47 replies to this topic

[Apoc1138]

on the OP's query - it's the mechlab that is bugged - in game DHS' are working as intended (engine sinks at 2.0 and placed engine sinks and outside sinks at 1.4)

to the guy that posted the link from November before the DHS patch even hit - this has later been confirmed that up to 10 engine sinks are 2.0 and "extra" sinks placed in the engine or outside are working at 1.4

to the guy that says DHS' should be more expensive on bigger mechs because Endo is...
DHS' give the same base benefit to all mechs (engine sinks at 2.0), it then costs more to put more DHS' on... so regardless of size, more DHS costs more in direct relation to how many you can fit... if you get the same benefit then it costs the same!
Otherwise you are saying that weapons should cost more on bigger mechs just because they are bigger - they already do because a big mech can fit more and bigger weapons.

Edited by Apoc1138, 06 December 2012 - 03:03 AM.

[Asmosis]

Pretty simple, the first 10 DHS are 2.0, everything else is 1.4

It doesnt matter if those initial 10 are inside your engine or not, nor does it matter if you put extra into a 275+ sized engine.

[FiveDigits]

Asmosis, on 06 December 2012 - 04:11 AM, said:

Pretty simple, the first 10 DHS are 2.0, everything else is 1.4

It doesnt matter if those initial 10 are inside your engine or not, nor does it matter if you put extra into a 275+ sized engine.

This is just plain wrong.

Re-iterating:

• in-engine DHS (1 per 25 rating up to 10 max at 250) are 2.0
  
• engine-slotted DHS (1 per 25 rating over 250, i.e. 1 at 275, 2 at 300 etc.) are 1.4
  
• external DHS (taking up three crit slots each) are 1.4

[Frantic Pryde]

OP, It's not a good idea to put ammo in your CT

[Tickdoff Tank]

Frantic Pryde, on 06 December 2012 - 06:34 AM, said:

OP, It's not a good idea to put ammo in your CT

I actually find that is one of the best places to store ammo (unless I have 2 lasers in there). If you lose the CT you are dead anyway, at least I have my ammo untill I get cored.

[HighTest]

I just can't agree with any strategy where DHS aren't 2.0x.

- They are called Double Heat Sinks. If they aren't 2.0x, they aren't DHS.
- DHS are twice as expensive to buy, so they should be twice as good.
- You already get dinged 1.5m CBills just to get in the door, and then some aren't even 2.0x
- The cooling/weight penalty is already more than offset by eating up 3 critical slots each (even at 2.0x).
- Many BT/MW/TT builds are simply not viable without proper 2.0x HS
- Users that complain that DHS are OP can go out and buy their own DHS, with CBills and not MC (physical cash)
- DHS do not increase DPS, they extend the duration they can be fired. But laser damage can still be avoided/spread/mitigated whatever using other methods over time.
- ...

There are many topics on the forums where I can see both sides of an argument -- is ECM OP? Is ECM not OP? Should weapon X be balanced slightly vs. weapon Y? You get the idea. Some issues aren't very clear-cut.

But I can't think of any logical, legitimate, factual reason why DHS should not be 2.0x.

[Snib]

HighTest, on 06 December 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

- DHS do not increase DPS, they extend the duration they can be fired. But laser damage can still be avoided/spread/mitigated whatever using other methods over time.

Huh? More seconds to fire, more damage per second, it's fairly obvious.

[canned wolf]

The threat here isn't an arms race where everyone ends up using DHS. The threat is an arms race where heavys and assaults become obsolete. PGI has done a lot of balancing between the different weight classes, using size, speed, armor and damage output as major factors in determining a mechs role in combat. Light mechs take greater advantage of DHS than heavier mechs. In a heavier mech the slots are more important that the tonnage you save with DHS. So, if you push the heat efficiency and therefore the damage output up on the lights and mediums and leave it the same on the heavies and assaults, you push half of your mechs to the edge or outside of useful territory.

If you want the real DPS of your mech, then you need to measure it over the length of time you are typically engaged. In my Atlas, I would need to measure over 2 or 3 minutes, because once I am engaged, I'm often unable to disengage due to my speed and size. That means while I'm cooling down, I'm likely still taking hits. Lighter mechs tend to have shorter engagements, which translate to less time for heat to build, and more time for it to cool.

Edited by canned wolf, 06 December 2012 - 09:23 AM.

[WVAnonymous]

HighTest, on 06 December 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

I just can't agree with any strategy where DHS aren't 2.0x.

- They are called Double Heat Sinks. If they aren't 2.0x, they aren't DHS.
- DHS are twice as expensive to buy, so they should be twice as good.
- You already get dinged 1.5m CBills just to get in the door, and then some aren't even 2.0x
- The cooling/weight penalty is already more than offset by eating up 3 critical slots each (even at 2.0x).
- Many BT/MW/TT builds are simply not viable without proper 2.0x HS
- Users that complain that DHS are OP can go out and buy their own DHS, with CBills and not MC (physical cash)

^^^^^^
I'm with HighTest on this. (Plus anyone from Kitchener could use more company )

[BLUPRNT]

Correct me if I'm wrong but this topic turned into a conversation about values of heatsinks rather than the fact that the 250 engine seems to be missing a heatsink if compared to the 245 if your lookin at the the HE numbers.
Is this what the OP was pointing out?
I'am now very curious to test this myself with other weight class engines. Unless someone knows if this is just a # bug?

[PapaKilo]

That's what we're saying, BLUPRNT. The Mech Lab Heat Efficiency numbers are off because they are assuming that all Double Heat Sinks cool at the same value, when we know they don't.

Double Heat Sinks built into engine: 2.0
Double Heat Sinks you have to manually put in (either in engine slots or outside criticals): 1.4

The HE scale doesn't take this into account.

[HighTest]

Right, Blu. And if all DHS were rated at 2.0x, the messed-up math wouldn't be an issue.

Snib - huh? How does having DHS or SHS in any way affect the recycle time of your weapon? If a weapon can only fire every 4 seconds, it can only fire every 4 seconds. HS don't affect that. What it DOES affect is how many times you can keep firing every 4 seconds before you hit your heat threshhold and have to lay off, which yes, DHSs can improve IF you have the space a 3 crits per slot to put them.

Wolf - The problem is, if you only get additional HSs that output at 1.4x, you are correct, it doesn't make sense for bigger mechs to field them. If they were 2.0x, you'd need fewer HS (and thus fewer slots) to pack more weapons. My AWS-8V has 28 SHS, not because it was in any way efficient, but because I didn't have the crit slots for them. Here is the math:

28 SHS = 9 engine (240) and 19 non-engine HS, so 19 tons and 19 crit slots above the actual engine.

To get 28 cooling out of lame DHS, engine has (9 x 2 = 18 cooling), so I need 10 cooling / 1.4 = 7.14, rounded up = 8 lame DHS = 8 tons and 24 crit slots!!! Sure, I save a bunch of weight, but I lose a ton of crits to place stuff! Sure, I get a tiny extra bit of cooling, but at the cost of 5 slots I don't have. And remember, you need 3 consecutive slots to fit them into, negating CT and legs.

To get 28 cooling with proper DHS, engine has (9 x 2 = 18), so I need 10 cooling / 2 = 5 real DHS = 5 tons and only 15 crit slots.

So... the REASON that heavy / assault mechs generally HAVE to run SHSs, at least with heavy energy loads, is because running DHSs as they stand in many cases actually make it HARDER to add more weaponry to compensate for things like slower speed, etc. If you had proper DHSs, you could actually add some stuff to your Atlas that might HELP you compete with the little Cicada with it's 6 MLAS running circles around you. Which might actually make it somewhat worth the 1.5m CBills currently charged to get DHSs.

Basically, the current system actually makes the little mechs that can run DHS OVERPOWERED relative to the bigger ones since they just can't afford to install them due to space limitations.

Tell me that you wouldn't want 1 more LLAS against that pesky little Cicada? Gosh knows, he's got you beat bad on speed, so you better have some sort of firepower advantage.

Edited by HighTest, 06 December 2012 - 11:55 AM.

[Snib]

HighTest, on 06 December 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

Snib - huh? How does having DHS or SHS in any way affect the recycle time of your weapon? If a weapon can only fire every 4 seconds, it can only fire every 4 seconds. HS don't affect that. What it DOES affect is how many times you can keep firing every 4 seconds before you hit your heat threshhold and have to lay off, which yes, DHSs can improve IF you have the space a 3 crits per slot to put them.

That's a bit of an artificial way to look at dps, don't you think? If a weapon can only fire every 4 seconds but your mech needs 5 seconds to dissipate the heat, then effectively your weapon will only fire every 5 seconds. That's why heat dissipation does effect a mech's (edit: sustained) dps output.

Edited by Snib, 06 December 2012 - 12:03 PM.

[HighTest]

Snib, on 06 December 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

That's a bit of an artificial way to look at dps, don't you think? If a weapon can only fire every 4 seconds but your mech needs 5 seconds to dissipate the heat, then effectively your weapon will only fire every 5 seconds. That's why heat dissipation does effect a mech's dps output.

There's nothing artificial about it. You can keep firing a weapon as long as it has recycled and you still haven't gone into shutdown due to hitting the heat threshhold, even if all of the heat from the previous shots hasn't fully dissipated. So the DPS in that case doesn't change, even though your heat build-up toward your total heat threshhold has increased.

Now, if you actually let your mech cool down to zero after every shot, I suppose then, yes, it affects your DPS. But that's not an equipment limitation, that's pilot choice.

My point is, SHS or DHS, it doesn't matter, since as long as you're attempting to maximize your DPS (ie rate of fire), HS make absolutely zero difference. It only affects when you need to let off to run away or cool down.

So the benefit of lights and mediums, which can easily afford to carry DHS, is they can fire for a longer time then run away and regroup. While Wolf's poor Atlas, which really can't afford DHS now due to inefficiency of crit slots, gets to unload for a short while, then sit there like a sitting duck while some light or medium gets to unload away at him. Usually from behind. Atlases are supposed to have more firepower than a light mech, but that doesn't work if it's always overheating.

[Snib]

Comparing burst dps without giving the duration of the burst is still an artificial number to me but if you disagree let's just leave it at that, it's not really important.

[Raishi Kytori]

canned wolf, on 06 December 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

The threat here isn't an arms race where everyone ends up using DHS. The threat is an arms race where heavys and assaults become obsolete. PGI has done a lot of balancing between the different weight classes, using size, speed, armor and damage output as major factors in determining a mechs role in combat. Light mechs take greater advantage of DHS than heavier mechs. In a heavier mech the slots are more important that the tonnage you save with DHS. So, if you push the heat efficiency and therefore the damage output up on the lights and mediums and leave it the same on the heavies and assaults, you push half of your mechs to the edge or outside of useful territory.

If you want the real DPS of your mech, then you need to measure it over the length of time you are typically engaged. In my Atlas, I would need to measure over 2 or 3 minutes, because once I am engaged, I'm often unable to disengage due to my speed and size. That means while I'm cooling down, I'm likely still taking hits. Lighter mechs tend to have shorter engagements, which translate to less time for heat to build, and more time for it to cool.

This is only an issue right now because light weapons are too powerful compared to big guns like PPCs. The problem with light mechs isn't that their heat dissipation is too good, it's that a MLas boat beats a mech with what should be real firepower. Somehow it always comes down to medium lasers in mechwarrior games, it seems. It shouldn't matter if they have the cooling potential to fire nonstop without overheating; a Jenner with four medium lasers shouldn't be more dangerous than an Awesome with four PPCs. Right now, they are.

As far as I can see, the problem with this is due to the much faster refire rate of medium lasers, and the extreme heat of PPCs. The dps, sustained -or- burst, is just too good with small or medium lasers to make it even remotely worthwhile to use bigger guns most of the time; the only advantage is range, and that rarely ends up being much of an advantage for long in this game.

But here's the thing; I don't see switching DHS to real 2.0 DHS as giving more of an advantage to lightweights. What's the effect on a light mech going to be? They save a ton or two cutting out the one or two heat sinks they have outside their engine, and get a better sustained dps (sustained, not burst, not "core an atlas in three seconds").

Now what's the difference to an Assault mech? They get a huge boost in heat dissipation, since almost all of them are going to have lots of the heat sinks in the engine, many of them slotted ones over their 10, often 12-14 or so, still a ton each and not using up slots. If they are using up critical slots, they're getting a lot more out of it. Now they have the heat capacity to -use- the tonnage advantage they have, making use of big, powerful, heavy guns, now that their heat won't be crippling. The can fire multiple PPCs at once. Which means, now those little backstabber light mechs have to really watch out, because they stand to get hit by an actually effective alpha strike.

So how does this shift the balance too far towards lights again?

[Gowan]

HighTest, on 06 December 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

But I can't think of any logical, legitimate, factual reason why DHS should not be 2.0x.

As per the dev posts on the subject, heat is the primary balancing mechanism for combat right now. It isn't perfect, obviously, but that's the plan. "Real" DHS made heat a non-issue, removing the primary balancing mechanism from the game for 1.5 million C-bills. They are how they are because real doubles literally broke the game. Changing the way DHS function to preserve some semblance of balance sounds reasonable to me (although I'm not sure 1.4 is the right balance).

Edited by Gowan, 06 December 2012 - 01:27 PM.

[WVAnonymous]

I'd be willing to pay another 1.5 million C-Bills to go from 1.4 DHS to 2.0 DHS...

[HighTest]

Gowan, on 06 December 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

As per the dev posts on the subject, heat is the primary balancing mechanism for combat right now. It isn't perfect, obviously, but that's the plan. "Real" DHS made heat a non-issue, removing the primary balancing mechanism from the game for 1.5 million C-bills. They are how they are because real doubles literally broke the game. Changing the way DHS function to preserve some semblance of balance sounds reasonable to me (although I'm not sure 1.4 is the right balance).

I don't agree that this ends up being a balancing mechanism. You could argue that 2.0x DHS would allow some mechs to run 4 ERPPCs at the same time. Sure, you can probably build one, maybe even with 20 DHS. But I guarantee that even with 20 2.0x DHS, that sucker is going to be real hard to keep cool. One Alpha could easily cause an overheat on its own if you were much above 0 heat to start.

Even still, that's 40 damage per alpha. I have one Centurion with 1 AC2, 2 MLAS and 3 SRM6s. At close range that's currently up to 57 points of damage per Alpha PLUS I can lay into the AC2 for 10 more points for 3 seconds. And I can Alpha it 3, maybe 4 times before I shut down. And since it's faster than non-XL Atlases and Awesomes, you can guess how this often ends.

Right now I'm convinced that 1.4x DHS are actively nerfing heavy and assault mechs, and from the number of times I've seen Atlases and Awesomes picked apart by 30-50 ton mechs, I'm saying the nerf is way too heavy. And I don't think bumping them to 2.0x is nearly likely to cause a shift to the opposite side -- it'll probably just bring things more in line. Why would anyone want to pilot a big mech when one small ones could tear it to shreds?

Not balanced.

[Capp]

It's never made any sense to be that somehow the engine sinks being 2.0 and the chassis sinks being 1.4 is supposedly to stop smaller mechs from being super-powered. It's the heavier mechs that need more heat dissipation than the lighter ones. The lights will run out of tonnage before they run out of crit space, so why is wasting the crit space of heavies for lesser return helping the heavies? It isn't!

And even full 2.0s wouldn't help a 4 ERPPC mech much. lol

On topic: I just upgraded a mech with 13 singles to DHS. It dropped the 3 internal singles so effectively went from 13 to 20 but the heat meter in mechbay barely moved. So I'm going to guess that the mechbay is measuring all DHS as 1.4's.