430 replies to this topic

[SirLANsalot]

7ynx, on 03 June 2014 - 07:30 PM, said:

The 'S' variants should be the least of your concerns. You made all IS mechs are essentially OMNI mechs with your PGI interpretation of BT mech configs. So the S-variants do not offer much in the way of "umph"... before you roll back the timeline, lets actually get to CW, otherwise I think we will be on the "EDGE OF TOMORROW" for a long time. Pun intended.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!

IS mechs are not omni you nut! If we wanted REAL omni then just remove the hardpoint system entirely, then we would have REAL omni mechs. Construction rules of TT have no limits beyond the tonnage of the mech, and the crits being used. MW4 did away with the crit system and many other things but did a good thing by putting in there own weapon sizes. PGI just hybridized between the two by giving the freedom of TT (the crits) with the limits of MW4 (Hard Points).

HP's let you LIMIT how many of a weapon you can place, and the CRIT system alone is its OWN limiter along with tonnage. OMNI as it was done in MW4 was a true omni system, allowing anything to be placed in that slot as long as it fit. PGI is going a different way and allowing US THE PLAYERS choose what HP we what where by trading HP's around, something IS cannot do. Also the way there doing Omni is more akin to Lore anyways, since you can configure your mech however you see fit, but still putting limits to the system (aka still having numbered HP's).

[Stingray Productions]

agreed, good move, and the clan invasion is what we all look forward to the most. Thanks for doing this

[Duke Hector]

well looks like the Mauler is off the table now.... and in all honestly if they were going to take this long they should have just started the game in 3046 or 3047 instead of 3049.

we'll just see IF they don't miss the CW deadline for a 3rd time....

[SirLANsalot]

Dan the Ice Man, on 03 June 2014 - 09:30 PM, said:

well looks like the Mauler is off the table now.... and in all honestly if they were going to take this long they should have just started the game in 3046 or 3047 instead of 3049.

we'll just see IF they don't miss the CW deadline for a 3rd time....

Dabuku, Linesman and MAL-1R are all still available, the 1R hits full production in 3050, but prototypes would of been 3049.

[IraqiWalker]

7ynx, on 03 June 2014 - 07:30 PM, said:

The 'S' variants should be the least of your concerns. You made all IS mechs are essentially OMNI mechs with your PGI interpretation of BT mech configs. So the S-variants do not offer much in the way of "umph"...

before you roll back the timeline, lets actually get to CW, otherwise I think we will be on the "EDGE OF TOMORROW" for a long time. Pun intended.

You haven't played much TT have you? The difference between omni tech and IS standard tech wasn't hardpoint restrictions, or that you could mount whichever weapon you wanted. No, both IS and Clan mechs could mount whichever weapon they wanted, almost anywhere they wanted. The difference was in cost and time.

See an IS CN9-A switching out it's stock AC10 for an AC20 required roughly 3+million C-Bills, and about 3 months of work. Because the mech techs would have to remove the arm, and rebuild that entire section to fit the AC 20 (including removing the actuator) While doing the same thing with an omni pod required maybe a third of the rpice and about a tenth of the time.

The numbers being given in this example are approximations, however, they are within reason as per TT construction rules.

Most people just fielded stock mechs because that was easier to deal with, and they didn't need to figure out the BV cost for every single item they removed/added. However, you will see this come into play more often during campaign games. Where it will be a team of pilots going through a long campaign that can last years. During which, mechs will be wrecked, salvaged, modified, and jurry-rigged.

MW:O is actually restricting us more than the TT did, when it comes to replacing weaponry, however, it doesn't punish us with time consumption as modifications happen, instead, they are instantaneous.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 03 June 2014 - 09:45 PM.

[Deux]

Nope doesn't sound reasonable, then again when did you ever listen to the player base. All this means is hey we couldn't get our stuff together in time, so to fix it hey poof we just time traveled.

[ImperialKnight]

I don't care about 1:1 timeline or what year it is. Just give us CW

[Jenny Winters]

Hello. I thank PGI for making this decision. The rp immersion, giving context, in-fiction aspect has not been utilised in MWO which is a shame when MW/BT has a treasure trove, decades worth of lore to play around with. Thank you again PGI for looking into the timeline, as it is key for MWO to come 'alive' as a living space in both the interweb and in our imagination.

Like others, I hope the RP Inner Sphere News would start again. I really enjoyed reading those. Also DEVS can rp abit to add flavour, like framing their posts in-fiction such as those in the previous technical updates for example. I also would to like to read backstories of new hero mechs (and why not continuation of old hero mechs) if possible. Heck why not make backstories for all mechs chassis, variants ect.

Also may I suggest, to build the rp immersion aspect of MWO, PGI may want to begin a lore-builder project, extending to the community to contribute player literature for the MWO universe. There are talented writers or fans who just want to write about mw/bt already in the player base. You can just go the forums fan fiction section to see how talented our players can be in writing and storytelling. This is an untapped available resource PGI should look into to forward community engagement.

I am very curious as to how exactly and to what extend Players Actions may determine the course of history in MWO as was hinted in Paul's post. I hope there will be more details of this in the near future.

Also, if possible, I would like further updates on the proposed players association concept which was roughly unveiled during launch (september 2013?) regarding Merc Unit, Merc Life, House Unit, House Life and now as well Clan Unit and Clan Life.

I am concerned that after the introduction of clan mechs and clan tech in june, much dev resources will be focus on finding gameplay balance between clan and IS mech and tech. Coupled with this are urgent matters that need to be addressed such as gameplay balance before the introduction of clans (the current meta), HSR- Hitbox Registration, MM, Ping issues, Improving new player experience, the front end of UI2.0...the list is long. My concern is that now the big PGI Dash will be for CW, can PGI cope with so many matters on its plate?

I wish the best for PGI, to bring the best product MWO should and could be, for fans of MW/BT, old and new, to be more happy to spend their hard earned money on.

Good luck PGI. There is much work to be done.

Edited by Jenny Winters, 03 June 2014 - 10:10 PM.

[Iacov]

a good idea and a good move!

[Tectonic]

It is good to know that I will be able to slaughter many Draconis Combine freebirth, right from the beginning of Operation Revival.

[IraqiWalker]

Tectonic, on 03 June 2014 - 10:27 PM, said:

It is good to know that I will be able to slaughter many Draconis Combine freebirth, right from the beginning of Operation Revival.

Not that I have any love for them, but it will not be easy, and if the Inner Sphere gears up, your hands are gonna be filled. Plus, I think we can afford the "They will choke on our dead" strategy here, and just drown you in dudes.

Yes, drowning in dudes seems to be a good solution to this invasion.

[Kain]

Finally...

A lot of us suggested this 2 years ago already, when they already couldn't keep up with the 1:1 timeline with their development schedule

[Phlinger]

This push back is a good thing, it means they are taking CW seriously this time around. People can choose to see it a different way, but that's how I'm seeing it. If it gets us closer to CW, I'm all for it.

[Brut4ce]

Woohoo! I got an excellent deal preordering 3050 holograms and 3050 "happy new year" banners to decorate my mechs' cockpits! Its always good to think ahead ehehehehe!

[Adrienne Vorton]

good luck making it even out of the periphery, test-tube babies... don´t expect a warm welcome

Edited by Adrienne Vorton, 03 June 2014 - 10:52 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

Adrienne Vorton, on 03 June 2014 - 10:52 PM, said:

good luck making it even out of the periphery, test-tube babies... don´t expect a warm welcome

woah woah woah. They SHOULD expect a warm welcome. I mean we brought all these ACs, and Lasers, and Missiles, and ... and flamers. I'm pretty sure that would get things warm and toasty in those mechs.

[Adrienne Vorton]

IraqiWalker, on 03 June 2014 - 10:59 PM, said:

woah woah woah. They SHOULD expect a warm welcome. I mean we brought all these ACs, and Lasers, and Missiles, and ... and flamers. I'm pretty sure that would get things warm and toasty in those mechs.

okay, a warm welcome then... TECHNICIAN, OVER HERE! WHERE ARE MY INFERNOS....?!

[Ebonkosh]

I am not a TT player and the dates and stuff are beyond me. I can get the general idea but there are other things more pressing. I guess it is taking more time than expected to reverse engineer WOTs community warfare code. Seriously, how long is it going to take? There are several games that already have this type of system in place. All I see is new mechs pushed out and 1 map or something? Different versions of the same map do not really count for me. I know they need funds but we need to have a real development timeline and when things are due. How far along they are etc. I mean, atleast add some clans/ house.aka guilds to the game so we can see who is in the guild. It will help with match making and forming groups. Add the guild logos and stuff. That stuff should be in the game already. Friends list is just not cutting it and not the real purpose of a friends list. Should be able to have guild chat and player chats etc. I just do not know why these smaller things (IMO) are not added. If you give these smaller things to the player base it will give you more time to get the bigger planet CW done. Design the system you want....I mean WOT already does this...Repopulation has a pretty good system for taking over bases etc. Game not out yet. I just still see MWO as a Beta still. I enjoy the game but I really do not think the progress is where it should be. The UI2.0 was just horrible. I am sure things need to be redone or maybe higher a few testers. If PGI had given the UI 2.0 to 50 people to use for 5 days they would of known about the issues way before it went live and not released it. ok venting over.....back to game..


Ebonkosh

Edited by Ebonkosh, 03 June 2014 - 11:28 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

Ebonkosh, on 03 June 2014 - 11:26 PM, said:

I am not a TT player and the dates and stuff are beyond me. I can get the general idea but there are other things more pressing. I guess it is taking more time than expected to reverse engineer WOTs community warfare code. Seriously, how long is it going to take? There are several games that already have this type of system in place. All I see is new mechs pushed out and 1 map or something? Different versions of the same map do not really count for me. I know they need funds but we need to have a real development timeline and when things are due. How far along they are etc. I mean, atleast add some clans/ house.aka guilds to the game so we can see who is in the guild. It will help with match making and forming groups. Add the guild logos and stuff. That stuff should be in the game already. Friends list is just not cutting it and not the real purpose of a friends list. Should be able to have guild chat and player chats etc. I just do not know why these smaller things (IMO) are not added. If you give these smaller things to the player base it will give you more time to get the bigger planet CW done. Design the system you want....I mean WOT already does this...Repopulation has a pretty good system for taking over bases etc. Game not out yet. I just still see MWO as a Beta still. I enjoy the game but I really do not think the progress is where it should be. The UI2.0 was just horrible. I am sure things need to be redone or maybe higher a few testers. If PGI had given the UI 2.0 to 50 people to use for 5 days they would of known about the issues way before it went live and not released it. ok venting over.....back to game..


Ebonkosh

These "smaller" stuff aren't added, because we already have them in place. Some of the Mechwarrior players here have been in units that date back to MW2, and have had the same website since then. We already have our guild halls (so to speak) and our chats, and forums and subforums on our websites, and the TS3 servers.

I'd rather they keep that stuff for CW, which is when it's supposed to be released anyways. working on the balance is more important.

As for the WOT CW map. I'm pretty sure, the WoT CW map doesn't have over 3000 planets in it, that are ripe for the taking, with unique bonuses for a plenty of them.

Not to mention you can't compare the 2 studios, not to mention that I've noticed some discrepancy between the test servers and the live servers. For example 4x3 worked wonderfully on the test server, however when implemented onto the live server, all kinds of problems that weren't encountered on the test servers started popping up.

[Thorn Hallis]

Rolling back the timeline doesn't make much sense to me. But with the widespread use of Level 2 tech on both sides it probably doesn't even matter which year we play.