Jump to content

What Should Mwo Become Down The Road?


108 replies to this topic

Poll: What direction should PGI take with MWO (149 member(s) have cast votes)

What direction should PGI take with MWO?

  1. Stay on course. (31 votes [20.81%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.81%

  2. Make a turn, go in the direction sugested. (118 votes [79.19%])

    Percentage of vote: 79.19%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Serpentbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 485 posts
  • LocationVanvikan, Norway

Posted 17 April 2015 - 12:45 PM

Edit: I made this thread some time ago, and like everything else it’s aging, and with that comes some inaccuracy as the game have aged or matured, depending on how you look at it, as well. However, instead of constantly making new threads with about the same topic, I’ll rather update this first post to better reflect the current development in the game, as long as the key elements of this post remains valid. I’ll add a “changelog” at the bottom of this post from now on.

I've added pictures visually explaining some of the functionality I'm sugesting, those are hidden in the spoiler buttons.

I’ve been playing this game for some years now, and even though the game have developed in certain aspects since I started playing, it also have a lot of unrealized potential. I also feel the game have moved a little away from the slogan PGI used to have, “MWO: A Thinking Person’s Shooter”. In this post I’ll describe how I’d like the development to make a turn from the current slightly fast pased arena shooter into a more tactical, and even strategical, oriented mech simulation.

I’ll also keep focus on the gameplay part for the game, the fighting if you like. There are other threads looking at CW between the drops elements written by other players that are great reads.

And before we kick off this post for real, I’d also like to add that I try to make as huge a move towards my target as possible without actually demanding to many and big changes to the game as it is. We can all dream, but let’s be honest. PGI is not going to rebuild the game to fit those dreams.

I like to start with some references to make you start thinking slightly in the direction I want to go with this. When MWO first started development, there was another Mechwarrior game out, the fan made Mechwarrior: Living Legends. I don’t want MWO to become this game, but LL had a few things going for it, and the most noticeable was the map size and more realistic buildup of the terrain. Now, some of you have played Living Legends, and even more have seen it on Youtube. For those who have not I’ll include this vid for reference.



As I wrote I liked the scale and realism of LL better, and things like good transition between running and walking movement was all quite interesting features. The more in depth sensors and focus on roles and classes was a plus. I could go on, but dare I just say it was more the tactical MechWarrior I imagined MWO would become as well. But to be fair, LL was not perfect by far.

Now, MWO have a lot going for it, especially the models are good, as well as most the effects and over all the graphics are better. MWO could, with few changes, easily be the best MW game ever.

My main issue with MWO is the scale, and total lack of mech roles and tactical gameplay. There are simply not enough room or time to make use of any of those. Making a 20 sec maneuver to the left is not tactics. Instead, we have nerfing of larger mechs and weapons so they can fit in the smaller arena style maps with the smaller mechs in the current rock, scissors and paper game. The new maps are bigger than before, but the new areas are not actually being used, both due to map design and objectives.

I also like the fact MWO only have mechs, not tanks and aircraft, as drivable units unlike LL. Many do not agrea with me here, but I think we should continue focusing on piloting mechs only.

As a reference to explain my toughts as well, this is from the King Crab description on Sarna.
"Its primary weapons, super-heavy autocannons mounted in its arms, can strip the armor off of any 'Mech in a few bursts." "The only reliable way to destroy a King Crab is with overwhelming numbers of heavy and assault 'Mechs, and casualties will be suffered in the attempt."

Needless to say, assaults in MWO cannot be what they are supposed to be, there is simply no way to balance the gameplay as there is no room to do any kind of real tactical maneuvers on the current maps, and there is little focus on roles and no use of cooperation between classes and roles.

Today, every single match is about making contact in the exact same location on the map and fight to the death. This is pretty much true in every game mode. The only reason one could call lights spotters is because they are faster and gets there 20 sec before the rest. They do not spot however; instead, they run circles around heavies/assaults or do occasional hit and runs. Actually, many players actually avoid targeting as much as possible. More often than not lights will have done the most damage and have more kills.

With assaults being real badass, lights would have a huge role just in locating, tracking and spotting, not running circles being the assaults worst enemy. Being able to move about without the enemy team knowing would become just as important as tracking the other team. Thus, the enemy spotters would need to be held off while key units are placed at key target areas.

I guess you know where I’m going with this, but I would like PGI to turn the ship a little, and bring us in the direction of Living Legends scale with huge maps and more role based gameplay. With mechs preforming how they should within the different classes and roles. Change the clash in the center arena maps with real terrain. Make more use of sensors.

In short I want a more sim and less arcade game. This would change the timeframe of each match, but in my opinion this is not a bad thing. Let’s take a look at how we and PGI can achieve this while not doing super big changes to the game.

So, what could be done to bring the game up to new standards?




Larger map size and new game mode with selectable drop zones that can be captured.

Having larger maps means further traveling distances, what’s the fun in that? Now, in Conquest, capping only gives points, and Assault is just about moving past the enemy instead of fighting. If you do, chances are the enemy team are not there to defend but on the other side capturing your base.
I’d like to blend Conquest with Assault into a new game mode. Where the goal is to capture the enemy base like in Assault. However, around the map there are drop points that can be captured like in Conquest. Controlling these drop points could let players drop at select locations. Then the team need to decide if they should defend these drop points, or use all mechs in attacks etc. Perhaps choosing select drop points to support a given maneuver, or to fall back into a defense. However, not keeping eyes on drop points could let the enemy drop in for a flank.

Tactics and strategy. Only downside of this would of course be the time it takes to finish a round. Sometimes it’s OK to sit down for 15 minutes just to play one round, but I’ll gladly sacrifice this for a more combat simulator kind of game and roles.




Multiple drops per round, and asymetric drop numbers.
Above I wrote about DZ’s that could be captured, and I realize the current game only lets you drop once. But the multi mech drop and weight limits from CW could be used in larger scale quick play maches as well. However, I would like to make a few changes. First I would make a 300 ton drop limit, then up the max number of mechs droped to 8. That’s 8 35 ton mechs or 3 100 ton mechs per player.

One match could then be 96 35 ton mechs against 36 100 ton mechs, with maximum 12 players ingame at any time, although I’d would perhaps prefer less drops and more players ingame if the maps were big enough. Each drop would also let players choose from the mech bay freely, as long as the tonnage limit is not exceeded, and mech have not already been destroyed this match. Trial mechs would have unlimited number of drops within the max 8 drops and 300 ton limit.

Another thing to consider is the Clan tech. We all know how Clan mechs should be a lot more powerfull than IS mechs, but fewer in numbers. Claners would sometimes need to make use of updated IS chassis, like the newly released IIC’s. So, to balance the game to account for tech differences I’d like to give all mechs efficiency points (EP) based on a base variable and to some degree actual game data, and then have a maximum EP for each game.

If we had an Efficiency Point max value of 400, where the Clan Direwolf maxes out with the highest number for a single mech at 250, and the IS Atlas could get an value of 130 a single player would not be able to drop with more than one Direwolf each match, whereas an IS player could still drop three times with an Atlas. The King Crab could be given a value of 200, opening for two drops.

These numbers are just examples, but doing something like this could make the game more like mechwarrior should be and in line with the BT universe where assault mechs were really powerfull but relatively few in numbers.

Max tonnage and EP values could also be different from map to map and/or game mode to game mode. Or even have some degree of randomization to force changes between other ways similar matches.

As a team is about to lose, dropping in an Atlas as last line of defense at home base could just turn the tide.

So, just by making the maps bigger, having more objectives, and opening for more drop options per match, the classes and roles in Mechwarrior could really shine where they were intended to, while each match would be more unreliable and more tactical driven.

In "quick drop" people would be able to drop with both IS and Clan mechs. In CW they would be locked to either Clan or IS depending on their contracts. This system would scale for both.

Yes, at the cost of 15 minute drop in matches. Then again, if this is your flavor, go play Hawken.




Active and passive radar, Sensors, and how they could work.
Kicking down the lights from the role as Assaullts, as some of them aparently are today, they would need other objectives.

My thought is still not to change existing key functionality to much at once. However, a few touches here and there could make for some extended use of scouting, tracking and intelligence gathering roles, with increased bonuses for playing out those roles. In addition, I do realize such changes might break with some rules here and there, but I also believe the game could benefit somewhat from them.

Note that this can be considered phase one, but I think it will buff the value of teamwork a little. It might not be lore, but I try thinking gameplay as well.

All mechs starts match with radar in passive mode.
- No enemy mechs will be targeted before radar is activated or data is relayed from other friendlies.
- When a mech is scanned by enemy radar it will know the direction of the enemy mech, but not the range.
Spoiler


Active Radar With basic sensors, can be carried by all mechs:
- Would track all enemy mechs not hidden by obstacles.
- Range equals current sensor range.
- All enemies would show up as red triangles on minimap like today, for mech with active radar.
- The mech can target and lock for its own weapons, and get targeting data.
- Enemy positions are relied to friendlies, but as dots only and with no targeting data.
- The mech cannot guide friendly mechs weapon systems, like LRM.

- When a mech is scanned by enemy radar it will know the direction of the enemy mech, but not the range. This includes mechs with longer radar range or mechs protected by ECM.
- The minimap shows a line with the direction to the source of the radar.
Spoiler


Active Radar with advanced sensors, can be carried by certain mechs (like the raven):
- All features of Active Radar with extended range.
- Enemy positions are relied to friendlies with full targeting data.
- Equipped mech relay targeting data to friendly mechs and can guide friendly weapon systems like LRM.
- Mechs with ECM still shows up on map, but data collection and weapons guidance is prevented.
Spoiler


- When two mechs with advanced sensors are scanned by enemy radar they can triangulate the source location.
- Triangulated data is relayed to friendlies and show enemy on minimap as a dot.
- This also works with radar in passive mode.
- Triangulated mech cannot be targeted.
Spoiler


ECM (How ECM should work can be discussed, but I use the existing ECM functionality as base)
- Blocks enemy radar like today, no targeting possible.
- Will not block radars with advanced sensors, but will prevent locks. Dots on enemy minimap.
- Counter mode will break enemy ECM within its bubble, nullifying it.
- Prevents enemy units within range to relay data to friendlies.

Tag laser
- Targets enemy mechs for own lock on, even with passive radar and if enemy is protected by ECM.
- Do not collect data about targeted mech.
- All mechs can relay data for lock on to friendly mechs as long as the targeted mech is not in enemy ECM bubble.
- Mech with Advanced Sensors can relay data for lock on, even if the targeted mech is in enemy ECM bubble.
- Tag laser is only visible trough night vision.

Spoiler


NARC
- Lets all mechs lock on to NARCed enemy, even with their radar in passive mode.
- If NARCed mech is protected by ECM, mechs with passive radar will not be able to target.
- If NARCed mech is protected by ECM, active radars will be able to pick up on the signal from NARC and lock on to target.
- Mechs with Standard Sensors would not be able to relay targeting data from NARCed enemy with ECM to others.
- Mechs with Advanced Sensors will be able to relay targeting from ECM protected enemies to friendly mechs as long as the NARC is active.
- NARC do not provide any data about mech.




Environmental hazards and weather
In addition, I’d like environmental hazards. No, not earthquakes and such, but walking in lava should not be healthy for your mech.

Make nights pitch black forcing night or heat vision.

Have blizzards with close to zero visibility forcing heat vision, still with low visibility. Powered down mechs looses their heat signature making them increasingly more difficult to spot over a period of 60 sec. etc. Cold objects do not show before 50m away, active mechs up to 400 etc. Just play with things like this, some might work, others not so much.

I think this could be a good place to start.

I’m just dropping thoughts as I write here. Might be going over board, but there you go….

Changelog
19.01.2016: Brushed up the post to be up to date relative to the current state of the game, but only smaller changes.

20.10.2016: Added images showing how radars could work, with passive, active and advanced sensors. Press spoiler buttons in the Radar and Sensors section. Did some changes in the multiple/asymetric drops section.

21.10.2016: Added image showing triangulation of enemies using passive radars with advanced sensors and image showing usage of the TAG laser.

08.04.2017: Changed the LL video with a newer one showing the map landscape and layout better. As well as weapons and explosions.

Edited by Serpentbane, 26 October 2018 - 06:18 AM.


#2 Serpentbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 485 posts
  • LocationVanvikan, Norway

Posted 17 April 2015 - 01:27 PM

And feel free to post what you like best with MWO, and what you liked with LL. Witch elements from both worlds should MWO have?

#3 TheArisen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 6,040 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 17 April 2015 - 06:53 PM

I voted "make a turn". I'd just say they shouldn't copy & paste LL. They should just see what LL did well and incorporate into the game. For example, we need more Alpine sized maps, but done in a way so that they don't end up being one dimensional (victory hill).

#4 Serpentbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 485 posts
  • LocationVanvikan, Norway

Posted 18 April 2015 - 01:38 AM

View PostTheArisen, on 17 April 2015 - 06:53 PM, said:

I voted "make a turn". I'd just say they shouldn't copy & paste LL. They should just see what LL did well and incorporate into the game. For example, we need more Alpine sized maps, but done in a way so that they don't end up being one dimensional (victory hill).

Just to be clear, I'l not saying they should make it the same LL. I just want it to be a larger more ambisious mech sim than the current arena box shooter.
- Larger maps
- More use of mech roles and classes
- More use of sensors
- More tactical teamplay
- More sim

#5 Catra Lanis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 1,182 posts
  • LocationSweden

Posted 18 April 2015 - 02:36 AM

I'd like more sim too, unfortunately that isn't going to happen and not for technical reasons. It isn't the 80's or 90's anymore. Gone are the days where people could sit down and read a manual the size of a small novel, gone are the days where people accepted the fact that you wouldn't top the leaderboards within the first week but realized that if they had some patience they would be rewarded tenfold by immersive gameplay.

If it isn't hop in and pwn face within an hour it's never going to be a commercial success these days.

#6 FlipOver

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 1,135 posts
  • LocationIsland Continent of Galicia, Poznan

Posted 18 April 2015 - 04:09 AM

I bet there are hundreds if not thousands of people who want something like this for MWO:
Spoiler - I might go a bit crazy on some of the points but if it is like a wish-list, why not? :P

1 - Story based gameplay
2 - Larger maps
3 - Destructible environment
4 - Ability to either pilot or have AI driving other kind of vehicles (tanks, ships, fighters, etc)
5 - Dog fights above a battle ground with the possibility to hit the ground "troops"
6 - Ability to jump out of a mech and run on the battlefield using buildings or their internal structures as a hiding point to scout or snipe
7 - A black market of mech parts
8 - Access to labs where each faction can use their expertise to develop new mods (using the resources captured on planets), either for weapons, armor, mines, etc
9 - Be able to fight not just for a piece of a planet but also a piece of space around the planet, creating choke-points to access the planet
10 - A true economy between IS / Factions / Clans
11 - Solo and group campaigns
12 - Access to travel in the IS and visit any IS planet either for research or military reasons (considering any constrains regarding access to any planet - Not same faction - might have a chance to negotiate your access if your faction and the planets faction are in speaking terms, and so on)

All in all, I wish this game would be so much more than it is right now and I know that, down the road, if PGI really wants that, it will be possible to have even if it takes 5-10 years.

#7 Serpentbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 485 posts
  • LocationVanvikan, Norway

Posted 18 April 2015 - 10:01 AM

View PostCatra Lanis, on 18 April 2015 - 02:36 AM, said:

I'd like more sim too, unfortunately that isn't going to happen and not for technical reasons. It isn't the 80's or 90's anymore. Gone are the days where people could sit down and read a manual the size of a small novel, gone are the days where people accepted the fact that you wouldn't top the leaderboards within the first week but realized that if they had some patience they would be rewarded tenfold by immersive gameplay.

If it isn't hop in and pwn face within an hour it's never going to be a commercial success these days.

If we compare to ther FPS' MWO is heading towards Call og Duty, I'd rather see it going in the direction of ARMA, even if it must touch BF on the way there.

If ppl like CoD like games, we have Hawken and all kind of ****...

#8 Wildstreak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 5,154 posts

Posted 21 April 2015 - 01:43 PM

Quote

WHAT SHOULD MWO BECOME DOWN THE ROAD?

Fun? :mellow:

#9 Mister Raven

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Location13/f/cali

Posted 21 April 2015 - 06:52 PM

nothings gonna change. instead we got ... ghost heat aaannd quirks to fix ghost heat aaand balancing of quirks aaaand generic canyon maps with steep canyon walls to keep us boxed in.


i have like 2000 hours in LL. I heard they hired some one from the living legends team. what they should do now is hire everyone from the living legends team as lead developers and steer this ship in the right direction.

heh.

PGI should just port some of the MWLL maps to MWO. with permission of course.

Edited by Mister Raven, 21 April 2015 - 06:59 PM.


#10 50 50

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,145 posts
  • LocationTo Nova or not to Nova. That is the question.

Posted 21 April 2015 - 06:53 PM

While I haven't played Living Legends I can see the appeal of what you are referring to from that small clip.
Not counting all the things that were going on prior, I believe the development of the game is coming along nicely these days.
More and more mechs.
More maps.... and look at Emerald Taiga. That's a beautiful map.
Continued development of Community Warfare, more features getting added as we go along.

I don't think it would take much to put in a couple of features to add to the immersion and there have been plenty of good suggestions in the forums.
An extra layer or two for Community Warfare and we'd be there.

#11 Serpentbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 485 posts
  • LocationVanvikan, Norway

Posted 26 April 2015 - 02:49 AM

View Post50 50, on 21 April 2015 - 06:53 PM, said:

While I haven't played Living Legends I can see the appeal of what you are referring to from that small clip.
Not counting all the things that were going on prior, I believe the development of the game is coming along nicely these days.
More and more mechs.
More maps.... and look at Emerald Taiga. That's a beautiful map.
Continued development of Community Warfare, more features getting added as we go along.

I don't think it would take much to put in a couple of features to add to the immersion and there have been plenty of good suggestions in the forums.
An extra layer or two for Community Warfare and we'd be there.

Although it’s true there has been some positive development lately, and don’t get me wrong, I really like MWO, none of these changes does anything to bring MWO from the small scale arena shooter to a larger scale mechwarrior simulation.

Now, some people like the arena style gameplay, just as some people like CoD better than BF and ARMA. However, in my opinion giving the game a larger scale allows us to make use of much more features. Recon, scouting, electronic warfare etc. could play a much larger part of the gameplay, opening for tactics and team play witch is impossible in today’s game.
In addition, instead of hyper balancing mechs, one could play out the real strengths and weaknesses of each class, role and individual mech type. Get rid of the rock, paper and scissors kind of gameplay we have today, where lights are the assaults worst enemy. Get rid of ghost heat and other stupid things. An assault is tons and tons of badass you just do not want to end up in front of, and this should be true in the game.

I do however like individual mech quirks though. Some mechs were built with certain capabilities in mind. The hunch should for example be able to carry weapons in RT witch other mediums cannot, and at least with less penalties.

PGI’s slogan for this game is “a thinking person’s shooter”, and that is what I want. More tactics, more planning, a need for better team play, and the need to adapt during a mach.

The exact changes in gameplay and mechs are difficult to lay out up front, but the scaling with much larger maps and natural terrain should be the first step.

#12 DrSlamastika

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 702 posts
  • LocationSlovakia

Posted 26 April 2015 - 03:19 AM

In the first place they should fix crashes and disconnets . . . then everything else!

Edited by DrSlamastika, 26 April 2015 - 03:24 AM.


#13 AkoolPopTart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 171 posts
  • LocationApartment

Posted 26 April 2015 - 08:08 AM

Things I'd personally like to see:

A store page on the website!

Cheaper mechs: $60 for a one mech is ridiculous and a complete waste of money. Yeah, I know you get a bunch of other useless stuff with it, but all I want is the mech with default weapons based on Battletech lore. For instance: A stock Mad Cat, according to Sarna.net, carries 2 ER LRG Lasers, 2 ER MED Lasers, 1 MED Pulse Laser, 2 LRM-20 missile racks, and 2 machine guns. Just give me that. That is at least worth $20.

Customizable Trial mechs and Starter weapons: Trails are okay at giving new players a taste of what gameplay is like, but it seriously restricts their ability to learn to actually play the game. A majority of experienced players are likely using machines that they built themselves which are equipped with way better weapons than any Trial mech could hope to possess. Starter weapons should be made available, for free if I might add, and Trials should be customizable so that new/experienced players can experiment with different builds without having to dish out cash for a Gauss rifle that they can't even use. The entire franchise is practically built upon the idea of being able to customize your own mech after all. So you could at least give us some low - medium grade weapons to use.

AI: I've seen people requesting AI controlled helicopters and tanks to fight against in matches, but after blowing dozens of Apache's, Chinooks, and heavily armored Hinds out of the sky with relative ease in the most recent Armored Core games, the only thing that would be remotely interesting to fight against is another mech. There should be at least some sort of wave mode gametype where 4-8 players can fight against multiple AI mechs and a variety of other vehicles as the game progresses. AI has become a lot smarter over the years, and I think it'd work with well in this kind of game.

Edited by AkoolPopTart, 26 April 2015 - 08:12 AM.


#14 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 26 April 2015 - 09:02 AM

What I want to see is spread all across these forums, but it equates to using material originally developed for BattleTech, ported into MWO, or at least a web site you can log into, make plans, and have those plans coincide with operations in the simulator... MOAR BattleTech in my MWO. I'm not talking RNGs in the combat simulator, I'm talking the meta-game, where we start with building merc units fresh, but it requires some math to keep them running, multiple levels of people playing the game, from those who just want to do combat all the way up to government heads, contracts the way they're done in Merc's Handbook and Merc's Handbook: 3055, the ability to travel in interstellar space over time, rather than being instantly 'there' for the fight, though a LOT more quickly than one week equals one 30 Light Year jump. I want to see strategic mission planning, tactical drops and execution of those missions, and a win-loss that is not based on killing each other more than accomplishing objectives based on the negotiated contract. I want to see repair and replenishment, I want to be able to order the things I need to keep my unit going, parts and sundries, ammo and armor, weapons, actuators, etc., on a market built for us.

I don't care if it would be a LONG way down the road, I just want to see that's where PGI wants to go, and I want them to tell us that's where they want to go, and then pick the first five things and put them in The Plan and in a Command Chair and tell us how far out they ESTIMATE they will have each of them done. As the last one or few are being done, I want them to put up the next five, and so on. I want to want to continue playing this game, I want to enjoy it, and I want to throw money at PGI for doing it, but while I may throw a smidge of money, for MC at them every so often, I will throw much more for PvE/single-player or single-group story missions, for story missions where each side is working on missions or contracts opposing one-another, etc.

Bring it on, PGI... let's have it, and let's make it good.

#15 Serpentbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 485 posts
  • LocationVanvikan, Norway

Posted 26 April 2015 - 01:09 PM

View PostDrSlamastika, on 26 April 2015 - 03:19 AM, said:

In the first place they should fix crashes and disconnets . . . then everything else!

I've never had much problems with game crashes or disconects myself, but such issues should have high priority, yes.

#16 DrunkenAntichrist

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 29 posts
  • LocationWaiting in ambush somewhere

Posted 26 April 2015 - 02:16 PM

If I had any hope of it ever getting seen, I could draft a design doc out of the ideas here, heh.

#17 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 10,966 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 26 April 2015 - 11:03 PM

MWO needs MWLL's:
  • passive/active sensor dynamics
  • base capture mode
  • bigger maps
  • more flexible weapon grouping


#18 Fire for Effect

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 5
  • Mercenary Rank 5
  • 583 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 27 April 2015 - 03:05 AM

MWO:
-much better looking Mechs, Alex is probably by far the most talented guy in their company
(wonder if he ever reads that)
the guys and gals implementing his concepts art are also not bad apart from a few glitches like strange walking animations of many clan mechs.
-has a Mech Lab (still undecided if the approach of LL might not actually better since it is detrimental to munkinism min-maxing)


Living Legends:
better AND more Maps
better Game Mechanics
better Physics (trees can be knocked down and roll down the hill with much mayham to be heard from afar for example)
better Balance
more Vehice Types AND weapons
better Electronic Warfare
better Jump Jet Mechanics
better Game Mode (terrain control)

#19 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 27 April 2015 - 03:17 AM

View PostDrunkenAntichrist, on 26 April 2015 - 02:16 PM, said:

If I had any hope of it ever getting seen, I could draft a design doc out of the ideas here, heh.
I already did this, about five years before I even knew PGI existed; in fact, I was in the middle of updating it when the announcement for this game came about. I've shared that doc three or four times on these forums, two or three times in PMs and Email with PGI and, of course, it's been ignored every time. Of course, my document was more along the lines of an MMORPG, but it included some things that might just have made this game stand out from previous MechWarrior work.

#20 AkoolPopTart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 171 posts
  • LocationApartment

Posted 27 April 2015 - 05:08 AM

View PostFire for Effect, on 27 April 2015 - 03:05 AM, said:

(wonder if he ever reads that)


Kiss ass





9 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 9 guests, 0 anonymous users