Clans Need More Mech Diversity Time To Let Us Upgrade To Endo Steel To Improve Sup Par Mechs!
#1
Posted 09 February 2015 - 07:09 AM
#3
Posted 09 February 2015 - 07:33 AM
Because every mech must have it's flavor, has its story, its lore.
If we are going to let this kind of chenges, so we also can have Urbanmech going at 100 kph, Vindy with tons of hardpoint and speed, Badder with speed and without flamer, Ice Ferret going slow and with a lot more tons for weapons,....
In few words, this will be a "Any ROBOTTO Online!"
No thanks.
edit: I want more new clan mechs
Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 09 February 2015 - 07:33 AM.
#4
Posted 09 February 2015 - 07:37 AM
#5
Posted 09 February 2015 - 07:38 AM
Quirks can help mitigate weaker chassis issues as well. I don't think it's a major issue.
#6
Posted 09 February 2015 - 08:23 AM
Edited by Duke Nedo, 09 February 2015 - 08:23 AM.
#7
Posted 09 February 2015 - 08:48 PM
Anakha, on 09 February 2015 - 07:09 AM, said:
No...core mechanics need to be balanced. The blame needs to stop being put on the mechs.
-Inflated Heat Cap
-Nerfed Heat Dissipation
-Inflated Armor
-Inflated (most of them anyway) Ammo Count
and then after all that, so many things were changed because of these core problems that they're way out of whack. PGI is looking to once again increase TTK, possibly through armor, which is RIDICULOUS. That means MORE ammo count, MORE shot to kill someone, Mechs will be INSANELY tanky, and then the process will start all over again.
Core mechanics need to be fixed first, as the 'balances' we're making on the mechs are doing nothing but promoting bad PPFLD High Damage Alpha builds.
#8
Posted 09 February 2015 - 09:51 PM
Anakha, on 09 February 2015 - 07:09 AM, said:
So what if PGI does provide you with enough Clan mechs in the future? Lock the Endos back?
#9
Posted 09 February 2015 - 10:13 PM
#11
Posted 09 February 2015 - 11:38 PM
FupDup, on 09 February 2015 - 10:16 PM, said:
STD Internals vs Endo is purely a weight vs crit balance, it fits quite well too. FF is the one that needs a bonus, something to do with a higher armor cap (requiring more tonnage put in) or an overall boost to tonnage/weight ratio giving it a better use on heavier mechs and still not being as useful to lighter mechs. I still like this idea I've constantly advocated for it.
Ferro - In addition to crit use for tonnage, raise max armor cap by X% but require tonnage to be invested to take advantage of it. It would be an armor boost to promote damage absorption, or to improve the survivability of specific component and leave the remaining tonnage gained for other use, such as putting armor on an Atlas' RT, and even CT and using the leftover tonnage gained for weaponry/equipment.
#12
Posted 10 February 2015 - 01:42 AM
yes some mechs would be better, some would not really be better.
now
/thread because we have already serveral of these "ES for the other clanners" topics.
#13
Posted 10 February 2015 - 01:47 AM
the bad mechs are bad, for the most part, because of limited hard points. be that a small number of hard points, or all being in the same locations(like the arms only) or both..
#14
Posted 10 February 2015 - 02:49 AM
Stefka Kerensky, on 09 February 2015 - 07:33 AM, said:
Because every mech must have it's flavor, has its story, its lore.
If we are going to let this kind of chenges, so we also can have Urbanmech going at 100 kph, Vindy with tons of hardpoint and speed, Badder with speed and without flamer, Ice Ferret going slow and with a lot more tons for weapons,....
In few words, this will be a "Any ROBOTTO Online!"
No thanks.
edit: I want more new clan mechs
There are some Pre Publication versions of teh Clan Omnis floating around teh web. They were build Better... smarter. What if PGI switched to these versions instead of the Canon TT ones?
#15
Posted 10 February 2015 - 03:30 AM
Joseph Mallan, on 10 February 2015 - 02:49 AM, said:
Where can I see them? It may be interesting.
Anyway I would like that mechs already long time published would remain as they are; we already have a lot of customizations available.
It would be weird to see a lot of mechs capable to mount whatever weapon they want. So, we would end to see quite the similar comp build in every mech, changing only the skin.
I would like to see stock matches implemented... figure
Another point to say, the trinity is not strong for the loadout, but for their hitboxes.
Imo, even with free endo, the summoner will still have its meh hitboxes, and it wouldn't be a tier 1.
Summoner has good ballistic hardpoints. What about giving him the possibility to have single pellet ballistic (esactly as IS)?
With its maneuverability and single pellet ballistic it would improve, without changing rules too much.
About the ferret, it may sound strange to say, but I like esactly as it is now.
Its a recon and scout medium mech, and while I use lore-wise, I do well with it.
Maybe ppl doesn't like that role for a medium.... BUT if it's so, then change mech. We need another clan medium available, not to change the "ice ferret's spirit". The viper, for example. Ferret must do the ferret, and viper the viper (config A, for example)
#16
Posted 10 February 2015 - 03:39 AM
It would make bad mechs better.
#17
Posted 10 February 2015 - 04:55 AM
Stefka Kerensky, on 09 February 2015 - 07:33 AM, said:
Because every mech must have it's flavor, has its story, its lore.
If we are going to let this kind of chenges, so we also can have Urbanmech going at 100 kph, Vindy with tons of hardpoint and speed, Badder with speed and without flamer, Ice Ferret going slow and with a lot more tons for weapons,....
In few words, this will be a "Any ROBOTTO Online!"
No thanks.
edit: I want more new clan mechs
yes and now we have like what 40 "flavoured light mechs" that just dust in the hangars because everyone runs FS9's and ravens and a few fools the fast dying locusts. I would then better prefer open construction rules and see more chassis variety by visuals even if they all run the same loadout instead of seing the same loadout on the same visual mech.
Edited by Lily from animove, 10 February 2015 - 05:35 AM.
#18
Posted 10 February 2015 - 05:09 AM
be it only perks instead of real quirks, may it be weapon hardpoints, ecm jumpjets and else.
To get real diversity you need "flaws" - what if you pay dearly for the heat dissipation of the TDR-9S when it means that the armor perks - are flaws - so instead of +10 points of armor you get -10.
I can only remember a single moment where PGI made things right - when they brought the Stalker - able to have more punch for lower buck as a Atlas they screwed the Mech with reduced movement values.
Same about the Centurion vs Hunchback.
But because people cry they made the Centurion as mobile as the Hunchback + screwed hitboxes cause almost the extinction of this "newb" friendly Mech.
SO QUIRKS MADE RIGHT = +/-0
20% better heat dissipation +2
-5 points of armor at the RT -1
-5 points of armor at the LT -1
With that you get different play styles - you know my old example - YLW vs Hunchback.... the Hunter vs the Finisher
The first fires often at short range - the later fires seldom at more range - instead of
20%<25%
You don't need ES when the mobility + precisions fire power of the Summoner can out gun the raw fire power of a TimberWolf that lack some mobility for "brawling" (reduced twist and turn rates and angles)
Edited by Karl Streiger, 10 February 2015 - 05:11 AM.
#20
Posted 10 February 2015 - 05:28 AM
Lily from animove, on 10 February 2015 - 04:55 AM, said:
yes and now we have like what 40 "flavoured light mechs" that just dust int he hangars because every oen runs FS9's and ravens and a few fools the fats dying locusts. I would then better prefer open construction rules and see more chassis variety by visuals even if they all run the same loadout instead of seing the same loadout on the same visual mech.
Does that even make sense?
PS: You forgot jenners and spiders as i see a lot of those (particularly oxides) in CW.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


























