Jump to content

Ask The Devs 32!


390 replies to this topic

#1 miSs

    Former CM

  • Staff
  • 1556 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • YouTube: Link
  • LocationMontreal, Canada.

Posted 12 February 2013 - 08:58 AM

Here we go again!

You have until this Friday, February 15th, to ask your questions! This is your chance to get inside the heads of the Dev team as they work hard at their craft.

We're glad you enjoyed last week's answers and we're looking to reading your questions this week!

Remember the guideline rules from Bryan:

View PostBryan Ekman, on 22 January 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

Here's some rules:
  • Monday - Question thread created.
  • Friday - Thread closed.
  • Following Friday - Answer posted.
  • Please write short to the point questions, avoid long paragraphs.
  • Please do not quote another persons question and use as your own. Questions are not answered by popularity.
  • No discussions, replies, etc.
Questions or people we will not answer:
  • Leading questions.
  • Questions based on personal opinion.
  • From people with a warning status.
  • If the question has been answered already.
  • Questions about why we didn’t adhere to TT rules.


#2 Butane9000

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 2644 posts
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:10 AM

Where is Battlemech #20?

#3 Silpher K

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 82 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:24 AM

any news or update on DX11? even if it's only a tentative date, or time frame? official SLI/Crossfire support/fix?

#4 RaNDoMPReCiSioN

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 123 posts
  • LocationThat tiny blue glow in the distance WATCHING YOU

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:25 AM

I have a question relating to the potetially upcoming EU founders programme. If and when you guys decide it will happen, will it also be possible to add in a gifting option?

The reason I ask is because I've already distributed some founders packs to members of my own gaming community (part of a small contest I ran,) which relied on a lot of trust on the pilot's part i.e. divulging pilot name and password so I can buy the required package for them. It would be great if there was a more fluent and non-intrusive method to do this. Surely you can see it's going to be good for the game and the business.

#5 intothefray

    Rookie

  • Legendary Founder
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 6 posts
  • LocationParis, TX

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:26 AM

Is there every going to be a match type where you lose your mech or components that are destroyed?

I'd love to see something a little more high risk and somewhat of a money sink (optional of course).

#6 Sedant

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 209 posts
  • LocationWinnipeg, Manitoba

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:28 AM

Can we get the next mech announcement please? Need another assault to keep me in suspense, thanks.

Edited by Sedant, 12 February 2013 - 09:37 AM.


#7 Thontor

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 6884 posts
  • LocationChicago

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:32 AM

1- How do you plan to implement the arm reticle for the HGN-733c when both arms have weapons but one arm has a lower arm actuator and the other does not?

2- What is your reasoning for not considering a system like a certain numbers of "weapon type" specific critical slots within a component, in addition to the current hardpoint system, to make it easier for you to achieve your goal of keeping each mech and variant unique

Edited by Thontor, 12 February 2013 - 11:16 AM.


#8 Starburster

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 92 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:37 AM

Are there any plans to start adding equipment slots to every mech chassis for any non-weapon piece of gear such as BAP, ECM, Command Console, etc... as you did with AMS?

It would give some of us that like to target areas to cripple stuff a better option then just guessing as well as make players choose if they really want that gear in that slot or have the crit space open. Also it might be nice to free up some weapon slots being used for TAG and NARC ;)

Edited by Starburster, 12 February 2013 - 09:39 AM.


#9 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • LocationŚwinoujście, Poland

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:38 AM

Is this the post mentioned here:

View PostBryan Ekman, on 22 January 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

Q: [insert question about ECM]
A: There are a lot of personal opinions about how ECM should work. ECM is currently under review and will undergo minor tweaks along with additions to help counter/disrupt the ECM effects. We are prepping a Command Chair post with details soon.

?
If not, where is it?

Edited by Krzysztof z Bagien, 12 February 2013 - 09:39 AM.


#10 Novawrecker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:41 AM

1) What are the odds of seeing re/un-seen mechs for certain factions? (example: Akuma for DCMS, and others similar for other factions). How would they be implemented (another example, faction grinding till earning enough merit)?
--1a) Hatamoto Hero mech? (c'mon, you know you wanna ;) )

2) How much stuff can you stuff in your Stuffie when your Stuffie stuffed enough stuff? (had to ask :P)

Edited by Novawrecker, 12 February 2013 - 09:49 AM.


#11 Odanan

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 3705 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:42 AM

View PostThontor, on 12 February 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

1- How do you plan to implement the arm reticle for the HGN-733c when both arms have weapons but one arm has a lower arm actuator and the other does not?


This. ^

#12 Thontor

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 6884 posts
  • LocationChicago

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:43 AM

Will there be some kind of modifier to our Elo rating for when we are grouped vs launching solo?

I only ask because I do both, and I would rather not have my Elo rating be high from playing with a group over voice comms, then launch solo without that advantage against people with higher ratings than I would have had if I hadn't played with a group.

#13 Monsoon

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 1580 posts
  • LocationToronto, On aka Kathil

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:44 AM

Q: Will there there be options to customize Bitchin' Betty?

Q: Will the volume for certain messages be increased to provide a sense of urgency/importance? (My hearing isn't great and is drawn to the loudest sounds. So in the middle of combat, I rarely ever hear a message like 'Overheat Imminent'.)

Edited by Monsoon, 12 February 2013 - 09:57 AM.


#14 Voidsinger

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 1317 posts
  • LocationAstral Space

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:46 AM

Information Warfare

Is the Beagle Active Probe for all intensive purposes dead technology for MWO? It is a minor extender of radar, but modules get better results. One would think that 1.5 tons of sensor suite, and associated processors tied into the Targeting and Tracking Systems would offer some benefits. Given that the detection of powered down mechs would require potent passive sensors, is it more than just an "active" probe?

Will we ever see proper sensory integration. It just seems like MWO is completely radar dependent for targeting. Given fighter aircraft are already hunting in infrared due to low radar observability, why are mechs limited to a jammable limited angle targeting system?

Just what terminal phase seeking systems are used on the missiles? (Silouhette, IR, Semi-active radar, laser)?

Are there any plans to open up ECM access to other mechs? Given there are currently two ECM beasts dominating mech choices (Atlas D-DC and Raven 3L), are other mechs being considered?

#15 Odanan

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 3705 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:55 AM

I know you will be adding quirks to some variants in order to balance them, but I have some questions:
  • Could you give the Stalker STK-3H one more module?
  • Could you give the Stalker STK-4N one more energy hardpoint? (as giving one more module would be too much)
  • Why isn't the Spider SDR-5V (the weaker variant) the one with ECM?
  • Why has the Raven RVN-3L (the one with ECM) more modules than the other Ravens? Shouldn't it have less modules?
  • Why has the Atlas AS7-D-DC (the one with Command Console and ECM capability) more modules than the other Atlases? Shouldn't it have less modules?
And last but not least:
  • Please don't make us wait too much for the mech #20 concept art, would you? (holding the suspense too long might have the effect of making us lose the interest all together)
PS: It would be a good mechanic if the Command Console counters ECM. (and more mechs could mount it)

PPS: there are some missing variants that could be added to the game: Commando COM-1C, Hunchback HBK-4N, our beloved (or not) Centurion CN9-AH and the Dragon DRG-1G (which is a Dragon variant itself - not a new mech - even if called "Grand"). That's easy new content, wouldn't you agree?

Edited by Odanan, 13 February 2013 - 09:03 AM.


#16 Thontor

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 6884 posts
  • LocationChicago

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:57 AM

Has there been any progress on increasing the rate at which mechs and maps are introduced into the live game, either by streamlining the process or hiring more people?

#17 Voidsinger

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 1317 posts
  • LocationAstral Space

Posted 12 February 2013 - 10:07 AM

The Rewards System

Are there any plans to overhaul the rewards system to actually reward those who contribute towards the stated outcome of the mission, rather than just those who participate in combat?

In Assault, there is a 75XP bonus for being part of Capturing the target base, no C-Bills
In Conquest, all resources and the bonus XP for a resource win are divided equally among the entire team, no reward for captures.

Salvage is divided up based on damage.
There are bonus C-bills for each point of damage you do.
There is XP for kills/kill assists (far higher than the mission objectives).

In fact, it is more profitable to ignore the mission entirely, and focus exclusively on the combat. You can earn more C-bills and XP for a better combat performance on a loss, than on focussing on the objective and winning. Indeed, this is a rising trend in Conquest. Moreso if someone on your team is putting their efforts towards the mission objective, which you share in for zero effort on your part.

Do you intend to change this approach, which favours heavier mechs (many drops I have been in average close to 50% assault mechs). There is no longer any repair and rearm costs, why reward so unequally?

#18 Tvae

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 200 posts
  • LocationEverfree

Posted 12 February 2013 - 10:09 AM

The Grand Dragon. Is there a chance we'll see it? After all, it's essentially a variant of the regular Dragon, just with a fancier title...

Edited by Tvae, 14 February 2013 - 04:17 AM.


#19 Suprentus

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 619 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 12 February 2013 - 10:26 AM

View PostThontor, on 12 February 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

1- How do you plan to implement the arm reticle for the HGN-733c when both arms have weapons but one arm has a lower arm actuator and the other does not?


I'd guess the right arm would just use the torso reticule.

#20 Mackman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 12 February 2013 - 10:27 AM

How do the Devs feel about the "min-maxing" or "boating" that is the somewhat-inevitable result of competitive play (as opposed to the more "balanced for all ranges of engagement" style that many of the stock mechs share)? Is it viewed as:

A. Desirable?

B. Undesirable but an unfortunate necessity?

C. Undesirable, and will be mitigated somehow?

(Tried to phrase the question as neutrally as I could).





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users