14 replies to this topic

[Iscariott]

TT neckbeards, I have need of you here. When I read Sarna it sounds like when FF armor is added to a mech it is in general used to keep the weight of the armor the same, but improve the total value of armor protection. This would seem to make a lot of sense especially for the game we play now: MWO.

14 slots for at best 1.5-2 tons of savings in weight is utterly pointless. On the flip side 14 slots to get another 1.5 tons worth of armor value onto a mech seems like a great idea. Is my understanding of how this works in TT correct?

Either way am I the only one who thinks that allowing the FF upgrade to pack more armor onto a chassis is a fantastic way to make the upgrade worth while?

[Zyllos]

PGI has actually answered this early this year but I have not heard/seen anything from it yet:

Quote

Q: Has there been any thoughts by you guys to help boost FF, to make it an upgrade, instead of a next step upgrade to ES? [Zyllos]
A: Yes we have, and they are ongoing. We have a few ideas, though a nice first step was removing the repair cost fromt he game [Garth]

http://mwomercs.com/...57#entry1690257

Edited by Zyllos, 30 April 2013 - 01:34 PM.

[Iscariott]

Zyllos, on 30 April 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

PGI has actually answered this early this year but I have heard/seen anything from it yet:



http://mwomercs.com/...57#entry1690257

Fair enough, I hadn't seen that ATD. An update would be nice though.

[Orzorn]

Personally, I use FF on enough mechs (obviously in combination with endo steel and XL, usually) that I'm okay with it. Its very useful for Dragons, as you need every ton you can get.

[SMDMadCow]

Iscariott, on 30 April 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

TT neckbeards, I have need of you here. When I read Sarna it sounds like when FF armor is added to a mech it is in general used to keep the weight of the armor the same, but improve the total value of armor protection. This would seem to make a lot of sense especially for the game we play now: MWO.

14 slots for at best 1.5-2 tons of savings in weight is utterly pointless. On the flip side 14 slots to get another 1.5 tons worth of armor value onto a mech seems like a great idea. Is my understanding of how this works in TT correct?

Either way am I the only one who thinks that allowing the FF upgrade to pack more armor onto a chassis is a fantastic way to make the upgrade worth while?

Not the way it works, you cannot mount more armor than the chassis will allow. FF allows you to mount max armor for less weight, ot is a weight for crits deal.
Allowing FF to add more armor like you suggest would only teally be a boon to light and medium mechs that can make use of more critical space than heavies and assaults as those chassis would be trying to cram larger weapons in.

[One Medic Army]

In TT Ferro armor functions exactly the same as in MWO.
It provides more points of armor per ton.

However, in both MWO and TT the maximum points of armor on any given section is set at 2x internal structure points, thus making FF purely a weight-saving measure and strictly inferior to Endo-Steel in both MWO and TT.

The reason you see it more in TT is that Ferro is a much easier retrofit to do on an existing mech. You're just replacing the armor, rather than sending the whole mech back to the factory to be disassembled and have a new skeleton put in.

[Yokaiko]

I wouldn't mind seeing FF being able to "over armor" either that or crack up the value to standard +20%.

Incoming damage is still 200% over TT values for 100% more armor.

[Scratx]

Neverfar, on 30 April 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

I play tabletop battletech, and even then, I think this is a very good idea for the MMO.

I don't know. Now that armor doesn't crank up your bills (since you got none) it's no longer really a problem that it is strictly inferior to Endo-Steel in weight savings.

One thing that makes me wonder is that more advanced armors (that admittedly aren't available on this time frame) like Ferro-Lamellor or Hardened Armor would lose some of the points in their favor if they were no longer the only armors that allowed having truly more effective armor (and not merely lighter or weapon-specific).

The other issue is that only lights and mediums can really take advantage of FF, heavies have trouble affording ES or FF... nevermind assaults.

[Yokaiko]

Scratx, on 30 April 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

I don't know. Now that armor doesn't crank up your bills (since you got none) it's no longer really a problem that it is strictly inferior to Endo-Steel in weight savings.

One thing that makes me wonder is that more advanced armors (that admittedly aren't available on this time frame) like Ferro-Lamellor or Hardened Armor would lose some of the points in their favor if they were no longer the only armors that allowed having truly more effective armor (and not merely lighter or weapon-specific).

The other issue is that only lights and mediums can really take advantage of FF, heavies have trouble affording ES or FF... nevermind assaults.

I have a minimum for four heavies with FF right now. That is the point though, being able to over-cap armor or get more weight saving would make it an actual choice. Right now its "meh I'm not armor capped and have the slots"

[Corvus Antaka]

Yokaiko, on 30 April 2013 - 12:33 PM, said:

I wouldn't mind seeing FF being able to "over armor" either that or crack up the value to standard +20%.

Incoming damage is still 200% over TT values for 100% more armor.

This

[One Medic Army]

I'd be fine with Ferro allowing a higher armor cap.
It'd make Endo vs Ferro a choice on heavy and/or assault mechs.

Do I want more armor? Do I want more tonnage?

Granted that I'd probably take the tonnage, seeing as 3-4 tons is a pretty big gain, compared to being able to stick another 5-10 pts of armor somewhere.

[Aurien Titus]

Don't forget Clans get these same techs at half the slot requirements. So their endo steel and FF are only 7 slots per instead of 14. Something to consider when saying FF should boost armor totals.

[One Medic Army]

Aurien Titus, on 30 April 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

Don't forget Clans get these same techs at half the slot requirements. So their endo steel and FF are only 7 slots per instead of 14. Something to consider when saying FF should boost armor totals.

Clan FF is also 20% more armor/ton, rather than the IS 12%.
Both Endos are the same though, IIRC.

[Zyllos]

Aurien Titus, on 30 April 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

Don't forget Clans get these same techs at half the slot requirements. So their endo steel and FF are only 7 slots per instead of 14. Something to consider when saying FF should boost armor totals.

Ya, the Ferro-Fibrous Revisioned thread I had several months ago talked about that same thing.

Would it be unbalanced towards the Clans if they received 20% extra armor while IS gets 12% extra armor?

But, someone brought up a good point in that Ferro-Fibrous, if implemented as such, would have to reduce their current loadout to benefit from the extra armor.

If you already had a build with Endo-Steel and Ferro-Fibrous with max armor, then this system got implemented, you would have to come up with another 12% (and 20% for the Clans) tonnage to gain that armor.

Also, considering that Clan Omnimechs generally can not swap around armor type, engine type (not sure why you would want STD engine with Clan XL), and Internal Structure type, I think the balance seems fair.

Edited by Zyllos, 30 April 2013 - 07:17 PM.