Terror Teddy, on 09 November 2012 - 12:42 AM, said:
AC20: Heat: 185 (70*2,5) DPS: 50
Gauss: Heat: 25 (10*2,5) DPS: 37,5
The Gauss, a weapon with huge *** magnetic accelerators and energy banks generate in comparison NO heat. How? Even NOT using real world physics makes ones head hurt in the illogical inbalance of the weapon.
The energy needed to expel that metal ball SHOULD give off more heat than 600% LESS than the AC20.
Ignoring the issues surrounding heat-heavy weapons (i.e. lasers/PPCs), which I personally think need a tonnage and/or slot decrease more than a heat decrease, the Gauss compared with other ballistics is way out of whack. It has the best alpha, second best range and a solid mid-range dps. And the lowest heat per second of any ballistic (barring the machine gun, which is so anaemic as to be irrelevant until crits arrive). This is just bad. HPS for the Gauss needs to be raised considorably. The AC10 has comparable dps (4 vs 3.75) with less range, less tonnage. These qualities and the advantage inherent in high alpha suggest they should have comparable heat issues. The AC10 sits at 1.2 HPS, the Gauss at 0.25 - that's almost five times as hot.
Indoorsman, on 09 November 2012 - 05:01 AM, said:
I honestly agree with you that TT values can't be used hard-and-fast as balancing mechanics. However the core issue, that of heat balance being clearly out of whack, is true irrespective of that. I don't understand why damage was split over a sub-10s ROF but heat wasn't. It's a glaring mathematical issue, not purely a case of not adhering to TT. That said, there are values being talked about that are a lot more relevant for real time balancing - Damage Per Second, Heat Per Second, Damage Per Heat, Damage Per Ton - these need focusing on more than TT values, IMO.