135 replies to this topic

[Dimento Graven]

1453 R, on 24 January 2017 - 09:46 AM, said:

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.

We will agree to disagree on this point then.

Fact is in most cases, there are more options in being able to swap out 3 or 4 different Omni pods in 3 or 4 (in some cases 5) locations, than there is in having 6 static variants.

Another "side grade" effect of this is that ANY Clan chassis that has an ECM variant means that EVERY variant in that chassis line has the option to equip ECM.

Unlike the IS and their static hard points, >IF< you have a Chassis that has an ECM option, you have to run THAT 'MECH in order to have ECM. Man, it'd be so much cooler to be able to move an ECM to the various Atlas, Raven, Commando, Cataphract, et al, variants, but you can't.

That's a considerable... "side grade"...

Don't poo poo it friend, it's a CONSIDERABLE difference, especially given that comparing Clan 'mechs vs. their IS counterparts typically run faster, with larger alphas, and have 1/3 more durability.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 24 January 2017 - 09:59 AM.

[Lugin]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:17 AM, said:

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).

Nope. Never was changed.

Every engine has 10 "mass-free" heat sinks. These are internal to the engine at the normal rate of 1 sink per 25 rating. Any that don't fit inside have to be located outside the engine, eating crits. So a 200 rated engine will have 8 internal, 2 external, all of which are mass-free.

The way PGI coded things back in the day caused the engine's mass to include the engine, gyro, and cockipit, minus the mass of any external heatsinks. That is why getting the UrbanMech caused such big deal. Under PGI's method, a 60 rated engine has negative mass. And then you still need to add enough sinks to reach the baseline 10 required.

[CK16]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

We will agree to disagree on this point then.

Fact is in most cases, there are more options in being able to swap out 3 or 4 different Omni pods in 3 or 4 (in some cases 5) locations, than there is in having 6 static variants.

Another &quot;side grade&quot; effect of this is that ANY Clan chassis that has an ECM variant means that EVERY variant in that chassis line has the option to equip ECM.

Unlike the IS and their static hard points, &gt;IF&lt; you have a Chassis that has an ECM option, you have to run THAT 'MECH in order to have ECM. Man, it'd be so much cooler to be able to move an ECM to the various Atlas, Raven, Commando, Cataphract, et al, chassis, but you can't.

That's a considerable... &quot;side grade&quot;...

Don't poo poo it friend, it's a CONSIDERABLE difference, especially given that comparing Clan 'mechs vs. their IS counterparts typically run faster, with larger alphas, and have 1/3 more durability.

Yet it is well known you hardly bring any clan Omni that can put an ECM slot with out it. Hellbringer and Shadowcat? We will have atleast one option in the Direwolf C that the CT is the ECM slot.

Stop trying to make this into apples to apples this at the core of every TT and MW game since they did the clans has been apples to oranges. They are not and should not be identical.

[1453 R]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

We will agree to disagree on this point then.

Fact is in most cases, there are more options in being able to swap out 3 or 4 different Omni pods in 3 or 4 (in some cases 5) locations, than there is in having 6 static variants.

Another "side grade" effect of this is that ANY Clan chassis that has an ECM variant means that EVERY variant in that chassis line has the option to equip ECM.

Unlike the IS and their static hard points, >IF< you have a Chassis that has an ECM option, you have to run THAT 'MECH in order to have ECM. Man, it'd be so much cooler to be able to move an ECM to the various Atlas, Raven, Commando, Cataphract, et al, variants, but you can't.

That's a considerable... "side grade"...

Don't poo poo it friend, it's a CONSIDERABLE difference, especially given that comparing Clan 'mechs vs. their IS counterparts typically run faster, with larger alphas, and have 1/3 more durability.

The BNC-3E Banshee, in its stock configuration, has three weapons - a PPC, an AC/5, and a small laser. In MWO, this translates into eight weapon hardpoints. Nearly 300% inflation.

The Summoner Prime, in its stock configuration, has three weapons - an ER PPC, an LB/X-10, and an LRM-15. In MWO, this translates into...three...weapon hardpoints. 0% inflation. The 'Mech must also sacrifice the lion's share of its quirks if it desires to utilize alternative pod configurations that improves this rather abysmal loadout. The BNC-3E, on the other hand, retains its quirks in their entirety even when expanding beyond its three stock weapons into making use of the five additional weapon hardpoints it was granted.

Care to tell me again how the OmniPod system is a flat-out upgrade to being a BattleMech? Yes, there are times when the OmniPod system heavily benefits a given chassis. There are also times when being a BattleMech and being able to modify one's base chassis and benefit from staggering hardpoint bloat is a very nice benefit to a given machine.

Edited by 1453 R, 24 January 2017 - 10:48 AM.

[Adridos]

Didn't MW:LL do away with the XL side torso deaths altogether? IIRC, that game was still great fun and no one complained about it being a simple shooter like any other and not a true Battletech game. It was just balanced better on top of it.

Considering they are moving forward to an era when STD engines lost any semblance of relevancy, it's not all that far-fetched to just do away with the imbalance. Clan XLs are still just plain updates over the IS stuff even without being tanky on top of it.

Your entire faction stands behind the idea, CK16. What with being the ones who merged with IS to protect them against further Clan aggression as the Ghost Bear Dominion in the game's upcoming timeline shift.

[Dimento Graven]

Lugin, on 24 January 2017 - 10:00 AM, said:

Nope. Never was changed.

Every engine has 10 &quot;mass-free&quot; heat sinks. These are internal to the engine at the normal rate of 1 sink per 25 rating. Any that don't fit inside have to be located outside the engine, eating crits. So a 200 rated engine will have 8 internal, 2 external, all of which are mass-free.

The way PGI coded things back in the day caused the engine's mass to include the engine, gyro, and cockipit, minus the mass of any external heatsinks. That is why getting the UrbanMech caused such big deal. Under PGI's method, a 60 rated engine has negative mass. And then you still need to add enough sinks to reach the baseline 10 required.

Actually I think it WAS changed because we have engines, where if you get them to decreasing size, you have to ADD heat sinks to your build.

The assumption being that under a certain size the 'mechs no longer have 10 heat sinks, and therefore your load out must be supplemented with external heat sinks to get to the minimum 10.

Fairly certain I'm at least partially right in what I've said.

CK16, on 24 January 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

Yet it is well known you hardly bring any clan Omni that can put an ECM slot with out it. Hellbringer and Shadowcat? We will have atleast one option in the Direwolf C that the CT is the ECM slot.

Exactly my point.

Quote

Stop trying to make this into apples to apples this at the core of every TT and MW game since they did the clans has been apples to oranges. They are not and should not be identical.

I'm not, but it's incredibly disingenuous to try and characterize the fact that Omni 'mechs can't switch out engines as some sort of INCREDIBLY HUGE draw back that COMPLETELY limits their build options.

That's BS, don't do it.

[Dimento Graven]

1453 R, on 24 January 2017 - 10:48 AM, said:

The BNC-3E Banshee, in its stock configuration, has three weapons - a PPC, an AC/5, and a small laser. In MWO, this translates into eight weapon hardpoints. Nearly 300% inflation.

Can you explain this further? Because, you mention 3 weapons, so that's 3 hard hard points.

Where do you get the other 5?

Now, if you're stating that there are more available hard points than just those 3, yes it makes sense, because historically, as in the past 30+ years of table top and various iterations of computer games, IS 'mechs have pretty much allowed for customization.

There has never been a hard and fast rule that you can't add weapons beyond what was available via stock, and in fact, TT and quite a few of the computer versions had no specific hard point limitations. If you had the crit space and weight available you could put any weapon anywhere you wanted.

In MWO that's not the case, and so be it. It's been 5 years now and it kind of works, so screw it specific predetermined hard point builds it is.

Quote

The Summoner Prime, in its stock configuration, has three weapons - an ER PPC, an LB/X-10, and an LRM-15. In MWO, this translates into...three...weapon hardpoints. 0% inflation. The 'Mech must also sacrifice the lion's share of its quirks if it desires to utilize alternative pod configurations that improves this rather abysmal loadout. The BNC-3E, on the other hand, retains its quirks in their entirety even when expanding beyond its three stock weapons into making use of the five additional weapon hardpoints it was granted.

Yeah I really feel SO badly you Clanners lose those quirks. Gee, the free CASE in every location, smaller, lighter, longer ranged, harder hitting weapons, with every 'mech having the ability to add TC's, and having ST loss survivable engines just ISN'T ENOUGH, is it?

Yeah, I am pouring on the sarcasm and derision. It's deserved.

Quote

Care to tell me again how the OmniPod system is a flat-out upgrade to being a BattleMech? Yes, there are times when the OmniPod system heavily benefits a given chassis. There are also times when being a BattleMech and being able to modify one's base chassis and benefit from staggering hardpoint bloat is a very nice benefit to a given machine.

Except that again as I mentioned before it's not just the adjustable hard points the Clanners get, it's EVERYTHING ELSE that they get to pile on top of it:

ST Loss Survivable Engines.
Smaller FF armor.
Smaller Endo Steel.
Smaller double heat sinks.
Smaller weapons.
Longer ranged weapons.
Harder hitting weapons.
Every 'mech can, if it wants, load a TC with crit/range and other bonuses.
If one variant in a chassis has ECM, every variant in the chassis can have an ECM.
Free CASE in every location.

So yeah a few extra hard points on the IS side seems like a minimal step in the direction of keeping things balanced, ESPECIALLY given that most IS 'mechs aren't going to be able to take advantage of all those hard points because:

Weapons are larger
Weapons are heavier
Compromise engine size too much, 'mech becomes overly slow and lacks agility

Your argument falls flat.

[Sjorpha]

1453 R, on 24 January 2017 - 10:48 AM, said:

The BNC-3E Banshee, in its stock configuration, has three weapons - a PPC, an AC/5, and a small laser. In MWO, this translates into eight weapon hardpoints. Nearly 300% inflation.

The Summoner Prime, in its stock configuration, has three weapons - an ER PPC, an LB/X-10, and an LRM-15. In MWO, this translates into...three...weapon hardpoints. 0% inflation. The 'Mech must also sacrifice the lion's share of its quirks if it desires to utilize alternative pod configurations that improves this rather abysmal loadout. The BNC-3E, on the other hand, retains its quirks in their entirety even when expanding beyond its three stock weapons into making use of the five additional weapon hardpoints it was granted.

How big the inflation is compared to the original setup doesn't matter really, what matters is the total access to hardpoints and how useful they are to make good builds. I mean the nova prime has 12 hardpoints with 0% inflation, so it makes more sense to say "this is a reasonable and useful access to hardpoints" than to look at the amount of inflation. The fact is that clan mechs on average has access to more hardpoints, usually more than any competitive build actually uses. It's true the summoner is a bit hardpoint starved and that this works out differently for different mechs, but you can't say the overall picture gives IS a hardpoint advantage because it's just not true.

I agree it's a side grade if you factor in the locked equipment, locked hardpoints (with some inflation) vs locked engine (etc) is a pretty fair and square tradeoff most of the time.

[nehebkau]

CK16, on 24 January 2017 - 08:07 AM, said:

Did you think they MIGHT not have "fixed" the instant dead ST lose is because they are going to add the LFE for IS come this summer?

No.
I think PGI doesn't want to fix is XL engines because that would be admitting a mistake with the IS vs. Clan XL engines and PGI never admits to making a mistake. Apparently EGO comes before good business.

[Dimento Graven]

Sjorpha, on 24 January 2017 - 11:20 AM, said:

...

I agree it's a side grade if you factor in the locked equipment, locked hardpoints (with some inflation) vs locked engine (etc) is a pretty fair and square tradeoff most of the time.

Except that with all the other bene's the clans get you start getting skewed performance profiles:

Where an HBK-IIC does better than a JM6, and a NTG performs better than a KGC, where you have IS 'mechs of heavier class than a Clan version of nearly identical layout, being far inferior.

Again, it's not JUST the differences in engines, or the difference between a locked engine vs. locked hard points:

It is the cumulative affect of all the systems interacting with one another that has produced such noticeable issues with balance over the past 3 or 4 years since Clans were introduced.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 24 January 2017 - 11:26 AM.

[Deathlike]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 08:58 AM, said:

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.

You are totally talking out the arse on this matter.

[Mcgral18]

1453 R, on 24 January 2017 - 08:33 AM, said:

Apply to both the cSTD and iSTD since the two engines are otherwise identical - cSTD has no benefits whatsoever over an iSTD. The LFE acts like a release cXL that saves less weight, the existing cXL continues to survive shoulder blowout at the cost of severe performance penalties, the iXL offers some pre-blowout bonuses that make it stronger than a cXL when it's intact. This is a more interesting route to take, and it's one I wish we could get the forum behind.

It's not that they're otherwise identical, they ARE identical
They, like SHS and a handful of other items, are the same
They have both factions flagged as equip-able

-<Module faction="Clan,InnerSphere" CType="CEngineStats" name="Engine_Std_60" id="3210">
<Loc iconTag="StoreIcons\StdEngine.dds" descTag="@Engine_Standard_Fusion_60_desc" nameTag="@Engine_Standard_Fusion_60"/>
<EngineStats movementHeatMultiplier="1.0" health="15" heatsinks="2" weight="-2.5" rating="60" sidesToDie="0" sideSlots="0" slots="6"/>
</Module>

There is only 1 STD engine
Not so for standard armour, which is odd

[Dimento Graven]

Deathlike, on 24 January 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

You are totally talking out the arse on this matter.

What ever.

[1453 R]

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 10:52 AM, said:

Actually I think it WAS changed because we have engines, where if you get them to decreasing size, you have to ADD heat sinks to your build.

The assumption being that under a certain size the 'mechs no longer have 10 heat sinks, and therefore your load out must be supplemented with external heat sinks to get to the minimum 10.

Fairly certain I'm at least partially right in what I've said.

Tabletop rules. An engine has 1 internal heat sink per 25 points of rating, period. A 175-rated engine had room for 7 internal sinks; at no point in the original tabletop canon did that engine have 10 heat sinks in it.

The tabletop rules allowed for weightless heat sinks outside the engine to make up the difference to the default required 10 - a 175-rated engine had seven internal and three external, but the first three external heat sinks cost zero tons. They still require critical space, but they do not require a tonnage allocation as well. A fact which makes people kinda scratch their heads if they know physics.

MWO did away with this by subtracting the required-heat-sink tonnage from the initial cost of the engine - lighter engines are actually lighter than they should be by tabletop rules, but that difference is exactly made up for by the weight of required external heat sinks. As gyro weight was also variable based on engine size, gyro weight was rolled into engine weight. As was cockpit weight for reasons I'm not sure on. The system has slightly different implementation, but you're neither gaining nor losing weight compared to tabletop. Nor gaining/loosing heat sinks.

Anyways.

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

Can you explain this further? Because, you mention 3 weapons, so that's 3 hard hard points.

Where do you get the other 5?

Banshee BNC-3E. RT 3E, LT 4B, H 1E

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

Now, if you're stating that there are more available hard points than just those 3, yes it makes sense, because historically, as in the past 30+ years of table top and various iterations of computer games, IS 'mechs have pretty much allowed for customization.

And yet Clan 'Mechs, which the lore specifically sets up as being extremely flexible due to the OmniMech system specifically developed for flexibility, don't get the same pass?

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

There has never been a hard and fast rule that you can't add weapons beyond what was available via stock, and in fact, TT and quite a few of the computer versions had no specific hard point limitations. If you had the crit space and weight available you could put any weapon anywhere you wanted.

In MWO that's not the case, and so be it. It's been 5 years now and it kind of works, so screw it specific predetermined hard point builds it is.

This is because previous MechWarrior titles were essentially Gunbags Online. Pick the best geometry, put the best guns in it, Game Solved. MWO attempts to preserve a balance between customization and 'Mech flavor with the hardpoint system, which is fine. It's the most interesting 'MechLab in the game series so far.

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

Yeah I really feel SO badly you Clanners lose those quirks. Gee, the free CASE in every location, smaller, lighter, longer ranged, harder hitting weapons, with every 'mech having the ability to add TC's, and having ST loss survivable engines just ISN'T ENOUGH, is it?

Yeah, I am pouring on the sarcasm and derision. It's deserved.

It's really not.

Have you not seen me and Sjorpha batting ideas for inter-tech balance back and forth? I've said in this specific thread that the cXL deserves today's performance hit and will likely end up with even more performance hits later on. I've been on record no less than forty-seven ganillion times as wanting Clan energy dialed back, and have put up exact numbers more than once. Ask just about anybody here who knows me - I'm looking for Different But Equal. I've been flogging that horse with everything I've got in recent times, and was a proponent of similar ideas before.

So you can take your sarcasm and derision and shove it straight back up your exhaust vents.

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

Except that again as I mentioned before it's not just the adjustable hard points the Clanners get, it's EVERYTHING ELSE that they get to pile on top of it:

ST Loss Survivable Engines.
Smaller FF armor.
Smaller Endo Steel.
Smaller double heat sinks.
Smaller weapons.
Longer ranged weapons.
Harder hitting weapons.
Every 'mech can, if it wants, load a TC with crit/range and other bonuses.
If one variant in a chassis has ECM, every variant in the chassis can have an ECM.
Free CASE in every location.

So fix those things.

We've spent the whole thread discussing engine balance.

Smaller structural upgrades deserves its own thread, but I've touched on it a few times.

I'm just as on record as believing that the lower bonus heat capacity per cDHS should be reinstated as another compensation for its size - give the same heat cap per slot, as well as the same health.

Smaller weapons are in the midst of being balanced out right now - Ultra/Standard autocannon balance being the signature "more like this, please" example between the two.

Range, damage? Ideally Clan gear pays for both with more difficult mechanical behavior - longer burn time on lasers, burstfire autocannons, ripple-fire missiles and the like. Most folks agree that Sphere lasers should have greater impulse damage than comparable Clan lasers. Slug vs. burst autocannons are already there. Missiles are halfway there.

Targeting computers are a nonissue. Spending tonnage on a TC removes tonnage available for other options, and reduces a 'Mech's killing power. They're basically quirks you have to pay weight and slots for. An advantage? Yes. And given the current MWO implementation of TCs, when the Sphere gets their own in a few months here they can just be to-for-ton comparable to the Clan version since the weight onus of the Sphere version disappears in our weird tiered system.

ECM is a paper tiger by this point. it's not the game-defining Supah Cloak it once was, and it's proliferated widely enough that people who want ECM can have ECM. Also yes, the OmniPod system allows Clan machines to have ECM. Okay, cool. Most ECM pods (most, mind) come at the expense of potential firepower, and those that don't can be dealt with individually.

C.A.S.E. is also a nonissue, since ammo explosions are a blue-moon event. Make Sphere C.A.S.E. into, effectively, C.A.S.E. II - have it just vent everything but a token amount of damage from an ammo boom out the back. Suddenly it makes sense on iXLs again, it becomes attractive for torso Gauss users, and also it's something the Clans don't get in exchange for their integrated C.A.S.E.

None of this has anything to do with Omni rules.

Dimento Graven, on 24 January 2017 - 11:03 AM, said:

So yeah a few extra hard points on the IS side seems like a minimal step in the direction of keeping things balanced, ESPECIALLY given that most IS 'mechs aren't going to be able to take advantage of all those hard points because:

Weapons are larger
Weapons are heavier
Compromise engine size too much, 'mech becomes overly slow and lacks agility

Your argument falls flat.

My argument hasn't been addressed. You just threw up a bunch of other stuff that is tangentially related to Omni rules at best and said "NYAH". Again - fix those things, don't use them as a stick to whack people with because you don't like Omni rules.

Tech balance is tech balance. Omni rules are Omni rules. OmniMechs should feel significantly different from BattleMechs because the game's more fun that way, but I've given up on the differences between the two being Clan/Sphere differences. Clan/Sphere differences need to be independent of 'Mech/OmniMech differences, or we get situations like the Hunch IIC or the Strider/Owens on either end. if both sides get access to both types of 'Mech, then Clan/Sphere balancing needs to be independent of the Battle/Omni distinction. No matter how much you want to flog Clan machines with it.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

process, on 24 January 2017 - 08:30 AM, said:

In the grand scheme of things, I think the IS engines are the least of our problems.

LFEs fit nicely between the high-risk-high-reward IS XL, and the supposedly tanky IS STD. The IS STD should get a buff, since it's being triple penalized: slower, fewer weapons, and fewer free heatsink crit slots. Also, zombie mode is highly overrated and not useful in a Clan mech world. Giving it something like extra tankiness or heat dissipation seems like the first step and a no-brainer.

As far as Clan XL vs IS engines, that's a completely separate discussion.

isXL= High Risk/High Reward
cXL=No Risk/Very High reward

[Dimento Graven]

1453 R, on 24 January 2017 - 11:45 AM, said:

Tabletop rules. An engine has 1 internal heat sink per 25 points of rating, period. A 175-rated engine had room for 7 internal sinks; at no point in the original tabletop canon did that engine have 10 heat sinks in it.

The tabletop rules allowed for weightless heat sinks outside the engine to make up the difference to the default required 10 - a 175-rated engine had seven internal and three external, but the first three external heat sinks cost zero tons. They still require critical space, but they do not require a tonnage allocation as well. A fact which makes people kinda scratch their heads if they know physics.

MWO did away with this by subtracting the required-heat-sink tonnage from the initial cost of the engine - lighter engines are actually lighter than they should be by tabletop rules, but that difference is exactly made up for by the weight of required external heat sinks. As gyro weight was also variable based on engine size, gyro weight was rolled into engine weight. As was cockpit weight for reasons I'm not sure on. The system has slightly different implementation, but you're neither gaining nor losing weight compared to tabletop. Nor gaining/loosing heat sinks.

Yeah, I'm beginning to remember that now. It's been more than a decade since the last time I played TT, and went through 'mech design process, and now that you mention it, maybe it was originally PGI had the 10 'free' heat sinks internal to the engine, then 'fixed' it with the weight adjustments.

Kind of backwards from what I was remembering.

Admittedly, you're probably right and I'm wrong on this one.

Quote

Anyways.

Banshee BNC-3E. RT 3E, LT 4B, H 1E

yeah it's like I was saying, the 3 weapons take 3 hard points, PGI just added some additional hard points based on... whatever, to allow for that IS customization.

Quote

And yet Clan 'Mechs, which the lore specifically sets up as being extremely flexible due to the OmniMech system specifically developed for flexibility, don't get the same pass?

They do get the same pass, and better, because an Omni 'mech isn't limited to only the hard points of their original Omni pod layout, they can swap a PRIM with an A, B, C, etc. pod, allowing for the building of various monstrous boats.

It's just that the supposed trade off is, they don't get to swap out their XL engine.

The point being that, so far in MWO, since the Clan default XL engine in the Clan Omni 'mech chassis, typically grants Clan 'mechs a speed advantage over their IS equivalent (plus ST survivability the IS doesn't get), it really isn't MUCH of a balance when compared to the IS's extra hard points, flexible engine, but game ending ST loss XL engines.

Quote

This is because previous MechWarrior titles were essentially Gunbags Online. Pick the best geometry, put the best guns in it, Game Solved. MWO attempts to preserve a balance between customization and 'Mech flavor with the hardpoint system, which is fine. It's the most interesting 'MechLab in the game series so far.

But falls far short of the intended purpose of allowing 'different but balanced'.

Quote

It's really not.

It is when you try to use the loss of Clan quirks when swapping out omnipods as some sort of balance against the IS having extra hard points it may not, and usually, can't take full advantage of due to weight and crit space issues.

Quote

Have you not seen me and Sjorpha batting ideas for inter-tech balance back and forth? I've said in this specific thread that the cXL deserves today's performance hit and will likely end up with even more performance hits later on. I've been on record no less than forty-seven ganillion times as wanting Clan energy dialed back, and have put up exact numbers more than once. Ask just about anybody here who knows me - I'm looking for Different But Equal. I've been flogging that horse with everything I've got in recent times, and was a proponent of similar ideas before.

So you can take your sarcasm and derision and shove it straight back up your exhaust vents.

Then stop making points that make it seem like the IS has it oh so good, because it gets some extra hard points.

Quote

So fix those things.

Agreed. Make the 'free Clan CASE' take up crit space. Make it OPTIONAL too, so that if the Clanner wants the crit space, he can remove the CASE. I don't even care about making it weight anything at this point. It could still be weightless, just make it take up some damn space already.

Quote

We've spent the whole thread discussing engine balance.

Smaller structural upgrades deserves its own thread, but I've touched on it a few times.

I'm just as on record as believing that the lower bonus heat capacity per cDHS should be reinstated as another compensation for its size - give the same heat cap per slot, as well as the same health.

Smaller weapons are in the midst of being balanced out right now - Ultra/Standard autocannon balance being the signature "more like this, please" example between the two.

Range, damage? Ideally Clan gear pays for both with more difficult mechanical behavior - longer burn time on lasers, burstfire autocannons, ripple-fire missiles and the like. Most folks agree that Sphere lasers should have greater impulse damage than comparable Clan lasers. Slug vs. burst autocannons are already there. Missiles are halfway there.

Points we more or less agree on.

Quote

Targeting computers are a nonissue. Spending tonnage on a TC removes tonnage available for other options, and reduces a 'Mech's killing power. They're basically quirks you have to pay weight and slots for. An advantage? Yes. And given the current MWO implementation of TCs, when the Sphere gets their own in a few months here they can just be to-for-ton comparable to the Clan version since the weight onus of the Sphere version disappears in our weird tiered system.

Yeah, no, we'll disagree on this one. The TC absolutely adds to a 'mechs 'killing power', with the speed, range, and crit benefits, and the fact that any Clan 'mech has been able to load one since the TC has been added, and the IS CC is limited to so very few chassis and lacks the same benefits, it's just adds to the preponderance of systemic advantages the clans enjoy.

We really can't balance each item one-for-one because these systems all interact with each other and the cumulative benefits or negative affects adds up when stacked.

Quote

ECM is a paper tiger by this point. it's not the game-defining Supah Cloak it once was, and it's proliferated widely enough that people who want ECM can have ECM. Also yes, the OmniPod system allows Clan machines to have ECM. Okay, cool. Most ECM pods (most, mind) come at the expense of potential firepower, and those that don't can be dealt with individually.

Have you been in FP recently. I've yet to encounter a single FP match where the Clan side didn't have multiple waves of ECM baring LRM boats.

I've yet to see an effective equivalent on the IS side because so few 'mechs have ECM available to them.

I'd hardly call it a 'paper tiger'...

Quote

C.A.S.E. is also a nonissue, since ammo explosions are a blue-moon event. Make Sphere C.A.S.E. into, effectively, C.A.S.E. II - have it just vent everything but a token amount of damage from an ammo boom out the back. Suddenly it makes sense on iXLs again, it becomes attractive for torso Gauss users, and also it's something the Clans don't get in exchange for their integrated C.A.S.E.

None of this has anything to do with Omni rules.

Don't really care about rules, I care about the affect in MWO, and it's a big one. I've played both IS and Clan 'mechs with ammo based builds and gauss based builds. When I'm in an IS 'mech and I have gauss in the arm, and it blows up? Ouch major ST damage, god help you if you're running an XL in there. Of course, I COULD give up some speed, and/or ammo, and/or armor, and/or firepower to load up the CASE.

In a Clan 'mech, and the IIC's I can remember, it's not even a consideration. It's just there, free of charge, and since it in all 8 locations (H, CT, LA, RA, LT, RT, LL, RL), that's 8 slots and the tonnage associated with it that the Clan pilot can dedicate towards fire power, heat sinks, and ammo.

Quote

My argument hasn't been addressed. You just threw up a bunch of other stuff that is tangentially related to Omni rules at best and said &quot;NYAH&quot;. Again - fix those things, don't use them as a stick to whack people with because you don't like Omni rules.

Tech balance is tech balance. Omni rules are Omni rules. OmniMechs should feel significantly different from BattleMechs because the game's more fun that way, but I've given up on the differences between the two being Clan/Sphere differences. Clan/Sphere differences need to be independent of 'Mech/OmniMech differences, or we get situations like the Hunch IIC or the Strider/Owens on either end. if both sides get access to both types of 'Mech, then Clan/Sphere balancing needs to be independent of the Battle/Omni distinction. No matter how much you want to flog Clan machines with it.

Yeah well, currently PGI is flying the "no Clantech for IS", so the basis of that particular argument isn't even moot. They've FINALLY changed their position on "Future Tech", but unless they do something to match the totality of effect of all the Clan systems, even that will be fraught with frustration and imbalance.

It's just not possible to balance this game based on an item-by-item comparison.

I_AM_ZUUL, on 24 January 2017 - 11:59 AM, said:

isXL= High Risk/moderate Reward
cXL=No Risk/Very High reward

FTFY.

[ZippySpeedMonkey]

They're fine the way they are, you all know the risk when taking them, so don't complain...

[Johnny Z]

Clan XL should go legged speed after side torso loss!

[Dimento Graven]

ZippySpeedMonkey, on 24 January 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

They're fine the way they are, you all know the risk when taking them, so don't complain...

Oh, ok, well if it's fine the way it is, then Clan 'mechs should die when they lose an ST with their XL engines too then.

They'll know the risk... So it's ok.

[1453 R]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 24 January 2017 - 11:59 AM, said:

isXL= High Risk/High Reward
cXL=No Risk/Very High reward

Knock it off. The two options have the exact same reward; the cXL doesn't offer a single gram of weight savings the iXL doesn't. The risk is different, true, but that's what people are trying to sort out. Snarky memebait serves no one.