170 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Deathlike, on 23 August 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

For the most part, PGI is just throwing stuff at the wall and putting in some of their own variants... just to sell another mechpack.

Oh I know, but adding variants outside the timeline that do not have any future tech isn't really that crazy.

If anything their willingness to add their own variants is more disturbing.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 August 2016 - 12:14 PM.

[Deathlike]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 August 2016 - 12:14 PM, said:

If anything their willingness to add their own variants is more disturbing.

It's to sell a hero sometimes.

Just add ECM to everything.

I know the Magic Jesus Box isn't totally nerfed, but it's almost an intended plan to keep the mechanics "as is" because some variants and stuff wouldn't sell otherwise.

[Alistair Winter]

IS and Clan mechs should be different. I'm all for buffing IS engines, but at least do it in a different way than Clan engines.

Clan mechs shouldn't be IS mechs with Clan skins and vice versa. Make the two factions play differently, make a Timber Wolf a different experience from the Marauder or whatever.

[Deathlike]

Alistair Winter, on 23 August 2016 - 12:24 PM, said:

IS and Clan mechs should be different. I'm all for buffing IS engines, but at least do it in a different way than Clan engines.

Clan mechs shouldn't be IS mechs with Clan skins and vice versa. Make the two factions play differently, make a Timber Wolf a different experience from the Marauder or whatever.

Yea... we told our balance overlord this. The response we got was a nerfbat.

[AnTi90d]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 August 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:

to the point where you are going on about it like this? It's ridiculous.

99% of my post was about the introduction of Light Fusion Engines.

You're the grognard that picks out the 1%, tries to start a fight about it and then insults me.

You're the one that's ridiculous.

[Y E O N N E]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 August 2016 - 12:00 PM, said:

Has nothing to do with dropping the ball and everything to do with the Jenner skating away before weapons recharge after getting caught by a glancing blow.

In the big picture that Jenner getting away only means something if your bigs have lost to their bigs because said Jenner 's output at this point is now a pittance. Taking the ST on a UIC still means death for it about two instances later in the overwhelming majority of cases.

It is one of the fringest of fringe benefits, like zombie builds, only worth it in any sense because one cERML is far and away more useful than one isML...which brings me full circle: it is not the engine making the Clans, it is the rest of the equipment.

Quote

You shouldn't be hitting from an angle where you can get shot in the first place, which is why lights spend so much time not doing anything running around at a safe enough distance. Either way, both lights are less useful because of the rescale making them much easier to hit.

That is always the prevailing theory, but you of all people should know that is an ideal case. Intel is unreliable and what might look like a clean angle at first can turn into a kill box in the blink of an eye. Long exposure lengthens the window of opportunity for the enemy to retaliate. The F has enough range to make it work and has an exposure time barely longer than cSPL. It can almost turn like a Locust, it can shoot faster and more often, and it can jump really well without having to turn into an ugly representation of a toaster in trade.

There is no accounting for incidentals.

Quote

Geometry really shouldn't need to be factored in to a base piece of equipment imo.

It has to be to the extent that the value assigned to this particular piece of equipment doesn't over-charge the 'Mechs with the optimum shapes. The scalar modifier would be on the 'Mechs themselves, with the best having a value of 1.00 and the rest having some larger number. The equipment values would be static.

I am assuming we don't want to leave crap Mechs as crap.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

AnTi90d, on 23 August 2016 - 12:37 PM, said:

You're the grognard that picks out the 1%, tries to start a fight about it and then insults me.

Ummm, I asked you a simple question with no hostility about which mech you were talking about and you went into a rant, sorry but you are being ridiculous.

[AnTi90d]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 August 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:

Ummm, I asked you a simple question with no hostility about which mech you were talking about and you went into a rant, sorry but you are being ridiculous.

You picked out 1% of my post to derail the entire thread because you already knew my answer, based upon that 1%.

I explained my position with direct quotes from lore, then you insult me.

You're the ridiculous one, Bronson Pinchot.

[Y E O N N E]

Chuck Jager, on 23 August 2016 - 12:09 PM, said:

I agree here, but I also hear plenty of whining when our clan FW faces other good IS IS teams.

With laser durations and structure quirks plus players who choose to run the most optimal builds the balance is dead on.

In slower long range short bus pug matches the clan has the advantage. But that is really more like trying to put a supercharged 4wd in a Yugo with many IS mechs. But most balancing in all games does not hit the poor to bad levels. It is usually the players responsibility to stay away from it.

Short durations only matter insomuch as the Clanners do not generally appreciate the fact that pulling the beam off of the target at the same time the IS burn ends results in the Clan Mech doing the same or better damage per laser.

That said, I do agree that balance is pretty decent between the two, but that does pigeon-hole me into playing very specific IS builds to say that truthfully while I have a little more freedom on the Clan side of things. Balance could be better distributed and in a cleaner, more intuitive fashion.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Yeonne Greene, on 23 August 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:

It is one of the fringest of fringe benefits, like zombie builds, only worth it in any sense because one cERML is far and away more useful than one isML...which brings me full circle: it is not the engine making the Clans, it is the rest of the equipment.

It really depends, the Kodiak is an example of where it is both. Hunchback IICs are a case as well.

Yeonne Greene, on 23 August 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:

That is always the prevailing theory, but you of all people should know that is an ideal case. Intel is unreliable and what might look like a clean angle at first can turn into a kill box in the blink of an eye. Long exposure lengthens the window of opportunity for the enemy to retaliate. The F has enough range to make it work and has an exposure time barely longer than cSPL. It can almost turn like a Locust, it can shoot faster and more often, and it can jump really well without having to turn into an ugly representation of a toaster in trade.

There is no accounting for incidentals.

The F still isn't as good, the lower alpha and shorter range still means it has to put itself in even more dangerous situations than a IIC just to do as much damage. If the F at least had the same range, it would be a different story, but it doesn't.

Yeonne Greene, on 23 August 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:

It has to be to the extent that the value assigned to this particular piece of equipment doesn't over-charge the 'Mechs with the optimum shapes.

If a mech suffers from poor geometry, chances are good that it will need quirks to begin with regardless of what engine you mount on it. Though I still find issue with making iXLs a special case for how one can kill a mech because it does mean geometry has to play into balancing the iXL on a mech by mech basis (that goes beyond quirks).

[SamsungNinja]

El Bandito, on 23 August 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

For the King Crab? Std 360 is too much--try 325. For energy only mechs such as the Banshee? It is doable.

That said, PGI really needs to balance IS XL and CLan XL 1 to 1. Clan XL is part of a the reason why Clan mechs are so successful in the leaderboards.

They are balanced. Lose 3 crit slots in either engine and you're dead. The moral of this story is that you don't XL in an Assault. I was going to include an "unless it's a support build" in there, but even then I'm meh about it.

I routinely run XL engines in my IS Heavies, Mediums, and Lights, though. And, when doing so, I recognize that I need to be the second or third person through the door, not the first. I don't feel unfairly gimped and I adjust my playstyle to accommodate my fragility. If I can achieve top match score in group queue with an XL Catapult brawler, as a mediocre pilot, then there's nothing wrong with them.

Maybe don't run an XL in something that can't move fast enough to correct a bad movement decision before it evaporates?

Edited by SamsungNinja, 23 August 2016 - 12:56 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

AnTi90d, on 23 August 2016 - 12:42 PM, said:

You picked out 1% of my post to derail the entire thread because you already knew my answer, based upon that 1%.

No, I picked out that 1% of your post originally because I thought you meant that a base variant of a chassis wasn't produced until after 3052, which would've been incorrect, but you meant variants of a chassis. That is really all it started as, I didn't really care about anything else about your post until after you answered.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 August 2016 - 12:54 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 August 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

The F still isn't as good, the lower alpha and shorter range still means it has to put itself in even more dangerous situations than a IIC just to do as much damage. If the F at least had the same range, it would be a different story, but it doesn't.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one, because the way I see it the range argument has become null when everybody else out-ranges you with instant damage weapons, now, leaving your speed and the relative ease of moving unseen as the most potent weapons. The IIC gets heat-capped and becomes a liability if the fight gets thick, the F does not.

Quote

If a mech suffers from poor geometry, chances are good that it will need quirks to begin with regardless of what engine you mount on it.

Correct, though I was never saying we wouldn't still need quirks to some extent. It is just that the quirks would no longer be trying to make crap gear good, only crap mechs.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

SamsungNinja, on 23 August 2016 - 12:52 PM, said:

The moral of this story is that you don't XL in an certain Assaults.

FTFY, there are quite a few assaults that are better with XLs.

[SamsungNinja]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 August 2016 - 01:10 PM, said:

FTFY, there are quite a few assaults that are better with XLs.

I know that, but OP is talking about 100 tonners. I thought I carved out enough room by clarifying support roles and 'mechs fast enough to gtfo if caught in a bad spot.

But, yeah, I agree. The KGC just isn't one of those.^

[Tarl Cabot]

AnTi90d, on 23 August 2016 - 11:16 AM, said:

To blow an engine and disable a mech, you have to destroy 3 of its critical slots.

Clan XLs have two crit slots in each ST, so they survive the armor and structure loss of a ST.. but will still die if both ST are gone. (No clan zombies.)

LFE (light fusion engine) behaves the same as Clan XL engines, with two crit slots in each ST. They weigh more, though, so they aren't 100% on par with them.

IS XLs have three crit slots in each ST. When their ST armor is gone, destroying their ST structure destroys the three engine critical slots contained within = boom to the mech.

I would absolutely love LFEs to be put into the game. We already have out-of-timeline variants and out of timeline chassis (incoming) so, PGI could make a whole lot of people happy by slowly introducing new tech.. and LFEs don't even require balancing (aside from possibly reducing some IS ST structure buffs.)

http://www.sarna.net..._Engine_-_Light

Hell, even if they cost 2x an XL engine, I'd still be thrilled to have them in the game.

..while we're on the subject.. XXL engines would also be cool to have.. even if only a few light mechs and suicidal heavies made use of them.. (they have six critical slots per ST.)

http://www.sarna.net...on_Engine_-_XXL

That is with the boardgame. In MWO there are no actual engine crits, so if you get one crit on a cXL in the RT/CT/LT that Clan mech is still not disabled.

isXL and cXL should function in a similar manner to be disabled, the loss of CT or both ST. The difference would be the isXL would have a greater movement/heat penalty and it still takes up 2 additional crit slots, so definitely not able to put an AC20 there, nor 2x AC10s or 2x UAC5 or 2x LBX10.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 23 August 2016 - 03:35 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Alistair Winter, on 23 August 2016 - 12:24 PM, said:

IS and Clan mechs should be different. I'm all for buffing IS engines, but at least do it in a different way than Clan engines.

Clan mechs shouldn't be IS mechs with Clan skins and vice versa. Make the two factions play differently, make a Timber Wolf a different experience from the Marauder or whatever.

Like i said, 4 critical slots to destroy, than 3. This will still consume 3 critical slots per torso for XL-engines, which is standard IS disadvantage, but now they will survive with one torso.

TKSax, on 23 August 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

Who is everone, it really does not matter what you or I think it matters what PGI Thinks, and XL engines have been like this sine the game was introduced, and they have declined to change in 4 years.

Well, obviously anyone besides you, so far you're only speaking for yourself, and you want things to happen as you want. Admittedly, i want otherwise, and this argument is just about conflicting interest. Of course the difference is that i never insisted that it is unfair, rather i asked first, but you admitted that it is still fair to do so.

So what if declined to change it in 4 years? Does the word of PGI suddenly makes it fair? Don't they update the game to address issues? Hell, they're doing the Energy Draw right now, further developing the heat system.

4 years ago is in the past. Leave it there, and move on.

TKSax, on 23 August 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

Correct, if IS is Hard mode, should he have not walked all over me in is Clan Mech? The rest of the matches don't matter since I was showing my Hard mode IS XL mech vs Clan Mech and won. However, I was in OrionIIC the second match which is of course a clan mech. The last match deviated from my usual XL Dual gauss because it was 1v1 Match, and I knew he would be shooting for my side torso. Solo Que, XL Warhammer 6R with Dual Gauss 4 ML laser all day every day.

What, haven't you played hard-mode on other games before? Of course it's still playable, it takes more skills to do so however. But what we are tackling right now, is that it is NEEDLESSLY hard, NEEDLESSLY disadvantaged. Other than for the sake of "flavor"

TKSax, on 23 August 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

As far as King Crab, you can't balance the whole game around a King Crab, so changing XL engines just so King crabs can run them safer is not the best reason. Especially when the Majority of Clan Mechs have not choice but to run an XL Engine. The King Crab is a sub-par assault mech in the game it could use some help, probably some structure quirks.

I never said to balance it around the king-crab, i just said to balance it. So what if clan uses XL-Engine? I run a Timber Main, my arms get destroyed with my left or right-torso destroyed. Not being killed with two torso's aren't really that much to go on when you're practically neutered.

Yes, KC needs help, but with assaults generally have larger hitboxes paired with slow mobility, this amounts to unprecedented vulnerability. They don't need that additional vulnerability. Perhaps we can just make assaults, or even heavies less vulnerable on XL, but Meds and Lights are.

I would suggest LFE -- but that would completely alter their available critical slots since the LFE just have two slots on each torso, and i would assume to be much harder to rebalance. I would suggest that it would take 4 destroyed critical slots than 3, Clans won't be affected, but IS would. At least it could only affect heavies and assaults, but lights and meds still die after 3 destroyed critical slots.

TKSax, on 23 August 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

Your not everyone either what people like me and others who are ok with as is? But really as I said above what you and I think means nothing, PGI has been pretty clear that they have no intention to change how XL Engines work in MWO.

Yeah, i never claimed that i speak for everyone. Rather i am pointing out that your "flavor" is not exactly appreciated by all MWO players.

Ooh, they're not going to change it -- suddenly it has become more fair.

TKSax, on 23 August 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

You can Run an XL in a King Crab Successfully, Sader does it, I have done it, it takes good awareness and positioning as well as smart Torso twisting but it can be done.

Sure, but that's not really the issue. Of course people can play disadvantaged mechs, yet win via skill. But the point is that XL-Engine is needlessly disadvantaged, just for the sake of "Flavor"

Edited by The6thMessenger, 23 August 2016 - 03:46 PM.

[Hades Trooper]

The6thMessenger, on 23 August 2016 - 06:14 AM, said:

So far, my experience with XL-Engine for my King Crab is quite debilitating, that one torso and then my mech is dead immediately.

I suppose that the XL-Engine isn't really for front-line build? Although my other mechs are Clan, which have XL-engines but would survive one-torso destroyed, whereas IS wouldn't. Simply they are too vulnerable when equipped with XL-Engine. In larger mechs, like assaults, they have large hitboxes compared to smaller mechs, making them the least advisable mechs to be equipped with XL engines.

But does anybody even use STD-360 engines? Those weigh so much.

I think it would be fair that it would take 4 destroyed critical engine slots than 3 to down a mech. That way it would be the same for the Clan by destroying both torso, just as the IS, without altering the size of the XL critical slots on the torso.

[Redacted] learn to drive your mech and it's not a problem but hey instead just [Redacted] complain till PGI grinds the clans completely into the dirt [Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 25 August 2016 - 01:44 AM.
unconstructive

[The6thMessenger]

Hades Trooper, on 23 August 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

[Redacted] learn to drive your mech and it's not a problem but hey instead just [Redacted] complain till PGI grinds the clans completely into the dirt [Redacted]

You know that you're not the only one playing right? There are other players who agreed, and disagreed with me. Simply saying "gitgud" does not address the issue, when there are others that see it other than me being a noob.

Edited by draiocht, 25 August 2016 - 01:46 AM.
Quote Clean-Up

[El Bandito]

SamsungNinja, on 23 August 2016 - 12:52 PM, said:

They are balanced. Lose 3 crit slots in either engine and you're dead. The moral of this story is that you don't XL in an Assault. I was going to include an "unless it's a support build" in there, but even then I'm meh about it.

I routinely run XL engines in my IS Heavies, Mediums, and Lights, though. And, when doing so, I recognize that I need to be the second or third person through the door, not the first. I don't feel unfairly gimped and I adjust my playstyle to accommodate my fragility. If I can achieve top match score in group queue with an XL Catapult brawler, as a mediocre pilot, then there's nothing wrong with them.

Maybe don't run an XL in something that can't move fast enough to correct a bad movement decision before it evaporates?

1. They are not balanced. Losing 3 crit slot does not work in MWO. Clan mechs must lose both STs in order to die with CXL, 3 crit slots be damned.

2. Catapult is actually very XL friendly. Try to run XL engine in a brawler Archer instead with same speed, and see how well you do.