36 replies to this topic

[UraniumOverdose]

Some weapons are just way too easy to crit, like the AC20. The more crit slots something takes up the easier it is to hit, I don't have a problem with that.

The health system on the other hand is completely broken.
There is obvious precedent for changing health values, like the 3 hp for the guass and ECM, notoriously fragile devices.

I say implement the following system:
Base health on number of crit slots, and type of device.
Devices are classified as either normal, or fragile.

Normal devices have 3 hp per crit slot, fragile devices have .5.

So a big bulky weapon like the AC20 has some survivability, whereas a medium laser has much less. This will balance out the fact that the medium laser is 10 times less likely to even get hit.

This system would also give an inventive to use weapons with more critical slots. It would make the PPC look even more attractive. The AC20 wouldn't be made of cardboard. The AC10 and LBX 10 would also be fairly sturdy.

Then Systems like Gauss and ECM will still crit easily, which will maintain the balance of them being borderline op.

If you classify double heat sinks as fragile, and standards as normal, then this gives a slight bonus to standard heat sink survivability, giving a further incentive to use the standards.

This will also make heat sink boating a little harder, as sinks will crit more often. Leaving mechs like the 6 ppc stalker something to think about.



***********************************EDIT*************************************************

A few people have said that my number values might need tweaked. That's completely fine, this system is obviously just an "idea". I just hope the devs read this post and maybe get a lightbulb above their head on how to improve the system, even if it is not my idea at all when they are done with it.

Edited by UraniumOverdose, 14 February 2013 - 09:34 AM.

[Volthorne]

Wow, I'm actually pretty impressed. Would support, +9001.

[UraniumOverdose]

If only you were a dev, lol.

[Volthorne]

UraniumOverdose, on 11 February 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

If only you were a dev, lol.

One can dream (will acquire necessary skills soon™).

Also, bump for great justice!

Edited by Volthorne, 11 February 2013 - 10:58 AM.

[ChrisOrange]

It's things like this that could end up making Clan Tech balanced as well, so I'm all for it.

[Stringburka]

This is an excellent suggestion.

[NKAc Street]

Sounds like a good idea.

[blinkin]

this is a very major change that they would have to test extensively. it definitely won't happen soon, but i think this is a well thought out decent idea that could go quite a ways towards balancing the game more.

the specific numbers you use should probably be up for debate, but the system as a whole seems solid.

[UraniumOverdose]

Bump

[UraniumOverdose]

Barump.

[focuspark]

Dislike. Being big doesn't mean not fragile. Actually, large, complex devices would be a lot easier to break than smaller ones because they're easier to hit. You break any one part of an AC/20 and it's useless regardless of its size. HP != Crits.

[Volthorne]

focuspark, on 13 February 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

Dislike. Being big doesn't mean not fragile. Actually, large, complex devices would be a lot easier to break than smaller ones because they're easier to hit. You break any one part of an AC/20 and it's useless regardless of its size. HP != Crits.

There would be a reason to pick an AC/20 over 4 MLas again if this were implemented. Do you not see exactly how AWESOME this would be for the game?

[focuspark]

Volthorne, on 13 February 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

There would be a reason to pick an AC/20 over 4 MLas again if this were implemented. Do you not see exactly how AWESOME this would be for the game?

I thought have a Ballistics Hardpoint instead of an Energy one was a good reason. Besides, multiple weapons suffer from convergence lag and lasers take a full second to apply their damage. You are comparing apples and four grapes here.

[Volthorne]

focuspark, on 13 February 2013 - 12:54 PM, said:

I thought have a Ballistics Hardpoint instead of an Energy one was a good reason. Besides, multiple weapons suffer from convergence lag and lasers take a full second to apply their damage. You are comparing apples and four grapes here.

They also have a 1/12 chance to take critical damage if the section they're in is completely full. An AC/20 will ALWAYS take critical damage if it is applied. Also, convergence is only a problem if spread across both torso and arms.

Yes, four very small, hard grapes compared to one big, squishy apple. I'll take the grapes as it stands right now. Give me this suggestion and I'd consider taking the apple because it would no longer be quite so squishy.

Edited by Volthorne, 13 February 2013 - 01:24 PM.

[DocBach]

Make it simpler - health is based on the amount of criticals it takes up. AC/20 is a hard mother to take out - hitting a medium laser once KO's it. Gauss rifle isn't as fragile as it is now, but when it goes, it blows up in your face.

[Jot Nara]

Not a lot of traction on this idea it seems. Too bad. I like it, and think it'd make for better gameplay. Your exact values are way off, however.
Anyhow... bump.

[blinkin]

Jotnara, on 13 February 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

Not a lot of traction on this idea it seems. Too bad. I like it, and think it'd make for better gameplay. Your exact values are way off, however.
Anyhow... bump.

this thread has done a decent job of staying afloat. it also has a few likes (including mine).

[JokerVictor]

Very much like this idea. Though, I have to disagree with the hard grapes/squishy apple analogy you used there. I run a CTF build with both 4 ML and an AC20, and that AC20 is by far the more effective weapon. Yes, on paper those ML are as effective, but shooting a light in the leg with a 4-pack of medium lasers has absolutely nowhere near the effect of shooting them in the leg with an AC20.

The instant burst damage and fairly low heat are pretty excellent reasons to take an AC20, it's far far faaaar from worthless. It just has to be cared for. As in, one of your priorities in a fight should be defending that weapon with every other part of your mech. Some mechs are definitely better suited to this than others, i.e. that isn't exactly possible in a hunchback, but you can try at least.

[CG Oglethorpe Kerensky]

Terrible idea.

Just because it is bigger doesn't mean that it is harder to wreck, the larger and more complicated a device is the easier it is to break it.
Yes we all get it, you drive an AC/20 cat and you can't stand how after your torso gets opened up those huge guns are easy to knock out. It isn't our fault that you drive a mech that has only 2 guns, and nothing else in the torso to crit.

[Volthorne]

CG Oglethorpe Kerensky, on 13 February 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Terrible idea.

Just because it is bigger doesn't mean that it is harder to wreck, the larger and more complicated a device is the easier it is to break it.
Yes we all get it, you drive an AC/20 cat and you can't stand how after your torso gets opened up those huge guns are easy to knock out. It isn't our fault that you drive a mech that has only 2 guns, and nothing else in the torso to crit.

Congratz on jumping to conclusions. We all know that AC/20s are way too easy to break, and they could use a bit of compensation.

And if this is such a terrible Ipodea, I suppose you have a better one?