83 replies to this topic

[Miles Naismith]

Tyronica, on 02 November 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

So lets see 1,4 heat for 3 critical slots, basicly means there useless tbh. if you want to make it 1,4 heat make them 2 critcal slots.
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.

A nice idea, but that'd invalidate the eventual Clan heat sinks.

ExAstris, on 02 November 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

Its taken a very long time to get the weapon balance to where it is now (and its still has a few problems), but drastically changing the heat efficiency of mechs would require a complete rebalance around those numbers. Not just a weapons rebalance, but a chassis rebalance as some mechs will end up needing more hardpoints to be competative. Furthermore, the 2.0 level dissipation just further magnifies the distance between new and old players, making those starting steps ever so rough.

Weapons kinda the rebalance anyway, and they've been saying so for a long time. As for new players, if they had some nice balanced Trial mechs, it wouldn't be a problem, and we've been calling for that for a long time. Still, as long as DHS are so expensive, I'm going to have to agree with you concerning new players.

Thing is, I'm really only seeing the lighter mechs gain the most benefit from DHS, as with their weight limits, DHS are far better for squeezing more into those precious tons. Hopefully, if they can fix the hitbox and firing delay issues, this would stop being a problem.

They've said that heat stopped being a problem with 2.0 Dissipation, and I have to say, what's wrong with that? We already deal with Heat neutral mechs like the Gausskitty and the Streakapult, and they're some of the most infamous mechs out there. Let other builds have their chance at that. Heat has always been a way of keeping people from stacking heavy non/lower ammunition dependent weapons, and lowering the alphas. Heat doesn't seem to be a problem in TT unless you overdo it, as it should be.

[Dal Gurak]

I can already see the huge limitations coming from DHS running at 1.4. It makes them a waste of the time and effort it takes to install them. With good team balancing I don't think it will really impact much on new players vs the old. Also, it'll add a goal for new players to reach.

I don't think DHS are all that easy to use. They take up a lot of critical slots and having an engine that takes more than a few are heavy too. You can't put Inner Sphere DHSs in your legs and if you mix your weapons with energy and an ammo dependant setup you can end up short on choice; sometimes having to put explosive ammo or DHS in sensitive areas then quickly having them lost in battle.

All of this I think balances the issue of them being 2 dissipation anyway.

[Xantha]

This is extremely disappointing. Don't call them double heat sinks when they don't even do 150% of the heat dissipation. The fact that DHS take up 3 crit slots alone makes it very limiting, especially when paired with endo or ferro.

Basically, you've just assured yourself that DHS won't be utilized at all. Overpriced, takes up 3 slots, barely an upgrade over a SH. Not to mention 2 SHS can be put into the legs while 1 DHS cannot.

Many of these restrictions make SHS a valid choice over DHS already. They should do 200% of what a SHS does. Period.

[Squarefox]

Double heat sinks should dissipiate 2.0 heat, but engine heat sinks should count completely as single heat sinks.
So you can decide whether your heat sinks take more critcal space or more weight.

[Excalibaard]

Stormfury basically says it all.

They're already pricy, take up a lot of space so they can't benefit from environmental cooling on the legs, and besides that they don't even reduce heat properly.
I like the 1.7 idea earlier in this thread too, but only if some other aspects are buffed as well.

[Decep-Qi-Kons]

Any of these games and decisions are about increasing performance margins. Upgrades in games are about small boosts to margins.

doubling effectiveness would be a huge boost to margins. There would be no trade off, everyone would have double heatsinks. Already they are the most effective upgrade because you get at least 10 of them for free, without the need to place them in hardpoints.


If heatsinks were 2.0 heat disipation, then assault mechs would be marginallized out of the game because the hardpoint space is so limited. Why have an assault mech which can't cram in all these DHS's when you can just throw them on a Cat and add a decent weapons loadout?

I support the 1.4 setup for the game balance. Otherwise, the whole game will turn in to a jenner/hunchback circle jerk.

[Amerante]

I don't vote, just simply put my opinion here.

This game is not the TT, but originates from it. I mean the basics are the same, but as we all see those are more likely guide lines and not rules set in stone, especially here.
The point of the lowered DHS efficiency is to make it a choice, rather then a must have.
I think it would be a fair change, if all engine HS would remain always SHS, but you could mix DHS and SHS, without the need to buy an upgrade, just pay the extra Crit slots and CB for the DHS. Also in the extra engine HS slots you could only put SHS.
This way you could chose to put in SHS for NO crit slot, but one ton, or use this ton as DHS if you have plenty of space.

I don't see the point in not allowing the mixing of them.
"operate in much the same way and for the same purpose as standard heat sinks."
"double heat sinks are normally incompatible with standard heat sinks." ( WHY?! )
("because it is the rule" is not an answer)

SHS and DHS both have their advantage and drawback, the most issue comes from the engine HS, and thats why I would keep them as SHS, then allowing the mixing of both SHS and DHS.

I know many canon build would suffer from it. But it is not TT, there are no 10 sec rounds, etc. The point is NOT make the SHS obsolete. And if we could mix them we probably would use both. (I find kinda silly to put the ammo into the leg, because DHS doesn't fit in)

Note: Keep in mind we have skills for robots that results in 15% better heat dissipation (doubled cool run, quite noticable already on my atlases) so the 1.4 DHS would be actually 1.4*1.15 = 1.61.
The 1.7 idea would lead to 1.955 which is really close to the original.
Then again all the SHS also work on 1.15 already because of this.

I hope it makes sense. its 4:00 here in the morning

Edited by Amerante, 03 November 2012 - 07:34 PM.

[TheBountyHunter]

DHS should be superior to SHS even for IS standards. With this decision, energy rich builds will turn even more unpopular. Weapons such as the ER Large Laser and ER-PPC only became viable with the introduction of DHS. Introducing them in this manner only soldifies the dominance of LRM and Gauss builds as those weapons do great amounts of damage with acceptable (LRMs) or minimal to non existant (Gauss) heat. Why should one bother with an Awesome or Hunchback with energy weapons when you can get a Gaussapult or a Hunback with Gauss?

Also, newer mechs and all Clan Mechs rely on DHS and their doubled dissipation rates. As per the current plan, no Clan Mech would be able to fire its weapons as it would subsequently overheat and shut down. The MadCat, Daishi or Warhawk would not be playable under the current trend.

I like the intention that heat should play significant role in the game, but simply cutting down the dissipation rates of DHS seems just wrong to me to keep it that way.

Edited by TheBountyHunter, 03 November 2012 - 11:42 PM.

[Black Ivan]

Excactly my thoughts TBH.

The Devs are effectivly killing the heavy energy weapons and improving the near to none or non heat weapons.
Clans mechs will not work because of their higher weapons heat and new IS Mechs won't be worthwile too. The 9M Awesome for example s worthless without its fully functional double heatsinks.

[Kaptain]

This 1.4 thing is garbage and needs to be reconsidered immediately.

[Dal Gurak]

The reason single heat sinks can't be mixed with double heat sinks are the huge in-balance it caused to early instances of battletech/mechwarrior to builds. You were able to fill in the drawback of Innersphere DHSs by having a few singles. Part of the difficulty of using the pre invasion innersphere tech was finding the space to use it. Especially DHSs with endo-steel or FF armour when you can find yourself running out of space very quickly and have to consider going back to singles.

This to me is part of the fun of mechwarrior at this time in the lore of the game. You need to be more creative with your builds than you had to be with clan tech.

It was also an effective way of keeping the huge gap between early innersphere tech and clan tech. Clan DHSs only take 2 critical slots and because of that are superior in every-way.

If the numbers turned out that DHSs were too overpowered at 2 dissipation I'd be happy to accept that they needed to be changed. But I think they should have put them into the game as they were supposed to be run, let us all test and give feedback then make the decision to do what ever with them.

Another minor point to bring up here were Double-Strength Heatsinks. These were different from double heat sinks as they were unstable in engines. But in the lore of the game they were a rare tech with none of the drawbacks of DHSs and could be used with singles. These could be a future rare item maybe.

Edited by Dal Gurak, 04 November 2012 - 05:10 AM.

[XtremeLord]

Double means double
make 3 HS
single 1.0 1 slot
double 2.0 3 slot
crap 1.4 2 slot
done

[wanderer]

Killkie, on 03 November 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

Any of these games and decisions are about increasing performance margins. Upgrades in games are about small boosts to margins.

doubling effectiveness would be a huge boost to margins. There would be no trade off, everyone would have double heatsinks. Already they are the most effective upgrade because you get at least 10 of them for free, without the need to place them in hardpoints.

I don't think you get it- but DHS are supposed to be the standard, and SHS the "budget-cheap" version of a cooling system.

Canonically, 3049 marks the point where Battlemechs take a step forward (or rather, forward again to where they were)- it would be like if we suddenly lost so much tech we went from jet fighters to WWII-style propeller ones. Sorta like the late 1940's/early 1950's (hey, funny that) where we started developing jet-engine aircraft, things like the DHS, Gauss Rifle, pulse lasers and ER weaponry began to make itself known. Just in time, too.

The Clans did what an armed force full of Korean War-era MiGs would pull on a force defending with old WWII aircraft- shot the existing defenders to pieces on a vastly superior basis- if they'd had comparable numbers, they'd have obliterated their opponents.

In the process, the Inner Sphere threw their old-tech designs in huge numbers into said meat grinder- with the result that most of them were turned into sausage even as they used the delaying tactics to push out upgraded versions and field refits.

By the late 3050's, old-tech machines, including ones commonly using single heat sinks had rapidly become the exception on the battlefield, mostly assigned to podunk militias or refit to newer standards. The double heat sink was actually the most common upgrade of the bunch (along with ferro-fibrous armor)- because modern warfare functioned at a higher baseline than the primitive, barely-buildable machines of the Succession Wars that marked the 3039 -> 2800 era of "lostech".

The single heat sink designs of old were literally blown out of warfare, either refitted into modern tech or scrapped by combat as newer, better designs marched off the assembly lines. There was no "sidegrade" discussions. SHS were inferior in most cases, DHS were the new standard and all 'Mechs were built with that base 20 heat removed/10 seconds standard in mind.

PGI's idea that somehow DHS should be a "sidegrade" is an A-1 method of leaving nearly every stock design to come that's 3050-era even worse than the stock Trial 'Mechs we see used in MWO today, and hampers or cripples heavier 'Mech designs even with customs using that technology.

People buying older 3025-era variants SHOULD be upgrading them quickly to DHS without much thought. It's what's supposed to happen anyway. Instead, later-tech chassis are given 70% their default heat removal while 3025 era ones get 100%, and the "upgrade" is functionally useless for assaults who desperately needed it.

Quote

If heatsinks were 2.0 heat disipation, then assault mechs would be marginallized out of the game because the hardpoint space is so limited. Why have an assault mech which can't cram in all these DHS's when you can just throw them on a Cat and add a decent weapons loadout?

I support the 1.4 setup for the game balance. Otherwise, the whole game will turn in to a jenner/hunchback circle jerk.

You apparently fail to realize that the less efficient a DHS becomes, the worse they are for heavier designs and the easier they are for lighter ones? Poorer DHS actually make the light/medium better off than the big guys.

[Exilyth]

[x] - at least 1.5

[Redlor Fidelious]

If "Doubling" up on things is supposed to increase any output by two then I may need to complain to NVIDIA. When I run two PCIE video cards I dont see 2 times the performance!

[Deadoon]

Redlor Fidelious, on 04 November 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

If "Doubling" up on things is supposed to increase any output by two then I may need to complain to NVIDIA. When I run two PCIE video cards I dont see 2 times the performance!

It isn't 2 heat sinks put together though it is a lightweight crystalline mesh mesh that is more bulky than a normal heat sink and provides double the cooling at the same weight at the cost of 3 times the size.

Video cards have a technical capacity to double the processing ability, but the limitation is transferring data between them causing a massive drop in performance, while a large bulky heat sink with a lot of surface can work alot better than a compact brick heatsink in computers.

Heck look at zalman heat sinks compared to the ones that come with you cpu they are a real life comparison of effectiveness.

[Damien]

Will the name of the double heat sinks be changed to 1.4 heat sinks? Will they only take up 1.9 critical spaces? There must be another way to balance the DHS than changing the definition of 'double'!

[Noth]

the Poll doesn't have enough options. 2.0 would be unbalanced and 1.4 makes the DHS not even worth it. 1.6-1.7 I think would be great.

[Deadoon]

Compact heat sinks would be fun to play with, adds a extra weird variety of options to choose from, but only viable on a few designs that are bulk heavy.

Noth, on 04 November 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

the Poll doesn't have enough options. 2.0 would be unbalanced and 1.4 makes the DHS not even worth it. 1.6-1.7 I think would be great.

Without 2.0 however later mech designs would be broken to the point of being unusable like the K2K model catapult(2 erppc 2 er medium lasers and 20 double heatsinks combined with the engine heatsinks made it effectively 50 heat dispersion) and many others or the K3 which is 10 years before the curent time period ingame and had the same thing without the er lasers that aren't even developed yet.

Edited by Deadoon, 04 November 2012 - 11:42 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

ExAstris, on 02 November 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

Going with a full 2.0 dissipation is a terrible idea. Its taken a very long time to get the weapon balance to where it is now (and its still has a few problems),

To upgrade my PPC from 1 DPS to 2 DPS (e.g. from firing it once every 10 seconds to twice over 10 seconds) I need to pay 10 tons in heat sinks if I don#t want to overheat any faster than before.
To upgrade my Gauss Rifle from 1.5 DPS to 3 DPS (e.g. from firing it once every 10 seconds to twice over 10 seconds), I need to pay 1 ton in heat sinks if I don#t want to overheat any faster than before.
To upgrade my AC/10 from 1 DPS to 2 DPS (e.g. from firing it once every 10 seconds to twice over 10 seconds), I need to pay 3 tons in heat sinks if I don't want to overheat any faster than before.
To upgrade my LRM20 from 4 DPS to 8 DPS (e.g. from firing it once every 10 seconds to twice over 10 seconds), I need to pay 6 tons in heat sinks if I don't want to overheat any faster).

So with a PPC, 10 points of damage cost 10 tons. With a Gauss Rifle, 15 points of damage cost 1 ton. With an AC/10, 10 points of damage cost 3 tons. With a LRM20, 40 points of damage cost 6 tons.

The weapon balance may have gone places, but it doesn't have just a few problems - it has considerable problems.