16 replies to this topic

[CrushLibs]

This will be a concept discussion but this game is not Table Top or Lore due to quirks and all the changes, so why not fix the game??

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 ???

[Alistair Winter]

You have to realize that this is an entirely academic discussion, because PGI will not even consider most of the changes you propose. Indeed, they've almost stopped balancing weapons all together, and they seem very content with how things are now. They're focusing mostly on balancing Clans vs IS mechs and giving a small nudge to the underperformers.

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.

[CDLord HHGD]

No Lore, no Mechwarrior....

[CrushLibs]

Would be nice to see what the players think and what "could" happen. i doubt PGI would put the time or money in to revamp the system. If they would then quirks would not exist to the extent they do now.

[Joseph Mallan]

I am not a fan of the hard point system. I understand its use, I just don't like it.

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.

[Nightmare1]

I've said for a while now that we need to avoid TT. I know it's lore and all, but it just doesn't translate well. MWO should draw from the novels and the MW series (especially MW4).

[process]

I'm okay with AC20 Ravens, especially on the other team.

[Joseph Mallan]

Nightmare1, on 29 May 2015 - 05:52 AM, said:

I've said for a while now that we need to avoid TT. I know it's lore and all, but it just doesn't translate well. MWO should draw from the novels and the MW series (especially MW4).

Letter of the law adherence no. But the feel of TT should be attempted to maintain.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

process, on 29 May 2015 - 05:53 AM, said:

I'm okay with AC20 Ravens, especially on the other team.

You laugh but an AC20 raven is still faster than a clan light and still has better pin point damage than any clan light that isn't using 2 cERPPC.

[CrushLibs]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 May 2015 - 04:52 AM, said:

I am not a fan of the hard point system. I understand its use, I just don't like it.

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

[Speedy Plysitkos]

new mechlab incoming...

[Nightmare1]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 May 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:

Letter of the law adherence no. But the feel of TT should be attempted to maintain.

*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.

[CrushLibs]

Titannium, on 29 May 2015 - 07:02 AM, said:

new mechlab incoming...

just a different look that changes nothing

[TLBFestus]

The last time PGI made a bold move was way, way back when they dumped Repair and Re-arm.

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.

[CDLord HHGD]

I think MWO would benefit greatly from more MMO-style mechanics. Yes, I am talking about semi-random damages (like I did for my TT RPG conversion), characters, skill trees, etc.

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.

[Mirkk Defwode]

cdlord, on 29 May 2015 - 07:28 AM, said:

I think MWO would benefit greatly from more MMO-style mechanics. Yes, I am talking about semi-random damages (like I did for my TT RPG conversion), characters, skill trees, etc.

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.

[Joseph Mallan]

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.