I have been irritated by current "critical slot/ armor" distribution since first day I sit to play MWO.
Its based on TT rules.
This is FPS, so system has to be changed
Its outdated, wrong, and forces you to play and love those mechs that have better composition of hitboxes.
So, what I want to change is not its core rule but just to shift it a little bit because this is FPS and we need realistic armor distribution. I don't need some ancient rule telling me that I have chance to miss or something - because its shooter.
Main "accuracy modifier" currently in MWO is size of the components hitbox
Not every chassis is same, so distribution of armor and crit spaces shouldnt be the same either
Number of total critical slots stays the same
Number of total armor points stays the same
*Considering that 100% includes RA, RT, CT, LT, LA without legs and head( RL, LL, HD ) their armor, crit slots will stay the same
Hunchback:
Percentage of armor, critical slots and structure in mech *Considering that 100% includes RA, RT, CT, LT, LA without legs and head( RL, LL, HD ) their armor, crit slots will stay the same
Critical slots:
How did I get that percentage? I manually set number of crit slots for each component, then I tweaked them a little bit
for example lets take RT which has 14 CS and divide with 48 (number of total crit spaces in RA, RT, CT, LT, LA)
I ll get 29,16%, now that percentage (0,2916) multiply with total armor (in RA, RT, CT, LT, LA) which is 224, I ll get 65,3 armor points in RT
others:
RA: 18,5
RT: 65,3
CT: 74,5
LT: 46,5
RA: 18,5
Armor:
Catapult:
Spoiler
Percentage:
Critical slots:
Divide number of critical slots in CT with total number of crit slots in RA, RT, CT, LT, LA - I got 37,5%
Multiplied that with total armor in RA, RT, CT, LT, LA to get armor for that component.
Armor:
Dragon:
Spoiler
Percentage
Critical slots
Armor
Stalker:
Spoiler
This was mistake on devs side and it will still remain problem. They labeled whole sides of CT as side torso hitbox. If you look at Raven, his side torso only reach half of CTs hitbox.
Percentage
Critical slots
Armor
Awesome:
Spoiler
Now funny thing with Awesome but I think devs kinda outscaled that poor mech. I dont remember that Awesome was that wide - his chest was little shorter
Percentage
Critical slots
Armor
Jagermech
Spoiler
Percentage
Critical slots
Armor
[/spoiler]
Tweaking FF critical size
Spoiler
ES takes up 16,666% of total mech
first we divide tons that FF will save with tons that ES saves (of any mech) to get another percentage 72%
then that percentage (72% actually 0.72) multiply with 16.666% and we get 11.999%
So to sum up: 16.666% for ES and 11.999% for FF
Now important thing here we have to fix another cheese and that is dynamic slot distribution
Simple:
ES takes up 16,6666% of crit slots of each component
FF takes up 11,9999% of crit slots of each component
Player will get to choose what component to upgrade with ES or FF. So for example you can have arm thats armored with FF armor and your left torso as ES structure.
Dynamic armor stays solid in all components - doesn't shift its self on other components like crazy
PPC:
Spoiler
Also Id like to increase PPCs crit size from 3 to 4 or 5 - because its projectile
all projectiles have large crit size and plus it doesnt require ammo - it requires DHS to be more effective and increasing its crit size would probably limit its boating
And LL to 3 critical slots - maybe
Increasing critical size of PPC will increase need for FF armor and single heatsinks (which would normally be placed in legs) on PPC builds
Why?:
Spoiler
Problem with PPCs is that they have similar convergence to ballistics, they are closer with similarity of convergence to ballistics tha to lasers.
But some values arent the same - thats ok, because thats what makes PPC a special weapon.
So where to find a solution how to fix PPC.
We look at PPC values, we think which aspect we want to keep and which to change.
PPC is special because of its instant speed and high damage at very long distance value and high heat output - thats how you recognize PPC - we do not want to change these values.
We need to choose from:
critical size
close range
cooldown
electrical effects
acceleration (while mech is at high heat, PPC now takes some time to accelerate before it fires, if you want to risk with higher heat output than usual you can have some toogle to fire it exclusively)
I went with critical size, because I know that will limit its boating, it will force players to use new FF (i went with in main post) and SHSs. And hopefully with new critical slot layout that I posted in main post we wont be able to see Stalker cramps 3 PPC in his arms.
Thats how you balance weapons without loosing their meaning for existence
Edited by Big Giant Head, 30 July 2013 - 06:30 AM.
Losing the Center Torso kills the Mech, so that has to have the most armor, but I like the idea that the bigger the hitbox the greater the number of armor points, that just makes too much sense to ignore. That's a good balance between say an Awesome and a Stalker or Atlas.
Of course the hitboxes seem arbitrairily assigned from Mech to Mech, no rhyme or reason there. On the Atlas only the front facing plate of the CT is called the CT, in the Awesome the CT side-plates are also counted as center torso.
RIP Awesomes; Killed by disfunctional heat mechanics.
Mechlab and hardpoints need better definitions, but increasing the criticals of the weapons is not the best approach. Better to have sized hardpoints on all the mechs and let players add what fits. Like 1 PPC or LLAS or 2-3 MLAS. That sort of thing. The you would know what you could do.
Losing the Center Torso kills the Mech, so that has to have the most armor, but I like the idea that the bigger the hitbox the greater the number of armor points, that just makes too much sense to ignore. That's a good balance between say an Awesome and a Stalker or Atlas.
Of course the hitboxes seem arbitrairily assigned from Mech to Mech, no rhyme or reason there. On the Atlas only the front facing plate of the CT is called the CT, in the Awesome the CT side-plates are also counted as center torso.
RIP Awesomes; Killed by disfunctional heat mechanics.
Yeah I agree, they have a lot of holes in hitbox system - needs to be fixed as soon, so you can continue to balance and change weapons
Every number can be tweaked tho ( I could have for example subtract from LT and add to CT)
But I found that HBKs CT is incredibly small - I think this could work - but as I said it can be tweaked.
Important thing here is system that covers that
Edited by Big Giant Head, 14 July 2013 - 04:47 AM.
imho PGI simply needs to "Tweak" btech. mech "looks" never affected Tabletop hit locations, but in a video game they do.
the hunchies hunch is way oversized givent he size of the ingame AC/20 model - logically this means more armour. given the hunchie has no jumpjets and is fairly slow, giving the hunch a 25% armour boost "potential" would be a cool feature. similar quirks like better heat dissapation if using PPC on the awesome in example would further refine this system and allow pilots to specialize more and balance things out better.
Edited by Colonel Pada Vinson, 14 July 2013 - 02:05 PM.
Colonel Pada Vinson, on 14 July 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:
imho PGI simply needs to "Tweak" btech. mech "looks" never affected Tabletop hit locations, but in a video game they do.
the hunchies hunch is way oversized givent he size of the ingame AC/20 model - logically this means more armour. given the hunchie has no jumpjets and is fairly slow, giving the hunch a 25% armour boost "potential" would be a cool feature. similar quirks like better heat dissapation if using PPC on the awesome in example would further refine this system and allow pilots to specialize more and balance things out better.
I 100% support idea of revamping BT rule for FPS
Yeah, I agree that Awesome is kinda underpowered - but increasing his heat dissipation is not the way to go - although I am for increasing PPCs crit size - just think what change that would bring
And I considered implementing hardpoints - and I actually made good amount of posts http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1 (page9/ post #172 and #178) on that topic
Edited by Big Giant Head, 14 July 2013 - 02:18 PM.
Losing the Center Torso kills the Mech, so that has to have the most armor, but I like the idea that the bigger the hitbox the greater the number of armor points, that just makes too much sense to ignore. That's a good balance between say an Awesome and a Stalker or Atlas.
Of course the hitboxes seem arbitrairily assigned from Mech to Mech, no rhyme or reason there. On the Atlas only the front facing plate of the CT is called the CT, in the Awesome the CT side-plates are also counted as center torso.
RIP Awesomes; Killed by disfunctional heat mechanics.
Mechlab and hardpoints need better definitions, but increasing the criticals of the weapons is not the best approach. Better to have sized hardpoints on all the mechs and let players add what fits. Like 1 PPC or LLAS or 2-3 MLAS. That sort of thing. The you would know what you could do.
UPDATED ^^ check main post
(Hunchback - substracted from LT to CT)
Edited by Big Giant Head, 14 July 2013 - 03:00 PM.
I love this system - but why are you so cautious?
The critical TT system had one major need - it has to fit on a A4 sheet of paper.
The MWO critical system doesn't have those needs.
So - we all know - the bigger the hitbox the easier the kill.... thats the reason why people take care about the bigger size of the quickdraw:
What if the component volume size of each Mech is taken into calculations. I know that some have allready posted the volumes of mechs - the quickdraw is bigger as Catapract so the Quickdraw has more room for armor, internals and equipment - while the Catapract has only limited room.
- as you allready did - Endosteel and Ferrofibrous are reducing the available volume for each location. The number of armor in each location reducing the available volume too.
So to start with that - we need the volume of the Hunchbacks AC 20 - hunch at first... the result = armor, internal and a AC 20 with ammo magazine.
The 12 crit system of TT is abstract - so I highly hope for less abstraction but more logic
I love this system - but why are you so cautious?
The critical TT system had one major need - it has to fit on a A4 sheet of paper.
The MWO critical system doesn't have those needs.
So - we all know - the bigger the hitbox the easier the kill.... thats the reason why people take care about the bigger size of the quickdraw:
What if the component volume size of each Mech is taken into calculations. I know that some have allready posted the volumes of mechs - the quickdraw is bigger as Catapract so the Quickdraw has more room for armor, internals and equipment - while the Catapract has only limited room.
- as you allready did - Endosteel and Ferrofibrous are reducing the available volume for each location. The number of armor in each location reducing the available volume too.
So to start with that - we need the volume of the Hunchbacks AC 20 - hunch at first... the result = armor, internal and a AC 20 with ammo magazine.
The 12 crit system of TT is abstract - so I highly hope for less abstraction but more logic
Yeah, I know whole system has to be built from scratch, but I dot know why are devs going with BT/TT rules when they can create their own
They said they want reborn of MW, I dont know if that includes BT/TT rules
They said they want reborn of MW, I dont know if that includes BT/TT rules
What have to count is the immersion of BattleTech - not to reinvent the wheel with allready known values.
That adresses - the numbers of criticals you used. You really want to stay at the same numbers of crit for each mech?
Shouldn't Mechs like Awesome have more critical space available as the Stalker?
The BlackJack more as a Commando?
While Endosteel and Ferro fibrous is indeed directly conected with the size of a Mech - the size of a weapon is not.
What have to count is the immersion of BattleTech - not to reinvent the wheel with allready known values.
That adresses - the numbers of criticals you used. You really want to stay at the same numbers of crit for each mech?
Shouldn't Mechs like Awesome have more critical space available as the Stalker?
The BlackJack more as a Commando?
While Endosteel and Ferro fibrous is indeed directly conected with the size of a Mech - the size of a weapon is not.
Thats exactly what I wanted
Ton = crit slots or somethung like that
But I dont have time to cofigure such system and plus I dont think devs are going to leave this current system - they are going to stick with it - thats lame, I cant understand why cant they revamp those rules, Is it money? time? - I dont know,
All I know is that there is way to implement something new and more logical than this current cheese we have
Edited by Big Giant Head, 18 July 2013 - 08:08 AM.
Very interesting approach. Definitely an undertaking to check out more variables such as the new tonnage from the different armor distribution (both front and back) and making sure that a stock build can fit into the change of crit slots available (stuff like heat sinks can float about, but weapons would need to be checked). And after thinking about it more, I guess pieces like Shoulder slots or actuators wouldn't apply with the modified crit system.
Praetor Shepard, on 24 July 2013 - 03:15 AM, said:
And after thinking about it more, I guess pieces like Shoulder slots or actuators wouldn't apply with the modified crit system.
Correct
I didnt include them as free slots, so the number of slots I posted on picture is number of free slots
I wanted to make more logical approach, so that mounting PPC in HBKs arm becomes insane and not effective as it is righ now and components like HBKs RT get more benefit from their size
6
