How Mech Lab may treat armor modifications

[Cloudburst]

The Mech Lab is a planned feature which involves many cornerstone decisions that will ultimately decide the fate of this game as "playable" or "unplayable" in the eyes of many people who currently play and those who are interested in playing but will not play because of the lack of some features (the mod's inherent incompleteness as a beta). It is so the point where I hear some player's saying that they would prefer the Mech Lab to be never introduced. I will say that I have faith in this development team bringing together what could be the most-balanced Mech Lab we have seen yet in a MechWarrior title.

Armor modifications are one of the advantages that BattleMechs have. I remember a dev saying about a year (or two) ago that armor modifications wouldn't be allowed, but, from how I think things are going now, that has changed. I can understand the principal, though. Generally speaking, you don't want the armor modifiable because it takes a large characteristic of a chassis and allows it to be modifiable, making for a hidden statistic. Like, for example, it's generally accepted that the Loki has a fairly low amount of armor, and it pays for it. Players can understand, when fighting a Loki, that their target won't have a whole lot of armor. If armor were completely modifiable (as per "allowed" in CBT), Mech Lab would make it so one could throw any amount of armor on a Loki up to a certain maximum determined by the chassis' tonnage. Then, when facing a Loki, or any mech for that matter, the amount of armor it has is unpredictable. It could have none or it could have the maximum, and anywhere in between. As said before, it takes some personality out of a chassis.

My general "compromise" between fully modifiable armor values (disregarding armor allocation, which is a different beast altogether), involves Standard and Ferro-Fibrous armor. In MWLL's Mech Lab, I propose that the tonnage of armor is not changeable. The relative armor minimum and maximum is locked, and cannot be changed on a per-chassis basis. This decision is towards maintaining the balance-scheme of various chassis' weapons and armor trade-off's, and keeps their "personality" when compared to other vehicles. However, when building a variant, one may choose between either Standard or Ferro-Fibrous armor. Obviously, Standard Armor is, well, standard. It is the base-line armor level of a chassis and doesn't modify it's cost, other than its tonnage. It is maintained as being relatively cheap. Ferro-Fibrous armor is a choice that one may make that sacrifices cost for protection. It is an all-around "upgrade" over Standard armor, but costs more, with its value and effectiveness being different between Clan and Inner Sphere implementation. From the Sarna entry on Ferro Fibrous, IS FF Armor protects 12% more per-ton, and Clan FF armor protects 20% more per ton. These seem like fair numbers to use when beginning the whole balance-test, but I wouldn't expect them to stay the same. Putting Ferro-Fibrous on a chassis would increase its cost by a yet-to-be-determined degree and armor level on all locations by 12% for Inner Sphere vehicles, and 20% on Clan vehicles. The Inner Sphere modification would be cheaper than the Clan's. Most importantly, the armor tonnage would remain the same and could not be changed.

With this implementation, it gives players a degree of choice over the armor levels of any chassis whilst increasing cost and, most importantly, does not mess with armor tonnage and keeps the relative armor maximum of all chassis the same. What do you think?

[ELH_Vivicector]

In fact, I don't see any real problem with armour modifications. This was made rather good in MW4.

Each chassis has minimum and maximum armour level. One can't downgrade armour lower, then allowed. One can't upgrade armour higher, then allowed. This allow to save chassis identity (like Atlas would still have high armour and Osiris would still have low armour, but exact numbers will vary). Like, Loki can't upgrade armour level to that of Thor and can't downgrade it to the level of Puma. But it can vary +/- 3 tonnes of overall armour.

Numbers are just imaginary, an example.

Also, I don't really see reason for standard/FF armour division. AFAIK, devs too have stated that they see no reason to have 2 same armours, that just have different price and protection. But I would like to see Reflective and Reactive types.

[DFDelta]

Currently we usually have one armor level on the variants that can be defined as "normal", namely that of the prime variant. And on most units we have at least one variant that differs in terms of armor.


I'd prefer to have a approach similar to mech commander 1.
We have the Chassis Mod P which stands for prime, it has no extras compared with the others and no extra weaknesses.
Then we have Chassis Mod A, which adds armor but sacrifices either weapon or electroncs tonnage. (depending on the mech/tank/ASF in question)
Chassis Mod W sacrifices armor for extra weapon tonnage


Thats in line with what we currently have. Usually we have the prime variant and one or two variants with extra armor but less weapons or the other way around.

[Spooky]

I don't really see a problem with armor modifications. I expect them to be changeable like in MW2, MW3 and MW4. Each component always had a maximum anyway. And even now we have different variants of Mechs with different armor values.

[AXEL]

Adding different armor types with clan having the advantage would just encourage people to take clan only assets. And you could be a mechlab warrior the whole match to lose your awesome loki the second you walk into LT range. Piloting skills should still be what decides if you live or die,  not clan tech.

[-SM-SUCKER]

IS FF Armor protects 12% more per-ton, and Clan FF armor protects 20% more per ton (6% per half-ton, 10% per half-ton).

Sorry to be a math nazi, but that is not how percentages work.
If you take a piece of butter with 45% fat and cut it half, both halfs will still have 45% fat each. It is somewhat relative as in 20 per hundred.

[=KoS= Eldragon]

While I like the idea, the devs have stated that they will not be implementing FF versus Standard armor. Given the stock configs in MWLL have different armor values, I am willing to venture a guess that the mechlab will support custom armor values with a reasonable min and max for each chassis.

Now what I really want to see is Reflective and Reactive armor. Not only does it have a lot of tactical uses, Its the natural counter to boats.

[=CJW= Zweistein000 (W)]

In fact, I don't see any real problem with armour modifications. This was made rather good in MW4.

Each chassis has minimum and maximum armour level. One can't downgrade armour lower, then allowed. One can't upgrade armour higher, then allowed. This allow to save chassis identity (like Atlas would still have high armour and Osiris would still have low armour, but exact numbers will vary). Like, Loki can't upgrade armour level to that of Thor and can't downgrade it to the level of Puma. But it can vary +/- 3 tonnes of overall armour.

Numbers are just imaginary, an example.

This

Also, I don't really see reason for standard/FF armour division. AFAIK, devs too have stated that they see no reason to have 2 same armours, that just have different price and protection. But I would like to see Reflective and Reactive types.

They are not 2 same armors. Standard armor is heavier, smaller, cheaper and repairs faster. FF armor is lighter, but bulkier, costlier and repairs longer. While neither of them provides a protection from a specific weapon type (like reactive and reflective armor) or other bonus (Reduced radar signature by Stealth armor), they represent a way to save space or mass, cost and quality. The only problem with them is how can devs implement the size difference between the two (will it be forcing bigger weapon mounts, reducing electronics capacity, making armor occupy one or several pods, or will there be criticals in addition to pod size and tonnage, we will see).

[=CJW= Zweistein000 (W)]

Adding different armor types with clan having the advantage would just encourage people to take clan only assets. And you could be a mechlab warrior the whole match to lose your awesome loki the second you walk into LT range. Piloting skills should still be what decides if you live or die,  not clan tech.

Who's talking bout clan tech 

[AXEL]

"Clan FF armor protects 20% more per ton"

Just trying trying to keep both factions competitive,  even if they never were meant to be

[=CJW= Zweistein000 (W)]

for those 8% clan FF pays with three or four times the cost.

[AXEL]

for those 8% clan FF pays with three or four times the cost.

So you're saying, IS top tier mechs should always lose to clan top tier mechs? While it may be true in battletech, it doesn't make for good gaming.

[Cloak and Dagger]

for those 8% clan FF pays with three or four times the cost.

So you're saying, IS top tier mechs should always lose to clan top tier mechs? While it may be true in battletech, it doesn't make for good gaming.

Uh... why?

If you take an IFV to fight with a MBT, you will lose.

I don't see the difference here.

[xInVicTuSx]

Uh... why?

If you take an IFV to fight with a MBT, you will lose.

You havn't played BF3 have you?

[Cik]

for those 8% clan FF pays with three or four times the cost.

So you're saying, IS top tier mechs should always lose to clan top tier mechs? While it may be true in battletech, it doesn't make for good gaming.

it doesn't? eh? that's always how it's worked, and it works fine. you shouldn't be able to beat a timber wolf with a warhammer. but you can beat a timber wolf with two warhammers. cost is a factor in balancing.