398 replies to this topic

[Kmieciu]

TTOH for DHS was working correctly in v1.72, so the bug was introduced in v1.73.

[3rdworld]

Okay, the TTOH issue is fixed. There was a mistake in a formula that pulled the engine rating out of the text string, which caused it give you the wrong number of EHS. I thought I had it fixed on Friday, but I guess I forgot to save it. I renamed the founder's mech to display as HBK-4G (F) instead of HBK-4G (Founder's Mech). If you want to re-download the cost should be corrected as well as the TTOH calculations.

MustrumRidcully, on 19 November 2012 - 05:39 AM, said:

Why did no one tell me that someone already made an excel based calculator for time to overheat? I wasted my time!

Or maybe mine is better? More accurate? Knows how to work with DHS?

2 MLs would produce 2 Heat per second, with 10 Engine Double Heat Sinks at least you definitely cannot overheat, unless you run around a lot, or are on Caustic?

I am sure it will prove as invaluable as your post in this thread.

[3rdworld]

Oh and the MWO heat scale is back. Forgot to mention

[GODzillaGSPB]

BIG THANKS for bringing the ingame heatscale back.

So...the current TTOH...like I said, I prefer to compare it via the ingame heatscale, but the new TTOG looks too good in the current version. I loaded it from the google mirror. Has it the correct formula?

For instance my Founder Hunchback. Built in the old version 1.72 I got something around 27 seconds TTOH. Now I get 45 seconds. Both with the basic "coolrun" option enabled and all the elite skills disabled.

[Furmansky]

Hey 3rdworld just wanted to thank you and all others involved for this great tool.
Saved plenty of C-Bills already, and good luck with the progress.
As well if you could add more rows with weapon stats at the bottom, this way I could put there all weapons loaded at current chasis... would give good DMG and RNG stats on printout for particular build
Thanks again for your time on that.

[3rdworld]

Furmansky, on 20 November 2012 - 03:28 AM, said:

Hey 3rdworld just wanted to thank you and all others involved for this great tool.
Saved plenty of C-Bills already, and good luck with the progress.
As well if you could add more rows with weapon stats at the bottom, this way I could put there all weapons loaded at current chasis... would give good DMG and RNG stats on printout for particular build
Thanks again for your time on that.

Try the weapon groups. It will tally the dmg stats for each group.

[3rdworld]

GODzillaGSPB, on 19 November 2012 - 03:00 PM, said:

BIG THANKS for bringing the ingame heatscale back.

So...the current TTOH...like I said, I prefer to compare it via the ingame heatscale, but the new TTOG looks too good in the current version. I loaded it from the google mirror. Has it the correct formula?

For instance my Founder Hunchback. Built in the old version 1.72 I got something around 27 seconds TTOH. Now I get 45 seconds. Both with the basic "coolrun" option enabled and all the elite skills disabled.

The new MWO should mirror what you are seeing in-game. Remember the formula itself is flawed however. It puts equal worth to EHS & additional DHS, where EHS are actually ~43% better. The TTOH should now be right on the money (+- a bit for map differences). It has had issues for a while, but I think they are corrected now. I am going to work on getting the map number put in soon, so you can see your TTOH on caustic and such.

Thanks.

EDIT: The formula for DHS is MWO Heatscale = .61*SQRT((HS*1.4)/HPS). As you can see it just multiplies the HS count by 1.4 to account for DHS, but engines should be multiplied by 2. (Thanks ZodiacX).

Edit #2: You have to discount HPS values of Ballistic and Missile weapons by 25%

Edited by 3rdworld, 21 November 2012 - 01:42 PM.

[Furmansky]

3rdworld, on 20 November 2012 - 04:33 AM, said:

Try the weapon groups. It will tally the dmg stats for each group.

Oh yes I've seen that and it works great.
But the bottom one has more data, and it would looks nice as weapon system info on printed page... nothing crucial mostly an eye candy if you would like. But would indicate used weapon's range and other stats. Nothing serious tho... and great job again.

[Slater01]

Loving v1.73

any chance we will see the Cataphract 4X soon?

[3rdworld]

The CTF-4x is in V1.74.

However there were some changes. The MWO Heat Scale has changed. The difference seems to effect Missiles and Ballisitics, the numbers are still correct for energy weapons.

Also they messed with FF. It was functioning on 36ppt values, however now it seems to work on 35.84ppt. So a Jenner used to be able to get 234 (6.5 tons) armor with FF and not have some small amount of tonnage, but now they can only get 232 (6.47 Tons).

Because of this it might be a bit on your update.

Sorry guys.

[3rdworld]

OMG, I thought that was going to kill me.

They are now discounting HPS values of missiles and ballistics by 25% as they concern the Heat Efficiency scale.

Give me a bit and I'll get 1.74 out for you guys.

[MustrumRidcully]

3rdworld, on 21 November 2012 - 12:42 PM, said:

OMG, I thought that was going to kill me.

They are now discounting HPS values of missiles and ballistics by 25% as they concern the Heat Efficiency scale.

Give me a bit and I'll get 1.74 out for you guys.

Wait, what?
They have not altered their stats, but they changed how they calculate their heat efficiency?

Okay, it might make sense, if they still don't understand how heat works in their game.

[3rdworld]

MustrumRidcully, on 21 November 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

Wait, what?
They have not altered their stats, but they changed how they calculate their heat efficiency?

Okay, it might make sense, if they still don't understand how heat works in their game.

As far as I can tell. The XML files show the same Heat & CD values, so the change had to only effect how they calculated their efficiency. I could tell because on Lasers only the MWO heat scale was right on the money. But any mech with a ballistic or missile was off. So unless they ninja buffed all ballistics & missile weapons without updating the xml file, the change only effected the scale.

What ****** me off: How are we supposed to get a feel for efficiency to how the mech plays if they alter the calculation every patch? There is no comparative value any more.

[MustrumRidcully]

My problem with the heat efficiency goes even further than that - the problem is it isn't a good representiative value at all. The same value will mean different things for different mechs and weapon loaduts. It has some relation to how heat efficient your mech is, but not necessarily somethnig practical.

IMO the best thing to do would alter the mech efficiency and simply say how long you can fire your weapons before you reach shutdown. AT the same time, Firepower should be at least two stats - alpha strike damage and DPS. Both values are useful to know, but limiting yourself to only the alpha value is not very meaningful.

Thankfully, your mech lab has more to offer than just the PGI scale.

[3rdworld]

Thontor, on 21 November 2012 - 01:52 PM, said:

How heat works isn't complicated. Weapons generate heat per shot, and heat sinks dissipate that heat over time.

The heat efficiency scale in game is complicated though, and doesn't do a very good job of representing how hot a mech runs or how manageable the heat is. I usually just ignore the in game scale.

I still don't know how the in game scale works. What calculation are they using?

.61*SQRT(HS/HPS)

multiply HS by 1.4 for DHS (does not consider EHS @ 2.0) and multiply HPS by .75 for Missile or Ballistic weapons.

Edited by 3rdworld, 21 November 2012 - 01:57 PM.

[3rdworld]

Okay, here comes Mech Lab v1.74.xlsm

• Added more metrics, comments contain the discriptions
  
• Added the ability to hide comments
  
• Added Map heat (Thanks Bubba Wilkins), just select the map you want from the drop down.
  
• Updated the MWO Heat Scale.
  
• Removed the CTF-3L and Added the CTF-4X.
  
• Updated CTF costs (Only missed it by ~300k, not too bad).
  
• Added BAP

Let me know if you guys think it is getting too cluttered. If you think it is, I may let you hide some of them.


Thanks guys.

Edited by 3rdworld, 21 November 2012 - 03:01 PM.

[Kiiyor]

3rdworld, on 21 November 2012 - 02:36 PM, said:

Okay, here comes Mech Lab v1.74.xlsm

• Added more metrics, comments contain the discriptions
  
• Added the ability to hide comments
  
• Added Map heat (Thanks Bubba Wilkins), just select the map you want from the drop down.
  
• Updated the MWO Heat Scale.
  
• Removed the CTF-3L and Added the CTF-4X.
  
• Updated CTF costs (Only missed it by ~300k, not too bad).
  
• Added BAP

Let me know if you guys think it is getting too cluttered. If you think it is, I may let you hide some of them.



Thanks guys.

I shall tinker with this! Thanks again man. I'd be a far poorer mechwarrior without this to experiment with.

[MustrumRidcully]

3rdworld, on 21 November 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

.61*SQRT(HS/HPS)

multiply HS by 1.4 for DHS (does not consider EHS @ 2.0) and multiply HPS by .75 for Missile or Ballistic weapons.

I didn't remember it being that complicated. I thought it was alpha strike heat / heat dissipated per 10 seconds or something like that.

Anyway, neither has any meaningful value. There is no logical reason why missile or ballistic weapons get a lower value, if they really use heat per second somewhere in the calculation. They do produce exactly the heat they produce, not effectively 75 % less. Or are they actually trying to "trick" people into putting on less sinks on mechs with ballistic and missile weapons so they overheat faster and aren't as strong as they could be if people knew how to optimize on their own? [/tinfoilhat]

Quote

And why go with something like that? What makes that better than a simple HS/HPS shown as a % value. With 100% being heat neutral, and higher than that like a Gauss only design would be off the chart, which makes sense since you don't even have to deal with heat.

I think this appraoch would also be flawed. 2 mechs with the same heat efficiency with this scale would still behave differently.

Let's say you have two mech with an efficiency of 50 %. Is that a good value for your mech? It depends on how much heat you produce in total.

Let's say you produce 2 heat per second, tha twould mean you had 1 heat per second dissipation with 50 % efficiency, which is equivalent to 10 heat sinks, which leads us to a heat capcity of 40. You gain 1 heat per second this way, so you last 40 seconds before you overheat.
Let's say you produce 5 heat per second. 2.5 dissipation per second, 25 heat sinks, 55 heat capacity, 2.5 net gain, 55/2.5 = 22 seconds.

I think there is a significant difference between having a mech overheat in 40 seconds or having him overheat in 20 seconds. (I would guessimate the 40 second build too be a bit too cool for this game, and he can easily afford a lower heat efficiency, while the 22 second build may be just right for most purposes.)

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 21 November 2012 - 11:19 PM.

[Kmieciu]

What`s the actual DPS of a UAC/5 ?
According to the Mech Lab v1.74.xls it`s 5,88 (Weapon stats) and 6,36 (when you put it on a Dragon DRG-5N)
60012,18,60,20,36,20,36,20,40,40,39,39,304,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,409,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,206,206,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,902,907,907,907,104,104,0,0,0,0,x0z0,a1,b2,c2,d3,e0,f0,g0,h0,i0,j0,k0,l0,1300

But on the Ohmwrecker`s sheet it`s 4,45 / 9,09 DPS for single/double fire.

http://mwomercs.com/...post__p__649382

Which value is right?

Edited by Kmieciu, 22 November 2012 - 12:50 AM.

[Aware]

You don't have enough slots on the LA of the CTF-4X