78 replies to this topic

[Ironwithin]

A 20ton Locust will always be gunned down by a 30ton Spider with comparable skill, just like an Awesome will always be gunned down by an Atlas with comparable skill.

Removing the 10HS rule for small engines changes absolutely nothing, EXCEPT lights/mediums die quicker to other lights/mediums because they all now carry more weapons. So what's the point really ?

Lights are not supposed to fight anything bigger than themselves on their own and running in a group of two or more lights (even if "just" LCTs) you can easily take out a lone, bigger 'mech right now.

[Sharp Spikes]

If "Removing the 10HS rule for small engines changes absolutely nothing" why are you so scared about it? You don't want anything below 35 tons to be even remotely viable for some reason, or what?

Quote

EXCEPT lights/mediums die quicker to other lights/mediums because they all now carry more weapons. So what's the point really ?

The point is that "10 HS rule" works as a penalty for light mechs, and the lighter the mech, the more severe the penalty.

[Modo44]

You are proposing to make the Raven irrelevant. Bad troll remains bad.

[42and19]

Sharp Spikes, on 20 October 2013 - 02:50 AM, said:

If "Removing the 10HS rule for small engines changes absolutely nothing" why are you so scared about it? You don't want anything below 35 tons to be even remotely viable for some reason, or what?



The point is that "10 HS rule" works as a penalty for light mechs, and the lighter the mech, the more severe the penalty.

Exactly, people seem to be missing the point.

How many builds are there for the locust 1v?

two

maybe?


I'm for this mainly for more VARIETY. I had the same issue with the commandos.

I'm honestly surprised by the amount of....negativity that this thread is generating and most the arguments against removing the minimum heatsink rule are....lame.

1) The locust won't be any better because it still has little armor and is 20 tons

Ok, sure. BUT we will have more customization options to better fit our play style

2) The locust shouldn't be an alpha master

Duh, and it won't be with an extra 3 tons, what is your point? You can currently run an ac/2 on a locust ( have seen this done) you can currently run an ppc on a locust (I have seen that done and the player manages to land 6 kills and 700 damage). 3 tons won't add that much to the firepower of the mech but it will GIVE US MORE OPTIONS

3) You want to replaces (such and such mech)

Really?

....


it's a 20 ton mech how exactly is that going to supplant the jenner/raven/spider with an extra 3 tons to play with?

let's compare shall we

locust=20 tons
spider=25 tons
jenner/raven=35 tons

hmmmm

even with the extra 3 tons you aren't gaining enough to even compete with the spider if pure available tonnage.

not to mention that both the spider and raven can have ecm and the locust cannot.

This is not a troll post but something that has bugged many of us for as long as the commando has been in the game and the requirement has existed. It's a mechanic carried over from TT that doesn't need to be and before I get jumped on by that let me just say that TT rules never really intended to run with custom builds. They added those rules as an afterthought to oppese the masses but they did it poorly and in such a way that it could be exploited regularly (like adding half ton bins of machine gun ammo to lower your BV, and if you don't understand that statement don't comment on TT)

[Kanajashi]

I agree with the idea of removing the minimum 10 heat-sink requirement. In the place of needing to have a specific amount of heat sinks I think a better system would be to have a minimum heat efficiency rating. That way if you have low heat weapons, you only need a few heat sinks and if you have high heat weapons you need more heat sinks to reach the minimum rating. This would allow for smaller mechs to save on some weight while also keeping it a simple rule: "mechs need minimum heat rating of...", instead of having more complex system: "mechs need 10 heat sinks except when....". This system will have absolutely no effect on larger mechs as they typically have a 250 rated engine anyway, but it would make the sub 30 ton mechs much more flexible.

For example:
Allows for the weight of extra ammo without needing to run with paper thin armor. With 70% heat rating why should that mech need to equip 3 more heat sinks?
Current: LCT-1V
New system: LCT-1V

Edited by Kanajashi, 20 October 2013 - 03:10 AM.

[42and19]

Kanajashi, on 20 October 2013 - 03:07 AM, said:

I agree with the idea of removing the minimum 10 heat-sink requirement. In the place of needing to have a specific amount of heat sinks I think a better system would be to have a minimum heat efficiency rating. That way if you have low heat weapons, you only need a few heat sinks and if you have high heat weapons you need more heat sinks to reach the minimum rating. This would allow for smaller mechs to save on some weight while also keeping it a simple rule: "mechs need minimum heat rating of...", instead of having more complex system: "mechs need 10 heat sinks except when....". This system will have absolutely no effect on larger mechs as they typically have a 250 rated engine anyway, but it would make the sub 30 ton mechs much more flexible.

For example:
Allows for the weight of extra ammo without needing to run with paper thin armor. With 70% heat rating why should that mech need to equip 3 more heat sinks?
Current: LCT-1V
New system: LCT-1V

Can anyone guess what the MAXIMUM damage output for that build is?

450

yea, so scary

[Ironwithin]

*sigh* Yes, I am deathly afraid of a light packing a ppc, that would be totally game breaking, good thing it's not possible now. Oh wait...


Repeating myself here, again: A 20ton LCT is not supposed to be "a good choice" when it comes to fighting other, heavier 'mechs. Non of the light 'mechs are. If you weigh less than your opponent, you are not supposed to engage in single combat unless you are absolutely sure you can "outskill" him.

The only way to make lights (ALL lights really) viable is to award players for choosing them over an assault 'mech and/or limiting the overall dropweight in a manner that they are necessary to "fill the ranks".
Or by bringing back rearm/repair costs, wich would make lights dirt cheap to maintain compared to that big, fat, stompy Atlas.

Removing the 10HS rule does not do that, does it ?
What would it do ?
It would give a 'mech that is supposed to be weaker than any other mech (but cheaper) the ability to compete with designs it shouldn't.
It's just a band-aid for the underlying problem and might break things further down the road.


PGI wrote on several occasions they are working on ways to reward the light-playstyle. No idea what they will come up with but there is hope: So just wait it out instead of "hotfixing" stuff that may or may not have other undesirable side-effects in the future.

Don't get me wrong, please... I too have those 3 LCTs sitting in my mechhangar and just can't see how it would be much fun getting pwnd by any and all other 'mechs out there. I too am dreading the day may OCD compels me to master them. I just don't see any benefit of "breaking" stuff now, that is working as intended, just because the game is incomplete.

[Kaeseblock]

42and19, on 20 October 2013 - 03:07 AM, said:

I'm for this mainly for more VARIETY.

Well said 42and19 (not just the one sentence I quoted above, but your whole statement )

I'm totally in for removing the 10 HS min. requirement. Will make playing the locust way more fun ^^
I highly doubt, it will ever be able to compete with the Spider or the Jenner, but well, the Locust is a 20 ton mech, so that's ok.

[Sharp Spikes]

Ironwithin, on 20 October 2013 - 03:21 AM, said:

*sigh* Yes, I am deathly afraid of a light packing a ppc, that would be totally game breaking, good thing it's not possible now. Oh wait...


Repeating myself here, again: A 20ton LCT is not supposed to be "a good choice" when it comes to fighting other, heavier 'mechs. Non of the light 'mechs are. If you weigh less than your opponent, you are not supposed to engage in single combat unless you are absolutely sure you can "outskill" him.

You are trolling, right? I mean, you weren't serious when you wrote that, were you? Even if I remove 3 redundand HSs from Locust it still will have THE THINNEST armour and THE WORST heat dissipation of all mechs. That additional 3 tons won't suddenly make a Locust OP, just will allow for more variety in builds for it.

Quote

The only way to make lights (ALL lights really) viable is to award players for choosing them over an assault 'mech and/or limiting the overall dropweight in a manner that they are necessary to "fill the ranks".
Or by bringing back rearm/repair costs, wich would make lights dirt cheap to maintain compared to that big, fat, stompy Atlas.

Just no. You are wrong. Because this statement made it obvious that you are trolling.

Quote

Removing the 10HS rule does not do that, does it ?
What would it do ?
It would give a 'mech that is supposed to be weaker than any other mech (but cheaper) the ability to compete with designs it shouldn't.
It's just a band-aid for the underlying problem and might break things further down the road.

... the trolling continues.

Quote

PGI wrote on several occasions they are working on ways to reward the light-playstyle. No idea what they will come up with but there is hope: So just wait it out instead of "hotfixing" stuff that may or may not have other undesirable side-effects in the future.

Don't get me wrong, please... I too have those 3 LCTs sitting in my mechhangar and just can't see how it would be much fun getting pwnd by any and all other 'mechs out there. I too am dreading the day may OCD compels me to master them. I just don't see any benefit of "breaking" stuff now, that is working as intended, just because the game is incomplete.

... and here trolling finally ends.

You are skillfull at getting rise out of people, mister. I could, of course, show that all your arguments are invalid, but you know it yourself and anyone around here see that too, so I won't bother. Welcome to my ignore list.

Edited by Sharp Spikes, 20 October 2013 - 03:52 AM.

[42and19]

I came in fairly late in the closed beta (about july or august last year) so could someone please explain to me why the minimum 10 heatsinks is required?

I'm a rather empathetic person but I really cannot understand the opposition. The only thing I am getting from the posts is that it will make the locust more powerful than the other lights and will break the game and I am not seeing either case no matter how hard I try.

So, post me a wall of text. I can, and often do, read long posts so don't be afraid.

I understand that the locust is supposed to be cheap and weak and that it is built as a scout. I understand that, in general, playing a light is not about getting in combat (I play lights all the time BECAUSE I like spotting for teammates). What bothers me is that there is no real customization for the locust or commandos because there isn't enough to play with. It's not about viability as much as the freedom to play the game how I want to.

Here is an example of what I am talking about

Locust-3S

Would that build be in any way scary on the battlefield? NO! Absolutely not. A single AMS would eat the lrms and the two srms are not enough damage up close to make much of a dent in anything. However, it would be REALLY fun to play.

FUN

That's what I am talking about, making the locust and commando FUN to play, The largest component that draws me to the game is the customization of the mechs and currently the locust and commando are penalized in this aspect just because they have to stack unneeded heatsinks. The developers can't up the engine because their netcode can't support it, nor do I think they should in the case of the commandos. Even when they finally add more scouting rewards what will be the incentive to choosing a locust/commando over a jenner/raven/spider? Hell, people would stay away from the spiders and run just jenners and ravens if it wasn't for the broken hit boxes. There needs to be a reason for the locust/commando/flea and even with CW there probably won't be.

[Ironwithin]

42and19, on 20 October 2013 - 03:44 AM, said:

It's not about viability as much as the freedom to play the game how I want to.
...
The largest component that draws me to the game is the customization of the mechs and currently the locust and commando are penalized in this aspect just because they have to stack unneeded heatsinks.

THAT arguement I totally get. Good point.



_{@randomrussian calling me a troll:
Please go ahead and explain to me in a PM or two why I am wrong and how I am trolling by simply stating my opinion/suggesting possible fixes to the perceived problem. I don't see any of that in your post, were you trolling me ? oh my...}

[Mahws]

42and19, on 20 October 2013 - 03:44 AM, said:

I came in fairly late in the closed beta (about july or august last year) so could someone please explain to me why the minimum 10 heatsinks is required?

It's a rule from table top. There's no reason it's in the game other than that.

Edited by Mahws, 20 October 2013 - 06:53 AM.

[Xendojo]

Tokra, on 18 October 2013 - 06:27 PM, said:

No, it does now. The engines under 250 weight less because of the less heat sinks.
The remove of the rule only help these mechs that have ballistic weapons. or do you really want a mech with large laser or PPC with only 6 heat sinks? In best case you can get one free ton from one heatsinks for mechs that dont have more than one laser.

1 ton on a 20 ton mech is more than it seems. That's a serious chunk of ANY weapons payload on a 20 ton mech.

Edited by Xendojo, 20 October 2013 - 07:41 AM.

[Duke Nedo]

+1 for removing the 10 HS rule, it doesn't really affect other mechs than the loc & commando and they don't need the extra restrictions on their already crowded tonnage. It's self-regulatory anyways, remove too many and your mech runs too hot. Like said very well above, it adds some flexibility to the builds. It will not overpower the locust since it already has so little armour that it doesnt matter what you do with it, a mech where every single location can be oneshotted will never be OP. Not even with spider hitboxes... It would be fun from a gaming perspective to give it a niche. Contrary to TT, in the computer game every mech (also the cannonfodder) is controlled by a human being spending his game time on it so if the mech is in the game, it really should fill some kind of purpose, otherwise PGI just wasted their time and resources to implement a pointless chassi... Removing 10 HS is a step in that direction, it will allow the "S" to have 4x streaks and BAP, no other light has that, but also without overpowering it since it has so little armour and is not much faster so it will still go down in a 1:1 versus anohter light unless the opponent really can't aim.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Modo44, on 20 October 2013 - 12:57 AM, said:

Yes. 4 less heatsinks would give it full armor, a laser, and 2 tons of ammo. Plenty scary for only 20 tons. In a similar fashion, the half viable ballistic heavy buids with no armor/no backup weapons/low ammo would suddenly be completely viable by just removing some (otherwise "unnecessary") heatsinks. Please quit whining already.

You don't pilots lights, do you? You do die to them a lot though, I am guessing.

Also, "whining". I don't think that word means what you think it means.

**edit**

Ok, that came out a lot snarkier than I really intended. Well not really, but the post does need something more OT.

Full armor? On a Locust. Seriously? Dude, I have 5 MLs and full armor. Guess what? That means 16 armor on the legs.

A laser and 2 tons of ammo. Hold still for 20 seconds, please, so I can peel away your armor. Or as someone else pointed out, 2 tons of AC/2 ammo is 450 damage max. Sure a laser would add to that, but short on heatsinks remember, and god forbid you are in Terra Therma or Caustic Valley.

Edited by Nick Makiaveli, 20 October 2013 - 10:22 AM.

[Deathlike]

The problem ultimately comes from the "increased speed cap", which was probably reserved for the Flea, but the CryEngine/game engine upgrade hadn't occurred yet. I get the feeling the cap would be expanded further once that occurs, and that should alleviate some of the problems that the Locust and future Flea has, but as of right now, it is literally not going to do the Locusts any favors. Lifting the cap isn't going to suddenly give Locusts that many more offensive options IMO as there is only so much you can fit on them... it will only benefit for evasion/speed for capping.

It used to be difficult to justify a Commando prior to the engine cap increase.. now it does have a tad more viability, but the Locust is suffering as a consequence... Jenners+Ravens+ECM variants are left alone, so there is some differentiating... there is really none for the Locust.

As of right now, you really should just deal with what you have now, or just wait it out for the Locust to benefit from a future engine cap buff.

Edited by Deathlike, 20 October 2013 - 10:42 AM.

[Koniving]

Haven't you guys actually considered something much simpler than changing core rules?

Example: We have a ton of 4-ton engines. Why not 3.75 ton? Why not 3.5? 3.25? 3.0? 2.75? 2.50? Etc.? Why so many engines of the same weight? Would that not be simpler, without jacking up everything else?

[Vanguard319]

Ironwithin, on 20 October 2013 - 03:21 AM, said:

*sigh* Yes, I am deathly afraid of a light packing a ppc, that would be totally game breaking, good thing it's not possible now. Oh wait...

Believe it or not, it is possible to mount an ER PPC on a Locust, and still have room for a med laser. Though you could still have more potential damage with 5 sm lasers, the only benefit would be the long range.

Edited by Vanguard319, 20 October 2013 - 11:34 AM.

[Modo44]

Nick Makiaveli, on 20 October 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

You don't pilots lights, do you? You do die to them a lot though, I am guessing.

I have mastered all except the Commando. I have learned that you get speed, or you get firepower. It really is that simple.

[GaintBeardedFace]

LCT-3M
this is what you can do even with the min 10 HS rule. It works and runs a bit hot but you don't need to fire the ppc every 5 sec.