118 replies to this topic

[Alind Back]

Based on what I've seen and heard it looks like the initial implementation of the turrets will only be for base defense. They will be nearly indestructible when not active and will only activate if an enemy gets close enough (probably within the turrets weapons range). While active the turret will be targetable like a mech would be, allowing for lrm and ssrm strikes.

It would seem that when the turrets are released into the game they will only be short range base defenders and will not be deployable or upgradable by players in any fashion. They will be base defenders in the revamped assault game mode.

My guess is that later down the line turrets will be added as a deployable, consumable module (like arty or uav or an airstrike) with armor and weaponry based on c-bill and MC cost.

As with all things in MWO the turrets will be balanced with different weapons and armor as PGI analyses the data on them and the user feedback.

For those of you that think PGI are wasting time and resources on frivolous things like these new turrets when they could be getting DX11 and UI 2.0 out sooner, well, that simply isn't the case. PGI is a team of only so many people. Those people don't all have the same skills (some are modelers, some are level designers, some are programmers). Even among people that could be labeled programmers there are distinctions to be made. As such, PGI only has a few people that have the skills to work on things like DX11 and UI 2.0, but they still have people that can do other things such as add new mechs or implement turrets. So, basically, PGI is working on things in the order that they determine is best for their product (MWO) and tasking their staff in ways that make their game more appealing or better in as quick a timeframe as makes sense for them.

[Arahantius]

These turrets would be great within a choke point between outcroppings or other obstructions

[Lupus Aurelius]

What the frak?!?!?!?!?!?

Don't you guys at PGI have "content" that is a year overdue? Why the hell are you wasting time on this dreck when you are so overdue on the important stuff?

You have got to be fraking kidding me...



Not. One. Penny. More. Until PGI delivers what has been promised.

Edited by Lupus Aurelius, 12 January 2014 - 01:17 PM.

[Arahantius]

Lupus Aurelius, on 12 January 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

What the frak?!?!?!?!?!?

Don't you guys at PGI have "content" that is a year overdue? Why the hell are you wasting time on this dreck when you are so overdue on the important stuff?

You have got to be fraking kidding me...



Not. One. Penny. More. Until PGI delivers what has been promised.

Yeah!!! Not one penny more lol.
Yeah PGI, work for nothing just like every other hard working person!!! Oh hang on a sec, everyone else does get paid
PGI staff : I'm bettin you're all looking for jobs elsewhere lol. I guess MWO will simply cease to exist.
All good, there are some great careers out there in games that are actually fun

[pbiggz]

Lupus Aurelius, on 12 January 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

What the frak?!?!?!?!?!?

Don't you guys at PGI have "content" that is a year overdue? Why the hell are you wasting time on this dreck when you are so overdue on the important stuff?

You have got to be fraking kidding me...



Not. One. Penny. More. Until PGI delivers what has been promised.

Quote

For those of you that think PGI are wasting time and resources on frivolous things like these new turrets when they could be getting DX11 and UI 2.0 out sooner, well, that simply isn't the case. PGI is a team of only so many people. Those people don't all have the same skills (some are modelers, some are level designers, some are programmers). Even among people that could be labeled programmers there are distinctions to be made. As such, PGI only has a few people that have the skills to work on things like DX11 and UI 2.0, but they still have people that can do other things such as add new mechs or implement turrets. So, basically, PGI is working on things in the order that they determine is best for their product (MWO) and tasking their staff in ways that make their game more appealing or better in as quick a timeframe as makes sense for them.

Why don't you read other reasonable posts to see why you are wrong, instead of spitting ******* nonsense and cursing about new features whilst simultaneously proving that you have ZERO understanding of how games are developed, how employees are allocated, and how there are very few employees actually trained in multiple disciplines (art, engine programming, ui programming etc) and even if they could focus multi-skilled employees, they dont, because that's not how companies work, and you'd effectively be paying the same employee double for doing 2 jobs.

Do us all a favour and shut up.

[Jay Kerensky]

pbiggz, on 06 December 2013 - 02:15 PM, said:

I fixed that for you. Clearly you have very little understanding of how expensive advertising can be.
I assume when you refer to advertising you are expecting conventional methods such as television. But consider that 30 seconds of air time during prime hours can potentially cost upwards of $ 100,000 USD, multiply that by say, 5 per day, and you are spending upwards of 3 million dollars per week on advertising. Money that can and should be spent on the game, and not talking about the game.

Citation: http://www.adweek.co...sts-soar-132805
Research it more if you don't believe me, the numbers range from slightly below 100 000 to 1 million +.

My marketing professor told us repeatedly that advertising is critical to a product's success, but online advertising and social network advertising are FAR better ways of getting the message across, especially in the games industry. If you are not a multi-million dollar international game publisher like activision, blizzard, Micro$oft, or EA, then you shouldn't be bothering with TV spots, especially when avenues of communication such as twitter and facebook are FREE. Also, TV was invented in the 1920s, was created in 2006, so you tell me, with these FACTS i have provided you, which form of advertising is "outdated and stupid".


Also, there was actually very little ill will in this thread, and you have done nothing but bring it here, as you do with every other thread you seem to comment in. Is your purpose in life to try and make everyone else miserable? All you seem to do is drop into random threads, even where there is little to no heated debate of any kind and post inflammatory or otherwise heavily polarizing statements as if you enjoy seeing perfectly civilized threads descend into chaos, and somehow you turn that around to being PGI's fault. I shouldn't be surprised that you would take a joke made by Niko Snow, who has done an excellent job in the community, especially considering he has to deal with people like you, and turn it into an argument for an entire development studio's ineptitude.

And I was under the impression you were leaving. Or perhaps you were just out of things insults to say to roadbeer and heffay.

THIS - I never read it!

[pbiggz]

Jay Kerensky, on 18 January 2014 - 03:13 AM, said:

THIS - I never read it!

sorry I don't know if you're insulting me or not.

I can TLDR it for you though. Conventional advertising costs A TON of money, social network advertising (twitter and facebook for example) costs nothing. PGI is making a F2P game, which is naturally, tight on funds, so naturally, using these newer methods of advertising both saves money and taps into a new market.

Edited by pbiggz, 19 January 2014 - 10:25 AM.

[Arahantius]

Jay Kerensky, on 18 January 2014 - 03:13 AM, said:

THIS - I never read it!

Yeah, this is just the way kiddies cyberbully these days. It's meant to be an insult if you actually take the teenie attitude seriously lol

[ArchSight]

Niko Snow, on 02 December 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Small laser turrets of death for locusts.

Aw, was hoping for Calliope Turrets.

[RapierE01]

if they have a good aim they could kill a light or a damaged heavier Mech.

[Ambuscade]

A feature that has the potential of making successful capping in assault a coordinated and challenging tactical endeavor? Yes please.

Ambuscade

[Alcom Isst]

ArchSight, on 19 January 2014 - 08:26 PM, said:

Small laser turrets of death for locusts.

Aw, was hoping for Calliope Turrets.

With or without the easy to 'splode control tower?

[Sug]

People still play modes with capping?

[pbiggz]

Alcom Isst, on 26 January 2014 - 01:02 AM, said:

With or without the easy to 'splode control tower?

If we have weak small laser turrets just as light insurance, then there should be no control tower, that just makes them too weak.

If we have big fat calliopes with as much firepower as a heavy mech, then the simplest way to balance that is with a control tower.

[MoonUnitBeta]

I feel the turrets should have two non-artemis LRM 5 launchers that target enemy mechs based on their own LOS (meaning, we can’t spot for them, they need their own LOS). This combo of LRM5 and Small Laser does a couple of things:

• You won’t have lights camping uncontended 200m away going pew pew destroying all the turrets; they will be forced to move around to avoid the LRMS, or move in closer and then move around to avoid the small lasers (which I’m assuming will have mediocre accuracy for a 125km/h+ object)
  
• Discourages slower, heavier mechs to approach the base since they are slower and would be receiving LRM damage quite easily.
  
• Because of this, you have lights that require to move around to avoid incoming damage, you have a deterrent for heavier mechs that carry more firepower. Both help reduce incoming damage to the turrets.

I’m assuming they’ll have something like a MINIMUM of 15 Armor and 10 Internal… but I’m pretty sure that all will depend how many turrets are on a base. I’m expecting 4 turrets max, 2 min. I’m hoping for 3.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 27 January 2014 - 09:01 AM.

[pbiggz]

MoonUnitBeta, on 27 January 2014 - 08:53 AM, said:

I feel the turrets should have two non-artemis LRM 5 launchers that target enemy mechs based on their own LOS (meaning, we can’t spot for them, they need their own LOS). This combo of LRM5 and Small Laser does a couple of things:

• You won’t have lights camping uncontended 200m away going pew pew destroying all the turrets; they will be forced to move around to avoid the LRMS, or move in closer and then move around to avoid the small lasers (which I’m assuming will have mediocre accuracy for a 125km/h+ object)
  
• Discourages slower, heavier mechs to approach the base since they are slower and would be receiving LRM damage quite easily.
  
• Because of this, you have lights that require to move around to avoid incoming damage, you have a deterrent for heavier mechs that carry more firepower. Both help reduce incoming damage to the turrets.

I’m assuming they’ll have something like a MINIMUM of 15 Armor and 10 Internal… but I’m pretty sure that all will depend how many turrets are on a base. I’m expecting 4 turrets max, 2 min. I’m hoping for 3.

They already stated that turrets can easily have their loadouts changed, and those loadouts would be changed depending on balance, so I wouldn't be surprised if those small lasers and machine guns will give way to medium lasers.

[wanderer]

These look like ideal weapons to plant in approaches where there's a corner they can be sheltered behind, or as insurance to cover your back long enough to warn of attackers/distract a capper. And I'd approve wholeheartedly if they were -standard- for Assault as a "base defense" system.

[MadCat02]

are you inside the Atlas or Imperial Walker?