62 replies to this topic

[Kshahdoo]

Arnold J Rimmer, on 27 December 2015 - 06:35 AM, said:

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: You get the benefit in increased max armour/structure, and still move at the same speed and still carry an equivalent weapons load. As others have said, a bigger vehicle requires a bigger engine to move at a given speed.

Lol, great benefit. You have the whole lot 44 armor more. And a few jump jets. For the expense of 3-7 tonn less load. I mean, TW has 10% more armor and 20-25% less firepower. Of course, it's a great trade, which every mech pilot would do.

Oh, I've forgotten about quirks, which EJ has like 10 times more (I mean positive ones). Or million times, because TW doesn't have any positive quirks at all.

Edited by Kshahdoo, 27 December 2015 - 06:56 AM.

[Arnold J Rimmer]

Kshahdoo, on 27 December 2015 - 06:47 AM, said:

Lol, great benefit. You have the whole lot 44 armor more. And a few jump jets. For the expense of 3-7 tonn less load. I mean, TW has 10% more armor and 20-25% less firepower. Of course, it's a great trade, which every mech pilot would do.

And yet, I'm still pretty sure you could find more people that would choose a TBR over an EBJ, given the chance. Your 20-25% less firepower stat doesn't feel quite right, either.

[Kshahdoo]

Arnold J Rimmer, on 27 December 2015 - 06:51 AM, said:

And yet, I'm still pretty sure you could find more people that would choose a TBR over an EBJ, given the chance. Your 20-25% less firepower stat doesn't feel quite right, either.

It's perhaps even more, if you add quirks.

[Arnold J Rimmer]

Kshahdoo, on 27 December 2015 - 06:57 AM, said:

It's perhaps even more, if you add quirks.

Tbh, quirks on Clan chassis don't usually mean much. Even when you stack combinations of different omnipods for the best outcome, you'd be hard-pressed to get into a double-digit percentage. Though it is true that the TBR tends to get hit heaviest by the negative ones.

Gotta ask why that is, though - why bother nerfing a sub-par machine? The answer is that it was not sub-par. They balanced it. Now here we are, agonising over why a TBR might be a better choice than an EBJ. That wouldn't have been a thing before.

[Kshahdoo]

Arnold J Rimmer, on 27 December 2015 - 07:00 AM, said:

Tbh, quirks on Clan chassis don't usually mean much. Even when you stack combinations of different omnipods for the best outcome, you'd be hard-pressed to get into a double-digit percentage. Though it is true that the TBR tends to get hit heaviest by the negative ones.

Gotta ask why that is, though - why bother nerfing a sub-par machine? The answer is that it was not sub-par. They balanced it. Now here we are, agonising over why a TBR might be a better choice than an EBJ. That wouldn't have been a thing before.

My bad, Jaguar doesn't have a lot of quirks, Summoner does. But still EJ is at least on par with TW, being 10 tonns lighter. Very wierd balance, to say the least.


I'm right now trying to build a 3 C-UAC5 Timberwolf, and getting something like this: 422 armor, 81 Km/h, 2 jump jets, 26.5 tonns load.

And I have EJ: 422 armor, 81 Km/h, 28.5 tonns load.

I mean, really. The first one is 75 tonn mech and the second is 65 tonn one. It's just ******* stupid.

Edited by Kshahdoo, 27 December 2015 - 07:47 AM.

[Arnold J Rimmer]

Kshahdoo, on 27 December 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

My bad, Jaguar doesn't have a lot of quirks, Summoner does. But still EJ is at least on par with TW, being 10 tonns lighter. Very wierd balance, to say the least.

One thing this game has usually done fairly well is make lighter mechs able to compete with heavier ones (several mediums excepting, but that's a different issue). In every other MW game it's been a race to the top of the tonnage ladder. Not here.

[dragnier1]

Kshahdoo, on 27 December 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

I'm right now trying to build a 3 C-UAC5 Timberwolf, and getting something like this: 422 armor, 81 Km/h, 2 jump jets, 26.5 tonns load.

And I have EJ: 422 armor, 81 Km/h, 28.5 tonns load.

Let me redo this post since i realised my original post did not answer the question of "Timber Wolf 10 tons heavier but less free tonnage compared to Ebon Jaguar"

First off :

Timber Wolf - 75 tons, 375 engine
Ebon Jaguar - 65 tons, 325 engine
TW has an extra 10 tons based on weight difference.

375 engine - 26.5 tons
325 engine - 19.0 tons
Difference - 7.5 tons

Internal structure weight - 10% of mech (5% if using Endo-steel).
That makes 0.5 tons more for TW (total 8 tons up to this point)

Additional heat sinks mounted inside engine slots :
TW - 5
EB - 3
Additional 1 ton per heat sink (total is 10 tons including heat sinks)

Jump jets (non-removable)
TW - 2 (TBR-S left torso)
EB - 0 (no JJ capable variant)
Total additional used space - 12 tons.


From the above you can see why the TW has less available tonnage for weapons. Should Jump jets be removable there would no longer be any difference between the two if we only compare on free tonnage.



Game play wise, i'm not sure if you actually noticed there are more players using timberwolf? This shows that despite the EJ looking better on paper, in actual play the TW is still ahead. Players are able to catch the trends (and the EJ is not the de-facto go to mech for performance reason).

A good example is the Jenner. It used to be the king of lights until the Firestarter came and usurp its place. Reason? Better hit boxes. It's not something you can calculate on paper.

Edited by dragnier1, 27 December 2015 - 09:27 AM.

[Spetulhu]

Kshahdoo, on 27 December 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

It's just ******* stupid.

Welcome to a game based on BattleTech. I don't claim to know how or why the designers calculated engine tonnages like they did, but (as you've noted) the effect is that speed usually is a trade-off in lost weight for armor/components.

You could as well complain about the stupidity of weapons where some just aren't worth it for the damage compared to weight, or the risk of an ammo explosion. And why is CASE such an arcane technology that the IS has to install it specifically (while clanners have it free)? Even WW2 tanks were designed with ammo storage that was supposed to not send the explosion into the crew compartment or engine if it blew up (and ofc, ammo is also designed to not just blow up from a small bump).

[Arnold J Rimmer]

I love it when people go back and edit their posts once people have already replied. It's just beautiful. Really helps the discussion.

Spetulhu, on 27 December 2015 - 08:41 AM, said:

*snip* the effect is that speed usually is a trade-off in lost weight for armor/components.*snip*

There's your reason. Everything was meant to be a trade, so you couldn't build a mech that was the best at everything. Although the TBR came pretty close.

[Tarogato]

This just in: the TBR and EBJ have 100% identical podspace. Commence mind-blow.

This Cauldron Born, 87.1 kph, 364 points of armour, 30.02 tons of space: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...ebb2bc50d56dc0b

This Timber Wolf, 87.1 kph, 364 points of armour, 30.02 tons of space: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...451a610bcf1182d


Timber has 20 extra points of internal structure, it can mount jumpjets, it has better hitboxes so it can spread damage better, and it has two extra DHS for free in the engine.

The Cauldy has 20 fewer points of internal structure, cannot mount jumpjets, has a large CT that attracts damage and is hard to protect, its arms almost never attract damage so can't shield at all, has much more spread hardpoints so weaker weapon convergence when using the arms, and has two fewer free DHS.


There's almost literally no reason to ever take a Cauldron Born unless you need to preserve 10 tons in a drop deck for CW or a competitive match. Also yes, I have run the Timber with reduced armour like the smurfy link above - it's good. It works better than the Cauldy for identical builds because of it's ability to better spread damage.

[dragnier1]

Let me just add to my earlier post that while the EJ appears better on paper the fact that the TW performs on par and better despite the penalties given and the lower free tonnage available shows why many recommend it over the EJ. Hit box design may also tilt to the TW's favour, which is why it is the king of the Clan heavy mech series.

Edited by dragnier1, 27 December 2015 - 09:34 AM.

[dragnier1]

Spetulhu, on 27 December 2015 - 08:41 AM, said:

CASE ... IS has to install it specifically (while clanners have it free)?

It's the same as inbuilt graphics and external graphics card.

One is inbuilt, the other is not. They both do the same thing, but don't weigh the same.

[Koniving]

Kshahdoo, on 27 December 2015 - 04:48 AM, said:

Man, I don't know what way it's made in Battletech, but I'm sure it's not as in the game. I mean, they take 65 tonn Jaguar, add to it 10 tonns of more engine and get 75 tonn Timberwolf. Do you really think it's ok?



Wrong, Jaguar has 422 armor.

In MWO, all mechs of 65 tons have a maximum possible limit of 422 armor (211 BattleTech) per the Battletech "make your own mech" Construction Rules.

The engine is only 7 tons more. I should also mention the weight in MWO's engine is greater than BT's, because it also includes BT's equipment such as Gyro and Sensors.

The actual (BT) Ebon Jaguar to Timber Wolf weight difference is:
Skeleton: 3.5 ton EBJ. 4 ton TBR.
Engine: 12 ton EBJ. 19.5 ton TBR. (In MWO EBJ is 19 ton; TBR is 26.5 tons)
Gyro: 4 ton EBJ. 4 ton TBR.
Cockpit: 3 ton. EBJ. 3 ton TBR.
Heatsinks: 3 ton. EBJ. 7 tons TBR. (This is a large reason of the weight difference in TBR; 5 are fixed.)
Armor: 9.5 ton (for 182 [364]) EBJ. 12 ton TBR.
Cost: 17,871,218 C-bills EBJ. 24,014,374 C-bills TBR.

The Ebon Jaguar (Cauldron Born) comes stock with 364 (182) armor, which is the only armor it is allowed to have in the source material. (The ability to change the amount of armor on an Omnimech is NOT permissible in the Battletech Customization rules.)

MWO uses construction rules (with tacked on hardpoints) and not customization rules, leading to little issues like you are pointing out. I was eluding to the fact that these mechs are very balanced in their appropriate source material, in which case the Timber Wolf usually owns the Ebon Jaguar to the point the TBR's rating is 2,737 while the Ebon Jaguar's rating is 1,952.

However -- Even permitting that we look at Mechwarrior Online for balance and not the source material...
The Ebon Jaguar (A Clan Smoke Jaguar Omni-Mech) has a maximum possible 422 armor and 217 structure.
(Max possible 639 health.)
The Timber Wolf (A Clan Wolf Omni-Mech) has a maximum possible 482 armor and 227 structure.
(Max possible 709 health.)

Furthermore, the Ebon Jaguar is a really fat target in MWO, considering how much larger it is compared to its BT source.

I'm surprised you haven't tried to mention the Summoner, which also goes 81 kph, is only 5 tons lighter than the Timber Wolf and 5 tons heavier than the Ebon Jaguar, is an absolutely awful mech that's incredibly easy to kill in spite of its armor, has horrible weapon hardpoints, and is the staple mech of Clan Jade Falcon.

IF you take the MWO versions, Ebon Jaguar at maxed armor has 28.5 tons free with 3 'fixed' heatsinks and 33 slots free to use.
The Timber Wolf at maxed armor has 27.5 tons free with 5 fixed heatsinks and 31 to 33 slots free depending on lower arm actuators.
(The Summoner at maxed armor gets 20.7 tons free... but it has 5 fixed jumpjets and 4 fixed heatsinks and that's only 434 armor.)

Is that a bit better? My original statement of free tonnage was including the Ebon Jaguar's stock armor which is supposed to be unchangeable.

This all said, rest assured if you pit Timber Wolf against Ebon Jaguar in MWO or in Battletech, ~most~ of the time the Timber Wolf will win.

Edited by Koniving, 27 December 2015 - 10:39 AM.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

Look, Kshahdoo, I get why you might be a LITTLE disappointed, that you can run a virtually identical weapons loadout on either mech, and in some cases, have more available tonnage for it. Got it. Try this:

Take a TBR-PRIME and EBJ-PRIME. Use any other omnipods on them, except for the TBR-S side torso omnipods. That means that neither mech will have jump jets. Both will move at the same speed. Max their armor, and then install two additional heat sinks in the EBJ-PRIME. Now, compare the available tonnage and critical space...

For the TBR-PRIME, it looks like THIS, and it has 27.46 tons available and 33 free critical slots.

For the EBJ-PRIME, it looks like THIS, and it has 26.51 tons available and 29 free critical slots.

Either now has 15 heat sinks (advantage goes to TBR, as two more of them are INSIDE the engine, where they work more efficiently) (EDIT: Never mind, I was mistaken. NONETHELESS...), travels at a max non-teaked speed of 81.0 km/h, and can mount an impressive array of weapons. The TBR, as previously mentioned (OVER AND OVER AGAIN), can mount significantly more armor than the EBJ, and still maintain more available critical space for the same heat capacity and with an extra ton of available weight. AND, with no further heat sinks mounted, the TBR will be measurably more heat efficient than its EBJ counterpart. And finally, consider that the ten-ton-heavier mech also carries greater INTERNAL STRUCTURE in each of its components, extending the Time To Kill TTK against it over the lighter EBJ.

Sorry. I get that it seems kinda dumb to make a mech 10 tons heavier, then spend 7 of those ten on a bigger engine that gets the same performance, and then spend two MORE tons on locked equipment (the two more internal heat sinks), and call it a better mech. I say 'seems', because it nonetheless works. In spite of its negative quirks on some configurations, and in spite of the slightly different (and less ideal for some) distribution of those fixed armor/structure allocations, it is a more popular mech, and it is generally agreed to be a better mech.

After all, it DOES have he flexibility to mount up to five jump jets. It can mount all THREE LT energy weapons in the high mount (though at a cost of slight negative quirks). And it carries significantly more armor AND STRUCTURE, making it more SURVIVABLE in a fight. So yeah.

It IS a better mech, it makes perfect sense, and I feel that you're being unnecessarily difficult after this has been explained numerous different ways so far in this thread. If you don't like it, don't drive it. I can't blame you. I, too, prefer the EBJ. But overall, TBR is worth the weight, and it is a better mech. It's arguably the best in the game right now, out of ALL of them. So, as it might say (if it could talk), "Timber Wolf doesn't NEED to make sense. Timber Wolf just OWNS."

EDIT: IRL EXAMPLE TIME!

The US Army's 5- and 10-ton cargo trucks, for example, weigh about 22,000 and 45,000 pounds, respectively. Both list similar top speeds (nonetheless, they are limited by LAW to 55 mph MAX, and I thank you, voters, for that... NOT!). The former has a Cummins 6-cylinder Diesel engine, producing about 240 hp. The latter has a Caterpillar 6-cylinder Diesel engine making over 500 hp. (I can tell you from experience, that with the old Detroit 8V92 in those things, they will, and I mean WILL, move over 70 mph WITHOUT tinkering with the governors.) In case you're wondering, the Cat engine IS a lot heavier than the older Cummins straight-six of the smaller truck. Add in the transmission, and hey, let's JUST consider three of the HEMTT's FOUR drive axles, and you have a FAR heavier drivetrain. I'm being kind and leaving out the hydraulic system of the larger truck, which is married to the steering. Oh, and the heavier one ALSO has a CRANE for handling its own cargo, which the lighter truck lacks. AND it's more comfortable to ride in, and will rock you to sleep on US highway 62. Again, I KNOW this.

Oh yeah, and the engineers at AM General and Oshkosh, respectively, who designed those trucks with their big engine weight disparities? They're doing just fine, thanks. Well, those who are still with us. Those vehicles are OLD.

Edited by TheRAbbi, 27 December 2015 - 10:41 AM.

[Arnold J Rimmer]

TheRAbbi, on 27 December 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

(advantage goes to TBR, as two more of them are INSIDE the engine, where they work more efficiently)

Untrue. Only the first ten (10) DHS inside the engine are truly double-dissipation. Any you mount in the extra slots are still 1.4's.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

Arnold J Rimmer, on 27 December 2015 - 10:31 AM, said:

Untrue. Only the first ten (10) DHS inside the engine are truly double-dissipation. Any you mount in the extra slots are still 1.4's.

We really need a f***in' guide to this s**t, y'know? It really IS starting to wear on me, that I either have to reference years-old patch notes to find this, or ask another PLAYER, but can't get the real skinny from PGI.

Thanks, man. Uh, let me go edit the s**t out of my f***ed up s**t.....

[Half Ear]

TheRAbbi, on 27 December 2015 - 10:40 AM, said:

We really need a f***in' guide to this s**t, y'know? It really IS starting to wear on me, that I either have to reference years-old patch notes to find this, or ask another PLAYER, but can't get the real skinny from PGI.

Thanks, man. Uh, let me go edit the s**t out of my f***ed up s**t.....

There was a short time where the external DHS were 2.0 and the internal engine DHS were 1.4 ......runs away!!!

[Koniving]

Arnold J Rimmer, on 27 December 2015 - 10:31 AM, said:

Untrue. Only the first ten (10) DHS inside the engine are truly double-dissipation. Any you mount in the extra slots are still 1.4's.

Technically there's been a change.

Internal (Engine) heatsinks (which will never be greater than 10) are 2.0s. That is 0.2/s cooling rate and 2 units threshold per Internal Engine DHS (so 2/s cooling and 20 (+30 base) units threshold for the 10 engine DHS ).

Clan DHS other than that are 0.15/s cooling per DHS and 1.1 threshold capacity per DHS (versus IS 0.14/s cooling per DHS and 1.4 threshold capacity per DHS).

Quote

• Clan Double Heat Sink cooling rate increased from 0.14 to 0.15.
• Clan Double Heat Sink capacity will be reduced from -1.4 to -1.1. This is reducing the maximum heat value for a 'Mech before it shuts down, not the speed at which it cools off.

Keep in mind the totals get a +25% cooling and a +20% threshold capacity boost to the total values (which in either case makes them superior to Battletech's double heatsinks which have a value of 0.2/s cooling OR threshold as the two in a turn are the same thing; which means MWO's double heatsinks are effectively quad heatsinks since they give cooling AND threshold).

The advantage the TBR has in the heatsink case is the heatsinks are fixed inside the engine, taking no additional space. Which is fantastic because it would be 4 slots lost otherwise.

TheRAbbi, on 27 December 2015 - 10:40 AM, said:

We really need a f***in' guide to this s**t, y'know? It really IS starting to wear on me, that I either have to reference years-old patch notes to find this, or ask another PLAYER, but can't get the real skinny from PGI.

Also: A guide to this s**t. You're very welcome.
(Doesn't include the Clan's DHS change.)

Edited by Koniving, 27 December 2015 - 10:58 AM.

[Tesunie]

TheRAbbi, on 27 December 2015 - 10:40 AM, said:

We really need a f***in' guide to this s**t, y'know? It really IS starting to wear on me, that I either have to reference years-old patch notes to find this, or ask another PLAYER, but can't get the real skinny from PGI.

Thanks, man. Uh, let me go edit the s**t out of my f***ed up s**t.....

Been there. Done that. Lived through the embarrassment.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

Koniving, on 27 December 2015 - 10:51 AM, said:

Also: A guide to this s**t. You're very welcome.
(Doesn't include the Clan's DHS change.)

As always, YOU DA MAN.

What I mean is, there needs to be either a MWO Technician Academy, or a MWO technical manual, or SOMETHING from PGI, that walks a new player through all this stuff, and that includes a reference for ALL THE LATEST EVERYTHING. How to calculate what different quirks mean. How to figure out your total heat capacity and dissipation rate. How the JJ + Weapon_Heat thing works. All the things.

I know, my generation is SPOILED on having bought video games in hard copy in a freakin' STORE, including a usually-comprehensive manual, for lack of the INTERWEBSES. My stepson was just having this problem yesterday, with one of the Metal Gear games, where there is no manual, there's an hours-long intro dialog sequence that eventually covers this stuff after lots of boring blah blah blah, and there was exactly ZERO paper manual. Most games only come with a quick-start guide now, if any guide at all, and then refer you to support or a forum for any questions. It's no wonder Mrs. RAbbi can't find any work in her field (graphic artist)! No one publishes anything any more, and the propagation of pirated Photoshop makes virtually anyone with some talent a design God. So, for the folks with a FORMAL education, nay, BACHELOR DEGREE in this field? Go flip burgers, yo, and good luck repaying student loans on Burger King wages--you're not qualified for anything else!

</rant>

Yeah, I miss having comprehensive manuals that covered a game beginning-to-end. Falcon (the original), Gunship (again, the original), LHX, etc., all came with nice, thick paper manuals, which could nowadays be distributed on almost-free-to-publish electronic media, and could be updated as game balance updates are applied with no need to rescind the previous manuals or publish paper changes (remove pp. 1-14, instert Ch.1 pp 1-14, 14a, 14b).

MAN, am I glad I got shafted out of taking art classes in high school. I'd be even MORE miserable than I am now! I really don't know how Mrs. RAbbi keeps it together...