Jump to content

Ferro-Fibrous Improvement


124 replies to this topic

Poll: Ferro-Fibrous Improvement (217 member(s) have cast votes)

Ferro-Fibrous Armor should increase max armor per location as described below

  1. Yes (148 votes [68.20%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 68.20%

  2. No (69 votes [31.80%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 31.80%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#121 SirNotlag

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 335 posts

Posted 17 January 2016 - 12:12 PM

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.

#122 Astarot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 167 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, Troy, hiding from the Romans

Posted 17 January 2016 - 02:44 PM

View PostTesunie, on 15 January 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

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.)

I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing, what I'm saying is FF and Endo, I personally picked FF in table top campaigns because it was easier to repair, and cheaper to boot, if you are good at campaigns and were good at min-maxing everything(I wasn't) then sure go for endo, I'm sure you can easily supply the fund to salvage or replace that endo-ac20-atlas when the enemy got a lucky roll that ended that atlas's rampage early. Anyways what I'm trying to say that we need more niched roles and modules, not less. And we need more mechanics to support those niched roles, not less mechanics. For example, I want to see harden armor with mechanics supporting it, which includes penetration rules, which means Harden armor would be great if you are having trouble with enemies using things with a high penetration value. Different ammunition types, and so forth and so forth. I want to see more niched mechanics, not less.


View PostTesunie, on 15 January 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

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.


see above.

View PostTesunie, on 15 January 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

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


How we cater to the causal gamer in a game who's roots were not about be casual at all. How we remove the ability to have to make meaningful choices in a game that all about making choices.

Maybe if we brough back Recover and Repair costs, then maybe some of those meaningful choices will be brought back and again, people would complain less about something being useless because statistically wise, it worst(yet cheaper) then another thing.

#123 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,575 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 17 January 2016 - 03:51 PM

View PostAstarot, on 17 January 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

How we cater to the causal gamer in a game who's roots were not about be casual at all. How we remove the ability to have to make meaningful choices in a game that all about making choices.

Maybe if we brough back Recover and Repair costs, then maybe some of those meaningful choices will be brought back and again, people would complain less about something being useless because statistically wise, it worst(yet cheaper) then another thing.


Some repair costs were really crazy in this game. If a mech lost it's XL engine, even by a side torso, it was a major expense to repair. More than you could often (at the time) earn in a match.

Also, the way Repair and Rearm costs were handled, people were gaming the system. To farm C-bills, a lot of players use to take a cheap light mech and play it. Then, they wouldn't repair it. The game would repair the mech up minimum play-ablity, so that mech would drop into the next match already red internals and no armor, charge in, and die. Lather, rinse, repeat. Hindered a lot of the teams when you had a couple players on your side doing that at once...

Back then, LRM (especially with Artemis) was almost never played, because the ammo alone was so expensive for the amount you needed in a typical match. However, they wrecked face back then, but it cost more than you made in a match to field it. And that was even with a free percentage (I think 30 or 70%?) of ammo being restored. Players often times would load up on insane amounts of ammo on their mechs, and turn off reloading. It was the only way many players even afforded to play a missile boat mech.


Basically, R&R is a good feature and I like the concepts. However, for this game play and it's style of game, it was not working as it was intended. That doesn't mean it might not come back, but if it ever does, it would need some massive rework to be functional in the game. (Though it would give many things that don't have a home a place in the game again, such as FF armor over Endo, and Std over XL (minus the survivable parts). It would also give a reason to CASE, even on an XL mech.)

I noticed you're a founder, so I'm guessing you probably do recall the times back then.

#124 Astarot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 167 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, Troy, hiding from the Romans

Posted 17 January 2016 - 04:26 PM

View PostTesunie, on 17 January 2016 - 03:51 PM, said:


Some repair costs were really crazy in this game. If a mech lost it's XL engine, even by a side torso, it was a major expense to repair. More than you could often (at the time) earn in a match.

Also, the way Repair and Rearm costs were handled, people were gaming the system. To farm C-bills, a lot of players use to take a cheap light mech and play it. Then, they wouldn't repair it. The game would repair the mech up minimum play-ablity, so that mech would drop into the next match already red internals and no armor, charge in, and die. Lather, rinse, repeat. Hindered a lot of the teams when you had a couple players on your side doing that at once...

Back then, LRM (especially with Artemis) was almost never played, because the ammo alone was so expensive for the amount you needed in a typical match. However, they wrecked face back then, but it cost more than you made in a match to field it. And that was even with a free percentage (I think 30 or 70%?) of ammo being restored. Players often times would load up on insane amounts of ammo on their mechs, and turn off reloading. It was the only way many players even afforded to play a missile boat mech.


Basically, R&R is a good feature and I like the concepts. However, for this game play and it's style of game, it was not working as it was intended. That doesn't mean it might not come back, but if it ever does, it would need some massive rework to be functional in the game. (Though it would give many things that don't have a home a place in the game again, such as FF armor over Endo, and Std over XL (minus the survivable parts). It would also give a reason to CASE, even on an XL mech.)

I noticed you're a founder, so I'm guessing you probably do recall the times back then.


I do agree that just putting R&R without any changes would most likely not be the best of ideas, however a game based on managing not only what you do in combat, but the effects and choices you make out of combat should still be preserved in this game. One of the reasons why I feel disappointed in the CW, which could of been something great, massive maps where pilots can freely travel and defend or perform attacks was the idea I had in my head that what it could have been, capturing planets with factories on them would give a discount to everyone that part of that faction and in turn of the mechs that are produced by those factories. Which is why I'm to be frank disapointed with CW at the moment, but now I'm getting off topic, so I digress

R&R does need to be brought back, am I saying that it needs to be brought back how it was? No, I'm not, however I'm sure with some effort and work, a R&R system could be brought into existence, we just need people willing to look at it from that perspective as well.

#125 Roughneck45

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Handsome Devil
  • The Handsome Devil
  • 4,452 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 15 April 2017 - 10:24 PM

If ferro gave an armor buff we still wouldn't have a choice, it would be better than endo.

I'd rather they reduced the amount of slots it requires.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users