143 replies to this topic

[Strum Wealh]

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

I understand this, I promise. My core point is that, take this away from the Table Top and put it into MWO, and you critically break a number of important systems.

With specific examples being...?

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

Fair enough, the first Daishi build I tossed out was excessive. A 2x10 and 2x20 build still throws out massive pinpoint damage, needing only 44 tons, freeing 4 more tons for ammo. 1x20 and 3x10 gets 2 more tons, and at a better ratio anyway. 3x20 is another option that leaves plenty of room for secondary weapons and ammo. Even 2x20 and 1x10 significantly exceeds the firepower of anything in the game presently.

With the base equipment locked-down, only the Daishi and the Masakari would have the pod space to actually equip such loadouts.

• Each Clan LB 10-X is 10 tons and 5 criticals; three of them is 30 tons and 15 criticals.
  
• Each Clan LB 20-X is 12 tons and 9 criticals; three of them is 36 tons and 27 criticals.
  
• Each Clan UAC/10 is 10 tons and 4 criticals; three of them is 30 tons and 12 criticals.
  
• Each Clan UAC/20 is 12 tons and 8 criticals; three of them is 36 tons and 24 criticals.
  
• Each Clan Gauss Rifle is 12 tons and 6 criticals; three of them is 36 tons and 18 criticals.
  
• Each Clan HAG-20 is 10 tons and 6 criticals; three of them is 30 tons and 18 criticals.
  
• Each Clan HAG-30 is 13 tons and 8 criticals; three of them is 39 tons and 24 criticals.
  
• Each Clan HAG-40 is 16 tons and 10 criticals; three of them is 48 tons and 30 criticals.

Note that all of the original 16 OmniMechs except the Masakari and the Daishi have less than 30 tons of pod space (which makes them wholly incapable of carrying more than two of any "large ballistic", if the base equipment is locked-down), and even the Masakari lacks the free tonnage to carry three of any of the largest of the large ballistics.

Additionally, allocation of internal space (that is, crits) is also an issue - both the Masakari and the Daishi use XL engines (which, for Clan XLs, means the loss of 2 criticals in each side torso), both have a set of fixed external-to-the-Engine Double Heat Sinks, and the Masakari has seven non-dynamic (if base equipment is locked-down) FF criticals.

• The Daishi has one fixed DHS in each side torso (reducing the available crits to 8 per side-torso) and one in the Left Leg (filling it completely).
  
• The Masakari has four fixed DHS in the Left Torso (which, together with the XL criticals and two FF criticals, fills the LT completely; of note is that the Masakari's LRM-10 is actually mounted on the Left Arm, crit-wise), one fixed DHS in the Right Torso (which, together with the XL criticals and two FF criticals, leaves only 6 criticals open in the RT), one fixed DHS in each leg (filling the legs completely), 1 FF critical in the Head (filling it completely), and one FF critical in each arm (reducing the maximum available number of crits per arm to 9).

The extent of the Masakari's ballistics capabilities is, essentially, "slower, more-heavyset, more heavily-armored Cataphract (either CTF-4X or Ilya Muromets)", and it completely lacks the ability to hide ammunition in its legs (which isn't as much of an issue since each location on a Clan 'Mech essentially has free CASE).

The Daishi, with only 8 crits available in each side torso, is completely incapable of mounting a LB 20-X (or, eventually, a HAG-40) in those locations, regardless of how much tonnage is available, and only one of its legs is open to store ammo (so the rest must be kept in the Head, an arm, or a torso location - which, again, isn't as much of an issue since each location on a Clan 'Mech essentially has free CASE).
For the Daishi, quad LB 20-X is impossible (due to crit allocations), both quad UAC/20 and quad Gauss Rifles are highly impractical (due to being unable to carry more than 2 tons of ammo), and both quad HAG-30 and quad HAG-40 would be impossible (due to weight considerations) if the OmniMechs' base equipment is locked-down.
Additionally, it must be noted that locking the Daishi's engine at a 300 XL means that its agility and maneuverability (acceleration/deceleration & torso twost speed) are locked at that level, as part of the price it must pay for such substantial damage output capability; if alone against a circling Light or Medium (with at least a semi-competent pilot) at close range, even the Daishi will take substantial damage (if not lose the fight entirely).

A Daishi with substantial ballistic capability would be a fearsome opponent (as it should be, to live up to the name ) but it pays a steep price for the ability to hit so hard, and that is what makes it far-from-unassailable.

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

Those 4 'mechs, with stock lockdowns are completely invalid in MWO. The Loki's stock armor is a guarantee for disaster (see the Jagermech). The Black Hawk will function, but will quickly be replaced by heavier 'mechs that can go just as fast, with more available space (See pre-buff hunchbacks). The Puma and Uller are worst off, they'll get run down by IS lights, out-fought by IS mediums, and bullseyed by IS heavies and assaults (see pre buff X-series ravens).

That's one third of the clan content gone the way of the Urbanmech.

Such 'Mechs would not be invalid if one plays to their strengths rather than trying to force them into playstyles that largely do the opposite.

As an example, the Loki (if the base equipment is locked-down) is most-emphatically not a brawler in the same sense as the "boomcat"/"boomjager"/"splatcat"/etc; the speed and armor levels indicate that it should, if anything, be played as a hit-and-fade skirmisher rather thanwading into the center of an ongoing brawl and attempting a face-to-face slugfest.
In other words, the Loki aguably should be played more like a Medium than like a typical Heavy.

Even if the base equipment is locked-down, the Puma and the Uller generally out-punch or out-armor (or, often, both) anything that they cannot outrun.
Additionally, the Uller (named after an old Nordic god that is traditionally associated with archery (and skis)) is likely relatively lightly-armored because, like the Loki, it is very much meant to stay out of the thick of combat and perform skirmishing and long-range support duties; marching into the thick of combat is evidently not something the Uller was meant to do, and doing so anyway if/when there are viable alternatives is arguably a failure on the pilot's part, rather than on the 'Mech's part.

The Black Hawk, for the most part, simply suffers grom the same "jack-of-all-trades" syndrome as the Centurion and the Hunchback (and many of the other Mediums) - "if you want faster, go with a Light; if you want more/bigger guns, go with a Heavy or Assault".
However, the Black Hawk (even with the base equipment locked down, and the hybrid hardpoints I described in my previous post in lieu of true Omni hardpoints) would arguably remain a very capable 'Mech, especially by comparison to other 'Mechs within its own weight class (that is, other Mediums).

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

As you mentioned, these lockdowns don't actually impact most of the clan omnimechs. This is the other half of my argument. If you cannot change the engine and armor, you divide omnimechs into 2 categories: the ones with GOOD locked stock parts, and the ones with BAD locked stock parts. The ones with GOOD locked stock parts are unaffected by the restriction. The Daishi could score a couple extra tons with Endo, so what? It's so close to perfect as is that there's not a huge loss. Plus, you get limitless power from being able to mix and match any weapon you like. Meanwhile the poor Puma has to go sit in the corner and eat paste with the Uller and the Loki.

I did not "mention" that "these lockdowns don't actually impact most of the clan omnimechs"; in fact, what I actually said was almost-exactly the literal opposite of that - "the locking-down of the pre-equipped base components (which is what creates the tonnage and crit limitations that define the pod space limitations) serves as an important limit on the OmniMechs' capabilities".

As noted above (with the specific examples of the Masakari and the Daishi & the general question of heavy ballistics and OmniMechs), it is the limits imposed by locking-down the base equipment that provides most of the control over what the OmniMechs can and cannot do - a level of control that can arguably only be equaled by completely removing even the semblance of OmniTech capability (that is, by treating the Daishi, Mad Cat, Black Hawk, and so on as "standard" BattleMechs with only single-weapon-type hardpoints in set distributions for each config/variant).

Moreover, it is the specific characteristics and locations of the locked-down base components (and the resulting overall characteristics of the base 'Mech) that provides the needed differentiation when there will be multiple OmniMechs of the same mass/weight - that is what provides the reason beyond "smallest profile/smallest or most-broken hitboxes" for choosing a Fenris over a Shadow Cat or vice versa (as both are 45-ton Clan OmniMechs), or for choosing a Night Gyr over a Mad Cat or vise versa (as both are 75-ton Clan OmniMechs), or for choosing a Nobori-nin over a Black Hawk or vice versa (as both are 50-ton Clan OmniMechs), or for choosing an Uller over a Hankyu or vice versa (as both are 30-ton Clan OmniMechs).

[Strum Wealh]

Also, because that other post took so long to write...

pbiggz, on 29 October 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

Hell bringer also has ECM and an active probe...

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

Now that's something I hadn't considered. Checking around some old forum posts, it looks like the Hellbringer, Kit Fox, and Mist Lynx are the canonical clan ECM 'mechs. This means they have no answer to the -D-DC, which is interesting.

I don't think this solves the stock armored Hellbringer's issues. Under armored is still under armored, and under engined is still under engined. No one's going to be taking a Hellbringer or Kit Fox for ECM, when there's the Mist Lynx, which isn't completely hobbled by it's locked equipment.

The Daishi's Configuration C caries the Clan version of Guardian ECM (which is lighter and less bulky than its IS counterpart, but should be otherwise identical) in the Center Torso - that, I take it, would constitute "the Clans' 'answer to the D-DC'".

[Finestaut]

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

With specific examples being...?

No need to get snarky with the smileys. This conversation has been mostly friendly so far. The specific examples are what I've been describing the whole thread: lights need speed to survive, heavies need armor, and weapons which are balanced individually can be broken when boated or combined cleverly.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

With the base equipment locked-down, only the Daishi and the Masakari would have the pod space to actually equip such loadouts.

That's the key problem with an imbalanced system. You only need one overpowered 'mech to break the whole game. See Cataphract-3D's during the previous age of the PPC.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

As an example, the Loki (if the base equipment is locked-down) is most-emphatically not a brawler in the same sense as the "boomcat"/"boomjager"/"splatcat"/etc; the speed and armor levels indicate that it should, if anything, be played as a hit-and-fade skirmisher rather thanwading into the center of an ongoing brawl and attempting a face-to-face slugfest.
In other words, the Loki aguably should be played more like a Medium than like a typical Heavy.

While this is all well and true in the table top, we presently have the ability to take lightly armored heavies with XL325s. No one does. This very strongly suggests to me that the role you describe does not exist in this game.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

Even if the base equipment is locked-down, the Puma and the Uller generally out-punch or out-armor (or, often, both) anything that they cannot outrun.

Additionally, the Uller (named after an old Nordic god that is traditionally associated with archery (and skis)) is likely relatively lightly-armored because, like the Loki, it is very much meant to stay out of the thick of combat and perform skirmishing and long-range support duties; marching into the thick of combat is evidently not something the Uller was meant to do, and doing so anyway if/when there are viable alternatives is arguably a failure on the pilot's part, rather than on the 'Mech's part.

Similar to my response to the Loki. If this worked in MWO, we'd surely see Jenners sporting XL240s, but we don't. A 'mech that lightly armored, without the speed to avoid shots, is a coffin on chicken legs.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

The Black Hawk, for the most part, simply suffers grom the same "jack-of-all-trades" syndrome as the Centurion and the Hunchback (and many of the other Mediums) - "if you want faster, go with a Light; if you want more/bigger guns, go with a Heavy or Assault".
However, the Black Hawk (even with the base equipment locked down, and the hybrid hardpoints I described in my previous post in lieu of true Omni hardpoints) would arguably remain a very capable 'Mech, especially by comparison to other 'Mechs within its own weight class (that is, other Mediums).

I disagree here, on similar grounds: you don't see any 50 tonners rocking the 250 engine rating anymore, but I'm willing to let this go.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

I did not "mention" that "these lockdowns don't actually impact most of the clan omnimechs"; in fact, what I actually said was almost-exactly the literal opposite of that - "the locking-down of the pre-equipped base components (which is what creates the tonnage and crit limitations that define the pod space limitations) serves as an important limit on the OmniMechs' capabilities".

I apologize if I misunderstood, that was my main take away from the below paragraph. Most of the clan omnimechs still manage to achieve speed/weight parity with similar inner sphere 'mechs, despite being locked into their equipment.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

Even the slowest of the original 16 Clan OmniMechs (the Daishi - which, as noted above, sacrifices speed for prodigious pod space) has a ground speed comparable to the stock ground speeds of other 'Mechs of the same mass - the majority of the stock Atlas variants (including those of the Atlas II and Atlas III chassis), the majority of the stock King Crab variants, the majority of the stock Marauder II variants, the majority of the stock Devastator variants, the majority of the stock Fafnir variants, and the majority of the stock Thunder Hawk variants all have the same ground speed (by virtue of having Engines with the same rating).

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

As noted above (with the specific examples of the Masakari and the Daishi & the general question of heavy ballistics and OmniMechs), it is the limits imposed by locking-down the base equipment that provides most of the control over what the OmniMechs can and cannot do - a level of control that can arguably only be equaled by completely removing even the semblance of OmniTech capability (that is, by treating the Daishi, Mad Cat, Black Hawk, and so on as "standard" BattleMechs with only single-weapon-type hardpoints in set distributions for each config/variant).

Which is, oddly enough, exactly what I'm advocating. Maintain game balance by holding omnimech builds to the same standards as battlemechs, but respect the lore by letting them chose builds late, after the map and mission are known. The canonical advantage of omnimechs wasn't that clan pilots could fit cheese builds, it was logistical: that they could be refit quickly, mission to mission.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

Moreover, it is the specific characteristics and locations of the locked-down base components (and the resulting overall characteristics of the base 'Mech) that provides the needed differentiation when there will be multiple OmniMechs of the same mass/weight - that is what provides the reason beyond "smallest profile/smallest or most-broken hitboxes" for choosing a Fenris over a Shadow Cat or vice versa (as both are 45-ton Clan OmniMechs), or for choosing a Night Gyr over a Mad Cat or vise versa (as both are 75-ton Clan OmniMechs), or for choosing a Nobori-nin over a Black Hawk or vice versa (as both are 50-ton Clan OmniMechs), or for choosing an Uller over a Hankyu or vice versa (as both are 30-ton Clan OmniMechs).

This provides only a small fraction of the variation of hardpoints, and only really invalidates a small number of extreme edge cases, as you demonstrated with the ballistic daishi.

Strum Wealh, on 29 October 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

Also, because that other post took so long to write...

The Daishi's Configuration C caries the Clan version of Guardian ECM (which is lighter and less bulky than its IS counterpart, but should be otherwise identical) in the Center Torso - that, I take it, would constitute "the Clans' 'answer to the D-DC'".

Fair enough, thanks for the correction.

[pbiggz]

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

That's the key problem with an imbalanced system. You only need one overpowered 'mech to break the whole game. See Cataphract-3D's during the previous age of the PPC.

While this is all well and true in the table top, we presently have the ability to take lightly armored heavies with XL325s. No one does. This very strongly suggests to me that the role you describe does not exist in this game.

Similar to my response to the Loki. If this worked in MWO, we'd surely see Jenners sporting XL240s, but we don't. A 'mech that lightly armored, without the speed to avoid shots, is a coffin on chicken legs.

Remember that when we get ACTUAL game modes that aren't just capwin/kill-to-win and actually require strategy and diversified builds, ALOT of mechs should become more relevant. As it stands, if you take the wrong mech you are essentially punished. Real game modes should solve that and in turn solve your problem. Competitive viability will obviously be a different beast all-together BUT you do see competitive builds often that you rarely if ever see in standard pug matches. I do agree though that they need to be VERY careful, people tend to flock towards the 1 broken build. It's that flavour of the month {Scrap} that I really hate. Of course it hasn't been too much of a problem recently, an autocannon heavy meta isn't so bad.

Edited by pbiggz, 30 October 2013 - 04:28 AM.

[Finestaut]

pbiggz, on 30 October 2013 - 04:28 AM, said:

Remember that when we get ACTUAL game modes that aren't just capwin/kill-to-win and actually require strategy and diversified builds, ALOT of mechs should become more relevant. As it stands, if you take the wrong mech you are essentially punished. Real game modes should solve that and in turn solve your problem. Competitive viability will obviously be a different beast all-together BUT you do see competitive builds often that you rarely if ever see in standard pug matches. I do agree though that they need to be VERY careful, people tend to flock towards the 1 broken build. It's that flavour of the month {Scrap} that I really hate. Of course it hasn't been too much of a problem recently, an autocannon heavy meta isn't so bad.

Maybe it's a lack of imagination on my part, but I cannot conceive of a game mode where "slow and fragile" is a desirable trait.

[CyclonerM]

Finestaut, on 30 October 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

Maybe it's a lack of imagination on my part, but I cannot conceive of a game mode where "slow and fragile" is a desirable trait.

"Die as fast as you can"..?

[Strum Wealh]

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

No need to get snarky with the smileys. This conversation has been mostly friendly so far. The specific examples are what I've been describing the whole thread: lights need speed to survive, heavies need armor, and weapons which are balanced individually can be broken when boated or combined cleverly.

There was no snark intended with the use of "curious smiley" - quite the opposite, actually.

However, what you clarified as "systems" were not what I was thinking you were defining as such - those are, IMO, more "truisms" ("a claim that is so obvious or self-evident as to be hardly worth mentioning" - e.g. "Yes, a lightly-armored 'Mech should generally be faster, so as to avoid taking hits it can't soak. Yes, a slower 'Mech should generally be more well-armored, in order to soak whatever hits it cannot avoid taking.") than "systems" ("a set of interacting or interdependent components, elements, or relationships forming an integrated whole" - e.g. the mutual relationships among damage per second, heat per second, damage per salvo, heat per salvo, and recycle time for a given class or family of weapons, and how those factors can and should affect the behavior of both the class/family as a whole as well as each class/family's individual members).

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

That's the key problem with an imbalanced system. You only need one overpowered 'mech to break the whole game. See Cataphract-3D's during the previous age of the PPC.

While this is all well and true in the table top, we presently have the ability to take lightly armored heavies with XL325s. No one does. This very strongly suggests to me that the role you describe does not exist in this game.

Similar to my response to the Loki. If this worked in MWO, we'd surely see Jenners sporting XL240s, but we don't. A 'mech that lightly armored, without the speed to avoid shots, is a coffin on chicken legs.

I disagree here, on similar grounds: you don't see any 50 tonners rocking the 250 engine rating anymore, but I'm willing to let this go.

The counterpoint to many of those is that there are a lot of things that could work in the game in its current state, but only work for certain persons with either unusual capabilities (e.g. particularly good reflexes, particularly good sense of timing, etc) or mindsets not fitting the seeming-norm (e.g. not the type to scream about the ready button, or rush headlong into the thick of combat).

IMO, most 'Mechs can perform well enough in the right hands - the issue is that not everyone is cut out to be "the right hands" for every 'Mech; just because a given 'Mech is not the "one-size-fits-all build" or the build (supposedly) used by the supposed (and often self-appointed ) "elite" does not necessarily mean it's necessarily one of the (rare, but extant) objectively "bad" or "unviable" builds.

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

I apologize if I misunderstood, that was my main take away from the below paragraph. Most of the clan omnimechs still manage to achieve speed/weight parity with similar inner sphere 'mechs, despite being locked into their equipment.

The point I was going for was more along the lines of the claim if the Daishi being "under-engined" being, IMO, largely unfounded given that a substantial number of other 'Mechs of the same mass use the same-rating Engine and move at the same speed - enough so that 100-tonners with higher-rated Engines (like the Kodiak, with its 400 XL) are arguably the exception rather than the rule.

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

Which is, oddly enough, exactly what I'm advocating. Maintain game balance by holding omnimech builds to the same standards as battlemechs, but respect the lore by letting them chose builds late, after the map and mission are known. The canonical advantage of omnimechs wasn't that clan pilots could fit cheese builds, it was logistical: that they could be refit quickly, mission to mission.

Though, the advantage of OmniMechs was that the same 'Mech (e.g. the same frame) could be adapted into any of its various configurations in short order.

For example, a familiar and energy-weapon-heavy Daishi Prime could, within hours, be refitted into the ballistic monstrosity that is the Daishi B (x1 LB 10-X in the Right Arm, x2 UAC/2s in the Right Torso, x2 UAC/2s in the Left Torso, and a couple of PPCs & a brace of lasers for good measure)), and then could sortie a third time a few hours after that as a Daishi S (the mixed-weapon close-combat specialist configuration... which would also necessarily have at least one ballistic hardpoint in each of the Left Torso (for a Machine Gun), Right Torso (for a Machine Gun), and Right Arm (for a LB 20-X)) - whereas similar transitions for non-OmniTech 'Mechs would (in-universe) take days, if not weeks or months.

Another part of the issue is that some of the canon configs are themselves necessarily "cheese builds", conform to builds that were considered so in the past, or are "cheese builds in waiting" - the Daishi B and S configs (each necessarily has 3-5 ballistics mounts across 3 torso/arm locations and the tonnage to carry three of any Clan-tech ballistic weapon), the Black Hawk Prime (12 energy mounts, all on the arm reticle), the Black Hawk D (at least one ballistic mount on each arm - ripe for Dual Gauss and dual UAC/10 or UAC/20), the Vulture C (dual Gauss), and others.
What should be done about them - should they be skipped entirely, as the VTR-9A and VTR-9A1 were?

Finestaut, on 29 October 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

This provides only a small fraction of the variation of hardpoints, and only really invalidates a small number of extreme edge cases, as you demonstrated with the ballistic daishi.

The aim of that statement was to show that without locked-down base components, or at least some form of type-specific hardpoint (either single-type or hybrid) allocation that is fixed and varies between designations, OmniMechs of the same tonnage become a moot point as players will overwhelmingly tend to choose the chassis with "the best hitboxes" and simply construct the others' configurations on that chassis.

IMO, it also ties back into the viability of PGI's spending time and money to create certain additional 'Mechs - "why bother creating a Kodiak - and expending all of the time and money that entails - when players are going to emulate it on the Daishi they already bought, which then hurts the prospects of selling the Kodiak and thus makes the time and money spent on implementing it wasted? Likewise, why bother ever implementing the Shadow Cat if the Fenris can emulate all of its configurations?"

At this point, we seem to be arguing two sides of the same proberbial coin: "completely-open, MW2/MW3-style OmniMech customization shouldn't/mustn't happen"?

[DI3T3R]

How about benefits that don't depend on construction-rules?

Omnimechs accelerate&decelerate faster, they turn faster (angular speed), they move their arms and torso faster, they move their arms and torso to larger angles...

That could give Omnimechs the edge over both Clan-Battlemechs and IS-Battlemechs, while being at the same time restricted to weapon-customizations.

[101011]

pbiggz, on 16 October 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

In canon, omni pods only fit weapons designed for omnimechs. This seems pretty complex and would just add an artifical division to the list of available weapons. This requirement should be relaxed. Weapons can be mixed tech, equipment should not be.

This game is pretty complex. You cannot just say 'mixtech' without having to understand what that means. Clan 'mechs, following your ideas, would become instantly worthless. Who cares about that crappy 'ol Summoner which has to move 84 kph with fixed armor when you can take that Highlander of yours and put half-weight LRM-20's on it. That's right, 80 missiles for the cost of 40, with no minimum range. Say goodbye to Tukayyid, and hello to the inversion of the Invasion.

[CyclonerM]

101011, on 30 October 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

This game is pretty complex. You cannot just say 'mixtech' without having to understand what that means. Clan 'mechs, following your ideas, would become instantly worthless. Who cares about that crappy 'ol Summoner which has to move 84 kph with fixed armor when you can take that Highlander of yours and put half-weight LRM-20's on it. That's right, 80 missiles for the cost of 40, with no minimum range. Say goodbye to Tukayyid, and hello to the inversion of the Invasion.

In the meanwhile.. No one used anymore IS tech.

[pbiggz]

101011, on 30 October 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

This game is pretty complex. You cannot just say 'mixtech' without having to understand what that means. Clan 'mechs, following your ideas, would become instantly worthless. Who cares about that crappy 'ol Summoner which has to move 84 kph with fixed armor when you can take that Highlander of yours and put half-weight LRM-20's on it. That's right, 80 missiles for the cost of 40, with no minimum range. Say goodbye to Tukayyid, and hello to the inversion of the Invasion.

That's why weapons have to be balanced. If they are properly balanced then mixed tech is not a problem.

[101011]

pbiggz, on 30 October 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

That's why weapons have to be balanced. If they are properly balanced then mixed tech is not a problem.

Balanced how? I'd love to see you explain how to actually and properly balance these weapons while staying true to lore. I can come up with some of my own ideas (or rather, modifications of others'), and if you're interested I'll share them, but you can't just say 'properly balanced' because no one even knows what properly balanced is even supposed to look like! Are clan weapons lighter and longer ranged but do less damage? Or perhaps the inverse, heavier with less range but more damage. Oh wait, the lore clearly says that they're supposed to be improvements, and that's what the heavy lasers are for anyways. I still think the best way to balance them is just to make separate queues, but that's nigh impossible. Perhaps Community Warfare + lobbies will help us control the OPness of Clan weaponry without relying on ghost heat or departure from lore.

[pbiggz]

101011, on 30 October 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

Balanced how? I'd love to see you explain how to actually and properly balance these weapons while staying true to lore. I can come up with some of my own ideas (or rather, modifications of others'), and if you're interested I'll share them, but you can't just say 'properly balanced' because no one even knows what properly balanced is even supposed to look like! Are clan weapons lighter and longer ranged but do less damage? Or perhaps the inverse, heavier with less range but more damage. Oh wait, the lore clearly says that they're supposed to be improvements, and that's what the heavy lasers are for anyways. I still think the best way to balance them is just to make separate queues, but that's nigh impossible. Perhaps Community Warfare + lobbies will help us control the OPness of Clan weaponry without relying on ghost heat or departure from lore.

Just to get this out of the way, throw canon out the window for this. If you stick with the whole "technologically superior" shtick you're setting yourself up for failure. Also, I am a game development student and actually study this stuff. So I do have a perspective on this that some people don't.

http://mwomercs.com/...t-clan-weapons/

[101011]

pbiggz, on 30 October 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Just to get this out of the way, throw canon out the window for this. If you stick with the whole "technologically superior" shtick you're setting yourself up for failure. Also, I am a game development student and actually study this stuff. So I do have a perspective on this that some people don't.

http://mwomercs.com/...t-clan-weapons/

With all due respect, I think you're looking at this a bit narrowly. I agree that we have to nerf Clan weapons, I agree that we can't stick 100% to canon. I do not agree that we have to 'throw it out the window'. The premise of this game is the canon, and the more PGI strays from canon, the more this game loses it's identity as a MechWarrior game. I'm currently writing up a post on it, so I hope you'll forgive me if it takes me a while to reply. Pretend it's a racing game, where an old VW Beetle from the sixties is equal to, say, a Ferrari. Sure, it's a racing game, but it's also a joke.

Edited by 101011, 30 October 2013 - 03:52 PM.

[pbiggz]

Oh no dont mistake what im saying for ignoring canon all together, what im saying is if we keep the TT values and the utterly broken tech were setting ourselves up for failure.

[Vanguard319]

I would point a problem with a pure tech rule: This would render IS Omnis like the Sunder not worthwhile to pilot, as one of their advantages is that they can readily use clan-spec Omni pods. You also ignore IS designs that make use of clan tech and vice versa.

The advantages of omnimechs is that they can hot swap weapons and equipment, and essentially be reconfigured mid mission. No MechWarrior game has ever allowed that kind of swapping out weapons however, so it's really a moot point.

IMO, Clan tech will likely be the new endgame, since it will likely cost much more than the IS equivalent.

[fuzzylogic01]

Clan tech is supposed to be overpowered.

The balancing in the BT universe was number of people fighting. clans would bid for the honor of battle. The clan who bid the fewest resources(mechs and people) got the chance and reaped the rewards.

I propose keeping clan and inner-sphere separated by teams with clans receiving a 3:2 or 4:3 penalty.
example:
12 IS vs 12 IS would be 12 IS vs 8 Clan.
or a 4:3 ratio i.e. 12 vs 9

Possibly, base the ratio on the player levels which would simulate conventional inner sphere forces VS unconventional clan forces

12 decent inner sphere pilots vs 4 excellent clan pilots.

I see this being an awesome way to change the monotony of the current game types and will force some interesting tactics, especially as the maps get larger.


My thoughts on clan mechs and omnimechs:

Clans should have access to all Inner Sphere tech, this is as a result of raiding Inner Sphere worlds. Inner Sphere could have access to clan tech but limit it by using a module slot for each different weapon or equipment type. This would be a Clan Tech Adaptation (CTA) module. This would prevent boating clan tech on Inner Sphere chassis(like Atlas D-DC)

Omnimechs are the most versatile mechs in the BT universe and should be wide open for mods. To pull a quote from the USPS, "if it fits, it ships!"
keeping in mind crit slots, tonnage and heat issues.
To nerf Clan tech or Omnimechs for so-called "fairness" would be an abomination and a direct slap to the face of true fans.


In closing, I'd rather die in battle while out numbered in a clan mech,or savor the taste of victory against a better mech than disregard the superiority of the Clans as warriors

Edited by fuzzylogic01, 30 October 2013 - 05:03 PM.

[pbiggz]

fuzzylogic01, on 30 October 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

Clan tech is supposed to be overpowered.

The balancing in the BT universe was number of people fighting. clans would bid for the honor of battle. The clan who bid the fewest resources(mechs and people) got the chance and reaped the rewards.

I propose keeping clan and inner-sphere separated by teams with clans receiving a 3:2 or 4:3 penalty.
example:
12 IS vs 12 IS would be 12 IS vs 8 Clan.
or a 4:3 ratio i.e. 12 vs 9

Possibly, base the ratio on the player levels which would simulate conventional inner sphere forces VS unconventional clan forces

12 decent inner sphere pilots vs 4 excellent clan pilots.

I see this being an awesome way to change the monotony of the current game types and will force some interesting tactics, especially as the maps get larger.


My thoughts on clan mechs and omnimechs:

Clans should have access to all Inner Sphere tech, this is as a result of raiding Inner Sphere worlds. Inner Sphere could have access to clan tech but limit it by using a module slot for each different weapon or equipment type. This would be a Clan Tech Adaptation (CTA) module. This would prevent boating clan tech on Inner Sphere chassis(like Atlas D-DC)

Omnimechs are the most versatile mechs in the BT universe and should be wide open for mods. To pull a quote from the USPS, "if it fits, it ships!"
keeping in mind crit slots, tonnage and heat issues.
To nerf Clan tech or Omnimechs for so-called "fairness" would be an abomination and a direct slap to the face of true fans.


In closing, I'd rather die in battle while out numbered in a clan mech,or savor the taste of victory against a better mech than disregard the superiority of the Clans as warriors

A: dont like your own posts it makes you look like a {Richard Cameron}.

B: as was said NUMEROUS times before, if you leave clan tech OP and try to balance with numbers, NOT ONLY are you sidestepping the issue and leaving it UNSOLVED, but you are going to inevitably trigger a mass exodus to clans. As has been proven time and again with "flavour of the month" builds, players will flock to the most powerful gear available, especially when they dont care about numbers. You cannot defend clan technology being OP, we've debunked this like 5 times already so stop resurrecting this half baked argument.

TLDR: IF CLAN TECH STAYS OP YOU WILL INVALIDATE IS TECH AND CAUSE A MASSIVE EXODUS TO CLANS REGARDLESS OF NUMERICAL BALANCING. STOP TRYING TO ARGUE FOR IT, IT DOES NOT WORK.

Edited by pbiggz, 30 October 2013 - 05:26 PM.

[Finestaut]

Strum Wealh, on 30 October 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

The counterpoint to many of those is that there are a lot of things that could work in the game in its current state, but only work for certain persons with either unusual capabilities (e.g. particularly good reflexes, particularly good sense of timing, etc) or mindsets not fitting the seeming-norm (e.g. not the type to scream about the ready button, or rush headlong into the thick of combat).

IMO, most 'Mechs can perform well enough in the right hands - the issue is that not everyone is cut out to be "the right hands" for every 'Mech; just because a given 'Mech is not the "one-size-fits-all build" or the build (supposedly) used by the supposed (and often self-appointed ) "elite" does not necessarily mean it's necessarily one of the (rare, but extant) objectively "bad" or "unviable" builds.

I actually think "objectively bad" isn't quite so rare. Specifically when it comes to engine/weights. Every weight has a well documented range of engines and speeds where that 'mech has more weight available than any other. For a 35 tonner like the Cougar, the objectively "best" speed with an XL is around 150, about where Jenners lie currently. At 97kph, you can have more free weight, in the same speed, in anything up to about a 60 tonner. So Basically, the Kit Fox, with a locked engine, is an under-armored Dragon.

Similarly, I don't think you can discount the relative popularity of a build when evaluating it's effectiveness. I don't think the Raven-4X was some under-appreciated diamond in the rough. It was a piece of junk, and no one played it because it was, flat out, junk.

Strum Wealh, on 30 October 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

The point I was going for was more along the lines of the claim if the Daishi being "under-engined" being, IMO, largely unfounded given that a substantial number of other 'Mechs of the same mass use the same-rating Engine and move at the same speed - enough so that 100-tonners with higher-rated Engines (like the Kodiak, with its 400 XL) are arguably the exception rather than the rule.

We're actually in agreement here. The engine problem only affects some 'mechs. The Daishi is unaffected.

The thing is, this is actually a bigger problem than if all the clan 'mechs were equally under-engined. Having some 'mechs so far below the curve basically puts them in Urbanmech territory, which is not a place anyone wants to be. Flexible engines allows MWO to include 'mechs that might've worked in tabletop, but don't translate to MWO's mechanics.

Strum Wealh, on 30 October 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

Though, the advantage of OmniMechs was that the same 'Mech (e.g. the same frame) could be adapted into any of its various configurations in short order.

Almost as if... you could pick which configuration, from a list of known goods, after you previewed the map and knew the mission.

Strum Wealh, on 30 October 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

Another part of the issue is that some of the canon configs are themselves necessarily "cheese builds", conform to builds that were considered so in the past, or are "cheese builds in waiting" - the Daishi B and S configs (each necessarily has 3-5 ballistics mounts across 3 torso/arm locations and the tonnage to carry three of any Clan-tech ballistic weapon), the Black Hawk Prime (12 energy mounts, all on the arm reticle), the Black Hawk D (at least one ballistic mount on each arm - ripe for Dual Gauss and dual UAC/10 or UAC/20), the Vulture C (dual Gauss), and others.
What should be done about them - should they be skipped entirely, as the VTR-9A and VTR-9A1 were?

Pretty much. It's unfortunate, and having the Daishi Prime, A, _, and C is slightly more conspicuous than a couple of weird letter combinations. But I'm fairly certain some of them have got to go. I'm not entirely sure all of these have to go, but with the convertible hardpoint idea, I'm sure a few of these would have to get the axe.

Strum Wealh, on 30 October 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

The aim of that statement was to show that without locked-down base components, or at least some form of type-specific hardpoint (either single-type or hybrid) allocation that is fixed and varies between designations, OmniMechs of the same tonnage become a moot point as players will overwhelmingly tend to choose the chassis with "the best hitboxes" and simply construct the others' configurations on that chassis.

This is definitely true. You can't reduce an omnimech to a blank canvas of a certain size. They need differentiation.

Strum Wealh, on 30 October 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

IMO, it also ties back into the viability of PGI's spending time and money to create certain additional 'Mechs - "why bother creating a Kodiak - and expending all of the time and money that entails - when players are going to emulate it on the Daishi they already bought, which then hurts the prospects of selling the Kodiak and thus makes the time and money spent on implementing it wasted? Likewise, why bother ever implementing the Shadow Cat if the Fenris can emulate all of its configurations?"

At this point, we seem to be arguing two sides of the same proberbial coin: "completely-open, MW2/MW3-style OmniMech customization shouldn't/mustn't happen"?

Absolutely. There need to be significant, real restrictions. For me, the most important restriction is on the number and combination of weapons you can take. Omni hardpoints don't accomplish that. Hybrid hardpoints don't accomplish that, as you need so many of either to cover the canon configs, that you basically create an MW2 situation. Locked internals don't accomplish that either, only disabling the most extreme edge cases.

That leaves our current hardpoint system, with flexi-engines. It works. It allows substantial customization, but let's the devs draw the line at certain builds. It allows Table Top 'mechs to be adjusted to stay competitive. It adds distinctive features to 'mechs that would otherwise be blank slates. These are good things. If you loosen these requirements, you start inviting badness.

So, if we've got a system that works, and allows a fair amount of customization, how do we respect the lore? I say, give the clanners their logistical/operational advantage. Let them pick their loadouts after the map and mission are settled. In the context of a single match, you can keep a ton of clan tech equal to a ton of IS tech, but you still make the omni-advantage meaningful. It respects the lore, but isn't a slave to it.

pbiggz, on 30 October 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

B: as was said NUMEROUS times before, if you leave clan tech OP and try to balance with numbers, NOT ONLY are you sidestepping the issue and leaving it UNSOLVED, but you are going to inevitably trigger a mass exodus to clans. As has been proven time and again with "flavour of the month" builds, players will flock to the most powerful gear available, especially when they dont care about numbers. You cannot defend clan technology being OP, we've debunked this like 5 times already so stop resurrecting this half baked argument.

TLDR: IF CLAN TECH STAYS OP YOU WILL INVALIDATE IS TECH AND CAUSE A MASSIVE EXODUS TO CLANS REGARDLESS OF NUMERICAL BALANCING. STOP TRYING TO ARGUE FOR IT, IT DOES NOT WORK.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Winner!

[Throe]

unFearing, on 16 October 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

So, to clarify, you get x number of omnipods for a mech, let's say you get 2 for a mech. and then you can put whatever weapon in there, but based on the slots of that weapon, it will take up slots in the other pod like dynamic armor/dynamic structure.

so if i have 2 pods, totaling to 24 slots, and i put in those clan lbx20s, i have SpaceNow = 24 - 2(C LBX20 slots).

but where do the extra dynamic slots come in to prevent the cheese boats? i get the "limit # of omnipods", but not so sure about how the slots work, asides from them shifting around based on what weapons you put in them.

mind writing an equation? It's a simple math thing, but i couldn't quite get it from just text

From what he's saying, it sounds like there would basically be a separate and distinct set of "omnislots" which behave much the same way as critical slots. Omnislots would obviously overlap critical slots, but omnislots would be limited entirely in their dynamism to the omnipods previously mentioned. As in:

I have 9 energy hardpoints on an Omniback HBK-4P, with a grand total of 18 omnislots between them. If I mount two ERPPCs, I now have only 4 omnislots left over for the other 7 energy omnipods, which effectively limits me to 4 medium pulse lasers(or something smaller; tag, SPL, flamer, etc.)

daneiel varna, on 16 October 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

Then lets make the Battlemechs proper first !!!!! The battlemech must be much more limited for customisation -> like hard point sizes and cost for any changes on them and mech lock for some time after changes too !!!!

I wouldn't object to this, so long as they eventually make the testing grounds a true testing grounds. Make it so that players can use *any* 'Mech variant, with whatever equipment they want, so long as it's fieldable, without having to pay CBills for it(excluding the Hero 'Mechs). This, because the learning curve is already extremely steep in MWO, and steepening it won't help anything.