21 replies to this topic

[MrXanthios]

I was thinking that pgi could just let us mix shs and dhs, the option in the bottom left corner of the mechlab would just affect engine heatsinks. This would be a minor change and it could open some new interesting options for our builds, mainly on IS side I believe, since cDHS take 2 slots. I actually don't understand why we can't already do that, is there some rule from battletech lore that prevents the two types of heatsink to be mounted on a mech at the same time?

[LordNothing]

build rules.

[Yosharian]

You can read about the original Battletech lore regarding Double Heat Sinks here:

http://www.sarna.net...ouble_Heat_Sink

Essentially DHS are incompatible with SHS on any given mech.

[justcallme A S H]

The topics these days...

[MrXanthios]

justcallme A S H, on 14 June 2018 - 06:53 PM, said:

The topics these days...

The arrogance these days. Dude, I was just asking if there was a rule against it, and Yosharian kindly linked the source where I could find the information.

[justcallme A S H]

Yeah cause Sarna is "that" hard to search?

[FupDup]

It's a rule that never made any sense, given that the engine heatsinks on a mech are always the same size and tonnage regardless of which type is installed.

I wouldn't see any harm in allowing heatsink mixing, and on the bright side it lets PGI make SHS useful in a way that still preserves the DHS tax that 99.9% of mechs have to pay (PGI doesn't want to buff SHS used alone because that means fewer C-Bills get spent).

[Nightbird]

Similar to copper versus aluminium based heatsinks today, if you have cooling fluid run through both, the ions that leech into fliud causes galvanic corrosion and quickly destroys the component.

[Christof Romulus]

... Actually...
http://www.sarna.net...uble_Heat_Sinks

I'm just going to leave this here and walk away... since people are asking if using Sarna is so hard XD

[Savage Wolf]

Alright, people, we get it. There is a TT rule for it.

Then lets ask a better question then. Why does this rules exist? Especially in MWO? Why? In TT it was sometimes necesary to simplify rules so people could calculate heat dissapation in our heads. But we would be in MWO already with double heatsinks being 1.4 heatsinks.

So why not allow us to mix them?

While we are at it, why not mix Artemis and non-Artemis launchers?

[Kaeb Odellas]

For what it's worth, HBS BattleTech allows you to mix SHS and DHS.

[MurghSharduk]

Since IS DHS takes 3 slots, could it be a tad more efficient than 2-slot Clan DHS?
Something like 1.6?

[Sjorpha]

There's really no reason to keep that rule, it would really help giving SHS a niche if you could mix them.

[Khobai]

PGI would definitely have to nerf SHS if they allowed mixing of SHS and DHS. Because 1.2 SHS would be completely broken with 2.0 internal true dubs.

But otherwise I see no reason it shouldnt be allowed.


Mixed ISDHS/SHS
10 internal DHS = 20 dissipation
12 external SHS = 14.4 dissipation
Total dissipation = 34.4 dissipation for 12 tons and 12 crit slots

CDHS
10 internal DHS = 20 dissipation
10 external DHS = 15 dissipation
Total dissipation = 35 dissipation for 10 tons and 20 crit slots


See how broken that is? Thats way better than clan doubles. That would just be wrong.

SHS would have to be lowered to like 0.9 to be balanced with mixed DHS. With those nerfs, its doable though.

Edited by Khobai, 15 June 2018 - 04:49 AM.

[Mystere]

justcallme A S H, on 14 June 2018 - 07:04 PM, said:

Yeah cause Sarna is "that" hard to search?

Yeah, cause everyone playing MWO is a BT diehard.

Nightbird, on 14 June 2018 - 07:18 PM, said:

Similar to copper versus aluminium based heatsinks today, if you have cooling fluid run through both, the ions that leech into fliud causes galvanic corrosion and quickly destroys the component.

At least someone here knows materials science.

Savage Wolf, on 15 June 2018 - 02:18 AM, said:

Alright, people, we get it. There is a TT rule for it.

Then lets ask a better question then. Why does this rules exist? Especially in MWO? Why? In TT it was sometimes necesary to simplify rules so people could calculate heat dissapation in our heads. But we would be in MWO already with double heatsinks being 1.4 heatsinks.

So why not allow us to mix them?

See above.

Edited by Mystere, 15 June 2018 - 04:33 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Khobai, on 15 June 2018 - 03:23 AM, said:

PGI would definitely have to nerf SHS if they allowed mixing of SHS and DHS. Because 1.2 SHS would be completely broken with 2.0 internal true dubs.

But otherwise I see no reason it shouldnt be allowed.


Mixed ISDHS/SHS
10 internal DHS = 20 dissipation
11 external SHS = 13.2 dissipation
Total dissipation = 33.2 dissipation for 11 tons and 11 crit slots

CDHS
10 internal DHS = 20 dissipation
10 external DHS = 14 dissipation
Total dissipation = 34 dissipation for 10 tons and 20 crit slots


See how broken that is? Thats way better than clan doubles. That would just be wrong.

SHS would have to be lowered to like 0.9 to be balanced with mixed DHS.

True, it would definitely require a rebalancing of SHS.

But it also illustrates how silly the current system with free engine dubs are as it completely messes up the natural balance point of SHS vs DHS, which should be a tradeoff between space and tonnage.

It would be interesting to see for example how a mixed system would work out with completely vanilla numbers, in other words all SHS = 1.0 and all DHS 2.0, and allowing mixing (effectively meaning all engine sinks are 2.0 and the externals are mixed as desired). I actually think that might be a pretty nice balance. (Clan external DHS should probably be something like 1.7 in that scenario.)

You could also do the above model with all engine mounted sinks being SHS (for both IS and Clan) and DHS only being available as external heatsinks. That would avoid the potential creep in firepower that mixed sinks could otherwise lead to. I think I like this alternative better.

Edited by Sjorpha, 15 June 2018 - 04:45 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

It would be interesting to see for example how a mixed system would work out with completely vanilla numbers, in other words all SHS = 1.0 and all DHS 2.0

SHS would have to be 0.9 for mixed heatsinks to not be completely better than CDHS

At 0.9 youd get...
10 internal DHS (20 disspation)
15 external SHS (13.5 dissipation)
Total dissipation = 33.5 dissipation for 15 tons and 15 crits

thats far more comparable to the 10 tons and 20 crits for CDHS

Quote

You could also do the above model with all engine mounted sinks being SHS (for both IS and Clan) and DHS only being available as external heatsinks. That would avoid the potential powercreep that mixed sinks could otherwise lead to.

That screws clans over pretty badly though to force them to use SHS internally when they could use DHS internally before. Their loadouts do typically run hotter.

Edited by Khobai, 15 June 2018 - 04:46 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Khobai, on 15 June 2018 - 04:43 AM, said:

SHS would have to be 0.9 for mixed heatsinks to not be completely better than CDHS

At 0.9 youd get...
10 internal DHS (20 disspation)
15 external SHS (13.5 dissipation)
Total dissipation = 33.5 dissipation for 15 tons and 15 crits

thats far more comparable to the 10 tons and 20 crits for CDHS



That screws clans over pretty badly though to force them to use SHS internally when they could use DHS internally before. Their loadouts do typically run hotter.

As I said Clan DHS would also be closer to 2.0 in that kind of model, maybe 1.8 or something. Maybe cDHS should even be 2.0 if their internals are SHS like in the second example.

Clans don't run hotter, that's a myth. Current Clan builds typically have the same or lower heat/damage than IS. You can't say a build runs hotter just because it chooses to mount more firepower, the relevant comparison is heat per damage or maximum sustained DPS with optimal heat management. For example the typical HBR laservomit build with 64 alpha has better sustained DPS than the typical 57 alpha WHR, and that's with a higher alpha and superior range too. That example is when the WHR is using 3LL and 6ML, you can approach the range of the HBR if you switch to ERML, but then the HBRs heat advantage increases even more. (On top of that the HBR is 5 tons lighter, has much better hardpoint locations, runs faster and has ECM)

So for comparable laser vomit builds the heat advantage is very firmly on the clan side in the current balance. The only advantages IS laser builds have right now is duration and cooldown (which isn't nothing of course as those advantages can win trades). Range, damage and heat advantage all goes to the clans as far as laser builds go.

The popular myth that clans are hotter has just been repeated so much that a lot of people believe it, but it has never been true.

Edited by Sjorpha, 15 June 2018 - 05:19 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

As I said Clan DHS would also be closer to 2.0 in that kind of model, maybe 1.8 or something. Maybe cDHS should even be 2.0 if their internals are SHS.

IS-DHS still take up 3 crit slots instead of 2 crit slots. So id like to see IS-DHS be better than C-DHS.

I think it could work with:
IS-SHS at 0.8-0.9
IS-DHS at 2.0 (both internal and external)
C-DHS at 2.0 (internal) and 1.5 (external)

and allow SHS and DHS to be mixed

SHS would be better when you have a surplus of tonnage

DHS would be better when you have a surplus of crits

Edited by Khobai, 15 June 2018 - 05:02 AM.

[Rusharn]

Personally I wouldn't mind the mixing of the single and double heat sinks as they stand now. IS would get more heat dissipation for less critical slots but a little more weight. I think that would go well with the dynamic that the IS should be running cooler than the Clan Mechs, and be a partial balance for their heavier engines and more slot intensive Endo Fiber, and Ferro Fiber.