87 replies to this topic

[TheSteelRhino]

***THIS POST IS NOT INTENDED, TO NERF WHATEVER THE OP BUILD OF THE MONTH IS***

This is to try and add VARIETY to the game, and get a lot of the unused builds a place in the game.


So if you look at the array of mechs used on field these days it would appear that some are not even close to their original designs.

For example, no stalker carried PPC's stock (at least not at this time in the game..Stalker 7d has 2, but that comes out later in the timeline). Should some of the hardpoints be limited to 1 or 2 crits be limited in the number of crits they can support via "quirks". I am NOT proposing zero PPC's on this mech, just limiting it to a reasonable amount like 2. After all, these are NOT omnimechs.

Wait, before you get upset, there are already two mechs in game that specialize in carrying PPC's.

Awesome: with 3
K2: with 2.

Another example would be to limit the size of the ballistic hardpoint in a K2 via quirk. Gauss rifle is FAR larger than a MG and that is a small side torso.

We already have some ballistics heavy chassis's...Atlas DDC, Jaegermech, Ilya.......etc. So you can still load up 2 Gauss Rifles.

These are just examples, but the idea would be to make every mech somewhat "special". I would do the same thing to Hunchbacks 4G/4H... (one gets large bore gauss/ac20, one gets up to AC10.)...I'm not going to list every possible quirk to every chassis. So don't assume it's just PPC and Gauss, nor just two chassis.


This would be to increase diversity on the battlefield, and to help give EVERYTHING a role and purpose.
*********************************************************************************************************************
And before folks start screaming "this thread again" lets point out the obvious, that we have added mechs over the months with more coming.

Edited by Rhinehardt Ritter, 01 May 2013 - 11:15 AM.

[Ryokens leap]

Unique variants that are faction specific would be kinda cool. I recall the click base TT game having faction specific weapon and equiptment load outs, every faction had different strengths and weaknesses.

[Wintersdark]

Would you have even posted this is PPC's weren't currently the darling of the meta?



"This thread is new and exciting".

[Echo6]

Rhinehardt Ritter, on 01 May 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:

So if you look at the array of mechs used on field these days it would appear that some are not even close to their original designs.

For example, no stalker carried PPC's stock (at least not at this time in the game..Stalker 7d has 2, but that comes out later in the timeline). Should some of the hardpoints be limited to 1 or 2 crits be limited in the number of crits they can support via "quirks". I am NOT proposing zero PPC's on this mech, just limiting it to a reasonable amount like 2. After all, these are NOT omnimechs.

Wait, before you get upset, there are already two mechs in game that specialize in carrying PPC's.

Awesome: with 3
K2: with 2.

Another example would be to limit the size of the ballistic hardpoint in a K2 via quirk. Gauss rifle is FAR larger than a MG and that is a small side torso.

We already have some ballistics heavy chassis's...Atlas DDC, Jaegermech, Ilya.......etc. So you can still load up 2 Gauss Rifles.

These are just examples, but the idea would be to make every mech somewhat "special".

This would be to increase diversity on the battlefield, and to help give EVERYTHING a role and purpose.
*********************************************************************************************************************
And before folks start screaming "this thread again" lets point out the obvious, that we have added mechs over the months with more coming.

Apparently you are wrong; they are omnimechs and apparently everybody but me and you are happy with this ****.

Good luck with your suggestion.

[Pupecki]

Wintersdark, on 01 May 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Would you have even posted this is PPC's weren't currently the darling of the meta?



"This thread is new and exciting".

you literally add nothing to this discussion, this is a valid idea and deserves a valid response with at least a little constructive criticism.

Edit: I'd like to add that I think this is a good idea and would do well to spice up the game regardless of what the current meta is, I think all mechs should have a role in which they can specialize in.

Edited by Pupecki, 01 May 2013 - 10:31 AM.

[Juodvarnis]

Wintersdark, on 01 May 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Would you have even posted this is PPC's weren't currently the darling of the meta?



"This thread is new and exciting".

This response is new and exciting...

[Draco Harkins]

While Rhino and i dont see eye to eye much latelly i know him and i can say HE WOULD PUT THIS IN EVEN IF THIS WASNT THE DARLING OF META. Its on big words so that people dont scream "omg another TT Fa* that comes whine blá blá blá lets just make snarky remarks about a IP we know nothing about and call names to him and his family to the 23th generation as per 4chan standard".

We "old school" are exactly that, old school, we know the chassis in and out, the weapons, the tactics, the lore (most of us are ex military to boot). Like it OR NOT (we dont care) we are the ones that kept this IP alive for this long, and boating is something that only exists in the money grabbing mind of PGI. If you restrict engines you have to restrict weapons, game set match. You cant have double standarts and talk about "balance".

"But what about customization dude???" I'm all for it, just put a heafty price on it or get R&R back. Lore dictates that changing a mech chassis was dangerous at times as it was costly and only the very best house units (faction variants anyone???) and the most wealthy merc units (Black market itens only aquired in a certain planet? Preparation for CW???) would aquire, the rest had to make do with stock and they fought WARS, not matches, WARS with them and prevailed because of their knowledge as pilots, their skill and (oh ho here it comes) TEAMWORK!

OMNI mech tech was what the Clans brought and what made them specially dangerous, but even that system was limited since you couldnt change the engines, so it would balance itself out and STILL be dangerous as hell (4 PPC's masakari ouch). It also showed diferent mentality of construction of the diferent clans giving them an identity and diferent tactics to counter augmenting your "metagame" (if i can think of this why cant PGI uh?).

In all this money would flow as rivers to PGI's coffers because to get that upgraded awesome you had to get the standart, same as mediums, same as heavies, same as lights.

Edited by Draco Harkins, 01 May 2013 - 05:40 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Pupecki, on 01 May 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

you literally add nothing to this discussion, this is a valid idea and deserves a valid response with at least a little constructive criticism.

*sighs* Fine.
It's one that's come up multiple times, and been debated to death. In fairness, I should assume the OP is new here, and didn't do any searching to see if this had been discussed previously. Nobody ever does, after all.

Long story short: No. It would severely limit mech customization, and while it would remove certain "OP" builds, it would just create others as people find new OP builds under the new restrictions.


In the end, though, things like the K2? Does anyone feel a K2 with two gauss rifles is overpowered? That it's even a problem anymore? It's just a poor-mans Jagermech now. Yes, mechs differ from their tabletop loadouts, sometimes dramatically. This is not a problem, it's by design. The customization is one of the best parts of the game for many, many people.

[MustrumRidcully]

Yes, but the effect should not be overwhelming. Something like "5-10 % less heat for Awesome 8Q on PPCs" or "5-10 % damage reduction on Hunchback Hunch" should probably be the max overall benefit.

[Shumabot]

Wintersdark, on 01 May 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Would you have even posted this is PPC's weren't currently the darling of the meta?



"This thread is new and exciting".

I think it has merit considering before PPCs it was nothing but SRMs and before that nothing but LRMs and right now the only things you see are PPC or LL boats. The games systems fundamentally punish mixed loadouts harshly to the point where they're mostly either a sideshow or the mechs already boating enough that it can spare a few streaks. This game has never not had a problem with it. No mechwarrior game has ever not, and that includes the tabletop game if you ever allowed mech customization. No competitive game with customizeable multi weapon loadouts has ever not had this problem, it's inherent to the very idea of customization because weapons are most realistically effective when taken in duplicate to the exception of all else.

Edited by Shumabot, 01 May 2013 - 10:51 AM.

[TheSteelRhino]

Wintersdark, on 01 May 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Would you have even posted this is PPC's weren't currently the darling of the meta?



"This thread is new and exciting".

Y E S.

I would do the same thing with the Hunchback 4G and 4H thank you.

4G gets Large Bore ballistics, 4H capped at AC10.

How about about to add variety 1 of the Jaegers can arm mount Gauss rifles/AC20 while other 2 max out at ac10.

And how about a little courtesy going forward? I feel attitude that is unwarranted coming from your post, and while your opinion is just as valid as mine, it is not anymore valid than mine or anyone elses. Just like my opinion is no more valid than anyone elses.

Why don't you try to think of the game overall, vs what I would assume to be selfish motivation about your favorite mech.

MustrumRidcully, on 01 May 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:

Yes, but the effect should not be overwhelming. Something like "5-10 % less heat for Awesome 8Q on PPCs" or "5-10 % damage reduction on Hunchback Hunch" should probably be the max overall benefit.

That's reasonable. I don't think it is enough personally, to get the desired results. But I can respect it.

Thanks for responding!

[TheSteelRhino]

Wintersdark, on 01 May 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

*sighs* Fine.
It's one that's come up multiple times, and been debated to death. In fairness, I should assume the OP is new here, and didn't do any searching to see if this had been discussed previously. Nobody ever does, after all.

Long story short: No. It would severely limit mech customization, and while it would remove certain "OP" builds, it would just create others as people find new OP builds under the new restrictions.


In the end, though, things like the K2? Does anyone feel a K2 with two gauss rifles is overpowered? That it's even a problem anymore? It's just a poor-mans Jagermech now. Yes, mechs differ from their tabletop loadouts, sometimes dramatically. This is not a problem, it's by design. The customization is one of the best parts of the game for many, many people.

NO..not new at all, I've played every version of mechwarrior, and have been in beta a VERY long time. I've seen all the flavor of the month builds. PPCs, Gauss Cats, LRM/SRM..I remember when medium laser 4P's were "OP" and then medium laser heat ws raised.

Boating is part of battletech. But if you are going to Limit customizations with hardpoints and engine restrictions..then you might as well go all the way. If each mech has special attributes more variety will show up. I'm not saying you shouldn't have your 4 PPC mech if you have to have it. But it should be an Awesome, or a Warhawk/masakari.


Let an Awesome, be Awesome. Let a Stalker be a Stalker. Let a Hunchback be a hunchback. I'm all for customization, but there isn't much variety out there these days.


This is NOT about just fixing an "OP" problem of the month. This is about encouraging diversity in the number of chassis's in game. Vs...stalker, stlker..highlander,highlander, Atlas.....or whatever in the beta.

Who knows...it might make the game more fun for everyone....

Edited by Rhinehardt Ritter, 01 May 2013 - 11:02 AM.

[Roadbeer]

I like the premise of the topic, but not the topic itself.

It's basically just a savvy way of swinging the Nerfhammer.

I think it would be better if you would put it in a format asking if 'quirks' should make loadouts attractive to putting chassis/variants into specific roles.

What I mean is, rather than limit hardpoints or put restrictions on chassis, use the quirks to make other chassis more attractive for the role. 5% heat dissipation of the K2, 5% reload rate on the Stalker. K2 is designed to 'boat' PPC, Stalker is designed to 'boat" missiles. Make those traits attractive.

[TheSteelRhino]

Roadbeer, on 01 May 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

I like the premise of the topic, but not the topic itself.

It's basically just a savvy way of swinging the Nerfhammer.

I think it would be better if you would put it in a format asking if 'quirks' should make loadouts attractive to putting chassis/variants into specific roles.

What I mean is, rather than limit hardpoints or put restrictions on chassis, use the quirks to make other chassis more attractive for the role. 5% heat dissipation of the K2, 5% reload rate on the Stalker. K2 is designed to 'boat' PPC, Stalker is designed to 'boat" missiles. Make those traits attractive.

Well..the intention is not to nerf everything. And maybe the implementation needs work. But the concept here,


Ok..I'll add an answer....how's that?

CHOICE ADDED SINCE IT SEEMS TO BE A POPULAR CONCEPT:

"I would support this if the quirks were something like: 5-10% extra heat dissipation of the K2, 5-10% faster reload rate on the Stalker. K2 is designed to 'boat' PPC, Stalker is designed to 'boat" missiles. Make those traits attractive. (0 votes [0.00%])"


Thanks for reading and responding.

[Roadbeer]

Rhinehardt Ritter, on 01 May 2013 - 11:08 AM, said:

Well..the intention is not to nerf everything. And maybe the implementation needs work. But the concept here,


Ok..I'll add an answer....how's that?

Nope, you're still limiting. I think you missed what I'm saying.

Rather than limit people with what they can do with a mech, Make it attractive to use certain mechs for certain roles by using the quirks as an incentive.

I personally don't care if someone puts 2 Gauss on a K2, cool, but have a quirk on the K2 (like increased heat dissipation rate) to make PPCs attractive and have a quirk on the Jagermech (say increase reload or weapon convergence rate) to make it more attractive to put the Gauss on it, rather than the K2.

Like with the Stalker, sure, you can put 5 PPC on it, but with a quirk that increases reload rate for missiles, you're basically taking a gimped version of the Stalker out when you PPC boat it, because 4 PPC on a K2 with the increased heat dissipation is a better build.

[Shumabot]

Roadbeer, on 01 May 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

I like the premise of the topic, but not the topic itself.

It's basically just a savvy way of swinging the Nerfhammer.

I think it would be better if you would put it in a format asking if 'quirks' should make loadouts attractive to putting chassis/variants into specific roles.

What I mean is, rather than limit hardpoints or put restrictions on chassis, use the quirks to make other chassis more attractive for the role. 5% heat dissipation of the K2, 5% reload rate on the Stalker. K2 is designed to 'boat' PPC, Stalker is designed to 'boat" missiles. Make those traits attractive.

A quirk that provides a benefit to a build inherently nerfs every mech that doesn't get that quirk by comparison (and it's competitive so it's never not compared). You're swinging the nerf bat just as hard. Mechs exist to interact with eachother, any buff to one is a nerf to the rest by definition.

Edited by Shumabot, 01 May 2013 - 11:19 AM.

[Cyberassassin]

The devs should re-evaluate the physical possibility that a weapon could be placed in specific locations for all variants.

Example 1.
The Highlander can put a missile rack on its arm. Which missile type and how large is allowable?
<insert answer with good rationalization>

Example 2.
The Raven can put in 2 ERPPCs . Is this feasible for a seven ton weapon? IF yes, does it have the structure to move a weapon like that around or does the mobility of xxx need nerfed? ie, nerfs/buffs
<insert answer with good rationalization>

Example 3.
The K2 can put a gauss rifle in a torso. Does the body and structure have the room to place on?
<insert answer with good rationalization>

[TheSteelRhino]

Cyberassassin, on 01 May 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

The devs should re-evaluate the physical possibility that a weapon could be placed in specific locations for all variants.

Example 1.
The Highlander can put a missile rack on its arm. Which missile type and how large is allowable?
<insert answer with good rationalization>

Example 2.
The Raven can put in 2 ERPPCs . Is this feasible for a seven ton weapon? IF yes, does it have the structure to move a weapon like that around or does the mobility of xxx need nerfed? ie, nerfs/buffs
<insert answer with good rationalization>

Example 3.
The K2 can put a gauss rifle in a torso. Does the body and structure have the room to place on?
<insert answer with good rationalization>

I wish we had actual "dimensions" of mechs and weapons systems. If you configure volume, and the amount of space required this coudl be feasible.

Shrug...alas I do not.

[Shumabot]

Rhinehardt Ritter, on 01 May 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

I wish we had actual "dimensions" of mechs and weapons systems. If you configure volume, and the amount of space required this coudl be feasible.

Shrug...alas I do not.

People shouldn't want correct mech scale with correct weight to volume. Assaults get smaller and lights get larger while mechs like the trebuchet don't change at all. People want "balanced" dimensions, not "actual" ones. You can fit 4 commandos inside of an atlases left leg and chest.

Edited by Shumabot, 01 May 2013 - 11:33 AM.

[Roadbeer]

Shumabot, on 01 May 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

A quirk that provides a benefit to a build inherently nerfs every mech that doesn't get that quirk by comparison (and it's competitive so it's never not compared). You're swinging the nerf bat just as hard. Mechs exist to interact with eachother, any buff to one is a nerf to the rest by definition.

True, but it's also encouraging "role warfare"

If each chassis, hell, each variant has it's unique quirk that makes it 'better' at something than something else, it's both a universal buff and a universal nerf. That's kind of the definition of a quirk. It's something that makes it unique.

The C4 is kind of the red-headed step child of the Catapult line, so if it had a quirk that gave it a higher reload rate, it would be more desirable than the C1 with it's increased heat dissipation as a missile platform.

Edited by Roadbeer, 01 May 2013 - 11:34 AM.