20517 replies to this topic

[Karl Streiger]

Odanan, on 04 October 2016 - 03:27 AM, said:

I'm afraid stock 10 vs 12 would still be unfair... Those poor SHS mechs wouldn't be able to lose heat on hot maps...

Maybe - they might not loose as much heat - but they should be harder to overheat.
As said we should think about a tonnage based balance system - a IS double heatsink might take 3 crits and weight a ton - so the overall efficiency should be slightly better when compared with a SHS. Only talking about non engine heatsinks.

Those engine heatsinks however causing me a headache - they are a not very nice mechanic to beginn with. Maybe it should be tuned towards - free heatsinks = engine rating / 25 = so a UrbanMech with its 1t of heatsinks changes from 11 heatsinks towards 3 heatsinks (makes somehow sense when talking about CBT - AC 10 3 heat; Jumping 3 heat; running and small laser 3 heat)

Well different story - would need a ton of testing and fine tuning -
I imagine (for 10 vs 12)
A Warhawk - Prime - (remove LRM for more heatsinks + free sinks = must be 13 + 12 Clan DHS and a TC MK VI
Facing a - hm Atlas with 4 PPCs and 18ton of heatsinks = 12 free (300 STD) +18 = 30 SHS

85*1.2 ~ 100t
This fight must be equal the decision should only depend on the pilot. Can the Warhawk keep range and keep up a constant barrage of single ERPPC bolts; or can the Atlas with its sturdy chassis take the beating until it closes to almost minimum range and blast aways with 2-3 Alpha strikes that bite huge chunks of the Warhawk

With such a underlinig base balance you can play stock - or go 100% vanilla Mechlab in the end the stock guy should have the same chance as the mech tuner

[Odanan]

Karl Streiger, on 04 October 2016 - 04:09 AM, said:

Those engine heatsinks however causing me a headache - they are a not very nice mechanic to beginn with.

The double HS inside the engine stuff was the single WORST balance unbalance decision of the Battletech designers, period.

EDIT: This is how it should have been: every engine dissipates 10 heat, no matter what type of HS you use. No inside or minimum outside the engine HS. Sure, this would break many many variants that are already absurd (like the Nova Prime), but would practically remove the need of Battlevalue as balancing meter in TT and justify the use of those terrible AC/2s and AC/5s

Edited by Odanan, 04 October 2016 - 04:52 AM.

[Steve Pryde]

Odanan, on 04 October 2016 - 04:43 AM, said:

The double HS inside the engine stuff was the single WORST balance unbalance decision of the Battletech designers, period.

Yeah I agree. Giving mechs 10t(!) heatsinks for free was just a terrible idea in the table top.

[Odanan]

Catalyst should have balls to do a proper new edition of Battletech, revising the game for the XXI Century.

- Why do you need to roll for criticals? - if the internal structure is hit, you get 1 critical. (but no more that stupid "roll again" thing)
- Group weapons by location (all weapon shot from one arm do 1 single to hit roll).
- Unification of rules from the various books.
- Variable critical distribution for each chassis (smaller mechs with less total internal criticals) and engine size (larger engines occupy more criticals).
- Ferro Fibrous increases the maximum armor.
- More dynamic combat, and so on...

Lets face it: we don't have time to spend 6 hours in a single TT match anymore.

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 04 October 2016 - 05:06 AM, said:

Catalyst should have balls to do a proper new edition of Battletech, revising the game for the XXI Century.

- Why do you need to roll for criticals? - if the internal structure is hit, you get 1 critical. (but no more that stupid "roll again" thing)
- Group weapons by location (all weapon shot from one arm do 1 single to hit roll).
- Unification of rules from the various books.
- Variable critical distribution for each chassis (smaller mechs with less total internal criticals) and engine size (larger engines occupy more criticals).
- Ferro Fibrous increases the maximum armor.
- More dynamic combat, and so on...

Lets face it: we don't have time to spend 6 hours in a single TT match anymore.

Well, if we are going there, they should revamp ranges, too.

There should simply be "Short, Medium and Long" range brackets, and each weapon has a maximum range (some a minimum).

It's absolutely stupid that to hit a mech at 90 meters with a PPC or SRM6 rack is "close range" but with a small laser, that is still, real world hit-scan, it's long range with a +4 modifier. Heck, even a MG is going to be pushing it's rounds with so much velocity, that it would be all but hitscan the entirety of it's 9o meter range.

Break targeting ranges to short (1-10hex) medium (11-20) and long (21-30) and you get a much more "IRL" and sensible, easier to track combat system.

Do that, and the all engines have 10 single heatsinks approach, and you actually start moving Battletech into the modern world.

[Zergling]

Odanan, on 04 October 2016 - 05:06 AM, said:

Catalyst should have balls to do a proper new edition of Battletech, revising the game for the XXI Century.

- Why do you need to roll for criticals? - if the internal structure is hit, you get 1 critical. (but no more that stupid "roll again" thing)
- Group weapons by location (all weapon shot from one arm do 1 single to hit roll).
- Unification of rules from the various books.
- Variable critical distribution for each chassis (smaller mechs with less total internal criticals) and engine size (larger engines occupy more criticals).
- Ferro Fibrous increases the maximum armor.
- More dynamic combat, and so on...

Lets face it: we don't have time to spend 6 hours in a single TT match anymore.

I'd like to see all that, along with a 're-balanced' TT game, with better thought out construction rules and better weapons balance.
They'd have to redo every single design, but that'd give them an excuse to reprint all the TROs and make a ton of cash from die-hard battletech fans like me.

Hell, I'm still seriously annoyed Catalyst re-released a bunch of new advanced/experimental weapons in Tactical Operations, but refused to fix the obvious horrible balance flaws (eg, Mech Mortar and ELRM having some stupid weights).
...and then they started releasing units in new TROs that used those unbalanced weapons, so they couldn't do a revision of Tactical Operations to fix those problems without doing revisions of all the affected canon designs too.

Edited by Zergling, 04 October 2016 - 05:33 AM.

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 October 2016 - 05:14 AM, said:

Well, if we are going there, they should revamp ranges, too.

There should simply be "Short, Medium and Long" range brackets, and each weapon has a maximum range (some a minimum).

This! ^

That change of rule, itself, would be the greatest thing for Battletech ever.

The enemy is at 9 hex? so it's medium range: shoot all weapons (that can reach that far) with -2 to hit penalty.

Zergling, on 04 October 2016 - 05:26 AM, said:

I'd like to see all that, along with a 're-balanced' TT game, with better thought out construction rules and better weapons balance.

They'd have to redo every single design, but that'd give them an excuse to reprint all the TROs and make a ton of cash from die-hard battletech fans like me.

Battletech "Reboot" with TROs with MWO-like art... OMG. I would buy EVERYTHING.

[Karl Streiger]

Odanan, on 04 October 2016 - 05:06 AM, said:

Catalyst should have balls to do a proper new edition of Battletech, revising the game for the XXI Century.

well they made Alpha Strike - but afaik they only reduced the micromanagement what is the single most thing i like about battletech - the calculations are still there.

A long long time ago I started to try to convert BT more into the direction of a Shilouette Core rule mechanism (Heavy Gear)
Each weapon had a damage profile at a given range (using the statistical to hit probability per range) (so gauss at long range had damage of 8. Armor and mobility were put together into the defensive value.
Damage > Defense = damage = critical


Not value for the pilot - (i had the idea that every pilot is able to use his targeting systems) but the option to role dice to boost your actions - there was the difference a newb got only one dice roll per round; the elite pilot got 3 per round

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 04 October 2016 - 05:30 AM, said:

This! ^

That change of rule, itself, would be the greatest thing for Battletech ever.

The enemy is at 9 hex? so it's medium range: shoot all weapons (that can reach that far) with -2 to hit penalty.


Battletech "Reboot" with TROs with MWO-like art... OMG. I would buy EVERYTHING.

gimme that but with a return to TRO 3025/3026 art, personally. That art defined the feel of the game, IMO. (of course, then TROs 3050-3060 largely flushed that feel down the crapper, but the newer 3145 art, etc? It's too anime. Gimme the industrial drafting look again, please!)

[Karl Streiger]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 October 2016 - 08:49 AM, said:

gimme that but with a return to TRO 3025/3026 art, personally. That art defined the feel of the game, IMO. (of course, then TROs 3050-3060 largely flushed that feel down the crapper, but the newer 3145 art, etc? It's too anime. Gimme the industrial drafting look again, please!)

Influenced by the late interview with Duane Loose ey?
But you are absolutely right... In all those years (23) no picture of any Mech was able to remove the Donnerkeil (you might call it Tee-bolt) from its throne.
The 3025 picture in the glossary of my copy of Wolfpack plus it's performance in the novel 100% Mechporn (I was 12 please be patient) - ironically no other picture of the thunderbolt even comes close - MWO Thud is on paar with the resseen (arm stub vs to slim)


I really look forward with fear and joy to see the new catalyst Thunderbolt.

Edit:

This seems to have the right proportions but as Bish said its missing the industrial look:

Edited by Karl Streiger, 05 October 2016 - 01:06 AM.

[Odanan]

Well, Russ would be revealing a new mech these days.

Yep, guys. I think because the Clan Heroes Pack, the new mech announcement will be delayed (even if PGI has the assets to do at least one new mech each month)...

Spoiler

I want the Fire Moth so much...

[Virlutris]

They may have realized that the mech pack fatigue is strong. (c.f. "Do You Wanna Buy A Mech Pack" video by Fantastic Tuesday, to the tune of "Do You Wanna Build A Snowman?")

I'd be willing to bet we get one announced later in the month instead, or they skip to the beginning of November. I wouldn't mind an IS Hero dump though.

Specifically: Panther hero please?

Edited by Virlutris, 06 October 2016 - 03:43 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Virlutris, on 06 October 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

They may have realized that the mech pack fatigue is strong. (c.f. "Do You Wanna Buy A Mech Pack" video by Fantastic Tuesday, to the tune of "Do You Wanna Build A Snowman?")

I'd be willing to bet we get one announced later in the month instead, or they skip to the beginning of November. I wouldn't mind an IS Hero dump though.

Specifically: Panther URBANMECH hero please?

ftfy

[lagartx3]

Odanan, on 06 October 2016 - 02:59 PM, said:

Well, Russ would be revealing a new mech these days.

You guys think the new mech will be in for the 2016 Rewards eligibility??

Because if its a ligth, im already putting $40 bucks on it

[Bishop Steiner]

lagartx3, on 06 October 2016 - 06:34 PM, said:

You guys think the new mech will be in for the 2016 Rewards eligibility??

Because if its a ligth, im already putting $40 bucks on it

there is very little chance of us seeing a Light as long as they keep the current pricing model

[Bishop Steiner]

Karl Streiger, on 04 October 2016 - 10:27 AM, said:

Influenced by the late interview with Duane Loose ey?
But you are absolutely right... In all those years (23) no picture of any Mech was able to remove the Donnerkeil (you might call it Tee-bolt) from its throne.
The 3025 picture in the glossary of my copy of Wolfpack plus it's performance in the novel 100% Mechporn (I was 12 please be patient) - ironically no other picture of the thunderbolt even comes close - MWO Thud is on paar with the resseen (arm stub vs to slim)


I really look forward with fear and joy to see the new catalyst Thunderbolt.

Edit:

This seems to have the right proportions but as Bish said its missing the industrial look:

JSN's work look more like something out of a Transformers comic than Battletech, to me. It's not BAD work, it just has the wrong aesthetic (IMO) for battletech. It's the same problem I have with Shortpainter. The guy is a great artist. It's just his robots don't look like Battletech robots.

[Sereglach]

Odanan, on 04 October 2016 - 05:06 AM, said:

*snip*

Bishop Steiner, on 04 October 2016 - 05:14 AM, said:

*snip*

You know the funny thing. Alpha Strike actually does a LOT of the things people mention in these few posts; and it makes the game play a lot faster. Mech construction is still there from Classic Battletech, and the Alpha Strike companion provides everything you need to do proper unit conversion from CBT to AS rules.

I am extremely fond of the game system, personally, because once you learn the standard rules you can get a company vs. company game done in under an hour. Add in a few of the optional rules (like variable damage) and the game becomes just intimate enough without bogging the game down. Last Company vs. Company game I played at "Standard" rules + Variable Damage took about a hour and 10 minutes +/- 10 minutes answering a few rules questions.

Zergling, on 04 October 2016 - 05:26 AM, said:

I'd like to see all that, along with a 're-balanced' TT game, with better thought out construction rules and better weapons balance.
They'd have to redo every single design, but that'd give them an excuse to reprint all the TROs and make a ton of cash from die-hard battletech fans like me.
*snip*

Karl Streiger, on 04 October 2016 - 05:42 AM, said:

well they made Alpha Strike - but afaik they only reduced the micromanagement what is the single most thing i like about battletech - the calculations are still there.
*snip*

You know, I tried advocating for stuff like this on the official Battletech Forums with Catalyst. To say the grognards there were hostile was an understatement. There's a clique of people there (said grognards) that will go out of their way to absolutely trash, insult, demean, and annihilate anyone and any thing/thread daring to suggest that the game be updated. It would still get brought up every once in a while, especially with the mythical "3250" time jump . . . but it's destroyed every time. I stopped going there a couple of years ago because of it. I'd like to believe that they've changed . . . but I wouldn't bet on it.

However, it really needs to be done to modernize the game. Again, I pushed for it a lot; and suffered because of it. Here's an example (rough and old . . . I can't believe I still had it lying around) of one such suggestion I had made . . . an actual draft of a post I had put on their forums. Keep in mind it was also presuming a 3250 time jump for the "reboot" to happen, which is why things like the default heat sinks are doubles. I have a pipe-dream document with lots of refinements and far more complete . . . but you'll get the idea. Beware . . . wall of text within the spoiler (I don't mind posting this quite so much because it's old as hell):

Spoiler

So, in order to serve as an example of how simple these new mech construction techniques are, I took a few minutes to convert two extremes in mech constructions, the Wasp WSP-1A and the Atlas AS7-D. Here's what they look like:

Wasp, WSP-1A

20 Ton Mech Chassis:
Chassis Internal Structure tonnage (tonnage/10) = 2 tons.
Chassis Internal Structure points (tonnage/2 for ct, half rounded up elsewhere) = CT 10 points; RT, LT, RA, LA, RL, LL all 5 points
Chassis Gyro Tonnage (IS tonnage/2) = 1 ton.

Chassis Maximum Armor Potential Tonnage (tonnage/5) = 4 Tons.
Chassis Armor Values at 3 tons (10 points per .5 tons, distributed at 2 per torso, 1 per limb) = CT, LT, RT 12 points; RA, LA, RL, LL, 6 points

Cockpit = Standard Mech Cockpit for 3 Tons (.25 tons for 5 structure points, .5 tons armor for 10 points, .25 tons for sensors and comms equipment, 2 tons for cockpit and life support systems)

Engine Rating of 120:
Standard Engine Tonnage (.05 tons per rating point) = 6 tons
Mech Movement (rating/tonnage) = 6 hexes/12 inches
In-engine heat sinks (1 per 25 engine rating . . . the minimum required to make the mech function, to a maximum of 10 "free" before additional tonnage is required) = 4 Double (the new standard with advanced technology) = 8 standard cooling.

Jump Jets:
Number of Jets = 6
Jet weight (tonnage/100) = .2 tons per jump jet
Total weight in jets = 1.2

Weapons Payload:
Right Arm - 1 Medium Standard Laser = 1 Ton, 1 Crit, 4 Heat, 6 Damage, 6Hex/12" range.
(This is a base item. Formula for each advancement: +3 tons, heat X2, damage +3, flat +3Hex/6" range increments. Formula for each smaller size: Tons/2, heat/2, damage -2, fixed 3Hex/6" range.)
Left Leg - 1 SRM 2 = .5 tons, 1 crit, 1 heat, 4 damage (2/missile)
This is a Base Item (formula for each advancement: every two tubes adds the stats of the base weapon system, stacking heat, damage, crits, etc.)
Left Torso - 1 Ton Standard SRM ammunition for 120 missiles (providing 60 shots to the SRM2)
Total Payload Tonnage = 2.5 tons

Current Tonnage:
2 tons structure + 3 tons armor + 1 ton Gyro + 3 tons cockpit + 6 tons engine + 1.2 tons Jump Jets + 2.5 tons weapons = 18.7 Tons.

Max Heat potential: 5 from weapons, 3 from jumping (.5 heat/jet, rounded up) = 8 heat (standard movements not included because they'd generate less heat @ 1/walk and 2/run).
-With 8 standard cooling, this is a completely heat neutral mech.

Using NEW technology the same mech is built with 1.3 tons to spare. In order to consume those tons . . .
-Increase armor by 6 points (.3 tons at 2 points per .1 ton, 2 points to ct, 1 point to each side torso and 1 point to each leg).
-Increase the engine rating by one movement increment, to a 140 engine (7 tons, total), also giving the mech one more internal engine heat sink (5 Double) to a maximum cooling of 10.

This also changes the mechs' movement capabilities to 7Hex/14" walk and 6Hex/12" jump.

18.7 + .3 + 1 = 20 Ton mech total.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Atlas, AS7-D

100 Ton Mech Chassis:
Chassis Internal Structure tonnage (tonnage/10) = 10 tons.
Chassis Internal Structure points (tonnage/2) = CT 50 points; RT, LT, RA, LA, RL, LL all 25 points
Chassis Gyro tonnage (IS tonnage/2) = 5 tons.

Chassis Maximum Armor Potential Tonnage (tonnage/5) = 20 Tons.
Chassis Armor Values at 19.5 tons (10 points per .5 tons, distributed at 2 per torso, 1 per limb) = CT, LT, RT 78 points; RA, LA, RL, LL, 39 points

Cockpit = Standard Mech Cockpit for 3 Tons (.25 tons for 5 structure points, .5 tons armor for 10 points, .25 tons for sensors and comms equipment, 2 tons for cockpit and life support systems)

Engine Rating of 300:
Engine Tonnage (.05 tons per rating point) = 15 tons
Mech Movement (rating/tonnage) = 3 hexes/6 inches
In-engine heat sinks (1 per 25 engine rating . . . the minimum required to make the mech function, to a maximum of 10 "free")= 10 Free Double (the new standard with advanced technology), with 2 extra in-engine heat sinks required = 24 standard cooling.
Additional tonnage of heat sinks = 2, setting total engine mass to 17 tons.

Jump Jets:
Number of Jets = 0
Jet weight (tonnage/100) = 1 ton per jump jet
Total weight in jets = 0

Weapons Payload:
Right Arm - 1 Medium Standard Laser = 1 Ton, 1 Crit, 4 Heat, 6 Damage, 6Hex/12" range.
(This is a base item. Formula for each advancement: +3 tons, heat X2, damage +3, flat +3Hex/6" range increments. Formula for each smaller size: Tons/2, heat/2, damage -2, fixed 3Hex/6" range.)

Left Arm - 1 Medium Standard Laser = 1 Ton, 1 Crit, 4 Heat, 6 Damage, 6Hex/12" range.

Right Torso - 1 Standard AC/20, 12 tons (2 base + rating/2), 10 crits, 5 Heat, 20 Damage, 10 Hex/20" range.
(Base Item = Standard AC/2, 3 Ton, 1 Crit, 1 Heat, 2 Damage, 20 Hex/40" range. Formula for advancement: 2 Tons + rating/2, Crits = rating/2, heat = Rating/4 (round up), damage = rating, Hex range = base - #crits)
Right Torso - 2 tons Std. AC/20 Ammo (shots per ton = 100/rating), providing a total of 10 shots.

Left Torso - 1 SRM6 = 1.5 tons, 3 crit, 3 heat, 12 damage (2dam./missile w/ 3, 2-missile clusters)
(base item = SRM2, .5 tons, 1 crit, 1 heat, 4 damage (2/missile). Formula for advancement: every two tubes adds the stats of the base weapon system, stacking heat, damage, tonnage, and crits)
Left Torso - 1 Ton Standard SRM ammunition for 120 missiles (providing 20 shots to the SRM6)
Left Torso - 1 LRM 20 = 6 tons, 4 crits, 4 heat, 20 damage (1dam./missile w/ 4, 5-missile clusters)
(base item = LRM5, 1.5 tons, 1 crit, 1 heat, 5 damage (1/missile). Formula for each adavncement: every five tubes adds the stats of the base weapon system, stacking heat, damage, tonnage, and crits)
Left Torso - 2 Tons Standard LRM ammunition for 180 missiles each (providing 18 shots, total, for the LRM 20)

Total Payload Tonnage = 26.5 tons

Current Tonnage:
10 tons structure + 5 tons gyro + 19.5 tons armor + 3 tons cockpit + 17 tons engine + 0 tons Jump Jets + 26.5 tons weapons = 81 Tons.

Max Heat potential: 20 from weapons, 2 from running = 22 heat.

Using NEW technology the same mech is built with 19 tons to spare. In order to consume those tons . . .
-Upgrade the remaining .5 tons of armor, giving the chassis its maximum tonnage.
-Install a Heavy Gyro, increasing gyro weight by 50% (2.5 tons), and giving the mech 10% more CT internal structure points (rounded up), CT structure now = 55.
-Turn the SRM6 into a "Artemis Streak 6", adding 3 tons.
-Install a C3 Command Unit for 5 tons, allowing the unit to give his side +2 initiative as well as control a C3 network.
-Upgrade the Medium Standard Lasers in the arms to Large Standard Lasers (4 tons, 1 crit, 8 heat, 9 damage, 9Hex/18" range) for 6 tons total difference.
-Install two more heat sinks, bringing the total heat sinks to 14 and the standard cooling to 28.

New Max Heat potential: 28 (8/LL + 8/LL + 5/AC20 + 3/SRM6 + 4/LRM20) Heat from weapons, 2 from running = 30 heat.
-This is not quite a heat neutral mech, but very close. Refraining from firing the LRM or SRM each round would retain heat neutrality.

81 + .5 + 2.5 + 3 + 5 + 6 + 2 = 100 ton mech total.

Gah . . . now I get to lament the fact I have no one to play Alpha Strike with AND lamenting how Battletech could be rebooted and updated into an incredibly awesome and modern game for the TT world.

[Sereglach]

Karl Streiger, on 04 October 2016 - 10:27 AM, said:

Edit:

That's not the "new" or "classic remake" of the Thunderbolt. That's the Primitive Thunderbolt. We've yet to see the new Thunderbolt.

For example . . . Primitive Wasp (first) vs. reimaged Wasp (second)



Although, admittedly, I love the looks of both of those Wasps. However, you can see the similar art style between the two primitive chassis.

Edited by Sereglach, 06 October 2016 - 08:31 PM.

[Karl Streiger]

Sereglach, on 06 October 2016 - 07:43 PM, said:

about alpha strike

What I like most about alpha strike is the aspect of combined warfare mixed with all those advanced rules from TacOps, the gaming group in this area tried to make an Alpha Strike Battle as part of a German wide Operation Götterdämmerung, but they played it classic - so in the evening the battle was not finished - just a clash of two companies.
It is important that CBT becomes faster without removing what made it great.

Maybe the recordsheet as replacement for a simulator are obsolete but considering the complexity of simulation in MWO I'm not so sure

Don't tell anybody that a pen & paper game of the 80s is the better mechsim when compared with a computer game of the 21st Century

[Sereglach]

Karl Streiger, on 06 October 2016 - 08:30 PM, said:

What I like most about alpha strike is the aspect of combined warfare mixed with all those advanced rules from TacOps, the gaming group in this area tried to make an Alpha Strike Battle as part of a German wide Operation Götterdämmerung, but they played it classic - so in the evening the battle was not finished - just a clash of two companies.
It is important that CBT becomes faster without removing what made it great.

Maybe the recordsheet as replacement for a simulator are obsolete but considering the complexity of simulation in MWO I'm not so sure

Don't tell anybody that a pen & paper game of the 80s is the better mechsim when compared with a computer game of the 21st Century

In my "pipe-dream" document that I mention above (if I could reshape and reboot Battletech) I actually have rule designs drafted out to have a mech record sheet with two sets of stats on it specifically designed to have more detailed small engagements and more generalized large engagements. The whole thing could fit on a 4"x6" index card.

CBT could still survive in a form if the grognards would just allow CBT and Alpha Strike to be rebuilt in a fashion that works more seamlessly together; and utilizes the massive improvements afforded by a lot of what Alpha Strike did to CBT. The problem is that it'd require a full-on rules reboot.

Lance vs. Lance? Play the CBT styled rules and get nitty-gritty with it.

Battalion vs. Battalion? Play some Alpha Strike styled rules and get the game done in the same time frame.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Bishop Steiner, on 06 October 2016 - 06:45 PM, said:

there is very little chance of us seeing a Light as long as they keep the current pricing model

As much as I can wish it is a light; and that they'd add some lights to the game, I've got to agree with this sentiment. Conveniently I'm not spending money on MWO, so I'm not disappointed with the severe lack of light releases.