Double Heat Sinks at 1.4? Seriously
#1
Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:31 PM
Paul, I am thoroughly unimpressed that PGI has decided to drop double heat sinks down to 1.4. Game balance aside, double heat sinks work as designed on tabletop, why do they not work in this game?
Double heats sinks are meant to be a force multiplier and meant to up the combat effectiveness of mechs. The fact that your message above indicated the fact that some builds had their DPS increase significantly indicates that DHS are working as intended.
By setting DHS at 1.4, This is one of the first steps of moving you significantly away from how TT works. I understand why you doubled the armor, to make matches last longer, but I begin to question your decisions with DHS to swerve so significantly away from TT Canon.
TL;DR Version
DHS are supposed to be 2.0 not 1.4 and this decision sucks!
#2
Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:35 PM
As requested, the link to my thread: http://mwomercs.com/...k-and-clantech/
Edited by Daekar, 02 November 2012 - 04:03 PM.
#3
Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:38 PM
Daekar, on 02 November 2012 - 03:35 PM, said:
Daekar, please link your thread.
#4
Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:27 PM
#5
Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:34 PM
They just effectively lowered the Threshold where Double Heat Sinks are worthwhile for Heavies and Assaults, in many ways making Endo-steel a better thermal choice (with extra single Heat sinks).
I do have issue also with their definition of "standard build". This is effectively something they need to tell us, because Standard builds don't work well in game at all.
I know in the game I killed Paul in, he was using a K2 with 4 Medium pulse lasers and a pair of machine guns. That is one massively light weapons load for a 65-tonner. Even 2 LPLs and 2 MPLs is more a medium loadout.
What they have done is maintained the Gauss Rifle at the top of the pile, especially with lasers now generating even more heat.
They have killed off the heavy energy weapons. Indeed, many builds will now be WORSE off with the "fix" than they were beforehand
#6
Posted 02 November 2012 - 05:22 PM
#7
Posted 02 November 2012 - 05:38 PM
My current DHS'ed Hunchie has 16 sinks. With the EHS 'bug' this means I have 10*1+6*2 = 22 heat per second.
When EHS'es are properly 'doubled' by the upgrade after the fix, the dissipation of DHS'es will be lowered: 16*1.4 = 22.4 HPS
So fixing the EHS bug does... absolutely nothing! Hell, having more than 16 sinks means the new DHS value will actually give you less cooling than before the fix!
#8
Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:26 PM
#9
Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:35 PM
#10
Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:42 PM
MasterNinja62, on 02 November 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:
Agreed. 1.4 is too low to be effective, but I think a full 2.0 could be overpowered.
A nice middle ground would be ideal.
#11
Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:46 PM
#12
Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:21 PM
You have just removed double heat sinks from the game effectivly.
You have removed large lasers, PPC's and ER large lasers already but now they have no chance except maybe in a raven.
I am very dissapointed.
#13
Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:42 PM
Furthermore, the 2.0 level dissipation just further magnifies the distance between new and old players, making those starting steps ever so rough.
Even at 1.4 the vast majority of mechs will be getting a massive boost to sustained firepower, only some assault mechs will be facing a lack of boost, hardly a big price to pay for a game that already has more assaults on average than other classes.
PGI does not have a perfect track record when it comes to design balancing decisions. But this gentlemen, is not a case error.
#14
Posted 02 November 2012 - 10:11 PM
God damnit this is so frustrating to me. Now, those lights that have been eating the hell out of my back armor get even -scarier-, and I stay exactly where I am. They get to lean on the trigger, I get to overheat a lot. Seriously, your heat scale is all screwy, PGI. Implement the one thing that fixes it properly.
/tableflip.
#15
Posted 02 November 2012 - 10:24 PM
MasterNinja62, on 02 November 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:
1.7 would be a good place to start. I still think 2.0 is where it should be, but I am willing to be convinced that 1.7 is acceptable. But 1.4 is simply too low.
I know they will be watching the "telemetry" of the game with 1.4 DHS, but I think what they will find is a severe lack of people using them. I would also love to know what mechs they tested 2.0 DHS on.
My opinion: set DHS to 2.0 (like they should be) and then adjust the weapons that are "too good". It is much easier to accept the changes to the individual weapons than to the whole heat system, at least to me. But as my wife is fond of pointing out, no one cares what I think.
#16
Posted 02 November 2012 - 10:36 PM
#17
Posted 02 November 2012 - 10:48 PM
They've stated that at 2.0 instead of 1.4 that DPS of certain builds went up exponentially. And to be honest, I believe it. I've played BattleTech since 1997 and I've been playing MechWarrior pretty much non stop since 2009 with MechWarrior Living Legends.
In MWLL, mechs have DHS, but engine heatsinks do not count as DHS. They haven't ever counted as DHS. When selecting some variants, they have 2-3 DHS listed. If that was actually 12-13 DHS, or 24-26 HSs. Then heat would never be an issue.
Now from a TT perspective DHS is 2. TT is also very RANDOM. You cannot normally hit things in the CT all the time (Tcomps help, but aren't 100%). This is a computer simulation where ten second turns are simulated, not emulated. The only way DHS could be balanced at 2.0 would probably if all weapons 'locked' and hit random locations when you pulled the trigger, had cool downs of 10s, and were fired independently of one another. (There is a game like this that someone on the Mektek.net forums has worked on).
So before you all make a decision, just give it a shot.
Though I'm going to wager a number of you are of the ilk that ran with light mechs with 16 ER Small lasers in MW3 or 6-8 ER Large in MW4 on Madcats and used third person to glitch shots through hills. I'm glad such builds will never be viable here. Those of you that want them can go flush yourselves down a toilet. (I'd use another phrase, but the forum TOS and CoC do not permit it).
#18
Posted 02 November 2012 - 11:42 PM
seems im staying with the 2 other upgrades they might take up 14 crit slots but what they bring to the table is worth it.
#19
Posted 02 November 2012 - 11:53 PM
Large lasers and PPC's are hugely underpowered. I think that maybe these weapons need a bit of a DPS boost. I don't think the heat balance is wrong, though.
#20
Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:09 AM
15 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 15 guests, 0 anonymous users