68 replies to this topic

[Juodas Varnas]

FupDup, on 02 July 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

It's 20 tons and 15 critical slots, good luck trying to fit that thing on a mech.

If you strip all armor and Jump Jets from an Urbanmech, with the default engine and Endosteel, i'm pretty sure you could fit into it and even have a few tons left for ammo!

It'd still need the crit slots to be divided between the arm and the side torso.

Wooo, LONG TOM URBANMECH!

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 02 July 2015 - 10:26 AM.

[Greenjulius]

FupDup, on 02 July 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

It's 20 tons and 15 critical slots, good luck trying to fit that thing on a mech.

The game already hybridizes so many TT rules that there isn't much holding it back. A heavy or assault mech would obviously have to carry it at that weight, which would once again be a balancing factor.

[1453 R]

FupDup, on 02 July 2015 - 09:53 AM, said:

Compromise: Maybe Pea Gee Eye could restrict CW to using 3052 tech only, while letting Puglandia and the Group Ghetto use the new stuff?

Maybe they could add a polling feature to the game launcher itself to get a good gauge of how the playerbase feels?

Does anybody actually give a squawk about CW anymore? I mean really? All I ever see when I take a brief glance through the CW forums is "why is nobody playing?!", followed by "this mode sucks!" Seriously. I'm not sure why we even bother anymore.

Anyways.

In-game polling would be very helpful, of course, though then I imagine some of the nasty-minded bittervets around here would suddenly be quite surprised indeed at the results of some of these wider in-game polls. Be a real shock to their system to find out that the game population as a whole doesn't actually think PGI is the Devil and MWO is a horrifying insult to all things BattleTech that exists only to steal money from unsuspecting innocent gamers.

Heh...maybe I need a break too. The sheer saltiness of the forums of late has gotten under my skin, and this absolutely asstastic work week has not remotely helped. Blegh.

[Mechteric]

They could just release different "variants" of existing guns.

For example an AC/20 that fires as quickly as an AC/2 but comes out to same DPS as an AC/20 (and same damage per ton of ammo so it doesn't run dry in two seconds). This way you could pick if you prefer hit and run weapons or DPS brawling type.

PPCs could add a laser duration style variant perhaps.

Lasers could introduce a constant beam firing variant with same DPS, or one that does all the damage in less duration but has longer reload times.


And so on, by keeping weapons DPS/HPS etc. normalized but with different behaviors based on what you want your build to be like.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 02 July 2015 - 10:30 AM.

[FupDup]

1453 R, on 02 July 2015 - 10:26 AM, said:

Does anybody actually give a squawk about CW anymore? I mean really? All I ever see when I take a brief glance through the CW forums is "why is nobody playing?!", followed by "this mode sucks!" Seriously. I'm not sure why we even bother anymore.

I was trying to imply that CW would be the designated "Old Man Paradise" where people who hate everything past 3050 or even 3025 can have a little utopia, while people who just want to blow up robbits can play in the "normal" queues.

[Aim64C]

CapperDeluxe, on 02 July 2015 - 10:26 AM, said:

They could just release different "variants" of existing guns.

For example an AC/20 that fires as quickly as an AC/2 but comes out to same DPS as an AC/20 (and same damage per ton of ammo so it doesn't run dry in two seconds). This way you could pick if you prefer hit and run weapons or DPS brawling type.

I've said for a long time that IS equipment should reflect the diversity of the Inner Sphere in general.

The rule set, itself, considered weapons to be "classes." If you look back at many of the older designs, specific companies are mentioned as being the supplier of a certain weapon system and even armor systems. The rule set simply generalized their performance into classes and categories to work within the turn system of the game.

There would be nothing functionally wrong with applying this concept - even with having certain weapon manufacturers that shave off a critical or a ton (but that don't get the range or heat improvements that another market competitor does).

Of course... this is still senseless so long as we don't have actual battlefields for our wars to take place.

When your game consists of nothing but solaris, then the weapon loadouts are going to shift toward solaris - not what you would actually find on a battlefield (outside of very specialized roles).

[Dulahan]

I'm still a huge proponent for Blazers (Binary Laser Cannon).

The main TT issue is... they just aren't worth the heat and such. Not when you can just do two LLs. But that particular hurdle becomes MUCH less of an issue in this game where we have Hardpoint Limitations. Any mech with the free tonnage, 4 available crit slots, and one free Energy HP could find a use. Is it for any Energy Mech? Gosh no. But there's a lot of places it could be great. Plus it is within the current timeline.

CDA 2c? YES PLEASE!

Arm slots on some other mechs? Indeed.

[Greenjulius]

Dulahan, on 02 July 2015 - 10:37 AM, said:

I'm still a huge proponent for Blazers (Binary Laser Cannon).

The main TT issue is... they just aren't worth the heat and such. Not when you can just do two LLs. But that particular hurdle becomes MUCH less of an issue in this game where we have Hardpoint Limitations. Any mech with the free tonnage, 4 available crit slots, and one free Energy HP could find a use. Is it for any Energy Mech? Gosh no. But there's a lot of places it could be great. Plus it is within the current timeline.

CDA 2c? YES PLEASE!

Arm slots on some other mechs? Indeed.

AND have no ghost heat with 2 Blazers. That way we can alpha the equivalent of 4 IS LL for 36 damage. That would bring IS mechs much closer to parity with clan laser vomit, but at more heat. Normal LLs can stay at 4 for ghost heat.

That way the choice between 3xLL+MLs or 2xBL is a tough one, one allows for a stronger alpha when stacked, while the other combines with other lasers for a better heat to damage ratio. (3xLL+4xML, etc)

Edited by Greenjulius, 02 July 2015 - 11:03 AM.

[Dulahan]

It flat out opens up a lot of new potential builds. Obviously some quirks might need to be changed to account for them. But it also opens up new variants like the ZEU-6Y which used one stock!

[Greenjulius]

Dulahan, on 02 July 2015 - 11:19 AM, said:

It flat out opens up a lot of new potential builds. Obviously some quirks might need to be changed to account for them. But it also opens up new variants like the ZEU-6Y which used one stock!

Plus, we could have a nifty new sound for them as well. Something powerful sounding...

[Tennex]

I think the biggest obstacle to mech mortars/ long tom is how PGI decided to implement torso movement. It'd be impossible for a torso mounted arching weapon to be fired high enough to get the range it needs.

Arm mounting is a different story

[Maxx Blue]

Juodas Varnas, on 02 July 2015 - 10:20 AM, said:

If you strip all armor and Jump Jets from an Urbanmech, with the default engine and Endosteel, i'm pretty sure you could fit into it and even have a few tons left for ammo!

No, no, no. You've got it backwards. You load urbanmechs INTO the Long Tom cannon. Sheesh! What did you THINK it fired!?

Seriously though, I don't consider forum rage and player disagreement a barrier to making a change to the game, and I doubt PGI does either. We added the friggin' CLANS, and no one agreed on how to balance them (still don't actually), but overall they have been fun and added to the game experience. I admit adding more weapons would cause balance problems and people would complain and moan about how some or all were OP. That will happen anyway. There will always and for all time be balance complaints as long as this game exists. The question is not whether adding weapons will cause upheaval, because it certainly will. The question is whether anyone else is ready to accept that upheaval to get some new weapon options?

A corrolary to that might be, is adding 'variants' of existing weapons like light/heavy PPC's that still have the same basic mechanics, just with different 'numbers' attached enough of a change, or would that be a waste of time and people would prefer entirely new weapon mechanics?

Personally, I'm OK with having a PPC act like a PPC, no matter if it is light, heavy, ER or whatever. I just want more variety in TYPES of PPC's. More combinations of heat/range/size/damage to play with. I could even be ok with the suggestion to have different stats by manufacturer rather than using the different classes from future-tech. I just know that I personally want more than just the 3025 weapons, at least on the IS side.

The only problems I have with the idea of making weapons slightly different within each 'class', say having three different versions of the AC5 with different recharge rates and per-shell damage is that it is going to add a butt-load more ammo types in the mech lab, and if it doesn't change the tonnage/crit slots, I don't think it is different enough.

Edited by Maxx Blue, 02 July 2015 - 12:52 PM.

[1453 R]

Maxx Blue, on 02 July 2015 - 12:50 PM, said:

...
The only problems I have with the idea of making weapons slightly different within each 'class', say having three different versions of the AC5 with different recharge rates and per-shell damage is that it is going to add a butt-load more ammo types in the mech lab, and if it doesn't change the tonnage/crit slots, I don't think it is different enough.

This could be potentially solved by A.) adding dropdowns for ammo types, say "AC/5 Ammo" drop-down, as well as a drop-down to select which specific AC/5 you're using. More clicks, less intuitive, but possible.

Or, B.) have AC/5 ammo be dynamic such that it adjusts to whatever AC/5 you're using. Got a version that burstfires five 1-damage shots? Ammo automatically scales up to 5x normal shot count, so you get the same damage potential per ton.

'Course, this is assuming Piranha can do dynamic anything, which seems unlikely given the fact that apparently the game engine just completely chokes on switchable ammo, so...never mind, I suppose. Blegh. BLEGH I SAY.

Fup: I don't think that's what the seven guys still playing CW with each other really want. Heh, nor is it what the crusty-old-men who keep blarching about how awful everything that existed after 3025 is. It's an idea, but I think it's more liable to cheese off both the CW folks and the 3025 folks than anything else. Unfortunately. I'd have no problem at all with CW running in era-based seasons to give folks a chance to do their thing in whichever When they prefer, but apparently season-based CW is a No-No.

A'ight, then - the CW folks then get to deal with the rest of us wanting new freaking crap.

[Cyborne Elemental]

Blazer
MRM
X-Pulse

Nothing else excites me.

[Matthew Ace]

What really excites me about new weapons is area-effect indirect fire weapons. That may add a new dimension into gameplay especially CW, would force teams which are strongly dug in to push out.

[Deathlike]

We didn't get Binary Laser Cannons when the Zeus came out.

Don't expect to get anything more unless we ninja-advance the timeline.

So, we're not getting anything anytime soon™ until then.

[Thumper3]

Aim64C, on 02 July 2015 - 10:34 AM, said:

There would be nothing functionally wrong with applying this concept - even with having certain weapon manufacturers that shave off a critical or a ton (but that don't get the range or heat improvements that another market competitor does).

This is what Quirks do, without adding the mind numbing overhead of having to sort through your AC5 cannons to find the one you want. Certainly as you stated in a world with battlefields, true salvage, etc a laser from one manufacture could be mounted to any mech, but currently quirks represent these differences at least to a point.

Although they don't go as far as reducing crit slots and tonnage of course, but the durations, reload, and speeds are good starts.

Personally, I would prefer to get hand-to-hand combat and knockdown added in before MORE weapons, but who in their right mind says they want a game with LESS content. Sure, give us more stuff......but I would hate to see it come at the expense of more important elements, like making CW more pointfull and giving us those rich battlefields with salvage.

[PappySmurf]

Helll I would just be happy if the dim light bulbs at PGI just fixed the IS SRM2_SRM4_SRM6 and the streak 2's none of them do any damage either they were nerfed on damage or there hit and crit ratio is like 1% its the same with the AC20 they also need fixed badly.


P.S RUSS SCREW IN A100 WATT BULB IN YOUR HEAD AND FIX THESE FIRST BEFORE NEW WEAPONS ARE ANOUNCED.

[Stain Pain]

Alan Davion, on 02 July 2015 - 09:24 AM, said:

None of those weapons are time-line ready yet.

We're only in 3052/3053. Most of those weapons didn't appear until like... 3057 at the earliest I think, and some not until the 3060's.

Exactly the reason this game sucks. Funboys QQing everytime a damn suggestion comes to address a problem in this game... pfff

[IraqiWalker]

Juodas Varnas, on 02 July 2015 - 10:20 AM, said:

If you strip all armor and Jump Jets from an Urbanmech, with the default engine and Endosteel, i'm pretty sure you could fit into it and even have a few tons left for ammo!

It'd still need the crit slots to be divided between the arm and the side torso.

Wooo, LONG TOM URBANMECH!

I LOVE the way you think good sir

Tennex, on 02 July 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

I think the biggest obstacle to mech mortars/ long tom is how PGI decided to implement torso movement. It'd be impossible for a torso mounted arching weapon to be fired high enough to get the range it needs.

Arm mounting is a different story

LRMs fire in an arc independent of our torso angle. It could be that the weapon will be extending over the shoulder like it's mounted on BT mechs.