65 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

IS Cockpit & Gyro Upgrades(Cockpit & Gyro Options)
as other Upgrades (STD/Endo)(STD/Ferro/LFerro)(SHS/DHS)(STD/Artemis),
in this Case like the Above but for Cockpits(STD/Small) & Gyro(STD/XL),


Small-Cockpit,
Smaller Cockpit that only need 1Crit for life support instead of 2,
allowing for some Weight/Crit savings, but making the Mech harder to Pilot,
=Stats=
+1Head Crit(2Crits now available in the Head(LL now possible in Mechs Head)
+1Ton Free(as a Mechs Life Support is reduced to only 1Crit instead of 2Crits)
-10% Acell/Decell/TwistSpeed/TurnSpeed(as mech is harder to Pilot(Lore)


XL Gyro,
a Larger Gyro that Weights Half what Normal Gyros Weigh,
allowing for Tonnage savings at Crit Costs(based on Engine Rating)
=Stats=
+XTons(savings Based on Gyro Weight(which is based on Engine Rating)
(60-100=+0.5Tons)(101-200=+1Tons)(201-300=+1.5Tons)(301-400=+2Tons)
-2CT Crits(takes up all Free Space in the CT(filling the Normal 2 Free CT Crits)
+52.5% Screen-Shake(does the opposite as the Improved-Gyros Skill(x3)

I feel both these Options(both Standard Tech by 3067)
will add options to IS mechs allowing IS Pilots greater Flexibility,

=(Poll)=

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 24 July 2017 - 03:03 PM.

[FupDup]

It's not possible in the current mechlab because all engine types have their tonnage increased to encompass the cockpit and gyro weights. The cockpit and gyro items actually listed on your critslot layout are weightless right now.

PGI would have to recode the mechlab such that your gyro weight increases automatically as you increase the engine. That, or code the mechlab to detect an invalid gyro (too big or small for your engine) and then make you have to swap in the correct one for your mech. In this design the gyros would be separate items like how the TC's and MASC have been split into classes (e.g. Gyro 1, Gyro 2, Gyro 3, Gyro 4).

Cockpits though are much easier since they don't scale based on anything. They always weigh the same on every mech, engine size, etc.

Edited by FupDup, 25 June 2017 - 04:10 AM.

[Chuck B]

Never going to happen, to much work for PGI to do with no monetary return.

[Andi Nagasia]

FupDup, on 24 June 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

It's not possible in the current mechlab because all engine types have their tonnage increased to encompass the cockpit and gyro weights. The cockpit and gyro items actually listed on your critslot layout are weightless right now.

PGI would have to recode the mechlab such that your gyro weight increases automatically as you increase the engine. That, or code the mechlab to detect an invalid gyro (too big or small for your engine) and then make you have to swap in the correct one for your mech. In this design the gyros would be separate items like how the TC's and MASC have been split into classes (e.g. Gyro 1, Gyro 2, Gyro 3, Gyro 4).

Cockpits though are much easier since they don't scale based on anything. They always weight the same on every mech, engine size, etc.

this shouldnt be a problem,
just make the Options Check the Mech and give the Tonnage Bonuses in Question,

Click Small Cockput Upgrade(Works like Endo/Ferro & OmniMech Locked JJs)
+1HD Crit(decreasing Life Support to 1 Crit), & add +1Ton, & -20%Mobility,

Click XL Gyro(Works like Endo/Ferro & OmniMech Locked JJs)
Gain 2Fixed Slots in the CT, & +XTons(have the System Check for Engine Rating)
(60-100=+0.5Tons) (101-200=+1Tons) (201-300=+1.5Tons) (301-400=+2Tons)
you wouldnt need the Weight of the Gyro, all you have to know is the Rating,

Chuck B, on 24 June 2017 - 08:25 PM, said:

Never going to happen, to much work for PGI to do with no monetary return.

its not hard to Program any of this in, as the Frame work is already there with Endo/Ferro) & (Omni Locked Crits)
after that for its just (IF)Statements,(IF{Engine Rating >= 60 && <= 100} X = 0.5(60-100Engine = +0.5Tons XL Gyro)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 24 June 2017 - 08:40 PM.

[SQW]

The only thing PGI is working on is how to squeeze more money out of people who are still hanging around a 5 yrs game that has seen no new major features since 2015. This company knows it's not worth their money to develop new f2p features given how few people are left so the only logical thing to do keep the game life support going with minimal resources while trying to monetize what's left of the player base.

So, forget about IK, mech resize, FP, community features etc because you'll be hearing a lot more about Solaris and of course, mech packs.

[Snowbluff]

If anything I'd rather have the compact gyro, so I can carry more stuff in my CT. Like an IS PPC or double heat sink.

[Sereglach]

I recommended much the same thing, HERE. However, there are some concerns that would need to be addressed.

The Small Cockpit is easy to do, but acceleration and deceleration are poor choices of things to get penalties out of (a small cockpit doesn't make your mech's engine suddenly have poorer performance). It'd be better to replace this with Torso Twist, Arm Movement, and Turning speed. However, I don't think they'd need to be at 20% to have the desired impact for a meager 1 ton weight savings. 10% is far more reasonable.

There needs to be an associated penalty for equipping an XL Gyro, and here's why: MWO does not have "death" by Gyro crits. Therefore, you need something to keep the XL Gyro from becoming the de facto upgrade of any mech that doesn't have CT hardpoints, in order to save weight. I'd suggest a 10% penalty on acceleration and deceleration, because the Gyro does control the mech's balance (which would have a distinct impact on those facets of engine performance).

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

As a side note, the XL Gyro is easier to implement, in my opinion, then FupDup implies. PGI already knows the tonnage of the gyros of associated engines. Therefore it's an easy jump to just calculate the saved tonnage based off of the engine size.

The real question there is does PGI want to put in the work? It's really easy to say that a small cockpit just frees up 1 ton, 1 head crit, and implements some modest agility penalties. It's another thing for PGI to put in the effort to have a dynamic upgrade, like an XL Gyro, that PGI would have to code specific weight savings for every engine (since the engines are all objects; and this upgrade effects the objects in question, and not the mech). However it shouldn't be too difficult, since something similar already exists with FF armor.

[Andi Nagasia]

Sereglach, on 24 June 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

The Small Cockpit is easy to do, but acceleration and deceleration are poor choices of things to get penalties out of (a small cockpit doesn't make your mech's engine suddenly have poorer performance). It'd be better to replace this with Torso Twist, Arm Movement, and Turning speed. However, I don't think they'd need to be at 20% to have the desired impact for a meager 1 ton weight savings. 10% is far more reasonable.

well Accell/Decell are more Potent as a Penalty where as Twist/Arm speed isnt as much,
which is why i included Accell/Decell as Penalties, it will make it harder to manuver your mech
so in a way it is making your mech harder to Pilot, so it would fit with Lore,

Sereglach, on 24 June 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

There needs to be an associated penalty for equipping an XL Gyro, and here's why: MWO does not have "death" by Gyro crits. Therefore, you need something to keep the XL Gyro from becoming the de facto upgrade of any mech that doesn't have CT hardpoints, in order to save weight. I'd suggest a 10% penalty on acceleration and deceleration, because the Gyro does control the mech's balance (which would have a distinct impact on those facets of engine performance).

Noted, ive since Given both Upgrades the Mobility Penalty to make them hard Choices not just a Tonnage Tax,

Sereglach, on 24 June 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

The real question there is does PGI want to put in the work? It's really easy to say that a small cockpit just frees up 1 ton, 1 head crit, and implements some modest agility penalties. It's another thing for PGI to put in the effort to have a dynamic upgrade, like an XL Gyro, that PGI would have to code specific weight savings for every engine (since the engines are all objects; and this upgrade effects the objects in question, and not the mech). However it shouldn't be too difficult, since something similar already exists with FF armor.

not Every Engine, just have the System Check the Engines, Engine Rating, then make a choice,
as i say above this could easily be down with the use of If Statements,

If (XL-Gyro == True)
(
+X Tons //where X is based on Mechs Engine Rating,
Add XL-Gyro Crits //Fills Free CT Crits with Locked XL-Gyro Crits(as Omni Locked JJs)
Add Quirk (+52.5% Screen-Shake)
 
IF(EngineRating >= 60 && <= 100)
(X = 0.5)
 
IF(EngineRating > 100 && <= 200)
(X = 1.0)
 
IF(EngineRating > 200 && <= 300)
(X = 1.5)
 
IF(EngineRating > 300 && <= 400)
(X = 2.0)
)

Edit- ya im actually a Programmer my self,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 26 June 2017 - 08:14 PM.

[MechaBattler]

I wanted small cockpit sooo bad. It would open up a few more possibilities. Especially for my Vindicator. Head mounted snub ppc anyone?

[Sereglach]

Andi Nagasia, on 24 June 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

well Accell/Decell are more Potent as a Penalty where as Twist/Arm speed isnt as much,
which is why i included Accell/Decell as Penalties, it will make it harder to manuver your mech
so in a way it is making your mech harder to Pilot, so it would fit with Lore,

Depends on what mech you're talking about. For many brawler mechs out there I think they'd be far more concerned with their ability to twist away damage then they are going to be concerned with a little bit of acceleration/deceleration. I'll agree on turn rate, but the others I think are still open for debate.

Regardless, another reason I make the recommendation I did is to try to spread the penalties out, so that taking both doesn't result in overly punitive penalties. That way reasonable investment into the skill tree can at least null out the penalties, as a viable option, and significant investment would still result in some gains.

[evilauthor]

Here's an idea: A Small Cockpit has less tonnage and crits devoted to life support. One of the things that life support does is prevent the pilot from being cooked when the mech overheats. So in MW terms, a mech with a small cockpit ought to have a lowered cap on their Max Heat that triggers automatic shut down.

IOW, by getting one ton and one extra free crit in the head, your mech has less capacity to build up heat before shutting down. Which is great for a cool running design because they don't care, but not so much for mechs that generate lots of heat. I think this, more than any subtle reduction in movement or torso twisting speed, will make players think long and hard on whether the Small Cockpit is worth the tonnage saved.

Also, I think it would be neat if Small Cockpits had a different design than normal cockpits from the pilot's perspective. Like more instrumentation crowding the pilot's view, perhaps obscuring the sides a bit and limiting peripheral vision.

---

Also seconding the Compact Gyro. They'd be useful primarily on Heavies and Assaults that need crit space more than tonnage.

What about Compact Engines? Free up two more CT crits, but the engine weighs 1.5 times that of a standard engine (before gyro and head weight gets thrown in). Would anyone actually use this? Did anyone even voluntarily use it in TT Battletech if they didn't have to?

[Brain Cancer]

Snowbluff, on 24 June 2017 - 08:45 PM, said:

If anything I'd rather have the compact gyro, so I can carry more stuff in my CT. Like an IS PPC or double heat sink.

Compact gyros would also let 'Mechs with 2E CT hardpoints mount things like double large lasers for super zombie firepower.

Tech like this marching into the "soon" category is part of why PGI's constant failure to deal with construction issues (like split-crit weapons) is going to be a really bad time in the near future.

[evilauthor]

Brain Cancer, on 24 June 2017 - 10:08 PM, said:

Compact gyros would also let 'Mechs with 2E CT hardpoints mount things like double large lasers for super zombie firepower.

Combine Compact Gyro with Compact Engine and you could have double PPCs in that CT.

[Brain Cancer]

evilauthor, on 24 June 2017 - 10:19 PM, said:

Combine Compact Gyro with Compact Engine and you could have double PPCs in that CT.

Or later, a single Heavy PPC, which will hit like every Clan ERPPC wants to.

[El Bandito]

evilauthor, on 24 June 2017 - 10:03 PM, said:

IOW, by getting one ton and one extra free crit in the head, your mech has less capacity to build up heat before shutting down. Which is great for a cool running design because they don't care, but not so much for mechs that generate lots of heat. I think this, more than any subtle reduction in movement or torso twisting speed, will make players think long and hard on whether the Small Cockpit is worth the tonnage saved.

Dual Gauss mech pilots will be jizzing in their pants.

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 24 June 2017 - 08:21 PM, said:

It's not possible in the current mechlab because all engine types have their tonnage increased to encompass the cockpit and gyro weights. The cockpit and gyro items actually listed on your critslot layout are weightless right now.

PGI would have to recode the mechlab such that your gyro weight increases automatically as you increase the engine. That, or code the mechlab to detect an invalid gyro (too big or small for your engine) and then make you have to swap in the correct one for your mech. In this design the gyros would be separate items like how the TC's and MASC have been split into classes (e.g. Gyro 1, Gyro 2, Gyro 3, Gyro 4).

Cockpits though are much easier since they don't scale based on anything. They always weight the same on every mech, engine size, etc.

It could be just some 1-slot head-only equipment like the command console. Could come either as "XL Gyro" or "Cockpit extension", with 2 slot head equipment as default.

I don't know though, i don't exactly support this stuff.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 25 June 2017 - 03:11 AM.

[Ced Riggs]

I am all for more customization. If we ever do switch to Unreal 4, it'd be nice if these things would/could be taken into account.

[Snowbluff]

Brain Cancer, on 24 June 2017 - 10:08 PM, said:

Compact gyros would also let 'Mechs with 2E CT hardpoints mount things like double large lasers for super zombie firepower.

Mty Zombie crab would be able to runn ERLLs in the CT for range on the good hardpoints.

[Andi Nagasia]

evilauthor, on 24 June 2017 - 10:03 PM, said:

Here's an idea: A Small Cockpit has less tonnage and crits devoted to life support. One of the things that life support does is prevent the pilot from being cooked when the mech overheats. So in MW terms, a mech with a small cockpit ought to have a lowered cap on their Max Heat that triggers automatic shut down.

IOW, by getting one ton and one extra free crit in the head, your mech has less capacity to build up heat before shutting down. Which is great for a cool running design because they don't care, but not so much for mechs that generate lots of heat. I think this, more than any subtle reduction in movement or torso twisting speed, will make players think long and hard on whether the Small Cockpit is worth the tonnage saved.

i dont think this Penalty would work as what you describe is the Penalty for Torso-Cockpit,
which frees up 4Crits in the Head, but takes up 1Crit each ST and both in the CT(1Life Support Crit each ST),
in turn the Mech would have increased Heating Problems(such as the Cockpit is in the CT)
(losing a ST causes a Heat Panalty to your mech)

i was going to add Torso-Cockpits to this Topic, but wasnt able to as it counts as Experimental Tech,
Experimental as such not Tournament Legal(PGI up to this point has only added Tournament Legal Stardard Tech)

evilauthor, on 24 June 2017 - 10:03 PM, said:

Also, I think it would be neat if Small Cockpits had a different design than normal cockpits from the pilot's perspective. Like more instrumentation crowding the pilot's view, perhaps obscuring the sides a bit and limiting peripheral vision.

would be cool, but not sure how much Work this would entail, so im mixed on this,

evilauthor, on 24 June 2017 - 10:03 PM, said:

Also seconding the Compact Gyro. They'd be useful primarily on Heavies and Assaults that need crit space more than tonnage.

What about Compact Engines? Free up two more CT crits, but the engine weighs 1.5 times that of a standard engine (before gyro and head weight gets thrown in). Would anyone actually use this? Did anyone even voluntarily use it in TT Battletech if they didn't have to?

would too like to see Compact Gyros, but they are currently both out of time line by a years or so(3068)
which is also the years for Clan HAG(20/30/40) & IS Light-AC(2/5) & MG-Arrays(2/3/4)(L/STD/H)(Both factions)
so in this case they are still a possibility just not quite yet here yet,

Compact Engine, not sure how that would help,
a Compact250 would Weights 6.5more Tons than a Standard250,
yes it takes up 3slots less, but thats allot of tonnage to give,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 25 June 2017 - 08:52 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

evilauthor, on 24 June 2017 - 10:19 PM, said:

Combine Compact Gyro with Compact Engine and you could have double PPCs in that CT.

a Compact250 would Weights 6.5more Tons than a Standard250, thats a steep penalty for 3more Crits,