183 replies to this topic

[Zordicron]

FupDup, on 05 July 2015 - 08:30 AM, said:

The Clan Battlemechs that are coming in the Origins pack will get to change their engine ratings...

Some Clan mechs do have STD engines, including at least 2 Omnimechs that I know of (Kingfisher and Stooping Hawk).

Yisss.... this is why I am for making the XL penalty idea somthing 100% related to loadout options vs some kind of "after it blows up" mechanic. Also why I wrote that last bit about CoD.
With the new systems of what I consider to be essentially "mixed tech" coming, some of our balance ideas are getting very messy. Changing Xl vs STD balance to 100% loadout considerations instead of survivability makes the whole issue turn into somthing we can put across the board between IS battlemechs, clan omni's, future clan battlemechs and IS omnis.


I know it isnt true to TT, not all the way. But then, MWO is already hands down closer to TT rules then we were with MW4. I mean MW4 just had an up and down arrow that changed the tonnage and speed.

I have never wanted to jump into these discussions much before, as I felt they left out a whole pile of things in overall clan balance. HOWEVER, "twocee" mechs are going to alter the current balance. Something is going to have to give soon.

[kapusta11]

People with clan banners admiting that their gundams are better and trying to figure out how to ease the inevitable nerfing.

- CORERULE IGNORE, penatlies are too severe there, nonono.
- 10% speed reduction, what do you say guys?
- Dude, that's too much, what are we going to do? 5% will do.
- Hey we can bring crap mechs like those slow lights to the discussion and use them as an argument against speed nerf!
- I though IS lights die when they lose ST unlike us.
- Shut up.

Nice read, keep going.

Edited by kapusta11, 05 July 2015 - 09:10 AM.

[FupDup]

kapusta11, on 05 July 2015 - 09:01 AM, said:

People with clan banners admiting that their gundams are better and trying to figure out how to ease the inevitable nerfing.

- CORERULE IGNORE, penatlies are too severe there, nonono.
- 10% speed reduction, what do you say guys?
- Dude, that's too much, what are we going to do? 5% will do.
- Hey we can bring crap mechs like those slow lights to the discussion and use them as an argument against speed nerf
- I though IS lights die when they lose ST unlike us
- Shut up

Nice read, keep going.

For the record, I *attempt* to be as objective as I can in debates like these. I don't have any "space nationalism" for fictional entities like most of this forum does, I chose the green turkey banner arbitrarily so that I could view the CW map. I hate pretty much every faction/house/Clan in the BT universe, I play them for their mechs/tech only.

The reason that I keep my Inner Sphere Phoenix Overlord badge displayed right under it is to try to reduce the number of times people call me a Clan shill, but that hasn't worked out as well as I hoped it would...

Edited by FupDup, 05 July 2015 - 09:11 AM.

[Wintersdark]

FupDup, on 05 July 2015 - 09:11 AM, said:

For the record, I *attempt* to be as objective as I can in debates like these. I don't have any "space nationalism" for fictional entities like most of this forum does, I chose the green turkey banner arbitrarily so that I could view the CW map. I hate pretty much every faction/house/Clan in the BT universe, I play them for their mechs/tech only.

The reason that I keep my Inner Sphere Phoenix Overlord badge displayed right under it is to try to reduce the number of times people call me a Clan shill, but that hasn't worked out as well as I hoped it would...

Absolutely. I kept my Overlord badge for ages for that reason too, but it didn't work.

I can't stand the absurd space nationalism, the ridiculous notion that everyone with a faction badge even plays that faction primarily.

I'd hazard a guess that the VAST majority of players don't play CW at all. And that most players with Clan mechs play IS mechs too in the pub queue.

For a great many players, your faction badge matches your unit, and you're in that unit because of the people there, not because of the faction tag. After all, the faction tag is totally irrelevant if you don't care about CW.

Hell, I play my IS mechs more than my Clan mechs, yet I've got a Clan tag.

[Hotthedd]

If an engine loses 3 crits, it is destroyed.
I.S. XL engines have 3 crits in each side torso.
Therefore, if a 'mech with an I.S. XL engine loses its side torso, its engine is destroyed.

Deviating from this would cease to be a game based on BattleTech.

[Ultimax]

FupDup, on 05 July 2015 - 07:47 AM, said:

This is actually the exact reason why I've suggested a relatively low Clan XL penalty of around 10% speed (15% tops), rather than the 20-30% that is more popular. It's basically like removing Speed Tweak, really.

I think that's a good idea to keep in reserve.

I'd like to see one thing changed at a time, and let it stew for a month or two.


The reason for this, is that sometimes one or two changes can create a cascade effect, multiple changes can shift the whole metagame making and breaking mech status (tiers).


PPCs nerfed, ACs nerfed, JJs nerfed, Clans introduced, Quirks introduced >>> Suddenly HGN & VTR go from strongest mechs in the game to some of the least used.

FupDup, on 05 July 2015 - 07:47 AM, said:

For STDs, I don't really know what they could give those without seeming too "weird" or "quirky." The only idea I have for those would be to allow engines to be critted, and give STDs a really really high health value so they're almost immune to engine crits. IS XL could have significantly higher HP than the Clan XL for obvious reasons...

I like that idea, and I like the idea of giving STD engines a higher heat dissipation ability to grant some "ghost tonnage".

FupDup, on 05 July 2015 - 07:47 AM, said:

It's really a can of worms no matter how we do it. Whether we nerf Clans, buff IS, or a bit of both, there's guaranteed to be a lot of chain-reactions and unintended consequences. It's a real clusterfudge if there ever was one in an MW game.

Exactly, that's why I'd like to see one thing at a time starting with boosting where the IS is weak rather than nerfing where Clan mechs are currently strong.

[Ultimax]

Hotthedd, on 05 July 2015 - 09:28 AM, said:

If an engine loses 3 crits, it is destroyed.
I.S. XL engines have 3 crits in each side torso.
Therefore, if a 'mech with an I.S. XL engine loses its side torso, its engine is destroyed.

Deviating from this would cease to be a game based on BattleTech.

When a movie is "based on" a true story, that simply means it was inspired by it.

It doesn't mean it is a 100%, exact replication of the original.



If that's what you want, then just play the original - which is designed for a completely different medium.

[Andi Nagasia]

as ive said what if, IS-XL Engines gave STs a +12 Internal Structure Quirk?
and IS-STD Engines gave the CT a +18 Internal Structure Quirk?

[Gyrok]

Mcgral18, on 04 July 2015 - 11:33 PM, said:

I know...I used a bad word. But, I want to pitch an idea and see what the Forums think of it.


The most common complaint about IS to Clam balance is the engine, which is fair enough.

At the moment, the only nerf is an 80% heatsink nerf for engines, TrueDub or PoorDub.
People propose a speed nerf on top of that, or a more significant loss to one, or both of those aspects.


I wouldn't be wholly against it, but still slightly trepidatious about blanket nerfing things like the Myth Lynx and Cute Fox (again).

Perhaps bring that number to 75%, and also include speed. So, a Cute Fox, if it were to lose the ever important RT, would have 2 ERMLs remaining, with 3 PoorDub heatsinks untouched, but the 7 TrueDubs would drop from 8.05H/s to 6.0375 H/s dissipation. Speed would also drop from 107 Kph to 80 Kph...that would hurt.



As for the Normalizing part...change how isXL engines react to ST removal. It's an easy .XML to change the dying part, but not sure where penalties are added for ST loss.

STD300

Module faction="InnerSphere" CType="CEngineStats" name="Engine_Std_300" id="3258">
<Loc iconTag="StoreIcons\StdEngine.dds" descTag="@Engine_Standard_Fusion_300_desc" nameTag="@Engine_Standard_Fusion_300"/>
<EngineStats health="15" heatsinks="12" weight="25.0" rating="300" sidesToDie="0" sideSlots="0" slots="6"/>

isXL300

Module faction="InnerSphere" CType="CEngineStats" name="Engine_XL_300" id="3358">
<Loc iconTag="StoreIcons\XLEngine.dds" descTag="@Engine_XL_Fusion_300_desc" nameTag="@Engine_XL_Fusion_300"/>
<EngineStats health="15" heatsinks="12" weight="15.5" rating="300" sidesToDie="1" sideSlots="3" slots="6"/>

cXL300

Module faction="Clan" CType="CEngineStats" name="Engine_Clan_XL_300" id="3458">
<Loc iconTag="StoreIcons\XLEngine.dds" descTag="@Engine_Clan_XL_Fusion_300_desc" nameTag="@Engine_Clan_XL_Fusion_300"/>
<EngineStats health="15" heatsinks="12" weight="15.5" rating="300" sidesToDie="2" sideSlots="2" slots="6"/>

Only important part here: "sidesToDie", going from 0-2. Penalties, again, I have no idea where they are. Not sure if they'd even be located on our client. If someone does know, please let us know. It should presently list the 80% Clan engine mounted +TrueDub heatsink nerf when it loses an ST.


The Normalisation...give the isXL a more severe penalty, to the tune of 50%, but let it survive the loss. The 2.3 H/s dissipation of 10 TrueDubs would become 1.15 H/s, although any PoorDubs mounted in the opposite ST or arm would be unaffected.

Speed would also be halved; so mechs would be noticeably less effective, running significantly hotter, while being an easier target...but still alive.

Example, this FS9-S (don't judge him!) which currently runs 142 Kph, has a 2.622 H/s dissipation and 63.36 heat capacity, and dead with a ST loss.

Proposed change brings that to 71Kph, 1.3915 H/s dissipation (1 PoorDub unaffected, one halved due to being in the engine), and 50.208 heat capacity, and while he may be fully armed, he cools at nearly half the rate, so he won't be shooting very much. That's while moving at an Assault mech's pace, with the same agility as a Warhawk.
But, again, alive.


Numbers could be fudged around with...but I wouldn't mind trying something like that. Perhaps too punishing, but it's no instant death.

Quirks may need to be touched down, such as bringing 3x RoF down to 2X, while giving armour or different weapon systems proper buffs. Huggin with 33/50% SRM4 and 50% MG RoF? Goes from 6 SRM4 DPS to 4 SRM4 DPS, but the equivalent to 8 MGs. Might even be worth taking the MGs...or not.


I know the Clam Apologists won't like the 5% nerf and significant speed loss
I know the Clam Whiners won't like the 25% discrepancy between factions and hate having quirks touched down
I know TT purists won't like isXL changes for ST death


What I don't know...is what the general consensus is on this?

Bridges one of the most significant gaps between Clam and IS tech, increases TTK, but changes a big enough mechanic, and a big balancing one at that. Still, nothing worse than what the cXL already does.


With PGI's upcoming "significant" balance pass, I'm wondering what they've come up with.

Honestly...

The solution is LFE for IS mechs in my mind.

Sure, the CXL is lighter, but a clan chassis either has ES/FF or it does not...meanwhile, any IS chassis can have LFE + Endo and that will essentially balance out some of the customization discrepancy between the 2 tech trees.

It also brings a parity to customization between battlemechs and omnimechs to a degree as well.

However, if this were to go into place, I would recommend a complete quirk reset, and a testing period afterward to assess the impacts of the changes.

Additionally...I am against further penalties to CXL engines on ST loss, I am against IS XL engines not dying on ST loss, and I am against a solution that does not involve bringing in some of the completely valid tech that the IS has to help them offset the advantage inherently of CXL engines.

This tech will come eventually, why not do it now and tackle the elephant in the room?

EDIT: Just thought about this a tad more...

Option B: ALL MECHS operate under omnimech construction rules, and IS can have CXL engines...?

Edited by Gyrok, 05 July 2015 - 09:38 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Ultimatum X, on 05 July 2015 - 09:35 AM, said:

When a movie is "based on" a true story, that simply means it was inspired by it.

It doesn't mean it is a 100%, exact replication of the original.



If that's what you want, then just play the original - which is designed for a completely different medium.

That (a game based on BattleTech) is not just "what I want", it is what IGP/PGI used to separate me from a good bit of my money.

I get that SOME things do not translate well (actually, they COULD, but it would take too much work), but the number of engine criticals before an engine is destroyed is NOT one of them. It is the risk you take with an I.S. XL engine.

There are plenty of good ideas in this thread, but adding the number of crits necessary to destroy an engine is not one of them.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

I still like my idea to help solve the engine disparity (which is ripped from an MW4 mod).

STD Engines give bonuses to internals of the torso sections and increase the heat cap and/or dissipation.
LFE Engines give half the bonuses of STD engines to internals and heat cap and/or dissipation.
XL Engines have no bonuses.

Nothing dies to side torso loss. No difference between IS and Clam XLs other than crit space (which is important considering DHS crits as well). It is simple, there is no confusion from new players about why IS XLs die from side torso destruction and nothing else does and standards have a more tangible survivability boost.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 05 July 2015 - 10:03 AM.

[Pjwned]

Gyrok, on 05 July 2015 - 09:37 AM, said:

Honestly...

The solution is LFE for IS mechs in my mind.

Sure, the CXL is lighter, but a clan chassis either has ES/FF or it does not...meanwhile, any IS chassis can have LFE + Endo and that will essentially balance out some of the customization discrepancy between the 2 tech trees.

It also brings a parity to customization between battlemechs and omnimechs to a degree as well.

However, if this were to go into place, I would recommend a complete quirk reset, and a testing period afterward to assess the impacts of the changes.

Additionally...I am against further penalties to CXL engines on ST loss, I am against IS XL engines not dying on ST loss, and I am against a solution that does not involve bringing in some of the completely valid tech that the IS has to help them offset the advantage inherently of CXL engines.

This tech will come eventually, why not do it now and tackle the elephant in the room?

EDIT: Just thought about this a tad more...

Option B: ALL MECHS operate under omnimech construction rules, and IS can have CXL engines...?

The thing is that LFEs should be implemented and cXL engines should be nerfed to have an actually appropriate penalty that does anything, and LFEs would have the same penalty.

Edited by Pjwned, 05 July 2015 - 10:08 AM.

[kapusta11]

WM Quicksilver, on 05 July 2015 - 10:02 AM, said:

I still like my idea to help solve the engine disparity (which is ripped from an MW4 mod).

STD Engines give bonuses to internals of the torso sections and increase the heat cap and/or dissipation.
LFE Engines give half the bonuses of STD engines to internals and heat cap and/or dissipation.
XL Engines have no bonuses.

Nothing dies to side torso loss. No difference between IS and Clam XLs other than crit space (which is important considering DHS crits as well). It is simple, there is no confusion from new players about why IS XLs die from side torso destruction and nothing else does and standards have a more tangible survivability boost.

And that's the problem with most people out here. People are too afraid to leave behind their pet mechs advocating their or someone else's ideas that either affect their gundams in a beneficial manner or do the opposite to everyone else or, in the worst case, keep status quo.

Nothing personal though, just noticed that that phrase of yours summarizes the behaviour of people on this forum rather well.

Edited by kapusta11, 05 July 2015 - 10:31 AM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Wintersdark, on 05 July 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:

FOR BALANCE, CORE RULE IGNORE.

People like to say that if PGI would just follow TT rules, the game would be more balanced. . That's stupid. TT wasn't even close to balanced in terms of IS vs. Clan. Not even close. It wasn't even intended to be.

The ClamXL difference is a MASSIVE buff to Clan mechs, and requires a vast firepower increase via quirks IS side to attempt to compensate for. Not dying on ST loss is not a trivial advantage.

Still, the ClamXL doesn't make Clam mechs feel a lot different in combat, at least not compared to IS STD engine mechs. It's not a "flavour" change, like omnipods or Clam weapons.

So, DURING THE BALANCE PASS, make Clam and IS XL engines have the same, severe penalties on side torso loss(see McGrals post). Yes, this nerfs the cute fox and all crappie Clam mechs. STFU about that; this is the middle of the balance pass.

Allow all Clam mechs to switch between ClamXL and ClamSTD engines but not change rating. Allow all ClamXL mechs to add/remove FF/ES(but with fixed crit locatiins). This brings ClamXL mech construction to a balanced state where mechs aren't arbitrarily nerfing certain Clam mechs (see:Summoner, Nova)

Now, you have IS vs Clam, where the Mechs differences are still:

Clan weapons are lighter, but fire longer / bursts and are hotter

IS weapons are still heavier, but IS mechs can run XL's with the same threat level if they wish, and downgrade engines to pack simply more firepower if the feel so inclined. Is mechs will still need quirks, but nothing near the current state.

I'm a bit confused here...

How can I possibly add MORE weapons and the ability to do more damage if I downgrade from an XL to a Std engine, in either a Clan or IS Mech, if the XL engines are equal in that side torso destruction doesn't cause death for IS or Clan?

XLs save weight, a lot of it, so I can add MORE weapons and therefore increase my damage output, and that works for both Clan AND IS. You DO realize that allowing the Clan Omni's to switch from XL to Std without changing their rating would NOT work very well, right? Have you even looked at the tonnages involved? I really don't think you have, not if you are making this post in ANYTHING but a totally satirical manner, because there's NO possible way you meant it seriously...is there?

And this entire proposal of McGral's totally removes ANY reason what so ever for ANY IS Mech to ever use a Std Engine, the is just no downside to it compared to the weight savings which means more guns for damage output. Yeah, an XL that doesn't mean instadeath when I lose a side torso in my Atlas, my King Crab? WTBF kind of stupid ass question is that, HELL YES I'D DO IT! Who the hell wouldnt'? The ONLY reason not to take an XL would be because you wanted an AC20 in the side torso. That's it, nothing else would be impacted by this, and it would allow Gauss in ST with an XL to be SAFE, which is something many of us would love. My dual Gauss Jager would be faster AND able to carry better back up weapons.

Yeah, great idea McGral, lets totally remove the Std engine from the game, it serves no useful function anyway right?

[Weeny Machine]

Hotthedd, on 05 July 2015 - 09:28 AM, said:

If an engine loses 3 crits, it is destroyed.
I.S. XL engines have 3 crits in each side torso.
Therefore, if a 'mech with an I.S. XL engine loses its side torso, its engine is destroyed.

Deviating from this would cease to be a game based on BattleTech.

Before you read this: I do hardly play CW and I am neither in the IS nor Clan camp

To this post: As you may have missed...some weapons have different values than in TT, there are no melee attacks, ECM is nothing like TT ECM, LB-X cannot use different ammo, IS mechs can swap their engines like underpants despite the Omnis are the peaks of flexibility in BT lore and even repairing an engine is considered major work - switching engines is basically building a new mech, weapons can shoot past their effective range of TT value and damage armour at double their intended rate etc etc etc

...but I am so glad that the XL slot issue would break your immersion when it comes to BT lore. I totally see how that breaks immersion, really.

Btw, the last part was sarcasm...

Edited by Bush Hopper, 05 July 2015 - 11:19 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Bush Hopper, on 05 July 2015 - 11:07 AM, said:

Before you read this: I do hardly play CW and I am neither in the IS nor Clan camp

To this post: As you may have missed...some weapons have different values than in TT, there are no melee attacks, ECM is nothing like TT ECM, LB-X cannot use different ammo, IS mechs can swap their engines like underpants despite the Omnis are the peaks of flexibility in BT lore and even repairing an engine is considered major work - switching engines is basically building a new mech, weapons can shoot past their effective range of TT value and damage armour at double their intended rate etc etc etc

...but I am so glad that the XL slot issue would breal your immersion when it comes to BT lore. I m sorry but ARE YOU ******* KIDDING ME?!

Yes, most of the things you mention ARE in fact missteps made by PGI, many necessitated by the FIRST things they deviated from TT on, namely pinpoint alphas, damage not being applied to the weapon as per 10 seconds worth of damage, heat cap and heat dissipation, etc.

But just because some things are broken due to straying away from TT, does not mean that MW:O should diverge entirely away from BattleTech. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc is a logical fallacy.

Once you deviate too much from BattleTech, you are left with a generic mecha shooter, and then you have to become the BEST generic mecha shooter in order to survive. PGI cannot have their BattleTech cake and eat it too.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 05 July 2015 - 11:23 AM, said:

Once you deviate too much from BattleTech, you are left with a generic mecha shooter, and then you have to become the BEST generic mecha shooter in order to survive. PGI cannot have their BattleTech cake and eat it too.

Battletech rules are not what define Battletech and separate it from other mecha universes.

TT arguments always seem to be solely based on the letter of the law argument, and there is more to Battletech than IS XL engines dying from a side torso loss.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 05 July 2015 - 11:32 AM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

WM Quicksilver, on 05 July 2015 - 11:30 AM, said:

Battletech rules are not what define Battletech and separate it from other mecha universes.

TT arguments always seem to be solely based on the letter of the law argument, and there is more to Battletech than IS XL engines dying from a side torso loss.

Yes, there is indeed more to the BTech universe than IS Mechs dying to side torso loss when using XL engines, but IS Mechs dieing to side torso loss when using XL engines IS part of the BTech universe, it's actually one of those defining things between Clan XLs and IS XLs, remember?

Hell, why don't we just let everyone use the best toys from both Factions on any Mech they want!

Oh, right, because that just turns the game into gunbags where there is no distinction between Mechs and Factions....

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Kristov Kerensky, on 05 July 2015 - 11:45 AM, said:

Hell, why don't we just let everyone use the best toys from both Factions on any Mech they want!

You realize that is actually part of the BT Universe as well right?

How many Mixtech mechs existed to abuse the best of both worlds and are part of the canon? Sure they are limited in number but you can't get away with limited supply of ultimate power in a PvP game.....

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 05 July 2015 - 11:51 AM.

[Roadkill]

I think you're trying to normalize in the wrong direction. Don't make IS XLs better, make Clan XLs worse.

Ignore Clans for a moment. For IS Mechs, it can be a pretty tough choice. XL or Standard? Do you want the extra weight, or do you want to be able to survive? That means that the IS XL and Standard are pretty well balanced.

Now toss Clans into the mix. Since the IS XL and Standard are pretty well balanced, you shouldn't change either of them. You should change the Clan XL until it comes into balance with them. Realistically there's no way to do that without just saying that Clan Mechs also explode with one ST loss. They would still be better than IS XLs, though, due to using fewer crit slots.

But I'm guessing no one will go for that solution.