200 replies to this topic

[armyof1]

I just don't see how it would help to undo all the balancing we've had recently with lessening the heat on heavier weapons that due to weight is mainly used by heavier mechs. If you want full 2.0 double hs then we'd have to increase the heat again because however you look at it, heavier mechs don't need better heat dissipation as they are quite powerful already.

[FiveDigits]

SinnerX, on 14 February 2013 - 04:22 AM, said:

What happened to KISS? Every other weapon is about where they want it, but you would rather they buff DHS to make large energy weapons viable, then nerf every other weapon that became OP from being able to fire forever.

You know what would have been adhering to KISS when you increase rate of fire to about thrice of that in TT for your real time game?

• Decrease damage and heat production of all weapons to one third.
  
• Triple ammo per ton.
  
• Keep SHS and DHS as they are.

What did PGI do?

• Keep damage and heat of weapons at TT values.
  
• Double armor.
  
• Tweak LRM damage.
  
• Tweak SRM damage.
  
• Tweak heat values of various weapons ... repeatedly.
  
• Introduce a convoluted DHS mechanic with non-linear returns.

And they are still nowhere near balance. I wonder why ...

[Adrian Steel]

FiveDigits, on 14 February 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

You know what would have been adhering to KISS when you increase rate of fire to about thrice of that in TT for your real time game?

• Decrease damage and heat production of all weapons to one third.
  
• Triple ammo per ton.
  
• Keep SHS and DHS as they are.

What did PGI do?

• Keep damage and heat of weapons at TT values.
  
• Double armor.
  
• Tweak LRM damage.
  
• Tweak SRM damage.
  
• Tweak heat values of various weapons ... repeatedly.
  
• Introduce a convoluted DHS mechanic with non-linear returns.

And they are still nowhere near balance. I wonder why ...

This. One million times.

[Redshift2k5]

I run high-heat Heavy & Assault builds and I don't feel disadvantaged.

250 engine mechs get a 'sweet spot' for dhs? That's fine with me. Heavy and Assault mechs do not need a heat buff.

[Aym]

FiveDigits, on 14 February 2013 - 03:54 AM, said:

But why more so for Heavies and Assaults than for Lights and Mediums?



The balance of this game is very much in flux right now and so is what people use. My problem with this implementation is that it is unnecessary and violates the fundamental KISS design principle. It will cause more and more balancing problems in the future



Even if they were, the issue would remain for all DHS beyond the tenth. I don't know where you get the idea of magically doubled 10 HS. The tests people ran and the item stats in the game files say differently..

First, heavies and assaults have greater access to missile and ballistic weapons that do relatively high damage for their heat generated, but pay for it in tonnage, which offsets the disparity in heat sink effectiveness.

Second, you have failed to prove that the current design is either of "less simple" than your proposed solution (which I was a proponent of months and months ago in closed beta when it was first brought up) or will necessarily cause balance issues down the road that your desired solutions would not also bring up, or even more or less issues than your desired alternatives would bring up.

Third, what tests show that only the 6 in-engine DHS in a 150 engine are double and not the required 4 beyond it? I am at work and not inclined to operate any search-fu but I believe I am right, willing to find out otherwise if you have any evidence.

[Aym]

FiveDigits, on 14 February 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

Large energy weapons just became viable after their heat production was nerfed repeatedly. This would have been completely unnecessary if they had implemented DHS properly.
That's exactly why I call their design and balancing bass ackwards.

Your logic leaves out any weapon besides the large energy weapons that JUST had their heat reduced. What about boated medium lasers? They had to have their heat increased BEFORE double heat sinks.

[ConnorSinclair]

Craftyman, on 14 February 2013 - 04:13 AM, said:

Sized hardpoints and DHS 2.0 would have to go hand in hand. And I would be totally fine with this.

if we had hardpoint sizes I'd be so happy.

[shabowie]

SinnerX, on 14 February 2013 - 03:21 AM, said:

The first thing that broke from canon was being able to shoot more than once per 10 seconds. Why doesn't anyone argue about setting that back to the TT value?

"Shooting once" in a ten second "round" is itself an abstraction for more frequent shooting. So in a real time game we shoot as much as 2-4 times more often but they failed to divide heat and damage per shot by a similar amount and make other adjustments needed math wise.

It's a consistent math fail.

Edit, I see somebody already pointed out the obvious to you. Didn't mean to pile on.

Edited by shabowie, 14 February 2013 - 05:21 AM.

[Eric darkstar Marr]

Learn heat management.

It is part of the game I think this is in part of missing the pilot heat scale as in losing speed having ammo explosions random shut downs at only 50% heat and so on.

To complain about this is dumb would you rahter have to have complete TT rules including the heat bar and really be screwed on having to play this game with a brain?

Imagine the QQing if you blew a leg off because you put ammo in there. or you shut down after firing 2 PPCs in an Awesome. So again I end this with LEARN HEAT MANAGEMENT or be called a newb forever.

[shabowie]

Eric darkstar Marr, on 14 February 2013 - 05:16 AM, said:

To complain about this is dumb would you rahter have to have complete TT rules including the heat bar and really be screwed on having to play this game with a brain?

Absolutely. A really deep heat capacity and severely gimped dissipation ability is the biggest balance problem with the game. TT heat system is vastly better balanced and richer.

Edited by shabowie, 14 February 2013 - 05:20 AM.

[FiveDigits]

Aym, on 14 February 2013 - 05:05 AM, said:

[...] what tests show that only the 6 in-engine DHS in a 150 engine are double and not the required 4 beyond it? I am at work and not inclined to operate any search-fu but I believe I am right, willing to find out otherwise if you have any evidence.

I am in the same situation (work, not inclined). I can't provide hard test data. The tests were done though ... months ago.
If you want a "hint" though, then look at this build with a 150 rated engine. Click on the "Weapon Lab" tab to see a dissipation of, I cite, 1.76 heat/s. You arrive at that value via 6 * 0.2 (for the 6 in-engine DHS) + 4 * 0.14 (for the 4 external DHS) = 1.2 + 0.56 = 1.76.
Smurfy extracts all data used in his MechLab form the game files.

Eric darkstar Marr, on 14 February 2013 - 05:16 AM, said:

Learn heat management. [...]

The issue with DHS and the heat system is not that it's "hard" or that I can't cope. The issue is that it's badly designed. Badly as in

• unintuitive - People still don't know which type of DHS dissipates how much, even in this thread!
  
• unbalanced - Heavier mechs are much more restricted than those at or closer to the 250 engine 10 DHS sweet spot.

Edited by FiveDigits, 14 February 2013 - 05:32 AM.

[AndyHill]

Eric darkstar Marr, on 14 February 2013 - 05:16 AM, said:

Learn heat management.

It is part of the game I think this is in part of missing the pilot heat scale as in losing speed having ammo explosions random shut downs at only 50% heat and so on.

To complain about this is dumb would you rahter have to have complete TT rules including the heat bar and really be screwed on having to play this game with a brain?

Imagine the QQing if you blew a leg off because you put ammo in there. or you shut down after firing 2 PPCs in an Awesome. So again I end this with LEARN HEAT MANAGEMENT or be called a newb forever.

Oh yes, absolutely the more complex heat management from TT! And to repeat a point I made in another thread; heat management in MWO is done in the 'mechlab, if you're holding off from firing in the heat (pun intended) of a battle because of overheating, your heat management has already failed. Considering that, I would suggest not using the n-word without a big chance of it backfiring on you, especially against someone who has made a simple, but powerful graph and nice research as well as good points throughout this discussion.

[Dracol]

Seeing the assault and heavy laden fields of battle these days, anything that makes meds and lights more attractive is a positive IMHO.

Also, it seems the 2xheat disipation exp unlock was considered when they designed their heatsink system. If straight up 2.0 were implemented, those with elite chassis whould gain too much of an advantage.

[Mongoose Trueborn]

Too many bads complain about laser boats and other high energy builds. 1.4 DHS is a way to force people to use ballistics and missiles in mixed builds. Now it's just harder for newer players to grasp what makes a good build.

[MustrumRidcully]

Aym, on 14 February 2013 - 05:09 AM, said:

Your logic leaves out any weapon besides the large energy weapons that JUST had their heat reduced. What about boated medium lasers? They had to have their heat increased BEFORE double heat sinks.

You know when they had their heat increased? That was at a time where projectile speed was much slower (and I am not just talking about the most recent buff) and had slower rates of fire, too, and where projectiles had very small hit boxes, so it was extremely easy to miss a target with them. Not to mention when lag shields were still in full effect.

Only after a few of these things changed (back in Closed Beta), people discovered and learned to love the Gauss Boat. Later we saw the Over-Engined M(P)L Awesomes and the SL Jenners and Hunchbacks.

But the DHS also helped the Medium Lasers. AT least on ligher mechs, or mechs that mix heavy, but low heat ballistics with medium lasers. a Dual Gauss Rifle mech has 10 engine double heat sinks he's not using much - add 2 lasers, and you increase your firepower by 70 % or so (at closer ranges), without any heat issues.
A Light Mech can't fit that Gauss Rifle (usually), but it still has those 10 engine double heat sinks it uses.

If you have a 35 ton mech, you can spend most of that on a large engine, armour, and 4-6 medium lasers, without ever adding a double heat sink. (5 or 6 MLs will be hot, but even the 5 ML mech can fire for 12 seconds without heat issues.)

On the other hand, a 70 ton mech that starts out with these 5 ML like the Jenner and uses another, say, 35 tons on weapons, has an entirely different deal. To compensate for the heat of each additional ML he may pack, he needs to invest 1 ton for the weapon and about 6-7 tons on Poodubs. Suddenly 35 tons don't buy you a complete mech with 5 guns, they buy you 5 guns. (And if you really install 5 guns, remember that you still stuck with the same armour and the same engine as that 35 ton mech is - so you'll be slower and an easier target to your size.).

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 14 February 2013 - 05:59 AM.

[Drenzul]

Well, lets take 14 DHS as a base marker (10 engine + 4 external)

Currently thats (10*2) + (4*1.4) = 25.6 HS

Instead make all DHS work at 1.8

Thats - 14*1.8 = 25.2

And the job is done.

Would mean mechs running without external heat-sinks and a lower-heat load-out may actually have the heat issues they should have for not having extra HS.

Would mean that mechs loaded with mass HS for heavy heat weapons actually get a decent return on the number of slots and tons invested.

I still find it very strange that my easiest way to create a cool build on an Atlas is using SHS not DHS.

[Anony Mouse]

As is right now, DHS are nerfed, for balance reasons or to compensate for module OPing, fine its doable. But after considering the fire rate and damage tweaks and so on and so forth that have happened PGI missed the boat on scaling DHS along with everything else. The simplest solution at this point would be to make DHS 2 crit slots.

[Glucose]

I support this post. These non 2.0 external heatsinks seem arbitrary and not worth it. I don't see a lot of lights suddenly gaining a huge advantage on the 1.2-1.8 extra heat dissipation they'd get by having true 2.0 DHS.

I would argue for 1.7/1.8 DHS universally. That would balance out smaller engines, and not have hidden math at play.

Edited by Glucose, 14 February 2013 - 06:26 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Drenzul, on 14 February 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

Well, lets take 14 DHS as a base marker (10 engine + 4 external)

Currently thats (10*2) + (4*1.4) = 25.6 HS

Instead make all DHS work at 1.8

Thats - 14*1.8 = 25.2

And the job is done.

Would mean mechs running without external heat-sinks and a lower-heat load-out may actually have the heat issues they should have for not having extra HS.

Would mean that mechs loaded with mass HS for heavy heat weapons actually get a decent return on the number of slots and tons invested.

I still find it very strange that my easiest way to create a cool build on an Atlas is using SHS not DHS.

Only if you lock yourself into using high heat weapons and for some reason need effective 40 SHS. If you can find a way to lower your max load, so you can use DHS instead SHS, you're better off and will get more damage output for the same weight.
The only mech that may come into this situation is the AWS-8Q. It has only energy weapon slots.

But a Atlas can easily pack a Gauss Rifle, AC/10, AC/20 or a few SRMs. It needs much less - if any - heat sinks for that, meaning that in the end its damage output is much higher as when ti would have invested the same weight in heat sinks and a energy weapon.

Your your Atlas is, say, at 80 tons loadout and would overheat heat in no less than, say, 15 seconds, you might consider it working heat-wise. NOw you still have 20 tons to fill.
If you equip a Large Laser, you need to dissipate an additional 1.65 heat per second. That requires about 16-17 standard heat sinks. The LL is 5 tons, so with standard heat sinks you'd need 22 tons. Let's say you do it with 20, sacrificing a little more of your heat viability.
Or you could install a Gauss Rifle. That's only 15 tons, giving you 5 tons for its ammo and extra heat sinks. And it gives you 15 damage every 4 seconds, instead of 9 damage every 4.25 seconds.

If you had "True Dubs", you could lower the cost down to 13 tons, leaving you another 7 tons to maybe add a medium laser and 5 DHS. That's at least about 14 damage every 4.25 seconds.
With "Poordubs", you need about 12 DHS, so that's a total 17 tons.

[Grand Ayatollah Kerensky]

Considering that the 1.4 DHS thing was (poorly) conceived before 3Ls were flavor of the month, I'd say lights could use the extra firepower. The raven 3L already runs cool enough to never shut down so it would be a much needed buff to non-ECM lights.