271 replies to this topic

[Besh]

Hazeclaw, on 17 March 2019 - 08:29 PM, said:

Putting aside that very little that happens in MWO has a lot to do with real life physics (otherwise balance would be impossible) Prototelis is 100% correct, when you have a heat source (engine) that dissipates heat through heatsinks, when the heatsinks are destroyed it doesn't magically transfer heat back into the heat source. The system would certainly lose total heat limit and heat dissipation though, but the heat in the heatsinks would also be gone. If anything, the engine that can run on 2/3 parts would probably run cooler (compared to 3/3 of it's moving parts), but in mwo terms compared to how hot the weapons are that would be completely inconsequential. I can't believe this is even a discussion

Correct me if I am wrong, but does Thermodynamics not somehwere say heat can not simply somehow be gone ? If I get your argument, you seem to say with the Heatsink destroyed, the Heat is "gone", becasue the Heatsink kindof falls off, and takes "its" Heat with it .

But what if the Heatsink simply stops functioning due to damage ? What does Thermodynamics/Physics say happens to the Heat that has been stored in that now not working anymore Heatsink ? For the sake of argument, what if the Heatsink remains inside the 'Mech, but - as said above - is simply destroyed beyond function . Does "its" Heat stay contained inside the damaged HS ( which is what some people seem to say ) and that heat does not transfer to the 'Mech ? I dont think that works, the Heat needs to go somewhere if the HS is destroyed, no ?

Or does the Heat somehow still have to be dealt with, because it does not magically disappear, and therefore it is imagineable the Mech instantly gets ( a bit ) hotter ? I mean, even IF the Heat stayed within the damaged HS and it "just" can not dissipate the Heat anymore, that Heat is still there, inside the 'Mech, and certainly the Heat would have to go somewhere ( since the HS can not dissipate it anymore )?

And I know, MW:O or BT is not real Life, but since we're discussing it anyways...

Edited by Besh, 18 March 2019 - 01:47 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Jay Leon Hart, on 18 March 2019 - 01:40 AM, said:

That's because of Heat Sinks. Remember those.

The engine *is* a fusion reactor. You're wrong about the engine not generating heat. Deal with it.

You know I've actually explained the mechanics of it all not so long ago in a different thread. If you weren't so inclined to stay ingnorant I might have even explained again, but I won't bother.

The only thing I'll say is that a mech engine is far from being just a fusion reactor.

[PhoenixFire55]

Besh, on 18 March 2019 - 01:41 AM, said:

But what if the Heatsink simply stops functioning due to damage ?

It would make sense to keep the heat if a heatsink gets critted while the location its placed in isn't "destroyed". But if a side torso is "destroyed" then it is gone, not attached to the mech in any way and not having any infuence on a mech in any way either. Because "destroyed" means zero structure, and zero structure means there is nothing left there.

[Zombiesbum]

HammerMaster, on 17 March 2019 - 03:08 PM, said:

For the billionth time.
STOP RIDING YOUR HEAT.
You got by without BT style penalties and now you expect no penalties.
The entitlement stinks here.

This is not BT mate. Stop comparing the two as if they should be the same. Otherwise I can complain that all the clan mechs are not powerful enough as clan mechs and weapons are better in every single way in the lore. Now how **** would that make game play if clan mechs and weapons were buffed in order to fit lore?

As a side note. I would not mind the change to heat if coolshot didn't cost me 40k credits. I rarely use consumables because they do not pay out what they cost. Once I have all the mechs I want I'll stop caring about credits, but until then I guess I'm a scrub.

Edited by Zombiesbum, 18 March 2019 - 01:54 AM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

TechManual, p. 35, "Fusion and Fusion Fuels"

Quote

[color=#000000]The fusion engine is capable of powering 'Mechs, Aerospace Fighters, and other vehicles. Fusion engines function by harnessing the power of a fusion reaction, as occurs in the core of the Sun.[/color]

Please, tell me more about how they don't use fusion reactions, oh intelligent one

[PhoenixFire55]

Jay Leon Hart, on 18 March 2019 - 01:53 AM, said:

Please, tell me more about how they don't use fusion reactions, oh intelligent one

Please quote where I said that "they don't use fusion reactions", oh [redacted] one.

[Jay Leon Hart]

PhoenixFire55, on 18 March 2019 - 01:38 AM, said:

Nothing to do with actual fusion reactions.

PhoenixFire55, on 18 March 2019 - 01:46 AM, said:

a mech engine is far from being just a fusion reactor.

As a reminder;

Quote

Fusion power is a theoretical form of power generation in which energy will be generated by using nuclear fusion reactions to produce heat for electricity generation. This is the same process that powers stars like our Sun. Devices designed to harness this energy are known as fusion reactors.

If it uses fusion reactions to generate power (which it does) then it's a fusion reactor (which it is) which also means it generates heat (which it does).

[PhoenixFire55]

Jay Leon Hart, on 18 March 2019 - 02:07 AM, said:

As a reminder;

If it uses fusion reactions to generate power (which it does) then it's a fusion reactor (which it is) which also means it generates heat (which it does).

Quite dense aren't you? ... Fusion reaction generates heat when its actually happening. There is absolutely nothing saying that a fusion reaction is cosntantly running in a mech engine. Hence its an engine, not a reactor. But I guess you are the one that leaves his car engine running when its parked in a garage. All those exhaust fumes would explain your comments tho ...

[Besh]

PhoenixFire55, on 18 March 2019 - 01:50 AM, said:

It would make sense to keep the heat if a heatsink gets critted while the location its placed in isn't "destroyed". But if a side torso is "destroyed" then it is gone, not attached to the mech in any way and not having any infuence on a mech in any way either. Because "destroyed" means zero structure, and zero structure means there is nothing left there.

I think that is how you want it to be , cos it fits your reasoning, but it seems to me you confuse "damage having to be applied to the Structure of that component of 'Mech for it to stop functioning" ( which I think is reflected in Structure "health" points in Game) with "damage to have to be applied to the Structure of that component of the 'Mech to fall off " .

What happens in Game is, components where the structure is destroyed stop functioning . They dont fall off . Arms? Parts/"something" still there ( not physically/shown in Game, but in - afaik - in terms of damage transfer ) . Legs ? The same . A small %age or the dmg. applied to destroyed components gets transferred . Yes, the components do not show up on paperdoll any more...but the Game still seems to think something is there . Or else the dmg. transfer would not work .

edit: just edited out a mistake I made in regards to what is shown on 'Mechs paperdoll
edit 2: added the part in brackets regarding Arms/dmg. transfer ;

Edited by Besh, 18 March 2019 - 05:22 AM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

PhoenixFire55, on 18 March 2019 - 02:12 AM, said:

Quite dense aren't you? ... Fusion reaction generates heat when its actually happening. There is absolutely nothing saying that a fusion reaction is cosntantly running in a mech engine. Hence its an engine, not a reactor. But I guess you are the one that leaves his car engine running when its parked in a garage. All those exhaust fumes would explain your comments tho ...

Except you "power up" your engine at the start of a match and can "power down" whenever you want. Also, how often do you turn your engine off when you stop at a set of lights? I know some cars have automatic stop/start, but most still do not and I don't know anyone who does so manually.

Also, re-read the quoted post, the part about " Devices designed to harness this energy are known as fusion reactors" and realise how wrong you are. It's a fusion reactor because it uses a fusion reaction. It's pretty black and white.

[PhoenixFire55]

Besh, on 18 March 2019 - 02:22 AM, said:

I think that is how you want it to be , cos it fits your reasoning, but it seems to me you confuse "damage having to be applied to the Structure of that component of 'Mech for it to stop functioning" ( which I think is reflected in Structure "health" points in Game) with "damage to have to be applied to the Structure of that component of the 'Mech to fall off ".

Woah woah woah ... why does it have to do with what I want it to be? It is what it is, when arm structure is zero, arm falls off. When torso structure is zero, torso falls off. It doesn't visually because PGI is too stupid to program that apparently, but it would at the very least imply that I have no control over anything in that torso anymore, nor anything in the torso have any effect on the rest of my mech.

Besh, on 18 March 2019 - 02:22 AM, said:

What happens in Game is, components where the structure is destroyed stop functioning . They dont fall off . Arms? Parts/"something" still there . Legs ? The same . A small %age or the dmg. applied to destroyed components gets transferred . Yes, the components do not show up on paperdoll any more...but the Game still seems to think something is there . Or else the dmg. transfer would not work .

edit: just edited out a mistake I made in regards to what is shown on 'Mechs paperdoll

Damage transfer works, because unlike heat damage keeps coming. I.e. you fire 20 damage at a 10 structure arm, arm falls off and remaining 10 damage goes through empty space into what is next - side torso. And please don't make me started on halved damage transfer between torsoes, because it is yet another dumb game design choice, basically just another crutch to incrase precious TTK.

[PhoenixFire55]

Jay Leon Hart, on 18 March 2019 - 02:23 AM, said:

Except you "power up" your engine at the start of a match and can "power down" whenever you want. Also, how often do you turn your engine off when you stop at a set of lights? I know some cars have automatic stop/start, but most still do not and I don't know anyone who does so manually.

And? What does "power up" have to do with anything? You plug a kettle into the electrical socket and its "powered up", yet it draws no energy from it and generates no tea for you unless you push the "alphastrike" "warm" button. Unless you count the shiny led light as drawing energy. Well, yes it does, just like mech sensors, computers etc., but the energy these draw in comparison to weapons is negligible, and so is heat generated from such small energy demand.

Jay Leon Hart, on 18 March 2019 - 02:23 AM, said:

Also, re-read the quoted post, the part about " Devices designed to harness this energy are known as fusion reactors" and realise how wrong you are. It's a fusion reactor because it uses a fusion reaction. It's pretty black and white.

Le sigh. You keep saying "fusion reactor" and "fusion reaction" as if you know what it actually is. FYI, there is not a single fusion reactor made by humanity in existence yet. Hence you don't know what it is and how it works. You don't know whether a reaction in such a reactor is running constantly or not or even if it (reactor) generates any heat in process or actually absorbs and utilizes generated heat for its own purposes, or even if generated heat is in fact the actual energy output of the reactor (exactly like it happens in our fission reactors).

If you for example knew the difference between standart, LFE and XL engines, you could have guessed, that the "radiation shielding" part that is different between them actually means that an engne has *drumroll* ... radiation shielding, that probably is there for a reason ... like absorbing radiation, or in other words heat, generated by the fusion reaction. Note how it is part of an engine, i.e. generated heat stays within the engine.

And if you knew a little smth about physics beyond the elementary school "boo hoo sun is a fusion reactor", you could have realized that there is a vast multitude of various fusion reactons, each with its own parameters and different energy outputs in different wavelenghts and even different types of particles.

But hey ... ain't nobody got time for studying these days. And I don't have time to educate you any further either.

Edited by PhoenixFire55, 18 March 2019 - 02:56 AM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Again, space magic.

And the fusion reactor with its associated shielding, which is comprised of components which acts as heatsinks and control functions. Or should say the ability to keep said reactor cool to an extent. When the ST is destroyed which holds engine components/shielding, that generates engine crits which has an effect on the cooling of the engine and the mech. BT this is done by adding additional heat each turn afterwards. For PGI and simplicity that entails the removal of HS use from gameplay, the disabling of said HS.

How PGI goes about rendering that effect is what most are arguing about, the disabling of x amount of HS associated when engine shielding has been damaged, as well as the values PGI has in place for each of those HS.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 18 March 2019 - 03:11 AM.

[Besh]

PhoenixFire55, on 18 March 2019 - 01:50 AM, said:

It would make sense to keep the heat if a heatsink gets critted while the location its placed in isn't "destroyed". But if a side torso is "destroyed" then it is gone, not attached to the mech in any way and not having any infuence on a mech in any way either. Because "destroyed" means zero structure, and zero structure means there is nothing left there.

Ummm...if I shoot at an already destroyed component, straight up face to face with the dmged 'Mech , does a %age of that damage get transferred ? If I shoot an already destroyed Leg, does a %age of that damage get transferred ?

Edited by Besh, 18 March 2019 - 03:41 AM.

[Prototelis]

Does all of that damage get transferred?

The damage transfer mechanic is honestly one of the best things the game has going for it.

[Cyanogene]

Oh my, the dumbos defending the atrocious mechanic are here already.

[Besh]

Prototelis, on 18 March 2019 - 03:29 AM, said:

Does all of that damage get transferred?

The damage transfer mechanic is honestly one of the best things the game has going for it.

I am asking specifically because PhoenixFire is arguing the destroyed component falls off the 'Mech, and is not there anymore . 'Cos you know, I am really wondering, if I shoot at empty Space ( i.e. a place where nothing of a destroyed Leg is 'cos it fell off the 'Mech 'cos all its Structure was destroyed ), how that not being there Leg, or the empty space where it used to be, actually manage to work damage into the 'Mech that fallen off Leg used to be attached to . IF that is what happens ( dmg. being transferred when shooting at already destroyed components ) .

Edited by Besh, 18 March 2019 - 03:36 AM.

[Subhntr]

It is a mechanic that PGI has chosen to implement in order to reflect a rule in TT BT, and it is technically an optional mechanic as no one is forcing you to use a 'Mech with a LFE/cXL.

If you don't like it, well, 'Mechs with Standard engines exist in both factions.

PhoenixFire55, on 18 March 2019 - 02:55 AM, said:

FYI, there is not a single fusion reactor made by humanity in existence yet.

Not entirely true - there are a number of experimental reactors that have been built; however, no operational reactor has yet been able to generate more power than it consumes.

[PhoenixFire55]

Besh, on 18 March 2019 - 03:27 AM, said:

Ummm...if I shoot at an already destroyed component, straight up face to face with the dmged 'Mech , does a %age of that damage get transferred ? If I shoot an already destroyed Leg, does %age of that damage get transferred ?

If its destroyed its destroyed, you can't shoot smth that is destroyed, it is already blown up, pulverized, grinded into fine dust, annihilated and dispersed into the wind.

If the trajectory of your weapons fire goes into adjacent component after you've destroyed the previous one, than ALL your remaining damage should go into that component. If the trajectory doesn't cross more than one component (i.e. the one you've destroyed), then the only thing you damage is dirt.

Partial damage transfer is a crutch for convenience and just like any crutch it shouldn't exist.

[PhoenixFire55]

Subhntr, on 18 March 2019 - 03:43 AM, said:

Not entirely true - there are a number of experimental reactors that have been built; however, no operational reactor has yet been able to generate more power than it consumes.

True. In the same manner that one can claim his bycicle is an experimental interstellar ship. Except it can't go into space yet.