159 replies to this topic

[Big Giant Head]

Kyrs, on 27 July 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

like the other said!
I would go with heat penalty, not limitation
the hardpoint system should let you put big weapons but with a heat penalty. In other words remove the heat scale but put the hard point heat scale limitation.

exemple of number (didn't do the math of those)
-energy; +50% heat per exceeded slots (if it not a stackable slot)
-balistic; 20% heat per slots (if not stackable slot)

This should be easier to understand for new players, since your putting to much electricity in those wires feeding the hardpoint (HEAT UP TO MUCH). In 3050 we don't use breaker!!!

Right now your just offerring added layer MW4 limitation over MWO system. Which is very bitter to the taste for many players.

Id like to replace heat with cooldown on ballistics, because its kinda unrealistic.

Edited by Big Giant Head, 27 July 2013 - 01:28 PM.

[Rhakhas]

Interesting the different approaches people have to this topic. When I first heard the idea of hardpoint limitations, my immediate thought was that would mean each hardpoint was allocated a limited number of critical slots. The number that made the most sense to me was the value for the stock weapon +1 (possibly +3 for ballistics, and/or +0 for SLs and MGs).

eg. an energy hardpoint that had a medium laser in the stock loadout would have 1+1=2 available crit slots. Meaning you could fit a small, medium or large laser, but not a ppc. It's simple, easy to communicate, and it works equally across all weapon categories. (With missiles it would also add the interesting choice of "do I want artemis, or a bigger launcher?")

The main issues would be how to handle extra hardpoints and multiple hardpoints in one location. (As in, can you combine 2 hardpoints to increase the space.)

Anyway, as I said, that was my first thought, and still I think the system I would prefer. Suggestions like the OPs, I think are a bit too limiting, you may as well just have a stock only mode (which they said they would like to implement).

[Kyrs]

Big Giant Head, on 27 July 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

Id like to replace heat with cooldown on ballistics, because its kinda unrealistic.

That you be great since cooldown would nerf guass ppc combo...

[shasta girl]

Kyrs, on 27 July 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

That you be great since cooldown would nerf guass ppc combo...

very true.

[Big Giant Head]

Rhakhas, on 27 July 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

Interesting the different approaches people have to this topic. When I first heard the idea of hardpoint limitations, my immediate thought was that would mean each hardpoint was allocated a limited number of critical slots. The number that made the most sense to me was the value for the stock weapon +1 (possibly +3 for ballistics, and/or +0 for SLs and MGs).

eg. an energy hardpoint that had a medium laser in the stock loadout would have 1+1=2 available crit slots. Meaning you could fit a small, medium or large laser, but not a ppc. It's simple, easy to communicate, and it works equally across all weapon categories. (With missiles it would also add the interesting choice of "do I want artemis, or a bigger launcher?")

The main issues would be how to handle extra hardpoints and multiple hardpoints in one location. (As in, can you combine 2 hardpoints to increase the space.)

Anyway, as I said, that was my first thought, and still I think the system I would prefer. Suggestions like the OPs, I think are a bit too limiting, you may as well just have a stock only mode (which they said they would like to implement).

Critical slot system doesnt have to be a huge problem.
We can still have it of course, but what would I do is to take weapon hardpoint layout in another window to substract it visually from critical slots.
And when you are done loading weapons in hardpoint slots, they fit themselves back in critical slot system, with their true crit size.

Quote

The main issues would be how to handle extra hardpoints and multiple hardpoints in one location. (As in, can you combine 2 hardpoints to increase the space.)

If you could increase space of any hardpoint that wouldnt be so great, now it would be great if you could do it, but if you sacrifice something:
like if you want to expand your energy critical from 2 to 3 it takes few structure slots of that component
or
you have to subtract 1 hardpoint segment from another, to add to your new hardpoint, so lets say you have 2 energy hardpoints in your arm and 2 ballistic hardpoints in your torso, you take 1 ballistic hardpoint from torso and add it to your arm energy hardpoint.

Because if you allow player to expand it, without sacrificing something it denies hardpoint limitation.

Edited by Big Giant Head, 27 July 2013 - 11:52 PM.

[Drunk Canuck]

Big Giant Head, on 26 July 2013 - 04:27 PM, said:

Was it hardpoint layout of each mech terrible in MW4 or the actual system of hardpoint slots, because those are two different things.
MW4 hardpoint layout for each mech was terrible because devs didnt used hardpoint slot system to full potential.
Plus on the other hand we here at MWO have variants, meaning more diversity - but it seems that that didnt work out well

I think it's a combination of both, the hardpoint slots limited you in terms of what you could carry, but you didn't have to work things like heat sinks, ECM, AMS and whatnot into each section of the Mech. I think that being able to say that a Light shouldn't be able to mount ER PPC's and Large Lasers is reasonable, however. At the same time, having limits on the slots would literally hamper Mech's in the smaller weight categories. XL engines take up extra space, so if you have say a Jenner, you would be limited to 1 slot in the torso for an energy or missile weapon, then the others would have to be allocated for AMS and heat sinks.

[Alreech]

Postumus, on 28 June 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

The idea of implementing MechWarrior 4 style hardpoint sizes has been around as long as this game has, as a way to add some common sense limits to mech customization, encourage balanced loadouts, and curb some of the more egregious cheese builds.

The idea is that all weapons can be divided into roughly 3 categories: small, medium, and large. Small weapons could include things like small and medium lasers, machineguns, SSRM2, SRM2, LRM5, and maybe SRM4 or AC/2. Medium weapons could include large lasers, AC/5, SRM6, LRM 10, and maybe LRM 15. Large weapons would be PPCs, AC/10 and 20, LRM20, weapon systems that are very big (volume/crit slots) and very heavy.

I like that suggestion, although I don't believe the DEVs would change it, because it will set up a massive stir in the community.

A smaller fix would to be to change the PPCs class to ballistic and the Machine Guns class to Energy.
It would need a redefinition of the Hardpoints in certain Mechs like the Catapult 2K:
Energy Hardpoint in the Arm to Ballistic, Ballistic Hardpoint in the Torso to Energy Hardpoint.

Stuffing a PPCs in a Place that have had hold a Small Laser or a Gaus instead of a Machine Gun wouldn't be possible any more. The Gausapult would be still possible, only with the Gausrifles in the arms.

[Big Giant Head]

Yes hardpoint sizes should be implemented.

Now question is what kind of limit will hardpoint sizes have?
Either:

• Completely limiting loading weapons in slots that are smaller than weapon size
  
• Add some kind of heat trade-off
  
• Add some kind of cooldown trade-off
  
• heat dissipation trade-off
  
• occupation of internal structure
  
• ...

[Karl Streiger]

Alreech, on 31 July 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

I like that suggestion, although I don't believe the DEVs would change it, because it will set up a massive stir in the community.

A smaller fix would to be to change the PPCs class to ballistic and the Machine Guns class to Energy.
It would need a redefinition of the Hardpoints in certain Mechs like the Catapult 2K:
Energy Hardpoint in the Arm to Ballistic, Ballistic Hardpoint in the Torso to Energy Hardpoint.

Stuffing a PPCs in a Place that have had hold a Small Laser or a Gaus instead of a Machine Gun wouldn't be possible any more. The Gausapult would be still possible, only with the Gausrifles in the arms.

First glance did sound good, on the second glance....hm dunno with PPCs ballistic the JaegerMech becomes a PPC carrier.
oh and my Atlas is also able to have multiple PPCs

Not the problem because of heat stacking - althoug i hope its just a temporary fix.

If you follow that idea however....
PPCs in the arms of a K2 became primary weapons. able to mount energy or ballistic
Jaeger in the arms as primary weapons - able to mount ballistic only

Big Giant Head, on 01 August 2013 - 01:34 AM, said:

Yes hardpoint sizes should be implemented.

Now question is what kind of limit will hardpoint sizes have?
Either:

• Completely limiting loading weapons in slots that are smaller than weapon size
  
• Add some kind of heat trade-off
  
• Add some kind of cooldown trade-off
  
• heat dissipation trade-off
  
• occupation of internal structure
  
• ...

Stick with the Refit Kit rules;
with increasing costs of GXP and C-Bills for each kit
Kit - E OR F are only possible once

Quote

REFIT KITS
Refit kits are factory-produced packages, often created by the
unit’s original manufacturer. The parts have been carefully selected
to be compatible with a specifi c unit. Extensive supporting documentation
is provided to make installation relatively straightforward.
The disadvantage of refi t kits is that they off er only a limited choice
of options. Refi t kits are graded by complexity. A relatively minor
modifi cation can be done in the fi eld, but others are more involved
and require a fully equipped maintenance facility or even access to
the kind of support only found in a manufacturing center.

Standard refit kits are available for any variant of a specific design
published in the Technical Readouts.

OmniMech versions of older
designs are always treated as a separate design in such cases. For
example, a BJ-1 Blackjack can be refi tted into a BJ-1DB, BJ-1DC, BJ-2,
BJ-3 or BJ-4 model. It cannot be refi tted into a BJ2-O OmniMech.
Refi t kits are not available for DropShips, JumpShips, WarShips
or Space Stations.

Any weapon/equipment can be removed and left off ; it does
not always have to be replaced with something else. In all situations
the refi t class still applies to the type of item removed. The
classifi cation of a refi t kit is determined by the highest class of
modifi cation included within the kit.

Class A Refit (Field): This kit allows players to replace one
weapon with another of the same category and with the same
(or fewer) critical spaces (including ammunition). For example,
players may replace a medium laser with a medium pulse laser or
ER medium laser, or replace an AC/10 with an LB 10-X AC, and so
on. Additionally, changing a weapon’s location or facing falls into
this category.

Class B Re t (Field): This kit allows replacement of one category
of weapon with another class of weapon(s), but with the same or
fewer critical spaces (including ammunition); for example, replacing
a machine gun and ammo with a small pulse laser, replacing
a Gauss rifl e with two large lasers (as they’re both the same class
and have fewer critical slots), and so on.

Class C Re t (Maintenance): This kit allows players to replace
one type of armor with another (all locations); for example, replacing
standard armor with ferro-fi brous. A Class C kit also enables
replacement of a weapon or item of equipment with any other,
even if it is larger than the item(s) being replaced; for example,
replacing an ER large laser with an LRM-10 launcher and ammunition.
Players may also change armor quantity and/or distribution,
move a component, or add ammunition or a heat sink.

Class D Re t (Maintenance): This kit permits players to install
a new item where previously there was none, or to install an ECM
suite, C3 system or targeting computer. Players may also change
heat sink types (including those integral to an engine) or engine
ratings (but not the engine type). Finally, a Class D kit allows players
to replace a location with a custom part.

Class E Re t (Factory): This kit lets players change the type of
myomer installed, install CASE, and/or increase the unit’s Quality
Rating one level.

Class F Refit (Factory): This kit lets players change a unit’s
internal structure type (all locations), engine type, gyro type, or
cockpit type. If a fusion engine is replaced by another type of
power plant, i.e. Fission or ICE, then the total number of heat sinks
mounted should be adjusted as indicated on the bonus heat sink
table (see p. 71, TM).

A refit kit to upgrade a JM6-S JagerMech to the JM6-DD
model involves:
• Replacing the medium lasers with medium pulse lasers (A)
• Replacing the AC/5s with Ultra AC/5s ©
• Replacing the standard engine with a XL (F)
• Add CASE (E)
• Change single heat sinks for double heat sinks (D)
• Move AC/2 ammo from center torso to left torso ©
• Add an additional ton of AC/2 ammo to the right torso ©
• Change armor from standard to ferro-fi brous ©

The highest refit class is F, making this a Factory-level refi t.

A refi t kit to modify an ALM-7D Fireball to an ALM-8D model
involves:
• Replacing the Streak SRM 2 and Ammo with 2 Medium
Lasers (
• Add Armor ©
The highest refi t class is C, making this a Maintenance-level refit.

[Big Giant Head]

Karl Streiger, on 01 August 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

First glance did sound good, on the second glance....hm dunno with PPCs ballistic the JaegerMech becomes a PPC carrier.
oh and my Atlas is also able to have multiple PPCs

Not the problem because of heat stacking - althoug i hope its just a temporary fix.

If you follow that idea however....
PPCs in the arms of a K2 became primary weapons. able to mount energy or ballistic
Jaeger in the arms as primary weapons - able to mount ballistic only




Stick with the Refit Kit rules;
with increasing costs of GXP and C-Bills for each kit
Kit - E OR F are only possible once

Im still trying to figure it out.
I like it because you seperated whole customization proces in several actions and if you would like to increase your customization freedom you will have to put your mech under maintaince ( C ) which would take some time, right?

Edited by Big Giant Head, 01 August 2013 - 02:23 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Big Giant Head, on 01 August 2013 - 02:23 AM, said:

Im still trying to figure it out.
I like it because you seperated whole customization proces in several actions and if you would like to increase your customization freedom you will have to put your mech under maintaince ( C ) which would take some time, right?

Exactly.
The best thing it is lore conform and it allows more freedom we have actually.
It negates free Omnification for BattleMechs as well.


Some Drawbacks:
You need more grinding, or you know exactly what you want:
for example a F - refit - you build the loadout and the upgrades of your mech first, than buy it, you have to pay additional for the F- kit wiht GXP and C-Bills.

After that you can only make changes of A-D

Edited by Karl Streiger, 01 August 2013 - 02:45 AM.

[Big Giant Head]

Karl Streiger, on 01 August 2013 - 02:43 AM, said:

Exactly.
The best thing it is lore conform and it allows more freedom we have actually.
It negates free Omnification for BattleMechs as well.


Some Drawbacks:
You need more grinding, or you know exactly what you want:
for example a F - refit - you build the loadout and the upgrades of your mech first, than buy it, you have to pay additional for the F- kit wiht GXP and C-Bills.

After that you can only make changes of A-D

Oh so E and F are permanent because they are made in factory.
So maintence and field, how are they different?

Im thinking its like if you do changes on "maintence level" you would have to sacrifice time in order to make those changes, but "field" level is real-time customization we have now, but its more restrictive than "maintence", correct?

[Distemper]

PGIs stock builds are generally terrible and you want a system where customisation possibilities are more closely linked/limited by those same stock builds? Madness.

[Karl Streiger]

Distemper, on 01 August 2013 - 03:52 AM, said:

PGIs stock builds are generally terrible and you want a system where customisation possibilities are more closely linked/limited by those same stock builds? Madness.

Nice that you said it. I think the madness is in the other direction. Why to create a game were - iconic BattleMechs in their loved and known config doesn't work?
Should all balancing not be achieved by - making the trial or stock mechs playable?

Big Giant Head, on 01 August 2013 - 02:56 AM, said:

Oh so E and F are permanent because they are made in factory.
So maintence and field, how are they different?

Im thinking its like if you do changes on "maintence level" you would have to sacrifice time in order to make those changes, but "field" level is real-time customization we have now, but its more restrictive than "maintence", correct?

Maintenace is made for example on a drohship in the hangar bay.
Were you can dismantle a complete mech.

E - is interesting...quality upgrade. We know it from cars that need that handling, so why not for mechs?
100 battles and after that the mech becomes worse with each battle - making it necessary to check it.

Another idea - while A and B are possible as players like, the other refit kits could be limited to refit kits that have to be patched into the game by the devs.

Would be interesting and something to look forward:
for example - tomorrow they bring the Refit Kit C for the JaegerMech DD allowing to place GaussRifles instead off the ACs.
or replacing the AS7-Ks Gauss für a dual Ultra 5. Something like that.
The devs could so directly influence any FotM. They could even make those Kits only available for a short period. (for example only on the 5th August you can buy the Refit Kit D - for the Stalker 5M - replacing the MLAS for PPCs and the Large Laser for a Large Pulse Laser - swapping out the LRMs and SRMs for Streak SRMs.

Or they bring the Striker Refit Kit - for the 8V Awesome - giving that thing a AC 5 instead of missiles

Edited by Karl Streiger, 01 August 2013 - 04:34 AM.

[Big Giant Head]

Distemper, on 01 August 2013 - 03:52 AM, said:

PGIs stock builds are generally terrible and you want a system where customisation possibilities are more closely linked/limited by those same stock builds? Madness.

First, stock mechs are terrible because of the poor SHS situation - its not wotking as devs imagined and because every mech HAS to have ES as well
Second, system is not trying to reduce customization to stock mechs completely. Goal of this system is to reduce freedom of customization that we currently have now to customization that is close to stock layout - not exact stock layout.
Freedom is not always good thing when you allow too much freedom everything will rotate over same weapons and builds. Restricition is what pushes you to think.
Currently, variants of the same chassis are not different enough, so reson for their existence is starting to fade
Example: Why should I buy Dragon 5N over Dragon 1C when I can apply same cookie cutter build on every mech (Gauss and 2 LL/ 2 PPCs )

Reson why other mechs exist is their hardpoint slot layout. We currently are in state where we can jam AC/2o or Gauss in any ballistic slot.
Same with energy and with missiles.

If you would actually look around and see what ppl are posting on this thread that would be great

[Big Giant Head]

Karl Streiger, on 01 August 2013 - 04:33 AM, said:

Would be interesting and something to look forward:
for example - tomorrow they bring the Refit Kit C for the JaegerMech DD allowing to place GaussRifles instead off the ACs.
or replacing the AS7-Ks Gauss für a dual Ultra 5. Something like that.
The devs could so directly influence any FotM. They could even make those Kits only available for a short period. (for example only on the 5th August you can buy the Refit Kit D - for the Stalker 5M - replacing the MLAS for PPCs and the Large Laser for a Large Pulse Laser - swapping out the LRMs and SRMs for Streak SRMs.

Or they bring the Striker Refit Kit - for the 8V Awesome - giving that thing a AC 5 instead of missiles

Okay, those refit kits allow you to change weapons just once or how?

[Karl Streiger]

Big Giant Head, on 01 August 2013 - 04:42 AM, said:

Okay, those refit kits allow you to change weapons just once or how?

You have to buy those Refit Kits and you only get the parts of that kit - only for a specifc mech.

For Kit A or maybe even B you don't have to buy extra kits. They work exactly like hardpoint sizes.
Although you have to be carefull with changing types of equipment.

At least it will make different variants obsolete.
So you buy a Hunchback 4G and change it with Kit B towards a 6P

• swap AC 20 for 6 MLAS (
  
• adding heatsinks (?

However you can not change a 4P Hunchback into a 4G without maintenance

Those reminds me at another MechGame working with Cards and Equipment. but I'm not allowed to say more.
Most interesting would be interchangeable equipment. For example you can mount the Poland Main A Gauss Rifle into the arms of a JM6-DGJaegerMech Refit Kit or the Torso of a Caesar Refit Kit for the Catapract 3D - but not into the Atlas D Refit Kit AS7-K.

The best benefit i see from such a "new" idea - is that if the Devs didn't want to have dual AC 20 jags - or dual Gauss Cats they should not make a Refit Kit available with those weapons.

[Big Giant Head]

Karl Streiger, on 01 August 2013 - 06:00 AM, said:

You have to buy those Refit Kits and you only get the parts of that kit - only for a specifc mech.

For Kit A or maybe even B you don't have to buy extra kits. They work exactly like hardpoint sizes.
Although you have to be carefull with changing types of equipment.

At least it will make different variants obsolete.
So you buy a Hunchback 4G and change it with Kit B towards a 6P

• swap AC 20 for 6 MLAS (
  
• adding heatsinks ( ?

However you can not change a 4P Hunchback into a 4G without maintenance


Those reminds me at another MechGame working with Cards and Equipment. but I'm not allowed to say more.
Most interesting would be interchangeable equipment. For example you can mount the Poland Main A Gauss Rifle into the arms of a JM6-DGJaegerMech Refit Kit or the Torso of a Caesar Refit Kit for the Catapract 3D - but not into the Atlas D Refit Kit AS7-K.

The best benefit i see from such a "new" idea - is that if the Devs didn't want to have dual AC 20 jags - or dual Gauss Cats they should not make a Refit Kit available with those weapons.

Although, we are driving of the topic here but anyway
With your system proposed would it be good to put higher cost in R&R when you switch of from stock to some other.
Because stock is easier to repair.

[Karl Streiger]

Big Giant Head, on 01 August 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

Although, we are driving of the topic here but anyway
With your system proposed would it be good to put higher cost in R&R when you switch of from stock to some other.
Because stock is easier to repair.

Maybe - but in general it still the same question, how to make the MechLab a working part of MWO experience.
R&R would be interesting eighter.

Afaik the first RnR was bad - the only advantage were FF would have could beaten ES was not used (repairing armor is much cheaper as repairing internals) - i think a well rounded R&R would be an inrichment. As long it is not possible to run broken builds with investment of real money.

A field kit - is a "official" upgrade - it has all information for your techs including how to install and maintain the Mech.
And Maintenantce is another option for a well rounded experience, as well as salvage.

So at least every Kit from C to F are "stock" mechs. only player customs at A and B are real customisation within the "hardpoint" size - but at least hard point size is the wrong term.
Because:
I have a AC 5 8t 4 crit: I can replace it with a AC2 or MG (Kit A)
Or i can replace it with a single PPC - Kit B
Or i can replace it with a LRM 15 Kit B
Or i can replace it with 3 MPLAS (not 4)

Same goes for Gauss...can replace it with 2 Large Laser or 2 PPCs.

And now you think that is senseless because it open again the problem we had before the heat stacking?
No not really:
Take for example the JM6-G field Kit...its a JM-6DD replacing the Autocannons for GaussRifles...now you can switch it for 4 PPCs....great? Not really because you still depend on Single Heatsink, as long as there is no "Simple" Refit - turn SHS into DHS or turn Standard Structure into ES everything is fine.

The Firebrand for example - could also not mount Quad PPCs..because its AC 2 are not able to turn into anything else. (maybe you need an exception here - because the only possible weapon would be the Machine Gun)

[Alreech]

Distemper, on 01 August 2013 - 03:52 AM, said:

PGIs stock builds are generally terrible and you want a system where customisation possibilities are more closely linked/limited by those same stock builds? Madness.

Stock Mechs are terrible because PGI uses the Mechvariants from the Boardgame,
with the Construction Rules of the Boardgame,
Weaponstats from the Bordgame,
and that leads "surprise, surprise" to the same problem the Boardgame has:
Players maxing out the Construction Rules by using only the Weapons with the best Stats.

One of the most important unofficial rule between players of the Boardgame is: only stock Mechs, no modified Mechs.
The Boardgame is very boring, if anyone plays only mechs with PPCs, Gausrifles or lots of Lasers.

FASA tryied to fix the problem of the "useless" weapons (MG, SRMs, LRMs, AC2, AC5) by introducing Clan Tech to the Boardgame:
They reduced the weight of the weapons to get a better damage/heat/weight ratio - and "surprise surpise" it didn't change anything besides the possibilty to put more useless weapons in the stock variants.
Finally they give up, and many of the stock Mechs in the latest Technical Readouts are heavy and assaults with two, three or even four ER-PPCs & Gausrifles.
Sounds familiar, right ?

Even the actual Hardpoint System that allows you to change a 0,5 ton Machine Gun with a 15 ton Gausrifle is more restricting as the Board Game, but it's IMHO not strict enough.
IMHO Piranha have to get the Hardpointsystem fixed, or they should give up and max the stock Mechs out.
The Thunderbolt could for example be delivered with a PPC in the right arm, three PPCs and two Streak SRMs in the left torso and a Gaus Rifle or two AC2s in the left Arm.
Because that's the way this Mech will be maxed out, and nobody will use the classic Loadout with LargeLaser / three Medium Laser / LRM 15 & two Machine Guns