72 replies to this topic

[Tier5 Kerensky]

With Jenner IIC you lose 4 CT front armor because of this bug. I recall when using 4 in rear. It allows using full CT armor only taking absurd 8 rear.


It's nice to get it fixed but I think 4 armor is not a life or death situation.

[MischiefSC]

Don't play Jenners because they are terrible.

That's old news.

[Villainy]

Bombast, on 15 May 2018 - 03:43 PM, said:

Well, because of this bug, Jenner's now have less armor than their weight should allow.

So... Why did Jenner's get their armor needlessly nerfed?

Always count on Bombast.

[R5D4]

MischiefSC, on 16 May 2018 - 11:02 AM, said:

Don't play Jenners because they are terrible.

That's old news.

Well you're not wrong,I tried running the IIC-A a bit and it's still too squishy for it's over inflated size. I'm at the point where I'd say the only thing that can help it now is a size reduction because as it is quirks and 'redistribution' of armor doesn't seem to cut it.

BTW taking armor off the arms PGI just means the arms explode faster.

Edited by R5D4, 16 May 2018 - 02:29 PM.

[Tordin]

I have stripped of armor from my Jager mechs until the yellow armor warning appears, then I re-add armor points and save the loadout. It worked.
NO need to remove until armor warning, save then go back into the loadout.

Edited by Tordin, 16 May 2018 - 02:26 PM.

[Navid A1]

Here is the problem explained in case you were wondering Chris:
https://www.reddit.c...or_adjustments/

[Guile Votoms]

On my Stalker Misery the armour sticks, on my Jenner Oxide it doesn't.
CT and ST armour always bounces back to pre-patch max values.

What baffles me is how PGI always chooses the most complicated ways to do things.
Why not simply give these chassi armour buffs? They're objectively underperforming to the point where no one even plays them anymore.

Edited by Guile Votoms, 21 May 2018 - 03:47 AM.

[Navid A1]

Guile Votoms, on 21 May 2018 - 03:41 AM, said:

On my Stalker Misery the armour sticks, on my Jenner Oxide it doesn't.
CT and ST armour always bounces back to pre-patch max values.

What baffles me is how PGI always chooses the most complicated ways to do things.
Why not simply give these chassi armour buffs? They're objectively underperforming to the point where no one even plays them anymore.

It depends on how much back armor you are running.

A torso has a max armor value that you can distribute between front and rear.

The bug is that the max armor value per torso (front+rear) is still the old number, so whenever you want to increase torso armor past that number it just reverts it back to the old max.

On your stalker, try re-locating armor from rear to front. You'll see that after a certain point the excess amount will not stick.

[Guile Votoms]

Navid A1, on 21 May 2018 - 04:53 AM, said:

It depends on how much back armor you are running.

A torso has a max armor value that you can distribute between front and rear.

The bug is that the max armor value per torso (front+rear) is still the old number, so whenever you want to increase torso armor past that number it just reverts it back to the old max.

On your stalker, try re-locating armor from rear to front. You'll see that after a certain point the excess amount will not stick.

What's the point of that? I don't need more than 4 back armour at the most.

[Tier5 Kerensky]

Guile Votoms, on 21 May 2018 - 05:17 AM, said:

What's the point of that? I don't need more than 4 back armour at the most.

Uuh exactly. The stalkers are bugged too, can confirm. You can't have max amount of front ST armor, without any quirks you will be limited to 72, which is 10 short of max . CT allows taking all full front but with Stalkers I often have extra CT back armor anyway since it won't be useful on front.

[Tarogato]

This change should be outright reverted. Not only did it invalidate everybody's builds, requiring them to redistribute, but it's bugged and doesn't even work as intended, and the logic being doing it in the first place is not even sound.


What is the point of *removing* armour from the arms of Jenners, when Jenners are prone to losing their arms, especially the IIC? Same for the Jagermech. You think those arms are small? Put a clutch of ballistics in there and they each become the size of entire torsos when shot at from the side. And then there's the CDA-2B, whose arms can shield the torsos quite well... yet it relies on them not falling off because that's where its weapons are.

This is almost a straight-up nerf for every chassis except the Stalker. What you get back in torso durability matters little when you've lost half or all of your weapons. 42% HP nerf for Jenner, 25% nerf for Jenner IIC, 20% for the Jager... that is *substantial*.

Is people running around stripped the actual intended outcome? I have to wonder. These were not overperforming mechs. It was not necessary to remove armour from one location to justify buffing the other. Just buff what needs buffed, don't make it more complicated than it has to be.

[YueFei]

Tarogato, on 22 May 2018 - 05:53 PM, said:

This change should be outright reverted. Not only did it invalidate everybody's builds, requiring them to redistribute, but it's bugged and doesn't even work as intended, and the logic being doing it in the first place is not even sound.


What is the point of *removing* armour from the arms of Jenners, when Jenners are prone to losing their arms, especially the IIC? Same for the Jagermech. You think those arms are small? Put a clutch of ballistics in there and they each become the size of entire torsos when shot at from the side. And then there's the CDA-2B, whose arms can shield the torsos quite well... yet it relies on them not falling off because that's where its weapons are.

This is almost a straight-up nerf for every chassis except the Stalker. What you get back in torso durability matters little when you've lost half or all of your weapons. 42% HP nerf for Jenner, 25% nerf for Jenner IIC, 20% for the Jager... that is *substantial*.

Is people running around stripped the actual intended outcome? I have to wonder. These were not overperforming mechs. It was not necessary to remove armour from one location to justify buffing the other. Just buff what needs buffed, don't make it more complicated than it has to be.

Yes.

[Jackal Noble]

Do not play Jesus