475 replies to this topic

[gregsolidus]

Up the damage and give it different ammo type just like in TT (AP,Caseless,etc) .

Edited by gregsolidus, 08 November 2011 - 04:12 PM.

[Amechwarrior]

gregsolidus, on 08 November 2011 - 04:02 PM, said:

That logic is flawed,by removing customization you just make minmaxers select one or two type of variants of a mech leading to mirror matches of Bushwhackers,Ravens,and Atlases.The system is flawed and needs to be fixed, not axed.

Boaters gonna' Boat. Yea boaters might only pick a few good stock designs, but how does allowing full TT style customization stop that? I do not see how allowing for extensive TT style customization can help solves the problems of people min/maxing, it can only make it worse.

[gregsolidus]

Worse is a relative,if its an inescapable issue you might as well give people who won't abuse it something to enjoy.

[TheForce]

gregsolidus, on 08 November 2011 - 04:11 PM, said:

Up the damage and give it different ammo type just like in TT (AP,Caseless,etc) .

Up the damage of an AC20? Thats not staying true to the battletech universe because now you'll be able to group AC20's together and kill people in 2 shots...

Again, is MechWarrior a simulation of the battletech universe, or a walking tank game?

Edited by theforce, 08 November 2011 - 04:24 PM.

[TheForce]

Customization is solved easily by allowing custom and stock battle types...like CoD regular and hard core games...

Maybe they should just add option for pinpoint vs. random damage too.

Edited by theforce, 08 November 2011 - 04:26 PM.

[Amechwarrior]

Worse is not relative. If you did blank slate customization, even if you made it for pay or crazy high in game $, boats would become the most efficient designs for competitive play. Custom boats would become the defacto standard if you wanted to win against other peoples custom boats. Sure you might find it fun to make a balanced design (as do I) but you will have a flood of min/maxers making everyone elses fun designs worthless for competitive match based play. Worse for you who wanted to try out new experimental layout, worse for everyone that wants a Battletech experience, worse for the level of fun the average(stock) player has.

The best way to allow free customization, is to nerf boating. If you cannot effectively boat, with any design, then have at it. Make whatever custom you like. The easiest, and most established gaming mechanic to do this is with the reticle that is probabilistic, expands and all that stuff you see in games like counter-strike. In addition it also has the weight of the canon rules behind it for the icing on the cake.

[gregsolidus]

theforce, on 08 November 2011 - 04:24 PM, said:

Up the damage of an AC20? Thats not staying true to the battletech universe because now you'll be able to group AC20's together and kill people in 2 shots...

Again, is MechWarrior a simulation of the battletech universe, or a walking tank game?

Its both.Also,How could you possible group something as a large as an AC20 without serious drawbacks?

[Halfinax]

theforce, on 08 November 2011 - 04:26 PM, said:

Customization is solved easily by allowing custom and stock battle types...like CoD regular and hard core games...

Maybe they should just add option for pinpoint vs. random damage too.

EXCEPT: CoD and other FPS games don't have a PERSISTANT world mechanic like the devs are planning.

I think the pinpoint thing can be changed simply by not having weapons be hitscan (damage dealt as soon as I pull the trigger) and instead using direct fire (have to lead the target to compensate for movement, bullet drop, etc. For some reason you keep assuming I mean random roll as opposed to skill shooting with the added effect of the lurching movement of your mech and your target's mech.

[gregsolidus]

You know,now that I think about it their probably just going to improve the MW4 system.It was easy for new peolpe to grasp and kinda captured the general idea of mech modification.

Edited by gregsolidus, 08 November 2011 - 04:33 PM.

[Odin]

Amechwarrior, on 08 November 2011 - 04:12 PM, said:

Boaters gonna' Boat. Yea boaters might only pick a few good stock designs, but how does allowing full TT style customization stop that? I do not see how allowing for extensive TT style customization can help solves the problems of people min/maxing, it can only make it worse.

In TT session with firends you talk about it and come to an understanding about the matter.
In MWO or any other real time MP game this will never happen.

but how does allowing full TT style customization stop that?

It can't and won't. It encourages it!


Only way to deal with it, in a real time MP game, the scale we see in MWO is:
kiss your TT rules goodbye! in this matter.
Don't ever allow it, the game will be ruined.

Edited by Odin, 08 November 2011 - 04:37 PM.

[Amechwarrior]

Odin, on 08 November 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

In TT session with firends you talk about it and come to an understanding about the matter.
In MWO or any other real time MP game this will never happen.

but how does allowing full TT style customization stop that?

It can't and won't. It encourages it!


Only way to deal with it, in a real time MP game, the scale we see in MWO is:
kiss your TT rules goodbye! in this matter.
Don't ever allow it, the game will be ruined.

Yes that is what I am saying in my post. But I am reading your post like you think I am saying the opposite. Am I misunderstanding you?

[Gaius Cavadus]

Odin, on 08 November 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

In TT session with firends you talk about it and come to an understanding about the matter. In MWO or any other real time MP game this will never happen. but how does allowing full TT style customization stop that? It can't and won't. It encourages it! Only way to deal with it, in a real time MP game, the scale we see in MWO is: kiss your TT rules goodbye! in this matter. Don't ever allow it, the game will be ruined.

The boardgame die-hards will never understand this. If Piranha deviates from the standard TT crit slot system they'll spazz out just like they did with mw4's far superior hardpoint system.

What a lot of the boardgame fanatics fail to understand was that TT's crit slot system was meant for creating new mechs and not really about modifying existing designs.

The crit slot system is great if you're making an entirely new mech from the ground up. For modifying existing designs it's garbage though. Mw2 and Mw3 easily proved how terrible it is for a video game. Mw2 was nothing but MPL boats and Mw3 was nothing but SL and ML boats.

Mw4 was on the right track but they messed up by failing to make the next version of each similar weapon occupy more slots. For instance, a SL and ML both took up one hardpoint slot. The ML should have occupied two, LL three, PPCs four, etc.

[Starkiller]

Mchawkeye, on 08 November 2011 - 02:49 AM, said:

Greetings.

it has come to my attention that many people keep saying things like 'on the TT...such and such is true and there fore that should be true here'. This seems to be especially true of many of the mechanical aspects of the games, like targeting.

It's a topic that seems to pervade a lot of the topics on the board.

While I understand that, it isn't how I see it.

I see the Mechwarrior games being a separate branch of the Battletech universe, based on the same canon and background as the TT and the RP, related to both but born of neither. Mechwarrior the computer game is not trying to be an incarnation of the TT.

They are simply different systems attempting to describe the same actions.

Mechwarrior is a simulation. The constraints it works too have a different solution to the dice rolling systems employed outside of the computer. As a computer game, the challenges are different, both from a piloting point of view and a game balance perspective. I think it's silly to hold one up against another as proof of something being right or wrong; what works in computer world may not work on the TT and vice versa, and shouldn't be expected to.

I just think people should bare that more in mind when putting forth their expectations of the game.

Or am I completely wrong?

Yes and no, Mechwarrior games mechanics were not based on TT, HOWEVER with that being said, Multiplayer Battletech was greatly influenced and guided by TT and this game is more based on following of MPBT:3025 than actual Mechwarrior 1, 2 , 3 or 4. The Devs themselves have stated that they will reference TT mechanics wherever possible when making this game.

As far as customizing mechs, why should a warrior be able to customize a mech on the fly in the game when it was not something done in the Unvierse itself, except by Clan pilots, on a regular basis? Take the OP out of the game and run stock mechs and make the games more fun for everyone.

Edited by Starkiller, 08 November 2011 - 04:53 PM.

[Odin]

Amechwarrior, on 08 November 2011 - 04:43 PM, said:

Yes that is what I am saying in my post. But I am reading your post like you think I am saying the opposite. Am I misunderstanding you?

No Amechwarrior, we share the same view of things,
I just wanted to point at this aspect of online competitive play.

S!

[Halfinax]

Cavadus, on 08 November 2011 - 04:48 PM, said:

The boardgame die-hards will never understand this. If Piranha deviates from the standard TT crit slot system they'll spazz out just like they did with mw4's far superior hardpoint system.

What a lot of the boardgame fanatics fail to understand was that TT's crit slot system was meant for creating new mechs and not really about modifying existing designs.

The crit slot system is great if you're making an entirely new mech from the ground up. For modifying existing designs it's garbage though. Mw2 and Mw3 easily proved how terrible it is for a video game. Mw2 was nothing but MPL boats and Mw3 was nothing but SL and ML boats.

Mw4 was on the right track but they messed up by failing to make the next version of each similar weapon occupy more slots. For instance, a SL and ML both took up one hardpoint slot. The ML should have occupied two, LL three, PPCs four, etc.

Actually from what I can tell it is the TT die-hards that are advocating no customization. I know for sure that as an avid fan of Battletech I really loathe the idea of personal loadout customization in a multiplayer iteration as it is horribly imbalanced even in the TT version (most die-hards use only canon 'Mechs).

[gregsolidus]

So how do you guys feel about a modified MW4 system?

[Gaius Cavadus]

halfinax, on 08 November 2011 - 05:02 PM, said:

Actually from what I can tell it is the TT die-hards that are advocating no customization. I know for sure that as an avid fan of Battletech I really loathe the idea of personal loadout customization in a multiplayer iteration as it is horribly imbalanced even in the TT version (most die-hards use only canon 'Mechs).

I could absolutely live with no equipment/loadout customization of any kind so long as Piranha went through the mechs and revised the stock loadouts to be a bit more sensical. Some are just awful and not worth recreating.

[Odin]

Cavadus, on 08 November 2011 - 04:48 PM, said:

The boardgame die-hards will never understand this. If Piranha deviates from the standard TT crit slot system they'll spazz out just like they did with mw4's far superior hardpoint system.

What a lot of the boardgame fanatics fail to understand was that TT's crit slot system was meant for creating new mechs and not really about modifying existing designs.

The crit slot system is great if you're making an entirely new mech from the ground up. For modifying existing designs it's garbage though. Mw2 and Mw3 easily proved how terrible it is for a video game. Mw2 was nothing but MPL boats and Mw3 was nothing but SL and ML boats.

Mw4 was on the right track but they messed up by failing to make the next version of each similar weapon occupy more slots. For instance, a SL and ML both took up one hardpoint slot. The ML should have occupied two, LL three, PPCs four, etc.

Absolut!

There is no place for boating and alpha striking in the lore.
Alphas are last resort maneuver.

Mechwarrior don't come along with every mech turning into something special, the are all standardized loss tech! Even Omni's remain standard in a large scale in the lore and fiction.

This gonna be online competitive play - in a scale we all have never imagined before!

If the restrictions gonna be only half@ssed, like in MW4 it'll be a mess online.
There need to be hard restrictions right from the very start, anything else will be an arms race to who the Heck gets more LL whatsoever, into his boat!

FACE IT!
(all capslock)


And I don't offend or belittle board players nor does Cavadus or Amechwarrior do so.

Edited by Odin, 08 November 2011 - 05:25 PM.

[Amechwarrior]

halfinax, on 08 November 2011 - 05:02 PM, said:

Actually from what I can tell it is the TT die-hards that are advocating no customization. I know for sure that as an avid fan of Battletech I really loathe the idea of personal loadout customization in a multiplayer iteration as it is horribly imbalanced even in the TT version (most die-hards use only canon 'Mechs).

Yes, count me as one of the TT die-hards. Back on page 1-3 of this thread, the topic was a little different, more about whether the TT rules should be used as a guide or not in building the gameplay of MWO. The die-hard know that MWO cannot be perfectly pure to the TT rules. But if we must change things, the rules would be our guide, our goal to strive to. Of course fun and fairness must be taken in account. Things like weapons convergence/targeting and customization limits are large grey areas of implementation. I just feel that when in question you should look to the TT rules and see how and why some choices were made.

In the fiction, customs are rare. Either you were super rich, or super poor. You had the $$ to have a very expensive "pimp my ride" treatment done or you were dirt poor, using duct tape to hold everything together and your supplier ran out of medium lasers in the last succession war. Most of the mechwarriors of the Inner Sphere would only ever see stock variants of 'mechs for their entire career until omnis came on the scene. House armies do not buy custom designs, royalty does. This is the fictional justification for stocks+variants.

The much bigger issue is gameplay reasons. The game must be fair and balanced to a degree. If you can solve the problem of boating, be it 12ERLL, 20 SPL or 8 LRM20s then I would love to be free to customize my 'mech knowing that I will not be going up against the cheesy masses of people out to win no matter what. But gameplay problems come first. The biggest and longest running problem in the MW series has been boating. One of the ideas, and an easy one is the expanding, probabilistic targeting reticle. There are many ways to solve boating and that is just one that happens to line up with the TT rules.

[gregsolidus]

It sounds like they may go the MW4 route.