145 replies to this topic

[Lukoi Banacek]

If you run a standard engine over XL you trade weight and therefore speed for durability.

If you run a lesser engine, standard or otherwise, you gain weight for use on weapons presumably, in a trade for speed.

[Vapor Trail]

The only place I've seen for slow mechs is in the long range support role. Basically sniper/LRM support. If you've got enough range, the twist/turn reduction isn't a liability unless you get jumped by a scout/raider.

If you're expecting to take a small engined assault into front line combat, you're looking at getting to the party late or slowing down your line, and not being able to keep up with the more maneuverable mechs when fighting, Which will either run and hide, or pick you apart from your flanks.

[Protection]

Lukoi, on 11 February 2013 - 07:52 PM, said:

If you run a standard engine over XL you trade weight and therefore speed for durability.

If you run a lesser engine, standard or otherwise, you gain weight for use on weapons presumably, in a trade for speed.

We're not talking XL versus Standard engines, were talking larger sized engines versus smaller (as in standard vs standard, XL vs XL, as well). And larger is almost always preferable, and I think that is an issue worth discussing.

[One Medic Army]

It's an issue that's also true in Tabletop, and is balanced there by cost and BV.
Here where there is no BV or cost matching between sides...

[HurlockHolmes]

STD 260 Fo Life!

Anyway, a slow medium or light is a dead one. I want to say that it is because the presence of heavies and assaults are so much more prevalent, and that 'pults and 'phracts can go the same speed, have more armor and have more firepower.

I understand that when you come as a 'mech, one of your enemies will be the same weight class as you. But being a medium in a game that is a 1/1/3/3 is a dangerous game indeed.

[Deamhan]

The biggest advantage is with the double heat sinks making the higher rating + dbl heat sink upgrade a must have. I don't think anything should be a "must have" per se. While things like the mech and pilot tree are "good to have", player skill should mean more. However, player skill doesn't really come in with a situation like the higher engine rating + dbl heat sink. it's simply too much of a performance boost.

The biggest reason is that you get the same number of hs regardless if std or dbl and the double are true double that come with the engine.

They need to...

- Do away with the "upgrade" and allow the combined use of both
- Swap out hs with hs slots on the engine and make the double use 3 slots per
- Reduce the std to .7 or up the dbl to 2 so that dbl hs are twice as efficiant as std
- Make the doubles cost twice as much as std

What this will do...

- Remove the "must have" of high rated engines + dbl hs
- Make std more useful
- With the heat efficiency per cost the same (1 dbl = 2 std), the trade off is 1 slot or 1 ton where the 2 std are 2 slot and 2 ton, the 1 dbl is 1 ton and 3 slots.
- It would allow for more flexible customization and better top up your mech's load out.

[Zanathan]

In my opinion it boils down to premades and pugs (yes I'm going there).

Basically you can afford to run smaller engines in a premade if you are playing a particular style that will be supporting your team. e.g. sniper or missile support protected by the rear guard. Obviously this will only really shine in larger groups and maps as the current maps can be traversed fairly quickly even in a 'normal' sized engine in most mechs.

In PuGs I would never run a slow mech since I would generally get left behind and get picked off and while there can sometimes be team support it can't be relied on.

[Deamhan]

Zanathan, on 11 February 2013 - 08:36 PM, said:

In my opinion it boils down to premades and pugs (yes I'm going there).

Basically you can afford to run smaller engines in a premade if you are playing a particular style that will be supporting your team. e.g. sniper or missile support protected by the rear guard. Obviously this will only really shine in larger groups and maps as the current maps can be traversed fairly quickly even in a 'normal' sized engine in most mechs.

In PuGs I would never run a slow mech since I would generally get left behind and get picked off and while there can sometimes be team support it can't be relied on.

Except that it is still possible to run a sniper build or LRM boat and not have to sacrifice on the engine much at all.

[One Medic Army]

Zanathan, on 11 February 2013 - 08:36 PM, said:

In my opinion it boils down to premades and pugs (yes I'm going there).

Basically you can afford to run smaller engines in a premade if you are playing a particular style that will be supporting your team. e.g. sniper or missile support protected by the rear guard. Obviously this will only really shine in larger groups and maps as the current maps can be traversed fairly quickly even in a 'normal' sized engine in most mechs.

In PuGs I would never run a slow mech since I would generally get left behind and get picked off and while there can sometimes be team support it can't be relied on.

Really, this makes no sense.
If you're going to pilot a stock speed hunchback, pilot a cataphract instead and get all the speed plus more tonnage and armor. Being PUG or Premade has nothing to do with it. A Cataphract with a 280 engine and full armor leaves 27.44 tons free, a Hunchback with a 200 engine (and the 2 requisite heatsinks) leaves you with 20.94 free tons.
If you play slow in a hunchback instead of a cataphract in this case you've just given up 96points of armor, space in your engine for 3 heatsinks, and 6.5tons of free space. It's just a bad idea unless you can't find the hardpoints to do your build of choice on a heavy mech.

Same deal with slow heavies vs assaults, in most cases if you want to down-engine you'd be better off up-engining a heavier chassis instead.

Edited by One Medic Army, 11 February 2013 - 08:50 PM.

[Targetloc]

Deamhan, on 11 February 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

The biggest advantage is with the double heat sinks making the higher rating + dbl heat sink upgrade a must have. I don't think anything should be a "must have" per se. While things like the mech and pilot tree are "good to have", player skill should mean more. However, player skill doesn't really come in with a situation like the higher engine rating + dbl heat sink. it's simply too much of a performance boost.

The biggest reason is that you get the same number of hs regardless if std or dbl and the double are true double that come with the engine.

They need to...

- Do away with the "upgrade" and allow the combined use of both
- Swap out hs with hs slots on the engine and make the double use 3 slots per
- Reduce the std to .7 or up the dbl to 2 so that dbl hs are twice as efficiant as std
- Make the doubles cost twice as much as std

What this will do...

- Remove the "must have" of high rated engines + dbl hs
- Make std more useful
- With the heat efficiency per cost the same (1 dbl = 2 std), the trade off is 1 slot or 1 ton where the 2 std are 2 slot and 2 ton, the 1 dbl is 1 ton and 3 slots.
- It would allow for more flexible customization and better top up your mech's load out.

Yes, Double Engine Heatsinks have always been broken, even in the board game.

They're even more broken now that they took out repair costs.


A lot of later year IS designs abused it to try to be more comparable to clan tech. Typical to have a gauss or two as the main gun, then add a PPC or a bunch of pulse lasers and magically declare your base 10 heatsinks are now worth 20 for zero extra cost.

[Goose]

Lukoi, on 11 February 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

WHY does every possible Mech combination need to be balanced?

Because Craven

[Goose]

Look: Once you got away from the board game restriction of multiples of design mass, everyone was going to add some cubic inches to their ride, even if only to hide that one last heat sink.

[Spinning Burr]

Centurions and Dragons need to move 90+ to be viable. Cataphracts and Catapults need to move 80+. The assaults bring too much firepower and armor compared to all others. The only way for these mediums and heavies to be viable in the match is to have the flanking speed and maneuverability. It doesn't matter how large the engine or standard vs XL it takes to get there, but you have to get to that speed.

[Sug]

The only way to make speed less important is to give speed a drawback.

[shintakie]

If they just decoupled torso twist from engine ratin then this wouldn't be as big of an issue. As is, every mech needs a huge engine in order to brawl effectively or to put it another way. Every mech needs a big engine in order to brawl as effectively as every other mech that shoves on a huge engine. The extra firepower you get from a smaller engine will never make up for your opponents bein able to completely outmaneuver you.

[One Medic Army]

shintakie, on 11 February 2013 - 09:21 PM, said:

If they just decoupled torso twist from engine ratin then this wouldn't be as big of an issue. As is, every mech needs a huge engine in order to brawl effectively or to put it another way. Every mech needs a big engine in order to brawl as effectively as every other mech that shoves on a huge engine. The extra firepower you get from a smaller engine will never make up for your opponents bein able to completely outmaneuver you.

If they de-coupled it, then Assault mechs wouldn't be able to deal with light mechs, unless every assault mech got high twist/turn rates. I like being able to get and stay around the back of someone who decided that speed was un-necessary in the pursuit of maximum firepower.

[Mycrus]

Generally slower mechs are food...

[shintakie]

One Medic Army, on 11 February 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

If they de-coupled it, then Assault mechs wouldn't be able to deal with light mechs, unless every assault mech got high twist/turn rates. I like being able to get and stay around the back of someone who decided that speed was un-necessary in the pursuit of maximum firepower.

You and I have different opinions on this then. I'm personally unhappy with how incredibly agile the Atlas is. Its supposed to be this slow lumbering beast, but instead they can turn with relative ease with a high rated engine. The only assault that actually acts like an Assault should act is the Stalker, and thats because they artificially forced it to by reducin its torso twist range.

Edit - Its a large part of why Mediums/Heavies are fairly useless compared to Assaults. Mobility is generally the key advantage of a Heavy over an Assault. With Assaults bein able to cover ground almost as effectively as a heavy and protect their rear torsos as well due to ridiculous torso twist speeds then theres little room for a Heavy when you could have an Atlas instead

Edited by shintakie, 11 February 2013 - 09:38 PM.

[Protection]

Again, I'm just trying to start discussion on this issue.

The only apparent advantage of a smaller engine is that you have more tonnage to work with -- but the problem is that you generally dont, really. Because of Endo Steel and Double Heat Sinks, even in an Assault mech, you extract more tonnage savings by pushing for a larger engine, such as a 325 or 350 rather than sticking with a smaller engine. The increased turning and speed are just extra value. Not to mention noticeable bonuses like speed tweak amplify with a larger engine.

A few options that come to mind to lessen the slant towards larger engines would be:

• Make smaller engines - anything sub-250 - cost much less weight than it does currently
  
• Using smaller engines will open up additional hardpoints on a mech, so that it can install more weapons
  
• Battle Value Team Balancing -- so slower smaller mechs can be used by cost effectiveness rather than weight class/tonnage

But it's a tough issue, and I do understand that some people are comfortable with almost all mechs being near as fast as possible as normal expectations from competitive play. It just seems like an odd, unintentional limitation for 'optimized' builds.

[Asmudius Heng]

Battlevalue balancing should be there no matter what, but i still think that it should not be a way to deal with the engine issue. The size of your engine should be a true tactical choice. Going slow should not be a punishment - it should be an option that balances out with more firepower, or better heat management through exta tonnage for HS or more ammo etc .that make it worthwhile.

Real choices, pros and cons are desperatly needed in this game or it becomes an arms race

EDIT: Spelling

Edited by Asmudius Heng, 11 February 2013 - 09:47 PM.