135 replies to this topic

[Sjorpha]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 08:46 AM, said:

These could work if you made the agility/speed buffs scale with the size of the engine, or 'mech's tonnage.

Otherwise you'd have IS lights that were blisteringly fast (even compared to current speeds), and/or laws-of-physics-breaking agile.

We don't need a fresh wave of super powered IS lights running around.

It's not like it's not already overly difficult enough to kill a Locust piloted by a skilled player...

I'd prefer mech tonnage in that case because the ST survival doesn't relate to engine size and that is what we are trying to balance here.

IS lights needs a little buff too though, clan lights are more competitive right now, so I don't think they should get nothing. Like for example the IS jenner needs to be allowed to retain whatever agility buff it needs to equal the durability on the Jenner iic without having structure quirks to do so.

[MechaBattler]

They used the excuse of not buffing IS XL because it would invalidate the standard engine. But that's probably what the LFE will do. Which is still going to be inferior to the Clan XL. That's three engines that are inferior to the Clan XLS. Three wrongs don't make a right!

Just to clarify. I don't want the engines to be the same. But some kind of buff might better than more nerfs.

Edited by MechaBattler, 24 January 2017 - 08:59 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Sjorpha, on 24 January 2017 - 08:54 AM, said:

...

IS lights needs a little buff too though...

No, I can't say I agree with that.

IS Lights are in a good spot. I've noticed that on non-potato computers, as the pilot's skills increase, there is a... geometric progression in the deadliness of a light 'mech.

It's re-dork-ulous how much damage IS lights "appear" to absorb.

For now I'm willing to chalk it up to damn small target profiles, plus malf'd hit registration, plus HSR shenanigans, plus my tendency to play this game at varying levels of intoxication, rather than something is actually "broke" with light 'mechs.

[Hit the Deck]

MechaBattler, on 24 January 2017 - 08:56 AM, said:

They used the excuse of not buffing IS XL because it would invalidate the standard engine. But that's probably what the LFE will do. Which is still going to be inferior to the Clan XL. That's three engines that are inferior to the Clan XLS. Three wrongs don't make a right!

It's actualy three rights because IS needs all of those engines. Each of them serves a specific purpose. Yes, STD is needed because of Heavy Gauss Rifle and builds like the AS7-S' which use all of ST slots.

IS never has engine which is equal to the Clan XL (even isXL with no ST death because it still occupies two more crit slots compared to cXL).

[Dimento Graven]

Hit the Deck, on 24 January 2017 - 09:03 AM, said:

...

IS never has engine which is equal to the Clan XL (even isXL with no ST death because it still occupies two more crit slots compared to cXL).

You're using lore as a reason why something can't be done, yet PGI has stated that lore isn't a deciding factor in game design.

Can't have it both ways.

[MechaBattler]

Hit the Deck, on 24 January 2017 - 09:03 AM, said:

It's actualy three rights because IS needs all of those engines. Each of them serves a specific purpose. Yes, STD is needed because of Heavy Gauss Rifle and builds like the AS7-S' which use all of ST slots.

IS never has engine which is equal to the Clan XL (even isXL with no ST death because it still occupies two more crit slots compared to cXL).

I'm not saying to buff one and nerf the others. I'm saying that they need to buff all three and keep them relevant. And I don't care if they never had an engine equal in the lore. They don't have to make them identical. But they should at least try to bring the balance closer.

[Hit the Deck]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

You're using lore as a reason why something can't be done, yet PGI has stated that lore isn't a deciding factor in game design.

Can't have it both ways.

The only thing engines have are crit slots, weight, and whether they can survives ST (or 3 crits - TT version) loss.

Changing the first two is taboo but you can change the last parameter.

Edited by Hit the Deck, 24 January 2017 - 09:10 AM.

[1453 R]

Sjorpha, on 24 January 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

Simply being faster? Seems to fit the bill, higher risk and higher reward than Clan XL. But very anti-canon and probably too controversial.

Potentially as part of a multi-point solution. A lot of folks seem to forget that you don't need to find The One Thing to bring the iXL to parity; you can do it via a number of not-enough-on-their-own, but Enough Together™ bonuses.

Sjorpha, on 24 January 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

Extra structure? I think this is a pretty boring solution, because it's very similar in function to surviving a ST loss, so it suffers from the sameness issue.

Yeah, extra structure is just kinda blah. it doesn't really fix the issue, and structure adjustments should be the purview of quirks/Skilltree anyways.

Sjorpha, on 24 January 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

Very significant agility buffs? I like this one, because going faster might be a bit too controversial, but significantly superior agility is probably acceptable to most people, and it would give another kind of durability from Clan XL through avoiding damage rather than surviving it. This is my favorite solution so far

Something like a 5% speed bonus combined with significant torso agility/possibly some leg agility would be an interesting experiment to try. Lots of folks, pre-Clan, called the iXL the 'race car' engine, so run with that. Give it a suite of mobility bonuses that make an iXL300 quite visibly more potent than a cXL300 in terms of movement, until it pops. The cXL becomes a sort of hybrid iXL/iLFE at that point and occupies a space on the curve which makes sense.

Sjorpha, on 24 January 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

That leaves the standard, how to not obslete? And how to make worth it on clan battlemechs. Here I think structure buffs fit much better. Make standard engine mechs super duper tanky, like double all structure or something.

It's important to note that whatever the buff you give to IS XL and standard, it can't be dependent on engine size because Clan XL ST survival isn't dependent on engine size.

On the final point, I tend to disagree. cXL durability isn't dependent on engine size, no, but that doesn't necessarily matter. It shouldn't be a specific point of contention; if the appropriate fix is size-independent cool, if it's not size-independent then hey, also cool.

One thing that's occurred to me is a global heat generation bonus to the STD engines. Heat build-up doesn't come from the weapons themselves, it comes from the reactor spiking power output to match the demands of the weapons. The STD engine is supposed to have much heavier, more solid shielding, so perhaps it doesn't bleed into the 'Mech as much and anything with a STD engine gets, by way of example, a 20% global heat generation reduction 'quirk' inherent to the engine type, on top of appropriate structure bonuses.

I can already hear the Wubshees drooling, and frankly a heat reduction bonus would be even more desirable for a lot of larger Clan machines with their whole novahot weapons packages and eternally insufficient cooling potential. Sure it doesn't benefit ballistic-heavy builds as much as it does energy or missile spam, but that's okay. If you're building a ballistic-heavy 'Mech you'd not likely be able to handle the additional weight of a STD engine anyways, and on either side of the tech divide you'd have options (LFE for big Sphere guys, iXL for ballsy little Sphere guys, cXL for Clan guys).

That one step could do a lot to bring the STD back into the curve, if the effect was magnitudinous enough.

[Dimento Graven]

Hit the Deck, on 24 January 2017 - 09:09 AM, said:

The only thing engines have are crit slots, weight, and whether they can survives ST (or 3 crits - TT version) loss.

Changing the first two is taboo but you can change the last parameter.

Don't forget heat sinks. Each engine will have a certain capacity for internal heat sinks that increases as the size of the engine goes up.

[Hit the Deck]

MechaBattler, on 24 January 2017 - 09:08 AM, said:

....
They don't have to make them identical. But they should at least try to bring the balance closer.

The way to do it (bring balance) is to give IS more options compared to the Clan.

It's the hard and indirect way to balance but it's more appealing to me to preserve the two different flavors.

Edited by Hit the Deck, 24 January 2017 - 09:15 AM.

[CK16]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

You're using lore as a reason why something can't be done, yet PGI has stated that lore isn't a deciding factor in game design.

Can't have it both ways.

It is not even lore....it is derived from Table top rules and builds. Something I actually like them.following as close as they have...this is not MW4 or 3 with open mech labs and mixed tech an no regard for TT rules....the only thing I liked about MW4 were sized hardpoints. Meaning you can not stuff a UAC5 into a MG slot or a PPC into a small/med laser slot.

We are not playing some battlefield 4 where everything is made equal (aka tanks have no armor just HP ect)there is tech differences in MW and Battletech and making everything the same vanilla flavor is not the solution to it. It just becomes another shooter at that point....as little that is left the mechlab and faction splits still keep close enough to MW and TT to say this game is still unique to other shooters

[Hit the Deck]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:12 AM, said:

Don't forget heat sinks. Each engine will have a certain capacity for internal heat sinks that increases as the size of the engine goes up.

That's a bit less taboo to change. Could be done if needed (IS engines having more heatsinnk cap).

[Dimento Graven]

CK16, on 24 January 2017 - 09:13 AM, said:

It is not even lore....it is derived from Table top rules and builds.

But... that is lore.

Quote

...

We are not playing some battlefield 4 where everything is made equal (aka tanks have no armor just HP ect)there is tech differences in MW and Battletech and making everything the same vanilla flavor is not the solution to it. It just becomes another shooter at that point....as little that is left the mechlab and faction splits still keep close enough to MW and TT to say this game is still unique to other shooters

The problem is they're trying to figure out how to make FP work, and FP doesn't work if one side has all the good tech and the other side has... nothing but compromises.

If they're not going to balance both sides in FP, then F'it, throw FP away, concentrate on quick play and creating PvE single player content.

Hit the Deck, on 24 January 2017 - 09:13 AM, said:

That's a bit less taboo to change. Could be done if needed (IS engines having more heatsinnk cap).

Hell it's already been changed. Originally each engine had 10 internal heat sinks, but PGI changed that because it OP'd light 'mechs (if I'm remembering correctly).

[MechaBattler]

Hit the Deck, on 24 January 2017 - 09:12 AM, said:

The way to do it (bring balance) is to give IS more options compared to the Clan.

It's the hard and indirect way to balance but it's more appealing to me to preserve the two different flavors.

Then you buff to the distinct flavor of each. You don't just leave completely inferior to the Clan XL.

[KuroNyra]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

You're using lore as a reason why something can't be done, yet PGI has stated that lore isn't a deciding factor in game design.

Can't have it both ways.

Clans have best overall engine but are pretty much stuck with them.

IS have multiple choice engine that allow for the battlemech to be fitted the way the player see fit. Fast and fragile, or slow but resilient.

My Atlas don't see anykind of problem with the STD, nor does he ask a buff ot it. Same goes for my Hunchback.

[Sjorpha]

1453 R, on 24 January 2017 - 09:11 AM, said:

One thing that's occurred to me is a global heat generation bonus to the STD engines. Heat build-up doesn't come from the weapons themselves, it comes from the reactor spiking power output to match the demands of the weapons. The STD engine is supposed to have much heavier, more solid shielding, so perhaps it doesn't bleed into the 'Mech as much and anything with a STD engine gets, by way of example, a 20% global heat generation reduction 'quirk' inherent to the engine type, on top of appropriate structure bonuses.

Better shielding would also be in line with taking less damage when overheating with overide shutdown. Let's say a standard engine mech has a 50% damage reduction while overriding. Just a thought as an alternative/complement to better cooling. It would also have a nice skill dependency to it, you would need to understand the override mechanics.

Anyways, we seem to be on same page now.

[Gentleman Reaper]

KuroNyra, on 24 January 2017 - 09:26 AM, said:

Clans have best overall engine but are pretty much stuck with them.

IS have multiple choice engine that allow for the battlemech to be fitted the way the player see fit. Fast and fragile, or slow but resilient.

Clan Battlemechs disagree

Quote

My Atlas don't see anykind of problem with the STD, nor does he ask a buff ot it. Same goes for my Hunchback.

Quirks are what's making up for the engine discrepancy. If they start applying structure buffs to engines, then quirks can be toned down, and it would also make it significantly easier to balance new mechs without needing a month to test early quirks.

[Dimento Graven]

KuroNyra, on 24 January 2017 - 09:26 AM, said:

Clans have best overall engine but are pretty much stuck with them.

I would NOT classify it as 'stuck with them'.

Considering that the Clans can change their hard point configuration, there's very few reasons to want to change out a Clan XL engine, AND CERTAINLY, even FAR FEWER situations where changing from a Clan XL to a Clan STANDARD engine would even make any sense.

So using that as some sort of justification... I find it disingenuous and silly to be honest.

What the Clans would do, probably 99.5% of the time is change from one sized XL to another sized XL for speed or weight considerations. I can't think of any non-LOL based reasons to, say... switch out a DWF's XL engine for a same weight (or smaller) STANDARD engine.

Quote

IS have multiple choice engine that allow for the battlemech to be fitted the way the player see fit. Fast and fragile, or slow but resilient.

The ability to change hard points actually offers MORE flexibility. The IS has to make builds with the static hard point configurations they have available.

Quote

My Atlas don't see anykind of problem with the STD, nor does he ask a buff ot it. Same goes for my Hunchback.

No, I'm sure you wouldn't, but I bet you'd have a lot of butthurt if you switched to XLs in those (the Atlas maybe not as much as the HBK, but you'd be doing a lot more 'observing' of matches rather than participating).

IS switching from Standard to XL means you're making a trade for more available weight, while giving up 2 more torso slots and immediate death on ST loss. Unlike the Clans and their IIC 'mechs that get the "best of both worlds". Static hard points, changeable engines, survivable ST loss XL engines, and lighter, smaller, longer reaching and harder hitting weapons.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 24 January 2017 - 09:38 AM.

[1453 R]

Sjorpha, on 24 January 2017 - 09:29 AM, said:

Better shielding would also be in line with taking less damage when overheating with overide shutdown. Let's say a standard engine mech has a 50% damage reduction while overriding. Just a thought as an alternative/complement to better cooling. It would also have a nice skill dependency to it, you would need to understand the override mechanics.

Anyways, we seem to be on same page now.

I'm hesitant to hang Bettah Balance on strictly "OH SHATNER" conditions that are undesirable in normal play. An override damage bonus would have to be in conjunction with a cooling bonus as saying to STD guys "your stuff is better when you're about to die!" is sorta not cool. Hueh hueh, 'not cool'. But yeah. I like package deals. Package deals are better for the game than simply Ultra-Overdoing one particular aspect of a thing, which brings up its own balance issues when you quadruple-down on something and push it outside the game's balance envelope.

Let STD engines offer something like a 10% structure bonus to all torso slots (or alternately a flat amount determined by engine weight, since percentage bonuses overly favor large 'Mechs and pseudo-penalize small ones), since it's heavier and sturdy and stuff and can take more of a beating. Let it also get the -20% heat generation bonus, and let it furthermore get the override reduction as well. A number of smaller adjustments is better for the overall health of the game than a single stupidly large adjustment; 50% weapon quirks should've taught everybody that lesson already, ne?

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

...
The ability to change hard points actually offers MORE flexibility. The IS has to make builds with the static hard point configurations they have available.
...

Horse hockey.

The Omnipod system is a sidegrade, not an upgrade, due to the fact that it utterly precludes OmniMechs from having any hardpoint inflation whatsoever. BattleMechs get massive inflation; they're stuck with their static hardpoints but they get smacktons of them, allowing the 'Mech to double down on whatever it's good at, while any given OmniMech is at the mercy of its stock pod loadouts to determine whether or not it has any viable pod configurations. See Shadow Cat, Adder, pre-loyalty Summoner, Mist Lynx...

If hardpoint inflation wasn't a thing you'd have a point, but it is so you don't.

Edited by 1453 R, 24 January 2017 - 09:48 AM.

[Hit the Deck]

MechaBattler, on 24 January 2017 - 09:21 AM, said:

Then you buff to the distinct flavor of each. You don't just leave completely inferior to the Clan XL.

We buff the IS by giving them more options like having greater number of equipment (e.g. number of weapons, armors, and yes, engine types), more consumable (*gasp*), or skill paths (soon).

Clan would be more vanilla and boring but basically a bit stronger 'Mech for 'Mech because of their superior tech (but not variety).

This is an indirect way to balance which I meant earlier.


EDIT: and by this, the balancing doesn't work 1 vs 1 but only when both sides bring a number of 'Mechs. Very hard to predict but seems to look better at least.

Edited by Hit the Deck, 24 January 2017 - 09:59 AM.