67 replies to this topic

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Max Liao, on 04 June 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

BV is a crutch. I use it only for tournaments. In home games (TT or MegaMech) we usually play by tonnage or weight classes. (e.g. 2 Lances, one light the other 2 med/2 hvy.)

The balance factor with the ACs comes with money. Lasers and PPCs cost a lot more than ballistic weapons. So, if the game does a good job of keeping us broke then you'll see more ACs/SRMs. If not, it'll be all PPCs and lasers.

I guess another advantage of missiles would be if indirect fire were to be implemented. That would be fun. It still doesn't help the poor AC though.

They do cost, ONCE!!! A full LRM loadout costs 30,000 C-Bills, while a full SRM loadout costs 27,000 C-Bills, AC can get get up to 20,000 C-Bills. While your employers will usually cover a good chunk of the cost, it is rarely a 100% repair/replacement contract. So if they do a good job at making us keep track of our equipment then ammo weapons should have some recurring cost.

Edited by zuul88, 04 June 2012 - 02:17 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Ammo will be a continueing on cost for all ballistic and missile weapons not needed for energy weapons, along with the problems of ammo explosions. The only way to balance this out would be to make heat far more important than in previous games. Most people when looking at customising mechs will, based off previous games probably set them up to run a bit hot. If mechs have heat problems unless then run heat neutral or even have to run cool then it would make a big difference, even with the availability of crit hungry double heat sinks.
I am sure that PGI are aware of the potential pitfalls of customisation -the many thread here about it would ensure that. It will be one of the things that they can get information on during closed Beta.

[DrM3CH]

I would love to comment - but until we see what they have actually done to the Mechlab - I am more interested in the game mechanics.

[Kanatta Jing]

Do you remember hanging out on the D&D forums right before 4th edition when people where certain it was impossible for the Wizard not to be above the Fighter?

People started long over wrought threads about how Wizards would always be better. How a class that broke the laws of physics would by definition be better then a class that didn't.

And then 4th edition finally came out and Wizards were irredeemably underpowered to the point of unplayability and the Fighter was the unquestioned lord of the battlefield?

Somehow watching people cry out that Lasers are inherently better then Ballistics due to there non reliance on Ammo reminds me of that time.

[DDM PLAGUE]

OMG are we talking about this again? A boat is only good for what its set up to do, and it is easy to kill with a mechs designed to kill said boat. As far as mech loadout, why for gods sake would you take a lance of Mechs into battle with a load out that was not designed for the mission, And if you are going into the fray alone , it dosnt matter what you drive , you are going to die.
Some weapons are allways going to be better than others, & they will cost more to use & repair. but that dosnt mean they are better for the job at hand.
You dont put short ranged weapons on a long range mech or Long range on a brawler. You build a lance to do the job & support eachother., different Mechs , different loadouts. for thier role in the lance.. & a Lances primary goal is to defeat the enemy & complete thier objective.
I hope there is no endgame, the only endgame a Mech pilot needs is to be the best he can be to support his unit.
The reason you dont see a lot of stock Mechs in game is simple, they generally arnt loaded out to do any 1 thing well, but alot of things badly.
As far as Mech4, It was agreat game particularly for league play, All the Mech games were great,. There is no "bad" Mech game for any Mech Pilot
For god sakes quit calling for the Nerf button the gane isnt even out yet.

Edited by DDM PLAGUE, 04 June 2012 - 03:25 AM.

[Max Liao]

DDM PLAGUE, on 04 June 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

... why for gods sake would you take a lance of Mechs into battle with a load out that was not designed for the mission ...

The reason you dont see a lot of stock Mechs in game is simple, they generally arnt loaded out to do any 1 thing well, but alot of things badly.

For god sakes quit calling for the Nerf button the gane isnt even out yet.

I'm getting a lot of work out of this one cut/paste ...


In BattleTech your 'Mech is assigned to you by the government, or it's a family hereditary item. While no Urbanmech would be assigned to a field recon lance, an Urbie pilot could find himself out in rear guard if his unit (Lance or Company) was assigned to that. So it is VERY possible, and well within canon to have a mech not so suited to the terrain - a fire support lance in a city, a recon lance running across open terrain, etc.

You go where you're assigned by your military superiors. And no, just like real war, they don't always give you the perfect tool for the job.

[GhostsofWar]

Kanatta Jing, on 04 June 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

Well every other MMO re balances the classes every now and then so that different things are over powered at different times.

Unless your playing WoT in which case Everything Russian is Over Powered and every other tank just has to suck it up

[chainedbeast]

Black Dragon EnDrakus, on 04 June 2012 - 01:32 AM, said:

I like this explaination, another thing to keep in mind, heavy weapons loads in mech arms are actually very vulnerable becuase the arms are easy to damage or destroy with broadside attacks, and they have much less armor than the torso, so I could disarm a Dragon's arm mounted AC 10 easier than I could a Hunchie's torso mounted AC 5

This is a good analogy of the weapon systems. In the table top it is harder to get to a torso unless you go through an arm first. Tonnage is the best way to do it. Wtih modifications it is up to players t be challenging enough. The other impact is the amount of c-bills that are available for upgrades. BV was a hard thing to do at times and I just wonder how harder it will be to match players up for games.

[Draxern]

Well customization with out consequences will create a game which only slighthly resembles mechwarrior. Maybe change the name to custom robot wars or something.But i feel the mech needs to resemble its stock config. HOPEFULLY they have addressed this already. Allowing player to improve but not fully recreate a design.

[UnLimiTeD]

We simply can't tell how the game will work out yet.
We know Lasers are semi-continuous beams now, that require tracking a target for a short while and produce rather massive heating.
It will be hard to explain to players why a ballistic weapon like a Gauss Rifle should have a minimum range.
Technological progress will have to be implemented into the game without making old things immediately worthless, despite that normally being the case.
There's so many challenges for development, but unless we think the world is doomed and they will completely fail, I think a bit of trust in the developers is justified.

And NO balancing by Economy; as long as the economy can be influenced by outside payment.
If weapons where only available by means of C-Bills, then this would be, indeed, fine.

[StarSlayer40]

I'm fine with playing either basic models, basic models with a few tweaks, or my own custom vehicle. About the "boating" I believe that the entire thing where everybody hides behind hills or walls with jump jets and a load of heavier direct fire weapons won't be such a problem in MWO as MW4. This is primarily because of how it appears that indirect fire weapons will be able to fire OVER said hill or wall. Not a perfect safeguard, but I think it should help avoid the boring type of game play, where everywhere you go, every fight is the same. The other thing is (as shown in the assault 'mech breakdown) if you have say, an LRM 10, SRM 6, 2 medium lasers, and an AC2 or AC5, you now have one or two ballistic weapons which can work at any range so long as you have direct visual, a long range indirect fire weapon, a short range direct fire missile, and then two short/medium range direct fire weapons. This allows you to occasionally help friendlies a ways off with that LRM, or maybe soften up your opponent(s)'s back up with it. meanwhile, you can strategically beat up your opponent with the SRM, AC, and lasers in a good coordination to 1. control your heat, 2. keep him/her rocking, lowering his/her accuracy, and 3. be able to neutralize him/her as a threat by either eliminating their weapons or legs/center torso. You want to have a configuration that can handle all of these areas with minimal damage taken yourself.
I personally focus on my enemy's weapons, because if my opponent has their two largest weapons on their right arm, and I remove that arm, I have, in truth, won the engagement already. The reason why is because, whether he defeats me or not does not matter at that point. Without his primary weapons, he shouldn't be much match for my allies any more. Sure, a 'mech with an almost destroyed center torso usually doesn't make its opponents afraid, but if that 'mech is a long ranged combatant and still has all of its weapons, it can still be troublesome.

Edited by StarSlayer40, 04 June 2012 - 05:04 AM.

[wanderer]

Ah, the "I'm not in the beta and I must speculate" thread.

Until we actually get our mitts in the cockpits, talking about what's good and bad is a moot point, as the data is significantly off enough from what we're used to playing (tabletop OR MW4/MWLL) to make our experiences useless. Clearly, weaponry operates differently. Damage levels taken operate differently. Heat operates differently.

The only ones capable of truly making statements on the subject beyond broad generalizations are under an NDA. Pending stinks, don't it?

[Grokmoo]

I am looking forward to proper balancing, where AC2s and AC5s are on par with medium lasers. I think we will finally get this in MWO.

[StarSlayer40]

Max Liao, on 04 June 2012 - 04:07 AM, said:

I'm getting a lot of work out of this one cut/paste ...


In BattleTech your 'Mech is assigned to you by the government, or it's a family hereditary item. While no Urbanmech would be assigned to a field recon lance, an Urbie pilot could find himself out in rear guard if his unit (Lance or Company) was assigned to that. So it is VERY possible, and well within canon to have a mech not so suited to the terrain - a fire support lance in a city, a recon lance running across open terrain, etc.

You go where you're assigned by your military superiors. And no, just like real war, they don't always give you the perfect tool for the job.

Hmm, sounds true...try not to anger the higher-ups...

Hmm, one question that might play a major role into this topic is whether destroying a torso (left or right) will destroy the arm attached to the 'mech through that torso (left or right once again).

Edited by StarSlayer40, 04 June 2012 - 05:17 AM.

[Sassori]

Simple Answer:

MW4 could put an AC-10 in the 2 critical slot center torso ballistic mount.

No way in hell is anyone putting an AC-10 in the 2 critical slot center torso ballistic mount in MW:O.

The crits for heat sinks alone will make the most extreme laser boats a thing of the past.

/thread

[Roland]

Quote

The largest fears I see are from people who dread the return of MW4 gameplay, or a stale endgame where there is but one single optimal build for every chassis.

From the perspective who played in multiple planetary leagues, throughout the entirety of MW4's lifecycle, I can assure you that your statement here does not describe effectively describe mechwarrior 4.

I personally had a number of builds for each chassis, used to support different tactics and different map environments.

Hell, even from the most simplistic perspective, going from a map like Dustbowl to Lunacy would immediately shatter your notion that there was a single optimal build for any chassis... and that doesn't even consider the differences in loadout necessitated by tactical choices.

If your experiences with Mechwarrior 4 boiled down into such a simple belief about how the game worked, then I'm sorry you had that experience, but the problem lies with you, not with the game. Mechwarrior had a ton of flaws, but what you are describing here is not one of them.

[BlackMoore]

I could only read half of the posts so far. It was way to painful. To the original poster, relax and wait. Alot of people seem to be focused on MW4 or MW2 or MW the table top game. Keep in mind one of the foundations of this game is MPBT: Solais and or MPBT: 3025. BattleTech was a MMO, MechWarrior was not (inherently). This game has infuences other than the MW franise.

I am optimistic about the gameplay balance.

[5150warpig]

speculation, the troll olf the forums, u can speculate all you want about how the game will work, but unless u have played it or helped devlope it is just specualtion, and therefore not worht the time or effort to finish reading this thread

[Haroldwolf]

You will see optimal configurations like MW4 if the sole purpose of the game is to kill another player. That's exactly how WoT plays, the whole purpose of PvP, is to kill the other player.

IRL war is alot about take and hold a position, deny the enemy control or access to an area, manuveur to drive them from a position without too many losses, clear a village, etc. Some of the MW4 games PvE scenarios did a good job at that. Now the challange for the devs is to turn the players' focus from kill the mech to meet the objective. If you do that, you will see a reduction of anti-mech "boats" towards something more balanced. Think about why FASA introduced Onmi-mechs to the board game... A player can customize the mech loadout for the mission and terrain.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Max Liao, on 04 June 2012 - 04:07 AM, said:

I'm getting a lot of work out of this one cut/paste ...


In BattleTech your 'Mech is assigned to you by the government, or it's a family hereditary item. While no Urbanmech would be assigned to a field recon lance, an Urbie pilot could find himself out in rear guard if his unit (Lance or Company) was assigned to that. So it is VERY possible, and well within canon to have a mech not so suited to the terrain - a fire support lance in a city, a recon lance running across open terrain, etc.

You go where you're assigned by your military superiors. And no, just like real war, they don't always give you the perfect tool for the job.

Well I doubt they would send marines into an assault in Iraq on MP motorcycles or rollerblades. That's kind of catelogued in the same category as a scout UrbanMech.