Jump to content

Ultimate Mech Discussion Thread

BattleMech Balance

20517 replies to this topic

#14721 Pariah Devalis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Clan Cat
  • The Clan Cat
  • 7,655 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationAboard the NCS True Path

Posted 27 September 2016 - 09:41 AM

View PostOvion, on 27 September 2016 - 09:22 AM, said:

Yes, and that is it really.

There's no future revenue stream from quads.

As much as I'd love them, unless someone throws around $400,000 at them to cover the dev costs, I don't see it happening.


Hey, it's about a year's worth of quad releases. Plus some early 3060 designs like the Bishamon, Blue Flame, Sirocco, and White Flame. So there is absolutely a good period of fresh income here in quad mechs alone.

The real value of quads is that they move differently. Play... differently. They can still exist in a Mechwarrior title, and technically be more mechs for the game, however they offer the players an all new gameplay experience just due to their strengths and limitations. Something new, something different, and something that absolutely exists in universe? Count me in. Could use a breath of fresh air.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 27 September 2016 - 09:44 AM.


#14722 Juodas Varnas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,534 posts
  • LocationGrand Duchy of Lithuania

Posted 27 September 2016 - 09:46 AM

View PostTordin, on 27 September 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:


I rather be driving a Demolisher Posted Image

Oh man, getting Vehicles too would be awesome.

SRM Carrier anyone? 10xSRM-6 Posted Image

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 27 September 2016 - 09:47 AM.


#14723 Pariah Devalis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Clan Cat
  • The Clan Cat
  • 7,655 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationAboard the NCS True Path

Posted 27 September 2016 - 09:49 AM

View PostJuodas Varnas, on 27 September 2016 - 09:46 AM, said:

Oh man, getting Vehicles too would be awesome.

SRM Carrier anyone? 10xSRM-6 Posted Image


Hey! Hey!! One crusade at a time, man. Focus!

#14724 Metus regem

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 10,282 posts
  • LocationNAIS College of Military Science OCS courses

Posted 27 September 2016 - 09:50 AM

View PostJuodas Varnas, on 27 September 2016 - 09:46 AM, said:

Oh man, getting Vehicles too would be awesome.

SRM Carrier anyone? 10xSRM-6 Posted Image



Both the SRM carrier and Demolisher (Tech 2 version) are in my "Top 10 city fighters) list...

Me though?

Yellow Jacket Gunship

30T with a Gauss Rifle, and can take a bunch of damage on the nose? Yes please!

#14725 Juodas Varnas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,534 posts
  • LocationGrand Duchy of Lithuania

Posted 27 September 2016 - 09:50 AM

View PostPariah Devalis, on 27 September 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:


Hey! Hey!! One crusade at a time, man. Focus!

Posted Image

#14726 Pariah Devalis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Clan Cat
  • The Clan Cat
  • 7,655 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationAboard the NCS True Path

Posted 27 September 2016 - 09:52 AM

The susceptibility of standard vehicles to through armor crits, if my memory serves, would be a cool counter to their proportionately huge amount of firepower per ton. Also make LBX a more interesting option, as well.

#14727 Ovion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:41 AM

View PostPariah Devalis, on 27 September 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:

Hey, it's about a year's worth of quad releases. Plus some early 3060 designs like the Bishamon, Blue Flame, Sirocco, and White Flame. So there is absolutely a good period of fresh income here in quad mechs alone.

The real value of quads is that they move differently. Play... differently. They can still exist in a Mechwarrior title, and technically be more mechs for the game, however they offer the players an all new gameplay experience just due to their strengths and limitations. Something new, something different, and something that absolutely exists in universe? Count me in. Could use a breath of fresh air.
Yeah, but it'd be 6-12 months of work for a sizeable team, (conservatively) cost $400,000+ to do, be more work than the clans, with less initial return and less potential return, for 3 to 9 months of releases (after the initial development outlay, depending on if they do packages or single releases).

For the same 9 to 21 month period (depending on how many mechs are completed in development, but also development + release cycle), they could just make 9 to 21 IS/Clan mechs, sell the same-ish number of packages, and make a significantly more equivalent profit per mech, as the overhead is so much lower.

I would love quads, I really would, my TT quads are a highlight of my collection, and I would love more.
But it's just not economically viable for them to bother. :(


(and to highlight this properly)
Spoiler


#14728 Ovion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:47 AM

View PostJuodas Varnas, on 27 September 2016 - 09:46 AM, said:

Oh man, getting Vehicles too would be awesome.

SRM Carrier anyone? 10xSRM-6 Posted Image
Vehicles would be fantastic tbh, and most of the systems should be in place from the Cryengine already, making it a FAR simpler proposal, with far fewer new code needed.

Vehicles would maybe need a new UI, but would also have new options - decals / colours shared, but camo's would need redoing and so would be extra's to get, and vehicle models are a damn sight simpler to create from scratch than mechs.



On a bit of a pipe-dream, (unlikely as a ton of extra work on top) having the option of taking a mech and vehicle in a drop (2 slot drop tech, total tonnage, pick which to start with) would give something a little interesting with minor reinforcements and different scouting / support options.
And in CW, with 6-8 slots, even more so.

#14729 Odanan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 8,206 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:55 AM

View PostMetus regem, on 27 September 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

Both the SRM carrier and Demolisher (Tech 2 version) are in my "Top 10 city fighters) list...

Me though?

Yellow Jacket Gunship

30T with a Gauss Rifle, and can take a bunch of damage on the nose? Yes please!

VTOLs would be invulnerable, considering how MWO's mechs can't shoot things above them (with some exceptions like the Rifleman).

#14730 Metus regem

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 10,282 posts
  • LocationNAIS College of Military Science OCS courses

Posted 27 September 2016 - 11:43 AM

View PostOdanan, on 27 September 2016 - 10:55 AM, said:

VTOLs would be invulnerable, considering how MWO's mechs can't shoot things above them (with some exceptions like the Rifleman).



True, but you just limit the height that they can fly at, no higher than UAV's for simplicity's sake...

As much as I love the Yellow Jacket, she has her fair share of problems... chief among them being the I.C.E. it uses as the power plant... Still a quick change to a 180 Fusion engine (or XL) and FF armour (4t) would let you pack the Gauss Rifle with 2t of ammo and two MLas, retain the stock 104.5km/h post speed tweak... I know that doesn't sound impressive for a 30t Vee, but the movement profile would be nuts.

#14731 Odanan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 8,206 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 27 September 2016 - 12:00 PM

View PostMetus regem, on 27 September 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:



True, but you just limit the height that they can fly at, no higher than UAV's for simplicity's sake...

As much as I love the Yellow Jacket, she has her fair share of problems... chief among them being the I.C.E. it uses as the power plant... Still a quick change to a 180 Fusion engine (or XL) and FF armour (4t) would let you pack the Gauss Rifle with 2t of ammo and two MLas, retain the stock 104.5km/h post speed tweak... I know that doesn't sound impressive for a 30t Vee, but the movement profile would be nuts.

You still could hover above a mech without it being able to shoot you.

I want vehicles in MWO more than anything, but I don't think they will work as player-controlled machines.

Edited by Odanan, 28 September 2016 - 01:35 AM.


#14732 Metus regem

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 10,282 posts
  • LocationNAIS College of Military Science OCS courses

Posted 27 September 2016 - 01:38 PM

View PostOdanan, on 27 September 2016 - 12:00 PM, said:

You still could hover above a mech without it being able to shoot you.

I'm want vehicles in MWO more than anything, but I don't think they will work as player-controlled machines.


VTOL's would be a problem, but tracked / wheeled tanks, Hover and WiGE would be fine. Tracked, wheeled and hover would have to be in contract with the ground, and would be limited in their ability to climb hills, WiGE would need constant forward move about 150m forward every 10-20 seconds to maintain 'flight'

#14733 Black Lanner

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Lanner
  • The Lanner
  • 200 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationAlbuquerque, NM

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:01 PM

Posted Imageif you get WiGE, I get my LAMs...

Edited by Black Lanner, 27 September 2016 - 10:02 PM.


#14734 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:08 PM

We need vehicles and infantry alone to stop those "great ideas like "we want a city map"

Uh Infernos we need Infernos.
Although why not implement base turrets as infantry pile boxes - a toned down ppc, some srm, a machine gun.
You can drop ~300 damage of antivehicle weapon fire on them or you use a flamer or machine gun for a second.

This would allow to remove awkward game mechanics like the stun effect of the flamer but keep a important role for this weapon.
Same could be said about conquest points - hit the fortifications at the edges of the station for some damage or just wash over with a flamer.

#14735 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,459 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:16 PM

View PostOvion, on 27 September 2016 - 10:47 AM, said:

Vehicles would be fantastic tbh, and most of the systems should be in place from the Cryengine already, making it a FAR simpler proposal, with far fewer new code needed.

Vehicles would maybe need a new UI, but would also have new options - decals / colours shared, but camo's would need redoing and so would be extra's to get, and vehicle models are a damn sight simpler to create from scratch than mechs.



On a bit of a pipe-dream, (unlikely as a ton of extra work on top) having the option of taking a mech and vehicle in a drop (2 slot drop tech, total tonnage, pick which to start with) would give something a little interesting with minor reinforcements and different scouting / support options.
And in CW, with 6-8 slots, even more so.

Vehicles with the TT Rules very overpowered (no Heat),seeing Vehicles Aerospace Fighters in MWLL, dominated the Battlefield...and Citys Deathtraps for Mechs ...Infantry in buildings armed with KSR/Inferno ...Buildings crash over and under Mechs ...ok , a mech have better Chances as a Black Hawk or Humvee in a City:D

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 27 September 2016 - 10:18 PM.


#14736 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 27 September 2016 - 11:04 PM

View PostOld MW4 Ranger, on 27 September 2016 - 10:16 PM, said:

Vehicles with the TT Rules very overpowered (no Heat),seeing Vehicles Aerospace Fighters in MWLL, dominated the Battlefield...and Citys Deathtraps for Mechs ...Infantry in buildings armed with KSR/Inferno ...Buildings crash over and under Mechs ...ok , a mech have better Chances as a Black Hawk or Humvee in a City:D

You forgot their vulnerability to crits. LBX or SRMs are tank killers, also the AC2 in classic 3025 matches.
In MWLL the tanks were not vulnerable against crits. Well there are Maximum Tech CBT rules for advanced hitboxes for tanks. Use them and you are right - tanks become a pain. You hardly can stop those Regulator Hovers before they savage your units.
But with standard rules.... give me a LB10X and get done with

The tank on the ground is similar to the Mech in vacuum - only the number of hits matter - the more the batter. Damage is secondary. (so one of the best Zero-G Anti Mech and Anti Tank guns is the Clan LB2X)

As you might see - combined arms is the way to create a wider range of weapons that are useful.

Again speeking in terms of turrets and objectives. If buildings are more vulnerable to SRM and LBX fire - it might be useful to take them with you - even in a pure sniper deck

Edited by Karl Streiger, 27 September 2016 - 11:08 PM.


#14737 Uncle Totty

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hunter
  • The Hunter
  • 1,556 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationSomewhere in the ARDC (Ark-Royal Defense Cordon)

Posted 28 September 2016 - 12:44 AM

View PostOdanan, on 27 September 2016 - 04:54 AM, said:

Are you talking about the Viper?

Viper
- speed: 129.6 km/h
- pod space: 8.36
- armor: 8.5 (stock = 7)

Black Lanner
- speed: 119 km/h (without MASC activated)
- pod space: 11.5
- armor: 11.5 tons (stock = 8)

Oh wait, you are talking about the Coyotl... OK, the Coyotl has 4 more tons of podspace, pod-mounted jumpjets and it is smaller (will not count the stock armor - that means nothing in this game), BUT it is slower (no MASC), has less hardpoints, less 3 tons of max armor and no ECM. Both have high mounted hardpoints, I guess - but the Coyotl might have "super high" torso hardpoints (Ebon Jaguar style).

They look pretty balanced, to be honest. But we need to consider the Black Lanner is much more famous (MW4+ & MW:LL), while the Coyotl is an almost extinct, very obscure mech.

What would you guys bring for Scout Faction Warfare? Coyotl or Black Lanner?
Spoiler

Metus: since you like the Coyotl, a best comparison is the Shadow Cat. And maybe the Shadow Cat ends up with the advantage...


It would be really nice if they removed pod locked JJ and made them pod specific instead.

#14738 Metus regem

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 10,282 posts
  • LocationNAIS College of Military Science OCS courses

Posted 28 September 2016 - 04:10 AM

View PostBlack Lanner, on 27 September 2016 - 10:01 PM, said:

Posted Imageif you get WiGE, I get my LAMs...


You get a like for L.A.M.s, but a thumbs down for re-seen image....

#14739 Black Lanner

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Lanner
  • The Lanner
  • 200 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationAlbuquerque, NM

Posted 28 September 2016 - 04:46 AM

hate the reseen all you want, I like that they got away from recycling Robotech...

#14740 Clownwarlord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,410 posts
  • LocationBusy stealing clan mechs.

Posted 28 September 2016 - 05:31 AM

I would like to see the Komodo

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Komodo


It also gives PGI a way to introduce new info tech warfare with 3C slave and master units. It also gives the Inner Sphere a mech similar to the nova but at a 45 ton. Would you want this mech in game?





10 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 10 guests, 0 anonymous users