42 replies to this topic

[Greyhart]

Khobai, on 26 August 2016 - 04:14 AM, said:

the weapon firing causes the heat

the weapon doesnt draw power from the reactor until it fires

so heat should not be generated until the weapon fires

and a mech should not shutdown until after its weapons fire

This is both the most fascinating and pointless discussion but I feel almost compelled to explore it more. I know I shouldn't because really it doesn't matter and I don't care. So I conceded the point but:

in the case of energy weapons. Surely the reactor has to create heat first before the weapon can fire. Now this may for a human perspective be instantaneous but the speed of light dictates that it cant fire before the energy is created.

Now it might be that the laser discharges a stored sum of energy and that creates the heat after the discharge.

As for ballistics etc there must be something to ignite or order the munition to be fired, but that would be so small in terms of heat. Then the heat would come from the munition at the time of being fired.

If we apply this model to the idea of heat damage. You could model a system that applies damage as a result of heat to each individual section of the mech and if that sections heat threshold is exceeded then the damage could be caused to that section. It would encourage spreading weapons and using the arms more. Also placement of heat sinks would become more important. BUT this would be far far to complex for the game and confusing to set out on the HUD. but fascinating all the same. Sort of want a hardcore version with heat modeled for each weapon and section

[SteelBruiser]

I'm sure glad you folks don't design real weapon systems. Real weapon systems are designed to send as much fire power down range in as little time as possible with as little mechanical interference as possible. Weapons are not designed to be "fair" in respect to other weapons already out there. They are designed to out perform what's out there. But in this game, instead of developing tactics to beat the new systems or buying them yourselves, you spend ungodly hours trying to figure out a way to change physics or to penalize the newer systems in order to be "fair" to the older systems! It's thinking like this that is part to blame for the horrendous, and game-wise boring, trench warfare of WWI. Without new tactics and both sides running nearly identical weapons, the war went nowhere. No real soldier wants a weapon that's just equal the the enemy's. That's plain stupid.

My suggestion for allowing some of the older systems to remain viable, would be to allow the purchase of system mods, like hard points to plug into the mech. This option would come into play after they've fallen significantly behind in system design. I know this would go against the lore but hey, this game isn't 100% lore true anyway and it would be more exciting if one could purchase a chassis mod or two to keep the old mech in the game for another season or two. It's what most militaries do. They'll modify the crap out of a current successful system base before they go through the expense of building a new one. Check out the history of the B-52 bomber for example.

If you still want to push for a penalty system then keep it somewhat real. Energy weapons depend on the energy source to function, that being the engine. If your weapons pull too much energy from the engine and battery system, your mech should slow down, not good in a battle but better than just shutting down. Maybe even have the ability to set the priority between weapons firing or mech movement. Ballistics don't rely on the engine except get them to the battlefield, so their use should have no engine effect except the amount of horse power required to transport them, but that is covered in the mechs overall tonnage. As for the heat issue, military balistics will generally fire efficiently right up to failure due to heat. They have two main types of failure, seizure/jamming and barrel meltdown/bursting. One would be temporary and the other is final for that weapon. If a barrel is run up to seizure/jamming too many times in a period it would have a higher chance of meltdown/bursting.

Anyway, in my mind the game is already pretty fair. Everyone can buy and run the same "OP" weapons systems as everyone else. And everyone can learn new tactics to take out these same systems. That's what the game is all about! I'm sure there has to be more things to spend mindless hours doing besides trying to twist physics and rules to fit your individual game style or favorite mech...like playing the game and develop new tactics or going outside.

[El Bandito]

Steve Pryde, on 26 August 2016 - 03:56 AM, said:

The problem ist that I don't believe that PGI can do that because they haven't just the knowledge for it. It's just too much work for them, a "simple" second energy draw bar is way less work for them. But yeah, a system like from Greyhart would be just the best. Easy understandable, even for beginner. Let a pilot do a big hot alpha strike but then he barely can move into cover because he so slow that he even can't move his mech and his hud and crosshair is unuseable for the next alpha that brings you 100% into shutdown.

TBF, PGI already knows how to create some effects that can be used as simulated heat penalty, such as steam rising, aim sway, lock breaking, movement and twist/turn speed decrease, heatsink exploding etc... Now the big issue is whether they can link those effects with the rising heat meter.

[AztecD]

They can start by making the mech more sluggish at high heat, i mean i see laservomit mechs run around like all is good at 90+ heat, slower speed, slower response something anything

[Greyhart]

AztecD, on 26 August 2016 - 08:15 AM, said:

They can start by making the mech more sluggish at high heat, i mean i see laservomit mechs run around like all is good at 90+ heat, slower speed, slower response something anything

Just some simple draw backs might change the balance of the game all together.

[Hotthedd]

Khobai, on 26 August 2016 - 03:40 AM, said:

nope. that makes absolutely no sense. how is heat being generated if the weapon hasnt fired? heat time travel?

heat should generate at the same time the weapon fires because the weapon firing is whats generating the heat.

thats basic thermodynamics.



and instead of energy draw what this game needs is a fixed heat scale and actual heat scale penalties.

mechs should have a heat buffer based on how many heatsinks they have. if you exceed your heat buffer youd start suffering heat penalties like reduced movement speed, reduced weapon cooldown, reduced sensor effectiveness, etc...

If we are going to stay with basic thermodynamics, then the number of heat sinks should not make a difference on the heat cap. More heat sinks simply means faster dissipation.

[Davegt27]

well the idea of punishing players for playing your game is kind of a screw balled idea

I would be more in favor of a real world type system

hard points system like all Jet air craft have

the ADL (armament datam line) would run down the center of the Mech
all your heaviest weapons can be mounted close to this line

the further from the ADL the lighter the weapon must be

"Rounds Limiter" to keep ammo weapons from burning out there hardware they would have a rounds limiter

also could be called rate of fire limiter
continuous fire UAC5's at this rate or rounds limiter rate at "XX" rate

just a few ideas

[Greyhart]

Davegt27, on 06 September 2016 - 05:33 AM, said:

well the idea of punishing players for playing your game is kind of a screw balled idea

I am a bit lost on how people having to make choices with consequences is punishing them. by that logic the shutdown and damage when you overheat should be removed too. In fact why have heat at all?

the other ideas are interesting.

[Khobai]

Quote

If we are going to stay with basic thermodynamics, then the number of heat sinks should not make a difference on the heat cap. More heat sinks simply means faster dissipation.

then heat capacity should be based on the size of the mech. lights should have the lowest heat capacity and assaults should have the highest heat capacity.

because more bulk = more heat capacity

the heat capacity of a mech should be based on its tonnage (i.e. heat capacity = 30 + tonnage/5)

the heat dissipation of a mech should be based on how many heatsinks it has

Edited by Khobai, 07 September 2016 - 12:58 AM.

[Mazzyplz]

i would like hud flicker and maybe some other things like hud turning more red, but becoming slower? no i think that only complicates this game more and it's complicated enough for new players

besides i think it's lame.

[Hotthedd]

Khobai, on 07 September 2016 - 12:51 AM, said:

then heat capacity should be based on the size of the mech. lights should have the lowest heat capacity and assaults should have the highest heat capacity.

because more bulk = more heat capacity

the heat capacity of a mech should be based on its tonnage (i.e. heat capacity = 30 + tonnage/5)

the heat dissipation of a mech should be based on how many heatsinks it has

No, not really.

Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius (at sea level) whether it is one liter or one thousand liters.
Larger 'mechs have more tonnage, but part of that tonnage is more myomers (which produce the heat from 'mech movement), so it is not a comparison of boiling a smaller pot of water on the same stove top as a larger pot of water. The larger pot is on a larger stove, so to speak.

[Khobai]

Quote

Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius (at sea level) whether it is one liter or one thousand liters.

but it takes 1000 times more heat energy to boil one thousand liters of water as opposed to one liter of water

so yes. derp.



the same should apply to mechs. the heat capacity of mechs should be based on their size. the larger the mech is the more heat energy it can store.

Edited by Khobai, 07 September 2016 - 05:03 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Khobai, on 07 September 2016 - 04:53 AM, said:

but it takes 1000 times more heat to boil if its one thousand liters of water as opposed to one liter

so yes

It takes exactly the same amount of heat, it just requires more energy. (Which is why bigger 'mechs need bigger engines to move at the same speed as smaller 'mechs with smaller engines)
The internal structure of the 'mech distributes that same amount of heat throughout the 'mech. A 100T 'mech has roughly the same percentage of volume of heating elements (myomers, electronic circuits, etc.) as a 20T 'mech.
Therefore, although there is more mass to be heated, there is more stuff to heat it up.

[Khobai]

Quote

It takes exactly the same amount of heat, it just requires more energy.

heat is energy you derp

go take a chemistry class

[ScarecrowES]

Funny... I have a topic about adapting the ED mechanics to bring the TT heat system into the game over on the ED PTS boards, and it actually outlines the types of penalties we can use.

Hate it when folks argue with me about how such a system would not work, and then post the exact same concept later on .

Seriously though, if you really want to fix the heat system AND you like the idea of progressive penalties, go check out my TT system proposal on the PTS forum.

The current ED mechanics could be adjusted and the system could be put on the PTS to test within a day.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Hotthedd, on 07 September 2016 - 05:00 AM, said:

It takes exactly the same amount of heat, it just requires more energy. (Which is why bigger 'mechs need bigger engines to move at the same speed as smaller 'mechs with smaller engines)
The internal structure of the 'mech distributes that same amount of heat throughout the 'mech. A 100T 'mech has roughly the same percentage of volume of heating elements (myomers, electronic circuits, etc.) as a 20T 'mech.
Therefore, although there is more mass to be heated, there is more stuff to heat it up.

Rate of heat transfer formula is K*A*(T1-T2)/D

So Khobai is on the money. A smaller mech with the same number of heat-sinks should theoretically transfer heat faster. Represented as surface Area.


If we knew the numbers Each mech would theoretically all have different heat transfer rates. In this game err........well I assume that doesn't really matter.

[Khobai]

well heat sinks are what allow for efficient exchange of heat between the mech and its surroundings

presumably heatsinks are placed on the exterior of the mech

so heatsinks would still largely effect dissipation... although the surface area of the mech should effect dissipation too.


heat capacity would be affected by the overall size of the mech. because it has more mass, a larger mech would require more heat energy for it to reach the same temperature as a lighter mech. so larger mechs should have higher capacity than lighter mechs.

[ScarecrowES]

Khobai, on 07 September 2016 - 04:53 AM, said:

but it takes 1000 times more heat energy to boil one thousand liters of water as opposed to one liter of water

so yes. derp.



the same should apply to mechs. the heat capacity of mechs should be based on their size. the larger the mech is the more heat energy it can store.

Just to dispel confusion. Mech engines, in theory, are capable of producing an infinite amount of energy. The mech could reasonably fire as many weapons as it could hold. However, each weapon generates heat... as does moving, jumping etc. And if the mech chassis accumulates too much heat, if will explode it's ammunition stores, fry it's myomer fibers, and cook the pilot. A mech chassis can only take so much heat.

Heat sinks determine capacity, not chassis size, because heat sinks are what removes the created heat from the chassis and prevents bad things from happening.

This is part of the investment balancing mechanic of BT, and is absolutely necessary for the balance system to function.

[Hotthedd]

Khobai, on 07 September 2016 - 05:05 AM, said:

heat is energy you derp

go take a chemistry class

Wow.

I am surprised at you, Khobai.

Heat is one form of energy, true, but in this case it is waste energy (not used as a power source).

I agree with you that there needs to be a heat scale with graduated penalties. If we actually had that in game there would be no need to defy physics and give larger 'mechs a magical heat capacity. Smaller 'mechs would necessarily need to run as cool as possible to keep their only advantage (speed and maneuverability), and they rely most on energy weapons.

i would be amenable (per basic thermodynamics) to having the surface area of a 'mech allow faster dissipation, but the fact is that heat is a constant.

If you want to be cranky, we really don't have to discuss the matter further. We actually agree on more than we don't, but if you want larger 'mechs to have a heat cap advantage, you are going to need different science to back it up.

Have a great day.

BLOOD WOLF, on 07 September 2016 - 05:08 AM, said:

Rate of heat transfer formula is K*A*(T1-T2)/D

So Khobai is on the money. A smaller mech with the same number of heat-sinks should theoretically transfer heat faster. Represented as surface Area.


If we knew the numbers Each mech would theoretically all have different heat transfer rates. In this game err........well I assume that doesn't really matter.

Thanks, but we are not talking about heat transfer (dissipation), we are talking about the temperature maximum (heat cap).

Khobai, on 07 September 2016 - 05:12 AM, said:

well heat sinks are what allow for efficient exchange of heat between the mech and its surroundings

presumably heatsinks are placed on the exterior of the mech

so heatsinks would still largely effect dissipation... although the surface area of the mech should effect dissipation too.


heat capacity would be affected by the overall size of the mech. because it has more mass, a larger mech would require more heat energy for it to reach the same temperature as a lighter mech. so larger mechs should have higher capacity than lighter mechs.

And what I am saying is that it DOES use more energy to do the same thing as a lighter 'mech.

[Khobai]

i apologize I didnt mean to lash out like that.

Quote

Thanks, but we are not talking about heat transfer (dissipation), we are talking about the temperature maximum (heat cap)

Ok now that youve used the word temperature I understand what you mean better.

Even though the assault mech and light mech overheat at the same temperature, it still requires more waste heat to bring an assault mech upto temperature than a light mech simply because it has more mass. So for an assault mech to overheat should require much more waste heat than for a light mech to overheat.

Remember the heatscale in a mech isnt measuring temperature, its measuring heat capacity. Were just arguing that its the actual mass of the mech that would store the waste heat rather than the heatsinks. The heatsinks dissipate heat not store it.

Using your water analogy of 1000 liters of water as opposed to 1 liter of water. Both are 100 C but it requires much more energy to bring 1000 liters of water upto temperature than 1 liter. So the 1000 liters has a higher capacity for holding heat energy.


As for heat dissipation, the higher % surface area a mech has, the faster it should dissipate heat. heatsinks should basically just increase surface area; because thats how heatsinks work theyre specially shaped so they increase surface area and transfer heat more efficiently.

lighter mechs in general would have more efficient base heat dissipation due to a higher % of surface area. although heavier mechs would be able to mount way more heatsinks which would give them a higher surface area.

Edited by Khobai, 07 September 2016 - 05:37 AM.