124 replies to this topic

[Burktross]

Homeskilit, on 05 October 2015 - 01:40 PM, said:

Yes it does. Your stock mech now has Endo stock instead of FF stock and functions exactly the same.

No, it doesn't. Mechs that only had ferro now have extra tons from the combined FF + ES savings.


Also, if the locust relies on speed not firepower, then 5kph does matter-- so does its already limited weapon payload.

[Escef]

Homeskilit, on 05 October 2015 - 01:40 PM, said:

Funny that you make a post in my thread directed at specific proposals that were not mine but do not quote those proposals (You quoted The Atlas Overlord who was not adding any proposals). Then verbally attack me for believing you are providing counter arguments for my original post. Seems like the whole misunderstanding could have been solved with you using certain tools at your disposal correctly.

• I was not talking to or about you.
  
• I was referencing in broad terms the difficulty of making alterations to how FF armor works.
  
• I was broadly referencing other threads that have cropped up on the subject over the past 2 or 3 years, I'm not hunting them all down to quote old conversations.
  
• You do not own a thread once you make it. It is not "your" thread, it is the community's thread. Neither I, nor anyone else, needs to address you or your points specifically so long as the post is reasonably on topic.
  
• The misunderstanding was caused in its entirety by YOU thinking every post in the thread is about YOU.
  
• Welcome to the block list.

[SirNotlag]

Burktross, on 05 October 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

No, it doesn't. Mechs that only had ferro now have extra tons from the combined FF + ES savings.

That's why I like my idea better It still works perfectly fine with stock load outs it just has more options when customizing the mech.

[Homeskilit]

Burktross, on 05 October 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

No, it doesn't. Mechs that only had ferro now have extra tons from the combined FF + ES savings.


Also, if the locust relies on speed not firepower, then 5kph does matter-- so does its already limited weapon payload.

I think I have said many times, roll FF weight savings into Endo. If this proves too be too much weight gain have it only apply to stock mechs and it reverts to normal Endo weight savings as soon as you adjust it.

And with .5 (guessing relative to the .77 the 35 ton Panther loses) you are only losing one of the mentioned pieces of equipment. You CHOOSE between your MG, SL or 5 KPH you do not loose all of it.

Escef, on 05 October 2015 - 01:56 PM, said:

• I was not talking to or about you.
  
• I was referencing in broad terms the difficulty of making alterations to how FF armor works.
  
• I was broadly referencing other threads that have cropped up on the subject over the past 2 or 3 years, I'm not hunting them all down to quote old conversations.
  
• You do not own a thread once you make it. It is not "your" thread, it is the community's thread. Neither I, nor anyone else, needs to address you or your points specifically so long as the post is reasonably on topic.
  
• The misunderstanding was caused in its entirety by YOU thinking every post in the thread is about YOU.
  
• Welcome to the block list.

Oh man, even funnier.

[SirNotlag]

Homeskilit, on 05 October 2015 - 01:40 PM, said:

Great minds think alike! I am sorry I did not read through your thread when i was perusing the older FF topics or I would have mentioned/linked it. While similar, I feel there are not enough trade offs in your version of it. I think in order to go above the original amount of intended armor points you need to sacrifice a decent amount of offense to compensate. I was also attempting to further differentiate Endo and FF as both being weight savers muddles the water between them.

I think there is enough of a trade off between offence and defence in my idea. To get the extra armour out of FF you would have to spend the weight you normally save with it.

For example Lets compare a thunderbolt that would running full standard armour with endo steel vs one that is running full FF armour with a standard structure using my proposal. Its 65 tons so its a good mid range mech that a lot of other mechs numbers will fall close to.

The thunderbolt running standard armour and endo would have 13.2 tonnes of armour and 3.5 tonnes structure leaving 48.3 tonnes free to work with. CT has 84 armour, sides and legs have 60, and arms have 40.

The thunderbolt running FF armour and standard structure would have 13.2 tonnes of armour and 6.5 tonnes of structure leaving 45.3 tonnes to work with. CT would have 94 armour, sides and legs 67, and arms 45.

the difference is that the endo steel gives the thunderbolt 3 extra tonnes of equipment to use,used for either a bigger engine or more fire power. While the FF give the thunderbolt 10 more armour on the CT, 7 more armour on the side torsos and legs, and 5 more armour on the arms. They both use the same amount of tonnage for armour because even though FF weighs less per point of armour (it weighs 36 points per ton instead of 32) they are throwing more armour points on the mech.

Its a simple change that makes taking the different load outs work a little differently but not being vastly different or requiring a massive overhaul.

[Trev Firestorm]

So, do I understand this right: OP wants FF to keep its current stats but additionally allow armor over the standard armor cap? If so that sounds not too bad considering how few mechs benefit from ES+FF and ES is straight up better when taking one. Lore/TT should step aside for this one.

[Homeskilit]

SirNotlag, on 05 October 2015 - 03:20 PM, said:

I think there is enough of a trade off between offence and defence in my idea. To get the extra armour out of FF you would have to spend the weight you normally save with it.

For example Lets compare a thunderbolt that would running full standard armour with endo steel vs one that is running full FF armour with a standard structure using my proposal. Its 65 tons so its a good mid range mech that a lot of other mechs numbers will fall close to.

The thunderbolt running standard armour and endo would have 13.2 tonnes of armour and 3.5 tonnes structure leaving 48.3 tonnes free to work with. CT has 84 armour, sides and legs have 60, and arms have 40.

The thunderbolt running FF armour and standard structure would have 13.2 tonnes of armour and 6.5 tonnes of structure leaving 45.3 tonnes to work with. CT would have 94 armour, sides and legs 67, and arms 45.

the difference is that the endo steel gives the thunderbolt 3 extra tonnes of equipment to use,used for either a bigger engine or more fire power. While the FF give the thunderbolt 10 more armour on the CT, 7 more armour on the side torsos and legs, and 5 more armour on the arms. They both use the same amount of tonnage for armour because even though FF weighs less per point of armour (it weighs 36 points per ton instead of 32) they are throwing more armour points on the mech.

Its a simple change that makes taking the different load outs work a little differently but not being vastly different or requiring a massive overhaul.

One of the issues I have with your version is the FF crit slots stay the same thus you run into the same problem it currently has where you cannot use both Endo and FF. I do not believe Endo and FF should an either or case, they should be different entities with different pros and cons giving the player multiple decision points rather than one.

The one question I have about your version though, is it free allocation? Or is it once you apply FF you automatically apply a specified weight in armor spread out around your mech. I think it should be totally up to the player where their extra points from FF go at increasing cost. I am not a fan of throwing numbers out their because that is the responsibility of the people balancing and they are subject to change, better to have an idea and let the people actually implementing said idea adjust as needed.

Trev Firestorm, on 05 October 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

So, do I understand this right: OP wants FF to keep its current stats but additionally allow armor over the standard armor cap? If so that sounds not too bad considering how few mechs benefit from ES+FF and ES is straight up better when taking one. Lore/TT should step aside for this one.

Yes that is correct though I think the trade offs for the additional armor should be weight instead of crit slots and the additional weight FF would have given you should be placed into Endo if necessary.

*Edit* I just realized I have been saying weight this whole time when I should have been saying mass.

Edited by Homeskilit, 05 October 2015 - 04:07 PM.

[SirNotlag]

Homeskilit, on 05 October 2015 - 04:04 PM, said:

One of the issues I have with your version is the FF crit slots stay the same thus you run into the same problem it currently has where you cannot use both Endo and FF. I do not believe Endo and FF should an either or case, they should be different entities with different pros and cons giving the player multiple decision points rather than one.

The one question I have about your version though, is it free allocation? Or is it once you apply FF you automatically apply a specified weight in armor spread out around your mech. I think it should be totally up to the player where their extra points from FF go at increasing cost. I am not a fan of throwing numbers out their because that is the responsibility of the people balancing and they are subject to change, better to have an idea and let the people actually implementing said idea adjust as needed.

I guess that is something we are going to have to disagree on then because I Feel it should be an either or except on the smaller mechs that already run both.

Yes it would be free allocation. My math was simply since it makes armour weigh 12% less (currently all it does) it could also give the bonus of being able to put 12% more armour points on a component (my buff idea). thus the original 84 max points available on the thunderbolt CT becomes 94 max. This stops him from putting all extra armour on the CT and being a zombie mech. In my previous example the thunderbolt running FF and standard structure could choose to have 94/94 on CT ,67/67 on sides, only 60/67 on the legs, and only 40/45 on the arms making the armour weigh only 12.5 tonnes, giving you a full 46 tonnes to work with.

Edited by SirNotlag, 05 October 2015 - 04:53 PM.

[Durant Carlyle]

How about we leave something that doesn't need to be changed, unchanged?

We will be getting other armor types eventually, and those don't need to be broken then like you're suggesting Ferro-Fibrous be broken now.

Ferro-Fibrous armor doesn't compete with Endo Steel internal structure. It never has. They are simply different options. Those 'Mechs that can fit it, do ... and those that can't, don't.

[SirNotlag]

Durant Carlyle, on 05 October 2015 - 05:24 PM, said:

How about we leave something that doesn't need to be changed, unchanged?

We will be getting other armor types eventually, and those don't need to be broken then like you're suggesting Ferro-Fibrous be broken now.

Ferro-Fibrous armor doesn't compete with Endo Steel internal structure. It never has. They are simply different options. Those 'Mechs that can fit it, do ... and those that can't, don't.

then you may as well take FF out of the game

[Durant Carlyle]

SirNotlag, on 05 October 2015 - 04:31 PM, said:

I guess that is something we are going to have to disagree on then because I Feel it should be an either or except on the smaller mechs that already run both.

And you are DEFINITELY not going to get agreement there. Making 'Mechs that can fit both choose between them instead? HELL EFFING NO.

SirNotlag, on 05 October 2015 - 05:27 PM, said:

then you may as well take FF out of the game

Why? Nearly all of my lights use it, plus some of my mediums. Weight savings is weight savings. Just because it doesn't give super boosts like you want doesn't make it invalid.

Edited by Durant Carlyle, 05 October 2015 - 05:30 PM.

[SirNotlag]

Durant Carlyle, on 05 October 2015 - 05:27 PM, said:

And you are DEFINITELY not going to get agreement there. Making 'Mechs that can fit both choose between them instead? HELL EFFING NO.

It was not to make it either or it was to leave it at 14 crit slots so lights can still run both completely the same as the way they run them now. if they ever put my idea into the game all builds would be the same the total armour on lights with FF equipped would go up so they could drop a machine gun or something to get a couple more armour points.

<sigh>
honestly its as if people don't even read.
and if your not going to read ask. don't assume

[Johnny Z]

So far the damage % reduction looks good. How much is another question. 12% seems to much? WHat ever % balances it with Endo Steel makes sense.

[Durant Carlyle]

lol

Question: How are you going to balance damage reduction of armor versus pure weight savings of internal structure?

Answer: You never will.

Solution: Stop trying to mess with Ferro-Fibrous armor.

Edited by Durant Carlyle, 05 October 2015 - 05:43 PM.

[SirNotlag]

Johnny Z, on 05 October 2015 - 05:37 PM, said:

So far the damage % reduction looks good. How much is another question. 12% seems to much? WHat ever % balances it with Endo Steel makes sense.

Damage reduction? who said anything about damage reduction? both the OP and me have been talking about adding more armour points that's not reducing damage that's just means you carry a little more armour so it takes an additional med laser blast to melt it away.

Edit*my bad didn't know who you were talking to.

Edited by SirNotlag, 05 October 2015 - 06:27 PM.

[GreyNovember]

Durant Carlyle, on 05 October 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

lol

Question: How are you going to balance damage reduction of armor versus pure weight savings of internal structure?

Answer: You never will.

Solution: Stop trying to mess with Ferro-Fibrous armor.

"STOP TRYING TO PROPOSE ALTERNATIVES, GOD, FERRO IS FINE BECAUSE I DON'T NEED IT BUFFED"

Did I get that right?

[SirNotlag]

Durant Carlyle, on 05 October 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

lol

Question: How are you going to balance damage reduction of armor versus pure weight savings of internal structure?

Same way you balance anything that is Asymmetrical, very carefully.

And come on thunderbolts currently have 15 extra hit points on their side torso's due to quirks. Where do those come from? Where ever the hell PGI decided to pull all their quirk ideas from I supose.
There is currently light mechs with quirks for 15 extra hits as well for Petes sake!

The point is I think it can be done you just have to make small changes carefully.

my idea does not change FF at all it simple gives it an additional function. If people want to keep using it for a little more weight savings they could do that.

And those lights and mediums you pilot. the ones that usually sit with less than 10% of the player base playing at that weight... maybe they could do with a very small buff.

just because something has been the same for 20 years doesn't mean it should keep doing what its been doing, or that it was even right in the first place.

Edited by SirNotlag, 05 October 2015 - 07:12 PM.

[Khobai]

Johnny Z, on 05 October 2015 - 05:37 PM, said:

So far the damage % reduction looks good. How much is another question. 12% seems to much? WHat ever % balances it with Endo Steel makes sense.

Actually 12% damage reduction is right around where it evens out with ES.


ES saves you 5% of the mech's tonnage. So on a 100 ton mech ES saves you 5 tons.

For FF to equal ES for a 100 ton mech, it also needs to save you 5 tons.

An Atlas normally has about 18 tons of armor.

So if FF reduces the weight of that 18 tons of armor by 12% that equals 2.16 tons saved
And if FF increases the damage reduction of that armor by 12% that equals the same as having 2.16 more tons of armor

So 12% less weight and 12% damage reduction would come out being worth 4.32 tons which is pretty close to the 5 tons. There's also the fact that FF's damage reduction is effectively allowing you to take more armor than the normal armor cap allows and thats worth something as well.

So giving FF 12% damage reduction seems just about perfect to me.

Quote

Damage reduction? who said anything about damage reduction? both the OP and me have been talking about adding more armour points that's not reducing damage that's just means you carry a little more armour so it takes an additional med laser blast to melt it away.

Since MWO has no repairing, extra armor and damage reduction end up being the same exact thing.

As far as damage being applied is concerned, having 113 points of armor works out exactly the same as having 100 points of armor with 12% damage reduction.

Damage reduction just happens to be the better option because it doesnt change the armor values or tonnage values of existing builds. All it does is add damage reduction.

Edited by Khobai, 05 October 2015 - 06:49 PM.

[SirNotlag]

Khobai, on 05 October 2015 - 06:20 PM, said:

Actually 12% damage reduction is right around where it evens out with ES.


ES saves you 5% of the mech's tonnage. So on a 100 ton mech ES saves you 5 tons.

For FF to equal ES for a 100 ton mech, it also needs to save you 5 tons.

An Atlas normally has about 18 tons of armor.

So if FF reduces the weight of that 18 tons of armor by 12% that equals 2.16 tons saved
And if FF increases the damage reduction of that armor by 12% that equals the same as having 2.16 more tons of armor

So 12% less weight and 12% damage reduction would come out being worth 4.32 tons which is pretty close to the 5 tons. There's also the fact that FF's damage reduction is effectively allowing you to take more armor than the normal armor cap allows and thats worth something as well.

So giving FF 12% damage reduction seems just about perfect to me.

I'm not sure it actually works out that way. With 12% less damage a 40 point alpha drops down to about 35 meaning something like an atlas would have to take an entire extra alpha to the CT alone... that seems worth a lot more to me than 2.1 tonnes of armour.

if my math is right.

I suppose with my suggestion an atlas gets 15 extra hits on the CT but he wouldn't get that for free, cause I don't think FF is that bad, I just think it could do with a little tweak.

[Johnny Z]

Nothing wrong with adding a little bit of toughness to these mechs as an option over endo steel or weapons. Many assaults dont use either because of space as it is. Yes Omni mechs get half space endo and ferro but still.

Edited by Johnny Z, 05 October 2015 - 06:53 PM.