16 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

Topic Poll for the XL Engine Balance Idea,
(Xl Engine Balance Idea! With Russ's Twitter Response!)

Andi Nagasia, on 18 September 2015 - 04:09 PM, said:

This Idea is Very Simple,

IS XL Engines have 3 Engine Crits in their STs,
Clan XL Engines have 2 Engine Crits in their STs,


=XL Balance Concept #1(Speed)=
Make IS XL Engines Survivable on ST loss,
then institute a -10%Speed Quirk per lost Engine Crit,
-
IS XL Engine has 3 Engine Crits in its ST,
so on ST loss an IS XL would gain a -30%Speed Quirk,
-
Clan XL Engine has 2 Engine Crits in its ST,
so on ST loss an IS XL would gain a -20%Speed Quirk,
-
Losing both STs on an XL Engine still results in death,


=XL Balance Concept #2(Structure)=
Make STD and IS XL Engines more Survivable vs C-XL,
by instituting Bonus Internal Structure to STD(CT) and IS-XL(STs),
-
IS and Clan STD Engines would gain a CT Structure Quirk,
giving the STD Equipped Mech +10-20 Bonus CT Structure,
-
IS XL Engines would gain a ST Structure Quirk(both sides),
giving the IS-XL Equipped Mech +10-15 Bonus ST Structure,
-
Losing a ST on an IS-XL Engine still results in death,


Russ on Twitter saying he would consider an IS-XL Change,

Twitter said:

AndrewPappas ‏@AndiNagasia 23h23 hours ago
@russ_bullock Alot ofTalk about XLEngines recently, would you Consider(C-XL -20%Speed(2Crits)STloss)&(Survivable)XL -30%Speed(3Crits)STloss?

AndrewPappas ‏@AndiNagasia 2h2 hours ago
@russ_bullock is this a possibility you would consider for Tech balance? your thoughts Please?

Russ Bullock ‏@russ_bullock 1h1 hour ago
@AndiNagasia in general I would consider changes to XL engine yes

there is a Fear of STD Engines becoming useless with this,
so if this is tested in the PTS and STD do seem to lose Viability,
the Penalty %s could be Increased or Structure Bonus Increased,

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

Edit-

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 19 September 2015 - 09:20 AM.

[Vlad Striker]

This is apocryphal.

[Tennex]

Yes it needs a speed nerf when you lose a side torso in a clan XL mech

[Kaptain]

Lets start with a movement, heat, and speed penalty for clan xl side torso loss and go from there.

EDIT: And by go from there I mean set all lasers back at TT values... See signature.

Then we can play with duration, cool down and range.

Edited by Kaptain, 19 September 2015 - 12:33 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

Provided "losing a ST on an IS-XL Engine still results in death" remains in place, I could see Concept #2 being not-wholly-unreasonable.

[Khobai]

speed nerf is a terrible idea

specifically because theres no way for clan mechs to avoid the speed loss. they dont have the option of using a heavier std engine.

forcing clan players to bend over and take an unavoidable crippling engine nerf up the @$$ is just going to cause widescale resentment and many players WILL quit playing clans as a result. its completely unnecessary too.

theres no need for a penalty at all. just buff ISXL to survive a side torso destruction so ISXL and CXL are equal. then theres no imbalance between the two. simple as that.

Edited by Khobai, 20 September 2015 - 02:42 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

The speed lost should already be there but there is no actual engine crits nor an actual heat scale penalties. I have built on her suggestion but added a few items while including the IS LFE in the mix. As for the heat scale, I do not see PGI building it with anymore items but to add things to other components in the game, which is disappointing.

This seems fitting here, another thread, similar discussions.

Quote

Good arguments on both sides but as many have mentioned, for a good FPS game compromises need to be made. atm though many BT rules/construction have either not been carried over or have been modified, and some of those were done for an attempt to balance or curb certain types of game play.
PGI has already doubled the internal structure/armor (good in a FPS ?)
Heat Sinks and Heat Scale

Double HS vs SHS - true DHS with engine DHS, all other DHS = 1.4
In a game where the max Heat scale depends on SHS/DHS and how many (30base + SHS/DHS)
Currently no negative Heat Scale effects EXCEPT when a mech hits 100% (bad)

Introduction of Ghost Heat - Even with an modified Heat Scale w/neg effects, it is possible Ghost Heat may still be needed, simply not in its current magnitude
Standard vs IS XL engine

Even with the IS XL introduction, there still were not actual ENGINE crits, only Engine health to it in the center torso. With no real engine crits, no negative heat effects.
PGI made it so that with the loss of a side torso, a XL-equipped IS mech would die to give an "effect" of BT engine destroyed.
This also balanced out the effect of being more durable, slower and less weapons vs fragile, more weapons and or faster in an environment with no Clan mechs.
IS XL vs Clan XL

Clans are introduced with their equipment
Originally, with a Clan mech's one side torso destruction equipped with Clan XL, that mech only lost that side/arm, same as an IS mech equipped with a standard engine. A Clan mech is destroyed if the 2nd side torso is destroyed.
PGI did had a miserly heat effect if a Clan did lose a side torso later but rarely noticeable in most Clan mechs
Currently, only Clan Omni can not change their engine, nor hard locked items like heatsinks, nor add/remove Clan Ferro nor Endo components (7 slots vs IS's 14 slots)
Now, would anyone in their right mind actually remove their Clan XL engine? (chuckles)

Many would change the engine rating - I would propose Clans could change the engine rating but would have a narrower range of available engines on both the max and min. Start off with half the range of IS mechs
Ferro vs Endo - In the board game, both stock IS/Clan designs very rarely had MAX armor, and switching to Endo is similar to replacing the frame on a vehicle, just bulkier, time consuming and expensive, initially and repairing.

If a Clan mech came with either one, for MWO allow a player to switch from Ferro to Endo.
A Clan mech would not be able to remove both Ferro and/or Endo completely
For a mechwarrior and his mech in MWO, speed/maneuverability is life, followed by being durable enough to exploit a hole in the enemy's defenses and the firepower to being to bear.


The Battletech boardgame was designed to cover a limited area, with an average play time with each round lasting 10 seconds perform several actions, and the result of many of those actions depending on dice rolls, to hit/not to hit, where it hit, crit or not, defensive rolls, after effect rolls (due to damage done/heat effects). Solaris was even harsher, 2.5secs/round, fewer available actions and even harsher effects, particularly heat scale-wise and not meant to be played with several mechs but as a one on one.

MWO is more related to the Solaris game. You are controlling only one mech and tis weapons have different cooldown timers. If jumping can fire while air-borne. The major component missing between the two is no valid heatscale.

Notice the opponents to having a mech slow down, saying, let the mech but partially ignoring that continuously firing their weapons til they are almost max heatscale has no negative impact on their mech's movement. In BT being near the top of the heatscale results in a max of a negative 5 movement penalty, as well as a negative 4 in targeting penalty (in MWO, I would see this as the crosshair moving slower, regardless of mouse settings).

Via boardgame a timberwolf movement is 5(walk)/8(run). At near max heatscale, besides avoiding shutdowns (rolls), its speed would be reduced to 3 hexes (run) at 32kph.

With the suggestion of changing on engines work, their durability, etc for a FPS with pin-point firing, the question is why not?
IS Standard engine
lose one or both sides, no speed change, zombie with head/CT weapons
IS XL engine (1/2 weight IS Standard but takes up 6 crit slots combined in side torsos)

Continues with lost of only one side/destroyed with lost of both - either or both movement penalty / heat penalty
Clan XL engine (same weight as IS XL engine but takes up 4 crit slots combined in side torsos)

Lives/destroyed - Same as IS XL engine but lesser penalties
Clan Omni mechs have ability to change engine rating but within more restrictive range vs IS mechs
IS FLE/Fusion Light Engine (3/4 weight of IS Standard engine but takes up 4 crit slots in side torsos (like Clan XL)

Lives/destroyed - Same as Clan XL and with same Clan XL penalties
That would be my counter-proposal, which also includes the future IS FLE.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 20 September 2015 - 03:04 PM.

[Durant Carlyle]

How about we leave the thing that doesn't need to be changed, unchanged?

The side torso crits on an XL engine aren't the engine itself anyway. They are the engine's cooling system. The cooling systems have safety valves to re-route coolant when part of the cooling system is damaged or destroyed. IS XL engines don't have enough of the cooling systems left to function after a side torso is destroyed -- they scram to prevent catastrophic failure when that happens. Clan XL engine cooling systems take up less room, so you have to destroy both side torsos to affect enough of it to make the engine scram to prevent catastrophic failure.

You want your IS 'Mech to still be active when a side torso is destroyed? Wait for the IS Light engine to be introduced, or run Standard engines.

Oh yeah ... and Standard engines (Clan and IS) need no adjustment whatsoever. They should get no boost at all.

My vote is neither, obviously.

[ApolloKaras]

PGI should try the more subtle of the two approaches. This is the structure quirks.

[Andi Nagasia]

Durant Carlyle, on 20 September 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

Oh yeah ... and Standard engines (Clan and IS) need no adjustment whatsoever. They should get no boost at all.

so if you could Choose a Clan XL or a Clan STD what do you choose? as it is you will always pick Clan XL,
why would some one Ever choose a Clan STD Engine Ever, give me an Example thats not an OmniMech?

[Strum Wealh]

Durant Carlyle, on 20 September 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

The side torso crits on an XL engine aren't the engine itself anyway. They are the engine's cooling system. The cooling systems have safety valves to re-route coolant when part of the cooling system is damaged or destroyed. IS XL engines don't have enough of the cooling systems left to function after a side torso is destroyed -- they scram to prevent catastrophic failure when that happens. Clan XL engine cooling systems take up less room, so you have to destroy both side torsos to affect enough of it to make the engine scram to prevent catastrophic failure.

Actually, the additional crits represent engine shielding & increased size of the "fusion bottle" (e.g. the fusor and tokamak array).

Quote

In standard fusion engines, the shielding is a very dense ceramic. Typically, this is tungsten carbide, which is reinforced with short ceramic fibers mixed into the carbide. This shielding isn't just thick enough to stop the radiation, but also to survive battle damage and to serve as a heat sink. By this, I mean a mass meant to soak up heat - just in case the magnetic containment bubble fails.

In BattleMechs, you'll find a few variations on engine shielding types. The famous extra-light (XL) engines slim down the tungsten-carbide reactor walls and reinforce them with a crystalline plastic similar to those of double strength heat sinks... Don't worry; I'll cover those when we get to cooling systems later.

Now, trying to make large blocks of this shielding is a trial for engine manufacturers. The scrap rate is phenomenal and accounts for some of the hideous price XL engines command in the open market. The newer so-called light engines use an innovative mix of layered shielding materials and secondary magnetic screens.

- TechManual, pg. 36

Quote

Compact engines emerged in 3068, a year after this document was compiled. Once again developed by Lyran engineers, this engine type was apparently an alternative approach to the "smaller, harder-to-kill engine" problem initially authorized by General Nondi Steiner during the FedCom Civil War. The compact engine has half the physical size of the standard fusion plant, but weighs fifty percent more through the use of denser shielding and a smaller, high-density fusion bottle.

- TechManual, pg. 214

Quote

'Mech fusion engines have 3 points of shielding. Each critical hit to an engine slot destroys 1 point of shielding. As shielding is destroyed, the amount of heat escaping from the 'Mech's fusion drive increases.

The first hit increases the 'Mech's heat build-up by 5 points per turn. The second hit results in 10 (total) points of added heat buildup per turn, and the third critical hit to an engine slot shuts down the engine and puts the BattleMech out of commission for the rest of the game. Though XL and light engines take up additional slots (in the side torsos), critical hits to any three engine slots also shut down XL and light engines.

A 'Mech is considered destroyed and out of the game if it suffers three engine hits (remember to count engine slots in the side torso if the torso is destroyed).

- Total Warfare, pg. 126

[Rogue Jedi]

while I am not crazy about ether suggestion I would be much happier with the extra structure than the XL being able to survive the loss of 1 side

if people consider XL fragility that much of an issue then just bring forwards the Light Fusion Engine, it only has half the weight saving that an XL does but you can survive a side torso loss.

if giving IS Mechs Clan XL engines is being considered why not also give them Clan DHS, Endo and Fero, and also think about giving them Clan weapons, that is the only way we will properly balance them after all.

[Nori Silverrage]

Not having IS mechs be destroyed on side torso loss would be ridiculous. It completely obseletes both the STD engine and the LFE which we don't even have yet.

The structure option is one I've seen several times and I think it makes sense. Put more structure in side torsos (50% seems good) and maybe a incrase in the XL HP would be good as well. To make STD engines better give them a CT structure bonus.

Voila problem solved.

[Tarl Cabot]

I am trying to figure out why many are opposed to changes like this, especially since many may have only played the Mechwarrior games where they switched out to Clan XL as soon as they could, if they were not already running Clan XL.

The discussion is to modify tech from the original Battletech created in the 1980s for a boardgame, be it Clan or IS. The current system is missing many aspects of the board game. And since each studio that created mechwarrior series did not have to deal with a persistent PVP involving Clan vs IS locked tech, they had no reason to really question if they should make changes to some of the base tech for balancing reasons.

There is the Steam release coming, full of players who may have or have not heard of Mechwarrior and Battletech. And those who have nothing vested in the Innersphere, and the default power mechs are Clan mechs. They go fast, most have decent hardpoints and they will not die with the lost of one side torso. Stock IS mechs are slow, tend to carry fewer weapons. Upgrading them to go faster and carry either slight more or heavier weapons with IS XL engines means instant death with the lost of one side torso.

The thing is, PGI is in a position to make changes to some of the base design of the IP in an actual PVP environment, not a PVE with some multiplayer access. Even the three Multi-Player Battletech (MPBT) games were only 3025 and with stock mechs.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 21 September 2015 - 06:40 PM.

[Nightshade24]

Andi Nagasia, on 20 September 2015 - 06:53 PM, said:

so if you could Choose a Clan XL or a Clan STD what do you choose? as it is you will always pick Clan XL, why would some one Ever choose a Clan STD Engine Ever, give me an Example thats not an OmniMech?

idk, I always pick IS XL engine over IS standard engine.

[Carl Vickers]

I would never put an XL in my Hunchie G, I couldnt have a AC20 in it then.

I think the speed option is great for balance but the secondary query of dead standard engines comes down to slots in the Torsi.

There are some mech builds that are not viable if you use an XL engine for IS cause of the increased crit slots required for IS engines.

It pretty much balances itself from there.

Yes the vast majority of mechs will use XL but tis the same in Clan mechs so why not level the playing field.

The extra crit slots on IS engines accounts for the tech difference between IS and Clan as well.

Edited by Carl, 21 September 2015 - 09:53 PM.

[Nori Silverrage]

Eh, I'm very much against the IS XL working the same as the Clan's. It completely changes the idea and flavor and in most situations invalidates the STD engine. Some people say crit slots, and yes that could be a issue. But keep in mind that with a XL you could forgo Endo.
It also reduces skill. We can go for a IS XL side torso because we know it will destroy the mech. With this people will be forced to focus on legs or CT which reduces options and tactical play.

The other reason is flavor. Clans and IS should be different and have different equipment. Flavorwise I could get behind IS being tough machines whereas clans are more advanced and agile but also more fragile.

This could be easily done by adding a 50% bonus to structure on side torso's for XL or a 50% bonus to CT structure on STD engines. XLs now aren't sure death for IS mechs and STD still have a good use.
Quirks would need to be adjusted, but since they plan on throwing everything out anyway it seems like a good time to try it.