20517 replies to this topic

[FLG 01]

Metus regem, on 02 May 2017 - 10:56 AM, said:

Either they all have to abide by the same rules or just toss the rules all together, no special treatment.

Since the rule of fixed engine, structure, and armour is taken straight from BT, I'd rather keep it.
PGI just needs to choose wisely when it comes to IS Omnis, that's all. There are some serviceable ones after all.

CK16, on 02 May 2017 - 04:10 PM, said:

Thanks for the news.

It's bad news though as it means the IS is stuck in the FCCW represented by two Mechs which had little to no impact in the FCCW. That's like a WWII tank simulator set in Normandy 1944 and the Germans get the Somua (which was part of their tank line-up, albeit in reserve) instead of the Tiger. And we are stuck with that!

Oh well, give me some weeks perhaps I'll get over it. It would certainly help if the next Civil War pack lived up to that name, not just in the choice of the Mechs themselves but also in the presentation: have one typical loyalist Mech and one typical allied Mech facing off against each other, perhaps even in the same colours being part of the same brigade just in different camps (like 2nd Robinson Rangers vs 3rd Robinson Rangers). Add cockpit items relevant to the FCCW and not some random "fun"-stuff.

The FCCW, as tragic as it was, offers so many opportunities to present some lore-driven packs.

[CK16]

Here I am wanting to first kick some Kuritan ***, then The Hell ponies shall be purged from the Innersphere. Also Wolfs, loving me some wolfs...been to long since had that fight!

[Requiemking]

Karl Streiger, on 02 May 2017 - 02:01 AM, said:

I need to disagree.
The only problem for this argument I don't have the numbers - yet.
The engine weight increases almost exponential - it is already so that an 80t Mech with the same top speed as a 75t Mech (300 Rating )doesn't gain anything for his additional 5tons.

this becomes more and more an issue the higher the rating comes - in the end, the only reason for a Banshee run a 380 STD in tt was its ability to wreck havoc in close combat by punching and kicking enemy mechs in seconds to death.

In MWO the whole concept of physical combat is missing - so an important part of the huge engine weight is missing, the same goes for the "defensive" modifications of TT combat.
A to hit roll of 10 rather than 9 or 11 rather than 10 is good armor.
The same is missing in MWO either - 15m/s or 20m/s doesn't matter much not when the target is bigger as a barn.

Ok I admit those XL engines are an issue - so MWO finally need to start to drop TT construction rules for good.
Options:

• weightier engines generate more speed STD Light > ISXL > ClanXL
  
• survivability is taken into account STD > Light > Clan XL > XL
  
• other stuff

Last not least what would you think might happen when a Kodiak gets the same mobility doesn't matter if 300 or 400 rated engine?

Would it not be stupid to sacrifice firepower for a bigger engine?
With Light Engines in reach - most of my Atlas will drop weight back to 300 or 325 (for the heatsink) and put more weapons and heatsinks in the chassis.

I'm going to counter you with my own scenario. Say you are piloting a Light mech, in this instance, a Locust. You run into an Assault mech, which for the purposes of this exercise is a Kodiak. Under normal circumstances, a Locust would utilise it's greater speed and agility to out-manoeuvre the Kodiak to attack it's back armor. However, thanks to current construction rules combined with the current Skill tree, a Kodiak with the stock XL 400 engine and elited skills moves with all the agility of a 75 ton Heavy mech. 75 tonners have more than enough agility to catch a Locust trying to move into their rear arc, but when a mech 25 tons heavier than that can also do this, suddenly it becomes an enormous undertaking for the Locust to even get out of their alive, let alone having done any significant damage to the Kodiak. And since the new Skill tree grants even more agility, that same Kodiak is going to start moving like a Medium mech unless full engine decoupling occurs. with the engine decoupling, suddenly that Kodiak is moving like a 100 ton Assault mech, not a 75 ton Heavy.

[Odanan]

FLG 01, on 02 May 2017 - 05:11 PM, said:

Since the rule of fixed engine, structure, and armour is taken straight from BT, I'd rather keep it.

Battlemechs also have fixed engine, structure and armor in BT...

FLG 01, on 02 May 2017 - 05:11 PM, said:

PGI just needs to choose wisely when it comes to IS Omnis, that's all. There are some serviceable ones after all.

Such as? There are very few IS omnis that would please the MechLabWarriors.

IS omnis either do have Std Engine, so they waste tonnage; either do have XL Engine, so they die easily.
Either do have Endo Steel, so they don't have internal space; either don't (so they waste tonnage).
And sometimes, they do have IS Ferro Fibrous, which is only useful for the lighter mechs.

Some cases:
- Raptor: kind of slow for a 25 tons in MWO;
- Arctic Fox: very slow for a 30 tonner;
- Owens: locked single heat sinks;
- Strider: locked single heat sinks;
- Men Shen: actually, a good option;
- Avatar: locked "slow" XL engine on a 70 tonner;
- Templar: XL engine on a 85 tonner;
- Sunder: XL engine on a 90 tonner;
- Hauptmann: locked very slow Std. engine.
...

[Bishop Steiner]

FLG 01, on 02 May 2017 - 05:11 PM, said:

Since the rule of fixed engine, structure, and armour is taken straight from BT, I'd rather keep it.
PGI just needs to choose wisely when it comes to IS Omnis, that's all. There are some serviceable ones after all.






Thanks for the news.

It's bad news though as it means the IS is stuck in the FCCW represented by two Mechs which had little to no impact in the FCCW. That's like a WWII tank simulator set in Normandy 1944 and the Germans get the Somua (which was part of their tank line-up, albeit in reserve) instead of the Tiger. And we are stuck with that!

Oh well, give me some weeks perhaps I'll get over it. It would certainly help if the next Civil War pack lived up to that name, not just in the choice of the Mechs themselves but also in the presentation: have one typical loyalist Mech and one typical allied Mech facing off against each other, perhaps even in the same colours being part of the same brigade just in different camps (like 2nd Robinson Rangers vs 3rd Robinson Rangers). Add cockpit items relevant to the FCCW and not some random "fun"-stuff.

The FCCW, as tragic as it was, offers so many opportunities to present some lore-driven packs.

Funny thing? Most of the Mechs in the FCCW era were still pre FCCW era mechs. It's not like they pahsed out all the CI era stuff in 1963 and said "screw it lets rearm with Hellspawns and Uziels and Argus".

Most of the mechs in the FCCW? The same exact ones we been using for the last 5 years.

Odanan, on 02 May 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

Battlemechs also have fixed engine, structure and armor in BT...

Such as? There are very few IS omnis that would please the MechLabWarriors.

IS omnis either do have Std Engine, so they waste tonnage; either do have XL Engine, so they die easily.
Either do have Endo Steel, so they don't have internal space; either don't (so they waste tonnage).
And sometimes, they do have IS Ferro Fibrous, which is only useful for the lighter mechs.

Some cases:
- Raptor: kind of slow for a 25 tons in MWO;
- Arctic Fox: very slow for a 30 tonner;
- Owens: locked single heat sinks;
- Strider: locked single heat sinks;
- Men Shen: actually, a good option;
- Avatar: locked "slow" XL engine on a 70 tonner;
- Templar: XL engine on a 85 tonner;
- Sunder: XL engine on a 90 tonner;
- Hauptmann: locked very slow Std. engine.
...

somebody done skipped the Firestarter and Blackjack Omnis....

which are both bad for MWO too, but just sayin.

[FLG 01]

Odanan, on 02 May 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

Battlemechs also have fixed engine, structure and armor in BT...

I mean that compared to the main variant BattleMech variants can change engine type and rating, they can change structure and armour types. If a BattleMech comes with a STD300, one of its variants may chose to change it to an XL engine or change the rating. OmniMechs have no such luxury, every configuration has to use the exact same engine, structure etc. set by the primary configuration. If the prime has a STD 300 every single alternate has to use a STD 300 as well.

Odanan, on 02 May 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

Such as? There are very few IS omnis that would please the MechLabWarriors.

IS omnis either do have Std Engine, so they waste tonnage; either do have XL Engine, so they die easily.

Not necessarily. A lot depends on geometry and engine rating. The Men Shen might do well enough despite its XL engine; the Avatar is a deathtrap not just because it its engine but because it its easily singled out STs which cannot be shielded.

It's a combination of factors. It is true that most IS Omnis would not be 'meta', but then it is not like Uziel or Annihilator set the bar extremely high, did they? I would give the Men Shen good chances though, even if it was not my first choice when it comes to the lore of the FCCW (although it does have some claim, too - at the very least as good as the Annihilator's)

Bishop Steiner, on 02 May 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

Funny thing? Most of the Mechs in the FCCW era were still pre FCCW era mechs. It's not like they pahsed out all the CI era stuff in 1963 and said "screw it lets rearm with Hellspawns and Uziels and Argus".

Most of the mechs in the FCCW? The same exact ones we been using for the last 5 years.

Sure thing. In fact we have a few notable Mechs already. Just give me some more. I have been re-reading the FCCW-stories recently; there are Nightstars, Dragon Fires, Falconers, and many more - most of them introduced in the TROs of 3055, 3058 and 3060.

My problem is we did not get those. The Annihilator was not found very often in the armies of the allies or the loyalists, and it is not mentioned once in the extensive narration of the conflict. The Uziel - also absent from the narrative - is not much better, albeit a tiny bit better for having seen limited action in loyalist ranks. (That's right: driving this one you declare for Katherine - think about it).

I don't need Mechs exclusively stemming from TRO:3067 or so. In fact, my favourites are still SL-designs which were republished in TRO:3058, including Precentor Irelon's Excalibur. Anyway, in the end I just want Mechs that represent that conflict well and I don't feel Uziel or Annihilator do that.

Edited by FLG 01, 02 May 2017 - 07:07 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

FLG 01, on 02 May 2017 - 07:05 PM, said:

I mean that compared to the main variant BattleMech variants can change engine type and rating, they can change structure and armour types. If a BattleMech comes with a STD300, one of its variants may chose to change it to an XL engine or change the rating. OmniMechs have no such luxury, every configuration has to use the exact same engine, structure etc. set by the primary configuration. If the prime has a STD 300 every single alternate has to use a STD 300 as well.




Not necessarily. A lot depends on geometry and engine rating. The Men Shen might do well enough despite its XL engine; the Avatar is a deathtrap not just because it its engine but because it its easily singled out STs which cannot be shielded.

It's a combination of factors. It is true that most IS Omnis would not be 'meta', but then it is not like Uziel or Annihilator set the bar extremely high, did they? I would give the Men Shen good chances though, even if it was not my first choice when it comes to the lore of the FCCW (although it does have some claim, too - at the very least as good as the Annihilator's)




Sure thing. In fact we have a few notable Mechs already. Just give me some more. I have been re-reading the FCCW-stories recently; there are Nightstars, Dragon Fires, Falconers, and many more - most of them introduced in the TROs of 3055, 3058 and 3060.

My problem is we did not get those. The Annihilator was not found very often in the armies of the allies or the loyalists, and it is not mentioned once in the extensive narration of the conflict. The Uziel - also absent from the narrative - is not much better, albeit a tiny bit better for having seen limited action in loyalist ranks. (That's right: driving this one you declare for Katherine - think about it).

I don't need Mechs exclusively stemming from TRO:3067 or so. In fact, my favourites are still SL-designs which were republished in TRO:3058, including Precentor Irelon's Excalibur. Anyway, in the end I just want Mechs that represent that conflict well and I don't feel Uziel or Annihilator do that.

whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?

You mean the 12 or so the Dragoons have operational at this time (since literally no one else in the IS has ANY until the Jihad) aren't properly representative of the FCCW? Dang you high maintenance.

Fafnir or Devastator would have been a better choice if we had to go 100 ton ballistics, even though I always liked the Anni. Gunslinger would have been simply a better mech. Still would kill for a Crusader or Vulcan from the classic era, or a Mongoose, Thug, Lancelot, etc.

I know I'll never get my Thug (or crossbow), which kind of sucks, but since I somehow was gifted with two completely off the wall, non meta selections (Urbanmech, including my very own Hero, and Assassins), I feel I've burnt out a lot of my "nag capitol" with Russ and PGI, even if I believe the Urbie justified itself in sales, and I have been informed that my Deputy Dawg design was apparently a "dev favorite" in the offices, which is pretty dang cool to hear.

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 May 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

Funny thing? Most of the Mechs in the FCCW era were still pre FCCW era mechs. It's not like they pahsed out all the CI era stuff in 1963 and said "screw it lets rearm with Hellspawns and Uziels and Argus".

Most of the mechs in the FCCW? The same exact ones we been using for the last 5 years.

That's true! Forget MW4. The iconic Civil War mechs are the same (even if sometimes updated) Succession Wars mechs.

Bishop Steiner, on 02 May 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

somebody done skipped the Firestarter and Blackjack Omnis....

which are both bad for MWO too, but just sayin.

Yes, I intentionally left out the "upgraded" chassis.
First, because I don't think that, with so many mechs out there, PGI would release a new chassis almost identical to one we already have in the game.
Second, because these IS omnis are actually worst than the MechLab'd battlemechs we already have.

Seriously, no one can consider the Blackjack omni, with it's locked 64 km/h as a serious candidate for mech released in MWO.

And there is the Black Hawk-KU (such an awkward name) which is nothing less than a low-quality copy of the Nova.

[Karl Streiger]

Odanan, on 03 May 2017 - 04:16 AM, said:

And there is the Black Hawk-KU (such an awkward name) which is nothing less than a low-quality copy of the Nova.

The irony of power kreep - the non cannon Schwarzfalke ST (Schwarzfalke German for Black Hawk and ST for Steiner instead of Kurita)
55tons, LFE - same performance.... less costs.

Ok there is the cannon Gauntlet - that takes the best from the KU and the Bushwacker and combine it into a nice and sexy Steiner Omni Mech - although its DarkAge

Odanan, on 03 May 2017 - 04:16 AM, said:

That's true! Forget MW4. The iconic Civil War mechs are the same (even if sometimes updated) Succession Wars mechs.

MUL says non of the "new age" tech upgrades was available during the FCCW - no Rotary Thunderbolt (although i would kill for that guy)

Edited by Karl Streiger, 03 May 2017 - 04:23 AM.

[Metus regem]

Odanan, on 02 May 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

Battlemechs also have fixed engine, structure and armor in BT...

Such as? There are very few IS omnis that would please the MechLabWarriors.

IS omnis either do have Std Engine, so they waste tonnage; either do have XL Engine, so they die easily.
Either do have Endo Steel, so they don't have internal space; either don't (so they waste tonnage).
And sometimes, they do have IS Ferro Fibrous, which is only useful for the lighter mechs.

Some cases:
- Raptor: kind of slow for a 25 tons in MWO;
- Arctic Fox: very slow for a 30 tonner;
- Owens: locked single heat sinks;
- Strider: locked single heat sinks;
- Men Shen: actually, a good option;
- Avatar: locked "slow" XL engine on a 70 tonner;
- Templar: XL engine on a 85 tonner;
- Sunder: XL engine on a 90 tonner;
- Hauptmann: locked very slow Std. engine.
...

The Templar I have a feeling would be largely okay to decent thanks to the arm sheilds it has, much like the Battlemaster. Also based on the art work, the ST hard points would be near cockpit level.



This is the best picture of Templar that shows off the location of the SSRM/4 in the RT and the sensor for the targeting computer in the LT


As an aside, I think it'd have made a fantastic Civil War mech for the IS... The only real problem with it, is limited crit space thanks to FF, Endo and XL engine.... But she does have 44t of pod space on a 85t mech....

[Metus regem]

Karl Streiger, on 03 May 2017 - 04:22 AM, said:

Ok there is the cannon Gauntlet - that takes the best from the KU and the Bushwacker and combine it into a nice and sexy Steiner Omni Mech - although its DarkAge

I love the Gauntlet, it's what the Bushy should have been in the first place...

[FLG 01]

Odanan, on 03 May 2017 - 04:16 AM, said:

That's true! Forget MW4. The iconic Civil War mechs are the same (even if sometimes updated) Succession Wars mechs.

Partially. The A rated units had more brandnew or rediscovered SL-designs in their ranks than they had upgraded SW-era Mechs.

Also take a look at what Mechs the IS heroes (and villains) are piloting:

Victor Steiner-Davion: Daishi
Peter Steiner-Davion: Fafnir
Nondi Steiner: Hauptmann
Adam Steiner: Thunder Hawk
Ardan Sortek: Templar
Tranced Sandoval: Nightstar, Templar
Kai Allard-Liao: Centurion
Linda McDonald: King Crab
Raymund Irelon: Excalibur
Rudolf Shakov: Exterminator
Galen Cox: Devastator
Lori Carlyle: Victor
Archer Christifori: Penetrator
Michael Searcy: Dragon Fire, Pillager

The 3025 Classics are still there and fine, but the FCCW heavily featured newer Mechs (obviously so, since they wanted to sell them!).

However that is not the point. The actual problem is simple: A pack that is marketed as "Civil War" damn well should give us those Mechs - and not some sidelined Mechs which are so negligible that they don't make it into a RAT of the era.

Edited by FLG 01, 03 May 2017 - 11:31 AM.

[Odanan]

Metus regem, on 03 May 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:

As an aside, I think it'd have made a fantastic Civil War mech for the IS... The only real problem with it, is limited crit space thanks to FF, Endo and XL engine.... But she does have 44t of pod space on a 85t mech....

FF? I don't have my PDFs anymore, but I believe it has Std Armor? (if it has FF, it's even worst than I thought)

[Metus regem]

Odanan, on 03 May 2017 - 11:33 AM, said:

FF? I don't have my PDFs anymore, but I believe it has Std Armor? (if it has FF, it's even worst than I thought)

Yup, she uses an XL engine with both Endo and FF... she is very, very tight on free crits.... but 44t of pod space to work with.

[FLG 01]

According to the RS, it has standard armour:



That means some 44 tons and 27 crits to work with. ...which is ok.

[Metus regem]

FLG 01, on 03 May 2017 - 12:14 PM, said:

According to the RS, it has standard armour:



That means some 44 tons and 27 crits to work with. ...which is ok.

Your right, I just double checked my TRO. For some reason I thought it was using all the weight savings tech....

[Odanan]

Metus regem, on 03 May 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

Your right, I just double checked my TRO. For some reason I thought it was using all the weight savings tech....

I liked the distribution of the Endo slots. With tiny side torsos, these make could be interesting (it's already the best option for IS omni assault).

[Karl Streiger]

Metus regem, on 03 May 2017 - 12:02 PM, said:

Yup, she uses an XL engine with both Endo and FF... she is very, very tight on free crits.... but 44t of pod space to work with.

Not 100% sure and to lazy to hit my Google drive but don't you mistake it with the templar 3 (what is the 2)

[Bishop Steiner]

Metus regem, on 03 May 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

Your right, I just double checked my TRO. For some reason I thought it was using all the weight savings tech....

smart IS assault designs no use Ferro.

[Metus regem]

Karl Streiger, on 03 May 2017 - 12:25 PM, said:

Not 100% sure and to lazy to hit my Google drive but don't you mistake it with the templar 3 (what is the 2)

Good question as to what happened to the Templar II....