Re: Remove LWFs!

Agreed with Doek -   LWF or Extra Plate -    Tactical choices are important!


What about a SUPER Lightweight frame that all but prevents you from taking part in pvp. but makes you even faster!

Re: Remove LWFs!

Deathmonkey wrote:

Agreed with Doek -   LWF or Extra Plate -    Tactical choices are important!


What about a SUPER Lightweight frame that all but prevents you from taking part in pvp. but makes you even faster!

We have an MRE 3000, how about MRE 9000?

Looking forward to new players and new conflicts.

28 (edited by Kokomut 2012-07-14 03:15:50)

Re: Remove LWFs!

Introduce afterburners which deals irreparable damage per second/cycle on the field! big_smile

29 (edited by Sundial 2012-07-14 04:10:05)

Re: Remove LWFs!

Kokomut wrote:

Introduce afterburners which deals irreparable damage per second/cycle on the field! big_smile

I support this idea. Mentioned it a while back in a thread, still thing its the most ballanced idea for another speed increasing module.

I took the name "Overdrive" from another game (Legions: Overdrive)

Looking forward to new players and new conflicts.

Re: Remove LWFs!

And jump jets. I wantz

Sparking to other games

Re: Remove LWFs!

Bad idea.

Re: Remove LWFs!

Sundial wrote:
Deathmonkey wrote:

Agreed with Doek -   LWF or Extra Plate -    Tactical choices are important!


What about a SUPER Lightweight frame that all but prevents you from taking part in pvp. but makes you even faster!

We have an MRE 3000, how about MRE 9000?

I support this naming scheme.

Re: Remove LWFs!

Never really been a fan of the overdrive thingy, because it looks good on paper and you can say "it wont be used in PvP" all you want to, but if it makes u faster, it will. If it's an active module that gives you [insert massive debuff here] and speed, then it'll be used by everyone to flee/charge if you have massive advantage, and thus become just as required to have as LWFs. If it's a passive module... Shield tanked 150kph range fit grophoz here I come.

Re: Remove LWFs!

I would say remove LWF for Lights they are a must as they are too dependent on speed, and I really hate the overdrive, jump jet idea for the reasons Sinceto says.

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Remove LWFs!

Sinceto wrote:

Never really been a fan of the overdrive thingy, because it looks good on paper and you can say "it wont be used in PvP" all you want to, but if it makes u faster, it will. If it's an active module that gives you [insert massive debuff here] and speed, then it'll be used by everyone to flee/charge if you have massive advantage, and thus become just as required to have as LWFs. If it's a passive module... Shield tanked 150kph range fit grophoz here I come.

Depends on the balancing really... but yes, it would be difficult to balance.

The idea is speed squads don't have the rep capability to run it for long and that slow armor tanked mechs would have to burn alot of their cap / armor to close distance.

Then again, distance closing modules like that only really work on the premise that close range brawling isn't a huge risk to your own bot (which it is due to explosion damage).

Maybe give it a very short effect and a very long cycle time so you have to use it right... Just an idea.

Looking forward to new players and new conflicts.

Re: Remove LWFs!

its a topic as old as the game.

imho the major flaw in that whole system is that there is no real alternative due to lack of a cap or dimishing returns.

If i could reach the same speed with my robot, by reducing my equipment mass by 30%, as with fitting a 30% mass reduction LWF, but not a higher speed by doing both (30% less equip mass + 30% from LWF), there would be much more flexibility in this system....

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

37 (edited by Rex Amelius 2012-07-31 00:15:55)

Re: Remove LWFs!

Celebro wrote:

I would say remove LWF for Lights they are a must as they are too dependent on speed, and I really hate the overdrive, jump jet idea for the reasons Sinceto says.

Perhaps I don't read well on my iPhone, but what negative reasons does Sinceto state for jump jets? I get that it has major balancing needs and would certainly require a debuff, like a long charge up and recovery time. I don't think it's like an active speed mod. It's more about bouncing over impassable terrain.

It would probably only work by selecting a target tile to jump to, one that is within whatever the required range and over whatever slope. My understanding is that one of the reason Artillery is still not in the game is that there is no way to select targetable tiles for delivering Artillery. I could be waaay off on that as my knowledge on Perpetuum Development History is not all that great.

I suppose at this point something like jump jets is a pipe-dream way off in the distant future ...if there is one.

Sparking to other games

Re: Remove LWFs!

the targeting for jump location isnt a real issue for jumpjets

for "JUMP"-jets the issue is that perpetuum is a 2.5D game, not a real 3D game. the status "flying" is right now impossible, as seen with "glider" mechs beeing nothing but mechs without legs, but still unable to float above impassable terrain*.

the only thing they could do with the current engine, is something like a short-range-teleport, probably only WITH a loading screen similar to intra-island port.
It shouldn't be that hard to script: remote place reciever beacon** -> remove from terrain ->place on terrain -> destroy reciever beacon.

*: impassable as in plants or buildings, not slope dependant
**: like interference beacon placement.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Remove LWFs!

My post was adressed at overdrives, but i suppose i can make one jump jets aswell =P

Jump jets sound nice on paper, but is it worth it for all the trouble they bring? You guys mention engine limitations, bu theres also balancing problems... What stops a gropho fleet from jumping into a little ditch in the ground, similar to the ones ppl us for probes on gamma, and not ger shot at all? Also, it requires a new set of animations for each robot, and we've seen how long that takes big_smile

Re: Remove LWFs!

I would favor to replace the lwf with a module that uses accumulator too to increase speed and not reduce mass, the trade off would be more balanced I think.

Re: Remove LWFs!

Vehacan wrote:

I would favor to replace the lwf with a module that uses accumulator too to increase speed and not reduce mass, the trade off would be more balanced I think.

one of the problems that have not been brought to light here is that a accu based module will heavyly favor smaller bots because they can regenerate their accumulator faster. even worse green bots have accu recharge bonus. so using that would greatly favor the green bots once again.

imagine a heavy with empty accu after "running" 500m... very usefull. and gets jumped by a tyrannos who can charge from large distance cause of accu regeneration. a castel may even be able to run it capstable if fitted right...

i dont think that is a good idea.

Re: Remove LWFs!

Zortarg Calltar wrote:
Vehacan wrote:

I would favor to replace the lwf with a module that uses accumulator too to increase speed and not reduce mass, the trade off would be more balanced I think.

one of the problems that have not been brought to light here is that a accu based module will heavyly favor smaller bots because they can regenerate their accumulator faster. even worse green bots have accu recharge bonus. so using that would greatly favor the green bots once again.

imagine a heavy with empty accu after "running" 500m... very usefull. and gets jumped by a tyrannos who can charge from large distance cause of accu regeneration. a castel may even be able to run it capstable if fitted right...

i dont think that is a good idea.

Well it's more realistic. Defenders have always used this as an advantage. The charging enemy when out of breath is useless, it has been a valid tactic since ancient times. The plus here is that defenders get more of an advantage during sieges, which is realistic. And the smaller bots will be generally more useful when they have a better accumulator / recharge ratio then bigger bots.
However it seems that the green bots are somewhat unbalanced in this, the missile bots that have a better speed overall will always have the upper hand. Missile bots that can outrun an enemy in battle continuously will always win.

Re: Remove LWFs!

yes defenders can use this. but attackers can use this in the same way and charge away while the defender is charging them. just to keep the distance. in the end i dont see that much difference. i only see a lot of problems. and even if you try to ballance this then you will run into a lot of problems. and that work will surly not be worth the gain. if it can be ballanced with the current mechanics at all.

i think the devs have made it clear some time ago. speed is a essential factor in this game. if someone uses this modules then everybody will have to use them. and then we are basicy at the same spot as we are now. and i think i remember that they made it clear that some kind of afterburner or mircrowarpdrive will not been seen in perpetuum.

now we have the diverity between lwf and plated fittings. yes for roams its always framed. but i use plated fittings often enough as well. and i think its ok.

Re: Remove LWFs!

Zortarg Calltar wrote:

yes defenders can use this. but attackers can use this in the same way and charge away while the defender is charging them. just to keep the distance. in the end i dont see that much difference. i only see a lot of problems. and even if you try to ballance this then you will run into a lot of problems. and that work will surly not be worth the gain. if it can be ballanced with the current mechanics at all.

i think the devs have made it clear some time ago. speed is a essential factor in this game. if someone uses this modules then everybody will have to use them. and then we are basicy at the same spot as we are now. and i think i remember that they made it clear that some kind of afterburner or mircrowarpdrive will not been seen in perpetuum.

now we have the diverity between lwf and plated fittings. yes for roams its always framed. but i use plated fittings often enough as well. and i think its ok.

A pity that it is so difficult to balance, I have given it a shot with this variant, hopefully a good solution will be found.

Re: Remove LWFs!

I think i found a solution everyone.

If you believe LWF's are required for pvp i will now direct you to the short bus, where you may put your helmet and seat belt on to ride away to special to land.

They are ONLY required when a larger bot uses one and you are the smaller bot attempting to get AWAY. However a smaller bot tanked can kill a framed larger bot.

So tell me where is the problem outside of personal preference on having speed to travel what the "need" is for a frame in pvp because frame or no frame there are viable builds.

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle