69 replies to this topic

[Rakshasa]

Escef, on 14 December 2014 - 08:15 PM, said:

There's a huge difference between tweaking armor values (which even in TT weren't optimized), and altering structural components. They haven't allowed the addition or subtraction of endo or ferro yet, and there is no reason to expect them to do so.

There's a shedload of stuff in TT which isn't optimized As for the endo/ferro issue, I agree entirely - there's no reason to expect them to allow it, even though it would seriously help mechs like the Hellbringer, Summoner and Gargoyle with default loadout heat/ammo problems.

Adamasartus, on 14 December 2014 - 08:17 PM, said:

It's hard to buff the Gargoyle without compromising it's purpose.

The Gargoyle is heavy on speed and armour but low on firepower. That's it's point. I feel it should be buffed in terms of outright survivability and cooling but not in firepower. Maybe with torso turn rates, acceleration and deceleration.

Ehh, I'm of the mind that if you want a fast 'mech, choose the right weight class for the job due to the way the engine weights scale. A 'mech which takes up 80 tons of space in a dropship but has the equivalent speed and firepower of a 50 tonner is probably going to get some funny looks and questions along the lines of "why didn't we just take a lighter 'mech?" Given that an Assault's strengths are high top-end armour and firepower values, neglecting those in favour of mimicing a lighter weight category seems like more than a bit of a waste

Edited by Rakshasa, 14 December 2014 - 08:28 PM.

[Escef]

Void Angel, on 14 December 2014 - 08:21 PM, said:

Because they've never broken canon for game balance yet! I see it now; oh, if only I had thought about it before I posted - I guess I just don't have a brain in my silly little head.

Have they yet allowed us to change structural components on omnis? The fact that they are locked is PART of the game balance. You speak of changes for game balance, yet ignore that these items are locked specifically for such reasons.

[Rakshasa]

Void Angel, on 14 December 2014 - 08:21 PM, said:

Because they've never broken canon for game balance yet! I see it now; oh, if only I had thought about it before I posted - I guess I just don't have a brain in my silly little head.

Escef, on 14 December 2014 - 08:30 PM, said:

Have they yet allowed us to change structural components on omnis? The fact that they are locked is PART of the game balance. You speak of changes for game balance, yet ignore that these items are locked specifically for such reasons.

Chill guys, no need for fighting and feuding - 'specially not at Christmas

Balance is still very much an ongoing thing with MWO; you only have to look at the convoluted maths and mechanics they've come up with just trying to balance weapon classes against each other, never mind between IS and Clan tech. It's what comes from using an old game system that hasn't had a serious revision since its release in 1984 as the basis for the online version. I wouldn't rule out them looking at anything in regards to balance, even "sacred cows" like the OmniMech rules - especially as more and more flaws with the old system are subjected to modern gaming principles. At the same time, I wouldn't expect it either. It's too hard to tell what they'll try and use for balance next.

Such things aren't important though - it's the season of goodwill and cheer, and I'd hate to see you both argue when you could be sharing the joy of peace, brother-(sister?)-hood and blasting limbs and armour off each other online without sour feelings. Equip the olive branch of peace and respect - it's a module, I hear, so it won't take up any tonnage

Edited by Rakshasa, 14 December 2014 - 08:45 PM.

[Escef]

Rakshasa, on 14 December 2014 - 08:43 PM, said:

Chill guys, no need for fighting and feuding - 'specially not at Christmas

Balance is still very much an ongoing thing with MWO; you only have to look at the convoluted maths and mechanics they've come up with just trying to balance weapon classes against each other, never mind between IS and Clan tech. It's what comes from using an old game system that hasn't had a serious revision since its release in 1984 as the basis for the online version. I wouldn't rule out them looking at anything in regards to balance, even "sacred cows" like the OmniMech rules - especially as more and more flaws with the old system are subjected to modern gaming principles. At the same time, I wouldn't expect it either. It's too hard to tell what they'll try and use for balance next.

Such things aren't important though - it's the season of goodwill and cheer, and I'd hate to see you both argue when you could be sharing the joy of peace, brother-(sister?)-hood and blasting limbs and armour off each other online without sour feelings. Equip the olive branch of peace and respect - it's a module, I hear, so it won't take up any tonnage

Season of goodwill and cheer? Please, this damn holiday brings out the worst in people.

[Matthew Ace]

Gargoyle could use speed or speed-based quirks, like the Summoner did.

[Karamarka]

I could only make 2 setups for this. The Gargoyle-A was useless i could not work out what to do with it that wasn't a was clone than the other 2.

[Capsta]

The GAR, all variants, need heat generation and cool down quirks.
Its CT hitbox needs to be smaller.
Its movement archetype needs to be 'large' instead of 'huge'.

At that point, once it actually rotates like it as an X400 in it, it may need arm armor quirks.

One 'fun' thing to do with it would be to give it vastly different quirks based on side torso selection, since they don't have a significant difference between them anyways.

[NovaFury]

Escef, on 14 December 2014 - 08:30 PM, said:

Have they yet allowed us to change structural components on omnis? The fact that they are locked is PART of the game balance. You speak of changes for game balance, yet ignore that these items are locked specifically for such reasons.

Part of game balance that serves to ensure we'll not see much aside from TBRs and SCRs in community warfare.

GAR's a huge over-engined 80 tonner with bad hitboxes. Much like the vindicator, the head-dome ensures you can aim CT from any direction. Arms aren't large enough to shield the STs like most humanoid designs (Summoner, Atlas). Tweaking probably isn't going to save it.

Edited by NovaFury, 15 December 2014 - 12:13 AM.

[Cattra Kell]

quirks for the GAR that would be useful - in my opinion

1. Its got a big engine and fast - give it some armor/internal quirks so it can be the lead of a charge
2. some minor quirks for energy - cant be too powerful though because of the huge bonus clan energy gets already.

I have been having a good time and great success with 1LPL and 4ML's

[SaltBeef]

Canon already broken DDC ECM example. If a chassis is weak an underperforming by majority or not being used because of deficiencies it needs improvements even if it break Canon.

[Deathlike]

FupDup, on 14 December 2014 - 07:28 PM, said:

5. Moar omnipods, particularly side torso hardpoints (and don't mount them as low as the belly button this time!).

The Glarg was a belly dancer in a previous life. True story.

[Karamarka]

Cattra Kell, on 15 December 2014 - 12:12 AM, said:

quirks for the GAR that would be useful - in my opinion

1. Its got a big engine and fast - give it some armor/internal quirks so it can be the lead of a charge
2. some minor quirks for energy - cant be too powerful though because of the huge bonus clan energy gets already.

I have been having a good time and great success with 1LPL and 4ML's

Good idea.

It should have heat and maybe somethign to do with pulses, because it is a laser vomit unit. The ballistics weigh too much to be reasonable and the missile hardpoints are tied to the ballistic ones, meaning zero energy..

[Escef]

SaltBeef, on 15 December 2014 - 12:17 AM, said:

Canon already broken DDC ECM example. If a chassis is weak an underperforming by majority or not being used because of deficiencies it needs improvements even if it break Canon.

I wouldn't call ECM capacity a break from canon, especially as they did not add it to the machine's stock loadout. You'd be better off pointing at the Cicada 3C's ballistics being in the side torsos instead of the legs if you want an example of a break from canon, or the upcoming ENF-5P.

Still, fixed structural elements are used as a balancing factor on clan mechs. I think making the Gargoyle's (or any other clan mech's) base components changeable would set a bad precedent. Far better to quirk the ever livin' poop out of it than to make that kind of a change... Or, perhaps you like the idea of Dire Wolves with endo steel? Just what they need, 5 more tons of guns at the cost of 7 crits.

[Cattra Kell]

Karamarka, on 15 December 2014 - 01:11 AM, said:

Good idea.

It should have heat and maybe somethign to do with pulses, because it is a laser vomit unit. The ballistics weigh too much to be reasonable and the missile hardpoints are tied to the ballistic ones, meaning zero energy..

I have made it pretty well known that I don't like the idea of quirks on clans because of their Swiss Army knife where they would have the ability of many styles but masters of none...

Armour quirks I would be ok with WAY more then giving a weapon quirk, but thats just my opinion.

[Vassago Rain]

But I was told the spurdo is super awesome.

Surely, such a grand gundam doesn't need help.

[KharnZor]

Vassago Rain, on 15 December 2014 - 02:33 AM, said:

But I was told the spurdo is super awesome.

Surely, such a grand gundam doesn't need help.

We cant give it the help it needs. Nobody can.

[Widowmaker1981]

They will never allow installing Endo steel on clan chassis that dont have it because the tears about the 4xGauss Direwolf would never end. The Hellbringer might be a touch OP as well.

[Vanguard836]

Widowmaker1981, on 15 December 2014 - 03:02 AM, said:

They will never allow installing Endo steel on clan chassis that dont have it because the tears about the 4xGauss Direwolf would never end. The Hellbringer might be a touch OP as well.

The hellbringer maybe, the direwolf I wonder if the extra weight would actualy be worth the crit slots. I can't look it up from my phone but if someone has the time to try it out that could be interesting to see. If it's the case then perhaps on a per chassis bassis.

The one sure thing is that some clan chassis do need some loving down the road.

[Widowmaker1981]

Vanguard836, on 15 December 2014 - 06:11 AM, said:

The hellbringer maybe, the direwolf I wonder if the extra weight would actualy be worth the crit slots. I can't look it up from my phone but if someone has the time to try it out that could be interesting to see. If it's the case then perhaps on a per chassis bassis.

The one sure thing is that some clan chassis do need some loving down the road.

Yeah, see this: DWF-PRIME 14 slots free, no spare tonnage, not enough gauss ammo. with endo you could add 5 tons more ammo and stil have 2 free slots.

[Johnny Z]

Anything the Gargoyle gets the Atlas get x2 and the Orion x3!!!