Jump to content

Increase/bypass Max Weight!


13 replies to this topic

#1 Arugela

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 419 posts

Posted 28 August 2016 - 11:50 AM

How about the ability to automatically go past max weight. Either a module or an automatic thing that lets you bog down the engine but loose speed/turn as you go. Say an, "Enhanced/Reinforced Engine Module"?! Maybe it could be an option like double/tripple heatsinks and artemis etc.

I have a commando I would love to get a little more stuff on but can't because of the weight limit. This stops me from maximizing my mech setup. It would allow much more versatile mechs on the field making strategy more important. Also making slots and speed and the like the balancing factors instead of weight purely. And adding more faster and slower mechs with more varied setups. This could make other setups both better and worse as teh average speed changes. You get more speed advantage but the speed mechs go up against more armament. This would, again, make strategy and teamwork more important over individual abilities. while also supplying more individual abilities. This would then make strategy even more important on the other side again making the game more teamwork based. Because solo play would be much more dangerous and teamwork potentially more advantageous or needed.

Edited by Arugela, 28 August 2016 - 11:58 AM.


#2 ProfPyro

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 91 posts

Posted 28 August 2016 - 12:48 PM

Posted Image

There's already a module for that; it's called a heavier chassis. If you have a loadout you want to run, find a 'mech to fit it. Picking the right chassis is a strategy in and of itself.


edited to sound less jerkish.

Edited by ProfPyro, 28 August 2016 - 12:55 PM.


#3 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 28 August 2016 - 01:55 PM

View PostProfPyro, on 28 August 2016 - 12:48 PM, said:

Posted Image

There's already a module for that; it's called a heavier chassis. If you have a loadout you want to run, find a 'mech to fit it. Picking the right chassis is a strategy in and of itself.

^ this right here.

#4 VonBruinwald

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undisputed
  • The Undisputed
  • 3,460 posts
  • LocationRandis IV

Posted 28 August 2016 - 02:27 PM

I have thought about a weight saving module:

Weight Saving: Increase available tonnage by 0.5 ton
Adv. Weight Saving: Increase available tonnage by 1 ton

I have a few builds were I find myself saying "just 1 more ton". Knocking a rating or two off the engine normally does the trick. If you can't do that then I question what you're trying to load on that chassis. You can't make a Boommando! It doesn't have the hardpoints!

#5 Thor Sten

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • 134 posts

Posted 29 August 2016 - 09:07 AM

View PostVonBruinwald, on 28 August 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

I have thought about a weight saving module:

Weight Saving: Increase available tonnage by 0.5 ton
Adv. Weight Saving: Increase available tonnage by 1 ton

Would be a "must have" on lights and "useless crap" on most other classes. Still I'd take it :)

#6 MechWarrior849305

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,024 posts

Posted 30 August 2016 - 03:39 AM

View PostVonBruinwald, on 28 August 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

Weight Saving: Increase available tonnage by 0.5 ton
Adv. Weight Saving: Increase available tonnage by 1 ton

Then you should ask for wait modules.

Wait module: shortens time of searching for quick play match by 5%.
Adv. wait module: increases effectiveness to 10%

Posted Image

#7 Arugela

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 419 posts

Posted 30 August 2016 - 04:11 PM

Weight saving modules is completely unrealistic though(unless you are talking about custom storage for custom lighter weight variants.). All they have to do is not have a max weight and make weight and other factors realistically affect speed and other things as it should. Add horsepower for instance. I doubt mechwarriors is so sci-fi that it has anti gravity. The realistic options solve like 10 things in one stroke.

Edited by Arugela, 30 August 2016 - 04:27 PM.


#8 Supersmacky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Messenger
  • The Messenger
  • 239 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted 31 August 2016 - 10:24 AM

As was eluded to by ProfPyro: choose the mech based on the load out you want, not modify the mech to do something it wasn't intended to do. Problem solved.

NOTE: No jerkiness intended here. It's just we already have all sorts of mechs, all manner of builds for those mechs, various modules to improve effectiveness, quirks, etc. No reason to now add to that a way to break the limitation deliberately imposed specifically to allow a mech to be 'beefier'. Don't get me wrong: I'd love to be able to add an additional ton to my Locust (or any mech, for that matter), but I just think it is one more 'thing'. I'd rather have PGI work on adding more mechs, maps, game modes, improving net code, etc.

#9 Rogue Jedi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,908 posts
  • LocationSuffolk, England

Posted 31 August 2016 - 11:35 AM

if there is not enough tonage then take a smaller engine.

simple

adding more tonage to a chassis would in most cases require a complete redesign

in my opinion (and you are welcome to disagree) a significant part of the fun of this game is working out the "best" (definition of best may vary depending on who you ask) for each chassis based upon its restrictions and your preferences, it can involve significant compromises, but in my opinion that is a great thing, it forces you to decide.

if tonnage was not a hard limit but mealy a suggestion what would that mean for engines?

For the "extra ton module" to be fair it would have to reduce top speed by at least 2 engine ratings as well as increasing available tonnage, that way it may be worth carrying on the lightest of Light Mechs. the 5 ton difference between the Locust and Command gives 20KPH less speed on the Comando from a 190 engine, they have more or less equal speed with a commando having a 235 to a locusts 190, so 5 tons is a 35-40 engine rating difference, I do not think 2 ratings for 1 ton is unfair, but then you are back to the point that you would get about the same benefit by reducing engine size

#10 Kaptain

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,284 posts
  • LocationNorth America

Posted 31 August 2016 - 03:43 PM

Let 20 ton mechs launch with 8 heat sinks and 25 ton mechs 9. That would do much to fix the ammo limitation for those 2 weights.

#11 Arugela

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 419 posts

Posted 31 August 2016 - 06:34 PM

I made another thread about realistic mechs for this reason. There are other limiters they could use if they unbound engines. But it would come in various things. They would have to look at the story for type of tech and then at real world comparison(which there will be as mechanical devices are as old as time.) For instance the engine could have internal parts that can only do so much. so you can overburnden but only so much. This could be the reason for xl engines. Then you could have the joints and servoes account for weight. If you overburden an arm it can't move as fast. Basically take what should already logically be there and what is actually there, but underutilized, and let the natural consequences of the build play out.

Upper weight all goes into the legs. Maybe the legs, as in real hydraulics etc, can only lift so much and potentialy have a different downward push to project forward etc. So weight in the legs can stop uplift and affect stride or whatever abut upper weight can affect the upper lift and how fast you push foward. maybe even make it clumsier(falling down for instance) uneven weight in the wrong way can make you move in circles or walk slower. Depends on the vehicles exact method of walking(if it has one strength for the uplift of the leg and another for the up-push of the run the weights could affect the running in interesting ways). Have you noticed how the legs all walk differently. Those all have upsides and downsides to the mechs functioning and could be represented. Even fairly easily. This could change how light mechs vs heavy mechs have to loadout for speed but the options would still be more there to choose.

The weight above the waist turning servo can affect the turn rate and also ultimately affect the walk speed. The arms the same thing. It depends on the mech and what it contains. But allowing the engine to take on more weight is the natural answer. You would just have to look into how much it can take and why. If you assume each mech has a different engine and std 190, for instance, is generic and differnt mechs have different variants, lots can be done. If they are all the same there could still be realities possibly to the mechs other aspects and maybe mouting realities or other thigs that affect if or how it gets energy or utilized heat dispation etc. they would just have to dive deeper into how the mechs should work and let natural limitation take affect. I would hope and imagine the history of these games would have specifics too work off of. But there are lots of things taht would make them muc more unique and let them play out in interesting ways.

Say the heat vision. why have it generic when you could look at how they vent and let them have hot spots and cold spots. Or hot sides and cold sides. Then there is more gameplay. And the more unique the more interesting.

Plus all weights should be constantly draining speed and versatility already shouldn't they. We already have arm movements but no consideration of weight.(they are all static numbers and not changed by configuration) and unrealistic engines that get lighter as they get bigger. It would be very simple and easy to use what is already in the game and some real formulas to let weight bog down the parts of the mech realistically instead of static numbers. This could be done with the numbers already present and not even need any of the more interesting things they could consider about mech designs in general. It is a bare bones as it can be right now. There is a lot they could do without even adding new things to the game. They can easily just do it within the confines of what values are already present and drastically improve the game.

I wouldn't be surprised if you couldn't just find the correct book or statistics somewhere and find how strong the individual servos or parts of the mech should be and add it to a calculation. I would be pretty shocked if those values have never been gone over before. Or if any values are unrealistic in any books what they should be from a descriptive sense to figure out how they should work from a real world sense.

Edited by Arugela, 31 August 2016 - 06:50 PM.


#12 Nightshade24

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,972 posts
  • LocationSolaris VII

Posted 31 August 2016 - 11:16 PM

To be honest I am not fully against this...
There are examples of mechs that are heavy/ lighter then their normal variants...

ie: Stalker 4P which is a 75 ton heavy mech despite it being a stalker variant and not a new 'mech
Then you have the Rifleman Legendkiller which was dubbed to be heavier than standard or well rumored...There's a flea at 15 tonnes i think but not sure if that's canon...

however I would rather they just add the stalker 4P and stuff like that and leave it at that instead of allowing people to turn their Locust into a 40 tonne medium mech with 4 AC 2's....

#13 Jobistober

    Rookie

  • Knight Errant
  • 7 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 01 September 2016 - 11:06 AM

It's not just a weight limitation, but space also. Every mech has a certain number of slots. Once you fill those, you're done, even if you are below max weight. You can only put so much stuff on one mech, plain and simple. If you want more stuff, you have to sacrifice in other areas like structure, armor, engine, etc. It's just part of the strategy of the game.

#14 Nightshade24

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,972 posts
  • LocationSolaris VII

Posted 02 September 2016 - 06:26 PM

View PostJobistober, on 01 September 2016 - 11:06 AM, said:

It's not just a weight limitation, but space also. Every mech has a certain number of slots. Once you fill those, you're done, even if you are below max weight. You can only put so much stuff on one mech, plain and simple. If you want more stuff, you have to sacrifice in other areas like structure, armor, engine, etc. It's just part of the strategy of the game.

You could also not sacrifice and go for a bigger engine... you can fit more DHS in there and thus open a lot more slots. That's why all my banshees run an XL 400. saves 12 slots of heatsinks.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users