32 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

Duncan Jr Fischer, on 25 November 2014 - 11:38 PM, said:

I like the majority of the ideas. The biggest NO is to Role Warfare as the TS described it. In that way it would be quite a far-fetched un-Battletech something, that I wouldn't like to see in a BT game.

Well, at the moment MWO is kind of falling between two stools. The game kind of tries to be like BT in terms of keeping assault mechs superior and light mechs inferior. It tries to keep some of the iconic mechs superior, while keeping others inferior. However, there's no real mechanic in place to attract players to the inferior mechs. It's not like an MMO where there's a constant race to the top, and it's not like CounterStrike where you start out with crappy equipment every time you start to play, then buy better equipment for each match, and risk losing all your equipment when you die.

This game has an endgame-model, but still depends on players not playing the endgame.

On the other hand, the mechs are far more equal than TT purists would like. Clans aren't slaughtering IS mechs like they should be, and assault mechs aren't butchering light mechs like they should be. Light mechs are shrunk down to miniatures (e.g. Locust) to make them viable choices.

So, again, falling between two stools. The reason I suggest Role Warfare is because it's a much cheaper way of avoiding the dreaded endgame-model, where everyone just wants to play mastered Timber Wolves and Dire Wolves with modules and consumables. The alternative is to completely redesign the game, in order to make the balance of power similar to what's seen in actual Battletech. And then you need to think of a reason why anyone would want to play the inferior, outdated FRR mechs when the Clans come knocking.

Duncan Jr Fischer, on 25 November 2014 - 11:38 PM, said:

There actually is some kind of a role warfare in MWO going on right now, some mechs scout, some may tank a little, some do the support,

And we kind of already have information warfare, community warfare and we kind of already have Solaris. But not really.

I don't like this sort of argument. I know what you mean, but I'm describing something far more comprehensive than "Stick a NARC and Advanced Sensor Range on it and it's a Scout".

NineTails, on 26 November 2014 - 12:19 AM, said:

As has been mentioned before; sweeping design ideas are cheap, but implementations are expensive. PGI / MWO's problem is not lack of vision.

I think it is. Role Warfare is not more expensive than the current Endgame-model

• Change the current skill tree to a role-based tree, where people are forced to choose between different abilities for each mech.
  
• Change mech upgrades (Endo, FF, DHS) and their standard counterparts so that every upgrade is a carefully made decision, not a necessary tax to stay competitive. (e.g. give certain advantages to standard heat sinks)
  
• Buff light mechs enough that assault mechs and heavy mechs are not inherently superior. Light mechs would be equal to assault mechs, but would offer a different playstyle. Different abilities. In other words, MC and C-bills unlock new content, you're not actually paying for better mechs.
  
• Give every module advantages and disadvantages, so you're paying for new content, not just paying to be better than new players.
  
• Restrict airstrike & artillery to mechs with command module or a similar hardware component, or restrict it to certain mechs. Give it a two-minute cooldown and adjust the damage accordingly. Instead of facing 12 mechs with 12+12 airstrike & artillery, you'd face 12 mechs, of which only 3 mechs will be using 12+12 airstrike & artillery.

Those things would move the game towards Role Warfare, away from the current Endgame-model. They're not more expensive either.

But yeah, a lot of the other stuff I mentioned would be pretty expensive. But others have done some of those things with a smaller budget than MWO.

Savage Wolf, on 26 November 2014 - 01:11 AM, said:

So taking this into consideration I think that PGI is doing pretty well trying to balance trying to appeal to old and new players with what limited ressources they have. And we should be thankful that PGI is even doing this. There was a reason why the franchise was collecting dust at Microsoft.

I didn't start this thread because I'm not thankful. I'm very thankful. But as a young man once told me, it's important to dream

[Lily from animove]

FupDup, on 25 November 2014 - 08:16 PM, said:

The main thing that sticks out is having mech choice be fully restricted by faction. That could very easily favor certain factions over others, unless somehow all the mechs were "equal" (not necessary same speed/firepower/whatever, but same overall impact on winning the match). Steiner's high-tonnage scout lances and Jade Falcon's Timbers + Stormcrows + Whales seem like the most obvious offenders.

IS is selling mechs or salvaging them amongs each other. so basically with factions you can give c-bill discounts to sepcific variants. or make soem achievemtns, like kill 10 atlas DDC and you can also buy one now.

It's just a matter of how you desing the access.

[HellJumper]

Nice idea... but only one BIG problem..


MWO2 being made by PGI...

i mean seriously??

[Alistair Winter]

HellJumper, on 26 November 2014 - 02:57 AM, said:

Nice idea... but only one BIG problem..
MWO2 being made by PGI...
i mean seriously??

Unless PGI manages to do one more game with the franchise, preferably a more successful one than MWO, I don't think we'll see anyone else making MW-games.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

Rogue Jedi, on 26 November 2014 - 01:02 AM, said:

they have the rights until at least mid 2018, probabaly mid 2020, this was mentioned in a command chair post, link below
http://mwomercs.com/...e-inner-sphere/

It means we are not to see a good lore-faithful BT game until 2020's. Or 2439.

[HellJumper]

Alistair Winter, on 26 November 2014 - 03:23 AM, said:

Unless PGI manages to do one more game with the franchise, preferably a more successful one than MWO, I don't think we'll see anyone else making MW-games.

you never know..maybe 10 years after this we will see another company picking it up and doing it one more time...

but serioulsy i dont want PGI to do a sequel..need another company to do it..competition is gooooooood

[MadPanda]

If there's a sequel that has all the right things, it's definitely not made by pgi.

[Tincan Nightmare]

FupDup, on 25 November 2014 - 08:16 PM, said:

The main thing that sticks out is having mech choice be fully restricted by faction. That could very easily favor certain factions over others, unless somehow all the mechs were "equal" (not necessary same speed/firepower/whatever, but same overall impact on winning the match). Steiner's high-tonnage scout lances and Jade Falcon's Timbers + Stormcrows + Whales seem like the most obvious offenders.

You got your Clan mechs mixed up there. Jade Falcons would be more Hellbringer and Summoner for heavies, while the Timber was Clan Wolf. The Smoke Jaguars were the largest user of the Dire Wolf, and were the heaviest user of the Stormcrow, so the best combo would be Stormcrows and Whales .

[Triordinant]

I want a prequel, not a sequel -set in the 3025 era!

[bluepiglet]

I want nothing but a real mechbay. Hoping I'm not asking for too much, can I have it before 2025, PGI?

[Alex Warden]

NineTails, on 26 November 2014 - 12:19 AM, said:

As has been mentioned before; sweeping design ideas are cheap, but implementations are expensive. PGI / MWO's problem is not lack of vision.

i doubt it somehow... they could have done alot with the budget they had... but the only vision there was, was a WoT spinoff with Battle Mechs, and PGI didn´t make a secret out of it...

their newly discovered communications path seem to deny that a bit, but many ppl from the early days might remember that...

maybe they WILL widen their horizon in the future, and i would certainly hope so... but ye, the lack of vision in the past brought us where we are...

[RedDragon]

Alistair Winter, on 26 November 2014 - 02:26 AM, said:

• Buff light mechs enough that assault mechs and heavy mechs are not inherently superior. Light mechs would be equal to assault mechs, but would offer a different playstyle. Different abilities. In other words, MC and C-bills unlock new content, you're not actually paying for better mechs.

Sorry, but this is a very bad idea. Light mechs should be inferior to other classes, but only when looking at firepower and armour. Lights don't need buffs, they need a role in which they can excel. In MWO; scouting basically means finding the enemy on a map where he is right around the corner. That is something you can do with an assault if you need to.
What we need is bigger maps that give lights a distinct advantage through their speed. And objectives that really matter. Capturing things that actually are important for winning the game, destroying bridges, gathering information, escorting things and the like. Or just make bridges that assaults can't cross because of their weight. Or passages that are too small for big mechs. There are countless ways to make roles really matter, it just requires initiative and work, two things PGI never wanted to invest into the game.

[Alistair Winter]

RedDragon, on 26 November 2014 - 05:29 AM, said:

Sorry, but this is a very bad idea. Light mechs should be inferior to other classes, but only when looking at firepower and armour. Lights don't need buffs, they need a role in which they can excel. In MWO; scouting basically means finding the enemy on a map where he is right around the corner. That is something you can do with an assault if you need to.
What we need is bigger maps that give lights a distinct advantage through their speed. And objectives that really matter. Capturing things that actually are important for winning the game, destroying bridges, gathering information, escorting things and the like. Or just make bridges that assaults can't cross because of their weight. Or passages that are too small for big mechs. There are countless ways to make roles really matter, it just requires initiative and work, two things PGI never wanted to invest into the game.

I respectfully disagree. Or at least, I think it would be much harder than people might think.

Do you remember Assault before turrets? For a while, light mechs were very effective because 4 of them would just slip past the enemy and end the game rapidly. But people got bored of that after a while, especially because there were very few rewards beyond the win bonus. So no light mechs were capping, which was a problem. Then people suggested that turrets would make things better.

"Imagine if light mechs had to actually fight their way through turrets and stuff. That would be super cool and light mechs would start capping again!"

A fine theory, but it never really happened. Because most MWO players enjoy the PVP aspect, and don't really get a big buzz from destroying AI-controlled turrets. So light mechs are still not capping too much in Assault, and light mechs are no more popular today than before PGI introduced turrets.

Beyond that, I agree with you that it would be nice if light mechs had an actual role beyond doing damage. Kind of like healers in traditional MMORPGs. They may not be very handy in a duel, but they are a huge asset to a large group or raid, due to all their buffs and their healing. Well, we don't have healing in MWO, but I would really, really love it if PGI developed information warfare to the point where piloting the Raven 3L was actually mentally challenging beyond shooting TAG and NARC at enemies.

Just destroying random objects on the map wouldn't be very fun for most people, but if you make the team rely on light mechs for indirect fire, artillery & airstrike, providing detailed target info (e.g. ammo location, engine types) and a multitude of other tasks, then it becomes interesting. But then, not all light mechs were intended to be scouts in Battletech lore. And without player controlled vehicles and infantry, it's kind of tricky to give them a direct combat role without buffing them. There's a reason no one's using the Spider 5V. It sucks.