63 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

For those of you who don't know, there used to be a Battletech Animated Series, a 1990's cartoon with, for its time, nice CGI and some beautiful mech on mech action. It featured Adam Steiner's crusade to liberate his homeworld, Somerset, from Clan Jade Falcon.

In honour of this great series, and to bring back some fan favourite mechs to MWO, I'm suggesting a Somerset package. I think this is easy money for PGI, because the nostalgia is strong with this one.

They could still do a 4-tier version, with 1 special Somerset mech per chassis with unique camo and geometry. It would probably be some time in the future, after the clans have been introduced. At that point, maybe some kind of Community Warfare event could launch the Somerset Package release.

There is money to be made here, I think. And these mechs need to be in the game.
Wolfhound (35t), Bushwacker (55t), Axman (65t) and Mauler (90t).

FAQ:

Q: The Axman doesn't have 3 variants available in 3050, how would it be included?
A: I don't care, really. It's an iconic mech, and I think it's a mistake to rob MWO of every iconic mech that doesn't have 3 variants available in 3050. Invent a new variant, for all I care. That's what they did with the Cicada X5, and I'm not losing any sleep over it.

Q: Some of these variants, like the WLF-1A and WLF-1B are basically the same mech. Why sell them as different variants?
A: Because you can still tinker a lot with their MWO stats, like number of hardpoints, engine cap, module slots, torso twist, etc.

Q: What would these mechs add to the game? What do they have that we don't have already?
A: First of all, this is primarily about introducing some classic mechs to MWO. Maybe this game would be good even without the Timberwolf / Madcat in it, maybe other Clan mechs can do the same thing as the Timberwolf, but it's just so iconic that it needs to be in this game no matter what. It's the same principle here.

Second, you have to consider that PGI has a long list of variables to play around with when designing new mechs. It's not just about hardpoints and tonnage. I'm confident that you could create a new and unique gameplay experience with these 4 mechs.

Q: Aren't you worried about the prospect of an assault mech with 2 AC20's or 2 gauss rifles? (the Mauler)
A: No...

Edited by Alistair Winter, 19 November 2013 - 02:18 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Alistair Winter, on 19 November 2013 - 01:59 AM, said:

A: I don't care, really. It's an iconic mech, and I think it's a mistake to rob MWO of every iconic mech that doesn't have 3 variants available in 3050. Invent a new variant, for all I care. That's what they did with the Cicada X5, and I'm not losing any sleep over it.

QFT
if this system will last forever - simple add a Version that add SRMs instead of LRMs. Or 2 AC 5s

but what is more important: what about the Axe? Leave it visual but give a bonus of 5tons for equipment?

Edited by Karl Streiger, 19 November 2013 - 02:09 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

Karl Streiger, on 19 November 2013 - 02:08 AM, said:

QFT
if this system will last forever - simple add a Version that add SRMs instead of LRMs. Or 2 AC 5s
but what is more important: what about the Axe? Leave it visual but give a bonus of 5tons for equipment?

I was going to say that by the time they release this package, they should be able to implement some rudimentary form of melee, but... at this point, with my feet planted firmly on the ground, I'm prepared for PGI to leave it as a visual and create some sort of bonus to compensate, yeah.

[Jarl Dane]

I support this!

[Galil Nain]

Alistair Winter, on 19 November 2013 - 01:59 AM, said:

Q: The Axman doesn't have 3 variants available in 3050, how would it be included?
A: I don't care, really. It's an iconic mech, and I think it's a mistake to rob MWO of every iconic mech that doesn't have 3 variants available in 3050. Invent a new variant, for all I care. That's what they did with the Cicada X5, and I'm not losing any sleep over it.

Liking the idea, however the above point in the FAQ does raise a key counterpoint...

To my knowledge, the only mech variants PGI has "made up" have been hero mechs. I doubt that they will deviate from this policy. As a result, the solution you propose for the Axman will result in a mech that you can only elite, let alone master, if you pay real money into the game. Whilst in a "package" this won't be an issue for those who get the mechs via that route, bear in mind that, if they use the same distribution schedule as for PP, on the day the package is released and non-buyers can get the chassis for C-Bills, there will be outrage that the only people who can elite the mechs are those who have paid real money, unless they wait several years for the next variant to be timeline-eligible for release.

[Alistair Winter]

Galil Nain, on 19 November 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Liking the idea, however the above point in the FAQ does raise a key counterpoint...

To my knowledge, the only mech variants PGI has "made up" have been hero mechs. I doubt that they will deviate from this policy. As a result, the solution you propose for the Axman will result in a mech that you can only elite, let alone master, if you pay real money into the game. Whilst in a "package" this won't be an issue for those who get the mechs via that route, bear in mind that, if they use the same distribution schedule as for PP, on the day the package is released and non-buyers can get the chassis for C-Bills, there will be outrage that the only people who can elite the mechs are those who have paid real money, unless they wait several years for the next variant to be timeline-eligible for release.

Again, this counter point doesn't really carry any weight, in my mind. For all I care, they can break the timeline and introduce an Axman from 3080 if they want. Just because some old BT manual says that the Axman didn't have 3 different variants at 3050 doesn't mean it shouldn't be in this game. It's all about priorities. Having these mechs in the game is more important to me than following BT lore by the letter.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 19 November 2013 - 02:06 PM.

[Corvus Antaka]

not sure i like the axeman since the axe will be useless, but anything with the bushwacker in it gets my approval

[Strum Wealh]

Galil Nain, on 19 November 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Liking the idea, however the above point in the FAQ does raise a key counterpoint...

To my knowledge, the only mech variants PGI has "made up" have been hero mechs. I doubt that they will deviate from this policy. As a result, the solution you propose for the Axman will result in a mech that you can only elite, let alone master, if you pay real money into the game. Whilst in a "package" this won't be an issue for those who get the mechs via that route, bear in mind that, if they use the same distribution schedule as for PP, on the day the package is released and non-buyers can get the chassis for C-Bills, there will be outrage that the only people who can elite the mechs are those who have paid real money, unless they wait several years for the next variant to be timeline-eligible for release.

The same also holds true for the Bushwacker (third variant in 3056) and the Mauler (third variant in 3060); only the Wolfhound "currently" has the necessary three available variants (in the WLF-1, WLF-1A, and WLF-1B).

(Also, the situation wherein a 'Mech could only be brought to the elite level with real money has happened before - there was a roughly week-long period between the removal of the CN9-AH (on Oct. 30, 2012) and the addition of the CN9-D (on Nov. 06, 2012) where the only way to get three variants was to buy Yen Lo Wang. )

Alistair Winter, on 19 November 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

Again, this counter point doesn't really carry any weight, in my mind. For all I care, they can break the timeline and introduce an Axman from 3080 if they want. Just because some old BT manual says that the Axman didn't have 3 different variants at 3050 doesn't mean it shouldn't be in this game. It's all about priorities. Having these mechs in the game is more important to me than following BT lore by the letter.

Which doesn't change the fact that, like it or not, it is an issue - and one that (barring the implementation of major time-skips) will probably prevent three of the four proposed 'Mechs from being placed in-game anytime soon.

[Lukoi Banacek]

It is only an issue for lore {Godwin's Law}. For PGI it is clearly not an issue to adhere 100% strictly to lore (ex. Coolant flush) or to adhere to previously promised stances (ex. Coolant flush, 3pv). Alistar's point is that he is not in the lore {Godwin's Law} camp and clearly neither is PGI. He wants the Mech and it would make for a good money sink for PGI. Win win as far as he is concerned.

And let us be honest....it would drive away soooooo few of the lore purists as to be a moot point. They would find a way to rationalize it and enjoy the package by a landslide majority I am sure.

[Strum Wealh]

Lukoi, on 19 November 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

It is only an issue for lore {Godwin's Law}. For PGI it is clearly not an issue to adhere 100% strictly to lore (ex. Coolant flush) or to adhere to previously promised stances (ex. Coolant flush, 3pv). Alistar's point is that he is not in the lore {Godwin's Law} camp and clearly neither is PGI. He wants the Mech and it would make for a good money sink for PGI. Win win as far as he is concerned.

And let us be honest....it would drive away soooooo few of the lore purists as to be a moot point. They would find a way to rationalize it and enjoy the package by a landslide majority I am sure.

Frankly, I'd love to see the Axman in-game as well (especially if it borrowed heavily from - or even just outright copied - Karyudo's design), but I'm also realistic about the likelihood of it happening anytime soon... if ever.

Aside from the variant availability issue (third variant in 3057), the primary variant (the AXM-1N, rather than the AXM-2N variant used by Adam Steiner) requires splitting its AC/20 between the Right-Torso and the Center-Torso as the RT must also accommodate an IS-built XL Engine (consuming 3 crits in the RT) and a single critical used for Ferro-Fibrous Armor.
(And the AXM-3S, the 3057 variant, would have the same issue as the 1N, as its LB 20-X would also need to be split between the RT and the CT to accommodate the IS-built Light Engine (consuming 2 crits in the RT) and the single FF crit.)

Even if they ignored the timeline constraint to allow for additional canonical variants (as Alastair suggests), two of the three near-term Axman variants would be outright impossible unless PGI (as I, and likely many others, are hoping they eventually will ) also reverses their position on crit-splitting after effectively nixing the idea in ATD 38.

Bryan Ekman, on 17 May 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

ZnSeventeen: In regards to critical slot splitting, as happens in the King Crab, will you ever consider having different numbers of critical slots in specific mechs as their "quirk." Ex: King Crab gets extra arm crits and fewer torso crits so the problems of slot splitting would be allayed.
A: It’s a very specific TT rule. Right now we’re not looking to add it.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 19 November 2013 - 05:51 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Given their history of self reversal, yoy might have more hope than ya know lol.

[Arctcwolf]

I dont know if I would throw in the bushwacker...we have plenty of 55 ton mechs right now. I'd rather see a vindicator at 45 tons thrown in.

With the upcoming patch to add collision damage, it would be fun to see the axeman swing that axe or be able to punch another mech. Remember that the axe is a 5 ton melee weapon, thus takes up crit slots and tonnage.

I dont mind a mauler having dual AC20 or gauss rifles...maulers hardly ever got up to above 65 kph, thus were more stationary weapons platforms during battle. The battle centered around them, or they affected it from long range. This makes them prime for light mechs to swarm and pick apart in battle if they arent supported. The old adage of platoons "stick with the heavy gunner" will come into play a lot.

I would definitely support this and buy a full package.

[Corvus Antaka]

a 45 ton mech would be nice for sure.

[HammerSwarm]

I voted yes, but with some apprehension. I worry that because melee isn't ready to go and is "A long way off" that they'd strip the melee from the axman as they did with the YLW.

I support the inclusion of more mechs as I did in my king crab crab thread.
http://www.mwomercs....ng-crab-thread/

Specifically though Alistair I would ask what role you see these mechs filling in their weight class and what they can do that other mechs of the weight class can't.

[The Black Knight]

If they picked something other than the axeman then I'd be all for it. I don't want the axemen or hatchetman in game unless the hatchets work. But I would love to see the bushwacker and especially the mauler get introduced.

[Cycleboy]

You are missing a BIG possible role for that vestigial axe... a new SHIELD ARM MECH! If the axe is big enough, the torso twist can put the axe arm in front of most of the torso!

[FupDup]

THEY ATTACKED MAH HOME PLANET!!!

[CDLord HHGD]

[Alistair Winter]

HammerSwarm, on 21 November 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

I voted yes, but with some apprehension. I worry that because melee isn't ready to go and is "A long way off" that they'd strip the melee from the axman as they did with the YLW.

Well, one side of me thinks that it can't possibly be so hard to implement some kind of melee. Even Doom 2 had multiplayer with melee, for Pete's sake. That was 20 years ago. The other side of me is more skeptical, given how many urgent issues haven't been resolved yet. I'm guessing they want to sort out collision before melee.

HammerSwarm, on 21 November 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

Specifically though Alistair I would ask what role you see these mechs filling in their weight class and what they can do that other mechs of the weight class can't.

Wolfhound - Potentially more firepower (hardpoints) than other light mechs, but less speed. And having a fully functioning arm with any number of energy hardpoints is an advantage over both the Jenner and Raven. I wrote about this in another thread.
http://mwomercs.com/...ease-wolfhound/

Bushwacker - Like a bigger Cicada. Very low profile, a lot lower than the Shadowhawk, while having just as much armour and maybe even firepower. Potentially a nice and fast ballistic platform, and having both energy, missile and ballistic hardpoints makes it potentially as versatile as the Shadowhawk. You might have a Streak-wacker with 4 SSRMs and some ballistics, for example.

Axman - Obviously melee would be something new, but even without melee, it's kind of like a cross between a Cataphract and a Jagermech. You've got an AC20 or maybe 2-3 different ballistics mounted as high as your head in the RT, and you've got arms that are very useful for brawling. And there's the LRM variant which would be kind of like the AWS-8T of heavy mech. Maybe 2 missile hardpoints in the torso and 4 energy hardpoints in the arms.

Mauler - Beyond being the only assault mech with potentially 2x gauss and 2xAC20, it also has more ballistic hardpoints than any other assault mech right off the bat. It has massive firepower, at the cost of a very unfavourable chassis shape. The LRM boxes makes it easy to spot, and it has the rough shape of the Awesome, i.e. barndoor. In other words, a lot of pew pew at the cost of being easy to hit.

[Ngamok]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 19 November 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

not sure i like the axeman since the axe will be useless, but anything with the bushwacker in it gets my approval

I agree. While the Axeman would be nice, if there is no melee combat, having a mech like the Axeman or Hatchetman or Shiro is pointless.