166 replies to this topic

[Pjwned]

ManDaisy, on 30 September 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

Hey big news! When I lose my side torso in my STANDARD (ANY) engine I ALSO LOSE 50% OF MY FIREPOWER! The firepower loss happens no matter what! Quit trying to tack it on like an additional penalty.

I don't see how it makes much sense to say that destroying 1/5 of the engine means 2/3 of the heat sinks should be gone, and you can't just ignore the penalty of losing 2 components when determining an additional penalty for losing parts of an engine.

That said, losing a couple heat sinks might not be enough of a penalty by itself, largely because the heat system in MWO works so much differently, but as far as I know PGI plans to add a top speed penalty as well, and I'm pretty sure that would be enough.

Brody319, on 30 September 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

once again. Lighter parts, so why the F do you not slap those lighter parts in your STD engine?! It would be slightly heavier than your current XL engine, but a hell of a lot less heavy than the current STD engine. So I ask again, why do XL engines need to be so damn big?

It's clearly a balance mechanic.

[CocoaJin]

Scratx, on 30 September 2014 - 12:08 PM, said:

Heatsinks in the engine are required to keep it cool. That's why when in tabletop the engine takes non-lethal hits, the damage to the containment vessel produces heat. That's because the heat inside the engine leaks out.

Or so the theory goes. Holes in that are actually easy to do, but I shan't bother with that.

TL;DR Heatsinks are canonically required for engines to work

Sarna states:

Quote

while the engine-mounted heat sinks constitute a "regenerative cooling" system that scavenges excess heat for power. {under heat sinks}

If properly ventilated, controlled fusion reactions generate little heat. {under fusion engines}

The heat released during intermittent containment breaches are abnormal conditions for which the engine mounted heat sinks were not intend to counter as a primary function...that's not to say they can't work to protect against the heat spikes of an intermittent containment breach. But it would seem unlikely the engineers would make the engine's operation dependent on the operational status of a scavenging heat pump on a system that generates little heat.

The damage to the containment field would produce heat only because you would have the intermittent release of high energy plasma escaping the containment field until the containment system is able to seal the leak...it's essentially the same as an uncontrolled, uninitiated use of a flamer inside your mech's torso. Though not a requirement for the engine to work, the heatsinks within the mech would naturally operate to dissipate that heat as it propagates through the chassis.

[Apnu]

What they should do is continue with the 20% heat penalty as described, but again borrowing from the TT, if the clan mech loses the OTHER side torso... Its dead. Just like TT.

[Metus regem]

Apnu, on 30 September 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

What they should do is continue with the 20% heat penalty as described, but again borrowing from the TT, if the clan mech loses the OTHER side torso... Its dead. Just like TT.

That's usually how I die with my Timber Wolf... both ST's gone... I'm still taking 3 engine hits when that happens, just I can't take an engine hit through a crit in MWO, like I can in TT...

[CocoaJin]

Brody319, on 30 September 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

The engines in this game don't make sense anyway. why do the engines that take up MORE space, lighter than the engines that take up less space? It cant be the parts, or you could just put lighter parts in a standard engine and lower its weight. So why the hell do IS engines weight less when they take up more space?

Clearly the Clan engines are redundant systems. Just standard engines with their containment systems placed in the side torsos. this allows them to lose a side torso and keep going.

It could be using a lighter, thinner material that isn't as resilient as the heavier standard construction material. So certain parts of the reactor that's more vulnerable have to placed farther away from the core to prevent them from having their limits reached during normal and/or abnormal operations that might be encountered in combat.

Edited by CocoaJin, 30 September 2014 - 12:52 PM.

[Brody319]

No I get it from a gameplay stand point. But in a lore standpoint it makes no sense to me. No one bothered to just be like "Yo, I made a engine with lighter parts, you can now carry that extra small laser I know you all wanted" in several hundred years?

[Mercules]

One thing so many people seem to be missing is that you will lose heat CAPACITY. Yes you might lose 50% of your firepower which means 50% of your heat generation, but since you will most likely have SOME of your DHS that are not in the engine in your torso/arms you will be losing 20% from your engine on top of whatever else you lost. At that moment in time your Heat Capacity will drop... and drop a LOT.

Now, if you are losing your torso you are most likely in combat. In combat you will be firing. If firing you will have heat built up. When your capacity drops you will most likely shut down. While being fired upon.

So... this is not a guaranteed shutdown for a side torso loss, but I am willing to bet that will be the end result of it in the majority of the cases. That is what will kill most Clan pilots/mechs since the IS mechs will then have a chance to focus their PPFLD on the other torso and finish off that wounded mech. There is still a chance you will survive but there is also a chance that that little extra heat will indirectly lead to your nearly immediate death.

[1453 R]

Apnu, on 30 September 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

What they should do is continue with the 20% heat penalty as described, but again borrowing from the TT, if the clan mech loses the OTHER side torso... Its dead. Just like TT.

They do. If a Clan 'Mech blows out both shoulders it drops.

As for the REST of you...

Scratx, on 29 September 2014 - 08:42 PM, said:

20% is still 20%. Let's see what it actually does in play before we go saying "It's too little!".

Remember, aren't we the ones continuously advocating for balancing to be done in small steps? Instead of big NERFINATOR-grade stomps?

Chill.

Scratx, on 29 September 2014 - 08:42 PM, said:

20% is still 20%. Let's see what it actually does in play before we go saying "It's too little!".

Remember, aren't we the ones continuously advocating for balancing to be done in small steps? Instead of big NERFINATOR-grade stomps?

Chill.

Scratx, on 29 September 2014 - 08:42 PM, said:

20% is still 20%. Let's see what it actually does in play before we go saying "It's too little!".

Remember, aren't we the ones continuously advocating for balancing to be done in small steps? Instead of big NERFINATOR-grade stomps?

Chill.

Scratx, on 29 September 2014 - 08:42 PM, said:

20% is still 20%. Let's see what it actually does in play before we go saying "It's too little!".

Remember, aren't we the ones continuously advocating for balancing to be done in small steps? Instead of big NERFINATOR-grade stomps?

Chill.

Scratx, on 29 September 2014 - 08:42 PM, said:

20% is still 20%. Let's see what it actually does in play before we go saying "It's too little!".

Remember, aren't we the ones continuously advocating for balancing to be done in small steps? Instead of big NERFINATOR-grade stomps?

Chill.

...need I continue? Because I totally can.

ManDaisy, Torgun, and all the other folks clamoring for Clan 'Mechs to die to CXL side torso loss: give it some time. We've been begging, positively begging, Piranha to put away the Orbital Foam Cannon and pick up the adjustment wrench. They finally pick up the adjustment wrench, and now you're all demanding they bring the Orbital Foam Cannon back online.

You can't have it both ways, and despite your fondest hopes and dreams and desires, Piranha will not render Clan technology completely useless so you can go back to playing last year's jump-sniping PP(A)C meta. The Clan side deserves its advantages and perks, and the CXL's improved durability is one of the Clan technology base's main perks and one of the primary reasons our OmniMechs have such limited frame customization.

You don't get to inflict all the disadvantages of the IS technology base on the Clans, whilst also forcing them to retain all of their own disadvantages, and then continue to strip away whatever few advantages the Clans had as well. The whole "Both sides need to be equal!" thing GOES BOTH WAYS. No matter how badly you desire it not to.

[Pjwned]

Hm...apparently I didn't read into PGI's proposed idea enough, since apparently there will actually not be a top speed reduction, or at least not until later when other systems (like effects of high heat on mechs) are addressed more fully.

I may have posted a little too hastily and I might be changing my tune after knowing this, because a 20% loss in cooling alone really isn't very much of a penalty...

I'm not really sure what my stance is on the issue now to be honest; I do definitely want clan XL engines to have a penalty for losing 2 sections, but proposing that clan mechs lose 2/3 of their cooling efficiency still seems a little extreme.

Apnu, on 30 September 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

What they should do is continue with the 20% heat penalty as described, but again borrowing from the TT, if the clan mech loses the OTHER side torso... Its dead. Just like TT.

That does already happen as far as I know, it's just that if you need to go through 2 side torso sections then that's a lot of armor and structure.

Edited by Pjwned, 30 September 2014 - 01:03 PM.

[Metus regem]

Most battle mechs by 3025 are actually a couple hundred years old, anything new, is being made in a factory that is automated. A very, very large population of the Inner Sphere doesn't really understand how mechs work, only a few people even have a rough idea of how to fix a mech.

It'd be like giving a modern I/T tech support an early computer that ran with punch-cards and vacuum tubes and telling him "Hey, can you fix this?" when there is an error in one of the punch cards...

[Corduroy Rab]

Is this nerf too slight? Maybe, on paper it seems like it, but let's see how it plays out on live before we all freak out. If it isn't enough of a nerf lets revisit the issue next patch.

Personally, I would rather have a dev make smaller incremental changes nerfs and buffs until balance is reached as opposed to making large sweeping changes and hoping everything works out as intended and doesn't cause negative side effects. Based on reading these forums and seeing people's reactions to past balance changes that went too far I don't think there is much disagreement.

[Mercules]

Brody319, on 30 September 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

No I get it from a gameplay stand point. But in a lore standpoint it makes no sense to me. No one bothered to just be like "Yo, I made a engine with lighter parts, you can now carry that extra small laser I know you all wanted" in several hundred years?

Most of the IS Houses don't have the capabilities to design new mechs much less new technology for them. The advances that do come are from the HELM core which contains lost technical knowledge from before the devastating wars that set them back several hundred years.

The Clans have what they have because they left and created a society that avoided those wars. When they did fight it was honor battles with defined parameters. Basically duels. So they didn't destroy most of their tech in futile fighting.

[IceSerpent]

CocoaJin, on 30 September 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

But a fusion generator is essentially a single cylinder engine...it's either capable of maintaining sufficient containment for some level of output or none at all. The heatsinks have nothing to do with this...they are an accessory required for operation of the various mech systems, not the engine. Two damage crits slots are destroying heatsink accessory, but presumably have yet to decrease field containment enough through engine damage to shut the reactor down.

Mech "engine" refers to a complete powerplant (including cooling system, control sysems, etc.), so engine damage doesn't necessarily imply loss of containment. Just like damage to a car engine doesn't necessarily mean a crack in a cylinder.

[Apnu]

Pjwned, on 30 September 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

Hm...apparently I didn't read into PGI's proposed idea enough, since apparently there will actually not be a top speed reduction, or at least not until later when other systems (like effects of high heat on mechs) are addressed more fully.

I may have posted a little too hastily and I might be changing my tune after knowing this, because a 20% loss in cooling alone really isn't very much of a penalty...

I'm not really sure what my stance is on the issue now to be honest; I do definitely want clan XL engines to have a penalty for losing 2 sections, but proposing that clan mechs lose 2/3 of their cooling efficiency still seems a little extreme.



That does already happen as far as I know, it's just that if you need to go through 2 side torso sections then that's a lot of armor and structure.

I have no recollection of a stick clan mech in any games I've played. The ones I see die that have a missing torso get blown out through the CT. I'd love to test this but no clanner stands still and lets me take out both torsos to find out what happens.

[Xyroc]

ManDaisy, on 29 September 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

If going by critical slots, say in Russ's mind when a clan mech loses its side torso that has 2 outta 10 crits slots in the side torso and only loses 20% of its heat sinks...

WHY DO IS mechs DIE! when then lose their XL side torso when they only have 3/10 criticals slots in the side torso?

Penalty should be much more severe for clans, mean side torso lose = 66% loss in XL engine heat sinks. 100% engine heat sink loss in IS XL mechs.

Maybe just maybe PGI is trying to take only the nerf bat out instead of the wrecking ball when they make changes now.

Its a lot better to change things a little bit and frequently than large changes once a month.

Personally I'm in favor of the idea.

To anyone saying it isnt enough ... how would you know? we havent tested it yet. K thx ... I dont even feel I need clans to be weaker but w/e

Edited by Beliall, 30 September 2014 - 01:18 PM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

ManDaisy, on 29 September 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

If going by critical slots, say in Russ's mind when a clan mech loses its side torso that has 2 outta 10 crits slots in the side torso and only loses 20% of its heat sinks...

WHY DO IS mechs DIE! when then lose their XL side torso when they only have 3/10 criticals slots in the side torso?

Penalty should be much more severe for clans, mean side torso lose = 66% loss in XL engine heat sinks. 100% engine heat sink loss in IS XL mechs.

Because IS mechs XL engines have 3 criticals allocated into the side torso.

A battlemech instantly dies if the Engine takes 3 critical hits.

if a location is destroyed, all critical allocated space in that section is destroyed.

Thus 3 instant critical hits to the engine with IS XL engines.

Learn the source material OP.

[Sjorpha]

One penalty that would make sense IMO is a one-shot forced shutdown when the side torso blows, the engine has to do this to handle the sudden requirement for sealing up the leak. After a couple seconds it would power up with the 1/5 HS reduction.

[CocoaJin]

Brody319, on 30 September 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

No I get it from a gameplay stand point. But in a lore standpoint it makes no sense to me. No one bothered to just be like "Yo, I made a engine with lighter parts, you can now carry that extra small laser I know you all wanted" in several hundred years?

BT had a very good pattern of forcing you you give up something to gain something else. It's very good at giving you lots of options to choose from, but limiting how much of it you can actually use at any one time...its brilliant really.

Give & risked, don't upgrade caps...rid root of good game balancing.

[CocoaJin]

IceSerpent, on 30 September 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

Mech "engine" refers to a complete powerplant (including cooling system, control sysems, etc.), so engine damage doesn't necessarily imply loss of containment. Just like damage to a car engine doesn't necessarily mean a crack in a cylinder.

Agreed...I dont think I was actually disagreeing with you. If anything, I was just using your post as a launch pad for my two cents.

The idea that the mech's fusion engine needs heat sinks to work is like saying a damaged heater core in one's car would cause an engine failure. They both scavenge power plant energy/heat for fulfilling a function...but have absolutely no integral purpose for power plant operation or health.

[ManDaisy]

Flash Frame, on 30 September 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:

Because IS mechs XL engines have 3 criticals allocated into the side torso.

A battlemech instantly dies if the Engine takes 3 critical hits.

if a location is destroyed, all critical allocated space in that section is destroyed.

Thus 3 instant critical hits to the engine with IS XL engines.

Learn the source material OP.

I suggest you reread my post. Losing 20% engine heat sinks does not = 2/3 engine hits. Losing 66% engine heat sinks = 2/3 engines hits.