11 replies to this topic

[Matthew Ace]

It's well known that a lot of players are talking about how Gargoyles offering little over competiting mechs (e.g. Timber Wolf). While thinking about the problem, I related it to the large engines and then have this idea:

Why not give a buff to movement archaetype (sp?) for mechs carrying engines of rating and above?

For example, Huge to Large, Large to Medium etc.

Numbers can be tweaked, but you get the idea.

Assaults: rating 350
Heavies: 325 (nerf TW 1 level)
Medium: 275 (nerf stormcrow 1 level)
Light: 150 or 6 x tonnage (whichever is larger)

There may be a need to add an archaetype thats beyond tiny as well.

Timberwolves and Stormcrow have their current movement archaetype reduced, hence retained by means of this buff.

The buff can potentially also extend to increased maneueverability such as turning and accel/decel. And even ROF just so to boost benefits of larger engines at expense of weapons.

Thoughts?

Edited by Matthew Ace, 15 January 2015 - 02:37 AM.

[Lily from animove]

because this seems not to be a balanced at all and is not equally distributed, actually the movement archtype should be a fixed value influenced by a mechs tonnage. This would create a smoother distribution of the archtype and significantly differ for an 100t assault compared to an 80t assault, while the differenc ebetween an 80t assault and a 75t heavy is a lot smaller. its only 5t diffeence at all.

Engine rating should never had been involved into this.

[Uthael]

Running 97.3kph in CPLT-J with JJs and all... Movement type - light. Deal!

Edit: I don't own a Jester yet, but am a fan of Catapults (except A1). They have only a head and a CT (which is also a big weakness), but that allows them to use XLs. Also, you can use the ears as shields and/or fodder if your main weapons are in torsos. Remember in old comics/movies where one would put his hat on a stick and show it above his cover to check for enemy fire? Yeah... You can use that here xD You lose the hat, but you don't need to check with your eyes and forehead.
Anyway; here's what I mean:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...06b337c2a3858d3

Edit2: All lights are expected to mount XLs and would get the bonus weather they're aiming for it or not. Therefore painting them red should bring that "movement archetype bonus"

Edited by Uthael, 15 January 2015 - 07:59 AM.

[Matthew Ace]

Lily from animove, on 15 January 2015 - 03:13 AM, said:

because this seems not to be a balanced at all and is not equally distributed, actually the movement archtype should be a fixed value influenced by a mechs tonnage. This would create a smoother distribution of the archtype and significantly differ for an 100t assault compared to an 80t assault, while the differenc ebetween an 80t assault and a 75t heavy is a lot smaller. its only 5t diffeence at all.

Engine rating should never had been involved into this.

While I get where you're coming from, how would you make it such that mechs like Gargoyles, Summoners or any others utilising heavier engines than optimal have a decent edge or selling point without touching locked engines, internals and armor, besides quirks and individual mech archaetype adjustment then?

Edited by Matthew Ace, 15 January 2015 - 11:01 PM.

[Lily from animove]

Matthew Ace, on 15 January 2015 - 08:30 PM, said:

While I get where you're coming from, how would you make it such that mechs like Gargoyles, Summoners or any others utilising heavier engines than optimal have a decent edge or selling point without touching locked engines, internals and armor, besides quirks and individual mech archaetype adjustment then?

heavier engine is for the speed. I can in reverse ask, how does it be fair for the SCR with the better fixed engine and better hitboxes to outclass most clanlights and by far the Nova? And this only because those mechs don't have a chance to change structure and take a bigger engine.

Investing tonnage into the engine is for speed, and your GAR is by the current system still not as good in tiwsting as the TBR, while your gargoyle invetss a laod more into the engine? thats hardly fair, given that the GARgoyle is only 5 tons heavier. and if the lore would have classified the heavy range from 60-80 and assault from 85-100 it would suddenly change a lot. So no the current system is not fair/logic when the archtype applies the same for a top end tonnage vs low end tonnage mech within its category

WHat i don't like at your idea is how this steps weirdly.

so going from 345 to 350 has suddenly a big impact on an assault
while going from a 340 to a 350 not.

That feels not like a conistent system, and even less if you think about how a 100t mech gets influenced the same like a 80tmech.
This is neither balanced nor conistent tbh.

Edited by Lily from animove, 16 January 2015 - 03:07 AM.

[Matthew Ace]

Well like I said, the numbers can be tweaked as needed. And i reiterate that i understand which angle you are coming from.

My rationale behind the current numbers for heavies and assaults is how the engine weight get much steeper at that point. The mediums and lights portion basically is an expansion of the idea, so as not to leave them out of this. And then for flexibility, this idea was conceived based on the engine so as to make heavy engine more viable than how things currently are.

[Firewuff]

Do you actually underatand what the 'archetype' does at all?

[Lily from animove]

Matthew Ace, on 16 January 2015 - 03:29 AM, said:

Well like I said, the numbers can be tweaked as needed. And i reiterate that i understand which angle you are coming from.

My rationale behind the current numbers for heavies and assaults is how the engine weight get much steeper at that point. The mediums and lights portion basically is an expansion of the idea, so as not to leave them out of this. And then for flexibility, this idea was conceived based on the engine so as to make heavy engine more viable than how things currently are.

the number doesn't cares because it is simply the fact that the engine 5ratins higher furfillign the "number reuirement" gets a massive buff like change, while 20ratings above, nothing happens, and 20 ratings below, also nothing happens. and further it does not influence the mech if its 80t or 100t (which is a difference of 25% mechmass).

And that is why any kind of softly distributing system is more suited. But treating an 350 engine atlas like a 350 engined awesome is somehow not feeling correct.

Firewuff, on 16 January 2015 - 05:38 AM, said:

Do you actually underatand what the 'archetype' does at all?

http://mwomercs.com/...ement-behavior/

its officially under that name only slope movement, yet pgi gave mech categories some rather own types of agility in terms of twist speed and such, which together with engine sizes still creates some own "archtype" like behaviors.

i never udnerstood that given system at all, because a mech like an atlas, should be able by feetsize to step harsher slopes easilier than light mechs with shorter legs. and in reverse light mechs would use their speed and agility to menouver around these kind of terrain barriers.

my adder cna run up the slopes on canyon, whle an atlas may only need 2 steps to get up some of the slopes as well.

Edited by Lily from animove, 16 January 2015 - 06:50 AM.

[Matthew Ace]

It is a rough idea that needs fleshing out but I cant tell whether you would be more agreeable to the idea if the increase is more incremental than spontaneous or you just dislike the whole idea even if such mods were made.

Firewuff, on 16 January 2015 - 05:38 AM, said:

Do you actually underatand what the 'archetype' does at all?

Is that directed at me or lily? Yes I'm well aware what it does. The larger the archetype the poorer it is at slope climbing. The gargoyle is currently at huge and i have my doubts that even it is changed to large, it would still be lacking. But what if both Summoner and Gargoyle, by means of this buff, climbs slopes like mediums? And because engines take up so much more weight after a certain point onwards... What if larger engines have a bigger purpose than increased speed for more increase in weight than is worth it? All without affecting omnimechs locked customisation? Hence I also said perhaps this engine idea may even extend beyond this.

I would like to encourage diversity beyond minmaxing and this is one of my ideas.

Edited by Matthew Ace, 16 January 2015 - 04:06 PM.

[Firewuff]

The architype is for all movement. They are tweeked anyway on a per chassis basis in any case including the torso twist and turn rates. Its not just climb rates. Why would you go and complicate things when quirk passes csn do the same thing?

[Matthew Ace]

How else would you make engines with weight heavier than the benefit it brings mechs that doesnt have its engines locked, while not buffing them if they decide to use a smaller engine?

Maybe it would have been a better idea from the start if I talk about how to make such range of engines be worth taking instead of concentrating on movement archetype. Hardly anyone would use a 400 rating engine if given the option not to.

Edited by Matthew Ace, 17 January 2015 - 07:30 AM.

[ShadowFire]

How about a simple power to weight ratio? Possibly stats could modified by a center-of-gravity wag? Heck you could add an improved turn rate base upon if the mech had toes/talons on its feet for gripping in the turns. They all would be nods toward real world physics.