1049 replies to this topic

[1453 R]

Cathy, on 08 April 2016 - 01:24 PM, said:

I care if the Whitworth gets abandoned I want it in Battletech, though I've lost a lot of passion since it's only going to be lance sized units

Seriously it's no worse looking mech than the TRO Quickdraw, or Blackjack.

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK!

......

Seriously, though. I pick on the Whitworth mostly because it's about as incrediboring vanilla as a medium 'Mech can get. Visually uninteresting, mechanically dull and easily superceded by multiple existing machines, slow as rocks, fragile, and with crappy 'variants' that basically just switch the launchers out or drop lasers for other stuff.

Even for the case of getting it into HBS' BattleTech game, I don't see the thing making the cut over choices like the Assassin, Vulcan, Clint, Sentinel, or other plethora of funky 40-tonners, or even potential offbeat weirdball stuff like the Wolf Trap.

I mean, heck. The Trebuchet exists. That pretty much rules out the Whitworth entirely in terms of "Would Be Good For Game," and most people consider the Treb one of, if not the, worst Inner Sphere mediums in the game.

...which is super sad because I really like my Trebs and miss the good times I had in them...

ANYWAYS. Moving on. ...actually, there's not much else I can think of to say concerning Next Clan 'Mech. We've pretty much concluded that the most logical/best option is the Night Gyr, followed by probably-the-Huntsman, then maybe the Linebacker or some funky assault if someone can twist Russ' Twitter arm hard enough, ne?

[pbiggz]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 08 April 2016 - 01:41 PM, said:

Well it means all the less fortunate Omnis will be asking for this, not that I'm against this since I would prefer we just ditch the omnimech construction rules since it causes certain mechs to require serious quirks to make even relevant.

Either PGI removes omni build rules, makes all omnimechs battlemechs, and inflates hardpoints as needed, or PGI does the legwork and makes the worse omnimechs better via changes to their stock loadouts, engines, and fixed components.

[Bishop Steiner]

Imperius, on 08 April 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

I'm for new tech but that isn't a legitimate reason to exclude the MK II like a few keep trying to do.

you do have a way of twisting things to fit your continued insistence on being persecuted, don't you?

Instead of seeing it as people looking for the most logical/marketable way to get to the progression to allow for your precious mkII.

Really, anything other than "Let's release it right this moment" is a personal attack against you and all that Murica stands for, ain't it?

SMH.

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 01:58 PM, said:

Either PGI removes omni build rules, makes all omnimechs battlemechs, and inflates hardpoints as needed, or PGI does the legwork and makes the worse omnimechs better via changes to their stock loadouts, engines, and fixed components.

or what?

[pbiggz]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 April 2016 - 01:59 PM, said:

you do have a way of twisting things to fit your continued insistence on being persecuted, don't you?

Instead of seeing it as people looking for the most logical/marketable way to get to the progression to allow for your precious mkII.

Really, anything other than "Let's release it right this moment" is a personal attack against you and all that Murica stands for, ain't it?

SMH.


or what?

Or more than half the omnis we get from here on out will be partially or completely garbage. Think about how many IS omnis have fixed IS XL engines for example.

Edited by pbiggz, 08 April 2016 - 02:04 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

Or more than half the omnis we get from here on out will be partially or completely garbage.

That can be said about most mechs though, just saying. We don't want the new releases to solely be focused on power creep. Ideally they add options rather than eclipse other options, and unfortunately until PGI does some think-tanking to figure out how to better balance omnis we are left with quirks helping close the gap between poor performers and optimized omnis. Luckily there are still some decent omnis left, and some solid battlemechs still within the timeline.

[1453 R]

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 01:58 PM, said:

Either PGI removes omni build rules, makes all omnimechs battlemechs, and inflates hardpoints as needed, or PGI does the legwork and makes the worse omnimechs better via changes to their stock loadouts, engines, and fixed components.

...or they maintain the Omni rules as they stand, use quirks where applicable (much as I hate the current "Band-Aid Dispensor" quirk system), and we deal with the fact that, much like some BattleMechs either abandoned by time or unsalvageable in the first place, some OmniMechs are just going to be less than awesome?

There's no reason to break stock configurations and play Invent-A-'Mech to substitute stats for 'bad' machines. Does that mean certain Spheroid Omnis are going to stink? Probably. Though let's face it, we all know Piranha will do something to make up for things like hardlocked SHS if 'Mechs like the Strider make it in. Beyond that? Most of the machines released in more recent days have been for flavor and to give more folks their Favorites than because they're big ridiculous game-changers.

The division between Omni build rules and Battle build rules is one of the few things left that helps give the game a more BattleTech-y flair. Let's try and hang onto it, shall we?

[pbiggz]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 08 April 2016 - 02:07 PM, said:

That can be said about most mechs though, just saying. We don't want the new releases to solely be focused on power creep. Ideally they add options rather than eclipse other options, and unfortunately until PGI does some think-tanking to figure out how to better balance omnis we are left with quirks helping close the gap between poor performers and optimized omnis. Luckily there are still some decent omnis left, and some solid battlemechs still within the timeline.

Except omnis are locked up in most ways that matter. If a battlemech's stock loadout is lame, swap its engine out, swap its structure, give it double heatsinks, no problem. If an omni is not performing on the other hand, the only thing you can do is try to swap hardpoints, and play with the loadout. Thats it. Internals, fixed components, fixed engine. There's far less you can do with an omni than you can with a battlemech in our mechlab.

1453 R, on 08 April 2016 - 02:08 PM, said:

...or they maintain the Omni rules as they stand, use quirks where applicable (much as I hate the current "Band-Aid Dispensor" quirk system), and we deal with the fact that, much like some BattleMechs either abandoned by time or unsalvageable in the first place, some OmniMechs are just going to be less than awesome?

There's no reason to break stock configurations and play Invent-A-'Mech to substitute stats for 'bad' machines. Does that mean certain Spheroid Omnis are going to stink? Probably. Though let's face it, we all know Piranha will do something to make up for things like hardlocked SHS if 'Mechs like the Strider make it in. Beyond that? Most of the machines released in more recent days have been for flavor and to give more folks their Favorites than because they're big ridiculous game-changers.

The division between Omni build rules and Battle build rules is one of the few things left that helps give the game a more BattleTech-y flair. Let's try and hang onto it, shall we?

I am of a mind to say that there is no reason to put mechs in the game if they suck. If you want to put mechs in the game, make those mechs good, or dont put them in.

[Gas Guzzler]

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

Or more than half the omnis we get from here on out will be partially or completely garbage. Think about how many IS omnis have fixed IS XL engines for example.

The Sunder will prevail!

Probably not, it doesn't even have Endo which is a blessing in slots, but a curse in tonnage.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 02:09 PM, said:

If an omni is not performing on the other hand, the only thing you can do is try to swap hardpoints, and play with the loadout.

You can hope it gets quirks like most crappy mechs, that's about it sadly, but like I said, until they find a better solution than just fudging the stock loadouts (which is something about as susceptible to meta shifts as quirks) it will have to do.

[Bishop Steiner]

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

Or more than half the omnis we get from here on out will be partially or completely garbage. Think about how many IS omnis have fixed IS XL engines for example.

most of us are projecting between 1-2 years before everything really works for a sensible, practical and well plotted timeskip. Since Clans don't' get JUST Omnis, I compiled a list of all currently available Clan Mechs. At minimum, 12, realistically, 18 are good viable and generally desirable Battlemechs. To MOST people. Yes, you and Imp will say they aren't because the mkII is not in that list. duly noted. moving on.

Add to that an equal number of existing and desirable IS mechs, and there are easily enough fodder, at current progression for 2-3 years worth of Mech before any timeskip is called for. Any reasonable person would guess that a Timeskip and the mkII do not sound to be on the books for the rest of 2016. In fact, judging by Russ's replies to Imperius, if anything, his cajoling will only probably draw that time out. Because he is clearly tired of hearing about it, and Russ tends to respond to that by becoming more obstinate.

So most of us realistically project early 2017 as the most likely and feasible time for one to occur. Which could, conceivably mean we are pulling for your precious mkII to appear as early as January.

Because yes, we are trying to keep Imp from ever getting his precious.

Or maybe because the rest of us are not running a myopic agendized campaign with no regards for the impact or needs of the rest of the game/playerbase.

But of course, it's the former, because everyone hates you and Impy, because you keep telling us we do.

Someday, sadly, thanks to your own actions, that WILL become a self fulfilling prophecy.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 08 April 2016 - 02:15 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 April 2016 - 02:12 PM, said:

The Sunder will prevail!

Probably not, it doesn't even have Endo which is a blessing in slots, but a curse in tonnage.

The Sunder is heavy enough that that's probably a good thing.

[Bishop Steiner]

Yeonne Greene, on 08 April 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:

The Sunder is heavy enough that that's probably a good thing.

locked big engine does cause some limits though.

[1453 R]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 April 2016 - 02:17 PM, said:

locked big engine does cause some limits though.

Also seems to suffer from hardpoint deficit in most reasonably timeline-viable configurations, if the typical Omni lack-of-inflation holds for Spheroid Omnis. Which it may not, who knows. Though the notion of Samual as the hero is mildly terrifying. if I'm reading that configuration correctly...5E/12B/6M. It almost literally has guns mounted on its guns. Even if I'm misreading the "four Machine Guns in the left arm and each torso" portion of the Sarna entry, 5E/4B/6M is still almost illegally violent. If you can't slaughter all that dare show its face before you with 5E/4B/6M, you need to improve your gudness.

[Gas Guzzler]

Yeonne Greene, on 08 April 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:

The Sunder is heavy enough that that's probably a good thing.

You end up with about 35 tons of podspace and a locked XL360, no incredible loadouts there, hopefully the hitboxes will be XL friendly!

1453 R, on 08 April 2016 - 02:25 PM, said:

Also seems to suffer from hardpoint deficit in most reasonably timeline-viable configurations, if the typical Omni lack-of-inflation holds for Spheroid Omnis. Which it may not, who knows. Though the notion of Samual as the hero is mildly terrifying. if I'm reading that configuration correctly...5E/12B/6M. It almost literally has guns mounted on its guns. Even if I'm misreading the "four Machine Guns in the left arm and each torso" portion of the Sarna entry, 5E/4B/6M is still almost illegally violent. If you can't slaughter all that dare show its face before you with 5E/4B/6M, you need to improve your gudness.

SSW agrees with 12 B IIRC

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 08 April 2016 - 02:27 PM.

[pbiggz]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 April 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:

most of us are projecting between 1-2 years before everything really works for a sensible, practical and well plotted timeskip. Since Clans don't' get JUST Omnis, I compiled a list of all currently available Clan Mechs. At minimum, 12, realistically, 18 are good viable and generally desirable Battlemechs. To MOST people. Yes, you and Imp will say they aren't because the mkII is not in that list. duly noted. moving on.

Add to that an equal number of existing and desirable IS mechs, and there are easily enough fodder, at current progression for 2-3 years worth of Mech before any timeskip is called for. Any reasonable person would guess that a Timeskip and the mkII do not sound to be on the books for the rest of 2016. In fact, judging by Russ's replies to Imperius, if anything, his cajoling will only probably draw that time out. Because he is clearly tired of hearing about it, and Russ tends to respond to that by becoming more obstinate.

So most of us realistically project early 2017 as the most likely and feasible time for one to occur. Which could, conceivably mean we are pulling for your precious mkII to appear as early as January.

Because yes, we are trying to keep Imp from ever getting his precious.

Or maybe because the rest of us are not running a myopic agendized campaign with no regards for the impact or needs of the rest of the game/playerbase.

But of course, it's the former, because everyone hates you and Impy, because you keep telling us we do.

Someday, sadly, thanks to your own actions, that WILL become a self fulfilling prophecy.

I wasn't talking about the MK II. Im trying to let the matter rest for now. Im talking about omnimech rules vs battlemech rules. My suggestion is that omni build rules only really mean something in battletech TT, and they dont add anything to a real time battletech game. A timberwolf isnt iconic because its an omnimech its iconic by its own virtue, being a unique mech with memorable art that has graced numerous book and package covers. The world wouldnt implode if PGI made the mech into a battlemech.

[Bishop Steiner]

1453 R, on 08 April 2016 - 02:25 PM, said:

Also seems to suffer from hardpoint deficit in most reasonably timeline-viable configurations, if the typical Omni lack-of-inflation holds for Spheroid Omnis. Which it may not, who knows. Though the notion of Samual as the hero is mildly terrifying. if I'm reading that configuration correctly...5E/12B/6M. It almost literally has guns mounted on its guns. Even if I'm misreading the "four Machine Guns in the left arm and each torso" portion of the Sarna entry, 5E/4B/6M is still almost illegally violent. If you can't slaughter all that dare show its face before you with 5E/4B/6M, you need to improve your gudness.

yeah but 12 MG, 4xaSRM6, 3x LPL and 2 Flamers sounds like...

SO
MUCH
FUN!!!

[pbiggz]

1453 R, on 08 April 2016 - 02:25 PM, said:

Also seems to suffer from hardpoint deficit in most reasonably timeline-viable configurations, if the typical Omni lack-of-inflation holds for Spheroid Omnis. Which it may not, who knows. Though the notion of Samual as the hero is mildly terrifying. if I'm reading that configuration correctly...5E/12B/6M. It almost literally has guns mounted on its guns. Even if I'm misreading the "four Machine Guns in the left arm and each torso" portion of the Sarna entry, 5E/4B/6M is still almost illegally violent. If you can't slaughter all that dare show its face before you with 5E/4B/6M, you need to improve your gudness.

The sunder was only ever really in mechwarrior 3, and I don't think they entirely did it justice, though it was at least mean looking. All I would ask for is the freedom to change my engine if I want to, and I'd give up hardpoint swapping to do it.

[Gyrok]

ScarecrowES, on 08 April 2016 - 01:45 PM, said:

If it were me... the way I'd introduce new tech on either side would be one new piece at a time, introduced by including one mech at a time that uses the new tech. So, say you want to introduce MRMs to the game. Find a new mech you like that features MRMs, and introduce that mech and the weapon to go with it. This gives a few advantages. First, it makes new tech just as exciting to see dropped as new mechs. "OMG, Heavy Large Lasers drop in June!" Second, it allows you to introduce a single balancing variable at a time, and see how it plays out against the rest of what's already available.

Keeping balance while introducing one piece of tech at a time would be infinitely easier than adding a whole lot of tech into the game at once. It's much easier to get the balancing right if you're only changing one thing at a time. It would also be a lot easier on the art and design departments, easier in testing, and so on.

But you have to move the timeline forward first and foremost. Otherwise the it's a moot point.

Now, I say 3059 for a couple of reasons. First, it's past the introduction dates for most new tech. It makes nearly all mechs available from a tech perspective. Second, it's still within the Invasion era, which is the only era during which you can cleanly divide the galaxy into two opposed sides. That doesn't work in any other era. Third is, of course, because no real IS vs Clan combat happens between 3053 and 3059. And fourth, probably best of all, 3059 is the start of Operation Bulldog, which is the definitive and ultimately concluding campaign set of the war. It is by far the best era to be set at in terms of what works for CW. Far better than 3050.

With CW set in 3050, you have one single end-game scenario... either the Clans get to Terra, or they don't. With CW set in 3059, you can have 3 end-game scenarios. Clans get to Terra, IS gets to Strana Mechty, or a stalemate forcing a Great Refusal. So instead of sitting in a stalemate scenario for months on end, as is the case with CW now, you could break that stalemate and provide a definitive end to each CW session with a Great Refusal style "tournament" to decide the overall winner. This let's us have what other games have in modes similar to CW... multiple sessions a year with clear endings. Having that is both more satisfying, but inevitably helps with balance by providing a constant reset to your system in which to test changes.

3059 is just much better for CW. In fact, it's really the only timeline that truly works for how that mode is set up.

Also, if it makes you feel any better, since the Lyrans seceded from the Federated Commonwealth in 3057, it now makes more sense for Steiner and Davion to fight.

Actually, you are better off going full monty, jump in feet first and do it all at once.

Stringing it out over months/years is not going to do anyone any favors, and is not going to dramatically change the outcomes.

You have to understand here...you can easily establish an expected performance baseline from your existing tech, decide what you want the performance delta for the given new tech will be, and you can set the baseline stats in that ball park to begin with.

Then, (this is where a good QA comes in handy), you pull the information from the servers regarding usage, damage, accuracy, all kinds of different things across all matches, and you review those compared to your historical baseline, and your expected performance for the tech and adjust one or both slightly.

This is all ned and the first reader stuff, but you get the idea...one piece at a time will not change what adjustments must be made. By dropping it all at once, you gain the benefit of being able to focus on micro adjustments for a few months and be relatively done.

Gas Guzzler, on 08 April 2016 - 01:46 PM, said:

That was my initial thought as well (why I was on Team Kingfisher, and I still am). I do like that it is a dedicated CJF Assault which is currently absent from the lineup, and they could give it better agility through twist range and a little bit of agility quirks so that it isn't so helpless against lights, and that would make it have some appeal over the Dire in some situations.

Turk can still pull off dub gauss + dub erppcs well enough...which was my favorite cheese whale build for a long time.

[Gas Guzzler]

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 02:32 PM, said:

The sunder was only ever really in mechwarrior 3, and I don't think they entirely did it justice, though it was at least mean looking. All I would ask for is the freedom to change my engine if I want to, and I'd give up hardpoint swapping to do it.

It was in MW4: Mercs as well.

And yeah, the hardpoint swapping sucks because most of the legal variants are all the same!

[Bishop Steiner]

pbiggz, on 08 April 2016 - 02:28 PM, said:

I wasn't talking about the MK II. Im trying to let the matter rest for now. Im talking about omnimech rules vs battlemech rules. My suggestion is that omni build rules only really mean something in battletech TT, and they dont add anything to a real time battletech game. A timberwolf isnt iconic because its an omnimech its iconic by its own virtue, being a unique mech with memorable art that has graced numerous book and package covers. The world wouldnt implode if PGI made the mech into a battlemech.

I want to agree with this. But as I noted with Quicksilver, there does need be some tradeoff when you count the advantages of the C-XL (biggest game breaker in the clan arsenal), and sappable/optimizable hardpoints. Not counting half crit and more effective FF, Half Crit Endo and 2 slot DHS.

Those are all undeniable advantages over the IS, where the IS get customizable cores, and hardpoint inflation. Quirks are too malleable and poorly done atm to realyl consider them a set "balancer" for either, though yes atm, Quirks are most prominent with IS, which was the intention.

That said, current balance is actually the closest it's ever been post clans. What is needed now (IMO) is tweaks to moderate the very moderate imbalances between the top contenders, not wholesale surgery.

And indeed it may seem that what you propose won't cause the world to implode, but every exception one makes, the foundation gets that much weaker, and yes, eventually the whole house of cards does tumble.

THESE are the rules we play by. With basic balance works and a complete rethink of quirks, there is no real reason it can't/won't work.

Aside from the mountain of bandaids the whole game seems to be comprised of by now. Which I think we all agree need to be ripped off, before they become even more precarious.

Gas Guzzler, on 08 April 2016 - 02:35 PM, said:

It was in MW4: Mercs as well.

And yeah, the hardpoint swapping sucks because most of the legal variants are all the same!

welcome to the suck that is mech reality. If you look at a huge chunk of IS mechs, realistically, they are all shades of the same flavor too. People just ID what laservomits best and ignore the other variants, too.

I do with they'd gone with a sized hardpoint system (Battlemechs) and some form of actual "omni" pod set up for Omnis.... but that wouldn't work with the eternally stupid and annoying "grind 3 variants" approach.