268 replies to this topic

[Thariel]

Endarius, on 23 June 2012 - 07:52 AM, said:

What you say flies in the face of everything battletech stands for. Terrible idea. The hardpoint system is more than restrictive enough. To go further would actually be in direct violation of lore and canon. It would also bring the game one perilous step closer to mechassault. Not only does this post likely infuriate 95% of the community. You're also citing examples which include clan tech, which doesn't exist in this game. In your model basically there would be no weapons that you could switch at all, except maybe laser types. It also is pretty unlikely the Dev's will do this simply because that is obviously not the standpoint they are working from. You havn't even played the game yet, I would suggest you do before making demands of Pirhana games with regards to an opinion on mech customization that is not only limiting, but likely yours alone.

1. Where did I do demands ? I made suggestions and asked for an opinion. thereforeIi made some examples to point out my concern.
2. Where did I ever involve Clan-tech?

ScientificMethod, on 23 June 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

You can't fit 2 ppc's in a standard catapult

You're bound to talk nonsense ? Or is it just some semi blindness wanting to read only what you like so your posting are somwhat fitting? if you remove the lrm there's more than enough free tonnage for 2 ppcs. and the hardpoint slots are available to, if you take away the meds.

[Primarck]

I love the guys here telling everyone how it's balanced, and the hard point system is restrictive enough, and then in the same post, they tell other people how they should not talk about balance if they haven't played the game yet. Hypocritics? Yes....yes they are...


P.

[Thariel]

Sierra19, on 23 June 2012 - 08:05 AM, said:

I'm not hating the OP, I'm just trying to explain to him the reason the mechlab works the way it does. Let's take the Hunchback 4G: Standard layout is one AC20 (right torso), and 2 ML's (one on each arm), and one SL on the head. So to customize it (the way I understand it), you have one ballistic hardpoint, and 3 energy hardpoints. I don't think we'll see as much min/maxing as we will see "The AC20 is too short ranged for me, so I'll swap it for an AC 10 and get more shots for the ammo tonnage to boot" Or, you can go with a canon variant, and drive Shakir Jerrar's ride with and UAC10, and 2 MPL's (medium pulse lasers), and you'll be all pimped out, Dragon style. And that's a 4G varaint, not a different model. If you do a little digging around in source material, it'll be hard for you to come up with something that some other mech pilot of note hasn't already done.

Yeah, and i'm fine with what you say. These are minor tweaks and they are full within range of what I just suggested, but with these hardpoints you mention, you could go ppc in each arm and some additional heatsinks. and for the sake of filling the ballistic slot, use a MG without ammo. altering the autocannon itself and then the lasers is one thing, ripping apart mechs and build totally new ones another.
Still this is only my OPINION and I just wanted to get some feedback.

[William Petersen]

How about just stock-only? I like that. Fun times would be had. B-)

[Ricama]

ScrapIron Prime, on 23 June 2012 - 05:49 AM, said:

Proabably because battletech canon says that mechs are really hard to modify. There's a reason that 90% of the mechs in the inner sphere run their factory-built options.

But in defense of the mech lab, 3050 was the dawn of "hey we know what we're doing now, lets customize!" And besides, the game has to bow at least a little to the reality of being a video game, and video gamers want a greater degree of control over things.

Compromise.. the art of making everyone unhappy.

False, only one type of each mech came from the original factory, every other official variant is either a house modifying the original to fit their tactical doctrine or a field modification that proved effective enough to produce. Modification is at the heart of Battle Tech and while I'm a little put off by the hardpoint system, I understand why it's important to keep the character of the mech alive.

The hardpoint system is the compromise, I can deal with it, hopefully so can you.

[Thariel]

Qayos, on 23 June 2012 - 08:22 AM, said:

Your idea goes against TT rules, Canon and precident set down by previous Hardpoint system set-ups.

The first problem is, using your example, there really aren't that many non-omni mech designs that have 2 e-weapons in the arms.

Secondly, while you'd have a fantastic heavy Warhammer, you'd have a poor Assault mech if all it carried was 2 ERPPCs, 2 Med lasers, 1 SRM6 and 1 machine gun.

1. I am sure there are more than enough 95 ton mechs with 1 e-slots in each arm.
2. If you had read my posting to the end, I wrote that you have a better Warhammer and still 10-15 tons free available. This is not about how bad the new created assault is, but how not useful a Warhammer would be in that system, for you can just build a better one.

Badfinger, on 23 June 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

Hmmm... Another I can't do, so nerf it for everyone else!

Surely not. I have created and altered more mechs in my life than you can count to. It's just about the feeling of the game.

[Voyager I]

Thariel, on 23 June 2012 - 11:55 AM, said:

You're bound to talk nonsense ? Or is it just some semi blindness wanting to read only what you like so your posting are somwhat fitting? if you remove the lrm there's more than enough free tonnage for 2 ppcs. and the hardpoint slots are available to, if you take away the meds.

Yes, but we've yet to see if it has enough critical slots available in its energy hardpoints to mount them.

[William Petersen]

Voyager I, on 23 June 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

Yes, but we've yet to see if it has enough critical slots available in its energy hardpoints to mount them.

Do you understand how the critical system in BattleTech works? Me thinks you don't.

[Raigir]

You want us the have 'vanilla' mech with little customization? Then why have a Mechlab at all? Lets just buy prebuilt mech and use those eh?

Just no, customization is what makes this game awsome. Turning a catapult-k2 into an dual AC5 toting power house makes this game fun and unique.

[Thariel]

Barlourd, on 23 June 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

It doesn't have to be a suggestion, maybe this is just a thought experiment. I think these can be very enlightening as a look into the psyche of future players or opponents.

PSSSST !!!!!

[Thariel]

garreth, on 23 June 2012 - 11:31 AM, said:

My solution is simple. Make two tiers of battle. Classic, and Open. In classic matches, you are required to use a stock Mech with known, IN print approved variants. in open matches. You can use any homebrew you want. You get put into matches with like Mechs. Classic, or homebrew. Simple fix.

Same idea came into my mind.

[Thariel]

Voyager I, on 23 June 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

Yes, but we've yet to see if it has enough critical slots available in its energy hardpoints to mount them.

Just looked it up, meds are in the side torsos together with a little bit of LRM ammunition, there's more than enough space to fit everything you want in there.

[Voyager I]

William Petersen, on 23 June 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

Do you understand how the critical system in BattleTech works? Me thinks you don't.

Yes. The system isn't difficult to understand. I just don't own the readouts.

Thariel, on 23 June 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

Just looked it up, meds are in the side torsos together with a little bit of LRM ammunition, there's more than enough space to fit everything you want in there.

That would settle it, assuming the MWO specs don't diverge substantially.


I have mixed feelings about this. PPCs only take up 3 slots. That doesn't seem terribly big for how substantial a PPC is treated as being.

[Lumpi]

Thariel, on 23 June 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

Example:
I want to play a warhammer? Sure, but why stick with it, I need 4/6 movement (tabletop). So with a xxl reactor, a 95 ton mech gives me the most free tonnage. So I can take any 95 ton mech, boost it to 4/6 speed, pick one of the dozens of variants that has 2 e-slots in the arms, put the ppc's in, add 2 med lasers srm6 and a machine gun, add a huge amount of double heatsinks and have still about 10 tons left, means I have an even better warhammer with way more armour, way more heatsinks and room for another ppc+ heatsinks at no disadvantage (this doesn't even include ferro-fibrus or endo steel, with both I have more than 15 tons free).

If we do so, why do we need lots of different mechs. One of the fun parts of battletech is having lots and lots of different mechs. If I could change 1 mech into whatever I need atm, I lose one major part of the game.

So lets do some quick maths on your build, even a bit simplified:
95t mech / 45 criticals free
should move 4/6 so a 380 engine gonna be 41 tons, as xl 20.5t /6 crits) =74.5t/39 crits
Cockpit 3t gyro 4t=67.5t/39crits
internal structure 9.5t = 58t
2 PPC (7t/3crits each= 14t/6crits)= 44t/33crits
2 M-Laser (1t/1crit = 2t/2crits)= 42t 31crits
srm6+one ton of ammo (4t/3crits)=38t/28crits
here I differ a bit, as the stock Warhammer has 2 light lasers and 2 MGs
2 MG+1t ammo (2t/3crits)=36t/25crits
2 small laser (0.5t /1 crit each = 1t/2crits)= 35t/23 crits
this means 34 heat per turn(if you want to run and shoot all weapons at all)
Your engine provides space for 15 Heatsinks and we use double HSs
we need 2 extra, (7t/6crits for the extra)=28t/17 crits
now we have an unarmored mech, which is nice and cool, lets add some armour:
max is 18t, for maximum protection, we choose, as you even suggested ferro-fibritl:
thats 18t and 14 crits= 10t/3crits free

if I add another PPC I have 3t free for more ammo (atm I'm not sure if additional ammo would need more crits, if yes, you have 3 useless tons, as you run aout of space), but no additional Heatsinks. Endosteel would need another 14 crits.

So, whats my point? The Balance of the MechLab lays within the system! The heavy mechs do have the free mass for lots of equipment, but they easily run short of their criticals. Lighter mechs aren't as limited critical-wise, but they lack the tonnage to add more equipment. And in addition you are limited in how many and what general type of weapon you can add...
You now could only argue why I should choose the 70t Warhammer of our 95t build, but that is an entire different discussion...

Voyager I, on 23 June 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Yes. The system isn't difficult to understand. I just don't own the readouts.



That would settle it, assuming the MWO specs don't diverge substantially.


I have mixed feelings about this. PPCs only take up 3 slots. That doesn't seem terribly big for how substantial a PPC is treated as being.

Ok, but they are hot and you need lots of critical space for the added heatsinks, and addition mass...

Edited by Lumpi, 23 June 2012 - 12:50 PM.

[William Petersen]

Voyager I, on 23 June 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Yes. The system isn't difficult to understand. I just don't own the readouts.

Neihter do I, but the CPLT-C1 has 4 MLas. The CT has only 2 crits; the missile boxes are the "arms". Ergo, one E.HP must be in the side torsos. Even if the -C1 has an XL Engine (which it doesn't but for argument), it has 9 remaining crits in each side torso once you strip all the weapons, after which you have plenty of tonnage for 2 PPCs.

Voyager I, on 23 June 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

I have mixed feelings about this. PPCs only take up 3 slots. That doesn't seem terribly big for how substantial a PPC is treated as being.

PPCs are treated as being "substantial" because heat is often ignored. Especially with Double Heat Sinks. =-/

[Clay Pigeon]

Thariel, on 23 June 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

As we all know there's hardpoints for weapons and these are limited by numbers, not weight, like 1 Slot energy-weapon can be re-equipped with just one e-weapon, no matter what kind (if the tonnage and max-crits fit).

first i'd like to have this more strictly. like not just energy-slot but Laser-slots, PPC-slots, AC-slots, Gauss-Slots etc.

So you can change your PPC for the ER-Variant , but not for lasers.

Same goes with this: (From the dev-Corner-thread Q& A no. 5)
[b]

I hope this gets changed so the engine can't be altered at all, armor can be upgraded only and only a little and no further heatsinks can be added, no change from normal to endo- structure, normal to ferro-fibrus armour, normal to xxl engine.


Why do i want it this way? Well if we can change whatever we want, what's the use of different mechs. I chose the speed i want, take a mech builder programm, find out what weight gives me most free tonnage for my desired speed and buy that mech and then just rebuild it.

Example:
I want to play a warhammer? Sure, but why stick with it, I need 4/6 movement (tabletop). So with a xxl reactor, a 95 ton mech gives me the most free tonnage. So I can take any 95 ton mech, boost it to 4/6 speed, pick one of the dozens of variants that has 2 e-slots in the arms, put the ppc's in, add 2 med lasers srm6 and a machine gun, add a huge amount of double heatsinks and have still about 10 tons left, means I have an even better warhammer with way more armour, way more heatsinks and room for another ppc+ heatsinks at no disadvantage (this doesn't even include ferro-fibrus or endo steel, with both I have more than 15 tons free).

If we do so, why do we need lots of different mechs. One of the fun parts of battletech is having lots and lots of different mechs. If I could change 1 mech into whatever I need atm, I lose one major part of the game.


Would like to hear you unbiased ("I want want want want to play MY build") opinions on that.

No fun allowed, eh comrade?


How about we let the game at least get to the point where the NDA is lifted before we, non-beta testers, start clamoring for changes?

[Alfred VonGunn]

Thariel, on 23 June 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

As we all know there's hardpoints for weapons and these are limited by numbers, not weight, like 1 Slot energy-weapon can be re-equipped with just one e-weapon, no matter what kind (if the tonnage and max-crits fit).

first i'd like to have this more strictly. like not just energy-slot but Laser-slots, PPC-slots, AC-slots, Gauss-Slots etc.

So you can change your PPC for the ER-Variant , but not for lasers.

Same goes with this: (From the dev-Corner-thread Q& A no. 5)
[b]

I hope this gets changed so the engine can't be altered at all, armor can be upgraded only and only a little and no further heatsinks can be added, no change from normal to endo- structure, normal to ferro-fibrus armour, normal to xxl engine.


Why do i want it this way? Well if we can change whatever we want, what's the use of different mechs. I chose the speed i want, take a mech builder programm, find out what weight gives me most free tonnage for my desired speed and buy that mech and then just rebuild it.

Example:
I want to play a warhammer? Sure, but why stick with it, I need 4/6 movement (tabletop). So with a xxl reactor, a 95 ton mech gives me the most free tonnage. So I can take any 95 ton mech, boost it to 4/6 speed, pick one of the dozens of variants that has 2 e-slots in the arms, put the ppc's in, add 2 med lasers srm6 and a machine gun, add a huge amount of double heatsinks and have still about 10 tons left, means I have an even better warhammer with way more armour, way more heatsinks and room for another ppc+ heatsinks at no disadvantage (this doesn't even include ferro-fibrus or endo steel, with both I have more than 15 tons free).

If we do so, why do we need lots of different mechs. One of the fun parts of battletech is having lots and lots of different mechs. If I could change 1 mech into whatever I need atm, I lose one major part of the game.


Would like to hear you unbiased ("I want want want want to play MY build") opinions on that.

Well lets see.. for example.. The Hunchie with the AC20. You pull the AC20.. that was on a Gun hardpoint.. Swap it for a Gauss rifle.. Still a gun.. But NOT for a bunch of lasers since they are Beam weapons.. But the Swayback variant has Beam hardpoints instead of ballistic.. . As an example.. That help? That is just how I have understood it baced on the mechlab video, dev comments and common sense oh and it is like the TT version if you had set hardpoints in it..

[Lumpi]

William Petersen, on 23 June 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

Neihter do I, but the CPLT-C1 has 4 MLas. The CT has only 2 crits; the missile boxes are the "arms". Ergo, one E.HP must be in the side torsos. Even if the -C1 has an XL Engine (which it doesn't but for argument), it has 9 remaining crits in each side torso once you strip all the weapons, after which you have plenty of tonnage for 2 PPCs.




PPCs are treated as being "substantial" because heat is often ignored. Especially with Double Heat Sinks. =-/

Yep, but as I said earlier, to make it heat neutral, with DHS, I need, with IS tech, 5DHS=15critcials and 5tons, or 10 HS = 10 critcials and 10tons... you have either a 12t and 18 critical weapon or a 17tons and 13criticals weapon, not counting your "free" heatsinks from the reactor. This puts you into the region of an AC/20 or Gauss...

Edited by Lumpi, 23 June 2012 - 12:56 PM.

[Voyager I]

Lumpi, on 23 June 2012 - 12:46 PM, said:

Ok, but they are hot and you need lots of critical space for the added heatsinks, and addition mass...

That is true, but you can afford a few extra heat sinks with the low weight of a PPC compared to similarly powerful weapons, and it seems like the chassis we're talking about aren't hurting for odd critical slots.

[Lord Exalted]

i really thought it looked like a really good amount of restriction vs. customzation in the trailers my self