13 replies to this topic

[Xeren KelDar]

Should the heat penalty for boating that PGI is implementing be on a per chassis basis? My thoughts are you could drop the numbers for most mechs, but allow cannon boats to run their stock loadout without penalty.

For instance if we set the threshold for boating PPC to 2, this would negatively affect the Awesome which comes stock with three. Increasing the base threshold to 3 PPC does nothing to combat some builds currently in use (3ppc Highlander/Cataphract).

If the thresholds could be modified per chassis then the numbers could be varied and allow some individuality as well as combat some of the "problem mechs". Setting the PPC threshold to two would combat most triple PPC builds and if they add a +1 PPC threshold as an Awesome quirk it may add a little more incentive to pilot an Awesome to boat PPCs.

*Praetor Shepard lines out my idea a bit better below as far as possibilities of adjusting weapons numbers.*

Edited by Xeren KelDar, 28 June 2013 - 06:44 PM.

[Lyoto Machida]

I voted no because I think the boating penalty/heat fix idea as a whole is stupid.

[Xeren KelDar]

Lyoto Machida, on 28 June 2013 - 06:06 PM, said:

I voted no because I think the boating penalty/heat fix idea as a whole is stupid.

I can understand that sentiment as many people think a different system would be better. What I'm trying to do here is improve the existing system that was announced if that's what we're going to get. That's what the poll is for.

[Lyoto Machida]

Changed my vote to yes, on the assumption that the stupid heat fix is a given and can't be changed. The Awesome should have a quirk for 3 PPCs like you said.

Or they should implement hardpoint sizes...or actual convergence times...

[Xeren KelDar]

Lyoto Machida, on 28 June 2013 - 06:21 PM, said:

Changed my vote to yes, on the assumption that the stupid heat fix is a given and can't be changed. The Awesome should have a quirk for 3 PPCs like you said.

Or they should implement hardpoint sizes...or actual convergence times...

I can't say I really disagree and I'm unsure if this system will fix the problems, but like you said if we're going to get it then I'd really like for it to be the best implementation possible.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I think I follow what you mean. But you might need to rephrase your question.
And this kind of limit needs weapons to definitely get another re-balancing pass anyway, but in theory, could also make the balancing process easier.


So I guess the idea could be like imposing a limit to the number of certain weapons that can be equipped on existing mechs in the Mech Lab. For example,

• With PPCs and ERPPC's any other mech (not the Awesome 8Q or 9M) can mount a max of two, those two Awesomes can mount a combo maxed at three.
  
• Only one AC/20 and/or Gauss can be mounted once on a mech.
  
• A max of two LRM 20 and/or LRM 15
  
• A max of three LRM 10
  
• A max of three SRM 6 and/or SRM 4
  
• Maybe a max of three Large Laser and/or LPL
  
• SSRMs maybe two or three
  
• and if possible maybe a conditional where if there is a Gauss mounted only one PPC or ERPPC could be mounted.

These are simply ideas that can be changed or challenged, and worth a discussion I guess.

At any rate, can't wait to test out these changes http://mwomercs.com/...te-june-112013/.

[Xeren KelDar]

Praetor that's pretty accurate to what I was trying to lay out. I used the PPC as the basis since that's a hot topic right now, but the idea can be applied across the board. Some mechs are canonically boats, Catapults mount a lot of LRMs for instance, but you could adapt the system to each chassis rather than a flat rate across the board. Allowing an Awesome to carry 3 PPC (instead of two as I suggested for the flat rate) gives each variant some flavor and allows it to keep its original feel.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I figure weapons and mechs need to be looked as a whole to be able to keep the game fun and challenging without forcing players to chase metas to be competitive.

And something like this could make it easier to keep weapons effective without need to be boats to field them effectively or limit customization too strongly I hope.

And once we have mechs introduced that do boat certain weapons then those should be addressed as they get introduced on a case by case basis.

[Gaan Cathal]

Nonsense. We all know that 6ML Jenners and Cicadas, Swaybacks and ML Quickdraws have been dominating the meta for far too long now, and PGI have found an elegant way to limit them while minimising the knock-on effect on the highly niche skill-intensive high-alpha builds like the quad-PPC Stalker, 2PPC+Gauss heavies etc that might otherwise have been affected by bringing the aforementioned terror-builds in line.

[FaleBowt]

My vote: No.

Reason: I believe that would devolve the game into cheesers just using the boat capable 'mechs or variants therein. Resulting in not truely fixing the problem and discarding the little variety we currently have.



edit: My English isn't the best.

Edited by FaleBowt, 28 June 2013 - 09:59 PM.

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

I voted yes, I've been thinking about a similar solution myself.

As for the details on what chassis sould get what quirks... I'm pretty sure you won't be able to find two people anywhere around here who agree on the same thing .

[Nothing Whatsoever]

FaleBowt, on 28 June 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

My vote: No.

Reason: I believe that would devolve the game into cheesers just using the boat capable 'mechs or variants therein. Resulting in not truely fixing the problem and discarding the little variety we currently have.



edit: My English isn't the best.

Well, may you define cheesers please?

I guess a main problem is pin-point damage of at least 25+ damage every 4 seconds or so; multiplied by focus fire. For most it is ranges beyond 300 Meters, where there is cause for concern.

[Xeren KelDar]

FaleBowt, on 28 June 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

My vote: No.

Reason: I believe that would devolve the game into cheesers just using the boat capable 'mechs or variants therein. Resulting in not truely fixing the problem and discarding the little variety we currently have.



edit: My English isn't the best.

I can understand this concern, but I don't think it would be as prevalent a problem as boating is now. Using the PPC as the example again limiting the standard allocation to two discourages the Highlander, Stalker, and Cataphract from boating 3 or more PPCs and these are the biggest offenders in this area. The Awesome has its large size as a detractor and there is an opinion that it is simply a walking CT so I don't think it would become as prevalent as the Stalker currently is for boating PPC.

Variants like the Catapult A1 or Hunchback 4P are all ready boats and wouldn't be changing that dynamic in any implementation of this boating system. The A1 has been a "cheese" chassis multiple times (streakcat and splatcat), but you could possibly limit it if need be by making its SSRM or SRM count for this system be 4 and maybe encourage to use LRMs as well.

The main theory behind my idea is that boats do and will exist, but we may be able to limit them with this system to chassis we know. The Awesome carried 3 PPC and is recognized by being an IS PPC boat, but that job is better filled by other mechs in MWO. The Catapult was one of the big players for being LRM support, but again has been eclipsed in MWO. Giving chassis quirks in this system to diversify them may help return some mechs to their original roles.

[Corvus Antaka]

no. just more heat dissapation for mechs like the awesome.