425 replies to this topic

[KeeperOf42]

Here's the problem. You've effectively stopped the ability for Assaults and Heavies to do their job properly. They have a challenge as is taking on the daring of Lights and Mediums especially with collision and knockdown removed.

Lights and Mediums can more effectively brawl then a lot of assault load-outs because they not only have the speed to play they have the crits to play with. We the Battletech/Mechwarrior community KNEW that Double Heat Sinks would make laser-boating and PPCs stupidly effective and accepted that because we also knew it would make usage of other weapons a lot easier as well and suddenly we had more crits to afford Endo-Steel and other needed items to give us the tonnage to bulk out are armor and weapons.

You tested internally and thought there was a flaw to it rather then releasing it to the community and let us test and give good feedback on the issue like we have always done in Closed Beta and even now in Open Beta. You didn't let us decide for ourselves as a whole if Double Heatsinks were over-powered or under-powered and when Clan Tech comes around I shudder to think how much of a nerf Clan Double Heatsinks will get or the head-rolling that will be spawned if Clan Tech gets better then Inner Sphere nerfed values.

We're shelling out 1.5 million C-Bills for an upgrade that we could have better spent our C-Bills on buying new mechs if this was the end result.

That is what has spawned ten pages of outrage.

[Vengeance1]

You know..... nah, screw it, not going to rant.

There is a bug of some sort that causes atlas' to go 'Boom' in one shot.... I have case, standard armor and standard frame.

Fix it or not.... I can see where this game is going... money grab, money grab, money grab, with no real fixes.

[General Peron]

I just don't understand it. Why the premade teams must be from 4 guys onward? I play only with 1 friend, so from 20th nov onwards i'm forced to get 2 more guys or play alone?

Where's the logic on that, or the advantage of 2 men/3men premade groups?

[Onyx Rain]

General Peron, on 07 November 2012 - 07:35 PM, said:

I just don't understand it. Why the premade teams must be from 4 guys onward? I play only with 1 friend, so from 20th nov onwards i'm forced to get 2 more guys or play alone?

Where's the logic on that, or the advantage of 2 men/3men premade groups?

I don't understand why your post is so off topic but I'll answer you anyways....
(I can only assume there was some issue with the language barrier)

1. You can team with 1 person, or 2, or 3 right now...So you can play with your one friend and drop into a game with him, and be matched with 6 other random players

2. A maximum of 4 in a pre-made group, IS TEMPORARY....this is only going to last a couple weeks, and we'll be back to 8 man groups, and have a better overall MM system.

3. How can you not see an advantage to playing with 2-3 people you know?, especially if you have voice chat? If they are decent players at all, you'll have a much better shot at winning with people you know and can hear then 3-4 random people who aren't in voice chat.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 07 November 2012 - 08:22 PM.

[Wildflame]

A few thoughts:

The current breakpoint is 17 heatsinks. If you had 16 or fewer heatsinks before they fixed DHS, your heat dissipation has now improved in-game (though it is not reflected in the heat efficiency scale in Mechlab AFAIK). If you had more, your heat dissipation has been nerfed.

This buffs non-assault Mechs, as they are more likely to have 16 or fewer heatsinks (My Jenner has 12, Cicada 15, Catapult 14), and also to have the necessary crit space to be able to use DHS.

This, combined with the disproportionately high heat output of the larger weapons such as the PPC/ERPPC and the AC/20 (which has been partially addressed this patch) limits build diversity. It will be interesting to see what they do from here.

[Krinkov]

Currently double heatsinks are proving to be at most a side-grade in the larger mechs; In many builds they are in fact downgrades. I propose a very simple solution. Make double heatsinks actually double your heat mitigation after you reach elite with a mech chassis. A rating of 1.7 would be perfect because 2/1.15 = 1.74; they would be a bit less than true double heatsinks at that point. This would finally let PPCs compete with gauss rifles on the battlefield.

[AsakuraZero]

******** on the spot, that was my magic number too, send it via ticket, 1.4 its a bit too low, 1.8 tad too high, 1.5 its like no, so 1.7 sounds good.

we should remember, we are not dakka dakka unlimited fire machines...

[Onyx Rain]

Wildflame, on 07 November 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

A few thoughts:

The current breakpoint is 17 heatsinks. If you had 16 or fewer heatsinks before they fixed DHS, your heat dissipation has now improved in-game (though it is not reflected in the heat efficiency scale in Mechlab AFAIK). If you had more, your heat dissipation has been nerfed.

This buffs non-assault Mechs, as they are more likely to have 16 or fewer heatsinks (My Jenner has 12, Cicada 15, Catapult 14), and also to have the necessary crit space to be able to use DHS.

This, combined with the disproportionately high heat output of the larger weapons such as the PPC/ERPPC and the AC/20 (which has been partially addressed this patch) limits build diversity. It will be interesting to see what they do from here.

Yep, I think with all the QQing , they will be forced into making a change and there is no where to go but up without making the QQing worse

We may never have true DHS at least with a 2 increase to threshold heat (maybe .2 to heat dissipation), but in the end we'll end up with something better then we have now. Hopefully by next patch.

[Caleb Lee]

I just want to report that while my heat efficiency indicator in the mech lab went down, actual in game performance is much, much better on my Jenner and Catapults. As for the Jenners specifically, fixing the DHS in the engines bug has resulted in me being able to fire all four Med lasers much more often along with Streak-2s and not overheating.

The last patch I had major heat issues and really had to watch it, even suicided once on Caustic. Those concerns are gone, and the additional 'cool' remake of Forest is a nice addition.

In a nutshell, the fixes to known heat issues make be believe that they are correct in stating that 2.0 might have been overpowered. I'd still like to see 1.6 or 1.7 but I'm liking the changes.

[Caleb Lee]

Wildflame, on 07 November 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

A few thoughts:

The current breakpoint is 17 heatsinks. If you had 16 or fewer heatsinks before they fixed DHS, your heat dissipation has now improved in-game (though it is not reflected in the heat efficiency scale in Mechlab AFAIK). If you had more, your heat dissipation has been nerfed.

This buffs non-assault Mechs, as they are more likely to have 16 or fewer heatsinks (My Jenner has 12, Cicada 15, Catapult 14), and also to have the necessary crit space to be able to use DHS.

This, combined with the disproportionately high heat output of the larger weapons such as the PPC/ERPPC and the AC/20 (which has been partially addressed this patch) limits build diversity. It will be interesting to see what they do from here.

Ok, this makes sense based on my 'in game experience'. I still feel 1.6 or 1.7 would be a better value.

[Marukeru]

I haven't come across this issue before, but I am running an AWS-8R (had this issue with my other 2 Dragons as well) and anytime I select to upgrade my heat sinks to the DHS I find that my move speed drops from 48.6 kph to 16.2 kph.

Now, I have yet to actually complete the upgrade as I fear I will actually be stuck with 16.2 for my movement. It seems that something is happening to my engine with the DHS upgrade.
I AM in fact still running the Standard 240 Engine, as a new engine is incredibly pricey atm.

An added note, I have removed all extra Heat Sinks, but still find this happening.
I hope this can be fixed relatively soon, as it has brought the customization of my mech to a halt, leaving me with lack of room for up to 3 of my desired weapons that I know should fit.



Any ideas? Any Fixes? Is this an issue for anyone else perhaps?

[Cest7]

re-equip the engine maybe?

[CrazyPenguin]

I've noticed that as well. It seems to be only an error in the GUI, as after you actually upgrade your listed speed returns to what it should be displayed as.

I have noticed a similar error in the mech's tonnage. If I repair a mech from the mechlab, and I choose not to fill up the ammunition, then the mech's current tonnage drops by the amount of ammunition the mech has for a couple of moments before it updates with the repairs. Even if I launch immediately, while it shows the incorrect tonnage amount, I will still have full ammo in-game.

[Dal Gurak]

At first I was somewhat sceptical about the DHS going to 1.4. After several games of using a Mech that revolves around energy weapons my view is changing.

As I see it now the choice really comes down to space on your mech. As with endo steel and ferro fibre, all you are doing is choosing between more weight being used or loosing weight but having fewer critical slots for weapons. As the system is now for heat sinks, that is pretty much what you are left with. Even with the slight increase to generate heat of the pulse lasers I'm still using them as I did with my single heat sink build, but I have a little extra weight for a few extras.

Is this what the developers actually had in mind? In battle tech lore DHS actually became the normal during the clan invasion and after single heat sinks were pretty much forgotten.

I still think the 1.4 is a little low; maybe a 1.5 setting would be better? This would ease the problem with assault mechs, which is that you just can't fit enough double heat sinks to your mech to be of benifit due to crits used. This especially applies to the awesome with erppcs.

I think going down the road of them being a choice, rather than something you defiantly need to upgrade to, will bring something to the game the others didn't have.

[Valder]

After reading through the 11 pages of responses to my thread, I want to shoot myself in the face. %90 of it is garbage that is 'general forum bait'. And the more I rage at it the worse it gets

=D

[Zylox]

I find it weird that the DHSs are in the "upgrade" category, but they're not really an upgrade - just a compromise. Maybe they should rename the tab to "compromises".

[Apoc1138]

the only way that DHS are viable on larger mechs is if you strip absolutely everything and then boat heatsinks and cram in whatever small weapons you can afterward

just for a laugh I'm going to try 3 PPC's on an atlas (and nothing else) just to see how bad it is

realistically it needs to be about 1.7 to offer anything by way of an "upgrade" to larger mechs, if this means that cheese builds with small lasers are possible then small lasers need a nerf, not DHS' which affect absolutely everything

[Dal Gurak]

Yeah, reading back I think 1.7 would be the better number but there is a chance that is too much. Also I agree with the renaming of the upgrades. Maybe that could call it 'modifications' instead. Other than the artemis, the others are just an exchange of weight for critical slots.

Artemis could come under '**** my mech'.

Edited by Dal Gurak, 08 November 2012 - 04:24 AM.

[Fooooo]

Zylox, on 08 November 2012 - 01:35 AM, said:

I find it weird that the DHSs are in the "upgrade" category, but they're not really an upgrade - just a compromise. Maybe they should rename the tab to "compromises".

Well they are an upgrade.

Single heatsink = 1.0DP , +1HT
Double heatsink = 1.4DP, +2HT

Looks like they perform better than singles in a 1:1 comparison. So, IF you could fit 30SHS or 30DHS, what would you choose ? DHS? I thought so..........

Yes, you can't fit enough DHS on some mechs to keep above the amount of singles you can put in, but that doesn't mean that the double heatsinks themselves are not an upgrade on single heatsinks......that just means there isnt enough room on some mechs to fit enough of them, meaning you can fit more singles for a better total effect.

Your thinking the upgrade means "Put this on to make your whole mech better than it is now no matter what", when it really means "Change these items (armor, Structure, Heatsinks) to these upgraded ones that perform better than their counterparts".

Edited by Fooooo, 08 November 2012 - 03:25 AM.

[Tuku]

Apoc1138, on 08 November 2012 - 01:43 AM, said:

just for a laugh I'm going to try 3 PPC's on an atlas (and nothing else) just to see how bad it is

Tried 3 ER PPCs on an Atlas RS .....Got 30% heat efficiency with a standard 360 engine (4 heatsink slots in engine) This puts him going 58.3 KPH in an atlas and most likely able to alpha strike 3 times before overheating....If you stood back and snipped in on ongoing battles you could do horrible dirty things to people.

23 total DHS on the thing. It would not take to much work to manage the heat enough to use this boat effectively I can promise you .