50 replies to this topic

[MagnusEffect]

This is more of an extension of another poll:

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

PLEASE READ EXPLANATION FIRST:

I just thought of this the other day. Many veteran players are concerned that customization will bring with it balancing issues to multiplayer. While it is very true that in a single player game (or possibly co-op), a player should be allowed the enjoyment of a customizing mechanic, in multiplayer it opens a whole other can of worms in terms of balancing gameplay and keeping things fun for everyone. To combat this, many have suggested hardset design variants created to be balanced by the developers (not all "Canon" designs were balanced guys... I played BT too... let's leave that out of this discussion for gameplay purposes).

My suggestion is that we have hardset variants (as close to Canon as is feasible) that allow for different playstyles, BUT... allow players to purchase (in-game credits i mean) "refit kits". Explaination below:

A refit kit could be an overhaul of the mech systems that still keeps it close to canon (maybe some "limited editions" could be less so... still balanced of course), but allows a player to have some choice in how their mech should handle. By all rights, a player should be allowed to swap a Dragon's autocannon out for a PPC and drop a secondary weapon (or two) out for more armor and/or heatsinks. The key here is that a developer approved refit kit would be a very easy solution to this that allows a player to customize his favorite model of mech WHILE STILL KEEPING THINGS BALANCED! The difference between this and just adding more variants is that it allows for canon designs to be purchased at "normal" prices but then also allows players to really dote on (i.e. tweak) a particular mech they really love. This also has the added bonus of allowing a refit kit actually change the appearance of a mech based on its new weapon loadout while keeping the coding relatively easy for programers!

I think THIS is probably the best solution in terms of customization vs. gameplay balance.

EDIT: Maybe the bigger problem is not the issue of "balance", but on how mechs should "behave". Obviously, ALL players want "balanced" gameplay that creates FUN gameplay. Rather, I think the bigger arguement is whether or not a hunchback should always "behave" like a hunchback or if it should be allowed to be customized to the extent of behaving like a phoenix hawk or ryoken/stormcrow.

For those who don't know, a Hunchback (a walking AC/20) has VASTLY different armaments to a phoenix hawk (mostly a variably sized laser boat with jumpjets). Older games (MW2/MW3) made no distinction of this which was (in my opinion) sort of boring in multiplayer. MW4 *tried* to fix this issue, but with only some success.

Another simpler way of putting it:
Does it seem practical to make a Hunchback behave like a Phoenix Hawk? Before you answer, let me ask you this:
Does it seem practical to make a Honda Civic behave like a 4x4 Jeep?

For this reason, I personally don't support FULL customization.

Edited by MagnusEffect, 30 November 2011 - 12:31 PM.

[Odin]

Voted for full custom - balancing, which is a necessity, can be done be other means.

[Kargush]

Canon variants, with some pre-made "packages" available for in-game currency.

And to the fiery pits of Lucifer's realm with balance tweaks. Some mechs are better than others, I can live with it.

[Haeso]

kargush, on 30 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

Canon variants, with some pre-made "packages" available for in-game currency.

And to the fiery pits of Lucifer's realm with balance tweaks. Some mechs are better than others, I can live with it.

Balance shouldn't be done with making everything equal arbitrarily. It should come from it's BV amount and it's C-Bill pricetag, complete with an economy of risk/reward. Imo.

[SwordofLight]

Ok, I understand the argument against customs, because in BT tourneys, you'll often see mechs that are built as crit monsters. In fact, my beloved Christine II was just such a mech - twin LB10X AC, twin Streak SRM6 racks, 2 ML - an alpha from that mech would almost guarantee a crit somewhere on the enemy mech. With all the WoT players whining about how squishy their tanks are, I can imagine WM players QQing over how their gyro got dinged with a through-armor crit (THATS BS! YOU HACKER! etc.)

Three things, though. One, its not BT without customization. Building your own thing on an existing mech, building your own mech, is half the game. This is robot wars - build it, and set it against other players designs. Thats the game, and its not a game I want to play without it.

Second, customization allows for play styles. Maybe you're a blitzer - well, do you favor speed over durability? Do you favor close range over long? Ammo over energy? You want jump jets with that? ECM? You a sniper? What kind? LRM boat like the Longbow? PPC boat like the Awesome, AC like the Rifleman? What? You want a mix of that? Pull out the LL on the Rifleman and put something new...

Three: In WoT, I drive a KV. You know the moment you look at me what my capabilities are. I've got the refrigerator welded to my hull, so I can either mount the 107 or the 152. I could possibly mount the short 122, but thats sort of pointless. I'm slow. I have a slow turret turn.
Thats the KV, and you know what to do with me. But, I hove into your targetting reticle, I'm a football on legs. Oh, a Stalker. Ok ... uh ... well, its big. Which means ... well, there are two cannons mounted on its sides, and SRM racks. Great, its a custom. Ok, well, lets see what that thing can do to me. Customization means uncertainty - it means a much more challenging game, because you dont know what you're up against. In MW:Mercs you couldnt even see the changes made, the way we ran our BT campaign, you couldnt see weapon modifications unless they took up more than one crit slot.

Theres gotta be customization, or this game is just another Rockem Sockem Robots game.

-Don

[Black Sunder]

I'm all about full customs. The whiners whining about balance need to look up what BV is and how it relates to things in the TT game. THAT was the balance.

[Haeso]

Sword_of_Light, on 30 November 2011 - 09:06 AM, said:

Theres gotta be customization, or this game is just another Rockem Sockem Robots game.

-Don

I agree with the overall gist of your post, but I must take exception that there's somehow something wrong with more Rockem Sockem Robots!

[MagnusEffect]

Haeso, on 30 November 2011 - 08:41 AM, said:

Balance shouldn't be done with making everything equal arbitrarily. It should come from it's BV amount and it's C-Bill pricetag, complete with an economy of risk/reward. Imo.

what makes you think these mutually exclusive? you can still allow some form of customization AND a BV calculator. has already been done in the TT and would easily translate (at least the formulas and computations) to a videogame

to be fair, the issue of hardset variants vs customization should probably be more about whether or not a hunchback can/should behave like a hunchback, NOT like a phoenix hawk or ryoken/stormcrow.

Edited by MagnusEffect, 30 November 2011 - 09:35 AM.

[Odin]

Black Sunder, on 30 November 2011 - 09:09 AM, said:

I'm all about full customs. The whiners whining about balance need to look up what BV is and how it relates to things in the TT game. THAT was the balance.

Than go play TT.
This is gonna be PC only sorry man, balance is needed.


Seriously, want to start something? Bored?

edit//

no, Im not offended, but we just can make without another TTvsPC boaters_or_not flame war.

Edited by Odin, 30 November 2011 - 09:17 AM.

[Kudzu]

Odin, on 30 November 2011 - 09:16 AM, said:

Than go play TT.
This is gonna be PC only sorry man, balance is needed.

Actually, TT is fairly well balanced. More than any of the past MW's anyway.

[Black Sunder]

Odin, on 30 November 2011 - 09:16 AM, said:

Than go play TT.
This is gonna be PC only sorry man, balance is needed.


Seriously, want to start something? Bored?

edit//

no, Im not offended, but we just can make without another TTvsPC boaters_or_not flame war.

I am bored actually but only because I want to see some actual gameplay elements stated by the devs instead of concept art.

All i'm saying is that the BV value of a custom is probably going to be far more than a stock mech. That should be a good indicator for how good that mech can be and should be the primary balance factor in determining matches.

[Odin]

Kudzu, on 30 November 2011 - 09:20 AM, said:

Actually, TT is fairly well balanced. More than any of the past MW's anyway.

Doesn't matter Kudzu, PC isn't.
Or was not to this point.
Completely different media(PC)=new ways are needed. Devs think around that way. And we had this discussions for weeks now, all is been said.

[LyssAbyss]

Haeso, on 30 November 2011 - 08:41 AM, said:

Balance shouldn't be done with making everything equal arbitrarily. It should come from it's BV amount and it's C-Bill pricetag, complete with an economy of risk/reward. Imo.

^ I love this man.
It is going to have full custom though, its a battletech game after all, and it will be balanced. Its like its their job to work on that kind of stuff or something, trust the developers it'll be fine.

[Haeso]

MagnusEffect, on 30 November 2011 - 09:14 AM, said:

what makes you think these mutually exclusive? you can still allow some form of customization AND a BV calculator. has already been done in the TT and would easily translate (at least the formulas and computations) to a videogame

to be fair, the issue of hardest variants vs customization should probably be more about whether or not a hunchback behaving like a hunchback, NOT like a phoenix hawk or ryoken/stormcrow.

I actually am for customization. My point was that customization shouldn't be balanced by homogenization of all the equipment. If someone wants to have a 2 ERPCC light clan mech, he can have the battle value of an atlas in his 35 ton 'Mech. (Looking at you, Adder.)

The game balanced very well with BV!

Edited by Haeso, 30 November 2011 - 09:30 AM.

[Odin]

Black Sunder, on 30 November 2011 - 09:24 AM, said:

I am bored actually but only because I want to see some actual gameplay elements stated by the devs instead of concept art.

All i'm saying is that the BV value of a custom is probably going to be far more than a stock mech. That should be a good indicator for how good that mech can be and should be the primary balance factor in determining matches.

OK, understood.

Its a long winter I know! And we all didn't know , at this point, if we gonna like it.Or like all of it lets wait - and hope for the or well deserved Betas

[MagnusEffect]

Haeso, on 30 November 2011 - 09:29 AM, said:

I actually am for customization. My point was that customization shouldn't be balanced by homogenization of all the equipment. If someone wants to have a 2 ERPCC light clan mech, he can have the battle value of an atlas in his 35 ton 'Mech. (Looking at you, Adder.)

The game balanced very well with BV!

Right, but should a Hunchback be allowed to "behave" as something other than a Hunchback? Should a pilot be allowed to turn a Hunchback into an LRM or Missile boat?* Personally, I think such customization causes mechs to lose their flavor and would make encounters with a specific mech rather generic affairs. Taking this same example, I would rather a Hunchback always perform as a "mech built around one bigass gun". That is what a Hunchback is famous for. To lose that would be sort of boring if you ask me.

Also, not sure what you mean by "homogenization of equipment". I'm certainly NOT suggesting we should have fixed generic loadouts... quite the opposite really. I just thought my original suggestion in the first post would be a VERY EASY solution to allow *some* customization while still retaining key "characteristics" of individual mechs. The number of "refit kits" out there could be quite extensive to ensure almost everyone was happy. Would also create interesting built-in "collecting" game mechanics.

*OmniMechs are a different story... that is kind of their *thing*, I realize.

Edited by MagnusEffect, 30 November 2011 - 09:50 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

If you want to go the full customisation "anything goes" route then it does make it easier for the dev's. All they need to do is one generic chassis at each weight class and just supply you a blank chassis for you to fit out as you wish. Oh - and change the tile to Rockem Sockem Robots Online as it won't be Mechwarrior.

[MagnusEffect]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 30 November 2011 - 09:53 AM, said:

If you want to go the full customisation "anything goes" route then it does make it easier for the dev's. All they need to do is one generic chassis at each weight class and just supply you a blank chassis for you to fit out as you wish. Oh - and change the tile to Rockem Sockem Robots Online as it won't be Mechwarrior.

lol... thank you for indirectly supporting my point through sarcasm

[BattleOfLuthien]

+1 to the above. Full customization within reason. May be a step further than MW4's customization: in MW4 you had hardpoints that only accepted ACs or lasers or LRMs, or supporting mods, so you couldn't put a jumpjet in your head or lasers in your toes (like MW2). I'd like to see something a little more liberal than that: you can put lasers and ACs on the same hardpoints, but not LRMs, so you couldn't fill your Hunchback with missiles, but you can put an AC20 or a couple of large lasers, or 8 machine guns in the same spot. Likewise, a Vulture would take LRMs or other missiles only in the torso... if you don't like missiles, it's probably not the mech for you.

Back in MW2 days, hours of fun were had trying to balance heat vs ammo by switching lasers to ac's and back, but we didn't generally go from lasers to missiles on the same mech... people stayed with their preferred play style between direct fire or smart missiles.

[Haeso]

Anything goes is part of the tabletop, actually...

On one hand, the hunchback is very iconic like that. On the other hand, wouldn't you be surprised if that hunchback cresting a hill at long range nails you with some LLs. I very much like the idea of full customization, though I don't pretend to know what to do about one trick ponies like the hunch and hollander. That said I also would support a MW4 system of hardpoints if it's done right. Rather than space for a type of weapon, it's space for anything, and hopefully the mech designs reflect what you equip. Again, no idea what to do about silly designs like the hollander/hunch based off of "Special" locations.