1453 R, on 10 October 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:
And the rest of us are chattering idiots with no idea what we're doing or talking about who should just listen to our betters, right?
This has nothing to do with superiority and everything to do with experience. We know this system works because we have seen it work, and very well at that.
That's all there is to it. You and others are playing theorycrafting sessions about why it may or may not work, while those of us championing have seen proof with our own eyes that it works - and very well at that.
1453 R, on 10 October 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:
You know Quick, it might have flown. If, way back in the closed beta days, there had been enough push for it, you probably could've implemented stock-sized hardpoints back then, when the game was still very much in flux. I maintain that it would have rendered nine out of ten chassis completely. F***ing. Useless. with the remaining one in ten lucky enough to have the right perfect-storm combination of hardpoints, hardpoint sizes, and hitboxes being so crushingly, impossibly dominant that we're not talking the difference between a T1 and a T3, we're talking the difference between a T1 and a T17. But you seem to be perfectly okay with that, so all right. We'll ignore for the moment how intensely restrictive and narrow-focused this would render the game.
Only if they absolutely butcher the hardpoint placement. Otherwise everything you just said is absolute, pure, unfounded conjecture based on "what you think" and nothing else.
1453 R, on 10 October 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:
It might've flown back in closed beta. It's not going to fly now. Not when thousands of players have two-plus years, billions of C-bills, and hundreds of dollars invested in stables of dozens of 'Mechs that you're effectively destroying. Even if Piranha could financially weather the whole "100% sellback!" solution, it wouldn't work. Many players would, with absolute justification, spit in Piranha's collective eye and say "I don't want my money back, I WANT MY GOD DAMN MECH BACK!" Because people who've sunk hours and hours in mastering out the 'Mechs they like, into grinding the bucks for the modules that work with the 'Mechs they like, that have built their styles of play and their unit doctrines around the 'Mechs they like, are not going to accept being told "You can't do any of that anymore. You have to use the stock armaments, because it's better for game balance and because a bunch of crusty old TT hands on the forums told us to."
First off: Nobody wants stock. For Christ's sake, people need to stop bringing up stock 'mechs in these threads. I loathe the idea of stock mech only.
Second off: Yes, that is actually an issue, that if you bought, say a Stalker for 4 PPCs and suddenly the Awesome is the 'mech for that. I get it. But you know what? The quirk system already does this, in a way, as does every single major change to every single weapon system.
1453 R, on 10 October 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:
You cannot remove ninety-nine out of a hundred builds from the hangars of every single player of MWO and expect them to shrug it off with a "Meh. I can deal. Especially since it wouldn't fix any of the problems Ghost Heat sets out to fix anyways and thus WE'D HAVE TO KEEP GHOST HEAT, TOO.
That is a huge leap in logic. "This wouldn't fix problems of X so WE NEED MORE X!" is just WTF? heh. And assuming that the variant designer does a decent job, those "huge libraries of 'mechs" would have different roles and purposes, and odds are you'd still have one fitting your play style.. and maybe introduce some
new play styles.
1453 R, on 10 October 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:
The net result of forcing stock hardpoint sizes on the game is that the Locust, the Commando, the Spider, the Raven, the Cicada, the Blackjack, the Centurion, the Griffin, the Kintaro, the Shadow Hawk, the Wolverine, the Quickdraw, the Dragon, the Thunderbolt, the Stalker, and the Banshee all become absolutely piss-poor worthless, as do most Hunchbacks, most Trebuchets, most JagerMechs, most Catapults, some Cataphracts, most Orions, some Awesome, some Battlemasters, some Highlanders, and most Atlases.
You keep saying stock. Nobody is suggesting stock. Ever.
Your logic is also
literally backward. With designer-set hardpoints, 'mechs like the Kintaro and Trebuchet could find brand new niches in this game. So they would be buffed, not rendered to "piss-poor" shape.
1453 R, on 10 October 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:
Does that sound like an acceptable list of "piss-poor worthless" to you?
No, but if any hardpoints are assigned that makes any mech "piss poor" someone did a bad job at picking the hardpoints!