50 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

RampancyTW, on 19 November 2015 - 04:04 PM, said:

Well... they are a thing. Look at all of the people upset about structure instead of armor. If they weren't a thing, it wouldn't matter.

What I meant is that crits and crit-seeking weapons are ineffective/pointless most of the time.

This picture below explains everything:

Edited by FupDup, 19 November 2015 - 04:11 PM.

[Deathlike]

Here's the thing...

It's been repeated over and over.. to the deafness of one balance master's ears that Internal Structure buffs are less useful than straight Armor buffs.

Having a mech that has its internals opened only serves to allow that dakka AC20 Right Torso to be disabled much more easily than any other section of the mech. What's the point of being durable if you can't keep weapons uptime as long as possible?

Crits are pretty much overrated... as you're more geared to build mechs with Crit protection in mind (through DHS stacking) RATHER than worrying actual bonus internal structure.

[VirtualSmitty]

All that structure doesn't help much at all, Atlas needed armor buffs. It's still bad, although the movement quirks are nice.

[Water Bear]

I think we can all agree that buffing the Atlas internal structure really doesn't do much to improve it. With the release of the Dire Whale your "tanking time until death" became about one third of what it used to be.

[Soultraxx]

Vickinator, on 19 November 2015 - 03:38 PM, said:

How do you get into tier 2 and not understand the difference between armor and structure

What a cheap attempt at trying to belittle the OP.

Just because you drive it doesn't mean you have to know how it all works.

How many people who drive cars can explain a galvenising process for the body panels, the vulcanisation process used in making tyres, how the fuel pump works?

I'll guess not many even though they use one every single day and trust their lives to the processes they dont understand.

Why? Because we dont have to understand how everything works.

Edited by Soultraxx, 19 November 2015 - 11:13 PM.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

Sarlic, on 19 November 2015 - 09:53 AM, said:

I disagree. Sorry!

I see no armor values quirks.

Although i get it why people thinks it tanks more.

You can give the Atlas as many structure quirks if you want but if the armor is still shaved off with a few hits then it will wander in the heat of a battle like a stick. Opened up components are extremely sensitive for crits and damage transfer. Your main cannon like the AC/20 or your sidetorso packed with SRMs will just be disabled at the same rate on the live servers.*

It feels tanker because of the +17 structure on both arms.

*When most of the people don't torso twist and spread the damage around by starting by the arms first. To protect your CT/ST.

In my opinion the Atlas should have gotten a optimal mix of both armor and structure. I gave my feedback on this and after years of playing them out.

Which also comes to the point when you put the above as suggested in the Atlas it wil not walk as a disabled zombie in the heat of the battle when the first seconds of a push/flank etc. are crucial to dish out some firepower. If the quirks stays: It will just be another jockstick with just disabled weapon systems. It only expands the longivity with disabled weapons.

In other words: i prefer have the Atlas have the first seconds fight his way through a main pack with all weapons functioning untill armor gets heavily pierced and then gets disabled in a later stage then a Atlas which loses all of his weapons in the first seconds but with attached useless disabled components and disabled weapons.

Edit: hard to explain...my English is terrible on this post sorry. Made some adjustments.
Edit² Ninja'd by Ulti.

yep this. But we know, devs dont care about the core of what you wrote there. THEY DONT CARE.

[Rampancy]

Deathlike, on 19 November 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

Here's the thing...

It's been repeated over and over.. to the deafness of one balance master's ears that Internal Structure buffs are less useful than straight Armor buffs.

Having a mech that has its internals opened only serves to allow that dakka AC20 Right Torso to be disabled much more easily than any other section of the mech. What's the point of being durable if you can't keep weapons uptime as long as possible?

Crits are pretty much overrated... as you're more geared to build mechs with Crit protection in mind (through DHS stacking) RATHER than worrying actual bonus internal structure.

Or maybe they KNOW that armor is better than internal structure, and are adding structure instead of armor to mechs to make them more durable while keeping things fair?

There's no reason to assume incompetence in this case. As a frequent Atlas pilot, I would love massive armor buffs, but I completely get why they've opted for structure buffs instead. It adds durability while keeping things, well, fair.

[Deathlike]

RampancyTW, on 20 November 2015 - 05:35 AM, said:

Or maybe they KNOW that armor is better than internal structure, and are adding structure instead of armor to mechs to make them more durable while keeping things fair?

There's no reason to assume incompetence in this case. As a frequent Atlas pilot, I would love massive armor buffs, but I completely get why they've opted for structure buffs instead. It adds durability while keeping things, well, fair.

It's actually reasonable to assume incompetence, but that's not even the point.

When you have the Dire Wolf pumping out DPS far and away greater than the Atlas's ability to tank such damage, there is a problem. The Atlas would need greater weapons uptime to properly respond to it.

Mind you, it shouldn't be a strict 1v1 situation, but generally speaking... tanking shouldn't compromise firepower uptime that significantly in an Atlas. The Direwolf can pretty much death stare you when unchallenged.

Edited by Deathlike, 20 November 2015 - 06:05 AM.

[Tombstoner]

Deathlike, on 19 November 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

Here's the thing...

It's been repeated over and over.. to the deafness of one balance master's ears that Internal Structure buffs are less useful than straight Armor buffs.

Having a mech that has its internals opened only serves to allow that dakka AC20 Right Torso to be disabled much more easily than any other section of the mech. What's the point of being durable if you can't keep weapons uptime as long as possible?

Crits are pretty much overrated... as you're more geared to build mechs with Crit protection in mind (through DHS stacking) RATHER than worrying actual bonus internal structure.

Armor is too week and crits need to penetrate. This is just about the only way to make a crit system work in this game. This would give the LBX series a nich. When it hits an location with no armor it would be simply devastating to internals.

[van Uber]

Deathlike, on 19 November 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

Here's the thing...

It's been repeated over and over.. to the deafness of one balance master's ears that Internal Structure buffs are less useful than straight Armor buffs.

Having a mech that has its internals opened only serves to allow that dakka AC20 Right Torso to be disabled much more easily than any other section of the mech. What's the point of being durable if you can't keep weapons uptime as long as possible?

Crits are pretty much overrated... as you're more geared to build mechs with Crit protection in mind (through DHS stacking) RATHER than worrying actual bonus internal structure.

But is this true?

When they buffed the internal structure of Hunchbacks we all experienced a greater resilience in the hump. Suddenly we got to actually keep the AC20 the entire match, something unheard of before. There was a noticeable difference in survivability of the AC20 of the 4G.

And now we get reports of YLWs having more durable Gauss due to what could only be interna structure buff.

Unless PGI is not telling us something about the mechanics.

In any case, it does not seem so clear cut as many in the community want to make it.

[Deathlike]

van Uber, on 20 November 2015 - 06:29 AM, said:

But is this true?

When they buffed the internal structure of Hunchbacks we all experienced a greater resilience in the hump. Suddenly we got to actually keep the AC20 the entire match, something unheard of before. There was a noticeable difference in survivability of the AC20 of the 4G.

And now we get reports of YLWs having more durable Gauss due to what could only be interna structure buff.

Unless PGI is not telling us something about the mechanics.

In any case, it does not seem so clear cut as many in the community want to make it.

The 4G's Hunch quirks are +18 to external armor for the RT, and +12 to the RT's internal structure.

It still highlights what I said earlier... external armor is preferred here.

Tombstoner, on 20 November 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

Armor is too week and crits need to penetrate. This is just about the only way to make a crit system work in this game. This would give the LBX series a nich. When it hits an location with no armor it would be simply devastating to internals.

Crits are overrated. When it comes to an AC20, you can't really crit buff that section outside of putting actual AC20 ammo in it (which is risky unless you can unload them all quick enough). For mechs that don't tend to run an AC20 (since it is a crit magnet), usually it's more efficient to take out the section outright, instead of hoping RNG works for you and removes the occasional large weapon or DHS.

[Tombstoner]

Deathlike, on 20 November 2015 - 06:39 AM, said:

Crits are overrated. When it comes to an AC20, you can't really crit buff that section outside of putting actual AC20 ammo in it (which is risky unless you can unload them all quick enough). For mechs that don't tend to run an AC20 (since it is a crit magnet), usually it's more efficient to take out the section outright, instead of hoping RNG works for you and removes the occasional large weapon or DHS.

Under the current design paradigm your right. In a system that uses crits as part of game play the ac-20's size undermines its utility.... it needs to do more damage.

[DarthHias]

You know, critseekers are overrated, but like with placebos people believe in them. When I start hitting people with my quad MG´s on my Nova on open components they twist like crazy. I cool a bit and when they twist back lasers kill them ^^

[Deathlike]

Tombstoner, on 20 November 2015 - 06:50 AM, said:

Under the current design paradigm your right. In a system that uses crits as part of game play the ac-20's size undermines its utility.... it needs to do more damage.

Um... no.

AC20s are already pretty effective for what they do at their range. Had CUAC20s operated under AC20 principles with the current jam mechanic... it would be crazy powerful.

The Atlas's problem is primarily hardpoints (relative to the Direwolf) as a King Crab can do more damage (but must do it in a fundamentally different way). Altering the AC20 is completely misunderstanding the actual deficiencies of the Atlas.

[Elizander]

Stop speculating and just 1v1 in the PTS and have an Atlas with AC/20 and rattle it with MGs.

[Tombstoner]

Deathlike, on 20 November 2015 - 07:01 AM, said:

Um... no.

AC20s are already pretty effective for what they do at their range. Had CUAC20s operated under AC20 principles with the current jam mechanic... it would be crazy powerful.

The Atlas's problem is primarily hardpoints (relative to the Direwolf) as a King Crab can do more damage (but must do it in a fundamentally different way). Altering the AC20 is completely misunderstanding the actual deficiencies of the Atlas.

I'm referring to the game as a whole not a specific fix. Hard point type and location/height is derived from (cut and pasted)TT where it didn't matter. What could go wrong. This has always been a balance issue specifically for the example you used. Worse yet money mechs typically have more hard points. blurring the line between p2W and cash for an advantage.

What PGI has done to date is to not address the issue but to mask them.

[van Uber]

Deathlike, on 20 November 2015 - 06:39 AM, said:

The 4G's Hunch quirks are +18 to external armor for the RT, and +12 to the RT's internal structure.

It still highlights what I said earlier... external armor is preferred here.

You are totally right with the quirks, of course.

However, that is the current quirks. The initial change was +10 Internal Structure only as per these patchnotes:
http://mwomercs.com/...07-29-jul-2014/

I am under the impression that the AC felt more durable after that change.

[Ultimax]

Soultraxx, on 19 November 2015 - 11:12 PM, said:

What a cheap attempt at trying to belittle the OP.

Just because you drive it doesn't mean you have to know how it all works.

How many people who drive cars can explain a galvenising process for the body panels, the vulcanisation process used in making tyres, how the fuel pump works?

I'll guess not many even though they use one every single day and trust their lives to the processes they dont understand.

Why? Because we dont have to understand how everything works.

That's all fine and good.


This isn't for the OP or you specifically, this is for players in general.




You should never, ever, give your opinion on game mechanics if you do not actually understand them.


You can say "I don't like X, it doesn't feel good/strong/fun/practical" or "I don't like this mech, it feels too weak/slow/undergunend".


Once you step into the realm of discussing actual game mechanics and detailed balance issues, please ffs know what you are talking about.

[Scout Derek]

Ultimatum X, on 20 November 2015 - 09:57 AM, said:

That's all fine and good.


This isn't for the OP or you specifically, this is for players in general.




You should never, ever, give your opinion on game mechanics if you do not actually understand them.


You can say "I don't like X, it doesn't feel good/strong/fun/practical" or "I don't like this mech, it feels too weak/slow/undergunend".


Once you step into the realm of discussing actual game mechanics and detailed balance issues, please ffs know what you are talking about.

Heh, least I didn't try and fight a losing battle like some do, or try and argue a point that wasn't feasible.

Now that I know for sure, I can now look back on this thread and say "Hey, these peeps told me what's hip, and what isn't".

[Zypher]

People will always fine the path of least resistance.

A good pilot will torso twist, and a good opponent will just leg you instead.