43 replies to this topic

[DeathWaffle]

Let's get the facts straight about our community's opinion

Edited by DeathWaffle, 18 October 2015 - 10:48 PM.

[Rushin Roulette]

Umm.... You do know that is a fixed rule in the BT universe dont you?

The rule is, that any engine is destroyed after loosing at least 3 sections.

The size of the engines is also fixed for all IS and clan mechs. IS XL engines have 3 sections per side torso and if they are destroyed then it means the engine is destroyed. Clans can only survive the side torso explosion, because the side torsos only have 2 engine sections per side (Again, this is fixed). That is also the reason why they die when both side torsos are destroyed, the Mech has loast 4 sections which is more than the 3 sections needed for a destruction.

[Karl Streiger]

Well and 2 engine crits should produce heat - virtually removing the effect of 5 true dubs (2.0 dissipation in the engine) and reduce the heat cap by 10.

We don't have this crippling rule either. So why to keep the IS XL destruction? All or nothing.

Ok IS XL should not work after loosing the ST - but so shouldn't the Clan XL.
Anyhow the structure and armor values of MWO are a nightmare

Edited by Karl Streiger, 19 October 2015 - 12:01 AM.

[Rushin Roulette]

Actually losing a Clan XL ingame does affect the heat. I beleive loosing a side torso means some engine heat sinks are also destroyed (Not sure if 20 or 40% of the engine heatsinks are removed). If a mech is built symetrically balanced, tehn the loss is not very noticeable, however if you have Lasers on one side and Balistics on the other side, loosing that balistic side means you are pretty much screwed, bolted and riveted for the rest of the match (You can shoot maybe one Alpha, but after that you are close to the heat threshhold and cool very slowly.

[DeathWaffle]

At this point the Battletech rules have been broken so many times, I don't even care anymore

I was thinking of giving IS some better chances of survival because most of the time I win against them when I'm with my lance of clan mechs, and at least see what the Inner Sphere community thinks

[Johnny Z]

+1 for shutdown instead of insta boom. On principle for a number of reasons. Insta boom is cheesey!

[Fubbit]

Making IS and Clan XLs equivalent is a really simple (obvious, intuitive, consistent) way to get closer parity between the technologies.

I do like the idea of a side torso loss being more of an issue to both technologies. Shutdown, heat gain, speed loss?

We might consider giving clanners the ability to change engines (and whatever all else) to compensate.

Arguments based on what the original rules say are pretty lame. ( The original rules were not trying to make IS and Clan mechs equally powerful. We are trying to move on from that model as it makes no sense in a game where everyone pilots one mech. )

Edited by Fubbit, 19 October 2015 - 10:30 AM.

[Burktross]

I'd rather it not being instaboom, but just bleeding out, you know? The Reactor growing unstable, doing 1 pt of damage per 1/4 second on a random torso location until you rot from the inside.

[Durant Carlyle]

+1 for IS XL engines that die when a side torso is destroyed.

[Spleenslitta]

I believe IS XL should be destroyed when a sidetorso is destroyed. But i also believe Clan engines should have 20-30 % less horsepower when a sidetorso is removed.
Furthermore whenever an engine is crited whether it's standard or XL it's heatsinks should be less effective and the engine might be less effective too.

This would have a chance at actually increasing TTK rather than lowering it since players would be more cautious.
Use their brains more.

[Wadesin]

OP this is not a topic this is mechwarrior. Tennis rules have no effect on football..

[Tarl Cabot]

The are several issues between the boardgame and MWO when translating the game from one format to another.

MWO does not have actual engine crits, be it a Clan XL, IS XL or even a Standard engine. Like everything else, the introduction of IS XL engine and how it would operate was not taken into consideration with regards to the future introduction of Clan equipment.

The boardgame differences between Standard engines vs both Clan/IS XL engines is that the XL engines are present in THREE locations instead of ONE location. The game also used the randomness of dice rolls to determine hit/miss then on a hit what location it did hit.

As noted MWO does not have actual engine crits. On a IS/Clan mechs it takes destroying the CT (6engine slots), or 4 engine slots for a Clan mech w/XL engine but that is 6 engine slots for an IS mech w/XL engine.

In the future there may be the IS's LFE, which is 3/4 weight of a standard engine but would act as a Clan XL (boardgame wise).

This will be the first Battletech/Mechwarrior game (besides the Virtual World version) where the setting is not 3025, there are both IS and Clan mechs and it is purely PVP, whereas the only MW games were simulations PVE, with no continuing purchases, and the ability to have PVP. But those games primary base was PVE.

And MWO has modified several rules to make MWO fit in a PVP environment. We all have either liked or disliked how many things have been handled but this is for the long term, not a quick buck to get a box out the door. And part of that is to balance things, not just between Clan vs IS, but also Clan vs Clan and IS vs IS, before there is a large flux of Steam players, many who will have little knowledge of the workings of the Battletech universe but many will question the transition of rules between a boardgame and a FPS/simulation, leaving out critical pieces that balanced out other aspects of the game.

And MWO is set to make the technologies comparable. A Clan XL engine loses a ST, it generates a heat penalty, a IS XL engine loses a ST, it dies?!?! Or run with a standard engine which tends to make the mech slower and it has to carry lighter and/or fewer weapons?

Options
Standard engines - no ill effects to loss of side torsos
Clan XL (1/2 wt/standard/4 extra slots) - loss of one ST, currently heat penalty (would be interested in speed/agility penalty but first things first)
IS XL (1/2 wt/standard/6 extra slots)- loss of one ST, current death. Change to greater heat penalty than Clan heat penalty (^^ for speed/agility penalty)
IS LFE (3/4 wt/standard/4 extra slots - possible future item. Heat penalty similar to Clan XL or between Clan/IS.

Additional option - Clan omnis already come with case but IS mechs do not. Allow IS case to be installed into each side to prevent IS XL engine destruction. That would be two less slots that can be used for other components while providing an additional reason for use of case.

As a Steam player at first look, they can see IS stock mechs are less expensive, slower and carry fewer/lighter weapons but tend to require major overhauls, and one of the critical pieces, an IS XL engine, if used will get my mech destroyed faster than a Clan mech's would. While Clan mechs are more expensive at the start, there are no major overhauls needed and its XL engine will allow my mech survive the loss of a side torso. AND if most of the elite/competitive players go with the Clans and their Clan mechs, it is due to the Clan tech being superior AND survivable vs slower or less durable IS mechs.

And, reminder that none of the previous MW versions had to constantly keep a product updated to either keep people interested or to response to pressure to make changes for a PVP environment.

Just to add. MWO does not have asymmetric games and FASA have posted that Clans technology was a mistake. Example. During the first rounds of beta testing Clans vs IS, Clans were using Star League era technology, and they barely were able to obtain a foothold in the IS using their battle tactics/strategy, it is then that Clan tech was created. It took creating the Dark Ages to basically wipe the slate clean. And all of that was using only the boardgame with dice. Translating that into a computer game where you can basically hit what you are aiming for would mean some things would need to change to account for that, particularly when many balancing aspects are not being used.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 21 October 2015 - 05:59 PM.

[Thorqemada]

Both Clan and IS should have a severe penatly to losing a Sidetorso but currently Clan have a Superhuge Advantage the way IS gets killed and Clans survive with no significant penalty.

[Neput Z34]

TLDR; Change how damage applied to destroyed Side Torsos is transferred to Center Torso INTERNALS.

Currently, of damage applied to Destroyed Side Torso, only 50% is transferred to Front Center Torso ARMOR or internals if a mech is equipped with Standard or Clan XL engine.

I propose have damage transfer % be dependent on engine type and damage transferred to CENTER TORSO INTERNALS in stead of armor.

STD engine damage transfer should be 10% ~ 25%. Any higher and it is not worth fitting one to "Zombie" your mech.


All Current penalties for a loss of a side torso on Clan XL should be retained and applied to IS XL


Clan XL damage transfer should be 50%~ 66.667%. Should be a sufficient enough reason to shield with an armored side

IS XL should survive a loss of a single side torso just like Clan XL but should have damage transfer of 66.667%~ 100% maybe even higher to highlight how fragile it is.


LOSS OF BOTH SIDE TORSOS ON A MECH WITH ANY XL = DEATH


P.S. SORRY ABOUT CAPS, BUT FORUMS ARE FULL OF READING COMPREHENSION FAILS.

Edit: Forums ate my initial post coupled with me hamfisting my POS keyboard

I highly doubt that something like this is even considered it would hurt the monetization of Clan tech and or could not be "profitable" to implement.

Edited by Neput Z34, 23 October 2015 - 03:21 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

With said penalties, I can climb on board with, if PGI agrees with the initial IS XL survivable w/one ST and believes there needs to be different penalties across for each tech.

[Tarl Cabot]

DeathWaffle, on 19 October 2015 - 04:20 AM, said:

At this point the Battletech rules have been broken so many times, I don't even care anymore

I was thinking of giving IS some better chances of survival because most of the time I win against them when I'm with my lance of clan mechs, and at least see what the Inner Sphere community thinks

It is not necessarily broken but the base rules were intended for one type of game. Those rules should provide a foundation to build on but would need to be modified to fit the environment, the conditions.

It would be interesting to hear from the original designers on their thoughts concerning the transition from a dice game that needs to be resolves within a comfortable timeframe to a FPS computer game where the dice is hanging inside the cockpit.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 23 October 2015 - 11:33 PM.

[VXJaeger]

Yes. F**k TT and screw BT-purists. Clans would still have weapon- and omnipod- advantages.
Or clan-XL should be destroyed when losing side torso, neitherway.

Ever since Clan-ERLL got nerfed, C-XL has been then only common factor in all balance issues.

Edited by VXJaeger, 24 October 2015 - 01:27 AM.

[Brother MEX]

DeathWaffle, on 18 October 2015 - 10:46 PM, said:

Let's get the facts straight about our community's opinion

Better READ THIS FIRST :
http://www.sarna.net...ategory:Engines
especially the entries about COMPACT and LIGHT fusion engines !

Instead of introducing a change to Classic Battle Tech reguarding the way a XL engine behaves, better wait until the LIGHT fusion engine is introduced by the Lyran Alliance in 3062 !

I am also looking forward to play with XXL fusion engines, which will be the ideal engine for light mechs

Edited by Brother MEX, 24 October 2015 - 04:11 AM.

[Neput Z34]

Brother MEX, on 24 October 2015 - 04:05 AM, said:

Instead of introducing a change to Classic Battle Tech reguarding the way a XL engine behaves, better wait until the LIGHT fusion engine is introduced by the Lyran Alliance in 3062 !

I doubt we all have the patience to wait 9 years for that to be implemented, assuming the game progresses at 1 to 1 time frame, with no time jumps.

At the going rate I doubt we see any changes implemented, that do not show quantifiable profit, or meet cost / benefit analysis. Video game development at the end of the day is a business.

[Tarl Cabot]

Brother MEX, on 24 October 2015 - 04:05 AM, said:

Better READ THIS FIRST :
http://www.sarna.net...ategory:Engines
especially the entries about COMPACT and LIGHT fusion engines !

Instead of introducing a change to Classic Battle Tech reguarding the way a XL engine behaves, better wait until the LIGHT fusion engine is introduced by the Lyran Alliance in 3062 !

I am also looking forward to play with XXL fusion engines, which will be the ideal engine for light mechs

Again, all of that is from a boardgame where dice was the deciding factor, not whether or not you can use your mouse to put that bullseye over that Catapult's right torso where sets part of an XL engine, even though the Timberwolf that is able to fire has lost a side torso, has had the armor gone from the CT and other remaining torso and crits have occurred.

The game started with 1-2 engine crits/increased heat and 3rd crit-mech destroyed. Clans were introduced but play tested with Star League era mechs, meaning primarily IS XL engines. With the introduction of Clan equipment, with lighter and longer ranged weapons also came the Clan XL engine but instead of 3 engine slots each side it was 2 engine slots, which decreased the chance of crit hits.

People really do need to step away from the boardgame, especially when many of its aspects have NOT been translated into a FPS game. There is no asymmetric warfare. There is no Star (and 1-3 Points) vs Company, it is 1 Company vs 2 Stars + 2 Points. And for myself, I am trying to look at the longevity of the game, the health of the game.

Just to add for MWO, PGI changed how the majority of components are destroyed. All components have health points so if they are hit with a critical hit, they are currently not destroyed/rendered inoperative. It is not until their health points have been depleted are they "destroyed" or the internal structure depleted to zero, destroying that compartment and the adjacent, if applicable (ST takes respective arm with it) . Excepts are armor/internal structure, gyro, cockpit, sensors, and lifesupport. Other components that if destroyed had adverse affects for the mech and/or pilot but are not present in the current game. By removing those aspects, PGI had removed some items that would destroy a mech or make it more difficult to operate.

Even if PGI were to really introduce engine critical hits, with Pinpoint aiming that would decrease TTK on both sides. PGI has already doubled the IS/Armor, now they need to decide should IS mechs TTK be similar to Clan mechs, or should IS have a lower TTK threshold? That is what, imho, brought about the IS quirks, some IS mechs to fire more option at equivalent Clan ranges in order to apply approx same or more damage to Clan mechs.

And for myself, I am considering the health and longevity of the game. IS may have more variety of mechs but at the end of the day many will want Clan mechs due to their speed, range and durability. The effect though is to keep both sides semi-happy and interested on both sides. For those who played the previous MW series, how many changed the equipment in their IS mechs to Clan, or changed to Clan chassis ?

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 25 October 2015 - 01:15 PM.