34 replies to this topic

[Stoned Prophet]

Alistair Winter, on 29 April 2015 - 01:18 PM, said:

Never. Ever.

Such an easy thing to fix. People have been making countless good suggestions in countless threads. Clear, concise, rational explanations. PGI's response has been... nothing.

They're not changing it. My guess is that they figure it's a can of worms and they don't want to risk upsetting the fine balance they've been working towards.

Or, its just not important to get to before, you know, everything else people scream about? Hyperbole is bad, mkay.

[Xetelian]

I'm sorry to post so soon again but I must ask people to tweet about Ferro and its lackluster benefits.

[Stoned Prophet]

Xetelian, on 29 April 2015 - 03:45 PM, said:

I'm sorry to post so soon again but I must ask people to tweet about Ferro and its lackluster benefits.

You want to make sure Russ stops answering questions on twittier? Constantly ask him **** like Ferro. Lol this is why they dont answer on the forums

[Xetelian]

Stoned Prophet, on 29 April 2015 - 03:50 PM, said:

You want to make sure Russ stops answering questions on twittier? Constantly ask him **** like Ferro. Lol this is why they dont answer on the forums

Where should we ask then? Bishop nagged an Urbie out of Russ, think we could nag a Ferro buff out of Russ or Paul?

What is the harm in trying?

[Roadkill]

Ragtag soldier, on 29 April 2015 - 03:40 PM, said:

i feel like i'm the only one here that uses ferro-fiberous over endo-steel.....huh.

That's because ES is strictly better than FF. There is absolutely no game-relevant reason to use FF unless you are already using ES.

If you're using FF over ES, you're doing it wrong. There's really no other way to say it.

[Ragtag soldier]

Roadkill, on 29 April 2015 - 04:09 PM, said:

If you're using FF over ES, you're doing it wrong. There's really no other way to say it.

how about "i have no real use for the tonnage"? armor's maxed, weapons are good, heat's managed. oh look, here's another three tons i can DO NOTHING USEFUL WITH.

[Roadkill]

Make your engine bigger? Go faster? Add more ammo? Add more heat sinks? ("Managed" != "neutral" heat. You can pretty much always use more heat sinks except on a very few very specialized builds.)

While it is theoretically possible, I find it hard to believe that all of your Mechs are perfectly tuned with exactly the right amount of ammo, all of the crits used, heat neutral, engine maxed, etc, while using FF instead of ES.

ES is strictly better than FF.

[1453 R]

How many times I gotta say this?

Ferro doesn't need a buff, or a fix, or anything.

If you give STD structure a durability increase over Endo, then everything falls into place neatly. Endo is a bigger weight savings than Ferro but comes at a greater opportunity cost (slots + weakened structure compared to STD), while Ferro offers less weight savings for the same slots, but lets you keep your STD structure toughness bonus. Taking Endo and Ferro both, if you have room, provides maximum tonnage savings at the cost of lots of slots and STD's structure bonus. Taking Endo alone is a bigger savings on weight than STD or Ferro, but costs you the STD structure bonus. Taking STD structure and Ferro armor, then, is the means a 'Mech with slots to spare but in need of weight can trim up a bit without losing their STD frame toughness.

Give STD structure a reason to exist and Ferro, you will discover, is a perfectly valid choice compared to STD armor. The only thing wrong with it now is that Endo takes the exact same opportunity cost as Ferro (7/14 slots) for a greater total benefit. If Endo had a greater opportunity cost, then you'd see people making some real decisions with their 'Mechs, and the Ferro/STD armor/structure combo would actually have a very definite purpose.

It really is that easy, guys.

[InspectorG]

Ragtag soldier, on 29 April 2015 - 03:40 PM, said:

i feel like i'm the only one here that uses ferro-fiberous over endo-steel.....huh.

Have you run the math?

In TT, Ferro also had a cost benefit.

But we dont have BV in MWO.

[InspectorG]

Huh, wrong post.

Edited by InspectorG, 29 April 2015 - 05:50 PM.

[Molossian Dog]

Stoned Prophet, on 29 April 2015 - 03:50 PM, said:

You want to make sure Russ stops answering questions on twittier? Constantly ask him **** like Ferro.

Please do.

[Lyoto Machida]

Ragtag soldier, on 29 April 2015 - 03:40 PM, said:

i feel like i'm the only one here that uses ferro-fiberous over endo-steel.....huh.

Pretty sure there is no reason ever to take Ferro over Endo...

[Mcgral18]

Ragtag soldier, on 29 April 2015 - 04:14 PM, said:

how about "i have no real use for the tonnage"? armor's maxed, weapons are good, heat's managed. oh look, here's another three tons i can DO NOTHING USEFUL WITH.

Mind showing us this robot?

Something tells me, you can use those tons in a useful manner. There's perhaps a half dozen robots who don't need Endo...but they most certainly don't need Ferro if they don't have Endo.

[Mister Blastman]

Ferro has a purpose already--to piss you off about its uselessness. It has been doing this for me since 1995!

[Dracol]

HOW MANY YEARS UNTIL FERRO IS GIVEN A PURPOSE? It already has a purpose, as a secondary method to free up tonnage after Endo steel has been installed.


Should ferro be buff? Imho, no.. but a better description of Endo and Ferro would go a long ways to helping the situation.

Something as simple as: Endo and Ferro both save weight at the cost of critical slots. Endo has the best weight savings at a higher initial cost. If c-bills are available, Endo steel should be selected. If, after Endo steel is equipped and your mech still has critical slots available, Ferro armor can be installed for additional weight savings.

Of even simplier: Endo steel is the initial weight savings a pilot should pursue. Only after endo is installed should ferro be considered.

Edited by Dracol, 29 April 2015 - 06:10 PM.