92 replies to this topic

[Teralitha]

nuff said.

Edit: I have a suggestion actually....


Double heat sinks take up more crit space... so why is it logical that they can fit in a standard engine and not occupy more space? They should only be allowed to be outfitted with XL engines. A mech carrying a standard engine should only be able to carry single heat sinks.


Instead of a double heat sink upgrade, make it so if you equip an XL engine all your heats sinks are double(or 1.4 or whatever)

Standard engines... only single.

I just want the playing field to be level. Both new and old players should have to deal with heat management equally. Then the only difference will be skill, instead of tech upgrades. Its one of those things that is good for the game, though no one seems to want unless its something that tastes good. Just like little kids they want more candy, but more candy is bad for them. And they hate it when their parents tell them to eat the broccoli.

Someone has to grow up and say NO! NO MORE CANDY. Now go to your room.

Edited by Teralitha, 26 March 2013 - 12:13 PM.

[Grayseven]

Hate to say it, but I have to use heat management with DHS for some builds.

The problem isn't DHS, it's the weakness of SHS and the way heat is done in MWO. They need to revisit the heat mechanic and come up with a better system.

At no point should a 6PPC mech be safe from explosion after an alpha just because they don't restart. That much heat should damage the engine before it shuts down...

[WinnieTheWhor]

Double heat sinks dont cause you to no longer need to manage your heat. Bad post is bad.

[Vilheim]

Could you people PLEASE use the search feature on the forums before posting ANOTHER thread about the same topic.

Not even a week ago someone made a thread about this, go post in that one.

[Teralitha]

Vilheim, on 26 March 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

Could you people PLEASE use the search feature on the forums before posting ANOTHER thread about the same topic.

Not even a week ago someone made a thread about this, go post in that one.

If your going top berate people for not posting in a topic, then search for it yourself, and post the link, otherwise ****.

Edited by Teralitha, 26 March 2013 - 10:59 AM.

[Bubba Wilkins]

Teralitha, on 26 March 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:

If your going top berate people for not posting in a topic, then search for it yourself, and post the link, otherwise ****.

You've got 2500 posts. Frankly you should know better.

[Teralitha]

WinnieTheWhor, on 26 March 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

Double heat sinks dont cause you to no longer need to manage your heat. Bad post is bad.

Oh sure, if you pack on more weapons and use less heat heats, yea you have to worry about heat. But you really dont get the issue....

Bubba Wilkins, on 26 March 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

You've got 2500 posts. Frankly you should know better.

Who really wants to search for old topics that may or may not be relevant?

Edited by Teralitha, 26 March 2013 - 11:04 AM.

[Viper69]

Its probably cheaper to run singles and their dumbass coolant shots than it is to buy double heatsinks. Screw learning we got coolant on tap now. What we need is more training wheels for dumb *** kids who find piloting a mech too hard...Oh wait we are getting 3pv. Nevermind.

[Vilheim]

Teralitha, on 26 March 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

Who really wants to search for old topics that may or may not be relevant?

It's not old. It's less than it's a week old. And it's your responsibility to search before you post. Whatever.

In any case, you have a point, and I could see something should be done about it, it's just that there is a thread that made the point much better and actually offered some decent ideas as to how it could be fixed other than just "REMOVE DBL HEAT SINKS PL0X". That does no good for the game, it just dumbs it down.

[Teralitha]

You mean... this topic? http://mwomercs.com/...them-being-opd/


or was it another topic.... you see I have no idea which topic your referring to, which is why you should post a link to it if your going to mention it at all....

[Vassago Rain]

You can't realistically run the tech 2 stuff without dubs, and even the poordubs we have now are FAR superior to singles. I own zero mechs that use singles right now, Any new purchase, I simply add 1.5 million to.

[Kdogg788]

Viper69, on 26 March 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

Its probably cheaper to run singles and their dumbass coolant shots than it is to buy double heatsinks. Screw learning we got coolant on tap now. What we need is more training wheels for dumb *** kids who find piloting a mech too hard...Oh wait we are getting 3pv. Nevermind.

And we're getting easy mode clan tech so the kids can fire their lazurs all night against us IS techies.

-k

[Lefty Lucy]

Grayseven, on 26 March 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

Hate to say it, but I have to use heat management with DHS for some builds.

The problem isn't DHS, it's the weakness of SHS and the way heat is done in MWO. They need to revisit the heat mechanic and come up with a better system.

At no point should a 6PPC mech be safe from explosion after an alpha just because they don't restart. That much heat should damage the engine before it shuts down...

Granted I don't think MWO should be 100% faithful to TT, if we're going by TT rules a mech can fire any number of PPCs and cause no damage to the engine. Generally damage from overheating only comes from ammo explosions.

[Viper69]

Kdogg788, on 26 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

And we're getting easy mode clan tech so the kids can fire their lazurs all night against us IS techies.

-k

Yeah cant wait for that.

[PeekaBoo I C Ju]

if people are owning you with bad heat management, they will own you after any changes as well, learn how to play and stop trying to ruin the game for people who have taken the time to develop their skillz

[Weiland]

I had the opportunity to play Battletech (complete with metal miniatures on a Heroscape board, no less) for the first time ever when I went to PAX East this last weekend. The experience was pretty significantly different from MWO in general - or from any sort of digital simulation I've encountered.

I have not read the original post so as to not be influenced by groupthink, but I have this to say: The two are radically different. MWO in its current incarnation cannot be compared much if at all to BT - the mechanics, gameplay, balance, and utility of each mech and each weapon system are drastically different.

This makes sense, however, and is not necessarily a bad thing. In BT, heavier is generally better, and a well-fitted heavy or assault can crush a couple of lights with general impunity. In MWO, a skilled light can dance circles around an assault and two would probably chew it apart in record time. In BT, that ten-second round gives plenty of breathing room and everyone operates according to the rules; in MWO, every second counts and there are no practical rules.

Different experience. And if we went back to hardcore heat management, we'd effectively have to adapt a heavy chunk of the game with it. If you doubt me, go pilot a trial mech - in an all-trial match, assault mechs almost always win out because they can simply put more damage downrange and eliminate the opposition through attrition.

[xDeityx]

Vassago Rain, on 26 March 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

You can't realistically run the tech 2 stuff without dubs, and even the poordubs we have now are FAR superior to singles. I own zero mechs that use singles right now, Any new purchase, I simply add 1.5 million to.

And PGI is perfectly happy with this because it adds to the grind and encourages people to pay premium.

The heart of the issue is the c-bill pricing. Cost is supposed to be a balancing factor in weapons. Sure, that Gauss Rifle is clearly superior to that machine gun, but the Gauss Rifle costs way more so it's balanced, right? Only if you can lose the Gauss Rifle if it gets exploded in a match so that there is an actual risk vs. reward mechanic in play. Otherwise, the cheap stuff only exists as a "noob-hurdle" for the folks who are under the (not totally unreasonable) assumption that all of the assets should be balanced.

Edited by xDeityx, 26 March 2013 - 11:21 AM.

[Fenix0742]

Double heatsinks are just one of the things that are flat out superior to the older tech. BT is a game rooted in power creep though, and pretty much new tech > old tech across the board. It would be nice to have sidegrades, but that won't ever stop mathwarriors from coming up with best-in-slot builds for all variants. You also can't balance by rarity, because everyone is playing a single mech at a time, and everyone wants awesome gear.

I really don't think there is a good solution when the foundation of the game is such that it is.

[Weiland]

Lefty Lucy, on 26 March 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

Granted I don't think MWO should be 100% faithful to TT, if we're going by TT rules a mech can fire any number of PPCs and cause no damage to the engine. Generally damage from overheating only comes from ammo explosions.

Heat scales in the TT on a chart. Any heat you don't sink off goes onto a scaling pool and after about five points of heat bad things start to happen. At first, it's simply slower motion (-1 to movement) due to the engine not operating well in the heat. After that comes +1 to accuracy (plus is worse when it comes to TT hit mechanics - lower is better). After ramping up both of those negatives for a couple tiers, there comes a smallish chance of ammo explosion. By the time you get near the 30-point limit on the top (automatic shutdown), you've already passed -4 to move, +4 to shoot, two or three ammo explosion chances, and a couple other things I think.

That kind of heat management would significantly change the game, for better or worse. It'd be significantly more tactical and less forgiving to the run-and-gun mentality. It's certainly different from the "heat only makes me shut down or have an ammo explosion when I override, maybe" system we have now.

[Vassago Rain]

xDeityx, on 26 March 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

And PGI is perfectly happy with this because it adds to the grind and encourages people to pay premium.

The heart of the issue is the c-bill pricing. Cost is supposed to be a balancing factor in weapons. Sure, that Gauss Rifle is clearly superior to that machine gun, but the Gauss Rifle costs way more so it's balanced, right? Only if you can lose the Gauss Rifle if it gets exploded in a match so that there is an actual risk vs. reward mechanic in play. Otherwise, the cheap stuff only exists as a "noob-hurdle" for the folks who are under the (not totally unreasonable) assumption that all of the assets should be balanced.

Cost as a balancing factor is terrible, and you all got to see just how terrible it is live until they removed RnR. It doesn't work.

Cheap stuff is strictly n00b hurdles. I have zero problems with this, but wish more guns and items were useful, period. Based on the source material, I have very little hope for this, however. People will learn not to take old ACs when we get UACs and more LBX.

There's...nothing wrong with this. Straight upgrades do what they're supposed to. Devs try to hide a straight upgrade as a sidegrade, in this case, dubs? Uhmmm, I don't think that's how it works.