110 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

my God i would love Hardened armor for MWO, though it would be akin to +50% Armor Weight for -50% Damage Taken,

unless Clans also got +50% damage for +50% tonnage, hardened armor wouldnt be balanced

Quote

Endo being better than Ferro is exactly like in any RPG how a +5 sword is better than a +1 sword.

This. Ferro is not meant to be as good as Endo for the simple reason that some mechs can take both.

If they were equal, a mech taking both would basically be dual wielding +5 swords.

Ferro is deliberately not as good, so the additive effect of taking both is not as good.

Which is why it makes far more sense to balance combinations like making Standard Structure + Ferro Armor equal to Endo + Std Armor rather than trying to make Ferro equal Endo.

Edited by Khobai, 17 July 2017 - 05:08 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Khobai, on 17 July 2017 - 05:03 PM, said:

unless Clans also got -50% damage for +50% tonnage it wouldnt be balanced

actually i think Clans also have access to Hardened armor, but its a BattleMech only Tech,

i think the TT Stats for Hardened Armor are,
8 Armor/Ton(half of TT Standard Armor(16Armor/Ton)
Each Armor Point has 2Health(Standard Armor is 1Hp per Armor)
-1Hex Speed when Equipped(Standard Armor doesnt slow you down)

so in MWO, Hardened Armor could be,
16 Armor/Ton(as MWO has Doubled armor)(STD Armor is 32Armor/Ton)
Each Armor Point has 2Health(-50% Damage to Armor) your armor can take twice the damage)
-7.5% Speed(this to simulate the -1Hex from TT)

Another way to Implement Hardened Armor in MWO is,
Double Armor Max(this would have the same effect as Double Weight Armor with 2 Heath)
-7.5% Speed(this to simulate the -1Hex from TT)

Khobai, on 17 July 2017 - 05:03 PM, said:

This. Ferro is not meant to be as good as Endo for the simple reason that some mechs can take both.

If they were equal, a mech taking both would basically be dual wielding +5 swords.

But ferro is deliberately not as good, so if you take both, the additive effect of both is not as good.

agreed, which is why ive since worked it to move away from free Armor Concept, so its now a Choice,
Select Ferro and dont change your Armor you get your partial Weight savings,
Select Ferro and Max your Armor may cost you more weight then you save but its a Choice for more armor,
this way Ferro isnt just a Weight savings upgrade, but a Armor Upgrade as its described in lore,

[Brain Cancer]

Hardened armor would be tremendous, actually. Sure, you're trading massive amounts of tonnage- but you're effectively doubling your protection in the process of doing so.

It'd basically turn some assaults into battering rams, never mind what it'd do with survival node bonuses on top of that.

[zeves]

so wait? dont FF give some kind of armor bonus already, why not increase that, and also whatever you add to FF both side should have it obviusly. maby itl help thoose long forgotten FF omnis out there aswell.

[ingramli]

I guess to balance things off, PGI could consider nerfing (yes, PGI only nerf, not buff) endo steel for both camps. In MW4, the damage transfer for destroyed components is different for endo steel and standard structure. Perhaps we can make it this may:

Standard: Take up 0 slots, transfer 20% of damage from destroyed components to adjacent components;
Endo steel (IS version): Take up 14 slots, transfer 60% of damage from destroyed components to adjacent components;
Endo steel (Clan version): Take up 7 slots, transfer 80% of damage from destroyed components to adjacent components;

So i'd say instead of buffing FF directly (which PGI would rarely do), increase the drawback for choosing Endo steel which bring more tonnage at the same crit slots cost as traditional FF armor.

For the disparity of FF armor between the two camps, i have got another suggestion: Clan's FF unchanged, but for IS', mechs that choose to use full FF armor could have up to 20% more armor points for each components (in other words, in such case, the FF armors eats up 14 slots for NO tonnage saving whatsoever, but the mech is 20% more tanky in return), for light FF armor, the mech can have 10% more armor points (again, no tonnage saving, trades 7 slots for 10% more armor), which should differentiate two camps better, IS could be more tanky, while Clan can have more tonnage and/or crit slots for more guns/equipment.

Edited by ingramli, 18 July 2017 - 08:06 AM.

[SMDMadCow]

zeves, on 18 July 2017 - 06:17 AM, said:

so wait? dont FF give some kind of armor bonus already, why not increase that, and also whatever you add to FF both side should have it obviusly. maby itl help thoose long forgotten FF omnis out there aswell.

No, FF let's you take the same amount of armor for less weight, but takes up more critical space.

Hardened armor actually comes out to be similar protection for half the armor value since it needs 2 points of damage to remove 1 point of armor - making it immune to LBX pellets. It also protects against penetrating weapons that we don't have in WMO.

[Andi Nagasia]

SMDMadCow, on 18 July 2017 - 08:29 AM, said:

Hardened armor actually comes out to be similar protection for half the armor value since it needs 2 points of damage to remove 1 point of armor - making it immune to LBX pellets. It also protects against penetrating weapons that we don't have in WMO.

yup, an Easy implementation for Hardened Armor could just be an Armor Type that Doubles your Max armor,
(X2 Armor HP(as you can equip Double the Armor) for X2Weight(as you can equip Double the Armor)
Perhaps also a -10.00%Crit-Hit-Chance(Receiving) Qurik like what is on the BoarsHead(AS7 Hero)

[Koniving]

Long story short... percentages are bad. (Primarily due to power creep between things with small numbers to tack percentages on versus things with big numbers for the same cost.)

So as an alternative instead of a percentage, how about this?

Lets say that 32 points of STD armor is 1 ton.
As such, for the IS 36 points of Ferro armor is 1 ton.

For 14 slots you get 4 points of additional armor per ton, or 2 points additional armor per half ton.

Your 100 ton mech (unquirked, unskill treed) is limited to 614 points of armor.
That's approximately 18.2 tons of armor!!
What if your limit of armor wasn't points, but weight?
614 might be 19.2 tons-ish in STD, but in IS Ferro that's 730 points rounded up.

OR we could do 20%...
...and you'd get 614+20% = 736.8. And yes you make out like a bandit at the high end.

Now consider the low end.
20 tons, bottom of the barrel. Your armor? Caps at 138 points STD or 4.315 tons.
Now we give you a 20% boost for Ferro! 165.6 points. Sounds great, doesn't it?

Or we could give you your max armor weight in ferro!
163.875 points.

Huh.

Okay well that isn't so bad, but this is a thing that's scaling upwards. Look at Ferro slapped onto the Annihilator pre-nerf with 20% and that's just insane. You already have skill tree adding percentages and quirks adding whole numbers that the skill tree tacks the percentage on top of. The more you can carry the higher a percentage based benefit will go, skewing some things. A solid number, however would keep things a little more in check. Even if it isn't as high a benefit as 20%, it still comes close.

Still think additional armor based on weight is pretty reasonable. And yes this means the Clans can tack a little more than the IS.

It's a shame that you couldn't, say, 'crit' the armor slots to chip off extra armor.

Edited by Koniving, 22 October 2017 - 02:13 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

@Koniving
well the percents could be based off the Unmodified Max armor Values,
this would stop Mechs like the AS7 and other out liners from pushing the boundaries,

but i get your point,

[Snowbluff]

No I hate this,. You've polluted my simple thread. I think just increasing the weight savings will help. Thye can't even mount anything with the slot costs and low weight saving as they are with IS FF, so trying to buff the armor is just going to force people to get the HP buff then not be able to fit good builds.

Edited by Snowbluff, 22 October 2017 - 08:12 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Snowbluff, on 22 October 2017 - 08:11 PM, said:

No I hate this,. You've polluted my simple thread. I think just increasing the weight savings will help. Thye can't even mount anything with the slot costs and low weight saving as they are with IS FF, so trying to buff the armor is just going to force people to get the HP buff then not be able to fit good builds.

technically not really, as this is my Topic on Ferro, and it existed before your Topic on Ferro,
(not to mention no one owns the rights to making or posting in a Ferro topic, )

but ya, personally im against changing the Crit Requirement, as PGI is unlikely to do such,
as well as people will complain that PGI is just Moving farther away from the Source Material,

well for most builds people are using Endo for Weight savings,
and if they have room to take Ferro and they dont need DHS ect they take Ferro,
as it is implemented Ferro is just an Inferior weight saving tool,

what ive proposed here makes it a choice,
Want Weight savings take Endo(nothing Changes in this Option)
Want more Armor take Ferro(people can now make Tankier mechs)