119 replies to this topic

[BerryChunks]

Don't you guys see the value of people being limited? instead of thinking about how it will make the game more fair and interesting, everyone wants to bicker about how they won't be able to make "X munchkin'd setup" for themselves.

It's like if people complained that they cant cast fireballs on their warrior or have Elder Scrolls level customization. The basis of the TT game's balance relied on mechs being incapable of being MW3 level customized. MW3 was solely to please casuals. Every time there's an argument against adhering to the TT rules, its always because "I want to build the perfect mech I had from mechwarrior(2-3-4)".

there's no point or use for a lot of mechs if full customization is allowed.
Even with some form of hardpoint modular customization, a lot of mechs will still stand out as superior. These mechs are going to be the ones with the most free tonnage and best tonnage free ratio to tonnage total.

Look at MW4. who used the Fafnir, ever?

The game's design is a case where the logic of it (weapon ports conform to the type of weapon fired out of it) falls in line with the game balance. Breaking the logic breaks the game balance too.

[Aegis Kleais]

So let me get this straight.

MWO ML is using CRITICAL SLOTS rather than space. Since each weapon/equipment has an amount of X slots used, it takes up those slots on any given hardpoint.

Things like actuators and the like (which CANNOT be removed), should not even show up. Yeah, they take up space, but just show the remaining space and don't bother listing them; it's pointless if you can't do a thing with them.

Now INTERNALS. That's something that can change the remaining critical space. If they choose Standard Internals, there would be a gray block taking up X space, but if they chose Endo Steel, it would take up 2X the space (but free up tonnage).

Endo would allow you to use less-critical-slot but higher tonnage/slot weapons/equipment. But less of it per hardpoint.

Do I have this right so far?

[SMDMadCow]

Mostly, think of it this way - critical slots represent the amount of space available in a mech. Equipment and weapons take up (X) amount of space in the mechs chassis (citical slots)
Endo steel is light, but bulky - its takes up more space in the mech (critical slots) but lightens your mechs total weight. It would actually have no effect on hardpoints unless it takes up the space that the hardpoint would also be trying to use.
Technically, you should be able to remove the lower arm actuators. It saddens me to have to use a watered down mech lab restricted by hardpoints.

[Banshee Bullet]

osito, on 26 February 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

not sure how much of a mechlab will be in game. Since they will have variant of the different mechs they may not allow full customization. They my allow some tweaking to a design but i don't think it will be full customization.

I really really hope you're wrong. I want to be able to use whatever combo of weapons I want (within the confines of hard points, tonnage, etc.). I think that's a huge part of the game. I should only be able to guess at your loadout in battle. I know your mech has such and such hard points available but not what you put there.

[Stone Profit]

I would have liked if I could replace a large laser with a PPC whic is done repeatedly in canon, as well as energy weapons and ballistics be able to use the same slots (PPC instead of an AC/5), but with the variants I hope Ill still get to have all my favorite alt configurations such as the Centurion with a large and small laser instead of the AC/10. All in all, a fair and even compromise in my opinion.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Munchkins will be munchkins. From their point of view they play the game to win therefore it makes sense to optimise your mech to the maximum allowed. At the moment the game is looking like a modified version of MW4 and therefore will go the same way with only a few optimum mechs in use. The role play of Role Warfare will fall before the exigencies of mech combat. How it pans out will depend on the matchmaker. Cost won't be a limiting factor as people will pay whatever is necessary for optimisation if it means the difference between winning and loosing.

[Javelin156]

Well i just read Dev Blog 6. I honestly have no idea what the dev team is thinking. How hard is it to just copy the rules from the battletech compendium into a pc gaming environment? Oldschool Mechwarrior 2 and 3 adapted it just fine. I would take mechwarrior 4's mechlab over what was explained in dev blog 6.

I also don't know if this is true, but i keep seeing that there is only going to be 12 - 25 mechs to choose from when this game launches. You have to be kidding me. You have hundreds of mechs not to mention all the possibilities counting variants. Your telling me every planet is only going to field Locusts or Ravens for light mechs. LOL.

I see a game rushing to get out, a game that needs to sit back for at least a year or more and think up a good game system. Luckily its free to play because i would never pay anything to buy this out of the box.

Hey what is canon btw, i keep seeing that reference everywhere.

Edited by Javelin156, 05 April 2012 - 09:00 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

Stone Profit, on 05 April 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:

I would have liked if I could replace a large laser with a PPC which is done repeatedly in canon

That assumes the LL was placed in a Hard Point with 3 Criticals thus leaving one unused (as the PPC requires 3 Critical slots versus the LL's 2).

Seeing as we have not actually seen the Crit #'s associated with the Hard Point layouts, there may in fact be such a Hard Point -> Critical Space availability.

That does not mean they won't stick to a Beam for Beam, Ballistic for Ballistic etc etc restriction (the way it should be imho) but perhaps a mounted LL on some Variant may indeed have a Free unused Critical that simply was not utilized. (speculation ofc)

Edited by MaddMaxx, 05 April 2012 - 09:50 AM.

[Pht]

Aegis Kleais™, on 04 April 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

Things like actuators and the like (which CANNOT be removed), should not even show up. Yeah, they take up space, but just show the remaining space and don't bother listing them; it's pointless if you can't do a thing with them.

Aegis, there is a very good reason to list out all of the things you can't mess with; it informs people of how their mechs are laid out; which is important information to have on a battlefield.


If you know you lost a shoulder actutator but otherwise having no idea where it actually is and how big it is ... you see?


Besides which, it's not skin off of anybody's nose to have it be visible.

Quote

Now INTERNALS. That's something that can change the remaining critical space. If they choose Standard Internals, there would be a gray block taking up X space, but if they chose Endo Steel, it would take up 2X the space (but free up tonnage).

They should not allow people to change the skeleton of the 'mechs.

Yes, it is possible, but only at the obscene "I have access to a factory and the influence and c-bills to pull it off" level ... either that or if you're a solaris tech wizard (the top of the top of the top of the top of the people customizing 'mechs).

Now, mechs that do have endo-steel internals do use of some of their internal spaces to house those bones (and that's all internals are - the endo-skeletal bones that support the 'mech).

Javelin156, on 05 April 2012 - 08:53 AM, said:

Well i just read Dev Blog 6. I honestly have no idea what the dev team is thinking. How hard is it to just copy the rules from the battletech compendium into a pc gaming environment? Oldschool Mechwarrior 2 and 3 adapted it just fine. I would take mechwarrior 4's mechlab over what was explained in dev blog 6.

MW2 and 3 did not adapt it just fine. They didn't adapt it at all, and the conseqence was to turn all 'mechs into walking gunbags that only differed by weight, visuals, and 3dmodel volume. It was horrible for anything other than stock play. Where there's no GM to say "NO, BECAUSE I SAID SO!" there must be a set of restrictions.

[Aegis Kleais]

Pht, on 05 April 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

Aegis, there is a very good reason to list out all of the things you can't mess with; it informs people of how their mechs are laid out; which is important information to have on a battlefield.


If you know you lost a shoulder actutator but otherwise having no idea where it actually is and how big it is ... you see?


Besides which, it's not skin off of anybody's nose to have it be visible.

I don't agree. If there's nothing I can do with the UI, it's valuable and wasted space for it to be in there. I cannot remove it, I cannot modify it. It basically, unlike the modifications I CAN do to a Mech, is a piece of static information, and does not need to be listed. If a hardpoint has 10 slots, just show the available space. Standard vs. Endo Steel should be shown since it can dynamically change depending on which you're using, and thus change the space you have left to customize in.

[Pht]

Aegis Kleais™, on 05 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

I don't agree. If there's nothing I can do with the UI, it's valuable and wasted space for it to be in there. I cannot remove it, I cannot modify it. It basically, unlike the modifications I CAN do to a Mech, is a piece of static information, and does not need to be listed. If a hardpoint has 10 slots, just show the available space. Standard vs. Endo Steel should be shown since it can dynamically change depending on which you're using, and thus change the space you have left to customize in.

Valuable for what? A blank space? Because that's all they'd put there, and it would take up the same visual space.

And it does give you useful information, which I pointed out. Not everyone playing MWO will "know" the internal layout of a 'mech.

[Javelin156]

Pht, on 05 April 2012 - 09:55 AM, said:

Aegis, there is a very good reason to list out all of the things you can't mess with; it informs people of how their mechs are laid out; which is important information to have on a battlefield.


If you know you lost a shoulder actutator but otherwise having no idea where it actually is and how big it is ... you see?


Besides which, it's not skin off of anybody's nose to have it be visible.



They should not allow people to change the skeleton of the 'mechs.

Yes, it is possible, but only at the obscene "I have access to a factory and the influence and c-bills to pull it off" level ... either that or if you're a solaris tech wizard (the top of the top of the top of the top of the people customizing 'mechs).

Now, mechs that do have endo-steel internals do use of some of their internal spaces to house those bones (and that's all internals are - the endo-skeletal bones that support the 'mech).



MW2 and 3 did not adapt it just fine. They didn't adapt it at all, and the conseqence was to turn all 'mechs into walking gunbags that only differed by weight, visuals, and 3dmodel volume. It was horrible for anything other than stock play. Where there's no GM to say "NO, BECAUSE I SAID SO!" there must be a set of restrictions.

Its not mechwarrior then. Mechwarrior 2 and 3 did adapt it amazingly. You know why? Because they followed the rules almost to the word from the battletech compendium.

The rules you want are not going to stop people from using crazy mechs. There are variants in game that are just so rediculous and to not have them would make for a very boring game. You have the best restriction in the game. C Bills.

I wanna hear your perfect take on what the game should be like???? Sounds like you only want stock mechs running around. BORINGGGGGGG. This is an MMO remember.

[Aegis Kleais]

Pht, on 05 April 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:

Valuable for what? A blank space? Because that's all they'd put there, and it would take up the same visual space.

And it does give you useful information, which I pointed out. Not everyone playing MWO will "know" the internal layout of a 'mech.

Not everyone CARES about what's there. You're too focused on wanting the lab to be just like all other labs HAVE been. Many of the labs were easily designed by developers who (no disrespect intended) can't design worth garbage. They are magicians with code, but don't understand the basic concepts of design.

When I'm in the lab, I'm here to customize my Mech. Since I cannot customize actuators, there's absolutely no logic in having it show up in the lab.

[Garth Erlam]

Javelin156, on 05 April 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

Its not mechwarrior then. Mechwarrior 2 and 3 did adapt it amazingly. You know why? Because they followed the rules almost to the word from the battletech compendium. The rules you want are not going to stop people from using crazy mechs. There are variants in game that are just so rediculous and to not have them would make for a very boring game. You have the best restriction in the game. C Bills. I wanna hear your perfect take on what the game should be like???? Sounds like you only want stock mechs running around. BORINGGGGGGG. This is an MMO remember.

MechWarrior 2/3's Mechlab in no way 'followed the rules almost to the word' from BattleTech - they completely disregarded it (for the most part.)

You can argue you want the 2/3 system, but the idea that it's how BattleTech worked is flat-out untrue.

[wwiiogre]

Yes you can customize actuators. In TT they served a purpose in melee mostly. You got penalties for not having them when trying to make a melee attack. In advanced rules you could use your hand actuator for different things like carrying things, dragging mechs, picking up a mech arm and beating your enemy with it and for climbing up vertical surfaces that normally couldn't be navigated without jump jets. You could remove actuators to free up critical slots to fit larger weapons in the area.

So without melee in, and without any reason to have hands, there really is no reason to list actuators unless they do provide a bonus somehow or someway. Otherwise just remove them completely and free up critical spots. So depending on where the Dev's want to go in the future, they may currently be listed cause at launch they have no purpose but possibly they will in the future.

chris

[Javelin156]

Garth Erlam, on 05 April 2012 - 10:12 AM, said:

MechWarrior 2/3's Mechlab in no way 'followed the rules almost to the word' from BattleTech - they completely disregarded it (for the most part.)

You can argue you want the 2/3 system, but the idea that it's how BattleTech worked is flat-out untrue.

You have no idea what your talking about. I could take the design, build it in my head using the rules from the battletech compendium and take that same exact design into the pc game. It followed everything completly by the book.

I want them to follow rules. I dont want some representation of what the devs think mechwarrior/battletech should be. You have the rule book and the lore. Its not hard to convert the rules to the pc. Its all layed out for you. Its iddiot proof. But yet they want to change the game like they did in mechwarrior 4, AGAIN. I am going to laugh when this game fails. Sounds like its just going to be a fps shooter.

I dont see what the point will be if i cant customize my mech. Its like playing WoW with no gear upgrades. Boring city.

Edited by Javelin156, 05 April 2012 - 10:36 AM.

[Tronchaser]

Javelin156, on 05 April 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

You have no idea what your talking about. I could take the design, build it in my head using the rules from the battletech compendium and take that same exact design into the pc game. It followed everything completly by the book.

I want them to follow rules. I dont want some representation of what the devs think mechwarrior/battletech should be. You have the rule book and the lore. Its not hard to convert the rules to the pc. Its all layed out for you. Its iddiot proof. But yet they want to change the game like they did in mechwarrior 4, AGAIN. I am going to laugh when this game fails. Sounds like its just going to be a fps shooter.

I dont see what the point will be if i cant customize my mech. Its like playing WoW with no gear upgrades. Boring city.

Guess what, you're going to get the representation the devs give you and you will play it, or you won't. If I remember correctly, MPBT3025 was stock only, and I, along with a crapton of other people, played it till the wheels fell off and they pulled the plug. Just because stock is boring for YOU, that doesn't mean the rest of us didn't enjoy it. If this game isn't for you, then please move along and stop trolling.

[Javelin156]

Tronchaser, on 05 April 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

Guess what, you're going to get the representation the devs give you and you will play it, or you won't. If I remember correctly, MPBT3025 was stock only, and I, along with a crapton of other people, played it till the wheels fell off and they pulled the plug. Just because stock is boring for YOU, that doesn't mean the rest of us didn't enjoy it. If this game isn't for you, then please move along and stop trolling.

Like i said you have no idea what your talking about. This will fail if it doesnt change. Like i said before its an MMO. There isnt really going to be a point to play without customization.

I wont play it most likely. Ill just watch as it fails.

Edited by Javelin156, 05 April 2012 - 11:17 AM.

[CapperDeluxe]

Javelin156, on 05 April 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

You have no idea what your talking about. I could take the design, build it in my head using the rules from the battletech compendium and take that same exact design into the pc game. It followed everything completly by the book.

I want them to follow rules. I dont want some representation of what the devs think mechwarrior/battletech should be. You have the rule book and the lore. Its not hard to convert the rules to the pc. Its all layed out for you. Its iddiot proof. But yet they want to change the game like they did in mechwarrior 4, AGAIN. I am going to laugh when this game fails. Sounds like its just going to be a fps shooter.

I dont see what the point will be if i cant customize my mech. Its like playing WoW with no gear upgrades. Boring city.

Somewhat limited customization is not "no customization". There will still likely be hundreds of thousands of different possibilities of configuration with a single mech, just not infinite.

Mechwarrior 4 failed because of terrible gameplay and weapon balance, I think theoretically its MechLab was quite innovative but didn't matter because when you took the config in-game things that should have worked well didn't (for instance medium lasers shouldn't have been the joke they were).

In the tabletop, even though you could rightly create your own mech from the ground up using their record sheets, according to the lore this kind of thing just didn't happen. You had set mechs that were manufactured, and some limited customizations based on those, but it was far from a free form customization that you saw in MW2/3.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 05 April 2012 - 11:17 AM.

[GDL Irishwarrior]

Javelin156, on 05 April 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

You have no idea what your talking about. I could take the design, build it in my head using the rules from the battletech compendium and take that same exact design into the pc game. It followed everything completly by the book.

I want them to follow rules. I dont want some representation of what the devs think mechwarrior/battletech should be. You have the rule book and the lore. Its not hard to convert the rules to the pc. Its all layed out for you. Its iddiot proof. But yet they want to change the game like they did in mechwarrior 4, AGAIN. I am going to laugh when this game fails. Sounds like its just going to be a fps shooter.

I dont see what the point will be if i cant customize my mech. Its like playing WoW with no gear upgrades. Boring city.

MechWarriors 2 and 3 did NOT use the rulebook rules for customizing a 'Mech. They used the rules for going to the factory and building an entirely new 'Mech from scratch.
Now, granted, TO A POINT, the 2/3 system was similar to what OmniMechs use, but there were still significant differences (being able to add/remove armor, being able to change engine size, being able to change internal structure/engine/armor/heat sink type, being able to remove weapons the rulebook says are fixed and UNABLE to be removed, and so on). The "Mechlab" was, instead, a magical, mobile 'Mech factory.