Jump to content

Why Do Heat Sinks Increase Capacity? Makes No Sense.


93 replies to this topic

#41 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:12 AM

View PostKhobai, on 07 November 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:


stuff

1) eliminate/reduce convergence so heat no longer needs to be strangled as an artificial means of limiting damage.
2) increase heat dissipation rate significantly.
3) implement negative status effects when certain heat % are reached (including movement penalties and RNG cone of fire penalties on aiming).


Table Top BattleTech already exists. That is what you described above.

How about we also go back to square/octagonal wheels too, because those round ones are just so passe' now.

Or how about we play with the modified ruleset in play, just like most TT games would have played out in order to spice **** up some.

#42 General Taskeen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,737 posts
  • LocationCircinus

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:17 AM

It increases the heat capacity, because they wanted more Arcade pew-pew-woosh stuff.

Thresholds
MW2 ?, MW3 30-35 same for all Mechs ?, MW4 (60ish same on all Mechs? Arcade Detected), MW:LL (30-40 equivalent same on all Mechs), MWO (80+ some Mechs, all different, SHS suck? Arcade Extreeeeme Edition!)

#43 RandomLurker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:20 AM

View PostAlmond Brown, on 07 November 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:


Table Top BattleTech already exists. That is what you described above.

How about we also go back to square/octagonal wheels too, because those round ones are just so passe' now.

Or how about we play with the modified ruleset in play, just like most TT games would have played out in order to spice **** up some.
Because we want a game that's better then 'counter strike with robots.'

#44 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:29 AM

View PostRandomLurker, on 07 November 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

Because we want a game that's better then 'counter strike with robots.'


Then be happy. You already have that in MWO. Despite what many think, MWO plays great and took a lot of time and effort to get where it is. Tearing it down for the sake of some "closer to TT" feel is simply BS and shouldn't and won't happen.

If I were to guess, more than 80% of the complaints come from players who die to builds that they themselves have never Driven, or ever tried out.

One does not have to get on the proverbial bandwagon but a Test drive may provide a stronger insight into what those Builds have as actual built in drawbacks. You know those things that everyone says the other Mechs don't seem to have, while their Mechs are just chalk full of nothing but drawbacks. ;)

#45 Mechteric

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 7,308 posts
  • LocationRTP, NC

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:30 AM

View PostTombstoner, on 07 November 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

yea we covered this topic (6-8 months ago) more like 12-18 months and pulled out the real ballistics data from the US army and guess what... the M1A1 has a cone of fire.... but no one wants to hear that. and no i'm not amazed that the M1A1 can hit a target at 8000 meters.


I stand corrected then, guess I missed that truffle. To counterpoint, I've seen some crazy robotics videos where they can maintain stability despite movement, I think its quite logical to think these things that are 1000 years in the future may have mastered that.

Reality aside, keep in mind that ALL prior Mechwarriors to MWO have had pinpoint accuracy, so its not like they're giving us a different experience besides the 2 reticle thing they already provided. I wouldn't argue against their decision if they were to ever decide to do a cone of fire, but I wouldn't hold it against them otherwise either.

#46 Taemien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,576 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:31 AM

View PostRandomLurker, on 07 November 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

Because we want a game that's better then 'counter strike with robots.'


This community can't handle a game that's more then counter strike with robots. They all want to go back to the circle jerk duels with 16 ER Small Laser Striders.

Two things PGI needs to do:

Add Single Player

Add Deathmatch mode with NH/UA


That will silence 90% of the community. At least until they get bored. But hopefully something else will catch their attention before then.

#47 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:34 AM

Quote

Table Top BattleTech already exists. That is what you described above.


What do you think mechwarrior is? Its the real-time implementation of a turn-based game. What I described is a way of translating the turn-based heatscale of battletech into real-time.

#48 Taemien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,576 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:36 AM

View PostKhobai, on 07 November 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:


What do you think mechwarrior is? Its the real-time implementation of a turn-based game. What I described is a way of translating the turn-based heatscale of battletech into real-time.


Except that MechWarrior isn't that.

You're thinking Blender BattleTech.

#49 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:37 AM

Quote

Except that MechWarrior isn't that.


Yeah except that it is. It even uses the same baseline numbers for damage, heat, armor, speed, etc...

If mechwarrior was intended to be entirely seperate from battletech there would be no reason to use any numbers from battletech whatsoever. But the reality is that mechwarrior is the real-time embodiment of battletech. Some things are lost in translation like having perfect convergence instead of random hit locations; and that causes some pretty serious balance issues, since the battletech numbers are balanced around hit locations being random.

Edited by Khobai, 07 November 2013 - 10:45 AM.


#50 Taemien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,576 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:56 AM

View PostKhobai, on 07 November 2013 - 10:37 AM, said:


Yeah except that it is. It even uses the same baseline numbers for damage, heat, armor, speed, etc...

If mechwarrior was intended to be entirely seperate from battletech there would be no reason to use any numbers from battletech whatsoever. But the reality is that mechwarrior is the real-time embodiment of battletech.


Except that the numbers don't translate all the time.

58.6 damage UAC20s in MW3 for example. Or MWO's Medium Laser dealing 4 heat instead of 3. Or better yet all weapon cooldowns faster than 10 seconds in all iterations of MechWarrior.

Quote

Some things are lost in translation like having perfect convergence instead of random hit locations; and that causes some pretty serious balance issues, since the battletech numbers are balanced around hit locations being random.


And then you have this. This is why MechWarrior will never be a real time version of the TT. Play Blender BattleTech, then play any MechWarrior game. They control somewhat similarly... but thats where the similarities end and end abruptly.

Blender BattleTech does wonders to match the balances of the TT to a real time game. Would anyone wish to play that multiplayer? I wouldn't and here's why.

It would be dependent on who locked on and fired first. Skill of any sort would be second to anything else.

It would probably need to remain to stock configs only. Cheese builds are even worse in TT then in any MechWarrior game. They'd be bad in BBtech.

Would probably get boring rather quickly.. ALL weapons lock on like LRMs in MechWarrior. ALL OF THEM. There is no difference between how you fire weapons except how much heat they make, damage, and range. You lock on with an LRM at 630, medium laser at 270. You don't get any say in where it hits. It hits or misses on a dice roll.

If I'm going to play a direct translation of the TT, it might as well be MechCommander or Megamek. Playing a 1st Person one unit version like Blender Btech is just playing a watered down version of the TT where I can only see what is in front of me, 20 hexes away.

#51 xe N on

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,335 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:56 AM

View PostTraining Instructor, on 07 November 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

I've always found this strange, but what's the logic in increasing a mech's heat capacity?


Heat capacity is an material specific constant that defines the amount of heat (Energy) you need to increase the temperature of the material by 1 degree C. That practically means it cost you more energy to heat the same amount of water in comparison to air. Water can store heat (energy) more "efficiently" then air.

The driving force for heat transfer is a gradient in heat between two heat reservoirs. However, the heat transfer coefficent defines how fast the heat transfer occours for a specific situation.

So adding 1 ton of heat sink can not only increase the speed of heat transfer but, if the right material is chosen, the amount of heat that can be transfered before overheat occours.

BattleTech has correct thermodynamics ;)



1 ton of material (weight of a heat sink) has some severe inf

Edited by xe N on, 07 November 2013 - 11:03 AM.


#52 Shadey99

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Tip of the Spear
  • The Tip of the Spear
  • 1,241 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 10:58 AM

I'll chime in here by just saying the easiest, quickest way to mimic the exact effect of TT is that you have a 'heat buffer' that is equal to your number of SHS (or 2x number of DHS) and all initial heat is taken from the buffer first and any leftover is then shown on the 'heat scale'. Then once the initial weapon or movement heat is accrued you have SHS or DHS which cool your mech at that point, starting from the actual heat scale and then moving into the heat buffer once the heat scale is at zero.

That would directly mimic the effects of the TT game and the buffer concept is what we lack as much as heat scale penalties in MWO. Making a giant heat scale does not mimic the initial discharge cooling that the TT game has.

I've said this all before though....

#53 stjobe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,498 posts
  • LocationOn your six, chipping away at your rear armour.

Posted 07 November 2013 - 11:02 AM

View PostShadey99, on 07 November 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:

I've said this all before though....

Haven't we all...

Edit: Never made an ASCII-art table on the subject before though, so there's that ;)

Edited by stjobe, 07 November 2013 - 11:03 AM.


#54 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 11:05 AM

View PostKhobai, on 07 November 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:


What do you think mechwarrior is? Its the real-time implementation of a turn-based game. What I described is a way of translating the turn-based heatscale of battletech into real-time.


So your not a run and gun type MechWarrior then? You would prefer your devastating BattleMech to get crippled because your using it to do its primary function?

Perhaps take that finger off the trigger just a tad more often. Or have someone throw water on you to simulate your sweating under the intense cockpit heat. Whatever floats the boat so to speak.

But please DO NOT gimp my fighting machine just because that is what TT did. Which is not really the case anyways. The next turn you could do nothing but lose heat. Same is true in MWO but that requires some self restraint.

A trait that is sorely lacking in many players currently seen on the MWO Battlefields. ;)

#55 Fuzzbox

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 07 November 2013 - 11:19 AM

View PostTaemien, on 07 November 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:


Interesting, I almost wonder how many complaints would have been ceased if they simply showed how much heat you generated in game rather than a percentage. I think many players don't seem to make the correlation.


Also one thing I wanted to point out earlier to those making realism arguments. Lets forget about what heatsinks are in the lore. In game terms they make your heat go down. Period. It doesn't matter how they do it, they just do it.

In a computer game it works like this: Heat Level is 30 - 30 heat = no heat. Doesn't care if its a radiator, a pump, or magic. 30-30=0


You just forgot the important part 30-30=0 over ten seconds.

#56 wintersborn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 412 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 11:36 AM

What makes no sense is a that Mechs are allowed to overheat by design.

"Hmm what if I put a temp sensor here that interrupts the trigger there, by gosh I think I got it!"

#57 Captain Stiffy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 2,234 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 11:43 AM

Posted Image

#58 Tombstoner

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,193 posts

Posted 07 November 2013 - 01:11 PM

View PostCapperDeluxe, on 07 November 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:


I stand corrected then, guess I missed that truffle. To counterpoint, I've seen some crazy robotics videos where they can maintain stability despite movement, I think its quite logical to think these things that are 1000 years in the future may have mastered that.

Reality aside, keep in mind that ALL prior Mechwarriors to MWO have had pinpoint accuracy, so its not like they're giving us a different experience besides the 2 reticle thing they already provided. I wouldn't argue against their decision if they were to ever decide to do a cone of fire, but I wouldn't hold it against them otherwise either.


but that's part of the problem with this game.... its just copy and paste. Then sticks to cannon when it should be changed.

And that level of precision control can be easily combined with screen scraping tech that exists now, that looks for pilot cockpits and now the game is running around doing head shots at max range. The devs are cherry picking the wrong things.

i completely concede that modern tech taken 1k years from now would be capable of that sort of targeting but for lasers only. ballistics have recoil. that's where this game jumps off the rails.... . its applying high accuracy to systems even with 1k+ more advancement just pushed the limits of reasonable in my book.

As for the game it would make lasers a great go to weapon for precision attacks and sniping. i just dont see how lasers have a shorter range the ballistics and LRM's shorter still. just because TT did. over all the ranges are just wrong but serve a practical use of fitting the game onto a table top in your kitchen. no reason they cant be extended much further in MWO. that might serve to make scouting more useful. but then the games just boring and sitting in a mech running.

Part of the issue with that level of accuracy is that the succession age destroyed much of the tech base of the IS. its could have been an option to save up and purchase new targeting computers and actuators to handle all that as part of player advancement, but also remember some mechs are supposed to be hundreds of years old.

Stuff like this is whats driving some of the forums users nuts.

As far as the heat sink issue goes the devs built a system basted on their understanding on TT heat system... they got it wrong.....

Its not about instantaneous heat spikes in 10 second intervals hitting 30 heat that triggers auto shutdown. its about accumulation of undissipated heat. there rational is that a single 3 ppc alpha would shut you down every time before heat sinks could dissipate and thus heat capacity is born from lack of understanding the difference between instantaneous and accumulated undissipated heat..

for example an awesome with 28 HS 3 ppc's...PGI goes hey this mech fires 3 ppc for 30 heat and it shuts down.... that's no fun we need to fix this. lets see each hs could hold 1 heat and dissipates .1 heat/s. that way the awesome can fire its ppc's make 30 heat and still be 30 heat away from shut down.... since the fire rate of ppc's are 4 seconds but heat dissipation is in 10 second intervals. the awesome next alpha will push the heat 60 - 2.8 = 57.2 heat and your red lining in danger of shut down.
some how this makes sence to the devs. it also gives the players a chance to use a cool shot. with 57 heat it will take ~20 second to be at zero heat.

where as if you get rid of heat cap all you need to do is display the heat level the mech will have at the end of a 10 second interval. if that hits 15 the pilot need to hit the shut down over ride.... something that's missing from the current game.
if it eventually hits 30 you shut down. the devs think that all you need to do with this system is not fire for a shot time and you good to go. that it trivelises heat as a game mechanic and heat neutral mech are and issue to be avoided.

I thin its BS and they just want to sell cool shots.

without heat cap an awesome at 29 accumulated heat would need to stand still for 10 seconds and have no heat. PGI doesn't want that. it gets worse with double HS and .2 ht/second. it devalues the cool shot and thus a method for PGI to make money.
thats why DHS where nerfred to .14 heat/sec

so thats your answer to your question. heat cap makes sence if you want to sell cool shots or dont understand what your building.

#59 topgun505

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,625 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationOhio

Posted 07 November 2013 - 01:21 PM

Incorrect. Heat penalties started at just 5 on the heat scale in TT. That is a mere 16% on your heat scale in MWO.

Granted those first effects were minor. I bit of a slowdown in speed, etc. But still ... Could you imagine the QQ here if that were implemented? heh

View Poststjobe, on 07 November 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

MWO has a pretty true-to-TT heat capacity, the only difference is in the pilot skills, which add up to 20% to the total capacity.

TT: # of SHSE + 30 = cap.
MWO: # of SHSE + 30 + pilot skills = cap.

What MWO does not have, and why so many feel the heat system is broken is a dissipation to match the heat generated by the weapons.

TT: # of SHSE = dissipation per 10 seconds (or # of SHSE/10 per second).
MWO: # of SHSE = dissipation per 10 seconds (or # of SHSE/10 per second).

That's great, right? Exactly like TT. Well, yes, but in MWO weapons fire 2-3 times faster than in TT, so heat generated is 2-3 times higher. This means MWO dissipation is 2-3 times too low.

Neither does MWO have heat penalties that match the TT system.

TT: # of SHSE + 5 = start of heat penalties (remember, cap is 25 higher than that number).
MWO: # of SHSE + 30 + pilot skills = start of heat penalties (same number as the cap).

If MWO had the same heat penalty system as TT, heat penalties would start at roughly 40-60% heat, and get increasingly worse up to an automatic shutdown at 100% heat.

I for one think MWO would be a better game with proper heat penalties and faster dissipation.


#60 stjobe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,498 posts
  • LocationOn your six, chipping away at your rear armour.

Posted 07 November 2013 - 01:29 PM

View PostTombstoner, on 07 November 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

so thats your answer to your question. heat cap makes sence if you want to sell cool shots or dont understand what your building.

The only problem with that explanation is that the heat system was created well over a year before the Cool Shot was even considered for inclusion in the game. Remember what used to be PGI's line? "We will never have a coolant flush, because it invalidates heat as a mechanic". I can go find the actual dev quote if you insist, but I can't be arsed right now.

View Posttopgun505, on 07 November 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

Incorrect. Heat penalties started at just 5 on the heat scale in TT. That is a mere 16% on your heat scale in MWO.

No, it's not 16%, it's closer to 50%.

Look at an AWS-8Q with 22 HS. It can generate 22+5 = 27 heat before getting to 5 on the heat scale. 27 out of 52 (22+30) is 51.9%, not 16%.

Please see my nice ASCII-art chart on the previous page, it explains the relationsship between TT and MWO heat scales rather nicely (if I do say so myself).





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users