48 replies to this topic

[Helmer]

Loler skates, on 24 April 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

why are people acting like this idea is new?

it's been suggested multiple times, infact most people used to mistakenly believe this was the case in spite of repeated information laying campaigns explaining the facts to people from October.

It has been suggested a few times, however, it is obviously new to some.

Relic1701, on 24 April 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

Ferro-Fibrous has always been the 'upgrade if you got the space' item, ES was always the better of the 2 options.

I will admit that it does need a bit of a boost, up to say maybe 38 points/ton (up from 35.84/ton), to make it a bit more attractive, but armour above and beyond what the chassis can handle is taking it a bit far.

I think they attempt is to make FF just as viable as Endo, without basically doing the same thing mathematically.
Give the individuals an options of additional weight for HeatSinks/Ammo/Weapons via Endo, or additional armor above the norm with FF.

It could very well be OP at 12% extra, but worth looking into. Not the most game changing thing to look into at the moment to be sure, but as a future option.

Cheers.

Edited by Helmer, 24 April 2013 - 12:18 PM.

[SMDMadCow]

3rdworld, on 24 April 2013 - 12:10 PM, said:

If you are killing every part of a mech, you are doing it wrong. You said zombie cents, which the only way to really kill a zombie cent is CT.

But anyhow.

A cent would take roughly 41 more dmg (assuming you killed all the armor on it and it was running full armor).
A raven would take 29 more dmg.

With HSR lights have become laughably easy to kill. A toughness buff is probably warranted.

Tell that to the other Cent and Jenner that tried to run me down on Alpine a few nights ago. All the way from the bottom of H10 to the top of G5 they sere shooting me up, but a Zombie uses their arms as sheilds and they could not kill me. I lost both arms and my right torso and then we got back to the rest of my team, who ate them up, lol.

[Macheiron]

I actually really like this idea. For those who keep saying, "The chassis can't mount more armor than it can mount." I say, it's ultimately the same tonnage of armor. Ferro-Fibrous armor is bulkier, but that's covered by the critical space requirement. As for clan mechs, this is a non-issue for omnimechs(armor is fixed on them anyway.)

[Hellcat420]

horrible idea

[SGT Puddles]

i always like the idea of the weight reduction plus a 5-10% damage reduction. its not game breaking, it makes ferro a viable option to take on an assault mech (tanky) and its fluffy (fits the lore, though not the table top rules)

[Bishop Steiner]

can't count the number of times I recommended this. Instead of being just 1.12x the armor per ton, allow it to add that amount above and beyond the norm. or 1.2x for Clan Mechs. Right now, Ferro is useless except on mechs like the Cicada or smaller.

[Taemien]

When talking about Ferro Fibrous Armor I always get a bit dubious when someone throws Endo Steel into the equation. Endo Steel and FF armor are not mutually exclusive. We shouldn't be fixated on choosing one or the other.

I wouldn't be opposed to allowing FF armor to give a percentage of armor over the max armor values. The reason for this is the double armor value makes FF less attractive at its current implementation. So allowing a bit over might make it more attractive but the critical cost keeps it inline.

Edited by Taemien, 24 April 2013 - 07:52 PM.

[Dr Killinger]

I would like to see this tested, but not only to make FF useful.

The way it is now FF, is only there for lights and mediums who still have crit space left after multiple upgrades.

Right now, lights and mediums (moreso mediums) are far fewer on the Battlefield than heavies and assaults, and I think that making this change wouldn't only allow for some interesting decisions to be made, but would also give smaller mechs a slight boost that is more easily attained that with larger mechs.

The only thing I worry about is that FF would then become mandatory. Survival is tops in this game- you never see anyone cutting down on torso or arm armour to save weight. If FF just becomes compulsory, I don't think the change would be worth it.

FF is not useless as it is right now, it's just the second step in the upgrade process, if crit space allows for it.

[Kmieciu]

This is a great idea! It would increase the diversity on the battlefield.
On heavy and assault mechs you could choose between more armor (FF), more weapons (ES) or more double heat sinks (none of the upgrades).
The change would not be very dramatic though. The most extreme case: the center torso of an Atlas. 124 *0.12 = 14.88. So for the cost of 14 critical slots an Atlas can endure an additional Gauss hit.
It makes about the same difference as cool shot 9+9 that allows you to fire a PPC two times.

Edited by Kmieciu, 24 April 2013 - 11:36 PM.

[Liege]

i like the idea.

I also feel FF would be more worth it (as it stands now) if it only took 7 slots. I have many mechs i would trade 7 slots for an additonal ton (or more). At the moment I only run it in a cicada.

Edited by Liege, 24 April 2013 - 11:42 PM.

[Ragor]

Garth Erlam, on 24 April 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Interesting idea, thanks for posting it

Interesting. Exactly the same idea in the CB forums you commented as ~nonsense...

[Voivode]

Or just change it from 14 slots. It seems like they settled on 14 slots for every weight saving upgrade without really considering how much they save you. Yeah an XL engine saves more weight for the crit space than endo steel, but it also comes with additional vulnerability. Have ferro-fibrous provide a modest weight reduction for a modest crit space cost. Something like 6 or 8 crit spaces might be better for the tonnage it saves

[Joseph Mallan]

Helmer, on 24 April 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Its 12% more armor overall.

Why do you feel insults are necessary? Do they enhance your position in some way? We make an attempt to maintain a civil , respectful forum, please conduct yourself accordingly.



Cheers.

the insults are not necessary but the sentiment is valid. FA and Endo have worked this way for 20 years, NOW it's no worth having? One uses FFA when they need a LITTLE more tonnage, an Endo when they need a bit more. When I used Lights they had both, anything larger and it is Endo only. Cause I need room for Sinks.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 25 April 2013 - 08:41 AM.

[Saltychipmunk]

id still have second thoughts even if it took 7 slots , as many have said it is essentially just a **** version of endo skelly.

but why should it function like endo skelly?

frankly i like the idea of over armoring stuff. hell with all insane ppcs boats , having more armor in the core areas really is a needed

[Artgathan]

Joseph Mallan, on 25 April 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

One uses FFA when they need a LITTLE more tonnage, an Endo when they need a bit more.

In what building situation is it preferable to have a lower amount of tonnage available?

[Joseph Mallan]

Saltychipmunk, on 25 April 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

id still have second thoughts even if it took 7 slots , as many have said it is essentially just a **** version of endo skelly.

but why should it function like endo skelly?

frankly i like the idea of over armoring stuff. hell with all insane ppcs boats , having more armor in the core areas really is a needed

I'm sorry the "insane PPC boats" Are hitting you as hard as Awesomes or Shrek PPC Carriers did TT.

Artgathan, on 25 April 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

In what building situation is it preferable to have a lower amount of tonnage available?

When all you need is 1.5T to make your Mech just how you want it and you are 40 ton Mech or larger.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 25 April 2013 - 08:46 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

SMDMadCow, on 24 April 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

Total armor values, not just CT? Its already aggravating enough to try and kill these mechs and you want to make it even harder? They would be the only ones really interested anyway, because they can make full use of their crit slots. If the benefit isnt that great, then the bigger mechs will still go for endo for more weapon or sink weight.

Yes, makes them harder to kill, AT THE EXPENSE OF 14 Crit Slots.
As opposed to now, where 14 Crit Slots really gets you a warm steaming pile of poo in your hand.

And sometimes the big Mechs don't need the extra tonnage that Endo would free, as often times the extra crits eat up any room to USE it. Whereas with the armor, while it would certainly not be useful on every build, it would allow them to buff the thing they are supposed to be known for.. durability.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 25 April 2013 - 08:50 AM.

[3rdworld]

Joseph Mallan, on 25 April 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

the insults are not necessary but the sentiment is valid. FA and Endo have worked this way for 20 years, NOW it's no worth having? One uses FFA when they need a LITTLE more tonnage, an Endo when they need a bit more. When I used Lights they had both, anything larger and it is Endo only. Cause I need room for Sinks.

It was a bad idea in the 80's. It is a shame that nostalgia won't let us move on.

Just like a spider having the same internal volume as an atlas.

We are better than this. The system can be improved.

[General Taskeen]

I think actually Over Armoring wouldn't program well, and would be especially confusing to see 502/500.

What they should do, which is technically the same, is simply give each ton of FF extra damage reduction, either as the "12%" of IS and "20%" for Clan (in clan's case, the "omni" rules say engine, structure, and armor can't be changed, but a non-omni mech can). That way they wouldn't have to deal with the headache of over-armoring calculations in the Mech Lab, and simply apply extra damage reduction bonuses for every ton.

So:

Endo
* Advantage - Lots of Weight Reduction

FF -
* Advantage - Extra Damage Reduction Per Ton (+12% IS, +20% Clan, or whatever could be balanced)
* Minor - Small Weight Reduction (same as it is now)

Disadvantage - Same, takes up crit spots, depending if it is IS or Clan version.


Personally, I'd like to see the other armor's in time as well. Especially Hardened Armor, which provides a lot of extra damage protection, but makes a Mech move even slower and sluggish.

Edited by General Taskeen, 25 April 2013 - 08:56 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

3rdworld, on 25 April 2013 - 08:48 AM, said:

It was a bad idea in the 80's. It is a shame that nostalgia won't let us move on.

Just like a spider having the same internal volume as an atlas.

We are better than this. The system can be improved.

There are rules to change this on TT. My table used them since their inception. We already have double armor, we don't need even more armor on top of that!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 25 April 2013 - 08:57 AM.