66 replies to this topic

[Kassatsu]

Sephlock, on 27 May 2014 - 12:42 AM, said:

Want. Stone Rhino and Kodiak. Mostly Kodiak.

And not because I flew around the mission levels at 300kph with jump jets spamming 5 chain-fired ER PPCs at anything that dared show up as a red dot on my HUD. Okay, entirely because of that. To be fair, almost any mech could do that in MW2. But the Kodiak did it in style.

Edited by Kassatsu, 27 May 2014 - 12:51 AM.

[Grimmrog]

LordKnightFandragon, on 27 May 2014 - 12:48 AM, said:

And the whole point of Omni was to make the mech quicker to repair and change stuff out and to make it mroe versatile to customize........PGI is really lost arent they?




Unlimited ammo with like 10 Capacitor PPCs on a JJ equipped mech? yeha, that was all I saw when I went MP with MW4.....

IT was really friggin stupid.

Well, not entirely, basically it would make sense when you ahve a limited dropship tonnage you can stuff in one Chassis and serveral pod variants. You land on terra therma, and stuff in all the heat friendly AC's. you land in Frozen City and you go all LAz0rs.
It is in this point correctly fine. stupid here is, you will for leveling the mech skills, still have to use other "variants", which counters the entire pod idea at all.

Where PGI failed was the regular battlemechs, they weren't customizable. They came in stock variants. You couldn't just replace a Sidetorso MG with an AC 20. In canon, that is possible, but has a high chance of fail and some enormous costs. But right now, by having all those variants + their crazy customisation options, this is kinda superior customisation compared to clanners. At leats PGI could make some penalty on this, like reducing C-bills gathered form a match by -X% increasing the more the mech is customised. or any weapon that is non stock loadout should have a chance of 10% to jam/fail.
Because in canon, you were bound to the mech you have as pilot. But hee in the game, we cna simply switch the mech whenever we want, which means with IS mechs your customising is just too good.

Imagine any MMORPG where you would be able to have 1 character able to be every class maxed and you can freely choose to change the class before you do any dungen run. It kinda would screw the sense of "chosing" a class to play it.

[Kassatsu]

Grimmrog, on 27 May 2014 - 12:57 AM, said:

Imagine any MMORPG where you would be able to have 1 character able to be every class maxed and you can freely choose to change the class before you do any dungen run. It kinda would screw the sense of "chosing" a class to play it.

You mean... Like this?

[LordKnightFandragon]

Grimmrog, on 27 May 2014 - 12:57 AM, said:

Well, not entirely, basically it would make sense when you ahve a limited dropship tonnage you can stuff in one Chassis and serveral pod variants. You land on terra therma, and stuff in all the heat friendly AC's. you land in Frozen City and you go all LAz0rs.
It is in this point correctly fine. stupid here is, you will for leveling the mech skills, still have to use other "variants", which counters the entire pod idea at all.

Where PGI failed was the regular battlemechs, they weren't customizable. They came in stock variants. You couldn't just replace a Sidetorso MG with an AC 20. In canon, that is possible, but has a high chance of fail and some enormous costs. But right now, by having all those variants + their crazy customisation options, this is kinda superior customisation compared to clanners. At leats PGI could make some penalty on this, like reducing C-bills gathered form a match by -X% increasing the more the mech is customised. or any weapon that is non stock loadout should have a chance of 10% to jam/fail.
Because in canon, you were bound to the mech you have as pilot. But hee in the game, we cna simply switch the mech whenever we want, which means with IS mechs your customising is just too good.

Imagine any MMORPG where you would be able to have 1 character able to be every class maxed and you can freely choose to change the class before you do any dungen run. It kinda would screw the sense of "chosing" a class to play it.

So pretty much the stock Warhawk were going to get that has 4 ERPPC and a LRM15 on one arm, we wont be able to switch the weapons as we choose, only w/e pods we have access to? thats derpy.

What prevents us from changing whats in the pod? derp...

[Grimmrog]

Kassatsu, on 27 May 2014 - 12:50 AM, said:

Want. Stone Rhino and Kodiak. Mostly Kodiak.

And not because I flew around the mission levels at 300kph with jump jets spamming 5 chain-fired ER PPCs at anything that dared show up as a red dot on my HUD. Okay, entirely because of that. To be fair, almost any mech could do that in MW2. But the Kodiak did it in style.

Kodiak? looks like a space wolf

LordKnightFandragon, on 27 May 2014 - 01:00 AM, said:

So pretty much the stock Warhawk were going to get that has 4 ERPPC and a LRM15 on one arm, we wont be able to switch the weapons as we choose, only w/e pods we have access to? thats derpy.

What prevents us from changing whats in the pod? derp...

you can change what is IN the pod, you can entirely remove all weapons and replace them with somethin else. But the Warhawks prime config, well I hardly see som viable changes possible to it. maybe LRM into some SSRM6. but the 4 ER PPK are already some kind of "best meta" you can get. Maybe LRM off and more heatsinks. I guess people may slap in 2 ER PPC and 1 gauss (From variant B pod) because of the heat and possibly some SSRM.

Edited by Grimmrog, 27 May 2014 - 01:09 AM.

[Kassatsu]

Grimmrog, on 27 May 2014 - 01:03 AM, said:

you can change what is IN the pod, you can entirely remove all weapons and replace them with somethin else. But the Warhawks prime config, well I hardly see som viable changes possible to it. maybe LRM into some SSRM6. but the 4 ER PPK are already some kind of "best meta" you can get. Maybe LRM off and more heatsinks. I guess people may slap in 2 ER PPC and 1 gauss (From variant B pod) because of the heat and possibly some SSRM.

What, no jump jets? CLEANSE THE NON-META FILTH FROM THESE LANDS.

[Khobai]

Quote

WHat downsides will omnis have?

locked engine ratings. locked armor values. very slow lights. heavies with oversized engines and not enough weapons.

[Kassatsu]

Khobai, on 27 May 2014 - 01:31 AM, said:

locked engine ratings. locked armor values. very slow lights. heavies with oversized engines and not enough weapons.

Were engines even completely locked? Never really bothered paying attention, and it's not like whether or not it happens in TT or canon even means ANYTHING at this point, but I'm curious. I'm pretty sure all of the older Mechwarrior games only let you use specific ratings (and not the exact **5 increment you wanted).

[Bullseye69]

A long time ago on the forums I heard mention that the cost of modeling a mech was $ 80,000 per mech so getting them to do one varient of that mech would not be cost effective. Unlike the clan omni mechs such as the madcat and the vulture use the same bottom half so does the loki and the thor. Now granted I not a expert on the cads system they probley use but should you be able to just replicate the bottom half of the mech and ghost it to the new mech say vulture and the mad cat that way you only half to design the upper torso, the same way for the mech arms on the old school mins you would get for the clan different weapons pods arms and you could mix and match all this one increase the ability to deliver mechs in a fast manner and it should be cheaper to.

This could also transfer to the second line clan mechs the non omni that were upgraded inner sphere mech with clan tech : the Hunchback 2, Highlander 2C thos existing model could be reused with minor tweaks and reduced cost.

Still can;t figure out how they say a mech cost $80,000 and a map cost this unless they the people get paid per map and mech I would think it would be a set salary for the year hence the faster the content chugged out the cheaper for PGI and better for us.

[KhanCipher]

Khobai, on 27 May 2014 - 01:31 AM, said:

locked engine ratings. locked armor values. very slow lights. heavies with oversized engines and not enough weapons.

although we haven't gotten any confirmation on armor locking for omnis in MWO yet.

[Joseph Mallan]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 May 2014 - 04:40 AM, said:

Ever since MW3 (cuz let's face it, Loose's 3058 TRO illustration was NOT One of his finer works) this has been my favorite Clan Assault (tied with the Warhammer IIC, technically, but we ain't gonna get it).

Yeah the SuperNova is a good ride. But my heart belongs to

[Strum Wealh]

Bullseye69, on 27 May 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

A long time ago on the forums I heard mention that the cost of modeling a mech was $ 80,000 per mech so getting them to do one varient of that mech would not be cost effective. Unlike the clan omni mechs such as the madcat and the vulture use the same bottom half so does the loki and the thor. Now granted I not a expert on the cads system they probley use but should you be able to just replicate the bottom half of the mech and ghost it to the new mech say vulture and the mad cat that way you only half to design the upper torso, the same way for the mech arms on the old school mins you would get for the clan different weapons pods arms and you could mix and match all this one increase the ability to deliver mechs in a fast manner and it should be cheaper to.

This could also transfer to the second line clan mechs the non omni that were upgraded inner sphere mech with clan tech : the Hunchback 2, Highlander 2C thos existing model could be reused with minor tweaks and reduced cost.

Still can;t figure out how they say a mech cost $80,000 and a map cost this unless they the people get paid per map and mech I would think it would be a set salary for the year hence the faster the content chugged out the cheaper for PGI and better for us.

The cost od those assets can be estimated with something like:
(asset cost) = (# of hours to bring asset to acceptable quality level) * (number of people needed to bring asset to acceptable quality level) * (average of asset team members' hourly wages) + miscellaneous costs

So, let's say that it takes ~10 people to make a map, the average of their wages is ~$35/hr, and it takes ~3 weeks at 40 hrs/week (for a total of 120 hours) to bring a map from the idea stage to the point where it is deemed ready for in-game implementation.
map cost = 120 * 10 * 35 = $42,000 for this map example

With PGI apparently being a rather small company, it's possible that most or all of them are working more than 40 hrs/week, so overtime pay has to be factored in. And the averages may be higher than the hypothetical $35/hr. Or it may actually take more than 10 people to make a map. or it may take longer than ~3 weeks to make a ready-to-play map. Then there is the cost of additional resources (power & other utilities, for example).
Costs have a way of building up quickly, if one is not exceedingly careful...

[Zervziel]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 May 2014 - 04:40 AM, said:

Ever since MW3 (cuz let's face it, Loose's 3058 TRO illustration was NOT One of his finer works) this has been my favorite Clan Assault (tied with the Warhammer IIC, technically, but we ain't gonna get it).








90 tons of Energy Based Face Wreckage.
6 Clan ER Large Lasers.
26 (!!!!!!!) DHS
3 JJs
464 pts of Armor (MWO armor scale)

THIS. This is why I dislike the PGI Mech Tree idea. Because Mechs like this only have ONE variant in Timeline. And because they cannot (figure out how to) increase the grind (and thus enhance likelihood of spending IRL money on the mech or GXP conversion to speed up the process) it's just one of several mechs that will NEVER see the light of day in MWO.

And this is why many of us have been telling PGI, since Closed Beta, that their Pilot Skill system is borked.

Please, White Knights of the PGI Table, come to their defense and explain how a Skill Tree design that EXCLUDES a HUGE portion of the extant Mechs PGI could be adding (and monetizing) to the game is a Good Idea.

*(Yes, this vile Black Knight just pulled a bait n switch. Deal with it. BTW, Black Knight would be cool to have in game too. But they would have to add a "PGI, We Totally Know What We're Doing!" Paint scheme to it to get it to sell...... but it might become the Mech du jour of us disgruntled masses, the sign of our own "Occupy" movement)

Oh god the memories! I remember the first time I played a Supernova. It was in MW3. Alpha-striked once when fighting an annihilator. Didn't do that again without some tweaking.

[Bishop Steiner]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 May 2014 - 06:52 AM, said:

Yeah the SuperNova is a good ride. But my heart belongs to

never really clicked for me visually (never had any air of menace, IMO) but it is a hoss.

[Scratx]

Grimmrog, on 27 May 2014 - 12:43 AM, said:

you can't change structure, engine type, engine rating, JJ's are fixed in their location, FF Armor structure is fixed in the location, Endo Steel structure is fixrd in the location. You can not change CT loadout, so a mech with flamer in CT (Adder) can not remove it.
Gauss, AC's and ER PPK's will have no lower arm actuators.

Oh also, regular heatsinks are also fixed in their location.

So all you can do is swap around the tonnage of Weapons and extra heatsinks.

Much of this information is incorrect or misleading. So let me correct the most glaring ones.

What actually happens is that there is a set of components and upgrades that are considered part of the base chassis and are locked. This means engine, armor/structure (and where their slots are), sometimes jumpjets and other equipment (like the Adder's flamer). Everything that isn't part of the base chassis resides in pod-space, which you can modify freely. We do not yet know if we'll be able to add/remove armor, though it does look like we'll be able to at least shift armor around so if you want to shave some off your rear torso to your front, you should be able to.

Hands and lower actuators, yes, I do believe they go away when certain weapons are mounted on the arms. Which has interesting implications for MWO.

There's a post probably on announcements or command chair that says how clan mechs will work that covers all this and more.

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 27 May 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

The cost od those assets can be estimated with something like:
(asset cost) = (# of hours to bring asset to acceptable quality level) * (number of people needed to bring asset to acceptable quality level) * (average of asset team members' hourly wages) + miscellaneous costs

So, let's say that it takes ~10 people to make a map, the average of their wages is ~$35/hr, and it takes ~3 weeks at 40 hrs/week (for a total of 120 hours) to bring a map from the idea stage to the point where it is deemed ready for in-game implementation.
map cost = 120 * 10 * 35 = $42,000 for this map example

With PGI apparently being a rather small company, it's possible that most or all of them are working more than 40 hrs/week, so overtime pay has to be factored in. And the averages may be higher than the hypothetical $35/hr. Or it may actually take more than 10 people to make a map. or it may take longer than ~3 weeks to make a ready-to-play map. Then there is the cost of additional resources (power & other utilities, for example).
Costs have a way of building up quickly, if one is not exceedingly careful...

and don't forget that part of the cost is also infrastructure. Hardware, software, updating to new software, and stuff. Just looking at Alex's art rig..... dear god, that gear he has is a years wage for a lot of people. And in today's digital tech world, very little is one time costs, but constantly replaced and upgraded. (Heck, I'd shudder just to see a small company's monthly power bill)

[EyeOne]

I actually piloted a Supernova this weekend. I managed to get MW3 working. I sat in the water and spammed the enemy with ER Large Laser shots. Because, ya know, water actually did something in MW3.

I don't have a problem with the Pilot tree regarding the 3 variants from a chassis to elite deal. Maybe that just because it's always been that way but I don't have a massive problem with it. Now, what I do have a problem with is the completely lazy design of the trees. About a quarter of the tree is useless for some mechs and all weight classes have the same tree. Crap, how much more time would that have taken? And at this point I'm not sure they will ever fix it.

Edited by EyeOne, 27 May 2014 - 07:20 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

EyeOne, on 27 May 2014 - 07:19 AM, said:

I actually piloted a Supernova this weekend. I managed to get MW3 working. I sat in the water and spammed the enemy with ER Large Laser shots. Because, ya know, water actually did something in MW3.

I don't have a problem with the Pilot tree regarding the 3 variants from a chassis to elite deal. Maybe that just because it's always been that way but I don't have a massive problem with it. Now, what I do have a problem with is the completely lazy design of the trees. About a quarter of the tree is useless for some mechs and all weight classes have the same tree. Crap, how much more time would that have taken? And at this point I'm not sure they will ever fix it.

no arguments here on the second half. Am feeling the system itself wasn't well thought out though considering how many mech it excluded from being playable, due to lack of variants.


How'd you get MW3 to work, details , please!!?!?!?!

[Joseph Mallan]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 May 2014 - 07:15 AM, said:

never really clicked for me visually (never had any air of menace, IMO) but it is a hoss.

The air of Menace is when I get my hands on one! Played in a Clan on Clan battle in one at GenCon. Killed 6 times my mass, including a Dire Wolf Prime, Warhawk Prime... and after that Nobody would call me out to battle. Finally died after 6 hours (2 hours were without Zelbrigen) It was awesome that half the enemy force ignored my team to kill my Rhino!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 27 May 2014 - 07:48 AM.

[EyeOne]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 May 2014 - 07:40 AM, said:

How'd you get MW3 to work, details , please!!?!?!?!

I found a youtube video with links in the description to some patches and files made by fans (). These did the trick for me. There are still some glitches, APCs still bounce a little and I'm having some slow down issues but it's playable finally. For me Instant Action is more stable than the campaign but I'm going to give the campaign a go and see what happens.

Edited by EyeOne, 27 May 2014 - 07:54 AM.