68 replies to this topic

[Baulven]

I know they lock a lot of things for balance in MWO but going forward as the IS get their omnis I see a lot of designs not able to change endo FF or single heatsinks which will be problematic. Anyone have suggestions for a fix on these issues?

[ScarecrowES]

Leave IS omnis out of the game OR get used to crappy meths? Either one is viable.

[Elizander]

I'd like Omnimechs to have 2-3 configuration save slots that you can fill out (duplicates require extra pods and equipment) then when you drop you can pick which configuration of your mech to use.

[Baulven]

Elizander, on 26 July 2016 - 05:03 AM, said:

I'd like Omnimechs to have 2-3 configuration save slots that you can fill out (duplicates require extra pods and equipment) then when you drop you can pick which configuration of your mech to use.

But having configurations won't help the omnis locked into SHS configurations or locked without endo or FF. Under the current construction rules it would eternally gimp the mechs that don't have those starting.

[Y E O N N E]

A.) Leave the ones with SHS out of the game. Owens is straight-up inferior to the Raptor anyway and doesn't contribute anything of value outside of appearance.

B.) Even the ones with Endo and/or FF have such small engines that it would not be a tremendous issue should they have neither upgrade. IS Omnis are slow.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 26 July 2016 - 05:14 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Baulven, on 26 July 2016 - 05:08 AM, said:

But having configurations won't help the omnis locked into SHS configurations or locked without endo or FF. Under the current construction rules it would eternally gimp the mechs that don't have those starting.

As I've expanded on elsewhere, locked upgrades don't provide balance, they only arbitrarily nerf mechs with poor upgrades. ES, FF, and heat sink type needs to be unlocked (but ES/FF slot location needs to be locked and not dynamic, so internal space in a given pod remains consistent when upgrades are used). Of course, engines and jump jets need to remain locked, because those add to gameplay by mandating constants over a chassis in factors that matter on the battlefield, not in the mechlab.

Locked ES/FF was a dumb idea from the start.

[Pariah Devalis]

Wintersdark, on 26 July 2016 - 05:29 AM, said:

As I've expanded on elsewhere, locked upgrades don't provide balance, they only arbitrarily nerf mechs with poor upgrades. ES, FF, and heat sink type needs to be unlocked (but ES/FF slot location needs to be locked and not dynamic, so internal space in a given pod remains consistent when upgrades are used). Of course, engines and jump jets need to remain locked, because those add to gameplay by mandating constants over a chassis in factors that matter on the battlefield, not in the mechlab.

Locked ES/FF was a dumb idea from the start.

I'm not so sure I'd loosen up on armor type, honestly. Not only is it the least impactful upgrade, but I think it gives just a smidge too much freedom to omnis. If anything, though, I'd unlock non-hardwired equipment, such as MASC.

Being able to pop off non-hardwired equipment and being able to swap internal types would do wonders. Mechs like the Executioner could be salvaged into a more firepower oriented omni vs a speed oriented one. The Mad Dog and the Summoner could get the tonnage savings they need to be truly worthwhile mechs of their weight class. The Nova would always be better for laser boating than the Huntsman, but at least it would have more room available for mixed or ballistic builds, should it be able to swap internal type.

I would definitely not touch engine rating and fixed hardwired equipment. Heat Sink unlocking is necessary to futureproof for IS omnimechs, but there would be no real advantage for Clan mechs in the current period. However, having armor and internals and equipment and heatsinks and hardpoints as flexible choices would be a bit much. We just need to ease up a smidge on the forced mediocrity that fixed internals causes specific omnimechs to suffer.

[Hit the Deck]

PGI has kind of resolved this issue by going back to one 'Mech/chassis per pack.

Bad 'Mech won't sell so they will not release gimped (Omni)'Mechs.

[Pariah Devalis]

Late add on to my prior comment:

Unlocking BOTH armor and internal mods would cause identity problems. Hellbringer with just Endo would still have less pod space than the EBJ, but gain ECM - a comfortable pro and con - whereas the HBR with both options has the same podspace plus ECM. Suddenly the EBJ has less relative worth. Nova with just Endo gains tonnage at the expense of crit space while retaining all the energy hardpoints, but a NVA with both Endo and Ferro ends up with just as much pod space as the Huntsman. It really starts to blur the lines between chassis, there.

So while I would agree with allowing Internal Structure changes or allowing Armor Changes, allowing both is a no go for me. Plus, I'd feel much more comfortable with one change at a time. Allow one thing, and see if it is enough before going overboard with other options.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 26 July 2016 - 07:18 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Pariah Devalis, on 26 July 2016 - 07:14 AM, said:

Late add on to my prior comment:

Unlocking BOTH armor and internal mods would cause identity problems. Hellbringer with just Endo would still have less pod space than the EBJ, but gain ECM - a comfortable pro and con - whereas the HBR with both options has the same podspace plus ECM. Suddenly the EBJ has less relative worth. Nova with just Endo gains tonnage at the expense of crit space while retaining all the energy hardpoints, but a NVA with both Endo and Ferro ends up with just as much pod space as the Huntsman. It really starts to blur the lines between chassis, there.

So while I would agree with allowing Internal Structure changes or allowing Armor Changes, allowing both is a no go for me. Plus, I'd feel much more comfortable with one change at a time. Allow one thing, and see if it is enough before going overboard with other options.

I disagree with regards to identity problems.

The difference in FF or not is minor - just a couple tons.

While I appreciate the look at the Hellbringer vs. EBJ, I'd argue that the HBR's ECM is one major differentiating factor, but what's really important isn't the precense or absence of FF, it's physical form and hardpoints. FF has practically zero impact in gameplay, and really shouldn't be considered as a "balancing point" for ECM - while it works in this specific example, it's not a good way to go overall as it could as easily further break other chassis where the ECM mech also had the correct upgrades vs. one without.

It's nice to say "The EBJ has marginally more pod space, the HBR has ECM" but really, that's a lucky coincidence (probably the only spot in the whole Clan lineup where the locked ES/FF works out) not a result of good game design choices.

Realistically, there are reasons to choose the HBR or the EBJ even if they both had ES/FF and thus had the same pod space. The EBJ features high shoulder mounts and a smaller front profile; the HBR has a larger front profile but humanoid hitboxes.
ECM isn't a big deal anymore; its presence doesn't require nerfs to counter. Hell, I have ECM mechs that don't mount ECM at all because it's not worth (in the particular build) the 1t/1s it requires! I certainly never thought I'd say that, but there you have it.


Nova vs. Huntsman? Totally different profiles, different hardpoint availability. They're quite different mechs. Neither requires an automatic 1t nerf because "reasons". The mech missing that ton doesn't gain anything in response, it's simply missing a ton. That's actually a really good example of where I feel FF being locked is silly. I can honestly say, ignoring quirks, with a Nova or a Huntsman, choosing between them would be:
If I wanted to run a LOT of Energy weapons, I'd go Nova; if I wanted to run anything else (anything else at all!) I'd go huntsman, because the Huntsman has an extra 1.1t to spend at no real cost to it at all, so it'll simply be objectively better at anything else, even if it used the same hardpoints as the same build on a Nova, be that via the extra "free" DHS, or ton of ammo, or what have you. With both unlocked, which I chose would be based wholly on chassis form, hardpoint location and availability - which is where the choice should be made.

Unlocking ES and FF (only; other things fall afoul of this as they have in-game impacts other than simply free-tonnage-nerfing) should have been done from day one. It was a stupid, terrible idea then and remains so today. Still, I wouldn't care much if they only unlocked ES, because as above, you're looking at roughly 1t at 50t and 2t at 100t, so it's hardly a big deal. Unlocking both wouldn't suddenly break anything, though, on those same grounds: it's a small change, and just makes things fair between the chassis without arbitrary tonnage nerfs.

[cazidin]

What if PGI gave the standard heat sink IS Omnimechs heat dissipation and other heat quirks to compensate? I know this will only fix one problem, mind you, and it'd be with quirks.

[Moldur]

This implies that MWO will last long enough to get to IS omnis.

[Kargush]

Wintersdark, on 26 July 2016 - 05:29 AM, said:

Locked ES/FF was a dumb idea from the start.

Blame FASA for that one.

[cazidin]

Moldur, on 26 July 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

This implies that MWO will last long enough to get to IS omnis.

We'd very likely get IS Omni's before we got Quads.

[El Bandito]

Baulven, on 26 July 2016 - 04:54 AM, said:

I know they lock a lot of things for balance in MWO but going forward as the IS get their omnis I see a lot of designs not able to change endo FF or single heatsinks which will be problematic. Anyone have suggestions for a fix on these issues?

QUIRKS.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

There's no IS omni with SHS that doesn't have space for DHS so PGI could and should just fudge it and give them DHS. Or you know... make SHS a useful alternative to DHS...

[Metus regem]

Baulven, on 26 July 2016 - 04:54 AM, said:

I know they lock a lot of things for balance in MWO but going forward as the IS get their omnis I see a lot of designs not able to change endo FF or single heatsinks which will be problematic. Anyone have suggestions for a fix on these issues?

In all fairness out of the first gen omni's most of them are bad, but after a lot of hunting on my part, this is a list that I feel has the decent to good ones in it: (Note these are all produced prior to 3058, as 3058 saw the release of the second generation Omni-mechs)

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Raptor
http://www.sarna.net...rter_(OmniMech)
http://www.sarna.net...jack_(OmniMech)
http://www.sarna.net...i/Black_Hawk-KU

These two, with the right geometry could be decent to good:

http://www.sarna.net...atar_(OmniMech)
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Sunder

In the second gen and third gen IS Omni's they got a lot of things right, with most of them using endo and decently sized engines with DHS.

[FupDup]

El Bandito, on 26 July 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

QUIRKS.

PGI isn't going to give quirks strong enough to save mechs like the Strider.

[El Bandito]

FupDup, on 26 July 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:

PGI isn't going to give quirks strong enough to save mechs like the Strider.

They lack imagination then. Reduced heat generation quirks, huge missile CD quirks, hardpoint inflation, agility quirks, durability quirks...the possibilities are there.

[FupDup]

El Bandito, on 26 July 2016 - 11:21 AM, said:

They lack imagination then. Reduced heat generation quirks, huge missile CD quirks, hardpoint inflation, agility quirks, durability quirks...the possibilities are there.

Possibilities that PGI will never capitalize on.