Jump to content

Mech Availability by Faction


91 replies to this topic

Poll: Mech Availability (208 member(s) have cast votes)

Should 'mechs only be available from the faction you're declared for / hired by?

  1. Yes (113 votes [54.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 54.33%

  2. No (26 votes [12.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.50%

  3. Sort of-- Explain in your post. (69 votes [33.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.17%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#81 Dlardrageth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,198 posts
  • LocationF.R.G.

Posted 22 November 2011 - 02:21 AM

Having the MechLab by itself would not necessarily mean it would be cheap to use. If there is a significant fee attached to getting a non-faction variant by customizing inside your MechLab... For all we know, PGI could actually charge real money for any modifications made in the MechLab that basically turn a Mech into a variant.

As long as there would be a significant advantage (in-game currency-wise most likely) to use your faction's variant or the stock one, I'm okay with people who want to spend a small fortune to get a different faction's one.

Complete recustomization of a given Mech chassis would be something different though. If one could easily turn the Warhammer from the example into a LRM platform just by fiddling around some in the MechLab, that would probably be not so great. Because that would effectively mean that it is in fact some kind of OmniMech. Which does fit neither the "BT lore" nor really versatility of gameplay in the long run. That would just lead to everybody and his dog using the same 5 or 6 cookie-cutter rebuilds and ultimately lead to stagnation and boredom. Don't think that'd be a good idea.

Regarding the acquisition of specific variants there could also be the opportunity to tie that somewhat into the meta-level of "Galaxy Conquest". If your faction/regiment/clan/unit manages to capture and/or hold a certain territory/planet, it makes perfect sense that they would get additional access to an extra variant or two which are more common in that region. Would also make that whole conquest stuff more flexible possibly, as I can very well envision units going on a "shopping raid" because they want to get their hands on some new Mechs.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 22 November 2011 - 02:23 AM.


#82 Dugra Dugrasson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 139 posts
  • LocationKris Kringle's Resistance Bunker

Posted 22 November 2011 - 03:00 AM

I stand by Faction-specifics. I believe there should be a "general" listing of 'Mechs. That is, common IS 'Mechs (FRR is largely exempt from this list) for players to access but otherwise, 'Mechs should be listed by faction and faction only. While the auctioning idea mentioned by 'OP' might be interesting to toy with at first, as TheRulesLawyer stated, it essentially voids the concept of faction specific 'Mechs. Player X goes to play for Steiner. Player Y goes to play for Kurita. Player X and Y are really good buddies in game so, they constantly swap faction specific 'Mechs for a low or no cost. Now, multiply Player X and Y on a mass scale and your "faction" 'Mechs are worthless. Faction lists and faction lists only.

While the first and foremost argument against faction 'Mechs is balance issues, balance is and should always be an issue, especially with the number of 'Mechs and the variety of load-outs for each of the 'Mechs. Without faction listings, within three months you'll see a large majority of the player-base gravitate towards "X, Y, and Z" 'Mechs because "X, Y, and Z" 'Mechs are OP/UB/FOTM. I hate to say it folks but, that's the nature of "competitive" gaming. People are going to use what is perceived as "the best" even though "the best" may be some sort of bullshit stirred up by non-official sources. However, *WITH* faction listing, the idea is to see OP/UB/FOTM 'Mechs for each of the factions as opposed to all the 'Mechs in general. That way, each of the Houses (and FRR) field the 'Mechs that are best FOR THEM and not FOR ALL. Faction listings combined with the idea of this "role warfare" that is, fielding 'Mechs that fit several roles required on a modernized battlefield (namely, urban combat) as opposed to spamming Atlas, may just begin to quell any silly thoughts of OP/UB/FOTM 'Mechs and maybe for once players will start to accept that they're defeated because the opposing Lance was better organized, better fielded, and better coordinated.

Ahhh... Who am I kidding? Bring on the "Tier Lists." :lol:

Edited by nodebate, 22 November 2011 - 03:05 AM.


#83 Anton

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 03:13 AM

Would prefer faction-specific with an option to get other faction's Mechs via salvage / events. One of examples for events use is the clan tech availability for inner sphere house(s) through the later timeline.

#84 Stahlseele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 775 posts
  • LocationHamburg, Germany

Posted 22 November 2011 - 07:20 AM

View PostMoppelkotze, on 22 November 2011 - 01:28 AM, said:

Yes, but the MechLab will ruin this for me. Why even have those variants when every player will change them?
With a MechLab you nearly only need a chassis for every tonnage and all other things are chosen by the player.
I would like to have only variants and no real MechLab. Only very slight changes should be allowed.

Well, there are several levels of modifications.
Things that would require a factory visit should not be allowed obviously.
But getting rid of 2 small lasers and 2 MG's and the ammo for them in exchange for some bolted on plates of armor or 2 or 3 more heat sinks, for example, should be possible for a cost of at least in game money . . maybe make that one of the things premium can do, and F2P is limited to the canon variants . . TIME should NOT be a limiting factor in this.
If you can't USE your Mech for a WEEK or so, because of MINOR changes, then this is a strict NO GO in my eyes . .
An in between would be that the change is possible immediately but costs WAY MORE than it usually would . .
And if you are willing to wait for it to be done in, let's say a week or so, then the change is basically free for you . .

#85 DocBach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 4,828 posts
  • LocationSouthern Oregon

Posted 22 November 2011 - 08:32 AM

A way to stop faction specific 'Mechs from becoming too proliferated in other realms would be to pull what Blizzard did and make players of various Houses unable to trade with each other.

Edited by DocBach, 22 November 2011 - 08:32 AM.


#86 Hohiro Kurita

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 75 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 09:40 AM

Should start out with faction-common mechs, and then be able to salvage other mechs or earn other mechs, like you did in the MPBT Beta (not the old mpbt, the newer one that EA axed in beta).

You shouldn't really be able to buy mechs that are exclusively sold and produced on enemy worlds, though - just capture.

#87 DocBach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 4,828 posts
  • LocationSouthern Oregon

Posted 22 November 2011 - 09:47 AM

Well 3025 didn't have any sort of restriction on technology by faction, or any sort of salvage system - your only limitation on what you could buy was your bank account.

Edited by DocBach, 22 November 2011 - 09:48 AM.


#88 Hohiro Kurita

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 75 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 09:52 AM

Actually it did. Realistically. FC obviously isn't going to be able to buy units from a Kurita owned manufacturer in 3015, in Kurita space.

Salvage has no limits, no - only what you can retrieve and repair, which again is complicating because some components are made, again in say Kurita space, and you may not be able to replace them with the exact model.

Many mech's were common to all Houses, so the faction list is really only going to hurt where there are faction-specific mechs that only they have, like say a Hatamato-chi.

Edited by Hohiro Kurita, 22 November 2011 - 09:56 AM.


#89 Damocles

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 1,527 posts
  • LocationOakland, CA

Posted 22 November 2011 - 01:01 PM

Yes to faction-specific 'mechs.

Increased cost/upkeep of another factions' design would be a good addition.
And if you find your faction lacking then you have a REASON to capture a factory that produces what you want.
^Thats a major +gameplay


/Damo

#90 Stormwolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 3,951 posts
  • LocationCW Dire Wolf

Posted 22 November 2011 - 01:24 PM

View PostDamocles, on 22 November 2011 - 01:01 PM, said:

Yes to faction-specific 'mechs.

Increased cost/upkeep of another factions' design would be a good addition.
And if you find your faction lacking then you have a REASON to capture a factory that produces what you want.
^Thats a major +gameplay


/Damo


We should have the possibility to salvage parts from destroyed/crippled mechs (of the same type) to repair the one you captured.
It would be a good alternative to having to capture a factory.

#91 Hohiro Kurita

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 75 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 02:48 PM

View PostDamocles, on 22 November 2011 - 01:01 PM, said:

Yes to faction-specific 'mechs.

Increased cost/upkeep of another factions' design would be a good addition.
And if you find your faction lacking then you have a REASON to capture a factory that produces what you want.
^Thats a major +gameplay


/Damo


Sorry dude I thought you literally meant 3025 the time period - not MBPT 3025 the EA bet and 3025 the old old MPBT 3025 game. Apologies!

#92 Torrent

    Member

  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 16 December 2011 - 10:56 AM

i would like faction specific but only from what is being made at that time and for salvage i think it should be that you have to pay for the mech that you are salvaging and have additional costs for the repairs





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users