64 replies to this topic

[HansBlix WMD]

There are (many) threads with the very decent suggestion of adding sizes to hardpoints (usually just small and large). The notion of weapon size already exists, represented by critical slots.

Why not just assign a max number of critical slots to each hardpoint? If canon- and balance-wise we want an energy hardpoint to be able to mount anything up to a ppc, make it a 3-pointer.

If we want a tiny energy hardpoint to be restricted to small/medium lasers, make it a 1 pointer.

Similarly the jagermech could have hardpoints that rule out AC/20s (given its canon anti-aircraft flak cannon role).

Different variants could then represent really different flavors, e.g. maybe one variant of the jagermech does have hardpoints with enough crit slots to mount AC/20s, if we want that.

I realize this does somewhat restrict customization, but I think the net effect overall would be very positive.

[FupDup]

This would let me put 3 ML in my K2's arms, so in some cases it actually lets you equip more than what the TT loadout had (see also: Hunchback with lots of MGs).

Of course, some variants like the A1 would have to get a lot more crit space's worth of hardpoints than the other variants of the chassis because it comes stock with the same size of LRMs (like 5 crit spaces per arm?). Overall, I think mediums and lights could stand to use a little more "liberal" sizes of hardpoints than heavies/assaults (under the same system) to help them out a little bit. Do want 10 MG Hunchback.

Edited by FupDup, 03 July 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[RG Notch]

HansBlix WMD, on 03 July 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

There are (many) threads with the very decent suggestion of adding sizes to hardpoints (usually just small and large). The notion of weapon size already exists, represented by critical slots.

Why not just assign a max number of critical slots to each hardpoint? If canon- and balance-wise we want an energy hardpoint to be able to mount anything up to a ppc, make it a 3-pointer.

If we want a tiny energy hardpoint to be restricted to small/medium lasers, make it a 1 pointer.

Similarly the jagermech could have hardpoints that rule out AC/20s (given its canon anti-aircraft flak cannon role).

Different variants could then represent really different flavors, e.g. maybe one variant of the jagermech does have hardpoints with enough crit slots to mount AC/20s, if we want that.

I realize this does somewhat restrict customization, but I think the net effect overall would be very positive.

What net overall effect? The move from only seeing a certain set of weapons to only seeing a certain set of variants? If weapons aren't balanced, all you will see is more of the variants that can carry the OP weapons.

[HansBlix WMD]

RG Notch, on 03 July 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

What net overall effect? The move from only seeing a certain set of weapons to only seeing a certain set of variants? If weapons aren't balanced, all you will see is more of the variants that can carry the OP weapons.

This is a really good point, but it has a solution. Take the stalker, for example. Let's decide as a community what the max number of PPCs on it should be. Let's say we decide that it's two, to let the Awesome stand out as the only mech that can mount three PPCs.

Then make two of the energy hardpoints 3-critters, and the rest 2, so it can fill out with large lasers or whatever it wants.

[RG Notch]

HansBlix WMD, on 03 July 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

This is a really good point, but it has a solution. Take the stalker, for example. Let's decide as a community what the max number of PPCs on it should be. Let's say we decide that it's two, to let the Awesome stand out as the only mech that can mount three PPCs.

Then make two of the energy hardpoints 3-critters, and the rest 2, so it can fill out with large lasers or whatever it wants.

I'm fine with hardpoint size for variant and mech diversity, I just don't think it will change the meta without weapon balance. You have to realize the "competitive" players don't want diversity, they want what's going to win. The problem is without weapon balance, they will find whatever variants are OP and that's all we'll see once it starts to trickle down.

[HansBlix WMD]

I think you are right in saying that the most competitive players will seek out the most competitive builds, like water down a hill.

However I believe it's possible for us to make those most competitive builds more interesting and varied than "make the biggest pinpoint alpha you can". At the least make different situations call for different optimal builds, whereas at the moment pinpoint alpha is the best at long range, short range, urban, hilly, whatever.

[RG Notch]

HansBlix WMD, on 03 July 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

I think you are right in saying that the most competitive players will seek out the most competitive builds, like water down a hill.

However I believe it's possible for us to make those most competitive builds more interesting and varied than "make the biggest pinpoint alpha you can". At the least make different situations call for different optimal builds, whereas at the moment pinpoint alpha is the best at long range, short range, urban, hilly, whatever.

Certainly, but I believe in order for that to happen something needs to be done about the massive pin point alphas hitting a single section. Absent that and obviously better weapon balance, all we will get is a shift to a handful of variants as opposed to a handful of weapons used on most variants. I just don't think that hardpoint limits alone will do anything to change the meta of massive pinpoint alphas.

[IceSerpent]

FupDup, on 03 July 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

This would let me put 3 ML in my K2's arms, so in some cases it actually lets you equip more than what the TT loadout had (see also: Hunchback with lots of MGs).

How do you figure? A single energy hardpoint that can hold up to 3 crits still can only mount a single weapon, so 3 MLs in K2's arm ain't gonna happen.

[Jonny Taco]

Just in, crit slot system does not work, has not work, and will not work w/o further restrictions. It's been stated by CB testers in multiple waves (including at the very beggining of testing), it's been stated by founders, and it's been stated by many others in the months since then.

There is no coincidence that this idea keeps showing it's head over and over again for more than 10 months...


BTW HANZ, you're spot on as usuall. Keep up the good work.

Edited by lartfor, 03 July 2013 - 09:27 AM.

[FupDup]

IceSerpent, on 03 July 2013 - 09:24 AM, said:

How do you figure? A single energy hardpoint that can hold up to 3 crits still can only mount a single weapon, so 3 MLs in K2's arm ain't gonna happen.

The way the OP was suggesting it, it wasn't hardcoded to limit to one weapon per HP.


Seriously, if my arm can hold a PPC I think it can hold more than one Flamer or whatever. Small weapons aren't as evil as PGI makes them out to be. Why does everyone hate small weapons carried in moderate or large quantities? It's not any worse (probably not even as bad as) 4+ PPCs...

Edited by FupDup, 03 July 2013 - 09:28 AM.

[Dawnstealer]

FupDup, on 03 July 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

This would let me put 3 ML in my K2's arms, so in some cases it actually lets you equip more than what the TT loadout had (see also: Hunchback with lots of MGs).

Of course, some variants like the A1 would have to get a lot more crit space's worth of hardpoints than the other variants of the chassis because it comes stock with the same size of LRMs (like 5 crit spaces per arm?). Overall, I think mediums and lights could stand to use a little more "liberal" sizes of hardpoints than heavies/assaults (under the same system) to help them out a little bit. Do want 10 MG Hunchback.

I think I had a post earlier about this, but it doesn't change the number of slots: it only limits the size of the weapon that can be put in the slot. So if you have two Ballistic Medium slots in your right arm, you could put two machine guns in there, two AC5s, or two AC2s, but you couldn't drop an AC20 or Gauss in there because it's too big and too heavy for the arm.

[HansBlix WMD]

RG Notch, on 03 July 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

Certainly, but I believe in order for that to happen something needs to be done about the massive pin point alphas hitting a single section. Absent that and obviously better weapon balance, all we will get is a shift to a handful of variants as opposed to a handful of weapons used on most variants. I just don't think that hardpoint limits alone will do anything to change the meta of massive pinpoint alphas.

There are two kinds of massive pinpoint alphas that are un-counterable by movement/torso twisting.

1) PPC+Gauss. This can be solved by this system! Work the hardpoints such that it's not possible to have more than X PPC and Y Gauss, where X*10+Y*15 < C, where C is the max pinpoint alpha damage we think is ok.

2) AC/40. This can be solved by this system. Decide if we want AC/40 to exist or not, then modify the Jager/Catapaults hardpoints accordingly.

Any other alpha (large lasers, SRMs, etc) can by countered by movement and torso twisting and takes a lot more skill to pull off than the "boom headshot" variety we have today.

[HansBlix WMD]

Thontor, on 03 July 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

I think it would be better to assign a max number of weapon-type specific critical slots to each component, shared between hardpoints of that weapon-type.

The Battlemaster's right torso for example has 3 energy hardpoints, and it could then have something like 5 energy critical slots. this would still allow you to put one PPC in there, but not 2 or 3.

I think this would help limit boating without limiting customization too much.

Good idea, it's an improvement on the OP.

[RG Notch]

HansBlix WMD, on 03 July 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

There are two kinds of massive pinpoint alphas that are un-counterable by movement/torso twisting.

1) PPC+Gauss. This can be solved by this system! Work the hardpoints such that it's not possible to have more than X PPC and Y Gauss, where X*10+Y*15 < C, where C is the max pinpoint alpha damage we think is ok.

2) AC/40. This can be solved by this system. Decide if we want AC/40 to exist or not, then modify the Jager/Catapaults hardpoints accordingly.

Any other alpha (large lasers, SRMs, etc) can by countered by movement and torso twisting and takes a lot more skill to pull off than the "boom headshot" variety we have today.

So then folks will just end up using whatever fits into the category that allows the max alpha or if virtually everyone can carry that much firepower than everyone will simply make that build. This is a circular argument if you don't change the pinpoint alphas. All you will do is shift it slightly from whatever we alpha value is allowable now to what is allowable under the new system. I fail to see how that would increase diversity. If you don't want diversity and simply want lower max alphas I guess that would work. I just don't see it changing what people would carry much or giving them a reason to not select the mechs or variants that allow the max alpha which still would be best in all circumstances.

[HansBlix WMD]

RG Notch, on 03 July 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

So then folks will just end up using whatever fits into the category that allows the max alpha or if virtually everyone can carry that much firepower than everyone will simply make that build. This is a circular argument if you don't change the pinpoint alphas. All you will do is shift it slightly from whatever we alpha value is allowable now to what is allowable under the new system. I fail to see how that would increase diversity. If you don't want diversity and simply want lower max alphas I guess that would work. I just don't see it changing what people would carry much or giving them a reason to not select the mechs or variants that allow the max alpha which still would be best in all circumstances.

If the mech pilot has to choose between pinpoint alpha and higher overall damage, then it might work. Thontor's idea is a good one. Suppose you have 3 energy hardpoints and 5 crit slots to work with. Currently you can fit 3 PPC's, well and good.

In Thontor's world, you can fit 1 PPC and two medium lasers, or 2 large lasers and 1 medium laser. One configuration has more pinpoint and the other more overall damage. A tradeoff! Instead of PPCs always being better!

Edited by HansBlix WMD, 03 July 2013 - 09:44 AM.

[East Indy]

I wouldn't want to see the hardpoint system loosened to allow players to cram small weapons into open slots. Piranha's system is a good start; work needs to be completed with size restrictions.

Going further, though, since the critical hit table no longer corresponds to six-sided dice, I'm not sure slots aren't obsolete with hardpoints. Lostech could instead be arranged in terms of tradeoff, choosing any two from among DHS, ES, FF, Artemis, etcetera -- instead of grabbing nearly all of them and eating the costs -- but I digress.

[RG Notch]

HansBlix WMD, on 03 July 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

If the mech pilot has to choose between pinpoint alpha and higher overall damage, then it might work. Thontor's idea is a good one. Suppose you have 3 energy hardpoints and 5 crit slots to work with. Currently you can fit 3 PPC's, well and good.

In Thontor's world, you can fit 1 PPC and two medium lasers, or 2 large lasers and 1 medium laser. One configuration has more pinpoint and the other more overall damage. A tradeoff! Instead of PPCs always being better!

That doesn't add up in weight though. That extra weight would matter for other weaponry, armor, HS etc. you'd have to see a whole mech setup to see if it would actually change anything. Looking at only one section doesn't tell the whole story. Not saying it wouldn't work, just need more data to theorize with.

[IceSerpent]

FupDup, on 03 July 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

The way the OP was suggesting it, it wasn't hardcoded to limit to one weapon per HP.

Ah, I see where you are coming from. I kind of took for granted that "1 hardpoint = 1 weapon" scheme remains unchanged.

Quote

Seriously, if my arm can hold a PPC I think it can hold more than one Flamer or whatever. Small weapons aren't as evil as PGI makes them out to be. Why does everyone hate small weapons carried in moderate or large quantities? It's not any worse (probably not even as bad as) 4+ PPCs...

It's much worse than quad PPCs, trust me. A Stalker boating as many SSRMs as crit slots allow would be absolutely deadly.

[MaddMaxx]

FupDup, on 03 July 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

The way the OP was suggesting it, it wasn't hardcoded to limit to one weapon per HP.

Seriously, if my arm can hold a PPC I think it can hold more than one Flamer or whatever. Small weapons aren't as evil as PGI makes them out to be. Why does everyone hate small weapons carried in moderate or large quantities? It's not any worse (probably not even as bad as) 4+ PPCs...

The 6 Ml Jenner would have a word with you about being a kinder build. At +/- 120kph and a 30pt Alpha, your legs had best be very sturdy otherwise you will develop a limp that will not be at all conducive to your battlefield lifespan.

That is why even the little ole ML ( a woeful 5 pt weapon) will get a max stack size before penalties are assessed.

[FupDup]

IceSerpent, on 03 July 2013 - 09:52 AM, said:

Ah, I see where you are coming from. I kind of took for granted that "1 hardpoint = 1 weapon" scheme remains unchanged.



It's much worse than quad PPCs, trust me. A Stalker boating as many SSRMs as crit slots allow would be absolutely deadly.

I suppose the Stalker doesn't do my argument any justice, seeing how it could mount Octo-Streaks under my system (8 total crits worth of missiles; 2 LRM10 and 2 SRM6 stock)...


I guess I'll have to fall back onto Thontor's revision, then. A hybrid of both critical slots and hardpoints (sizeless), i.e. 3 slots in a K2's arm but only 2 hardpoints (can hold 1 PPC, 1 LL + 1 SL, 2 ML, etc.).

MaddMaxx, on 03 July 2013 - 09:53 AM, said:

The 6 Ml Jenner would have a word with you about being a kinder build. At +/- 120kph and a 30pt Alpha, your legs had best be very sturdy otherwise you will develop a limp that will not be at all conducive to your battlefield lifespan.

That is why even the little ole ML ( a woeful 5 pt weapon) will get a max stack size before penalties are assessed.

The 6 ML Jenner sidesteps the stack size penalty unless PGI decides to change it down from 6 at the last minute. And really, 6 ML Jenners (and all lights in general) aren't exactly a metabuild. I also don't think I've ever seen a single thread whining about the 9 ML Swayback, which is clearly the root of all evil for carrying small weapons. Bigger stuff like PPCs are still overall better for various reasons.

Edited by FupDup, 03 July 2013 - 10:01 AM.