59 replies to this topic

[AppleseeN]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 11:05 AM, said:

How exactly is it a "crappy" quick fix when it does fix the need for agility quirks for some slower than average chassis and helps counter the BESM?

For example the Adder and Kit Fox would no longer need agility quirks to ensure they handle better than the Stormcrow since they are lighter and NEED to handle better to make up for the lack of firepower compared to the Stormcrow.

BESM?
You mean "myomer"? For the Lore it sounds cool, for real battle walker it's a 100 tons of crap cause...
a) You need to repair in field conditions, not lab-conditions.
Simple geometrical mechanics are more powerful than any real or artificial muscles. Need less time to repair and get mech back into battle.
c) It costs a lot more in money and resources to produce. Need an too special learning for pilots which means that amount of pilots would be limited.

Overall: - Too expensive, too hard to maintain, don't have obvious advantage over conventional servo-hydro-electric drive in walking and "hand" gear.

Yes, mech or so called "heavy-exo-suit" is more mobile than tank cause "walkers" can easy travell over heavy rough terrain, more "zombie" than tank, have less crew than tank, have more elevated "targeting sensors" than tank that's allow to engage and detect target from far long range. Etc, etc, etc...

[Quicksilver Aberration]

AppleseeN, on 09 January 2017 - 11:40 AM, said:

BESM?

Big-Engine-Stomp-Meta

[AppleseeN]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 11:42 AM, said:

Big-Engine-Stomp-Meta

If it's a XLVLAR usage Meta, that is an AWKWARD way to do meta. For any-thing which got 2 or more legs and are heavy than 70 tons such thing as: - Can Zombie Ability is CRUCIAL.
For exsample... in some tight area you "suddenly" face an MAL1P on STD fitted with 4xAC5 and you got IS mek that "wear" XL VLAR, your actions if you well know the result?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

AppleseeN, on 09 January 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

Can Zombie Ability is CRUCIAL.

Zombies aren't a real threat and are a relic of days before firepower was impressive.

[1453 R]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

When going the same speed, an Enforcer with a 250XL and a 300XL would be indistinguishable with regards to agility, the leg agility does NOT go down, you are just able to go faster to the point where your unable to turn as well. Stop misconstruing your argument to make it look worse than it is.

At which point you've spent three tons on just about literally nothing, with the exception of two heat sink holes. The 250 guy gets to shoot you with more ammo for less heat from behind thicker plating, or however he ends up spending his three-ton bonus, while your ability to match his maneuverability is dependent on scaling down to his same speed.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

You say that like foot speed is pointless...the ability to reposition faster is not to be underestimated. Either way, it becomes more of a choice than it is now, where speed is too important to pass up.

Which, if we were talking very significant benefits to footspeed, would be an argument. We're not.

Not-even-quite-twelve KPH on a Grasshopper isn't going to get you repositioned any faster in any way that matters more than one time in a thousand. Smaller 'Mechs may end up getting slightly more benefit somewhat more often, but again - you're compromising your ability to fight for improvements to your ability to move. All else being equal, the 250XL Enforcer is going to beat the 300XL Enforcer in a straight fight because the 300XL Enforcer does not bear any advantage worth mentioning once the fight has been joined. He's not fast enough to escape the fight and find better ground if things go wrong, and we've explicitly disallowed him from deriving any benefit to his machine outside of that anemic footspeed boost from his chunkier engine.

If the 250 guy catches him out, the 250 guy wins. Pmuch end of story. Does that sound like a great idea to folks?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

That said, for energy boats you often save quite a bit of tonnage so often if you can find a way to squeeze an extra heat sink in, you are going to upgrade your engine to try and optimize your heat sink count as much as possible.

Which amounts to "I ran out of slots so I'm spending tonnage on my engine because I don't have any other choice". Again, in this world of every-'Mech-has-absolutely-identical-performance-in-its-weight-point, engine upgrades are a measure of absolute last resort because they amount to spending your tonnage on nothing save for momentary positioning advantages.

Does an Ice Ferret, hardlocked into a 360 engine, merit having the exact same completely identical movement profile as a 180-rated Blackjack that gets more than double its firepower? The Ferret is already awful as it is without its "I'm desperate here" quirks, those are going away in a couple of months, and again - Hard. Locked. 360. In a 45-tonner.

Why does the Ferret deserve to be as hapless and ham-handed as a 180 Blackjack?

And before anyone gives me the "but we could adjust movement profiles for 'Mechs like that to make them more agile if we have to!" tomfuggery...EXCUSE ME. THEY DID THAT ALREADY. It's in the game right now, in the form of mobility benefits for larger engines. You're effectively stating "we're going to decouple engine rating from anything important, but in cases where doing this would be Bad we'll just quirk up the 'Mech that needs it instead."

How is that any functionally different than the current system?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

Because outside of the Whale days, it has been dominant since Closed Beta days of the Lunchback and Gaussapult? Do I not need another reason for trying to remove the fact that speed is too important of a factor in the meta? Considering anything that is slow like the Highlanders, Adders, Kit Foxes are considered junk without extensive quirks, yes. Hell even the Stalker is too slow these days (because the turret meta that the Whale brought along is gone).

Speed should bloody well be an important factor in the meta. BESM has not even remotely been uninterruptedly dominant since closed beta days - I distinctly remember a period wherein toaster pastries rained fire from the sky and engines were choked down as much as players could possibly manage in order to strap one more PPC on their 'Mech, specifically because groundspeed wasn't important next to Poppy-ness.

The game was a bloody chore. It was awful and bad, and people are still shuddering in distaste whenever it comes up again, because stationary fights suck. Bigger 'Mechs are already weighing options and making the choices you're claiming to want to promote. Smaller 'Mechs up-engine more than bigger ones because that's kind of the fundamental nature of BattleTech. 'Mechs like the Kit Fox and Adder are mostly just bad outright because there's not enough weight savings in 'Mechs that small to justify their top speeds no matter how much you cut the engine. A good pilot can offset that with a little luck (sort of), but smashing the entire game with "nobody gets to move anymore" to try (and fail) to bolster slowboats is something of an overreaction, ne?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

At which point you've spent three tons on just about literally nothing, with the exception of two heat sink holes.

Faster speed is not "literally nothing".

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

Not-even-quite-twelve KPH on a Grasshopper isn't going to get you repositioned any faster in any way that matters more than one time in a thousand.

Ummm, lolwut? 12kph will get you repositioned faster since even seconds matter in not getting caught out of position or in allowing you breathing time.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

Smaller 'Mechs may end up getting slightly more benefit somewhat more often, but again - you're compromising your ability to fight for improvements to your ability to move.

Given that plenty of mechs run fast and are considered top ends of their chassis, I'm pretty sure compromising your ability to fight isn't that big of a deal these days, and that's a problem.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

All else being equal, the 250XL Enforcer is going to beat the 300XL Enforcer in a straight fight because the 300XL Enforcer does not bear any advantage worth mentioning once the fight has been joined.

Because all fights are straight up
Sorry but you have a serious problem over-simplifying and misconstruing arguments, Mystere is correct in his/her assessment of you.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

Which amounts to "I ran out of slots so I'm spending tonnage on my engine because I don't have any other choice". Again, in this world of every-'Mech-has-absolutely-identical-performance-in-its-weight-point

Except there is a choice, on more efficient weapons for the tonnage, like say upgrading 1-2 ML to an LPL, but guess which is the better way to spend your tonnage if you have the engine cap to support it? The engine.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

Does an Ice Ferret, hardlocked into a 360 engine, merit having the exact same completely identical movement profile as a 180-rated Blackjack that gets more than double its firepower?

The Blackjack that moves half of its speed gets double the firepower? Even were that true, sounds like a decent trade-off don't you think, one can reposition like a light, the other can get caught out of position like an assault and murdered even faster.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

The Ferret is already awful as it is without its "I'm desperate here" quirks

The Ice Ferret isn't that bad right now, it is far from the horrible mech that many still think it is (much like the idiots that think the Summoner isn't strong even without the nipple PPCs).

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

those are going away in a couple of months, and again - Hard. Locked. 360. In a 45-tonner.

• They aren't going anywhere, Russ said there will still be quirks, so its very possible they are backtracking on their original plan.
  
• and again Hard. Locked. 180/210. in a 30/35 tonner. The Ice Ferret is not the only one who has un-optimized engine, the difference is that a light with a smaller engine is much worse than a medium with a larger than it should have engine.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

Why does the Ferret deserve to be as hapless and ham-handed as a 180 Blackjack?

Why do the Adder/Cute Fox deserve to be as ham-handed as a mech 20-25 tons heavier than it?

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

Speed should bloody well be an important factor in the meta.

Seriously, do you have a reading disability or something (seriously, the number of times you misconstrue an argument is getting ridiculous):

Quote

speed is too important of a factor in the meta

Never did I say it SHOULDNT be an important factor, just that it is TOO important.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

BESM has not even remotely been uninterruptedly dominant since closed beta days - I distinctly remember a period wherein toaster pastries rained fire from the sky and engines were choked down as much as players could possibly manage in order to strap one more PPC on their 'Mech, specifically because groundspeed wasn't important next to Poppy-ness.

Yes, and that was before the Victor came about, then guess what assault toaster pastry you saw was? Hint, its the one that was faster despite having less armor.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

Mechs like the Kit Fox and Adder are mostly just bad outright because there's not enough weight savings in 'Mechs that small to justify their top speeds no matter how much you cut the engine.

You realize the inverse is true for Ice Ferrets and Linebackers too right?

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 January 2017 - 12:36 PM.

[1453 R]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Faster speed is not "literally nothing".

Your statement was "the 300XL guy can move exactly the same way the 250XL guy does if he goes the same speed as the 250XL guy". If he does that, then while he's doing that his advantage of a three-tons-bigger engine is nil. He can throttle back up and claim that advantage again, but only at the cost of poorer handling than the 250XL guy.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Ummm, lolwut? 12kph will get you repositioned faster since even seconds matter in not getting caught out of position or in allowing you breathing time.

Fifty points of engine rating amounts to 'bout ~20% faster groundspeed in every 'Mech's case I've checked. This is a bigger absolute investment for a smaller absolute advantage for every five tons up the chain you go. As stated, the Enforcer can get 16 klicks for 50 rating points - roughly a 20% advantage for 3 tons. The Grasshopper can go from 300 to 350 (in one variant's case, anyways) for the same ~20% boost...for six and a half tons. Its 20% boost equates to less absolute gain than the Enforcer.

Those twelve klicks can buy you seconds, but not all that bloody many of them. It might be a swing decider in a fight, the thing that lets you edge around a corner just in time to avoid taking fire...but the six and a half tons of additional gear you get for not taking that engine could also be the difference in taking down an enemy with one blast or leaving him just barely alive enough to retaliate and take your face off, or being able to fire that one last salvo at the end of your +6DHS heat bar without shutting down to finish off a wounded target. It works both ways, and both decisions have their edge cases.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Given that plenty of mechs run fast and are considered top ends of their chassis, I'm pretty sure compromising your ability to fight isn't that big of a deal these days, and that's a problem.

Clan 'Mechs get to do that because of lingering tech imbalance. BESM wasn't nearly as big a deal until the Clans dropped and were able to shoehorn SETM firepower or close to it on a chassis with thirty extra klicks in the tank.

That's an issue, but it's not an issue you solve by robbing every 'Mech in the game of its ability to up-engine and benefit from it.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Because all fights are straight up
Sorry but you have a serious problem over-simplifying and misconstruing arguments, Mystere is correct in his/her assessment of you.

Please, Quicksilver. Mystere doesn't need the encouragement. Obviously actual battles are different, but in an all-other-factors-being-equal balance discussion, a'la this one, my opinion is that raw groundspeed alone is a poor use of tonnage compared to virtually anything else. That's the point being made. The 300XL guy doesn't have a single defensive benefit; he can't twist better, he can't turn better, he can't outmaneuver his foe. He doesn't have a single offensive benefit once a battle begins and his greater footspeed has theoretically done its job. His foe, on the other hand, has the advantage of three extra tons of stuff to fight with.

One of these 'Mechs has an inarguable edge in an actual fight. The other's advantage disappears once combat begins, unless it breaks contact for some reason.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Except there is a choice, on more efficient weapons for the tonnage, like say upgrading 1-2 ML to an LPL, but guess which is the better way to spend your tonnage if you have the engine cap to support it? The engine.

And this change would push the game too far the other direction - upgrading your engine would never be the wise choice over things such as upgrading to LPL, because spending huge tonnage allotments on raw footspeed and heat sink holes, with absolutely no secondary benefits whatsoever, overly favors SETM with masses of heavy weapons, a'la the Days of the Toaster.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

The Blackjack that moves half of its speed gets double the firepower? Even were that true, sounds like a decent trade-off don't you think, one can reposition like a light, the other can get caught out of position like an assault and murdered even faster.

In this theoretical world, the Blackjack would have the same movement profile as an ORION. Yes, that is because the Blackjack is a bad 'Mech, but in the current system it can be made a better one by up-engineing the thing to more appropriate mobility levels for its tonnage.

In the proposed system, there would be no point to up-engineing the Blackjack because it would still maneuver like an Orion and be just as easy to catch out and squish - and because the Blackjack has to maneuver like an Orion, so would the Ice Ferret. For reasons which are inexplicable to all of mankind.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

The Ice Ferret isn't that bad right now, it is far from the horrible mech that many still think it is (much like the idiots that think the Summoner isn't strong even without the nipple PPCs).

Short quirks, the Ferret is inferior in most every way I can figure out to the Viper, which gets nearly identical payload weight, actual jump jets that can jump, arguably better geo (arguably. The arms snap off of both 'Mechs like kindling, but the Viper is noticeably smaller and can sort of shield one arm with its big honkin' nose if it has to), better weapon mounts, and a profusion of hardpoints to play with. The Ice Ferret suffers badly from hardpoint deficiency, if not as badly as things like the Adder. And note: the Viper, which is superior in most every reasonable way to the Ice Ferret, is considered to be inferior in most every reasonable way to the Arctic Cheetah.

And we're trying to make the Ice Ferret maneuver like an Orion...why?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

• They aren't going anywhere, Russ said there will still be quirks, so its very possible they are backtracking on their original plan.
  
• and again Hard. Locked. 180/210. in a 30/35 tonner. The Ice Ferret is not the only one who has un-optimized engine, the difference is that a light with a smaller engine is much worse than a medium with a larger than it should have engine.

I'm going to run under the assumption that Piranha will be flipping the tables on quirks and Doing Weird Junk, because that's their MO. Indications (what few of them we have now) are that post-Skilltree 1.0 quirks will mostly be used to address bad geo, a'la Dragons. The clear intent was to scrub quirks as much as possible and replace them with Choose Your Own Quirkventure 'Mech trees. So yes, you can get back the mobility you're a couple months away from losing on the Ferret...but only by throwing every single skill node you have into Mobility and praying it's enough, which further imbalances the whole "I pay everything I have for a minor mobility advantage that is not even remotely comparable to your sheer stupefying SETM firepower" issue.

If I'm proven wrong? Then hey, sweet. Until then, it makes more sense to me to assume that some structure/armor might remain but everything else is gone.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Why do the Adder/Cute Fox deserve to be as ham-handed as a mech 20-25 tons heavier than it?

They don't. Which is exactly the thing quirks are supposed to be used to shore up, as I understand the existing system. Nobody likes it much, but flipping the tables and requiring scads of mobility quirks on Ice Ferrets and Linebackers and Executioners and everything else with a too-big engine that would handle like a pregnant moose in a Decoupled Engines game doesn't really strike me as being better. One way or another, something is going to require a fix. One way encourages mobile games with lots of options and opportunity for movement. One way pushes SETM. I'm going to cast my vote for BESM over SETM.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Seriously, do you have a reading disability or something:

Nah. But my brother does. Took them until halfway through fifth grade to so much as recognize he had it because he was that aces at quickly memorizing what everyone else was reading aloud and just spitting it back out. Invented his own ways to get by even with a pretty heavy case of dyslexia. Hell of a guy, really. Wish he'd call more often. Suppose the Army does that, though.

Anyways.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Never did I say it SHOULDNT be an important factor, just that it is TOO important.

And I figure we're a lot closer to that knife-edge now than people really think. Again, the bigger your 'Mech is the worse an idea it is to upengine it a bunch. If the Clans didn't exist, I'd imagine that SETM would likely be the dominant playstyle in the game right now because Inner Sphere machines pay a lot more in terms of opportunity cost for their up-engine fits than the Clans do. Clan lighter-weight tech means less of an opportunity cost hit for ending up with a giant engine - and even then, I've seen plenty of folks arguing over whether the Night Gyr obsoletes the Timber Wolf. General consensus seems to be that the Gyr is just too clumsy to quite manage it, but it's a close thing.

And of course we all know what everyone says about machines like the Gargoyle and the Executioner. I don't think I've seen a single serious Kodiak fit that retains the original 400XL. A small handful of 390XL, a number of 375XL, and a significant pile of 350XL, with the latter seeming to be the norm and the 375 mark being used for specific fits or pilots.

Fix tech balance more and things might settle out better. BESM is only as dominant as it is because the Clans are better at doing it than the Sphere is and inter-tech balance is still wonky in too many cases.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

Yes, and that was before the Victor came about, then guess what assault toaster pastry you saw was? Hint, its the one that was faster despite having less armor.

I distinctly recall seeing both, with the Highlander considered a Fattest of Bros option (prior to Ghost Heat, anyways) to the Victor's leaner design. Certain folks preferred one or the other, and certain folks liked to mix the two. Triple-PPC Highlanders only fell off completely in favor of Dragon Slayers after Ghost Heat went in and choked off massed PPC fire. If Ghost Heat ever dies in the fires of Gehenna the way it damn well ought to, that alone would be a pretty hefty knock against BESM.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

You realize the inverse is true for Ice Ferrets and Linebackers too right?

Oh, on the contrary! Assuming I'm understanding your phrasing correctly, anyways. The same could be said to be true of 'Mechs like the Ice Ferret and the Linebacker, if for a mirrored reason. The Linebacker, especially, is the most egregious case of overmotoring a 'Mech in the whole of MWO, stealing that title from the poor unfortunate Gargoyle, and the design suffers for it. There's just not enough room in a 65-ton 'Mech for a 390XL, and the Linebacker's overall performance seems to bear that out. Certainly Piranha threw the design a bone with some exceptionally high-mounted energy hardpoints, trying to give it a niche role as a somewhat higher-mobility hill poker, and that niche does exist. But the Summoner does it better even with its lack of Endo. 97kph is just not enough of an edge over 81 kph, not when you're paying eight frickin' tons for that edge.

As for the Ferret? Step it down to a 315XL and it'd still get light 'Mech-ish speed, but would gain five and a half tons of payload space. At that point it'd be roughly comparable to an Adder or Kit Fox for payload and would've been quite a nice little raider. 113 works almost as well as 129 on a 'Mech with enough payload weight to rig up a couple of PPCs or LPLs, or run five cMPL instead of cERML and be a great swordfighter. But 360 was more engine than the 'Mech can really tolerate and it suffers quite a bit for it.

In both cases, pretty much the only reason either 'Mech is still remotely usable is that their vastly oversized engines afford them a great deal of overall mobility that this "fix" would completely rip out of them. Linebackers would have the same crappy movement as Thunderbolts, and Ice Ferrets would have to be slaved to the same crappy movement as BLACKJACKS. You'd have to fix that by doing what you claim this "fix" would eliminate the need to do - slather on piles and piles of quirks to compensate for the fact that a given 'Mech is spending assloads of tonnage on an engine that no longer does it anymuch good.

Right now, drastically undermotored 'Mechs like the Adder or Cute Fox get tons of extra mobility to help them out. In the given system, overmotored 'Mechs would need the same attention, instead. Where's the benefit?

Edited by 1453 R, 09 January 2017 - 01:44 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

Your statement was "the 300XL guy can move exactly the same way the 250XL guy does if he goes the same speed as the 250XL guy". If he does that, then while he's doing that his advantage of a three-tons-bigger engine is nil. He can throttle back up and claim that advantage again, but only at the cost of poorer handling than the 250XL guy.

The point was that you aren't getting WORSE leg mobility, it had nothing to do with the scenario and everything to do with how you were presenting your argument. They have the same leg mobility, one just has the ability to move faster with that same mobility. Yes, he will turn on a wider arc because he is moving faster, why is that so horrible again? Agility isn't the only reason people bump engines, it just ensures that there is no real drawback to bumping up your engine and thus a no-brainer to run the largest possible engine with a reasonable payload.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

Please, Quicksilver. Mystere doesn't need the encouragement.

It's true though, over our past discussions you have on multiple occasions made leaps and exaggerations that were no where near the original argument.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

One of these 'Mechs has an inarguable edge in an actual fight. The other's advantage disappears once combat begins, unless it breaks contact for some reason.

This is assuming the main fight always occur where LOS is rarely broken, not everyone tries to push or brawl (and even then that LOS can be broken).

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

And this change would push the game too far the other direction - upgrading your engine would never be the wise choice over things such as upgrading to LPL, because spending huge tonnage allotments on raw footspeed and heat sink holes, with absolutely no secondary benefits whatsoever, overly favors SETM with masses of heavy weapons, a'la the Days of the Toaster.

The days of the Highlander were pre-ghost heat, until we remove ghost heat I don't see us going back to the very short termed SETM (which only lasted for the release of the Highlander to the introduction of ghost heat roughly).

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

In this theoretical world, the Blackjack would have the same movement profile as an ORION. Yes, that is because the Blackjack is a bad 'Mech, but in the current system it can be made a better one by up-engineing the thing to more appropriate mobility levels for its tonnage.

And we're trying to make the Ice Ferret maneuver like an Orion...why?

This is one of those strawmen again, where did I ever say that would be the case?

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

In the proposed system, there would be no point to up-engineing the Blackjack because it would still maneuver like an Orion and be just as easy to catch out and squish

Ignoring your ridiculous line of logic that follows this, there would be a point to upping the engine on the Blackjack just like there would be on an Assault, and it involves making it as hard as possible to get caught out especially given that you gain little to no tonnage for not upping your engine. The gains in free tonnage at that low of engine are almost non-existent, which is partially what makes it worth upping the engine. Then of course there are the poor dubs.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

Short quirks, the Ferret is inferior in most every way I can figure out to the Viper, which gets nearly identical payload weight, actual jump jets that can jump, arguably better geo (arguably. The arms snap off of both 'Mechs like kindling, but the Viper is noticeably smaller and can sort of shield one arm with its big honkin' nose if it has to), better weapon mounts, and a profusion of hardpoints to play with. The Ice Ferret suffers badly from hardpoint deficiency, if not as badly as things like the Adder. And note: the Viper, which is superior in most every reasonable way to the Ice Ferret, is considered to be inferior in most every reasonable way to the Arctic Cheetah.

Without quirks, you are correct the Viper does place better than the Ice Ferret since 8/12 is more optimal for 35/40 tonners than it is for a 45 tonner. It also suffers much like the Pixie since most of its firepower is in its arms, but it really doesn't have that horrible of a deficiency in hardpoints. It is one short of having a suitable payload (6 cSPLs) and does just fine with 5 cERML which was the meta build before it got quirks. Those are separate issues though, those aren't because it is overengined, those are because the design of it is subpar. That is an important distinction to recognize. It doesn't really need much to make good use of its engine, hell it could use different quirks instead of agility to make up for the oversized engine (like heat gen quirks, if PGI could be trusted with quirks).

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

Nobody likes it much, but flipping the tables and requiring scads of mobility quirks on Ice Ferrets and Linebackers and Executioners and everything else with a too-big engine that would handle like a pregnant moose in a Decoupled Engines game doesn't really strike me as being better.

You are assuming that there are more over-engined omnis than there are mechs stuck with low engine caps or small engines period. Also, to be fair, the Executioner doesn't really have an overly large engine since the Wubshee ran 375-400 XLs.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

And I figure we're a lot closer to that knife-edge now than people really think. Again, the bigger your 'Mech is the worse an idea it is to upengine it a bunch.

Actually this is false as well, bigger mechs actually have more free tonnage to play with and do this as evidenced by the massive firepower of the Kodiak and Battlemaster while still retaining upwards of 350 XLs.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

I've seen plenty of folks arguing over whether the Night Gyr obsoletes the Timber Wolf. General consensus seems to be that the Gyr is just too clumsy to quite manage it, but it's a close thing.

This should tell you a lot given that the Timby has bad mounts and still manages to be better, all because of its speed and agility.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

And of course we all know what everyone says about machines like the Gargoyle and the Executioner. I don't think I've seen a single serious Kodiak fit that retains the original 400XL.

Spirit Bear uses a 400.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

A small handful of 390XL, a number of 375XL, and a significant pile of 350XL, with the latter seeming to be the norm and the 375 mark being used for specific fits or pilots.

350 is on the slow end of most builds, I'm sure a lot of worse off builds use a 350 but the 375 is the goto engine for most builds.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

Clan 'Mechs get to do that because of lingering tech imbalance. BESM wasn't nearly as big a deal until the Clans dropped and were able to shoehorn SETM firepower or close to it on a chassis with thirty extra klicks in the tank.

Fix tech balance more and things might settle out better. BESM is only as dominant as it is because the Clans are better at doing it than the Sphere is and inter-tech balance is still wonky in too many cases.

Tech balance won't change the dominance of it, it will just allow the IS to keep up.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

I distinctly recall seeing both, with the Highlander considered a Fattest of Bros option (prior to Ghost Heat, anyways) to the Victor's leaner design. Certain folks preferred one or the other, and certain folks liked to mix the two. Triple-PPC Highlanders only fell off completely in favor of Dragon Slayers after Ghost Heat went in and choked off massed PPC fire.

Ghost heat helped, sure, but so did the speed differential which left the Highlander in the dust after people figured out the Victor which is why prior to the Clans it was Victors for days and not Victors/Highlanders for days.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

Oh, on the contrary! Assuming I'm understanding your phrasing correctly, anyways. The same could be said to be true of 'Mechs like the Ice Ferret and the Linebacker, if for a mirrored reason.

You are understanding me correctly.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

Right now, drastically undermotored 'Mechs like the Adder or Cute Fox get tons of extra mobility to help them out.

Only through quirks which we know are inconsistently given out. I would much rather a couple of mechs need quirks then a lot of mechs (because there are more with low engine caps than there are over-engined omnis).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 January 2017 - 02:22 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Only through quirks which we know are inconsistently given out. I would much rather a couple of mechs need quirks then a lot of mechs (because there are more with low engine caps than there are over-engined omnis).

Well, what makes you think that the low-engine capped mechs would be assigned agility any more consistently then how quirks are done now? (In the event that agility and engine rating are decoupled, that is.)

[Deathlike]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 January 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

Well, what makes you think that the low-engine capped mechs would be assigned agility any more consistently then how quirks are done now? (In the event that agility and engine rating are decoupled, that is.)

We don't.

We're still at the mercy of the Dartboard of Balance.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 January 2017 - 02:29 PM, said:

Well, what makes you think that the low-engine capped mechs would be assigned agility any more consistently then how quirks are done now? (In the event that agility and engine rating are decoupled, that is.)

Depends on how they are basing agility, ideally they would base it strictly off of tonnage so that it is at least consistent across the board. That said, Paul could easily throw a wrench in there and make it based off of something that makes less sense, the point is that there still needs to be some sort of system to buff the mechs with lower than average engines and thus agility. To me it makes more sense to have a systematic way to buff these mechs since they are more numerous than mechs that are over-engined.

[Gas Guzzler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

Depends on how they are basing agility, ideally they would base it strictly off of tonnage so that it is at least consistent across the board. That said, Paul could easily throw a wrench in there and make it based off of something that makes less sense, the point is that there still needs to be some sort of system to buff the mechs with lower than average engines and thus agility. To me it makes more sense to have a systematic way to buff these mechs since they are more numerous than mechs that are over-engined.

But then, don't you think a mech like the Highlander deserves to have more agility than a Mauler because of the lack of firepower? The have the same engine cap but the Maulers hardpoints allow it to be much more devastating, despite the lack of HoverJets.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 09 January 2017 - 03:15 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 January 2017 - 03:14 PM, said:

But then, don't you think a mech like the Highlander deserves to have more agility than a Mauler because of the lack of firepower? The have the same engine cap but the Maulers hardpoints allow it to be much more devastating, despite the lack of HoverJets.

Those are two separate issues, the Highlander should get something in return for having lesser ability to utilize its firepower but also for its lower than average engine cap (which is where untying agility from speed comes into play). The increased agility will help slower mechs like the Mauler and the Whale compete with the Kodiak while keeping the difference between the Kodiak and mechs like the Wubmaster on par since both should probably have less agility than they enjoy currently.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 January 2017 - 03:26 PM.

[Dino Might]

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 10:50 AM, said:

The engine in a 'Mech isn't comparable to the engine in a car. As Appleseen noted, you shouldn't even really be calling it an 'engine'; it's a powerplant, not a mechanical driver. Realistically, engine swaps shouldn't be possible without what amounts to a ground-up redesign of the machine as replacing the power core invalidates all the engineering put into the rest of the machine.

However, this is MWO the video game, not reality. We don't have powerplants, power cores, or generators, we have engines, and in MWO/the BattleTech lore MWO is drawn from, engines principally affect your 'Mech's movement. TT doesn't have mobility so engines don't affect it there, but MWO very much does have mobility. Decoupling engine from movement makes no sense in a BattleTech perspective - should the game decouple speed from engine rating as well? An Orion is supposed to be a 4/6 'Mech - should it be a 4/6 equivalent (64kph) 'Mech regardless of whatever engine you put into it?

Of course not - that makes no sense. The tabletop game explicitly makes a point of "Biggah Engine = Moar Movement". An Orion rejiggered to run on a 375 instead of a 300 would be a 5/8 'Mech, same as the Timber Wolf. Conversely, an Orion rejiggered to run on a 225 instead would be a 3/5 barge, moving at the same pace as stock Atlases or Whales. Those values are the entirety of a 'Mech's movement profile in TT, and it is strictly and entirely dictated by the engine.

So why should we remove the ability of the engine, in MWO, to influence a 'Mech's movement profile? Simply because MWO has more factors in said profile than a TT 'Mech, you wish to enormously devalue engines/engine upgrades as a sop to the STD folks, or a crappy quick-fix to the oft-conceived notion that 'Mechs are too agile for their own good?

Can we, like...not do that, instead?

If you want to get all TT on this, then realize that engine does not affect torso twist at all. Mechs get a one hex side torso twist in the reaction phase - all mechs, regardless of engine or tonnage.

So....many reasons (both more realistic and more lore friendly) to decouple engine size and torso twist speed.

Now I await for you to come back and tell me that all mechs should therefore have the same torso yaw range and rate. To that I say, give up on verbatim lore rules in this FPS. It's silly to use that type of all or nothing solution here.

[Dino Might]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

Depends on how they are basing agility, ideally they would base it strictly off of tonnage so that it is at least consistent across the board. That said, Paul could easily throw a wrench in there and make it based off of something that makes less sense, the point is that there still needs to be some sort of system to buff the mechs with lower than average engines and thus agility. To me it makes more sense to have a systematic way to buff these mechs since they are more numerous than mechs that are over-engined.

I'd prefer that overall agility is nerfed. Tired of heavy ballerinas never needing to think a step ahead and being able to 180 in a flash. Decouple engine size from torso yaw rate and make it depend on tonnage. Use a 50t mech as your baseline and adjust from there.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Dino Might, on 09 January 2017 - 03:37 PM, said:

I'd prefer that overall agility is nerfed. Tired of heavy ballerinas never needing to think a step ahead and being able to 180 in a flash. Decouple engine size from torso yaw rate and make it depend on tonnage. Use a 50t mech as your baseline and adjust from there.

Yeah, I realized later that letting optimal XL engines would be a bit high given that the Summoner and Executioner would be spot on given that. I'd probably say about 80% of the agility they have at those levels then. Which means a 50 tonner would behave like they do currently do with around a 280 XL and a 70 tonner would behave like they do with a 280 XL as well (roughly). So basically equivalent to a HBK-IIC with a 275 and a Tempest with a 280.

Though basing it off of optimal engines doesn't help lights either as the optimal for a 35 tonner would be around 225-240 and would put a Locust at 160 rated engine levels so it may have to be more linear since they don't need less agility. I guess it really depends on how hard the heavier mechs are nerfed.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 January 2017 - 03:45 PM.

[1453 R]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

The point was that you aren't getting WORSE leg mobility, it had nothing to do with the scenario and everything to do with how you were presenting your argument. They have the same leg mobility, one just has the ability to move faster with that same mobility. Yes, he will turn on a wider arc because he is moving faster, why is that so horrible again? Agility isn't the only reason people bump engines, it just ensures that there is no real drawback to bumping up your engine and thus a no-brainer to run the largest possible engine with a reasonable payload.

Improving your movement profile should be an alluring choice. I would disagree that it's a no-brainer in a lot of circumstances, though. After all, if getting the biggest B possible for your BESM design was a constant no-brainer, then neither Kodiaks nor Marauder IICs would ever drop below their 400-point caps.

They do, though. A lot. Because past a certain point the tonnage just isn't worth it, and that's with engines actually improving your movement profile, not just your lumbering speed. Knock three-quarters of what a bigger engine does for you off of the engine, and that 'certain point' turns into "a 250XL to maximize TruDub count unless you have nothing else to spend tonnage on."

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

It's true though, over our past discussions you have on multiple occasions made leaps and exaggerations that were no where near the original argument.

I favor a lot of Reducto Ad Absurdum-style arguments. I find that rephrasing an argument with negative wording/connotations rather than the original positive wording/connotations, or extending the argument to its (utterly il)logical conclusions, is one of the few ways of pointing out the questionable nature of a given thing to Internet grognards. Sometimes my understanding is incorrect, and for that I apologize. But Devil's Advocate is a valid stance to take, especially for a proposal like this which makes a fundamental assumption that BESM is Bad and should die forever.

Counterpoint: BESM is more fun than most potential alternatives, with the exception of Whales complaining about NASCAR.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

This is assuming the main fight always occur where LOS is rarely broken, not everyone tries to push or brawl (and even then that LOS can be broken).

In the proposed system, the 300XL guy would be unable to accelerate or decelerate any faster than 250XL, and thus he gets no poking advantage. He can't twist or turn any faster, so he gets no corner-peeking or close brawling advantage. The one, sole, singular thing the 300XL guy can do is change his location slightly faster than the 250XL guy can. This is an advantage, but it's not often a decisive one by itself below a certain absolute value of speed (see: Linebacker). If the two get into a cover-choked pokey trade-y fight, they're evenly matched - except one has three extra tons of stuff. If they get into a brawl, they're evenly matched - except one has three extra tons of stuff.

Since the two machines have absolutely identical movement profiles (to every single fifty-ton 'Mech in the game. Talk about homogeneity!) with the sole, singular exception of footspeed, the one that gets three extra tons of stuff has the edge in any fight where the two are aware of each other and are otherwise in similar overall condition. The 300XL guy gets a slight edge in his ability to get the drop on someone, but if he fails in that then his edge evaporates and he's back to being at a strict disadvantage.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

The days of the Highlander were pre-ghost heat, until we remove ghost heat I don't see us going back to the very short termed SETM (which only lasted for the release of the Highlander to the introduction of ghost heat roughly).

And yet it was there. In an era where engines improve your ability to move, and not simply your tromping speed - a thing many people continue to point out as being impossible, that "Bigger engines are overpowered because they're ALWAYS better!"

No, they are not. The Dire Whale was once the most feared, 'overpowered' assault 'Mech in the game. SETM had its days, however brief.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

This is one of those strawmen again, where did I ever say that would be the case?

The proposed system states that mobility - twist speed, turn speed, pitch, arm speed, whatever else - is all completely, 100% decoupled from all 'Mechs forever, and that all 'Mechs are given a single, completely and utterly unalterable movement profile based, most likely, on their weight and no other factors. Thus, all 50-ton 'Mechs would have completely identical movement profiles, all 45-ton 'mechs would have identical movement profiles, all 75-ton 'Mechs would have identical movement profiles, so on and so forth. These profiles would have to account for the least agile member of any given weight point, and as such any weight point with an unusually under-engined 'Mech likely gets the shaft as that least-agile member becomes the new Immutable Standard for that weight point.

After all, what else is fair? We're trying to get mobility out of the game with a change like this, after all. I can't really see any other reason to make an alteration like this. Am I missing something?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Ignoring your ridiculous line of logic that follows this, there would be a point to upping the engine on the Blackjack just like there would be on an Assault, and it involves making it as hard as possible to get caught out especially given that you gain little to no tonnage for not upping your engine. The gains in free tonnage at that low of engine are almost non-existent, which is partially what makes it worth upping the engine. Then of course there are the poor dubs.

Little tonnage for not upping an engine is still tonnage. Adding eight klicks to your Blackjack might not be worth the ton of ammo it costs you for your build, considering those eight klicks don't come with any other benefits but a ton of ammo comes with the benefit of getting another ~150 damage to shoot your enemies with. Certainly you'll want as many TruDubs as you can get, but that just means that the 250 becomes the new Galactic Standard Stuffed-In-Everything engine, as opposed to the 300. Especially as the rest of the game will be much slower and you won't generally be nearly so threatened with being caught out in the first place, as everyone else will also be running SETM.

If engines don't buy enough to be worth upgrading, then not much'a nobody will upgrade them, and thusly there will be even less point to upgrading them because you don't have to worry about being caught out by someone who can move more quickly than you do. Nobody ever will, and if they do then they're going to be sorely undergunned compared to the folks you're moving with and will be easily eliminated.

Quote

You are assuming that there are more over-engined omnis than there are mechs stuck with low engine caps or small engines period. Also, to be fair, the Executioner doesn't really have an overly large engine since the Wubshee ran 375-400 XLs.

Point being that whichever way you flip it, somebody's gettin' the shaft. Either the undermotored 'Mechs get rekt on or the overmotored 'Mechs get rekt on. The undermotored 'Mechs get the option of slinging a bunch more of everything else. The overmotored 'Mechs, or at least the overmotored OmniMechs, get to be bad at everything forever if their big fat engines no longer provide any benefit to their mobility.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Actually this is false as well, bigger mechs actually have more free tonnage to play with and do this as evidenced by the massive firepower of the Kodiak and Battlemaster while still retaining upwards of 350 XLs.

Doesn't really matter. Those 'Mechs are still paying more for less benefit than smaller 'Mechs are. The fact that they're able to do so is sort of irrelevant, especially in a proposed system where those 'Mechs could get back half again the firepower they currently carry by dropping down to a 275 or such in a system where their mobility is fixed and immutable and their engines don't buy them anything worth the price. Again, who's going to catch them out? Everyone else will be SETM-ing as well, and even if they don't, the UltraFatbros aren't at a mobility disadvantage in a fight. SOmething might be able to up-engine a bunch to reach them, but just like our Enforcers above, who cares when they do? You've got a Fattlemaster with firepower approaching Dire Whale levels of stupidiculousness, and that up-engined fastie still only carries so much armor and can no longer stay out of your guns with l33t jukes.

Just blow him away and move on with your SETM day.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

This should tell you a lot given that the Timby has bad mounts and still manages to be better, all because of its speed and agility.

It barely does better, despite one of the most legendarily awesome hardpoint mixes in all of OmniMechdom and its oh-so-vaunted medium 'Mech-like mobility. If the Night Gyr had elbows, or a slightly better twist arc, or even simply slightly better twist speed, it would be considered to outclass the TBR just as severely as everyone wanted it to outclass the TBR. In a SETM, engine-upgrades-buy-you-nothing world like the OP suggests, the Night Gyr would be far and away the most crushingly dominant Clan heavy, disputed by absolutely non. It would only ever be challenged by the eventual introduction of the Nova Cat.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Spirit Bear uses a 400.

I did say serious Kodiaks. The Spirit Bear has been dead for many weeks now, and it wasn't terribly popular next to the 3 even when it could actually move.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

350 is on the slow end of most builds, I'm sure a lot of worse off builds use a 350 but the 375 is the goto engine for most builds.

So noted.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Tech balance won't change the dominance of it, it will just allow the IS to keep up.

And allowing the IS to keep up is a bad goal? I thought that was rather the point, wasn't it?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 January 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Only through quirks which we know are inconsistently given out. I would much rather a couple of mechs need quirks then a lot of mechs (because there are more with low engine caps than there are over-engined omnis).

You're also chopping the legs off of everyone who stuffs bigger engines in 'Mechs with higher natural caps, and which may or may not have received less ludicrous hardpoint inflation or other compensating adjustments for having a lower engine cap. A handful of OmniMechs will be the worst losers, but your Quickdraws, your Dragons, your Grasshoppers to an extent?

Your Assassins, your Cicadas, your Trebuchets, your Shadow Hawks and Wolverines, your CN9-Ds? All the rest of the game's fast-feetie'd swift movers who were given fewer hardpoints, less attention, crappier geo, or whatever-else simply because they were going to be able to move and maneuver more quickly then their contemporaries?

They all lose, too.

How many losers are you willing to accept?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

Improving your movement profile should be an alluring choice. I would disagree that it's a no-brainer in a lot of circumstances, though. After all, if getting the biggest B possible for your BESM design was a constant no-brainer, then neither Kodiaks nor Marauder IICs would ever drop below their 400-point caps.

They do, though. A lot. Because past a certain point the tonnage just isn't worth it, and that's with engines actually improving your movement profile, not just your lumbering speed.

The tolerance level at which that becomes not worth it is incredibly high right now and practically matches the optimal engines for free weight (that is for that speed, no other mech offers as much free tonnage) which unfortunately is much higher than some mech's engine caps and is why PGI has slowly become lax about engine caps (having raised several over the past few years). For example the Banshee and Executioner are actually pretty much spot on for their optimal tonnages as is the Summoner and the Timber is really close.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

I favor a lot of Reducto Ad Absurdum-style arguments. I find that rephrasing an argument with negative wording/connotations rather than the original positive wording/connotations, or extending the argument to its (utterly il)logical conclusions, is one of the few ways of pointing out the questionable nature of a given thing to Internet grognards. Sometimes my understanding is incorrect, and for that I apologize. But Devil's Advocate is a valid stance to take, especially for a proposal like this which makes a fundamental assumption that BESM is Bad and should die forever.

Counterpoint: BESM is more fun than most potential alternatives, with the exception of Whales complaining about NASCAR.

The ideal scenario should be that both BESM and SESM and are both actually apart of the real meta. Both should be viable, but right now unless you carry an absurd level of firepower it just isn't worth it to go slow.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

In the proposed system, the 300XL guy would be unable to accelerate or decelerate any faster than 250XL, and thus he gets no poking advantage.

You aren't staying in the same position in a poke fight. Poking isn't just about standing in the same firing line for 5 minutes and winning pokes, it is about trying to envelope the enemy and finding angles which give you better trades, and this is where speed helps, it allows you to adapt to the enemy's movements better.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

to every single fifty-ton 'Mech in the game. Talk about homogeneity!

That's where quirks can and should come into play, to give some mechs that extra flavor, like say giving the Spider extra agility because it is meant to be nimble in the first place.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

And yet it was there. In an era where engines improve your ability to move, and not simply your tromping speed - a thing many people continue to point out as being impossible, that "Bigger engines are overpowered because they're ALWAYS better!"

Yes, because of a set of serious circumstances (aka you needed JJs to be able to compete). That isn't really a good bar to measure with especially given the dearth of real mech options back then as well. I mean the only jumping heavy back then was the CTF-3D (and it is the only one that could carry ballistics and energy on top of being jump capable for the longest time). Wasn't the only assault capable of real speed during this time only the AWS-9M as well?

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

The Dire Whale was once the most feared, 'overpowered' assault 'Mech in the game. SETM had its days, however brief.

Sure, and I admitted that part, BUT, would that have been the case if the Kodiak had been out during that time?


The proposed system states that mobility - twist speed, turn speed, pitch, arm speed, whatever else - is all completely, 100% decoupled from all 'Mechs forever, and that all 'Mechs are given a single, completely and utterly unalterable movement profile based, most likely, on their weight and no other factors. Thus, all 50-ton 'Mechs would have completely identical movement profiles, all 45-ton 'mechs would have identical movement profiles, all 75-ton 'Mechs would have identical movement profiles, so on and so forth.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

These profiles would have to account for the least agile member of any given weight point, and as such any weight point with an unusually under-engined 'Mech likely gets the shaft as that least-agile member becomes the new Immutable Standard for that weight point.

No, that's not how it works and is a false assumption on your part. These under-engined mechs would be buffed in agility to match whatever the standard mobility is considered for that tonnage. There is nothing that says this system HAS to be based on the lowest common denominator, nor does that make any sort of sense given 30 tonners would be screwed by the Urbanmechs sheer existence (seriously, what sense does that make).

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

Adding eight klicks to your Blackjack might not be worth the ton of ammo it costs you for your build

Try 16-17 clicks, since you would most likely upgrade from 180 to a 225-235. That's a lot of mobility, especially given its stock assault speed.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

Especially as the rest of the game will be much slower and you won't generally be nearly so threatened with being caught out in the first place, as everyone else will also be running SETM.

Lights will still be about BESM because speed is still life to them, and being an immobile turret is how you get caught out often especially when your team already has assault turrets.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

The undermotored 'Mechs get the option of slinging a bunch more of everything else.

That doesn't mean much when it is only 2 tons of something else....there are points where speed is more important than firepower just like how there is a time when firepower is more important than speed. The problem is that many mechs run into the problem where speed is more important than firepower than the opposite.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

It barely does better, despite one of the most legendarily awesome hardpoint mixes in all of OmniMechdom and its oh-so-vaunted medium 'Mech-like mobility.

It may have a good hardpoint mix, but the locations of those aren't really that great and that matters a lot, just ask the BK.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

If the Night Gyr had elbows, or a slightly better twist arc, or even simply slightly better twist speed, it would be considered to outclass the TBR just as severely as everyone wanted it to outclass the TBR.

Elbows wouldn't make it better, but better twist speed and turn rate could definitely help it out, but so could better speed.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

In a SETM, engine-upgrades-buy-you-nothing world like the OP suggests, the Night Gyr would be far and away the most crushingly dominant Clan heavy, disputed by absolutely non.

Well, depends on whether we are counting the Summoner with loyalty pods or not, but the Night Gyr would be better than the Timby that's true. Is that really a problem though, I'm ok with it getting minor quirks to help make it more competitive so long as it doesn't get agility quirks to make it dance like it does now?

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

I did say serious Kodiaks. The Spirit Bear has been dead for many weeks now, and it wasn't terribly popular next to the 3 even when it could actually move.

During the tournament it was a serious Kodiak that you could potentially run into, maybe not as popular or as strong as the 3 but still one of the stronger mechs in the game.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

And allowing the IS to keep up is a bad goal? I thought that was rather the point, wasn't it?

Those are two separate goals. Allowing the IS to keep up with the Clans and allowing things to compete with the BESM are separate things. You can accomplish one while nerfing the BESM (in fact this is better for the IS since many don't have the engine caps to actually compete with the Clans).

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

A handful of OmniMechs will be the worst losers, but your Quickdraws, your Dragons, your Grasshoppers to an extent?

None of those mount massive engines now, most are around the 300-325 XL range, nowhere near typical Clan speed or really on spot with their optimal engine speeds.

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

Your Assassins, your Cicadas, your Trebuchets, your Shadow Hawks and Wolverines, your CN9-Ds?

Of those mechs you just listed, only one really should be using most of its engine speed and that is the Cicada. The Assassin is most notably an SRM bombed so its speed will be limited, Trebuchets run around 250-300 XLs, Shadow Hawks and Wolverines rarely run faster than a Griffin generally with 255-300 XLs and CN9-D runs around 255-300 because of the ammo demands of the LBX10. Just because they have high engine caps doesn't mean they can actually use it (typically because of limited energy weapon mounts meaning heftier tonnage requirements) so really the standard builds should either be helped or not touched at all. Only the Cicada would really feel it, and it has other problems (like being IS tech, a 40 tonner, and having a glass jaw).

1453 R, on 09 January 2017 - 03:55 PM, said:

How many losers are you willing to accept?

The lowest amount, which is why I'm pushing for this.

[Spheroid]

The solution to the XL problem has always been additional structure. Why are we looking for additional solutions? A mech that fails to die quickly prevents the exponential focus fire damage that leads to stomps. An arbitrarily large amount of side torso structure functions identically to a Clan setup since damage transfer will eventually destroy their CT in the same amount of time.

Massive structure quirks benefit Clan damage farmers and fans of super zombie standard engine builds as well. There is no need for convoluted or clever solutions to the so called problem.

Edited by Spheroid, 09 January 2017 - 04:45 PM.

[Duke Nedo]

Spheroid, on 09 January 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

The solution to the XL problem has always been additional structure. Why are we looking for additional solutions? A mech that fails to die quickly prevents the exponential focus fire damage that leads to stomps. An arbitrarily large amount of side torso structure functions identically to a Clan setup since damage transfer will eventually destroy their CT in the same amount of time.

Massive structure quirks benefit Clan damage farmers and fans of super zombie standard engine builds as well. There is no need for convoluted or clever solutions to the so called problem.

If you just take a look at the quirks-list you'll find that a really large potion of all mechs have agility quirks. That's band-aid to help them perform with a smaller engine, which in turn is compensation for heavier weapons/equipment and/or inability to mount a XL engine reasonably well.

If you decouple agility from engine size, then you will need much less of these quirks, because bringing a smaller engine, like most IS mechs need to do because light clan tech, will no longer be as punishing relatively speaking.

I think my preferred solution to this would be to link agility to tonnage as a baseline, and then either tweak with quirks from there, or give every single mech an agility value between 0 and 100 and have that modify the agility stats by -50% to +50%, starting at the tonnage-derived baseline.