Odanan, on 05 November 2015 - 04:11 AM, said:
This was specially true when we had 3/3/3/3, where people min/maxed their mechs. With the new tonnage-based system, things might get different (and the class lower tonnage mechs will be more useful).
Aye the tonnage based system was bad for several Mechs.
While a fast heavy/assault was a good choice in 3333 - its a liability in a tonnage based system
This is not exactly the fault of PGI - ok they should have known this fact.
I think the best example for this: Gargoyle vs TimberWolf:
Consider PGI allows OmniMechs to have ES and to limit the number of fixed Heatsinks:
it still:
TimberGod: 12t FF ES 10 DHS and 32.5t modul space
vs
Garagmel 11t FF ES 10 DHS and 31.5t modul space
so considering those additional "structure points" of the gargoyle equal towards the additional ton of armor for the Timber - they are equal.... that is bad bad bad - because the Gargoyle has 5t more - it should not be equal it have to be better.
So the same happens with 55t vs 60t
DRG-1N - 22t available
WVR-6K - 20.5t available
looks fair? right? 5t more weight for 1.5t more loadout
but say we want to increase speed?
WVR-6K 17t
vs
DRG-1N 16.5t
This calculation is nothing new and its a pity PGI did nothing to fix it - you have to consider that the heavier chassis is bigger and you have the same internal crits available.
So for maximum vanilla for the IS - the new chassis have to be 35, 55t 75t and 85-90t (depends if you want it jump capable)
Edited by Karl Streiger, 05 November 2015 - 04:40 AM.