140 replies to this topic

[EvilCow]

Another option would be to give standard internal structure and standard armor some advantages over their lighter counterparts (like quirks but related to the component not the mech).

For example standard structure could allow to retain an arm if the torso section is lost and give more speed on a damaged leg. Standard armor could give a 5% bonus vs ballistics.

Mechs without FF/ES would make a lot more sense.

[kapusta11]

El Bandito, on 18 April 2015 - 08:49 PM, said:

Quad Gauss Direwhale with macro = GG. Will never overheat and have plenty of ammo.

Yes, there is a macro that allows you to chain-fire all four Gauss within very short amount of time.

I'd take 2xGauss+2xLPL+4xERML OR 3xGauss+5xERML OR 2xGauss+6xMPL instead of it any day.

Now back to the topic.

I support unlocking Endo and Ferro, and Engines while we're at it, Gargoyle would be grateful. The worst situation we may get is when every other mech is as good as SCR and TBR but since everyone is using those already what's the difference?

[One Medic Army]

kapusta11, on 19 April 2015 - 12:21 AM, said:

I support unlocking Endo and Ferro, and Engines while we're at it, Gargoyle would be grateful. The worst situation we may get is when every other mech is as good as SCR and TBR but since everyone is using those already what's the difference?

2 places I draw the line: allowing the endo/ferro slots to be fully dynamic, and unlocking the engines. If you allowed a timber wolf to drop to a 350xl it'd get 4.5 tons more pod space (plus another ton for the DHS that gets kicked out IIRC), dropping to a 325 adds 7.5 tons pod space (plus 2 DHS removed).

Unlocking engines makes the best clan mechs even better, not just the under performers. To stop that from happening I'd gladly leave the gargle stuck with its XL400. If you want to help him, maybe ease up the tonnage scaling between 375 and 400XL so it's not so much more?

[kapusta11]

One Medic Army, on 19 April 2015 - 12:30 AM, said:

2 places I draw the line: allowing the endo/ferro slots to be fully dynamic, and unlocking the engines. If you allowed a timber wolf to drop to a 350xl it'd get 4.5 tons more pod space (plus another ton for the DHS that gets kicked out IIRC), dropping to a 325 adds 7.5 tons pod space (plus 2 DHS removed).

Unlocking engines makes the best clan mechs even better, not just the under performers. To stop that from happening I'd gladly leave the gargle stuck with its XL400. If you want to help him, maybe ease up the tonnage scaling between 375 and 400XL so it's not so much more?

The most timeline appropriate mech after clan wave 3 mech pack http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Night_Gyr

TBR doesn't need any more tons of pod space, you simply don't have enough crits to put anything else, everything is filled with DHS. In theory you can downgrade engine to 350 and remove ferro-fibrous armor to put 3 additional DHS but the way external DHS work after 17 and increased facetime gained due to lower engine rating make this min-max effort questionable.

Edited by kapusta11, 19 April 2015 - 01:09 AM.

[Novawrecker]

I highly doubt we'll see the Owens Omni due to it having a C3 unit hardwired into it. This, of course, is unless PGI actually works C3 into the game (and seeing the phenomenal job they've done with the Command Console ... yeah right). Don't get me wrong, I'd KILL to see that mech in game, but PGI needs some serious R & D regarding implementing C3 (and still CC) into MWO properly.

The Avatar (especially over the Black Hawk KU) and Sunder definitely have my attention (and hope greatly they consider releasing them).

As for allowing future IS (or any Omni-mech) to upgrade their engines, structure, or armor type? Not really. It would be unfair toward the previous Omni-mechs as well as create mass imbalance between them.

[Chuanhao]

Durant Carlyle, on 18 April 2015 - 09:24 PM, said:

Lore cannot be left out of it, as without lore this would be Generic Giant Stompy Robot Combat Game #247.

I know that we will never have Stock 'Mechs Online, but we can maintain our current relationship with lore and still have a successful game. We don't need to move farther away from our BattleTech roots.

I support this. We are not armoured core nor virtual on nor heavy gear. There are distinctiveness to Btech. We can continue to move further and further from lore and soon wr just need one mech per weight class that can fit anything, dont even need to differentiate between IS and Clan.

what needs to be changed are the mechanics that are not working as intended. Imagine with JJs were fixed. The Summoner might just be THE mech with the means to pivot on the spot 360 with its JJs.

Fix the things that really need fixing. Dont go offering up all the mechs up to the buff diety.

I have seen and many would agree that there are viable builds for all mechs. They just need to be played as intended and this may not be the most popular but it adds variety and is good long term

[Lightfoot]

Not Engines because that is a critical payload balance that you actually get some rewards for. That part is good, much as I want my 2xLB-20X Summoner from MW4 which smaller engines would allow.

However, Jump Jets are not doing anything which you could call agility so they should be removable as the player desires. The Jump-jets are not anywhere near as agile as Battle Tech TT calls for or describes so they should always be optional or be revamped to be canon.

Canon Battle Tech Jump-jets on a 100 ton mech......



That's what you want. About 2.5 to 3 mech heights and then the distance. If full JJets are equipped. Lights fly higher. If they don't do that they don't make you agile they just make you a fat target. So no fixed jump jets, they are too bound up in 3PV pop-tart nerfing in MWO.

Endo and FF should be optional always just for pure balance across all chassis. Just map the fixed hardpoints for them if the player chooses Endo or FF. Everything gets corrected and balanced and is very very balanced. That makes the weapons easier to balance too.


.

Edited by Lightfoot, 19 April 2015 - 05:06 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Please remember when i say Change an Omni Engine,
i mean Engine Type(XL to STD), i dont mean Engine Rating(300XL to 250XL),
this Change would only Benefit IS as they have 2 Engine Types, Clans dont,

Chuanhao, on 19 April 2015 - 04:18 AM, said:

I support this. We are not armoured core nor virtual on nor heavy gear. There are distinctiveness to Btech. We can continue to move further and further from lore and soon wr just need one mech per weight class that can fit anything, dont even need to differentiate between IS and Clan.

what needs to be changed are the mechanics that are not working as intended. Imagine with JJs were fixed. The Summoner might just be THE mech with the means to pivot on the spot 360 with its JJs.

Fix the things that really need fixing. Dont go offering up all the mechs up to the buff diety.

I have seen and many would agree that there are viable builds for all mechs. They just need to be played as intended and this may not be the most popular but it adds variety and is good long term

i agree to some point, but remember this is a MechWarrior Game,
MechWarrior came out in 1989, the first to feature a MechLab was MechWarrior 2(1995),
the First Armored Core Game came out in 1997, if anything Armored Core is trying to be MechWarrior,

i grew up on MechWarrior, i love the Universe, Mechs, Weapons, & Custimization,
when i Play Mech Warrior they feel as if im a Hero in their own Personalized and Custom mech,
but you cant have MechWarrior construstion rules for IS, and BattleTech TT Construction rules for Clan,
its just way too limiting, and when IS Omni-Mechs are released more people will see and be more Flexable,

ive given up on Unlocking JJ, as now i feel JJ and DHS are Defining and Balancing tools,
but when the Usefulness of a Mech is decided by its Free Tonnage, Endo could really help,
its not about Breaking the Rules, because those Rules Never applied to MechWarrior before this,
if anything what im asking is to make the Game More Like a True MechWarrior Title,

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 18 April 2015 - 10:14 PM, said:

yeah but battletech has BATTLE VALUE. So having mechs that are worse than others its acceptable because better mechs cost more BV than worse mechs.

MWO sadly does not have BV so having mechs that are way worse than others isnt acceptable or balanced.

There's another critical difference in that you can use more than "X" number of units at a time, and each player can control more than 1 unit. So, a Panther might not have any advantages over a heavy or medium mech in any way, but I could control a larger force of them against you. But in a game like this, we have a specific hardlocked number of players per team, and it's impossible to control more than 1 mech at a time from first person view.

As such, those large inequality gaps wouldn't be so wonderful here.

[FupDup]

Durant Carlyle, on 18 April 2015 - 10:18 PM, said:

There would be far more choices of viable chassis, and the battlefield would see more variety.

You wouldn't have situations like the Griffin, where you can boat SRMs, or LRMs, or LLs, or MPLs, or MLs, depending on your exact preferences. People would have to take different 'Mechs depending on the weapons mix they prefer. Sure, some might match up, but those would be few and far between.

You're making the dangerous assumption that those "weapon preferences" and other such choices are equal, but they're not.


Things like Small Lasers, SRM2, AC/2, MGs when not boated, Flamers, and so on are simply outclassed choices whether or not you have "a preference" for them. Mechs that have them stock are therefore inferior to mechs that come stock with "meta" weapons like various lasers, ACs (excluding the AC/2), and Gauss (in BT, PPCs were also superior to nearly every other option, but that doesn't apply to MWO because of the projectile speed nerf). There isn't really choice here, because some options are inherently superior to others.


In general, variants with low armor are inferior to variants with higher armor or max armor. This is because armor is so much more powerful than offensive equipment in BT. Consider that the most efficient weapon per ton in 3025 BT is the Small Laser, giving you 6 damage per ton of weight. In BT, you get 16 points of armor per ton.

So, in 3025, 1 ton of armor is 167% superior to 1 ton of weaponry, and that's assuming you use the most efficient weaponry! Even when we throw in better weapons like the Clan ER Small (10 damage per ton), armor is still superior. It's not a tradeoff, it's an upgrade. Mechs like the Locust 1M, Hellbringer, Cicada, Kit Fox, and Jagermech are gimped by having garbage armor.


There's also some mech that have Endo, DHS, and XL, and a lot that don't. A number of stocks didn't even carry enough heatsinks for their loadouts in TT, much less MWO. The ones that do have those upgrades are superior because they can hit harder, take more damage, move faster, or a combination of all 3. For example, compare the Shadow Hawk 5M to any other stock Shadow Hawk. It's pretty much a direct upgrade over the others, and better than the majority of other mediums in the game (excluding some Clan mediums).


In general, being on the high-end of your weight class is still better because that's just how the BT construction system was designed. A 35 ton light, with all other factors being equal, is superior to the average light that is only 20, 25, or 30 tons. 55 tons is more optimal than 40, 45, or 50 tons. 100 tons is better than almost everything unless you're using a suboptimal build. Etc.


Many mechs have poor engine choices. Some mechs have engines that are obnoxiously large, such as the Charger (not in the game yet though). Many mechs have engines that are too small, such as the majority of 3025 mediums moving at the same speed as heavies without gaining anything in return. And then there's the Urbanmech that gets outran, outgunned, and out-armored by any assault, any heavy, and most mediums.

Durant Carlyle, on 18 April 2015 - 10:18 PM, said:

No 'Mechs would be able to maintain the fire rates of current 'Mechs.

Alpha strike frequency would be decreased.

This is a somewhat contradictory train of thought. Firing rates are correlated with DPS, which is the polar opposite of alpha striking (yin-and-yang). If you remove DPS from the game, firing a single salvo and then hiding to cover is literally the only way to play because anything else is hardcoded impossible.

...Unless you're one of those lucky stock mechs that comes with oodles of DHS, that is (like that STORMCROW PRIME that I keep mentioning). In that case, you get to roll your face over your keyboard as you effortlessly curbstomp poorly armed poorly armored slow as fuq SHS ghettomechs.

Durant Carlyle, on 18 April 2015 - 10:18 PM, said:

No more using a single jump jet to get increased weapons/ammo/equipment.

That's annoying for sure, but the real solution is to make MULTIPLE JJS WORTH USING.

Durant Carlyle, on 18 April 2015 - 10:18 PM, said:

'Mech speeds would be back the way they are supposed to be. Light and Medium 'Mech survivability would increase.

In case you forgot, most stock mediums move at the exact same speed as heavies, while having way less armor and guns. Why would I ever use most mediums over a heavy when a heavy MOVES JUST AS FAST while being tougher and more powerful? In fact, the Timberwolf can actually outrun most stock mediums...

For lights, most of the 3025 ones are barely faster than mediums if at all, and very often carry paper-thin armor that can be penetrated by spitballs, in addition to having pinprick weapon loadouts.


This ignores the fact that you're basically blanket nerfing the IS while the Clans get to keep their already higher engine ratings and often more armor. Tell me why I would use any IS medium (or heavy!) over a Stormcow Prime (faster, tougher, stronger, longer), and why I would ever use any light mech other than the Arctic Cheetah.

Edited by FupDup, 19 April 2015 - 08:04 AM.

[Armorine]

El Bandito, on 18 April 2015 - 08:49 PM, said:

Quad Gauss Direwhale with macro = GG. Will never overheat and have plenty of ammo.

Yes, there is a macro that allows you to chain-fire all four Gauss within very short amount of time.

Link or it doesn't exist. I keep hearing people talk about gauss macros but no one ever has proof


For clarification. I know about auto fire. Which DOES NOT get around the charge mechanic,

Edited by Armorine, 19 April 2015 - 09:00 AM.

[mark v92]

agreed.

unlock endo with fixed structure for all and switching between standard and XL engine of the same rating for IS omni would be nice.

Edited by mark v92, 19 April 2015 - 09:25 AM.

[Trashhead]

You forgot the -> Strider, which is particularly fcuked:
- STD-Engine
- Single Heatsinks
- Fixed Case (left and right torso)

On the Plus side it has Endo-steel.
Being basically an Omni-version of the Cicada, i do not think anyone would prefer it over the Cicada.

Which is sad, because Alex had already done a sketch for the Strider some time ago, and it looks AWESOME (at least as far as I'm concerned):



Possible solutions to IS-Omni's with sub-par hardwired technology:
(bare in mind this could also apply to Clan Omnis, if needed).

1) Upgrading Techology:
Lets assume there are 4 items that normal mechs could up- or downgrade at will, which we are considering important:
- Engine (STD or XL)
- Heatsinks (Single or Double)
- Skeleton (Standard or Endo)
- Armor (Standard or Ferro)

When ever an Omni has less then 2 of those items as Standard (like the Strider), it is allowed to upgrade until at least 2 of those Items are High-Tech.

So the Strider, who already has one item (Skeleton) upgraded, can only upgrade another one item (i guess most players here would go for Double-Heatsinks then).
The Owens, who already has an XL-Engine, but nothing else, could also upgrade another item (again: most likely Double heatsinks).

2) Quirks:
Simply apply enough quirks until the Mech is valid.
(feels a bit... cheap to me... like circumventing the problem instead of actually fixing it).

It would be especially absurd if Omni's like the Owens or Strider would get a quirk like "Heat dissipating +40%", as this is what current Double heatsinks in MWO DO: "heat dissipating x 1.4"
See next point.

3) Rework Heatsinks...
... so Single Heatsinks have twice the CAPACITY* of the Double Heatsinks.
Heat dissipating is still 1x.
(If necessary, keep heat dissipating rate of double heatsinks at 1.4x instead of 2x.)

* for clarification: "twice the Capacity" means: your mech can run twice as hot as one with Double heatsinks.
It would still need the same time to get rid of that heat; given twice the capacity, this would look as if it now dissipates heat at half the speed, though... .

(This has been suggested a number of times now, and i still think this is an excellent idea; especially in the context of Omni-mechs with fixed Single-Heatsinks.)

4) Clan Weapons
Inner Sphere Omni Mechs are designed to be able to equip Clan Weapons.
This should be reflected in MWO in ANY case.

It has been mentioned that the IS-Omni's need a special Computer Interface to use the Clan weapons; the physical connectors are already build into the Omni mechs.

So, the IS-Omni's could have Module Slots (like Consumable, Mech Module and Weapon-Module's we already have).
But in this case special Modules that you need to use Clan weapons.

Either the count as Weapon-Modules (which in this case could only be put on IS-Omni's),
or as separate Weapon-Adapter-Modules (again: Software, not Hardware).

In either case, you might need one Module per type of weapon (Ballistic, Energy, or Missile-Modules) to use these kind of Clan Weapons.
Or one Module per Connector / weapon.

In any case, the number of available Weapon-Adaptor-Modules could vary, depending on the type of IS-Omni-Mech.
Weak Omnis get more, stronger Omnis less.
(On the other hand, Mechs like the Owens or Strider do not have that much free tonnage anyway, so having a lot more Module-Slots would probably not help them, unless PGI goes for one Module per Connector/Weapon.)


5) A combination of all of the above
Nuff said.

[Andi Nagasia]

noted will add the Strider, knew i was missing one,

but ya you should be able to Upgrade Endo & Ferro as long as they have Fixed Points,
lets look at this, in a different way, how many people would play less if Endo was unlocked for Omnis?
now how many people would play those Omnis and play them more because of Endo?

[Andi Nagasia]

if you jump on this topic please post your thoughts,
1) if your For it?
2) if your Against it?
3) if you dont Mind ether way?
4) if you think it would help any?
thanks
Edit-

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 20 April 2015 - 09:55 AM.

[Mechteric]

I think they should be locked to the engine, but otherwise able to add/remove endo/ferro at will (that is to say both Clan and IS omnis)

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 20 April 2015 - 10:00 AM.

[John80sk]

I think we're beating a dead horse at this point... though it is a dead horse that PGI has so far refused to acknowledge despite it starting to smell.

Allow upgrades, but not downgrades would be my thoughts on the matter. Meaning you could upgrade a mech from standard to endo, but you wouldn't be able to downgrade a mech from ferro to standard.

Allowing the swapping of engine types will probably be necessary for IS omni's.

[CyclonerM]

Neg.

Instead of messing with the few things done right, give the underperforming Clan 'Mechs the uberquirks given to some IS 'Mechs. And maybe try to make BattleMechs actual battlemechs instead of GodMechs.

Btw, if this was a deeper game, many 'Mechs would have more of a purpose (also, did anyone say BV?)

[Ragtag soldier]

the whole point of omnimechs was to make the underlying structure (the chassis, cockpit, engine and so on) fixed in place "hardened" against reworking so that weapons, mission-specific equipment, and so on could be quickly swapped in as pods to speed redeployment and reduce time spent in repair. complaining the very things that they sacrifice to be omnimechs needs to be done away with so you can use them is like saying "i like electric cars, but can't they burn unleaded instead of using this heavy battery i keep needing to charge?"

now ferro-fibrous armor being swappable, that might be viable and i could see you asking for that. pulling a ton or two for more open slots would be a balanced tradeoff and wouldn't go against the point of omnimechs.

[CyclonerM]

Ragtag soldier, on 20 April 2015 - 10:42 AM, said:

now ferro-fibrous armor being swappable, that might be viable and i could see you asking for that. pulling a ton or two for more open slots would be a balanced tradeoff and wouldn't go against the point of omnimechs.

It would, because the type of armor is supposed to be fixed as well.