20517 replies to this topic

[John MatriX82]

Odanan, on 28 November 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

So, next hero a Quickdraw? Or people are still betting on the Hunchie?

Whatever is, hunchies have lost many places in my ladder, as the quickdraws did. Unless they add one with some high-mounted ballistics xD

[Devil Fox]

Only way I see a Hunchback Hero actually having a place is 2 ballistic slots, one per shoulder... then the fun will begin!

[John MatriX82]

Apostal, on 28 November 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Only way I see a Hunchback Hero actually having a place is 2 ballistic slots, one per shoulder... then the fun will begin!

Too bad at this rate we'll never see IICs.. but it would be uberpowah xD

[FupDup]

Apostal, on 28 November 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Only way I see a Hunchback Hero actually having a place is 2 ballistic slots, one per shoulder... then the fun will begin!

Or maybe a balanced kind of loadout with a ballistic right torso and missile left torso? Something that existing hunchies can't do? (You can just shove both ballistics in one big hunch on the 4G).

Edited by FupDup, 28 November 2013 - 03:01 PM.

[Devil Fox]

FupDup, on 28 November 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

Or maybe a balanced kind of loadout with a ballistic right torso and missile left torso? Something that existing hunchies can't do? (You can just shove both ballistics in one big hunch on the 4G).

But honestly the Hawk can already do that better... all the Hunchie has at present is a variety of different system set-ups on it's various variants. It needs something completely different to even remotely seem different, sad fact is that the Shadow Hawk more or less dominates the medium bracket to the point that the only machine that seems to be deployed alongside is the Yen-Lo Wang because it can mount a very large XL for speed and still retain the heavy AC20 punch.

It's a sad state of affairs where PGI continuously sideline older machines with newer ones.

[FupDup]

Apostal, on 28 November 2013 - 04:00 PM, said:

But honestly the Hawk can already do that better... all the Hunchie has at present is a variety of different system set-ups on it's various variants. It needs something completely different to even remotely seem different, sad fact is that the Shadow Hawk more or less dominates the medium bracket to the point that the only machine that seems to be deployed alongside is the Yen-Lo Wang because it can mount a very large XL for speed and still retain the heavy AC20 punch.

It's a sad state of affairs where PGI continuously sideline older machines with newer ones.

The Shawk can already do pretty much everything better TBH, although a balanced Hunchie would still be an interesting addition to the Hunchie line despite its obsolescence.

Personally I think this is more of a problem with the Hunchie and other mediums than it is with the Shawk--I like to think of the Shawk as the "baseline" that all mediums should be measured against (sort of like the Medium Laser for energy weapons, instead of using the Flamer or SPL as the baseline).

[Strum Wealh]

Apostal, on 28 November 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Only way I see a Hunchback Hero actually having a place is 2 ballistic slots, one per shoulder... then the fun will begin!

• The HBK-IIC Prime has double ballistic hunches (twin CUAC/20s), as does the HBK-IIC 4 (twin CRAC/5s).
  
• The HBK-IIC 2 has double energy hunches (quad CHLLs, two per hunch), as does the HBK-5P (six ER Medium Lasers, 3 per hunch).
  
• The HBK-4SP has double missile hunches (twin SRM-6 launchers), as do the HBK-IIC 3 (1 ATM-12 launcher in the RT, 2 ATM-12 launchers in the LT) and the HBK-5SS (twin Artemis-enhanced MML-9 launchers)

One novel possibility for a Hero Hunchback is to have two missile hardpoints on each arm, dual energy-based hunches with a single hardpoint each, and the traditional head-mounted laser.

The initial loadout could be:

• 270 XL Engine (base top speed of 87.48 kph)
  
• no jump capability
  
• full actuator sets in both arms
  
• Standard Internal Structure
  
• 12 Double Heat Sinks (10 in Engine, 1 in each side-torso)
  
• Full Ferro-Fibrous Armor (338 points)
  
• Hardpoints:
  
  • x3 Energy (1 in Head, 1 in LT, 1 in RT)
    
  • x4 Missile (2 in LA, 2 in RA)
• Initial Armament:
  
  • x1 Small Pulse Laser (Head)
    
  • x2 PPCs (1 in LT, 1 in RT)
    
  • x4 SRM-2 launchers (2 in LA, 2 in RA) with 2 tons of ammo (1 in LT, 1 in RT)
• Torso: 35° pitch, 28° twist
  
• Arms: 20° pitch, 125° twist

The arm-mounted missile launchers provide a similar missile-based brawling capability to that seen in the ON1-V and ON1-VA Orion variants that is as-yet-unprecedented in a Medium 'Mech, while the high-mounted PPCs create a capable Medium-class sniping/marksmanship platform.

Thoughts?

[stjobe]

Apostal, on 28 November 2013 - 04:00 PM, said:

It's a sad state of affairs where PGI continuously sideline older machines with newer ones.

That's the price we pay for our almost unlimited customization; a Hunchback in TT was rather unique in that it mounted an AC/20 - the Shadow Hawk's AC/5 and rather eclectic mix of other weaponry just didn't compare with the raw knock-out punch of the AC/20, and there was no Shadow Hawk variant mounting an AC/20. They were intended to be distinct 'mechs with distinct areas of expertise.

But in MWO that's not an issue; just rip out the AC/5 and drop in an AC/20 and you've just removed everything that's original and special about the Hunchback except for aesthetics.

Totally unlimited customization would mean only the top weight chassis (35, 55, 75, 100 tons) were worth playing, and while we're not quite there, we're seeing shades of it.

[Diego Angelus]

Apostal, on 28 November 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Only way I see a Hunchback Hero actually having a place is 2 ballistic slots, one per shoulder... then the fun will begin!

Hell no I despise that idea. That will render all other variants useless and why is there a need to make hero mech unique variant in first place? If pgi continues to make hero mechs unique then we will have lots of misery examples out there and that will affect competitive matches, every time they introduce unique hero mech they make one step to p2w direction. Why not make mech of this guy http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Isoroku_Kurita and give it nice unique colour, shape with all nice bonuses to cbills and xp. I would be first in line to buy that mech if they add unique hardpoints for it then it gets immediate ban in my mech list.

[John MatriX82]

stjobe, on 28 November 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

Totally unlimited customization would mean only the top weight chassis (35, 55, 75, 100 tons) were worth playing, and while we're not quite there, we're seeing shades of it.

Yep, because we'd need to have restricted hardpoints. Catapult K2 comes with machine guns? Max upgrade for the ballistics is like up to dual AC5, nothing more or 8 crits. Do you want to drop a GR in one side? Ok you can, but then the left hardpoint is restricted to a Mgun or an AC2. Nothing else. Something like this, each variant would be different, an HBK 4G would be AC 20 capable while the 4H would be limited to GR or Ac10 and so on. Stalkers would be different from each other, boating would be a non-issue with all weapons systems and it would all be a better game..

[stjobe]

John MatriX82, on 29 November 2013 - 05:29 AM, said:

Yep, because we'd need to have restricted hardpoints. Catapult K2 comes with machine guns? Max upgrade for the ballistics is like up to dual AC5, nothing more or 8 crits. Do you want to drop a GR in one side? Ok you can, but then the left hardpoint is restricted to a Mgun or an AC2. Nothing else. Something like this, each variant would be different, an HBK 4G would be AC 20 capable while the 4H would be limited to GR or Ac10 and so on. Stalkers would be different from each other, boating would be a non-issue with all weapons systems and it would all be a better game..

My preferred (and pipe-dream, of course) implementation would be this:
* All 'mechs come as stock variants
* Limited modifications are possible, but would need to be done with the field repair rules, meaning there's a chance that it won't work properly - it may have an increased cool-down, a jam chance, an offset from the targeting reticule, or something similar.

I see 'mechs as analogous to cars; sure you can rip out the engine on that VW Beetle and put a big-block Chevy V8 in there, but it may not run as smoothly as the stock car.

In the BattleTech Universe there just isn't all that much customization; most 'mechs are stock and repaired with stock components after battle. If you have a wizard MechTech, you might get away with changing one weapon system with another, but it would more often than not mean a seriously quirky 'mech.

Sure, there's lore about mating a Rifleman upper torso to a pair of Warhammer legs, but the end result wasn't pretty and it wasn't working really well.

And before anyone tries the obvious counter that TT allowed you to build any kind of 'mech you wanted: Yes, it did. Under the 'mech construction rules. What you did was create a whole new 'mech, not modify or customize an already produced 'mech.

Edited by stjobe, 29 November 2013 - 05:37 AM.

[Odanan]

Diego Angelus, on 29 November 2013 - 01:11 AM, said:

Hell no I despise that idea. That will render all other variants useless and why is there a need to make hero mech unique variant in first place? If pgi continues to make hero mechs unique then we will have lots of misery examples out there and that will affect competitive matches, every time they introduce unique hero mech they make one step to p2w direction. Why not make mech of this guy http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Isoroku_Kurita and give it nice unique colour, shape with all nice bonuses to cbills and xp. I would be first in line to buy that mech if they add unique hardpoints for it then it gets immediate ban in my mech list.

Cloud-Gatherer = Hunchback with jumpjets.
(tough I think it's not the time for another Japanese hero mech...)

Edited by Odanan, 29 November 2013 - 05:44 AM.

[Diego Angelus]

Odanan, on 29 November 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

Cloud-Gatherer = Hunchback with jumpjets.
(tough I think it's not the time for another Japanese hero mech...)

Well I couldn't find any info on that mech but that would be 5s version right. Anyway I still think it was 4G and I would like to have real hero mech that is available for everyone

[John MatriX82]

stjobe, on 29 November 2013 - 05:37 AM, said:

My preferred (and pipe-dream, of course) implementation would be this:
* All 'mechs come as stock variants
* Limited modifications are possible, but would need to be done with the field repair rules, meaning there's a chance that it won't work properly - it may have an increased cool-down, a jam chance, an offset from the targeting reticule, or something similar.

I see 'mechs as analogous to cars; sure you can rip out the engine on that VW Beetle and put a big-block Chevy V8 in there, but it may not run as smoothly as the stock car.

In the BattleTech Universe there just isn't all that much customization; most 'mechs are stock and repaired with stock components after battle. If you have a wizard MechTech, you might get away with changing one weapon system with another, but it would more often than not mean a seriously quirky 'mech.

Sure, there's lore about mating a Rifleman upper torso to a pair of Warhammer legs, but the end result wasn't pretty and it wasn't working really well.

And before anyone tries the obvious counter that TT allowed you to build any kind of 'mech you wanted: Yes, it did. Under the 'mech construction rules. What you did was create a whole new 'mech, not modify or customize an already produced 'mech.

I believe that mech customization is absolutely needed, but you shouldn't be able to do certain things like dual AC 20 on the K2.

I'm certain that all the troubles PGI has in reaching a decent weapon (and mech) balance for this game, after more than one year, stems from the current hardpoint system.

So far they have nerfed practically everything from DHSs, LRMs, SRMs, PPCs, GR, Streaks, all weapons through ghost heat, movement archetypes, Pulse lasers have never been truly viable and so on.

Now we're in the AC5/UAC5 PPC or AC20-PPC meta.
You can drop these two weapons basically into any mech available and what makes a good mech a.. good mech it's the capability to bring those guns in favourable locations with a proper shape/size/scale. Before it was 2PPC+GR (after ghost heat intro), before again it was 4PPC Stalkers, earlier again Lulrms or SRM boats, with dual GRs and Dual AC20s being present at times through the CTPL-K2 first and then after the Jagers introduction.

If hardpoints were restricted, things would be easier and much clearer for newcomers to understand.
I think it's easy to let someone understand that a Stalker is hard-limited to 2xPPCs (this is an example of course) because once you mount 2 of them, all of the other energy hardpoints can house either ML/MPS/SL/SPL nothing bigger, and maybe 2 of them get even blanked out because you've eat 2 energy crit slots upgrading the LLs to those said PPCs. You'd not need ghost heat to balance stuff, people would understand the mechanic in a clearer way I think.

You'd still be able to place those big energy guns in the arms instead of inside the side torsoes (taking into consideration the stock loadout) but then you'd see the side torso energy guns be either blanked out or capable to house 1 crit slot energy weapons only.

Something like "stalkers have a 8 energy crit slot limit". This either means 2xLL + 4MLs or 2PPCs+2MLs, or 4LLs and nothing else. Selected variants could see this energy crit bumped up or reduced.

I'd then limit missile weapons by defining a fixed amount of tubes in a section. You wouldn't be able to fire off multiple salvoes, if you have 15 tubes, you can use a LRM5 or a LRM10 or a LRM15. If you have 2 hardpoints, you'd be limited to 15 lrms either way so LRM5+LRM10 if you want more DPS; I'd only allow to leave SRMs to be mixed with LRMs sharing the same tubes.

A Centurion-A would be able to use a LRM10+SRM6+SRM4 (10 tubes). Or 2xSRM4+SRM2 or SRM6+2xSRM2 or 2xLRM5+SRM6.

However it's too late for PGI to rethink that system I fear, and then we'll have to keep living with dull choices like ghost heat, DHSs not working as DHSs, crippled gauss rifles, lrm 70-80 boats and such.

Edited by John MatriX82, 29 November 2013 - 06:10 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

John MatriX82, on 29 November 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

I believe that mech customization is absolutely needed, but you shouldn't be able to do certain things like dual AC 20 on the K2.

I'm certain that all the troubles PGI has in reaching a decent weapon (and mech) balance for this game, after more than one year, stems from the current hardpoint system.

So far they have nerfed practically everything from DHSs, LRMs, SRMs, PPCs, GR, Streaks, all weapons through ghost heat, movement archetypes, Pulse lasers have never been truly viable and so on.

Now we're in the AC5/UAC5 PPC or AC20-PPC meta.
You can drop these two weapons basically into any mech available and what makes a good mech a.. good mech it's the capability to bring those guns in favourable locations with a proper shape/size/scale. Before it was 2PPC+GR (after ghost heat intro), before again it was 4PPC Stalkers, earlier again Lulrms or SRM boats, with dual GRs and Dual AC20s being present at times through the CTPL-K2 first and then after the Jagers introduction.

If hardpoints were restricted, things would be easier and much clearer for newcomers to understand.
I think it's easy to let someone understand that a Stalker is hard-limited to 2xPPCs (this is an example of course) because once you mount 2 of them, all of the other energy hardpoints can house either ML/MPS/SL/SPL nothing bigger, and maybe 2 of them get even blanked out because you've eat 2 energy crit slots upgrading the LLs to those said PPCs. You'd not need ghost heat to balance stuff, people would understand the mechanic in a clearer way I think.

You'd still be able to place those big energy guns in the arms instead of inside the side torsoes (taking into consideration the stock loadout) but then you'd see the side torso energy guns be either blanked out or capable to house 1 crit slot energy weapons only.

Something like "stalkers have a 8 energy crit slot limit". This either means 2xLL + 4MLs or 2PPCs+2MLs, or 4LLs and nothing else. Selected variants could see this energy crit bumped up or reduced.

I'd then limit missile weapons by defining a fixed amount of tubes in a section. You wouldn't be able to fire off multiple salvoes, if you have 15 tubes, you can use a LRM5 or a LRM10 or a LRM15. If you have 2 hardpoints, you'd be limited to 15 lrms either way so LRM5+LRM10 if you want more DPS; I'd only allow to leave SRMs to be mixed with LRMs sharing the same tubes.

A Centurion-A would be able to use a LRM10+SRM6+SRM4 (10 tubes). Or 2xSRM4+SRM2 or SRM6+2xSRM2 or 2xLRM5+SRM6.

However it's too late for PGI to rethink that system I fear, and then we'll have to keep living with dull choices like ghost heat, DHSs not working as DHSs, crippled gauss rifles, lrm 70-80 boats and such.

I've been stumping for sized hardpoints since ClosedBeta. Nothing complex, just Type, and whether it's Small or LArge. Smalls includes anything UP TO an UAC5, Medium Laser SRM4 or LRM10. Any larger weapons are large. Small weapons can be put into large slots.

This a Stalker, while having a ton of hardpoints, (2 LRM10, 2 SRM6, 2 Large Laser, 4 Mediums) would be 2 Large Missile, 2 LSmall Missile, 2 Large Energy, and 4 Small Energy. So you could carry 2 PPC, 2 LRM20, etc. But not 4 Large Laser, 4 LRM20, 4 PPC, 2 Large/2 PPC. Or you could go with 2 srm6, 2 srm4 and 6 mediums, or whatever.

The K2 could use up to UACs in the torsos, but no more Gaussapults. No MOre AC40 Jagers. Now it's more than just what are the hitboxes, but what role does each chassis fill, and doe it match your play style. It actually increases diversity, because it reduces the minmax meta.

[Odanan]

John MatriX82, on 29 November 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

However it's too late for PGI to rethink that system I fear, and then we'll have to keep living with dull choices like ghost heat, DHSs not working as DHSs, crippled gauss rifles, lrm 70-80 boats and such.

Why it's too late?

[Odanan]

Diego Angelus, on 29 November 2013 - 05:56 AM, said:

Well I couldn't find any info on that mech but that would be 5s version right. Anyway I still think it was 4G and I would like to have real hero mech that is available for everyone

See the chapter "BattleMechs" here.

About the hero Hunchback, there is something to consider: the Devs didn't include the HBK-4N (missiles + ballistics) for some reason. Maybe the Hunchback hero will have a similar loadout.

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 November 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

I've been stumping for sized hardpoints since ClosedBeta. Nothing complex, just Type, and whether it's Small or LArge. Smalls includes anything UP TO an UAC5, Medium Laser SRM4 or LRM10. Any larger weapons are large. Small weapons can be put into large slots.

This a Stalker, while having a ton of hardpoints, (2 LRM10, 2 SRM6, 2 Large Laser, 4 Mediums) would be 2 Large Missile, 2 LSmall Missile, 2 Large Energy, and 4 Small Energy. So you could carry 2 PPC, 2 LRM20, etc. But not 4 Large Laser, 4 LRM20, 4 PPC, 2 Large/2 PPC. Or you could go with 2 srm6, 2 srm4 and 6 mediums, or whatever.

The K2 could use up to UACs in the torsos, but no more Gaussapults. No MOre AC40 Jagers. Now it's more than just what are the hitboxes, but what role does each chassis fill, and doe it match your play style. It actually increases diversity, because it reduces the minmax meta.

Sized hardpoints are very important, specially if the game will continue to add lots of new mechs. We already have problems of some mechs making others obsolete (like the Shadow Hawk/Hunchback case). It would add a lot of diversity to the variants/chassis and it would guarantee the balance and healthiness of the meta game (could even make the ghost heat dispensable).

[Strum Wealh]

Odanan, on 29 November 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

Cloud-Gatherer = Hunchback with jumpjets.
(tough I think it's not the time for another Japanese hero mech...)

And, apparently, the "SP" in HBK-4SP actually stands for... Shawn Phillips!

Quote

Captain Shawn Phillips
Commander of House Liao's Phillips' Company of Ling's Battalion, 15th Dracon Regiment, Shawn Phillips is a serious and deadly MechWarrior in his Hunchback, the Retribution. Orphaned at a young age by a Davion counterattack on his home planet of Lincoln V, he was adopted by a sergeant in the repair section of the 15th Dracon Regiment, which was then stationed on Lincoln V for R & R.

Phillips learned BattleMech combat from the ground up, first helping to repair damaged 'Mechs, then rebuilding those destroyed but shipped back from the front. Phillips built his own Hunchback from spares and cannibalized parts, and so the design is unusual. The Type 20 autocannon has been replaced with two SRM six racks (15 shots each) and two arm-mounted medium lasers. This mixed bag of weaponry has caught many opponents by surprise over the years.

(Source: original TRO 3025, pg. 58)

Also, Bishop and I were all over the whole jumping Hunchback thing earlier this month, in this very thread (see here and here).

EDIT: *looks up and sees all of the new posts about hardpoint sizes, ans wonders why he didn't get the "see 'n' new posts" notification...

Edited by Strum Wealh, 29 November 2013 - 07:00 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

With regard to the hardpoint sizing, what about a straight adoption of the Class A refit limitations found in BattleTech (specifically, on page 188 of the rulebook Strategic Operations).

• "Class A Refit (Field): This kit allows players to replace one weapon with another of the same category and with the same (or fewer) critical spaces (including ammunition). For example, players may replace a medium laser with a medium pulse laser or ER medium laser, or replace an AC/10 with an LB 10-X AC, and so on."

As an example, one would be able to fit a Medium Laser into a slot that originally (that is, in the variant's stock configuration) had a Large Laser in it (e.g. replacing the LL in the arm of the CN9-AL with a ML), but one would not be able to fit a Large Laser into a slot that originally (again, in the variant's stock configuration) had a Medium Laser in it (e.g. one would not be able to replace the CT-mounted MLs on the CN9-AL with a single LL, as each of the hardpoints there are "too small").

Likewise, a LB 10-X plus one ton of ammo (a total of 7 criticals) could be replaced with an AC/10 with no ammo (7 criticals) or a Gauss Rifle with no ammo (7 criticals) or a UAC/5 and up to two tons of ammo (that is, up to a total of 7 criticals) but not by an AC/10 plus one ton of ammo (a total of 8 criticals) or a Gauss Rifle plus one ton of ammo (a total of 8 criticals) or a UAC/5 and more than two tons of ammo (that is, a total of 8 or more criticals) due to "size/volume limitations".
Alternatively: MGs could be replaced by class-2 ACs and vice-versa, but neither could be replaced with Gauss Rifles or class-5/10/20 ACs due to the space restrictions.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 29 November 2013 - 07:23 AM.