268 replies to this topic

[monev]

I don't know how much we've seen about the ability to change engines and such. but i don't think it's an inharently bad idea. it would certnaily COST to do so. The only caviot to that idea is the fact that many people will be playing it as F2P only and if say only mechs with upgraded engines and chasis are truely viable on the battlefield, and the cost of them is priced out of the range of any even dedicated F2P player, then those player will become very frustrated and we may have a smaller total player pool. That would leave us without sheep to shear.

From what we;ve seen of the mechlab in thr released videos I'd say there is balance in the restrections of what types and numbers of weapon systmes that can go on a mech. sure to can change sizes of ACs but it not like you can swap it for an LRM 20. The ability to swap missles for missles, energy weapons for energy weapons, ACs for ACs, hard point for hard point already seems like a very fair compromise.

What i've always loved about Mechwirror games is the ability to come up with creative builds for a mech weather they work or not. With out a mechlab, in my mind, it's only half a game.

[TwisTed94]

Please forgive me if this question was covered elsewhere. Will I be able to tell in game what changes have been made to other mechs? For example we have seen screenshots of the catapult with ppc's vice LRMs. Will changes to other mechs look similar?

[Lumpi]

The catapult with the PPC is a variant, not changed with the mechlab. But if I look at the screenshots, I think you will se the name of the variant and the weapons built into the mech targeted.

[KageRyuu]

I love how people make such grandiose assumptions based on minimal information and personal fear.

First of all, how serious do you think the Devs take our non beta access input when it comes to game mechanics and balance issues? I hope not serious at all seeing as we haven't had the privileged of being in the beta yet and seeing what they've done so far. Regardless your entire suggestion to basically do away with mechlab isn't going to happen, it's just not in the MW and BT spirit what with mech construction being such a major component of the TT and previous game. The Devs have already instated hard points, which I don't much agree with personally but understand objectively, and there's already plenty of restricting factors from the TT, so in my opinion there's no need to further restrict people's creativity just because of a one person's uninformed fear.

[Alfred VonGunn]

TwisTed94, on 23 June 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

Please forgive me if this question was covered elsewhere. Will I be able to tell in game what changes have been made to other mechs? For example we have seen screenshots of the catapult with ppc's vice LRMs. Will changes to other mechs look similar?

Based on some of the screen shots/videos yes.. If your scout has the skills and gets close enough to the bad guys.. From long range visual we are not sure yet only the beta teams knows for sure:)

[William Petersen]

Lumpi, on 23 June 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

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...

Yup. I know this. You know this. PPC-freaks do not know this. A lot of it comes from those "Free" heat sinks in the engine itself (which shouldn't be doubled. Ever. This is one big deviation from "canon" I hope PGI has the courage to do).

It's also helped by heat really not meaning much in previous MW games. It doesn't really mess up your targeting, it doesn't reduce your speed, it's just like, "oh, well, I overheat, I shut down for a few seconds, no big."

The biggest reason to not shut down in TT: the -4 to-hit bonus attackers get (And/or aimed-shot ability), is practically non-existent in the MW games. Sure it's a little easier to hit your target, but it doesn't make nearly the difference it did in TT. One turn of being shut down in TT was pretty much a guaranteed maiming on whatever mech shut town. In MW Games you take a few free hits, boot up again, and get back into it.

Edited by William Petersen, 23 June 2012 - 01:24 PM.

[Sierra19]

Thariel, on 23 June 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

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.

But in that case, you run into the problem of "Are there enough critical spaces in the arm to mount a PPC?", and "do I have enough tonnage left over to mount a PPC on each arm?". The answer is "No." You are constrained firstly by the type of Hardpoint it is (in this case energy), secondly, you are constrained by how many "critical slots", and tonnage you have available, i.e. how much space a particular weapon system will take up and how much it weighs, and a PPC takes up a LOT more space and tonnage than a Medium Laser, so you can't just swap out the ML for a PPC, and toss in a couple of extra heat sinks. You don't have the tonnage to do that. So I feel, that your fears of "OMG HE'S GOT 6 PPC'S HAXXORZ!" is unfounded and unjustified. Now I could be totally wrong, but the devs seem to have a handle on these things, so I for one, am not worried. But for the sake of argument, assuming you COULD do that, doesn't necessarily make it a wise choice, as your armor would be nonexistent, and if somebody sneezed on your mech, it'd blow up.

Edited by Sierra19, 23 June 2012 - 01:39 PM.

[CCC Dober]

OP: Sorry to say it, but you are over4n4lizing things. The Mechlab as I see it right now mainly helps to minimize boating, which has been agreed on as detrimental. That already cuts into the options of some more specialised Mechs that are either available or upcoming. What you suggest would not only cut into said Mechs, but also cripple them further in terms of flexibility. I do not know if that was your original intention, but it appears that your suggestion doesn't really help the game in general or tries to tackle longstanding, severe problems.

P.S. This word filter really cracks me up lawl

Edited by CCC Dober, 23 June 2012 - 01:28 PM.

[ZetaFalcon]

I enjoy as much MechBay control as possible.

I forgot which version , but I had a shadowcat that I stripped of armor, maxed out the speed and loaded with LRM20's

In an open field My little Cat took on ANYONE, soundly.

[Grokmoo]

Seems too restrictive. With what is being described, there is almost no point to having the mechlab at all.

I prefer the system as described by the devs.

[ScientificMethod]

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

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?



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.

The medium lasers are spread out through all three torsos, each torso having two energy slots. A ppc takes up three slots. Ergo, no ppc will be able to fit due to hardpoint restrictions. Sure, overall it has enough space, but not once you look at where the hardpoints are and how they're spread out.

Unless you're thinking of the CPLT-K2 but that's an entirely different mech variant all together.

Onto the rest of defending myself, must I really go through your entire post?

Thariel, on 23 June 2012 - 07:50 AM, said:

I have read many cons and some pros now, and I just want to state, I am not a "fanatic table-topper".
Also I am not against cumstomization, but it needs to be in line.
E.G. taking a Catapult removing the Lrms and putting 2x srm2 in it and therefore removing 2 meds and putting 2 ppcs in it makes it a totally different mech. Why play a Catapult then? This new mech is more like a jumping Warhammer than a catapult. If there's too much freedom , everyone will run the same mech (fotm-setup) as well as if there is too few freedom (fotm killer-mech). Would love to see it balanced out very well. I just posted a suggestion as to how balance it, restrict it, but not too much, give freedom, but not too much either.

So all i want is a little restriction. You can still have lots of fun tinkering with your mechs, but stay closer to the original. Changing internals , armourtype and engine is way too much in my opinion.

The only mechs that could swap weapons free at will are Clan-Omnis, and they are special for that ability. With variants to IS mechs available, and therefore lots of diffrerent hardpoint setups , what's the difference to omnis. and even omnis couldn't change anything about their general mech layout (engine armour, internals, fixed heat sinks), just the free weapon slots could be altered.

I dunno how teamplay will be matched, but if it is e.g. per tonnage, each team will just pick the tonnage then select appropriate weighted mechs and build e.g. laserboats out of all of them. I can't see the real fun in that. a good PvP lives from difference.

Again: I don't want NO changes, I just want them to stay within some range so it doesn't turn into a fotm setup 1 mech for everything game.

1. Why would anyone want to do that to a catapult? There are other mechs that do it better. That build just wastes the team's tonnage and if you mismanage your heat sinks it's going to run far too hot to be effective.

2. I agree, limitations are good. So tonnage, cost, internal space, and hardpoints aren't enough limitations for you? Armor type has never been limited and I don't see a reason why it should be, same with internals and engine. These give bonuses yes, and also have serious costs. Sure, get your fancy armor. It also takes up about 1/5th your mech's internal slots (you know, the places where you'd put heatsinks, weapons, ammo, etc). Sureee, grab the xl engine. Now you can get taken out simply by losing a side torso since your reactor is spread out across all three. The only reason I see to limit all this is if someone wanted a simple game like MW4 (not saying it's bad, but there was a whole lot more pew-pew than thinking to that game)

3. Omni mechs still will have an advantage. Yes they will have hardpoints, but their omni hardpoints will allow any weapon type. That still gives them an edge in versatility.
"even omnis couldn't change anything about their general mech layout (engine armour, internals, fixed heat sinks), just the free weapon slots could be altered."
I assume you're referring to one of the videogames, because everywhere else in the battle tech universe and game-verse this is wrong. Omnis were notable for being extremely versatile and easy to fit to the owner's play style.
4. Who knows how pvp will work? Not us, that's who. Shooting down the mechbay because you don't have experience in the game is putting the cart before the horse. Yes MW4 had laser boat and balance issues. This isn't MW4:Online. This mechlab system will limit a good deal of the MW4 balance issues and their adherence to TT heat rules will make most player-made laserboats laughable.
5. I'm sure inflexible players still will have their favorite mech they use all the time. Heck, even I probably will end up with a favorite and I bet I could run it every match if I wanted to. Does that mean it's a smart thing for me to do? No, but the ratio of bad:good:amazing players isn't going to lean towards experience until you get high into your house or merc-group.


I think you have some well thoughtout points but I disagree with the conclusions you're reaching. Personally I feel like you're taking your feelings and experiences from MW4 and superimposing them on this game. While in my mind I find myself thinking that this game should be far different than MW4, especially from everything the dev's have been hinting at. Line of sight radar, hinting that the weight classes will be balanced, talking about the changes to lrm's, etc etc.

Edited by ScientificMethod, 23 June 2012 - 02:36 PM.

[ScientificMethod]

I do wish people that only have experience in MW 2-4 would be more open minded though. You haven't even tried this system yet and you want to burn it to the ground. Lets just wait for Aug7, then you can tell me how much you hate it.

[Kanatta Jing]

If the Mechlab needs to be tightened up or loosened it can be done any time. This is a MMO. Idealy it will never stop being worked on.

[ScientificMethod]

Primarck, on 23 June 2012 - 11:57 AM, said:

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.

Yes, somewhat hypocritical but these people have also seen this rule system at work in TT, they have some knowledge of how this all works. If you've tried something and don't like it (or like it) cool. If your opinion is getting shot from the hip with no experience, you should find something more logical to complain about. After all it'll only take a few minutes for a new complaint post to pop up...

[Dragonsbane]

Is the OP an Apple user/fan? I don't get it why people want to restrict the game....

[Phasics]

8 pages of no way in hell, awww I love you guys

[KageRyuu]

Phasics, on 23 June 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:

8 pages of no way in hell, awww I love you guys

What can we say, it's an easy argument.

Who wants less freedom?

[Chunkymonkey]

You have to follow the TT critical rules also, go read the dev blog on it.

[Mota Prefect]

All that your suggestion would do is limit the variety of mech's fielded by pilots and make the game more monotonous. Besides, there really is no need to have any rule set like this, I am sure the dev's know that what hard points are given to each mech in order to keep balance in check.

[Tip]

I kinda like the options to be able to tweak my mech based on my tactics and how I play. I am too agressive and like close combat. If I am limited to lasers and long range weapons then I will have to adjust to tactics Im not very familiar with. Whereas a sniper would already know where to go and when to bail out.