14 replies to this topic

[TELEFORCE]

Most people are talking about MASC failure locking up leg actuators, impeding mobility or causing the 'mech to completely stop.

In the current BattleTech Total Warfare ruleset, MASC still has a chance to do that, but it's not fixed like it used to be years ago. Instead, a critical hit is rolled on each leg, making it possible that something else besides a leg actuator will take damage due to the stresses placed on the leg. So anything in the leg can be damaged, like jump jets, or even ammunition.

For the upcoming Shadow Cat and Executioner, we only have to worry about losing leg actuators and jump jets. For any other 'mech that can mount MASC, just be careful where you put that ammunition, or else you may lose your 'mech quite early in-game (CASE and a standard engine would help with that, but then you'd only have half a 'mech left anyway.)

...Well, that's if the developers go that route. Currently we don't have any critical hit effects from damaged leg actuators, and we're waiting to see how they're going to implement MASC, which Russ said we'd find out this month.

[Lily from animove]

I doubt they do any damage or chance to malfunction. becasue mobility and HP are keys in MWo, and if implemented like that, it will be a dead concept no one will use.

They either gonna make it like JJ's having a short time of additional speed, or just make some additionl heat, like it was in MW3 or increase base heat as currently running additional heat does.

[Joseph Mallan]

TELEFORCE, on 13 April 2015 - 02:45 AM, said:

Most people are talking about MASC failure locking up leg actuators, impeding mobility or causing the 'mech to completely stop.

In the current BattleTech Total Warfare ruleset, MASC still has a chance to do that, but it's not fixed like it used to be years ago. Instead, a critical hit is rolled on each leg, making it possible that something else besides a leg actuator will take damage due to the stresses placed on the leg. So anything in the leg can be damaged, like jump jets, or even ammunition.

For the upcoming Shadow Cat and Executioner, we only have to worry about losing leg actuators and jump jets. For any other 'mech that can mount MASC, just be careful where you put that ammunition, or else you may lose your 'mech quite early in-game (CASE and a standard engine would help with that, but then you'd only have half a 'mech left anyway.)

...Well, that's if the developers go that route. Currently we don't have any critical hit effects from damaged leg actuators, and we're waiting to see how they're going to implement MASC, which Russ said we'd find out this month.

I hardly used MASC so I didn't know that had changed. I have had MASC lock up one to many times on the first use. SO if PGI uses the New failure rules... I may be interested in using it here. For Science of course.

[Kuritaclan]

Lily from animove, on 13 April 2015 - 03:38 AM, said:

I doubt they do any damage or chance to malfunction. becasue mobility and HP are keys in MWo, and if implemented like that, it will be a dead concept no one will use.

They either gonna make it like JJ's having a short time of additional speed, or just make some additionl heat, like it was in MW3 or increase base heat as currently running additional heat does.

I do not think so - breaking the leg could be a possibility, if the masc just have a normal usage zone, for a couple of seconds, and a second zone you could get into your own risk using it longer than for your own goods, which has a chance to do the damage over time or even break your leg. The implementation is not full BT lore conform, but in the case of mwo the best solution to provide a good usage over the full time of a match, and also a "at your own risk case". Like the Jam Mechanic of a uac or the override function for the shutdown.

Implementation like the TT rule or the BT lore description, would make it a no go item, since you have at first usage a chance that something goes horrible wrong, what is with bound item to the mech and no chance to unequip a dead part eating tonnage. So in the end MASC needs an adaption to mwo anyhow.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 13 April 2015 - 04:50 AM.

[FupDup]

I'd rather scrap things like this entirely and just do something along the lines of:

FupDup, on 11 April 2015 - 04:28 PM, said:

If they don't go with heat, I suppose that internal leg damage based on the duration of use would be workable.

The key here is that the damage should be PERCENTAGE of your maximum leg internals, not a specific pre-set value. A pre-set value would poop on lower-weight mechs using MASC while high-weight mechs like the Gladiator would just be slapped on the wrist. Using % of total leg HP keeps it more "fair" across the board.

As said above, the damage should also scale based on how long you've had MASC activated. There should be a certain "grace" period where you get no penalty, and then using MASC after that window will cause damage that slowly scales up as you keep it toggled on. If you leave MASC toggled off long enough, the damage window would reset.

The intervals at which penalties kick in or scale up should be specific amounts of time rather than some kind of random decision, and there should be a bar in your HUD to indicate how long you've got until the penalty scales higher.

[Lily from animove]

Kuritaclan, on 13 April 2015 - 04:40 AM, said:

I do not think so - breaking the leg could be a possibility, if the masc just have a normal usage zone, for a couple of seconds, and a second zone you could get into your own risk using it longer than for your own goods, which has a chance to do the damage over time or even break your leg. The implementation is not full BT lore conform, but in the case of mwo the best solution to provide a good usage over the full time of a match, and also a "at your own risk case". Like the Jam Mechanic of a uac or the override function for the shutdown.

Implementation like the TT rule or the BT lore description, would make it a no go item, since you have at first usage a chance that something goes horrible wrong, what is with bound item to the mech and no chance to unequip a dead part eating tonnage. So in the end MASC needs an adaption to mwo anyhow.

No, people would, like alphastriking Nova's cry about how stupid it is and it would be changed. even if its the people using it wrong. So PGI kinda has to make it "suicide proof" or they start another flame war vs themselves. It's ot 1998 anymore, games have to be easy.

Edited by Lily from animove, 14 April 2015 - 07:58 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 13 April 2015 - 04:42 AM, said:

I'd rather scrap things like this entirely and just do something along the lines of:

I'd rather see if it can work according to lore first, then adjust to fit what will work.

[Kuritaclan]

Lily from animove, on 13 April 2015 - 05:47 AM, said:

No people, would like alphastriking Nova's cry about how stupid it is and it would be changed. even if its the people using it wrong. So PGI kinda has to make it "suicice proof" or they start another flame war vs themselves.it's ot 1998 anymore, games have to be easy.

Unfortunately yes.

Ok the other way it could be done - would be a new U.I. This U.I. has to provide in the mechlab everytime you chose a masc equip mech the annoying notifiction that tell you how mask work and what it could mean if you use it, with an uncheck option, that you no longer wanna have this tooltip. - But as long as the U.I. does not provide such tooltips with an individual savespace for notificitions you wanna see and others you have read, and unsubscribed, PGI needs to go the save route, so "new player experince" isn't **** up.

[topgun505]

If you want it working according to lore then you have to implement leg crits being able to be hit (which I'm not against).

But if they are going to go to that trouble then they may as well implement engine crits as well.

And, taking it a step further, it wouldn't take much to implement ammo explosions due to excessive heat

And the list goes on ...

Joseph Mallan, on 13 April 2015 - 05:56 AM, said:

I'd rather see if it can work according to lore first, then adjust to fit what will work.

[QuantumButler]

None of these overly complex things will matter, they will likely use the most simple implementation possible [Sprint Key with heat buildup or a fuel bar like jjs] and ignore any remotely even possibly interesting mechanics.

Minimally Viable is the keyword here folks.

[Kuritaclan]

QuantumButler, on 13 April 2015 - 06:31 AM, said:

None of these overly complex things will matter, they will likely use the most simple implementation possible [Sprint Key with heat buildup or a fuel bar like jjs] and ignore any remotely even possibly interesting mechanics.

Minimally Viable is the keyword here folks.

Maybee, maybee not. If they do so, then it is a wasted potential, what in first place will make the game outstanding to others, but in second just is no deep enough to really bring the glow in the eyes of all BT Fans, who are the main sponsors of this game.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 13 April 2015 - 06:39 AM.

[Khobai]

damaged leg actuators do NOTHING in MWO so why would PGI use the MASC failure rules from tabletop? MASC would have zero downside if they did that. That would be fail.

the most likely way MASC will work in MWO is that it will have an on/off toggle and a time limit it can stay on for and if you exceed that time limit you will take leg internal damage and eventually destroy your own legs. turning MASC off will gradually refresh the time limit.

Quote

If you want it working according to lore then you have to implement leg crits being able to be hit (which I'm not against).

no thanks theres already little enough reason to play lights as is. leg actuator crits would make it even easier to strip their mobility away.

Although I could maybe get behind the idea of leg actuator crits being added if time to kill was drastically increased across the board, particularly for lights. But TTK is a complete joke right now and lights dont need anymore disadvantages.

Edited by Khobai, 13 April 2015 - 08:27 AM.

[QuantumButler]

Kuritaclan, on 13 April 2015 - 06:39 AM, said:

Maybee, maybee not. If they do so, then it is a wasted potential, what in first place will make the game outstanding to others, but in second just is no deep enough to really bring the glow in the eyes of all BT Fans, who are the main sponsors of this game.

MWO doesn't do "outstanding", it does "minimally viable"

[Paigan]

Lily from animove, on 13 April 2015 - 03:38 AM, said:

I doubt they do any damage or chance to malfunction. becasue mobility and HP are keys in MWo, and if implemented like that, it will be a dead concept no one will use.

They either gonna make it like JJ's having a short time of additional speed, or just make some additionl heat, like it was in MW3 or increase base heat as currently running additional heat does.

once again I simple quote what Lily wrote.

A complete mobility failure is pretty moronic, even in TT (like most of TT's rules, TBH)
No engineer or army would employ such a broken technology.

It has to be some temporary penalty, not a complete GAME OVER.