282 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Widowmaker1981, on 21 April 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

Yes, exactly this - the best** real time simulation of this would be for all weapons to have a 10 second cooldown and have the heat cap be 30 (the auto shutdown level) + amount of heat you can sink in 10s, which is SHSx1 or DHSx2. We have an altered version of this with less disipation and cap (due to DHS 1.4) and greater heat generation (due to enormously reduced cooldowns). Heat is considerably MORE punishing in MWO for any given loadout than it would be in TT. What they should do, imo, is to increase DHS to 2.0 all the way, and then have 2 heat bars. one with a value of simply DHSx2 which has no effect on you, and the other with a value of 30 with increasing negative effects (not identical to TT because RNG is bad, but some version of it) as you fill the 2nd bar.

**not actually best, that would be boring as hell to play

not really the point...just clarifying how TT heat worked for all those who seem to not understand it, which is a surprising number. Get tired of inaccurate statements like "a hard 30 pt heat cap like TT would save the world". When the way heat worked in real TT you did not have a hard cap because your Sinks removed heat before any effects were counted. Apparently, Megamek has some optional or house rules that act otherwise, limiting "alpha strikes" (according to Koniving) which makes no sense, since in TT, anytime you fired your entire weapon load it was an alpha strike. Weapon rolls were all separate of course.

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 11:00 AM, said:

Assuming that the calculation represents the actual time things are happening (that somehow you're firing all the weapons simultaneously every turn, and the heat sinks each flush their amount of heat all at once immediately after that) you would be correct.... if and only if you calculated penalties BEFORE flushing heat.

This is not what's happening.

Each turn is ten seconds. The heat sinks dissipate their energy across that -entire- span of time, and the weapons generate their heat throughout that span of time.

The best illustration of this is the Solaris rules, which use turns 1/4 the length. This means four times as many heat dissipation phases, and to keep weapon firing rates from accelerating, these rules (the 'Mech Duel Rules, officially named, though they're usually called Solaris) multiply weapon heat by four. This keeps the dissipation and generation of heat in tandem with each other, particularly with the four movement phases also quadrupling movement heat. You still overheat at 30 excess heat in these rules, because your capacity is still 30, despite the rate of everything being increased by four.

The reason your GHR generates 52 heat before shutting down is that while it's generating 52 heat, it's also dissipating 22 at the same time. This is why you calculate penalties after dissipation.

The amount of excess heat needed to overheat remains the same no matter how many heat sinks you have. In both cases, you have exceeded your dissipation over time by 30.

If, as you asserted, the 22 heat sinks added more capacity than the 10, you would need to exceed your dissipation by more than 30 in order to overheat.

And you do. Just not in one round. Because excess heat rolls over. But you have to overcome your base heatsinks AND (eventually) hit 30 excess heat to hit your heat cap.

No matter how you want to try to twist it, mechs with more heatsinks have higher heat caps because they dissipate more before ever getting to the scale.

[JustEvil]

TexAss, on 21 April 2015 - 10:47 AM, said:

Sadly this.

You know how long it must have took to type in all those quirks and numbers into a database?

And now do it ALL OVER AGAIN?

MADNESS!

Please... Select all -> Delete. Done.

Edited by JustEvil, 21 April 2015 - 11:13 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 11:00 AM, said:

The best illustration of this is the Solaris rules, which use turns 1/4 the length. This means four times as many heat dissipation phases, and to keep weapon firing rates from accelerating, these rules (the 'Mech Duel Rules, officially named, though they're usually called Solaris) multiply weapon heat by four. This keeps the dissipation and generation of heat in tandem with each other, particularly with the four movement phases also quadrupling movement heat. You still overheat at 30 excess heat in these rules, because your capacity is still 30, despite the rate of everything being increased by four.

While i never played those rules, i dont think that can be right.

http://www.solaris7....Info.asp?ID=678

If that Panther EVER fired its ERPPC it would generate 60 heat, if multiplied by 4. it would then sink 13 and have 47 extra heat, shutting it down for quite some extensive time, and probably killing it.

Simply multiplying heat by 4 would make it impossible for small mechs to ever fire big energy weapons, and since so many.. have those, there must be something else to it?

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2015 - 11:13 AM, said:

No matter how you want to try to twist it, mechs with more heatsinks have higher heat caps because they dissipate more before ever getting to the scale.

You just declared that dissipation is the same thing as capacity. You should know this is wrong.

You remember those ten gallon tanks I referred to? You just said that the one that drains four gallons per minute is bigger because it drains faster.

Widowmaker1981, on 21 April 2015 - 11:14 AM, said:

While i never played those rules, i dont think that can be right.

http://www.solaris7....Info.asp?ID=678

If that Panther EVER fired its ERPPC it would generate 60 heat, if multiplied by 4. it would then sink 13 and have 47 extra heat, shutting it down for quite some extensive time, and probably killing it.

Simply multiplying heat by 4 would make it impossible for small mechs to ever fire big energy weapons, and since so many.. have those, there must be something else to it?

Actually, things like this are why a lot of field-viable 'mechs just aren't used in Solaris-rules games, and why some Solaris-rules 'mechs are hilarious in Battletech. I didn't say it was perfect, but it is representative.

[Widowmaker1981]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:

You just declared that dissipation is the same thing as capacity. You should know this is wrong.

You remember those ten gallon tanks I referred to? You just said that the one that drains four gallons per minute is bigger because it drains faster.

Its EFFECTIVELY bigger because it drains faster while you fill it, making the same flow rate take longer to fill it.

If a 10 Gallon drum drains 1 gallon per second, and you pour in water at a rate of 2 gallons per second, it will take 10 seconds to fill (you poured in 20, but 10 poured out in the same time). If the same 10 gallon drum with a bigger hole (more dissipation) drains water at 1.5 gallons per second after 10 seconds it will only be half full (you poured in 20, but 15 poured out in that time) - Thus it requires a larger volume of water to fill it up to the brim, and is effectively bigger.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 21 April 2015 - 11:27 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:

You just declared that dissipation is the same thing as capacity. You should know this is wrong.

You remember those ten gallon tanks I referred to? You just said that the one that drains four gallons per minute is bigger because it drains faster.

Lol. ok. Sure. Except what you don't get is in TT Dissipation and capacity are linked. Because they are all figured at the same bloody time. Your real world explanation doesn't work because that hat isn't magically filling and draining in precise 10 second intervals. Which IS how the heat in TT is figured. One doesn't have a real time dissipation or heat building to begin with. Thus, regardless of how things work "IRL", in Btech TT, your Dissipation, aka Heat Sinks is directly connected to your capacity.

Because, no matter how you explain it, a mech with more heatsinks always can generate more heat than a mech with less. Thus it's "Capacity" is higher.

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 11:17 AM, said:

You just declared that dissipation is the same thing as capacity. You should know this is wrong.

You remember those ten gallon tanks I referred to? You just said that the one that drains four gallons per minute is bigger because it drains faster.



Actually, things like this are why a lot of field-viable 'mechs just aren't used in Solaris-rules games, and why some Solaris-rules 'mechs are hilarious in Battletech. I didn't say it was perfect, but it is representative.

Widowmaker1981, on 21 April 2015 - 11:18 AM, said:

Its EFFECTIVELY bigger because it drains faster while you fill it, making the same flow rate take longer to fill it.

Exactly. The difference is the more heat sinks, the bigger the hole in the hat, the faster it drains, so the more water has to flow. Because it's not a closed end system. Heat is a fluid dynamic, it's dissipating as it's being generated.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 21 April 2015 - 11:21 AM.

[Osis]

Hail,

30% 40% 50% is not a quirk or tweak, it is a misconstrued adjustment throwing the complete game out of balance in an attempt to sell underused Mechs.

Seyla,

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2015 - 11:19 AM, said:

Because, no matter how you explain it, a mech with more heatsinks always can generate more heat than a mech with less. Thus it's "Capacity" is higher.

No, it can generate more because it's getting rid of more. That's not what capacity is. Capacity is how much it can hold.

Every 'mech regardless of how much heat it tosses during any given time period can only hold 29 heat without shutting down. Period. It doesn't matter whether it's one turn or thirty or three hundred, at the point where a 'Mech has generated 30 heat more than it dissipates, it is forced to shut down. How many heat sinks it has is relevant only to the rate at which it produces heat.

The tanks illustration still holds if you add and take away the water before reality checks for overflow (somehow).

What you are saying is that if, somehow, I manage to add the two gallons of water, then take away one, that changes the fact that adding a net total of one gallon to the tank doesn't make it overflow until the tenth time.


Your capacity is your limit. You're looking for 'when does this exceed twenty-nine'. It doesn't actually matter if you're going in steps of 'add two take away one', 'add thirteen, take away twelve', or 'add forty-seven, take away forty-six' as long as you don't check until the step is complete. It still exceeds twenty-nine after thirty iterations. At no point has the goal of 'exceed twenty-nine' changed. At no point has that limit changed. Changing how much is being added and how much is being taken away has absolutely no effect on that.

This is why, in tabletop, heat sinks clearly don't and cannot affect capacity. What matters is the rate of net change, not how big the numbers you differentiate to find that change.

No matter how fast I'm going, if you're going five kilometers per minute faster, in six minutes, you'll be thirty kilometers ahead of me. If I lose when you get thirty kilometers ahead of me (the limit or capacity), I lose in six minutes. It doesn't matter when the math is done, it doesn't matter what order you do it in.


The heat generation and dissipation in a turn of Battletech are functionally happening simultaneously, because you always only check after both have been performed. How much was generated (weapons and equipment and movement) and how much was dissipated (heat sinks) have no effect on the fact that 30 excess heat, whether during that one turn or residual over any number of turns (so long as you don't consume that residual heat somehow) results in a shut down.

[LordMelvin]

I always figured quirks would help mechs apply their damage, not increase the damage done.

Things like RoF/Cooldown quirks only serve to make mechs like the Thunderbolt "overpowered" by battletech standards. Proper quirks would be things like minor (10%-20%) heat quirks, range/velocity quirks, armor quirks, agility quirks, etc.

For example, the hunchbacks got armor quirks to make the hunch last longer in a fight. This is a good quirk. It's not a direct power boost since it doesn't make the weapon housed in it any more powerful, but it does allow the weapon to last longer in a fight thus increasing the amount of potential damage it can deal.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2015 - 11:21 AM, said:

Exactly. The difference is the more heat sinks, the bigger the hole in the hat, the faster it drains, so the more water has to flow. Because it's not a closed end system. Heat is a fluid dynamic, it's dissipating as it's being generated.

Hat size hasn't changed. Capacity hasn't changed. Telling heat sinks to change capacity rather than or in addition to dissipation is telling them to change the size of the hat, barrel, drum, whatever.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 April 2015 - 11:46 AM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

After a bit of thought, a discrepancy has occurred to me that would account for this issue of understanding.

Bishop, I have mulled over your last few posts, and come to a conclusion.

When you say heat capacity, you are thinking of 'the amount of heat I can generate in a given period of time without overheating'.

When I say heat capacity, I am thinking of 'the amount of heat I can have at one time without overheating'.

Unfortunately, the game (whether we're talking about Battletech or Mechwarrior) uses the definition I am using for 'heat capacity', not the definition you are using.

In the tank example I used earlier, your heat capacity is the amount of water that is poured into the tank, regardless whether or not it stays in the tank.

My heat capacity, and the games' heat capacity, are the amount of water that can be held in the tank at any given time.

When a heat sink (or quirk) increases dissipation, it increases the rate at which water leaves the tank- the 'size of the hole' if you prefer. When it increases heat capacity, it increases the size of the tank.

Does this help?

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 April 2015 - 12:12 PM.

[Widowmaker1981]

LordMelvin, on 21 April 2015 - 11:40 AM, said:

I always figured quirks would help mechs apply their damage, not increase the damage done.

Things like RoF/Cooldown quirks only serve to make mechs like the Thunderbolt "overpowered" by battletech standards. Proper quirks would be things like minor (10%-20%) heat quirks, range/velocity quirks, armor quirks, agility quirks, etc.

For example, the hunchbacks got armor quirks to make the hunch last longer in a fight. This is a good quirk. It's not a direct power boost since it doesn't make the weapon housed in it any more powerful, but it does allow the weapon to last longer in a fight thus increasing the amount of potential damage it can deal.

RoF quirks for Ballistic / Missile weapons = Heat generation quirks for energy weapons. If you give out heat quirks (and 20% is not minor for heat, its huge) and no cooldown quirks for ballistics you remove ballistic weapons from the game.

[Widowmaker1981]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 12:04 PM, said:

After a bit of thought, a discrepancy has occurred to me that would account for this issue of understanding.

Bishop, I have mulled over your last few posts, and come to a conclusion.

When you say heat capacity, you are thinking of 'the amount of heat I can generate in a given period of time without overheating'.

When I say heat capacity, I am thinking of 'the amount of heat I can have at one time without overheating'.

Unfortunately, the game (whether we're talking about Battletech or Mechwarrior) uses the definition I am using for 'heat capacity', not the definition you are using.

In the tank example I used earlier, your heat capacity is the amount of water that is poured into the tank, regardless whether or not it stays in the tank.

My heat capacity, and the games' heat capacity, are the amount of water that can be held in the tank at any given time.

When a heat sink increases dissipation, it increases the rate at which water leaves the tank- the 'size of the hole' if you prefer. When it increases heat capacity, it increases the size of the tank.

Does this help?

In order for your definition of heat capacity to apply in this game as it does in TT, weapons would have to generate their heat not as a spike when fired, but gradually over the next 10 seconds (fire a PPC and it causes you to generate 1 heat per second for the next 10 seconds). With instant heat generation a 30 cap would be extremely punitive, not to mention if you applied the TT rules for ammo explosions/RNG shutdowns etc you would constantly be exposed to them - if someone fired an ERPPC with that system EVER the 15 heat would have chances for shutdown etc for at least a couple of seconds while the heatsinks reduced it.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Widowmaker1981, on 21 April 2015 - 12:12 PM, said:

In order for your definition of heat capacity to apply in this game as it does in TT, weapons would have to generate their heat not as a spike when fired, but gradually over the next 10 seconds (fire a PPC and it causes you to generate 1 heat per second for the next 10 seconds). With instant heat generation a 30 cap would be extremely punitive, not to mention if you applied the TT rules for ammo explosions/RNG shutdowns etc you would constantly be exposed to them - if someone fired an ERPPC with that system EVER the 15 heat would have chances for shutdown etc for at least a couple of seconds while the heatsinks reduced it.

I didn't say a 30 hard cap was practical for MWO or even should be tried. I said it's what we have in Tabletop.

If there was ever a time to try to institute a 30 heat hard cap for MWO, it was way the heck back probably even before closed Beta. For all I know, it -was- tried.

Trying to do it now would be an exercise in setting the game back years. Not an option.

However, my definition of 'heat capacity' does apply to this game- it's just that this game doesn't have a hard heat capacity, it has one influenced by heat sinks.

Do I think the current system allows excessive heat caps? Abso-friggin-lutely. I can get a 51 (excuse me, Smurfy was glitching for some reason) heat capacity on a Trebuchet with eleven double heat sinks and no efficiencies. That's without even trying.

Do I think we should set things to a hard 30 for MWO? Not on your life. Not on my life. Not on anyone's life.

I'd really like to see a compromise point, something in-between. What would it be? I dunno. Lots of propositions have been made, I like some of them and not others.

But that's not the point.

The point is that anyone claiming that tabletop heat sinks affect heat capacity is either using a different definition of 'heat capacity' than the games themselves, or is wrong, and pretending otherwise makes it massively harder for anyone to understand each other when talking about the elements of this game in a game-design related discussion.

I happen to agree with a lot of Bishop's ideas, and I think he's a dynamite artist besides. That doesn't mean I can't argue with or disagree with him (particularly about his 'true double' thing, because the 'true doubles' aren't double heat sinks- I'm not sure what they -are-, but being as they affect both heat dissipation and heat capacity by doubling each value separately from a standard heat sink, and the values interact with each other as force multipliers, they're worth more than double).

I don't think that Tabletop should be considered The One And Only Source Of Hard Rules, but that doesn't mean I can't argue against it being misinterpereted or poorly translated for discussion's sake.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 April 2015 - 12:27 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 12:22 PM, said:

I didn't say a 30 hard cap was practical for MWO or even should be tried. I said it's what we have in Tabletop.

If there was ever a time to try to institute a 30 heat hard cap for MWO, it was way the heck back probably even before closed Beta. For all I know, it -was- tried.

Trying to do it now would be an exercise in setting the game back years. Not an option.

However, my definition of 'heat capacity' does apply to this game- it's just that this game doesn't have a hard heat capacity, it has one influenced by heat sinks.

Do I think the current system allows excessive heat caps? Abso-friggin-lutely. I can get a 51 (excuse me, Smurfy was glitching for some reason) heat capacity on a Trebuchet with eleven double heat sinks and no efficiencies. That's without even trying.

Do I think we should set things to a hard 30 for MWO? Not on your life. Not on my life. Not on anyone's life.

I'd really like to see a compromise point, something in-between. What would it be? I dunno. Lots of propositions have been made, I like some of them and not others.

But that's not the point.

The point is that anyone claiming that tabletop heat sinks affect heat capacity is either using a different definition of 'heat capacity' than the games themselves, or is wrong, and pretending otherwise makes it massively harder for anyone to understand each other when talking about the elements of this game in a game-design related discussion.

I happen to agree with a lot of Bishop's ideas, and I think he's a dynamite artist besides. That doesn't mean I can't argue with or disagree with him (particularly about his 'true double' thing, because the 'true doubles' aren't double heat sinks- I'm not sure what they -are-, but being as they affect both heat dissipation and heat capacity by doubling each value separately from a standard heat sink, and the values interact with each other as force multipliers, they're worth more than double).

I don't think that Tabletop should be considered The One And Only Source Of Hard Rules, but that doesn't mean I can't argue against it being misinterpereted or poorly translated for discussion's sake.

I respect your right to disagree, whilst remaining civil but Widowmaker already summed it up. The only version of TT i have seen that uses heat capacity in the manner you mention is Megamek.

In real TT, heat is a spike, all heat generated instantly on the weapons phase, all waste heat accounted for AFTER dissipation of the amount of heat sinks available. For their to be a hard 30 cap, would mean that when you fire a large laser, you just added 8 heat....and thus before you do anything else you have to deal with the consequences of 8 heat on the heat scale. Fire a second and you have hit 16 heat. Because dissipation has not occurred yet. That happens at the end of the round. 16 heat is already broken your targeting, and other effects. This makes no sense for a number of reasons, not the least being..movement has already occurred so the movement effects would serve no purpose.

In a real time setting what you say works, because dissipation and generation are congruent. In TT, it's in defined phases. ALL you heat is generated during the weapons phase. So whether you like the terminology, what you want to call dissipation, and I am calling capacity, is irrelevant. Because since Dissipation is part of the heat phase, and one doesn't get penalties during the weapons phase for heat build up, you are increasing your practical cap. Because no matter how you want to phrase it, a mech with 22 shs can generate more heat than one with 10, with no ill effects.

And The only thing about TT Heat that translates well to the FPS real time environments is that there IS a heat cap, and that there should be more side effects for heat.

In MWO because of constant recycling and faster RoF, adding to cap is potentially problematic. In TT, which we are arguing for reasons that serve zero benefit to the point of the OP, Dissipation and Cap are essentially one and the same.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 21 April 2015 - 12:38 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2015 - 12:36 PM, said:

Stuff

Again... what your saying would apply if and only if you constantly checked for heatscale penalties and current heat.

You don't.

You check for heatscale penalties after dissipating heat, every turn. Tabletop has always worked this way and still does.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 April 2015 - 12:45 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

Again... what your saying would apply if and only if you constantly checked for heatscale penalties.

You don't.

You check for heatscale penalties after dissipating heat, every turn. Tabletop has always worked this way and still does.

Which is why, it effectively is adding to the Capacity.

Because it allows you to generate more heat, without negative effects. Because the dissipation occurs BEFORE any waste heat is recorded. Thus your capacity to generate heat, is HIGHER.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 21 April 2015 - 12:46 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

Which is why, it effectively is adding to the Capacity.

Because it allows you to generate more heat, without negative effects. Because the dissipation occurs BEFORE any waste heat is recorded. Thus your capacity to generate heat, is HIGHER.

Whether or not it effectively adds to the capacity is not the question. The question is 'does it add to the actual capacity, as defined by the game to which we are referring?' And the answer is 'No.'

I will not argue that increasing dissipation does not increase your ability to handle heat, because it does.

However, it does not increase the momentary capacity of your 'mech, which is what the game is referring to when it refers to 'capacity' in a rules sense. Capitalize or don't, claim its effectiveness or don't, that's irrelevant. The capacity as defined by the rules, as in the term used to refer to the specific number as it is used in the game, is not altered by heat sinks. Every time you talk about heat sinks altering capacity as though they do alter this specific number, you are muddying the issue (unintentionally, but still doing it) and making it harder to legitimately follow what's being said.

I should also add that this is made worse by the fact that in MWO heat sinks do alter this capacity, which is not the capacity to which you are referring when you refer to capacity.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 April 2015 - 12:53 PM.

[LordMelvin]

Widowmaker1981, on 21 April 2015 - 12:06 PM, said:

RoF quirks for Ballistic / Missile weapons = Heat generation quirks for energy weapons. If you give out heat quirks (and 20% is not minor for heat, its huge) and no cooldown quirks for ballistics you remove ballistic weapons from the game.

RoF quriks on ballistics are fine in most cases, although I'd honestly prefer that the weapon class just get an overall buff instead (RIP AC2s). It's when you give energy weapons massive RoF AND Heat quirks that things get out of hand. I probably should have specified. It's also worth noting that duration quirks count as RoF quirks for energy weapons since it allows them to cycle faster.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that Velocity/Range and Armor/Agility quirks are better than RoF/Heat quirks since they increase the potential effective damage a mech can put out with a given loadout without directly impacting the rate at which that damage is applied.

Edited by LordMelvin, 21 April 2015 - 12:57 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 12:53 PM, said:

Whether or not it effectively adds to the capacity is not the question. The question is 'does it add to the actual capacity, as defined by the game to which we are referring?' And the answer is 'No.'

I will not argue that increasing dissipation does not increase your ability to handle heat, because it does.

However, it does not increase the momentary capacity of your 'mech, which is what the game is referring to when it refers to 'capacity' in a rules sense. Capitalize or don't, claim its effectiveness or don't, that's irrelevant. The capacity as defined by the rules, as in the term used to refer to the specific number as it is used in the game, is not altered by heat sinks. Every time you talk about heat sinks altering capacity as though they do alter this specific number, you are muddying the issue (unintentionally, but still doing it) and making it harder to legitimately follow what's being said.

I should also add that this is made worse by the fact that in MWO heat sinks do alter this capacity, which is not the capacity to which you are referring when you refer to capacity.

the point is in TT, one never DEALS with the "momentary capacity" to handle heat, because it is not dealt with in real time. In TT it does increase the capacity because the ONLY time one deals with the heat is at the end of round. There is no momentary capacity in TT.

MWO being real time, is a different story. And I have no issue with looking at hard caps in MWO..but it's disingenuous and untrue to claim that is how "TT does it". Which is what most proponents of hard caps claim. Yet since there IS no "heat of the moment" so to speak in TT, there is no hard cap that is not affected by a units total number of HS.

Period.