28 replies to this topic

[Farix]

As it currently stands, if you are running an XL Engine, there is no point in carrying CASE. CASE only protects the damage of an ammo explosion from spread out of the side torso that it is placed in, but if you are using an XL, you are dead anyways. And if you are a ballistic or missile boat build, you are almost always running an XL.

So how do you make CASE relevant? Simple, have it protect the engine like it does in Clan mechs. But if both side torso go, then the mech dies. IS pilots will then have to consider whether worth sacrificing an extra ton and 2 critical slots to make their mechs more durable or use that space/weight for more ammo, weapons, or heat sinks.

[Tarogato]

I love the idea, but there's one huge glaring problem: CASE only weighs 0.5t. Spend only a half ton to protect my torso from being XL popped? Yes please, every single time. Time to put XLs in all my assaults and put CASEs on all my lights and mediums. Now I can brawl with an XL at a sacrifice of at most only a single ton.

Extraordinarily overpowered, so I can't support this. If you have any ideas on how to balance it, then go ahead and bring 'em on.

[The Massive]

I'd like a reason to use CASE. But this is overpowered.

[Farix]

And why would it be overpowered? You still have to dedicate 2 crits along with that extra ton. That would mean less ammo, heat sinks, or weapon/smaller weapon.

[Leo Kraeas]

Yes, but not necessarily for ALL damage. CASE (Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment) redirects explosions from volatile ammunition. Therefore Case Should protect your XL engine from an ammo explosion, but not from losing the torso altogether. Case should simply make critically hit ammo or cooked ammo be destroyed instead of allowing it to consume the torso it resides in, but does not allow it to spread. That is almost how CASE II performs in tabletop and that is how CASE performs in current military application.

Edited by Leo Kraeas, 08 October 2014 - 09:29 PM.

[ImperialKnight]

OP's suggestion is too.... OP. 1 ton is nothing compared to the ability to survive an XL side torso destruction. The penalty isn't nearly enough.

I agree with Leo Kraeas' suggestion. It would improve survivability a little but not by much, since you've lost all armor anyway. An acceptable trade off for 0.5ton and 1 crit slot.

[Kmieciu]

Leo Kraeas, on 06 October 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

Yes, but not necessarily for ALL damage. CASE (Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment) redirects explosions from volatile ammunition. Therefore Case Should protect your XL engine from an ammo explosion, but not from losing the torso altogether. Case should simply make critically hit ammo or cooked ammo be destroyed instead of allowing it to consume the torso it resides in, but does not allow it to spread. That is how it performs in tabletop and that is how CASE performs in current military application.

What you are describing is even better than CASE II
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Case_II

Edited by Kmieciu, 07 October 2014 - 10:58 PM.

[Leo Kraeas]

You are indeed correct. The suggestion is in fact stronger than CASE II and I need to edit a bit. However, It does allow for a mech to be salvaged afterward and rebuilt effectively on the cheap. Without the old re-arm/repair costs CASE is almost worthless in MWO; so essentially what I am suggesting is a non-canon change to CASE to make it a viable option for everyone. Additional C-Bills is out of the question which leaves in-game effects that hopefully can be normalized. In this case CASE II would theoretically reduce the damage taken and redirect it out the back thus potentially saving some of your systems and weapons.

This does mean that my version of CASE would have to do something less than that... Maybe CASE could reduce the damage from ammo explosions by 50% and reduce the chance of critting ammo in the first place. The redirecting function I still think should be ample protection enough to save other components even if the trade off is a massive heat spike from the explosion. (CASE II would likely be a 90% damage decrease, lessened heat spike, and lessened chance of internal damage being crits via the explosion. ((That is of course in addition to the reduced crit chance as above.)))
The lowered crit chance doesn't have to be large; even 3-7% is a worthwhile investment. This item would also allow a special counter-play function to targeting computers which currently increase crit chance by substantial amounts.

[General Taskeen]

Thinking about this needs to center around what Case does in TT and how to translate that into something similar in real-time terms.

The term Repair+Rearm is often used to explain CASE and its function with Standard, or in this case an XL Engine. In TT an IS XL engine being hit in the side torso may be fatal, and of course the CASE can protect the pilot from death. And as pointed out repairing may be 'cheaper.' The repair-rearm that used to be in MWO Beta also hardly represented actual BattleTech salvage and repair anyways. MW3 or MW4 had something closer to that during the Single Player portion.

Now in game terms, what does the pilot represent? The pilot is actually the engine. If the is engine is destroyed, you the player are dead, then engine is "you." There is no avatar, one does not have multiple lives or create new characters.

From my point of view, PGI translated CASE wrong in conjunction with XL, because there was an initial focus on attempting to shoe-horn in exact rule behavior of a particular component, but this is not a board game and it doesn't work that well to translate it as such. This is something that Developers of the previous games learned very early on in development of those games and turned out better for not being exact with rule behavior, but rather just close approximation.

One of the other big problems is that they made an IS XL side hit a death no matter what, this is also a poor translation for real-time, instead other solutions could have been decreasing engine speed, reducing torso twist, and reducing heat capacity/dissipation. This would have made Standard more distinctive in retaining full heat capacity, speed, and twist, despite losing torsos, where as the Clan XL and IS XL losing both would become difficult to drive. That is how Mech Warrior 2 used to be - lose the engine crits in side torsos, the Mech became sluggish and speed is cut in half so you did not die and could still fight, but it became more difficult to do so.

So what should CASE actually do for an XL in a game? It should be protecting the engine crits from damage from internal explosion. It needs an in-game benefit in the manner of protecting "you" from death, which is the engine.

[Leo Kraeas]

Dropship mode is going to put a whole new spin on the

Quote

The pilot is actually the engine.

What you don't see is the ejection that happens upon engine death. The process is expedited to conserve data sever side.
In reality the pilot would be subject to exhaustion, heat stroke, concussions, and other nasty things that do happen on tabletop.
Simply put, CASE has little merit in MWO. It does offer an opportunity to make another piece of gear that does do something much as the command console does now.

[LasBlast]

I'd make it so carrying CASE allows for the ammo blow-out to trash everything in the side torso EXCEPT the XL engine - so it protects against a critical hit to an ammo bin in the side torso, but does not provide 'extra' protection to the XL.

[Draykin]

CASE doesn't protect Clan 'Mech XLs. Clan 'Mech XLs are just better. Furthermore, allowing CASE to cancel out XL side torso death is a horrible idea, since everyone and their mother will pay that one extra ton to gets all the benefits of an XL while removing all the downsides of an XL.

[OznerpaG]

just let IS mechs use CASE in their arms - it ain't lore, but this ain't TT, and the weight and crit cost is enough of a penalty

[Sadato]

Leo Kraeas, on 08 October 2014 - 09:29 PM, said:

You are indeed correct. The suggestion is in fact stronger than CASE II and I need to edit a bit. However, It does allow for a mech to be salvaged afterward and rebuilt effectively on the cheap. Without the old re-arm/repair costs CASE is almost worthless in MWO; so essentially what I am suggesting is a non-canon change to CASE to make it a viable option for everyone. Additional C-Bills is out of the question which leaves in-game effects that hopefully can be normalized. In this case CASE II would theoretically reduce the damage taken and redirect it out the back thus potentially saving some of your systems and weapons. This does mean that my version of CASE would have to do something less than that... Maybe CASE could reduce the damage from ammo explosions by 50% and reduce the chance of critting ammo in the first place. The redirecting function I still think should be ample protection enough to save other components even if the trade off is a massive heat spike from the explosion. (CASE II would likely be a 90% damage decrease, lessened heat spike, and lessened chance of internal damage being crits via the explosion. ((That is of course in addition to the reduced crit chance as above.))) The lowered crit chance doesn't have to be large; even 3-7% is a worthwhile investment. This item would also allow a special counter-play function to targeting computers which currently increase crit chance by substantial amounts.

This is an excellent suggestion! +1

[tripsangel]

NEG, start developing this: http://www.sarna.net..._Engine_-_Light

[Telmasa]

I say if case were to protect engines, then it should also weigh more depending on the tonnage of the mech (since I think making it weigh a certain amount according to the size of the engine would be too complicated to program...but who knows).

[Ashvins]

Your base Ideal is ok but the "fix" should be to allow Case to be placed in the arms of IS mechs. Allowing for Gauss or ammo in arms not to take out XL engines. That is the only change I think needs to be made. I can't tell you how many times I've died thanks to a gauss or ammo explosion in an arm that takes out my XL engine.

[Karl Streiger]

First we need a better working CASE, the current implementation is in most cases worthless.
Reasons:

• its better to have 10 crit-able slots in a section with ammunition rather than CASE
  
• if you choose CASE and ammunition -you can be sure that you will loose half your mech in the moment armor is broken
  
• mount ammo to the legs - well it will explode but damage transfer is only 50% - you will survive a ammunition explosion even with XL

imho - CASE should work like CASE II.

• blast the complete ammunition out of that location
  
• deal damage of 2 point per ammunition bin to the mechs internal
  
• remove the rear armor

[Danghen Woolf]

I hate to admit it but I have removed CASE from all of my mechs. I have never died to an ammo explosion even without it and the percentage to actually have ammo cook-off is low enough that I do not bother with it. I think that if PGI makes the move to have more critical damage options, e.g. actuator, engine, gyro, sensors, etc and makes ammunition explode 100% of the time it is critically damaged then I will put it back on. Until then, I will add a few more armor points.

[Lily from animove]

No, but IS should be able to place case in arms and legs.

Maccasimus, on 05 October 2014 - 11:10 AM, said:

I'd like a reason to use CASE. But this is overpowered.

No its not, it is currently pointless for an XL mech to use case. Only on LFE's this would make sense, But we do not ave them.

Ammo explodes in a leg, or arm, it will transfer to ST, and bye bye mech.
Ammo explodes in ST, byebye mech.

o case only has a point in STD engined mechs. truly underwhelming pointless.

They could also change case to deal, maybe 90% less damage. or 95%, maybe that would also make it less pointless.

Edited by Lily from animove, 13 April 2015 - 01:15 AM.