126 replies to this topic

[Armorine]

could just go with lore and make them MANY times more expensive then xls.....still leaves the problem of a massive arms race coming from their introdction.

[Tarl Cabot]

Johnny Z, on 14 June 2015 - 08:21 AM, said:

Well MASC is a new addition to the game which does adress some Omni engine weaknesses and thats great. LFE and possibly Lostech weapons fall into this realm. Completely new additions and would have to be added in a balanced way once everything in game is stable. The IS XL shutdown should be added first to see how it plays out. I have totally convinced myself IS XL shutdown is a must.

I am thinking Lostech weapons could be limited to one per mech and have some change in stats of some sort. Just a vague idea. Also these could only be gained through questing for Lostech weapon caches(lore based idea). Which is impossible in game at the moment so....

I have no idea what would be balanced for LFE.

For LFE (light fusion engines) I would not allow all LFE ratings in the game. I would even suggest setting it up so that an IS mech could use only one specific LFE size. The LFE could be set to specific weight, weight class or mech weight ranges, etc. Then the choices would be either one specific LFE, or a variety of Standard/XL engines.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 14 June 2015 - 09:01 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

For LFE (light fusion engines) I would not allow all engine sizes in the game, or even set it up so that an IS mech could use only one specific LFE size. Then the choices would be either one specific LFE, or a variety of Standard/XL engines.

I still think adding engine crits is the way to go.

it allows you to balance all the different engine types by giving them different hitpoints.

Clan XL would have more hitpoints than IS XL, but IS XL would have enough hitpoints to *barely* survive a side torso destruction

LFE would also have less hitpoints than standard engines to keep standard engines viable. standard engines would be the least prone to crit destruction.

So something like:
IS XL = 30 hitpoints
Clan XL/LFE = 40 hitpoints
Standard = 50 hitpoints

Losing a side torso with an XL/LFE would do 20 damage to your engine.

Edited by Khobai, 14 June 2015 - 09:04 AM.

[Averen]

Buffing IS XL or adding LFE doesn't solve the problem, it's just another piece of power creep. The issue are clan XL's.

There were some good ideas going around, like the 20% clan mobility nerf after lossing a side, but it's not like PGI does good ideas. Rather use the '20% engine heat sinks loss thingy' and pretends that's actually changing anything.

[Khobai]

Quote

Buffing IS XL or adding LFE doesn't solve the problem, it's just another piece of power creep. The issue are clan XL's.

And adding engine crits fixes that... it allows Clan XLs to be destroyed by crits rather than having to destroy both side torsos. But it also keeps Clan XLs superior to IS XLs by giving them more hitpoints and making them more durable.

Quote

There were some good ideas going around, like the 20% clan mobility nerf after lossing a side, but it's not like PGI does good ideas. Rather use the '20% engine heat sinks loss thingy' and pretends that's actually changing anything.

Again. This isnt a good idea. Anything that encourages people to shoot torsos more and legs less is a bad idea.

If you want to slow down a clan mech you shoot its legs off.

If you want to reduce their firepower and heat dissipation you shoot their side torsos off.

different reasons for shooting different locations. that makes the game more tactical.

Edited by Khobai, 14 June 2015 - 09:10 AM.

[Hornviech]

Poisoner, on 13 June 2015 - 07:09 PM, said:

I know its a TT rule that IS mechs with XL motors die from losing a side torso, but since PGI likes to pick and choose what rules they enforce, why continue to enforce this one?

My reasoning is, if IS mechs need huge buffs to armor and structure while having to take an XL to keep up with lightning fast clan mechs in order to stay relevant, why not just make both the clan and IS XL engines have to lose both side torsos or the CT before dying?

I think it could be a positive thing.

Yes you're right its the rules!!!!

Why aren't you IS guys stop whining over everything you already have so much bonuses light freedom of choosing an Engine! your Armor Type! your Structure Type!

Its the Rules dammit!!!

Just wait !!!! And you will see what the IS will come up with in future!
PGI should just Implement IS Omnis to show what Omni is all about, RESTRICTIONS!!!!

PGI should just move forward to 3055 then you can stop whining !

For you "I have no clue about the BT Universe" just read the the Books, Field Manuels, Tech Readouts aaaand especially the MASTER RULES!!
Maximum Tech is also nice.

Clickhere for all the infos

[Burktross]

bad arcade kitty, on 13 June 2015 - 07:30 PM, said:

is mechs have massive advantages as a compensation already and i dont mean armor quirks, they can freely choose their engine, their endo is dynamic and they can pick it on any mech etc

Endo picking will change soon. You'll be able to change ferro --> Endo for clanner mechs I heard

[Johnny Z]

Averen, on 14 June 2015 - 09:03 AM, said:

Buffing IS XL or adding LFE doesn't solve the problem, it's just another piece of power creep. The issue are clan XL's.

There were some good ideas going around, like the 20% clan mobility nerf after lossing a side, but it's not like PGI does good ideas. Rather use the '20% engine heat sinks loss thingy' and pretends that's actually changing anything.

This game got its dose of power creep with the introduction of Omni mechs. So ya the 20% speed decrease is just common sense. The heat sink thing does nearly nothing but at least it is sim like.

-1 for power creep.

[Johnny Z]

Hornviech, on 14 June 2015 - 09:08 AM, said:

Yes you're right its the rules!!!!

Why aren't you IS guys stop whining over everything you already have so much bonuses light freedom of choosing an Engine! your Armor Type! your Structure Type!

Its the Rules dammit!!!

Just wait !!!! And you will see what the IS will come up with in future!
PGI should just Implement IS Omnis to show what Omni is all about, RESTRICTIONS!!!!

PGI should just move forward to 3055 then you can stop whining !

For you "I have no clue about the BT Universe" just read the the Books, Field Manuels, Tech Readouts aaaand especially the MASTER RULES!!
Maximum Tech is also nice.

Clickhere for all the infos

Many players would choose 3025 over whats in game now if it was to start over. Lets hope this game can make the current time line fun and balanced with some Battletech atmosphere before it skips ahead in the timeline. The table top couldnt have done that worse. Lets hope Mechwarrior Online does it ALOT better.

This is a good spot in the timeline though and it only gets worse lore wise. Whats Clan and Inner Sphere character if everyone is running Clan tech like lore?

Skipping ahead is really not attractive at all.

[Averen]

Khobai, on 14 June 2015 - 09:07 AM, said:

Again. This isnt a good idea. Anything that encourages people to shoot torsos more and legs less is a bad idea.

If you want to slow down a clan mech you shoot its legs off.

If you want to reduce their firepower and heat dissipation you shoot their side torsos off.

different reasons for shooting different locations. that makes the game more tactical.

I don't think killing STs is anywhere the main goal. Afaik legging basically high level meta in MWO?

Everywhere else killing the CT is standard tactics outside IS-XL mechs, so being able to slow down clan mechs by killing the ST does indeed at more value to aim for different parts. More strategy, more balance, can't see what's bad about this.

Hornviech, on 14 June 2015 - 09:08 AM, said:

Why aren't you IS guys stop whining over everything you already have so much bonuses light freedom of choosing an Engine! your Armor Type! your Structure Type!

Do you really not understand the issue? No matter what engine i might pick for my IS mechs, they will be almost always worse.
And btw, there are no IS-guys. Most players choose between all mechs and don't care for your 'MY SIDE, YOUR SIDE' video game nationalism nonsense.

Edited by Averen, 14 June 2015 - 09:26 AM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Yeah, naw, IS dont need Clan XLs. IS have been OP'd enough. Thier 0.25s CD AC5s, their 15t of quirked on armor, their vastly superior beam times, weapon Cool downs, heat efficiencies....yeah, they have been quirked enough. SCR/TBR nerf can be reverted now, no way the CLans are that damn OP anymore........just wow.

[Burktross]

Maybe not live.
But it'd be cool if you "bleed out" in an IS XL.

-5 dmg per second on remaining ST internals and CT internals

Averen, on 14 June 2015 - 09:21 AM, said:

there are no IS-guys.

Wishful thinking.

[Gyrok]

One Medic Army, on 13 June 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:

IS XL engines are well balanced vs IS standard engines on IS mechs.

If there's any problem, it's that there's no balance between clan XL and clan Std. Which is completely irrelevant because all clan mechs use XL engines.

Or in other words, no reason to change it. And if you do change something, change clan XL engines, not IS ones. And if you change clan XL engines, you ought to de-nerf some of their weapons as compensation. Most clan mechs are not OP.

Actually, there is balance, IS/Clan STD engines must lose CT, or can lose both STs.

Clan XL engines can only lose 1 ST.

IS XL engines cannot lose a torso.

The Kingfisher actually uses a clan STD engine...it is a 90T chassis as well...and was common around the invasion, I expect we will see it soon enough. It comes with a STD 360 for a top speed of 71.3 kph after speed tweak and brings ~25T of podspace with a clan STD engine and 17 fixed DHS.

Edited by Gyrok, 14 June 2015 - 12:08 PM.

[Mystere]

Averen, on 14 June 2015 - 09:21 AM, said:

And btw, there are no IS-guys. Most players choose between all mechs and don't care for your 'MY SIDE, YOUR SIDE' video game nationalism nonsense.

You have not been paying attention it seems.

[Moldur]

People fear power creep in a game following a timeline that involves new technologies. smh.

[Khobai]

Quote

I don't think killing STs is anywhere the main goal.

thats my whole point. if you make killing STs too good it will be the main goal.

[Andi Nagasia]

=Solution=
Add a notation that allows 1 Item to Survive ST Loss,
that way an XL could possibly Survive ST loss,

if you want a guarantee that you will Survive ST Loss
would be forced to leave your ST empty,(only Engine there Engines the item that will Survive)
Same goes for having an Mech with weapons in ST, on ST loss your weapons may Survive,

[Khobai]

Quote

=Solution=
Add a notation that allows 1 Item to Survive ST Loss,
that way an XL could possibly Survive ST loss,

that makes no sense. thats like getting to keep a finger after your arms been amputated.

[Andi Nagasia]

Khobai, on 14 June 2015 - 03:15 PM, said:

that makes no sense. thats like getting to keep a finger after your arms been amputated.

more like Riding on on your Rim after your Tire Blows out,

[Tincan Nightmare]

Johnny Z, on 14 June 2015 - 09:21 AM, said:

Many players would choose 3025 over whats in game now if it was to start over. Lets hope this game can make the current time line fun and balanced with some Battletech atmosphere before it skips ahead in the timeline. The table top couldnt have done that worse. Lets hope Mechwarrior Online does it ALOT better.

This is a good spot in the timeline though and it only gets worse lore wise. Whats Clan and Inner Sphere character if everyone is running Clan tech like lore?

Skipping ahead is really not attractive at all.

God I would have loved this game to be set during the 4th Succession War for CW, was my favorite timeline for BT. Makes me sad that MW5 got canned, since it was going to be set during the first succession war right after the Star Leagues fall. If that had been done well, could have made for a really fun campaign.