

Why Can't We Have Nice Things? Mechlab And Weapons Revamp
#1
Posted 29 May 2015 - 04:30 AM
MechLab:
1. Change the # for crits for weapon sizes:
1-small , 2-med , 3-Large , 4-PPC
2-AC2 , 4-AC5 , 7-AC10 , 10-AC20
1-UAC2 , 3-UAC5 , 6-UAC10 , 9-UAC20
etc etc for all weapons
2. Change the hard points to SIZED based crits (similar to MW4)
This would allow some flexibility but limit boating and or mounting too large of weapons on small mechs. like 4 Large Lasers on a 35t Panther or the AC-20 on the Raven.
Example: Mech has 2 Energy Slots # of crits allowed could vary on size and type of mech.
Awesome might have an extra crit since its primary function is energy. DW would have slightly smaller energy but larger ballistics due to its role.
Energy example: a mech has 2 energy hard points(arm) and is given 5 crits to work with. That player could mount 2 smalls , 2 med , 1 med+1 large , 1 PPC + 1 small , etc etc.
A light mech might only get 3-4 crits , assault could get 6-8 crits to work with.
All unused crits would be used for heatsinks , ammo etc etc , so in the above example the user picked 2 small lasers leaving 3 crit slots for other things.
Weapons:
1a. Change ranges on the weapons similar to MWLL to tighten up IS with Clan
Release IS-ERsmall and ERmed , put ER small lasers at 200m/225m (IS/Clan) , ER med 400m/450 , ERLL = 800/875m
2a Release Heavy lasers (clan) and X-Pulse (IS)
3a. Standardize the velocity (1000m/sec) , Pellet count (1,2,3,4) and balance ACs and UACs on both sides , release RAC-2/5 and UAC-10s for IS
4a Eliminate Gauss charge up and increase cool down
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mixing the FASA lab with MW4 lab would give PGI and players more flexibility but could be used to limit boating or abusing the system at the same time.
Why not take the best aspects of MW3 + MW4 and MWLL and use the past to improve the future of MWO ???
#2
Posted 29 May 2015 - 04:37 AM
Whether or not the other players agree with you is less important when you realize PGI would never do it anyway. Unless of course you're after a purely hypothetical discussion.
#3
Posted 29 May 2015 - 04:40 AM
#4
Posted 29 May 2015 - 04:42 AM
#5
Posted 29 May 2015 - 04:52 AM
I would like sized hard points even less.I shave off an SRM6 and ammo to put a consistent large laser or hard hitting PPC on a mech in place of a Medium laser. This system would not allow that to happen. Not a fan.
#6
Posted 29 May 2015 - 05:52 AM
#7
Posted 29 May 2015 - 05:53 AM
#8
Posted 29 May 2015 - 06:01 AM
Nightmare1, on 29 May 2015 - 05:52 AM, said:
Letter of the law adherence no. But the feel of TT should be attempted to maintain.
#10
Posted 29 May 2015 - 06:56 AM
Joseph Mallan, on 29 May 2015 - 04:52 AM, said:
I would like sized hard points even less.I shave off an SRM6 and ammo to put a consistent large laser or hard hitting PPC on a mech in place of a Medium laser. This system would not allow that to happen. Not a fan.
having fixed size hard points could even open up a semi omni pod for mechs
example Firestarter current loadout mostly energy give the arms a choice -- 4 energy crits (2 hard points) OR 4 ballistics crits( 2 hard points) OR 3 missle crits (1 hard point)
You could mix and match depending on what you want to bring
#11
Posted 29 May 2015 - 07:02 AM
#12
Posted 29 May 2015 - 07:08 AM
Joseph Mallan, on 29 May 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:
*Shrug* As someone who plays strategic board games, I just don't think that even their feel translates well into video games. The closest thing I've seen to that was the failed MWTactics. Even it didn't feel particularly like I expect TT would feel. Trying to chase something like that, to me, is akin to trying to make one thing into something it's not. In the end, you just have a lot of unhappy players on both sides of the coin.
#14
Posted 29 May 2015 - 07:22 AM
While there are some ways to completely change the game, your suggestion among them, I don't think they have the intestinal fortitude to do anything that game changing anymore.
#15
Posted 29 May 2015 - 07:28 AM
Remove quirks completely from the mechs and apply them to weapon and armor manufacturers and have gear "sets". Not totally like a MMO, but similar.
Also implement a salvage mini-game. Every game you get a token, one for a loss, two for a win, and in the front end you can spend these tokens, these s-bills if you will, on a random grab bag of goodies similar to the halloween/stocking stuffer event.
#16
Posted 29 May 2015 - 08:37 AM
cdlord, on 29 May 2015 - 07:28 AM, said:
Remove quirks completely from the mechs and apply them to weapon and armor manufacturers and have gear "sets". Not totally like a MMO, but similar.
Also implement a salvage mini-game. Every game you get a token, one for a loss, two for a win, and in the front end you can spend these tokens, these s-bills if you will, on a random grab bag of goodies similar to the halloween/stocking stuffer event.
I like the salvage idea. Actually that was pretty close to the system for MWtactics to acquire gear and how that was dolled out by buying the card packs.
#17
Posted 29 May 2015 - 08:42 AM
Nightmare1, on 29 May 2015 - 07:08 AM, said:
*Shrug* As someone who plays strategic board games, I just don't think that even their feel translates well into video games. The closest thing I've seen to that was the failed MWTactics. Even it didn't feel particularly like I expect TT would feel. Trying to chase something like that, to me, is akin to trying to make one thing into something it's not. In the end, you just have a lot of unhappy players on both sides of the coin.
I wasn't a fan of Tactics. And how something feels is going to be different from user to user. After all no two people think exactly a like.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users