35 replies to this topic

[42and19]

Something that I really am surprised I haven't seen suggested more is the removal of the minimum heatsink requirement.

The commando and locust suffer incredibly from this so much so for the locust 1v that there are very few builds that even remotely work on it and all of them run with a heat efficiency of between 1.8 and 2 which is just silly. Let me pull off the 3 required heatsinks giving me 3 more tons to play with. Give the builds more variety.

[Airborne Thunder]

42and19, on 19 October 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

Something that I really am surprised I haven't seen suggested more is the removal of the minimum heatsink requirement.

The commando and locust suffer incredibly from this so much so for the locust 1v that there are very few builds that even remotely work on it and all of them run with a heat efficiency of between 1.8 and 2 which is just silly. Let me pull off the 3 required heatsinks giving me 3 more tons to play with. Give the builds more variety.

Yeah it's weird. I wonder, do other mechs have this and I just haven't noticed it because there hasn't been any mechs this small before? I would like some more free tonage for ammo.

[Caboose30]

I agree with the cockpit issues. I was just in a fight and it was impossible to see both surrounding terrain and what I was fighting. You pretty much are fighting through a scope.

[42and19]

Airborne Thunder, on 19 October 2013 - 05:55 PM, said:

Yeah it's weird. I wonder, do other mechs have this and I just haven't noticed it because there hasn't been any mechs this small before? I would like some more free tonage for ammo.

It's on all mechs but like you said it's barely noticeable because you rarely have a reason to run below a 250 engine (250 being the lowest engine size that you can go and still have 10 heatsinks in the engine)

[PocketAces]

The problem not lies in the extra heat sinks but how it is implemented.

In TT you received 10 heat sinks with the engine, now some had to be mounted externally and took up space but not weight. Some people argue that the engine tonnage was decreased, but in fact the engine tonnage is higher.

sometimes this game makes no sense what so ever.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

The engine tonnage is higher because the weights of the cockpit and gyroscope have been folded into the engine.

Of course, with the mandated heat sinks taking up tonnage, PGI has made it impossible to have engines below a certain size (which, among other things, makes the Urbanmech impossible), but that's another side effect.

[Tesunie]

Wispsy, on 17 October 2013 - 08:50 PM, said:

Spider 5K moves same speed as Locust. It is literally worse in every way. Smaller hitboxes too.

I say it's different flavors of the same thing. It may be worse, but if weight balancing and R&R are placed into the game (or back into), the Locust might become a better option over the Spider for other reasons. Otherwise, I agree but still want to have the Locust in the game (and the Flea, and many other mechs).

42and19, on 19 October 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

Something that I really am surprised I haven't seen suggested more is the removal of the minimum heatsink requirement.

The commando and locust suffer incredibly from this so much so for the locust 1v that there are very few builds that even remotely work on it and all of them run with a heat efficiency of between 1.8 and 2 which is just silly. Let me pull off the 3 required heatsinks giving me 3 more tons to play with. Give the builds more variety.

You need 10 heat sinks by lore to just keep the engine running and operating correctly. It's like running a normal engine with one less quart of oil. It wont effect it's operating performances at first, but over the long run it will cause damage to the engine. This rule is observed across all mechs, and is just felt more in the lighter chassis.

PocketAces, on 20 October 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

The problem not lies in the extra heat sinks but how it is implemented.

In TT you received 10 heat sinks with the engine, now some had to be mounted externally and took up space but not weight. Some people argue that the engine tonnage was decreased, but in fact the engine tonnage is higher.

sometimes this game makes no sense what so ever.

As someone else stated above, other items are included into the engine weight. It is the same weight after you place in the heat sinks as it is "included" in the engine cost . Ex: If an engine only has 9 sinks included in it, and one has to be external, then it is reduced by a ton for the sink you have to place outside the engine. If you know TT, then add in the Gyro and Cockpit into the cost of the engine and it should match up. (If my information is correct.)

[EXO-Scorpion]

I agree about the sight issues with the cockpit framework/glass, needs to be thinner or re-designed different to allow more visibility!!!

Also, to make the Locust (RIGHT NOW) more Valuable vs the other Lights in game.... GIVE ALL LOCUST VARIANTS 3 MODULE SLOTs, WITH MASTERING THEM TO ADD THE 4TH!!!!!!!!!!!

[PocketAces]

PocketAces, on 20 October 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

The problem not lies in the extra heat sinks but how it is implemented.

In TT you received 10 heat sinks with the engine, now some had to be mounted externally and took up space but not weight. Some people argue that the engine tonnage was decreased, but in fact the engine tonnage is higher.

sometimes this game makes no sense what so ever.

Tesunie, on 21 October 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

As someone else stated above, other items are included into the engine weight. It is the same weight after you place in the heat sinks as it is "included" in the engine cost . Ex: If an engine only has 9 sinks included in it, and one has to be external, then it is reduced by a ton for the sink you have to place outside the engine. If you know TT, then add in the Gyro and Cockpit into the cost of the engine and it should match up. (If my information is correct.)

You are partly correct the Gyroscope tonnage is included into the tonnage. So a 190 Std engine (in Smurfys weighs 9.5t) as a 190 Std engine in the TT rules weighs 7.5t + 2t (1.9t rounded up) for a total of 9.5t, so I concede on that point.

The extra heat sinks on the other hand do not take up tonnage:

Quote

Add Heat Sinks
Heat sinks dissipate heat produced by movement, weapons
fire and other actions. Every BattleMech comes equipped with
10 heat sinks as part of the design that do not take up tonnage
(but they may take up critical slots,) Core Rulebook 2006 Wizkids

My point that the extra heat sinks added to the engine take up weight still stands, in essence a 190 Std engine weighs 12.5t, TT rules 9.5t (including Gyroscope).

So can we petition PGI now to fix this little anomaly?

[LiGhtningFF13]

Always pleased to see opponents using this light variants.

[Joe Psycho]

PocketAces, on 22 October 2013 - 03:28 AM, said:

You are partly correct the Gyroscope tonnage is included into the tonnage. So a 190 Std engine (in Smurfys weighs 9.5t) as a 190 Std engine in the TT rules weighs 7.5t + 2t (1.9t rounded up) for a total of 9.5t, so I concede on that point.

The extra heat sinks on the other hand do not take up tonnage:



My point that the extra heat sinks added to the engine take up weight still stands, in essence a 190 Std engine weighs 12.5t, TT rules 9.5t (including Gyroscope).

So can we petition PGI now to fix this little anomaly?

You're forgetting the cockpits tonnage

Edited by Joe Psycho, 22 October 2013 - 06:41 AM.

[PocketAces]

Dammit!! Missed that, I concede the point and going to blow up some mechs now, in my correctly weighed Locust.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Cockpit framework is VERY distracting but locusts worst enemy, is fall damage. Its so easy to scrap armor off these things by running off fairly small hills. (Pretty much any of the ridges in Canyone Network will do it)

[Tesunie]

A post I made in another topic. I feel it is needed here as well to make the point.

Tesunie, on 22 October 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

I present more cockpit views, like how I had said I would last night.
Here are the ones I wish for you to really look close at. (I have more, but wont post them unless needed.)

Spider


The Champion Spider (Trial version, same thing). This is the "same variant, but pay cash for exp bonus" version.



Now, for the other possible version. I present the Cicada.


And now the Cicada X hero mech. Notice how much the cockpit changes?




Now for the Locust, standard C-bill version cockpit.


Now, observe the difference with the Phoenix version of the locust. Notice the roll bars? Now, if every locust had the roll bars, I wouldn't be pointing it out so much, it'd be a passing mention.





I can continue to post other mech cockpits, but I think this should clearly point out what I am talking about. Why is it that the version I paid real money for is the one with a difference in cockpit that is hindering to my playing the mech? Why is it that the Locust (phoenix) version is the only "hero" or "champion" mech with a difference that boarders on hindrance? Why are the roll bars even there to begin with?

So, all I ask is that the Devs look into the roll bar and either try to get it to be less noticeable, invisible or removed. I wouldn't mind some other small changes too, but I'm only really wishing to have something done with those roll bars.

As for the three end of match scores, they don't really prove all that much. It shows either teamwork, skill, luck, or a good ability of situational awareness. We also don't know how often you might have changed to 3pv to counter the bars while in combat or generalized movement. For the general masses, those bars are a hindrance to performance. It does leave me to wonder how much better your individual performance on the field of battle might have been if you didn't have the roll bars there.

So far, personally, I find that the Locust P is the only mech in the game I just about have to play in 3pv just to be able to use it. Sure, I can use it in 1pv, but I find I can't see buildings and terrain around me enough to effectively dodge and weave between them. I keep getting hung up in 1pv on things I couldn't see when I take a turn because the bars block most of my side vision. And let me add, a stuck Locust in a building is an easy kill for the opposition. So, those roll bars do impact my performance inside the mech. I do not have these problems with the other locusts, so I much conclude that if it's a problem for me, it is a problem for others. So, I bring it to the attention of the Devs as feedback, and let them deal with it as they may.

[rdmgraziel]

The Locust needs....something. (that or it's just supposed to be really really hard to use) I defintely agree that the cockpit view is dreadful, especially on the Phoenix variant (which seems particularly silly to me since it cost real money). After drop limits are in place, its value will be allowing heavier 'Mechs on your team, but it's still easy to hit, takes leg damage from short falls, and can literally be insta-gibbed by a single AC20 shot. It's also supposed to be a pure SCOUT (with low-firepower to match), unlike every other Light in the game with the exception of the Spider (which is only good due to maneuverability + hit box/registration issues).

Spider engine buff makes sense since they're supposed to be really really maneuverable, and they should have had a higher engine cap size based on the engine size calculation in the first place (I forget the details on engine size calculations, if I'm wrong please correct me). I could mention buggy hitboxes, but I'm not sure if it's hitboxes or hit registration which is wonky (or some combination of the two) and until hit registration is good all the time across the board, it's not worth arguing.

Commando buffs make sense in the context that they were considered sub-par light 'Mechs as heavier Lights designed for the Striker role (i.e. Jenners/Ravens) generally seemed to outclass them (honestly I think part of that is hit registration on SRMs but that's besides the point). They didn't buff the only exception to the rule, the 2D. I assume it was an attempt to increase the survivability and/or viability of the non-ECM Commando variants so they would seem more appealing.

[Vashramire]

I don't know if it's a bug or not but so far I've only used my phoenix version and every match I straight up lose my right leg every time. This is only for about 7 matches but seems oddly consistent even though I have max armor. I seem to pop now if I even look at someone with an SRM.