2 replies to this topic

[Dawnstealer]

So the short version is that Ferro Armor weighs less than normal armor, and Endo Steel weighs less than normal internal structure. The cost for this weight reduction is an increase in space it takes up.

Canon-wise, and MWO-wise, they took up the same amount of space (so 14 slots each). However, Endo offers more of a weight savings than Ferro, so if you have to pick one or the other, you would NEVER pick Ferro.

How about reduce the slots for Ferro from 14 to 12? Now you get two more slots if you take Ferro over Endo, which could pay off depending on what your build is.

Now the choice isn't automatic and both options offer something different.

Edited by Dawnstealer, 15 September 2015 - 12:20 PM.

[Night Thastus]

While I don't think it would hurt to try, there's already another reason to use it, it's cheap as ****. Ferro is really, really cheap compared to Endo.

If we had repair and re-arm, then people would REALLY have a reason to use it.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

PGI won't change stuff like that from TT values.

If the goal is to give people a reason to use FF instead of endo a better idea is to allow IS FF to mount the same tonnage of armor which would amount which would amount to 12% more armor.

Why not clan FF? Simply put clan battlemechs can take both clan ES and clan FF for the same number of slots and for the most part won't have to choose between them.