97 replies to this topic

[Will9761]

Updates:
Raptor has 244 votes
Men Shen has 411 votes
Avatar has 426 votes

I will add a "Reinforcement Add-On" for the Templar and Sunder later on.

[Chloe Cole Kerensky]

LordNothing, on 24 June 2023 - 08:28 AM, said:

people have been asking for is omnis since clan omnis became a thing.

IS Omni would be easy considered the clan framework is already programed into the game.

XL is a major issue though with anything over medium weight class. Very few heavies are viable with an XL. Assault XLs get laughed at in QP.

Rifleman is the most infamous XL friendly mech I know of. A few of those mechs you posted would be ok with XL, a prominent CT helps.

[Will9761]

Chloe Cole Kerensky, on 26 June 2023 - 05:54 PM, said:

IS Omni would be easy considered the clan framework is already programed into the game.

XL is a major issue though with anything over medium weight class. Very few heavies are viable with an XL. Assault XLs get laughed at in QP.

Rifleman is the most infamous XL friendly mech I know of. A few of those mechs you posted would be ok with XL, a prominent CT helps.

I agree with the XL Engines being an issue. I'd basically say that in order to make them viable, the side torso armor should be strengthened to maybe at least 120 or 155 at best.

[LordNothing]

Chloe Cole Kerensky, on 26 June 2023 - 05:54 PM, said:

IS Omni would be easy considered the clan framework is already programed into the game.

XL is a major issue though with anything over medium weight class. Very few heavies are viable with an XL. Assault XLs get laughed at in QP.

Rifleman is the most infamous XL friendly mech I know of. A few of those mechs you posted would be ok with XL, a prominent CT helps.

also talked to death previously. there are ways to make it work though. extra st armor, mobility quirks/base stats, etc. postulated an xl survivability quirk that makes isxl behave like clanxl. you could even do an is omni xl since it would be non-purchasable fixed equipment. similar to the urbie's std60.

[Will9761]

Update:
Added the Sunder and Templar as a part of the Primary Mechs and Reinforcements groups since I know that people like them and would vote for them.
Also, Vote Updated:
Raptor (245 votes)
Men Shen has (412 votes)
Avatar has (427 votes)
Hauptmann (390 votes)

[Gas Guzzler]

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).

[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.

[Mechwarrior2342356]

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).

That would be the best way to start them off. Adjust survivability as needed down the line.

[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.

[Mechwarrior2342356]

Will9761, on 28 June 2023 - 08:10 AM, said:

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.

I don't think Stealth would be a gamebreaker regardless, but with the same restrictions as Clan Omnis plus more restricted crits with Endo and Ferro I think they balance out with IS weapons having advantages in some situations.

[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

[Mechwarrior2342356]

Will9761, on 28 June 2023 - 02:05 PM, said:

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

They're a stand-in for solid slug ammo, which is something TT LBX can switch to if they have an ammo bin of it.

[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.