184 replies to this topic

[Y E O N N E]

The Image, on 02 January 2019 - 01:00 PM, said:

I disagree.

It could be very good, but there would need to be other corresponding interface and reporting changes necessary for it to make sense, I grant you.

Taking a gyro hit that while the first one won't kill you out right, but does result in slowing you down and/or significantly higher cockpit rattle, would be interesting.

Same thing with the engine, first crit raises heat generation/slows down heat mitigation and reduces heat capacity, second crit, more of the same, plus significant speed reduction.

Or apply crit management to headshots... As far as I can tell PGI has pretty much nerfed 'criting' a cockpit, you have to destroy the entire head before you kill a pilot and get that "head shot" (unless you've stored ammo in your cockpit and RNGesus says it was hit and explodes, in which case the ultimate result is the same no matter what), but instead have potential to destroy sensors which causes your HUD to start shimmering like you're near an ECM 'mech and makes it more difficult to establish locks and gather target info.

Things like this add depth to game play.

Leaving them out has just left the game feeling more like Robot CoD/Quake...

That's not good. That's just making people die prematurely.

Piranha, Flea, Javelin, Mist Lynx, Cheetah, or even a damn Locust can run up behind you and crit out your engine after a second or two of fire. You want people to quit en masse? This is how you get them to quit en masse. It's already not fun to have your weapons evaporate almost immediately when the armor is breeched, now you want to extend that frustration to things that can kill you outright.

Crits are not a fun mechanic; they disproportionately reward small, accidental damage and diminish the value of piloting ability. Brush that open side torso with a small laser at 200 meters? Oops, there goes your AC/20! Spatter a pair of LMG at 400 meters? RIP your engine! No. F*** that.

Edited by Y E O N N E, 02 January 2019 - 01:08 PM.

[The Image]

SFC174, on 02 January 2019 - 01:01 PM, said:

Why is it always a character like this guy making these sorts of comments? I mean if you're gonna call people lazy, not smart and not skilled, I'd hope you have some credibility to stand upon other than your opinion.

I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Elaborate.

Hazeclaw, on 02 January 2019 - 01:05 PM, said:

because if you had credibility you wouldn't be making those kinds of statements

I take it you and he disagree, so instead of arguing the point you insult and attempt to bait me into responding in kind.

Edited by The Image, 02 January 2019 - 01:24 PM.

[The Image]

Y E O N N E, on 02 January 2019 - 01:05 PM, said:

That's not good. That's just making people die prematurely.

Lose 3 engine components, you're engine is SUPPOSED to be dead. Take 2 gyro hits, you're 'mech is SUPPOSED to be dead. Take two sensor or life support hits, your 'mech is SUPPOSED to be dead.

Not really sure how you count it as 'premature'...

It's actually kind of how the game is SUPPOSED to be played...

Quote

Piranha, Flea, Javelin, Mist Lynx, Cheetah, or even a damn Locust can run up behind you and crit out your engine after a second or two of fire. You want people to quit en masse? This is how you get them to quit en masse. It's already not fun to have your weapons evaporate almost immediately when the armor is breeched, now you want to extend that frustration to things that can kill you outright.

The problems with those 'mechs aren't because of crit issues, it's because PGI has incompletely implemented various aspects of BattleTech play, ignoring key balancing factors while exacerbating the Risk-verses-Reward of playing lights by ensuring lights can, with very little risk most of the time, jam themselves into an opposing 'mechs legs/*** and fire with nearly 100% impunity.

There are certain light 'mechs that have an incredibly unbalanced impact to game play.

Yeah, PGI would need to fix that too...

Quote

Crits are not a fun mechanic; they disproportionately reward small, accidental damage and diminish the value of piloting ability. Brush that open side torso with a small laser at 200 meters? Oops, there goes your AC/20! Spatter a pair of LMG at 400 meters? RIP your engine! No. F*** that.

Yeah, uh, what you're describing with the AC/20, that's happening now actually. Open component location with a weapon has a chance of critting upon any weapons hit, so we're already getting a portion of this, exactly how you describe including the RNGesus effect. Crimany, weapons like clan gauss are garunteed to explode, even if it's a flamer that hits the open location (unless flamers no longer get crit chances in this game, I dunno, correct me if I'm wrong there I cant remember).

It's just that with weapon/gyro/sensor/life support/actuator crit management there's more consequences to be had. More depth what's happening with your 'mech and maybe more thought on what you want to do to the other player's 'mech.

As it stands now, on this account and my main, I've seen a general regression in player skill levels. So many people not bothering target what they're shooting at to see which locations might be open. They're just sitting there vomiting their alphas because they know eventually they'll spread enough damage on the enemy to blow something up.

Edited by The Image, 02 January 2019 - 01:37 PM.

[Daurock]

Perhaps I'm in a minority here, but I'm not seeing this change as a huge, dramatic problem.

There isn't really any question that the change takes the LFE and cXL down a peg, but those two engines were by far the most common ones put into mechs, precisely BECAUSE the penalties were minimal compared to the weight savings. Now those penalties are have been changed, and now are far more visible. The fact that people are re-considering their builds, and likely changing some of engine choices is probably a good thing, balance wise. Keep in mind that if the devs had wanted to make a singular engine choice the norm, they probably would have taken off isXL side torso death a long time ago, allowing it to simply become the norm. That they did this instead tells me that a- they want all 3 choices to be chosen in more varied places, and b- that they aren't going to make isXL engines lose side torso death anytime soon.

I do have some feels for Clan Omnis, since they don't get an engine choice, but perhaps this is one more step towards getting actual quirks on clan mechs, or one more step towards lowering quirk levels on some of the IS mechs.

Edited by Daurock, 02 January 2019 - 01:40 PM.

[K O Z A K]

The Image, on 02 January 2019 - 01:23 PM, said:

I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Elaborate.

I take it you and he disagree, so instead of arguing the point you insult and attempt to bait me into responding in kind.

Ok, you calling people who ride the heat wave not smart, and not skilled is funny considering we both know for a fact why you're hiding behind an alt.

It was in fact a skill to ride the heat wave as close as possible, to output maximum damage, then reposition while cooling when it became untenable to hold even with max output, then ride it again to output max damage, then reposition. The timing, awareness and map knowledge required to do this took skill compared to not riding the heat, which basically means you're not using your mech to it's full potential while not worrying at all about heat since you're always "safe" from overheating

[Y E O N N E]

Daurock, on 02 January 2019 - 01:38 PM, said:

I do have some feels for Clan Omnis, since they don't get an engine choice, but perhaps this is one more step towards getting actual quirks on clan mechs, or one more step towards lowering quirk levels on some of the IS mechs.

No and...no.

The Image, on 02 January 2019 - 01:35 PM, said:

Lose 3 engine components, you're engine is SUPPOSED to be dead. Take 2 gyro hits, you're 'mech is SUPPOSED to be dead. Take two sensor or life support hits, your 'mech is SUPPOSED to be dead.

Not really sure how you count it as 'premature'...

You are thinking in terms of turn-based table-top rules, not in terms of real-time combat. It's premature because the indicators say you have X percentage of your health remaining with the implication that you die when the relevant indicators reach zero, yet now you are dead despite them not reading zero. It's premature because the 'Mech was expected to last much longer than it does. It's premature because there is no point in really having internal structure at all if we're almost always going to die by engine crits. Even now, structure is considered pointless because all your weapons tend to evaporate once the armor is gone in the current game environment. So much for structure quirks!

Quote

It's actually kind of how the game is SUPPOSED to be played...

No it isn't. This is MechWarrior, a subset of BattleTech.

Quote

The problems with those 'mechs aren't because of crit issues, it's because PGI has incompletely implemented various aspects of BattleTech play, ignoring key balancing factors while exacerbating the Risk-verses-Reward of playing lights by ensuring lights can, with very little risk most of the time, jam themselves into an opposing 'mechs legs/*** and fire with nearly 100% impunity.

There are certain light 'mechs that have an incredibly unbalanced impact to game play.

Yeah, PGI would need to fix that too...

This is not BattleTech, this is MechWarrior. I will continue to flatly repeat that every time you bring up BattleTech comparison until you accept what that means.

Until there is some sort of per-match economy that makes choosing a Light over an Assault have proper tactical and strategic value, then Lights need to be as valuable as Assaults in combat. Those listed, and the Wolfhound, are really the only ones worth a damn because they are combat viable. I'm not here to whinge about Lights killing things quickly (pro-tip: I am a Light pilot), I'm here telling you that crits are not fun. It is perfectly acceptable to me for a Piranha to gank an Assault, it is not acceptable to render it worthless without actually killing it because that just adds insult to injury. Assault pilot dies, he can disconnect and start another match. Gets sticked, what is he supposed to do? If he disconnects, he gets penalized. His only choice is to wander around and try to get killed or, if he happens to be in a game mode with caps, go cap. At 55 kph.

So fun.

Quote

Yeah, uh, what you're describing with the AC/20, that's happening now actually

Yes it is, that's how I know it isn't fun.

Quote

. Open component location with a weapon has a chance of critting upon any weapons hit, so we're already getting a portion of this, exactly how you describe including the RNGesus effect. Crimany, weapons like clan gauss are garunteed to explode, even if it's a flamer that hits the open location (unless flamers no longer get crit chances in this game, I dunno, correct me if I'm wrong there I cant remember).

Inconsequential word salad from one person to another who is already acutely aware of all of the above. Doesn't change that it isn't fun. Getting mission-killed and walking around as a stick is not fun.

Quote

It's just that with weapon/gyro/sensor/life support/actuator crit management there's more consequences to be had. More depth what's happening with your 'mech and maybe more thought on what you want to do to the other player's 'mech.

So instead of walking around as a stick, we get to collapse on the ground as a stick assuming we aren't actually dead because of engine crits.

Still not fun.

Quote

As it stands now, on this account and my main, I've seen a general regression in player skill levels. So many people not bothering target what they're shooting at to see which locations might be open. They're just sitting there vomiting their alphas because they know eventually they'll spread enough damage on the enemy to blow something up.

There is a regression because all of the things that actually did take skill (read: aiming and torso-twisting) have been devalued by all of the various attempts to increase raw TTK. The nerfs to agility skills, the nerfs to base agility, the nerfs to PPFLD weapons, the shortening of laser beam durations, the buffs to guided weapons, and the stock mode official tournament have all driven away the players who took the time to get good at the game prior to the changes. What we have now are stupid, durable damage sponges volleying big, stupid alphas at each other with big, stupid DPS and there's nothing to it. This game does not value or sufficiently reward pilot skill when it comes to managing TTK, instead disrespecting it.

The hardest build archetype to do well with in 2019, excluding meme builds, is a PPFLD poptart. Your alpha is small, your DPS is small, and the 'Mechs that can do it are typically on the squishier side of things. It's funny, considering how dominant that was even two years ago with the NTG and SMN, and then three years before that with the CTF, HGN, and VTR-DS.

Edited by Y E O N N E, 02 January 2019 - 02:02 PM.

[The Image]

Hazeclaw, on 02 January 2019 - 01:59 PM, said:

Ok, you calling people who ride the heat wave not smart, and not skilled is funny considering we both know for a fact why you're hiding behind an alt.

You're misquoting me, I said the play wasn't smart, not that the people doing it weren't.

Quote

It was in fact a skill to ride the heat wave as close as possible, to output maximum damage, then reposition while cooling when it became untenable to hold even with max output, then ride it again to output max damage, then reposition. The timing, awareness and map knowledge required to do this took skill compared to not riding the heat, which basically means you're not using your mech to it's full potential while not worrying at all about heat since you're always "safe" from overheating.

Opinions will vary on what you're describing, but the process appears to be:

Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
[is the flashy bar and noisy noise being made indicating next shot might make me too hot?]
Alpha
[is the flashy bar and noisy noise being made indicating next shot might make me too hot?]
Alpha
-- toss in the occasional ducking behind cover for LRMs/multiple enemies firing in your direction adding an opportunity to cool down more... the occasional activation of a cool shot, turning on override, etc.

At least now the process will be:

Alpha
Alpha
[how's my ST armor]
Alpha
[how's my ST armor][is the flashy bar and noisy noise being made indicating next shot might take me to hot?]

etc...

Just a little more thought and skill required to do it safely with the changes now.

[SFC174]

Hazeclaw, on 02 January 2019 - 01:59 PM, said:

Ok, you calling people who ride the heat wave not smart, and not skilled is funny considering we both know for a fact why you're hiding behind an alt.

It was in fact a skill to ride the heat wave as close as possible, to output maximum damage, then reposition while cooling when it became untenable to hold even with max output, then ride it again to output max damage, then reposition. The timing, awareness and map knowledge required to do this took skill compared to not riding the heat, which basically means you're not using your mech to it's full potential while not worrying at all about heat since you're always "safe" from overheating

Pretty much what I would have said. Figured it was an alt too. No activity in at least 30 months, started 6+ years ago and still Tier3.

Anyways, regardless of the rule changes PGI makes to how things work in game, the skilled players will still find a way to maximize their mech's performance better than the average or sub-par player. They're not better because the heat system let them be. They're better because they were able to process all the various inputs the game was giving them and get more out of their mech more consistently than the guy in the middle of the pack.

One reason you saw such massive uproar over the heatbug from top players was that they couldn't play around it because it was unpredictable and gave you no warning. Complete RNG as to when and where you were suddenly going to be over the heat limit. This new heat stacking system is predictable (not fun, but predictable) and consistent so top players will still work around it and stomp the scrubs. In fact I'd say that if anything it will increase the gap between high and low skill players because instead of processing where you are on the heat scale, you also need to consider the state of your armor, the heat contribution of your weapons when fired, and who is firing at you all at once. The sad part is, the heat bug still seems to exist....

[Maxx Blue]

I don't mind the new heat mechanic, but I did put up a post in the feature suggestions asking for the numeric heat scale indicator to show numbers over 100%. Part of my problem is that I'm having a hard time judging just how far over 100% I am when I lose a side torso or a pile of heatsinks. If the percentage would show me how far over I was rather than capping at 100%, I could respond and turn off override. Yes, I would still need to do that very quickly, but at least I would have a clear indicator that I was way overheated and not going to drop back below 100% any time soon so I know that I need to take action.

[The Image]

Y E O N N E, on 02 January 2019 - 02:00 PM, said:

...

You are thinking in terms of turn-based table-top rules, not in terms of real-time combat. It's premature because the indicators say you have X percentage of your health remaining with the implication that you die when the relevant indicators reach zero, yet now you are dead despite them not reading zero. It's premature because the 'Mech was expected to last much longer than it does. It's premature because there is no point in really having internal structure at all if we're almost always going to die by engine crits. Even now, structure is considered pointless because all your weapons tend to evaporate once the armor is gone in the current game environment. So much for structure quirks!

Then it sounds like you're completely against head shots being in the game too.

After all, losing to a cockpit shot leaves more than 90% of your 'mech remaining.

Quote

No it isn't. This is MechWarrior, a subset of BattleTech.

This is not BattleTech, this is MechWarrior. I will continue to flatly repeat that every time you bring up BattleTech comparison until you accept what that means.

Even MechWarrior used BattleTech rules when it came to 'mech play.

I'm sorry you don't like it, but again most of the problems of balance, TTK, and all the rest can be laid at the feet of PGI's incomplete implementation rules and features within BattleTech that brought balance to the game.

Some of the rules/features had to be ignored because the Cry engine sucks. Some were ignored because PGI didn't have the time/manpower to do them right and others were ignored, apparently because the people making the decisions didn't like them.

Regardless of all that, what this game needs in it, is a bit more BattleTech and a lot fewer excuses...

Quote

Until there is some sort of per-match economy that makes choosing a Light over an Assault have proper tactical and strategic value, then Lights need to be as valuable as Assaults in combat. Those listed, and the Wolfhound, are really the only ones worth a damn because they are combat viable. I'm not here to whinge about Lights killing things quickly (pro-tip: I am a Light pilot), I'm here telling you that crits are not fun. It is perfectly acceptable to me for a Piranha to gank an Assault, it is not acceptable to render it worthless without actually killing it because that just adds insult to injury. Assault pilot dies, he can disconnect and start another match. Gets sticked, what is he supposed to do? If he disconnects, he gets penalized. His only choice is to wander around and try to get killed or, if he happens to be in a game mode with caps, go cap. At 55 kph.

So fun.

Yes it is, that's how I know it isn't fun.

Inconsequential word salad from one person to another who is already acutely aware of all of the above. Doesn't change that it isn't fun. Getting mission-killed and walking around as a stick is not fun.

So instead of walking around as a stick, we get to collapse on the ground as a stick assuming we aren't actually dead because of engine crits.

Still not fun.

So apparently you're just against all crits period?

Quote

There is a regression because all of the things that actually did take skill (read: aiming and torso-twisting) have been devalued by all of the various attempts to increase raw TTK. The nerfs to agility skills, the nerfs to base agility, the nerfs to PPFLD weapons, the shortening of laser beam durations, the buffs to guided weapons, and the stock mode official tournament have all driven away the players who took the time to get good at the game prior to the changes. What we have now are stupid, durable damage sponges volleying big, stupid alphas at each other with big, stupid DPS and there's nothing to it. This game does not value or sufficiently reward pilot skill when it comes to managing TTK, instead disrespecting it.

The hardest build archetype to do well with in 2019, excluding meme builds, is a PPFLD poptart. Your alpha is small, your DPS is small, and the 'Mechs that can do it are typically on the squishier side of things. It's funny, considering how dominant that was even two years ago with the NTG and SMN, and then three years before that with the CTF, HGN, and VTR-DS.

That's just it, the prior to the change, torso twisting for the vast majority of mediocre players out there wasn't worth it because they could continue to face tank even after an ST loss, and continuing the endless alphas wasn't very punitive on the heat side of things. At least now, there's more of a motivation to maybe START torso twisting to maybe protect that weakened/opened ST because of the potential consequence of NOT protecting it.

Just as an aside we have differing opinions on the effects on TTK of the various changes you mentioned:

The nerfs to agility skills, the nerfs to base agility - Didn't affect lights and mediums as much as it affected heavies and assaults. Little to no change in TTK was felt on the lighter end, but at the heavier end, those changes decreased TTK, being less agile than lights and mediums to begin with, the nerf really puts heavies and assaults at a much higher than should be agility disadvantage.

the nerfs to PPFLD weapons, I agree here, but the nerfs were necessary because of a lack of a heat affects table putting actual RISK to continued, repeated alphas.

the shortening of laser beam durations - sorry, wouldn't shorter beam duration actually decrease TTK? Less potential to spread the damage, higher rate of fire as the refresh rate of the beam starts at the end of the current firing

the buffs to guided weapons - buffing LRMs/ATMs/Streaks decreases TTK too. While PGI made some minor changes that makes them a bit more difficult to use, over all the other changes in flight paths, damage, heat, etc. seems to allow more missiles in the air, more hits to register, more damage overall. To increase the TTK, you'd need to ensure less computer guided damage is actually being inflicted, not more.

[The Image]

SFC174, on 02 January 2019 - 02:34 PM, said:

...

The sad part is, the heat bug still seems to exist....

Yes, the heat bug needs to be fixed.

I'm both surprised and not surprised it's existed as long as it has.

[Bongo TauKat]

I find that not riding the red line the whole match and knowing when to disengage to cool off negates the ST overheat. Adjust your tactics and you will be fine.

[Tarl Cabot]

The Image, on 02 January 2019 - 12:15 PM, said:

This goes along with my aforementioned statement that engines are artificially more durable than they should be as you have to blow away an entire torso before they start taking damage (or in the case of isXL, dead) vs. just getting 3 crits in any one of 3 locations...

Artificially durable and unfortunately adding to the 'mediocre' feeling in game play and 'mech design...

Not really arguing about the actual engine crit system from BT to MWO, as it was something PGI said they were looking into implementing each and every time a penalty was added to cXL. Clans ran for a few months without ANY penalties with loss of the 1st ST. PGI then added the 20% engine heat dissipation penalty. 20% movement penalty was added approx a YEAR later then finally increased the heat dissipation penalty from 20% to 40%. Each time PGI indicated these were place holders than not.

But correct, when isXL was introduced PGI followed the the 3 crit rule but only when the first ST was loss but at that time it was only IS vs IS, IS vs Clans were still a few years away. As for BT, for a STD that is 50% of the engine shielding. For isXL that is 25% and for cXL/LFE that is 20%. Nor was there a reason for FASA to change the engine crit rules since the game used dice and each weapon was rolled for, both hit/mis THEN location.

Once it became apparent that PGI was not going to introduce an inclusion engine crit system, it almost meant that PGI could use the BT rules as flavor/guide while applying their flavor to MWO, and PGI showed how they could make it work with how it was implemented for the cXL.

The other side of the shoe is that by leaving isXL 1st ST loss = immediate death, there is no emphasis for vet/reg to return and play FP due to that death, or spend MORE c-bills to switch out the isXL for LFE, eliminating or reducing components/speed. Nor does it setup IS Omnimechs in a good spot if they were to be introduced since engines would be locked in.

In every time PGI has done, lack of engines being equivalent when a ST is destroyed is the one thing that irks me the most right now. Quirks come and go at the flip of a switch. Armor/Structural quirks work for STD, LFE and isXL. And below is my suggestion on non-lethal penalties.

LFE 15% movement penalty - 15% or 20% engine heat dissipation penalty (20% - 2 out of 10 engine slots but denser -lesser weight savings)

cXL 20% movement penalty - 30% engine heat dissipation penalty (20% - 2 out of 10 engine slots - base line)

isXL 30% movement penalty - 40% or 45% engine heat dissipation penalty (25% - 3 out of 12 engine slots)

And yes, people have become "accustomed" to riding that red line because there is no active heat bar/scale penalties, at least 2-3 movement penalty thresholds, nor anything to effect targeting due to running high on the heat bar/scale.

[El Bandito]

Bongo TauKat, on 02 January 2019 - 09:07 PM, said:

I find that not riding the red line the whole match and knowing when to disengage to cool off negates the ST overheat. Adjust your tactics and you will be fine.

But crying in the forums about the change feels so much better!

[WrathOfDeadguy]

The Image, on 02 January 2019 - 02:59 PM, said:

Yes, the heat bug needs to be fixed.

I'm both surprised and not surprised it's existed as long as it has.

It took them how long to fix Artemis giving a tonnage-free lock time buff to Streaks? Half a decade or thereabouts?

Escort was in the rotation for how long with broken AI pathing?

The TBR and SCR dominated every queue for how many months before they finally got nerfed? And it took how many years after they were no longer OP to finally get some of those nerfs removed?

It took how long to remove Long Tom from FP after it literally killed the game mode?

For how long did AC2 trigger its own ghost heat limit, rendering an already marginal gun totally useless, before it finally got fixed?

MGs were trash tier for how many years before they finally got buffed back into viability?

How long did the ACH keep its unwarranted quirks and run roughshod over the light queue before getting toned down?

IS UACs and UAC-focused 'Mechs, even the bad ones, have suffered under the global UAC nerfs PGI dropped because of the Clantech KDK-3 for how long now?

How many 'Mechs are still all but totally worthless because of bad scaling, bad geometry, bad or nonexistent quirks, or all of the above?

How many major balance changes have been introduced without at least a PTS session to shake them out?

...

I'm not surprised at all that the heat bug is still with us. I'll be surprised when it finally buggers off.

Edited by WrathOfDeadguy, 02 January 2019 - 11:13 PM.

[Sjorpha]

Tarl Cabot, on 02 January 2019 - 09:31 PM, said:

LFE 15% movement penalty - 15% or 20% engine heat dissipation penalty (20% - 2 out of 10 engine slots but denser -lesser weight savings)

cXL 20% movement penalty - 30% engine heat dissipation penalty (20% - 2 out of 10 engine slots - base line)

isXL 30% movement penalty - 40% or 45% engine heat dissipation penalty (25% - 3 out of 12 engine slots)

I like the gist of it, but I don't understand why you must insist on keeping cxl strictly superior to isxl.

If anything cxl should have slightly higher penalties than isxl since it already has the advantage of being more compact, so in your suggestion it would make sense to swap the values for is and clan xl penalties.

Whatever the suggestion is to balance engines, the goal should be actual balance. Such that in a hypothetical mixtech scenario the choice between a cxl, isxl, lfe and standard isn't a no brainer (and the same should be true for all equipment btw).

Now personally I'd prefer a solution that preserves the flavor distinction between engines, so what I would do is to make isxl save more weight than cxl and keep st death. Then make cxl and lfe have different penalties like you suggest. Now there is a sensible progression from std to isxl where std is the heaviest, most compact and most durable while isxl is the lightest, largest and least durable with lfe and cxl sitting in between. That would mean no engine is strictly better than another which is the ideal scenario for all asymmetric balancing.

[El Bandito]

WrathOfDeadguy, on 02 January 2019 - 11:13 PM, said:

It took them how long to fix Artemis giving a tonnage-free lock time buff to Streaks? Half a decade or thereabouts?

Escort was in the rotation for how long with broken AI pathing?

The TBR and SCR dominated every queue for how many months before they finally got nerfed? And it took how many years after they were no longer OP to finally get some of those nerfs removed?

It took how long to remove Long Tom from FP after it literally killed the game mode?

For how long did AC2 trigger its own ghost heat limit, rendering an already marginal gun totally useless, before it finally got fixed?

MGs were trash tier for how many years before they finally got buffed back into viability?

How long did the ACH keep its unwarranted quirks and run roughshod over the light queue before getting toned down?

IS UACs and UAC-focused 'Mechs, even the bad ones, have suffered under the global UAC nerfs PGI dropped because of the Clantech KDK-3 for how long now?

How many 'Mechs are still all but totally worthless because of bad scaling, bad geometry, bad or nonexistent quirks, or all of the above?

How many major balance changes have been introduced without at least a PTS session to shake them out?

...

I'm not surprised at all that the heat bug is still with us. I'll be surprised when it finally buggers off.

And FP is still crap compared to what they advertised to us in 2012.

Sjorpha, on 03 January 2019 - 02:29 AM, said:

I like the gist of it, but I don't understand why you must insist on keeping cxl strictly superior to isxl.

If anything cxl should have slightly higher penalties than isxl since it already has the advantage of being more compact, so in your suggestion it would make sense to swap the values for is and clan xl penalties.

Correct. Tone down some IS quirks to balance it out.

[R Valentine]

Sjorpha, on 03 January 2019 - 02:29 AM, said:

I like the gist of it, but I don't understand why you must insist on keeping cxl strictly superior to isxl.

If anything cxl should have slightly higher penalties than isxl since it already has the advantage of being more compact, so in your suggestion it would make sense to swap the values for is and clan xl penalties.

I'll never get why PGI insists on following TT rules only in the stupidest of situations. There was never any reason ISXL should have been a death on a single ST loss, and their implementation of that and then repeated failures to correct it over several years is what led to this garbage band-aid solution to begin with. They're trying to fix what they should have fixed years ago when the solution was obvious, only now they have to justify having LFE as well as XL. What a complete s*** show.

[Tarl Cabot]

Sjorpha, on 03 January 2019 - 02:29 AM, said:

I like the gist of it, but I don't understand why you must insist on keeping cxl strictly superior to isxl.

If anything cxl should have slightly higher penalties than isxl since it already has the advantage of being more compact, so in your suggestion it would make sense to swap the values for is and clan xl penalties.

Whatever the suggestion is to balance engines, the goal should be actual balance. Such that in a hypothetical mixtech scenario the choice between a cxl, isxl, lfe and standard isn't a no brainer (and the same should be true for all equipment btw).

.....

It is keeping to the flavor of BT while providing a twist to it. cXL and isXL have the same 50% weight savings (for non-BT MWO engine weight combines engine-gyro-cockpit together) over STD but cXL is only using 20% of the shielding while isXL loses 25% of its shielding. cXL would be superior to the isXL in that context and that is likely how PGI would view it, and presumably the player base.

And it is that compactness of the cXL that would lead to the LFE having lower penalties to counter the the lack of engine weight savings of only 25% instead of 50% due to it being denser, to give a counter argument, a reason why a player should consider using a a LFE instead of a isXL.

--- For the few who may wonder where the 50% and 25% savings is coming from, it is a combo fo engine, gyro and cockpit.

From STD / XL / LFE
MWO 200 engine wtg 11.5 ton / 9.5 ton / 7.5 ton + another external 2 tons for HS = 10 total HS rule
MWO 300 engine wtg 25 ton / 20.5 / 15.5 ton
MWO 400 engine wtg 59.5 ton / 46.5 ton / 33.5 ton

BT 300 engine only wtg 19 ton / 14.5 ton / 9.5 ton

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 03 January 2019 - 06:56 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Tarl Cabot, on 03 January 2019 - 06:53 AM, said:

And it is that compactness of the cXL that would lead to the LFE having lower penalties to counter the the lack of engine weight savings of only 25% instead of 50% due to it being denser, to give a counter argument, a reason why a player should consider using a a LFE instead of a isXL.

Yes, and what is still missing is a reason to pick ISXL over cXL.

Unless that choice is difficult (in a hypothetical mixtech build), the engines are not balanced, cXL remains overpowered compared to IS engines, and the problem this causes in the game remains unfixed.

The concept to strive for is that IS and Clan tech/mechs should be different in flavor and mechanics, but equally strong ton for ton.

I would prefer balancing the tech itself to be equally good, starting with the engines, but I can absolutely see a case for doing it with quirks instead if you think quirks are fun. (I actually quite like heavily quirked mechs, they can be very distinct and fun in their role so there is definitely an argument for that approach too). The problem is that a lot of IS mechs lack the degree of quirkage required to match clan tech, and PGI seems more eager to nerf quirks than buff them.

Edited by Sjorpha, 03 January 2019 - 07:12 AM.