(By the way, keep banging that armor mechanic change drum. It'd be infinite types of fantastic if they actually implemented it!)
Many do agree, and I'll keep at it.
Worse comes to worse it'll be used in my first game, whether Battletech inspired but using original works (like Supreme Commander and Plantary Annihilation were inspired -- though intended to be direct sequels but couldn't get the rights to -- Total Annihilation) or of the other IP (Front Mission) that's being retired that I'm really interested in where most of the same mechanics can work.
Holy crap, a fully armored HBK-4G would have 468 points of armor! That's 130 points more than it's current max. This means that if we were to distribute those points equally across the mech we could put about 66 points of armor on the side torsos. That is a significant gain.
In the words of the internet: WHY ARE WE NOT FUNDING THIS!?!?
Koniving, does your idea go as far as to allow for more variable armor distribution as well? What I mean is, are there hard capped limits on sections like the current system?
I have to say it is pretty slick looking. Remember it was created by the Capellan Confederation, if I read correctly, and they are mineral, resource, and financially poor so it looks like it was built on a low budget. It looks accurate to the Battletech universe. I pkayed with it in smurfy and the builds look pretty good for a 45 tonner.
The only thing that would make it even more awesome is if you get a kill the police lights and siren activate and a PA announcement saying, "Officer involved shooting! or "Suspect down!". How about both?! Make it happen!!!!!!!!!!
Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time
Posted 20 August 2014 - 08:13 AM
IceCase88, on 20 August 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:
The only thing that would make it even more awesome is if you get a kill the police lights and siren activate and a PA announcement saying, "Officer involved shooting! or "Suspect down!". How about both?! Make it happen!!!!!!!!!!
trying real hard not to make a Fergusson comment here.
Bishop Steiner, on 20 August 2014 - 05:38 AM, said:
3rdworld, on 20 August 2014 - 06:23 AM, said:
Guys... I hear you and I truly do understand your points.
That said, your logic leads to a pigeon-holed meta where all mech reside withing a predefined class of mechs to net acceptable armor values, speed / maneuverability, load-out / slot assignment, predefined acceptable hit-boxes and scale values.
If that's not beige-box cookie cutter I don't know what is... You essentially wind up with roughly the exact same mech except for cosmetics.
I know I'm an odd bird... I run counter-meta mechs and I do very well with them (all hold positive W/L & K/D). I know and accept that I have to work twice as hard to obtain this, but for me that's part of the attraction... I don't want "easy mode".
That said, absolutely... these "marginal mechs" are not as pervasive on the battlescape and the higher scored meta mechs. The forwarded premise that this is the case is because PGI has yet given us a greater goal than "kill or be killed" and as most tend to agree...(unless you screwed in the head like me) You take a gun to a gun fight not a knife.
Faced at least one S.I.B. in every match last night and was overall impressed with the mech as an observer.
- It was quick, noticeably quicker than you usually see IS mediums moving around (no matter what folks say about being able to fit 300+ engines in the 55toners, they usually don't because they end up with no firepower).
-The jjs seemed effective both in height and speeds achieved.
-The firepower was as you'd expect from a mech with lackluster hard points (but i saw a few folks doing quite well with 3xerLL builds or 2xERPPCs or 2xLRM10s + 3xMLs, etc).
-The durability was equal to that of a well built BJ or GRF. Not stellar, but not weak either. The VND may lose arms easily, but to knock out the torsos and get the kill, one must work for it. I went 1-on-1 while in my SCR (2xCLPL + 5xCERSMLs w/ lvl 2 mod) and it wasn't "easy" to get the kill. Absolutely i had the upper hand and better mech from the start, but even so the VND pilot was able to spread a lot more damage than i expected and nearly took out my RT.
My only complaint from observing them is the height. As is true for nearly all mediums, it is too tall. Why PGI can't get the scaling right is beyond me. Can it be so hard?
Holy crap, a fully armored HBK-4G would have 468 points of armor! That's 130 points more than it's current max. This means that if we were to distribute those points equally across the mech we could put about 66 points of armor on the side torsos. That is a significant gain.
In the words of the internet: WHY ARE WE NOT FUNDING THIS!?!?
Koniving, does your idea go as far as to allow for more variable armor distribution as well? What I mean is, are there hard capped limits on sections like the current system?
That'd be entirely based on how PGI would do it if they used it. It's likely a set increase to all sections. If I were doing it and I'll actually figure it out below as I write (I kid you not as this wasn't something I thought about knowing PGI would do its own thing)... I would use a hardcap of how much and where, but allow that hardcap to vary from chassis to chassis (not variant to variant though unless really warranted).
Spoilered. For...lots of reasons.
Armor allocation, lots of stuffs.
Spoiler
The were very careful reasons for choosing a hard tonnage rather than a percentage. One of them is a hard tonnage does exactly 16 to 18 points per ton. Even, clean. (Also ferro armor is the same for both sides, so why does PGI have it as 12% more for IS and 20% more for Clan? What is wrong with them? They can't seem to understand how a player can have 54.8 tons left over but fits a 0.25 ton machine gun on it (making it 55.05 tons) yet they do stupid stuff like make up their own rules for ferro? Rules that hurt its usefulness for the IS and enhances it for the Clan?)
Take a Centurion. Its current max is 1 ton of armor on the arm. 1.5 tons on the legs. 1.5 tons on the side torsos. 2 tons on the CT and a very odd number (1.125 tons) on the head.
Lets say you add 3 tons to it. Assume standard armor.
That's 12 points to each section (all 8).
Lets exclude the head to make headshots still mean something.
13.714....now this just screwed things up.
So lets try 12 points to each leg, each arm, 12 + 4 to the center torso, 12 + 2 to each side torso, and 4 to the head.
That's 96. All 3 tons consumed.
That'd be 60 per leg, 44 per arm, 80 for the CT, 62 per side torso, 22 for the head (now we can remove the structure = half armor + 6 to account for the 15 structure in the head to prevent 1 shot headshots with Gauss Rifles). This example just shows what it would be if done to a current 50 ton max.
One sec.
On a Centurion A the results would be...
32 + 12 per arm = 44.
32 + 12 per leg = 44.
50 + 16 CT = 66.
18 + 4 head = 22.
38 + 14 per ST = 52.
So it's not super overpowered.
Now on a Hunchback.. it'd be... (This is also true of the C1 catapult, the 3M Griffin, and any 320 stock armored mech in MWO)
32 + 12 per arm = 44.
40 + 12 per leg = 52.
62 + 16 CT = 66.
18 + 4 head = 22.
48 + 14 per ST = 62.
Obviously, a Hunchback is simply more armored.
But of the 50 ton mechs, the Centurion AL (most unloved, needs love anyway) is the most armored 50 ton mech in Battletech and in existence at 338 + 0.43 tons (it's giving 10.5625 tons, but is listed as 11 tons so the stock armor would be 352 with 11 tons).. It's a goddamn tank!
Fun fact: Shadowhawk's typically high armored variants are equal to a Centurion A.
Shadowhawk's most advanced variant, the 5M, is 336 points of armor at 10.5 tons of armor stock.
The Shadowhawk is also listed as a Recon Spotter and Fire Support mech, not a brawler.
The Wolverine however, is listed as a brawler, charger, and all out goddamn lunatic on the battlefield as well as a medium-class Command mech.
<.<; Dun, dun, dun. Btw. Wolverines in tabletop are awesome at beating the living **** out of Atlases and Clan mediums with its fists, and has more than enough armor to survive getting close. The Ballistic Wolverine is the worst in armor (but in MWO would be the most powerful and highest endurance). The other Wolverines are 368 stock (464 std after) and the 7k can't hold its stock armor tonnage at the moment. Rawr.
Anyway, armor distribution if ferro... That's 108 max.
So.. The first thing to remember is that the points per limb automatically change at stock builds. If it's 32, it becomes 36. If it's 48 it becomes 54.
Spoilered because I confused myself and went into a circle as I went about figuring it out. Also thinking music included.
Spoiler
So lets take the total armor in a part of a Centurion A, side torso. 38 / 32 * 36 = 42.75. This is gonna take a bit of thought.
Mkay.. Hm.
(Thinking music)
Section must equal 0.5 or 1 ton intervals as a max.
Wait, approaching it from the wrong side.
108 divided by 8 = 13.5 points.
So again we'll have to split the head.
Lets assume 4 points for the head again (don't want a super cockpit).
108 - 96 = 12 extra points to work with.
Mkay!
More thinking music.
14 per arm
14 per leg
15 per ST
18 CT
4 head.
= 108.
There we go.
Depending on what PGI (or for my own thingy what I'd feel like doing) is alter just where some of the additional points could go based on the geometry of the mech. Say the Awesome's arms are particularly large, so some of the extra armor might go there.
Just to note: It benefits the armored mechs, it can and does benefit some of the lower armored mechs but certain "blatantly superior" mechs in MWO will actually be hurt by this and put back into their canon place in lore. The goal of it is actually to allow you to have a max armor but keep the ratio in armor between every single mech variant identical to the stock ratios between all mechs. If this mech has 5 tons more armor than that mech, regardless of weight class, it will be allowed 5 tons more armor at max. So the Dragons will have brawling armor that, for some, rival or surpass every single one of the Victors in armor. Certain Thunderbolts, Cataphracts, etc. will have more armor than the most armored Stalkers. Meanwhile the faster Battlemasters won't have quite as much armor. And an Atlas at 608 with standard armor will be 704, but if it chose to sacrifice firepower with ferro armor it could reach 792.
Now, all Clan mechs already have ferro, they have their current stocks in ferro.
Spoiler
PGI gave the Kitfox 152 stock armor. Because I trust how PGI did ferro like I trust a blind and deaf dog not to walk into traffic...
Battletech has the Uller (Kitfox) at 76 armor * 2 = 152 (except the tonnage consumption is even rather than 0.04 tons free). Now, 152 ferro is + 3 tons ferro.. Suddenly I see the reasoning behind PGI's madness. (It's not obvious on the ones I checked).
---
Mk the armor intervals for Clans is 0.5 = 9, 1.0 = 19, 1.5 = 28, 2.0 = 38... So 9.5 points per ton? My rate for 1 ton and 2 tons is correct. Back to the IS... Yeah it's consistent. Okay so I never noticed the .5 ton inconsistency before. Keeping it at 9 * 2 = 18 per ton then, otherwise ferro might get OP.
---
Back on track. 152 is about 4.22 to 4.25 tons. Wouldn't have to toy with this if PGI could make good hitboxes... Anyway.
152 + 108 = 260 new armor Kitfox (210 is the current max).
For comparison, another 30 ton Clan mech..
Hellion. 5.5 tons of armor. Stock is at the max 105 armor (so 210 in MWO). + 108 = 318.
That's future tech though.
Incubus is a standard Clan battlemech (not an omnimech) at 30 tons. XL 270 (that's faster than a Spider), 210 armor (so 318), changeable engine, changeable structure (but already has its best), and it's...nasty. Hardpoints kinda blow but hey, regular mech can't change hardpoints.
Hm. Here we go, there is one more Clan Omni at 30 tons..
76... Okay the Arctic Cheetah will be identical to the Kit Fox in armor.
-----------
For fun, Clan 65 tonners (I know we don't have any yet).
Ebon Jager (Cauldron Born)
182 * 2 = 364 = 472. (Compare to Thunderbolt 5S, one of the weakest Thunderbolts in armor... 416 + 96 = 512 standard, but that Cauldron Born has ferro, so compare ferro, 576.)
Hellbringer
128 * 2 = 256 + 96 (standard) = 352. (It has endo steel).
Linebacker
192*2 = 384 + 108 (ferro) = 492.
Anyway there is an important thing to note:
It's awesome for some mechs that are truly suffering as they get outclassed by...everything. It also hurts some mechs back to where they belong (and is meant to work in conjunction with an engine overhaul; for example Locusts, Spiders and Cicadas have identical speeds and thus should have identical speed caps, but Cicadas are slower than dog-poo, the speed would fix that nerf in armor here).
Just because some Locusts, the Jenner D, some Commandos, and some Cicadas have identical stock armor values doesn't mean they are screwed.
Locust structure is 75.
Commando Structure is 95.
(It had me curious. Kitfox / Spider / Urbanmech structure is 110).
Jenner structure is 125.
Cicada structure is 143. (So even with identical armor, it'll still take more of a beating than anything smaller).
Vindicator / Blackjack structure is 159.
To find out structure, take the current max armor (not the new from my concept) and divide by 2 then add 6 (for the 15 structure in the head instead of 9).
For example, the Jagermech (and all 65 ton mechs) have 217 structure in addition to their armor. So the lowest armored Jagermech has more structure than armor stock, and after the change and thrown in Ferro armor, it'd have 217 structure + a maximum of 324 ferro armor = 541 total health (armor + structure). So while nerfed it might be to the brawling b.s. it is now, it isn't the end of the world and the mech is certainly far from dead. You're just not going on the front line. Interestingly enough -- because you're not trying to cram so much tonnage into armor, you now have a lot more tonnage free to run your favorite build with a standard engine in a ballistic Jagermech... (le gasp). (A good brawling Jager would be the Jm6-A, highest amount of armor possible on a Jagermech.)
Non-canon heroes would need obvious reworking and is probably the reasoning PGI will never support the armor concept. (Lots of angry Dragon Slayer owners; but all the Victor nerfs could be removed as a positive result; they won't be necessary anymore).
Supreme commander is a sweeeeet game and I loved TA. Kon good games. Sins of a SOLAR empire is supreme commander in space or like conquest from earlier. Kol battleships with railguns oh yeah!
Bishop Steiner, on 20 August 2014 - 06:14 AM, said:
and a lot harder to flank, and a huge Field of fire advantage to the LRMS. And yeah, not as great as pre nerf, but 7jj smokes 3 for terrain traversing, poptarting, etc.
Of course, uber high should ballistic trumps a lot of crap, too. But between the twist and JJs, I can do some serios shooting gymnastics in my Griffin.
Regardless, the point was the GRF is still inferior, but is still useful, hence why you still see a fair number fielded, while comparatively few Wolverines, Trebbies, etc.
The GRF-3M is a beast and in terms of brawling I think its better than the shadowhawks though the shadowhawk is much better for sniping. I think srms > Ac20 right now.
Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time
Posted 20 August 2014 - 09:37 AM
DaZur, on 20 August 2014 - 08:23 AM, said:
[/size]
[/size]
[/size]
Guys... I hear you and I truly do understand your points.
That said, your logic leads to a pigeon-holed meta where all mech reside withing a predefined class of mechs to net acceptable armor values, speed / maneuverability, load-out / slot assignment, predefined acceptable hit-boxes and scale values.
If that's not beige-box cookie cutter I don't know what is... You essentially wind up with roughly the exact same mech except for cosmetics.
I know I'm an odd bird... I run counter-meta mechs and I do very well with them (all hold positive W/L & K/D). I know and accept that I have to work twice as hard to obtain this, but for me that's part of the attraction... I don't want "easy mode".
That said, absolutely... these "marginal mechs" are not as pervasive on the battlescape and the higher scored meta mechs. The forwarded premise that this is the case is because PGI has yet given us a greater goal than "kill or be killed" and as most tend to agree...(unless you screwed in the head like me) You take a gun to a gun fight not a knife.
But, you don't.
You have multiple aspects to work from. The Dire Wolf, for instance, has the firepower of a moonbase. And the mobility of one. Check and balance. My La Malinche, has the firepower of a well... good Medium, mediocre Heavy. But do to it's mobility and arms, and hitboxes, I can often 1v1 the DireWolf in it....provided I can get close. They play TOTALLY different, yet there is some parity there.
Have mechs that are blatantly ABOVE that parity, like the Timberwolf, or Below, like the Pretty Baby, the Locust, the St Ives Blues, HURTS game play and diversity far more.
They by no means have to be fit into some cookie cutter box, but they bloody well have to stand a chance.
If those were good for the game, and fun, dontcha think we'd see a few more Dragons, Awesomes, Trebbies and TBolts and other weak sister mechs?
Edited by Bishop Steiner, 20 August 2014 - 09:46 AM.
Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time
Posted 20 August 2014 - 09:44 AM
Blacksoul1987, on 20 August 2014 - 09:16 AM, said:
The GRF-3M is a beast and in terms of brawling I think its better than the shadowhawks though the shadowhawk is much better for sniping. I think srms > Ac20 right now.
still kill SRM Grf a lot from my Shad or my other GRF models, TBH, but it's possible that since I drive them so much, I just know how to fight them better than the average pilot I encounter knows how to use them. I dislike the limited scope for SRM GRFs though, as outside 270, they are mostly useless.
I do have to ask Does PGI have ANY actual methodology when it comes to figuring a mech size?
like did they bother to use any math to figure out require volume to get the required tonnage for each mech, then ensure their design would at least be CLOSE to that? or do they just "eyeball" everything and guess?
6
Logan Hawke, on 20 August 2014 - 06:46 AM, said:
