64 replies to this topic

[Ramagar]

Out of all I prefer the MW4 system for game play and simplicity.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Method 4. I am assuming that as tech improves we can get refit kits to upgrade our mech(s) to the higher tech level variants?
I love customising/designing new mechs and see no reason why once the game is up and runnig we can't have competitions etc to try for new designs to be introduced, Skunkworks makes it easy to do a design, the real problem comes with the artwork so it might ean modifying existing mechs to change their appearance to fit the new weapons loadout.

[trycksh0t]

Went with option 4 'minor tweaking of existing variants', because it's the closest to something I've been thinking about. I'll explain:

As much as I hate comparing different games, I've been looking at WoT recently. Been playing about a week, rather enjoyable. Anyway, the unlock system they have for different tank components intrigues me, and I think that could actually translate to MW:O. Earn experience with a given 'mech, and you can use that to unlock different components from other variants of said 'mech, for the price of the equipment and refitting costs.. You can then mix-and-match those components, altering armor/heatsinks/engine rating to compensate for heat/weight/ammo requirements. I figure this should work, as if the engineers can already create the full-variants, doing partial refits shouldn't be too hard.

Ex: You purchase a Javelin stock, with it's twin SRM-6's. After a few games, you save enough XP to unlock the medium lasers for the Fire Javelin. Now, you could either pay X amount of C-Bills to do a full overhaul to the Fire Javelin with it's 4 medium lasers, or just swap out one SRM-6 for 2 medium lasers and a couple of heat-sinks.

[AC]

When NBT implemented a cannon only mech game in its HardCore MW4 mod, it ended up being a very unpopular game mode. What works well for a table top game does not translate well into a video game. Mechs that performed well in the table top game or megamech, performed quite poorly when implemented in the game. So only certain designs were used and other mechs and variants were completely shelved.

Also, people enjoy tweaking things. Buidling, modifying, optimizing... These are the cornerstone concepts of quite a few games. Removing or severely limiting a persons creative/design options would negatively impact the number of people this game would appeal to.

[SMDMadCow]

I voted for option 7.
I want my full blown customization that shows on the model / skin.
However I predict that the mech bay (however we get it) will end up being a pay-to-use feature - it would allow players the customization they want and make the devs some easy money.
I'd shell out a few bucks for a permanent custom ride, how about you?

[Mr Sockpuppet]

I've always been a big fan of being able to fully customize my 'mech, but that comes from being a table top BT player. My group of friends who I played came up with house rules for a lot of types of customization that wasn't included in the base rules.

[Forsakened]

Kudzu, on 14 November 2011 - 03:02 PM, said:

I keep seeing people use expense as a balance for customization when all it does is expand the gap: the faster you get up in cash, the faster you make a "perfect" mech, the faster you kill people without "perfect mechs". It becomes a vicious cycle where new people and those that don't play constantly get hit harder and harder until they can't really compete.

Yes, many of the canon designs were imperfect-- they were intentionally designed that way. A bit of dev tweaking and a well planned bv system should fix the worst of the problems.

Customization is great for single player modes because the AI doesn't care how cheesy you make a mech... in a multiplayer setting it becomes a gigantic issue.

TheRulesLawyer, on 14 November 2011 - 03:06 PM, said:

Yup. There needs to be some sort of on-going penalty for custom mechs. Preferably in game, not just economics. Otherwise it just makes things worse for new players. It really should be a choice you have to make all the time, not a "I finally made enough money!" once sort of thing.

I agree and disagree with all this. First off I think this will make it worst for starting characters and quickly make someone that does not grind out the biggest cannon fodder that ever found there way to the battlefield. Second I don't believe that people that strive to make a perfect mech should be penalized rather they should maybe have like a grouping structure that will only let someone in on the opposite side if only equally matched. Just a thought.

[Xhaleon]

I don't understand people who want ultimate freedom of customization. I can understand wanting to recreate canon designs, but if you cannot make a mech perform a role that you want, then perhaps it's time to swap machines? There are so many designs in Battletech not because the engineers were bored and had too much time on their hands, but because the existing machines just couldn't do or fit what they wanted.
Why is it such a difficult prospect for some people?

[Yeach]

My ultimate question if we have full blown customization is

Why should the designers put more than 17 mechs (for each weight class) if they are essentially all the same gunbags?

[TheRulesLawyer]

Forsakened, on 15 November 2011 - 09:42 PM, said:

I agree and disagree with all this. First off I think this will make it worst for starting characters and quickly make someone that does not grind out the biggest cannon fodder that ever found there way to the battlefield. Second I don't believe that people that strive to make a perfect mech should be penalized rather they should maybe have like a grouping structure that will only let someone in on the opposite side if only equally matched. Just a thought.

A grouping structure would just mean there would be the same number of OP mechs on the same side. In endgame you'd have all the long time players running their custom mechs and the n00bs in stock designs. There has to be something that will make an end game player want to drive a stock mech.

[Jervinator]

Xhaleon, on 15 November 2011 - 10:30 PM, said:

I don't understand people who want ultimate freedom of customization. I can understand wanting to recreate canon designs, but if you cannot make a mech perform a role that you want, then perhaps it's time to swap machines? There are so many designs in Battletech not because the engineers were bored and had too much time on their hands, but because the existing machines just couldn't do or fit what they wanted.
Why is it such a difficult prospect for some people?

There are plenty of houses out there, so why bother redecorating when you can just move into a house that is already just the way you want it? There are plenty of cars out there withteh seat in just the right position for you to reach the pedals comfortably, so why adjsut the seat when you can just get a new car?

Seriously, I have played for over 20 years, read every TRO, and yet I still have not found a design that works the way I want it to. Maybe the heat curve is wrong. Maybe I don't want jump jets. Maybe I just plain old don't play the same way the designers do. Why is it so hard for you to understand that maybe people don't like what is offered to them as-is and must tweak it before they are happy with it.

Why is that such a difficult prospect for some people?

[Kudzu]

Jervinator, on 16 November 2011 - 12:50 AM, said:

There are plenty of houses out there, so why bother redecorating when you can just move into a house that is already just the way you want it? There are plenty of cars out there withteh seat in just the right position for you to reach the pedals comfortably, so why adjsut the seat when you can just get a new car?

Seriously, I have played for over 20 years, read every TRO, and yet I still have not found a design that works the way I want it to. Maybe the heat curve is wrong. Maybe I don't want jump jets. Maybe I just plain old don't play the same way the designers do. Why is it so hard for you to understand that maybe people don't like what is offered to them as-is and must tweak it before they are happy with it.

Why is that such a difficult prospect for some people?

Because in a competitive multiplayer setting it ends up ******** everything up.

[The Basilisk]

I think the possibilities for customisation should be carefully ballanced from Mech to Mech with a good portion of common sense.
A Warhammer for example ( the pov mech in the Trailer deploying the drone ) carries 2PPCs in the Arms, 2 medium Lasers in the Torso sides some missle defense or Machine guns in Torso an a SRM launcher with six tubes on his Shoulder.
So there is no way to replace the PPCs with a Gauss or a Autocannon without major modifications to the Mechs Structure in order to install ammunition feed and ammunition storage. But replacing the PPCs with a bundle of medium Lasers or a single large Laser won't be the Problem. Energy circuits or coolant junktions are allready there.
Same thing for the torso weapons. Replacing the SRM 6 with a LRM 5 or even a MRM Launcher wont be a big deal. But installing some Lasers or Autocannons wont be easy.

An other case would be hand held Weapons like in a Poenix Hawk or the good old Battlemaster. This are discrete weapons witch could be easy replaced.

Engines shoulden't be replacable at all. They are the vital part of every Mech. But tweaking the Armor or the Heat sinks should be allowed according to battletech rules. Also integrating electronics like ECM, Artemis IV FCS or Beagle Probes shouldnt be a Problem.

Roundabout i think it should be a mix of MW4 and Battletech rules. Meening exchanging Weapons of the same family and comparable size would be ok.(AC 5 standart upgraded to UltraAC5 or LB-X5) But exchanging weapons of difftrent categories and sizes should be prohibited for non Omnimechs.

Some people mentioned the fact that sometimes multiple smal weapons seemed to be more effective than 1 big gun.
(4 medium Laser VS AC20) This can easylie be solved by modifications in the way Alpha Strikes work.
Little delays in the firing cycle of single weapons or lack of weapons focus.

sincerly
The Basilisk

Edited by The Basilisk, 16 November 2011 - 06:53 AM.

[Xhaleon]

Jervinator, on 16 November 2011 - 12:50 AM, said:

Seriously, I have played for over 20 years, read every TRO, and yet I still have not found a design that works the way I want it to. Maybe the heat curve is wrong. Maybe I don't want jump jets. Maybe I just plain old don't play the same way the designers do. Why is it so hard for you to understand that maybe people don't like what is offered to them as-is and must tweak it before they are happy with it.

Why is that such a difficult prospect for some people?

Because Battletech is a universe built to be flawed. The people in-universe work with and around these flaws, and only when they have the time and a pile of cash do they switch a medium laser for an ER medium laser.

Being flawed just makes the game harder and more fun. Deal with it.

Edited by Xhaleon, 16 November 2011 - 05:13 AM.

[Leonardo Monteiro]

I vote 4)

Although in the BT universe, custome made mechs existed, those were very, very few - should be kept that way ingame

Every other mech should be variants

Hell, and lets put this in Piranha perspective: It will be great and easier for them to be able to sell us variants (like, they "give" you the worst config of a jenner, but allow you to purchase other ones)

[Wolvers]

how exactly is customization bad if everyone will be able to do it?

[feor]

Leonardo Monteiro, on 16 November 2011 - 02:54 AM, said:

I vote 4)

Although in the BT universe, custome made mechs existed, those were very, very few - should be kept that way ingame

Every other mech should be variants

Hell, and lets put this in Piranha perspective: It will be great and easier for them to be able to sell us variants (like, they "give" you the worst config of a jenner, but allow you to purchase other ones)

Actually, in 3025 era, especially among mercs, custom mechs were almost the norm, since if your Jenner got it's SRM shot off you probably don't have a spare but.. hey, didn't you salvage that Stinger's arm with it's Medium Laser a month ago?

I've got the "Tales of the Black Widow" book from back in the day, and more than half the company listed has mechs have permanent damage or faulty weapons (less accurate than normal, or make more heat than normal, etc) and that's from, arguably, the best equipped mercenary command in the Inner Sphere.

Things will be better by '49, I'm sure, but there should still be the option to customize our mechs. We should just pay for it in time, money, and the potential that we permanently foul up something on out mechs. (so we'd be wise to wait until we have a spare mech floating around)

[AC]

Do we even know if this is going to be a resourced based game? Maybe if your PPC is blown off you have to pay for a new one.

[Kallian Ryke]

I picked option 3. You were trying to say that you could, say, add more small weapons (I'm thinking AC's 5-10, Small-med lasers, 5-rack SRM's) without having to consult what the chassis supported, but for major weapons (hunchback main gun, Catapult Missile pods, etc) the chassis could only support so much.

This results in what I'll term "capital" weapons being limited by specifics of mechs, and becoming very desirable slots. Capital weapons in this case being, definitely, PPC's, Gauss, AC-20, (probably LRM20 as well, though one would think missiles would get a slightly different system. Considering you could conceivably load up an SRM Catapult, while SRM's would probably not be considered capital).

This seems fair to me.

[Jervinator]

Xhaleon, on 16 November 2011 - 02:12 AM, said:

Because Battletech is a universe built to be flawed. The people in-universe work with and around these flaws, and only when they have the time and a pile of cash do they switch a medium laser for an ER medium laser.

Being flawed just makes the game harder and more fun. Deal with it.

You are refuting every invention, innovation, and idea in history with that statement.

Humanity has worked out many flaws by tweaking things. We took carriages and replaced the horse with an engine. We took the human immune system and "customized" it to be rid of smallpox. You say, "Work around the flaws", and then seek to prevent people from doing exactly that. You can't have it both ways.