13 replies to this topic

[JC Daxion]

all this talk about balancing IS XL's, and no-one talks about the STD engines.. the one thing IS does well is tank with a STD engine, but the weight makes them lack damage and a fairly decent amount.

So how about a Structure buff, basically an HP bonus with installing a STD engine? Maybe something like start at +10 and add +5 per class? +25 on an assault would be a pretty big hit, especially if stacked with a mechs structure buff, and perhaps a skill tree bonus.


Id really like to see Tanking a more viable roll over all, verse just load up weapons and play the Glass cannon game. Perhaps this could work?


another thing along these lines i have thought about was, what if keeping "standard structure" aka Not adding endo for lower weight, would be yet another buff. again by class..

Perhaps all the stacking could turn many under performing mechs into very tanky death machines, even if you are hitting with 10 less damage per strike for instance.. I know i have heard why won't that HBK DIE! a few times, but it has some pretty decent quirks.. But tack on another +15 or +20.. and boy maybe that thing could out tank a HBK IIC even packing Dual UAC10's


I think everyone gets very caught up in weapon stats, and forgets there are other ways to balance.. and making some mechs harder to kill could be one of them. I really want more variety in mechs, outside of which can just pack the biggest punch.. especially for those brawlers out there.

[Johnny Z]

Added structure to offset straight up weight saving upgrades is a great idea.

[Baulven]

If you want a standard Buff it should be flat not incremental. Heavy weight classes have enough bonuses it should benefit little guys more.

[JC Daxion]

Baulven, on 17 January 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

If you want a standard Buff it should be flat not incremental. Heavy weight classes have enough bonuses it should benefit little guys more.

I am not sure, i did state it as flat.. But seeing everything else when compared to Ferro and Endo are all tied directly to tonnage. I could easily see a strait up ton for ton ratio.. What that number is, I have no idea. Perhaps a sliding scale of sorts is needed though, perhaps not.

But For say, Standard structure, 25% of tonnage bonus? that would give a 20 ton mech +5, 35 ton, +7.5 af, 55 ton +13.75 , 65 ton +18.75 100 toner would get +25. (would it need to be rounded for the engine? i dunno)

Engine bonus could be the same, bonus is by engine tonnage.


And yea, i realize not lore, but it's a video game and we are also not rolling dice.. This is a different beast, found these 2 stories, thought it was pretty cool.. But yea some things need altering..




"My favorite had to be the one-on-one first game...I think Spider vs Commando [commando's been stuck in my brain for years, but last time I told the tale someone pointed out commandos don't have jump jets, so that might've been the opponent, not the mech that died]. 4th ed base set, lights. Anyway, aside from keeping the pedants happy the exact mechs don't matter.

Very first turn. 'Mech jumps, something about the landing forces a piloting skill roll. Fails. Damage: CT possible crit. 3 crits. engine engine engine. The poor thing literally bellyflopped and blew up before the other player got to take a turn.

One of my favorite non-kills was the poor thing who the dice just hated. Towards the end its pilot turned it around and started running into battle backwards...because the back had more armor left than the front. In the end I think the stupid thing had 4-5 points of armor left, and just enough internal structure to keep walking around. I've never seen the dice so afraid to kill a 'mech before..."

(in this game if your good you can call your shots and hit 100%.. wish i was that good, but i digress)






"Towards the end its pilot turned it around and started running into battle backwards...because the back had more armor left than the front."

This is giving me flashbacks to a game I just played. 2v1 (I was the 1), closest game I've ever played. He had a Panther and I have a heavily damaged Malice with no armor on the right torso. Afraid that the torso would get hit and then have the ammo critted, blowing out the XL, I kept him facing away since there was more armor on the back and I could just flip the guns over and shoot. The Panther rolls a headshot and, being the 6th consciousness hit, kills my pilot. I've never been so angry playing this game than that moment.


(just imagine how much someone would get trolled in MWO if they did this.. FRONT LOAD YOUR ARMOR!! lol)


But Hmm... how about flipping weapons to fire in back!! that would be so cool!

Edited by JC Daxion, 17 January 2017 - 04:08 PM.

[1453 R]

Tie the bonus structure from a STD engine to the weight 'lost' to not taking an equivalent XL engine. Larger engine, more bonus, in exchange for finding the extra weight for a larger STD engine.

STD structure bonus is same; bonus scales based on tonnage 'lost' to not using Endo.

Flat overly benefits smaller 'Mechs; a non-scaling proportional (25%, say) overly benefits fatter 'Mechs. Scaling proportional should hopefully strike the right balance, as well as being directly tied to the actual weight savings gained/lost by the use of old bad GarboTech or not.

[Andi Nagasia]

as ive said in another topic, make it Dynamic,
1/10th Engine Rating as CT Structure & 1/20th Engine Rating as ST Structure,
(STD300 = +30CT Structure & +15ST Structure)

a Wolfhound with a STD 225 would gain:
+22(22.5)CT Structure & +11(11.25)ST Structure,
wail still being able to Carry 1LL & 3ML,

(Insert Battletech, AdamSteiner, in a WLF, saying "get off My Planet! Meme)
Edit-

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 17 January 2017 - 04:18 PM.

[Baulven]

In each of the scaling bonuses above it flat out benefits the more tonnage you sink into it, guaranteeing that things like the Atlas will grab massive bonuses for what it does anyways, and not offering enough incentive for anyone in lower brackets to even consider switching. So all it will do is buff mechs running standards that would already run standards.

Since heavies and assaults already possesses disproportionate stats in the game rewarding them even more because they can take larger standards is making that disparity even more apparent. For example the bonus for an Atlas could force an additional alpha or two for something it would carry anyways. The lights on the other hand at best may force half an alpha in exchange for completely gutting their firepower. That is why any bonuses should be flat, and not proportional.

[50 50]

What about all Standard engines have the default 10 single heat sinks?

I know there was a reason why the base 10 heat sinks were not included with the engine but I can't find why.
Plus with the XL and potential new engines coming in, maybe it's a good opportunity to look at this again?

[Lily from animove]

a buff would be changing the mechanics of twisspeed being bound to mechtonnage and not engine size. this would give the STD less disadvanatages comppared to the ISXL.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

I say use the cXL as a baseline, in other words it has no bonuses nor penalties (remove ST death entirely). The IS XL takes up 2 extra slots, so it gets a minor buff of some kind, say a slight increase IS (to all three torsos) to offset the lost critical space and thus lost weapon flexibility. The IS LFE loses a lot of weight compared to a cXL, so it gets a significant IS boost. The STD (for both tech bases) sacrifices the most in terms of weight, though it gains a few crits in space, but the price in extra weight is significant enough that the space gains are negligible aside from one or two outlier situations (big torso ballistics, mainly), so just give it a massive IS boost.

Of course, that's just balancing them based on weight and space. Lily from animove is correct that agility should really be based on the variant rather than on the engine (though I'd go farther and say that all agility stats should be fixed per variant, not just twist specs).

[Kaeb Odellas]

Buff torso twist and agility too.

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

Surely if the STD engine is weighty, it should slow down the torso etc. I would still really want to see STD engines deliver structure buffs. It would force clanners to seriously weigh up this option if building a tank style mech.

[Kaeb Odellas]

The Unstoppable Puggernaut, on 18 January 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

Surely if the STD engine is weighty, it should slow down the torso etc. I would still really want to see STD engines deliver structure buffs. It would force clanners to seriously weigh up this option if building a tank style mech.

Not necessarily. Since a standard engine is all contained in the CT, it will have a lower moment of inertia along the axis of rotation compared to an XL engine of equivalent weight. Half of an IS XL engine occupies the side torsos, and presumably much of the weight. Plus, lighter engine means more weapons, which means even more weight in the arms and STs, which means higher rotational inertia

Plus, it's not hard to imagine the bulk of the XL engine potentially restricting the torso's range of movement.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 18 January 2017 - 08:37 AM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Structure buff to STD engines = yesssssssssssssssssss. 15 IMHO would be just enough (number not backed by any research, I just "feel" it will be the right number, I take into account I can be completely wrong)

Incremental bonus = not really, the game rewards bigger engines and bigger mechs enough already. We're starting to have the same problem older MW games had, i.e. "bigger is better". After the rescale, most light mechs are more of a liability than an asset, while most meds are a suboptimal choice.

Fixed twist speed/decoupling twist speed from the engine = no. "Bigger is better" is a problem, yes, but this solution doesn't make any logical sense and could potentially led to smaller engines being better, especially on bigger mechs that gain very little pure speed from the engine upgrades. STDs COULD add a bit of twist bonus to offset their weight, but just a bit.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 18 January 2017 - 08:53 AM.