Jump to content

Sized Hardpoints


85 replies to this topic

Poll: Sized Hardpoints (67 member(s) have cast votes)

What do you think of the OP?

  1. I want sized hardpoints and this is the plan. (34 votes [50.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.75%

  2. I want sized hardpoints but have my own idea. (6 votes [8.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.96%

  3. I don't want sized hardpoints of any kind and like it as it is today. (25 votes [37.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.31%

  4. Obligatory "other" suggestion posted below. (2 votes [2.99%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.99%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#81 Equuleus

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • 32 posts

Posted 17 March 2025 - 06:35 AM

What is the problem with this mech warrior? IMO, it wants to automatically throw in an "OP" weapon via "critical hit" script kiddie nonsense and pretend the clunky way a gauss weapon shoots should be an excuse to give it a handicap instead of saying this much damage is this much damage regardless of the weapon. All that critical hit nonsense is exactly that!

#82 simon1812

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 848 posts

Posted 19 May 2025 - 11:23 AM

the only downside I find obvious is that laser vomiters will suffer if sized hardpoints were a thing. but I concede both sides do have good arguments.

#83 KursedVixen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Wolf
  • The Wolf
  • 3,383 posts
  • LocationLook at my Arctic Wolf. Closer... Closer...

Posted 21 May 2025 - 07:21 AM

View PostEquuleus, on 17 March 2025 - 06:35 AM, said:

What is the problem with this mech warrior? IMO, it wants to automatically throw in an "OP" weapon via "critical hit" script kiddie nonsense and pretend the clunky way a gauss weapon shoots should be an excuse to give it a handicap instead of saying this much damage is this much damage regardless of the weapon. All that critical hit nonsense is exactly that!
but you pay for that big weapon in not being able to fit other stuff in and also bigger guns= more heat

Did I say this is a bad idea? I meant it'sa horrible idea I didn't like it in MW4 I didn't like it in mw5 clans i don't like it here....

Omnimechs are suppose to have slots not hardpoints so the whole hardpoint size thing doesn't fit at all with omnimechs are we going to apply hard point sizes to only battlemechs? because that's an even more horrible idea....

When i bought mw5 clans i was hoping to once again get real omnimechs like in Mw2 (granted they had battlemechs with the same thing but, maybe the tech wasn't avalibe at the time to differentiate between an omni and a battlmech)

This game has a low enough population as it is, we don't need to do any major changes that'd potentially lose MORE players.

#84 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 8,671 posts

Posted 23 May 2025 - 12:17 PM

View PostKursedVixen, on 16 March 2025 - 03:07 PM, said:

View PostTesunie, on 08 December 2015 - 05:50 PM, said:

I actually find, as far as balance issues go in the game, the current unbalancing factor isn't large weapons where small ones in lore would go, but a massed amount of small weapons. (Look at Firestarter, Arctic Cheetah, etc for examples.) I don't believe your solution would really solve any balancing issues, besides someone's fanatical adherence to a more stock like mech loadout. (And anyone who knows me, knows I like stock mech, and I like lore.)

As far as another point against your concept, in order for it to work (as far as I can figure in my head), a lot of mechs would need to have their hard points reworked, typically in an inflating manner. This would have to be done just to sell some of the stock configuration of some mechs (such as the Summoner, of note the C variant specifically). I feel this would just farther disrupt balance, as well as reinforce the concept of "boating a lot of smaller weapons". (See note above.)
I absolutly despised size hardpoints in MW5 Clans... don't need them here either.


Please, stop necroing long dead threads from 2015.

Thank you.

#85 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,604 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 24 May 2025 - 07:49 AM

View Postmartian, on 23 May 2025 - 12:17 PM, said:


Please, stop necroing long dead threads from 2015.

Thank you.


Although I normally would agree with you, and although this thread is 10 years old, I think I'd have to say that this particular thread is an opinion thread. It actually rarely, to never, will expire.

Necroing thread is more of an issue on threads that information has become irrelevant due to game changes. This one is asking how people feel about Hard Point sizing, which is still relevant considering MW5 and MW5:C (on top of MW:O).

Just my 2 C-bills worth.

#86 Xylonic

    Rookie

  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 3 posts

Posted 10 June 2025 - 04:40 PM

I understand game balance is a thing, and thus can get behind hard points as a concept. However I would much prefer to stick as close to lore as possible and in lore there is no reason I couldn't stick 20+ small lasers on an assault mech. It would take time and some skilled mech techs but it could be done. Sizing hardpoints takes us further from lore (an issue I have with both MW5 games by the way, which is why I'm glad there are mods) and breaks the feel of battletech which has had the same basic rules and lore for over 30 years.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users