72 replies to this topic

[VonBruinwald]

LT. HARDCASE, on 08 July 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

Why would a Clan pilot ever switch from their almighty, best of both worlds XL?

This would only benefit the Kingfisher.

You could put some Gauss in that Night Gyrs shoulderpods....

[Khobai]

Quote

That's the elegance of it. You make IS omnis not suck, while making Clan omnis not better than they already are.

Except IS omnis would still suck. LFE is worse than CXL..

The only way IS omnis arnt gonna suck is if you make ISXL and CXL more or less equal by making ISXL survive side torso blowout

And if you do that you dont need this engine swapping nonsense. It doesnt balance the tech bases so its a completely fail idea.

Edited by Khobai, 08 July 2017 - 06:52 PM.

[sycocys]

I'm just going on the assumption that the IS omnis will have the same ridiculous xl engine that the clan omnis have.

Also they should have ALL their equipment locked pod by pod, being able to swap out to whatever gear you want defeats the whole purpose of the omnimech system, which also would have allowed them to actually balance the two out right from the get-go. Additional bonus would be that it would make the clan mechs feel much more unique and interesting/challenging to play.

[SirNotlag]

Khobai, on 08 July 2017 - 06:50 PM, said:

Except IS omnis would still suck. LFE is worse than CXL..

The only way IS omnis arnt gonna suck is if you make ISXL and CXL more or less equal by making ISXL survive side torso blowout

And if you do that you dont need this engine swapping nonsense. It doesnt balance the tech bases so its a completely fail idea.

I do wonder if that would be a decent way to make IS Omnis more viable is to give them clan XL instead of IS XL engines. I know it would be mixing tech but it would give them a distinct advantage over IS battlemechs.

That's not the only thing that should be done though. I feel upgrades shouldn't be locked in on Omnis for both the clans and IS. Endo steel is too useful not to have on a mech.

Edited by SirNotlag, 08 July 2017 - 08:48 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

SirNotlag, on 08 July 2017 - 08:45 PM, said:

I do wonder if that would be a decent way to make IS Omnis more viable is to give them clan XL instead of IS XL engines. I know it would be mixing tech but it would give them a distinct advantage over IS battlemechs.

That's not the only thing that should be done though. I feel upgrades shouldn't be locked in on Omnis for both the clans and IS. Endo steel is too useful not to have on a mech.

Nope, give isXL the same benefits as cXL, but with different penalty percentages since the MWO does not have fully functional engine crit system. There is no reason why PGI should stick with a portion of that system, the 3 engine crit rule in a game that is not using dice to determine not just hit/miss but also location.

Edit. If PGI were to give MWO a fully functioning engine crit setup, imho they would need to change the number of engine crit slots from 3-4 and give each slot more health then they currently have. I would go so far as to decide on the overall engine health, then divide that amount the slots. Then the STD engine would benefit the most, where the internal structure is more likely to be destroyed before receiving enough engine crits to destroy the engine.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 08 July 2017 - 09:11 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Then the STD engine would benefit the most, where the internal structure is more likely to be destroyed before receiving enough engine crits to destroy the engine.

I would just make the STD engine immune to crits.

Because if crit slot destructions have cumulative penalties, that would be a nerf for the STD engine, if it suffered penalties for losing a crit slot.

[Lucian Nostra]

FupDup, on 07 July 2017 - 08:13 PM, said:

SHS. No Endo. No Ferro. Hardwired BAP and TAG eat up your already limited pod space.

Do your homework next time.

and thus the owens will be garbage just like all the garbage clan omni's we have that are loaded with locked crap all over them.

ce la vi

[Y E O N N E]

Lucian Nostra, on 08 July 2017 - 10:09 PM, said:

and thus the owens will be garbage just like all the garbage clan omni's we have that are loaded with locked crap all over them.

ce la vi

Which Clan Omnis actually suck? The Mist Lynx? Most of the rest have seen extensive comp use. That's the KFX, ADR, GAR, TBR, NTG, EBJ, NVA, SCR, HMN, IFR, SMN, HBR, ACH, and even the EXE. Some have been swapped out because of nerfs to other things (ACH with the cSPL) or being slightly outclassed (HBR vs EBJ).

[FupDup]

Lucian Nostra, on 08 July 2017 - 10:09 PM, said:

and thus the owens will be garbage just like all the garbage clan omni's we have that are loaded with locked crap all over them.

ce la vi

How many Clan Omnis have SHS, exactly?

[Dogstar]

Khobai, on 07 July 2017 - 07:48 PM, said:

they should integrate quickplay into FW and make every match count for FW. and they should bring back the seperate queues for groups and pugs.

when you go to play a FW match your choices would be scoutmode, quickmode, or invasion.

scoutmode would be 4v4 and exactly the same
quickmode would be exactly the same but 8v8 instead of 12v12 and still single life
and invasion mode would be 12v12 and respawns

all three would contribute towards capturing planets in varying amounts

This. So much this would fix the queues.

Khobai, when next we meet on the battlefield you shall be the last to die!

[SirNotlag]

Tarl Cabot, on 08 July 2017 - 09:02 PM, said:

Nope, give isXL the same benefits as cXL, but with different penalty percentages since the MWO does not have fully functional engine crit system. There is no reason why PGI should stick with a portion of that system, the 3 engine crit rule in a game that is not using dice to determine not just hit/miss but also location.

Edit. If PGI were to give MWO a fully functioning engine crit setup, imho they would need to change the number of engine crit slots from 3-4 and give each slot more health then they currently have. I would go so far as to decide on the overall engine health, then divide that amount the slots. Then the STD engine would benefit the most, where the internal structure is more likely to be destroyed before receiving enough engine crits to destroy the engine.

Hmm so what would be good amount clans loose 20% agility and top speed with side torso loss, would 30% loss and a force shut down and restart seem appropriate for IS XL side torso destruction? LFE then only looses 10% and no shutdown.

[Andi Nagasia]

Void Angel, on 08 July 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

I included the Rakshasa because the OP did; I was poor when those were coming out, and never picked up the 'mech readouts. Thus, my knowledge of specific canon Battlemech models is far from encyclopedic.

understandable, people make mistakes, its our joke to point out those mistakes,
and not hold them against them for making said mistakes, in this case calling a BattleMech an OmniMech,

Void Angel, on 08 July 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

Regardless, the assertion stands on its own merit despite the example. If we allow "omnihardpoints" that can match any weapon, Omnimechs become superior to any similar Battlemech, which is bad for MWO. Not only are their loadouts superior, but adoption of Omnimechs gives players more flexibility than Battlemech pilots, simply because their one chassis can do anything and the Battlemech is limited to its designed hardpoints.

agreed, but assuming that this was only 1-2 Hardpoints on an OmniMech,
and it replaced 1-2 of an OmniMechs Established Hard Points, i dont see this as being a Problem,
-
lets look at the NVA, if the NVA-S had 2Universal HardPoints in each ST and Arm what would Change?
Assuming 2Univeral Hardpoints perST/Arm, it would have 1E 2U(universal) in each Arm & 2U in each ST,
Assuming 1Univeral Hardpoints perST/Arm, it would have 2E 1U in each Arm & 1U 1B in each ST,
Nether would be Considered increasing the Power of Said nova, just increasing is Options,

Void Angel, on 08 July 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

It bears mentioning, however, that your counter-example did not deal with this issue in the slightest. You've conflated one topic with the other - hopefully through carelessness - but this is a very bad misstep when making an argument. Similarly, your repeated and increasingly strident requests for contrary evidence far in advance of anything you've provided are also unacceptable tactics.

i beg to Differ, i stated retorting to Khobai,
were he was talking about OmniMechs being unable to Change their Engines,
where i said this wouldnt change their Speed but would give options to help with their Viability,
i have always given feed back and my thoughts to this Topics OP, as such that is how ive been Posting,
-
i have been talking about OmniMechs being able to Change their Engine Types,
as per the OP, and as per my own Topic, i have since linked the 2Post of this Topic,

Void Angel, on 08 July 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

You are not permitted to assume you're correct until someone else proves you wrong, nor to demand much stronger proof for objections than you yourself provided for the claim. This isn't my first rodeo - if I let you do this, you'll simply make some assertion that my example is wrong or inconclusive, then require even stronger proof that you're wrong in order to accept the example. In other words, you'll continue to move the goal posts and beg the question until an unattainable level of "proof" is required - you may not have thought it through, but it's what you've already been doing. It's... not going to happen.

i have show Facts on how this could work, and evidence to show that it wont have Fallout,
i have Plead my case, and have such evidence to show my thoughts and feelings on the Subject,
-
if you feel i(or my Statements) are wrong then you then have to Plead your case,
and then show Evidence on how im wrong or what ive missed that im not taking into consideration,
you cant hinge on the Statement (well it just wont work) as your only Defense, as that defense doesnt hold water,

Void Angel, on 08 July 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

In any case, these changes are expected to be beneficial, or neither you nor the Op would be asking for them. If, as the OP suggests, these changes should be applied to IS omnimechs, there is no possible case where this does not worsen balance, because Is Omnis would have an ability that Clan Omnis lack - and both Battlemechs and Omnimechs share the same tech bases for their factions.

correct,
-
Firstly, yes i hope to see IS OmniMechs introduced into MWO,
these Changes i feel would allow them more Flexibility and greater Options to make them More Viable,
even though they arnt in MWO yet, i would like to have these Discussions not before their Release,
so if changes can be made to help them these Changes come with them, not months after,
-
Secondly, i feel that this Rule should be added to all OmniMech Construction, IS & Clan,
this is to be fair to both sides, and if STD engines ever get a buff to their Utility, will be be a choice for both,
as of now(and soon after Next patch) their are(will be) very few reasons to take a IS / Clan-STD engines,

Void Angel, on 08 July 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

Now, if you are, as you now seem to suggest, talking about allowing engine type changes for either tech base, I have no opinion other than to point out that engine type balancing should probably be done first - this is the first time you've mentioned that in our exchange, however, even though you've endorsed "what is Proposed in the Topic OP," - and I've been very clear that this is my point of contention.

this shouldnt be done until a month after Next Patch,
this way PGI can gather Data on how the LFE is preforming,
as such i dont agree both IS & Clan XL engines should work Identical,
but thats its own Topic, heavens know ive had my share of Crazy IS-XL Ideas,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 09 July 2017 - 02:39 PM.

[Void Angel]

OK, most of your rebuttal just isn't true; you've never provided the kind of "proof" that you're asking me for - you've just described your idea and told us why you think it would work. Those are conclusions, not evidence, and when you were challenged on those conclusions, you responded with demands for actual in-game examples, that sort of thing. Such demands are both meaningless and inappropriate - inappropriate because you haven't demonstrated that level of proof, and meaningless because you can argue about a hypothetical example forever.

Similarly, you really did respond to an example talking about "omnihardpoints" with an illustration that dealt with engine swapping. The fact that you wanted to talk about engine swapping has nothing to do with what I was talking about when you quoted me. The fact that you linked your own topic at whatever page of this thread has exactly as much to do with the relevance of that quote as whether or not I am wearing edible underpants. You quoted a post completely out of context and then proceeded to respond to it as though it was about what you wanted to say. This is not acceptable, and your attempts to defend the error simply server to embarrass you further. It also insults me and every other person who are actually reading responses on this thread, since it seems as though you just skimmed a post, dismissed it without consideration, and generated a talking point for your own stubborn opinion - this wastes my time and theirs.

What you seem to be saying now is that you want engine types to be swappable for any and all omnis - which is not what the OP was asking for - and that this will help "fix" omnimech balance because it's less attractive for the Clans (i.e. the only reason ever to do it is if you need the space in a side torso.) As has been explained to you many, many times, this will not work unless the tech bases are balanced. Allowing the Clans to do it does little, because the Clans almost always want their superior XLs; and if it's a bigger buff to the Inner Sphere, well... That means that balance needs fixing, not that it's a good idea to allow swapping in order to fix balance.

Until there is a legitimate reason to take a STD over a LFE or XL, any omni that has a STD will be dramatically weaker than a equivalent Battlemech with favorable hardpoints. But this is a reason to balance the engine types - swapping out the bad engine simply obscures the core issue. Sure, it's not a huge issue in itself, but every superficial solution or flawed mechanic that obscures balance issues (did you know that +cooldown skills/quirks have increasing returns?) will hurt the health of the game more than the deeper issue they're trying to patch.

PS: Don't chop up people's posts to respond. It's not necessary, clutters your own posts - and is often inappropriate, as many posts are intended to convey a unified thought and you risk misrepresenting them by taking quotes out of context.

Edited by Void Angel, 09 July 2017 - 03:32 PM.