410 replies to this topic

[Hitman xXx qp]

To be true i rather have it where I can put any weapon anywhere. It took a lot of time but in the books and readouts there where mechs loadouts that was what the pilot wanted on it and not stander.

[Cattra Kell]

I wouldn't mind a mixed version of this system. As much as I liked the freedom of the Mw2/Mw3 system I found far to many players min-maxing. With Mechwarrior 4 I did enjoy the hard point system as well due to the fact it *tried* to balance what weapons could be fitted.
Lets also not forget in the Novels and lore wise that indeed you could fit what you wanted but it often took weeks of hard work that involved either buying a new arm or tearing out all the guts in the arm and reconstructing it after the weapon was installed, most of the time if there was a large laser in the arm before, you either were installing a PPC or other lasers to replace the large laser due to the capacitors already there.

I wouldn't mind seeing though, different mech variants. What I mean by this is the same mechs, say there are 3 versions of the Thorn, the only difference is the hard points available on it. This would allow some customization (based on what variant you want) but also keep some balance so you don't roll with a 5 ERPPC Alpha-Cat. Just my own opinion on the subject, I am sure other people have other opinions and I hope that they post them too.

[Jredbaron96]

MW2 style.

Keep 'em guessing.

[Tarmok_II]

ok most meches are designed to have specific weapons on each position because of that i think the MW4 system would be better.

[Stormwolf]

MW2/MW3 system, the MW4 system failed in too many ways for me, it is not as balanced as most people think it is.

There should be a distinction between omni and regular mechs though.

[Woodstock]

I really don't see how it makes all that much difference.

BUT ... I think the MW4 option of having weapon type designated hard points ... missile/projectile/energy etc will be the closest to Canon.

I don't see how its a big deal either way. I would have preferred to limit customisation to canon variants and omni mechs personally ...but that does not seem to be the direction the devs have decided on.

[Alex Wolfe]

I'd like an option of MW4 MT Merc style slots (more than just ballistic/energy/missile), but with multiple variants per mech (preferably with visible differences, like MekTek's Argus/Argus XT).

Otherwise the mechs are just too homogenized. If every 50 tonner can be outfitted with identical stuff, then barring minimal differences in chassis performance, it makes every 50 tonner... the same. Centurion is a Hunchback is an Uziel. I want more difference between mechs than tonnage and cosmetics.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 05 December 2011 - 05:36 AM.

[Hitman xXx qp]

Alex Wolfe, on 05 December 2011 - 05:34 AM, said:

I'd like an option of MW4 MT Merc style slots (more than just ballistic/energy/missile), but with multiple variants per mech (preferably with visible differences, like MekTek's Argus/Argus XT).

Otherwise the mechs are just too homogenized. If every 50 tonner can be outfitted with identical stuff, then barring minimal differences in chassis performance, it makes every 50 tonner... the same. Centurion is a Hunchback is an Uziel. I want more difference between mechs than tonnage and cosmetics.

That where space comes in. If you cannot fit a UAC for it takes up 7 slot's and that LT only has 5 then that how you stop most same weight mechs from holding same load-outs.

Also they can make it so that mech as a whole can only be allowed to put so many of one type of weapon without doing the MW4 restrict's. The Mech got 10 Power slot and 4 missile slot's. But you can pick where to place it.

Say you do not want all your weapons on your arms and want it more leg and torso.

Edited by Hitman xXx qp, 05 December 2011 - 05:47 AM.

[Alex Wolfe]

Hitman *** qp, on 05 December 2011 - 05:42 AM, said:

That where space comes in. If you cannot fit a UAC for it takes up 7 slot's and that LT only has 5 then that how you stop most same weight mechs from holding same load-outs.

Barring really large weapons, that was never an issue in MW3. You could stuff almost anything anywhere and boat almost anything on anything. MW2/3/MechCommander style mechs are mostly "skins + Clans' run faster", which is the reason they almost never share the same weight. Bleh.

Hitman *** qp, on 05 December 2011 - 05:42 AM, said:

Also they can make it so that mech as a whole can only be allowed to put so many of one type of weapon without doing the MW4 restrict's. The Mech got 10 Power slot and 4 missile slot's. But you can pick where to place it.

Say you do not want all your weapons on your arms and want it more leg and torso.

A decent proposal, anything is better than the army of cookie cutter clones, only with different "skins". Still, it creates another problem - it would make everyone min-max their most valuable weapons to the better-armored torso, making mechs' arms, bristling with guns... essentially obsolete.

I'd rather take a system that enforces most slots to the arms, but making the configuration up to you (costing money, time, and changing the mechs looks in the process). Torso/leg stuffing while using arms as ablative shields kind of stinks, considered weapon mounts is what a mech's arms are for.

Again, MekTek essentially did something similar by introducing an energy/ballistic-friendly Catapult, ballistic with minor missile slots Vulture, double ballistic arms' Argus and Thanatos and so forth, as well as making certain slots "direct fire (ballistic/energy only)" or "ammo-consuming (ballistic/missile only)" rather than strict B/E/M. I could really see MWO iterating on that.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 05 December 2011 - 06:02 AM.

[Hitman xXx qp]

Alex Wolfe, on 05 December 2011 - 05:50 AM, said:

Again, MekTek essentially did something similar by introducing an energy/ballistic-friendly Catapult, ballistic with minor missile slots Vulture, double ballistic arms' Argus and Thanatos and so forth, as well as making certain slots "direct fire (ballistic/energy only)" or "ammo-consuming (ballistic/missile only)" rather than strict B/E/M. I could really see MWO iterating on that.

Yes something like this.
As for getting into clans there mechs where made to fit anything the pilot could dream of. But most only Fitted the premade loadouts.

Edited by Hitman xXx qp, 05 December 2011 - 06:05 AM.

[Cattra Kell]

Hitman *** qp, on 05 December 2011 - 06:05 AM, said:

Yes something like this.
As for getting into clans there mechs where made to fit anything the pilot could dream of. But most only Fitted the premade loadouts.

When you get into clan territory you get into some fun stuff of the Omni's. The Omni mechs were actually made so entire arms could be removed for quick weapon pod switches. Often Clan warriors had fully outfitted arms that were never fitted to the mech, but rather sitting in a hanger in case they need a hot-fix or a hot-switch, both which could be performed quickly and efficiently since you remove the old arm (which was designed to do on the fly) and then attach the new pod's. The down side is that the CPU and engine's of Omni's were often hardwired in and very VERY hard to change and upgrade.

In conclusion its not entirely true that they could fit anyone a pilot could dream of on the same arm. As I said, they often had multiple arms for one pilot, one could be laser only, one could be a slug thrower, etc. but in the end that arm was still only Laser or Missile or Ammo, etc.
They were still limited to hard points on the arm, but rather it was the swapping of those arm's and weapon pods that allowed for the flexibility of the omni-mechs.

Edited by Cattra Kell, 05 December 2011 - 06:13 AM.

[Black Sunder]

True customs. I have some...ideas....that involve lance coordination and using varied weapon mixes to achieve my goals. I'm not one for boats and think if you do boat there is always a way to kill you rather easily.

[Kodiak Jorgensson]

didnt really take to the MW4 style lab my self, i liked the idea of fixed locations for battlemechs but everything was a battlemech. i would rather have the AT1-BT style lab, which worked well imo. heres two examples,

KEY:-

Red outline - Energy based weapons

Green outline - Missle based weapons

Yellow Outline - Balistic based weapons

Blue outline - Omni Weapons Pod

Orange Highlight - fixed crtical item /rating /value

ok, the battlemech probably isnt the best example, but should convey what iam trying to get at



should be easy to follow, should also show the limitations of the Omni Mechs

Edited by Kodiak Jorgensson, 05 December 2011 - 07:39 AM.

[Agasutin]

MW4 did a decent job on weapon hard points, most chassis weren't alike, and MekTek added variant's of some chassis that modded their hard points, like Alex Wolfe mentioned. IMO a system like that would be ideal, so not every chassis is an Omni-mech, and each chassis has it's uses.

Edited by Agasutin, 05 December 2011 - 07:40 AM.

[Warbeast]

Mech load out should really be restricted to MW4 style it made it much harder to min mak mechs and kept mechs individual rater than making them just fancy skins, I always liked the custom armour, engine and heat to.

Dave

[lyonn]

I think MW4 went a long way to make mechs stand apart more rather than becoming gun bag suits.

Maybe PGI have a 3rd way

[Belrick]

If there is going to be some sort of system of merc group wars, territory progression big map etc, it should take time to do huge subs. I'm not against big customization, but one way to help balance the game is to have limits on how quickly you can sub and swap weapons. It would force you to keep multiple mechs for different situations, or to equip mechs to fill multiple roles.

Allowing some sort of drag and drop system right before a battle, if there is going to be a grand campaign online, is silly.

Beyond this, I'm sort of indifferent to the MW4 / MW3 differences that people have brought up, but that might change.

Edited by Belrick, 05 December 2011 - 08:03 AM.

[Angelicon]

Your topc title says "or not" but you don't have an "or not" option.
While I like the idea of a little customization, I think both of the options provided will be too prone to munchkin-itis
I really hope the devs go with providing several semi-canon variants, then letting players make very minor tuning tweaks rather than wholesale replacement of weapon systems (which -will be- abused in every way possible).

Edited by Angelicon, 05 December 2011 - 08:09 AM.

[Adridos]

I like customisation, but putting lasers on every part of your mech coupled with heat-sinks wasn't just OP, it ruined the MW feel.

[KitLightning]

Lets get MW2 style JJ's and mounting LRM's in the feet

Joking aside. Customizing the assets should be based on chassis restriction, as well as taking the weapons sizes into consideration, as seen in MWLL: The Modular Weapon System.