135 replies to this topic

[IceSerpent]

General Taskeen, on 25 February 2013 - 09:06 AM, said:

Suit yourself if you don't want longer game modes. I'm not arguing with you people when you have no idea what possibilities it would bring.

Yeah, we totally didn't have repair bases in previous MW titles and have absolutely no idea how bad the gameplay is with them around. More than that, we never ever had to put strict limit on maps with repair bases in the league play.

[Rift Hawk]

Oni Ralas, on 25 February 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

Didn't say it was. However, there are mobile repair field bases in the BT universe in addition to triage mechs in the TT game. It is not outside of canon, however implementation would be interesting. Oh, and EVE is a pure space/tech game and it has rep - which is a *huge* part of fleet warfare. It's not all fantasy.

Eve is a completely different game. Though it does have one thing in common. Whoever spams the most OP ships of the day win. Used to be Drakes and basis/scimis. Then it was Tengus and scimis. Eve really isn't a good comparison to Mechwarrior because there are a lot of other elements to be considered in that game, that aren't here. For instance, actual team work. Eve has it in plenty, MWO doesn't. Perhaps in clan wars, if it ever comes out....

[Oni Ralas]

Mercules, on 25 February 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

That was not a Mobile Field Base, that was a stationary repair bay. My statement is fact. Mobile Field Bases were in MW3 and vanished in MW4. I believe there is a reason for that and the reason was balance issues. When you can turn the mission into a series of small encounters with repairs and reloads between them you can literally design your mech differently and gain a large increase in performance over the AI opponents. It becomes hard to balance the difficulty for those that do this and those that don't.

....didn't they call it a mobile field base in the dialog? So perhaps it's a nomenclature issue here. For our context, having a stationary unit fueled by your current resource holdings that allowed a mech a small amount of R&R (at the cost of being shutdown/out of the fight for X amount of time) could be interesting on large maps. I dunno, I was just spitballing and some folks got really angry over it hehe.

[Mercules]

General Taskeen, on 25 February 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

Ever played MW:LL? It works absolutely, perfectly fine for 2 hour long matches in the context of Mech Warrioring.

No, it doesn't. I disagree. It adds durability to a mech but doesn't create a game world. What would would be needing to repair and salvage mechs and having a campaign style set of matches that linked. This would allow for "off screen" things that would take place like mech repairs.

Oni Ralas, on 25 February 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

....didn't they call it a mobile field base in the dialog? So perhaps it's a nomenclature issue here. For our context, having a stationary unit fueled by your current resource holdings that allowed a mech a small amount of R&R (at the cost of being shutdown/out of the fight for X amount of time) could be interesting on large maps. I dunno, I was just spitballing and some folks got really angry over it hehe.

Because we have had this silly argument a dozen times over. On top of that the Devs have stated they don't like the idea.

[Oni Ralas]

Imperial X, on 25 February 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

Eve is a completely different game. Though it does have one thing in common. Whoever spams the most OP ships of the day win. Used to be Drakes and basis/scimis. Then it was Tengus and scimis. Eve really isn't a good comparison to Mechwarrior because there are a lot of other elements to be considered in that game, that aren't here. For instance, actual team work. Eve has it in plenty, MWO doesn't. Perhaps in clan wars, if it ever comes out....

Trust me, I know EVE...I have spent way too many years playing that game. Blob warfare still exists (in a huge way thanks to TD) but good FC's still make or break a fleet. When spitballing on the whole rep thing, I was thinking more down the road -- when community warfare/clans are in full swing. Ultimately I just want even more layers of complexity adding to a dynamic, persistent game (which is one thing I loved about EVE). In the current 5min bash sessions, even a dedicated repair mechanic wouldn't change the game - just like you said, it's whom ever (usually) fields the most firepower at the moment.

Mercules, on 25 February 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:

Because we have had this silly argument a dozen times over. On top of that the Devs have stated they don't like the idea.

I thought the idea was still on the board for long term viability. I mean if we're going to be rocking some real, game changing events...then a match must have some deeper meaning than a 5 minute smashfest. I dunno, perhaps it's wishful thinking on my end, I should have gotten involved in this back in 2011 when I got the invite. Maybe I'd be far more jaded about the future

[Ferret Thorn]

To answere the question... Yes I would pilot a reapair or rearming mech if we had one.

If the game should have these or not wasnt the question. Personally a true support mech would be pretty cool but thats just my opinion but not the question that was asked.

But yes i would deffinately have one in my mech bay for team play!

[xxREVxx]

Escef, on 25 February 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

What it was meant to be and what it was are apparently two serperate animals. And if you wish to address a a specific post, address it. That's what the "Quote" button is for. Instead you chose to make a blanket statement targeted at everyone who disagreed with the OP.

Don't use artillery if you don't want to anger the folk caught in the splash damage.

*SIGH* I swore I would never again get caught up with one of these morons on here who are just looking for things to misconstrue so they can start an arguement. Oh well....
Seriously, dude...look at you trying to flame over nothing and looking stupid doing it.///END OF STATEMENT///

[Escef]

PoisonWolf, on 25 February 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

Seriously, dude...look at you trying to flame over nothing and looking stupid doing it.///END OF STATEMENT///

I'm not flaming you. If you can't take constructive criticism as anything but an insult I might recommend you get off the internet, you won't like it here.

[Mercules]

Oni Ralas, on 25 February 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

I thought the idea was still on the board for long term viability. I mean if we're going to be rocking some real, game changing events...then a match must have some deeper meaning than a 5 minute smashfest. I dunno, perhaps it's wishful thinking on my end, I should have gotten involved in this back in 2011 when I got the invite. Maybe I'd be far more jaded about the future

Have you played on Alpine? Lot less "smashfest" there. Light mechs really do need to run around and find out where the enemy is coming from and the team does have to respond correctly. Blobbing up and capturing the spawn points in the Conquest mode will more often than not lose you the match.

In addition we can add in repairs without having to add in "repair" vehicles, doing it in between battles and maps. We don't know what PGI has planned exactly for CW but I could see a series of matches with objectives that move one into the other where being able to make limited repairs on your mechs between matches might add a realistic touch and encourage not getting your mech pummeled.

[Merky Merc]

If maps continue to get larger and CW has us battling over extremely large distances, we're going to need some form of limited repair and definitely re-armament.

[Mercules]

Merky Merc, on 25 February 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

If maps continue to get larger and CW has us battling over extremely large distances, we're going to need some form of limited repair and definitely re-armament.

Not really... Playing smarter goes a long way.

"The Gauss Rifle is overpowered!"
"PPCs suck!"
Those two comments go away when you run out of ammo in a "long match" for your overpowered Gauss Rifle. Carrying both allows you to still snipe with the PPCs at ranges where you are likely to miss but then add in the Gauss when you have good shots or closer up where all PPCs might get hurt by overheating too quickly. That would be why most cannon mechs didn't boat.

[Escef]

Merky Merc, on 25 February 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

If maps continue to get larger and CW has us battling over extremely large distances, we're going to need some form of limited repair and definitely re-armament.

I got in the habit of maxing my armor protection back in table top. On heavies I avoid XL engines, max the armor to the practical limit (I won't use half a ton to cover 6 points of armor), and pack adequate ammo. In smaller engagements, fast, lightly armored mechs packing the bare minimum of ammo work. On larger maps, especially with lager numbers of mechs, such designs need much more discipline and experience to pilot to victory.

Just as an example, I see heavies and mediums surviving better on Alpine than I do lights and assaults. Perhaps this is only my experience, though.

[Merky Merc]

Mercules, on 25 February 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

Not really... Playing smarter goes a long way.

If it's a 40 minute battle for planet X, then yes you're going to need to be able to re-arm. Is this not a canonical feature for those who argue using such examples? The IS uses supply lines and FOBs to bolt on new sheets of armor and load up more ammo, if the Clans were fighting in these battles as well they would not have access to such things I suspect.

[Oni Ralas]

Mercules, on 25 February 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

Have you played on Alpine? Lot less "smashfest" there. Light mechs really do need to run around and find out where the enemy is coming from and the team does have to respond correctly. Blobbing up and capturing the spawn points in the Conquest mode will more often than not lose you the match.

I have, and I get all giddy when it pops and I have one of my sniper mediums selected. I let out a long sigh if I happen to have a brawler though.

I really like Alpine, just wish they'd increase the capture times to give a bit more chance of engagement if you don't have a speedy team.

[StalaggtIKE]

I wish people that wanted this game to be just another fps/mmo with mechs would just die leave.

[Mercules]

Merky Merc, on 25 February 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

If it's a 40 minute battle for planet X, then yes you're going to need to be able to re-arm. Is this not a canonical feature for those who argue using such examples? The IS uses supply lines and FOBs to bolt on new sheets of armor and load up more ammo, if the Clans were fighting in these battles as well they would not have access to such things I suspect.

This would be why most cannon mechs carry energy weapons as well as ammo based. The ammo based weapons have unique values to them compared to Energy weapons, specifically high burst and short term DPS. An all ammo based mech that is not used as Fire Support near the back lines is usually frowned upon. You know... like a CPLT-A1 with all SRMs.

You might be able to reload if you sat out a 40 minute battle,but you wouldn't have enough time to repair. Note, if you sat out the whole battle. Handle that crap off screen.

[Tarman]

Mercules, on 25 February 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

Have you played on Alpine? Lot less "smashfest" there. Light mechs really do need to run around and find out where the enemy is coming from and the team does have to respond correctly. Blobbing up and capturing the spawn points in the Conquest mode will more often than not lose you the match.

In addition we can add in repairs without having to add in "repair" vehicles, doing it in between battles and maps. We don't know what PGI has planned exactly for CW but I could see a series of matches with objectives that move one into the other where being able to make limited repairs on your mechs between matches might add a realistic touch and encourage not getting your mech pummeled.

I would MUCH rather have a campaign-style introduction of this concept, rather than an on-the-field implementation. IDW a Ratchetmech. Maybe if he transformed. But only because it'd be cool to be a Transformer, not because it would add any kind of real depth to a battle that lasts less than 20 minutes. Personally I think that's a ridiculous timeframe for critical vehicle repair. If we had some kind of continuous warzone then maybe, but we aren't getting any persistent world combat any time soon I'd imagine.

[IceSerpent]

Mercules, on 25 February 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

An all ammo based mech that is not used as Fire Support near the back lines is usually frowned upon. You know... like a CPLT-A1 with all SRMs.

King Crab and Arctic Wolf would like to have a word with you...

[xxREVxx]

Merky Merc, on 25 February 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

If it's a 40 minute battle for planet X, then yes you're going to need to be able to re-arm. Is this not a canonical feature for those who argue using such examples? The IS uses supply lines and FOBs to bolt on new sheets of armor and load up more ammo, if the Clans were fighting in these battles as well they would not have access to such things I suspect.

Initially during the clan invasion logistical support was quite efficient as they assimilated every world conquored and put that worlds resources to work for them. Most clans would not obliterate those worlds nor their infracture instead making great efforts to quickly put the local populaces back to work with better work conditions and production.

So different game modes for different game folks.
People can have:
-their DM tailored gameplay,
-CW/mission based (certainly should have tertiary targets i.e., repair/rearm bays, comm arrays, power generators, factories etc

[Skylarr]

HQ to Recon One. What is you situation. Over.

Recon One to HQ. We found and hit their Forward Repair Facility. An Atlas, Awesome, Catapult and a Hunchback were vaporized in the explosion. Several other Mech received heavy Damage. Lost Recon Four on the way in. We have a lance of Light Mech hot on our tail. Over.

HQ to Recon One. Roger that. Drag them through B5 we have a surprise for them set up. Over.

Recon One to HQ. Roger that. Be there 60 seconds. Over.