97 replies to this topic

[Will9761]

Gas Guzzler, on 27 June 2023 - 06:30 PM, said:

One possible solution for XL locked IS omni mechs is to use a new-to-MWO engine: OmniXL Engine. Essentially, since the engine is locked, you can basically allow it to perform like a Clan XL (two torsos to kill) without turning the entire balance of the game upside down. Because the locked engine is a fixed point, you simply balance around those mechs having that engine.

I know this has been a huge concern surrounding IS omni mechs (especially heavies and assaults), so I feel like this alleviates that and makes them simpler to balance (no MASSIVE side torso durability quirks required out the gate).

Gas, how would you feel if an LFE variant was introduced to IS OmniMechs, for example, as an add-on or an Early Adopters reward?

Edited by Will9761, 27 June 2023 - 06:37 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

It's not a bad idea, my concern is just that then you lock a unique capability behind a single variant, which means the rest are all subpar out of the gate.

If all of the variants have the same engine, it opens up opportunities for unique loadouts (So8 quirks, JJ CT, unique CT hardpoints, etc, and non of the variants have a massive advantage by default.

Giving them a special engine type that doesn't die to one side torso destruction has virtually no downside:

-They are still implemented exactly the same as Clan omnimechs and follow the same construction rules.
-All variants are on a level playing field
-Opens up IS mechs to the opportunity to min-max hardpoint counts (Sunder 9-10+ E hardpoints depending on hero implementation for example, or Raptor with its 10-11 E hardpints as a light, there are many more I'm just not in a position to look it all up right now)
-Does NOT turn the entire balance of the game upside down by changing all IS XL engines
-Kept in check by inherent omni-mech limitations
-Is easy to implement (engine performance code is already there, it's just copying and pasting)

Where is the downside?

[Will9761]

Gas Guzzler, on 27 June 2023 - 06:52 PM, said:

It's not a bad idea, my concern is just that then you lock a unique capability behind a single variant, which means the rest are all subpar out of the gate.

If all of the variants have the same engine, it opens up opportunities for unique loadouts (So8 quirks, JJ CT, unique CT hardpoints, etc, and non of the variants have a massive advantage by default.

Giving them a special engine type that doesn't die to one side torso destruction has virtually no downside:

-They are still implemented exactly the same as Clan omnimechs and follow the same construction rules.
-All variants are on a level playing field
-Opens up IS mechs to the opportunity to min-max hardpoint counts (Sunder 9-10+ E hardpoints depending on hero implementation for example, or Raptor with its 10-11 E hardpints as a light, there are many more I'm just not in a position to look it all up right now)
-Does NOT turn the entire balance of the game upside down by changing all IS XL engines
-Kept in check by inherent omni-mech limitations
-Is easy to implement (engine performance code is already there, it's just copying and pasting)

Where is the downside?

After considering what you said about an IS Omni Engine, I'm down to add that in the awareness thread.

I can see these engine types being in-game for the IS:
XL Engine
LF Engine
OXL Engine

[KursedVixen]

Due to how the balance in this game works IS omni's will break the game


not to mention other issues that will need fixed before we should even consider this.

Edited by KursedVixen, 28 June 2023 - 07:21 AM.

[Will9761]

I don't believe that IS Omnis would break the game. Using a special (Clan-based) IS XL engine would help to balance any problems they might pose. They can't even equip Stealth Armor.

[pbiggz]

KursedVixen, on 28 June 2023 - 07:17 AM, said:

Due to how the balance in this game works IS omni's will break the game


not to mention other issues that will need fixed before we should even consider this.

Are you going to bother to explain why that would be the case? Or are you just content to make a wild unfounded claim and expect people to believe you.

Gas Guzzler, on 27 June 2023 - 06:52 PM, said:

It's not a bad idea, my concern is just that then you lock a unique capability behind a single variant, which means the rest are all subpar out of the gate. If all of the variants have the same engine, it opens up opportunities for unique loadouts (So8 quirks, JJ CT, unique CT hardpoints, etc, and non of the variants have a massive advantage by default. Giving them a special engine type that doesn't die to one side torso destruction has virtually no downside: -They are still implemented exactly the same as Clan omnimechs and follow the same construction rules. -All variants are on a level playing field -Opens up IS mechs to the opportunity to min-max hardpoint counts (Sunder 9-10+ E hardpoints depending on hero implementation for example, or Raptor with its 10-11 E hardpints as a light, there are many more I'm just not in a position to look it all up right now) -Does NOT turn the entire balance of the game upside down by changing all IS XL engines -Kept in check by inherent omni-mech limitations -Is easy to implement (engine performance code is already there, it's just copying and pasting) Where is the downside?

This is the way.

[LordNothing]

Will9761, on 27 June 2023 - 06:37 PM, said:

Gas, how would you feel if an LFE variant was introduced to IS OmniMechs, for example, as an add-on or an Early Adopters reward?

that was always one thing i didnt like about clan omnis, every variant is running the same engine. at least if there was some variation i could move pods around and do new things. lore is full of instances of frankenmechs and other weird builds that shouldnt exist. i can see a clan warrior go to his tech and ask "what would it take to convert this timberwolf to a battlemech" and the tech going "six months and a breifcase full of cbills". "ok, do it".

[LordNothing]

Gas Guzzler, on 27 June 2023 - 06:52 PM, said:

It's not a bad idea, my concern is just that then you lock a unique capability behind a single variant, which means the rest are all subpar out of the gate.

If all of the variants have the same engine, it opens up opportunities for unique loadouts (So8 quirks, JJ CT, unique CT hardpoints, etc, and non of the variants have a massive advantage by default.

Giving them a special engine type that doesn't die to one side torso destruction has virtually no downside:

-They are still implemented exactly the same as Clan omnimechs and follow the same construction rules.
-All variants are on a level playing field
-Opens up IS mechs to the opportunity to min-max hardpoint counts (Sunder 9-10+ E hardpoints depending on hero implementation for example, or Raptor with its 10-11 E hardpints as a light, there are many more I'm just not in a position to look it all up right now)
-Does NOT turn the entire balance of the game upside down by changing all IS XL engines
-Kept in check by inherent omni-mech limitations
-Is easy to implement (engine performance code is already there, it's just copying and pasting)

Where is the downside?

not necessarily. a ballistic boat needs tonnage and space, but a vomit mech needs those engine sink mounts to be viable, which are only available on the bigger engines. based on what you want to build some flexibility in the engine is a plus. there is less variation in clan omnis because of this. because if your engine is not suited to a ballistic or a vomit mech, you just don't build one. how many omnis suck because their engine is over speced? lots. like the timby is a fine example of a mech i should like, but cant make a build i like because the engine is hogging all the space. thats why the houl is such an awesome mech for me, because i can finally do that boom boom timby i always wanted.

Edited by LordNothing, 28 June 2023 - 11:53 AM.

[Will9761]

I wouldn't mind having an IS OmniXL engine as long as there's a difference between regular IS XLs, LFEs and them. The Howl, "Legendary" Clan BattleMech and Clan regular autocannons does show that PGI can make new things with a bit of copying and pasting. Heck, take a look at the Clan Autocannons for example, these never existed in lore, but PGI made them regardless. Even though they act like Clan Ultra Autocannon 10s:
AC/2
AC/5
AC/10
AC/20

[Gas Guzzler]

LordNothing, on 28 June 2023 - 11:52 AM, said:

not necessarily. a ballistic boat needs tonnage and space, but a vomit mech needs those engine sink mounts to be viable, which are only available on the bigger engines. based on what you want to build some flexibility in the engine is a plus. there is less variation in clan omnis because of this. because if your engine is not suited to a ballistic or a vomit mech, you just don't build one. how many omnis suck because their engine is over speced? lots. like the timby is a fine example of a mech i should like, but cant make a build i like because the engine is hogging all the space. thats why the houl is such an awesome mech for me, because i can finally do that boom boom timby i always wanted.

My proposal is simply addressing the issue of mechs being locked into single side torso deaths (particularly an issue for heavies and assaults). The larger engine in some cases (Sunder with a 360 engine for example) remains and simply locks the mech into a particular archetype, just like Clan omni's do.

I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel here, I'm trying to add a 4th spoke to the wheel that isn't excessively hamstrung while maintaining the status quo with the other three spokes. There are obviously winners and losers with omni-mechs, and in my opinion PGI/Cauldron has done a great job with that on the Clan side at this point in the game. I don't see why that wouldn't be doable for the IS side.

pbiggz, on 28 June 2023 - 11:23 AM, said:

Are you going to bother to explain why that would be the case? Or are you just content to make a wild unfounded claim and expect people to believe you.

I swear he drops this in with no context every single time an IS omni thread comes up.

KursedVixen, on 28 June 2023 - 07:17 AM, said:

Due to how the balance in this game works IS omni's will break the game


not to mention other issues that will need fixed before we should even consider this.

This is a ridiculous take. Even if an IS omni was released into the game tomorrow, the rest of the hundreds of mechs in game would not be broken. There is literally no reason to fear the game being broken.

Will9761, on 28 June 2023 - 05:47 AM, said:

After considering what you said about an IS Omni Engine, I'm down to add that in the awareness thread.

I can see these engine types being in-game for the IS:
XL Engine
LF Engine
OXL Engine

To be clear, the OXL engine couldn't be equipped on anything. It would solely be the locked engine type (and size) on IS omni mechs that canonically have an XL engine.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 28 June 2023 - 03:53 PM.

[LordNothing]

Gas Guzzler, on 28 June 2023 - 03:52 PM, said:

My proposal is simply addressing the issue of mechs being locked into single side torso deaths (particularly an issue for heavies and assaults). The larger engine in some cases (Sunder with a 360 engine for example) remains and simply locks the mech into a particular archetype, just like Clan omni's do.

I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel here, I'm trying to add a 4th spoke to the wheel that isn't excessively hamstrung while maintaining the status quo with the other three spokes. There are obviously winners and losers with omni-mechs, and in my opinion PGI/Cauldron has done a great job with that on the Clan side at this point in the game. I don't see why that wouldn't be doable for the IS side.



I swear he drops this in with no context every single time an IS omni thread comes up.



This is a ridiculous take. Even if an IS omni was released into the game tomorrow, the rest of the hundreds of mechs in game would not be broken. There is literally no reason to fear the game being broken.



To be clear, the OXL engine couldn't be equipped on anything. It would solely be the locked engine type (and size) on IS omni mechs that canonically have an XL engine.

heh, turns out your proposal was the same one i posted further up the thread. sort of like the urbie's std60, which you can only get by purchasing an urbie. you can take the engine out of the urbie, but you cant put it in anything but an urbie. only difference is it will be locked equipment.

what i want is a variation of engine ratings within a particular chassis in order to make more builds viable, to make up for the heavier is equipment. you wont have mechs like the gargoyle and the ice ferret, where the only weapon system you can afford to pack and use effectively is vomit.

there are lots of ways to make is omnis work.

Edited by LordNothing, 28 June 2023 - 04:49 PM.

[Will9761]

KursedVixen, on 28 June 2023 - 07:17 AM, said:

Due to how the balance in this game works IS omni's will break the game

not to mention other issues that will need fixed before we should even consider this.

I'm all for a valid disagreement, but you have to back that up with proof. Otherwise, I would consider this statement a fallacy based on hatred and as an unwilling mindset to being open to change.

Gas Guzzler, on 28 June 2023 - 03:52 PM, said:

To be clear, the OXL engine couldn't be equipped on anything. It would solely be the locked engine type (and size) on IS omni mechs that canonically have an XL engine.

Oh, Absolutely. Hence why I said that could be a new option to differentiate to the other engines. I just didn't clarify how it could be, so here is what I think it could happen. So this is what I mean:
IS XL - 1 Side Torso loss, destroyed
IS OXL - 2 Side Torso losses, destroyed, only for IS OmniMechs
LFE - Two hits, destroyed

Edited by Will9761, 29 June 2023 - 01:33 PM.

[pbiggz]

Gas Guzzler, on 28 June 2023 - 03:52 PM, said:

I swear he drops this in with no context every single time an IS omni thread comes up.

Anyone who has "Battletech Purist" in their signature is going to say some out of pocket ****.

"TT is balanced for real time" is a great way to tell everyone you don't understand game design without saying you don't understand game design.

[Pixel Hunter]

the Mercury would be a fun mech for an early adopter pack

[pbiggz]

LordNothing, on 28 June 2023 - 04:38 PM, said:

heh, turns out your proposal was the same one i posted further up the thread. sort of like the urbie's std60, which you can only get by purchasing an urbie. you can take the engine out of the urbie, but you cant put it in anything but an urbie. only difference is it will be locked equipment.

what i want is a variation of engine ratings within a particular chassis in order to make more builds viable, to make up for the heavier is equipment. you wont have mechs like the gargoyle and the ice ferret, where the only weapon system you can afford to pack and use effectively is vomit.

there are lots of ways to make is omnis work.

As far as omnimechs are concerned, the engines are a black box. PGI should be able and willing to simply assign whatever ratings and stats are needed to make a mech interesting. They should be willing to do the same for clan Omnimechs too.

[Will9761]

Pixel Hunter, on 29 June 2023 - 05:41 AM, said:

the Mercury would be a fun mech for an early adopter pack

I'd partially agree with you seeing how the Mercury was the grandaddy to all Clan and IS OmniMechs given its modular systems, but it's a BattleMech, not an OmniMech. I like the way you think though.

[LordNothing]

pbiggz, on 29 June 2023 - 05:45 AM, said:

As far as omnimechs are concerned, the engines are a black box. PGI should be able and willing to simply assign whatever ratings and stats are needed to make a mech interesting. They should be willing to do the same for clan Omnimechs too.

the idea is that different variants of a chassis can have different engine types/ratings/heatsinks. you cant change the engine or the engine sinks, so yes its a black box. but if you want something else you can switch to another variant. so if you have one variant with an xl300 and another with an xl350, if you want to build a heavy weapons build, you can put the appropriate omnipods on the xl300 variant or vise versa if you want a fast build. you might also have a standard or lfe variant if you want to build a more robust build that can survive a cleaving. its kind of boring when every variant has the same engine configuration like the clans do.

[Will9761]

Also, I updated my IS OmniMech poll with an additional question. So if you have the time, please go ahead and check that out.

[Gas Guzzler]

LordNothing, on 29 June 2023 - 09:08 AM, said:

the idea is that different variants of a chassis can have different engine types/ratings/heatsinks. you cant change the engine or the engine sinks, so yes its a black box. but if you want something else you can switch to another variant. so if you have one variant with an xl300 and another with an xl350, if you want to build a heavy weapons build, you can put the appropriate omnipods on the xl300 variant or vise versa if you want a fast build. you might also have a standard or lfe variant if you want to build a more robust build that can survive a cleaving. its kind of boring when every variant has the same engine configuration like the clans do.

I think this is a separate topic TBH. It's an interesting idea worth entertaining but completely independent of IS omnis.

IS omnis can be implemented without adding this and add plenty to the game. I've done some theory crafting before, when I get home I can post some interesting possibilities.

[LordNothing]

Gas Guzzler, on 29 June 2023 - 09:35 AM, said:

I think this is a separate topic TBH. It's an interesting idea worth entertaining but completely independent of IS omnis.

IS omnis can be implemented without adding this and add plenty to the game. I've done some theory crafting before, when I get home I can post some interesting possibilities.

its at least an idea for future heroes and legendries, or other non-lore based variants.