234 replies to this topic

[Bors Mistral]

OK, first, here's what we seem to agree on regarding the current (unintended) 2.0/1.4 DHS implementation:
- light mechs, the Janner in particular, benefit disproportionately more than other mechs
- on mediums, the current implementation seems to be OK
- on heavies, it is hard to justify the extra cost and equipment juggling for using DHS
- on assault mechs, if you don't care about the cost and you absolutely want to install DHS and not gimp yourself too much - you have to basically forgo Endo and Ferro-Fibrous (not that there is any reason to take that last one with it's current performance and cost) completely.

Conclusion: give all Triple-Slot-Heatsinks a value of 1.8 - both in and out of engine. That will make them feel like an upgrade worth the cost for all mech.

The problem with Janners and such has to do more with the bad hit detection and the lack of tripping. Once the first is improved and the second returns, even a DHS value of 2 would probably be alright.

[Clay Pigeon]

Bors Mistral, on 13 November 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

OK, first, here's what we seem to agree on regarding the current (unintended) 2.0/1.4 DHS implementation:
- light mechs, the Janner in particular, benefit disproportionately more than other mechs
- on mediums, the current implementation seems to be OK
- on heavies, it is hard to justify the extra cost and equipment juggling for using DHS
- on assault mechs, if you don't care about the cost and you absolutely want to install DHS and not gimp yourself too much - you have to basically forgo Endo and Ferro-Fibrous (not that there is any reason to take that last one with it's current performance and cost) completely.

Conclusion: give all Triple-Slot-Heatsinks a value of 1.8 - both in and out of engine. That will make them feel like an upgrade worth the cost for all mech.

The problem with Janners and such has to do more with the bad hit detection and the lack of tripping. Once the first is improved and the second returns, even a DHS value of 2 would probably be alright.

I'll give you a 2.0 out of ten. That's the best I can do. DHS should be 2.0

[fxrsniper]

Vassago Rain, on 13 November 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

It's because of lagshields. You remove them, lights poof when you hit them.

That is true

MiG77, on 13 November 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

???

I eat any hunchback for lunch in my Atlas. I have way more firepower/armor, they cannot out manouver me and I never overheat before they are dead. Jenners/other 130+km/h mech are only problem because they are so fast. If they moved only ~100kp/h, I would easely destroy them aswell.

So but it is what it is. It's a fact that some hunchback variants are over powered like the 4j the can run 6 med 2 srm 6 and not overheat thats over powered

Edited by fxrsniper, 13 November 2012 - 12:55 PM.

[Like a Sir]

fxrsniper, on 13 November 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

That is true

So but it is what it is. It's a fact that some hunchback variants are over powered like the 4j the can run 6 med 2 srm 6 and not overheat thats over powered

I'm sorry, gonna have to call bs on this. I have 7 med lasers on my AWS-8Q with 36 single heat sinks. With the way things are right now, that's over 22 double heat sinks.. My AWS overheats after 2-3 alphas, depending on the map I am playing, so please please, show me a hunchback that can fit this many double heat sinks, and then if it does, not overheat, post a video because until then, you are incredibly full of it.

[AEgg]

Like a Sir, on 13 November 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

I'm sorry, gonna have to call bs on this. I have 7 med lasers on my AWS-8Q with 36 single heat sinks. With the way things are right now, that's over 22 double heat sinks.. My AWS overheats after 2-3 alphas, depending on the map I am playing, so please please, show me a hunchback that can fit this many double heat sinks, and then if it does, not overheat, post a video because until then, you are incredibly full of it.

6 Medium Lasers and only 12 DHS on a Cicada is entirely usable (Although not as good as 4 ML and two LL with the same number of HS). The reason is that you're moving around so much that you never fire more than one alpha in sequence. Assaults tend to stand in place more often so builds attempt to be more heat efficient, but for lights and mediums heat efficiency isn't as important because you don't ever constantly fire.

[ReD3y3]

2.0 would be appreciated

Maibly because the game is a bit too hot. I want to be able to shoot my lasers. Not watch them cool down.

[Vanguard319]

I'm definitely loving the new heat sinks now. Now can we get working PPCs, and the ability to knock down light mechs again?

[ReD3y3]

yes plz

collision back
net code so i can hit lights
ppc buff
2.0 heat sinks
matchmaking



do those things and ppl will be REALLY happy

oh then you can throw in a mech or two then maps!!!!

[MWHawke]

IMO a lot of people are not very clear of the argument.

Think about this guys, if DHS were 2.0, you could run the same set up as the JNRs AND add more weapons on your heavier mechs. Doesn't that mean heavier mechs get a better advantage?

And with regard to hard point restrictions, think about this, It's not about maxing out weapons at a particular range. The ability to fight long range AND short range is one of the biggest benefits of heavier mechs.

Example is, you create a JNR, fill it up with MLasers and necessary DHS. Compare it to a heavy/assault mech, you could also tag on LRMs/Gauss/SRMs/ER PPCs. You're not supposed to mash your alpha strikes continuously, but to use the appropriate weapons at the appropriate range.

[TigrisMorte]

Rifter, on 12 November 2012 - 10:50 PM, said:

He didnt make a poor statement he outright lied, and since he isnt backing up his statements with any facts or explanation it sure isnt helping his cause any.

He could have at least said they made a huge mistake and that he only accomplished what he did due to the internal structure having 0 hp bug that was introduced last patch, as that at least makes sense as to what he described.

But still doesnt explain the fact that in 3 seconds SHS or DHS are going to be completly irrelivent as to what a jenner can do for damage.

No need to be rude. His intent and belief are unknown and irrelevant.

[Solis Obscuri]

FiveDigits, on 12 November 2012 - 01:25 AM, said:

The two points you made:

• 0.2 / 2.0 DHS are not OP.
  
• Only engine-internal DHS are true DHS, externals are 0.14 / 1.4 which favors Lights and Mediums.

can not be stressed enough and need to be repeated ad nauseum until PGI acknowledges that they misjudged the situation and give us proper 0.2 / 2.0 DHS across the board.

I fully agree on that.

I'd also like to repeat a suggestion that would give SHS a purpose beyond being cheap:

• SHS cool 0.1 HPS and increase total heat capacity by 1.0
  
• DHS cool 0.2 HPS and increase total heat capacity by 1.0

This would allow builds with (many) SHS increased alpha strike capability while DHS would provide better sustained damage.

I do have to say, I've been thinking this could be a good compromise solution.

[Lanessar]

Marzepans, on 13 November 2012 - 02:12 AM, said:

Has nobody noticed the Jenners running about with 4 M Lasers and 2 SSRMs alpha striking continually without ever getting much beyond 60% of their heat threshold? They are all over the place and loving the DHS.

I drive such a Jenner, and this is simply not true.

EDIT: Let me qualify that statement.

I usually have LA and RA lasers mapped to 1 and 2. These generate 5 heat per laser (20 heat) when fired in relatively short order. Previous to DHS, my heat threshold was 30 (base) + 12 (300 XL engine) + 2 additional.

This means a total of about 8 alphas with a heat dissipation of 4.6 per second (4 second recharge time, 4 lasers heat dissipated, SSRMs are the only "above and beyond" heat). With singles, this is as close to a heat-neutral build as you can get, honestly. Without constantly firing SSRMs, you could probably bump this up to about 20 alphas from ML alone.

Now, with DHS I have effective heat threshold of 30 (base) + 24 (300XL engine) + 2 additional (total of 56), I can do about 15 alphas. That's a total of (non-stop) 15x4 seconds - 60 seconds. However, what Jenner can constantly fire (non-stop, no evasion) 8, let alone 15 alphas?

I sit still that long, I die. I usually have between 15-20 seconds in between 2-3 alphas where I'm running for dear life, or evading if the other team is even moderately skilled, and by moderately I mean "can find the 'R' key on their keyboards" which brings me down to 0 heat anyways.

In short, heat dissipation in actual practice has not changed for this Jenner build. In the rare, extremely rare, situation where you can park behind a mech for ~45 seconds non-stop and alpha away? Sure. But c'mon, the ***** who lets a jenner do that sort of deserves 12 alphas to the back. ANY mech could destroy another mech with ~45 seconds of free firing time.

Edited by Lanessar, 13 November 2012 - 06:23 PM.

[Like a Sir]

AEgg, on 13 November 2012 - 04:47 PM, said:

6 Medium Lasers and only 12 DHS on a Cicada is entirely usable (Although not as good as 4 ML and two LL with the same number of HS). The reason is that you're moving around so much that you never fire more than one alpha in sequence. Assaults tend to stand in place more often so builds attempt to be more heat efficient, but for lights and mediums heat efficiency isn't as important because you don't ever constantly fire.

Oh yeah, I am not claiming it's not usable, hell my assault is 9M with 20 doubles and 385 xl, it does 83.8 kph with all pilot proficiencies, heat is pretty bad, but can be managed still, plus I can often brake contact to go cool down... I'm just saying that you won't be running a hunchback with 6 medium lasers, alpha striking non stop and not overheating, all I am saying, is that that hunchback/cicada, will be far from heat neutral, the post I quoted before makes it sound like there will be heat neutral hbk with 2 srm4's and 6 medium lasers...

[Grey Rabbit]

As far as the them favoring lights and mediums, if I'm not mistaken, don't heavies and assaults have bigger engines and therefore more heatsinks already built in. I need to look that up...

Squid von Torgar, on 12 November 2012 - 02:16 AM, said:

So now is the time to get them out to us to test. If they do indeed break balance and not contribute to then it fair enough to nerf them. But at least test it before making sweeping ascertains that just dont hold up in game.

I would say.... No...

But here's why:

I'm no expert on the proper way to beta test a game, but I'm pretty sure of this. Before our open test servers, there are closed test servers. The devs and their testing guys(if they have any) get our patches first. They have programs that take statistics on the numbers and they try to break the current build and test for balance, taking notes the whole time. Then, they look at these notes, redo the patch on their servers over and over until they're satisfied. This is where they came up with the numbers of 1.4 on the DHS.

After that, we get to test the patch(this is a beta test still). The devs don't have every computer and video card known to man, nor can they think of every mech build that we can come up with so they open things to a wider range of testing to narrow things down. This is where we come in. This is where the double heat sinks are now, the SECOND step of balancing and testing. The devs are going to run their statistics again on us and our wider range of builds and see if it needs a bump up or down. To sum things up, we are testing them.. You know... Right now and stuff...

While I'm no fan boy, I do like what PGI's done so far. We can only trust that they're steering the game on the right course or get out. If they say they were over powered, then either they were or they kept the real DHS for themselves as a conspiracy to make our mechs weaker so they can enjoy blowing us up more . Which is more likely?

Oh wait... I don't think anyone trusts Paul... Carry on...

-Rabbit

[Lootee]

I'm liking the way engine heatsinks are. I've ditched some smaller lasers on my Jenner and put an ER Large instead. Just use that when the enemy is further than 270m and use 3 mediums when they are up close.

Before I wouldn't dream of using a high heat weapon ever. We're finally starting to see some more diversity in weapon loadouts. Not just all LRMs, gauss rifles, and small lasers any more.

Make all DHS 2.0 like the engine ones, so everyone can get in on the action. You might even start seeing medium and heavy mechs mounting the *gasp* ERPPC, like they do in TT 3050+ BattleTech.

Edited by PanchoTortilla, 13 November 2012 - 08:00 PM.

[Kirkland Langue]

Double heat sinks should... you know... sink double the heat. Anything else is just stupid. If you want them to be something else, they should be called something else.

Would 2.0 be OP? no, of course not. Since the only thing (basically) that the Heat Sinks are used for is sinking the heat from weapons... even if one wanted to make an argument that having 2.0 everywhere led to some weapon systems being OP - you just modify those weapon systems.

It isn't as though PGI hasn't already played around with the weapons... a lot. By keeping 2.0, PGI would remain closer to TT rules, while still having the flexibility to balance the weapon systems as they see fit.

It's so glaringly obvious that this is how it should be handled.. But, then again, the Devs seem to think that adding Factions/Corps/Chat into the game can wait until 6 months after release or some such nonsense. Then again, the mods have stated explicitly that they do not believe selling OP mechs for MC only would be P2W.

[Darvaza]

Purlana, on 12 November 2012 - 05:29 AM, said:

If your using DHS on an assult mech your doing something wrong. Any assult mech can get better heat by using SHS, because you simply don't have enough critical slots.

It seems that assult mechs will need to wait for clan DHS...

Unless all you need is the basic 10 DHS for your build. I can save 8 tons by changing from SHS.

[Squid von Torgar]

Quote

I'm no expert on the proper way to beta test a game, but I'm pretty sure of this. Before our open test servers, there are closed test servers. The devs and their testing guys(if they have any) get our patches first. They have programs that take statistics on the numbers and they try to break the current build and test for balance, taking notes the whole time. Then, they look at these notes, redo the patch on their servers over and over until they're satisfied. This is where they came up with the numbers of 1.4 on the DHS.

I trust Paul, at the end of the day he has to be committed to making MWO the best game it can be. What I dont trust is their Q/A team.

PGI are right to change things like lrms. But if you played before the last hotfix, I am sure you like me wondered how such a huge unbalancing buff to LRMs could get through. At one point we had a poll that said 49% of those that voted would not play the game until it was fixed. To PGI's credit they reacted quickly and we got a hotfix. Perhaps now its too much of a LRM nerf, we will see if there are further balances.

But to go back to DHS. Given the current numbers are totally different to those mentioned in the patch notes, and given that this is the 3rd time they arent working as described, It does cause somewhat a crisis of confidence.

This stuff should be easily spotted by their QA team. The community identifies this **** within minutes of the patches being released, and I would say we are primarily just playing the game rather than actively looking for bugs.

Finally Garth mentions being able to core an Atlas in under 3 seconds. Obviously an exaggeration, but he cites it as the main reason we cant have 2.0 DHS. Again this doesnt inspire confidence.

After all the changes, mistakes and misinformation, yes I think its time for us to test full DHS. If then we get them and they are truely OP, it is an easy fix to nerf them back. However all evidence so far is pointing to them not being OP. Further having them at the full value unlocks a myriad of builds that will make the game more competitive and interesting.

Again dont forget that lights and meds are getting the full benefit of 2.0 DHS, whereas Larger mechs arent. This in itself is creating further unbalance that would be eliminated if they were set to a flat value of 2.0

Thats the thinking behind the original post, I hope you will agree with me when I state I cant think of a single reason not to implement full 2.0 DHS.

Edited by Squid von Torgar, 14 November 2012 - 02:48 AM.

[MWHawke]

Darvaza, on 14 November 2012 - 01:39 AM, said:

Unless all you need is the basic 10 DHS for your build. I can save 8 tons by changing from SHS.

That's the whole point of DHS. Totally agree.

[Vassago Rain]

Grey Rabbit, on 13 November 2012 - 06:10 PM, said:

As far as the them favoring lights and mediums, if I'm not mistaken, don't heavies and assaults have bigger engines and therefore more heatsinks already built in. I need to look that up...



I would say.... No...

But here's why:

I'm no expert on the proper way to beta test a game, but I'm pretty sure of this. Before our open test servers, there are closed test servers. The devs and their testing guys(if they have any) get our patches first. They have programs that take statistics on the numbers and they try to break the current build and test for balance, taking notes the whole time. Then, they look at these notes, redo the patch on their servers over and over until they're satisfied. This is where they came up with the numbers of 1.4 on the DHS.

After that, we get to test the patch(this is a beta test still). The devs don't have every computer and video card known to man, nor can they think of every mech build that we can come up with so they open things to a wider range of testing to narrow things down. This is where we come in. This is where the double heat sinks are now, the SECOND step of balancing and testing. The devs are going to run their statistics again on us and our wider range of builds and see if it needs a bump up or down. To sum things up, we are testing them.. You know... Right now and stuff...

While I'm no fan boy, I do like what PGI's done so far. We can only trust that they're steering the game on the right course or get out. If they say they were over powered, then either they were or they kept the real DHS for themselves as a conspiracy to make our mechs weaker so they can enjoy blowing us up more . Which is more likely?

Oh wait... I don't think anyone trusts Paul... Carry on...

-Rabbit

The math favors builds you can refire forever. So 6 small lasers are infinitely more useful than PPCs, because you save so much tonnage on the guns, and the heatsinks.

Mechs who run few sinks outside the engine gained the most from this. It's more mech specific than class specific. Swaybacks, camels, jenners, even commandos...

Because of hardpoints, the 6 laser jenner really doesn't have that much less firepower than an atlas, anyway.