Hollander 35t can mount large ballistic weapons due to its specialist chassis that has to compromise on many common light mech features, Raven 35t shouldn't be able to mount large ballistic weapons, but currently does in MWO, where does it put them? These two images explain the sort of situation I want to see able to be addressed by adding the suggested feature:
Please note, this is a suggestion for how to balance hard point use, it is not advocating that every single hard point in every Mech must be restricted, merely asking if this is a suitable option to add a second layer of balancing for PGI to implement to enable some hard points to be restricted if needed.
*Edit 2* Alternative system to hard point size (slot number) restrictions for a given hard point would be maximum tonnage, have added a second part to the poll to find out which would be the preferred option as a means of balancing Mech builds for a specific hard point.
You must 'delete vote' to be able to vote in the second poll (and re-vote in the first).
*Edit* Updated with poll as requested for new suggestion guidelines.
As a solution to the 'insane' and 'cheese' builds commonly referred to, perhaps combining the current hardpoint system with a maximum capacity system (similar to that used in MW4) for some slots is the solution?
To give a couple of examples:
A Commando 2D is currently capable of using 2 energy weapons in its right arm. As it stands this means you can even cram an ERPPC into a tiny Commando.... Using the alternative system I propose you still have the 2 energy hard points for the right arm, but you combine it with a maximum slots being available. There are two ways to do this, either a) a total space allocation available e.g. of 2 slots (which will prevent ERPPC's being installed) or b ) allocated 1 slot per energy point for this chassis (thus limiting energy installation to light and medium lasers only) or 2 slots enabling large lasers also to be fitted, or one hard point with 2 slots and one hardpoint with 1 slot, enabling one to mount up to a single large laser, the other restricted to medium or small.
The Stalker 3F enables a 6 PPC/ERPPC Stalker, or 'cheese' build. Now this is because it has 6 energy hardpoints, located in 2x LA, 2 x RA, LT and RT. Each location has more than six slots available so can be crammed full of ERPPC's. If my suggested system was introduced this could be restricted by also allocating a maximum capacity for one or more hardpoints. Perhaps allow up to 4 in each arm, therefore limited the Mech to a maximum of 2 x PPC's in total for arms, and e.g. 3 in the left torso (allowing for a third PPC) and only 1 slot for the right torso (maximum medium lasers). This would immediately limited the build to 3 ERPPC's and then either medium/small in all other hard points. Alternatively the same build could use up to five large lasers, two per arm and 1 in left torso.
I've had crazy builds myself, one of my favourites was my AC20 Raven 2x... It was completely wrong in every way and given even I don't think it logically made sense it probably shouldn't have been allowed. If this system of having the additional layer of slot limitation able to be added for a given hard point, it would be very easy to restrict a Raven from mounting an AC20 by putting the maximum slots able to be used below 10.
The important things to bear in mind with this suggestion are:
1) Not every hard point has to include any slot based size restrictions.
2) This system could give PGI a relatively easy way to balance Mechs if cheese builds are discovered.
3) Ultimately the system should provide balance
to the force to MWO by preventing crazy builds that shouldn't really be possible e.g. a Gauss Rifle in a Commando or a 'Splatcat' with 6 x SRM 6's...
4) This doesn't mean each slot can be filled with a weapon, if a single hard points has up to 4 slots available this is still a single weapon allowed, but that weapon can be up to a size four for critical slots.
7
