39 replies to this topic

[kapusta11]

Khobai, on 11 July 2017 - 01:40 PM, said:

A lot of the time you do though. Especially using the example of AC20s. If im within like 200m with an AC20 im pretty much never going to miss where im aiming for..

Like I said we needed closer to triple armor/structure to even being to cancel out perfect aiming/convergence.

You do, huh? Maybe you'll post a screenshot of your AC20 accuracy stat then?

[Alexander of Macedon]

Yeah, if there was one thing that piggy could do to drastically improve combat, it would be removing instant perfect convergence. That wouldn't solve all of the problems, but it would do a hell of a lot for the engine imbalance and PPFLD dominance.

[davoodoo]

Khobai, on 11 July 2017 - 01:34 PM, said:

You cant aim for someones CT in tabletop though. Thats what youre forgetting.

You can with huge penatly if you mount targeting computer.

[Khobai]

Quote

You can with huge penatly if you mount targeting computer.

Yes and anyones whos used targeting computers in battletech knows how crazy broken they are lol

Especially in earlier editions of battletech where clan large pulse lasers stacked with targeting computers.

They did fix that in later editions though

You could also aim at specific locations if a mech was prone. And that generally meant you killed the mech that was prone. Being able to aim for specific locations was extremely powerful in battletech. Just like it is in MWO, because they had to double/armor structure, and it still wasnt enough.

Which is why I feel the ISXL needs to be able to survive side torso destruction. But its way too easy to kill side torsos.

Edited by Khobai, 11 July 2017 - 01:55 PM.

[davoodoo]

Khobai, on 11 July 2017 - 01:44 PM, said:

Yes and anyones whos used targeting computers in battletech knows how crazy broken then are lol

Especially in earlier editions of battletech where clan large pulse lasers stacked with targeting computers.

They did fix that in later editions though

Well its not like you can just pop 1 ton 1 crit computer...

"The Targeting Computer can be used to help aim all direct fire weapons, including most energy and ballistic weapons. This results in a -1 to-hit modifier for all eligible weapons that tie in, or the ability to aim for a location that is not the head with a +3 to-hit penalty. Clan Targeting Computers weigh one ton and occupy one critical slot for every five tons of equipment they control (rounded up), while a comparable Inner Sphere version weighs one ton and occupies one critical slot for every four tons it controls (also rounded up)."

So typical clan laservomit would be 18 tons which would require extra 4 tons 4 crits of computer and gl hitting at +3 penatly...
But this was mech which would need to get nice and comfy within 150m so gl not being torn apart instantly with such a poor weaponry.

Edited by davoodoo, 11 July 2017 - 01:48 PM.

[FupDup]

Alexander of Macedon, on 11 July 2017 - 01:42 PM, said:

Yeah, if there was one thing that piggy could do to drastically improve combat, it would be removing instant perfect convergence. That wouldn't solve all of the problems, but it would do a hell of a lot for the engine imbalance and PPFLD dominance.

PPFLD dominance isn't some MWO or convergence-based thing. It's straight out of TT itself that weapons with the most damage to a single hitbox (PPC, Gauss, AC/20, etc.) are generally the best. In fact, I'd go as far to say that convergence allows groups of smaller weapons to actually stand a fighting chance against the big guns in this game and other MW games.

[davoodoo]

Imo, just make weapons relatively accurate within optimal range.

Edited by davoodoo, 11 July 2017 - 01:54 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

PPFLD dominance isn't some MWO or convergence-based thing. It's straight out of TT itself that weapons with the most damage to a single hitbox (PPC, Gauss, AC/20, etc.) are generally the best. In fact, I'd go as far to say that convergence allows groups of smaller weapons to actually stand a fighting chance against the big guns in this game and other MW games.

PPFLD is far more dominant in MWO though. because if you fire two AC20s in MWO they both hit the same location you aimed at. But if you fire two AC20s in tabletop, odds are theyre going to hit different locations, and neither one may hit the location you want.

In fact weapons like LBX were useful in tabletop specifically for that reason. Because you rolled a different hit location for each submunition. So LBX could help you hit a specific location with a high degree of probability. With the goal of getting critical hits on locations with open armor, especially engine crits. Critseeking was an important part of battletech and they havent really translated that well into MWO.

Edited by Khobai, 11 July 2017 - 02:00 PM.

[Tarogato]

None of this makes any sense to me. It's backwards.

If you're going to have engine type influence heat capacity (or internal heatsink capacity) then STD engines should be the worst because they are the smallest (less surface area, less volume, more dense, heavier materials), and ^(IS)XL should be the best, because they are the largest. To have STD have superior cooling to an XL seems counter-intuitive.

Khobai, on 11 July 2017 - 01:34 PM, said:

You cant aim for someones CT in tabletop though. Thats what youre forgetting.

You can against immobile mechs, actually. There's a note on page 110 of Total Warfare has a note about "aimed shots" , where you can call a specific location, even the cockpit. And if you have a Targeting Computer, you can make an aimed shot on mobile mechs as well (except the cockpit), it just adds a +3 to-hit.

Edited by Tarogato, 11 July 2017 - 02:28 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Tarogato, on 11 July 2017 - 02:24 PM, said:

None of this makes any sense to me. It's backwards.

If you're going to have engine type influence heat capacity (or internal heatsink capacity) then STD engines should be the worst because they are the smallest (less surface area, less volume, more dense, heavier materials), and ^(IS)XL should be the best, because they are the largest. To have STD have superior cooling to an XL seems counter-intuitive.

More mass in smaller space = greater density = better sink (materials pending), worse radiator.
Less mass in greater space = greater surface area = better radiator, worse sink.

[Tarogato]

Yeonne Greene, on 11 July 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

More mass in smaller space = greater density = better sink (materials pending), worse radiator.
Less mass in greater space = greater surface area = better radiator, worse sink.

As far as I'm aware, the only major thing that does change size and weight between the types is the radiation shielding. It's tungsten carbide in STDs, and replaced/reinforced with bulky crystalline polymers in XLs, while LEs also use magnetic shielding and layered shielding to slim down on bulk.

[davoodoo]

Either way shielding cant be conductive to heat cause that would kinda defeat the point of having shielding so neither would be good heat sink...

[Y E O N N E]

Tarogato, on 11 July 2017 - 03:03 PM, said:

As far as I'm aware, the only major thing that does change size and weight between the types is the radiation shielding. It's tungsten carbide in STDs, and replaced/reinforced with bulky crystalline polymers in XLs, while LEs also use magnetic shielding and layered shielding to slim down on bulk.

I mean, without knowing what the specific heat capacity on the crystalline polymer is, I'm going to hazard a guess and say that tungsten carbide has a higher one on account of most polymers being inferior to metals in that category. And on the chance that I'm wrong on that count, the crystalline polymer is space magic dust anyway.

Also, magnetic fields don't stop heat radiating out of your system. If they did, you and everybody within the immediate orbital region would be dead because that's one helluva magnetic field.

[Bolide]

I hear what most of you are saying, and I agree Heat Capacity is not the only balance problem in the game (Alphas, Quirks, ect).

My point here is to make sure there is still a spot in mech design for a standard engine. After all, both Clans and Inner Sphere continued using them as technology advanced. There should be a reason why other than cost.

I want IS to still use Std engine even though Light Engines will be better in most circumstances, just like I want IS to continue to use XL engines (when you need all the speed you can get or are a support mech and won't take much fire).

Heat Sinks on the other hand, only a handful of designs used regular Heat Sinks after Double Heat Sinks were available.

As far as "that's not cannon" then think about it. The TT heat system was vastly simplified. Who is to say whether your mech's "30" heat capacity and sinking "20" heat from 10 DHS is really the same in all situations. After all, I'd think a Medium mech will a 200 engine would struggle to generate enough power to fire 3 PPC's, whereas it might be optimal for an Awesome sporting a 240 engine. Nothing in MWO has to be "cannon" (*cough* ECM prevent locks). Think outside the box.

Edited by Bolide, 11 July 2017 - 05:58 PM.

[Snowbluff]

Yeonne Greene, on 11 July 2017 - 04:08 PM, said:

I mean, without knowing what the specific heat capacity on the crystalline polymer is, I'm going to hazard a guess and say that tungsten carbide has a higher one on account of most polymers being inferior to metals in that category. And on the chance that I'm wrong on that count, the crystalline polymer is space magic dust anyway.

Also, magnetic fields don't stop heat radiating out of your system. If they did, you and everybody within the immediate orbital region would be dead because that's one helluva magnetic field.

He's right, the fusion engines re only different due to their shielding. The LFEs have some space voodoo involving an energy damper of some kind.

Quote

Using the Lostech protective energy damping grid of the Steiner Stadium on Solaris VII as a base, Blackwell engineers were able to reduce the level of physical shielding with the energy field assisting in keeping the engine's fusion reaction in check. As rumors of this technology began to leak out in 3053, Archon-Prince Victor Steiner-Davion of the Federated Commonwealth entered into protracted and ultimately fruitless negotiations with Blackwell, becoming apparent either the rumors were false or Blackwell would not sell the technology to anybody outside of the Dragoons.

[Vellron2005]

Bolide, on 11 July 2017 - 08:21 AM, said:

Been a while since I've posted wishes on the forum, figured I would mention some stuff before new engines go live.

I would like to see engine types influence a mech's base heat capacity, based on tonnage.

Currently all that matters is how many additional heat sinks you can cram on. If you think about it that doesn't make much sense. The mass of an object should determine it's capacity to retain heat (assuming equal materials). A 1 kg chunk of metal contains less energy than 2 kg of same.

I'm not saying that an XL engine should have half the capacity of a Standard, but it should have enough less to make the standard engine a consideration for some builds.

With the new Light Fusion engine available soon this will provide a niche for all three types in the inner sphere arsenal. XL for long range or most speed, Light for mix of speed and brawling, and Std for pressing in and taking hits.

Clan will still have two engines, but their XL engine is lighter and less vulnerable than IS XL, with the drawback of less heat capacity than the Inner sphere Light Engine.

If PGI really wanted to go nuts they could take into account surface area to increase or decrease heat dissipation rates. Again, as a modifier, not as a base. The same could be applied to heat sinks.

Additionally, heat sinks and gyro's in the engine could increase capacity (to help lighten the curve) but heat sinks in the mech itself would not. They only increase dissipation, not capacity.

You could also apply a modifier to the dissipation of heat sinks based on crit space.

So it would look like this.


Engine Heat Capacity: Std > Light > XL (Clan and IS)

Engine Heat Dissipation: IS XL > Clan XL and IS Light > Standard

Heat Sink Dissipation: IS Double > Clan Double > Standard

These changes would also make it possible to have compact heat sinks and compact engines if that tech were to be developed and released as well.

Duuude, don't give the balance overlords ideas like that! Next thing you know, there will be a game-wide "engine heat rebalancing" that will yet again nerf a bunch of mechs like the engine decoupling did..

Don't give them ideas..

[evilauthor]

Pedant mode activated!

Despite being called "Heat SINKs", Battletech heat sinks are cannonically not really heat sinks. They're more like industrial air conditioners or car radiators in that they take heat generated from throughout the mech, and dump it into the outside air. Changing your engine mass isn't really going to effect your mech's ability to move heat outside itself.

This is the reason why leg mounted heat sinks work better in water; water is better at carrying away heat that air. And why cold environments help cool your mech better than hot environments; there's a greater heat differential between the mech's internals and the outside air in cold maps.

[Natred]

Nope

[davoodoo]

evilauthor, on 12 July 2017 - 06:50 AM, said:

Despite being called "Heat SINKs", Battletech heat sinks are cannonically not really heat sinks. They're more like industrial air conditioners or car radiators in that they take heat generated from throughout the mech, and dump it into the outside air. Changing your engine mass isn't really going to effect your mech's ability to move heat outside itself.

Radiator doesnt sound cool i guess.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Why not just give them extra internal heatsink every 100 points they go up in rating? Not a heatsink slot, but a heatsink proper.

So something like:

100 to 120: 5 heatsinks
125 to 145: 6
150 to 170: 7
175 to 195: 8
200 to 220: 10
225 to 245: 11
250 to 295: 12
300+: 13

Or make it simple and give all standards a flat +2 heatsinks.