30 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

I have advocated from the start that making one thing more like another is the most b7tch way to balance.

Because unless you can make 2 things completely the same, whichever side that's getting shafted will just find the still remaining differences and complain about it.

It's like everyone complaining about Protoss being a newb race. How the Protoss Deathball is the most op thing ever... until people figured out the you can rush Reapers and/or have other great harasses from zerg early aggression to out macro the Protoss. Then all of a sudden, Protoss is too weak.

As much as it sucks to have asymmetrical warfare design (cause, Starcraft II has been 5 years in balancing so far), it's still a more attractive option. Cause let's look at another series that try to make everything the same... Command and Conquer. Who the fok even still plays Command and Conquer? They took the lazy way out, and their game died.

My point in all of these, balance is hard work. Asymmetrical warfare is tough sh7t. But it's precisely because it's tough sh7t, that you keep going at it, because it just makes the game more interesting.

With all that said, here's my opinion on engine desync and how it's just batsh7t crazy. First of all, if you put a V4 vs a V6 on the exact same car, are they going to perform exactly the same except for top speed? No? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Now, I understand that if said car has an automatic sun roof, regardless of putting v4 or V6 engine, that sun roof is going to open at the same rate.

Those are realistic and practical expectations. You don't expect your charger port for your IPhone to be more powerful because you have a V6 engine. But what you do accept, is that your car is going to be .5 second faster in 0-60 test.

Which brings me to combine my 2 points, and if you bothered to make it this far, the whole engine desync, even though it's too late, still needs to be addressed... is complete HORSESH7T.

The simple reason that you don't make IS mechs more like Clan mechs is because of asymmetric warfare. Look bud, if you are telling me that my omnimechs can sacrifice weapons to go faster, then sure, I am all for it.

How many god damn Grasshoppers or Warhammers are using 325 or below? You really don't think that if I could, I will reduce the amount of heatsink and medium laser, and make my EBJ run a 350 engine and go like 90+ KPH? Flexibility and the impact of new tech that's NOT available on both sides is what makes IS mechs stand out.

Ultimately, people can b7tch about how Clan is so much better... yea, 4% over average is really that much lopsided... Give me a break.

Then we move onto criteria that you consider "mobility" and you start to question, why does an urbie need to accelerate at the same rate as an ACH? A Urbie is a piece of sh7t in movement. (but that's not quite true either, cause my max engine Urbie is plenty nimble) But that's why it can turret 360 degrees.

Certain things are just not meant to be the same. Certain things are not meant to be in the same category. And it's really that simple. If we want to continue this BS trend of making everything the same as one another, then let's be fair about it... make it like past Mechwarrior games and open tech to everything and full flexibility to every single mech.

Let's have those 110 KPH EBJ. Let's have those CERLL firing Grasshopper. But you know the end result of that? It's the same god damn mech with different skin overlay with no unique identifier. Diversity be damned, we might as well all pilot a Sphere. Yup, can't get more fair than that if everyone just go fight in a sphere.

(but then people will b7tch about using laser is more OP than using missiles... or AC is better than missiles, or how everything is better than missiles. So yea, people will find a way to b7tch no matter what)

If you are going to stuck to your original vision of asymmetric warfare, then f-ing stick to it. Stop caving to whiners everytime there is an issue. Better yet, you know how to truly balance the sides without f-ing up sh7t? Give mechs the environments that they are DESIGNED to fight at. (And just recognize that people like the flashy designer of Clan mechs than the old sockem robits of the IS mechs) Drop Mechs into downtown Manhattan, and my EBJ is god damn useless compare to a Warhammer.

In fact, NYC or no NYC, we had 2 brawl maps that you murdered with your 2 ****** game modes. Why don't you fix that first?

but ultimately, none of this matters, because it's too late. So... um... how you like Trump so far?

Edited by razenWing, 15 May 2017 - 07:02 AM.

[l33tworks]

Couldnt get past the V4 part...



Agree with you though.

Edited by l33tworks, 15 May 2017 - 07:13 AM.

[Zigmund Freud]

Did they allready published stats of engine-to-speed rate in different mechs? Because if no - this thread is pointless.

[Bud Crue]

You want to talk about engine decoupling, etc.

Ok

I run Quickdraws more than any other mech.
I currently run an H with an XL325. With 40% accel/decel that engine is effectively a 455 for those purposes.
I currently run several Gs with between an XL 355 and an XL300. With 60% accel/decel that's an engine performance of 568-480.
I have several 5Ks that run between a XL355 and XL300. With 10% Accel/decel that's an engine performance of 390-330.
All three mechs are losing their agility quirks in exchange for a base engine performance of 360.

There are two things that make Quickdraws viable and those things are its agility and its offensive quirks, which even if we consider them, they pretty much lend themselves to the 3LPL and 4LL (ERLL) builds and not much else (1-3 tube restricted M hard points are not particularly useful even with great cool down quirks remaining on the G (2 hard point) and the 3 hardpoints of the H are not much better since its missile quirks are not that good even currently...we can only wait and see what MRMs provide, but with 1 M mount in the CT I expect not much).

Yet, between engine decoupling and quirk changes PGI asserts that this mech will suddenly be more attractive to players and even more friendly to a diversity of builds. All I see is a mech that will be slower and FAR less agile and wonder why would anyone intentionally take such a mech? Why would anyone take a mech such as the H and G that is going to be less agile by ~50% when its agility was the main thing that made the mechs viable in the first place?

Now consider the 5K. It is losing its mere 10% agility buff. Running a 300-355 give you baseline performance of 330-390. After skills tree that is 360 + mobility nodes. So the 5K is actually a bit more agile under the auspices of the skills tree than it is now.

So 3 variants, all of which have meta builds of 3-4 Energy weapons. PGI asserts that by making two of the three mechs objectively worse performers via engine decoupling (an a very mild loss of quirks relatively speaking) that somehow magically more people will want to play all of these mechs and with more "diverse" builds" since they will no longer be "limited" to the builds defined by the quirks.

Seriously. This is what they assert in the Q&A.
Gimmie a break.

Zigmund Freud, on 15 May 2017 - 07:30 AM, said:

Did they allready published stats of engine-to-speed rate in different mechs? Because if no - this thread is pointless.

Yes they did. Last iteration of the first skills tree PTS. There has been no indication since then that those listed engine multipliers have changed or are going to change further.

[Dino Might]

We are in dire straights. If they keep up this pattern, we may have reason to use mediums in the future!

[El Bandito]

For engine de-sync, it has to happen, because large XL engine is infinitely better than smaller Std engine, which makes Std engines obsolete. Current accel/decel and twist/turn bonus gives XL engines survivability as well as speed--unless one is too potato to twist.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

How many god damn Grasshoppers or Warhammers are using 325 or below? You really don't think that if I could, I will reduce the amount of heatsink and medium laser, and make my EBJ run a 350 engine and go like 90+ KPH? Flexibility and the impact of new tech that's NOT available on both sides is what makes IS mechs stand out.

To be fair IS will get their own restrictive omnimechs soon enough, and Clan battlemechs are already here and dominating.

Edited by El Bandito, 15 May 2017 - 11:13 AM.

[sycocys]

I'm daydreaming that engine desync means that they are working on an energy system. Which would probably swing things to hard in favor of non-engine locked IS mechs, but more actual mechanics are needed to actually close that gap down some.

[Templar Dane]

Engine decoupling is stupid. It's going o decrease TKK on a lot of mechs. Before if there was a mech that twisted sluggishly you could fit a bigger engine to help with that......afterwards you're out of luck.

And how about those bigger engines having bigger gyros built into them, then nerfing the twist speed of those bigger engines......and not giving back the weight from the bigger gyro?

Edited by Templar Dane, 15 May 2017 - 11:30 AM.

[MechaBattler]

Engine Desync is an attempt at reigning in high engine builds. Which of course the Clans have a lot of. Plus if the IS wants to use LFEs in place of XLs they have to downgrade. So maybe it will be viable? I think XLs still gonna XL. But that's just my conspiracy theory.

[sycocys]

Templar Dane, on 15 May 2017 - 11:25 AM, said:

Engine decoupling is stupid. It's going o decrease TKK on a lot of mechs. Before if there was a mech that twisted sluggishly you could fit a bigger engine to help with that......afterwards you're out of luck.

And how about those bigger engines having bigger gyros built into them, then nerfing the twist speed of those bigger engines......and not giving back the weight from the bigger gyro?

Well technically I don't think the gyros would be on the engines but somewhere in the hydraulics system the engine powers. What would make more sense to to allow people to upgrade the various gyro systems - but you'd need an energy system in place to make that work any amount of well, just tonnage/crit slots doesn't work as we've seen over and over again.

Edited by sycocys, 15 May 2017 - 11:37 AM.

[razenWing]

El Bandito, on 15 May 2017 - 10:59 AM, said:

For engine de-sync, it has to happen, because large XL engine is infinitely better than smaller Std engine, which makes Std engines obsolete. Current accel/decel and twist/turn bonus gives XL engines survivability as well as speed--unless one is too potato to twist.




To be fair IS will get their own restrictive omnimechs soon enough, and Clan battlemechs are already here and dominating.

I don't deny that XL run than Std. But the point is that IS has the flexibility to use HIGHER XL than Clan counterparts. That's the flexibility of speed vs survivability. What's sad in all of these, is that somehow caught in the middle, the Clan Battlemechs are all of sudden the best as they benefit from both worlds.

When in accordance with the lore, almost all Clan Battlemechs are second line mechs. Something is twisted.

Would engine desync solve that? I don't know, but I highly doubt it. If we go back the very basic of Omni vs IS Battlemechs, none of these would be issues. It's optimized restriction vs flexible cumbersome. But IIC had to come along... then all of a sudden, everything is wrong.

What I will say is that... had it not been an "engine decoupling" but a gyro/engine decoupling, I would totally be for it. Because, as I said, sun roof opening rate is not affected by the size of the engine. My Toyota Yaris can open my sun roof just as fast as your Bugati Veyron. I have no issue with that. I don't like how they put direct engine related traits into independent variables in the name of decouplings, such as acceleration and turning.

[Magnus Santini]

Much love to Bud for mentioning the Quickdraws for the first time I can remember in the forums. For those of you watching at home they are 60 tons of pure medium laser (cut with SRMs to differing degrees). But I mention the medium laser because it is so medium that all other weapons in the game can be balanced against it. I -think- PGI hinted that it may lose a point of heat, which will ripple across all weapons and bring balance to the force. Game. I said game. EDIT: Bud's build is better. Mine has the firepower of a Blackjack.

Edited by Magnus Santini, 15 May 2017 - 01:55 PM.

[Bud Crue]

Magnus Santini, on 15 May 2017 - 01:51 PM, said:

Much love to Bud for mentioning the Quickdraws for the first time I can remember in the forums. For those of you watching at home they are 60 tons of pure medium laser (cut with SRMs to differing degrees). But I mention the medium laser because it is so medium that all other weapons in the game can be balanced against it. I -think- PGI hinted that it may lose a point of heat, which will ripple across all weapons and bring balance to the force. Game. I said game. EDIT: Bud's build is better. Mine has the firepower of a Blackjack.

If you believe in what PGI is doing with the quirk nerfs and decoupling, then the general population is going to see the nerfed and slower H and G and think to themselves of all sorts of wonderfully diverse builds. THAT is what they assert in the Q&A.

Yet I suspect that because of the existence of the 5K, no one is going to play these slow oversized mediums with 4E and 2-3M (one of which is in the CT) hardpoints. Even with most of their offensive quirks intact (in total contradiction to the position put forth in the Q&A by the way) a mixed build Heavy with the firepower of a Jenner is not going to be played. Yet PGI insists that their changes will make these mechs more desirable and more diverse.

They are clueless. Now go look at the Dragons for a real hoot.

[Athom83]

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

With all that said, here's my opinion on engine desync and how it's just batsh7t crazy. First of all, if you put a V4 vs a V6 on the exact same car, are they going to perform exactly the same except for top speed? No? Yea, I didn't think so either.

And you think an engine put in a sports car should have the same performance if it was put in a 4x4 truck? And you also misunderstand the propulsion of BattleMechs. They aren't moved via drive shaft that turns engine power into mechanical energy. They use a synthetic musculature system that moves armor plated war machines with their top speed dictated by the amount of energy supplied to the muscles. The rate of energy doesn't matter much. "Myomer is an artificial analog of biological muscles with a greater strength to weight ratio. They are engaged with electrical current and its strength depends on the amount of fibers activated, not the current provided." -Sarna.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

The simple reason that you don't make IS mechs more like Clan mechs is because of asymmetric warfare. Look bud, if you are telling me that my omnimechs can sacrifice weapons to go faster, then sure, I am all for it.

Um... getting off topic here.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

How many god damn Grasshoppers or Warhammers are using 325 or below? You really don't think that if I could, I will reduce the amount of heatsink and medium laser, and make my EBJ run a 350 engine and go like 90+ KPH? Flexibility and the impact of new tech that's NOT available on both sides is what makes IS mechs stand out.

Quite a few if they aren't running XLs and still want to be running enough firepower. Speed is not always key.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

Ultimately, people can b7tch about how Clan is so much better... yea, 4% over average is really that much lopsided... Give me a break.

Source?

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

Then we move onto criteria that you consider "mobility" and you start to question, why does an urbie need to accelerate at the same rate as an ACH? A Urbie is a piece of sh7t in movement. (but that's not quite true either, cause my max engine Urbie is plenty nimble) But that's why it can turret 360 degrees.

It doesn't. Initial runs are based off of tonnage, yes. However, each mech also has their own mobility adjustments based on lore and design. Clan mechs in general will still be accelerating faster than IS mechs of the same tonnage with the same engine rating. Even different variants of the same chassis will behave differently. The Clan quirk change has yet to be updated to the mobility changes, as they all seem to be tonnage based with little difference between mechs of the same tonnage as IS mechs are (Except a few cases like the Viper C).

https://static.mwome...Final%20PTS.pdf
https://static.mwome...Final%20PTS.pdf

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

Certain things are just not meant to be the same. Certain things are not meant to be in the same category. And it's really that simple. If we want to continue this BS trend of making everything the same as one another, then let's be fair about it... make it like past Mechwarrior games and open tech to everything and full flexibility to every single mech.

Before, a Cicada with a 250 engine would have the same acceleration, turn speed, etc as a 100 ton mech with a 250 engine. Engine desync seem to make things a bit different, wouldn't any rational thought think?

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

Let's have those 110 KPH EBJ. Let's have those CERLL firing Grasshopper. But you know the end result of that? It's the same god damn mech with different skin overlay with no unique identifier. Diversity be damned, we might as well all pilot a Sphere. Yup, can't get more fair than that if everyone just go fight in a sphere.

Ebon Jaguar is 65 ton mech that can use Clan technology. Grasshopper is a 70 ton mech that uses IS technology. They both have different hitboxes. The Ebon Jaguar can use Ballistics while the Grasshopper cannot. And Ebon Jaguars can only 81(87) kph as their engine is locked. The Grasshopper can freely change its engine to attain a different speed, up to 79(81) kph with a 340 engine.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

(but then people will b7tch about using laser is more OP than using missiles... or AC is better than missiles, or how everything is better than missiles. So yea, people will find a way to b7tch no matter what)

Everything is generally better than LRM boating. SRMs are debatable based on loadout, mech, etc. Your point?

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

If you are going to stuck to your original vision of asymmetric warfare, then f-ing stick to it. Stop caving to whiners everytime there is an issue. Better yet, you know how to truly balance the sides without f-ing up sh7t? Give mechs the environments that they are DESIGNED to fight at. (And just recognize that people like the flashy designer of Clan mechs than the old sockem robits of the IS mechs) Drop Mechs into downtown Manhattan, and my EBJ is god damn useless compare to a Warhammer.

You seriously don't know or understand what asymetric balance is, do you? And, they are working on more maps while overhauling current maps. Plus, comparing an EJG to a WHM is comparing apples to oranges.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

In fact, NYC or no NYC, we had 2 brawl maps that you murdered with your 2 ****** game modes. Why don't you fix that first?
but ultimately, none of this matters, because it's too late. So... um... how you like Trump so far?

Um... what? We have plenty of "brawl" maps, with ways in "ranged" maps to close distance. Take Polar LRMlands for example. If you actually use the terrain to your advantage, you can somewhat easily slip into brawling range on their side/back and lay into them. Just because you are, as you put it, sh1t doesn't mean its the game's fault.

[Athom83]

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

I don't deny that XL run than Std. But the point is that IS has the flexibility to use HIGHER XL than Clan counterparts. That's the flexibility of speed vs survivability. What's sad in all of these, is that somehow caught in the middle, the Clan Battlemechs are all of sudden the best as they benefit from both worlds.

An Atlas (100 ton IS mech) has a max engine cap of 360. A Kodiak (100 ton Clan mech) has a max engine cap of 400. A Linebacker (65 ton Clan) has a engine size of 390, every IS 65 ton heavy have a max engine size of 315. Deliberate falsehoods do not make you right.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

When in accordance with the lore, almost all Clan Battlemechs are second line mechs. Something is twisted.

Um... false. Dire Wolf, Executioner, Timber Wolf, Ebon Jaguar variants, Summoner, Huntsman, and many others in game were designed as either frontline mechs or other roles besides second line. Blood Asp, Blood Kite, and Bane (before Omni's were designed) are examples of frontline mechs we yet have in the game.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

Would engine desync solve that? I don't know, but I highly doubt it. If we go back the very basic of Omni vs IS Battlemechs, none of these would be issues. It's optimized restriction vs flexible cumbersome. But IIC had to come along... then all of a sudden, everything is wrong.

So all your problems are with IIC mechs then.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

What I will say is that... had it not been an "engine decoupling" but a gyro/engine decoupling, I would totally be for it. Because, as I said, sun roof opening rate is not affected by the size of the engine. My Toyota Yaris can open my sun roof just as fast as your Bugati Veyron. I have no issue with that. I don't like how they put direct engine related traits into independent variables in the name of decouplings, such as acceleration and turning.

That would be true for mechanical sources of locomotion. However, the movement of a Battlemech is directly related to its musculature structure while its speed is related to the amount of power available (produce more torque).

[Angel of Annihilation]

I have to admit the Engine Decoupling is a stupid idea. I have some mechs I purchased with real money specifically because of the fact they could operate a big engine and gain an agility bonus from it. To make such a big change now, so far into the game is a huge risk for PGI.

I mean what is my Stormcrow going to be like tomorrow? It is still going to turn on a dime and accelerate up hills like a rabbit? How about the Linebacker which is only a good mech by virtue of its extreme mobility? Those are the features I paid for when I bought those mechs for real money but I have a bad, bad feeling that these features that make these mechs unique, fun and worth the money I spent on them are going away with this patch and I have a feeling it isn't going to be only my Clan mechs that get hit. Take the Phoenix Hawk for example, up-engined it has near the agility of a light mech, especially with all the quirks. This to me this is its defining characteristic but what is it going to be like after the patch? Just like every other 45 ton medium and no where near as agile right?

This goes back to my talk about risk. You make big changes and you risk lots of angry customers. If my favorite mechs don't play like my favorite mechs tomorrow, after years invested in the game playing those mechs, what will be the point to continue playing?

Edited by Viktor Drake, 15 May 2017 - 04:54 PM.

[Moadebe]

If any of yall played the PTS when the skill tree 2.0 and engine de-sync was on it you would find out that the engine de-sync was necessary. The perks you get from the skill tree increases coupled with HOW they set the engine de-sync makes for a very nimble light/medium mech. Heavies is where you start to see a slight difference....then assaults will take a hit but not as much as everyone thinks...

The biggest mechs that will get hit by this are omni mechs and kodiaks...

[Bud Crue]

Moadebe, on 15 May 2017 - 04:54 PM, said:

If any of yall played the PTS when the skill tree 2.0 and engine de-sync was on it you would find out that the engine de-sync was necessary. The perks you get from the skill tree increases coupled with HOW they set the engine de-sync makes for a very nimble light/medium mech. Heavies is where you start to see a slight difference....then assaults will take a hit but not as much as everyone thinks...

The biggest mechs that will get hit by this are omni mechs and kodiaks...

Not quite. A locust with a baseline 160 and no quirks was trash even with full mobility tree node-out it is WAY slower and less nimble than current and that means in the new system it is DOA. Even the all mighty AC is hit pretty hard (185). Look at the heavier lights and some are getting a bit of a performance boost but NONE are "very nimble".

Certainly most mechs are not hit much and with the skills tree many can recover, and some are even a a bit better under the new system as played on the PTS (1st PTS, second iteration specifically), but don't kid yourself or mislead others, A lOT of the more agile mechs under the current system were far less agile in the PTS and presumably will be tomorrow when this goes live.

[Athom83]

Viktor Drake, on 15 May 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

I have to admit the Engine Decoupling is a stupid idea. I have some mechs I purchased with real money specifically because of the fact they could operate a big engine and gain an agility bonus from it. To make sure a big change now, so far into the game is a huge risk for PGI. I mean what is my Stormcrow going to be like tomorrow? It is still going to turn on a dime and accelerate up hills like a rabbit? How about the Linebacker which is only a good mech by virtue of its extreme mobility? Those are the features I paid for when I bought those mechs for real money but I have a bad, bad feeling that these features that make these mechs unique, fun and worth the money I spent on them are going away with this patch and I have a feeling it isn't going to be only my Clan mechs that get hit.

Mechs that are supposed to have massive mobility advantages over everything else will retain those advantaged (Kodiak, Linebacker, etc). The Linebacker specifically will have over double the mobility of the Ebon Jaguar.

razenWing, on 15 May 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

Take the Phoenix Hawk for example, up-engined it has near the agility of a light mech, especially with all the quirks. This to me is its defining characteristic but what is it going to be like after the patch? Just like every other 45 ton medium and no where near as agile right?

Phoenix Hawk will be retaining its mobility. It has almost double the base mobility of same weight IS mediums. The only mechs lighter to compare to are the Cicada and Assassin, both were designed as rapid recon mechs. Hell, it has the same mobility as the Wolfhound, a mech 10 tons lighter.

Edited by Athom83, 15 May 2017 - 05:02 PM.

[razenWing]

Athom83, on 15 May 2017 - 04:13 PM, said:

And you think an engine put in a sports car should have the same performance if it was put in a 4x4 truck? And you also misunderstand the propulsion of BattleMechs. They aren't moved via drive shaft that turns engine power into mechanical energy. They use a synthetic musculature system that moves armor plated war machines with their top speed dictated by the amount of energy supplied to the muscles. The rate of energy doesn't matter much. "Myomer is an artificial analog of biological muscles with a greater strength to weight ratio. They are engaged with electrical current and its strength depends on the amount of fibers activated, not the current provided." -Sarna.



Um... getting off topic here.


Quite a few if they aren't running XLs and still want to be running enough firepower. Speed is not always key.


Source?


It doesn't. Initial runs are based off of tonnage, yes. However, each mech also has their own mobility adjustments based on lore and design. Clan mechs in general will still be accelerating faster than IS mechs of the same tonnage with the same engine rating. Even different variants of the same chassis will behave differently. The Clan quirk change has yet to be updated to the mobility changes, as they all seem to be tonnage based with little difference between mechs of the same tonnage as IS mechs are (Except a few cases like the Viper C).

https://static.mwome...Final%20PTS.pdf
https://static.mwome...Final%20PTS.pdf


Before, a Cicada with a 250 engine would have the same acceleration, turn speed, etc as a 100 ton mech with a 250 engine. Engine desync seem to make things a bit different, wouldn't any rational thought think?


Ebon Jaguar is 65 ton mech that can use Clan technology. Grasshopper is a 70 ton mech that uses IS technology. They both have different hitboxes. The Ebon Jaguar can use Ballistics while the Grasshopper cannot. And Ebon Jaguars can only 81(87) kph as their engine is locked. The Grasshopper can freely change its engine to attain a different speed, up to 79(81) kph with a 340 engine.


Everything is generally better than LRM boating. SRMs are debatable based on loadout, mech, etc. Your point?


You seriously don't know or understand what asymetric balance is, do you? And, they are working on more maps while overhauling current maps. Plus, comparing an EJG to a WHM is comparing apples to oranges.


Um... what? We have plenty of "brawl" maps, with ways in "ranged" maps to close distance. Take Polar LRMlands for example. If you actually use the terrain to your advantage, you can somewhat easily slip into brawling range on their side/back and lay into them. Just because you are, as you put it, sh1t doesn't mean its the game's fault.

I don't know enough about the lore stuff to argue whether muscular whatever is how we should interpret engine output. Nor am I going to argue with you about my observation about general trends and your personal "you can do this otherwise" preference.

So I'll just stick to point 1 that yes... putting the same V6 engine in a compact car is WAY different from putting it in a truck. Which is exactly my point and doesn't change anything I said one bit.

Hence, a Kodiak with a 400 engine do not have the same top speed nor acceleration than... say... a Linebacker with a 380.

(but you know what, though I have a gut feeling that somehow they are capped and not remotely the same, since you claim that a cicada has the same turn and accel rate as a Kodiak at the current iteration of the gameplay, I will check this)

And also, you are contradicting yourself with the "muscular output stuff." Which in that case, theoretically, a 400 engine on a Locust should be the same as a Kodiak as long as the same engine can move the Kodiak. That's the whole point of your fancy space pseudo-mimic-human engine, right? Why would something that can support and generate the same rotational cycle to produce the same speed be affected by weight? (And of course, if it can't be supported, then the mech just won't move, or the engine burns up, so that's beyond the question)

So obviously, you can't have both. Either the fictional muscle engine is pure crap or the car engine theory is actually valid, but you can't claim to be one and have the trait of both.

Athom83, on 15 May 2017 - 05:01 PM, said:

Mechs that are supposed to have massive mobility advantages over everything else will retain those advantaged (Kodiak, Linebacker, etc). The Linebacker specifically will have over double the mobility of the Ebon Jaguar.


Phoenix Hawk will be retaining its mobility. It has almost double the base mobility of same weight IS mediums. The only mechs lighter to compare to are the Cicada and Assassin, both were designed as rapid recon mechs. Hell, it has the same mobility as the Wolfhound, a mech 10 tons lighter.

I know you messed up the quote, but just want to make it clear that I didn't say the Phoenix Hawk stuff. But... carry on.

--------------

Edit: Ran a quick simple trial

KDK with 400 vs EBJ with 325

KDK to Max Speed (0-69)
trial 1: 4.4
trial 2: 3.99
trial 3: 4.2

EBJ to 69 (Pause when reach)
trial 1: 2.19
trial 2: 1.71
trial 3: 2.18

Now obviously, I didn't do a frame count, so these numbers are subject to human error. But even then, I think I just easily disproved that same engine size produce the same acceleration across weight class.

Cause, what I am looking for is that the KDK, minus top speed, should hit 69 FASTER than EBJ with a smaller engine, correct? But, that's not the case.

I don't know why I need to prove that, but I think my point is fairly sound so far.

Edited by razenWing, 15 May 2017 - 05:30 PM.