I would like to know if there is something other than "Cooling Efficiency" (Smurfy) when it comes to the amount of heat sinks a mech has.
To put it simply would there be any difference or advantage to having 28 Single HS's vs 14 Double HS's (not including the 10 in the engine) ?
The Cooling Efficiency is about the same (48% SHS vs 50% DHS) but is there a Heat Cap or other factors that would benefit the use of a lot more SHS's other then crit. padding ?
Thank you.
1
Heat Sink Info ?
Started by wintersborn, Feb 26 2014 11:57 AM
30 replies to this topic
#2
-
-
- The Determined
- 10,358 posts
Member
- LocationAlaska!
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:07 PM
28 SHS (outside or inside the engine) would be 2.8 heat cooled a second, and 28 more heat cap
14 DHS (Outside the engine) would be 1.96 heat cooled a second, and 19.6 more heat cap
As outside the 10 engine heatsinks DHS are only worth 1.4 rather than a true 2.0
That works for any heatsinks outside the engine - even the required HS - so
225 engine with DHS would have 9x 2.0 and 1x 1.4 heatsinks
250 would have 10x 2.0
275 (with bonus HS slot filled) would have 10x 2.0 and 1x 1.4
that make sense?
If not Koniving will probably be along shortly to explain it better.
14 DHS (Outside the engine) would be 1.96 heat cooled a second, and 19.6 more heat cap
As outside the 10 engine heatsinks DHS are only worth 1.4 rather than a true 2.0
That works for any heatsinks outside the engine - even the required HS - so
225 engine with DHS would have 9x 2.0 and 1x 1.4 heatsinks
250 would have 10x 2.0
275 (with bonus HS slot filled) would have 10x 2.0 and 1x 1.4
that make sense?
If not Koniving will probably be along shortly to explain it better.
Edited by Shar Wolf, 26 February 2014 - 12:09 PM.
#3
-
-
- 2,520 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:09 PM
Not really. Unless you dont have the space or dont need that much cooling and dont want to spend money on the upgrade there is really no reason not to upgrade to double.
Heat sinks have two components capacity and cooling. If I'm not mistaken double heat sinks in the engine are true double heat sinks. They are twice as effective as a single. All double heat sinks after those that come hardwired to your engine are 40% more effective. So in your example even though the cooling is about the same the weights are nowhere even close.
Heat sinks have two components capacity and cooling. If I'm not mistaken double heat sinks in the engine are true double heat sinks. They are twice as effective as a single. All double heat sinks after those that come hardwired to your engine are 40% more effective. So in your example even though the cooling is about the same the weights are nowhere even close.
#4
-
-
- Overlord
- 3,441 posts
Member
- LocationCharging my Gauss Rifle
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:20 PM
SHS are there because Lore, DHS decimate SHS because 1.5 million C-Bill black hole somehow makes sense in game balance.
#5
-
-
- 412 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:38 PM
Shar Wolf, when you say heat cap you mean that the single HS mech in my example would have 8.4 more heat allowed before shutdown or its "Cap" (max heat before shutdown) ?
If so that's about one ERLL worth of heat without ghost heat and some extra cooling so thats a plus. Now do Single heat sinks have different hit points than doubles for Crit. padding use ?
And yes I understand your explanation about the 10 internal vs external (2.0 vs 1.4), thanks.
If so that's about one ERLL worth of heat without ghost heat and some extra cooling so thats a plus. Now do Single heat sinks have different hit points than doubles for Crit. padding use ?
And yes I understand your explanation about the 10 internal vs external (2.0 vs 1.4), thanks.
#6
-
-
- Guardian
- 1,326 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:43 PM
Actually, double heat sinks decimate single heat sinks because advanced tech.
In MWO they're even more vital than in the original rules (tabletop) or in previous games (MW1-3, though I didn't play 4 so I can't talk about that one, and the various Battletech video/computer games) because where in the tabletop rules every 'mech has the same overheat threshhold regardless of heat sinking capability and all weapons fire at exactly the same rate (once every 10 seconds), in MWO heat sinks affect your overheat threshhold and each weapon has its own refire rate (always considerably better than once every 10 seconds).
When used in tabletop, there are actually some situations in which single heat sinks are preferable (less critical hit slot occupation is pretty much the only concern there), and they come up more often than they would in this game because engine ratings are fixed to multiples of the 'mech's tonnage.
As for the actual numbers, Shar has the right of it- except that in his math he didn't include the 10 2x2 double heat sinks in the engine, so the actual heat capacity would be 20 higher and dissipation rate would be 2 per second higher.
This is on top of the base heat capacity per 'mech, which I believe is 10? I could be wrong, it's been some time since I've looked at the math. I'm going to show you the two basic maths if we're assuming a 250 engine, which holds all 10 mandatory heat sinks and doesn't have extra heat sink slots.
If that 10 is right, then the 28 total (10 in engine and 18 not in engine if it's a 250 engine) is devoting 18 tons and up to 18 critical hit slots in single-slot items for a heat capacity of 38 and a dissipation per second of 2.8.
The DHS 'mech in question, with 14 DHS not in the engine (and 10 in the engine) is then devoting 14 tons and up to a staggering 42 critical hit slots (more than any 'mech can spare, since being in three-slot items none of these can be in the legs, center torso, or head) to get a heat capacity of 39.6 and a per-second heat dissipation of 3.96.
This gives DHS a dissonant increase, but that's beside the point. In order to get a result comparable to that 28 SHS 'mech, you'd probably only want, say, 8 DHS not in the engine, which costs 9 tons and 18 critical hit slots (much more viable) and gives you a heat capacity of 31.2 and dissipation per second of 3.12 (and with the higher dissipation, that still might be stronger than the 28SHS 'mech). However, since every 25 engine rating over 250 adds another heat sink slot to the engine that doesn't consume critical hit slots, a 'mech with a large engine has a much higher threshhold before it's spending too much internal space on double heat sinks.
There's a lot more math that can be done with this, but I think you probably get the idea already. Basically what it amounts to is that if you're running more than 18 or 19 heat sinks total with a 250 engine (including in-engine), then you simply can't use double heat sinks- and you'll get a slightly superior heat capacity at the same number of critical hit slots consumed. The tonnage, though, becomes absolutely prohibitive for most 'mechs, and the loss of a high dissipation rate is not really made up for with the way MWO works.
For every 25 engine rating increase, though, that maximum reasonable capacity increases by 1. A 275-295 engine has a 19-20 DHS threshhold, a 300-320 engine has a 20-21 threshhold, a 325-345 engine has a 21-22 threshhold, a 350-370 engine's reasonable max is around 22-23, and something with a 375-400 rating engine can usually afford to go as high as 23-24, though few things use engines in that rating window (and the engine itself is prohibitively heavy).
-QKD-CR0
In MWO they're even more vital than in the original rules (tabletop) or in previous games (MW1-3, though I didn't play 4 so I can't talk about that one, and the various Battletech video/computer games) because where in the tabletop rules every 'mech has the same overheat threshhold regardless of heat sinking capability and all weapons fire at exactly the same rate (once every 10 seconds), in MWO heat sinks affect your overheat threshhold and each weapon has its own refire rate (always considerably better than once every 10 seconds).
When used in tabletop, there are actually some situations in which single heat sinks are preferable (less critical hit slot occupation is pretty much the only concern there), and they come up more often than they would in this game because engine ratings are fixed to multiples of the 'mech's tonnage.
As for the actual numbers, Shar has the right of it- except that in his math he didn't include the 10 2x2 double heat sinks in the engine, so the actual heat capacity would be 20 higher and dissipation rate would be 2 per second higher.
This is on top of the base heat capacity per 'mech, which I believe is 10? I could be wrong, it's been some time since I've looked at the math. I'm going to show you the two basic maths if we're assuming a 250 engine, which holds all 10 mandatory heat sinks and doesn't have extra heat sink slots.
If that 10 is right, then the 28 total (10 in engine and 18 not in engine if it's a 250 engine) is devoting 18 tons and up to 18 critical hit slots in single-slot items for a heat capacity of 38 and a dissipation per second of 2.8.
The DHS 'mech in question, with 14 DHS not in the engine (and 10 in the engine) is then devoting 14 tons and up to a staggering 42 critical hit slots (more than any 'mech can spare, since being in three-slot items none of these can be in the legs, center torso, or head) to get a heat capacity of 39.6 and a per-second heat dissipation of 3.96.
This gives DHS a dissonant increase, but that's beside the point. In order to get a result comparable to that 28 SHS 'mech, you'd probably only want, say, 8 DHS not in the engine, which costs 9 tons and 18 critical hit slots (much more viable) and gives you a heat capacity of 31.2 and dissipation per second of 3.12 (and with the higher dissipation, that still might be stronger than the 28SHS 'mech). However, since every 25 engine rating over 250 adds another heat sink slot to the engine that doesn't consume critical hit slots, a 'mech with a large engine has a much higher threshhold before it's spending too much internal space on double heat sinks.
There's a lot more math that can be done with this, but I think you probably get the idea already. Basically what it amounts to is that if you're running more than 18 or 19 heat sinks total with a 250 engine (including in-engine), then you simply can't use double heat sinks- and you'll get a slightly superior heat capacity at the same number of critical hit slots consumed. The tonnage, though, becomes absolutely prohibitive for most 'mechs, and the loss of a high dissipation rate is not really made up for with the way MWO works.
For every 25 engine rating increase, though, that maximum reasonable capacity increases by 1. A 275-295 engine has a 19-20 DHS threshhold, a 300-320 engine has a 20-21 threshhold, a 325-345 engine has a 21-22 threshhold, a 350-370 engine's reasonable max is around 22-23, and something with a 375-400 rating engine can usually afford to go as high as 23-24, though few things use engines in that rating window (and the engine itself is prohibitively heavy).
-QKD-CR0
Edited by Elli Gujar, 26 February 2014 - 12:49 PM.
#7
-
-
- 2,520 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:44 PM
wintersborn, on 26 February 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:
Shar Wolf, when you say heat cap you mean that the single HS mech in my example would have 8.4 more heat allowed before shutdown or its "Cap" (max heat before shutdown) ?
If so that's about one ERLL worth of heat without ghost heat and some extra cooling so thats a plus. Now do Single heat sinks have different hit points than doubles for Crit. padding use ?
And yes I understand your explanation about the 10 internal vs external (2.0 vs 1.4), thanks.
If so that's about one ERLL worth of heat without ghost heat and some extra cooling so thats a plus. Now do Single heat sinks have different hit points than doubles for Crit. padding use ?
And yes I understand your explanation about the 10 internal vs external (2.0 vs 1.4), thanks.
Right, it does raise the cap. But dont forget that the mech using SHS is dedicating 14 more tons to heat sinks.
I dont know if they have more hit points but for padding: DHS is 1 ton for 3 crits vs. SHS 1 ton for 1 crit. The component will be destroyed before the difference would really matter.
Edited by Rouken, 26 February 2014 - 12:47 PM.
#8
-
-
- 412 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:48 PM
Like this ERLL Stalker build: STK-3F
vs.
This ERLL Stalker build: STK-3F
Other than speed and maybe the extra danger of the XL engine, would it not make sense to go for the SHS set up for the faster cooling and extra heat Cap. ?
**Edit**
After doing some math and if its right.
SHS:
Engine = 10 x 1.0
Chassis = 28 x 1.0
Total = 3.8 heat per second and 38.0 heat cap?
DHS:
Engine = 10 x 2.0
Chassis = 14 x 1.4
Total = 3.96 heat per second and 39.6 heat cap ?
If a SHS has the same damage properties (for Crit. padding) as a DHS per crit space then if I am right DHS is the way to go.
vs.
This ERLL Stalker build: STK-3F
Other than speed and maybe the extra danger of the XL engine, would it not make sense to go for the SHS set up for the faster cooling and extra heat Cap. ?
**Edit**
After doing some math and if its right.
SHS:
Engine = 10 x 1.0
Chassis = 28 x 1.0
Total = 3.8 heat per second and 38.0 heat cap?
DHS:
Engine = 10 x 2.0
Chassis = 14 x 1.4
Total = 3.96 heat per second and 39.6 heat cap ?
If a SHS has the same damage properties (for Crit. padding) as a DHS per crit space then if I am right DHS is the way to go.
Edited by wintersborn, 26 February 2014 - 01:07 PM.
#9
-
-
- Guardian
- 1,326 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:53 PM
wintersborn, on 26 February 2014 - 12:48 PM, said:
Theoretically, yes. Mind, running a Stalker with an XL engine is an exercise in futility and risk since the side torso hitboxes are gimundenormouhuge, but if that weren't an issue and all you really wanted to do with your Stalker was have four large lasers, then yes, that would be a superior option from the fire rate angle. However, no element of this game exists in a vacuum- not only is throwing an XL engine in a stalker more or less just stupid, but you're also moving 10 kph slower. Besides that, you make up for the 1.5 million C-bill loss on the DHS upgrade and then some by not using a massively expensive XL engine. Unless you already have an XL 255 lying around for some reason.
#10
-
-
- 2,520 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:56 PM
wintersborn, on 26 February 2014 - 12:48 PM, said:
Well the XL is a very big concern.
Aside from that the stalker with DHS has better cooling all around.
The mech with SHS has 38 total heat sinks.
The mech with DHS effectively has 39.6 heat sinks.
10 x 2 in the engine and 14 x 1.4 external heat sinks
2(10) + 1.4(14) = 39.6
In conclusion the only advantage the stalker with SHS has is that it is 1.5 million cheaper. And thats assuming you already had the XL255 to make it work.
Edited by Rouken, 26 February 2014 - 01:05 PM.
#11
-
-
- Guardian
- 1,326 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:06 PM
Rouken, on 26 February 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:
In conclusion the only advantage the stalker with SHS has is that it is 1.5 million cheaper.
Except that a 255 XL engine is over 4 million C-bills and a Standard 300 is 1.8 million.
#12
-
-
- The Guide
- 23,384 posts
Welcoming Committee
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:07 PM
wintersborn, on 26 February 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:
I would like to know if there is something other than "Cooling Efficiency" (Smurfy) when it comes to the amount of heat sinks a mech has.
To put it simply would there be any difference or advantage to having 28 Single HS's vs 14 Double HS's (not including the 10 in the engine) ?
The Cooling Efficiency is about the same (48% SHS vs 50% DHS) but is there a Heat Cap or other factors that would benefit the use of a lot more SHS's other then crit. padding ?
Thank you.
To put it simply would there be any difference or advantage to having 28 Single HS's vs 14 Double HS's (not including the 10 in the engine) ?
The Cooling Efficiency is about the same (48% SHS vs 50% DHS) but is there a Heat Cap or other factors that would benefit the use of a lot more SHS's other then crit. padding ?
Thank you.
http://keikun17.gith...eat_simulator/# This will be handy.
#13
-
-
- 2,520 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:19 PM
There is a rare case where the stalker with SHS would have better cooling. If you move 4 heat sinks into the legs and stand in water you double (not sure but I think it is doubled) the effectiveness of the heat sinks in your legs. Essential adding 4 more heat sinks. But even then it is not worth the weakness of an XL on a stalker.
#14
-
-
- 412 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:27 PM
Koniving, thank you for that link. Its a great tool I did not know about although I can not seem to get chain fire working but I will check it out more.
If that Site/Tool is correct then the SHS build has a Cooling rate or 4.37 and a Heat threshold of 81.6 vs the DHS of 4.5 and 83.52.
So unless the SHS have more hit points per crit. slot there does not seem to be any reason to keep SHS's on any build. Even if it does the XL engine would more than likely negate any benefits.
Does anyone know what the hit points per heat sink or per crit. slot used by them is?
Thank you for your help and info.
If that Site/Tool is correct then the SHS build has a Cooling rate or 4.37 and a Heat threshold of 81.6 vs the DHS of 4.5 and 83.52.
So unless the SHS have more hit points per crit. slot there does not seem to be any reason to keep SHS's on any build. Even if it does the XL engine would more than likely negate any benefits.
Does anyone know what the hit points per heat sink or per crit. slot used by them is?
Thank you for your help and info.
#15
-
-
- Guardian
- 1,326 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:30 PM
Every heat sink, double or single, has 10 hit points. Regardless how many critical slots it takes up.
Keep in mind that those hit points -ONLY- matter for the critical hit's component damage, not for your 'mech counting the amount of damage dealt to structure.
Keep in mind that those hit points -ONLY- matter for the critical hit's component damage, not for your 'mech counting the amount of damage dealt to structure.
#16
-
-
- 2,520 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:37 PM
wintersborn, on 26 February 2014 - 01:27 PM, said:
So unless the SHS have more hit points per crit. slot there does not seem to be any reason to keep SHS's on any build. Even if it does the XL engine would more than likely negate any benefits.
Does anyone know what the hit points per heat sink or per crit. slot used by them is?
Does anyone know what the hit points per heat sink or per crit. slot used by them is?
The thing is, the health of equipment doesnt add to the health of a component. The goal is to have damage on unarmored locations destroy the less useful heat sink instead of say the weapon, ECM, or ammo in that component. Since components are generally destroyed long before all the equipment in that location DHS are the more weight efficient way to pad crits.
#17
-
-
- Guardian
- 1,326 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:46 PM
Rouken, on 26 February 2014 - 01:37 PM, said:
The thing is, the health of equipment doesnt add to the health of a component. The goal is to have damage on unarmored locations destroy the less useful heat sink instead of say the weapon, ECM, or ammo in that component. Since components are generally destroyed long before all the equipment in that location DHS are the more weight efficient way to pad crits.
Except that once that DHS is critted into oblivion, its three slots are effectively empty, where killing one of three single heat sinks leaves two slots still occupied by crittable equipment. So DHS aren't actually more efficient (for crit padding), they just fill more space per sink.
Edited by Elli Gujar, 26 February 2014 - 01:47 PM.
#18
-
-
- 2,520 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 01:57 PM
Elli Gujar, on 26 February 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:
Except that once that DHS is critted into oblivion, its three slots are effectively empty, where killing one of three single heat sinks leaves two slots still occupied by crittable equipment. So DHS aren't actually more efficient (for crit padding), they just fill more space per sink.
Well, if you're willing to put up the inferior cooling and increased tonnage spent on that cooling to keep important equipment intact for a few more seconds before the component is destroyed be my guest.
I did say it was the most weight efficient way to pad crits.
#19
-
-
- 412 posts
Member
Posted 26 February 2014 - 02:08 PM
Hmm, ok let me see if I got this right.
Take this build for example STK-3F just focusing on only the right torso taking damage with(no armor).
Now there are 12 crit. slots with 12, 10HP SHS's filling up that torso.
So say a PPC doing 10 points of damage to that un armored torso, then the "Torso's Structure" has hit points and that is what the PPC damages. Then there is a chance (crit. roll) to do a % of damage to components in that location like SHS's in this case?
So you can destroy a "Structure" like a unarmored side torso and then any extra (non crit.) damage to it bleeds into the CT or its components(engine)? All without having to go through that side torso's components, in this case the 12 SHS's?
I don't think I fully understand how damage is done.
Take this build for example STK-3F just focusing on only the right torso taking damage with(no armor).
Now there are 12 crit. slots with 12, 10HP SHS's filling up that torso.
So say a PPC doing 10 points of damage to that un armored torso, then the "Torso's Structure" has hit points and that is what the PPC damages. Then there is a chance (crit. roll) to do a % of damage to components in that location like SHS's in this case?
So you can destroy a "Structure" like a unarmored side torso and then any extra (non crit.) damage to it bleeds into the CT or its components(engine)? All without having to go through that side torso's components, in this case the 12 SHS's?
I don't think I fully understand how damage is done.
Edited by wintersborn, 26 February 2014 - 02:11 PM.
#20
-
-
- The Determined
- 10,358 posts
Member
- LocationAlaska!
Posted 26 February 2014 - 02:20 PM
wintersborn, on 26 February 2014 - 02:08 PM, said:
I don't think I fully understand how damage is done.
You kinda lost me when you started bringing the Stalker into it (not a mech I use) but this I can cover (I think....)
Every mech has 3 kinds of "Health"
Armor (set in the mechlab)
Internal structure (under the armor or the skeleton of the mech - equal to 1/2 MAX armor potential)
Items (weapons, heatsinks and the like - 10 'health' with some exceptions, such as Gauss rifles with 3 or AC/20 with 18)
You normally can only damage armor - but after the armor is gone you start damaging internal structure.
Every hit against IS has a chance to damage the items instead (or with? I'm a little vague myself) with some weapons (MG and LBAC for example) having a higher chance to 'crit' or hit the items.
Also: there are some (very) few builds that do better with SHS. (They are few, and there are generally better builds for the same chassis)
An example being the 4MG 1Mediumlaser Locust (for one that really gets nothing/little from DHS)
or the 40+heatsink Atlas. (which there are 'better' builds for the chassis)
Edit: when I say has a chance to hit the item instead, I mean that there is a chance that the internal structure may take none (or reduced?) damage, with which item being hit being randomly selected based on the size (slot-size) of the item (IE the DHS would be 3 and an AC/2 would be 1, so if those are the only items then you would have a 75% chance of hitting the DHS, and a 25% chance of hitting the AC/2)
Edited by Shar Wolf, 26 February 2014 - 02:23 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
