124 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Scrawny Cowboy, on 09 February 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

Would this be best as an IS only upgrade?

Because Clanners got them nice durable XL's, locked engine size aside heh

I would depend that upon how good clan FF is in this game. If it's 12%, it'd be on level with IS FF. If it's as stated in TT at 20%, then that would be crazy (for mechs that, by lore, can't change their armor values and typically have lower armor values because they have such better gear).

Might be best as (for the moment) an IS only option, if it's to be considered at all. (My opinion.)

[VinJade]

@Tesunie
I know they already upped the armor on the mechs as noted in my very first or second reply to this topic(many pages back) using the Adder as an example.

Instead of wasting time on this they should be fixing the hit boxes on lights and bring them inline with everything.

[Tesunie]

Right now, they aren't wasting time working on this, as it's just someone's suggestion. As a suggestion, I feel it's got a solid concept behind it. I'm not saying it should be placed in right now, just that, maybe it could be a consideration at some point.

[Demon Horde]

@Tesunie

Microsoft doesn't own the rights to MechWarrior 1, MechWarrior 2 31 century combat , or MW2 Mercenaries. those were pre MS games. and MW3 was done through a subsidiary of MS (microprose). the only mech warrior games MS can make solid claim on is MW4: Vengence and MW4: Mercenaries. both MW2 games were published/developed by Activision and FASA. i'm pretty sure MS doesn't own those two gams though because when MW:Mercenaries came out there was a law suit regarding it with MS an some one else ( can't remember if it was fasa or activision).

[Johnny Z]

+1 for FF being better.

Edited by Johnny Z, 25 February 2015 - 04:01 AM.

[Varent]

I wouldn't go with that high of a percentage. What I would actually do is instead allow for more armor to be placed. Essentially freeing up more armor capability. For example if an armor usually could have 36 armor points placed on it. Allow if you have ferro to place 40.

[Pz_DC]

FF and ES are canon-based things so NO, dont change it coz its work as intended, as far as i know. Even more - IMHO armor values should be nerfed becouse now its too strong. Same time to balance weaker armor weapons should have longer cd. AC20 should be able to "destroy most light and some medium mechs with one or /max/ two well-placed shoots", same about gauss. Anyway - as it is now armor is too strong. Dosnt matter IS or Clans we are talking about.

Edited by MGA121285, 25 February 2015 - 11:48 AM.

[TheArisen]

I like this but tbh this would be a pretty big buff to lights and meds. This could make it desirable on heavier mechs though.

[VinJade]

they already upped the armor more than they should have done.
why don't they just reduce the damage weapons do as it will more or less be the same thing.
making mechs be able to hold more armor means taking more hits.

reduce weapon damage* = taking more hits to destroy any given mech.

so there problem solved.

*AC 2s, MGs, S/LRMs would be immune since their damage is still weak

[kosmos1214]

nope bad idea vin and they did not raise armor to much it is probably one of there smarter moves they made as to makes it realistic for a new player to get good at this game with out it being a beat fest if they had not double them it would be expectantly hard on players who are new to battletech / mwo

[VinJade]

Kos, I just don't like the idea of putting so much extra armor on any of the mechs than they already have.

[kosmos1214]

fair enough i under stand the opinion and sorry for poping off a bit im just fed up of listening to the wieners on these boards
you know the type " they changed some thing from the way it worked in tt there for it must be bad "

[Bors Mistral]

Just reducing the amount of slots it requires by about 1/3 would be a good start.

Fancy effects can be figured out later, let's just make it even remotely practical for more weight classes.

[SockSlayer]

In MW4:Mercenaries, it had FF Armor, but no Standard Armor. It also had two other armor choices that both took up more tonnage (just like the Standard Armor, except with special effects):

-Reflective Armor which is a situational armor that takes less damage from energy weapons, takes regular from other weapons.
-Reactive Armor would take more from energy, and less from ammunition type weapons.

Was actually bummed those options weren't in MWO when I first started, and would suggest this:

-Perhaps keep the FF as is, I've had little issue with it, and it is usually only an issue on light mechs where everything counts.
-Maybe add the two armor options above(with great care, and perhaps only a small advantage given like -5% less damage, takes up the same amount of tonnage as standard).
-Add a new armor that would be for noobs...(lessens damage by half, but takes more slots and tonnage than any of the previous armors, leaving little room for weapons).

[Astarot]

I personally don't see the problem with FF, even in the table top games, it was a situational armor for situational builds. Table top, I must commonly use it on mechs that aren't made to brawl (gauss rifle builds are an example). And in MWO I put it on lights and or mechs where I need to squeeze out extra weight and don't care about the loss of critical slots, Fitting a slightly bigger engine on my lights, or making weight to fund ammo for my LRM20 mechs, and again, these mechs aren't made to brawl.

It a niche armor, just like everything in Battletech, niche is king, you just have to figure out what the niche means to you. And personally I'm getting tired of people making modules, mechs, and ectra, fit jack of all trade, when the table top game was original founded around getting a bunch of NICHE mechs together and building an effective lance, and then work with other lances to crush your enemies.

[Tesunie]

Astarot, on 15 January 2016 - 08:27 AM, said:

I personally don't see the problem with FF, even in the table top games, it was a situational armor for situational builds. Table top, I must commonly use it on mechs that aren't made to brawl...

FF was a cheaper way to reduce weight rather than Endo Steel, which was more expensive. You could also switch between normal armor and FF armor without the needs of a factory, as you just simply remove and replace armor plates.

In MW:O, it's very situational. It has little to do with brawling or not, and more to do with weight vs crit space exchange. If you run out of weight, but have plenty of Crit slots (after Endo), then you can easily add in FF armor. If not, then you forgo that option.

FF armor is just as tough as standard armor. You can place just as much protection of it on. It's just lighter than standard armor is all.

(I'm saying this, because I'm confused as to what brawling and FF armor had to do with each other in your post. Even from TT, that doesn't make much sense. Your statement makes more sense when applied to the IS XL engine instead of FF. )

[Mad Porthos]

I have to say no, in part because there are other ways to make ferro-fibrous have a better effect, but which do not happen to be so imbalanced. By imbalanced, I simply mean the imbalance between clan and inner sphere implementations of ferro, where at the cost of 14 slots, IS mechs would get an 12% increase, whereas for 7 slots only, clans would get a 20% increase. IN a game where they are trying to make the two tech levels different but equal, this is a mechanic rife with INEQUALITY. It could over an entire mech result in many more armor points on the clan mech, for a much smaller cost in critical space, than the IS mechs trying to use Ferro-Fibrous.

There are already other effects of Ferro- Fibrous and Endo Steel Structure which if implemented would be valuable, but not unbalancing. For example, allowing the dynamic armor and structure slots to critical pad the areas they are in, as they seem to do in the original table top game, might serve to increase Time To Kill and durability, whilst being internally balanced. Inner sphere would get 12% more weight to play with - not much, BUT 14 slots of critical padding to be hitand destroyed rather than weapons, ammo or things like beagle, ecm and heat sinks. Meanwhile, while CLAN gets 20% more weight to play with, they only get 7 slots of critical padding - thus less innate resistance to crits, but still SOME additional advantage to running ferro-fibrous. Mind you, in the case of many clan omni mechs, they will have both endo and ferro, still granting a similar total 14 slots critical padding to them and comparing very closely to an inner sphere mech that could only run one or the other, usually choosing only endo steel for the better savings in weight.

Edited by Mad Porthos, 15 January 2016 - 07:50 PM.

[Astarot]

Tesunie, on 15 January 2016 - 09:11 AM, said:

FF was a cheaper way to reduce weight rather than Endo Steel, which was more expensive. You could also switch between normal armor and FF armor without the needs of a factory, as you just simply remove and replace armor plates.

In MW:O, it's very situational. It has little to do with brawling or not, and more to do with weight vs crit space exchange. If you run out of weight, but have plenty of Crit slots (after Endo), then you can easily add in FF armor. If not, then you forgo that option.

FF armor is just as tough as standard armor. You can place just as much protection of it on. It's just lighter than standard armor is all.

(I'm saying this, because I'm confused as to what brawling and FF armor had to do with each other in your post. Even from TT, that doesn't make much sense. Your statement makes more sense when applied to the IS XL engine instead of FF. )

because typically, MANY but not ALL heavy weight weapon systems tend to be focused around longer ranged engagements and not brawling. When I making FF builds, that because I'm attempting to shove something onto that mech that might not nessearily be design to fit on that mech, Gauss rifle jauger mechs are an example. I would never try to brawl with those things. Double large laser light mechs, and so forth. Sure you can add more armor as soon as you get that FF on, but will it let you do so and still fit the equipment you want on? Or do you FF on and keep the current armor rating the same? Regardless, even if you only fit FF to squeeze in those extra armor points in, you do it at a niched cost

FF takes up additional slots for the reletively cheap to install and cheap to repair system(I wish they would add in a true repair cost on things, then maybe people wouldn't complain, and people would have to make a choice between endo-steel and FF)

Endo-steel save a MUCH greater amount of weight, however it also had a MUCH GREATER COST AND REPAIR, ontop of that, it also took critical slots, I wish that MWO would simulate a good repair cost so that people wouldn't just make laser vomit builds, or make FF-Endo builds, and maybe people would think to themself "What would happen if I lost those two ppc cannons in a duel?

[Tesunie]

Not sure if you are agreeing, disagreeing, or what... but I'll respond to each paragraph in kind (so we can be clear on the rules and how things actually work. If we agree, then I'm just simply making an agreeing statement.)

Astarot, on 15 January 2016 - 09:04 PM, said:

because typically, MANY but not ALL heavy weight weapon systems tend to be focused around longer ranged engagements and not brawling. When I making FF builds, that because I'm attempting to shove something onto that mech that might not nessearily be design to fit on that mech, Gauss rifle jauger mechs are an example. I would never try to brawl with those things. Double large laser light mechs, and so forth. Sure you can add more armor as soon as you get that FF on, but will it let you do so and still fit the equipment you want on? Or do you FF on and keep the current armor rating the same? Regardless, even if you only fit FF to squeeze in those extra armor points in, you do it at a niched cost

Even in TT (excluding R&R and conditions for customization), Endo was still better at saving weight than FF. FF was cheaper and easier to replace, but saved less weight for the same about of crit cost as Endo. You could then take that weight saving and toss it into armor if desired and get more armor that way.

Astarot, on 15 January 2016 - 09:04 PM, said:

FF takes up additional slots for the reletively cheap to install and cheap to repair system(I wish they would add in a true repair cost on things, then maybe people wouldn't complain, and people would have to make a choice between endo-steel and FF)

R&R was once in the game. It got removed because it was deemed too punishing. And, to be fair, it honestly could be too punishing depending upon the upgrades. However, now there are less reasons for certain upgrades to be taken now over another type...

Astarot, on 15 January 2016 - 09:04 PM, said:

Endo-steel save a MUCH greater amount of weight, however it also had a MUCH GREATER COST AND REPAIR, ontop of that, it also took critical slots, I wish that MWO would simulate a good repair cost so that people wouldn't just make laser vomit builds, or make FF-Endo builds, and maybe people would think to themself "What would happen if I lost those two ppc cannons in a duel?

Endo and FF each take up crit space. The same amount to be technical. As far as R&R, view above statement.

[SirNotlag]

Yes this really needs to be a thing, I cant stand having something in the game that no one uses because it is designed to be inferior.