| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
 Posted: 18-Aug-2013 10:20 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
  |
|
How so? How is it game balance? The engine is still there and it is still a threat to the mech.
It still will die just as fast once the armor is breached as it would with 3 in the side torso.
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8050
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 10:26 Post subject: Re: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
| Karagin wrote: | How so? How is it game balance? The engine is still there and it is still a threat to the mech.
It still will die just as fast once the armor is breached as it would with 3 in the side torso. |
No, it wouldn't. A mech without 3 engine hits in the side torso still lives when that side torso is destroyed, while one with the three there is dead.
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 12:29 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
It would still take two hits, thus leaving it open to the third hit coming from the center being breached or the other torso being breached or destroyed. So you get a few turns more which would put it in par to Clan mechs, but the trade off would be the lost of the CT torso critical slots thus limiting the placement of other items.
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8050
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 18:47 Post subject: Re: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
| Karagin wrote: | | It would still take two hits, thus leaving it open to the third hit coming from the center being breached or the other torso being breached or destroyed. So you get a few turns more which would put it in par to Clan mechs, but the trade off would be the lost of the CT torso critical slots thus limiting the placement of other items. |
You just contradicted your first point.
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 19:01 Post subject: Re: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
Agreed with chihawk. It does change game ballance and about brokenness of this arrangement - would you do this on most of your designs? If the answer is probably yes, then it's probably a lot better than original and thus game balance change is changed. For me the answer is yes.
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 19:11 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
I am not contradicting my point, IF the the engine is spread out in that it covers the CT first taking the extra critical slots there and then the remaining moves to the side torso I am saying how is it any different then before? Three hits still kill the engine, it doesn't change things for the IS XL engine all that much and in fact could make it easier to kill a mech since now the CT becomes the bigger threat point for the mech which bring the point up do you even use an XL engine with the larger risk, so I don't see how this change would upset game balance anymore then moving around the Ferro or Endo would do.
Also if you check the mech I posted and look at the HMPro file you will see that I spread the XL crits out in the respective side torso vs lumping in the first three slots of each side torso. Now based on the stance of Jymset and others that would mean it changes the game by creating a break point from both a balance point and a rule point, BUT there is nothing in the rules that prohibit one from moving the the slots around with in the area, and if there is it is not mentioned in the rule books and has not made it into an errata sheet.
So please explain how this upsets game balance and prevents mechs from dying when it takes three engine hits or even two given how hot some do run to start with.
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8050
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 19:40 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
"It still will die just as fast once the armor is breached as it would with 3 in the side torso."
"So you get a few turns more..."
How are those two statements not contradictory?
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 20:07 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
Does it not take 3 engine hits to stop a mech? I do believe it still does. Now if they are spread out in the section it takes a bit more then rolling a 1,2 or 3 on the dice to get the kill, so really that doesn't mean things change it means you have to work a bit harder for the kill, if the slots are moved around either going with the CT taking two of the six extra for the IS XL engine or not going with that having the slots be able to occupy other critical slots in the side torsos.
Which is what I am saying that the only change is you won't have a dead mech as fast thus you might get a couple of more turns out of it, but at the same time the rules don't change in that the idea of three hits to the engine if it occupies the CT torso as a whole or the as it is now with the extra crits in the sides or if those side critical slots are spaced out more with in the torso.
Now does that help? Or are you in disagreement with the idea of being able to move the slots around for things like XL engine with in their off shoot torsos?
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8050
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 20:24 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
Your post is nothing but doublespeak.
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 18-Aug-2013 20:43 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
If you say so then it is.
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Ozzy McKinnen
Free Rasalhague Republic
Sergeant
Joined: 12-Mar-2012 15:46
Posts: 51
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: 05-Feb-2014 09:19 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
If Clan stuff is markedly better than IS stuff - standard and XL engines are still the same weight, regardless of tech base.
It's important to consider carrying ammo together with XL engines. An open side torso in a Clan mech with Clan XL gives two potential engine hits. Stuffing ammo in such a location is still a viable option given "free" CASE, and given the Clan single-slot double heat sinks and that pretty much all Clan mechs sport DHS, the +10 heat is often survivable. However: an open side torso in an IS mech with IS XL gives three potential engine hits, making it a killer. Since only torso locations can sport IS CASE, an IS XL engine makes IS CASE moot.
Moving those difference-making XL engine crit slots into the center torso would fundamentally change the nature of IS XL engines, together with IS CASE.
As for the awkward logic in center torso being equally exposed to engine hits, it readily sports those six engine crit slots. There's also the gyro, so center torso is a natural prize target for crit hits. The whole point of the IS XL engine is reducing a mech's endurance rather heavily compared to the Clan version. That's the reason to specify where the crits go. Arguing that the open side torso exposes a mech to CT crits is slightly moot as the side torso hits will "pour" down CT only if the side torso had no locations left to hit in the beginning of that attack phase. (A different case, but a good point for stuffing something in a side torso!)
What would be the official guidelines for arranging crits inside a mech? I think the basic lines are readable from official sheets, but anyway.
One good point for not arranging a mech's internals again on a whim would be gameplay speed and memorizing locations. Statistically it's the same chance, anyway.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Mordel
Mordel.Net
Administrator
Joined: 03-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 6021
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 05-Feb-2014 10:16 Post subject: Re: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
| Ozzy McKinnen wrote: | | ...and given the Clan single-slot double heat sinks... |
Well, technically they take up two critical slots. IS ones take up three critical slots.
_________________
Mordel Blacknight - Site Administrator
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Ozzy McKinnen
Free Rasalhague Republic
Sergeant
Joined: 12-Mar-2012 15:46
Posts: 51
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: 08-Feb-2014 12:51 Post subject: Designing a Mech and critical placement |
|
|
Ja, was counting them as being single slot per point of heat loss instead of one and a half. The only "issue" with them is vulnerability.
There's basically no reason not to sport double heat sinks on a Clan mech (unless you're a credit-shaving Diamond Shark). The vulnerability is something of a non-issue once crits start landing, anyway, as having DHS is supposedly a decent advantage in the heat phase. A heat sink hit counting as double on an already well-sinked design is on a different decade of severity scale compared to potentially mech-killing engine hits.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
