23 replies to this topic

[Darian DelFord]

Do you think the introduction of Reflective and Reactive Armor at the cost of C-bills would help with the damn High Alpha's going around and at least slightly increase TTK?


Reflective 50% damage reduction on Lasers but balistics do normal damage

Reactive 50% damage reduction on Balistics but lasers do normal damage?

Just curious is all.

[Kotzi]

No, not really. Better gameplaymechanics would, like longer matchtimes and actually beeing able to retreat to repair and reload using the never used regions on some big maps.

[Darian DelFord]

Kotzi, on 08 June 2016 - 05:52 AM, said:

No, not really. Better gameplaymechanics would, like longer matchtimes and actually beeing able to retreat to repair and reload using the never used regions on some big maps.

I think it would add an interesting aspect.

IMHO I think it would be relatively easy to implement.

[invernomuto]

I like the idea but if we move the timeline then we should introduce new weapons and equipments (so also plasma gun, heavy MG, etc).
OT: Is it possibile that this kind of mechanic was present in one of the Battletech related PC games of the past? Maybe it was mechcommander.
I remember that in one of the Mechwarrior PC games the armor had different performance against each weapon family.

Edited by invernomuto, 08 June 2016 - 06:11 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

No, I don't think the different armor types are necessary.

Besides, wouldn't Reflective be better than usual against energy, but LESS than usual against ballistics (not equal to standard armor)? The same with Reactive armor (but switched around of course).

If you take an armor that excels in one area, as a counter for balance, it would need to be weak in another.

Despite all the energy meta, there are still TONS of ballistic boats floating around too. Running reflective armor would cause you to dissolve when getting pegged by DireWolves, Maulers, King Crabs, Jagers, Warhammers, Rifleman, etc..., while taking reflective means you get melted by everything else.

IDK, I think it would be better to leave the armor as is.

[vettie]

invernomuto, on 08 June 2016 - 06:10 AM, said:

I like the idea but if we move the timeline then we should introduce new weapons and equipments (so also plasma gun, heavy MG, etc).
OT: Is it possibile that this kind of mechanic was present in one of the Battletech related PC games of the past? Maybe it was mechcommander.
I remember that in one of the Mechwarrior PC games the armor had different performance against each weapon family.

MW4 had these types of armour

[Metus regem]

MeiSooHaityu, on 08 June 2016 - 06:19 AM, said:

No, I don't think the different armor types are necessary.

Besides, wouldn't Reflective be better than usual against energy, but LESS than usual against ballistics (not equal to standard armor)? The same with Reactive armor (but switched around of course).

If you take an armor that excels in one area, as a counter for balance, it would need to be weak in another.

Despite all the energy meta, there are still TONS of ballistic boats floating around too. Running reflective armor would cause you to dissolve when getting pegged by DireWolves, Maulers, King Crabs, Jagers, Warhammers, Rifleman, etc..., while taking reflective means you get melted by everything else.

IDK, I think it would be better to leave the armor as is.

Almost right...

in TT:

Reflective armour reduced laser damage, but took extra damage from missiles and ballistics

Reactive armour reduced damage from ballistics, but normal from everything else

Hardened just flat out took half damage from everything

Ferro Lamiellor reduced damage by 1 point per 5 points a hit, so a big middle finger to LB series AC's cluster shot, MG's and SRM's doing half damage.

[Lugin]

Tabletop versions:
Reflective: Cuts all energy weapon damage in half (Las, flamer, PPC, Plasma rifle/cannon). More brittle, so doubled fall/physical and increased vulnerability to armor-piercing effects (AP ammo, tandem missiles, taser).

Reactive: Cuts damage from explosive weapons (missile-type, mortars, artillery). Also cuts armor-piercing effects (see above). Doesn't affect ballistic damage.
For that, you need Ballistic-reinforced, which doesn't exist until the 3100s.


Bonus:
Hardened: Each point of armor eats two points of damage, and weighs double also slows the mech. Armor piercing effects (see above) are nullified. The mech is also has it run MP dropped by 1. Also, cannot be used by Omnis.

Edited by Lugin, 08 June 2016 - 09:12 AM.

[Jman5]

Darian DelFord, on 08 June 2016 - 05:41 AM, said:

Do you think the introduction of Reflective and Reactive Armor at the cost of C-bills would help with the damn High Alpha's going around and at least slightly increase TTK?


Reflective 50% damage reduction on Lasers but balistics do normal damage

Reactive 50% damage reduction on Balistics but lasers do normal damage?

Just curious is all.

Yes it would, and it's the best way to counteract the offensive power-creep that has been going on in the last few years. Minor hitpoint quirks help, but they haven't even come close to matching what's been going on in the weapon side of the power-creep.

I mean we've got 35 ton lights with 72 damage alpha strikes... Compare that with what we used to have where the height of offensive power from lights were 30 damage alpha strikes from 6 medium lasers and no quirks.

The way I would do it is repurpose the AMS slot into a generic Defensive hardpoint where players can insert one Weapon type defense. Then like MASC and Jumpjets you give it a different weight proportional to the mech. Mechs with 2 or more AMS slots could use the other slot for a regular AMS.

The important thing to note is that you are creating a system that can naturally self-balance with the changing meta. If Lasers are the big threat, more people can equip the energy defense. If UACs become the next great thing, people can adjust their mechs to deal with ballistics.

Edited by Jman5, 08 June 2016 - 11:12 AM.

[wanderer]

Quote

actually beeing able to retreat to repair and reload using the never used regions on some big maps.

You have to live long enough to get to the repair point, meaning in general repair stations do nothing for TTK.

Reloads would actually make TTK worse. To put it simply: Jenner IIC without ammo worries and the speed to easily hit, kill, and go reload between applying 36 SRM enemas.

Also, the solution to TTK isn't new equipment.

It's diffusing the alpha strke.

[Suko]

I would like these as upgrade options just to add variety to the game. However, not in the way you described. Standard armor should be standard resistance to both energy and ballistics. Reflective should be get a 20% damage reduction from energy, but a 20% dmg increase from ballistics. Vice versa for reactive armor.

Edited by Suko, 08 June 2016 - 12:38 PM.

[TheArisen]

I'm all for more defensive tech. Currently, the game is heavily weighted for offense. When you build your mech it's almost always about fitting as many guns/lasers/missiles as you can on your mech. The ability to build a more defensive minded mech should exist.

[Corrado]

TheArisen, on 08 June 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

I'm all for more defensive tech. Currently, the game is heavily weighted for offense. When you build your mech it's almost always about fitting as many guns/lasers/missiles as you can on your mech. The ability to build a more defensive minded mech should exist.

almost, just a bit more complicated. the game is heavily weighted on finding the best compromise between FIREPOWER and SPEED. A good chassis geometry is often superior to armor quantity (see highlander IIC with terribad CT)

and i'm up for defensive tech too, but i imagine the core of a good build will still gravitate around firepower / speed / geometry

Edited by Corrado, 08 June 2016 - 02:43 PM.

[wanderer]

Hardened armor is in-timeline.

You want 38 tons of armor on your Kodiak? Doable with HA.

[Andi Nagasia]

i think its a great idea but it needs to be an option on all mechs BattleMechs as well as Omni's,

[wanderer]

Omnis don't get to change armor types (though later-tech ones sometimes come with such armor equipped).

[rolly]

Darian DelFord, on 08 June 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

I think it would add an interesting aspect.

IMHO I think it would be relatively easy to implement.

Given PGI's track record, even if such a thing were being considered; it would take ridiculously long and probably suck up resources from other things more crucial. Like perhaps a fully working in-depth game. This would just be fluff that wouldn't even begin to address deeper issues.

Edited by rolly, 08 June 2016 - 03:22 PM.

[chucklesMuch]

I would love to have more armour options and the likes of; standard, hardened, reflective, reactive sound good... so long as there are options for available all mechs chasis types.

Had been thinking about Improvised armour too. Whether armoured plates or something else that could be attached to your mech, maybe on existing mount-points, to buff the armour of that section. (I have no background in lore/TT - just thinking about what has happened in RL).

anyways +1 for more armour options (Not sure how practical this is considering all the additonal modelling required to show the different armour types though)

[Scout Derek]

oh look this thing again. I want this, I even made a thread on it awhile ago.

I don't think ttk would increase, it'd mix up the tactics used in gameplay; do you always go with laser vomit and dakka now? or do you bring a mixed loadout?

[TheArisen]

Corrado, on 08 June 2016 - 02:42 PM, said:

almost, just a bit more complicated. the game is heavily weighted on finding the best compromise between FIREPOWER and SPEED. A good chassis geometry is often superior to armor quantity (see highlander IIC with terribad CT)

and i'm up for defensive tech too, but i imagine the core of a good build will still gravitate around firepower / speed / geometry

A fair point but I think it'd depend on how good the defensive tech is. If it's reasonably good, we could see more mechs built around taking DMG & not just the speed & firepower that you mentioned.