48 replies to this topic

[Goose]

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

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

No one remembers Solaris Box Set …

[Karl Streiger]

Goose, on 26 September 2013 - 06:32 AM, said:

No one remembers Solaris Box Set …

I do - and Its a pitty nobody remembers - like Microprose did in MW3
PPC = 40 heat
SHS = 0.4 cooling
ERPPC = 60 heat
DHS = 0.8 cooling

Edited by Karl Streiger, 26 September 2013 - 06:52 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

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.

Thus in 4 and 8 years respectively, we are in 3050 still right?, the Dev can look again at those designs and their design needs.

[Almond Brown]

3rdworld, on 26 September 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

You think lowering dissipation will promote less Alpha?

Sorry, but no. CB gauss cat says hello.

The Gauss Rifle is simply a moot point, and a wasted mention, in all this. It has 1 heat. No SHS nor DHS change will ever effect that, so the 2 x Gauss Cat will always be doable, it has other built in limitations.

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 26 September 2013 - 07:03 AM, said:

Thus in 4 and 8 years respectively, we are in 3050 still right?, the Dev can look again at those designs and their design needs.

To be honest, it would not kill the DEVs to switch the sinks to doubles on most Mediums and up. At our table it's how we played 'em.

Goose, on 26 September 2013 - 06:32 AM, said:

No one remembers Solaris Box Set …

I do remember it. It was the only product I did not want to waste my money on back in the day.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

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

A Jenner-D can run a 250XL, with ES and FF, and enough sinks (got the tons) to run 1 PPC all day long. Why is 12 SHS's apparently the magic # again? TT? Is this TT?

If you could never build a Light Mech that could run 1 PPC all day, then a complaint could be made. That is not the case here.

Edited by Almond Brown, 26 September 2013 - 07:18 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Almond Brown, on 26 September 2013 - 07:11 AM, said:

The Gauss Rifle is simply a moot point, and a wasted mention, in all this. It has 1 heat. No SHS nor DHS change will ever effect that, so the 2 x Gauss Cat will always be doable, it has other built in limitations.

The Gauss Cat was always possible, regardless of heat sink types available and heat sink mechanics, but how powerful it was compared to the alternatives has changed a lot.

The biggest nerf to the Gauss Rifle where double heat sinks. Not because it became worse, obviously, but because suddenly tons of other weapon configurations became considerably more effective.

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 26 September 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

A Jenner-D can run a 250XL, with ES and FF, and enough sinks (got the tons) to run 1 PPC all day long. Why is 12 SHS's apparently the magic # again? TT? Is this TT?

If you could never build a Light Mech that could run 1 PPC all day, then a complaint could be made. That is not the case here.

10 heat for the weapon plus we do generate a bit of heat running. So 12 to cover the gun and movement in MW:O. Last time I tried it it was in CB. I think I was the first player to build a Panther out of a Jenner... I could be wrong. 12 heat sinks should leave me at break even heat as it does on TT. This is not TT, BUT it is the BattleTech IP and therefore should be bound by the canon of the universe it takes place.

[Almond Brown]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 September 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

The Gauss Cat was always possible, regardless of heat sink types available and heat sink mechanics, but how powerful it was compared to the alternatives has changed a lot.

The biggest nerf to the Gauss Rifle where double heat sinks. Not because it became worse, obviously, but because suddenly tons of other weapon configurations became considerably more effective.

Thus my mention of it not being a great weapon to use in a Heat Sink discussion.

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

10 heat for the weapon plus we do generate a bit of heat running. So 12 to cover the gun and movement in MW:O. Last time I tried it it was in CB. I think I was the first player to build a Panther out of a Jenner... I could be wrong. 12 heat sinks should leave me at break even heat as it does on TT. This is not TT, BUT it is the BattleTech IP and therefore should be bound by the canon of the universe it takes place.

That "binding" was tried and "failed" miserably. Thus why we have Double armor (no TT binding complaints there much eh , Capped Engines, an online issue that a "Kitchen Table" does not have), Ghost Heat (Heat, as high as is needed, is totally required to level the playing field imo), etc etc. Attempting to "bind" an already "unbound" game seems rather pointless about now.

TT never translated to PC 100 percent. I know most know that as well. Why are so many not willing to work within the "framework" that is in place. Radical change is no longer in the cards. All it does is make the Forums poison. I heard poison is not good, unless you wish to kill something...

Edited by Almond Brown, 26 September 2013 - 07:34 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 26 September 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

Thus my mention of it not being a great weapon to use in a Heat Sink discussion.



That "binding" was tried and "failed" miserably. Thus why we Double armor, capped engines, Ghost heat, etc etc. Attempting to "bind" an already "unbound" game seems rather pointless about now.

Ah but the double armor for a real time game makes sense. And we never had a proper bind of Heat sinks. Back in CB I had 4 Mediums on my (F)Atlas and 22-24 Sinks... I was unable to Alpha 12 points of heat as I could have on TT. 20 points of damage is a lot of damage in universe, able to shred a light Mech of armor in seconds. Double the armor was a fair call to avoid this. But It was bad to have Sinks vent the heat 2.5 times slower than weapons fire.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 September 2013 - 07:35 AM.

[Cimarb]

The TT vs MMO argument is poisonous and unneeded.

DHS are supposed to be "better" than SHS, which is the whole reason they were made. They are called double heat sinks because they can dissipate relatively twice the heat as a single heat sink, but that doesn't mean it HAS to be EXACTLY twice the heat. It's just a naming convention used to label them, probably by some marketing agency trying to get sales up...

The entire issue with the heat system is that it is DESIGNED to allow a high rate of alpha spamming. I have read PGIs reasoning behind it, and totally disagree. It is their game, so whatever, but it is still the wrong way to do it.

Heat capacity should be capped at 30, or whatever number they come up with, to allow ONE alpha strike when you are in an emergency. Heat dissipation should then be good enough to allow you to continue cycling weapons (slowly) while your heat dissipates (relatively quickly) so you can alpha again in a minute or so. At no time should firing ANY single weapon make you overheat, even if you are firing it every cooldown. Chain firing multiple weapons within that cooldown, of course, should make you overheat eventually if you have more heat generating than your dissipation can handle.

Having the heat capacity fixed, or increased minutely per heat sink, and focusing more on heat DISSIPATION instead, will make heat management more important and extend fights greatly. When clan mechs come out, that balance may need tweaking, but the basic concept is much more scalable and manageable than the current joke of a system. Then, they can start focusing on the real issue with alphas: accuracy.

[focuspark]

Cimarb, on 26 September 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

DHS are supposed to be "better" than SHS, which is the whole reason they were made.

Wrong. Welcome to the world of online, multiplayer, competitive game play.

Nothing should be "better". Things should be better in some ways with tradeoffs, if anything is plain better the inferior should be simply removed. This isn't World of WarCraft, nobody is leveling or grinding for loot - that's not how this game works.

[Joseph Mallan]

Cimarb, on 26 September 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

The TT vs MMO argument is poisonous and unneeded.

DHS are supposed to be "better" than SHS, which is the whole reason they were made. They are called double heat sinks because they can dissipate relatively twice the heat as a single heat sink, but that doesn't mean it HAS to be EXACTLY twice the heat. It's just a naming convention used to label them, probably by some marketing agency trying to get sales up...

The entire issue with the heat system is that it is DESIGNED to allow a high rate of alpha spamming. I have read PGIs reasoning behind it, and totally disagree. It is their game, so whatever, but it is still the wrong way to do it.

Heat capacity should be capped at 30, or whatever number they come up with, to allow ONE alpha strike when you are in an emergency. Heat dissipation should then be good enough to allow you to continue cycling weapons (slowly) while your heat dissipates (relatively quickly) so you can alpha again in a minute or so. At no time should firing ANY single weapon make you overheat, even if you are firing it every cooldown. Chain firing multiple weapons within that cooldown, of course, should make you overheat eventually if you have more heat generating than your dissipation can handle.

Having the heat capacity fixed, or increased minutely per heat sink, and focusing more on heat DISSIPATION instead, will make heat management more important and extend fights greatly. When clan mechs come out, that balance may need tweaking, but the basic concept is much more scalable and manageable than the current joke of a system. Then, they can start focusing on the real issue with alphas: accuracy.

1.4 is not about double though... It is closer to single than it is to double. Other than that, I agree, It does not have to be exactly TT but it needs to feel "right". and as is firing 4 Mediums on 20 single sinks do not feel "right"

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 September 2013 - 08:19 AM.

[Bhael Fire]

DHS are a direct upgrade to SHS. This has always been the case. You're supposed to upgrade to them as soon as you can.

Now, that said, just how much of an upgrade is debatable. But the fact is, DHS are superior to SHS. That is whole point.

[Cimarb]

focuspark, on 26 September 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

Wrong. Welcome to the world of online, multiplayer, competitive game play.

Nothing should be "better". Things should be better in some ways with tradeoffs, if anything is plain better the inferior should be simply removed. This isn't World of WarCraft, nobody is leveling or grinding for loot - that's not how this game works.

You totally miss my point, so I will elaborate. Technology advances and replaces itself endlessly. Double heat sinks would not have been made if they did not improve on the original single heat sinks. ER PPCs would not have been made if PPCs had a long enough range to begin with. A car would not have been made if a horse could run fast enough. Fuel injection would not have been created if carborateurs were "better".

That being said, single heat sinks DO have a purpose, or at least should, because they are cheaper to manufacture/buy and take up less space per sink, albeit with significantly worse performance. It should be a trade off, yes, but DHS are "better" at heat dissipation, which was my meaning in the context of my post.

Honestly, I don't understand why we can't use both in the same mech. If I only have space to jam a couple singles in my legs, but have the room for bigger ones in my torso, why can't I? Having the DHS cost significantly more on a sink-to-sink basis would be a great fix for the cost issue, but the heat scale itself is really what needs fixed. Everything else is just a band-aid...

[Almond Brown]

The reason we see discussion about Heat at all is that it is a "concern" to pilots now. As it should be and rightly so. How that is achieved is moot.

Before the current "Heat" setup the "Alpha Strike" was King, Queen, Jester and Joker all in one. Now you have to pick one but you can't be all of them. The game is better for it too.

The Dev will never appease everyone, especially not around here. So griping about how they did it, versus how "you" would have do it is fine, utterly pointless, but fine. You want in on the process, bring CODE, not supposition.

[Joseph Mallan]

To add to that Cimarb. Many of the Mechs with single sinks after 3050 is because they ARE enough to keep the Mech cool. Take a Lineholder.
55 Tons
2 LRM5
1 Large
4 Medium
14 single sinks. It can fire both LRM and the Large without fear of Overheating or the 4 Mediums while still being cool. it was a well balanced Mech. Try firing 2 LRM5s and a Large in this game (using 14 singles) w/out generating ANY heat build up. Heat is not working as Canon was intending.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 26 September 2013 - 08:31 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Joseph Mallan, on 26 September 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

To add to that Cimarb. Many of the Mechs with single sinks after 3050 is because they ARE enough to keep the Mech cool. Take a Lineholder.
55 Tons
2 LRM5
1 Large
4 Medium
14 single sinks. It can fire both LRM and the Large without fear of Overheating or the 4 Mediums while still being cool. it was a well balanced Mech. Try firing 2 LRM5s and a Large in this game (using 14 singles) w/out generating ANY heat build up. Heat is not working as Canon was intending.

WHy not install double heat sinks and use all weapons at once without overheating?


It was always perfectly possible to make mechs with SHS not overheat. Just don't fire all your guns, orinstall less guns and more heat sinks in the first place. That's basically the first thing PGI broke with its heat system - SHS mechs suddenly become overheating monsters even if they weren't anything like that in the table top.

It got worse from there.

[Joseph Mallan]

MustrumRidcully, on 26 September 2013 - 09:01 AM, said:

WHy not install double heat sinks and use all weapons at once without overheating?


It was always perfectly possible to make mechs with SHS not overheat. Just don't fire all your guns, orinstall less guns and more heat sinks in the first place. That's basically the first thing PGI broke with its heat system - SHS mechs suddenly become overheating monsters even if they weren't anything like that in the table top.

It got worse from there.

I agree. I did in fact. The Linebacker was a good Medium with singles but is a tough customer with doubles.

[zhajin]

I see two problems with this plan right off the bat,

1. PGI does not do anything "simple", you need at least 2 more algorithms and 5 more random constants for them to even look at your solution.

2. You imply that PGI does not want you to have to grind for your double heatsinks. Grind is the name of the game in f2p and PGI has jumps squarely on that wagon. atleast until ui 2.0 when we can buy DHS for MC.