77 replies to this topic

[Naduk]

the engine desync allows for more solid chassis identity

for a great many builds and chassis its a direct buff

take a current hunchback for example
if you run a massive engine in it, its super fast and agile
but if you put a very small engine its super slow and bulky

but lore describes it at a more sluggish medium

what the desync does is equalize this variance that should never have existed
it makes all hunchbacks feel and perform like hunchbacks
if you want to go faster than the usual top speed you increase your engine
if you dont mind going slower so you can carry some more guns , you decrease your engine

if you want to be more agile then you should be spending skill points on agility instead of other things

you can still run a agile and fast brawling hunchback
you just have to spec your machine for the purpose
you no longer get everything for free

[Zuesacoatl]

MMoonSetW, on 27 April 2017 - 06:33 AM, said:

No, the steering does not change, but the acceleration most definitely will. Also, a car's steering is different than that of a mech. To make a closer comparison, if you have double the muscle, you surely will run faster, accelerate faster and turn quicker.

This is wrong, Adding muscle does not guarantee faster acceleration or more agility. Adding muscle adds mass, more mass taxes the ligaments and joints to make the appropriate actions to make the leap forward, or to turn quicker. If what you say were true, The last gold medalist in the long run would be the size of Arnold during his Predator days. More agility requires a more refined and defined muscle than a larger one. Watch US football and watch replays of the massive lineman with huge muscles pop their ACLs when they tried to make a turn on a dime to catch the runner. Pretty hard evidence against the bigger the muscle, the better the accel and agil. Cars are truly a better example. Dropping a big block into a normal small block chassis will increase acceleration, it can increase turning ability because it adds more weight to the front wheels to produce more grip, but that power at some point will overpower the chassis created ability of compensation. you can add a better suspension and ground effects to assist with it (skill tree perks in essence) but overall, you will never be able to harness the full power of a power plant that outputs more power than the chassis was designed to take.

i like the desync, it allows for more customization options without being forced to have to sacrifice mobility in order to carry firepower, much like the current system demands. If you want mobility, get it in the tree. If you are fine with the standard mobility and wish to spend more in other areas of the tree, that is fine as well. There should have been more give and take in this system from the beginning, it has always favored those who want mobility over those who want firepower. Now both ends start off at the same location, and can adjust accordingly.

[Zuesacoatl]

Naduk, on 28 April 2017 - 12:19 AM, said:

you can still run a agile and fast brawling hunchback
you just have to spec your machine for the purpose
you no longer get everything for free

Beat me to my last point lol

[SmokedJag]

MMoonSetW, on 27 April 2017 - 06:33 AM, said:

No, the steering does not change, but the acceleration most definitely will. Also, a car's steering is different than that of a mech. To make a closer comparison, if you have double the muscle, you surely will run faster, accelerate faster and turn quicker.

Tell that to professional athletes. There's a reason swimmers, sprinters and footballers (soccer) are lean and tailor workouts specifically to not put on new pounds of muscle. You also don't see 250lb cornerbacks in the NFL. Speaking of the NFL, the extreme mass and burst speed some positions go for has a lot to do with all the ligaments and tendons they blow. These don't strength-train, they only work at "stock" values as it were.

There is absolutely a physics point of diminishing returns and then negative returns (enough mass to reduce performance, structural failures) in adding power to both humans and machines.

Edited by SmokedJag, 28 April 2017 - 02:48 AM.

[MMoonSetW]

Karl Streiger, on 27 April 2017 - 11:59 PM, said:

Well as far as i understand the desync will ignore any engine. So any 50t Mech will behave the same (minus quirks)

So this guy:


Will be as mobile as this one:

100XL vs 350XL

I'm pretty sure there is an average "mobility" sweet spot - for example (tonnage rating x 4) that would have the same mobility as now - anything above will get nerfed anything below will get buffed.
But this depends on the "average" - it could also be x6 for lights, x5 for meds, x4 for heavys x3 for assaults

However, this change goes completely in the wrong direction.
Rather than the rating - the engine weight x crits should be considered

For example, a Mech with 350 STD moves faster than those with 350XL - of course the gain in mobility should not be linear - this would be stupid,

Not sure if there is an actual sweet spot, but I think letting people configure the base stats themselves will always be better since you never know what a player would like to do to a mech.

[MMoonSetW]

Naduk, on 28 April 2017 - 12:19 AM, said:

the engine desync allows for more solid chassis identity

for a great many builds and chassis its a direct buff

take a current hunchback for example
if you run a massive engine in it, its super fast and agile
but if you put a very small engine its super slow and bulky

but lore describes it at a more sluggish medium

what the desync does is equalize this variance that should never have existed
it makes all hunchbacks feel and perform like hunchbacks
if you want to go faster than the usual top speed you increase your engine
if you dont mind going slower so you can carry some more guns , you decrease your engine

if you want to be more agile then you should be spending skill points on agility instead of other things

you can still run a agile and fast brawling hunchback
you just have to spec your machine for the purpose
you no longer get everything for free

No I cannot get an agile hunchback anymore, the current one with skills has about 70 acceleration, and the PTS one is 24 with skills (I didn't get all the agility skills, but even at full skills the PTS will still have a very hard time being half as agile.)

No I did not get agility for free, a 275 is heavier than a 200.

The lore is like that only because it has a small engine in it.

Zuesacoatl, on 28 April 2017 - 12:54 AM, said:

This is wrong, Adding muscle does not guarantee faster acceleration or more agility. Adding muscle adds mass, more mass taxes the ligaments and joints to make the appropriate actions to make the leap forward, or to turn quicker. If what you say were true, The last gold medalist in the long run would be the size of Arnold during his Predator days. More agility requires a more refined and defined muscle than a larger one. Watch US football and watch replays of the massive lineman with huge muscles pop their ACLs when they tried to make a turn on a dime to catch the runner. Pretty hard evidence against the bigger the muscle, the better the accel and agil. Cars are truly a better example. Dropping a big block into a normal small block chassis will increase acceleration, it can increase turning ability because it adds more weight to the front wheels to produce more grip, but that power at some point will overpower the chassis created ability of compensation. you can add a better suspension and ground effects to assist with it (skill tree perks in essence) but overall, you will never be able to harness the full power of a power plant that outputs more power than the chassis was designed to take.

i like the desync, it allows for more customization options without being forced to have to sacrifice mobility in order to carry firepower, much like the current system demands. If you want mobility, get it in the tree. If you are fine with the standard mobility and wish to spend more in other areas of the tree, that is fine as well. There should have been more give and take in this system from the beginning, it has always favored those who want mobility over those who want firepower. Now both ends start off at the same location, and can adjust accordingly.

Simply, for a mech there is a top tonnage, your argument is invalid.

The closest analogy to adding a big engine to a mech is a human with powerful legs but skiny top half, keeping the overall weight the same. However you didn't mention the overall weight in your analogy.

Yes there is a point when a engine is overpowering the chassis, and that's called engine cap.

Edited by MMoonSetW, 28 April 2017 - 04:56 AM.

[Nameless King]

Dogstar, on 27 April 2017 - 01:17 AM, said:

Have you actually tried your mechs with the engine desync?

I just finished testing my Assassin, Black Knight, Battlemaster, and Cyclops and they all felt nicely agile. A bit slower to accelerate and decelerate but I haven't applied any skill points to any of them.

Engine desync has no effect on top speed - so a fast mech in the live game is still a fast mech after this goes live, and, as I've just pointed out, agility (twisting and turning) is still good.

Are you kidding? All of those mechs feel sluggish compared to current.

[Karl Streiger]

King Alen, on 28 April 2017 - 04:52 AM, said:

Are you kidding? All of those mechs feel sluggish compared to current.

He posted the engine rating in a different post - with exception of the black knight all had below average engines - so they woudl have felt better.

MMoonSetW, on 28 April 2017 - 04:45 AM, said:

Not sure if there is an actual sweet spot, but I think letting people configure the base stats themselves will always be better since you never know what a player would like to do to a mech.

No I think this is the only thing I might accept. People should get the minimum mobility based on the rating of the Stock Reaktor - reducing the rating will cause less mobility- over exceedingg that rating will do nothing but grant higher top speed.

In other words, the 300er CN9-D would be the most mobile, but you hardly would make the UrbanMech any faster (ok this would be a death sentence - simple because twisting and turning is a defensive manoeuvre that is needed to compensate for those silly armor distribution.

[MMoonSetW]

Karl Streiger, on 28 April 2017 - 04:58 AM, said:

He posted the engine rating in a different post - with exception of the black knight all had below average engines - so they woudl have felt better.


No I think this is the only thing I might accept. People should get the minimum mobility based on the rating of the Stock Reaktor - reducing the rating will cause less mobility- over exceedingg that rating will do nothing but grant higher top speed.

In other words, the 300er CN9-D would be the most mobile, but you hardly would make the UrbanMech any faster (ok this would be a death sentence - simple because twisting and turning is a defensive manoeuvre that is needed to compensate for those silly armor distribution.

Then what's wrong with people reconfiguring their mechs' agility, that way everyone is right at the sweet spot.

Yeah the Urbanmech is the perfect example for a mech that will need a big buff in the PTS, and every other mech that tends the use larger engines than the stock ones as well. And that effectively brings us to the current system, so why bother limiting people's choices?

Edited by MMoonSetW, 28 April 2017 - 05:15 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

MMoonSetW, on 28 April 2017 - 05:12 AM, said:

Then what's wrong with people reconfiguring their mechs' agility, that way everyone is right at the sweet spot.

Yeah the Urbanmech is the perfect example

Given the state of the game? nothing.

in a perfect MWO - the urbanmechs ability to have an AC10 and heavy armor would be unique and it would be devastating fighting other mechs - or at least given the RnR you need to pay.

But hey we have tiny weapon stacking for the full death star effect, armor points that are not depended on hit box size, heatsinks that become more and more inefficient the more you mount
- so no nothing would be wrong.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 28 April 2017 - 05:19 AM.

[MMoonSetW]

Karl Streiger, on 28 April 2017 - 05:15 AM, said:

Given the state of the game? nothing.

in a perfect MWO - the urbanmechs ability to have an AC10 and heavy armor would be unique and it would be devastating fighting other mechs - or at least given the RnR you need to pay.

But hey we have tiny weapon stacking for the full death star effect, armor points that are not depended on hit box size, heatsinks that become more and more inefficient the more you mount
- so no nothing would be wrong.

Then we can at least stop making it less right.

[Naduk]

MMoonSetW, on 28 April 2017 - 04:51 AM, said:

No I cannot get an agile hunchback anymore, the current one with skills has about 70 acceleration, and the PTS one is 24 with skills (I didn't get all the agility skills, but even at full skills the PTS will still have a very hard time being half as agile.)

No I did not get agility for free, a 275 is heavier than a 200.

The lore is like that only because it has a small engine in it.

yes you did get agility for free
to increase agility you would have to upgrade your actuators and myomers to better quality ones
just like anything else you want to upgrade it must come from somewhere and cost something
this is where masc and superchargers come in

engines only increase your max speed in trade for tonnage
getting total agility increase on top of that should never have happened

you are correct in stating that you cannot match a hunchbacks agility to the current standard
however this issue has nothing to do with the desync as mobility and speed has been reduced game wide

the desync performs its task perfectly
a mech line now operates via its base stats
many of the intended agile mechs have retained their mobility because their quirks and buffs were baked into the base stats

therefore
under the new agility standards
an agility hunchback build is still available, but it must be gained via the skill tree
note that you can then drop engine size and sacrifice speed to adjust weapons and retain all agility
this means your future builds and tweaks will not be punished by dropping down a little bit to get a little bit of extra something

a agile hunchback is still agile and snappy compared to its other weapon/defense orientated brethren
even if it is slower in comparison to todays "standard"

if you require more agility
find a new mech that suits the role of agility like a phoenix hawk

improvements are not free
not all units can do all roles
this is the core flavor of battletech

[MMoonSetW]

Naduk, on 28 April 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

yes you did get agility for free
to increase agility you would have to upgrade your actuators and myomers to better quality ones
just like anything else you want to upgrade it must come from somewhere and cost something
this is where masc and superchargers come in

engines only increase your max speed in trade for tonnage
getting total agility increase on top of that should never have happened

you are correct in stating that you cannot match a hunchbacks agility to the current standard
however this issue has nothing to do with the desync as mobility and speed has been reduced game wide

the desync performs its task perfectly
a mech line now operates via its base stats
many of the intended agile mechs have retained their mobility because their quirks and buffs were baked into the base stats

therefore
under the new agility standards
an agility hunchback build is still available, but it must be gained via the skill tree
note that you can then drop engine size and sacrifice speed to adjust weapons and retain all agility
this means your future builds and tweaks will not be punished by dropping down a little bit to get a little bit of extra something

a agile hunchback is still agile and snappy compared to its other weapon/defense orientated brethren
even if it is slower in comparison to todays "standard"

if you require more agility
find a new mech that suits the role of agility like a phoenix hawk

improvements are not free
not all units can do all roles
this is the core flavor of battletech

There's no option to upgrade actuators beyond the deplorable amount offered by the skill tree. If there's one in the lore then PGI must make it so that I have the option. MASCs are great but not every mech can do it.

The link you provided did not say that a bigger engine ONLY allows a mech to have higher top speed.

The relative loss in agility is caused by the desync because some mechs are hit way harder than others.

Engine desync has a very questionable task to begin with.
A mech now performs however PGI thinks it should, not how its owner thinks (pays tonnage for) should.
Many does not mean all. PGI has no right force a role onto a mech, the individual player should, or by the process of designing a build, will naturally determine a role of the individual mech owned by that individual player.

Agility builds work by competing with (enemy) human reaction, which is not nerfed by desync. So even all agility numbers are nerfed by the same percentage, it is still a nerf to agility builds. Skill tree does not bring the hunchback to the agility level RELATIVE to other mechs post nerf. So agility hunchback builds are no longer viable.

Even not comparing to today's standard the agility hunchback has still dropped a significant amount relative to its peers.

Improvements have never been free.
A unit can at least do whatever within its engine cap.
This is the core flavor of MWO.

[Lunatic_Asylum]

Moonset is right. Speed, turning power, and acceleration should all depend upon the engine type. Light Mechs now have less chance of survival with all of those changes, and it just feels obtuse to get a Stalker STD 100 build that turns well and accelerates well at 19.1 kmph.

I say a big "NO!" to this change.

[MMoonSetW]

Also, to all of you out there saying that the skill tree + engine desync provides more customization in terms of mobility, just look at how much the entire mobility tree can provide and how much engine swap can provide, the new system is deplorable.

[Naduk]

MMoonSetW, on 28 April 2017 - 08:12 AM, said:

PGI has no right force a role onto a mech

im going to stop you right there for a second

PGI is trying to maintain the role of mechs provided by 25+ years of battletech history
regardless of how this might upset you, it is fully their right and is expected of them by the majority of the player base

it is also THEIR version of Mechwarrior and its their product and game
that means

PGI has every right to force a role, flavor, feel ,aspiration or any other such characteristic for any mech
PGI has the right to balance any mech, item, weapon, gear, object, map or currency to how they see fit, whenever they see fit

they get to choose every microscopic detail
what mech has what hardpoints, movement stats, armour values, everything

they are under no obligation to listen to you or me or anyone else because they have thousands of people who all believe different things who all want different things all vying for their attention

if you play their game in a way they dont like, they have every right to change its rules
**see jump sniping **

ok back on topic

your going to loose this mobility regardless
so be very careful what you wish for

even if they drop the engine desync idea
your going to get mobility nerfs and it will probably be something worse that we havent thought of
they have been looking for speed reductions in game for a long time

the engine desync is more than just speed reductions, this is a total quality of life improvement

putting a smaller engine in a Assualt mech is exceedingly punishing
putting a smaller engine in a light mech is even worse
your sacrifice is top speed and by extension life time

dropping your reaction speed is an unrealistic penalty to a already paid for change

across the board this change allows you to shift engine tonnage up or down with more freedom
you can design your build to your liking without the fear of being punished for small engine reductions

as to the links i provided
its states specifically that velocity is the only change via engine change

"Mechs, the engine rating is the mathematical product of the mass of the vehicle and its desired maximum walking or cruising velocity"
engine swap does not affect your melee damage, jump ability's, aim accuracy or any other stat that had direct ties to mech agility

if an Atlas has a 100 or a 400 engine equipped it will punch with the same strength
it will twist with the same speed at the same rate

[Galenit]

MMoonSetW, on 28 April 2017 - 04:51 AM, said:

No I cannot get an agile hunchback anymore, the current one with skills has about 70 acceleration, and the PTS one is 24 with skills (I didn't get all the agility skills, but even at full skills the PTS will still have a very hard time being half as agile.)

No I did not get agility for free, a 275 is heavier than a 200.

The lore is like that only because it has a small engine in it.

The hunchback is based on the lore with its small engine.
Want a fast hb, no problem.

Want a more agile mech, take one, maybe you cant have that high weaponmounts or a little less tons to use but if agility is what you want, it should be no problem.

But if you want high speed and high agility and high mounts...
Sorry no allinclusive any more, you have to deside what you want:
High mounts or dancing balarina?
More weapons or better speed?
And to some degree you can compensate it with invested skillpoints.

I like the new system, i will bring more variance on the battlefield.

Edit:
If they would make the base agility of each mech not only tied to its wheigt but also on its mounts, i would be a great s tep to make low weaponmounts more viable again.
Like: Giving the atlas a little more base agility then the kodiak to compensate the high kdk mounts.

Edited by Galenit, 29 April 2017 - 02:43 AM.

[MMoonSetW]

Naduk, on 29 April 2017 - 02:02 AM, said:

im going to stop you right there for a second

PGI is trying to maintain the role of mechs provided by 25+ years of battletech history
regardless of how this might upset you, it is fully their right and is expected of them by the majority of the player base

it is also THEIR version of Mechwarrior and its their product and game
that means

PGI has every right to force a role, flavor, feel ,aspiration or any other such characteristic for any mech
PGI has the right to balance any mech, item, weapon, gear, object, map or currency to how they see fit, whenever they see fit

they get to choose every microscopic detail
what mech has what hardpoints, movement stats, armour values, everything

they are under no obligation to listen to you or me or anyone else because they have thousands of people who all believe different things who all want different things all vying for their attention

if you play their game in a way they dont like, they have every right to change its rules
**see jump sniping **

ok back on topic

your going to loose this mobility regardless
so be very careful what you wish for

even if they drop the engine desync idea
your going to get mobility nerfs and it will probably be something worse that we havent thought of
they have been looking for speed reductions in game for a long time

the engine desync is more than just speed reductions, this is a total quality of life improvement

putting a smaller engine in a Assualt mech is exceedingly punishing
putting a smaller engine in a light mech is even worse
your sacrifice is top speed and by extension life time

dropping your reaction speed is an unrealistic penalty to a already paid for change

across the board this change allows you to shift engine tonnage up or down with more freedom
you can design your build to your liking without the fear of being punished for small engine reductions

as to the links i provided
its states specifically that velocity is the only change via engine change

"Mechs, the engine rating is the mathematical product of the mass of the vehicle and its desired maximum walking or cruising velocity"
engine swap does not affect your melee damage, jump ability's, aim accuracy or any other stat that had direct ties to mech agility

if an Atlas has a 100 or a 400 engine equipped it will punch with the same strength
it will twist with the same speed at the same rate

PGI did not come up with any build beyond the stock builds, so every other build is players' content, and PGI cannot just break the build without paying, which they are trying to get away with. (Basically the same thing has happened to Robocraft, and look at that game now.)

They did it in the past, but it does not mean it was right.

I'm not going to lose my mobility if the game does not have update. They just have problems with their own mind, they being the devs does not mean they are right.

The desync is a deep dive in quality of life for us, unless you are using the opposite sign convention than the majority. A nerf is always negative.

I partially agree with your point with small engines being underpowered, which can be solved by adding agility to smaller engines. (the buff will decrease as you go up in rating, top rating engine receives no buff.) That way no content created by the players will be broken.

I'm not asking for a nerf to reaction speed. If you understand how punishing is a small engine now you understand how punishing is desync to agility builds, they are punishing in the same way. An added problem for agility builds is that once they are nerfed below the threshold (human reaction speed), they don't work anymore.

Desync does not introduce more freedom, no engine cap has been changed. Sure smaller engine users are not gonna worry because they just dragged the whole game down to their level.

I assume your quote ends where you put the second quotation mark.

There is never the word "only" in your quote. If you assume momentum has anything to do with acceleration, then I suggest you go read some physics books. The quote did not say engine rating can only change speed.

Your last two lines tell me that you are OK with eating only 25% as you would per day, and still able to perform just as well as you normally would. Wow you are a beast.

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

I haven't had much time to test, but has anyone noticed the Kodiak can barely move. It's like piloting wooden planks even when fully quirked up. Bit worried about that but if it's like that across the board, this will give lights a strong advantage.......



Also if anyones got any issues with lore vs PGI. Speed twerk shouldn't even exist. For that extra kph you have to make a big engine sacrifice. So while the game should be based around LORE, to make it a good fair game with diversity, they'll need to make some bumps and changes here and there.

[MMoonSetW]

The Unstoppable Puggernaut, on 29 April 2017 - 03:18 AM, said:

I haven't had much time to test, but has anyone noticed the Kodiak can barely move. It's like piloting wooden planks even when fully quirked up. Bit worried about that but if it's like that across the board, this will give lights a strong advantage.......



Also if anyones got any issues with lore vs PGI. Speed twerk shouldn't even exist. For that extra kph you have to make a big engine sacrifice. So while the game should be based around LORE, to make it a good fair game with diversity, they'll need to make some bumps and changes here and there.

No it does not give lights an advantage because they are nerfed even harder.