48 replies to this topic

[SchwarzerPeter]

The Problem has always been, that you need DHS to make your mech competitive. SHS have no use, because they have only drawbacks. In theory DHS should be balanced, because they take more slots. But you get 10 engine DHS for free, which is not only a mayor drawback for smaler enines, its also free cheese which makes SHS absolute obsolente. So my suggestion is:


Make the engine SHS heat sinks as efficient as DHS (or vice versa).


With this simple approach the DHS will have a real drawback (space), and SHS may find their place. Giving SHS the same efficiency as DHS will not change much in the game also, which is fine the way it is (if you got DHS).
Making enigne DHS as efficienct as SHS would be more logical (because they take up the same space), but it would screw up much of the heat meta in the game right now.
The other solutions (make them expensive, unlock them with XP ...) just make them harder to grind and make it much harder for new players to get into the game.

Edited by SchwarzerPeter, 26 September 2013 - 04:41 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

ok do you have calculated what you suggest?
While you are right about the engine heatsinks... the current rate for DHS is 1.4 - that means
with additional 5tons of SHS vs 5 tons of DHS the difference is 2 for the capacity and 0.2 per second.
But you are spending 15 over 5 criticals...
that will not level the field...that will make SHS supperior over DHS - and i can't believe that this is your suggestion?

No Sir - before any curious change will be made - the first step had to be to make all DHS work in the same way:
because 10 DHS - have an average of 2 dissipation
because 15 DHS - have an average of 1.8 dissipation
because 20 DHS - have an average of 1.7 dissipation
because 24 DHS (must be near the maximum of possible) have an average of 1.65

So when all heatsinks will have a dissipation of 1.65 - we can take a look if DHS still are more supperior over SHS.

[Joseph Mallan]

you do know that a major portion of future Mechs will have doubles to start with right? Why bork a good thing when you have it. A engine double sink is what is supposed to be twice as good as a single sink. Hence the word double.

[MustrumRidcully]

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 03:21 AM, said:

you do know that a major portion of future Mechs will have doubles to start with right? Why bork a good thing when you have it. A engine double sink is what is supposed to be twice as good as a single sink. Hence the word double.

Can we just forget about Battletech rules when it is not conducitive to balance, and only use them to show why certain things have broken balance and how one could adapt the rules to balance things again, instead of using it as a holy grail whose pursuit is worth any sacrfice in balance or gameplay?

Let's simply forget about this rule, and state that engine sinks are always the same, because even engineers that can manage to make a walking tank more effective than a normal tank couldn't build an engine that suddenly holds the same number of heat sinks at three times the space without making the engine larger, so they always use the same sink type.

3 Categories of Heat Sinks:
- Engine Heat Sinks (Possibly: +1 cap, +0.2 dissipation/sec, can only be put inside the engine)
- Standard Heat Sinks (Possibly: +1 cap, +0.1 dissipation/sec, can only be put outside the engine)
- Double Heat Sinks (Possibly: +2 cap, +0.2 dissipation/sec, can only be put outside the engine).

Done. Double Heat Sink upgrade isn't a ridicilously powerful boost anymore just because your engine suddenly can sink twice the heat it usually could. Single and Double Heat Sinks are now a choice. If you have the tonnage, take standards, if you don't have it, pick DHS.

[Joseph Mallan]

I'm not talking BattleTech, I am talking standard definition. Double according to Webster. At least the TT DEVs understand both English definition an the math behind the word double.

Double equals Double
Double is not Equal to Doub

4*2 is 8. Not 5.6. And with 2-3 times the firing rate in MWO double sinks need to be double.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 September 2013 - 03:58 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Yeah, and there is no need to d

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 03:57 AM, said:

I'm not talking BattleTech, I am talking standard definition. Double according to Webster. At least the TT DEVs understand both English definition an the math behind the word double.

The Webster definition doesn't explain technical details of double heat sinks.

A mech that can equip double heat sinks at all doesn't necessarily have to be one that carries it inside his engine. It might be that engine sinks are different because they can be installed inside the engine and operate differently since they sit at the source of the heat, while heat sinks placed all over a mech need to meet different requirements. "Double Heat Sink" technology might just imply a technology of improved heat sinks for use outside engines.

[Xanquil]

DHS have always been stated as an upgrade. An they should be 2x as effective as SHS, hence the name. As it stands the best thing PGI could do to make SHS not suck so much is make them get rid of 1.4 heat, and make DHS get rid of 2.8.

[Joseph Mallan]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 September 2013 - 04:15 AM, said:

Yeah, and there is no need to d

The Webster definition doesn't explain technical details of double heat sinks.

A mech that can equip double heat sinks at all doesn't necessarily have to be one that carries it inside his engine. It might be that engine sinks are different because they can be installed inside the engine and operate differently since they sit at the source of the heat, while heat sinks placed all over a mech need to meet different requirements. "Double Heat Sink" technology might just imply a technology of improved heat sinks for use outside engines.

The source of the heat is both the Engine AND the Weapons. A ballistics heat comes from the Gun powder exploding and Missiles from the thrusters firing. Heck even lasers heat would be at the focusing lenses more than the Power out put. Double Sinks have been double in every past version of the video game, and if they were not, they acted in a way that felt like what occurs in the canon.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 September 2013 - 04:21 AM.

[FupDup]

Personally, I'd just prefer DHS to dissipate a lot faster than they do now (current rate is 0.2 per truedub, I'd make it like 0.4 or so) at the downside of not increasing capacity, and for SHS to work similar to current dubs (very slow cooling but increase capacity).


CURRENT NUMBERS:
SHS: +0.1 cooling, +1 capacity
True DHS: +0.2 cooling, +2 capacity
Poor DHS: +0.14 cooling, +1.4 capacity

PROPOSED NUMBERS:
SHS: +0.16 cooling, +1.6 capacity (arbitrary numbers, shouldn't be greater than 0.2 or 2 respectively)
All DHS: +0.4 cooling, +0 capacity

Edited by FupDup, 26 September 2013 - 04:33 AM.

[Magna Canus]

I like the idea of EHS, SHS and DHS above.

[krash27]

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 03:57 AM, said:

I'm not talking BattleTech, I am talking standard definition. Double according to Webster. At least the TT DEVs understand both English definition an the math behind the word double.

Double equals Double
Double is not Equal to Doub

4*2 is 8. Not 5.6. And with 2-3 times the firing rate in MWO double sinks need to be double.

Your "standard" definition of double could refer to the size of the heatsink or that it has double chambers. People fighting for actual double heat sinks in game have no idea how that would break the game. If they adjusted singles to be half what doubles are then there would still be nobody using them. I say make the double refer to the heatsinks size or amount of chambers. PGI needs to forget about double this and double that and balance them to the game they are making. And they will. Its a work in progress and it takes time. Lots of time. Game dev always does. HEat cap and dissipation should be lowered. I think people just want to be able to alpha more. They are right MW 4 created alpha strike warrior online. The whole reason that PGI didn't make them true double heatsinks is to avoid this high alpha game that you desperately want. Why promote more alpha builds?

Edited by krash27, 26 September 2013 - 04:31 AM.

[SchwarzerPeter]

You need to consider that SHS should be a viable option in the game. Not only that extra 1.5mio CB you have to spend to make your mech competive.

Sure it may be against Battletech and the lore, but you can't translate them 1:1 into a shooter like MWO. Its not a TT at all.

[Joseph Mallan]

krash27, on 26 September 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

Your "standard" definition of double could refer to the size of the heatsink or that it has double chambers. People fighting for actual double heat sinks in game have no idea how that would break the game. If they adjusted singles to be half what doubles are then there would still be nobody using them. I say make the double refer to the heatsinks size or amount of chambers. PGI needs to forget about double this and double that and balance them to the game they are making. And they will. Its a work in progress and it takes time. Lots of time. Game dev always does. HEat cap and dissipation should be lowered. I think people just want to be able to alpha more. They are right MW 4 created alpha strike warrior online. The whole reason that PGI didn't make them true double heatsinks is to avoid this high alpha game that you desperately want. Why promote more alpha builds?

Do you know how many of the nearly 1,000 Mech designs carry single sinks???

TRO 3055 has 10 of 34 Mechs(primary builds only here) with singles. of those 10 they could alpha or fire long or short without ever getting hot. There was only 2 Mediums and nothing larger with single sinks.

TRO 3058 has 6 Mechs with singles out of 19 and once again they could alternate long short range with zero heat. The Long bow could Alpha the 2x LRM20s and 2x LRM5s non stop. LRM50 with no Phantom heat BTW.

So mostly light Mechs with light weapons had single sinks. and those that did ran cool with them. It is the stupid Solaris cyclics that are invalidating single heat sinks! 3 Medium lasers should not over heat a Mech that is walking and Alpha striking... EVER! If you triple the weapon cyclic you should triple the cooling cyclic.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 September 2013 - 05:10 AM.

[Xanquil]

I don't want a high alpha game, I want a game where 12 SHS is all you need to run and fire a PPC all day without ever overheating. Just like you can in the IP that MWO is based on. As it stands 12 DHS still are not even good enough to do that. The problem with High damage pinpoint alpha strikes is the PINPOINT part. If an alpha strike was treated lake every other multi-(projectile, beam, missile) attack and scattered like they do; a lot of this alpha problem would go away.

[Goose]

SchwarzerPeter, on 26 September 2013 - 04:39 AM, said:

You need to consider that SHS should be a viable option in the game.

The difference in heat sinks is on a real short list of times Teh Powers That Be gave us a proper upgrade, and even then Doubles take up a lot of crits, to the point where one can rarely use Endo-Steel on a high-heat build, which in turn tends to force the use of an XL engine, ergo said design is delicate.

They are not draw-back free [insert furry eyeball for Russ here], and even with any DSHS wut takes crits only working at 1.4 strength, everybody wants them; But that's the way they should be …

[mike29tw]

krash27, on 26 September 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

Your "standard" definition of double could refer to the size of the heatsink or that it has double chambers. People fighting for actual double heat sinks in game have no idea how that would break the game. If they adjusted singles to be half what doubles are then there would still be nobody using them. I say make the double refer to the heatsinks size or amount of chambers. PGI needs to forget about double this and double that and balance them to the game they are making. And they will. Its a work in progress and it takes time. Lots of time. Game dev always does. HEat cap and dissipation should be lowered. I think people just want to be able to alpha more. They are right MW 4 created alpha strike warrior online. The whole reason that PGI didn't make them true double heatsinks is to avoid this high alpha game that you desperately want. Why promote more alpha builds?

You know back in CB we initially had true DHS. Correct me if I'm wrong, when PGI first introduced DHS, engine HS remained to be SHS while external heat sinks were true 2.0 DHS. People did the math and found that out, so they asked PGI to give us real DHS across all board. PGI said "nope, a jenner would core an atlas in 3 sec that way" and buffed engine heat sinks to 2.0 while nerfing external DHS to 1.4.

IIRC, they gameplay didn't even change that much after they nerfed external DHS.

[Joseph Mallan]

krash27, on 26 September 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

Your "standard" definition of double could refer to the size of the heatsink or that it has double chambers. People fighting for actual double heat sinks in game have no idea how that would break the game. If they adjusted singles to be half what doubles are then there would still be nobody using them. I say make the double refer to the heatsinks size or amount of chambers. PGI needs to forget about double this and double that and balance them to the game they are making. And they will. Its a work in progress and it takes time. Lots of time. Game dev always does. HEat cap and dissipation should be lowered. I think people just want to be able to alpha more. They are right MW 4 created alpha strike warrior online. The whole reason that PGI didn't make them true double heatsinks is to avoid this high alpha game that you desperately want. Why promote more alpha builds?

It could also be said that those arguing against it don't have any idea how it would impact the game due to it not being actually tried. Nearly 30 years of TT doubles and what 5-7 video games have used double sinks effectively. They worked just fine. This is the first MechWarrior game that my builds cannot handle even partial alpha's repeatedly. That is 30+ years playing this IP both on TT and a computer!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 September 2013 - 06:25 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 September 2013 - 03:50 AM, said:

Can we just forget about Battletech rules when it is not conducitive to balance, and only use them to show why certain things have broken balance and how one could adapt the rules to balance things again, instead of using it as a holy grail whose pursuit is worth any sacrfice in balance or gameplay?

Let's simply forget about this rule, and state that engine sinks are always the same, because even engineers that can manage to make a walking tank more effective than a normal tank couldn't build an engine that suddenly holds the same number of heat sinks at three times the space without making the engine larger, so they always use the same sink type.

3 Categories of Heat Sinks:
- Engine Heat Sinks (Possibly: +1 cap, +0.2 dissipation/sec, can only be put inside the engine)
- Standard Heat Sinks (Possibly: +1 cap, +0.1 dissipation/sec, can only be put outside the engine)
- Double Heat Sinks (Possibly: +2 cap, +0.2 dissipation/sec, can only be put outside the engine).

Done. Double Heat Sink upgrade isn't a ridicilously powerful boost anymore just because your engine suddenly can sink twice the heat it usually could. Single and Double Heat Sinks are now a choice. If you have the tonnage, take standards, if you don't have it, pick DHS.

It is very good that the crusade for single heatsink viability continues, but you need to give it up. Even if they were viable, the mana increase from dubs makes them useless.

Kind of like a small mana potion versus a big mana potion. You're not gonna balance extra capacity versus less capacity, and them bringing over legacy guns like AC10, singles, SRM2, AC2...that was the real problem all along. They should not have gone with the system they did, but they did, and I'd rather no one gives them funny ideas to screw over heat.

[3rdworld]

krash27, on 26 September 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

Your "standard" definition of double could refer to the size of the heatsink or that it has double chambers. People fighting for actual double heat sinks in game have no idea how that would break the game. If they adjusted singles to be half what doubles are then there would still be nobody using them. I say make the double refer to the heatsinks size or amount of chambers. PGI needs to forget about double this and double that and balance them to the game they are making. And they will. Its a work in progress and it takes time. Lots of time. Game dev always does. HEat cap and dissipation should be lowered. I think people just want to be able to alpha more. They are right MW 4 created alpha strike warrior online. The whole reason that PGI didn't make them true double heatsinks is to avoid this high alpha game that you desperately want. Why promote more alpha builds?

You think lowering dissipation will promote less Alpha?

Sorry, but no. CB gauss cat says hello.

[Joseph Mallan]

As Xanquil said. 12 single sinks should be enough for a single PPC to shot and scoot All. Game. Long.