4349 replies to this topic

[verybad]

The Urbie could work with the meta as well, it's kind of designed to be a poptart, hoppie ho, hoppie ho.

Would it be a good mech? No, but in the right hands it could be effective, and would be fun.

[Grimmrog]

Well to be competitive we would need 2 things,

A extra perk givng the urban mech +X% torso twist speed. Urban mech has a low engine rating which unfortunately also affect the Torso turn rate.

Crash damage, The Urban mech was designed to be slow, since speed isn't usefull in Urban environment. If your raven would 120kph into a wall, you would b seriously in trouble. Here in MWO that doesn't matters. So the advantage of the urban mech to not have a big engine using on slow speeds is entirely gone.

[KuroNyra]

between a Dire Wolf or a Urbie, I would definitly choose the urbie.
True warrior's like challenge!

[Smedlee]

Make them walk like Ompa-Lumpas from Willie Wonka's factory. Ompa lumpa, doopity doo. I have another laser for you.

[Uncle Totty]

KuroNyra, on 26 May 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

between a Dire Wolf or a Urbie, I would definitly choose the urbie.
True warrior's like challenge!

If you want a challenge, look at the new Dire Wolf. (No, really. Just try looking at the new Dire Wolf.)

[Cimarb]

Nathan K, on 26 May 2014 - 04:31 PM, said:

If you want a challenge, look at the new Dire Wolf. (No, really. Just try looking at the new Dire Wolf.)

I don't get the joke - where did you see the in-game Dire Wolf?...

[Uncle Totty]

Cimarb, on 26 May 2014 - 04:42 PM, said:

I don't get the joke - where did you see the in-game Dire Wolf?...

Here...

http://mwomercs.com/...ed-by-accident/

[Cimarb]

Nathan K, on 26 May 2014 - 04:45 PM, said:

Here...

http://mwomercs.com/...ed-by-accident/

Interesting. Thanks for the link. It looks stretched to me, so I'll wait for the official announcement before getting too irate about it.

I'd still take it over an Urbie, lol.

[Wintersdark]

blackicmenace, on 04 April 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

His point is just as idiotic as anyone dumb enough to step onto the field in that trash can. There would be no challenge in destroying you instantly. Might as well have 1 less person in the company. ANY other mech would be more desirable and worthy, wasting time on Battletech's trashcan would be a slap in the face when so many better options exist. Handicapping your team because you think its a challenge is a fools errand, there is no challenge destroying the slowest mech in the game that also has light mech armor. Anyone that says they want that are obviously trolls.

What? It's a 30 ton light. Nobody would (* well, other than people running troll builds and the odd teehee on Stock Mech Monday) run it with it's stock config.

MWO mechs, remember, are basically bags of hardpoints. The Urbanmech stock sucked monkeyballs, but in MWO it's what you build it to be.

How a mech performed in Battletech has pretty much nothing to do with how it will perform in MWO.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Wintersdark, on 26 May 2014 - 07:46 PM, said:

How a mech performed in Battletech has pretty much nothing to do with how it will perform in MWO.

And if you kept it to the (yknow) urban environments - the Urbie did pretty well in TT.

[Edustaja]

Build one from a spider and see how well you do. Even with the minimum engine you're faster twice as fast as the urbanmech is supposed to be.

Edited by Edustaja, 26 May 2014 - 08:01 PM.

[Koniving]

Edustaja, on 26 May 2014 - 07:55 PM, said:

Build one from a spider and see how well you do. Even with the minimum engine you're faster twice as fast as the urbanmech is supposed to be.

All the more reason this game needs per variant/chassis armor limits.

Urban mechs have 6 tons of armor. That's 192 points in MWO.
The Spider only has 112 (3.5 tons).
What if that difference of 2.5 tons in armor 'stayed' even at their new maxes?

Lets say they both could get 3 tons more.
Spider gets 208 points as its new max.
Urban mech gets 288 points as its new max.

Spread this to all mechs and some interesting things happen. For example the Awesome being over 100 points higher in armor than most Victors. Thunderbolts and the Dragon 1-C being only half a ton in armor short of the most armored Stalker (which they already were stock). Hunchbacks being immensely better in armor than all but 1 Shadowhawk (and that's out of 5 variants!)

Its just one more place to look for balancing and its completely untapped.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Koniving, on 26 May 2014 - 08:14 PM, said:

Its just one more place to look for balancing and its completely untapped.

Soon^tm I would assume (dangerous as that is)

Probably when they start to run out of other mechs to add to the game -and are looking for ways to justify adding more to the Pokedex errr...I mean mechlabs.

[Cimarb]

Koniving, on 26 May 2014 - 08:14 PM, said:

All the more reason this game needs per variant/chassis armor limits.

Urban mechs have 6 tons of armor. That's 192 points in MWO.
The Spider only has 112 (3.5 tons).
What if that difference of 2.5 tons in armor 'stayed' even at their new maxes?

Lets say they both could get 3 tons more.
Spider gets 208 points as its new max.
Urban mech gets 288 points as its new max.

Spread this to all mechs and some interesting things happen. For example the Awesome being over 100 points higher in armor than most Victors. Thunderbolts and the Dragon 1-C being only half a ton in armor short of the most armored Stalker (which they already were stock). Hunchbacks being immensely better in armor than all but 1 Shadowhawk (and that's out of 5 variants!)

Its just one more place to look for balancing and its completely untapped.

I can't remember exactly where it was stated, and I'm not about to fool with the horrible search tool in this forum right now, but PGI stated that they were planning on implementing quirks such as "tough armor" (paraphrased) that would make certain mechs tougher than other variants, and I'm pretty sure the Awesome was even used as an example.

[Koniving]

Cimarb, on 26 May 2014 - 08:19 PM, said:

implementing quirks such as "tough armor"

That's neat, but I get the feeling it'll have some loop holes. I'd like to simply have different armor limits; I know PGI can't mess that up...
I hope...
....maybe...
...possibly...

Edited by Koniving, 27 May 2014 - 09:31 AM.

[Koniving]

Thinking about it further, that's an awful idea.

Here's why...

The Problem with a tough / weak armor quirk that PGI is thinking about...

Spoiler

Take the Jagermech.
Of the 422 max, the average use is an even tonnage of 13 tons for 416 points of armor (the stock of a certain Thunderbolt and would-be stock Dragon 1C if not for the armor limit being lower than its tonnage).

That said, consider this.
Jagermechs are, by lore, supposed to have paper thin armor. PGI slaps on the "weak armor quirk."
So you still get up to 422, people still slap on 13 tons of armor for 416 points...

...and it's worth 20% less or something? So you get 332.8 points of armor 'worth' out of 13 tons.

Instead! Armor Concept!

Spoiler

The armor concept I've been spreading around is we take your stock tonnage and add 3 tons to say that's the new max.
So lets take the lowest armored Jagermech and the highest armored Jagermechs (not counting heroes as they need re balancing; Firebrand used to start with ferro and 192 points of armor and got changed to endo steel later and far too much armor for a Jagermech).

Lowest Jagermech.
6 tons at 192 points of armor (same as an Urbanmech so if you follow this, you can find out how much armor the Urbie will have [which will be more than the current 30 ton max]!). Just to mention it, 192 points of armor is exactly what the 4 UAC/5 build requires and that works really damn good when it doesn't jam.
+ 3 tons (at 32 points per ton) = 9 tons at 288. Okay, so it doesn't sound that great. But it's better than what you had and it's only taking 9 tons, which means more tonnage for other things!

But what if you added Ferro? Remember the rule is tonnage, not points! So it's possible now to get more armor with Ferro than without, it's not limited to only weight saving anymore!

9 tons of Ferro (at the rounded even number of 36) = 324 points of armor for only 9 tons and 14 slots. Now that's the weakest Jagermech in armor. That puts it at 4 points above the stock Hunchback.

So what about the highest?
The Jagermech A is completely unloved by most players.
It features 8 tons of standard armor at 256 points.
+ 3 tons is 11 tons at 352 points of armor.
Switch to ferro and... 11 tons at 36 points per ton is 396 points of armor. The lamest Jagermech is now brawl-capable. So those SRM lovers can use this Jagermech for that. Or they could pack on twin AC/20s with those easy to destroy arms if they want.

We heard about the Jagermech S which'll carry the most ammunition and the Jagermech that's gonna load on the speed or the missile ammo.
But wait! What about the most powerful middle ground Jagermech?
Well when we look at the Stock DD... we see that Ferro is already isntalled.
Lets correct its armor. 232 points is 6.444444444444444, correct to 6.5 tons and we even it out without any problems caused to the stock loadout. At 6.5 tons it gets 234 points of armor.

Now corrected, lets find out standard before we move on. 6.5 tons = 208 (Shadowhawk 2D2, Raven 2X, Huginn without ferro) for standard armor.

Now add 3 tons to make the new max (the reason we're using '3 tons' on all mechs is we're taking 'stock' and enhancing by 3 tons. Nothing more, nothing less. It is stock but enhanced).
9.5 tons at standard is 304 points.
9.5 tons at ferro is 342 points.

Armor Concept Example Summary: (TL;DR. Explanation in English and less math.)

Spoiler

We took all stock mech armor tonnage and increased it by 3 tons.

So, Jager S weakest armor at 9 tons of armor max, 288 max std, 324 max ferro (Urbie armor values with this concept!) You'll want to keep this at longer ranges and use the free tonnage for ammunition or speed to relocate quickly. Akin to lore, you are fire support with paper armor for a mech your size. Funny enough the Urbie, much smaller, will have identical armor and feel like a tank. If you're really good you'll make a good backlinesman here.

Jagermech A, strongest armor at 11 tons. 352 std max, 396 ferro max. While completely non-meta before, this has become the Jagermech to go to for that kind of ballistic and missile brawler. At the same time though, Catapults are universally better armored (but no catapult currently features both ballistics and missiles).

Jagermech DD, middle ground at 9.5 tons max armor. 304 std max, 342 ferro max. This meta mech can have a little more armor than the S, but typically has more weapons so it will have to choose slightly between armor, weapons, and ammunition. Unlike the S, the DD is almost completely ammunition dependant and even its lightest fallback weapons weigh more than the S's typical fallback weapons.

Or with what PGI talked about, you can slap on 13 tons of armor with a tough/weak armor design quirk and get maybe 332.8 points (instead of 416 points as you would with 13 tons) worth out of it with no idea as to whether or not it'll be worth anything.

I am kinda partial to my idea, because I know exactly how much armor I could get and even better, for 14 slots and the switch to Ferro I can improve it slightly [but I have to keep to my allowed weight]. That extra weight I can put into other things, like more long range weapons or more ammunition or a bigger engine to make up for my reduced armor.

Adding 3 tons to all mechs benefits most of them. Why were Jagermechs impacted negatively? Are they still viable?

Spoiler

Before we begin, this is an excerpt from here.

Quote

While it does address the Rifleman's heat issues and limited ammunition, it does so at the cost of significant armor protection. Carrying only a miserly six tons of standard armor, the JagerMech is very vulnerable to return fire. In its favor, the long range of its autocannons, combined with the excellent Garret D2j targeting and tracking system (made famous by the Rifleman), make it a prime choice for anti-aircraft work. The range of its autocannons also allow it to engage many enemies without suffering return fire.

So basically anti-air mech. Paper thin armor. Fire support. The definition of a glass cannon.

This example focused on Jagermechs, most powerful and deadly mechs in the game and this universal buff to stock, lowered them from what they are in MWO, which in turn discourages them from unlorefriendly brawling (without taking it away from them entirely) encourages them to play to role warfare. Specifically the role of support as exampled here.



In MWO these are still the most powerful, coldest and deadliest mechs to exist in the entire game. They just became a little easier to kill to match the lore. This video, pure stock against non-stock, proves that the mech can in fact survive at lower armor levels than listed here, even in close quarters and using single heatsinks. The skill quotient for using the mech simply increased. (Yes, I performed awful but this was doing the 6 PPC days and c'mon, standard heatsinks and worthless LRMs). This was 254 points of armor very poorly spread.


For a more extreme example, here's what a player can do with 126 points of armor (less than a Locust) on a target as big as a Catapult. So if you allocate your armor well, you can do amazing stuff!

This example was using one of the meta mechs that are impacted negatively by the armor concept to bring it in line with the lore found here.
Since the trait is applied equally to every single mech, positive and negative impacts are at the fault of the mech's intentional design fallacies as originally intended by Battletech, and not as a result of any intentional buffing or nerfing.

The results of the armor concept are literally "Stock but enhanced," nothing more, nothing less.
Some mechs benefit, some mechs suffer, and in almost every case, its the meta mechs that suffer armor losses.

Edited by Koniving, 27 May 2014 - 10:26 AM.

[Heffay]

The Urbanmech is coming...

[Alex Warden]

you guys really necroed this one? ....

Edited by Alex Warden, 27 May 2014 - 09:58 AM.

[Dawnstealer]

Heffay, on 27 May 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

The Urbanmech is coming...

I'll get some paper towels.

[Odanan]

Koniving, on 27 May 2014 - 09:31 AM, said:

Thinking about it further, that's an awful idea.

Here's why...

The Problem with a tough / weak armor quirk...

Spoiler

Take the Jagermech.
Of the 422 max, the average use is an even tonnage of 13 tons for 416 points of armor (the stock of a certain Thunderbolt and would-be stock Dragon 1C if not for the armor limit being lower than its tonnage).

That said, consider this.
Jagermechs are, by lore, supposed to have paper thin armor. PGI slaps on the "weak armor quirk."
So you still get up to 422, people still slap on 13 tons of armor for 416 points...

...and it's worth 20% less or something? So you get 332.8 points of armor 'worth' out of 13 tons.

Instead! Armor Concept!

Spoiler

The armor concept I've been spreading around is is take your stock tonnage and add 3 tons.
So lets take the Lowest Jagermech and the Highest armored Jagermechs (not counting heroes as they need re balancing; Firebrand used to start with ferro and 192 points of armor and got changed to endo steel later).

Lowest Jagermech.
6 tons at 192 points of armor (same as an Urbanmech so if you follow this, you can find out how much armor the Urbie will have [which will be more than the current 30 ton max]!).
+ 3 tons (at 32 points per ton) = 9 tons at 288. Okay, so it doesn't sound that great. But it's better than what you had. And it's only taking 9 tons.
But what if you added Ferro? Remember the rule is tonnage, not points!
9 tons of Ferro (at the rounded even number of 36) = 324 points of armor for only 9 tons and 12 slots. Now that's the weakest Jagermech in armor. That puts it at 4 points above the stock Hunchback.

So what about the highest?
The Jagermech A is completely unloved by most players.
It features 8 tons of standard armor at 256 points.
+ 3 tons is 11 tons at 352 points of armor.
Switch to ferro and... 11 tons at 36 points per ton is 396 points of armor. The lamest Jagermech is now brawl-capable. So those SRM lovers can use this Jagermech for that. Or they could pack on twin AC/20s with those easy to destroy arms if they want.

We heard about the Jagermech S which'll carry the most ammunition and the Jagermech that's gonna load on the speed or the missile ammo.
But wait! What about the most powerful middle ground Jagermech?
Well when we look at the Stock DD... we see that Ferro is already isntalled.
Lets correct its armor. 232 points is 6.444444444444444, correct to 6.5 tons and we even it out without any problems caused to the stock loadout. At 6.5 tons it gets 234 points of armor.

Now corrected, lets find out standard before we move on. 6.5 tons = 208 (Shadowhawk 2D2, Raven 2X, Huginn without ferro) for standard armor.

Now add 3 tons to make the new max (the reason we're using '3 tons' on all mechs is we're taking 'stock' and enhancing by 3 tons. Nothing more, nothing less. It is stock but enhanced).
9.5 tons at standard is 304 points.
9.5 tons at ferro is 342 points.

Armor Concept Example Summary: (TL;DR)

Spoiler

We took all stock mech armor tonnage and increased it by 3 tons.

So, Jager S weakest armor at 9 tons of armor max, 288 max std, 324 max ferro (Urbie armor values with this concept!) You'll want to keep this at longer ranges and use the free tonnage for ammunition or speed to relocate quickly. Akin to lore, you are fire support with paper armor for a mech your size. Funny enough the Urbie, much smaller, will have identical armor and feel like a tank. If you're really good you'll make a good backlinesman here.

Jagermech A, strongest armor at 11 tons. 352 std max, 396 ferro max. While completely non-meta before, this has become the Jagermech to go to for that kind of ballistic and missile brawler.

Jagermech DD, middle ground at 9.5 tons max armor. 304 std max, 342 ferro max. This meta mech can have a little more armor than the S, but typically has more weapons so it will have to choose slightly between armor, weapons, and ammunition. Unlike the S, the DD is almost completely ammunition dependant and even its lightest fallback weapons weigh more than the S's typical fallback weapons.

Or with what PGI talked about, you can slap on 13 tons of armor with a tough/weak armor design quirk and get maybe 332.8 points (instead of 416 points as you would with 13 tons) worth out of it with no idea as to whether or not it'll be worth anything.

I am kinda partial to my idea, because I know exactly how much armor I could get and even better, for 14 slots and the switch to Ferro I can improve it slightly [but I have to keep to my allowed weight]. That extra weight I can put into other things, like more long range weapons or more ammunition or a bigger engine to make up for my reduced armor.

This example was using one of the meta mechs that are impacted negatively by the armor concept to bring it in line with the lore found here.
Since the trait is applied equally to every single mech, positive and negative impacts are at the fault of the mech's intentional design fallacies as originally intended by Battletech, and not as a result of any intentional buffing or nerfing.

The results of the armor concept are literally "Stock but enhanced," nothing more, nothing less.
Some mechs benefit, some mechs suffer, and in almost every case, its the meta mechs that suffer armor losses.

Interesting... I agree mechs should have an armor limitation based on the stock armor, like is done with the engine limits.

That would make mechs like the Awesome (which has excellent stock armor) more appealing AND would finally give an utility to the Ferro Fibrous.

(sure, other balancing would be necessary, like de-nerfing the Autocannons a bit - to help the weak armored mechs like the JagerMech, Victor and the Banshee)

Edited by Odanan, 27 May 2014 - 10:08 AM.