108 replies to this topic

[Greenjulius]

After running the Shadowcat for a number of matches yesterday, something really began to bug me. I noticed that MASC felt like it made far less difference on the Shadowcat than it did with the Executioner. The Executioner's MASC provides a boost of 18.5% speed. That means it goes from running 71.3kph to 84.49kph, a boost of 13.19kph. It feels effective, and makes the mech a joy to pilot.

The Shadowcat however? MASC MK II only provides 10% boost, which means the Cat goes from 106.9kph, up to 117.59kph, an increase of 10.69 kph. Less than the Executioner!

Adding insult to injury, MASC MK II weighs 2 tons. What could that 2 tons buy you if you put it into an engine? The XL270 weighs 13.5 tons. 2 tons higher would get you a XL300 at 15.5 tons. Maximum speed would raise from 106.9 up to 118.8. FASTER THAN MASC!!!

On top of that, the faster engine would provide faster accel/decel and turn speeds. Not MASC levels, but the speed increase is permanent and doesn't blow up your legs if you use it longer than 8 seconds. The only reason for its existence on 20-50 tonners is the Accel/Decel bonus, but that's simply not enough.

MASC MK II is not well optimized and either needs to boost the mech 20-25%, or needs to drop by a ton. It simply makes no sense whatsoever. 90% of the time you would simply be better off leaving it.

Update: I just tweeted this to Russ' Twitter account. I'll let everyone know if I hear anything back.

LINK

Stats common to all MASC items:•Acceleration bonus: +175%

•Deceleration bonus: +150%

•Turn rate bonus: +25%

•Gauge fill rate: 10% per second

•Gauge drain rate: 2% per second

•Damage threshold: 75%

MASC Stats:

Clan MASC MK I

• Slots/Tons: 1 slot, 1 ton
  
• 'Mech Tonnage Range: 20 - 25 tons
  
• Speed bonus: +10%
  
• Random damage range: 0.72 – 0.88

Clan MASC MK II

• Slots/Tons: 2 slots, 2 tons
  
• 'Mech Tonnage Range: 30 - 50 tons
  
• Speed bonus: +10%
  
• Random damage range: 1.26 – 1.54

Clan MASC MK III

• Slots/Tons: 3 slots, 3 tons
  
• 'Mech Tonnage Range: 55 - 75 tons
  
• Speed bonus: +15.5%
  
• Random damage range: 2.34 – 2.86

Clan MASC MK IV

• Slots/Tons: 4 slots, 4 tons
  
• 'Mech Tonnage Range: 80 - 100 tons
  
• Speed bonus: +18.5%
  
• Random damage range: 3.06 – 3.74

Edited by Greenjulius, 22 July 2015 - 08:11 AM.

[Whatzituyah]

On the flip side you can stick a bigger engine in and get a bigger boost. This system was to make sure that the mechs do not go too fast for the graphics engine. Though I do agree its not "Canon" speeds but you can think this as a alternate reality where such things were not possible.

[ScoutMaster]

What's really annoying is that if I press a+s+alt it doesnt register all 3 keys... Stupid keyboard,anyone else have that problem?

[Kotzi]

Its your keyboard. Some dont support pressing more than 2 keys. Try binding another key.

Edited by Kotzi, 22 July 2015 - 07:45 AM.

[Greenjulius]

Whatzituyah, on 22 July 2015 - 07:37 AM, said:

On the flip side you can stick a bigger engine in and get a bigger boost. This system was to make sure that the mechs do not go too fast for the graphics engine. Though I do agree its not "Canon" speeds but you can think this as a alternate reality where such things were not possible.

I only see the "too fast" issue happening with lights. However, the fastest mediums in the game are currently the Cicada with a XL340 running at 151.5 and the CN9-D with a XL390 running at 139kph. The Ice Ferret runs 142kph, but can't equip MASC.

The Centurion wouldn't break the 170kph limit often quoted by PGI as being "danger zone" as it would run 166.8, even with 20% boost. 18.5 like the Executioner gets would push it 164kph.

The Cicada is the only exception in the entire game. If given 18.5%, it would run 179.5kph, faster than the commando with a top engine.

Solution? Raise the weight category for MASC MK I to 20-40 tons and keep its boost at the current 10% limit. MASC MK II would be 45-50 tons, and boost AT LEAST 15%, if not 20%. No mech in that weight category can break the 170kph limit, even with a 20% boost.

Another solution? Put limits on very few mechs that could possibly equip MASC. We currently have no IS MASC mechs, so it would be easy to limit their top engines to they can never run 172kph, even with MASC.

Edited by Greenjulius, 22 July 2015 - 07:51 AM.

[0bsidion]

I have to admit, you make a good point. MASC should provide a bigger boost than increasing the engine size, otherwise it is kind of silly. In that context the whole temporary usage and potential leg damage make no sense whatsoever. And it's not like the SCat is anywhere near the game engine speed cap, which is what, 170?

[Greenjulius]

0bsidion, on 22 July 2015 - 07:48 AM, said:

I have to admit, you make a good point. MASC should provide a bigger boost than increasing the engine size, otherwise it is kind of silly. In that context the whole temporary usage and potential leg damage make no sense whatsoever. And it's not like the SCat is anywhere near the game engine speed cap, which is what, 170?

Exactly. This current implementation is completely bonkers. MASC MK II simply needs boosted or tonnage lowered. 2 tons for 10.7kph for 7 seconds is a complete joke, especially when an equivalent engine would result in MORE speed with no drawbacks.

I don't normally get up in arms over these kinds of things, but this feels like a huge oversight that needs be fixed with the next patch.

Edited by Greenjulius, 22 July 2015 - 07:55 AM.

[Hit the Deck]

0bsidion, on 22 July 2015 - 07:48 AM, said:

I have to admit, you make a good point. MASC should provide a bigger boost than increasing the engine size, otherwise it is kind of silly. In that context the whole temporary usage and potential leg damage make no sense whatsoever. And it's not like the SCat is anywhere near the game engine speed cap, which is what, 170?

I agree with your opinion that MASC should provide more boost to speed than upgrading the engine with the equivalent occupied weight. But I guess PGI purposefully made it like this to prevent Lights or Mediums going too fast in the future.

So we are stuck kind of stuck with this implementation.

[Greenjulius]

Hit the Deck, on 22 July 2015 - 07:55 AM, said:

I agree with your opinion that MASC should provide more boost to speed than upgrading the engine with the equivalent occupied weight. But I guess PGI purposefully made it like this to prevent Lights or Mediums going too fast in the future.

So we are stuck kind of stuck with this implementation.

It's an easy fix. Limit top engines on future MASC capable mechs so they won't go over ~170kph with MASC, or keep the boost limit the same on MK I MASC. Either drop MASC MK II to a ton, or increase the boost. As it stands, there is no reason we can't fix this.

[Greenjulius]

Update: I just tweeted this to Russ' Twitter account. I'll let everyone know if I hear anything back.

[Lily from animove]

Whatzituyah, on 22 July 2015 - 07:37 AM, said:

On the flip side you can stick a bigger engine in and get a bigger boost. This system was to make sure that the mechs do not go too fast for the graphics engine. Though I do agree its not "Canon" speeds but you can think this as a alternate reality where such things were not possible.

I don't think, that the 2 tons of masc on mediums spent into a bigger engine would have such a big impact on acc/decc and turnrates. So I think it needs more time to figure out it's true value. On JJ emchs, landing and speedburst accelerating is very appealing.

I guess many will drop it, since aside form some higher elo players, too many will find controlling masc additionally to the rest of the mech as too complicated.

a simple toggle masc on, and add heat to the mech constantly until it could overheat would have been better. Easier for many to understand, and free of rather quick "self damage" capabilities.

Edited by Lily from animove, 22 July 2015 - 08:16 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

Greenjulius, on 22 July 2015 - 07:24 AM, said:

Adding insult to injury, MASC MK II weighs 2 tons. What could that 2 tons buy you if you put it into an engine? The XL270 weighs 13.5 tons. 2 tons higher would get you a XL300 at 15.5 tons. Maximum speed would raise from 106.9 up to 118.8. FASTER THAN MASC!!!

This is a very good point!

[Zeriniel]

I would like to imagine that this was the first implementation of MASC, and they're going to watch how it works and make changes to it. (SOON™ if ever...)

[Koniks]

Yes, the MKI and MKII need to have different acceleration ranges. Especially since the MKII has a larger damage penalty.

[DAYLEET]

I dont own the SHC or the ACH but from what i have seen of them, without elite or even basic, they are really good mech already. Let's wait before we buff them further.

Edited by DAYLEET, 22 July 2015 - 08:18 AM.

[Night Thastus]

MASC needs to be overhauled...already.

20% speed boost for all 'Mechs.

Acceleration boosts are the greatest for huge 'Mechs (like the executioner) and small for the smaller 'Mechs (like the Shadow Cat).

This same scaling goes for other bonuses, like turning bonus.

That way all 'Mechs get an effective boost, but no 'Mech gets absurd acceleration and deceleration.

[spottiedogman]

I agree MASC is very lack luster in the SHC, wish they would make it removable because that extra two tons used for weapons on this mech would be of much more benefit.

Edited by spottiedogman, 22 July 2015 - 08:20 AM.

[Greenjulius]

Zeriniel, on 22 July 2015 - 08:14 AM, said:

I would like to imagine that this was the first implementation of MASC, and they're going to watch how it works and make changes to it. (SOON™ if ever...)

The only way I see MASC getting fixed is for us to let PGI know about it. It seems okay for the Executioner, as Mk IV provides 18.5% boost, which is really noticeable on an assault mech. But the Shadowcat boost (10%) provides lower KPH than the Executioner!

I've tweeted to Russ... the more people talking about this, the sooner we can come to a compromise.

DAYLEET, on 22 July 2015 - 08:18 AM, said:

I dont own the SHC or the ACH but from what i have seen of them, without elite or even basic, they are really good mech already. Let's wait before we buff them further.

Are you kidding me? It's inferior to the Stormcrow in nearly all ways but jumping! Same speed, far less tonnage, less armor, worse hitboxes, worse hardpoints, etc.

Players who dominate with the Shadowcat do it IN SPITE of the Cat, not because of it.

I own the Cat, and while it's better than the Ferret, it's mediocre to above average at best. The Cheetah on the other hand... that thing is outrageously OP.

Edited by Greenjulius, 22 July 2015 - 08:24 AM.

[process]

ScoutMaster, on 22 July 2015 - 07:39 AM, said:

What's really annoying is that if I press a+s+alt it doesnt register all 3 keys... Stupid keyboard,anyone else have that problem?

The Alt key can be tricky in general, try using a different one. I use left Shift since it's my sprint key in other first person shooters.

Greenjulius, on 22 July 2015 - 07:53 AM, said:

Exactly. This current implementation is completely bonkers. MASC MK II simply needs boosted or tonnage lowered. 2 tons for 10.7kph for 7 seconds is a complete joke, especially when an equivalent engine would result in MORE speed with no drawbacks.

I don't normally get up in arms over these kinds of things, but this feels like a huge oversight that needs be fixed with the next patch.

I can't see PGI doing anything about reducing the weight, in order to preserve stock loadouts and such. Fine.

However, I don't see why Clan and IS MASC need to follow the same rules. I think we have a good idea about the movement speeds of all future IS MASC-capable mechs based on their weight classes (lights 140+ kph, etc.), so we can apply simple percentages to their speed increases. Clan mechs are a little all over the place with movement speeds within their weight class, so a simple percentage isn't as predictive or useful. I think it may be better for Clan mechs to adjust their speed increase on a per-chassis basis.

Otherwise, maybe we just start Clan MASC MK1 at 15% and work up incrementally to 20%.

Edited by process, 22 July 2015 - 08:28 AM.

[Zeriniel]

Greenjulius, on 22 July 2015 - 08:19 AM, said:

The only way I see MASC getting fixed is for us to let PGI know about it. It seems okay for the Executioner, as Mk IV provides 18.5% boost, which is really noticeable on an assault mech. But the Shadowcat boost (10%) provides lower KPH than the Executioner!

I've tweeted to Russ... the more people talking about this, the sooner we can come to a compromise.

Sounds about right. Think I should tweet him as well, and we can go for harrassment in numbers?