314 replies to this topic

[Shadow Magnet]

Marodeur, you are right - especially my suggestion has no background in the BT lore. But I like the idea of giving some advantages but also some penalities - so people must take a choice. Also, somehow you must encourage people to participate in role warfare.

[Marodeur]

Of course you are right with your opinion and the module slots are a very good way to create or expand the role warfare. I also made a suggestion a few posts before (not as detailed as yours and not completetly elaborated... but a suggestion!). I saw the people in this thread made a lot of suggestions regarding role warfare. Didn't have the time to read them all ;-). And it is good that everyone has its own opinion and I will change my, if I see a good or even better suggestion!

Edited by Marodeur, 22 July 2014 - 12:20 AM.

[o0Marduk0o]

Terciel1976, on 21 July 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Six strikes per mech?

And here the game dies.

Let's hope it's not that.

Can't you "read" the picture? You may have 2 consumable slots. In the given situation the player has 3 strikes in his inventory. The checkbox most certainly is for auto-refill of consumables after a match.

[SgtKinCaiD]

@Niko : thanks for the info but can we have a command chair post explaining in details the module revamp because it's only available in the vlog. Can we have also a sneak peek on the module distribution for each chassis ?

[Kinski Orlawisch]

Do mechs wich had unmastered 3 Slots, still have more Slots than mechs wich had unmastered just 1?

[Uncleclint]

Limit consumable slots down to 1 please, right now this is too obvious an attempt to squeeze a little extra cash out of the players at the cost of a good gaming experience -> one with less than 48 arty strikes per game.

Thank you very much in advance.

[SgtKinCaiD]

HAS UncleClint, on 22 July 2014 - 01:20 AM, said:

Limit consumable slots down to 1 please, right now this is too obvious an attempt to squeeze a little extra cash out of the players at the cost of a good gaming experience -> one with less than 48 arty strikes per game.

Thank you very much in advance.

Either that or a player can only choose an arty or an airstrike not both.

[mechbane]

oh wow you listened to us in regards to the Omni slot, nice PGI it seems you do care

[Asmosis]

Vassago Rain, on 21 July 2014 - 02:01 PM, said:

Every single player will now carry X weapon mods and practically everybody will spam consumables, because there's nothing else to equip.

Hope you like red smoke.

Premium players who have run out of things to buy with cbills will spam consumables. F2P players wont be as they are either mostly saving up for current mechs, or (if they are smart) saving up cbills for clan mechs. Its going to take a big chunk of change to buyout 3 direwolf's and equip properly. Can't say I'd spend 40k cbills for a 5k return.

Given how many clan mechs are in matches currently though, I think its fair to assume at least a couple per team will have consumables equipped and be prepared to use them willy nilly.

Edited by Asmosis, 22 July 2014 - 02:07 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

I love how the community always jumps to conclusion on everything. only by them releasing it and it being out for a few days-weeks can people begin to start to give "how to fix it ideas".

HAS UncleClint, on 22 July 2014 - 01:20 AM, said:

Limit consumable slots down to 1 please, right now this is too obvious an attempt to squeeze a little extra cash out of the players at the cost of a good gaming experience -> one with less than 48 arty strikes per game.

Thank you very much in advance.

Consumables can be bought with C-Bills, so how are they squeezing money? only need to spend mc for the better versions which is not much better

[Xeno Phalcon]

BLOOD WOLF, on 22 July 2014 - 02:08 AM, said:

Consumables can be bought with C-Bills, so how are they squeezing money? only need to spend mc for the better versions which is not much better

While I don't entirely know if this is what he meant but most people view the double consumable slots as a 'cash sink', not refering to MC but c-bills; its pretty standard practice in games to have some way to keep game money from inflating too much in the hands of a good player. (Best examples are repair costs in MMORPGs, also 'auction fees' in games like WOW, though WOW also cranks out a new pack of ways to devour tens of thousands of gold each patch on mounts.)

Encouraging players to use consumables is a good approach, but limiting arty/air strikes is the only way to prevent the spamfest from going absolutely bonkers if everyone can comfortably take both without sacrificing other precious modules. As such I propose one of the consumable slots be strictly non-damaging and the other a hybrid damage/nondamage consumable IE in one they could only put in coolant flush or UAV while the other would allow all consumables. That way at worst people would be standard issued coolant flush + arty but have the capacity to do coolant flush/UAV if they wanted.

[AssaultPig]

Since it wasn't really discussed in the dev log, I would like to know what the goal of these module system changes is.

It seems like the outcome of the changes as stated will be:

1) More consumable use. Do you consider this a desirable outcome given the current implementation of air/artillery strikes?

2) Fewer 'utility' (mech slot) modules available for use. In practice this will probably lead to less diversity, as people default to using the most powerful modules (i.e. radar deprivation.)

3) More ability to use weapon modules.

So, does PGI think the current weapon modules are useful? Trading more heat for slightly better range really isn't a good deal, and probably wouldn't be a good deal even if the ranges involved increased substantially (doubled or more.)

[TercieI]

o0Marduk0o, on 22 July 2014 - 12:20 AM, said:

Can't you "read" the picture? You may have 2 consumable slots. In the given situation the player has 3 strikes in his inventory. The checkbox most certainly is for auto-refill of consumables after a match.

I hope you're right. Sincerely. But I can think of at least three ways to "read" that picture. Given how unintuitive much of the UI is, saying anything is "most certainly" anything from a screenshot is somewhat dubious.

Edited by Terciel1976, 22 July 2014 - 04:22 AM.

[VoodooLou Kerensky]

The striving for balance while allowing customization is nigh unachievable, since min/maxing will always exist. And if you limit players to stock/canonical builds then some mechs will only get used as 1) a Lark, 2) someones totally new and buys it with no prior info, and 3)its free/1st mech (no choice situation). If Community Warfare uses damage done, depending on mech size versus size of mech attacking getting a bonus,(light vs assault +30% vs hvy 20%), as well as mechs destroyed to determine a victor when/if time runs out, airstrikes/arty will override the use of other modules due to the potential damage they can inflict. This will just add another wrinkle trying to create balance, and just make the game more pay to win.(How many people are going to use 3 of their 4 mech bays to get master skill for a module slot? And since you cant buy bays with c-bills, You better like that 1 mech chassis ALOT! or be willing to drop the other 2 mechs (at a considerable loss) to do the same for another Mech, pretty much makes the game now p2w)

[TamCoan]

Thanks for the change to the mastered slot, I don't think anyone was happy with the idea of a third weapon slot.

The thing that I find amusing is that now my mastered mechs will run the same two slots that my un-mastered mechs currently run. I say this because I don't use consumables in PUG matches and the weapon mods just aren't worth it currently. So net change for me = zero.

I really would like to see a rundown of slots available for each mech so we could get an idea of what is being offered. (Assuming you guys still plan on offering different module configurations.) EG: The atlas d-dc currently has 4 mech module slots mastered, will it have three in the new system?

Weapon slots I could really care less about. A few meters range for more heat really isn't worth it. I do just fine without them now, I'll do just fine without them in the future.

My concern, like everyone else, is the effect of consumable slots. As stated earlier you currently have a choice between consumables and mech modules. If you bring a consumable then you are giving up a mech slot. With the new system that penalty no longer exists. In fact it promotes overuse of arty/air-strike. What do you plan to do to limit the game from turning into consumable spam?

[skorpionet]

FupDup, on 21 July 2014 - 01:42 PM, said:

C. Dedicated consumable slots is just begging for arty/airstrike spam all day erryday. No consumable slots, please.

We are not all Americans.

[sabujo]

Excellent decision! I am also concerned about the consumable slots and their spamming potential, but let's see what you guys have in mind to counter that.

[Negaman1971]

Me likey!

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

Unless you increase damage of a weapon, most people will never equip a module that increases heat.

IS ppc vs IS erppc is a prime example of this.

I don't want an increase in weapon damage...
What I do want, is for you to remove the heat penalty from the weapon modules.

Want me to fill this weapon modules... Remove the heat penalty... If by doing this, means you can't balance the extended range of the weapon... Ok fine, instead in increased range, make the benefit cosmetic, something like pretty sparkles... What ever, I might consider this, but as weapon modules as they stand now, are terrible. (Ok maybe ams and mg are good, but those don't add heat?)

Remove the heat penalty from weapon modules... No one likes heat, hell I can't imagine firing a clan erppc with more heat then they are already... Remove the heat penalty from weapon modules

[Xeno Phalcon]

skorpionet, on 22 July 2014 - 05:25 AM, said:

We are not all Americans.

Its a poor misconception that americans like to bomb stuff, thats middle easterners.

We do however own guns, lots of them; My grandma owns a gun, my dog owns a gun.


(My cat owns a knife, but we don't judge.)