128 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

In case you still don't understand why heat gen is not the same as heat containment, let's walkthrough a word problem using mat3049's analogy.

Person A makes $5 a second and has a wallet that can carry $50.
Person B makes $4 a second and has a wallet that can carry $40 BUT this person also gets a 20% discount on all items.

Now, say these two people want to buy something that is $20 dollars, how long will it take both persons to be able to buy this item considering Person B gets a discount (meaning it only costs $16 for Person B )? The answer is it takes them the same amount of time (answer: 4s). Now, let's say they both have full wallets (meaning Person A has $50, and Person B has $40) and they want to buy something worth $50, can they both buy it? The answer is again yes, because Person B has a discount for 20% making something that costs $50 for Person A only costs Person B $40.

For this analogy, income is dissipation, wallet size is heat capacity, and heat generation is your price of an item. Now given that, while they work differently, you need BOTH dissipation and heat capacity to match the effect of heat generation and generally you need a higher percentage of both to match it (again, 1000 / (100 - heat gen %) is the formula you want). With that said, they should make cool run match the percentage gain of heat containment to follow suit.

FupDup, on 27 July 2017 - 09:42 AM, said:

I still don't see much reason not to get all three at the same time (Heat Gen + Heat Cont + Cool Run) unless you're running a particularly cool build. If you're laser or PPC vomiting then you definitely need all of the heat efficiency you can get.

Depends on the mech, honestly I prefer going all the way through survival rather than dealing with ops depending on the mech.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 27 July 2017 - 11:04 AM.

[FupDup]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 27 July 2017 - 10:50 AM, said:

In case you still don't understand why heat gen is not the same as heat containment, let's walkthrough a word problem using mat3049's analogy.

Person A makes $5 a second and has a wallet that can carry $50.
Person B makes $4 a second and has a wallet that can carry $40 BUT this person also gets a 20% discount on all items.

Now, say these two people want to buy something that is $20 dollars, how long will it take both persons to be able to buy this item considering Person B gets a discount (meaning it only costs $16 for Person B )? The answer is it takes them the same amount of time (answer: 4s). Now, let's say they both have full wallets (meaning Person A has $50, and Person B has $40) and they want to buy something worth $50, can they both buy it? The answer is again yes, because Person B has a discount for 20% making something that costs $50 for Person A only costs Person B $40.

For this analogy, income is dissipation, wallet size is heat capacity, and heat generation is your price of an item. Now given that, while they work differently, you need BOTH dissipation and heat capacity to match the effect of heat generation and generally you need a higher percentage of both to match it (again, 1000 / (100 - heat gen %) is the formula you want).


Depends on the mech, honestly I prefer going all the way through survival rather than dealing with ops depending on the mech.

You can grab nearly all of survival, heat gen, and ops at the same time (33 firepower, 32 survival, 20 ops, 6 left over for whatever you want like consumables or more firepower).

https://tarogato-mwo...0d-2dd7a59a061b

Edited by FupDup, 27 July 2017 - 11:05 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

FupDup, on 27 July 2017 - 11:04 AM, said:

You can grab nearly all of survival, heat gen, and ops at the same time (33 firepower, 32 survival, 20 ops, 6 left over for whatever you want like consumables or more firepower).

https://tarogato-mwo...0d-2dd7a59a061b

You are missing aux then, and the cool shots and strikes are worth more than ops imo. It also means you are missing good things like velocity or laser duration quirks.

For example this would be one of my ERLL boat trees: https://tarogato-mwo...0d-91a514ded93d
Though for that depending on the mech I may drop survival for ops like this: https://tarogato-mwo...0d-c77ffbb48196

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 27 July 2017 - 11:19 AM.

[FupDup]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 27 July 2017 - 11:15 AM, said:

You are missing aux then, and the cool shots and strikes are worth more than ops imo. It also means you are missing good things like velocity or laser duration quirks.

For example this would be one of my ERLL boat trees: https://tarogato-mwo...0d-91a514ded93d
Though for that depending on the mech I may drop survival for ops like this: https://tarogato-mwo...0d-c77ffbb48196

But I don't wanna give up my precious Spacebucks on money sinks. -.-

[Quicksilver Aberration]

FupDup, on 27 July 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

But I don't wanna give up my precious Spacebucks on money sinks. -.-

I mean they don't cost money if you use them in comp play , not that I spend most of my time there, but I don't wanna respec things just for comp play.

[Tarogato]

Chris Lowrey, on 17 May 2017 - 04:55 PM, said:

Don't want to get in the way of the discussion, but just want to poke in and say that Heat Containment factors in the total heat threshold of the 'Mech (Base + Value gained through your heatsinks,)

Is that the intended behaviour? Because that's not how Heat Containment works in game. At least, according to our testing. Check the highlighted values here, they show a disparity:




I modeled MWO's heat system in a spreadsheet to get the mathematically expected values and measured them against the in-game results. Everything checks out except for Heat Containment.

Also, I find it strange that in-engine integral "TruDub" heatsinks count as 2.0 capacity instead of 1.5 capacity, which is not noted in the heatsink properties XML (unlike the 0.20 vs 0.15 dissipation rates, which are clearly noted there)





Other people mentioning the Heat Containment behaviour:

MadBadger, on 19 May 2017 - 02:19 AM, said:

@Chris Lowrey:

Actually, fairly extensive testing done in this guide: https://steamcommuni...s/?id=686548357 says that as of mid-2016, Heat Containment only applied to the 30 Base Heat Capacity of a mech.

Thus the 15% bonus from Heat Containment in operations would only add a net 4.5 heat capacity to a mech.

I hope to figure out an accurate way to test this myself, in the meantime this would seem to conflict with your comment that it applies to Base Mech + Heat Sinks.

Palfatreos, on 23 May 2017 - 04:21 AM, said:

idk about cool run but i disagree about that heat contaiment factors heatsink instead it onyl factors the 30 base mech heat capacity.

Source: https://steamcommuni...s/?id=686548357

personal testing
https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__5755105
https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__5755738

[Cato Phoenix]

It's been a while since I've done these calculations, but percentagewise, it seemed to be that Heat Gen and Cool Run were near equivalent for heat efficiency and time to cooling.

So 2% of Heat gen was roughly equal to 2% of Cool Run. However, due to the percentages you need like 2.5 nodes of heat gen to equal 1 node of cool run. So the math to determine the per/node cost for heat efficiency differs, especially since not all the nodes in those trees have the same 'cost', i.e. the same junk-node requirement.

Overall - if you're running a hot build you should probably not be sacrificing either of these.

[Vxheous]

FupDup, on 27 July 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

But I don't wanna give up my precious Spacebucks on money sinks. -.-

When you're sitting on half a billion+ of C-bills, dropping airstrikes and using coolshots is a no brainer

[Mechrophilia]

The benefit of +coolrun depends on how many heatsinks you have (more hatsinks=more benefit). The benefit of -heatgen depends on how much heat your weapons produce (more heat=more benefit). The Weapons tree has alot of other useful nodes, whereas the operations tree has more gabage-nodes blocking your path. The choice is yours.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Cato Phoenix, on 27 July 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

So 2% of Heat gen was roughly equal to 2% of Cool Run.

That's because the difference is minor in the low percentages due to being somewhat of an exponential curve as heat gen improves.

• at 2% heat gen, ~2.04% cool run is needed
  
• at 10% heat gen, ~11.111% cool run is needed
  
• at 20% heat gen, 25% cool run is needed

Mechrophilia, on 27 July 2017 - 07:16 PM, said:

The benefit of +coolrun depends on how many heatsinks you have (more hatsinks=more benefit). The benefit of -heatgen depends on how much heat your weapons produce (more heat=more benefit). The Weapons tree has alot of other useful nodes, whereas the operations tree has more gabage-nodes blocking your path. The choice is yours.

Technically true, but negligent of its impact on DPS (the benefit to sustained DPS does not care about number of heat sinks or heat load).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 28 July 2017 - 08:12 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Cato Phoenix, on 27 July 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

It's been a while since I've done these calculations, but percentagewise, it seemed to be that Heat Gen and Cool Run were near equivalent for heat efficiency and time to cooling.

So 2% of Heat gen was roughly equal to 2% of Cool Run. However, due to the percentages you need like 2.5 nodes of heat gen to equal 1 node of cool run. So the math to determine the per/node cost for heat efficiency differs, especially since not all the nodes in those trees have the same 'cost', i.e. the same junk-node requirement.

Overall - if you're running a hot build you should probably not be sacrificing either of these.

But the math doesn't take into account real situations. Let me try to explain. I have a Banshee with 2 Snubs, 4 MLs and a AC/20 with 18 DHS. I don't have any skills on it yet. The energy armament on this is very spiky on heat and it will reach critical heat very quickly. This means I have to withdraw into cover every so often and wait until my heat bar goes down substantially.

Now due to the fact that my weapons are very spiky in how they generate heat, having weapons that do 10% heat per pull of the trigger isn't going to help all that much because even firing a single Snub PPC is going to generate something like 20% heat which is obviously more than that extra 10% of heat capacity I gain from Heat Gen.

Basically I gain almost nothing from heat gen because I still have to retreat into cover and cool down and I am going to be there for a substantial amount of time so that I can get my bar down to near zero. That being the case, having Cool Run would actually be useful because it will reduce the amount of time it takes for me to get my heat back to near zero.

So my point is that which skill is more useful is more dependent on how your using your mech or the skill than the math behind the skill itself.

I do however agree with your statement that you shouldn't neglect either, in fact there is rarely a situation where I feel that a mech runs too cool.

[process]

Viktor Drake, on 28 July 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:

Basically I gain almost nothing from heat gen because I still have to retreat into cover and cool down and I am going to be there for a substantial amount of time so that I can get my bar down to near zero. That being the case, having Cool Run would actually be useful because it will reduce the amount of time it takes for me to get my heat back to near zero.

The math actually makes heat gen more valuable in this exact scenario. In the comparison of heat gen to cool run, specifically for weapons fire, the actual weapon heat and cooling rate cancel out, leaving you with a lower time to cool off with heat gen.

Let's say you alpha your listed weapons: 6 + 20 + 13.6 = 39.6 heat. 18 DHS = 3.2 hps. The baseline time to dissipate 1 alpha is 39.6/3.2 = 12.375 seconds.

With heat gen, the time is (.895*39.6)/3.2 = 11.076 seconds.

With cool run, the time is 39.6/(1.1*3.2) = 11.25 seconds.


Basically with heat gen your weapons generate less heat, and as a result your heatsinks and heat capacity are proportionally more efficient than the benefit of cool run.

However, despite heat gen being objectively better for weapons fire, cool run takes fewer nodes to unlock, and benefits heat-generating equipment, so there are still good reasons to opt for cool run over heat gen.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

process, on 28 July 2017 - 07:23 AM, said:

The math actually makes heat gen more valuable in this exact scenario. In the comparison of heat gen to cool run, specifically for weapons fire, the actual weapon heat and cooling rate cancel out, leaving you with a lower time to cool off with heat gen.

Let's say you alpha your listed weapons: 6 + 20 + 13.6 = 39.6 heat. 18 DHS = 3.2 hps. The baseline time to dissipate 1 alpha is 39.6/3.2 = 12.375 seconds.

With heat gen, the time is (.895*39.6)/3.2 = 11.076 seconds.

With cool run, the time is 39.6/(1.1*3.2) = 11.25 seconds.

This person gets it.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 28 July 2017 - 07:31 AM.

[Wyald Katt]

So, there's no easy answer. Math it is! We all just need to do the math with and without skills and tinker until we find the happy balance with benefits/nodes invested.

Really, though, we need to stop saying X is worthless. Forget everything except the numbers. Do the math for the values for comparison.

And then, come the opinions and prioritizing what you feel is best for your playstyle, all that. But enjoy the math and the numbers part. They won't lie. Because then it's less math and more accounting and statistics. Whatever.

[Shifty McSwift]

Wyald Katt, on 28 July 2017 - 08:03 AM, said:

So, there's no easy answer. Math it is! We all just need to do the math with and without skills and tinker until we find the happy balance with benefits/nodes invested.

Really, though, we need to stop saying X is worthless. Forget everything except the numbers. Do the math for the values for comparison.

And then, come the opinions and prioritizing what you feel is best for your playstyle, all that. But enjoy the math and the numbers part. They won't lie. Because then it's less math and more accounting and statistics. Whatever.

I do love delving into the mechanics of gaming, particularly if my virtual life is constantly on the line

But I always find the funnest way is trial by fire, its why I rarely look up meta builds and the like, I tend more to settle on what works for me in practice, then look and ask around about what kinds of things work the best for that style, even if it is working for me, just for perspective.

In other words I rarely "do the math" but damn do I appreciate when people go the effort of doing so and share their findings. Champion effort stuff it is.

Edited by Shifty McSwift, 28 July 2017 - 11:12 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 27 July 2017 - 11:15 AM, said:

You are missing aux then, and the cool shots and strikes are worth more than ops imo. It also means you are missing good things like velocity or laser duration quirks.

For example this would be one of my ERLL boat trees: https://tarogato-mwo...0d-91a514ded93d
Though for that depending on the mech I may drop survival for ops like this: https://tarogato-mwo...0d-c77ffbb48196

I would always point out however that you're spending 8 pts on right wing of Survival Tree for 3 Skeletal Density and 1 Armor Hardening perk.

On any mech you'd take that's at most 4 structure on CT, 3 on ST and 1 point of armor. Given how crits deal with structure you're spending 8 points to get 2 or 3 viable HP per torso location, give or take.

There's some mechs like the Roughneck and Zeus that have so much structure quirks that the payoff starts to be worth it but is there nowhere else you wouldn't get better use out of those 8 points?

Every bit helps, absolutely, but I can't help but wonder if the last 3 Cooldown quirks and 5 hard break/kinetic burst/5% anchor turn might not give more real benefits.

Edited by MischiefSC, 28 July 2017 - 12:12 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MischiefSC, on 28 July 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

I would always point out however that you're spending 8 pts on right wing of Survival Tree for 3 Skeletal Density and 1 Armor Hardening perk.

On any mech you'd take that's at most 4 structure on CT, 3 on ST and 1 point of armor. Given how crits deal with structure you're spending 8 points to get 2 or 3 viable HP per torso location, give or take.

There's some mechs like the Roughneck and Zeus that have so much structure quirks that the payoff starts to be worth it but is there nowhere else you wouldn't get better use out of those 8 points?

Every bit helps, absolutely, but I can't help but wonder if the last 3 Cooldown quirks and 5 hard break/kinetic burst/5% anchor turn might not give more real benefits.

Honestly whether structure or armor is more valuable depends on whether they round on the percents or not and whether the ratio is static for all mechs. 1% of armor is worth 2.3% of structure is what it boils down to (though that isn't quite correct due to critting out components). That said while the cooldown may be worth it, messing with any of the mobility quirks is most certainly not worth it for any of the heavier laser boats. So yeah that tree may not be optimized but the real point is it would be in survival as opposed to anything else.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 28 July 2017 - 12:32 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

MischiefSC, on 28 July 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

I would always point out however that you're spending 8 pts on right wing of Survival Tree for 3 Skeletal Density and 1 Armor Hardening perk.

On any mech you'd take that's at most 4 structure on CT, 3 on ST and 1 point of armor. Given how crits deal with structure you're spending 8 points to get 2 or 3 viable HP per torso location, give or take.

There's some mechs like the Roughneck and Zeus that have so much structure quirks that the payoff starts to be worth it but is there nowhere else you wouldn't get better use out of those 8 points?

Every bit helps, absolutely, but I can't help but wonder if the last 3 Cooldown quirks and 5 hard break/kinetic burst/5% anchor turn might not give more real benefits.

Honestly you have a very good point here. For Survival to be worth it you have to actually commit fully to Survival. picking only enough nodes to add 1-2 points of armor here or there is a waste points. 10-15% armor and structure here and there however makes you significantly more tanky.

So if your not going to fully commit probably at least 20-25 points into the Survival tree, your much better off adding it to Firepower, Mobility or Operations. Heck you would probably be better off adding it to Sensors, Jump Jets or Aux to be honest.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 28 July 2017 - 03:38 PM.

[FupDup]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 28 July 2017 - 12:30 PM, said:

Honestly whether structure or armor is more valuable depends on whether they round on the percents or not and whether the ratio is static for all mechs. 1% of armor is worth 2.3% of structure is what it boils down to (though that isn't quite correct due to critting out components). That said while the cooldown may be worth it, messing with any of the mobility quirks is most certainly not worth it for any of the heavier laser boats. So yeah that tree may not be optimized but the real point is it would be in survival as opposed to anything else.

PGI confirmed that armor/structure quirks never round at all. They can be and often are decimals in-game even if the mechlab UI doesn't display it.

[Khobai]

I dont like putting any points in survival tree because shock absorbance and reinforced casing are a waste of skill points.

Id rather put points into a skill tree where my points arnt wasted on pointless skills.