425 replies to this topic

[Do Legs]

How did they end up with that 1.4 anyway?

Are all engine SHS converted into same count of DHS or proportionally to space occupied?
Say you have 300 engine with 12 SHS. If upgraded do you end up with 12 or 4 DHS?

If 12 then it looks like the source of disbalance and the cause the low heat efficiency of DHS. Still I believe they would never get a proper numbers; engine should have same heat dissipation while extra heat sinks you put are twice effective. That's the point of customization, is it not?

[Bob Fire]

hi all

- or the name is DHS and the efficiency is double.
- or efficiency is 1.4 and the name is not DHS.
- but NOT a mix of both.

<<S>>
Bob Fire

[Dal Gurak]

brundron, on 08 November 2012 - 04:53 AM, said:

Are all engine SHS converted into same count of DHS or proportionally to space occupied?
Say you have 300 engine with 12 SHS. If upgraded do you end up with 12 or 4 DHS?

All engine heatsinks are now converted to the DHS at the setting of 1.4. Before the last patch they weren't, they stayed as single. Only the heatsinks outside your engine were double.

brundron, on 08 November 2012 - 04:53 AM, said:

How did they end up with that 1.4 anyway?

Apparently, after fixing the problem where engine HSs were staying as single when upgrading, they found that they were too OP at 2 dissipation and they just couldn't overheat. 1.4 is a test setting to see how it works out and they will be watching it closely they say.

Edited by Dal Gurak, 08 November 2012 - 05:35 AM.

[Calmon]

LRMs are heavily overpowered in moment and it seems more and more its a combination of a lot of things coming together. One of it is the fact that DHS engine WORKS with 2.0 now, only the not-engine DHS have 1.4. For sure this increase LRM power because heat management was an issue for them.

So hotfix engine DHS because it gives light mechs increadible advantage. Details seeing here:

http://mwomercs.com/...-effectiveness/

You really need to check what you're doing. I can't believe you did another major mistake by implementing this again in a wrong way. What are you doing? Is the guy doing this is not double checking everything works fine? Feels nobody else responsible for doing some heat math?

I mean you test/balance the game on this data. Heat is one important fact of the game so it should get some attention especially if you made this mistake with engine=1.0 before...

Edited by Calmon, 08 November 2012 - 06:26 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Well, I haven't heard anyone complain yet that DHS were overpowered... So it may not be as relevant.

[Calmon]

MustrumRidcully, on 08 November 2012 - 06:26 AM, said:

Well, I haven't heard anyone complain yet that DHS were overpowered... So it may not be as relevant.

Well some part of the LRM OP resulted because of this! So now they nerf LRM to oblivion, fix all the bugs and on the end people cry LRM is unusable. On the same time Light mechs will get most power for their tons. Big engine, all 2.0.

[Flapdrol]

ah, so that's why my 3x artemis lrm15 catapult didn't have any heat problems

[Calmon]

OhGilPin, on 08 November 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:

I've only just started using LRMs since this patch and I can assure you I haven't used DHS yet. 2x LRM 20 with 4 single heatsinks and a standard 260 engine, lets me do sustained fire for quite a while. I'm pretty sure the only problem is the huge arc and drop LRMs currently do...

All I can say is I'm boosting all the LRM based 'Mechs during this patch so I don't have to do them all later.

No its not only a problem of Arc because I can fire 2xLRM20 AND 2xLRM15 nearly constantly now which I could fire only 2-3 times in row until heat was 100% before the patch!

So a lot of factors which makes LRM incredible OP so they need some deep testing otherwise it will be horrible overnerfed

Edited by Calmon, 08 November 2012 - 06:45 AM.

[EnigmaNL]

How do YOU know that the DHS in engines do 2.0 instead of 1.4?

[MustrumRidcully]

EnigmaNL, on 08 November 2012 - 06:46 AM, said:

How do YOU know that the DHS in engines do 2.0 instead of 1.4?

Another poster found it out. He experimented, and he found the datamined the stats - the findings where the same. It's somewhere in the General Discussion forums.

[Calmon]

EnigmaNL, on 08 November 2012 - 06:46 AM, said:

How do YOU know that the DHS in engines do 2.0 instead of 1.4?

I linked the thread.

[Mechteric]

Double heat sinks already get double the heat dissipation, this alone makes it worth it. The extra capacity is just icing on the cake, who cares if its "only" 1.4x.

Hell I can fire 2 ERLL nonstop on Caustic in the middle of the crater in my centurion with double heat sinks now. Double heat sinks are very good and there's really no complaints to be had here.

[Calmon]

So you think SHS is bugged as well? Maybe running like DHS with 2.0 now in engine? Possible is everything.

[Lanessar]

DHS has been beaten to death with evidence, builds, loadouts, theorycrafting, etc. The bottom line is that heat versus rate of fire is broken.

Granted, we're working with a broken foundation already (per MCXL's awesome post). However, a build that breaks the game is apparently the JR7-D per a post that Garth made using anecdotal information. Note that the anecdote given is still possible with 1.4 HS and granted that said Atlas had stripped rear armor.

However, Streaks never, ever built up enough heat to have this as a downside versus 2xSRM4 or another config. The downside to SSRMs is the lock time. With a good light pilot at the helm, a commando or Jenner is about the only build that can regularly hit a Jenner running about (granted they know how to use JJ). That's presuming you manage a lock, which was really hard with a close fast moving mech.

Even as a Jenner, I'd regularly miss other JR's with SSRMs. You had to fire slightly ahead of their travel path, and if they used JJ at the right time, those streaks would miss. I used this tactic a few times against streak cats, and they do have a hard time hitting when it's done right.

SRMs actually seemed to work better when the Netcode was decent, if you fire well ahead of a circling light. The spray would hit them with 2-3 missiles out of six, as opposed to missing with both. Sometimes they JJ right into the missile path. You just had to be clever with predicting where the light was headed. Running my AWS with 4xSRM6, I was far more accurate with SRMs than Streaks - primarily because of the lock-on time.

[Atheus]

Tuku, on 08 November 2012 - 04:26 AM, said:

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 .

You'll have higher DPS with just 2 and add another DHS. That's the silly thing about ER PPC's right now. It's literally not possible to have enough cooling to run more than 1 at full output on any mech. Yeah, it's a balance between encounter time and weapon heat, but the bottom line is when you've got a Jenner circling you, you're probably going to need a lot of shots to bring him down with any unguided projectile weapon.

[Name60014]

I haven't looked recently but aren't XL engines heavier now regardless of whether or not you slot the additional sinks in the engine? They're no longer 50% lighter from the get-go.

Why would they include the extra tonnage before you even throw it in a mech and add sinks?

[syngyne]

Red Leaves, on 08 November 2012 - 07:31 AM, said:

I haven't looked recently but aren't XL engines heavier now regardless of whether or not you slot the additional sinks in the engine? They're no longer 50% lighter from the get-go.

Are you taking into account the gyro weight?

[Name60014]

syngyne, on 08 November 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Are you taking into account the gyro weight?

No because an XL is supposed to be 50% lighter than a standard engine. An XL and standard of the same rating no longer have that ratio. An XL 300 is 15.5T where before it was 12.5T. I don't know if its a display issue on the front end but I haven't taken the time to really dig into component weight to see where those 3 tons are.

[Egomane]

Engine weight now includes:
- Cockpit
- Gyro
- Engine

It does currently not include:
- Weight for heatsinks below 10 if they don't fit into the engine

So, yes, it could get confusing with the engine weight, but I haven't noticed any errors, so far.

Example:
Per Tabletop rules, a standard 100 engine would weigh 3 tons. A cockpit always weighs 3 tons. A gyro for a 100 rated engine costs 1 ton (engine rating/100, always round up to the next full ton). For a total of 7 tons.
In MWO, a standard 100 engine weighs 1 ton. That is the above 7 tons minus the 6 tons for heatsinks that don't fit into the engine.

Example 2:
Per Tabletop rules, a XL 200 engine would weigh 4.5 tons. A cockpit always weighs 3 tons. A gyro for a 200 rated engine costs 2 ton (engine rating/100, always round up to the next full ton). For a total of 9.5 tons.
In MWO, a XL 200 engine weighs 7.5 ton. That is the above 9.5 tons minus the 2 tons for heatsinks that don't fit into the engine.

Everything is fine here, please move along.

Edited by Egomane, 08 November 2012 - 08:07 AM.

[Death Dealer 199]

DHS need to be 2x
This last change to 1.4 made my atlas unplayable. I run a mix of ballistic, energy, and missiles. If I played correctly and managed my heat I could play the whole match without overheating, now I overheat so often I die within the first 3 min of the match.
I do not think the 1.5 mill c-bills paid for the downgraded DHS are worth it now.