418 replies to this topic

[Tastian]

Scratx, on 06 October 2014 - 06:16 PM, said:

Furthermore, from the angle of "increasing variety of builds", we have the goddamn quirks coming on the 21st. What do you think THOSE will do?

Jeeze. Wake up.

Hardpoints broken up further into size limitations is not new. And yes, the Quirks are coming. But for the first time, we have a post from Russ asking to hear about it further.

[Victor Morson]

Scratx, on 06 October 2014 - 06:16 PM, said:

Jeeze. Wake up.

You need to wake up if you think this isn't part of the process.

Getting rid of arm lock, changing weapon balance [The REAL key], and then making 'mechs have a whole new set of build restrictions (but still allowing for a huge amount of customization).. these are good things.

MW4 had a good thing going with it's hardpoint system, and MW:O has a good thing going by overlaying hardpoints onto core rules. I think it's time to take another que from what worked and bring that in.

Frankly this isn't even about stopping certain weapon combinations for me, as much as it is making the different variants and chassis matter more, and be more diverse, which will help shake up gameplay dramatically.

[Belorion]

Implementing hard point sizes would most likely make me quite this game. MW4 Mechlab was awful.

[Psydotek]

I'd like to see some 'mechs have a quirk where weapons of any size can fit on a hardpoint.

The Jagermech could be a nice example of this since the entire arm is basically the autocannon so fitting an AC/20 in place of an AC/2 or AC/5 shouldn't be a problem.

[Johnny Z]

Limiting the insta kill builds would be a great benefit to this system possibly. This seems to be an alternative to the COF idea to balance DPS and TTK.

The largest and easiest to see benefit would be the differentiating(long word hope i got it right lol ) between the chassis variants.

Either way this is an enormous undertaking for anyone involved, its no wonder they asked for players to take a run at it first. Not to mention some of the forum warriors have a better handle on balance than nearly anyone.

[Tastian]

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 06:22 PM, said:

Implementing hard point sizes would most likely make me quite this game. MW4 Mechlab was awful.

People have been throwing around the "I'll quit" promise since closed Beta. "I'll quit if they add ....<Third Person, Ghost Heat, Clan weapon nerfs, Jump Jet nerfs, etc..>"

[Victor Morson]

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 06:22 PM, said:

Implementing hard point sizes would most likely make me quite this game. MW4 Mechlab was awful.

You are likely in a big minority on this, in terms of the hardpoints. That's the one thing almost universally liked about MW4.

The fact it was not using core TT rules, I admit, I disliked a lot. Blending the core rules with hardpoints is a very good thing, and something that I've thought could have benefitted even table top for the longest time. If you've EVER played a game of TT where you let peopel customize their 'mechs, they no longer resemble the chassis after 5 minutes.

Kirkland Langue, on 06 October 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

Hunchback 4P was designed to carry 8 ML.
That this community believes 8ML to be OP is pretty telling, when it comes to whether we should follow TT rules.

Under the system I posted I'd basically just assign the whole pod as level 1 energy slots, and put the level 2s on the other hardpoints. That way it could still have a flexible energy loadout, still run it's laser combo as the boat it was meant to be, etc.

I think it's insane that MLs were ever given heatscale in the first place, along with quite a few other guns.

[Tastian]

Victor Morson, on 06 October 2014 - 06:27 PM, said:

You are likely in a big minority on this, in terms of the hardpoints. That's the one thing almost universally liked about MW4.

The fact it was not using core TT rules, I admit, I disliked a lot. Blending the core rules with hardpoints is a very good thing, and something that I've thought could have benefitted even table top for the longest time. If you've EVER played a game of TT where you let peopel customize their 'mechs, they no longer resemble the chassis after 5 minutes.

I used to be in the camp of "design your own mech from ground up" when it came to TT. And, I would ALWAYS use Clan Tech and ALWAYS use Pulse Lasers plus Targeting computers. And you NEVER use light mechs, AC2s, MGs, etc... But after I grew up I realized that there was more fun in using Stock builds: diversity, challenge, strategy.

Stock MWO battles would still be fun but noone wants to use under armored mechs or SHS. And if you can put Endo in, do it. Giving the players these options plus plenty of weapon options and upgrades will still allow plenty of diversity.

Edited by Tastian, 06 October 2014 - 06:33 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Tastian, on 06 October 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

People have been throwing around the "I'll quit" promise since closed Beta. "I'll quit if they add ....<Third Person, Ghost Heat, Clan weapon nerfs, Jump Jet nerfs, etc..>"

... the difference being people did quit over third person and ghost heat. In droves. Still, the sentiment of what you're saing in this case is right.

[Belorion]

Tastian, on 06 October 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

People have been throwing around the "I'll quit" promise since closed Beta. "I'll quit if they add ....<Third Person, Ghost Heat, Clan weapon nerfs, Jump Jet nerfs, etc..>"

I am fine with everything they put in... Most of what a very vocal minor on the forums want I will quit over.

Cone of Fire
Growing Reticle
Hard point sizes

all terrible ideas that would kill the fun of this game for me. I think Russ hit the nail on the head with the fact that many of the possible builds now will die, and the number of viable builds will go down, not go up...

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Alistair Winter, on 06 October 2014 - 05:13 PM, said:

Meh, it's just an intellectual exercise anyway. PGI will never touch the hardpoint system. The AC40 Catapult will live as long as this game lives.

Why are you so concerned about the ac40 cat when theres about to be a 100 ton dual ac40 mech lol

[Black Arachne]

Is this being looked at as a replacement for ghost heat or another band aid?

[Belorion]

Victor Morson, on 06 October 2014 - 06:30 PM, said:

You are likely in a big minority on this, in terms of the hardpoints. That's the one thing almost universally liked about MW4.

I doubt this is the case. While there is a very vocal following of MW4, I have seen many a forumite post about not liking the MW4 Mechlab.

Its bad enough we even have hard point limitations.

[Asmudius Heng]

The MW4 mechlab was bad for a few reasons though Belorian.

1. No critical spaces like BT and MWO. This meant that the hardpoint sizes were the ONLY thing that limited weapons. You cl stack on heat sinks til the cows came home as well as JJs being on or off etc. The entire buid of the mech came down to weapons not other stuff

2. Not breaking up the hardpoints on each location. If you had 4 medium lasers on a torso, that would be 4 slots in one block. Mektek changed that later though for some mechs.

3. Terrible balance between large and small weapons. This was because they were scared of the stacking power of medlas etc .... but the ERLL instead dominated.

4. Not made for online. MW4 was a single player game not designed for online play really. By happy chance there was a huge amount of stuff that made it pretty good in competition play - but may things that were not. The mechlab was built around a single player experience.

MWO solved many MW4 issues that meant hardpoint sizing would have been much more successful IMO.

[Victor Morson]

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

Cone of Fire
Growing Reticle
Hard point sizes

I hate to tell you that most of what everyone hates is Cone of Fire and Growing Reticle. People don't like those ideas at all and I understand. People would probably be accepting of it if the player could have direct control over how much it grows (like an FPS) but ultimately, you can't in this environment.

I think the number of builds PER VARIANT will go down, but the desire to own more variants will go up. That's the big thing. In MW4 you could almost always find a 'mech to fit the niche you're looking for, and the same thing should happen here. Want to run 6 SRM4s? Well, there's a 'mech for that. Want to run ballistic+energy, there's a 'mech for that. Want to run 5 Large Lasers, there's a 'mech for that. And so on, and so on.
Then those specific 'mechs can be balanced according to that. All punishing mechs does now is make the same concepts jump to a new build.

I am a major "Fit anything you can, bring the best that you can to the fight" kind of player. This helps keep that within reason.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Kirkland Langue, on 06 October 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

Hunchback 4P was designed to carry 8 ML.
That this community believes 8ML to be OP is pretty telling, when it comes to whether we should follow TT rules.

This community didnt create Ghost heat

[CocoaJin]

Make convergence much more restricted for Ballistic(excluding MGs) and PPCs. These things are bored/barreled projectile weapons(yes, even the PPC, it fires high energy packets of matter) so unless you have a well actuated arm, you can use a lenses to aid in convergence/aim...they can only fire where you point them.

Make it difficult for weapons mounted all over the mech to tightly converge on a point over such are large aiming area. All of sudden, the boating of front loaded weapons such as ACs and PPCs are forced to spread those shots around more with their long cool downs, torquing and twisting to deliver those boated weapons as individual salvos instead of a single, pin-point converging alpha.

[Victor Morson]

Asmudius Heng, on 06 October 2014 - 06:34 PM, said:

3. Terrible balance between large and small weapons. This was because they were scared of the stacking power of medlas etc .... but the ERLL instead dominated.

Yep! Largely due to it's hitscan more than anything, and the fact the Medium Laser wasn't even remotely usable until Mercenaries.

Notably even at the height of the ER Large domination though, there was plenty of room for all kinds of rival builds that could easily ruin it's day in the right situation. I can't count the amount of times you personally hounded down our ace Novacat pilots Heng, being the first unit to start running those nasty ballistic Bushwackers

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Kirkland Langue, on 06 October 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

1. Either make all those Hard points only able to carry small lasers,

So it cant use its own stock loadout?

[Belorion]

Victor Morson, on 06 October 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

I hate to tell you that most of what everyone hates is Cone of Fire and Growing Reticle. People don't like those ideas at all and I understand. People would probably be accepting of it if the player could have direct control over how much it grows (like an FPS) but ultimately, you can't in this environment.

I think the number of builds PER VARIANT will go down, but the desire to own more variants will go up. That's the big thing. In MW4 you could almost always find a 'mech to fit the niche you're looking for, and the same thing should happen here. Want to run 6 SRM4s? Well, there's a 'mech for that. Want to run ballistic+energy, there's a 'mech for that. Want to run 5 Large Lasers, there's a 'mech for that. And so on, and so on.
Then those specific 'mechs can be balanced according to that. All punishing mechs does now is make the same concepts jump to a new build.

I am a major "Fit anything you can, bring the best that you can to the fight" kind of player. This helps keep that within reason.

Kind of my point... right now if you want to run dual guass you can do it with several platforms. Each with their own nuance (and presumably more nuance in the future) if you implement sizes that choice drops to what 1?

All the players wanting dual gauss will now be running around in King Crabs. How did that do anything for variety?