34 replies to this topic

[StandingCow]

So, while listening to the drop command podcast I had an idea... and realized that PGI's idea of increasing internal structure HP does nothing but nerf ballistics (you need to bring more ammo to do the extra damage required).

Instead, why don't they use something already in game? FF armor, which right now I don't believe is used all that often. Make it more resistant against energy weapons (since we don't have reflective armor yet). Or hell, go outside the timeline a bit to introduce reflective armor.

Having different armor types would force teams to mix their loadouts a bit more, a PPC stalker would not be near as effective against reflective armor mechs, but neither would a ballistic only platform against FF armor mechs.

TLDR:
Regular armor = no change
FF armor (Or reactive) = more resistant to ballistics, weaker against energy.
Reflective armor = More resistance to energy weapons (Yes it isn't in the timeline yet, but for balance sake, bring it in) and weaker against ballistics.

Thoughts?

Edited by StandingCow, 30 June 2013 - 08:46 PM.

[Brilig]

Cool idea to add more tactical depth to the game. Though I don't think it will balance our current issues with heat/convergence making for awesome pinpoint alpha strike damage.

There would have to be downsides to each to keep them from being straight upgrades for normal armor.

Example:
Reflective armor has energy resistance, but is weaker to ballistics.
Ballistic armor has ballistic resistance, but is weaker to energy.
Standard armor has no extra resistance, and no extra weaknesses.

Then maybe have a FF version of each?

Edit: Formatting.

Edited by Brilig, 26 June 2013 - 02:03 AM.

[StandingCow]

Brilig, on 26 June 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

Cool idea to add more tactical depth to the game. Though I don't think it will balance our current issues with heat/convergence making for awesome pinpoint alpha strike damage.

There would have to be downsides to each to keep them from being straight upgrades for normal armor.

Example:
Reflective armor has energy resistance, but is weaker to ballistics.
Ballistic armor has ballistic resistance, but is weaker to energy.
Standard armor has no extra resistance, and no extra weaknesses.

Then maybe have a FF version of each?

Edit: Formatting.

haha, you typed exactly what I did over on our forums here at the same time. So, we are thinking along the same lines.

Edited my OP to reflect the negative side to each choice.

Edited by StandingCow, 26 June 2013 - 02:14 AM.

[trollocaustic]

Quote

Reflective armor = More resistance to energy weapons (Yes it isn't in the timeline yet, but for balance sake, bring it in) and weaker against ballistics.

God NO
Aren't energy weapons weak enough as is?

[StandingCow]

trollocaustic, on 26 June 2013 - 02:31 AM, said:

God NO
Aren't energy weapons weak enough as is?

You think PPCs are weak?

[trollocaustic]

Compared to gaussclear rifles and AC20²⁰ Yeah.
The Gauss, AC/20, AC/2 AC/5 AC/10 and the UAC neds to be brought back into line, halve their ammo, bring DHS back to 2x for all (They were the only reason energy was ever even usable) and shorten the beam length of lasers.

[StandingCow]

trollocaustic, on 26 June 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

Compared to gaussclear rifles and AC20²⁰ Yeah.
The Gauss, AC/20, AC/2 AC/5 AC/10 and the UAC neds to be brought back into line, halve their ammo, bring DHS back to 2x for all (They were the only reason energy was ever even usable) and shorten the beam length of lasers.

Just noticed your name... yea...

[mindwarp]

trollocaustic, on 26 June 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

Compared to gaussclear rifles and AC20²⁰ Yeah.
The Gauss, AC/20, AC/2 AC/5 AC/10 and the UAC neds to be brought back into line, halve their ammo, bring DHS back to 2x for all (They were the only reason energy was ever even usable) and shorten the beam length of lasers.

Trolling? Yeah, must be.
I mean, after all it's not like energy weapons are the most used weapons in the game or anything. Oh wait, they are.

[El Bandito]

Brilig, on 26 June 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

Cool idea to add more tactical depth to the game. Though I don't think it will balance our current issues with heat/convergence making for awesome pinpoint alpha strike damage. There would have to be downsides to each to keep them from being straight upgrades for normal armor. Example: Reflective armor has energy resistance, but is weaker to ballistics. Ballistic armor has ballistic resistance, but is weaker to energy. Standard armor has no extra resistance, and no extra weaknesses. Then maybe have a FF version of each? Edit: Formatting.

For future reference, the armor that is resistant to ballistics and missiles is called Reactive Armor. It was even used in MW4. Look it up.

Edited by El Bandito, 26 June 2013 - 02:49 AM.

[VonRunnegen]

Would be very helpful - if one weapon is sufficiently out of balance it gets used nearly universally (see: PPCs now, LRMs during the lrmpocalypse etc) then being able to counter that single weapon would help a lot. That said, it wouldn't stop it being about e.g. 'AC20 or PPC' as you can't counter both, and e.g. LLas right now would be penalised by the popularity of PPCs by many reflective armour users. Still, a helpful step allowiung users to self-balance weapons to a degree.

[William Mountbank]

FF armour might not be used much in mechs over 40t - so you think it's not important, but lights can't always fill their slots and so have plenty of space for FF, Endo and DHSs along with an XL. Those few extra free grams from using FF can really make the difference for lights.
Without FF I can't fit the optional toilet roll attachment in my Spider.

[StandingCow]

William Mountbank, on 26 June 2013 - 04:29 AM, said:

FF armour might not be used much in mechs over 40t - so you think it's not important, but lights can't always fill their slots and so have plenty of space for FF, Endo and DHSs along with an XL. Those few extra free grams from using FF can really make the difference for lights.
Without FF I can't fit the optional toilet roll attachment in my Spider.

Fair point.... but I think there is a lot more potential in different types of armor that PGI isn't currently taking advantage of. If you introduce different armor types that counter different types of weapons then you make people want to bring multiple types of weapons and not just boat single weapon mechs. You add a whole new dimension to the battlefield.

[General Taskeen]

El Bandito, on 26 June 2013 - 02:48 AM, said:

For future reference, the armor that is resistant to ballistics and missiles is called Reactive Armor. It was even used in MW4. Look it up.

True story.

There are many armor types, each with advantages/disadvantages.

No one has yet mentioned Hardened Armor, 2x damage resistance, with the disadvantage of sluggish Mech movement, reduced speed.

Plus they could also give IS and Clan FF an extra bonus for damage resistance to anything (IS 12%, Clan 20%)

[Chavette]

I believe its one way to do it. Not the only one, but one way.

Still better than not doing it as they are now.

[Howdy Doody]

I like the idea but I'm not sure how you handle having one out of balance weapon knock out an entire type of weapon system.

Example. Since PPCs are so Rockstar, everyone is going would take Reflective (anti energy) armor. This may make everyone go ballistics and missiles depending on how good the armor.

Now if you had a "Super Armor" that you could choose it to be effective against only one weapon that would be awesome, or this case...PPC Armor.

I like the thinking though. More options == more creativity == Good!

Edited by Howdy Doody, 26 June 2013 - 05:30 AM.

[Rattlehead NZ]

StandingCow, on 26 June 2013 - 01:46 AM, said:

So, while listening to the drop command podcast I had an idea... and realized that PGI's idea of increasing internal structure HP does nothing but nerf ballistics (you need to bring more ammo to do the extra damage required).

Instead, why don't they use something already in game? FF armor, which right now I don't believe is used all that often. Make it more resistant against energy weapons (since we don't have reflective armor yet). Or hell, go outside the timeline a bit to introduce reflective armor.

Having different armor types would force teams to mix their loadouts a bit more, a PPC stalker would not be near as effective against reflective armor mechs, but neither would a ballistic only platform against FF armor mechs.

TLDR:
Regular armor = no change
FF armor = more resistant to ballistics, weaker against energy.
Reflective armor = More resistance to energy weapons (Yes it isn't in the timeline yet, but for balance sake, bring it in) and weaker against ballistics.

Thoughts?

The idea PGI has about raising the internal structure HP's won't nerf AC's at all. It will nerf the mass boating of AC's making it better to carry 1xAC20 with 4 tons of ammo and other weapons than 2xAC20's with 4 tons of ammo and nothing else. Also with alot of the alpha kits going around people aren't going to lose half their weapons or be cored out in 2 alphas to a side torso.

But the idea of different types of armor to combat different weapon systems would add more depth though the screams of "WTF he should of died" will fill the airways. That aside the idea of different armour types will make me spend more time in the mechbay

[StandingCow]

Rattlehead NZ, on 26 June 2013 - 05:29 AM, said:

The idea PGI has about raising the internal structure HP's won't nerf AC's at all. It will nerf the mass boating of AC's making it better to carry 1xAC20 with 4 tons of ammo and other weapons than 2xAC20's with 4 tons of ammo and nothing else. Also with alot of the alpha kits going around people aren't going to lose half their weapons or be cored out in 2 alphas to a side torso.

But the idea of different types of armor to combat different weapon systems would add more depth though the screams of "WTF he should of died" will fill the airways. That aside the idea of different armour types will make me spend more time in the mechbay

It buffs energy weapons more... because if it takes more to kill, you have the chance of running out of ammo, which doesn't happen with energy weapons.

I am not suggesting this fixes everything, but I think it's a good step to take.

[Strum Wealh]

El Bandito, on 26 June 2013 - 02:48 AM, said:

For future reference, the armor that is resistant to ballistics and missiles is called Reactive Armor. It was even used in MW4. Look it up.

For clarification, Reactive Armor is not (supposed to be) resistant to ballistic weapons.
"Reactive Armor reduces all damage from explosive-type weapons such as missiles, mortars and artillery weapons by half (rounded down, to a minimum of 1 point per hit). Physical attacks, as well as attacks using energy weapons, autocannons, Gauss weapons or other weapons deliver their normal damage and effects to the target, but any weapons that rely on an armor-piercing effect, such as Armor-Piercing Ammo, Tandem-Charge Missiles or Tasers lose any special armor-penetrating abilities if they strike a location protected by Reactive Armor."
(Tactical Operations, pg. 282)

Additional resistance to ballistics (ACs, Gauss weapons, and MGs) comes with Hardened Armor (50% damage reduction against everything; put into production by the FedSuns in 3047) and Ferro-Lamellor Armor (20% damage reduction against everything; Clan tech and not available until 3070).

[Michido]

I like OP's idea. Lots in interesting possibilities and an additional caveat to encourage team work

I'd assume that armor type would come up on target information so a player knows what they're dealing with.

[MaddMaxx]

El Bandito, on 26 June 2013 - 02:48 AM, said:

For future reference, the armor that is resistant to ballistics and missiles is called Reactive Armor. It was even used in MW4. Look it up.

Quote

Reactive Armor


Description

Reactive Armor (sometimes called Blazer Armor) is an experimental armor that uses a series of microscopic explosions to reduce the effects of explosive weapons fire like missiles, artillery, and mortars. When these weapons hit a unit with Reactive Armor protecting the area, the damage is reduced by 50%. The microscopic explosives embedded in the armor redirect the force of the weapon away from the protected unit. This force redirect also reduces the armor-piercing effects of Tandem-Charge Missiles, Armor-Piercing autocannon ammunition, and BattleMech Taser spikes.

Though effective against missiles and artillery, the armor is no more effective than standard armor against other weapon types and physical damage. In addition there have been several cases where lucky weapon fire has initiated an armor explosion, stripping the Reactive Armor away from the protected location, leaving the unit extremely vulnerable. Another drawback to the armor is its bulk: Reactive Armor occupies as much space on a chassis as standard Ferro-Fibrous Armor, but only provides as much protection as standard 'Mech armor.

The armor was developed by the Draconis Combine in 3063, but Clan Ghost Bear captured several samples during the Combine-Ghost Bear War. The Bear's Scientist caste was able to reverse-engineer the armor and put it into limited production two years later.