Deleted, please ignore.

[ColBosch]

Edit: deleted. I'll avoid this subforum from now on.

[Cannonshop]

Triple-Strength Myomer's effects are fairly easy to understand and track, but getting it to activate and maintaining its effects is the wrong kind of challenge. If used as originally written it's fine, but in the current metagame it's annoying and demands constant, fiddly attention and perverse actions. As first intended, TSM was to provide a bonus to hot-running 3025-era machines (i.e., those with heavy loadouts and single heat sinks). It encouraged an aggressive play style, where the 'Mech "powers up" a little once it joins the action, helping it counteract some effects of high heat levels.

In the current play era, with double heat sinks and more-efficient designs, TSM has become more irritating than fun. It now encourages micro-management of heat, often slowing down the game as players carefully plot out their attacks to stay in the "sweet spot" or even making untargeted attacks merely to raise their heat level. The TacOps solution of selectively turning off heat sinks doesn't actually help, it just adds another variable to the player's planning. While some players enjoy this level of detail and control, for others it just detracts from the flow of the game.

So here's a simple fix: at the beginning of the game, at in the Heat Phase of each turn, a player with a TSM-equipped 'Mech may declare its TSM active or inactive after calculating its heat for that turn. If active, the base heat of the 'Mech is set at 9 instead of 0 and it may use all the standard rules for TSM. In all ways heat is tracked and dissipated as normal, but it will never drop below 9. If deactivated, then the 'Mech may not use TSM in the following turn, but its "heat floor" returns to 0. (Since the declaration is made after heat is calculated, this prevents players from flicking it on and off every other turn.)

I think this should make TSM far simpler to use and increase its utility in "marginal" (low-heat) designs.

whatever.

[ColBosch]

Edit: deleted.

[AlphaMirage]

I agreed with Cannonshop. If you want always active TSM use the industrial version (no move bonus but double strength with no heat tracking) and all the resultant side effects of it (a physical to hit penalty) or retrofit it to an older SHS equipped and hot running design (like I do with my Golden Lion AU) in order to upgrade it to a Clan Invasion era fight.

TSM is fine as is, its just the designs that need work and the players to understand the bits for best effect (like you should with all the mechs you bring with you). Plus again, it works really good if you just accept that you can't always get everything out of it but you will get good use of it when you can.

[DevianID]

My only issue with this is how it interacts with heat weapons.  One of the things I always look for when up against TSM mechs is what they declare in the weapon phase.  If they go to exactly 9 heat in their declarations, and I have units with heat effects still to declare, then I can shoot the TSM mech to bring its heat from +9 to past shutdown range.

Turning off heat sinks the turn before is a huge pain in the butt I agree.  The Wolverine with TSM I just hate piloting, as I have to constantly turn on and off heat sinks and pick weapons very carefully to get the heat to 9.  But, if my heat was just set to 9 in the heat phase, then my opponent wouldnt be able to use heat damage against the wolverine, who is grossly oversinked if you dont need to shut off heat sinks cause you can just set heat after all heat damage is done.

[ColBosch]

Noted. Deleting.

[Cannonshop]

My only issue with this is how it interacts with heat weapons.  One of the things I always look for when up against TSM mechs is what they declare in the weapon phase.  If they go to exactly 9 heat in their declarations, and I have units with heat effects still to declare, then I can shoot the TSM mech to bring its heat from +9 to past shutdown range.

Turning off heat sinks the turn before is a huge pain in the butt I agree.  The Wolverine with TSM I just hate piloting, as I have to constantly turn on and off heat sinks and pick weapons very carefully to get the heat to 9.  But, if my heat was just set to 9 in the heat phase, then my opponent wouldnt be able to use heat damage against the wolverine, who is grossly oversinked if you dont need to shut off heat sinks cause you can just set heat after all heat damage is done.

I think that downside is part of the risk of using a system like TSM.  it's still a manageable risk (if you know someone is using plasma weapons, you might be a little bit circumspect about edging to 9 too obviously, and so on.  the same can be said of 3025 machines with bad heat curves like the OG Warhammer).

hell with it, not worth it.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

I remember that the original proposal was the minimum heat is 9 instead of 0 if you choose to power it up, so that won't be different with the basic rule... but when the heat increasing weapon is involved it would be quite problematic - then, it means, you can fully turn on exceeding heat sinks and if it is many enough the mech can effectively ignore to reduce the effect of those weapons while fully utilize the effect of TSM.

I do think that build up exactly 9 heat and keep it is somewhat annoying, indeed. So something that ease the process would be not that bad. But that would touching the balance issue, for the current ruling says you can only affected by the switched off heat sinks starting to the following turns so the presence of heat generating weapons forcing those TSM mechs to either turn off their TSM or risking overheat. Since TSM doesn't uses any tonnage but only some criticals, while gives juicy effect(in exchange of some penalty of keep heat 9+ and suffer some effect such as 1+ to difficult against attacks), it's not that bad to put some drawbacks who can ruin their plans.

Perhaps, allows an option to start with exactly 9 heat, or able to choose one of the DHS to only reduce 1 heat instead of fully functional or switched off, and maybe allowed to generate more heat on the heat phase(but not colling down even further) would solves the issue and it would be not that complicated either.

Asides, while no one have to disagrees with you, but it is also not true that everyone have to agreed on you unto the last single bits. Everyone have their own opinion, and it does not always connected well, but that's the world what we know.

[Giovanni Blasini]

I've been debating whether not to wade into this mess all day, given [c]ColBosch[/b] has withdrawn from the thread and, evidently, the Player Rules section of the board.  But, since posters continue to post afterwards with arguments that appear to not actually address what was originally proposed, I figured "what the hell?"
 

I remember that the original proposal was the minimum heat is 9 instead of 0 if you choose to power it up, so that won't be different with the basic rule... but when the heat increasing weapon is involved it would be quite problematic - then, it means, you can fully turn on exceeding heat sinks and if it is many enough the mech can effectively ignore to reduce the effect of those weapons while fully utilize the effect of TSM.

See, I didn't read it that way at all.  Because the proposal was declaring it in heat phase, and that it would go active next turn, if I'm using this suggested house rule, it's effectively no different than if I've spent the last turn carefully honing my heat through a myriad of needless complication in order to get to that +9 heat at the end of the turn, anyway.

Either way, TSM wasn't active the turn I declared I'm turning it on for next turn.  Either way, you're free to shoot my 'Mech and overheat it, either enough to make my declaration at the end of the declaration turn pointless because you've put me over +9 heat anyway, or the next turn to take my 'Mech that's already at +9 heat way past that to the point of shutdown.  As far as I can tell, the only thing that's changed is the amount of time we need to take out of gameplay to get to that point.

I do think that build up exactly 9 heat and keep it is somewhat annoying, indeed. So something that ease the process would be not that bad. But that would touching the balance issue, for the current ruling says you can only affected by the switched off heat sinks starting to the following turns so the presence of heat generating weapons forcing those TSM mechs to either turn off their TSM or risking overheat. Since TSM doesn't uses any tonnage but only some criticals, while gives juicy effect(in exchange of some penalty of keep heat 9+ and suffer some effect such as 1+ to difficult against attacks), it's not that bad to put some drawbacks who can ruin their plans.

That strikes me as effectively no different in effect from the proposed house rule, just different in terms of the amount of time you slow down the game while figuring out your heat balance and the crap needed to get to exactly +9 heat.

Either way, whether it's "I had to shut down these three double heat sinks and that Pink Floyd Laserium show I put on with my small laser got me to +9 heat going into next turn" is effectively the same as "Since I otherwise would have been at less than +9 heat, let's assume I juggled the crap I needed and will be at +9 next turn", it's effectively the same.

Perhaps, allows an option to start with exactly 9 heat, or able to choose one of the DHS to only reduce 1 heat instead of fully functional or switched off, and maybe allowed to generate more heat on the heat phase(but not colling down even further) would solves the issue and it would be not that complicated either.

So, starting the next turn with +9 heat?  Like the original suggestion?

I mean, don't get me wrong, being able to turn off half a double heat sink would also be a way to ease calculations, and isn't a bad idea, per se, though it does add one more thing you'd need to track when doing your calculations, so while it might cut down on the free Laserium shows, I don't know that it's really going to speed up the time it takes to work out your TSM calculations that much.

Asides, while no one have to disagrees with you, but it is also not true that everyone have to agreed on you unto the last single bits. Everyone have their own opinion, and it does not always connected well, but that's the world what we know.

I don't see that as what happened here at all.  In fact, most of the arguments against their original proposed house rule didn't appear me to actually address the issue as discussed, implying that it makes weapons that apply heat to their target useless, or emphasized how important it is that we not streamline the game with house rules for TSM that might make gameplay a little faster on the tabletop.

Either way, was there any particular reason we had to have two additional posts dogpiling on a suggested house rule that's already been withdrawn with the original poster having left the thread?

That seems like needless dogpiling to me, and perhaps we'd be better off closing this thread and, if one of you is inclined to do so, starting a new thread or taking it to PMs to inevitably tell me why I'm wrong in my interpretation of the suggested house rule.

[Cannonshop]

I've been debating whether not to wade into this mess all day, given [c]ColBosch[/b] has withdrawn from the thread and, evidently, the Player Rules section of the board.  But, since posters continue to post afterwards with arguments that appear to not actually address what was originally proposed, I figured "what the hell?"
 
See, I didn't read it that way at all.  Because the proposal was declaring it in heat phase, and that it would go active next turn, if I'm using this suggested house rule, it's effectively no different than if I've spent the last turn carefully honing my heat through a myriad of needless complication in order to get to that +9 heat at the end of the turn, anyway.

Either way, TSM wasn't active the turn I declared I'm turning it on for next turn.  Either way, you're free to shoot my 'Mech and overheat it, either enough to make my declaration at the end of the declaration turn pointless because you've put me over +9 heat anyway, or the next turn to take my 'Mech that's already at +9 heat way past that to the point of shutdown.  As far as I can tell, the only thing that's changed is the amount of time we need to take out of gameplay to get to that point.

That strikes me as effectively no different in effect from the proposed house rule, just different in terms of the amount of time you slow down the game while figuring out your heat balance and the crap needed to get to exactly +9 heat.

Either way, whether it's "I had to shut down these three double heat sinks and that Pink Floyd Laserium show I put on with my small laser got me to +9 heat going into next turn" is effectively the same as "Since I otherwise would have been at less than +9 heat, let's assume I juggled the crap I needed and will be at +9 next turn", it's effectively the same.

So, starting the next turn with +9 heat?  Like the original suggestion?

I mean, don't get me wrong, being able to turn off half a double heat sink would also be a way to ease calculations, and isn't a bad idea, per se, though it does add one more thing you'd need to track when doing your calculations, so while it might cut down on the free Laserium shows, I don't know that it's really going to speed up the time it takes to work out your TSM calculations that much.

I don't see that as what happened here at all.  In fact, most of the arguments against their original proposed house rule didn't appear me to actually address the issue as discussed, implying that it makes weapons that apply heat to their target useless, or emphasized how important it is that we not streamline the game with house rules for TSM that might make gameplay a little faster on the tabletop.

Either way, was there any particular reason we had to have two additional posts dogpiling on a suggested house rule that's already been withdrawn with the original poster having left the thread?

That seems like needless dogpiling to me, and perhaps we'd be better off closing this thread and, if one of you is inclined to do so, starting a new thread or taking it to PMs to inevitably tell me why I'm wrong in my interpretation of the suggested house rule.

NOt worth the hassle.

[Giovanni Blasini]

Did I not just suggest taking this to either PM or its own thread since the original poster has disengaged from discussion?

I don’t know if that was ignored or purposely discarded but either way, I’m done.  Keep your necessary complexity.  I’m gonna go back to playing Alpha Strike, and ignoring this thread.