268 replies to this topic

[Xandre Blackheart]

Motion to table discussion until after most of us have actually had a chance to play the freaking game.

[Jonneh]

Another thread trying to turn the PC game into the table top.

Sorry dudes. Freedom, customization and accessibility are a big pull for me and I'm sure a lot of others. I don't want to be restricted just because the table top says so.

I'm sure the Devs are capable of balancing this game without the need to pick up the rule book and start copying it into the mechlab. Lets see what they come up with before making more threads like this ok?

[ScientificMethod]

Stop judging this system if you've never played under TT rules, otherwise you're just speculating. As it is this system has precedence in canon and the more indepth tabletop game.

OP, your assumptions are at least partially incorrect, the weapons you can put into a mech are limited by hardpoints, weight, and internal space. Sure you can slap a PPC into a catapult, but the mech wasn't designed for it so the weight and internal space taken up would at least partially ruin its ability to run as a missileboat.

Also, there's the bit where increasing the stuff you throw in a mech also increases the cances a critical hit will break something you rely on. Easiest example, an xl engine. I would love to run into someone running an xl engine, all I have to do is breach any of their torso armor to core them to death (instead of just the center torso).

Edit: Giving the game a more indepth area to tinker with our mechs adds a lot to the replay value and the amount of depth in the game. If they had kept the MW4 mechlab I feel like I would be impressed by the new graphics but ultimately bored in the end, I know we've all played our fair share of MW4 already. I'd like something new.

Edited by ScientificMethod, 23 June 2012 - 07:02 AM.

[Outrider01]

And no, cause yet again more pointless whining as if it is game breaking already...

...wait I just relized...OMG HOLY SH*T!!!! You must be from the future where this needs to be changed ASAP!!! in the past to restablized the timeline...

Back to reality...engine limit doesn't change much. The higher tonnage you start at, the less weight you get for other things after you change the engine size up...same for lights so if you get a super fast 9/17 it can't mount much in armor and maybe a obligatory small laser great for reheating burritos (XL engines will free up more weight, but in fact reduce the side torso limit and with divergence we don't know if arm or torso weapons will be more accurate). Ferro armor and endo steel lock up 14 criticals each, which is like 1/5 the space of a mech so your choices for weapons get even tighter. Heatsinks can have a max of free 10...to slow and you have to slot it the ones not covered by the engine rating and if you need more then 10 thats even more slots.

As it is, Inner Sphere mechs tend to be a bit more balanced...you can XL engine, ferro-armor or endo steel, use double heatsinks, and still can't make much change to an Awesome except make it a bit more faster while adding 2 Streak 2, an extra medium pulse laser and upgrade that small laser to pulse while also upgrading to ER PPC from the origional 3 PPC and a small laser. Its not a huge difference, because the fittings on are tight to begin with, now clans on the other hand are just munchkiny OP probably dreamed up by some intern back when FASA still owned BT.

[DigitalSuicide]

I think a lot of people just want this game to be a great mechwarrior experience and they really fear it turning into a 15 med pulse laser to the leg circle strive game.

[Braedin]

sorry i played the table top game for 27 years now. if they did not want you to make changes to your mech, then why give you the weight and crit space for engines, weapons, armor and everything else? there is not 1 mech i used in the table top game is didnt make a change to.

[ScientificMethod]

DigitalSuicide, on 23 June 2012 - 07:08 AM, said:

I think a lot of people just want this game to be a great mechwarrior experience and they really fear it turning into a 15 med pulse laser to the leg circle strive game.

Trust me, one hit kills are the least of my concerns with how mech building is working currently.

[GHQCommander]

Might aswel just deliver the mechs with weapons, then remove weapons from the game in that case.

[Temu]

roughly 3025 a common "tech special" for mech weapon upgrades was taking the internals out of a SRM 6 and mounting 6 small lasers in the launcher tubes with one or two extra heat sinks where the ammo bins used to be... that was back when they knew how to keep the factories running, but didn't really understand yet HOW some of the manufacturing actually worked.

i prefer being able to modify a mech.. within reason. BUT a complete overhaul would allow a player to use a mech they like the looks of even if the thing is slow as heck and outgunned by a light. That being said, i've also had times in the MW games where i take a weapon setup i like, but due to that mechs placement, the weapons don't work as well.. so there is a "feel" to it also (with me at least) Might rock on paper, but lack in execution.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Jonneh, on 23 June 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

Another thread trying to turn the PC game into the table top.

Sorry dudes. Freedom, customization and accessibility are a big pull for me and I'm sure a lot of others. I don't want to be restricted just because the table top says so.

I'm sure the Devs are capable of balancing this game without the need to pick up the rule book and start copying it into the mechlab. Lets see what they come up with before making more threads like this ok?

Actually it's the other way around. This game is restricting it where the TT gives you complete freedom.

Learn your facts please.

[ScientificMethod]

I hear you Temu. In my experience every time I think I've built something clever the mech really is only good in one specific situation that I rarely see.

[Saevus]

As near as I can tell, they are using rules similar to TT construction rules. If the hardpoint types, weight and my amount of C-bills is what limits me, then I think it's a perfect system. You want enough limitations that you need to buy a new variant to change the role of the mech (IE, long range missile boat to energy brawler), but enough freedom that you can change the mech around if you want to give you some variety. I imagine eventually it'll all be kinda moot since there will be dozens of mechs, but that is a long way off, so I am gonne need some freedom. That being said, I'll be playing mostly stock + armor/engine/heatsink upgrades as my weight allows, I have a love of most mechs they way they were originally designed and I could agree with some of the people here that a strong argument could be made for forcing people to use pre-balanced mechs. Though the system they have for weapons damage, etc, seems to be a good middle ground and will give us all flexibility without letting any one weight class/variant rule the day.

[sgt coloncrunch]

Variety is the spice of life, please don't try and force your flavorless grool on the rest of us.

Thanks.

[Rattlehead NZ]

On August 7th everyone with a founders pack will know all the answers to their questions

[Sierra19]

To the OP, you are forgetting, or perhaps you don't know, that swapping weapons/armor/engines/structure/engine is a core concept of the Battletech universe, as well as a core mechanic of the TT game. Otherwise, why are programs like Heavy Metal Pro, and Skunkworks even around? Those two programs allow you, along with the Classic Battletech Tech Manual (A BT construction rule book), to build mechs from scratch, or modify existing mech chassis as you see fit. The requirements are limited to how much space you have on the mech, as well as available hardpoints for weapons, and if the tech you want is actually available. There are some Prime variants of mechs that are great as is, Centurion CN9-A and Atlas AS7-D (imho), that you don't need to do a whole lot, but others, like the Banshee, and Charger, aren't very effective (imho) prime variants, that could use some reworking. What works for one player, may be a total turnoff for someone else, and to force them to "grind" through a mech they hate, to get a variant they want is a really good way to drive off the player base.

[Groundstain]

I vote variety. Just because you have done the ultimate min/max on a mech does not mean I will not find a way to take it down. In fact the more variety we see means the less of a chance that the one true mech to kill them all will exist.
As long as we are not allowed to purchase a win I'm up for any "realistic" build.

[gregsolidus]

Oh god,not this again.

Edit:Probably just trollin'.

Edited by gregsolidus, 23 June 2012 - 07:30 AM.

[Kreator666]

Wow what a hatestorm on OP... to be expected tho... basic human taugh patterns... you limit my freedom, I cry (wich is ok in itself)

Altho OP is somewhat right. If mechs are too customizable then they are too much alike so ppl mightstick to one "im used too" mech per tonnage class and fit it for whatever they needs are.

Like all of us ive been waiting for ages for a new MW. Been playing the snes one then MW2 to 4. I agree that fitting your mech is the best part its just fun to play with the constraint and try to make OP builds but too much freedon lead to anarchy while not enough **** ppl off and they burn your palace ... So you want just the right amount of freedom in the mech lab. People want the maximun freedom they can grab and are against regulation in game as in life but its the wiseman (devs I assume ) job to find the rules that might limit individual freedom in exchange for the greater good (of players).

What im driving at and is the main reason for this 1st post is my past exp. as a Eve Online player. I fell in love with that game because it reminded me of MW in the way that you buid your own death machine the way you like. Yes you could fit pretty much anything that would fit but each ship had unique bonusses on some specific module or weapons thus specialising them so that they would fill a "role". So depending of what task you wanted to do on the battlefield you chose accordinly the ship class and the ship general fit. Its the best, alot of freedom but some insentives like maybe 5% to medium laser damage while a variant or another mech would have 5% less heat instead.

To summerise I dont want a playdoh mech that can shapeshit into anything but rather a set of specialised mech that I can tinker with within limits regarding to its intended "role"

[Badfinger]

- 1

[TLBFestus]

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

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.

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.

I don't understand this argument. If you further restrict the options for change, you end up with less variety not more.

Certainly there is a tendency for the players, in a form of darwinian evolution, to evolve mech builds that are the most "powerful or useful", making them better suited for the battlefield. That will always happen unless the game only generated random mechs for each player every time they played, which is of course insanely stupid.

With your suggestion, the same thing will happen, mech loadouts will still "evolve" until the best variant is achieved, however having less options it will happen quicker and earlier. People will be able to experiment less, and it will cut down on the number of "creative, yet flawed" designs you see.