34 replies to this topic

[Kraven Kor]

I'll at least give it a chance before I freak out.

[Urza Mechwalker]

Particle Man, on 02 November 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

Why would we need to do that? they discovered just by internal testing that 2.0 is overpowered. Why push a patch that is unbalanced, only to have to nerf it anyway?

there's no reason to get the QQ crowd used to 2.0HS only to nerf it on them later, when it's ALREADY obvious to them that they are overpowered?

Because they clearly lack the comrpehension that currently in game the weaposn that least worry about heat are the ones considered overpowered. And their new solution is WORSE than single heat sinks for assault mechs. Simple MATH!

[Particle Man]

Squigles, on 02 November 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

What internal testing? You must have missed the earlier "whoops" (That took precisely one game for many CB testers to find) that led to this "fix".

the internal testing that they did on the 2.0 thread that they talked about in the DHS announcment. I'm sure you saw that thread, considering you're all up on the DHS issue:

Quote

After fixing the EHS bug, and setting DHS to a canon value of 2.0, we experienced anticipated results. Heat was no longer a concern, increasing DPS exponentially on certain types of mech loadouts. After testing a variety of standard builds, we settled on 1.4. This value maintains the spirit of both DHS and maintains the integrity of MWO's overall gameplay experience.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1335931

INTERNAL TESTING. none of us got to try it fixed, but they did and saw that it is OP at 2.0

[MechTinker]

We will take your 1.5 million cbills and give you nothing for it...take that. Also, it will cost 250k to get those crit spaces back. Have fun.

[Particle Man]

MechTinker, on 02 November 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

We will take your 1.5 million cbills and give you nothing for it...take that. Also, it will cost 250k to get those crit spaces back. Have fun.

you got double heat sinks for it. Ones that were known to not be working right since before OB. spend your cbills wisely next time.

now i feel sorry for you, you now have to play the game you are going to play anyway, some more. You poor thing! what will you ever do?

Edited by Particle Man, 02 November 2012 - 02:56 PM.

[CCC Dober]

OP: Seconded. PGI should rather nerf the Swayback and Jenner heat profiles than kill the rest of the game. But I suspect there is some sort of protectionism involved here, so that certain important people can keep their easy mode. Bias killed World of Tanks balance and if this keeps up, we will see something similar here. I hate it already ...

[Particle Man]

CCC Dober, on 02 November 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

OP: Seconded. PGI should rather nerf the Swayback and Jenner heat profiles than kill the rest of the game. But I suspect there is some sort of protectionism involved here, so that certain important people can keep their easy mode. Bias killed World of Tanks balance and if this keeps up, we will see something similar here. I hate it already ...

how exactly is it going to "kill the game"?

we sure have a bunch of drama queens around here!

[Vermaxx]

Particle Man, what build do you run where you do not want more heat dissipation?

What build are you AFRAID OF that you do not want IT to have more heat dissipation?

They had this problem for two weeks, which with their current load means it got a couple days of playtesting; and from that they decided correct DHS were wrong.

I think they knew all along that engine sinks weren't doubling, but they liked the heat profile and only marginal increase in DPS, so they ran it hoping no one would notice.

We made a stink, so they got even. The new "DHS" aren't even as good across the board as the old ones and the old ones already unevenly benefitted lights. They significantly boost people who have low numbers of heatsinks, while hampering people with high numbers. Meaning the Jenner and Swayback got better than they were in the broken system, and somehow this is preferable to the alternative.

A stock 4SP can hold 10 doubles, with 8 in the engine. It comes with 19 standard heatsinks, and spends 11 tons doing that.

A true double 4SP can hold a total of 18 doubles including engine. It spends ten tons and increases dissipation to 36. What is more likely is you will drop down a few and pump up the weapons.

The current broken model double 4SP spends the same amount of weight, 10 tons, but gets 28 heat.

The announced change double 4SP spends the same weight, 10 tons, but gets 25.2 heat. This is comparable to the Atlases people are quoting, because a smaller mech has tons of spare room for sinks.

Let's say you left the 4SP with engine plus just a couple. It started out with 19 heat in default. It would need default engine doubles to beat that. With the new system it needs 14.

This system only normalizes people who can't spend almost all of their crit spaces on heatsinks. People who can do far better than large mechs who canonically rely on doubles to catch back up. Small mechs never carry that many doubles, they carry 12 including engine and a bunch more weapons.

This new system doesn't save enough weight to boost weapons loads, so they're just knee jerking how fast optimized builds can kill people. Optimized builds could already rapidly kill people. They didn't need an uneven sliding scale weighting their heat benefits above assault mechs.

[Squidhead Jax]

Bloody, on 02 November 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

i already can guess which builds which led to their conclusion. The issue is 2 possibly 3 builds which has led to a blanket nerf of DHS.

now if i was to sit down and think about things i would like change the 2 -3 build loadouts instead of nerfing DHS.

Yes, the way to nerf the Death Star is to nerf the Death Star, not everything around it.

It's not even hard to come up with ideas... Say, make lasers take longer to burn the more of them you fire within the same half-second.

[Like a Sir]

While I don't think it's the end of the world. And I am not saying it would stop me from playing (just from buying any more MC points, but I was on the fence about that to begin with). Being an assault mech pilot I completely agree, that while double heat heat sinks will still greatly benefit mediums and lights, who will have the majority of them in the engine, they won't fix anything for my assault.

Also I have to say, that I don't give a crap if the lazer back got higher heat efficiency I don't think I ever seen one shut down before it got blown up anyways. And they simply wouldn't have the crit slots and the tonnage to run any weapons much bigger then they have now... On the other hand I was hoping to start playing with bigger guns then 4 medium pulses and 3 srms on my assault or at least not have it overheat as much after all the upgrades I sunk in it (ES, XL, DHS), but I guess that would be too game braking.

[Particle Man]

Vermaxx, on 02 November 2012 - 03:42 PM, said:

Particle Man, what build do you run where you do not want more heat dissipation?

What build are you AFRAID OF that you do not want IT to have more heat dissipation?

They had this problem for two weeks, which with their current load means it got a couple days of playtesting; and from that they decided correct DHS were wrong.

I think they knew all along that engine sinks weren't doubling, but they liked the heat profile and only marginal increase in DPS, so they ran it hoping no one would notice.

We made a stink, so they got even. The new "DHS" aren't even as good across the board as the old ones and the old ones already unevenly benefitted lights. They significantly boost people who have low numbers of heatsinks, while hampering people with high numbers. Meaning the Jenner and Swayback got better than they were in the broken system, and somehow this is preferable to the alternative.

A stock 4SP can hold 10 doubles, with 8 in the engine. It comes with 19 standard heatsinks, and spends 11 tons doing that.

A true double 4SP can hold a total of 18 doubles including engine. It spends ten tons and increases dissipation to 36. What is more likely is you will drop down a few and pump up the weapons.

The current broken model double 4SP spends the same amount of weight, 10 tons, but gets 28 heat.

The announced change double 4SP spends the same weight, 10 tons, but gets 25.2 heat. This is comparable to the Atlases people are quoting, because a smaller mech has tons of spare room for sinks.

Let's say you left the 4SP with engine plus just a couple. It started out with 19 heat in default. It would need default engine doubles to beat that. With the new system it needs 14.

This system only normalizes people who can't spend almost all of their crit spaces on heatsinks. People who can do far better than large mechs who canonically rely on doubles to catch back up. Small mechs never carry that many doubles, they carry 12 including engine and a bunch more weapons.

This new system doesn't save enough weight to boost weapons loads, so they're just knee jerking how fast optimized builds can kill people. Optimized builds could already rapidly kill people. They didn't need an uneven sliding scale weighting their heat benefits above assault mechs.

i have plenty of mechs that could benefit from better heat dissipation, but that doesnt mean the game needs to play that way. i got by just fine on those mechs before DHS.

If DHS doesnt help the specific mech you are using it on, dont use it. That's kind of been the plan the whole time anyway, hasnt it? 3 crits each is a lot on a mech that's already packed full of stuff (like my atlas), but on a jenner, it's no problem at all.

and i dont think my atlas needs to be any more badass, because that would just make it OP and everyone knows what they say about OP

[ReD3y3]

Particle Man, on 02 November 2012 - 04:57 PM, said:

i have plenty of mechs that could benefit from better heat dissipation, but that doesnt mean the game needs to play that way. i got by just fine on those mechs before DHS.

If DHS doesnt help the specific mech you are using it on, dont use it. That's kind of been the plan the whole time anyway, hasnt it? 3 crits each is a lot on a mech that's already packed full of stuff (like my atlas), but on a jenner, it's no problem at all.

and i dont think my atlas needs to be any more badass, because that would just make it OP and everyone knows what they say about OP

Nice non answer.

Give the specs.

Or talk in circles more

[CCC Dober]

Particle Man, on 02 November 2012 - 02:58 PM, said:

how exactly is it going to "kill the game"?

we sure have a bunch of drama queens around here!

Look, I know it's hard for you to rub 2 working brain cells together. So let's do this the easy way.

Single Heatsinks give you standard heat dissipation.

And now, this is really important. Here it comes:

Double Heatsinks give you double heat dissipation.


I knew you were something real special the moment you entered this thread.
Now go play the game and don't worry about that complicated stuff. It'll hurt your head anyway. Good boy.

[Khobai]

I've done the math and DHS need to be at least x1.6 or x1.7 to give an advantage over SHS.

[Dragoon Furey]

What probably happend is they had Jenners and Cicadas running around with 4-6 medium or medium pulse firing continusly without overheating and coring out mechs really fast. everyone went "Stuff is dying alot faster" and no one said "Wasent that the point?"

I mean really what is the point of upgrading to double heat sinks if they don't let me make a build that kills stuff faster then using singles? and if the jenners and cicadas boating medium pulse were the real problem that has a hell of alot more to do with the fact that we cant knock them over, have to lead shoot them, and that they have a abundance of energy hardpoints.

What if the Jenner F only had 4 energy hard points but had some other feature that made it different from the D and K varients beyond hard points like a second ams, or the ability to use ecm/bap where the D and K could not, or if the 8Q awesome only had 4 instead of 7?

the whole thing reeks of a knee-jerk reaction.