220 replies to this topic

[Johnny Z]

First Step:

Inner Sphere XL shutdown on side torso loss.

Inner Sphere standard structure increase.

Second Step:

Wait, then look at the problem again under the new circumstances.

Edited by Johnny Z, 16 March 2016 - 03:47 AM.

[MechWarrior5152251]

It is such an easy fix yet PGI cannot figure it out?

[CDLord HHGD]

It took MS cutting a deal with PGI to give life back to the Clans in CW. Do you really want to buff IS mechs?

A others have said, buffing the ISXL would invalidate the additional engines that are coming. I'd rather PGI add the other engines early than change how the ISXL is supposed to be per lore.

FE Type / CT Crits / RT Crits / LT Crits / Total Crits / % Weight of STD FE
Standard / 6 / 0 / 0 / 6 /100%
XL / 6 / 3 / 3 / 12 / 50%
LFE / 6 / 2 / 2 / 10 / 75%
CFE* / 3 / 0 / 0 / 3 / 150%
XXL* / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?

*Sarna doesn't contain the information to make reliable statements about the CFE and XXL and apparently I do not own the books they use as reference to verify.

Source

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

thehiddenedge, on 16 March 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

The thing is, Clan XL is supposed to be superior to IS. It's one of the trade offs for having locked engines. It's been this way for twenty plus years. It doesn't need to change now because some people want a game where both sides play exactly the same. We already have enough of this bland, balance everything the same mentality.

It's true that cXL is supposed to be superior; just not to the extent that it is.

In TT, ALL engines (Std, LFE, cXL or isXL) died under the same conditions: 3 engine crits destroyed.

The superiority of cXL over isXL was in using 2 crits less space (1 less in each ST).

MWO's current implementation of XL engine (cXL and isXL) function does not reflect that reasonably or accurately.

thehiddenedge, on 16 March 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

I instead advocate for a more meaningful choice for IS, a choice that Clan mech's, outside of IIC's, do not get. An advantage of choice.

Really this choice has more to do with construction type (Battlemech/Omnimech).

But aside from this, all engines should be viable choices. That's how they become meaningful choices. cXL vs. Std is a non-choice. isXL vs. Std are two inferior choices (compared to cXL)

thehiddenedge, on 16 March 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

Did I make a hyperbolic statement? sure, maybe I did, but inaccurate? Nope. Making isXL survive side torso loss makes Std. engines obsolete no matter how much you buff them, structure or otherwise. Unless of course you're talking about crazy high numbers, which will make even less logical sense.

Not true.

If XL engines suffer mobility penalties that Std. never experience, that can offset their durability. Combined with extra durability for Std., there is definitely meaningful choice there.

thehiddenedge, on 16 March 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

Also, inflammatory? Because I used a bit of sarcasm? The nerve of some people... so rude around here...

[Andi Nagasia]

lets look at this for a second,

if IS-XL Engines Servived ST loss, that would be Huge, and would need -50% Engine Everything to be Balanced,
for all those people saying they would never take an STD Engine Ever again i want you to think about this,
Ex,
lets say your QKD-5K with 300XL(81kph) loses one ST,
you survive but lose half your weapons and most of your speed(40kph)(being Legged),
many dont consider in most Close environments you only get 1 more Alpha(1/2Alpha) before death,

this of course doesnt matter as much if your peaking 600m away and lose a ST to another Peak'er but still,
Losing a ST will still mean death for all Mediums and Lights, and just make Heavies slightly more durable,

Im still on the fence Personally, until some one can convince me other wise,
i do however feel a Public Test needs to be Run with IS-XL surviveability

[Hit the Deck]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 16 March 2016 - 05:04 AM, said:

It's true that cXL is supposed to be superior; just not to the extent that it is.

In TT, ALL engines (Std, LFE, cXL or isXL) died under the same conditions: 3 engine crits destroyed.

The superiority of cXL over isXL was in using 2 crits less space (1 less in each ST).

MWO's current implementation of XL engine (cXL and isXL) function does not reflect that reasonably or accurately.

In TT, losing an ST also means that your XL toting IS Mech dies. This means that cXL has more advantage than having 2 crits less similar to what we have.

[Duke Nedo]

thehiddenedge, on 16 March 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

The thing is, Clan XL is supposed to be superior to IS. It's one of the trade offs for having locked engines. It's been this way for twenty plus years. It doesn't need to change now because some people want a game where both sides play exactly the same. We already have enough of this bland, balance everything the same mentality.

In TT clans were superior, not just the engines, and it was no trade-off. They were OP per mech by design.

In MWO PGI has decided that we are matched with the same number of players on each side and each player can bring one mech. By doing so, they also say that 1 clan mech and one IS mechs needs to be comparably powerful. That's a design decision, and a good one too. Full asymmetric balance works poorly in online games... and this is an online game, we need it to be balanced and fun if we want to have any opponents to play against.

That said, when it comes to engines there is really not much of a choice. What we have now is extremely strong clan XL engines, and we have weaker IS XL, IS STD and clan STD engines. I.e. not balanced. IS got a wide array of ST structure quirks to compensate the weak IS XL and that works to some extent, but it's difficult to balance properly for all mech variants, and it leaves IS STD and clan STD engines behind, especially the clan STDs are completely obsolete for the IIc mechs.

If you want to address that imbalance you really only have the choice to buff both IS and clan STD engines to be near the same level as clan XL, and by doing that you're better off if you also buff the IS XL to the same level and remove the ST structure quirks because if you don't you'll run into problems with some variants that get too much ST structure or too little, or use ST structure + buffed STD engines or whatever. It's just a mess.

The simple way towards better balance to be is:
+ IS XL ST loss survivability, same or even bigger ST loss penalties as clans have, that's not game breaking
+ Clan and IS STD engines gain +30-ish CT structure, or tonnage/3 or something like that.
- Remove IS ST structure buffs

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 16 March 2016 - 05:04 AM, said:

If XL engines suffer mobility penalties that Std. never experience, that can offset their durability. Combined with extra durability for Std., there is definitely meaningful choice there.

There isn't a meaningful choice currently, so changing iXLs would only make that situation worse.

I still want this change though, along with buffs to STD engines to make them actually worthwhile.

[ImperialKnight]

Clan XL is balanced against fixed engine, equipment and structure. move along

[TamCoan]

All I have to say is that if you give me IS XL engines that function the same, or close to clan XL engines, I am going to abuse that until they nerf it. I already have better heat, lower burn times, better auto-cannons, better lrm saturation, better quirks, more build flexibility. Let me put in XL engines that no longer have the one penaltystopping me from using them and you are going to see some crazy OP builds. IS assaults with XLs that I don't have to worry about a side torso loss? It must be Christmas!

Edited by TamCoan, 16 March 2016 - 07:20 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

TamCoan, on 16 March 2016 - 07:18 AM, said:

All I have to say is that if you give me IS XL engines that function the same, or close to clan XL engines, I am going to abuse that until they nerf it. I already have better heat, lower burn times, better auto-cannons, better lrm saturation, better quirks, more build flexibility. Let me put in XL engines that no longer have the one penaltystopping me from using them and you are going to see some crazy OP builds. IS assaults with XLs that I don't have to worry about a side torso loss? It must be Christmas!

Because, obviously, all current quirks would be left exactly as is when making a major balance change like changing the IS XL engine.

DERP.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Lordred, on 14 March 2016 - 11:26 AM, said:

The more I play, the more I am feeling that we really should make IS XL act like C-XL.

By that I am not saying it should take up less critical space, but only that it should gain the extra ruggedness that C-XL enjoys, lose a ST, and keep fighting, lose the second one, good night. This wouldn't render the Standard engine completely obsolete for the IS either.

We would need to use the same penalties the C-XL suffers from loss of a ST, or perhaps slightly higher ones to off set that the C-XL is clearly better then the IS-XL, perhaps a 50% speed reduction. (throwing wild numbers at the wall)


I am sure this is just going to bring out more fighting about X is OP, or Y is OP.

But I'm really coming around to the idea of making IS-XLs able to lose a ST and not be knocked out.


Fight on Forum Warriors.

The idea should be to balance all 3 engine types.

STD engine should provide a not inignifcant structure bonus to account for its denser reactor shielding.

IS XL should provide the STD engine structure bonus split accross all 3 sections with some slight bonuses related to speed and agility.

Clan XL remains as is.

I think these changes would go a long way to creating a meaningful choice between the different engine types.

[nehebkau]

So, to read between the lines:

OP wants to be able to boat more/bigger weapons on her/his IS mech without the worry that a standard IS XL engine would give him/her and given that an IS XL engine is required for her/him to boat more weapons. So the OP, in order to meet her/his desire, s/he proposes to make IS engines the same as Clan engines under the guise of game balancing rather than reveal her/his own personal agenda to carry a bigger stick.

Got ya,

nope.

[CDLord HHGD]

nehebkau, on 16 March 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

So, to read between the lines:

OP wants to be able to boat more/bigger weapons on her/his IS mech without the worry that a standard IS XL engine would give him/her and given that an IS XL engine is required for her/him to boat more weapons. So the OP, in order to meet her/his desire, s/he proposes to make IS engines the same as Clan engines under the guise of game balancing rather than reveal her/his own personal agenda to carry a bigger stick.

Got ya,

nope.

Basically. There's no other reason why the lore options are being so obviously ignored. Everyone, EVERYONE knew the Clans were more powerful than the IS yet it's such a surprise to so many people.....

[Gyrok]

cdlord, on 16 March 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

Basically. There's no other reason why the lore options are being so obviously ignored. Everyone, EVERYONE knew the Clans were more powerful than the IS yet it's such a surprise to so many people.....

If you consider the total package, including structure quirks, IS is a little stronger than clans at the moment.

[Metus regem]

cdlord, on 16 March 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

It took MS cutting a deal with PGI to give life back to the Clans in CW. Do you really want to buff IS mechs?

A others have said, buffing the ISXL would invalidate the additional engines that are coming. I'd rather PGI add the other engines early than change how the ISXL is supposed to be per lore.

FE Type / CT Crits / RT Crits / LT Crits / Total Crits / % Weight of STD FE
Standard / 6 / 0 / 0 / 6 /100%
XL / 6 / 3 / 3 / 12 / 50%
LFE / 6 / 2 / 2 / 10 / 75%
CFE* / 3 / 0 / 0 / 3 / 150%
XXL* / 6 / 6 (4 for clan) / 6 (4 for Clan) / 18 (16 for Clan) / 33%

*Sarna doesn't contain the information to make reliable statements about the CFE and XXL and apparently I do not own the books they use as reference to verify.

Source

Edited for you CD, also the XXL cost 5 times as much and generates 2/4/6 heat (standing/walking/running)...

Overall, not worth the weight savings over an XL for clans, the Savage Wolf (Mad Cat. Mk. IV) makes use of a 375 XXL, and yet offers less BV even with FL armour in Prime configuration, when compared to the Timber Wolf Delta configuration... (3700 for Mk IV vs. 3701 for Timber Wolf D)

I find it very amusing, as the Savage Wolf was meant to fix problems that the aging Timber Wolf had with keeping up with Starmates, yet the Savage Wolf is no faster, it is hotter and more easily brought down, seems like a steep down to me...

[Gentleman Reaper]

knightsljx, on 16 March 2016 - 06:57 AM, said:

Clan XL is balanced against fixed engine, equipment and structure. move along

That disadvantage doesn't apply to the Storm Crow/Ebon Jaguar/Timber Wolf because of the perfect engine size and lack of fixed equipment, and especially the IICs, which don't have those restrictions to begin with. So no, saying it's balanced because some Omnis have crappy engine sizes doesn't mean it's balanced for every mech.

Narcissistic Martyr, on 16 March 2016 - 07:26 AM, said:

The idea should be to balance all 3 engine types.

STD engine should provide a not inignifcant structure bonus to account for its denser reactor shielding.

IS XL should provide the STD engine structure bonus split accross all 3 sections with some slight bonuses related to speed and agility.

Clan XL remains as is.

I think these changes would go a long way to creating a meaningful choice between the different engine types.

My idea is IS XL gets ST structure buffs and STDs get a buff to the CT and STs. This makes it harder for the IS XLs to lose the STs vs cXLs, while STDs are much more difficult to core, and harder to lose some of its firepower.

Gyrok, on 16 March 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

If you consider the total package, including structure quirks, IS is a little stronger than clans at the moment.

Arguable, the top tier Omnis are clearly the top mechs in the game, while the lower tier Omnis are somewhat balanced. The biggest issue though is the sheer range advantage on Clan lasers, which, in CW, creates a death field that IS mechs can't cross without getting severely damaged before they can do damage.

Edited by Gentleman Reaper, 16 March 2016 - 09:02 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Gyrok, on 16 March 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

If you consider the total package, including structure quirks, IS is a little stronger than clans at the moment.

I try not to take quiks into account as they are subject to opinion and changes by PGI whereas the written lore of a thing has (potentially) less wiggle room.

[CDLord HHGD]

Metus regem, on 16 March 2016 - 08:46 AM, said:

Edited for you CD, also the XXL cost 5 times as much and generates 2/4/6 heat (standing/walking/running)...

Overall, not worth the weight savings over an XL for clans, the Savage Wolf (Mad Cat. Mk. IV) makes use of a 375 XXL, and yet offers less BV even with FL armour in Prime configuration, when compared to the Timber Wolf Delta configuration... (3700 for Mk IV vs. 3701 for Timber Wolf D)

I find it very amusing, as the Savage Wolf was meant to fix problems that the aging Timber Wolf had with keeping up with Starmates, yet the Savage Wolf is no faster, it is hotter and more easily brought down, seems like a steep down to me...

This look about right then?

Edited by cdlord, 16 March 2016 - 09:10 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

cdlord, on 16 March 2016 - 09:06 AM, said:

This look about right then?

Also, how much more does the LFE and CFE cost compared to the STD? For example the XXL is x5 the cost of STD while the XP is ~2.66x the cost... Any other heat penalties to note for the other engines too?