62 replies to this topic

[Kanil]

Willard Phule, on 05 June 2017 - 01:17 PM, said:

Nope. Clan Omnis can't swap engines, structure or armor type, IS Omnis shouldn't be allowed to either.

And the last thing anyone wants is for us filthy Clanners to make the Dire Whale viable again. Or make a 150+ kph Cheetah. Nope, we're OP. Haven't you heard?

Switching from a 240 XL to a 240 STD isn't going to make your Cheetah any faster. It'll merely lower your podspace from 8 tons to 2.5, but allow you to survive the loss of both side torsos...

[razenWing]

Guys, there's another easy solution. Look at the arctic wolf. End of discussion.

[Willard Phule]

Andi Nagasia, on 05 June 2017 - 02:01 PM, said:

didnt read what i posted, and personally i couldnt care about TT Rules, as MWO doesnt follow them anyway,
this change i feel we Need in MWO for balance, of OmniMechs mostly IS Omnis, and doesnt effect Clan Omnis too much,

So, what you're saying is that for balance's sake...IS should be able to swap engines on their Omnis, but the Clans shouldn't?

Somehow, that doesn't seem right, since we're the ones that invented the Omnis in the first place. I'm all for allowing both sides to swap engines. Either that or just suck it up. It's not like we don't have access to Standard engines for our IICs.

[Y E O N N E]

Willard Phule, on 05 June 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

So, what you're saying is that for balance's sake...IS should be able to swap engines on their Omnis, but the Clans shouldn't?

Somehow, that doesn't seem right, since we're the ones that invented the Omnis in the first place. I'm all for allowing both sides to swap engines. Either that or just suck it up. It's not like we don't have access to Standard engines for our IICs.

While I'm all for just sucking it up, it really doesn't matter who invented what in the lore when it comes to game balance.

[Darlith]

Willard Phule, on 05 June 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

So, what you're saying is that for balance's sake...IS should be able to swap engines on their Omnis, but the Clans shouldn't?

Somehow, that doesn't seem right, since we're the ones that invented the Omnis in the first place. I'm all for allowing both sides to swap engines. Either that or just suck it up. It's not like we don't have access to Standard engines for our IICs.

Now what I read of what was said was, omnimechs (both sides) can change engine type, not size. So clan mechs would be fine to change their clan XL out for a clan std of the same rating if they for some reason wanted to.

Edited by Darlith, 05 June 2017 - 04:33 PM.

[Deathlike]

Viktor Drake, on 05 June 2017 - 09:06 AM, said:

The sad part is I think you will find IS Omnimech performance less that you would hope it to be. Omnimechs have so many build restrictions that combined with IS tech, they will likely under perform.

You'd only come to that assessment if you'd totally undervalue Clan tech (like CERMEDs, Clan Gauss, Clan DHS, CERPPC) and overvalue IS tech (like IS DHS, IS Endo, IS FF, IS ERPPC).

Edited by Deathlike, 05 June 2017 - 04:42 PM.

[Metus regem]

Kiran Yagami, on 05 June 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

No, no, no, nononononono, no no no no, nono. Just look at the Templar:



That mech is locked to an XL engine. An untrained cat could hit those STs every time. IS XL engines kill IS omnimechs before they are even conceived. You can not have an XL engine side torso loss on a mech locked to XL engines, especially one with garbage hit boxes. And the Templar isn't even the worst offender. There's the Sunder:

It's funny, when ever someone argues against the Templar, they always got to the MW4 version, rather than the FM:FS or TRO art, as the TRO and FM:FS both show very large sheilding arms, small ST's with near cockpit level high mounts in the ST's. Granted it does have waist level CT mounts and mid belly level arm mounts. The biggest knock against the Templar is lack of internal space (crits) thanks to Endo and an XL engine. How ever based on her art in the two sources I highlighted, I'm sure she would have hit boxes on par with those of the Battlemaster if not better.

[Valhallan]

Huh? say what now? Omnis could totally have a full custom like battlemechs in lore, but the moment you do that they become battlemechs and lose all omni-capability, which is why it wasn't really done because you lose omni-capability forever barring a factory reset. As such IF the terribad (and let's be honest barring uberquirks these are going to be "bad" and will only played by the same players who play urbies) IS omnis are going to get stuffed in, PGI should take the opportunity to give omnis a toggle for omni capability, if it's on you can switch pods but no structural modifications (i.e. like now), if it's off you are locked into stock pods but can customize like a battlemech.

[Willard Phule]

Valhallan, on 05 June 2017 - 05:18 PM, said:

Huh? say what now? Omnis could totally have a full custom like battlemechs in lore, but the moment you do that they become battlemechs and lose all omni-capability, which is why it wasn't really done because you lose omni-capability forever barring a factory reset. As such IF the terribad (and let's be honest barring uberquirks these are going to be "bad" and will only played by the same players who play urbies) IS omnis are going to get stuffed in, PGI should take the opportunity to give omnis a toggle for omni capability, if it's on you can switch pods but no structural modifications (i.e. like now), if it's off you are locked into stock pods but can customize like a battlemech.

Well, except for the fact that PGI isn't representing the omni technology correctly in the first place. Omnipods, the thing that is supposed to make them superior to Battlemechs, are supposed to be "Omni"...meaning you can put anything in there as long as it fits size/weight restrictions. MW4 did it better. As it is, it's simply a matter of switching out hardpoints.

[Andi Nagasia]

Willard Phule, on 05 June 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

So, what you're saying is that for balance's sake...IS should be able to swap engines on their Omnis, but the Clans shouldn't?

Somehow, that doesn't seem right, since we're the ones that invented the Omnis in the first place. I'm all for allowing both sides to swap engines. Either that or just suck it up. It's not like we don't have access to Standard engines for our IICs.

what im segesting that Engine Type Swapping be allowed for both factions,
and as no one has given me a reason why it shouldnt be done i dont see a problem with it,
(and because Lore isnt a reason, if its for balance and is only a benefit to MWO why not?)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 05 June 2017 - 05:46 PM.

[Chuck B]

Well IS 1st Gen Omni's were more trash then pass. with the Raptor, BJ, Firestarter, Black Hawk-KU, and Sunder being the exceptions. Later Generations got better but , with how MW:O treats Omni's PGI will have to be very selective if they want sales.

In my opinion the best selling IS Omni Pack PGI could put together would be

Light - Raptor
Medium - Men shin
Heavy - I would pass but if they arn't willing to do 2 assaults then the Blackhawk -KU
Assault - Hauptmann and Templar 2nd

Edited by Chuck B, 05 June 2017 - 06:14 PM.

[Valhallan]

Willard Phule, on 05 June 2017 - 05:32 PM, said:

Well, except for the fact that PGI isn't representing the omni technology correctly in the first place. Omnipods, the thing that is supposed to make them superior to Battlemechs, are supposed to be "Omni"...meaning you can put anything in there as long as it fits size/weight restrictions. MW4 did it better. As it is, it's simply a matter of switching out hardpoints.

In practice all Omni technology did was significantly cut down refit and repair times. Even battlemechs could stuff in anything if you had enough time to do it. Since we got zero logistics here, of course it's not represented correctly, MW4 didn't do it correctly either (only some of the omnimech slots were omni when it should be total). MW4 was better because it was simple, no mix and match required, but the end result of both is pretty much the same thing since of the 4 general weapon pods there is usually some with at least one of the other hardpoint types.

[MustrumRidcully]

I think any mech with locked heat sinks will certainly be dead on arrival, unless maybe it's a Gauss Boat.

Alternatives. Cryptic makes single heat sinks worth having (screw table top). I would say to make single heat sinks viable all they'd need to do always treat engine heat sinks as doubles. (That would even lead to changes in existing mechs for many players, as some heavier mechs are strapped for crit slots, not for tonnage.)

Or Cryptic simply gives the IS Omnis double heat sinks (screw table top), regardless of what they have originally.

I think a fixed XL Engine is something one can probably deal with on many mechs, depending on design. If neccessary, they can just quirk the side torso armor or structure to be closer to that of the CT.


In fact, that could be something they could do anyway to distinguish Standard, XL and Clan XL Engines. Clan XL Engines have only 2 slots per side torso and this survive a side torso loss (at penalty), IS XL engines could grant bonus structure to the side torsos, and STDs might grant bonus structure to everything.

[InvictusLee]

ManganMan, on 05 June 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

so what's the problem?

1. power creep
2. pandering sales models rather than selling good mechs
3. they are some how stuck to a timeline which honestly makes no damn sense for a shooter.
4. They dont wanna break the game/meta

[Battlemaster56]

I'll take IS Omni's if I get my Owens , a mech truly built for such an insane pilot with bad taste.

[Willard Phule]

Kanil, on 05 June 2017 - 02:37 PM, said:

Switching from a 240 XL to a 240 STD isn't going to make your Cheetah any faster. It'll merely lower your podspace from 8 tons to 2.5, but allow you to survive the loss of both side torsos...

Your grasp of the obvious is overwelming.

If I wanted to make my Cheetah faster, I'd swap out the 240XL for a larger XL. Duh.

It's not the lights that will feel the ability to swap engines, it's the heavies and assaults. Imagine a Timberwolf that moves as fast as a Linebacker but can still jump. Or a Dire Whale that can keep up with the herd.

Valhallan, on 05 June 2017 - 06:48 PM, said:

In practice all Omni technology did was significantly cut down refit and repair times. Even battlemechs could stuff in anything if you had enough time to do it. Since we got zero logistics here, of course it's not represented correctly, MW4 didn't do it correctly either (only some of the omnimech slots were omni when it should be total). MW4 was better because it was simple, no mix and match required, but the end result of both is pretty much the same thing since of the 4 general weapon pods there is usually some with at least one of the other hardpoint types.

True enough. The only people that will truly understand the improvements of the Omni over the Battlemech are most likely those that have played campaigns in TT. It takes a lot of time to make major repairs on Battlemechs (even IICs, since they operate under the same rules), Omnis can do it on the field.

[Metus regem]

Metus regem, on 05 June 2017 - 05:01 PM, said:

It's funny, when ever someone argues against the Templar, they always got to the MW4 version, rather than the FM:FS or TRO art, as the TRO and FM:FS both show very large sheilding arms, small ST's with near cockpit level high mounts in the ST's. Granted it does have waist level CT mounts and mid belly level arm mounts. The biggest knock against the Templar is lack of internal space (crits) thanks to Endo and an XL engine. How ever based on her art in the two sources I highlighted, I'm sure she would have hit boxes on par with those of the Battlemaster if not better.

To add to my above point:

Templar TRO art, source: TRO 3067 page 95:



This image shows that the large drum sections are still part of the arm, as well as showing little to none of the torso sections stick out past the arms from the sides, meaning fantastic side protection.



Templar Feild Manual Federated Suns (FM:FS) art, page: 162



This image really drives home where the arms meet the ST's as the large drums are still arm, well showing how small the ST's would be as the SSRM/4 and Targeting computer sensor are both located in the ST's at what looks to be cockpit level. Now small ST's from the front mean that it stands a very strong change of being decent to good even with the XL engine.


As both of these images are canon, I would imagine that they would rank higher in terms of inspiration for Alex than MW4 models would. As that was seen to be the case when it came to the Mad Cat Mk. II, his art is more in line with the TRO art than the MW4 art.

[Andi Nagasia]

Metus regem, on 06 June 2017 - 06:19 AM, said:

As both of these images are canon, I would imagine that they would rank higher in terms of inspiration for Alex than MW4 models would. As that was seen to be the case when it came to the Mad Cat Mk. II, his art is more in line with the TRO art than the MW4 art.

this is almost certain, look at the Arctic Wolf,

TRO Artwork,


and here is the Model from MW4,

Personally i like the MW4 better than the TRO Artwork,


but heres what we got,

Granted it looks amazing, but personally i have a thing for chicken walkers,

[Ch_R0me]

@Andi Nagasia
And with the Early Access colours (along with some decent Black) & camo (along with Huntsman cockpit trinkets and warhorn) I could do something like this...
http://camospecs.com...75/gamma-galaxy

Now if I had some golden (or even better - copper) colours along with Smoked Jags camo...
http://camospecs.com...9/corvus-keshik

Or just this
http://camospecs.com...-pharaoh-keshik

So much possibilites...

[drifter bob]

perhaps we just make is omnis with xl engines the exception to the rule and make them able to survive a torso destruction

just a thought let me know what u guys think