112 replies to this topic

[Elizander]

Apoc1138, on 11 December 2012 - 01:42 AM, said:

if you want (or need) 40 SHS on a build then the only way to do it is with singles (and an XL engine to save the weight you need to do it)
around 30-34 you can go either way, and at 20 it's a no brainer to use DHS as they are all in the engine saving you 10 tons of weight for 0 crits

what I don't quite get is that they said they wanted 2.0 and 1.4 because otherwise light mechs become OP... but the current system penalises heavier mechs more than lighter mechs... an all round 1.7-1.8 would be the same or slightly worse for light mechs and give back some to heavier mechs

DHS are absolutely a no brainer on light mechs that usually wouldn't carry all that many external sinks anyway, the only time there's a "choice" for singles is on the heaviest assault builds where crits become an issue using DHS'

This is true. I was expecting the exact opposite. 1.4 in engine and 2.0 outside. This will make it more of a benefit to larger mechs than smaller mechs.

[BigJim]

No.

SHS are utterly worthless imho, even at 1.4 (contrary to popular "wisdom" at the time) DHS blow SHS out of the water.

I've got over 100x SHS in stock at the moment, I'd sell them off (for a cool 200k ) if I didn't have to click the sell button individually for each one.

One of my team mates just told me he's got over 500x SHS in his inventory.

Edited by BigJim, 11 December 2012 - 04:11 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

BigJim, on 11 December 2012 - 04:10 AM, said:

No.

SHS are utterly worthless imho, even at 1.4 (contrary to popular "wisdom" at the time) DHS blow SHS out of the water.

I've got over 100x SHS in stock at the moment, I'd sell them off (for a cool 200k ) if I didn't have to click the sell button individually for each one.

One of my team mates just told me he's got over 500x SHS in his inventory.

You just blew my mind! I could sell all those useless single heat sinks you say?

I just need one mech that hasn't been upgraded yet, otherwise i won't see them, right? Dang.

[SirLANsalot]

Phoenix182, on 11 December 2012 - 03:50 AM, said:

The disconnect, to me, is that they kept DHS 3 slots, but dropped the dissipation. If they want doubles to dissipate less, fine...but then they need to take them down to two crit slots, not 3. They've already shown that this game is NOT canon/TT, so quit holding on to those tropes.

Clan DHS take 2 crits and dissipate the same as IS DHS, there just smaller. Thats why they weren't 2 crits. The mechs and tech are cannon based, as thats what makes this game a MW game. However they do, and have, broken from cannon to balance some things out as fluff doesn't make for a good game (see Warhammer 40k books and the game, two very different things).

[Pygar]

DHS is too expensive for most of my mechs (Dragon mostly so far), and most of my builds are geared for only needing a couple extra heatsinks anyways. When PPCs get buffed and I start using an Awesome again, I'l probably get them.

[Trystan Thorne]

So upgrading to DHS gives me full 2.0 DHS inside the engine?
While additional DHS give me a ratio of 1.4 and use 3 crit spots. So if I have enough weight, single heatsinks would be better then as I could put in 3 single which would give me more than double the cooling than 1 DHS?

[LarkinOmega]

Trystan Thorne, on 11 December 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

So upgrading to DHS gives me full 2.0 DHS inside the engine?
While additional DHS give me a ratio of 1.4 and use 3 crit spots. So if I have enough weight, single heatsinks would be better then as I could put in 3 single which would give me more than double the cooling than 1 DHS?

If you had the weight. The primary issue is that the majority of Weapons that need the heat sinks, also need the weight. I have not yet seen a build that would actually benefit from SHS more than DHS. DHS at 2.0 in the engine are (so far) always worth it. Always.

This leads to the arguments that PGI are presenting for the nerfed DHS.
1) 3 sec Jenner. It's already working at full capacity and takes at least 9s to core an Atlas from behind (due to internal structure)
2) SHS have to remain viable as a choice. I haven't seen a fit yet, not a single fit that would not benefit from DHS. The only fit that I can conceive of is one that downgrades the engine so far to make space for SHS that the Innate 2.0 DHS are negated. And that's such a dumb design decision that it doesn't even merit discussing.
3) ??? I haven't heard of another reason why DHS are the way they are right now.

I challenge anyone to show off a fit that works better with SHS than it would with DHS and a bit of tinkering. Please, show me so I can be wrong about this.

[Javok]

Make speed generate a lot more heat, you run fast? You run hot! Lights would have to actually use DHSs *and* manage their speed-generated heat and not spend the entire match running at top speed.

The smallest (and therefore short-legged) the mech the more movement, friction and heat it would generate in order to reach high speeds.

Light DHS imba problem solved!

[BigJim]

MustrumRidcully, on 11 December 2012 - 04:19 AM, said:

You just blew my mind! I could sell all those useless single heat sinks you say?

I just need one mech that hasn't been upgraded yet, otherwise i won't see them, right? Dang.

Yes, yes you can.

However they only sell for 2K each, so even with 100x of them, I'd only make 200-thousand C-Bills, which is just a few half decent wins.

Quote

Make speed generate a lot more heat, you run fast? You run hot! Lights would have to actually use DHSs *and* manage their speed-generated heat and not spend the entire match running at top speed.

The smallest (and therefore short-legged) the mech the more movement, friction and heat it would generate in order to reach high speeds.

Light DHS imba problem solved!

Not a bad idea, I do say.
Now personally, I don't even see the imba(lance) as a major problem; The perceived unfairness of it tweaks the nipples of Assault pilots the world over, but if fast-movers are seen as being too strong, it's not because of a few measley heatsinks. (netcodenetcodenetcodenetcode)

Heat at the moment works off the throttle setting, regardless of the actual speed attained by that throttle setting, and what you're advocating could make a lot of sense imho.

[MustrumRidcully]

LarkinOmega, on 11 December 2012 - 05:46 PM, said:

) ??? I haven't heard of another reason why DHS are the way they are right now.

I challenge anyone to show off a fit that works better with SHS than it would with DHS and a bit of tinkering. Please, show me so I can be wrong about this.

I think the only remaining reason is - doubling the dissipation rate for all mechs would increase the damage output of all mechs notably, making the gameplay faster, more twitchy.

There are solutions for that (triple armour? Lower damage across the board? Lower rate of fire on all weapons?), because their current approach is just screwing stock mechs with DHS even more over t han stock mechs with single heat sinks. That's not reasonable either.

[anonymous175]

No.

[Trystan Thorne]

Well, I have Endo and DHS in my MBK-4SP now. With the Endo I had to remove some ouf my DHS, but with the engine DHS and the remeining DHS I'm still fine.
Does a bigger engine also get you more DHS inside the engine?
Bigger Engine and maybe replacing some of my medium lasers with medium pulse lasers is my next goal.

EDIT:
Sorry, I really should be opening a new thread in the Player support subforum then derailing the thread here.
So far, I doubt I would want to go back do standard Heatsinks, but I yet have to fully understand how DHS work in MWO.

Edited by Trystan Thorne, 12 December 2012 - 12:21 AM.

[Adrienne Vorton]

Quote

Use Single Heatsinks On Your Mechs?

Started by Crunk Prime, Yesterday, 01:31 AM

not on my current builds... don´t know if i will have a build that uses singles, but who knows...

[Javok]

BigJim, on 11 December 2012 - 07:36 PM, said:

Yes, yes you can.

However they only sell for 2K each, so even with 100x of them, I'd only make 200-thousand C-Bills, which is just a few half decent wins.



Not a bad idea, I do say.
Now personally, I don't even see the imba(lance) as a major problem; The perceived unfairness of it tweaks the nipples of Assault pilots the world over, but if fast-movers are seen as being too strong, it's not because of a few measley heatsinks. (netcodenetcodenetcodenetcode)

Heat at the moment works off the throttle setting, regardless of the actual speed attained by that throttle setting, and what you're advocating could make a lot of sense imho.

Oh no, this wasnt intended as a nerf to lights, but as a way to accommodate 2.0 DHS since one or the main stated reason against them is that the lights would actually become OP and heat indifferent (the 3-sec Jenner). If you tie heat to speed you solve that while still making heat-intensive builds a little (not even that much) more viable in the heavier classes, which is the main issue with the current weak version of the DHS.

[Kraven Kor]

If you can squeeze on more than 20 SHS but lack the crit space for more than 15 or so DHS, then right now, SHS would be better for you.

Like the 38 SHS Awesomes or whatever.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Crunk Prime, on 10 December 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Garth had this to say about DHS in the recent ask the dev thread.



He says full 2.0 DHS wont go in because it makes SHS obsolete(which is the point), and that nobody would use singles anymore. But now I want to ask, do any of you even use singles anymore? I know once I can afford it I slap doubles on my mechs. Engine heatsinks are already at 2.0, so I still just cant wrap my head around not making them all 2.0.

Even lore wise once DHS were out and common almost everybody switched over because singles suck.

Yea we should get to beta test dhs in our MWO Beta

[Kraven Kor]

At most, a mech can fit 16 DHS outside engine, and that only if they have zero weapons in arms or LT/RT.

At 2.0, with a 400 Rated Engine (16 HS "in engine" requiring no crit space) you could, in theory, have 32 DHS for 64 heat dissipation per 10 seconds... with 3 crits left for actual weapons. 5 if you lack hand actuators, 7 if you lack hand and lower arm.

Most builds topped out at around Engine HS + 6 or 8 DHS with weapons. So, for a 300, 20 DHS. 40 heat dissipation @ 2.0 DHS.

A serious ballistic mech lacking crit space would only have the engine HS and 1 or 2 outside; so 14 DHS or so. Moving to SHS on such a build in TT was perfectly valid; if you had 16 tons to spare but only, say, 2 free crits in any given location.

For the most part, DHS replaced SHS in Tabletop, and was required on IS mechs period to compete with Clan mechs (again, excepting those few instances where you had 20-ish tons to play with, but limited crit space.)

With 1.4 DHS, the splitting point between using DHS and SHS has been lowered.

With 2.0 DHS, it was around 30 to 40 or better Heat Dissipation needed that you might have used SHS.

With 1.4 DHS, it is around 25 to 30 Heat Dissipation needed that you are likely better off with SHS.

But it all depends on the build, hardpoint locations, etc. as well.

[Corvus Antaka]

SHS are obselete. I run DHS on every mech I own. even 15 DHS is preferrable to 30 SHS even though stats would indicate otherwise.

And yet the heatscale still allows for massive fire dumping of multiple alpha strikes because it is much too high, while dissapation is only good if you have DHS equipped.

[Clay Pigeon]

DHS are nearly mandatory, and will become absolutely mandatory as the timeline progresses and newer, heavier, hotter, higher dps weapons are introduced.


If you didn't want power creep you shouldn't have licensed the rights to a battle-tech based game.

[Congzilla]

Not on any mech I plan on keeping.