60 replies to this topic

[Mister Blastman]

It is about time.

Think about it. With all these threads complaining about snipers--what is the one thing the snipers themselves can count on? Speed cap. They know, without fail, that their enemy is hampered by smaller engines and slower speeds. They know they have time to get their shots in.

Why not get rid of this certainty?

I'm not talking remove the 400 limit--no, the 400 limit stays. That's BT. What I'm talking is letting Hunchies fit as big an engine as they can afford by weight if they want. Or Centurions. Or Cicadas. Or Jenners. Or Ravens.

With HSR in full effect (except missiles) I can comfortably say fast mechs are way easier to hit than ever before. Isn't that the reason it was put in to begin with?

Well, not completely. The other reason was the netcode warping. Well, we're in beta, right? Let's see just how far things have come.

Remove the caps, now!

What say you all? Yea or Nay?

Let's let the brawlers... brawl!!!!!!!!

[Scandinavian Jawbreaker]

Yes! Moar trololollers!

[ratgoat]

Yes please make my Swayback god like again! Poor hunchie never gets out of the mech lab nowadays.

Edited by ratgoat, 10 May 2013 - 03:07 PM.

[Howdy Doody]

More options = more combinations = more battlefield variety. Sounds good to me!

Looking forward to reading the negatives to this.

Edited by Howdy Doody, 10 May 2013 - 03:10 PM.

[One Medic Army]

For most chassis, yes.
Some chassis (I'm looking at you, swayback) need some chassis based downsides to make up for their hardpoints/target profile.

If chassis get some tweaks, like perhaps accel/decel/twist boosts/nerfs based on how agile the stock machine is, then I'd be perfectly fine with it.

Of course this makes Dragons even more useless.

P.S. I was I favor of engine limitations in closed beta, when there were few chassis tweaks available to use for balancing.

Edited by One Medic Army, 10 May 2013 - 03:15 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I voted "No" because we'll have to wait and see how things go when they release the 8.6xTonnage Engine restriction... after that goes into effect for a couple months then it might be more appropriate to entertain the idea of completely derestricted Mechs. (even then, I would vote "No" again, but at least it would be a more reasonable environment to make a suggestion such as this..)

Edited by Prosperity Park, 10 May 2013 - 03:44 PM.

[Jabilo]

I think over 150 kph is pretty fast enough.

200 kph plus ping of 300 means crazy rubber band hell.

I do not think this game can handle it yet.

[Mister Blastman]

Prosperity Park, on 10 May 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

I voted "No" because we'll have to wait and see how things go when they release the 8.6xTonnage Engine restriction

You're speaking Greek here. Whatchu talkin' bout, Willis?



Right now we have the 1.2 and 1.3x restriction.

[Kaijin]

Might as well. If only to make the abandonment of the IP more complete.

[Stone Profit]

Prosperity Park, on 10 May 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

I voted "No" because we'll have to wait and see how things go when they release the 8.6xTonnage Engine restriction... after that goes into effect for a couple months then it might be more appropriate to entertain the idea of completely derestricted Mechs. (even then, I would vote "No" again, but at least it would be a more reasonable environment to make a suggestion such as this..)

You clearly know more than the average MWO player... BRING ME THE LOSTECH TORTURE... AHEM I mean PERSUASION EQUIPMENT!

[Monky]

I like the idea of engine limitations giving a mech a role, however I am open for any and all mechs to have that limitation re-evaluated at any time based on how the mechs perform.

Basically, it provides some needed limitations to provide some consistency and expectations of a battlemech. Currently I think a lot of the engine limitations are too low (most awesomes/cents/hunchbacks/dragons). They should be tweaked individually for best results.

[Deathlike]

Don't bother asking the question when the netcode can't handle 150+kph mechs.

[Lukoi Banacek]

I think incremental increases to engine cap based on specific chassis (consider it like quirk system) is the better option. Blanket removal of the speed cap seems like it might be rife with imbalance. When it comes to PvP games, I'm usually not a fan of sweeping changes, especially given the vast number of variables they are always tinkering with.

[Durant Carlyle]

Right now, there are two restrictions in place.

There's the "role-based" restriction:
Lights = stock engine x 1.4
Mediums = stock engine x 1.3
Heavies and Assaults = stock engine x 1.2

...and the netcode-forced restriction:
Max engine = (8.5 x 'Mech tonnage)

The Spider should be able to go 183.6 kph with a 340 engine using the role-based limit, but it's currently hog-tied by the netcode-forced limit. The Jenner should be able to go 159.7 kph with a 345 engine using the role-based limit, but is also hamstrung by the netcode-forced limit. Those speeds are before any Speed Tweak bonus.

I don't agree at all with unrestricted engine sizes. Being a light that's unable to escape from mediums sucked royally. Especially since those mediums were designed to be slow in canon. If you are a class lighter than your pursuer, you should be able to outrun him automatically (unless he's in a 'Mech specially designed to go fast for its class, like a Cicada). It would be even worse now, since we have HSR.

I do agree with the netcode-forced limit removal, but the role-based limit should stay in place forever. Otherwise, what's the point of taking a light when a medium has more firepower, more armor, and is just as fast?

[FrostCollar]

Deathlike, on 10 May 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

Don't bother asking the question when the netcode can't handle 150+kph mechs.

I'd certainly like an update on that from the devs. Until then, we won't know if it even can be lifted (for now).

[OneEyed Jack]

While unlimited engine sizing is BT canon, I like the size caps as a way to differentiate chassis and variants. Some of those could use adjusting, but they're already slowly working on that. Several mechs have already gotten increased engine sizes as they do the quirk passes.

I do think they will need to remove the artificial speed cap to make certain mechs have a point, though.

[StandingCow]

Would it be nice? Yea. But the Engine from what I understand cannot handle it.

I would rather them work on other things first.

[Mister Blastman]

Deathlike, on 10 May 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

Don't bother asking the question when the netcode can't handle 150+kph mechs.

That was months ago. Things have changed since then.

[Sephlock]

Mister Blastman, on 10 May 2013 - 05:59 PM, said:

That was months ago. Things have changed since then.

Did they fix the netcode?

[Gaan Cathal]

Kaijin, on 10 May 2013 - 05:21 PM, said:

Might as well. If only to make the abandonment of the IP more complete.

Nope.

Durant Carlyle, on 10 May 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

Lights = stock engine x 1.4
Mediums = stock engine x 1.3
Heavies and Assaults = stock engine x 1.2
...
I do agree with the netcode-forced limit removal, but the role-based limit should stay in place forever. Otherwise, what's the point of taking a light when a medium has more firepower, more armor, and is just as fast?

There's a problem here. I agree in principle that lights need to be faster than mediums need to be faster than heavies need to be faster than assaults but it needs to be chassis based, not variant based. Prime example here is that the two 'combat' Ravens are significantly worse at combat than the 'support' 3L. This is not because ECM (ECM just made it competitive with the JR7). It's because you can't fit the same engine in a -2X as in a -3L despite them being the same ******* chassis.

Sephlock, on 10 May 2013 - 06:06 PM, said:

Did they fix the netcode?

Yep, though it's not tested at >150km/h