79 replies to this topic

[ShinobiHunter]

Prosperity Park, on 12 October 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

I'm slightly disappointed by the prospect of "stock" loadouts getting buffed when the Mech's combat-viable loadouts vary so strongly from stock. It's almost as if they're getting BattleTech: Online buffs instead of MechWarrior: Online buffs.

For instance, they gave an example of how the Hunchback 4G will be getting bonuses for running an AC/20 and energy weapons, because that's what it is "meant" to do. If this were BattleTech: Online, then yes, the Hunchback 4G would be meant as the go-to Hunchback variant for running an AC/20 and some energy weapons. However, in MechWarrior: Online, the Hunchback 4H is "meant" to run an AC/20 and energy weapons because it has only one ballistic slot and 5 energy slots. The Hunchback 4G has 3 ballistic slots and only 3 energy slots. The obvious choice for running an AC/20 and energy weapons is the Hunchback 4H with AC/20 and 5xML.

In Mechwarior: Onlnie, the Hunchback 4G is "meant" to run multiple ballistics with few energy backups because the Hunchback 4H is so much better at mounting a single large ballistic while backed-up by numerous energy weapons. Giving the Hunchback 4G a boost to AC/20 + energy is boosting it just because BattleTech. It has nothing to do with MechWarrior.

If they were giving the Mechs a quirk-pass based on MechWariror: Online, then the Hunchback 4G would be receiving buffs related to mounting multiple ballistics since it is not "meant" to run an AC/20 backed up by energy weapons.

Let me put this another way: Who here runs a single AC/2 on their Dragon? Will an AC/2 buff make you dust off the old Dragon and mount a single AC/2 for glorious single-AC/2-dominated combat?

This quirk pass would be MUCH more effective if it was based on MechWarrior: Online gameplay instead of TRO sheets.

Fair point, but Russ did say they would be getting blanket ballistic quirks, it would just get an additional quirk for the stock loadout. I think this is a terrific idea. You get a better mech even if you change everything around, but you get even better if you stick with stock. It encourages mech diversity and stock builds, which is awesome IMO.

[Karl Marlow]

Asmudius Heng, on 12 October 2014 - 06:47 PM, said:

From the town hall meeting he said that was just for one variant and was just one of the bonuses it gets due to stock loadouts or some other measurement.

Which is fine, it means that variant might be really good at doing that flanking irritating long range harassment.

It will probably have much better acceleration and deceleration too i think so being able to pop in and out of cover quickly means it will be hard to get a bead on them with gauss especially or slow PPCs.

If the buff was shortening the BURN TIME too that would make it even better to be able to quickly pop in and out and deliver its damage quickly.

Would it be a great mech? no of course not, but it might have a little niche role, and it might be more fun doing it.

In CW with tonnage limits suddenly that little 20 tonner might fit somewhere in the new game mode before you get killed and swap out to your fat boy etc

the 1V is more of a MG build though. I would understand a little more if they were putting it on one of the Energy variants but it doesnt make much sense on the 1V. IIRC no Locust has ever had a Large Laser stock.

[Mothykins]

ThomasMarik, on 12 October 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

the 1V is more of a MG build though. I would understand a little more if they were putting it on one of the Energy variants but it doesnt make much sense on the 1V. IIRC no Locust has ever had a Large Laser stock.

LCT-5M3 from the Dark Age.

But yeah, Makes no sense really.

[KraftySOT]

Other than it being a "role" apparently in MWO.

At least its an option. Albeit not a great one. At least engines weigh less.

[Asmudius Heng]

ThomasMarik, on 12 October 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

the 1V is more of a MG build though. I would understand a little more if they were putting it on one of the Energy variants but it doesnt make much sense on the 1V. IIRC no Locust has ever had a Large Laser stock.

Was not sure which one he was referring to, but if they are teir 5 they will be getting 5 buffs i think so that might just be one of them along with others.

Maybe the others were already crammed with medlas buffs and to make this one stand out they needed to give it something - i think someone stated that MG buffs might really reduce the lifespan of a locust anyway and the reality of Mechwarrior vs BT is that lights typically do better if they can harrass not infight all the time?

In any case i am sure many of the quirks will seem wonky but they have said it will be an evolving process not set in stone so willing to see what they have done - i am just chuffed we are seeing serious steps to mech differentation and diversity!!!

[White Bear 84]

FupDup, on 12 October 2014 - 07:52 AM, said:

We were already told of Locust quirks such as +100% leg internal structure, some ERLL cooldown bonuses (1V variant at least), ERLL beam duration reduction, arm armor, and a few other things that I don't remember.

That is a nice quirk for the locust.. ..submerged in water as well will make this a hard nut to leg. I am eagerly anticipating the Awesome quirks

LORD TSARKON, on 12 October 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

Seems to me that every mech in the game already has this negative quirk Bad Reputation [i]A unit with the Bad Reputation quirk is perfectly sound and operable, but for some reason has earned an undeservedly bad reputation, and as a result is only worth half the normal resale value

Nope. Mechs sell for the full normal resale value - which is half the mech value. This quirk would mean that mechs sell for a quarter of their actual value.

[Greziz]

Alek Ituin, on 12 October 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

P-39 was still a pile of trash either way. Horrid CG, terrible stall characteristics, and it would spin like nobodies business if you handled it like a normal plane. It was also incapable of high or even mid altitude work, and as such, could be easily outperformed if dragged to 6km or so. There were much better planes such as the La-5, La-7, and Yak-3 available to the Russians. Oh, and even the earliest Bf-109F series were superior to the P-39, not to mention the 190 Antons.

P-39 was obsolete and outperformed by 1942... not the best plane for any analogy.

As for the Starfighter, everybody who flew it thought it was horrible. It had a ridiculously high landing speed, and it ended up killing more of its pilots than the enemy... that's the mark of a terribad aircraft no matter what.

Both aircraft would have solidly earned the "Bad Reputation" quirk with everybody (except the Russians).


I get what you're trying to say though, I really do. But having a keen interest in WWII aviation, I couldn't help but point out the flaws in your statement. Sorry 'bout that... I'll leave now... :/

The p39Q variant had a super charger and could perform decently at 10km. However the russians did discover that the p39 had a very hard to reproduce unrecoverable stall. Overall though the russians once they reworked their tactics in using the plane cruised it at around 8-12km and loved it because the planes engine kept the cockpit very warm in the cold. The p39 was more than a match for the planes it was used against and some of the russian aces when given the chance to upgrade their rides to yaks or la7's declined and stayed with their p-39's

[Kmieciu]

7 days util quirks?

[Tarzilman]

No.
20 Days until quirks.
Have a look at the october road map update.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Yeonne Greene, on 12 October 2014 - 08:27 AM, said:

Wut, ERLL? Who uses an ERLL on a Locust anymore?

With those quirks, maybe quite a few people will

[MeiSooHaityu]

Cavale, on 12 October 2014 - 09:53 AM, said:

Though I'm REALLY looking forwards to seeing what they give the K2 and Jester. (Please be Buffs to PPC, Pleeeeease be PPC Buffs...)

I'll be honest, I am a bit scared of the quirk pass for the K2. I LOVE my K2 dual A/C10 build. I have even bought the A/C10 Cool Down and Range modules for it. I'm affraid they will negative quirk ballistics on this chassis. I do like the idea of some strong PPC buffs, but I don't think it will make the chassis as strong as the dual A/C10 build. Maybe it will, we will have to see, but I am nervous about it.

[Victor Morson]

I don't think there is any reason at all to negative quirk the AC/10s on the K2. They probably won't. They might negative quirk the AC/20, but I hope not, because unless they hardpoint the 'mechs it's the only thing the K2 does truly well.

But if it gets positive quirks to arm mounted PPCs, that'd be rad, because it's silly having a K2 and then just running torso guns.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Victor Morson, on 15 October 2014 - 02:04 AM, said:

I don't think there is any reason at all to negative quirk the AC/10s on the K2. They probably won't. They might negative quirk the AC/20, but I hope not, because unless they hardpoint the 'mechs it's the only thing the K2 does truly well.

But if it gets positive quirks to arm mounted PPCs, that'd be rad, because it's silly having a K2 and then just running torso guns.

The main reason I can see them nerfing the ballistics though is because a K2 with strong PPC buffs and no A/C nerfs could become a Meta monster. I'm not sure that would be a good idea. I think they NEED to buff PPCs, but I can see ballistic nerfs following.

However, If they don't touch ballistics, they won't touch the A/C20 specifically. The K2 just isn't quite heavy enough to make dual A/C20 practical. I used to run dual A/C20s, and I think the dual A/C10s are a bit more practical (higher speed and torso twist, more ammo, better range, and higher refire rate). It loses that Dual A/C20 FLD, but still, a Jager can do it better because it is a bit heavier and can run an XL (unlike the Catapult). I think that is why I don't see dual A/C20 builds in Cats anymore.

Anyway, if the PPC buffs are good (like they should be in a K2), I will go back to it.

[Vassago Rain]

MeiSooHaityu, on 15 October 2014 - 02:11 AM, said:

The main reason I can see them nerfing the ballistics though is because a K2 with strong PPC buffs and no A/C nerfs could become a Meta monster. I'm not sure that would be a good idea. I think they NEED to buff PPCs, but I can see ballistic nerfs following.

However, If they don't touch ballistics, they won't touch the A/C20 specifically. The K2 just isn't quite heavy enough to make dual A/C20 practical. I used to run dual A/C20s, and I think the dual A/C10s are a bit more practical (higher speed and torso twist, more ammo, better range, and higher refire rate). It loses that Dual A/C20 FLD, but still, a Jager can do it better because it is a bit heavier and can run an XL (unlike the Catapult). I think that is why I don't see dual A/C20 builds in Cats anymore.

Anyway, if the PPC buffs are good (like they should be in a K2), I will go back to it.

I don't think the 'quirks' will have any kind of negative downsides.

[KraftySOT]

Tarzilman, on 15 October 2014 - 01:42 AM, said:

No.
20 Days until quirks.
Have a look at the october road map update.

I blame this post for it too...

After reading it they were like....OH CRAP IS IT REALLY?! DELLLAAAAAY

Nah, seriously though we havent seen hide nor hair of any devs in a week. Theyre clearly really busy doing their thing. So its another two weeks *shrug* we'll live.

If its delayed again though. Its time to forum riot.

[DarkonFullPower]

Victor Morson, on 15 October 2014 - 02:04 AM, said:

I don't think there is any reason at all to negative quirk the AC/10s on the K2.

To my knowledge, no negative quirks are going to happen. It's all buffs, at least not during this pass. Tier 1 get no (maybe 1) quirks. Tier 2 get more. And so on so forth.

[oldradagast]

Prosperity Park, on 12 October 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

I'm slightly disappointed by the prospect of "stock" loadouts getting buffed when the Mech's combat-viable loadouts vary so strongly from stock. It's almost as if they're getting BattleTech: Online buffs instead of MechWarrior: Online buffs.

For instance, they gave an example of how the Hunchback 4G will be getting bonuses for running an AC/20 and energy weapons, because that's what it is "meant" to do. If this were BattleTech: Online, then yes, the Hunchback 4G would be meant as the go-to Hunchback variant for running an AC/20 and some energy weapons. However, in MechWarrior: Online, the Hunchback 4H is "meant" to run an AC/20 and energy weapons because it has only one ballistic slot and 5 energy slots. The Hunchback 4G has 3 ballistic slots and only 3 energy slots. The obvious choice for running an AC/20 and energy weapons is the Hunchback 4H with AC/20 and 5xML.

In Mechwarior: Onlnie, the Hunchback 4G is "meant" to run multiple ballistics with few energy backups because the Hunchback 4H is so much better at mounting a single large ballistic while backed-up by numerous energy weapons. Giving the Hunchback 4G a boost to AC/20 + energy is boosting it just because BattleTech. It has nothing to do with MechWarrior.

If they were giving the Mechs a quirk-pass based on MechWariror: Online, then the Hunchback 4G would be receiving buffs related to mounting multiple ballistics since it is not "meant" to run an AC/20 backed up by energy weapons.

Let me put this another way: Who here runs a single AC/2 on their Dragon? Will an AC/2 buff make you dust off the old Dragon and mount a single AC/2 for glorious single-AC/2-dominated combat?

This quirk pass would be MUCH more effective if it was based on MechWarrior: Online gameplay instead of TRO sheets.

Agreed. If these quirks basically buff stock loads, than most of them will be useless. Fortunately, it sounds like a good chunk of them will be more than buffing stock loads.

Edited by oldradagast, 15 October 2014 - 03:29 PM.

[Thorqemada]

TRO inspired quirks take the place of sized hardpoints and be probably very easy to implement and a soft restriction while sized hardpoints be pretty much of a work and hard restrictions - i am for TRO inspired quirks that bring the game closer to Battletech.

[Y E O N N E]

MeiSooHaityu, on 15 October 2014 - 01:55 AM, said:

With those quirks, maybe quite a few people will

Pfff, I'd rather see buffs to SRM refire, ballistics range, or energy range. I'd become a god, then!

MeiSooHaityu, on 15 October 2014 - 02:11 AM, said:

The main reason I can see them nerfing the ballistics though is because a K2 with strong PPC buffs and no A/C nerfs could become a Meta monster. I'm not sure that would be a good idea. I think they NEED to buff PPCs, but I can see ballistic nerfs following.

However, If they don't touch ballistics, they won't touch the A/C20 specifically. The K2 just isn't quite heavy enough to make dual A/C20 practical. I used to run dual A/C20s, and I think the dual A/C10s are a bit more practical (higher speed and torso twist, more ammo, better range, and higher refire rate). It loses that Dual A/C20 FLD, but still, a Jager can do it better because it is a bit heavier and can run an XL (unlike the Catapult). I think that is why I don't see dual A/C20 builds in Cats anymore.

Anyway, if the PPC buffs are good (like they should be in a K2), I will go back to it.

You have that backwards, man. The Catapult can run the XL engine far more reliably than the Jager can because its side torsos are protected by the arms and are harder to hit from head-on. The reason you don't see twin AC/20s so much is because A.) they are short-ranged and B.) that's a lot of weight capacity to dedicate to a mount that has a positively awful elevation range. Trying to get your main guns to line up on a target on Caustic around the crater is a real chore in the K2.

I don't think double AC/20 was ever that much of a scourge in the game because of the range and weight limitations. Sure, they are powerful when properly played but they have a very niche role and are entirely dependent on the rest of the team to take the heat so they can sneak into range.

Finally, it doesn't make sense to me to bring ballistic nerfs to the K2 since, despite the PPCs being canon, within the game it's the ballistics that give it its raison d'être. You can run PPCs on a C4 just as easily as on the K2 and, unlike the K2's ballistics, the missile slots are present on two more models.

[Evogenesis]

A delay would be more acceptable (grudgingly so) if they tell us what the proposed quirks are going to be.