336 replies to this topic

[Almond Brown]

Thecure, on 09 October 2014 - 04:28 AM, said:

They are already resticting my choices with ghost heat.

Point. But you can exceed any limitations GH places on your machine. That makes it a conscious "choice" and you have to deal with it. The Locked Hard-point systems does not allow that choice. There is no out of the Box thinking allowed then. (bad bad bad)

Only choice left then is "which is the best Locked hard-point Mech" per weight class that offers something similar to what you had before.

[Lord de Seis]

I agree with the OP, the current system works well I don't see what people's issue is. Direwolf builds annoy but I don't think it is worth changing the game over. I posted this in another hardpoint thread:


I personally would have absolutely no problem playing MWO with only stock variants and no mech lab, it worked great in Multiplayer Battletech 3025 and a majority of the balance issues in MWO originate from the mech lab. However I am realistic and understand two things:

1) Mechwarrior has never been very true to sticking to the hardcore battletech line of thought.

2) MWO is a game that needs to appeal to more people the just the hardcore battletech crowd and customization is one way of doing that.

Having the freedom to try different builds out is a big part of the fun in MWO, when you restrict that aspect of it you take away players ability to be imaginative and creative with something that usually requires a lot of gameplay to work towards because of the grind. If I have to play a week to earn that assault mech I have been working towards I should be able to play it a few different ways to see how it works, not just the one or two ways that I am being told I have to play it as.

[Almond Brown]

Tastian, on 09 October 2014 - 05:23 AM, said:

stuff

Oh, sure it would be fun to build a 20x LRM5 mech; but our field would be nothing but outrageous boats.

I thought the number of "Outrageous Boats" currently on the field is what sparked this whole debate. Would a Locked system still not have "Boats"? Some seen as outrageous by others, as is always the case.

Xarian, on 09 October 2014 - 05:24 AM, said:

If you bothered to read one of the many proposals on hardpoint sizing, you'd know that very few proposals want the sizes restricted to stock loadouts.

However, the SHD is a good example - it makes the HBK completely obsolete. It does the same job, except it has more hardpoints, more available space, and jump jets. Even if you restricted the SHD to near-stock values, it'd still be a great mech - you'd just be stuck with an AC/5 instead of being a HBK with jets.

Please compare Mech of the same "exact" weight. 5 tons may not seem like much to some but it is.

Or give the HBK JJ's and be done with it.

[Sybreed]

Tastian, on 09 October 2014 - 05:23 AM, said:

"like in Battletech". In Battletech, you use stock loadouts. period. That's why Innersphere had variants. Otherwise whats the difference between the Jagermech A, DD, S, and Firebrand. All Hero mechs in MWO would be useless. And why master 3 variants if they are identical? Omnimechs in Battletech allowed limited customization because full customization didn't exist. Oh, sure it would be fun to build a 20x LRM5 mech; but our field would be nothing but outrageous boats.

I was using sarcasm.

I think the mechlab is an abomination and has been a huge detriment to MWO's gameplay.

Edited by Sybreed, 09 October 2014 - 06:21 AM.

[Tastian]

Sybreed, on 09 October 2014 - 06:20 AM, said:

I was using sarcasm.

I think the mechlab is an abomination and has been a huge detriment to MWO's gameplay.

My apologies then. The internet needs a sarcasm font.

[Tastian]

Almond Brown, on 09 October 2014 - 05:56 AM, said:

I thought the number of "Outrageous Boats" currently on the field is what sparked this whole debate. Would a Locked system still not have "Boats"? Some seen as outrageous by others, as is always the case.



Please compare Mech of the same "exact" weight. 5 tons may not seem like much to some but it is.

Or give the HBK JJ's and be done with it.

The matchmaker doesn't care that they are 5 tons different. They are in the same weight class. But imagine if the Hunchback was the only medium allowed to bring an AC20; it would have a purpose over the SHawk.

[Why Run]

Ya'll clearly don't understand sized hardpoints. The point is 90% of mechs won't have gauss or AC20 sized ballistic hardpoints, but could still multi mount ac5s. You wouldn't get 3 gauss DWs, or 6 PPC stalkers, but you could get rid of ghost heat. You'll never get diversity with ghost heat or "creativity", it'll always gravitate to the meta-combination, until that is "tweaked". The end result being everything is 1 ton for 1 damage. Yawn.... More clueless, short-sighted rants...

[EgoSlayer]

Tastian, on 09 October 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

The matchmaker doesn't care that they are 5 tons different. They are in the same weight class. But imagine if the Hunchback was the only medium allowed to bring an AC20; it would have a purpose over the SHawk.

Wrong - the match maker DOES care about both weight, and weight class. It tries for tonnage matching but it's a soft lock and currently one of the release valves.

But in CW there is at hard tonnage lock on your drop deck. So tonnage is in issue in both cases, which will force people to make choices and not always take the 35/55/75/100 ton options.

The quirk system is 10,000 times a better solution than sized hard points; its gives a reason for people to stay close to stockish configurations, promotes diversity among both weight classes and variants far better than sized hard points, can be quickly changed/adjusted without invalidating a single build, etc.

Sized hard points create more work/programming effort for less gain.

[Almond Brown]

Tastian, on 09 October 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

The matchmaker doesn't care that they are 5 tons different. They are in the same weight class. But imagine if the Hunchback was the only medium allowed to bring an AC20; it would have a purpose over the SHawk.

Indeed. For those who wished to carry a AC20 they would "have to BUY" a HBK if they desired a 50t AC20 carrier. What about those who don't want to have to do that, just because the system disallows it?

Actually the Voting for mode things is a prefect example. They "forced" modes on folks and looked what happened. Pissed of 48.7% of the total voters. Locking chassis would garner the same result and the P2W flags would be flying in a heart beat.

"Want a decent chassis by Build. Then you must Buy this Build!" Choice is good, forced choice is, (bad bad bad)

[Why Run]

EgoSlayer, on 09 October 2014 - 07:02 AM, said:

Wrong - the match maker DOES care about both weight, and weight class. It tries for tonnage matching but it's a soft lock and currently one of the release valves.

But in CW there is at hard tonnage lock on your drop deck. So tonnage is in issue in both cases, which will force people to make choices and not always take the 35/55/75/100 ton options.

The quirk system is 10,000 times a better solution than sized hard points; its gives a reason for people to stay close to stockish configurations, promotes diversity among both weight classes and variants far better than sized hard points, can be quickly changed/adjusted without invalidating a single build, etc.

Sized hard points create more work/programming effort for less gain.

You're wrong on so many levels, and when the Victor meta returns, you'll see why. It's all about the most effective weapon combination in a GH world. No one is going to use less effective weapons because of some silly quirks.

Almond Brown, on 09 October 2014 - 07:03 AM, said:

Indeed. For those who wished to carry a AC20 they would "have to BUY" a HBK if they desired a 50t AC20 carrier. What about those who don't want to have to do that, just because the system disallows it?

Actually the Voting for mode things is a prefect example. They "forced" modes on folks and looked what happened. Pissed of 48.7% of the total voters. Locking chassis would garner the same result and the P2W flags would be flying in a heart beat.

"Want a decent chassis by Build. Then you must Buy this Build!" Choice is good, forced choice is, (bad bad bad)

Yet another clueless individual. Why would the hunchback with Ac20 be a BETTER build than a non ghost heat 4P? It would play different, and the 4P would still be hot, but it would not be useless. Same with the Novas, for example. The stock nova would function as intended, instead of blowing itself up because of ghost heat. Lasers could stop being nerfed, while the FLD weapon meta would be marginalized! I think the problem is none of you have a concept of the hardpoint system.

[EgoSlayer]

Why Run, on 09 October 2014 - 07:02 AM, said:

Ya'll clearly don't understand sized hardpoints. The point is 90% of mechs won't have gauss or AC20 sized ballistic hardpoints, but could still multi mount ac5s. You wouldn't get 3 gauss DWs, or 6 PPC stalkers, but you could get rid of ghost heat. You'll never get diversity with ghost heat or "creativity", it'll always gravitate to the meta-combination, until that is "tweaked". The end result being everything is 1 ton for 1 damage. Yawn.... More clueless, short-sighted rants...

Wrong. First, not 90% of mechs are running around with Gauss or AC20s. And second sized hard points can't eliminate Ghost Heat, without replacing Ghost Heat with some other additional artificial balance factor. There are too many stock builds even with sized hard points that will become the new high-alpha meta. It's unavoidable unless you limit to stock only, and even still there are mechs that are issues.

It Just Doesn't Work.

It's you who are being clueless and short sighted by not seeing these mechs and these problems even with the proposals.

[Almond Brown]

Why Run, on 09 October 2014 - 07:02 AM, said:

Ya'll clearly don't understand sized hardpoints. The point is 90% of mechs won't have gauss or AC20 sized ballistic hardpoints, but could still multi mount ac5s. You wouldn't get 3 gauss DWs, or 6 PPC stalkers, but you could get rid of ghost heat. You'll never get diversity with ghost heat or "creativity", it'll always gravitate to the meta-combination, until that is "tweaked". The end result being everything is 1 ton for 1 damage. Yawn.... More clueless, short-sighted rants...

Ok then wise guy. Take Russ up on his challenge. Present the Community 20 Mechs that all have different locked hard points that is true to the TT/BT system, or even a system that totally prevents what you see as an issue on any Mech.

P.S. Can I get 4 AC5's please as I was looking for a Mech with a 20 pt ballistic Alpha, in this particular weight class and chassis type. Thanks.

Oh, and don't be mad at me when your "selection" doesn't fit my requirement, for whatever reason and then shat on your system of lock downs.

I currently have a "build" choice. That is a good thing.

[Why Run]

Sure, there is a version of JM that would fit your 4 ac5s, in the heavy weight class. You'd be a little lighter on ammo vs. the traditional AC5/AC2 combination, but both are feasible. Cataphracts would still fit up to 4, and i venture t guess the 4X woudl still fit 4, but you'd have the ammo issue. ac5s would still fit on a lot of mechs, they are small. Ac10s and 20s could be restored actually doing something on certain builds, but remember weight still limits the rest of the loadout.

EgoSlayer, on 09 October 2014 - 07:07 AM, said:

Wrong. First, not 90% of mechs are running around with Gauss or AC20s. And second sized hard points can't eliminate Ghost Heat, without replacing Ghost Heat with some other additional artificial balance factor. There are too many stock builds even with sized hard points that will become the new high-alpha meta. It's unavoidable unless you limit to stock only, and even still there are mechs that are issues.

It Just Doesn't Work.

It's you who are being clueless and short sighted by not seeing these mechs and these problems even with the proposals.

The entire competitive battlefield is made up by the AC/Gauss/PPC meta, as evidenced by the last major tournament. NOTHING ELSE. when the victor is unnerfed, it'll be the only assault used, especially in light of the latest clan nerfs. and why not?

[Almond Brown]

Why Run, on 09 October 2014 - 07:07 AM, said:

It's all about the most effective weapon combination in a GH world. No one is going to use less effective weapons because of some silly quirks.

Re-read what you wrote dude. LOL!
LOL! And fixing hard-points is going to change that mindset, even without GH. Pleeease. And your name calling. wow...

Quote

Yet another clueless individual.

Very classy of you.

P.S. A Stock Nova without a GH govener would not be a problem? Really?

[Why Run]

Remember though Almond, you get the AC5 boat, but there are tradeoffs, You're not carrying as much ammo, and you're not carrying backup weapons because of weight. That puts a premium on accuracy. You get your 2x range AC5, probably increase speed back up a bit, and you can decide if it's competitive. You'd probably find an unnerfed AC2 works better in that combination, no heat, dakka dakka dakka away plus probably 2 usable MLs or SLs as backup.

Almond Brown, on 09 October 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

Re-read what you wrote dude. LOL!
LOL! And fixing hard-points is going to change that mindset, even without GH. Pleeease. And your name calling. wow...


Very classy of you.

P.S. A Stock Nova without a GH govener would not be a problem? Really?

Why do you think it wouldn't be hot? It would still generate a ton of heat, it's 12 mls. It's a paper mech, it was never a real threat anyway, but now it's completely useless. The 12 CERML Nova was a casualty of the other nerfs, not the cause of the problem.

[UnsafePilot]

A fixed hardpoint system won't lessen the amount of "meta weapons" seen on the field unless it also includes limiting chassis selection. Otherwise people will just swap to the mechs that still carry the weapons they were having success with before.

[SgtKinCaiD]

Almond Brown, on 09 October 2014 - 07:09 AM, said:

I currently have a "build" choice. That is a good thing.

Oh yeah a "build" choice : the same meta-compliant build on every mech that can fit it. Talk about choice and diversity ...

[Why Run]

UnsafePilot, on 09 October 2014 - 07:19 AM, said:

A fixed hardpoint system won't lessen the amount of "meta weapons" seen on the field unless it also includes limiting chassis selection. Otherwise people will just swap to the mechs that still carry the weapons they were having success with before.

Perfect example of why you are wrong. Ever seen an effective Victor 9S use the missile hard points? Nope, because pre nerf, it was the Ac5/PPC meta mech. Ignore the missiles, because you can cram in the then rolfstomp AC5/PPC meta combo... (Or the DS for that matter)

SgtKinCaiD, on 09 October 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

Oh yeah a "build" choice : the same meta-compliant build on every mech that can fit it. Talk about choice and diversity ...

This guy, FTW. These anti-hardpoint folks are likely the largest meta abusers. They just don't want to lose their effective boats.

Edited by Why Run, 09 October 2014 - 07:23 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Why Run, on 09 October 2014 - 07:19 AM, said:

Remember though Almond, you get the AC5 boat, but there are tradeoffs, You're not carrying as much ammo, and you're not carrying backup weapons because of weight. That puts a premium on accuracy. You get your 2x range AC5, probably increase speed back up a bit, and you can decide if it's competitive. You'd probably find an unnerfed AC2 works better in that combination, no heat, dakka dakka dakka away plus probably 2 usable MLs or SLs as backup.

Why do you think it wouldn't be hot? It would still generate a ton of heat, it's 12 mls. It's a paper mech, it was never a real threat anyway, but now it's completely useless. The 12 CERML Nova was a casualty of the other nerfs, not the cause of the problem.

That is understood. BUT, like anything else I may buy, be it a Mech, a Car, whatever, When the seller "tells" me that is it, like or lump, then I will and have, gone elsewhere to spend my money.

Just did that with a new car actually. Only one dealer gave me what I wanted, and with some effort as well. The others just said no. That dealer who gave me what I wanted made a nice chunk of change, the others, missed a dip into my money pot.

I hope PGI does not prevent further dips into my money pot is the point I guess.

Edited by Almond Brown, 09 October 2014 - 07:33 AM.

[UnsafePilot]

Why Run, on 09 October 2014 - 07:22 AM, said:

Perfect example of why you are wrong. Ever seen an effective Victor 9S use the missile hard points? Nope, because pre nerf, it was the Ac5/PPC meta mech. Ignore the missiles, because you can cram in the then rolfstomp AC5/PPC meta combo... (Or the DS for that matter)

That doesn't address my point at all. If the victor 9s was locked into hard points that people didn't prefer I'm saying they'd simply stop using it. The net result there isn't a decrease in the weapons you don't like, just a decrease in the variety of mechs you'll see.