103 replies to this topic

[Pjwned]

Telmasa, on 11 September 2015 - 10:18 PM, said:

Not if LFEs suffer the same side torso loss penalty that cXL does. Brawler mechs in particular would not fancy the mobility/heat penalties from losing a torso...and also would fear losing both torsos (so any "zombie" mechs especially would want STD engine).

FupDup, on 11 September 2015 - 10:19 PM, said:

Being able to survive one side torso loss is functionally about the same as surviving two of them. By that point, your CT and/or legs are usually damaged to the point that it won't matter. Surviving one side is the best of both worlds between instadeath and zombies, it has the advantages of both and the weaknesses of neither.

Telmasa, on 11 September 2015 - 10:27 PM, said:

That same argument pretty much applies to regular XL too though...and zombies (done properly) can take much, much more punishment than any Clan 'Mech can.

Many of the Clan 'Mechs I see definitely rue the fact they can't survive the loss of both torsos.

Now, certainly, *most* 'Mechs would want to use the LFEs...that's rather the point. It's a middle ground between two extremes. But you missed another disadvantage: LFE doesn't free up as much tonnage as XL.

FupDup, on 11 September 2015 - 10:29 PM, said:

The decision would look like:

If you're a light or maybe medium/heavy with good agility and certain hitboxes --> Use IS XL
If you're anything else --> Use IS LFE

That's really about it. The only possible exception might be a critslot-starved mech like the Stalker.

For heavier mechs at least, with enough of a penalty on the LFE it would become a question of "do I want to save 25% weight to deal with less crit slots and an annoying penalty on side torso loss or do I just want a standard engine instead?"

Bespoke Cheese Cake, on 11 September 2015 - 10:29 PM, said:

Clan XL doesn't need a nerf.

Wrong.

Quote

There was a time when you could say the clan mechs were much, much better than their innersphere counter-parts.

I forgot that clan mechs don't have top tier mechs in every weight class now, my bad.

Quote

That time has passed, your're not advocating a balance, you're advocating the clan mechs to be made a worthless joke.

You're a moron and you can't read; that's not at all what I'm advocating.

F8Sealed, on 11 September 2015 - 11:59 PM, said:

I think a lot of this falls on the clan medium lasers. Everyone knows that all clan mechs generally preform well when you slap a bunch of ac5's or guass with medium lasers. The range needs to be lowered on the medium laser so you can't snipe with medium lasers.

That's a separate issue entirely.

Edited by Pjwned, 12 September 2015 - 11:36 AM.

[Johnny Z]

I am really surprised 1 damage hasnt been taken of every Omni weapon including Cgauss.

I am also surprised the Inner Sphere XL does do a shutdown on destruction instead of insta boom yet.

Is ECM stacking still a thing?

[ChapeL]

F8Sealed, on 11 September 2015 - 11:59 PM, said:

The range needs to be lowered on the medium laser so you can't snipe with medium lasers.

Clan Meds' current optimal range ( without any modifiers) is 405m with max range of 810m. I'd imagine we could keep current optimal range on clan lasers and make the damage drop off much faster beyond that. So instead of 810m it could be 600 ? ( Keep in mind you're not doing any damage at that range just stuffing your heat guage )

[Bespoke Cheese Cake]

Pjwned, on 12 September 2015 - 11:13 AM, said:

Wrong.


You're a moron and you can't read; that's not at all what I'm advocating.

As I said in my last post:

Ok, but how am I wrong?
In my experience clan mechs are not that hard to kill using Innersphere mechs. I don't make any claims of being a great player, but if my XL grasshopper can smash through a clan heavy 1 on 1 then the conclusion I make is they must be pretty even.
My wolverine can go toe to toe with stormcrow and my Locust can be fantastic for harassing clan assaults.

So please point out to me how and why this match up is unfair.

You have not addressed what I've said, you have told me I'm wrong and that I' am a moron. That is not a very convincing argument. Saying I'm wrong does not automatically make me wrong, you need to qualify that statement and tell me how I am wrong. Calling me a moron is just an insult and is not a valid counter argument.

[Skarlock]

SkyHammr, on 11 September 2015 - 09:46 PM, said:

Actually, I want to see IS get CXL equivalent engines.
Just make all the IS XLs LFEs and call it done.

The only problem I have with this is that LFEs are not as good as clan XLs because they are straight up heavier. I would actually go so far as to say they should do one of two things.

1. Make LFEs just as light as clan XL engines.

2. Leave them being heavier than XL engines, but make LFEs give some other bonuses that clan XL engines don't give. It could be extra turning, acceleration and torso twisting, or extra cooling or extra structure on the center and side torsos giving you a longer life in the battlefield. Just have them give something that gives them a benefit for their extra weight cost.

[Pjwned]

Bespoke Cheese Cake, on 12 September 2015 - 03:25 PM, said:

As I said in my last post:

Ok, but how am I wrong?
In my experience clan mechs are not that hard to kill using Innersphere mechs. I don't make any claims of being a great player, but if my XL grasshopper can smash through a clan heavy 1 on 1 then the conclusion I make is they must be pretty even.
My wolverine can go toe to toe with stormcrow and my Locust can be fantastic for harassing clan assaults.

So please point out to me how and why this match up is unfair.

You have not addressed what I've said, you have told me I'm wrong and that I' am a moron. That is not a very convincing argument. Saying I'm wrong does not automatically make me wrong, you need to qualify that statement and tell me how I am wrong. Calling me a moron is just an insult and is not a valid counter argument.

PGI themselves acknowledge that the current penalty for losing 20% of a clan XL engine isn't enough, they just didn't do anything about it because clan apologists came and made a flood of biblical proportions with their tears when an extra (appropriate) penalty was being considered for losing 20% of the engine.

[Telmasa]

FupDup, on 11 September 2015 - 10:29 PM, said:

The decision would look like:
If you're a light or maybe medium/heavy with good agility and certain hitboxes --> Use IS XL
If you're anything else --> Use IS LFE
That's really about it. The only possible exception might be a critslot-starved mech like the Stalker.

Um, no...I can think of a few light mechs that would benefit from LFE instead of XL, and there's plenty 'Mechs around that make good CT-only zombies that aren't assaults, Centurions being a prime example; hell, the Spider variants with only CT weapons can survive much longer than normal with a STD engine, you just can't go yolo speed if you do that.

Edited by Telmasa, 12 September 2015 - 05:47 PM.

[Tapdancing Kerensky]

It's totally time to give IS mechs clan engines.

[Chuck Jager]

Pjwned, on 11 September 2015 - 09:55 PM, said:

That would be a way of doing it I guess, but it would also be insane power creep, and standard engines might as well not exist after that.

I do actually think LFEs should exist, but only if properly balanced, and then cXL engines would have the same penalty but still retain their weight advantage.

No we got the insane power creep with clan xl and no reason for either IS engine without huge quirks. We have no reason for steam engines anymore either. Kiss the crap goodbye or stick to TT in mommies basement.

[Pjwned]

Chuck YeaGurr, on 12 September 2015 - 09:50 PM, said:

No we got the insane power creep with clan xl and no reason for either IS engine without huge quirks.

Yeah, it's not like I'm trying to address that exact problem or anything...

HURF

Quote

We have no reason for steam engines anymore either. Kiss the crap goodbye or stick to TT in mommies basement.

That's not a good reason to power creep the holy hell out of everything else. Clans are not irredeemably power creeped either, they just need some tweaks (namely their cXL engines) and they will be pretty much fine.

[Alexander Miyamoto]

Haven't read it all, but what about if clan looses a side torso, your "agility" (walking speed, turn speed and so on) would be reduced by X amount?

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

It seems to me the heart of this problem is that XL engines behave differently across tech lines. That is, when a Clan 'Mech loses 1 side torso it doesn't die, it only suffers a heat penalty, but when an IS 'Mech running XL loses 1 side torso it dies.

So, why not just forget about tech lines and examine how XL engines work?

I suggest that XL engines should work the same for both Clan and IS: losing 1 side torso causes not only a heat penalty, but a speed and maneuverability penalty (since you lost part of your power source!), and losing both results in death. This penalty might be anywhere from 25-50%, though I personally like about 30% as this reflects the percentage value that the side torso contributes to the 'Mech's power.

This is simple and effective and gives the opportunity to tweak chassis by chassis as necessary via Quirks. It levels a major Clan/IS advantage/disadvantage and does not require the introduction of additional tech (and programming headaches).

Additionally, it has the advantage of believability and logic (as in: the "how things work" for each tech line is the same).

[BananaBlaster]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 13 September 2015 - 12:14 AM, said:

It seems to me the heart of this problem is that XL engines behave differently across tech lines. That is, when a Clan 'Mech loses 1 side torso it doesn't die, it only suffers a heat penalty, but when an IS 'Mech running XL loses 1 side torso it dies. So, why not just forget about tech lines and examine how XL engines work? I suggest that XL engines should work the same for both Clan and IS: losing 1 side torso causes not only a heat penalty, but a speed and maneuverability penalty (since you lost part of your power source!), and losing both results in death. This penalty might be anywhere from 25-50%, though I personally like about 30% as this reflects the percentage value that the side torso contributes to the 'Mech's power. This is simple and effective and gives the opportunity to tweak chassis by chassis as necessary via Quirks. It levels a major Clan/IS advantage/disadvantage and does not require the introduction of additional tech (and programming headaches). Additionally, it has the advantage of believability and logic (as in: the "how things work" for each tech line is the same).

Sounds good to me, but how would you differentiate clan and IS then? I mean, they're NOT supposed to be exactly the same, right? Why would all weapons and equipment behave differently between clan and IS but not engines?

(My personal opinion on the matter is that I never really had a problem with cXL engine not exploding your face off when a ST is destroyed. Maybe the new quirk design thingy would change that, but for now, I don't feel like it needs change)

[Livewyr]

Let me change my Shadowcat's engine, armor, structure, MASC, and Jumpjets.. and we'll talk about the Clan XL Engine.

[Xevius Von Morrigan]

I agree with BananaBlaster.
and I can add that Light Fusion engines would be a great improvements for IS 'mechs. But I have read that it will aviable only in 3053 (as prototype) {http://www.sarna.net...Engine_-_Light}

[Andi Nagasia]

the best idea i saw was Duke Nedo's on Engine Crits,

Duke Nedo, on 10 July 2015 - 01:47 AM, said:

The suggested engine "normalization" is imo an excellent step in the direction of Balance without any serious drawbacks. Let me expand a little on this.

The suggestion I threw out in the OP just to give an example how it could be done in the simplest way. From the OP
______________________
1. Allow individual crit slots to be destroyed in the engine
2. Make harsh penalties for losing an engine crit slot, like 10% cooling, 10% speed per slot
3. Increase death by engine destruction to 4 crit slots
______________________

What does this mean? It would mean that both IS and clan XLs would survive losing one side torso. By doing so, the IS Version would lose 3 engine slots, then clan Version (and any future LFE I think) would lose 2 engine slots. With the numbers about, a lost ST for an IS mech would mean -30% cooling and -30% speed, and for a Clan mech it would mean: -20% cooling and -20% speed.

Isn't that fair? The IS XL engines would still be worse than clan XL in every conceivable way. They would be the same weight, 2 more slots, and larger penalty for lost ST and have no benefits.

The other good thing with XL normalization is that mechs that do not suffer too badly from XL ST Death ("XL safe") also do not gain so much be getting safe XL, which means that there is no risk of overpowering any mech by doing this. It's a completely safe change that can only improve Balance. If they would instead opt for achieving the same by ST armor buffs, these could easily become wrongly scaled and either do nothing or OP some mechs.

Some argue that STD engines would be obsoleted, which firstly is not entirely true since mechs with low engine cap don't really benefit from XLs, like Stalkers and the slow Awesomes. Secondly, it can easily be countered by giving for example STD engines a Component HP buff of appropriate size, whatever that is. Something in between could be done for LFEs, if they should be introduced at all.

All in all, I'd argue that XL normalization like this would be a really elegant step towards Balance. PGI still have the tonnage penalty difference between weapon/Equipment to deal with, but the XL fix would cut the amplitude of the problem approximately in half, reducing the need for extremely strong quirks.

(LINK)

Edit-
the problem with LFE is that Russ has stated that the timeline wont be moving up any time soon,
Russ wants to wait till after steam release to have the Clan Invasion again but for steam,
then after 6 Months or so move the timeline up, so 3060 isnt coming anytime soon,
though i would love for the timeline to move up to 3060 for new Variants and Tech,
(New Weapons Coming In 3060! How Should They Work? Discussion!)
(Push Up The Clock To 3054! Just For Variants!)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 13 September 2015 - 06:15 AM.

[Pjwned]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 13 September 2015 - 12:14 AM, said:

It seems to me the heart of this problem is that XL engines behave differently across tech lines. That is, when a Clan 'Mech loses 1 side torso it doesn't die, it only suffers a heat penalty, but when an IS 'Mech running XL loses 1 side torso it dies.

So, why not just forget about tech lines and examine how XL engines work?

I suggest that XL engines should work the same for both Clan and IS: losing 1 side torso causes not only a heat penalty, but a speed and maneuverability penalty (since you lost part of your power source!), and losing both results in death. This penalty might be anywhere from 25-50%, though I personally like about 30% as this reflects the percentage value that the side torso contributes to the 'Mech's power.

This is simple and effective and gives the opportunity to tweak chassis by chassis as necessary via Quirks. It levels a major Clan/IS advantage/disadvantage and does not require the introduction of additional tech (and programming headaches).

Additionally, it has the advantage of believability and logic (as in: the "how things work" for each tech line is the same).

I don't see a problem with clan XL engines essentially being lighter weight light fusion engines, but currently there are 2 problems with that.

1. The penalty for losing 20% of the engine (which would apply to LFEs too) is practically nothing, and that's what I'm trying to address here.

2. The 2nd problem is that light fusion engines don't exist yet for IS mechs, even though they could really use a middle of the road option between XL (death on side torso loss) and standard (can lose both side torsos) engines.

There's nothing wrong with IS XL engines as they are now, the Inner Sphere just needs clan engines to be actually balanced and then to have a 3rd engine type (LFE) and the imbalance will be much less.

Livewyr, on 13 September 2015 - 05:30 AM, said:

Let me change my Shadowcat's engine, armor, structure, MASC, and Jumpjets.. and we'll talk about the Clan XL Engine.

That's not an excuse for having an engine that saves the maximum amount of weight and has practically no penalty when 20% of it is lost. You can have 1 or the other, not both.

Andi Nagasia, on 13 September 2015 - 06:05 AM, said:

Edit-
the problem with LFE is that Russ has stated that the timeline wont be moving up any time soon,
Russ wants to wait till after steam release to have the Clan Invasion again but for steam,
then after 6 Months or so move the timeline up, so 3060 isnt coming anytime soon,
though i would love for the timeline to move up to 3060 for new Variants and Tech,
(New Weapons Coming In 3060! How Should They Work? Discussion!)
(Push Up The Clock To 3054! Just For Variants!)

If the timeline is simply not going to advance any time soon and we don't get LFEs, then that's fine as long as clan XL engines end up properly balanced.

Edited by Pjwned, 13 September 2015 - 10:31 AM.

[Mcgral18]

I recommend normalization.

[Pjwned]

Mcgral18, on 13 September 2015 - 10:28 AM, said:

I recommend normalization.

I still don't agree with that because of the power creep involved.

[Mcgral18]

Pjwned, on 13 September 2015 - 10:43 AM, said:

I still don't agree with that because of the power creep involved.

You'll have to explain the power creep.
Which IS mech will mount more firepower than a StormCrow or TimberWolf?

All this does is make mechs more durable, without increasing the power level at all. Big STD engine structure buffs have no real down side (aside from crits)


TTK would rise considerably for STD engine mechs, and XL engined IS mechs will be roughly where Clams are now.