72 replies to this topic

[Johnny Reb]

Narc and ams are the only ones I hear/find useful.

[MadPanda]

Johnny Reb, on 29 July 2014 - 11:05 PM, said:

Heh, wouldn't a reduction in heat as a wep mod be more favorable devs?

No, they want you to play role warfare. You can take the role of being a ****** mech by equipping the weapon modules.

[Ultimax]

I logged in, and thought "OK I've slagged off the system a lot. Let me at least give the MG +Range modules a go on my Nova".

I mean, 0 heat anyway so why not?

Then I looked at the range increase of 3 or 4m for the cost of a 3 million cbill module.


This was my reaction:

[Y E O N N E]

Believe it or not, those extra 10 meters to make a difference on the machine guns. The reason it makes a difference is because at ranges outside of 125 m, you are not really going for DPS as much as crit-factor. I've made mincemeat out of many 'Mechs at the ends of my Arrow's MG range with that, in places where walking a little closer was tactically impossible.

I do suppose if MGs are not the focus of the 'Mech, though, that the module wouldn't be worth it.

[FDJustin]

To get me excited, weapon modules have to either: Offer a small bonus for no penalty, or offer a large bonus for a small penalty (needs an obviously positive trade-off), or somehow change the function of the weapon. I'd rather pay 500,000 cbill for a weapon mod that changes the colour of my lasers than what's there now. Actually, that would be a more useful mod, since it makes it harder for people to gage my effective fighting range.

Well... The small bonuses at no penalty don't get me -excited-, but they do make me go "Guess if I had a bunch of spare cbills, I'd consider taking this."

Actually, if I had a clan mech, I might just possibly maybe consider the modules as they are. They still wouldn't get me excited, but their bigger bonuses at smaller penalties might work well with targeting computers. Not sure. Still... They have enough range that adding more is probably not their most efficient investment.

Edited by FDJustin, 30 July 2014 - 03:42 AM.

[MasterBLB]

Cementi - how about somelike these:
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3595664

[MadcatX]

I wouldn't mind seeing mech-specific weapon bonuses based on it's stock loadout of the more commonly known variants. Catapults get 5% faster reloads on LRM's, A hunchback's AC20 doing an additional two points of damage, some quick examples.

At least it would add to the whole "mech quirk" category that I wish was a much bigger thing then it currently is.

Edited by MadcatX, 30 July 2014 - 04:07 AM.

[SnowdogJJJ]

They have taken away the "useful" modules and given us less in return (or so it seems). It just feels odd, so many things that need to be added and these are the things we get? Maybe in the long view it will make sense, time will tell.

But for now I have no use for the less that advantageous weapons mods.

[Training Instructor]

SnowdogJJJ, on 30 July 2014 - 04:11 AM, said:

They have taken away the "useful" modules and given us less in return (or so it seems). It just feels odd, so many things that need to be added and these are the things we get? Maybe in the long view it will make sense, time will tell.

But for now I have no use for the less that advantageous weapons mods.

Pfft, you don't get it. The devs consulted their records of mods used during the recent solo and team tournaments, and determined that what all players really wanted were dedicated slots just for arty/airstrike.

[Thejuggla]

I think negatives should be removed from weapon modules or the positives buffed. Right now I look at most modules as a heat increase not a performance increase.

[Alistair Winter]

I think this is how weapon modules need to work. Forget one module for every weapon.

Make three modules for each category of weapon. Lasers, ballistic weapons, SRMs, LRMs, PPCs.

For example, you would have 3 laser modules. Note: I'm pulling numbers out of thin air here, just as an example.

• All lasers get 10% more damage, 20% less range
  
• All lasers get 15% less heat, 10% less damage.
  
• All lasers get 20% more range, 15% more heat.

This would actually force players to choose a role (brawler, sniper, striker, etc) and stick to it. Two people with the same build could have different modules, leading to different roles and playstyles.




EDIT: You could do three modules for every weapon in the game, of course. But there needs to be a trinity if there's going to be any kind of role warfare going on. Right now, it's a binary situation, either you use the module or you don't. Most people don't. If they buff the modules a bit, most people will. That's not role warfare.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 30 July 2014 - 05:41 AM.

[Mawai]

One of the biggest issues with most weapon modules is that they give a minor situational advantage at the cost of a general and global disadvantage.

Range modules allow for slightly increased damage application at long ranges ... e.g. large laser changes from 450m to 460m ... however, the cost is increased heat on every shot at all ranges. The trade off makes no sense and never will unless you can guarantee that most or all of the shots you take will be at ranges greater than 450m .. which doesn't happen.

It is never worthwhile to accept a global disadvantage of 2% extra heat for a situational advantage of 2% extra range. It really doesn't matter what weapon you are using.

The only time such a trade off is worthwhile is -
1) You will always get the advantage (i.e. all shots will be at the extended range)
2) The disadvantage is negligible. (e.g. a 2% heat increase on a gauss rifle is meaningless) or small enough relative to the advantage to make it worthwhile ... i.e. 10% extra range for 5% extra heat might be worth considering ... but 10% extra range for 10% extra heat isn't.

On the other hand if they had designed weapon modules properly so that a global advantage was coupled with a global disadvantage ... you could have.
- decreased rate of fire for decreased heat generation
- decreased beam duration for increased heat
- decreased range for decreased heat
- decreased damage for increased ammo/ton (uses smaller rounds)
- increased damage for decreased rate of fire

The ideas are freaking limitless ... and what did PGI implement? increased range for heat ... which isn't worth while due to the fact that it is situational. I'm sorry ... but do the people working at PGI even have a clue about game design?

I like the overall change to module structure ... but the flaws with the existing consumable and weapon modules make the nice new system just as flawed.

Edited by Mawai, 30 July 2014 - 05:42 AM.

[DONTOR]

GAUSS CHARGE MECHANIC HOLD TIME INCREASE MODULE PLEASE / or maybe 50% less charge time.

just something for every weapon would be nice.

[CocoaJin]

Veteran players should be tuning their mechs for play style, not for performance creep. Modules should be allowing us to enhance certain aspects of mech performance for a roughly equally substantial trade-off someplace else. That you can further pidegon hole our mechs into a niche that we believe our experience and skill will allow us to flourish.

Like a cheetah, it's so specialized, but in no way better than other big cats. In fact, it's specialization puts it a significant disadvantage outside it's improved ability to catch prey...but this level of specialization should be deemed an acceptable risk based on our time in game and experienced presumably playing toward that niche anyway.

These modules shouldn't make better mechs, just better specialists.

Edited by CocoaJin, 30 July 2014 - 09:35 AM.

[verybad]

They should attach weapons modules directly to the weapons (reducing the cost appropriately) have multiple affects like damage, rate of fire, range, etc.

Every module gets either one negative and one positive affect or one positive effect (these ones are mroe expensive) These are chosen by the player when they buy the module. In addition, there are multiple values of effect.

In addition, PGI could have contests where the winner gets a rare module that isn't available to everyone.

Bam! suddenly you've got something similar to Diablo where higher level players get better gear. It becomes more interesting. Kind of like runes and gems in Diablo.

The weapons themselves get either no module slots (at base cost) 1 module slot (double cost), 2 module slots (4 times base cost) or three module slots (8 times base cost)

Weapns can also come with preloaded modules that can't be exchanged. These are given various manufacturing names from battletech, and can have affects that aren't available to generic modules.

In addition, module effects in a weapons based system would stack, so if you want a longer range ERPPC for example, up to three range effect modules could be used for a strong increase in range.

Currently the weapons modules system is BORING!!! Make it something truly useful and people will be interested, both n designing the system and buying the things.

Edited by verybad, 30 July 2014 - 09:51 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Cementi, on 29 July 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

The big limiting factor in this game is heat management. A tiny increase of range for a tiny increase in heat is something most pilots are not going to bother with. About the only thing I would consider using these modules on auto cannons.

How about you give us the reverse for starters, reduce range to reduce heat. I bet people would use those.

Or dont even touch the heat scale and increase range and cooldown time, or again the reverse reducing range to have a shorter cooldown time.

Laser burn time or ballistic projectile speed could be altered as well.

Id like to see ballistics having to deal with recoil so if they did that there would be another option for some kind of module.

Bottom line is for me at least, that I like the idea of weapon modules. However they have been in the game for months and I stopped reading when I seen "increased heat". Thats the last thing I want to deal with. This change feels like "Hey no one is using weapon modules lets change the module system to force people to use them so we can get some data"

So sorry, still not going to equip them. Please design some alternate tradeoffs and I will think about it.

I mentioned this myself. Most of my mech designs I feel are already too hot or at the very least on the razor edge. In fact since there is no such thing as a heat neutral build in MWO, heat management is probably the most important consideration when choosing your build. That being the case, there is no way in hell I am going to compromise my heat management even in the slightest for just a 10-15m range boost. I am also not going to pay 3 million C-bills for just a 10-15m boost in range either.

So what the need to do is simple.

1 - Remove the heat penalty from the modules. Honestly 10m-15m or even 30m isn't much of an advantage. That is about 2-3 steps forward for the average mech so there is no need for a penalty to offset the boost. Also most mechs only mount 1 weapons module so on most builds the bonus effects only a part of the weapons. (where as the heat nerf effects ALL the weapons).

2 - Reduce the cost of modules drastically. I currently own 41 mechs that would need at least one module each. A current prices that would be 123 million C-bills if I didn't add new mech. No way in hell and I spending 123 million C-bills on modules that only give me 10-15m range boost even if, as I mention, they didn't have heat penalties. Weapons modules need to be around 100k C-bills a piece.

The other option is to make weapons modules offer significant buffs like 100+ meter range bonuses, then and only then would they be possible worth some minor heat penalties and 3 million each.

[Y E O N N E]

Alistair Winter, on 30 July 2014 - 05:38 AM, said:

I think this is how weapon modules need to work. Forget one module for every weapon.

Make three modules for each category of weapon. Lasers, ballistic weapons, SRMs, LRMs, PPCs.

For example, you would have 3 laser modules. Note: I'm pulling numbers out of thin air here, just as an example.

• All lasers get 10% more damage, 20% less range
  
• All lasers get 15% less heat, 10% less damage.
  
• All lasers get 20% more range, 15% more heat.

This would actually force players to choose a role (brawler, sniper, striker, etc) and stick to it. Two people with the same build could have different modules, leading to different roles and playstyles.





EDIT: You could do three modules for every weapon in the game, of course. But there needs to be a trinity if there's going to be any kind of role warfare going on. Right now, it's a binary situation, either you use the module or you don't. Most people don't. If they buff the modules a bit, most people will. That's not role warfare.

I don't think projectile speed should ever be affected, but if you swap that for reload speed you have yourself a deal.

[Sandpit]

Cementi, on 29 July 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

The big limiting factor in this game is heat management. A tiny increase of range for a tiny increase in heat is something most pilots are not going to bother with. About the only thing I would consider using these modules on auto cannons.

How about you give us the reverse for starters, reduce range to reduce heat. I bet people would use those.

Or dont even touch the heat scale and increase range and cooldown time, or again the reverse reducing range to have a shorter cooldown time.

Laser burn time or ballistic projectile speed could be altered as well.

Id like to see ballistics having to deal with recoil so if they did that there would be another option for some kind of module.

Bottom line is for me at least, that I like the idea of weapon modules. However they have been in the game for months and I stopped reading when I seen "increased heat". Thats the last thing I want to deal with. This change feels like "Hey no one is using weapon modules lets change the module system to force people to use them so we can get some data"

So sorry, still not going to equip them. Please design some alternate tradeoffs and I will think about it.

^this
this is exactly why weapon modules are considered "useless" or "worthless" by most players. The single biggest factor in weapons and loadouts is heat. Anything that increases heat without a rather large bonus to the other side isn't going to get used much. 10 meters is nothing when talking about range, this is especially true since with er tech clans can already begin blasting you after spawning on some maps while you can do nothing except scurry off for cover and hope you make it before you're blown up 20 seconds after spawning. 10 meters is negligible at best in most cases.

[Alistair Winter]

Yeonne Greene, on 30 July 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

I don't think projectile speed should ever be affected, but if you swap that for reload speed you have yourself a deal.

I see where you're coming from, but projectile speed is already affected by Clan targeting computers. And reload speed is pretty much the same as rate of fire, which I already put in there.

But you could always do damage, rate of fire, range. Or heat, rate of fire, range. You could even make cockpit shake one of the three factors, but that might cause even more protests.

[PANZERKAT]

Thejuggla, on 30 July 2014 - 05:26 AM, said:

I think negatives should be removed from weapon modules or the positives buffed. Right now I look at most modules as a heat increase not a performance increase.

I agree with this. Add in all the bonuses. Decide what should stay the same, need buffs and what negatives should be applied. We should also have a weapon module slot that grants a % bonus to stand alone ammo types. Ballistics, Missiles and Equipment with ammo. ie. Narc. THAT is a useful module, especially since they gave mechs double armour.

Edited by KOMMISSAR KITTY, 30 July 2014 - 11:11 AM.