15 replies to this topic

[ReaverLord]

Why are there very few mechs having a balanced hardpoint layout like the HBK-4SP? Is the Meta that there are physical restrictions? For instance ammo feed prevents running ammo through the leg or across the chest from Arm to Arm? Oh wait, we can do that...Why is there weird hardpoint layouts like 3 missiles points in one side and none on the other? Why is there 3-4 ballistics in one arm?<br>Why can't we have symmetrical looking mechs ?

[Angel of Annihilation]

ReaverLord, on 27 June 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Why are there very few mechs having a balanced hardpoint layout like the HBK-4SP? Is the Meta that there are physical restrictions? For instance ammo feed prevents running ammo through the leg or across the chest from Arm to Arm? Oh wait, we can do that...Why is there weird hardpoint layouts like 3 missiles points in one side and none on the other? Why is there 3-4 ballistics in one arm?<br>Why can't we have symmetrical looking mechs ?

Because if you follow the Table Top rules, weapon ammo had to be located in adjacent sections i.e. next to the weapon, not in the leg when the weapon was in the arm.

Then you have the fact that for it to be Mechwarrior, the mechs have to be similar in loadout to the classic mechs from the Battletech Technical Readouts which follow Table Top rule for mech construction.

And that is your answer.

[Bishop Steiner]

ReaverLord, on 27 June 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Why are there very few mechs having a balanced hardpoint layout like the HBK-4SP? Is the Meta that there are physical restrictions? For instance ammo feed prevents running ammo through the leg or across the chest from Arm to Arm? Oh wait, we can do that...Why is there weird hardpoint layouts like 3 missiles points in one side and none on the other? Why is there 3-4 ballistics in one arm?<br>Why can't we have symmetrical looking mechs ?

here's a question for you........

Why NOT?

Symmetrical is boring after a bit.

[Hans Von Lohman]

The tabletop mechs are actually design wonky on purpose. The board game has design rules in it from the beginning, and the makers of the game (Jordan Weisman was one of them) actually made the stats of the first mechs.

The deliberately made them unbalanced on purpose. They wanted room for improvement so the players would make their own mechs. So, you get odd mechs like the Trebuchet that has one of the LRM-15's on the left arm, or the JaegerMech that has very thin armor.

They wanted the players to have fun with it.

MWO often has extra hardpoints on a mech so they keep up with an average for that weight class. However, hardpoints are not part of the board game at all, and there you can design a100 ton assault mech with 20 small lasers and jump jets if you wanted to. Here, they have the hardpoint system that is still a bit flexible, but not to a great degree.

[Fate 6]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 June 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

here's a question for you........

Why NOT?

Symmetrical is boring after a bit.

Clan mechs would like a word with you (other than the Summoner and Hellbringer, they're oddballs)

[Bishop Steiner]

Fate 6, on 27 June 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

Clan mechs would like a word with you (other than the Summoner and Hellbringer, they're oddballs)

Don't Forget the Kit Fox, Viper, Ice Ferret and Executioner, not to mention almost ALL alternate variants of the the Omnis.....

[Angel of Annihilation]

Hans Von Lohman, on 27 June 2013 - 05:10 PM, said:

The tabletop mechs are actually design wonky on purpose. The board game has design rules in it from the beginning, and the makers of the game (Jordan Weisman was one of them) actually made the stats of the first mechs.

The deliberately made them unbalanced on purpose. They wanted room for improvement so the players would make their own mechs. So, you get odd mechs like the Trebuchet that has one of the LRM-15's on the left arm, or the JaegerMech that has very thin armor.

They wanted the players to have fun with it.

MWO often has extra hardpoints on a mech so they keep up with an average for that weight class. However, hardpoints are not part of the board game at all, and there you can design a100 ton assault mech with 20 small lasers and jump jets if you wanted to. Here, they have the hardpoint system that is still a bit flexible, but not to a great degree.

Disagree. Pure Battletech didn't allow for lets call it "field modifications" of Inner Sphere mechs. Basically they had only stock loadouts just like the trial mechs have. The only modification you had were factory modification aka the stock variants we see in game. Again these weren't modifiable.

The mech creation rules were in place so that people could create their own mechs from scratch and have the ruleset to do so. They were never intended to allow for ala carte modifications of existing mechs.

This was also why there was a big difference in Clan Omnimechs which were the only true field modifiable mechs in the game and even they were limited to swapping out modular weapons and equipment. You still couldn't change structure, engines, armor type, etc.

Mechlab however came along and pretty much invalidated Omnimech is one fell swoop so there is now no real difference between a Clan mech and an IS one especially since IS mechs can be modified to use Clan Tech weapons and equipment.

[627]

Viktor Drake, on 27 June 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Mechlab however came along and pretty much invalidated Omnimech is one fell swoop so there is now no real difference between a Clan mech and an IS one especially since IS mechs can be modified to use Clan Tech weapons and equipment.

This will be the biggest issue with clans... allow mixed tech or not. If you do, we have no problems with balancing because all IS mechs would be clan mechs, just another shape - in fact, they would be superior because an omni-mech can't change it's engine or structure.
Problem with this is, no one would ever field other equipment, only clan tech, that would obsolete our whole arsenal we have now.

I really hope there will be no mixed tech but other ways to balance this out. maybe something betwee all or nothing, like you may change two lasers for a heavy investment, but not more...

[xRatas]

627, on 27 June 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

This will be the biggest issue with clans... allow mixed tech or not. If you do, we have no problems with balancing because all IS mechs would be clan mechs, just another shape - in fact, they would be superior because an omni-mech can't change it's engine or structure.
Problem with this is, no one would ever field other equipment, only clan tech, that would obsolete our whole arsenal we have now.

I really hope there will be no mixed tech but other ways to balance this out. maybe something betwee all or nothing, like you may change two lasers for a heavy investment, but not more...

IS mechs are not supposed to be able to change engine or structure either.

But I'd like to see pure tech too, and it will be balancing nightmare.

Btw. Endo steel swap is one of the stupidest allowable upgrade. It would be cheaper to buy mech with endosteel as a new than upgrade your old... That's what ferro fibrous is. It was possible to refit a mech with it.

[DarkDevilDancer]

Given that the devs clearly respect the TT and lore I doubt you'll ever be able to just buy clantech and fit it to a IS mech.

Maybe when CW comes in they'll be a system to salvage the odd clan weapon.

But as said Above IS mechs are already in effect omnimechs so the clans will need their superior weapons to stand out against players already mastered battlemechs.

[Aim64C]

I would argue that the best way to go about mix-tech would be the idea of individual weapon manufacturers amongst the Inner Sphere with different manufacturers having different advantages/disadvantages. Making it so that running weapons from the same manufacturer conveys a reduction to heat, or something along those lines, might pan out alright.

The Clan weapons would be, overall, superior - but would not come with the same diversity as the Inner Sphere varieties.

Of course, I'm sure someone more versed in the lore will come along and inform me that there was extensive diversity in weapon supply amongst the clans and we'd have to do the same thing for both sides...

but you know... It's a thought.

Though, honestly, I think we need to revisit the hardpoint concept. I don't think it's functioning quite as intended.

[Amsro]

DarkDevilDancer, on 28 June 2013 - 02:43 AM, said:

Given that the devs clearly respect the TT and lore ?

Other then mech chassis names and weapon names not much is left from TT in this game. It is very much something different with a MechWarrior Skin at this cross in the road.

[Kamarok]

Viktor Drake, on 27 June 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Disagree. Pure Battletech didn't allow for lets call it "field modifications" of Inner Sphere mechs. Basically they had only stock loadouts just like the trial mechs have. The only modification you had were factory modification aka the stock variants we see in game. Again these weren't modifiable.

The mech creation rules were in place so that people could create their own mechs from scratch and have the ruleset to do so. They were never intended to allow for ala carte modifications of existing mechs.

This was also why there was a big difference in Clan Omnimechs which were the only true field modifiable mechs in the game and even they were limited to swapping out modular weapons and equipment. You still couldn't change structure, engines, armor type, etc.

Mechlab however came along and pretty much invalidated Omnimech is one fell swoop so there is now no real difference between a Clan mech and an IS one especially since IS mechs can be modified to use Clan Tech weapons and equipment.

Viktor, please point me to the rule about not being able to modify the standard IS mechs in TT? I've played for years and years (well since the 80's) and I've never seen any specific rule about it (I even just glanced through my basic battletech rules on it just to make sure I was remembering right). The Constructions rules are designed to create your own mechs, agreed, and you might not be able to do more than the most basic battlefield retros (because unlike the Omni's, they are not designed to be swapped out on a moments notice), but the very fact of the existance of variants says that with the proper equipment, you can create your own variant of a basic mech. Some of those variants include different engines and even Jump Jets when the original didn't have either. Obviously, it makes sense that you can't just field change internal structure, but if you have a full mechbay, you should be able to fully strip a mech, and mount the equipment on a new internal structure. The advantage of Clan over IS mechs is in the field, while they cannot change internel structure, engines and the like, they can quickly change their pods to get the weapons and other like equipment to match the coming mission. Not sure how MWO will simulate this, or if they will even try.

While I am at it, I kind of understand the reason for the hardpoints that MWO uses here, but in original TT, the only limits are the internal structure slots available which made for a more flexible loadout. I think they are too tight myself, but it keeps down on maxing out the best available weapons only. Sometimes I do wish that instead of limiting by Balistic, Missile or Energy, they were just hardpoints and you could just mount whatever in the same number, but doubt that will happen for the same reason, to prevent maxing.

[xRatas]

Swapping a laser instead of autocannon, or ppc in place of LRM is considered quite radical modification in BT lore. Bossible to do as a field modification, but most likely takes days or weeks to pull off.

IS mech never were unmodifiable, but hard to modify. If you install something, it is a lot of work, and can not be changed back easily either. Also adding new or different weapons to targeting system was largely unknown tech still at 3050. For example, Marauder's lore tells that many techs bypass whole targeting and just install hard switch for refitted laser so pilotcan use it. Omnimechs on the other hand have modular swap pods, so they could be refitted to pilot's tastes and even mission specific loadouts to some decree.

Edit: interesting solution would be to lock mechs for hours, days or weeks after serious refit. And completely crazy refit costs for things that should not be refitted. I'd like that.

Edited by xRatas, 28 June 2013 - 05:52 AM.

[SMDMadCow]

Viktor Drake, on 27 June 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

Because if you follow the Table Top rules, weapon ammo had to be located in adjacent sections i.e. next to the weapon, not in the leg when the weapon was in the arm.

Then you have the fact that for it to be Mechwarrior, the mechs have to be similar in loadout to the classic mechs from the Battletech Technical Readouts which follow Table Top rule for mech construction.

And that is your answer.

No such rule exists regarding ammo placement.

[Angel of Annihilation]

DarkDevilDancer, on 28 June 2013 - 02:43 AM, said:

Given that the devs clearly respect the TT and lore I doubt you'll ever be able to just buy clantech and fit it to a IS mech.

Maybe when CW comes in they'll be a system to salvage the odd clan weapon.

But as said Above IS mechs are already in effect omnimechs so the clans will need their superior weapons to stand out against players already mastered battlemechs.

Which lore are you talking about. I have read all the Clan Era Battletech novels and the Inner Sphere clearly adopted Clan Tech into their mechs. It was in fact very common for the Inner Sphere forces to field modify caputered/salvaged Clan weapons and mount them on Inner Sphere mechs to allow them to be more competitive. PGI would be crazy not to jump on this fact and use it to address the balancing issues of Clan vs Inner Sphere.

No unfortunately at some point the only barrier to our current mech mounting all Clan tech is going to be cost. Remember an Omnimech typically runs about 24 million C-bills out the gate or 2.5x the cost of our existing mechs. Want a Clan ER PPC? Sure you can have it but it is going to cost you 3 million, not 600k.