21 replies to this topic

[TheArisen]

Credit to ManganMan
https://mwomercs.com...rnal-structure/
So we have Light Ferro Fibrous armor, which is exactly between full Ferro Fibrous and Standard Armor, in terms of bonuses and slot taking for itself.

I would suggest to implement similiar solution for the chassis, that is:

Endo Composite
http://www.sarna.net.../Endo_Composite

Pros:
- Less slots taken than ES (by half, just like LFF against FF);
- Same resilience like standard and ES chassis.

Cons:
- Saves less tonnes than ES (about 75%, practically just like LFF against FF).

Composite Internal Structure
http://www.sarna.net...ernal_Structure
Pros:
- Same weight saving as ES;
- Less slots taken than ES.

Cons:
- Drops structure hitpoints by half (CIS is much more fragile than ES).

Edited by TheArisen, 06 April 2018 - 05:54 PM.

[Jackal Noble]

Hey with the PIR nerf, these might make sense now.


lol.

[FupDup]

Regular Composite would suck because of the squishiness. EndoComp would be nice though, particularly for the IS.

[Hauptmann Keg Steiner]

I just want Compact Gyros and Engines, so I can start shoving Heavy PPCs into CT energy hardpoints.

Oh, Small Cockpits too.

[Zergling]

Endo-Composite, Heavy Ferro-Fibrous, Compact Gyros and XL Gyros are all on my 'wish list' for MWO

[Battlemaster56]

I would love to have these options make building mechs alot easier and not a pain espically when I have enough tons for extra hs or ammo but all my space is used.

[evilauthor]

IdToaster, on 06 April 2018 - 09:17 PM, said:

Oh, Small Cockpits too.

Given that piloting skill checks aren't a thing in MWO, there probably has to be some kind of mobility penalty for the extra crit and ton that Small Cockpits provide. Probably a straight up speed debuff by some small percentage which doesn't bother heavier mechs too much but would be REALLY noticeable on speedster Lights and Mediums that need every ton and crit they can get.

That said...

Hardened Armor - Halves ALL damage done to it, but you can only buy half the Armor Points per ton of armor, effectively allowing mechs to double the amount of armor that they can carry. As with the TT game, using Hardened Armor comes with a huge mobility debuff to balance it with other armor types. Like the Small Cockpit above, I'm thinking a flat speed debuff... only more extreme. Say a flat speed reduction by 30% which includes torso twist and arm movement speed as well as running speed. In a game which prizes mobility so much, especially in fast lights and slow assaults that need every bit of speed they can get, a 30% speed reduction is VERY painful.

[FupDup]

evilauthor, on 07 April 2018 - 06:59 AM, said:

Given that piloting skill checks aren't a thing in MWO, there probably has to be some kind of mobility penalty for the extra crit and ton that Small Cockpits provide. Probably a straight up speed debuff by some small percentage which doesn't bother heavier mechs too much but would be REALLY noticeable on speedster Lights and Mediums that need every ton and crit they can get.

I think that the Small Cockpit's penalty should be translated as a reduced field of view. You know how the Shadow Hawk has a very tiny window compared to something like the Griffin? Putting a Small Cockpit in a Griffin should give it the same visibility as the Shawk. Another comparison would be the Locust 1V(P) compared to a normal Locust. I guess add a few sensor penalties in there too for good measure.

Why would a lighter and smaller cockpit reduce speed? That makes absolutely no sense. There is no logical connection there.

[Composite Armour]

Ye, more decent options.

[evilauthor]

FupDup, on 07 April 2018 - 07:05 AM, said:

I think that the Small Cockpit's penalty should be translated as a reduced field of view. You know how the Shadow Hawk has a very tiny window compared to something like the Griffin? Putting a Small Cockpit in a Griffin should give it the same visibility as the Shawk. Another comparison would be the Locust 1V(P) compared to a normal Locust. I guess add a few sensor penalties in there too for good measure.

Why would a lighter and smaller cockpit reduce speed? That makes absolutely no sense. There is no logical connection there.

Wouldn't that basically require new cockpit artwork for... every single mech (except the Omnis of course) in the game? That sounds like way more work than PGI is willing to put out. Programming a speed debuff is easy in comparison.

Besides which, as I understand it, Small Cockpits are small and cramped lacking many of the amenities regular Cockpits have. This effects piloting, much like trying to drive a car when your seat is pulled much too close to the steering wheel. Your elbows and knees are bumping into things every time you move, which while it won't affect much on a cruise, WILL have a significant impact on combat where reaction time and reflexes are important.

Edit: To be true to the TT game, a Small Cockpit needs to affect piloting skill checks, not gunnery skill checks. Reducing field of view affects the latter. I suppose instead of affecting running speed, the speed debuff should instead be applied to things like turning speed, torso twisting speed, and arm movement speed.

Or... change the cockpit. But instead of making it smaller, start... removing features. No kill counter. No decorations. Things missing from the HUD like the minimap and compass (makes navigating harder).

I'd suggest replacing the virtual crosshairs with iron sights, but that might be a bit much.

Edited by evilauthor, 07 April 2018 - 07:18 AM.

[TheArisen]

FupDup, on 07 April 2018 - 07:05 AM, said:

I think that the Small Cockpit's penalty should be translated as a reduced field of view. You know how the Shadow Hawk has a very tiny window compared to something like the Griffin? Putting a Small Cockpit in a Griffin should give it the same visibility as the Shawk. Another comparison would be the Locust 1V(P) compared to a normal Locust. I guess add a few sensor penalties in there too for good measure.

Why would a lighter and smaller cockpit reduce speed? That makes absolutely no sense. There is no logical connection there.

I love this idea. It's a great balancer that thinks outside the box of just numbers

[Nightbird]

I want these options, you don't have to use them.

[Alexander of Macedon]

evilauthor, on 07 April 2018 - 07:12 AM, said:

Wouldn't that basically require new cockpit artwork for... every single mech (except the Omnis of course) in the game? That sounds like way more work than PGI is willing to put out. Programming a speed debuff is easy in comparison.

Besides which, as I understand it, Small Cockpits are small and cramped lacking many of the amenities regular Cockpits have. This effects piloting, much like trying to drive a car when your seat is pulled much too close to the steering wheel. Your elbows and knees are bumping into things every time you move, which while it won't affect much on a cruise, WILL have a significant impact on combat where reaction time and reflexes are important.

Edit: To be true to the TT game, a Small Cockpit needs to affect piloting skill checks, not gunnery skill checks. Reducing field of view affects the latter. I suppose instead of affecting running speed, the speed debuff should instead be applied to things like turning speed, torso twisting speed, and arm movement speed.

Or... change the cockpit. But instead of making it smaller, start... removing features. No kill counter. No decorations. Things missing from the HUD like the minimap and compass (makes navigating harder).

I'd suggest replacing the virtual crosshairs with iron sights, but that might be a bit much.

Inb4 PGI implements it by force-locking your settings to Windowed mode in a resolution one step lower than your monitor for as long as you have a 'mech with it equipped selected.

Yes, even in the 'mechlab.

[Deathlike]

Alexander of Macedon, on 07 April 2018 - 05:41 PM, said:

Inb4 PGI implements it by force-locking your settings to Windowed mode in a resolution one step lower than your monitor for as long as you have a 'mech with it equipped selected.

Yes, even in the 'mechlab.

Don't give PGI ideas. They would actually implement these bad ideas!

Edited by Deathlike, 07 April 2018 - 07:05 PM.

[evilauthor]

Alexander of Macedon, on 07 April 2018 - 05:41 PM, said:

Inb4 PGI implements it by force-locking your settings to Windowed mode in a resolution one step lower than your monitor for as long as you have a 'mech with it equipped selected.

Yes, even in the 'mechlab.

That's especially bad because windowed mode is bugged. How? If I turn too far to the left or right, my mouse pointer appears at the edge of the screen. And if I click to shoot, the entire game gets deselected...

No other game I played windowed does that.

[TheArisen]

evilauthor, on 07 April 2018 - 07:12 AM, said:

Wouldn't that basically require new cockpit artwork for... every single mech (except the Omnis of course) in the game? That sounds like way more work than PGI is willing to put out. Programming a speed debuff is easy in comparison.

Besides which, as I understand it, Small Cockpits are small and cramped lacking many of the amenities regular Cockpits have. This effects piloting, much like trying to drive a car when your seat is pulled much too close to the steering wheel. Your elbows and knees are bumping into things every time you move, which while it won't affect much on a cruise, WILL have a significant impact on combat where reaction time and reflexes are important.

Edit: To be true to the TT game, a Small Cockpit needs to affect piloting skill checks, not gunnery skill checks. Reducing field of view affects the latter. I suppose instead of affecting running speed, the speed debuff should instead be applied to things like turning speed, torso twisting speed, and arm movement speed.

Or... change the cockpit. But instead of making it smaller, start... removing features. No kill counter. No decorations. Things missing from the HUD like the minimap and compass (makes navigating harder).

I'd suggest replacing the virtual crosshairs with iron sights, but that might be a bit much.

That could work quite well as well.

[Khobai]

Quote

Why would a lighter and smaller cockpit reduce speed? That makes absolutely no sense. There is no logical connection there.

smaller cockpit = smaller bicycle pedals = not as much speed

[Nightbird]

Just reducing agility with small cockpit is fine (accel, decel, turn, twist, pitch speeds by 10%), and cut structure hp in 1/2 so it's easier to headshot.

[Brain Cancer]

IdToaster, on 06 April 2018 - 09:17 PM, said:

I just want Compact Gyros and Engines, so I can start shoving Heavy PPCs into CT energy hardpoints.

Oh, Small Cockpits too.

Compact gyros would get a lot of play, ditto small cockpits.

The latter just need to apply a general agility penalty to represent the more difficult piloting needed to use one.

Also, compact gyros would go miles towards making the Spider with the 2E hardpoints better, as you'd actually be able to potentially fit bulkier guns. Ditto the Dragon or anything else IS tech with CT mounts, like the Centurion. XL gyros and small cockpits squeeze that extra bit of tonnage out of machines, especially lighter ones that tend to have bigger engines and mobility relative to others.

All of these show up in-timeline around 3067-8, meaning they're just on the cusp between Civil War tech updates and Jihad-era ones. Of course, we still haven't shuffled FW around to show the factional changes post Clan Invasion...

[Spheroid]

Perhaps increased cockpit shake for small cockpits. It would be very easy to implement. Going full advanced gyro in the skill tree would be equivalent to regular cockpit unskilled.

Edited by Spheroid, 08 April 2018 - 03:41 PM.