9 replies to this topic

[Pjwned]

So the PTS2 notes were talking about decoupling agility from engines, and part of the notes had this to say:

Quote

While Engine sizes no longer dictate core Mobility traits, larger Engines will still play a role in Acceleration, Deceleration, and Turn Speed in other ways, as we will explain in a later section of these notes.

But then it doesn't actually explain anywhere in the notes how larger engines will affect accel & decel or turn speed. The notes do mention shortly after that agility will be adjusted on a per variant basis and such, but no mention of how engine rating is involved at all.

So what's the deal? Personally I think accel & decel should be directly tied to engine rating actually, and arguably turn speed should as well, but if there is some sort of satisfactory indirect effect then that would be alright too...except I don't know what the heck it is.

[Andi Nagasia]

before Agility was 100% determined by the engine,

now that everything decuppled the Engine only equates i believe 10%

[Lukoi Banacek]

10% of what?

[Andi Nagasia]

i know the Engine still matters in some extent,
when the PTS was up my Engine Swapping was giving me better Accell/Decell,
though it seeming minor, i could still feel it Slightly,

sorry i dont have Tested numbers,
but it seemed that Acceleration, Deceleration, and Turn Speed do get better with bigger engines,
however the Boost i can say was huge, maybe 5-15%(which is why i posted 10% above)
i dont have any hard data sadly to collaborate any of this though,

[Moonlight Grimoire]

Likely it will be a situation of Acceleration + .1*(Current Engine Rating - Base Engine Rating). So instead of currently how it is where it is 100% dependent upon engine rating now it is only a small portion. This is likely to help make it so over engined mechs get some mobility back (clan omnis) that they lost and IS mechs that got strangely low mobility values can get some of it back without having to throw into the mobility tree.

[nitra]

its a hidden bonus have no idea what the numbers are. but you can feel the effects maybe could have even seen them in the quirk description.

on the dragon with a 350 + all the agility quirks added, it was twisting like chubby checker fans on Flakka.

so it is a noticeable buff . wished they had not taken down the pts so quick so we could look at these effects and other things a bit more closely.

[Pjwned]

Well I guess that's helpful enough, but it is somewhat annoying that PGI mentions that accel & decel and turn speed are affected in some way...and then apparently they forget to explain what the effect actually is.

Typical of PGI I guess.

[Deathlike]

The theory of decoupling engines from agility is based off of MW4.

Simply put, regardless of your top speed, the engine tonnage spent will not change your agility. Agility would be defined by other factors, relative to chassis (and variants).

For instance, a Gargoyle has the greatest natural agility (it's fixed by design) compared to the rest of the 80 tonners.

An Awesome has relatively crappy agility relative to the other mechs (particularly ones capped with a 300 engine). Boosting the agility of the slower Awesomes to like having a "325 engine" or "350 engine" or so would be a nice agility buff to the chassis.

What this can also mean is that something like the Dragon Slayer (Victor hero) could have an equivalent to an 350 engine "agility-wise" despite having the stock 320 engine or even the 400 max XL engine that it could equip.

That's how you're supposed to look at it.

Ideally, something most agile "may" get adjusted down (except for Lights, because they actually do need the added agility) but something very non-agile like a Highlander or even the Vindicator that has really bad engine caps (outside of the 1AA) can be closer to par to a more agility mech (like a Cyclops and a Phoenix Hawk respectively). Something like a Mauler that would naturally be pathetically not agile (at best running a STD 325 engine, due to the vast amounts of tonnage invested in dakka) would at least be able not feel like a total brick driving it.


It's not that complicated, but people are trying to make something out of nothing and thinking it would just be straight nerfs (or somehow a sub-250 engine would somehow become more popular when that's genuinely not the case - top speed is actually important when you're increase speed by like 10kph or more)... where it's actually a lot more complicated than that.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 April 2017 - 05:09 PM.

[Pixel Hunter]

Lukoi Banacek, on 29 April 2017 - 03:58 PM, said:

10% of what?

10% of the 100%, of course

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 29 April 2017 - 05:07 PM, said:

It's not that complicated, but people are trying to make something out of nothing and thinking it would just be straight nerfs (or somehow a sub-250 engine would somehow become more popular when that's genuinely not the case - top speed is actually important when you're increase speed by like 10kph or more)... where it's actually a lot more complicated than that.

Well, not like we don't see plenty of that about just about everything else these days.

Just good to see someone actually acknowledging that about this facet. Since some mechs are getting an agility buff, and others stay about the same.... (and sorry DWF pilots but if you think your Whale is supposed to be as agile as a Victor, well, that's a you problem!)