1 reply to this topic

[Kael Posavatz]

In Table Top* mech hit locations are based on direction of incoming fire and a dice roll.

Assuming no armor, a component with a standard engine has a 19.43% chance of being hit from the front or rear but only 13.88% when engaged from the side. With the same assumption, a component with an XL engine has a chance of 47.19% when engaged from the front or rear, and 44.42% when engaged from the rear. This gives the standard-engine mech a degree of robustness in TT that is not present in MWO because hits are not randomly allocated.

Additionally, XL engines provide an incentive (faster movement for a given tonnage, for a given velocity more tonnage to devote to armor/cooling/weapons), and also a disincentive (death or disablement). The lack of mobility is a strong disincentive to us standard engines, but MWO lacks an equally strong incentive to use them.

And so... Have standard engines come with an armor buff to all torso components. This would reflect that the XL engine makes compromises on the inherent toughness of a mech's structural fabric implied by the lower hit-rates used in TT. Some testing would be needed to determine how much of buff is appropriate, but it would probably be between 25%-33%.

*figures based on Total Warfare

TL;DR: Have standard engines come with an armor/structure buff to all torso locations, granting survival benefits to offset mobility/weapon loads offered by XL engines.

[Insanity09]

I could see giving mechs with a standard engine a structure buff to the CT only, make them even more durable and more likely to zombie. The side torsos as well? Not so much.