5 replies to this topic

[Erebus Alpha]

I was playing around in the mechlab with a Stalker, and noticed an interesting mathematical phenomenon. Note that both of the following tests are done on the same build: a Stalker 3F at near-full armor, with 6x Medium Pulse Lasers, 4x SRM4+Artemis, five tons of ammo, and a Beagle Active Probe.

DHS version:

Able to fit 8 double heat sinks in the mech (plus two in the engine), and an XL310 engine (fastest available) ALL criticals are full, with three tons unused. Heat Efficiency 1.19.

SHS version:

Dedicated same critical space completely to heat sinks. TWENTY FOUR single heat sinks added to the mech. Only able to fit an XL195 engine as a result of triple the heat sink tonnage density. Heat efficiency: 1.13.

The DHS version's 12 engine heat sinks plus another 8 additional heat sinks totals to (0.14*8)+(0.2*12) = 3.52 heat cooled per second.

The SHS version's 10 base heat sinks plus another 24 additional heat sinks totals to (0.1*10)+(0.1*24) = 3.4 heat cooled per second.

The problem I see with this is that the SHS version has an enormous tonnage investment over the DHS version, and yet, suffers from worse performance.

Thus, I propose the following buffs to heat sinks (as a whole, applicable to DHS and SHS alike):

Heat sinks synergize locally (only within the same body part) and cumulatively add 0.01 cooling per second to each locally installed heat sink.

Thus, one single heat sink on a body part would cool 0.1 heat per second, as normal. Two heat sinks would each cool for 0.11 heat per second. Three would cool for 0.12 heat per second apiece.

Double heat sinks could not benefit much from this effect, as they are quite large, and fitting more than two or three in one body part is rarely practical. However, stacking single heat sinks would become an advantageous (albeit very tonnage-intensive) method of increasing one's cooling capacity.

Applying this new formula, let's see how the SHS-Stalker would perform now:

6x SHS in LT, RT, LA, and RA apiece. Heat-sink stacking brings each of those SHS to 0.16 cooling per second. Let's not forget the default 10 in the engine:

(0.15*6)+(0.15*6)+(0.15*6)+(0.15*6)+(0.1*10) = 4.60 heat cooled per second with SHS
(0.15*2)+(0.15*2)+(0.15*2)+(0.15*2)+(0.2*12) = 3.60 heat cooled per second with DHS

Now, this is a fairly extreme build - but even so, let's compare how much tonnage we've spent (as the DHS and SHS variants both require the EXACT same number of critical slots):

+24 tons for 4.60 heat cooled per second
+10 tons for 3.60 heat cooled per second

These numbers are appropriate. DHS remains FAR more efficient in terms of heat per second per ton. Currently, the option doesn't even exist to begin trading tonnage for heat efficiency after exhausting critical space.

[Erebus Alpha]

CONTINUED:
  
But is it OP? Can it ever be OP? Distended to its most extreme configuration mathematically possible, say someone puts six large pulse lasers on a hero-Atlas, and concentrates all the heat sinks into the left and right side torsos (and runs a standard engine). The heat sink stacking will bring that to 0.21 heat per second per heat sink, plus the 10 engine heat sinks at 0.1 heat per second cooled apiece. That totals to 6.04 heat per second cooled. Even with the most boaty and cheesy build permissible by math, you'll still only be going 32 KPH and have room for 12.5 tons of armor; under half of maximum - and even with that extreme cooling, it's nowhere close to a heat-stable brawler.
  
The clan mechs stand to gain a little bit of heat efficiency from this as well. Clan DHS can be stacked a bit more than IS DHS can, and certain clan builds that run way too hot (warhawk prime, nova prime) will not run quite as laughably and ridiculously hot. Instead, they'll only run appropriately hot.
  
In terms of the metagame, heat sink stacking also stands to add another layer of interesting gameplay; distributing heat sinks everywhere through the mech gets you less efficient cooling, compared to piling all of the heat sinks in just one body part. Stacking them all into one arm or one side torso for the extra cooling is riskier; the destruction of that body part could impede one's ability to fight, just as the loss of a weapon could.

Edited by ABFalcon, 07 December 2014 - 11:07 PM.

[Firewuff]

No... they dont need to be balanced. Dhs are and should be superior.

[Adamski]

Ideally, they could remove the Increased Heat Capacity from Double Heatsinks, making them the Heatsink of choice for DPS builds.

Then, for a high alpha you would want SHS for increased capacity,and for sustained fights, get DHS.

EDIT: This would also have the effect of reducing alpha builds, and increase overall TTK, making it feel more like Mech tanks, instead of Mech FPS

Edited by Adamski, 09 December 2014 - 02:14 PM.

[Sigmar Sich]

Was thinking too about heatsinks balance not long ago, wrote suggestion. It uses different approach - same heatcapacity rate for both SHS and DHS, and decreased mech's basic heatcapacity, which allows SHS get more (30-40%) total heatcapacity, when used massively. DHS get better cooling rates, but less heatcapacity. Further details by the link.

About suggested here stacking - interesting idea. One way or another, IMO, boating SHS should get some benefits.
PS Calculations are a bit wrong - its no metter where to put additional DHS, in engine or other places - they still will have same rate, 1.4. Fully doubled are internal in engine, not in engine's additional slots.

Edited by Sigmar Sich, 09 December 2014 - 03:06 PM.

[Mordric]

They should make a change to encourage people to use single and dubbles. There should be a trade off pick the singles it better for cooling because there is more of them, but you take the dubbles and they will allow you to hold more heat. That way like you said their will be a trade off and will make people put more thought into their builds. And is tech can not put dubbles in the feet. But clans can. And I thought that if you put heat sinks in the feet and are in the water you would cool faster?