26 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Leone, on 20 May 2021 - 07:01 PM, said:

Nonsense. Engine weight to tonnage works out so that both a heavy and a medium going the same speed've spent the same percentage of tonnage on their engine.

~Leone.

Edit: I stand corrected! You're even more wrong.

youre wrong because of a huge flaw in your logic. heavies and mediums DONT usually go the same speed lol.

Mediums normally need to go faster than heavies by necessity because they carry less firepower and armor they need to be able to outrun heavies. which means the medium spends more of its proportional tonnage to ensure it goes faster than heavies.

comon people this is common sense.

ScrapIron Prime, on 20 May 2021 - 08:22 PM, said:

a 50 ton mech with a 200 rated engine moves at the same speed as a 75 ton mech with a 300 rated engine. Mathematically, this is about as efficient as it gets. The 50 ton mech spends 13.5 tons on this (27% of its total mass), while the 75 ton mech spends 25 tons (33%). This is for standard engines. XL would make it 9.5 tons (19%) and 15.5 tons (21%) respectively.

the key thing youre forgetting is that mediums need to go faster than heavy mechs, not the same speed. so yes in a medium you absolutely have to spend a bigger percentage of your tonnage on engine to make sure you go faster than heavies.

yes I agree if a 50 ton medium takes a 200 engine and a 75 heavy takes a 300 engine then the heavy is paying more tonnage proportionally for its engine. But most mediums need to go faster than 65kph. Most 50 ton mediums need bigger than 200 engines, at least 250, or maybe even 275-300 engines so they can go faster than heavies. running those bigger engines costs a lot of the mediums tonnage and some mediums are even forced into using XL engines just to go the right speed.

How could you possibly think that a medium going 65kph is okay? lmao... not in the game I play. any medium that goes that slow dies horribly. mediums normally need to go at least 80-90kph if not faster.

For a medium mech to reach its optimal max speed (which is higher than a heavys optimal max speed) it needs to spend more proportional tonnage on its engine than a heavy mech. thats a fact.

so please stop with this stupid nonsense of heavies and mediums going the same speed. the reason mediums have to spend more for engine tonnage is because they have to go faster than heavies. if youre going to play a medium that goes the same speed as a heavy you might as well just play a heavy instead!

And I havent even talked about the CXL yet and how it allows clan heavies to go just as fast as IS mediums because CXL weighs so little. Thats another big reason IS mediums need to spend more tonnage on their engines or are forced into using ISXL so they can stay faster than the clan fast heavies.

the problem is mediums are getting taxed for what should be an inherent advantage of their weight class.
thats why mediums (at least the IS ones maybe not the clan ones) absolutely should get at least a +5% max speed bonus to help them maintain a speed edge over heavies and help alleviate how much tonnage mediums have to spend on their engines.

Maths:

Since its necessary for mediums to go faster than heavies this is a more fair comparison:

For a 50 ton medium to go 81kph it needs a 250 engine (15.5 for a LFE = 31% of total tonnage)

For a 75 ton heavy to go 64kph it needs a 300 engine (20.5 tons for an LFE = 27.33% of total tonnage)

And those numbers get worse the faster the medium wants to go compared to heavies.

And yes its true that non-clan fast heavies will pay a lot more tonnage to go fast, but the key difference is not all heavies need to be fast heavies (usually just the clan ones that can use CXL), while all mediums really do need to go at least 81kph or faster.

Edited by Khobai, 21 May 2021 - 02:38 AM.

[ScrapIron Prime]

I’m guessing you aren’t a fan of Hunchbacks, then.

[PocketYoda]

If you go by lore the Annihilators made the Atlas redundant.

[Khobai]

ScrapIron Prime, on 21 May 2021 - 04:37 AM, said:

I’m guessing you aren’t a fan of Hunchbacks, then.

im not a fan of hunchbacks that only go 65kph. whats the point of that? I might as well just play a heavy. With a heavy I can still go 65kph but have way more firepower and armor.

the whole point of mediums is to go faster than heavies. so you can run from enemy heavies and screen friendly heavies from enemy lights and other mediums. mediums need speed so you can be where you need to be exactly when you need to be there and bring enough firepower to make a difference.

MechaGnome, on 21 May 2021 - 04:59 AM, said:

If you go by lore the Annihilators made the Atlas redundant.

Lore should not be used for balancing mechs though.

From a game balance perspective both the annihilator and atlas should have their own places in the game.

the atlas should be very tanky and strong at short range brawling while the annihilator should be better at mid to long range. I still dont think the atlas is fully where it needs to be compared to other assaults. The mobility buffs were decent but the atlas is still offensively lacking because of its goofy mixed hardpoints. And defensively it just isnt that much tougher than other assaults like the annihilator.

the same goes for mediums. they should not be made obsolete by fast heavies. thats why this game needs better role warfare to help make sure every weight class and mech in the game has a clearly defined purpose and a reason to exist.

I still think CXL is a huge problem for that reason. because CXL essentially allows clan heavies to go as fast as IS mediums without a huge tonnage commitment and that fundamentally violates the concept of role warfare. Which is why I definitely think IS mediums across the board could use a slight max speed buff. I think thats preferable to nerfing CXL.

Edited by Khobai, 21 May 2021 - 06:35 AM.

[Leone]

Khobai, on 21 May 2021 - 01:18 AM, said:

youre wrong because of a huge flaw in your logic. heavies and mediums DONT usually go the same speed lol.

Which is a choice. The flaw is yours in assuming that the choice isn't. At the same speeds the medium pays less for the engine. It is not necessary for a medium to go faster than a heavy. Yes, a faster mech must pay more for a bigger engine, but this is the same across all weight classes.

Did you know, a mech can take less armour, so you might have a heavy as weak as a medium in order to fit the huge weapon loads it chose to take. Should we complain heavies must pay more tonnage to max armour than mediums therefore and should all get more armour?

I have a gargoyle that pays out heavy tonnage to go as fast as this hypothetical 81kph medium, should it get more firepower because it's an assault?

Choices! Use common sense.

~Leone.

[Khobai]

you lost the argument.

its not a choice. mediums need to move faster than heavies. you think its a coincidence that virtually all stock mediums move faster than stock heavies? its not. its deliberate.

playing a medium thats slower than a heavy is pretty much always inferior to just playing a heavy. since one of the core defining characteristics of a medium is being able to move faster than heavies.

sure you can choose to play a slow medium but you really have to question if its a good build or the best use of a medium when you can just play a heavy that can go the same speed but pack more armor and firepower.

stop trying to argue that mediums dont need to go faster than heavies when we both know they do. And because of the need for mediums to go faster they need to devote proportionally more tonnage to their engines. And a lot of mediums, especially the IS ones, suffer as a result of that. Its one of the big reasons theres such a huge power level disparity between mediums and heavies. Its not a linear power curve like it should be, the difference in power level between 50 tons and 65 tons spikes up hugely for example.

Edited by Khobai, 21 May 2021 - 05:40 PM.

[Leone]

Nope! You lose!

Khobai, on 20 May 2021 - 04:58 PM, said:

I would also like to see all mediums get a +5% max speed buff as well. the way the engine weight curve works it screws mediums because they spend a higher percentage of their total tonnage on engine weight than heavies do. they should get slightly more performance out of their engines to make up for that. Id be fine with an anchor turn buff as well.

ScrapIron Prime, on 20 May 2021 - 08:22 PM, said:

Not quite. The larger the mech, the larger the tax on the same speed.

a 50 ton mech with a 200 rated engine moves at the same speed as a 75 ton mech with a 300 rated engine. Mathematically, this is about as efficient as it gets. The 50 ton mech spends 13.5 tons on this (27% of its total mass), while the 75 ton mech spends 25 tons (33%). This is for standard engines. XL would make it 9.5 tons (19%) and 15.5 tons (21%) respectively.

if you jack up the movement rate, it gets worse. A 50 tonner with a 250 engine uses 18.5 tons (37%) for standard or 12.5 tons (25%) for XL, while a 75 ton mech with a 375 engine pays 45.5 tons (61%) for standard or 26.5 tons (35%) for XL.

Refuted, with actual work shown!

Or, are you talking about the arguement that mediums don't need to go faster than heavies? Because if you wanna start that arguement, I'd be happy to prove you wrong. Again. This time, however, I'll hafta ask for more than opinions. Show your work please, because so far, you've been refuted by actual facts and have doubled down with more opinion.

And be warned, I am planning on pulling out the Urbie and my personal hunchbuddy if you actually manage to cobble together a halfway convincing arguement.

Also, you seem to be arguing that weight shouldn't matter? Do you not drop with friends or join in faction warfare? Having a pocket assault at 50 tonnes is a blast on invasion defense, and sometimes one wants to group with friends, and stick with them.

~Leone.

Edited by Leone, 21 May 2021 - 06:15 PM.