89 replies to this topic

[tenderloving]

Our current hardpoint system was set up ostensibly to prevent boating and provide the mechs with "flavor." The # of hardpoints was limited except on mechs that were specifically designed to boat.

I think most sane people agree that 18 medium laser Awesomes blasting around would cause problems for gameplay. The hardpoint system was a ALMOST a good decision...

ALMOST


...because they left out the other end of the spectrum. They left out the part where the SIZE of a weapon is just as critical as how many weapons there are. It seems arbitrary to me that the developers made a decision to limit the number of Medium lasers you can carry, but allow an inordinate amount of larger weapons to be carried on mechs that weren't designed for it.

I can run 2 ppcs on a Jenner at 115kph, which is supposed to be a short/medium range guerilla fighter. I can throw a Gauss on a Raven, which is supposed to be a light weapons/electronic warfare mech. I can put 6PPCs on a Stalker, which has missile slots in it for some reason. Should I be able to do these things? Not really.

If you are going to make the argument that a mech needs hardpoints to limit the amount of small weapons within reasonable limits/design considerations, then you have to maintain that some sort of control should be put in place to restrict the heavier weapons as well. We haven't seen that, and until we do the min/maxing and elimination of roles is going to get worse and worse and worse.

What we are experiencing now was predicted in Closed Beta many times, and until something about the way heavy weapons are handled- be it through hardpoint size/weight/critical restrictions or some other method- it's not going to improve.

[Sephlock]

Did you just cite my gaussraven as a sign of something wrong in this game?

[Majorfatboy]

YESYESYESYESYES

This has been bugging Me for a while. Take the arms on the Catapult K2: You've got this huge barrel meant for bringing a great whopping load of energy firepower to bear, but can only carry one (1) weapon. Either a single erppc, or down to a single small laser.
Not take a look at the arms on the Jenner-F: A little box on a pivot joint that can mount three (3) weapons. You could slap three erppc's in there. Not that you'd want to, but the point is one mech has a physically huge, barely articulated arm that can only hold a single device, but the other mech has a tiny little matchbox of a limb the not only has a greater range of movement, but can potentially carry three times the hardware.

Things like this is what leads to doublegaussdoubleerppc setups. It forces the player into a minmax situation where they have to carry a couple of the biggest weapons, because they simply can't carry a diverse mix of smaller ones.

[Joseph Mallan]

Hollander,
or a Raven carrying a Gauss... Ok in my book.

Because we don't have the original chassis, does not mean we should not be able to bring a substitute and test the viability.

[Wrenchfarm]

I love customization. I probably spend more time on the battlemech forums and in smurfy than I do playing the game. But I have to agree.

The system is way too open and easy to abuse. I would be OK with somekind of hardpoint size limitation to prevent people slotting PPCs in a MLAS mount or penalties for taking multiple super heavy weapons.

There should be a reason to take the Awesome as a PPC boat, it was designed to do that. The fact that the Stalker, Phract, Highlander, and Cat can do it just as well or better is pretty nuts.

[Splinters]

Well one solution would be to require large weapons to use more hardpoints. Say a PPC needs 2 hardpoints, AC20 needs 3 ballistic hardpoints, LRM20 needs 2 hardpoints, etc. That way they can increase the number of hardpoints for small boating, but limit the craziness of large weapon boating.

The concern of course is that we'll end up with an even harder system for new players to BT/MW to decipher, but at this stage I'm not sure if it's a big deal with all the web-based online mech builders.

-S

[Koreanese]

Only boating problem I see is. Large laser stalkers. Other then that,I see no problems. TThere's counter for just about everything

[That Dawg]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 April 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

Hollander,

holy hell, that thing looks like a ***** with legs.....great.....now I'm going to have nightmares.......

[Ens]

amen ppl


amen
but i dont think this will ever change

[FupDup]

I think the real issue with our sizeless hardpoints is that it favors big weapons over small ones too much. This hits weapons like the Small Laser pretty hard and I imagine that the SL might be more useful if you could run 2 of them in place of a single Medium Laser.

[That Dawg]

lol, they edited the correct word for a mans genitalia. Starts with P...oh god PGI....the humanity of it all

[Chavette]

Small weapons don't get boated as much as they usually have smaller range, which makes them less of use in the current meta.

#Answered

/lock

[Royalewithcheese]

ThatDawg, on 17 April 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

a ***** with legs.....

A time-honored BT tradition. It's the second-most popular chassis type after "Japanese mecha with the serial numbers filed off"

[tenderloving]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 April 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

Hollander,
or a Raven carrying a Gauss... Ok in my book.

Because we don't have the original chassis, does not mean we should not be able to bring a substitute and test the viability.

I'm glad you brought that up. The Raven does everything the Hollander can do better. The Hollander has huge limitations to simulate cramming a massive weapon onto a tiny frame. The Raven has none of these limitations, and will outperform the Hollander regardless of how they implement it because it can carry an XL engine.

[Sephlock]

Could someone with talent whip me up a sig banner that has a little raven with a gauss rifle and maybe a cowboy hat, some spurred boots... and a lasso looped up on it's side? There should be big text that says "TONIGHT, THE GAUSSRAVEN RIDES!" or something like that.

Or maybe something with a "Mask of Zorro" theme...

[Erasus Magnus]

Majorfatboy, on 17 April 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

YESYESYESYESYES

This has been bugging Me for a while. Take the arms on the Catapult K2: You've got this huge barrel meant for bringing a great whopping load of energy firepower to bear, but can only carry one (1) weapon. Either a single erppc, or down to a single small laser.
Not take a look at the arms on the Jenner-F: A little box on a pivot joint that can mount three (3) weapons. You could slap three erppc's in there. Not that you'd want to, but the point is one mech has a physically huge, barely articulated arm that can only hold a single device, but the other mech has a tiny little matchbox of a limb the not only has a greater range of movement, but can potentially carry three times the hardware.

Things like this is what leads to doublegaussdoubleerppc setups. It forces the player into a minmax situation where they have to carry a couple of the biggest weapons, because they simply can't carry a diverse mix of smaller ones.

qft because i went out of likes!

[Eddrick]

I prefer restricting the size of Hardpoints. Personaly, I don't have much of an issue against the weapon boats we currently have.

Joseph Mallan, on 17 April 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

Hollander,
or a Raven carrying a Gauss... Ok in my book.

Because we don't have the original chassis, does not mean we should not be able to bring a substitute and test the viability.

This one I can't realy argue against. However, Hollander isn't developed till 3054.

[TB Freelancer]

MW4 had a far superior hardpoint system than MWO. With the restricted hardpoint sizes and locations, you just couldn't build some of the configs we're seeing. It had its flaws sure, but right now it feels like half a step backward to MW3 and will seem a lot more like MW3 with omni mechs when they begin to arrive where the only real restrictions are tonnage.

[tenderloving]

Eddrick, on 17 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

I prefer restricting the size of Hardpoints. Personaly, I don't have much of an issue against the weapon boats we currently have.


This one I can't realy argue against. However, Hollander isn't developed till 3054.

Yes you can argue against it and I did. The Raven can carry Gauss + XL, the Hollander can't. It is better than the Hollander at the Hollander's only job.

[Odins Fist]

F.Y.I., I have "NOT" seen a Small-Laser used in combat in months, and I can't remember the last time I saw a Small-Laser on anything, not to mention Small Pulse-Lasers...