

Remove Most Of The Mechlab
#21
Posted 09 March 2013 - 12:56 PM
MAKE THE GAME BALANCED IN THE FIRST PLACE! COPY TT STATS!
#22
Posted 09 March 2013 - 12:58 PM
#23
Posted 09 March 2013 - 01:04 PM
#25
Posted 09 March 2013 - 04:44 PM
0X2A, on 09 March 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:
that is 66 heat per shot.
besides the stalker manuevers like a beached whale so even if the ERPPC were viable i would still say get in close. they are slow and can't turn their heads.
#27
Posted 09 March 2013 - 09:46 PM
CloaknDagger, on 09 March 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:
MAKE THE GAME BALANCED IN THE FIRST PLACE! COPY TT STATS!
You don't bring a walrus to a dog show, and you don't bring tabletop mechanics to a shooter. Stop pretending that TT mechanics will correlate to a shooter/simulator. Consider yourself fortunate that vaguely similar weaponry and battlemechs transition over from TT to MWO. (Even this is questionable, given how badly most stock variants SUCK, and how poorly some weapons perform alongside others)
Also, medium laser boats and clan tech have a bone to pick with you; your argument is even more invalid in practice than in theory.
I don't mean to sound exceptionally bitter, but go ahead and read my signature over. If you still hold your viewpoint, then I encourage you to back it up with facts and intricate analysis. Show me equations and math that actually back up your statement, and I will gladly review them.
Edited by Xandralkus, 09 March 2013 - 10:55 PM.
#28
Posted 09 March 2013 - 10:14 PM
#29
Posted 09 March 2013 - 10:19 PM
Imo, the matches would be a lot more entertaining, and last longer, if we were limited to original payloads, or even slightly modified payloads. I also think there would be a lot more strategy and teamwork in these matches as a result.
In canon Battletech/Mechwarrior these machines were not modified as such, and only those in high-end merc units, nobles, or mechs that belonged to Solaris Champions were afforded such modifications... And even then, they didn't put 4 ER-PPC's on their Stalker, or 6 SRM 6's on a Catapult, or 9 Medium Lasers on a Hunchback, etc etc..
Don't get me wrong, I love Mechwarrior and Battletech, but these mech builds we are able to make are just ridiculous, and, in my opinion, they break the game. Sooner or later, I think this game will lose it's appeal unless Piranha finds a way to make these matches more substantial.
#30
Posted 09 March 2013 - 10:27 PM
Xaevin, on 09 March 2013 - 10:19 PM, said:
Imo, the matches would be a lot more entertaining, and last longer, if we were limited to original payloads, or even slightly modified payloads. I also think there would be a lot more strategy and teamwork in these matches as a result.
In canon Battletech/Mechwarrior these machines were not modified as such, and only those in high-end merc units, nobles, or mechs that belonged to Solaris Champions were afforded such modifications... And even then, they didn't put 4 ER-PPC's on their Stalker, or 6 SRM 6's on a Catapult, or 9 Medium Lasers on a Hunchback, etc etc..
Don't get me wrong, I love Mechwarrior and Battletech, but these mech builds we are able to make are just ridiculous, and, in my opinion, they break the game. Sooner or later, I think this game will lose it's appeal unless Piranha finds a way to make these matches more substantial.
This game would have no appeal to me if I couldn't design my own mechs.
And I have never built a splatcat or a 6 PPC stalker.
#31
Posted 09 March 2013 - 10:59 PM
zztophat, on 09 March 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:
Exactly what he said.
Removing the dice from TT fundamentally and radically changes the game, and likewise, fundamental and radical changes to the game must be made to rebalance it.
This is not a difficult idea to grasp, is it?
Now if only there were a way to echo these words, throughout the entire community. Or at least, the ones that pay attention to the state of game balance...

#32
Posted 10 March 2013 - 05:00 AM
Most Original mechdesigns where created to cover multiple roles a once(including anti aircraft/infantry/etc.making them weaker in general) which makes them extremely more fun to play then these max-gain/min-efford Mechbusters the min-maxers come up with.
I will not vote for getting rid of the mechlab, but i seriously whish for a playfield for original Battletech fans besides this mech-tune-a-zilla-heaven.
#33
Posted 10 March 2013 - 05:46 AM
None of that carries over to MechWarrior as a FPS simulator. Crippling weaknesses make for interesting tactical decisions, but having to actually pilot a machine that ultimately dies because it's ludicrously undersinked, has paper for armor, or some genius decided the ammo should be mounted in the CT is only frustrating. Meanwhile, the actual combat element is no longer automatic, introducing huge new skill elements that completely reshape the focus of the gameplay. Making everyone use designs that were gimped because they were designed for a different game with different goals is stupid.
In short, they're two completely different games, and you won't balance one by trying to turn it into the other. If you want to play TT, go download Megamek or something.
#34
Posted 10 March 2013 - 06:30 AM
kiltymonroe, on 10 March 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:
Oh. More frustrating then being unable to hit a mech that is moving faster then it i is supposed to? Or being oneshot by a 6ppc alphasstrike because armorlimitations were never designet to cope with this amount of dmg?
Why one would want place a game a certain universe and then ignore all things that are essential to it is beyond me.
A whoever-rolls-6-first-wins concept is as boring in an fps as in a tactical TT.
But again, there is absolutely no reason to have not the best of both worlds with minimal efford. All we´d need is a second league besides the modders one. It´s not taking something away it is adding something worthwhile.
#35
Posted 10 March 2013 - 09:05 AM
#36
Posted 10 March 2013 - 11:24 AM
#37
Posted 10 March 2013 - 11:28 AM
Then stock builds are no longer terrible - and boats are no longer overpowered!
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users