111 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

Voivode, on 31 January 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:

Ah, the MW:O community! I've been here two years and I tell you, every single mech they've released has been declared "DOA" by half the community. Everything everywhere is always DOA!

The old: "It isn't what I'm used to so I hate it so much!"

No, not all mechs were anticipated to be DoA. Some examples:


Victor: Was expected to have a variant that could handle 2 Gauss and 2 PPCs (the one with leg MGs) and utterly break the game in half (didn't get 2 heavy ballistics, but still one of the best mechs this game has ever seen bar none)

Orion: Expected to be a nice brawler, but upon arrival it actually turned out worse than expectations due to its initial hitboxes

Battlemaster: Mixed expectations, mostly positive or neutral; turned out slightly worse than expectations

Kintaro: Was expected to completely replace the Centurion's SRM bombing role, but turned out worse than expectations due to the worst hitbox screwup in the history of ever (got fixed, but still doesn't replace Cent)

Quickdraw: Expected to replace the Dragon (which it did)

Highlander: Expected to be the poptarting king (which it turned out to be very quickly)



Those are the ones I can remember off the top of my head, but the idea is that you are severely overexaggerating when you say that "all of the mechs were thought to be DoA"--because, that is simply a false statement.

[Voivode]

Interesting, you wish to call me out for "severely exaggerating" but the idea that all clan mechs are DOA doesn't deserve to be called out for the same?

Perhaps some will be better than others. Perhaps some will be worse than anticipated and some better than anticipated. Surely they will not be all DOA.

The statements being made about clan mechs (especially all of the lights) are AT LEAST as much hyperbole as my "all mechs were called DOA" statement.

I look forward to seeing you call those people out as well.

Edited by Voivode, 31 January 2014 - 08:31 AM.

[FupDup]

Voivode, on 31 January 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

Interesting, you wish to call me out for "severely exaggerating" but the idea that all clan mechs are DOA doesn't deserve to be called out for the same?

Perhaps some will be better than others. Perhaps some will be worse than anticipated and some better than anticipated. Surely they will not be all DOA.

The statements being made about clan mechs being DOA (especially all of the lights) are AT LEAST as much hyperbole as my "all mechs were called DOA" statement.

I look forward to seeing you call those people out as well.

I didn't call out those other folks because I didn't see their posts in this thread (at least not when I skimmed it).


To be fair, with the given command chair post we can at least somewhat theorycraft about how well a new Clan Omnimech would perform in MWO. We can look at its tabletop record sheet for armor (multiply by 2 for MWO), engine, etc and then use our knowledge of MWO gameplay mechanics to discern if a certain base config takes advantage of gameplay mechanics, or is weakened by those mechanics. The only things we can't predict are hitboxes, degree of Clan weapon nerfing, and if PGI loosens their stance on customization. But we can still get a reasonably close idea of how a mech would perform. For example, I really hope it's obvious that a 65 ton heavy like the Hellbringer, carrying an armor level similar to a Cicada, would not be able to accomplish much given the way that this game has been designed.

Edited by FupDup, 31 January 2014 - 08:36 AM.

[Voivode]

Fair enough, but PGI seems to be aware of how people customize the IS mechs. You can see that with the change from pure stock builds in the trial mech bays to the "champion" custom variants now. They haven't stated that they will simply double the TT values for armor and use the stock TT engines. They have created a game that shares more with TT than previous MW titles but is still different in significant ways. If the weapons are going to be changed in order to balance the game, it is likely the armor and engine values of clan mechs will be as well. Obviously we need more details but it seems people are drawing conclusions that don't necessarily follow in a logical way.

We may find out in a few months that, yes, the Hellbringer is carrying as much armor as a Cicada and then we should all be ticked. However, in a few months we might find out that he Hellbringer isn't just 2x the TT armor and is carrying as much armor as a Jager's max.

We don't know yet. To declare things DOA is completely hyperbolic as it relies on information that isn't there rather than information that is.

Edited by Voivode, 31 January 2014 - 08:45 AM.

[w0rm]

Josef Nader, on 31 January 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

What Clan lights will absoloutely be good at is pecking IS assaults and heavies to death with harassment tactics and long range bombardment. You've got to think past the current meta.

Will be hard to pick on IS Assaults and Heavies when your lance got completly screwed by 4 Jenners.

[Josef Nader]

w0rm, on 31 January 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

Will be hard to pick on IS Assaults and Heavies when your lance got completly screwed by 4 Jenners.

Gonna be hard for those 4 Jenners to get close when there's 6 ER mediums and a UAC 20 providing cover for the clan lights.

[Hellcat420]

Khobai, on 30 January 2014 - 06:34 PM, said:

No I definitely understand the OP. But I dont agree that battlemechs are more customizable than omnimechs in tabletop.

While its true that you can change virtually anything on a battlemech by using refit kits, the reality is those refit kits are extremely expensive, often require access to a mech factory, and are usually only available to elite mercenary or house units. And factory refits can take weeks if you have to transport the mech to a factory.

Omnimechs on the other hand can completely change their weapon loadouts between missions. Even if they cant change their engine or armor values. So I would definitely say omnimechs are more customizable overall in tabletop.

However thats not the case in MWO since IS mechs can change their loadouts freely from one mission to the next without penalty. IMO whenever you change anything on an IS mech, that mech should be placed "out of commision" for several hours while it undergoes refit. You should of course be able to pay MC or cbills to speed this process up. Conversely omnimechs should be able to switch weapons/configurations in between missions without penalty.

don't forget that as far as mwo goes, refit kits don't even exist yet. they didn't come up with the concept of refit kits until 3051.

[FupDup]

Voivode, on 31 January 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

Fair enough, but PGI seems to be aware of how people customize the IS mechs. You can see that with the change from pure stock builds in the trial mech bays to the "champion" custom variants now. They haven't stated that they will simply double the TT values for armor and use the stock TT engines. They have created a game that shares more with TT than previous MW titles but is still different in significant ways. If the weapons are going to be changed in order to balance the game, it is likely the armor and engine values of clan mechs will be as well. Obviously we need more details but it seems people are drawing conclusions that don't necessarily follow in a logical way.

We may find out in a few months that, yes, the Hellbringer is carrying as much armor as a Cicada and then we should all be ticked. However, in a few months we might find out that he Hellbringer isn't just 2x the TT armor and is carrying as much armor as a Jager's max.

We don't know yet. To declare things DOA is completely hyperbolic as it relies on information that isn't there rather than information that is.

The thing is, we actually do have a lot of the information already. It is a given fact that MWO gives twice as many armor points per ton of weight as TT does, and we can observe this on existing IS mechs. As a completely random example, here is the record sheet for a Griffin 3M: http://bte.battletec...te/pdf/4030.pdf

Here is a stock Griffin 3M in MWO: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...#i=128&l=stock. Compare its armor values to the BT record sheet.


So, assuming that PGI does not fiddle with the Clan Omnimech stock configurations, it is a very safe assumption that we can take TT armor values and double them to figure out a mech's armor distribution in MWO. Naturally, PGI can in fact change their stance on Omnimech customization at any time, so all of these assumptions are based on what we have currently been told.




EDIT: For funzies, here is a Hellbringer Prime record sheet: http://bte.battletec...te/pdf/4575.pdf
Here is an approximation of what its armor would be in MWO: Ghetto Hellbringer
34 CT armor...ouch.

Edited by FupDup, 31 January 2014 - 10:17 AM.

[Snoopy]

CYBRN4CR, on 30 January 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

Careful, you suggest things like that and the devs just might make it so that every time you make a change to a BattleMech, you have to wait an hour or so of real time for your mech to be available to you after you click save.

P.S. I'm not upset about it.

Upps ... Ehmmm

...

Did not want to suggest anything,

I wanted to give a short explanation concerning the disparity of modification between the BT lore / TT and MWO. And that comparing apples (modification) and oranges (podspace change) is not the best way to make a statement like "matching the lore" ... whatever

[w0rm]

Josef Nader, on 31 January 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

Gonna be hard for those 4 Jenners to get close when there's 6 ER mediums and a UAC 20 providing cover for the clan lights.

Gl trying that against HGN's and 3D's.

[Voivode]

FupDup, on 31 January 2014 - 10:11 AM, said:

The thing is, we actually do have a lot of the information already. It is a given fact that MWO gives twice as many armor points per ton of weight as TT does, and we can observe this on existing IS mechs. As a completely random example, here is the record sheet for a Griffin 3M: http://bte.battletec...te/pdf/4030.pdf

Here is a stock Griffin 3M in MWO: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...#i=128&l=stock. Compare its armor values to the BT record sheet.


So, assuming that PGI does not fiddle with the Clan Omnimech stock configurations, it is a very safe assumption that we can take TT armor values and double them to figure out a mech's armor distribution in MWO. Naturally, PGI can in fact change their stance on Omnimech customization at any time, so all of these assumptions are based on what we have currently been told.




EDIT: For funzies, here is a Hellbringer Prime record sheet: http://bte.battletec...te/pdf/4575.pdf
Here is an approximation of what its armor would be in MWO: Ghetto Hellbringer
34 CT armor...ouch.

Doubling the armor of IS mechs was a tacit admission by the developers that TT armor was inadequate for the decreased weapon recycle times, not to mention the fact that hits in MWO aren't decided by dice rolls. Even after that they essentially abandoned the idea of running the stock armor (as evidenced by the change in trial mechs) due to the same limitations, and the limitations of single heat sinks in this game.

It stands to reason that if they recognized the stock armor as inadequate with IS mechs they will recognize it as inadequate with clan mechs as well. We already know they are implementing clan mechs differently than IS, so drawing an armor comparison from IS mechs doesn't seem like it will tell us much. Sure, it's possible they just double the TT values, but given how they've all but abandoned the idea of the stock IS mechs it isn't at all a safe assumption that they will.

Customization of armor is possible with IS mechs, so having armor amounts that make the mech a non-starter out of the box is, for the most part, irrelevant. Armor and engine settings for clan mechs will have to be good to go out of the box since the user cannot alter them. I would say the safer assumption is that they will take steps to make the speed and protection of the clan mechs more along the lines of customized IS setups. Whether those steps happen, or will be considered adequate or not, remains to be seen.

All in all, assuming a certain implementation will be used is jumping to conclusions.

Edited by Voivode, 31 January 2014 - 10:52 AM.

[seija]

I pulled up the TRO 3050 and made this table (Sorry it looks cluttered, it doesnt like to keep the spacing.)
Armor Values TRO 3050
Tons Max Actual Name(In Game)
20 69 38 55% Fire Moth (N)
25 89 67 75% Myst Lynx (N)
30 105 76 72% Kit Fox (Y)
35 119 115 96% Adder (Y)
40 137 134 97% Viper (N)
45 153 144 94% Ice Ferret (N)
50 169 160 94% Nova (Y)
55 185 182 98% Stormcrow (Y)
60 201 163 81% Mad Dog (N)
65 211 128 60% Hellbringer (N)
70 217 182 83% Summoner (Y)
75 231 230 99% Timber Wolf (Y)
80 247 211 85% Gargoyle (N)
85 263 259 98% Warhawk (Y)
90 279
95 293 259 88% Executioner (N)
100 307 304 99% Dire Wolf (Y)

Of the currently advertised mechs only the Kit Fox and Summoner have less than 90% of their max Armor.

[FupDup]

Voivode, on 31 January 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:

Doubling the armor of IS mechs was a tacit admission by the developers that TT armor was inadequate for the decreased weapon recycle times, not to mention the fact that hits in MWO aren't decided by dice rolls. Even after that they essentially abandoned the idea of running the stock armor (as evidenced by the change in trial mechs) due to the same limitations, and the limitations of single heat sinks in this game.

It stands to reason that if they recognized the stock armor as inadequate with IS mechs they will recognize it as inadequate with clan mechs as well. We already know they are implementing clan mechs differently than IS, so drawing an armor comparison from IS mechs doesn't seem like it will tell us much. Sure, it's possible they just double the TT values, but given how they've all but abandoned the idea of the stock IS mechs it isn't at all a safe assumption that they will. The IS Champion mechs are just here to conceal the fact that stock builds are horrible in this game and to increase player retention (no cadet likes being in a slow, underarmored, underarmed walking target).

Customization of armor is possible with IS mechs, so having armor amounts that make the mech a non-starter out of the box is, for the most part, irrelevant. Armor and engine settings for clan mechs will have to be good to go out of the box since the user cannot alter them. I would say the safer assumption is that they will take steps to make the speed and protection of the clan mechs more along the of lines customized IS


All in all, assuming a certain implementation will be used is jumping to conclusions.

Assuming doubled armor is a very safe conclusion to make, and you seem to at least somewhat agree with that specific one (first paragraph, 1x TT armor was inadequate for IS mechs). The Hellbie in particular actually uses the same armor type as most IS mechs--Standard--instead of Clan Ferro Fibrous, so giving it more armor than just doubled TT would require PGI inventing a new and imaginary armor type for mechs like that. And if they did give Clan mechs super armor, then it would give them an unfair construction advantage over mechs that aren't blessed with super armor--they'd have similar durability as an IS mech, while still having all of the other benefits of Clan technology. If they upgraded Clan armor they'd have to downgrade something else to compensate.

It's also not a bad assumption that the "core" configs of Clan mechs would be their BT variations, because so far they've kept stock mechs in MWO identical in construction to the stock mechs from BT (except for doubled armor). It would contradict their previous handling of stock mechs in the game to give theme different engines/armor/whatever. The Champions are just here to increase player retention (newbies don't like being in a walking coffin) and disguise the fact that stock builds are horrible in this game.

For your third paragraph, I don't think previous design/balancing decisions indicate that the Clan armor/engines/etc. would have to be "good out of the box," in light of lacking customization. There are many mechs in MWO that are total {Scrap}, which have been poopy for a long time and will probably always be poopy. I don't think I have to list them all off, they're pretty well known and obvious. The devs don't seem to mind it. They simply are not very concerned about mechs being able to compete with one another. If they don't care about certain IS mechs being competitive, why would they suddenly decide to start caring about the Clanners?

seija, on 31 January 2014 - 10:56 AM, said:

I pulled up the TRO 3050 and made this table (Sorry it looks cluttered, it doesnt like to keep the spacing.)
Armor Values TRO 3050
Tons Max Actual Name(In Game)
20 69 38 55% Fire Moth (N)
25 89 67 75% Myst Lynx (N)
30 105 76 72% Kit Fox (Y)
35 119 115 96% Adder (Y)
40 137 134 97% Viper (N)
45 153 144 94% Ice Ferret (N)
50 169 160 94% Nova (Y)
55 185 182 98% Stormcrow (Y)
60 201 163 81% Mad Dog (N)
65 211 128 60% Hellbringer (N)
70 217 182 83% Summoner (Y)
75 231 230 99% Timber Wolf (Y)
80 247 211 85% Gargoyle (N)
85 263 259 98% Warhawk (Y)
90 279
95 293 259 88% Executioner (N)
100 307 304 99% Dire Wolf (Y)

Of the currently advertised mechs only the Kit Fox and Summoner have less than 90% of their max Armor.

Percentages don't tell the full story. The actual distribution of the armor points matters a lot, and on most of those mechs they carry redundantly large amounts of leg armor (i.e. Mad Cat and Daishi have maxed leg armor, which is not necessary for a heavy or assault mech in MWO). There are also issues of too much rear armor (i.e. my Victor carries about as much frontal CT armor as a stock Daishi).

Edited by FupDup, 31 January 2014 - 11:08 AM.

[Voivode]

FupDup, on 31 January 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

It's also not a bad assumption that the "core" configs of Clan mechs would be their BT variations, because so far they've kept stock mechs in MWO identical in construction to the stock mechs from BT (except for doubled armor). It would contradict their previous handling of stock mechs in the game to give theme different engines/armor/whatever. The Champions are just here to increase player retention (newbies don't like being in a walking coffin) and disguise the fact that stock builds are horrible in this game.

They altered the hardpoints on IS stock variants. Yes, they stuck to a theme (only adding hardpoints of the type already on it) but they did alter the setup. It wouldn't be hard to fudge a small detail like structure weight to come up with a half ton or ton for armor or engine rating on a clan mech.

FupDup, on 31 January 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

For your third paragraph, I don't think previous design/balancing decisions indicate that the Clan armor/engines/etc. would have to be "good out of the box," in light of lacking customization. There are many mechs in MWO that are total {Scrap}, which have been poopy for a long time and will probably always be poopy. I don't think I have to list them all off, they're pretty well known and obvious. The devs don't seem to mind it. They simply are not very concerned about mechs being able to compete with one another. If they don't care about certain IS mechs being competitive, why would they suddenly decide to start caring about the Clanners?

Which come back to my previous point, that some of them may be better than others and some may be better/worse than expected, but surely they will not all be DOA.

Shall we go through the logical circle again?

Edited by Voivode, 31 January 2014 - 11:16 AM.

[FupDup]

Voivode, on 31 January 2014 - 11:16 AM, said:

They altered the hardpoints on IS stock variants. Yes, they stuck to a theme (only adding hardpoints of the type already on it) but they did alter the setup. It wouldn't be hard to fudge a small detail like structure weight to come up with a half ton or ton for armor or engine rating on a clan mech.

Saying that they "altered" hardpoints is a bit misleading, because hardpoints are a concept that never existed in BT. You can't alter something that didn't exist. They are a system invented by Microsoft for MW4 and reused in this game (in a different form). Whatever the hardpoint layout is, so far they have been able to carry the stock loadout of the mech in question. The hardpoints are also based off of what the stock loadout carries; for example, there are no Awesome variants that carry ballistics here because none of the variants we have carried any ballistics stock.

Voivode, on 31 January 2014 - 11:16 AM, said:

Which come back to my previous point, that some of them may be better than others and some may be better/worse than expected, but surely they will not all be DOA.

Shall we go through the logical circle again?

I never said that they would all be DoA. I'm just saying that the current command chair information (http://mwomercs.com/...gn-perspective/) makes some certain configs really, really bad in MWO and very possibly DoA (Hellbringer being the reused example). IS mechs can circumvent the horribleness of stock loadouts via the mechlab, but Clan mechs are going to have most of their stock features locked down (except for weapons and other equipment) unless PGI changes their mind in the future. Only the ones that come stock with reasonably good armor and engine are going to stand a chance (such as the Ryoken) given the current information.

Edited by FupDup, 31 January 2014 - 11:25 AM.

[Karyudo ds]

Well it doesn't even seem to me that they've gotten to testing anything yet so I've guessing that changing their minds might happen down the road. Would be nice to have some flexibility with armor. Maybe not to the level the Sphere mechs have now but maybe something like a narrow min/max range.

Still oddly surprising how little thought has gone into this when they picked a classic time period for the Clan Invasion in the first place... so at the very least I expect they fix things if they come out borked. Eventually.

[Bounty Dogg]

Im wondering.......

What if PGI does not relent on the restriction of clan engines and armor being 'locked in', but instead relents on the armor value of a clan armor/FF armor point. What if, to keep it competitive, the armor value of IS vs. clan is adjusted so that IS values would be worth 1 pt, but clan values would be worth 1.5 or more per ton? That would give them half again the protection of a standard IS point, allowing them more protection for the same armor values, and still allow them to be locked into place, sticking closely to the rules set forth.

Its a devious move, and one I would wholeheartedly approve of!

[Chemie]

Bounty Dogg, on 31 January 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

Im wondering.......

What if PGI does not relent on the restriction of clan engines and armor being 'locked in', but instead relents on the armor value of a clan armor/FF armor point. What if, to keep it competitive, the armor value of IS vs. clan is adjusted so that IS values would be worth 1 pt, but clan values would be worth 1.5 or more per ton? That would give them half again the protection of a standard IS point, allowing them more protection for the same armor values, and still allow them to be locked into place, sticking closely to the rules set forth.

Its a devious move, and one I would wholeheartedly approve of!

The clan mechs with full armor would be OP. Balance is tgoing to be VERY hard despite what PGI has shared to date.

I think you will end up with a few clearly OP variants and several very useless DOA variants (kitfox as an example).

But those OP ones will become FOTM and until they are available for CB, will be P2W.

[Bounty Dogg]

Chemie, on 31 January 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

The clan mechs with full armor would be OP. Balance is tgoing to be VERY hard despite what PGI has shared to date.

I think you will end up with a few clearly OP variants and several very useless DOA variants (kitfox as an example).

But those OP ones will become FOTM and until they are available for CB, will be P2W.

I didn't mean flesh them out from their current values to 100% armor, I meant that for every 1 point of protection that is provided by 1 ton of IS armor, Clan armor would provide 1.5 points of protection for that 1 ton. Meaning, that Clan armor would count for half again MORE protection per ton than IS mechs. Now, I think I like the armor locking in place stance they are currently taking, but I admit it baffled me that the armor profiles of some of the clan mechs could possibly be thought to stand up in TODAY'S MWO game, until this idea came to me. This would allow them to keep closely to the armor point rules they have set up, but would also allow them to adjust the 'toughness' of clan mechs to make them a better threat than they would otherwise be in the MWO universe under the current stance.

Of course, the 1.5 number is just an example and could be adjusted down if proven too effective/adjusted up if proven not effective enough, but it would allow them to MAKE the adjustments without having to jerk around with the armor points themselves.

*edited cus I hit the quote button too many times lol.

Edited by Bounty Dogg, 31 January 2014 - 03:06 PM.

[FupDup]

Bounty Dogg, on 31 January 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

Im wondering.......

What if PGI does not relent on the restriction of clan engines and armor being 'locked in', but instead relents on the armor value of a clan armor/FF armor point. What if, to keep it competitive, the armor value of IS vs. clan is adjusted so that IS values would be worth 1 pt, but clan values would be worth 1.5 or more per ton? That would give them half again the protection of a standard IS point, allowing them more protection for the same armor values, and still allow them to be locked into place, sticking closely to the rules set forth.

Its a devious move, and one I would wholeheartedly approve of!

That would definitely be a nice deviation for certain Clan mechs that come with too few stock armor points (cough cough Uller cough cough), but this can cause problems for the chassis that already come with max armor. In the invasion package lineup, this includes the Daishi, Mad Cat, and Ryoken. The Masakari isn't maxed out, but is fairly well protected already.