47 replies to this topic

[cazidin]

Greetings MechWarriors. Today I have a few simples questions. First. How would balance change if IS XL engines survived Side Torso loss? Second. What would you do to make Standard Engines worth the tonnage? Personally, I'd give them agility quirks. They won't be faster, but you'll have better torso twisting and accel/deceleration. Third. Would Michael Bay be a good Director for Battletech 2019?

[Pariah Devalis]

Give mechs with standard engine, regardless of tech, a sort of integrated structure quirk. An additional 10% to internal structure across all three torsos should be sufficient. A heavy engine that is chosen for durability at the expense of free weight and speed needs to pay off in all the durability it can generate.

IS XL? Death might be a tad excessive, but the penalties incurred by losing a side torso should be worse than those suffered by Clan mechs under a loss. Say, a 35% movement penalty in addition to the base 50% reduction to in-engine DHS?

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 05 January 2017 - 05:05 PM.

[LordNothing]

give is an option to run a couple of the st engine slots in the ct. this gives the engine clan like behavior. but costs you any ct hardpoints you might have.

extra armor equipment, let players install extra armor in their sts to keep the engine alive longer.

make std engines harder to crit and bring back the zombie.

Edited by LordNothing, 05 January 2017 - 05:08 PM.

[Bud Crue]

1) Hardly at all. Especially if IS also lost ST structure as a result of gaining the new and improved engine.
2) Std engines get 25% more armor in side torsos and center torso, front and rear for both IS and Clan.
3) I'd rather eat a PPC bolt than see a Michael Bay movie (though I admit I still have a soft spot for Armageddon...its just so wonderfully cheesy. For my money I would go with Neill Bloomkamp or Pete Travis or someone else capable of the seemingly impossible task of instilling a little character in mostly inanimate objects).

[NighthawK1337]

No, Michael Bay would not be a good director to a Battletech film. Based on his previous Transformer films, all he will do is make Bayhem for every scene and hope it rakes in moolah. For Battletech fans it means that the plot will have to take a backseat and the priority will be to put as much action in as possible, forgetting the minor nuances and the dynamics of the factions fighting at the Inner Sphere. Economy-wise, people also might see the BT movie as a rehash of Transformers if it came from the same director so it might get less revenue and make it even harder to get a sequel if it flops. Given that studios like sequels and the large amount of source materials to be adapted, BT Universe needs a good Pilot movie that rakes in lots of cash. JJ Abrams hasn't made a robot themed movie yet so maybe he's the better choice given his career history, I think he'll give the source material a proper amount of respect.

[Y E O N N E]

Pariah Devalis, on 05 January 2017 - 05:04 PM, said:

IS XL? Death might be a tad excessive, but the penalties incurred by losing a side torso should be worse than those suffered by Clan mechs under a loss. Say, a 35% movement penalty in addition to the base 50% reduction to in-engine DHS?

That would not be balanced, though. And the issue is TTK, not strictly death on ST-loss.

[Bandilly]

I was watching one of the newer TMNT movies and thought to myself "Wow, this is terrible, no plot, just random back to back action sequences." Once I saw the credits I realized why it was so terribad. Michael Bay does not a good movie make.

[Tarl Cabot]

Pariah Devalis, on 05 January 2017 - 05:04 PM, said:

Give mechs with standard engine, regardless of tech, a sort of integrated structure quirk. An additional 10% to internal structure across all three torsos should be sufficient. A heavy engine that is chosen for durability at the expense of free weight and speed needs to pay off in all the durability it can generate.

IS XL? Death might be a tad excessive, but the penalties incurred by losing a side torso should be worse than those suffered by Clan mechs under a loss. Say, a 35% movement penalty in addition to the base 50% reduction to in-engine DHS?

The engine critical hits were against the engine overall shielding allowing excess heat to be released into the mech's interior. It was not about actually destroying actual heatsinks, or said heatsinks would have been taken away from the overall count.

The 20% heat/movement penalty for cXL is based on both the additional heat generated for each engine hit and how that would be represented if there was an actual heatscale with negative modifiers. Your penalties are actually outrageous but it really does not matter because of Russ and Paul, enough said.

[Ryokens leap]

No, Michael Bay shouldn't be allowed to direct ever again. Battletech should never be a movie but a cable tv series with a decent budget and high end production.

[Andi Nagasia]

as ive said in another Topic,

Andi Nagasia, on 14 December 2016 - 01:42 PM, said:

Personally ive always thought of going half way on it,

1) Solution to Balance? make IS-XL like C-XL, no Death on ST loss,
2) but what about STD Engines? give them CT Structure Equal to 1/10 their Rating(ie 300STD = +30CT Structure)
3) but what about LFE Engines? give them CT Structure Equal to 1/20 their Rating(ie 300STD = +15CT Structure)

we know they can Mod Stats with Equipment because thats what Clan TCs do,

if people still feel both should be the same but Different,

Andi Nagasia, on 03 January 2017 - 06:15 PM, said:

on Clan XL ST loss, -20%Speed(10x2Crits) and -20%HeatEfficacy(10x2Crits)(Clan gets hotter)
on IS XL ST loss, -24%Speed(8x3Crits) and -24%Accel/Decell(8x3Crits)(Is gets more Sluggish)
they now work the same but in use behave very Differently on ST loss,
(lore wise we can say this is because how they are made Different)

Edit- Spelling

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 05 January 2017 - 06:15 PM.

[cazidin]

Bud Crue, on 05 January 2017 - 05:13 PM, said:

1) Hardly at all. Especially if IS also lost ST structure as a result of gaining the new and improved engine.
2) Std engines get 25% more armor in side torsos and center torso, front and rear for both IS and Clan.
3) I'd rather eat a PPC bolt than see a Michael Bay movie (though I admit I still have a soft spot for Armageddon...its just so wonderfully cheesy. For my money I would go with Neill Bloomkamp or Pete Travis or someone else capable of the seemingly impossible task of instilling a little character in mostly inanimate objects).

1.IS would probably keep some of their structure quirks, because their XL engines are still slightly worse and their equipment generally heavier.
2.No! That is NOT a good way to get people to use Standard Engines! Most often you'll be stuck with a smaller standard engine due to its weight. Compensating with extra agility, but not speed, not only adds depth but will keep them in play. Faster torso twisting alone will help you survive.
3.What about 2 PPC bolts and a Gauss Rifle to the nether regions?

Andi Nagasia, on 05 January 2017 - 06:12 PM, said:

as ive said in another Topic,


if people still feel both should be the same but Different,

Edit- Spelling

No. See 2.

And no. See 1.

[Master Pain]

michael bay is the worst movie director ever. i hate everything he has ever made.

[Bud Crue]

cazidin, on 05 January 2017 - 07:17 PM, said:

1.IS would probably keep some of their structure quirks, because their XL engines are still slightly worse and their equipment generally heavier.
2.No! That is NOT a good way to get people to use Standard Engines! Most often you'll be stuck with a smaller standard engine due to its weight. Compensating with extra agility, but not speed, not only adds depth but will keep them in play. Faster torso twisting alone will help you survive.
3.What about 2 PPC bolts and a Gauss Rifle to the nether regions?

2) Hooey. Standard engines (IMHO) are all about durability at the expense of increased weight. Fine. Make that durability a real thing. Imagine an Atlas that doesn't lose its ST torso in 2 alphaa from even some light mechs. That is what a standard engine should be about. Toughness.

3) Whatever it takes to keep my old man eyes from his crap. I swear to god I never had migraines until I saw the first Transformers movie.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Surviving by XL is good, -use cover-Twisting ,

Michael Bay ...running Blondes in High heels ,Destroyed Citys,Melee Fights ...stupid Stories
JJ Abrams...Destroyed Planets,Super-Super-Superweapons,Meleefights with the Badass...Badass before Strongest enemy ...in meleefight weaker as a Little Girl, reboot of Stories

[Gentleman Reaper]

I still don't want to see isXLs survive a torso loss, giving it enough ST structure and maybe mobility bonuses would be enough to balance it. Introduce LFEs if you want a heavier, but tougher, Clan XL. Give the STD big structure quirks to balance it to the XLs, especially if we ever get STD running Omnis like the Strider and the Kingfisher.

[El Bandito]

Gentleman Reaper, on 05 January 2017 - 07:40 PM, said:

I still don't want to see isXLs survive a torso loss, giving it enough ST structure and maybe mobility bonuses would be enough to balance it. Introduce LFEs if you want a heavier, but tougher, Clan XL.

LFE is not tougher than CXL, BTW. It is just heavier, still straight up inferior.

[Gentleman Reaper]

El Bandito, on 05 January 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

LFE is not tougher than CXL, BTW. It is just heavier, still straight up inferior.

I meant from a balance stand-point, in MWO, the LFE would need to make up for the extra weight with more durability than the cXL.

[Andi Nagasia]

cazidin, on 05 January 2017 - 07:17 PM, said:

1.IS would probably keep some of their structure quirks, because their XL engines are still slightly worse and their equipment generally heavier.
2.No! That is NOT a good way to get people to use Standard Engines! Most often you'll be stuck with a smaller standard engine due to its weight. Compensating with extra agility, but not speed, not only adds depth but will keep them in play. Faster torso twisting alone will help you survive.
3.What about 2 PPC bolts and a Gauss Rifle to the nether regions?

No. See 2.

And no. See 1.

something needs to happen,
i dont think Twist Speed would work as a buff to STD engines(assuming XL Survivability)
even if a STD 300 had the same Twist as an XL 400 the 400XL still has better Speed Accel/Decell,
unless with that your also Proposing a Nerf to All XL Engines Twist/Accell/Decell speeds?

got some CT Strucuture would give STD use as a Tool to make a mech more of a Tank,
at 10% of its Rating as CT Structure(300STD=+30CT structure) i can see my self and others using STD engines,
at just an Agility Buff i cant, personally you would have to make STD engines stupid Agile or make XLs stupid Slugish,

[Mister Blastman]

Here's an idea... Don't balance the engines. Back when I was a kid, when things were tough, we lifted weights and got tough.




I honestly thing this is all silly. I don't care what accusations or names I might face, but darn it, it is silly. There's nothing wrong with engine balance. It is fine. Yes, I do believe this. Stop calling for balance changes and learn to use mech advantages folks.

If you want real balance changes, fix the root problem... huge hitboxes and convergence.

[razenWing]

NighthawK1337, on 05 January 2017 - 05:25 PM, said:

No, Michael Bay would not be a good director to a Battletech film. Based on his previous Transformer films, all he will do is make Bayhem for every scene and hope it rakes in moolah. For Battletech fans it means that the plot will have to take a backseat and the priority will be to put as much action in as possible, forgetting the minor nuances and the dynamics of the factions fighting at the Inner Sphere. Economy-wise, people also might see the BT movie as a rehash of Transformers if it came from the same director so it might get less revenue and make it even harder to get a sequel if it flops. Given that studios like sequels and the large amount of source materials to be adapted, BT Universe needs a good Pilot movie that rakes in lots of cash. JJ Abrams hasn't made a robot themed movie yet so maybe he's the better choice given his career history, I think he'll give the source material a proper amount of respect.

First thing first, let's be real about the "source" material. No one ever clamor the BTech universe being some sort of great American novels. BTech by and large is just a mesh-up of techs from various other source materials with some filler backstories to give the TT game some substance. It's by no mean "deep" or "full of nuance."

The "intricate" dynamics are B-level fan fictions imagined by someone with no experience in real politics, let alone know how to properly develop a story. But I don't blame the original writers, as the main theme isn't the fake politics, but giant robot combat with few recognizable characters.

Just ask yourself, of all the Mech games, which single player campaign storyline did you enjoy the most? Was it the pseudo revenge Mech 4? The conflicting plots of Mech 2? Or is it the most straight forward, just about one lance's story of survival in Mech 3? In that sense, Michael Bay will definitely do a great job directing BTech movie as long as he sticks to the Mech 3 formula.

Small scale, concentrated elements, and full loads of action. That's pretty much what I envision a Btech movie to be like. (But to be honest, Michael Bay would be a horrible fit. He is more skilled in actions with a lot of blurred effect. Mechs are stompy slow robots. You need a director that can bring out that massive feel. Michael Bay is definitely the wrong action director)

It's like saying Pacific Rim should have more stories and less action. Like, totally wrong direction. And as I recall, Godzilla 2014 went with the minimal action, lots of stories route... guess how that turned out? More people just want to see Godzilla smash buildings. Who gives a damn about Walter White and his clueless son?

Not saying you shouldn't have a story with good characters, but definitely weigh your source material and do an object analysis of how much it really weigh. Cause just because you think it's intricate (it's really not), doesn't mean it is. Most people would find the BTech source stories to be shallow and boring. (and believe me, if it's actually fun, most people would read the books, more people would fanboy over the "source materials", and we wouldn't be stuck with just 1000 players a day)

Cause "source" material stories, you will never compete with Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar, etc. BTech needs to play to its strength, which is the a lot more personable stories of mech pilots, not some BS intergalactic conflicts.