24 replies to this topic

[Sybreed]

I won't search for the direct quote, but Bryan said that we would rather have 1.4 DHS now, then possibly get them buffed afterwards after getting telemetry data, then get 2.0 DHS now then get them nerfed.

And ********* is he right.

Just imagine the current whining, then multiply by 10^10 if they ever thought of nerfing 2.0 DHS.

Be patient people, Rome wasn't build in a day.

If they discover current DHS need to be buffed, they'll do it. They buffed other stuff before based on "CONSTRUCTIVE" player feedback (read: Before closed beta founders got in, no offense, but that's when the !$!" hit the fan).

Gauss Cats are annoying, but would you rather turn the game into a Laser fest? Some of us remember the days of the dreadful Lunchbacks squads that could rip through an entire Lance of Atlas like knife through butter.

All I'm saying is wait guys. Test the new DHS when they come out, post constructive, non-whiney feedback, and PGI will listen to your point. They might not do what you want, but sometimes, what individuals want aren't necessarily what's best for a group.

[Keifomofutu]

Its as bad as the current iteration for the majority of mechs. But hey it benefits lights more so I guess it balanced.

[Bloody Moon]

The waves of the whine about DHSs already started to wash the shores of the forums. Just wait 'till they get implemented with 1.4 effectiveness, you'll see the tsunami aswell.

After some quick number crunching i've already made my suggestion in the proper forum section so i'll probably ignore this from now on and adapt as best i can.

Edited by Bloody Moon, 03 November 2012 - 08:30 PM.

[Konflict]

While I agree with OP, this stuff should have been tweaked in closed beta before we went OB. Cuz now we are paying for this stuff with real MC/CBill's/$'s that simply do not work. When/if they get this fixed, who knows, but right now I am not that happy about this DHS issue. If they consider giving all that went DHS route a CBill refund if we don't like it because we wasted a ton on it.

[Jarvis]

Konflict, on 03 November 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

While I agree with OP, this stuff should have been tweaked in closed beta before we went OB. Cuz now we are paying for this stuff with real MC/CBill's/$'s that simply do not work. When/if they get this fixed, who knows, but right now I am not that happy about this DHS issue. If they consider giving all that went DHS route a CBill refund if we don't like it because we wasted a ton on it.

Given that you're up for 750,000 credits to swap back to regular heat sinks, I think that's exactly what they should do. A roll back to regular heat sinks with a credit of the 1,500,000 cost please.

[Bloody]

well, imho, the better point is the PGI does not do much testing internally.

They implemented DHS thinking it would work as expected.

But it was bugged

they then retested it and then came to the conclusion that if it worked properly, then it would be OP and thus they nerfed it to 1.4

Do you see the problem here? If they actually did TEST it properly in the FIRST instance, and more importantly how did they test it in the first place and not come to the GOSH ITZ OP >>> NEERRFFFF .. situation they are in now ??

so yeah /shrug. Oh yeah i would like a refund please and a rename of DHS to 1.4HS

Edited by Bloody, 03 November 2012 - 08:44 PM.

[Konflict]

Well I won't get into my thoughts about how well they tested this, but it should have been tested much more... like in Closed Beta... Before OB hit, or at least get some real testers in there. Here's an idea, put up a test server and copy over our accounts so we can you know, test before we spend.

Edited by Konflict, 03 November 2012 - 08:49 PM.

[NaerahQc]

Here: http://mwomercs.com/...15#entry1336815

[Konflict]

I did post my build on that one thread, thanks for the link tho. It does prove a point that they need a test server for us so we don't waste $'s on features that are not working, until they work right.

[Khobai]

The thing is we already know 1.4 double heatsinks will need a buff. So why not just save themselves the trouble and start them out at a higher value like 1.6?

[Mister Blastman]

Khobai, on 03 November 2012 - 09:38 PM, said:

The thing is we already know 1.4 double heatsinks will need a buff. So why not just save themselves the trouble and start them out at a higher value like 2.0?

Fixed.

[Johnny Reb]

Dreaded I still miss my fast Hunchie! All good, the Cicada and dealing have quelled my rage.

[Xantars]

1.4 Isnt that big a diffrence We are paying 1,500,000 for 2.0 HS if they are going to Nerf the HS then they better Nerf the Price

[Like a Sir]

I would normally say wait and see, but my problem is, simple math shows that the 1.4 heat sinks will make my heat dissipation worse in aws-9m then it is now, making DHS worthless. So yeah, the fact that PGI can't do simple math or half arse descent internal testing, makes me want to say DIAF.

[Wolfways]

I'm sure they will work it out fine.
I mean, they made sure that the K2 carried the big weapons in its "arms".

[Daurock]

Honestly, i thnk i like the idea of having the current "bugged" implementation more than the potential "1.4" implementation.

The effective cap remains about the same as the 1.4 sinks (about 30-35 effective dissipation) but is much more straightforward to calculate, and benefits the larger mechs a bit more (as the 1.4 implementation would benefit smaller mechs more than the engine-free model does.) In my opinion, those are good things.

[the huanglong]

I would be okay with 1.5 even, just because it is way easier to calculate if you are weighing your options in your head. 2DHS = 3SHS of cooling. I can't think of a good thing to say about 1.4 except that it is better than <1.4.

[Ordin Hall]

Behold the power of the golden glasses.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

Double Heat Sinks don't sink double the heat generated? where am I? this isn't mechwarrior.

[EvilCow]

While I agree that DHS should not reach the TT x2 efficiency I also feel that 1.4 is too low as starting point, the risk is to make them useful only for light mechs and those are already way too effective (Jenner pilot here...).

I would start with x1.5 or 1.6 then collect statistics.