1453 R, on 22 February 2017 - 01:25 PM, said:
You're not protesting them now, eh?
Here; I'll use nice big letters so it's easy for you:
I'm not protesting them now, BECAUSE THERE AREN'T ANY YET. YOU'RE SPECULATING. I'll protest them if they happen.
Otherwise, I'll say "Hey, that would be bad, and would need to be tuned" - which is what I've said. I don't poopoo an entire system because of a potential tuning problem that'd be easily correctable
on the test server this is going to arrive on long before it goes live, if at all. That would be ridiculous.
Quote
Yes, I get that agility is a function of groundspeed. You know what I meant - in a system where the only possible variable one can adjust to increase or decrease their mobility is removed from play, it doesn't matter what counts as 'bonus' agility, baseline agility, or anything else - it's all the same absolute untouchable hardlocked package. Agility tree nodes are a complete nonentity because either they're mandatory, and thus part of the basic mobility package, or they're garbage and thus not part of the base mobility package.
Skills. In a well balanced world, you'd choose whether or not you want the extra mobility from skills.
Don't you see; right now, large engines are mandatory. This is fundamentally identical to agility skills being mandatory. If agility skills are viewed as mandatory, then baseline agility should be increased or (if they are too extreme) the skills should be decreased, so that they're balanced around "You have sufficient agility to be competitive as a baseline, and can
elect to be more agile at the cost of something else.
There's a cost to it now; except as 100% of people use very large engines now, it's exactly as "mandatory" as your skills complaint. And that's a problem.
Quote
So. Once more - which tab in the MechLab can I go to in order to tweak my myomer rig, actuator systems, control runs, or whatever else it takes to get some shake back into the bake?
Skills. See above.
Quote
You and Quick and everyone else keeps ignoring the Prosperity question y'all shoved in my face when Prosperity was trying to get Clan gear megagigagagglenerfed:
Why is it that a 26.5t engine is ideally supposed to be considered equivalent, with no advantages or desirable traits, compared to a 12.5t engine? Because that's the game you keep describing to me, and I don't understand why fourteen tons is allowed to buy you nothing of value if these two engine types are supposed to be perfectly competitively equivalent to each other.
Is a twenty-six ton engine supposed to be better than a twelve-ton engine or isn't it? If it's not supposed to be better than a twelve-ton engine, explain to me why a player would choose to spend fourteen tons on flab? If fourteen tons of weight, however, is supposed to buy the sort of massive advantage you'd expect the entire mass of two PPCs, or one AC/20 (with ammo/heat sinks, on the Clan side!) to yield...then why is everyone so pissed the hell off that upgrading your engine yields strong benefits?
It is supposed to be better. It IS better. Lets use real examples here, because you waffle heavily hyperbolic and that makes legitimate discussion impossible.
Exhibit 1a:
WHM-6R with 320XL at 18.5 tons 80kph.
Exhibit 1b:
WHM-6R with 270STD at 18.5 tons 62kph. Doesn't die at ST loss, but loses a 18kph (around 23% of its ground speed!), 6 critical slots (having to move the 2DHS out-of-engine), AND roughly a quarter of it's agility.
This is clearly not a good deal, because
absolutely nobody runs the later build. In the later system, the STD equipped mech still loses it's ground speed (and again, 23% speed loss is HUGE) and the 6 critical slots, but that's it. It's still every bit as agile.
Thus, standard engines (which are always going to be lower rated) are getting buffed by this change. That's valuable, because right now standard engines are a joke and this directly contributes to Clans having a massive survivability advantage.
Oh, but you're talking about a 26t vs 12t engine, right? Well, lets look at that. We'll stay in XL's, to not complicate things with survivability differences.
Exhibit 2a:
BNC-3M with 375XL at 26.5 tons 69kph. 20DHS. Heavy mech agility.
Exhibit 2b:
BNC-3M with 250XL at 12.5 tons 48kph. 15DHS. It makes a Direwolf look like a dancer. Sure; "More Firepower!" you say.... How? How do you use that tonnage for more armor, or more firepower? You don't. Period. Because more tonnage free isn't always useful at all. It's got -2 small lasers and +2 LPL and a Medium Laser. YAY! More firepower! Except...
But lets pretend the new system is in place. They have the same (reasonable, not "worst case scenario terrible) agility. Are people going to flock to the later build? No, of course not.
To be frank: If you're going to argue that 48 KPH is functionally identical to 69 KPH in a MWO battle, you're a bloody idiot. That 21kph is huge, it's a near third of the faster mechs speed.
Those 5 extra DHS are also massive, a quarter of the total DHS count. You're going from 12s to overheat firing everything (but not triggering ghost heat) to 6s to overheat. 78 capacity/4 dissipation to 69 capacity/3.16 dissipation. Sure, the later mech has more guns, but that just means it hits heat cap twice as rapidly. If you DIDN'T take those extra guns, you couldn't have taken more DHS
because you didn't have sufficient slots, even after you remove Endosteel.
Those 5 DHS you can pack into the 375 are HUGE. You're going from 48 KPH to 69 KPH.
And you're
seriously arguing:
Quote
"explain to me why a player would choose to spend fourteen tons on flab? If fourteen tons of weight, however, is supposed to buy the sort of massive advantage you'd expect the entire mass of two PPCs, or one AC/20 (with ammo/heat sinks, on the Clan side!) to yield
You're spending 14 more tons to gain a
45% increase in ground speed and 5x3=
15 critical slots you can spend on DHS. The bigger engine is allowing MORE functional firepower. The bigger engine is moving you 45% faster.
That's not "Flab".
Edited by Wintersdark, 22 February 2017 - 04:08 PM.
5
