146 replies to this topic

[Kaeb Odellas]

Just penalize IS XL side torso loss more than Clan XL. The Clan XL loses something like 20% performance, right?

Give the IS XL a harsher performance penalty, like 50% or something. At the same time, give Standard engines some kind of buff to compensate. Something like:

-Increase twist speed 10%. Standard engines would have a lower moment of inertia (more mass concentrated near the axis of rotation)
-Increase twist angle 10%. Standard engines don't poke out to the side torsos, so they don't interfere with twist?
-Increase CT structure by 1 point per rating / 20. Standard engines are more dense, so they can absorb damage more readily, with bigger engines being denser and tougher. A STD 200 engine would give 10 points to CT, while a STD 400 engine gives 20.

This change would tighten the engine gap between IS and Clans while keeping standard engines an attractive option. 50% performance loss is a harsh penalty, and probably a death sentence for Lights, but still better than dying immediately.

[Homeskilit]

I am all for STD engines getting structure buffs as long as it is for the CT only.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Kaeb Odellas, on 25 February 2016 - 05:22 PM, said:

Just penalize IS XL side torso loss more than Clan XL. The Clan XL loses something like 20% performance, right?

Give the IS XL a harsher performance penalty, like 50% or something. At the same time, give Standard engines some kind of buff to compensate. Something like:

-Increase twist speed 10%. Standard engines would have a lower moment of inertia (more mass concentrated near the axis of rotation)
-Increase twist angle 10%. Standard engines don't poke out to the side torsos, so they don't interfere with twist?
-Increase CT structure by 1 point per rating / 20. Standard engines are more dense, so they can absorb damage more readily, with bigger engines being denser and tougher. A STD 200 engine would give 10 points to CT, while a STD 400 engine gives 20.

This change would tighten the engine gap between IS and Clans while keeping standard engines an attractive option. 50% performance loss is a harsh penalty, and probably a death sentence for Lights, but still better than dying immediately.

This is pretty much my line of thinking, too.

-50% for ST loss might be a bit much. I was thinking a much softer -25% or -30%. The formula that cXL follows shows a percentage decrease for percentage lost: 1/(x/y)=Z where 'x' is the total number of crit slots used by the engine, 'y' is the number lost on ST destruction and 'Z' is the percentage lost on ST destruction. That gets the result of -20% that cXL suffers now.

That would mean -25% for isXL following the same formula.

I'm a big fan of the system-based approach, so I would prefer the formula apply to both techlines equally.

But, that being said, I would accept a bigger penalty to accommodate "flavor".
_______________

For Std. engines, I like percentages to structure based on type instead of additive values based on rating for the simple reason that it makes bigger (and supposedly tougher) 'Mechs progressively more durable without biasing for that rating.

That is: Why should the Battlemaster with the Std. 340 be more durable than the one with a Std. 320? I suppose size could be the answer, but I'm not sold.

Either way, this isn't a big thing. I could live with both methods.

[Khobai]

ISXL should work exactly the same as CXL. Then all the IS structure quirks can be removed.

Quote

Just penalize IS XL side torso loss more than Clan XL. The Clan XL loses something like 20% performance, right?

Or just have no penalty at all. The only reason CXL got a penalty in the first place is because it was so much better than ISXL. But if CXL and ISXL are the same theres no reason to even have a penalty anymore. Theres no speed penalty for losing a side torso in tabletop and there shouldnt be one in MWO either.

PGI wants IS and Clan mechs to be balanced 1:1 in MWO so it makes no sense for ISXL to be way worse than Clan XL. The only way 1:1 balance works is if both are equal. So both should have no penalty.

And STD engine should get a significant CT structure buff.

Edited by Khobai, 25 February 2016 - 06:40 PM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Khobai, on 25 February 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

ISXL should work exactly the same as CXL. Then all the IS structure quirks can be removed.



Or just have no penalty at all. The only reason CXL got a penalty in the first place is because it was so much better than ISXL. But if CXL and ISXL are the same theres no reason to even have a penalty anymore. Theres no speed penalty for losing a side torso in tabletop and there shouldnt be one in MWO either.

PGI wants IS and Clan mechs to be balanced 1:1 in MWO so it makes no sense for ISXL to be way worse than Clan XL. The only way 1:1 balance works is if both are equal. So both should have no penalty.

And STD engine should get a significant CT structure buff.

Eh. Without a penalty, STD engines would be largely obsolete. The CT structure buff would have to be absolutely massive to make STD engines worthwhile, and even then, people would just strip a STD mech's STs and leave them alone. Or just leg them. The only reason to take a STD engine would be for big ballistic ST builds that need the space (AC20, 2xLB10, 2xUAC5, 3xAC5) or mechs with low engine caps.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Khobai, on 25 February 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

ISXL should work exactly the same as CXL. Then all the IS structure quirks can be removed.



Or just have no penalty at all. The only reason CXL got a penalty in the first place is because it was so much better than ISXL. But if CXL and ISXL are the same theres no reason to even have a penalty anymore. Theres no speed penalty for losing a side torso in tabletop and there shouldnt be one in MWO either.

PGI wants IS and Clan mechs to be balanced 1:1 in MWO so it makes no sense for ISXL to be way worse than Clan XL. The only way 1:1 balance works is if both are equal. So both should have no penalty.

And STD engine should get a significant CT structure buff.

I actually like the penalty. It feels logical and realistic (I know... but it does feel right; you did just lose a chunk of your engine!).

It also serves in driving the contrast between XL and Std. engine types. That's good, it makes choices more meaningful.

[Khobai]

Quote

I actually like the penalty. It feels logical and realistic

yeah well I dont like the penalty.

the whole reason the penalty was added was to bring the CXL down a notch.

but if ISXL and CXL are both identical theres no need to bring them down a notch anymore.

Quote

It also serves in driving the contrast between XL and Std. engine types. That's good, it makes choices more meaningful.

except omnimechs cant make that choice. youre penalizing them without giving them a choice to use std engines to avoid the penalties. thats why the penalty sucks. you shouldnt be forced to use a penalized engine when its your only engine choice.

Edited by Khobai, 25 February 2016 - 07:05 PM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Khobai, on 25 February 2016 - 07:04 PM, said:

except omnimechs cant make that choice. youre penalizing them without giving them a choice to use std engines to avoid the penalties. thats why the penalty sucks. you shouldnt be forced to use a penalized engine when its your only engine choice.

There is absolutely no reason for a Clan omni to switch to a standard engine. None whatsoever.

EDIT: To expound on this, the sacrifices that omni would have to take in speed and/or firepower means that it would probably run about as well as an equivalent XL omni when both lose a side torso. Except the XL omni enjoys the benefits of speed and firepower before losing the side torso, while the STD omni is inferior throughout its lifetime.

Except when both lose side torsos, but scant few Clan mechs can zombie worth a damn, and zombie mechs aren't particularly dangerous anyway.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 25 February 2016 - 07:17 PM.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Khobai, on 25 February 2016 - 07:04 PM, said:

yeah well I dont like the penalty.

the whole reason the penalty was added was to bring the CXL down a notch.

but if ISXL and CXL are both identical theres no need to bring them down a notch anymore.

They may not NEED it anymore, but it does make sense and it does drive the contrast against Std. engines.

Khobai, on 25 February 2016 - 07:04 PM, said:

except omnimechs cant make that choice. youre penalizing them without giving them a choice to use std engines to avoid the penalties. thats why the penalty sucks. you shouldnt be forced to use a penalized engine when its your only engine choice.

Ah, but the player made a choice to use that Omnimech knowing that the engine was locked. That's a meaningful choice.

The Omnimechs we have now all have XL. But I'm sure there are Omnimechs out there (like IS) that have Std. engines.

The engine function contrast also provides a meaningful choice in the chassis you choose.

Kaeb Odellas, on 25 February 2016 - 07:12 PM, said:

There is absolutely no reason for a Clan omni to switch to a standard engine. None whatsoever.

It is conceivable that if Std. engines are buffed to viability some players may wish they could change the engine type on their Omnimech.

That doesn't mean they should be able to, it just makes the choice of chassis more meaningful.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 25 February 2016 - 07:16 PM, said:

They may not NEED it anymore, but it does make sense and it does drive the contrast against Std. engines.



Ah, but the player made a choice to use that Omnimech knowing that the engine was locked. That's a meaningful choice.

The Omnimechs we have now all have XL. But I'm sure there are Omnimechs out there (like IS) that have Std. engines.

The engine function contrast also provides a meaningful choice in the chassis you choose.



It is conceivable that if Std. engines are buffed to viability some players may wish they could change the engine type on their Omnimech.

That doesn't mean they should be able to, it just makes the choice of chassis more meaningful.

STD engines would need an absurd buff to make them worthwhile against Clan XLs.

[Pjwned]

MiniKin, on 25 February 2016 - 01:29 PM, said:

I know that when you lost a left or right torso in the tabletop game you died if you were IS and had an XL engine. 3 engine hits and you died on all mechs. This was fine on the tabletop where you had hit location RNG on your side - I get it. The problem with MWO is that you can choose where you want to hit and hit it with good accuracy; often times this is the left or right torso so that you can get rid of weapons from the arm and torso and if they have an XL engine they die. This has led to having to get rid of all XL engines on all my mechs so I could survive longer. This is an option that has become useless.

Is there any chance that it could be changed where you lost performance instead?

No, the answer is to introduce light fusion engines if Inner Sphere players want a 10-slot engine with reduced weight.

[Homeskilit]

Pjwned, on 25 February 2016 - 07:23 PM, said:

No, the answer is to introduce light fusion engines if Inner Sphere players want a 10-slot engine with reduced weight.

A wild TT purist has appeared!

homeskilit used repel.

It's super effective!

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Kaeb Odellas, on 25 February 2016 - 07:19 PM, said:

STD engines would need an absurd buff to make them worthwhile against Clan XLs.

They would, if XL penalties were dropped.

They should not be dropped for the dual purpose of making sure Std. buffs are not insane and furthering contrast between the two types.

[Khobai]

Quote

No, the answer is to introduce light fusion engines if Inner Sphere players want a 10-slot engine with reduced weight.

except PGI is trying 1:1 balance. for 1:1 balance to work you need CXL and ISXL to be the same.

LFE only makes sense if IS and clans arnt 1:1 balanced. Since LFE is a worse version of CXL. LFE just doesnt make sense the way MWO is setup at present.

Because LFE admits IS tech is inferior to Clan tech. And 1:1 balance contradicts that notion.

Quote

They would, if XL penalties were dropped.

XL penalties should be dropped anyway. Because omnimechs shouldnt be penalized for not being able to choose a different engine.

XL engines are supposed to be an upgrade over STD engines. The only reason its not is because MWO has aiming and convergence instead of random hit locations. Even 100 ton assaults like the devastator rock XL engines in tabletop. And theyre not afraid of doing it because of random hit locations.

STD engines are like single heatsinks... theyre an outdated technology. The only real way to make the STD appealing compared to CXL would be to add engine crits to the game. When CXL loses 4 slots the engine is destroyed; while the STD engine would have to lose 6 slots.

Edited by Khobai, 25 February 2016 - 07:57 PM.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Pjwned, on 25 February 2016 - 07:23 PM, said:

No, the answer is to introduce light fusion engines if Inner Sphere players want a 10-slot engine with reduced weight.

I'll say again, if isXL is buffed to function like cXL, then we really will never need LFE.

If isXL is not buffed to function like cXL, then LFE will not solve the engine disparity. Rather, it will exacerbate it by creating a further confusing of how to handle Quirks for balance.

That is, the Quirks that the have taken so long to work out to the current (illusion of) balance would no longer be acceptable because LFE would be more durable than isXL but less than Std. engine. The developers would have to go back through every variant of every chassis and rework the whole thing again.

This illustrates the major flaw in the Quirk-based balance system. Everytime a major change takes place, the Quirks have to be reworked. That's a very intensive process that uses precious development time that would be better spent on pushing the real development of the game instead of rebalancing what should be already done!
_______________

Even if they were to introduce LFE it would have to have its crit use reduced to make it viable in a continuum and the change to make isXL function like cXL would still need to be done.

The penalty for LFE would just be that much smaller (if it used only 1 crit in the ST, the penalty would be -12.5%, according the formula above).

Edited by Brandarr Gunnarson, 25 February 2016 - 07:53 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Kaeb Odellas, on 25 February 2016 - 07:19 PM, said:

STD engines would need an absurd buff to make them worthwhile against Clan XLs.

Which is fine by me.

Give the Clam Battlemechs a choice; Give my Hunch IIC a reason to take a STD (with those Zombie CT lasers? Almost a prime candidate)

Old BJ +100% Structure sort of thing, yes, even to the STs.

Reduce quirks as needed (with the largest faction gap being bridged), and work from there.

[Mole]

I find use for standard and XL engine in my mechs. Obviously all of my light mechs run XLs. Most of my Mediums run XLs with the excepting of the Hunchback, my Thunderbolt runs and XL, my Warhammer, Rifleman, Marauder, and Catapult run STDs. My Awesome runs a STD and my Victor runs an XL. Both engine types see plenty of use by my IS mechs and some chassis are better at running XLs than others. Each mech is unique.

[GrimRiver]

My rule is "Never put XL in anything heavier then a light(except my cicada)"

I wouldn't be half way to tier 1 if my rule didn't work for me.

Cons: Weight is given up that could've been used for weapons/ammo/JJ/bigger engine rating.

Pros: I don't die from a simple ST loss, ideal for brawlers which I run alot.

I won many a games because I was still alive in where I would've been dead if I running an XL.

In my eyes I see XL's as too much of a liability.

Just my opinion.

[Homeskilit]

Mcgral18, on 25 February 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Old BJ +100% Structure sort of thing, yes, even to the STs.

Why don't we save structure buffs for the rest of the mech for Standard Structure? That way it is a viable alternative to Endo Steel?

Edited by Homeskilit, 25 February 2016 - 08:08 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Why don't we save structure quirks for the rest of the mech for Standard Structure? That way it is a viable alternative to Endo Steel?

standard structure is already a viable alternative to endosteel for IS assault mechs. you get 14 extra crit slots in exchange for 10% of your mechs tonnage. 14 crit slots is a lot. I dont know many assault mechs that wanna give up 14 crit slots.

its clan standard structure that needs a buff compared to clan endo. Because theres almost no reason for a clan assault not to take clan endo since its only 7 crit slots instead of 14.

IS ferro fibrous also needs a major buff because its outright worse than IS endo steel. IS ferro fibrous should give 12% damage reduction in addition to making armor weigh 12% less. Clan ferro fibrous should get damage reduction as well since its also worse than Clan endo but it should only be 7%-8% instead of 12% since clan ferro is 67% lighter than IS ferro (and thus should only get ~67% of the damage reduction).

But yeah they really need to buff clan standard structure and IS/clan ferro fibrous.

Edited by Khobai, 25 February 2016 - 08:19 PM.