48 replies to this topic

[McQuackers]

As it currently stands, Ferro-Fibrous is categorically worse than Endo-Steel Structure.

For example, at 70 tons, my 'Phract sheds 3.5 tons by using the Endo-Steel structure. Alternatively, I can shed a measly 1.5 tons by using Ferro-Fibrous armor (at max armor). They both take 14 slots, making them somewhat mutually exclusive on the larger mechs.

As it stands: if you're using Ferro-Fibrous armor, you're leaving tonnage on the table.

How do I suggest this be remedied? By keeping the weight saving feature of FF armor, but also allowing you to add additional armor beyond maximum values.

Give pilots and designers the ability to trade off extra firepower vs extra survivability.

This would actually result in Ferro-Fibrous armor being desirable for a certain playstyle. Maybe brawlers want the extra armor for closing the gap, or mechs that run XL engines go for FF so that they can better armor their side torsos.

It'd be a boon to lopsided mechs as well, allowing them to shore up their armor plating on the vital side (I'm looking at you, Highlanders and Hunchbacks).

As it stands, Ferro-Fibrous is a wasted feature. It adds nothing to the game as there is no reason to choose it.

[Helmer]

Agreed.

I've been suggesting this since FF was introduced.

Allow FF to not only give you an additional 12% armor per ton, but allow you to mount 12% more armor in each component of the 'mech (rounding up)
This would make FF a much more viable option for more than just Lights.



Cheers.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Good idea - should turn it into a poll.

[Hell Mel]

McQuackers, on 24 April 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

As it stands, Ferro-Fibrous is a wasted feature. It adds nothing to the game as there is no reason to choose it.

That's a pretty bold statement.

Yes, 100% of the time Endo is better. It is universally useful, and should generally be applied to every mech as kind of an 'end-game' upgrade, much like DHS should go on everything.

FF is not universally useful. It is useful for only a select few mechs that need to cut fractional weight and have crit slots to spare after the Endo upgrade. This means that it is not going to be useful for Assault mechs, and that's okay. An upgrade doesn't have to be a universal upgrade that everyone always wants. Niche upgrades are okay.

FF is a niche upgrade, and that's much different than "A wasted feature" that "adds nothing to the game as there is no reason to choose it. I run it on 2-3 chassis at a time. But I play Light/Mediums. It's hardly worthless.

Edited by Hell Mel, 24 April 2013 - 11:10 AM.

[SMDMadCow]

No. Total armor coverage is based on the internals and the skeleton can only hold so much. What you want is hardened armor that ignores single point damage hits, because it takes 2 points of damage to remove 1 point of hardend armor.

Edited by SMDMadCow, 24 April 2013 - 11:13 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

It might be simpler to change FF to work exactly like standard armour, except provide 20 % damage reduction or something like that.

Let's face it, Battletech technology upgrades mostly do one thing - add more firepower. They do very little defensively. This won't be healthy for MW:O at all.

Of course, that might just make FF a mandatory upgrade, which isn't much better, either.

[3rdworld]

Personally I would just like to be able to add extra armor at the cost of crits. Like .5 armor for 2 crits. Want to add 16 armor to a hunch's hunch? stick an "armor" slot in there and you can put 16 more armor there. You still have to pay for the armor, so in actuality 16 points of additional armor would weigh 1 ton.

SMDMadCow, on 24 April 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

No. Total armor coverage is based on the internals and the skeleton can only hold so much. What you want is hardened armor that ignores single point damage hits, because it takes 2 points of damage to remove 1 point of hardend armor.

It's okay, the FF armor upgrade would include modifications to the skeleton to carry the extra armor.

[Andrew Waltfeld]

This is probably one of the best ideas I've read here in quite a while. This would allow for some serious differences in a lot of top-tier mechs, and really help diversify the battlefield. 5 stars!

[McBrite]

Helmer, on 24 April 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

Agreed.

I've been suggesting this since FF was introduced.

Allow FF to not only give you an additional 12% armor per ton, but allow you to mount 12% more armor in each component of the 'mech (rounding up)
This would make FF a much more viable option for more than just Lights.



Cheers.

If you don't see how 25,44% more armour is game breaking, you are living in DisneyLand...

[Caviel]

My vote is no, there's no reason why Endo Steel and Ferro-Fibrous armor have to be "equal" is this regard. Think of FF armor as a "bonus" on top of Endo if you happen to have the space available for both. You're basically saying "I'll take an extra couple of tons in trade of these internal slots I can't use anyways."

For mech builds that can take advantage of both to use the additional tonnage, great. If you can't, just stick with Endo since it is the better value tonnage wise.

Also keep in mind that Clan FF armor only consumes 7 criticals so even an assault mech could take both Endo and FF armor (Clan Endo + Clan FF Armor = 14 criticals). Any bonus that would be given to IS FF technology should also apply to Clan technology which nullifies any sort of "diversification" benefits within the IS technology bubble, you're just making Assault mechs more powerful.

[3rdworld]

McBrite, on 24 April 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

If you don't see how 25,44% more armour is game breaking, you are living in DisneyLand...

it is only 12 % more armor. the 12% more a ton is just a weight saving feature, does nothing to increase the amount of armor possible.

And that is only around 15 more armor on the CT of an atlas. Game breaking indeed.

[SMDMadCow]

Sure lets do this, how much longer will it take to kill my max armor Zombie Cent with that kind of an armor increase? How about max armor Ravens and Jenners?

[3rdworld]

SMDMadCow, on 24 April 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

Sure lets do this, how much longer will it take to kill my max armor Zombie Cent with that kind of an armor increase? How about max armor Ravens and Jenners?

The CT of a full armored cent would have ~8 more armor.

the CT of a raven would have ~6.

It isn't nearly as big of a change as you are trying to make it out to be.

edit: math fail

Edited by 3rdworld, 24 April 2013 - 12:01 PM.

[Helmer]

McBrite, on 24 April 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

If you don't see how 25,44% more armour is game breaking, you are living in DisneyLand...

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.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

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.

Exactly.

Its nearly an insult that they (PGI) would retain some things that even in TT were bad. Since the '09 MechWarrior game was supposed to be a reboot of the series, why not keep with that spirit and fix some things in TT that were just bad? Best example is FF armor. Make it useful.

For those who think FF is fine as is, you're the ignorant one. It was bad in TT, and there is no reason it should be kept bad in MechWarrior for the sake of mimicking TT verbatim.

[SMDMadCow]

3rdworld, on 24 April 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

The CT of a full armored cent would have ~8 more armor.

the CT of a raven would have 7.

It isn't nearly as big of a change as you are trying to make it out to be.

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.

[Garth Erlam]

Interesting idea, thanks for posting it

[3rdworld]

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.

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.

[Loler skates]

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.

[Relic1701]

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.

Edited by Relic1701, 24 April 2013 - 12:14 PM.