53 replies to this topic

[JadePanther]

kapusta11, on 17 July 2017 - 11:48 PM, said:

20% movement speed and reduced heat dissipation. Same as cXL engine.

given the inferiority should they really incur the same penalty?

[ingramli]

El Bandito, on 18 July 2017 - 04:53 AM, said:

Not only that, due to everything IS costs more weight than Clans, LFE IS mechs will be moving slower than Clan mechs with similar loadout. Which means the LFE ST penalty will make them EVEN slower. Thats not how you balance the tech. Thats guaranteeing continued IS quirk dependency, which is detrimental for this MP only game.

The biggest problem of using quirks to balance the engine disparity between the two camps is that the quirks is hit and miss, so often the IS mechs do not get the quirks people find useful of, and/or limiting the effective build of a variant too much (making them most of the time only do decent/well in a specific role, or a specific build around a single weapon platform).

In my opinion, to make the game fair, quirks have to go. Both camps has access to engines/weapons of both sides. The engine disparity should be balanced by structure bonus for IS' equivalent (making mech using them harder to destroy, at the cost of less tonnage saving and/or more critical slots consumed), single ST death for isXL should go completely, introduce engine crits system if there is a need for engine destruction mechanism.

I dont think PGI would listen, though....

Edited by ingramli, 18 July 2017 - 05:13 AM.

[Snowbluff]

El Bandito, on 18 July 2017 - 03:32 AM, said:

They could have reduced and removed the durability quirks at the same time or shortly afterwards. Thats how tech balancing works! Not this horsedung.

**** no! Keep structure and armor quirks. I like that there is a way to increase mech survivability! >:0

[Khobai]

Quote

If the goal is to reduce overall quirks (which Chris has repeatedly said is one of his goals) wouldn't it make sense to give the LFE -with its greater tonnage than clan XL- some benefit over clan XL so that then as a seemingly logical next balance move, some of the IS defensive quirks -which exist mostly due to a lack of XL viability on some mechs- could start to be reasonably reduced?
Or no?

nope

if the goal is to ultimately remove all structure quirks then the only logical way to do that is make ISXL survive side torso destruction

[Bud Crue]

Khobai, on 18 July 2017 - 05:21 AM, said:

nope

if the goal is to ultimately remove all structure quirks then the only logical way to do that is make ISXL survive side torso destruction

Reduce. Not eliminate. There is no partity. IS will always have some quirks. But the goal was stated to be "the dramatic reduction of quirks". But by making the LFE not only weigh more but have the same "draw backs" as the clan XL, they seem to be wasting an opportunity to give an iterative opening to that goal.

Of course this is PGI, they will probably just pull the defensive quirks whole sale from a bunch of mechs despite the lack of parity and say "LFE has provided increased survivability for these mechs over our internally created target values." And then the cycle of bitching can continue unabated.

[Khobai]

Quote

Reduce. Not eliminate.

eliminated.

the only reason the global structure quirks were ever added is because of the fragility of the ISXL

if the ISXL is no longer fragile, the global structure quirks can be eliminated

you should not get an ISXL that survives side torso destruction and still get to partially keep your structure quirks too. Thats not how it works. Otherwise every clan mech would have structure quirks which they dont.

Quote

But by making the LFE not only weigh more but have the same "draw backs" as the clan XL, they seem to be wasting an opportunity to give an iterative opening to that goal.

it doesnt have all the same drawbacks as CXL because IS still get structure quirks, and LFE benefits doubly from side torso structure quirks since you have to destroy two side torsos instead of only one side torso. And because of those quirks LFE should still have at least half the penalties. But i agree the full penalties are probably too much.

But if you removed structure quirks completely, and ISXL were changed to survive side torso destruction (with full penalties), then the LFE should also probably be changed to have no penalties at all. And STD engines would need some kindve CT structure buff.

Edited by Khobai, 18 July 2017 - 05:53 AM.

[Pjwned]

Pjwned, on 15 July 2017 - 10:18 PM, said:

If you're going to argue for LFE buffs then at least be consistent with your bad ideas and argue for STD & XL buffs at the same time.

If you can't argue for buffs to all 3 engine types then it makes even less sense to just buff 1 of them.

Why are people bringing up this incredibly stupid idea lately anyways? The only reason I can see is that PGI has not indicated in any way that they're going to buff XL or STD engines--indeed they actually said the opposite a while ago--so people seem to think they can still get PGI to single out LFE for a buff despite that being an even worse idea.

[ShadeofHades]

I'm confused. When the cXL was the only way to survive ST loss without a STD engine, I distinctly remember regular cries of "Stop complaining, any penalty for ST loss is better than being dead!" Now that they will have access to similar survivability, some spheroids think that no penalty should be applied to their tech?



If, as someone said above, ST buffs remain in their entirety for IS, then I'd posit that IS still comes out at least even if not ahead. Take those away, and it would seem fair reducing the penalty to half cXL levels, in exchange for half the weight savings...

[Gentleman Reaper]

El Bandito, on 18 July 2017 - 12:09 AM, said:

Horsedung, that's what. There is no balance logic behind making the LFE strictly inferior than CXL. Obviously the balance underling didnt get the memo.

Until they start playing with engine-related structure buffs (and subsequently reworking durability quirks on every mech in the game) LFE need to stay as it is, or it would completely obsolete STDs and isXLs.

[Grus]

El Bandito, on 18 July 2017 - 04:53 AM, said:

Not only that, due to everything IS costs more weight than Clans, LFE IS mechs will be moving slower than Clan mechs with similar loadout. Which means the LFE ST penalty will make them EVEN slower. Thats not how you balance the tech. Thats guaranteeing continued IS quirk dependency, which is detrimental for this MP only game.

so you're upset because your LFE that was backwards engineered from captured clan xl reactors has the same penility as what they are based off of and arnt ad light... really?

[Xetelian]

20% speed loss is fine, unless you're in an assault then it is brutal. I can get behind an 10% or 15% speed loss.

However the 40% cooling efficiency loss is too much for how much it weighs. 20% would be better and more balanced.

[MechaBattler]

Scout Derek, on 18 July 2017 - 12:10 AM, said:

more like LFEs are more survivable than XLs and better than STDs....

YA KNOW. :/

That's still not good logic for nerfing it further into inferiority. So the IS has 3 inferior engines. Does that make sense to anyone? Instead of finding a way of improving the other two. They're making the already inferior LFE, more so.

Edited by MechaBattler, 18 July 2017 - 08:49 AM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

It baffles me how they were basically handed with a tool to lower the power gap between Clans and IS in form of LFE and they go out of their way to make LFE 100% inferior to cXL. It's obvious that the inferior engine should have a smaller penalty. How come anyone can think otherwise? Would it be so terrible for the IS to have a chance of being stronger for a month until structure/armor quirks nerf?

That's a bit too much effort to keep things exactly as they are while they're not in the best place to start with. IS TCs are bad, light LFE is a very minor boon, LFE was nerfed into inferiority before release, most weapons are straight up bad.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 18 July 2017 - 08:56 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

GoatHILL, on 17 July 2017 - 11:54 PM, said:

I don't play clan mechs so I wasn't sure but seems a little high since it still weights more.

Keep in mind that PGI has for years been balancing (Nerfing) Clan mechs and equipment around the existing IS tech and whether your not you believe they have been successful, the absolute difference between the Clan and IS leading up to this tech drop isn't all that far apart.

That being the case, this tech drop, at least from my personal experience of 30+ hours on the PTS testing, will buff pretty much every IS mech by 10-20% across the board. LFE's alone will make 75% of all IS mechs either faster, able to carry more firepower and/or become more durable. Therefore it isn't too harsh a penalty.

Oh before someone dares call me a Clan Apologist, over half my mechs are IS and are benefiting from the new tech.

[Cy Mitchell]

I am a Clan only player and I think that the LFE ST destruction penalties should be no more than half of what the cXL penalties are.

[Widowmaker1981]

Balanced engines:

XL: 1st ST loss = -30% heat -20% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death.
C-XL: 1st ST loss = -40% heat -20% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death.
LFE: 1st ST loss = -10% heat -5% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death. (Could also go with no penalty on 1st loss)
STD: No effect on ST loss. +20% structure for CT/RT/LT

Same tonnage and crit usage as now.

IS-XL has slightly lower penalties than Clan XL due to being slightly larger in the ST (which limits builds) and due to IS running lower total numbers of heatsinks (and therefore a higher percentage being mounted in the engine) due to being 3 slot.

Imo that would largely allow PGI to remove structure quirks as a racial balancing mechanism - some quirks of some kinds will always be required for chassis balance. It also keeps all engines somewhat viable, including the standard. Obviously specific values could be tweaked.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 18 July 2017 - 11:31 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Widowmaker1981, on 18 July 2017 - 11:30 AM, said:

Balanced engines:

XL: 1st ST loss = -30% heat -20% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death.
C-XL: 1st ST loss = -40% heat -20% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death.
LFE: 1st ST loss = -10% heat -5% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death. (Could also go with no penalty on 1st loss)
STD: No effect on ST loss. +20% structure for CT/RT/LT

Same tonnage and crit usage as now.

IS-XL has slightly lower penalties than Clan XL due to being slightly larger in the ST (which limits builds) and due to IS running lower total numbers of heatsinks (and therefore a higher percentage being mounted in the engine) due to being 3 slot.

Imo that would largely allow PGI to remove structure quirks as a racial balancing mechanism - some quirks of some kinds will always be required for chassis balance. It also keeps all engines somewhat viable, including the standard. Obviously specific values could be tweaked.

Ok I am find with that. We just need remove all quirks, adjust heat upward for nearly all IS weapons, reduce the weight of all IS weapons, make ACs do bursts of shots, give the Clans all the unique tech the IS is getting, decrease the critical cost of FF and Endo for IS. Fix mount all the engines, JJs and heat sinks on IS mechs so they can't be modified from the base stock build. IS LRM should stream into the target and Clan LRMs should be adjusted to they have 180m minimum range. Also there is a few other things that need changing as well and then we will be balanced.....BECAUSE EVERY MECH WILL BE THE SAME.

Of course then we wouldn't actually be in the established Battletech/Mechwarrior IP so we should probably change the names of the game to Robowarrior Online.

[Khobai]

ISXL taking up 2 extra crit slots isnt really enough to justify it having lower penalties. 2 crit slots is not worth all that much. I mean you get that just by taking off hand actuators which dont do anything.

ISXL should still have the same penalties as CXL. Its already getting a good enough buff surviving a side torso destruction when its not supposed to. Asking for lesser penalties too is really pushing it.

LFE should have no penalties or at most half penalties if no penalties proves to be too good.

And STD engine should give a +25%/+20%/+15%/+10% weighted CT structure buff, with lights getting a bigger weighted bonus than assaults. Because lighter mechs have less CT structure and need a bigger incentive than assaults to take STD engines. This might encourage some slower mediums to take STD engines for example.

And of course structure quirks should be removed completely. Except in cases where the mech really needs them like the atlas or annihilator.

Edited by Khobai, 18 July 2017 - 12:31 PM.

[GoatHILL]

I am an IS only player and I am fine with IS XL as is this is Battletech.

That said a lot of IS mechs only have weapons on 1 side (right generally) so if I am going to play dead side I'll still be better off with a STD.

So PGI gave us an engine that will not replace XLs but with the penalty is going to be inferior to STDs in a lot of builds.

Khobai, on 18 July 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

ISXL taking up 2 extra crit slots isnt really enough to justify it having lower penalties. 2 crit slots is not worth all that much. I mean you get that just by taking off hand actuators...

You know IS do not get to remove actuators.

Edited by GoatHILL, 18 July 2017 - 03:00 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Grus, on 18 July 2017 - 08:47 AM, said:

so you're upset because your LFE that was backwards engineered from captured clan xl reactors has the same penalties as what they are based off of and arn't as light... really?

Wolf Dragoons did it but the reason for the 25% savings vs 50% is the material the cXL are made out of is only available on a Clan planet.

Quote

XL: 1st ST loss = -30% heat -20% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death.
C-XL: 1st ST loss = -40% heat -20% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death.
LFE: 1st ST loss = -10% heat -5% speed. / 2nd ST loss = death. (Could also go with no penalty on 1st loss)
STD: No effect on ST loss. +20% structure for CT/RT/LT

The current isXL death on loss of 1ST is based on PGI using the TT 3 engine crit rule, so 1 ST destroyed-check for Flag if isXL death, cXL/LFE - 20% movement-40% heat penalty, STD-nothing.

imho on 1 ST loss - isXL loses 3 engine slots out of 12 or 25%. cXL loses 2 slots or 20% both XL 50% weight savings. LFE loses 2 slots or 20% but engine is heavier. And anything done STD takes affect after mech has been damaged, not buffing it up to stay whole longer.

• LFE - 20.0% (edited) movement-20.0% heat. It only has 25% weight savings but same amount of crit slots as cXL.
  
• cXL 20.0% movement-30% heat (only reason not at 20% is that PGI felt it needed to be 40%, but I would reduce it to 30%
  
• The difference between the two above is that the LFE is made of heavier/denser material. Or make it the same as the cXL based on simply losing 2 engine shielding sections but it would still be less than the isXL
  
• isXL 25% movement-40% heat penalties.
  
• STD (Clan & IS mechs) - DOUBLE the current damage reduction for incoming fire that hits destroyed arm/leg/side torso areas, which are transferred to the next location.