255 replies to this topic

[MechaBattler]

Is 25% heavier engine weight for LFE for the entirety of a fight equal to the 40%(?) performance penalty a C-XL receives only after a side torso is destroyed?

That's the real engine balancing question here. The LFE pays for it's survivability in weight at all times. The C-XL's penalty doesn't come into play until it loses a side. Which is to balance it against the IS XL which flat out dies.

Edited by MechaBattler, 01 July 2017 - 06:04 PM.

[MadRover]

Tarl Cabot, on 01 July 2017 - 02:14 PM, said:

Of course they can, especially if equipping ballistic equipment, which are bulkier and heavier than clan equipment, which means they will still be reliant on isXL engines that die with the loss of one side torso. For a mech using 300 rated engine, that is a 9.5-ton difference between STD and isXL, or a 5-ton difference between STD/LFE or 4.5-ton difference between LFE/isXL. The other different with the tonnage difference does not mean a player will fit more weapons, but likely both DHS and a higher rated engine for more speed.

MWO 300 engine rating
XL- 9.5(engine) + 3 (cockpit) + 3 (gyro) = 15.5 tons
LFE - 14.5 + 3 + 3 - 20.5 tons
STD - 19.0 + 3 + 3 = 25 tons

you cant fit any of the heavy gauss or ppc into your mech without some sacrifice. it all comes down to choice and how you want to play like it always has been. anyone who complains once the Civil War update is either one who wants to be fed wins without putting forth the effort or use some form of team work or one who will most likely not be a decent pilot.

you have an arsenal of weapons coming in from the update that you have to figure out how to use properly and be ready to make some sacrifices for. also, all my IS sphere mechs run at a sluggish speed and i tend to do well with them. not saying i'm this great pilot who knows what he's doing all the time, but the amount of complaining that IS pilots tend to make goes somewhere from between are you even trying and or you engaging the brain. Teamwork will determine how well a game goes everytime. Skill will then become a factor when both teams are actually communicating and working with each other instead finding themselves shot in the back because reasons.

Edited by MadRover, 01 July 2017 - 07:20 PM.

[Pjwned]

Acehilator, on 01 July 2017 - 05:26 PM, said:

The reason to make LFEs superior is to close the performance gap to ClanXL. LFE without side torso loss penalties would go a loooong way to better faction balance. Halved penalties would the ABSOLUTE minimum if they want to stay true to their whole "balance tech bases" approach (number of DHS is quite a bit lower in IS builds, so the heat penalty hits us harder).

And what do STDs have do to with faction balance, apart from the fact that they are bad, and have been bad since the day Clantech arrived? PGI could have buffed STDs any day in the last three years, they didn't, expecting them to do it now is pretty naive... they will just point you to LFEs. "Undeniably wrong", you are funny, rofl.

The problem is that if you throw intrafaction balance out of whack by doing stupid **** like that (i.e making equipment obsolete on purpose) then it turns interfaction balance into a nightmarish mess.

If the only concern is buffing IS tech then the better solution would be to buff all of the engines equally, except that's stupid when there's about a dozen other things that could be sensibly improved instead of hyperfocusing on this 1 aspect that--after IS mechs finally get a 10-slot engine to have a balanced compromise between STD & XL--doesn't need any more attention anyways.

There are other ways that are better to balance IS & Clan tech closer together, stop acting like the engines are the only way to achieve balance because that's stupid & wrong.

[MadRover]

Pjwned, on 01 July 2017 - 08:11 PM, said:

The problem is that if you throw intrafaction balance out of whack by doing stupid **** like that (i.e making equipment obsolete on purpose) then it turns interfaction balance into a nightmarish mess.

If the only concern is buffing IS tech then the better solution would be to buff all of the engines equally, except that's stupid when there's about a dozen other things that could be sensibly improved instead of hyperfocusing on this 1 aspect that--after IS mechs finally get a 10-slot engine to have a balanced compromise between STD & XL--doesn't need any more attention anyways.

There are other ways that are better to balance IS & Clan tech closer together, stop acting like the engines are the only way to achieve balance because that's stupid & wrong.

Exactly. Engines isn't everything. Engines only make up 1/4 of the fight. The other 3/4s are common sense, communication, and teamwork and playing to your role.

[Dogstar]

MadRover, on 01 July 2017 - 10:14 PM, said:

Exactly. Engines isn't everything. Engines only make up 1/4 of the fight. The other 3/4s are common sense, communication, and teamwork and playing to your role.

As far as I can tell there's the unspoken assumption by those who favour the clans that the IS mechs' role is to be a target for glorious clan warriors - they simply do not want parity under any circumstances and that's what makes this whole debate so ******* annoying when one side won't move at all

Edited by Dogstar, 02 July 2017 - 12:33 AM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

MadRover, on 01 July 2017 - 10:14 PM, said:

Exactly. Engines isn't everything. Engines only make up 1/4 of the fight. The other 3/4s are common sense, communication, and teamwork and playing to your role.

Apparently though, not basic counting

LFE ST loss penalty should range from absolutely nothing (to balance vs C-XL) to half the C-XL penalty (to balance vs STD and C-XL). Anything more is a joke.

[Sjorpha]

From a faction balance perspective its perfectly obvlous that lfe should have no st loss penalties, otherwise clan xl is just strictly better and that seems pretty silly. The principle should be that no piece of equipment in the game is strictly better on either side, both versions should always have their own up and downside. So for lfe and cxl it should be that lfe has the extra weight and cxl has the st loss penalties, its an obvious and elegant balance.

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 29 June 2017 - 11:41 AM, said:

That's kind of the point. The IS needs a boost more than the Clams do.

However, keep in mind that most of the new IS items suck anyways.

Yeah. I mean honestly, there's a reason why Clan is usually the winner on FW. Hell even this new tech, Clan is still pretty much generally OP.

The RAC seems awesome, until you realize that you're not doing so much damage equivalent to the risk of staring people to death.

[Jay Leon Hart]

The6thMessenger, on 02 July 2017 - 01:41 AM, said:

The RAC seems awesome, until you realize that you're not doing so much damage equivalent to the risk of staring people to death.

But goodness are they fun

[DrxAbstract]

The6thMessenger, on 02 July 2017 - 01:41 AM, said:

Yeah. I mean honestly, there's a reason why Clan is usually the winner on FW. Hell even this new tech, Clan is still pretty much generally OP.

The RAC seems awesome, until you realize that you're not doing so much damage equivalent to the risk of staring people to death.

They certainly look fun, though... They may not be particularly effective from a damage application time vs. damage delivery precision perspective but there's something to be said about being able to re-create that feel-good macro'd AC2 rapid-fire with a single weapon now.

[The6thMessenger]

DrxAbstract, on 02 July 2017 - 02:06 AM, said:

They certainly look fun, though... They may not be particularly effective from a damage application time vs. damage delivery precision perspective but there's something to be said about being able to re-create that feel-good macro'd AC2 rapid-fire with a single weapon now.

Fun. But even the 6x AC2 macroed is also pretty bad performance-wise in relation to the requirement needed to set it up.

They really need to make the RACs that archetypal MG that overheats then stalls immediately as the jam meter is filled, and just balance the damage output from there.

Like have RAC2 do 24 damage over 4s shoot time before 6s jam time, RAC5 does 48 for 6s shoot time and 8s jam time.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 July 2017 - 02:38 AM.

[Baulven]

Tarl Cabot, on 01 July 2017 - 12:14 PM, said:

Agree.

Imho, I did not nor do I expect LFE to go live with no heat/movement penalties. But since PGI has no plans to introduce an functional engine crit system, even though they hint at it each time they add or make change to cXL penalties, there is also no reason for them to stick to 3 engine crits/death rule either. Using the crit rule w/heat scale as guideline PGI could change it to 4 engine crits.

With the loss of one side torso, the engine crits is the destruction of engine shielding, and LFE engines are using heavier material, this is my proposal.

LFE - 15.0% movement-20.0% heat / cXL 20.0% movement-30% heat / isXL 25% movement-40% heat penalties.

FYI for others - From the BT stats, LFE is 25% lighter than STD while both XL are 50% lighter. But MWO's engine weight is not just the engine itself, it also includes Cockpit (set 3 tons) and Gyro (engine rating/100: 4-tons for 400 engine, 3-tons for 300 engine, 2-tons for 200 engine, etc.)

CXL gives you legged movement speed and 40% wors3 heat. That being said I am more than ok if they decided to reduce LFE penalties to half that of CXL.

[C E Dwyer]

KevinZhang, on 29 June 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

I didn't follow along with every release but only recently looked over the notes for the PTS and what is coming to MWO with the Civil War tech. I'm not sure if it is just me but doesn't it seem really skewed towards IS mechs with this release? A majority of the weapons and tech seem to be IS only (especially the bigger stuff like rotary AC, STEALTH ARMOR, rokkit launchas, etc) while clans only get some micro-lasers and whatnot. I know people complain that clan is too strong but is swinging the pendulum hard towards the IS side really the right fix for balance?

Yes it is, but this was the period, (a period I don't like that much, and have zero interest in, I might add,) where the I.S tech started to catch up in the arms race.

The biggest and only noteworthy addition is the LFE this is going to be a big game changer and I'm sure it will, cause nerfs in the future.

The light ferrous, on a ECM mech is going to be broken when it launches in two weeks time, because in the hands of a good player it will be OP, but in the hands of a potato it will be badly handled, so expect both cries for nerfs and buffs for this.

None of the new weaponry has grabbed my attention, it seems mostly broken for my admittedly limited time on P.T.S, it's inclusion has caused many of the nerfs in current weapons, in a desperate attempt to balance it.

It still isn't ready for live servers but just like the skill tree it will be put in game months to early.

While it may cause me to finally give up on the game, this isn't P.G.I's fault, we all know now how legendary P.G.I's utter inability to balance anything well, yet you the community screamed for this time jump so when it comes in two weeks time and it's busted.

It's YOUR fault not P.G.I's

[Davegt27]

yep I for see many tears

[Acehilator]

Pjwned, on 01 July 2017 - 08:11 PM, said:

The problem is that if you throw intrafaction balance out of whack by doing stupid **** like that (i.e making equipment obsolete on purpose) then it turns interfaction balance into a nightmarish mess.

If the only concern is buffing IS tech then the better solution would be to buff all of the engines equally, except that's stupid when there's about a dozen other things that could be sensibly improved instead of hyperfocusing on this 1 aspect that--after IS mechs finally get a 10-slot engine to have a balanced compromise between STD & XL--doesn't need any more attention anyways.

There are other ways that are better to balance IS & Clan tech closer together, stop acting like the engines are the only way to achieve balance because that's stupid & wrong.

Don't be obtuse. Of course it is not THE ONE thing. But the OP state of Clan XL is still one of the biggest reasons for bad faction balance, the other big reasons being 7-slot Endo/Ferro and 2-slot DHS, as has been stated ad nauseum in the past. Clan weapons have been brought down enough, that is not really an issue anymore. That is why I wrote that LFE without penalty would go a long way to remedy that situation... LFE with the same side torso loss penalties as Clan XL is still woefully inadequate. Of course people will use them because 95% of the time it is better than STD already, but those two points are not mutually exclusive.

And which impact would making STD engines obsolete have on intra-faction balance? Dafuq?

[Snowbluff]

Acehilator, on 02 July 2017 - 06:12 AM, said:

Don't be obtuse. Of course it is not THE ONE thing. But the OP state of Clan XL is still one of the biggest reasons for bad faction balance, the other big reasons being 7-slot Endo/Ferro and 2-slot DHS,

NO, it really doesn't seem to matter much nowadays, and yes, your argument is making me nauseated.

[Vonbach]

FupDup, on 29 June 2017 - 11:41 AM, said:

That's kind of the point. The IS needs a boost more than the Clams do.

However, keep in mind that most of the new IS items suck anyways.

Basically this IS needs a big buff and this new tech is a good start.

[Alexander of Macedon]

Vonbach, on 02 July 2017 - 06:49 AM, said:

Basically this IS needs a big buff and this new tech is a good start.

Clan XL, FF, ES, DHS are all still flatly superior. Civil War tech gave us a heaping pile of crap. The only weapons that matter are a PPC variant that can tussle with the cERPPC... in a vastly smaller range band, and the HMG (which is still flatly inferior to the cHMG). Maybe rocket launchers, but they're a meme and gonna get nerfed.

Meanwhile IS is still stuck with all their viable 'mechs nerfed into the ground because of the ******** "lol civil war gonna be asymmetric balance IS OP" meme. There is not and will never be balance until IS and clams are on par in those fundamental areas: engine cost-benefit, structure+armor cost-benefit, and DHS cost-benefit.

Guarantee that every last member of Clan Crocodile Tears will fight that out to the bitter end, since they're so intent on MWO being a masturbatory sendoff to their MW4 nostalgia. The only reason IS 'mechs see play in QP is a combination of stubbornness and the fact that a decent player in a shitaro can still outperform a tater running clan PPFLD.

[Pjwned]

Acehilator, on 02 July 2017 - 06:12 AM, said:

Don't be obtuse. Of course it is not THE ONE thing. But the OP state of Clan XL is still one of the biggest reasons for bad faction balance, the other big reasons being 7-slot Endo/Ferro and 2-slot DHS, as has been stated ad nauseum in the past. Clan weapons have been brought down enough, that is not really an issue anymore. That is why I wrote that LFE without penalty would go a long way to remedy that situation... LFE with the same side torso loss penalties as Clan XL is still woefully inadequate. Of course people will use them because 95% of the time it is better than STD already, but those two points are not mutually exclusive.

Except that with the (long overdue) introduction of LFEs finally, the "OP state of clan XL" is actually not such a huge reason for faction imbalance anymore, because the bigger issue by far was always that IS mechs didn't have access to a 10-slot engine to have a balanced option between XL and STD, and now that they finally do have that it means that attention is needed elsewhere instead.

There's still a lot of room to improve IS weaponry, it's just that PGI needs to stop being so passive about it and relying on quirks way too much. Other things like improving standard heatsinks and ferro fibrous armor (or, arguably, standard structure instead) and not screwing over mechs with sub-250 rated engines (which impacts IS mechs quite a bit more) would also help, and I'm sure I could think of a bunch more to do if I really tried.

You also say "of course it's not the one thing," except you wouldn't know that reading all of the posts around here still bitching and wailing and screaming about clan XL.

Quote

And which impact would making STD engines obsolete have on intra-faction balance? Dafuq?

You realize that intra-faction balance is describing balance within 1 faction and not compared to another faction, right? Inter-faction would be the term for IS vs Clan balance, and I did try to make a distinction there by using both terms.

And if you're talking about intentionally making equipment obsolete then yeah obviously that has an effect on intra-faction balance.

If IS engines must be buffed, which is a dumb solution by the way because they're fine as is, then buff all of them equally instead of making 1 engine superior for no good reason.

Edited by Pjwned, 02 July 2017 - 09:43 AM.

[Koniving]

Khobai, on 29 June 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

ISERML (720m) has better max range than the CERML (688m)

this makes absolutely no sense and clearly PGI forgot about the max range nerf on CERMLs. OOPS.

CERML is a sad weapon right now... we pay way more heat for less range than the IS counterpart. Yeah CERML gets extra damage but thats largely nullified by the longer beam duration.

Consider the often overlooked element, though.
Clan ERML is 7 damage, IS ERML is still 5 damage.
IS ERML optimum range for 5 damage is 360 meters.
Clan ER ML optimum range is 405 meters.
IS ER ML does 0 damage at 720 meters.
Clan ER ML does 0 damage at 688 meters.
At 630 meters, the IS ER ML is delivering 1.25 damage.
At 617.5 meters, the Clan ER ML is delivering 1.75 damage. BUT At 630 meters, the Clan ER ML is delivering 1.434629 damage.

I know there is more that factors play into this such as beam time, but provided the player skill is there, the Clan ER ML is still matter of factly superior. It just isn't playing the role of 1 ton sniper weapon anymore.

(I do confess Clan ER ML heat is too high. It should be 5 heat to the IS ML 3 heat (instead of 3.4), and IS ERML's 5 heat (don't know what it was on the PTS).
However some of the bonus heat is to combat the superior ability to rack in high thresholds with fewer slots consumed per DHS. The alternative is to gimp the threshold increase per DHS.... or do the smart thing and remove threshold increases altogether.

Edited by Koniving, 02 July 2017 - 10:03 AM.