 1 crit slot in the next hit - the chances of getting hit at the Gauss Rifle is stil always higher, and the difference of two such critical hits in a row not hitting the Gauss rifle is either 17 % (all other items stay healthy) or 9 % (one DHS was taken out on the first crit.). And by the second crit, your torso will have taken something between 10 to 40 points of damage minimum, and likely much more, since the crit chance is something less than 50 %, IIRC.

[AndyHill]

qki, on 26 March 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...4b5630f003be786

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...9a805cbf123ce08

More heat efficient standing on the beach than the SHS version in water.

[Joseph Mallan]

Shumabot, on 25 March 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

Stop speaking for other people. You don't represent them and your inference that everyone wants a broken tiered system of pay for performance is patently wrong.

You mistake what I say as speaking for EVERYONE. There is no Pay for performance. In every game I have played over the last 34 years, players have had to earn better equipment over time. A beginning player does not start with access to the good stuff until he/she earns it. You don't see beginning characters having access to holy smiting weapons until they play a while and buy it in game, grind the XP to unlock or similar means of game play. This is my first MMO but it is not my first video game. Double sinks aren't something you deserve, they are something you earn. To date you don't get a Gauss on anything but an Atlas-K. The most expensive Mech in the game IIRC.

So if you want double sinks and you don't already have them. Earn them.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 March 2013 - 04:17 AM.