50 replies to this topic

[Chet Beefstrong]

I'm trying to wrap my brain around how a 40% efficiency boost is worth the 3 slots and extra cost per Heat Sink.

I'm new to the MW world, so I'm really unfamiliar with how a lot of the math plays out. Can anyone offer some insight?

[Darwins Dog]

It's a little complicated, but here it goes.

Your engine has up to 10 free HS (divide the rating by 25 and drop the decimal). Getting DHS fully doubles these, so with any engine rating above 250 you are effectively getting 20 HS right there.

All others that either fit in the engine or elsewhere are at 1.4. If they fit in the engine, then they don't take extra room. The cost in cbills is not too bad, and you will earn that in a few games. The engine HS are what make it worthwhile.

For example, if you have a 300 rating engine, you get 10 that run at double, and can fit 2 more at 1.4 in the engine giving you the cooling power of 22.8 single HS without taking up critical space (beyond the engine).

EDIT: clarity

Edited by Darwins Dog, 29 January 2013 - 06:34 AM.

[Rushin Roulette]

Double heatsinks should actually, as the name implies, be double as effective as single heat sinks.

In MWO, the devs decided that double heat efficiency was too powerful, so they limited them to 1,4 heatsinks.

Please note however, that the heatsinks in your engine are actually double, only heatsinks mounted outside of the engine are 1,4.

As to the part where you are asking what the point of them is... they weigh as much as single heat sinks, but take up 3 times the space. They are usefull to give you an extra 0,4 heatsink for the weight as long as you have the internal space. Many builds need very few internal slots because they dont need large engines, the weapons are all in the arms or they dont need ammunition. Instead of leaving loads of space free and unused, they can mount double heat sinks to more efficiently fill the space while also having a better heat efficiency.

Edited by Rushin Roulette, 29 January 2013 - 06:34 AM.

[Mechteric]

It may not be double precisely, but their effectiveness is apparent. I don't have a single configuration that uses single heat sinks.

[zraven7]

Chet Beefstrong, on 29 January 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

I'm trying to wrap my brain around how a 40% efficiency boost is worth the 3 slots and extra cost per Heat Sink.

I'm new to the MW world, so I'm really unfamiliar with how a lot of the math plays out. Can anyone offer some insight?

Double Heat Sinks may take up 3 slots, but they weigh as much as a normal heat sink. It's trading more slots for less tonnage. So, pretty much, instead of being 1 heat sink per ton, it's 1.4 heat sinks per ton. Add to that the fact tha engines come pre-installed with up to 10 "slotless" heat sinks, which are all upgraded, as well as having 2, well, "slotless slots" for 2 additional heatsinks, which will also be double heat sinks, and on engine sinks alone, the upgrade is worth it.

My Cicada 2A runs around with 6 medium lasers, and would not be able to really operate without double heat sinks.

Edited by zraven7, 29 January 2013 - 06:35 AM.

[Redshift2k5]

Imagine a mech with only 10 heatsinks. For the exact same tonnage DHS offers the equivalent of 14. Big difference. 20 vs 28 heatsinks is an even bigger difference.

Alternatively, if you had 14 singles and switch to 10 doubles(keeping the same heat efficiency), you save 4 whole tons to spend on more ammo, armor, a larger engine, etc.

There is of course a hard cap on how many DHS you can fit, but almost always a mech has room to spare and benefits from additional heat sinking, additional free tonnage, or both.

[Boulangerie]

So in what case are DHS unadvisable? I'm pretty new, but it seems like they wouldn't be worth it if you are loading lots of ammo/ballistics weapons. Is this just a straight upgrade?

[SPencil]

I can't think of a build that wouldn't benefit from DHS off the top of my head, but it would be a build where critical slots were a premium, maybe if you had a mech with Endo, Ferro, and an XL. So I can imagine that there could be a few light mech builds that would not be able to use DHS...I'm just speculating, ever since DHS dropped I've never went back to singles.

[IceSerpent]

Boulangerie, on 29 January 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

So in what case are DHS unadvisable? I'm pretty new, but it seems like they wouldn't be worth it if you are loading lots of ammo/ballistics weapons. Is this just a straight upgrade?

In most cases it is a straight upgrade. The only exception is an assault mech with a lot of energy weapons that doesn't have crit space to spare, but does have a lot of tonnage to spare.

[HighTest]

DHS may be unadvisable if you are tryiong to mount gobs of ballistic weapons, as they take up a ton of slots and generate relatively little heat. But that can also depend on the engine you choose -- the bigger the engine, the more you benefit from having DHS mounted inside it. If you have a 200 engine, you can only mount 8 internal and then MUST chew up 6 more critical slots just to get to 10, for example.

It really ends up being an exercise in Min/Max optimization. Try one of the mech builders that are listed in other posts on these forums and tinker until you get the best possible outcome.

I've been trying to campaign to the devs that the whole 1.4x DHS thing makes absolutely zero sense and is compromizing gameplay and loadout choices, but sadly my efforts have fallen on deaf ears. So instead everyone is running around with ballistics, SRMs and a few medium lasers instead of being able to effectively field larger lasers, PPCs and LRMs (although admittedly ECM has a lot to do with the LRM issue too.)

[Strig]

Darwins Dog, on 29 January 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

It's a little complicated, but here it goes.

Your engine has up to 10 free HS (divide the rating by 25 and drop the decimal). Getting DHS fully doubles these, so with any engine rating above 250 you are effectively getting 20 HS right there.

All others that either fit in the engine or elsewhere are at 1.4. If they fit in the engine, then they don't take extra room. The cost in cbills is not too bad, and you will earn that in a few games. The engine HS are what make it worthwhile.

For example, if you have a 300 rating engine, you get 10 that run at double, and can fit 2 more at 1.4 in the engine giving you the cooling power of 22.8 single HS without taking up critical space (beyond the engine).

EDIT: clarity

What Darwins Dog posted is entirely correct. It is almost always worth it to get the DHS upgrade and only the most unusual builds would not benefit from them (you would have to work hard to fins such a build). I have 23 mechs of all weight classes and every one of them has, and benefits from (some immensely) DHSs. In short, get them when you can afford them on every mech you plan to use.

[Haalbrecht]

Boulangerie, on 29 January 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

So in what case are DHS unadvisable?  I'm pretty new, but it seems like they wouldn't be worth it if you are loading lots of ammo/ballistics weapons.  Is this just a straight upgrade?

Assaults can run in to this problem.  It's usually when you have more weight than slots available.  Some Heavies and Mediums can run in to this if they use both FF Armor and Endo-Steel structure (they take up a LOT of space), but easily avoided if you just don't use FF Armor.For example, an Atlas on a pure energy build will generate a lot of heat and have a lot of weight and slots open.  Those slots generally will be filled up on DHS long before you run out of weight, so SHS work better in this instance.  In most cases, if you have a good balance of energy, ballistic, and missile weaponry, DHS work just fine, even for the Atlas.</p>

Edited by Haalbrecht, 29 January 2013 - 07:38 AM.

[Redshift2k5]

HighTest, on 29 January 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

DHS may be unadvisable if you are tryiong to mount gobs of ballistic weapons, as they take up a ton of slots and generate relatively little heat. But that can also depend on the engine you choose -- the bigger the engine, the more you benefit from having DHS mounted inside it. If you have a 200 engine, you can only mount 8 internal and then MUST chew up 6 more critical slots just to get to 10, for example.

It really ends up being an exercise in Min/Max optimization. Try one of the mech builders that are listed in other posts on these forums and tinker until you get the best possible outcome.

I've been trying to campaign to the devs that the whole 1.4x DHS thing makes absolutely zero sense and is compromizing gameplay and loadout choices, but sadly my efforts have fallen on deaf ears. So instead everyone is running around with ballistics, SRMs and a few medium lasers instead of being able to effectively field larger lasers, PPCs and LRMs (although admittedly ECM has a lot to do with the LRM issue too.)

If you Buff DHS you only serve to further buff boating MLAS and SRM without giving enough of a buff to ERLL/LPL/PPC/ERPPC. Instead, the 'large' energy weapons are being revised for heat balancing (while the regular LL is pretty much fine) http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1639491

[pseudocoder]

Chet Beefstrong, on 29 January 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

I'm trying to wrap my brain around how a 40% efficiency boost is worth the 3 slots and extra cost per Heat Sink.

What makes it worth it is the engine heat sinks. As others stated, starting at 250 engine you get 10 built in heat sinks, and smaller engines get incrementally less. The bigger the engine, the more benefit you will get out of DHS, but it is pretty much always a good upgrade if you can afford the cbills.

Every weight saving upgrade in the game effectively sacrifices space for tonnage. If you get every upgrade you will typically run out of space before you can max your weight, so you should only choose the tonnage-saving upgrades that work best for your build. Usually that ends up being Endo and DHS, and possibly an XL engine. Sometimes you might want to take an XL engine instead of Endo, but you almost always want DHS.

I believe DHS is hands down THE best upgrade because it is the only one where you actually save space to start out with, and space requirements only increase if you want super-high cooling performance. In other words, you often don't have sacrifice any space to get the same cooling performance at less tonnage.

As a side note, Ferro-Fibrous is wholly inferior to Endo and I have never found a situation where you'd want to take it, but it is possible that I just haven't found its use yet.

IceSerpent, on 29 January 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

In most cases it is a straight upgrade. The only exception is an assault mech with a lot of energy weapons that doesn't have crit space to spare, but does have a lot of tonnage to spare.

I've had this thought too. But in fact, even then I've found that you have to spend just as much crits on single heat sinks to make up for the huge bonus DHS gives through the engine. You're still better off with DHS in every scenario I've tested.

[HighTest]

Redshift2k5, on 29 January 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

If you Buff DHS you only serve to further buff boating MLAS and SRM without giving enough of a buff to ERLL/LPL/PPC/ERPPC. Instead, the 'large' energy weapons are being revised for heat balancing (while the regular LL is pretty much fine) http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1639491

Yes and no. If the light can already continuously fire its MLASes or SRMs for 15 seconds without overheating, adding another 5 or 10 seconds means it can shoot for 20-25 before it overheats.

If the Assault can Alpha for 5 seconds, maybe it becomes 10. But if the assault is carrying enough firepower, it may only need 10 seconds. The light already had the ability to maximize DPS for a while, but now the Assault can for a while too where before it couldn't. The extra seconds the light gets to fire is meaningless if it's already dead. Lights won't be nearly as inclined to run up to Assaults so much if they don't expect it to shutdown as quickly, or expect it to have to stagger its fire as much.

Right now light pilots can, becuase they know many Assaults will probably just shoot themselves into a shutdown or fire the occasional laser to manage heat, so the light can just pick away at it safely.

I am very much waiting to see what the balancing does -- I'm hopeful that it will solve some of the problems with the Assault builds right now.

[RumRunner151]

One thing to note. ONLY DHS that come in the engine are 2.0. When you have engine slots that you can put DHS into (like 4 on a XL360) they are only 1.4, not 2.0. Their sole advantage is that they dont take up crit slots,

[Lightfoot]

The developers wanted heat management to be part of gameplay so they nerfed doubles to 1.4 the normal 2.0 value. Having deviated that far from Battletech, they should only require 2 critical slots instead of the 3 they do in Battletech. In this way Energy configs could work about like they do in Battletech, yet still be hot and difficult to boat.

Also, shouldn't the engine DHS be the ones to get the nerf? Heat Management is a non-issue in MWO, unless your config needs more than the 10 DHS in the engine. I mean you can run 2-3 ballistic weapons and 3 medium lasers and maybe get just one heat warning for an entire match right now.

[Darwins Dog]

Lightfoot, on 29 January 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

Also, shouldn't the engine DHS be the ones to get the nerf? Heat Management is a non-issue in MWO, unless your config needs more than the 10 DHS in the engine. I mean you can run 2-3 ballistic weapons and 3 medium lasers and maybe get just one heat warning for an entire match right now.

I'm inclined to agree with you there. As it stands, there's really no choice to be made. The only build I've ever had that didn't run them was in my Commando 2D because it just doesn't generate enough heat (I dropped the ML for a TAG). It can still fit them, and there's no reason not to, it just doesn't need it.

[Wun]

Lightfoot, on 29 January 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

Also, shouldn't the engine DHS be the ones to get the nerf? Heat Management is a non-issue in MWO, unless your config needs more than the 10 DHS in the engine. I mean you can run 2-3 ballistic weapons and 3 medium lasers and maybe get just one heat warning for an entire match right now.

Thats a pretty feeble weapon load for a large mech. You can make a mech with 20DHS and enough energy/missile weapons to overheat pretty quickly. I think heat management is actually pretty good right now, maybe with PPCs and ER lasers needing a slight heat decrease.

pseudocoder, on 29 January 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

What makes it worth it is the engine heat sinks.

I believe DHS is hands down THE best upgrade

I've found that you have to spend just as much crits on single heat sinks to make up for the huge bonus DHS gives through the engine. You're still better off with DHS in every scenario I've tested.

I completely agree. I've spent days in the mechbuilder trying and only a rare low-heat build like dual gauss catapult is effectively equal with single and dual heatsinks. DHS never makes a build worse IF you are willing to remove any endo/ff that is taking up crit slots the DHS needs.

Quote

As a side note, Ferro-Fibrous is wholly inferior to Endo and I have never found a situation where you'd want to take it, but it is possible that I just haven't found its use yet.

Light mechs that cant carry many crit slots worth of weapons/heat sinks can benefit a little from FF armor.

Edited by Wun, 29 January 2013 - 10:56 AM.

[Lege]

The only configuration DHS aren't better is in assault mechs.
Take an Atlas-RS with 4 large lasers and do some math, you will see single heat sinks are better.
Critical space becomes more important than tonnage in assault mechs.
If your looking at extreme builds and optimizations, the difference in a few heat makes a difference.
Maximum heat using a 350 XL, DHS and 2 large lasers in each arm is 22 DHS or 36.8 heat dissipated.
Maximum heat using a 325 XL, SHS and 2 large lasers in each arm is 46 SHS or 46 heat dissipated.
So your alpha is the same, but your damage over time is better with SHS as your able to fire more often and not overheat.
If able to chain fire for a long time your able to sustain 20% higher dps using SHS.
Light to heavy mechs, your always better off using DHS and an assault using gauss rifle(s) is usually better off with DHS.
With clan technology and DHS only taking 2 critical slots, DHS are always better.
If your goal is to make a mech with as much heat dissipation as possible you would want to use a 400 engine to carry the 16 heat sinks, no XL for the extra torso slots.
Your talking 28 DHS or 45.2 heat dissipated or 55 SHS or 55 heat dissipated.
So SHS wins that contest too.

Edited by Lege, 29 January 2013 - 11:31 AM.