86 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 March 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

Was wondering what was up with that? Not CGBI anymore? Got a unit, or just dropping Davion for fun?

Well after the last ToP went bad for me, against Salhoma Steve, I just said "To hell with it, I'm not really loving my Clan Mechs for the most part right now."

So for now, just Dropping Davion for a bit, after 28 days, I'll flip to Steiner, then back again... might try to find a unit, might not...

Still having just bought my first Battlemaster (3S) I am really liking the switch so far. I like the flexibility in the IS mechs, helps in CW that I know where the Clan mechs are weakest, and use it to my advantage.

[Bishop Steiner]

Metus regem, on 10 March 2015 - 10:15 AM, said:

Well after the last ToP went bad for me, against Salhoma Steve, I just said "To hell with it, I'm not really loving my Clan Mechs for the most part right now."

So for now, just Dropping Davion for a bit, after 28 days, I'll flip to Steiner, then back again... might try to find a unit, might not...

Still having just bought my first Battlemaster (3S) I am really liking the switch so far. I like the flexibility in the IS mechs, helps in CW that I know where the Clan mechs are weakest, and use it to my advantage.

Yeah, have never bothered with a ToP other than my initial one as a Warrior. I'm the Clan equivalent of a beach bum. Freebirth slacker and happy to be that way!

[Metus regem]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 March 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

Yeah, have never bothered with a ToP other than my initial one as a Warrior. I'm the Clan equivalent of a beach bum. Freebirth slacker and happy to be that way!

I gave a good fight, dueling Adder primes, but hit-reg was seeming a bit off for me....

I know I smoked him in the rear CT with both cERPPC's but no damage was dealt....

[Rossario x Vampire]

Vote for... ELAR440 or V-ELAR 440XXL

[Almond Brown]

Pjwned, on 09 March 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

Better yet just make it so that losing a chunk of your clan mech's XL engine actually matters, 20% heatsink loss is practically nothing.

Yaah, and losing roughly 50% of your external DHS's and weapons is "****" all too right?

[Almond Brown]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 March 2015 - 08:38 AM, said:

Needs 25 % speed reduction too.

So 20% of Internal DHS's lost, a 25% speed reduction and the standard loss of +/- 50% of external DHS's (ST + Arm store) and whatever weapons were in that side as well?

That is hardly a Nerf at all. The Clanners would surely be very pleased with that idea.

Don't forget that after that small nerf to the Clan Engine, that I.S. also guy wants his I.S. Engine to get a 50% Internal Structure buff too...

So that way everyone will finally be happy. LOL!

[Bishop Steiner]

Almond Brown, on 10 March 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:

Yaah, and losing roughly 50% of your external DHS's and weapons is "****" all too right?

compared to the IS losing their entire mech when the ST comes off an XL? YEah seems minor, plus a sword and board meta build can sacrifice that half.

[RAM]

WM Quicksilver, on 09 March 2015 - 01:00 PM, said:

This becomes important because the Clans have no reason to ever run a standard engine mech, ever. The case would be the same with the IS light engine, as outside of lights there would be no reason NOT to use it.

Both of these statements are utterly false.


RAM
ELH

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 10 March 2015 - 08:41 AM, said:

The main issue here is that not all geometry is created equal, so if I can put a STD in any mech and get this benefit – mechs with superior geometry come out ahead.

Which was the original concept behind quirking specific mechs based on their overall rating (hardpoints, geometry, etc)

True, certain mechs like the Crab would definitely benefit from this, so maybe get rid of some quirks (TBolt anyone) and allow the STD engine to replace them.

Ultimatum X, on 10 March 2015 - 08:41 AM, said:

As for the higher heat cap and dissipation:

I like this idea for STD engines in general, not sure if 25% of each might be a bit too large.


Also, as above not all mechs are created equal.

I can stuff 20 to 24 DHS into a Stalker easily for energy boat builds - then I'd get additional cooling from the STD engine I have to take.

I can't get nearly as many DHS into an Atlas, because weapons like an AC 20 and multiple SRMs gobble up crit space.


So I think some boost for STD would be nice, but it should not be a replacement for quirks - rather an addition and adjustment to how quirks are handled.

25% is just a number, so that is always flexible.

As for some mechs being better when it comes to crits, for me this isn't something that is within the scope of the discussion. This is more a problem of the mech creation rules more than anything, about how worthless hand actuators and overall problem with crit space of weapons.

The one thing though is that the heat generated by the AC20 and 4 SRM6 isn't as much as the 6 LL Stalker. With the AC20 +4 SRM6 generating roughly 5.8 HPS (w/ghost heat) vs the Stalker's 9.9 HPS (w/o ghost heat). So the Stalker needs a lot more DHS to be as heat efficient as the Atlas (~29 DHS in fact).

Ultimatum X, on 10 March 2015 - 08:41 AM, said:

IS XL is definitely in a very difficult place vs. Clan XL and obviously clearly inferior - especially on larger mechs.

I agree something needs to be done to prevent the easy kills they can present - however I would temper this with the fact that while Clan XL is clearly superior the stipulation is that it is locked to the mech.

This is the main reason I don't want just more nerfs for Clan XLs, I would love to see IS XLs viable on larger scale mechs. So rather than weight being the determining factor of whether an IS XL is suitable, to role dictates it which is the problem with the engine situation currently. Not to mention the confusion of new players when they die from a side torso and trying to explain why IS XLs are that way.

As for Clan XLs being locked, honestly I just want them to redo how they handle Omni's, I have not really liked it since day one. Also, I miss my Kit Fox running 130kph

RAM, on 10 March 2015 - 12:06 PM, said:

Both of these statements are utterly false.


RAM
ELH

How about you give an example rather than making empty statements? It has been discussed before how inferior standard engine clan omnis would be in previous speculation threads, simply because you gain so little for how much you sacrifice.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 10 March 2015 - 01:32 PM.

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 10 March 2015 - 12:22 PM, said:

True, certain mechs like the Crab would definitely benefit from this, so maybe get rid of some quirks (TBolt anyone) and allow the STD engine to replace them.

Even with all of the quirks they have received, most competitive players (or just competitive minded if not actually on comp teams) consider the 9S and the 5SS to be T2 at best, and only in their niche - that's with all of their quirks.

WM Quicksilver, on 10 March 2015 - 12:22 PM, said:

As for some mechs being better when it comes to crits, for me this isn't something that is within the scope of the discussion. This is more a problem of the mech creation rules more than anything, about how worthless hand actuators and overall problem with crit space of weapons.

All valid issues, perhaps we will see PGI address them before the heat death of the universe.

WM Quicksilver, on 10 March 2015 - 12:22 PM, said:

The one thing though is that the heat generated by the AC20 and 4 SRM6 isn't as much as the 6 LL Stalker.

Honestly I wasn't think that Stalker - just in General. If you want to make my Misery build even more tanky, I won't complain.



The point is, that quirks address the imbalance between mechs.

Where my Stalker can tank with a shield side, and the Awesome with it's humongous torsos can not.

Addressing the Awesome directly helps the Awesome, adding the bonus to the STD engine improves the Stalker more than the Awesome in a comparison vs. each other.


So I think the idea has merit, but it is certainly not a replacement for quirks - perhaps in addition to quirks and having quirks adjusted a touch to compensate.


The issue with STD engines though isn't that mechs aren't tanky enough - it's that they struggle to build competitive levels of firepower or speed.

So I actually think your heat concept has more merit, because that is in effect "ghost tonnage" - allowing a mech to not need nearly as many DHS to run a build with tonnage being devoted to that massive engine.

It's a good idea.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 10 March 2015 - 04:17 PM, said:

Even with all of the quirks they have received, most competitive players (or just competitive minded if not actually on comp teams) consider the 9S and the 5SS to be T2 at best, and only in their niche - that's with all of their quirks.

True, but with a STD engine, they would getting an even higher heat cap on top of both side torso internal boosts AND center boosts. Quirks can always be added back afterwards.

Ultimatum X, on 10 March 2015 - 04:17 PM, said:

Honestly I wasn't think that Stalker - just in General. If you want to make my Misery build even more tanky, I won't complain.

The point is, that quirks address the imbalance between mechs.

Where my Stalker can tank with a shield side, and the Awesome with it's humongous torsos can not.

Addressing the Awesome directly helps the Awesome, adding the bonus to the STD engine improves the Stalker more than the Awesome in a comparison vs. each other.

True, but at the same time, XLs are hopefully being made assault friendly. Mechs like the King Crab could very possibly swing for an XL instead of the standard because of the firepower it can mount, which would still be a boost, but in a different direction. Still doesn't solve the Stalker vs Awesome debate, so keeping side torso internals quirks are always a possibility, got a little ahead of myself on that one I suppose.

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 10 March 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:

True, but with a STD engine, they would getting an even higher heat cap on top of both side torso internal boosts AND center boosts. Quirks can always be added back afterwards.

Having them adjusted down would definitely be fair, I suppose it depends on the magnitude of the STD engine buff.

WM Quicksilver, on 10 March 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:

True, but at the same time, XLs are hopefully being made assault friendly. Mechs like the King Crab could very possibly swing for an XL instead of the standard because of the firepower it can mount, which would still be a boost, but in a different direction. Still doesn't solve the Stalker vs Awesome debate, so keeping side torso internals quirks are always a possibility, got a little ahead of myself on that one I suppose.

Not to mention XL will not even be possible for "good" builds for many Assault mechs - particularly the Atlas as it would lose it's primary weapons.

You can't fit an AC 20 or a heavy Artemis SRM load in a torso with an XL.


Balance is a precarious thing. Giving more firepower to the Crab (plus a lot of speed from a 350xl or similar), pushes the Atlas further down from usage.


Quirks can never really be abolished, there are simply too many variables among mech designs and mech geometry.

Adjusted to compensate is doable however.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 10 March 2015 - 04:48 PM, said:

Quirks can never really be abolished, there are simply too many variables among mech designs and mech geometry.

Adjusted to compensate is doable however.

Oh I agree, quirks are a great idea, PGI just needs to have some sort of guideline/rules for them. MW4:HC had its own version of quirks with guidelines and even had a calculator for such a thing, if only PGI were as organized.

[El Bandito]

I personally want the engines to only increase movement speed, NOT twist speed.

That way, the superiority of XL engines can be pared down a bit. Right now, I prefer XL engines on pretty much any mech that is not named Stalker.

Edited by El Bandito, 10 March 2015 - 06:03 PM.

[Koniks]

Instead of coming up with more gimmicks, I'd rather they just rebalanced damage, cooldowns, and heat so that I.S. were mostly tanky DPS mechs and Clan had less frequent, hotter alphas. With an overall max damage and max DPS reduction.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mizeur, on 10 March 2015 - 09:47 PM, said:

gimmicks

I do not think this word means what you think it means.....

[Koniks]

Convoluted mechanics that alter the standard way of playing are gimmicks. Like ghost heat. Or quirks. (Or Clans for that matter.)

So the armor/structure quirks are already a gimmick trying to fix a flaw in gameplay. Incorporating them into how STD engines work doesn't make them less gimmicky. It just adds another layer of complexity. So instead of getting a mech that always has the quirk, now it's player choice.

The game would be better off if they fixed the core mechanics instead of applying more bandages.

Edited by Mizeur, 10 March 2015 - 10:27 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mizeur, on 10 March 2015 - 10:24 PM, said:

Convoluted mechanics that alter the standard way of playing are gimmicks. Like ghost heat. Or quirks. (Or Clans for that matter.)

So the armor/structure quirks are already a gimmick trying to fix a flaw in gameplay. Incorporating them into how STD engines work doesn't make them less gimmicky. It just adds another layer of complexity. So instead of getting a mech that always has the quirk, now it's player choice.

The game would be better off if they fixed the core mechanics instead of applying more bandages.

Gimmicks =/= Convoluted mechanics
Gimmick is usually used in RPG style games and I feel the usage of it by pokemon players is fairly apt and easily put in terms of MWO.

Quote

A gimmick in Pokémon is "any set that uses sub-optimal moves or items to gain a surprise advantage over opposing teams or standard counters".

Giving a piece of equipment a static boost is akin to saying endo steel relies on convoluted mechanics. Standard Engines would have a flat 100% increase to torso internals and some increased max heat/cooling. The "flaw" it is trying to fix is the imbalance with regards to low hanging arms or unfortunately shaped profiles as well as give a better reason to take an IS mech over a clan mech (or a Kingfisher over an Executioner or Gargoyle). There isn't a whole lot of fixing that (though a scaling pass would do wonders).

It also doesn't add a layer of complexity since it is a mechlab only kind of thing, it isn't like it is yet another thing you have to "manage" in game and is just reinforcing a trade-off that kind of exists currently. Not to mention that an IS XL would not cause quite as much confusion when they die from a side torso destruction. You want to talk about convoluted, talk about the critical system.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 10 March 2015 - 10:46 PM.

[Ultimax]

Mizeur, on 10 March 2015 - 10:24 PM, said:

So the armor/structure quirks are already a gimmick trying to fix a flaw in gameplay

Mechs are being given armor/structure quirks for two primary reasons:



1) PGI has tried to stay true to the art in battle tech, they have not always gotten it perfect but that's why some mechs are as big as they are and some as are small as they are.


2) PGI didn't invent the ridiculously bad power gap between IS & Clan mechs, they have inherited it. They are trying to close that gap as much as possible so that we have a relatively balanced game with faction warfare.



1 & 2 are compounded issues, it makes for some complicated and tricky balance. This is just the nature of the beast.

[Johnny Z]

Anything is better than what is in game now. Cant compare the omni XL and is XL. There are tons of advantages to omni tech beyond the XL engine. So bring the two techs engines closer together isnt so bad.

One of, or a combination of the following adjustments could help possibly. I would put more ideas if i knew more.

- Give IS XL side torso more structure do to having 3 crits instead of the omni's 2
- Have IS XL or Omni XL mechs do a shutdown on side torso loss instead of a "BOOM" in the case of the IS XL.
- Nerf the clans side torso loss
- Adjust heat for either or both of the XL engines.

The IS standard should probly have some structure buffs and or heat buffs.

The IS light fusion engine is an idea also but may not be a good one. It depends on the adjustments to current engines. If those are good IS light fusion engine isnt needed maybe.

Edited by Johnny Z, 11 March 2015 - 12:40 AM.