MauttyKoray, on 03 November 2015 - 10:49 PM, said:
You're treating it like I'm suggesting a change to the game. I'm not.
Let's take a glance back at the original post that started this thread:
MauttyKoray, on 03 November 2015 - 10:00 PM, said:
Am I wrong or is this essentially a mechanic that we should actually lose, and have it locked to the specific chassis/variants it comes naturally on? I know it would create a major difference in a lot of mechs and change the game balance a lot when a ton of these mechs suddenly can't free up random tonnage suddenly. However the specific variants that naturally come with Endo would suddenly have a special characteristic about them making unique and have another aspect to separate them from the others.
MauttyKoray, on 03 November 2015 - 10:49 PM, said:
I said that I thought about this and how its a major production aspect of a mech (like, a factory production thing, not just a mech garage hot swap) compared to MWO where its a simple click and a ridiculously small amount of CBills. I brought up to discussion this fact and what if switching between standard and Endo weren't a thing. Differences in variants could be unique in this aspect, such as standard variants getting more hardpoints to take advantage of more low tonnage weapons while endo variants could have fewer hardpoints and thus be more viable with larger weaponry?
So in translation, the non-Endo variants would have to spam Medium Lasers and heatsinks to the gills to make effective use of their limited tonnage. Because if you tried to use any weapons that required decent tonnage (e.g. any ballistic weapons at all or most missiles), lacking Endo would significantly hinder them.
PGI pretty much never touches a mech's hardpoints anyways, they only did that a few times waaaaay back in CB.
MauttyKoray, on 03 November 2015 - 10:49 PM, said:
I think one of the problems of this game is the fact that Endo is in fact a straight upgrade and almost every mech ever gets switched to it. Its not a choice, not an alternate, its the core choice for practically every mech. However, that's not the discussion, what I stated above is.
Once again:
FupDup, on 03 November 2015 - 10:37 PM, said:
When an idea has a large impact on balance, you can't just dismiss concerns about how it's gonna affect balance.
MauttyKoray, on 03 November 2015 - 10:49 PM, said:
Oh, and for the last ******* time in any thread ever that I've created "IM NOT ******* TRYING TO MAKE THIS TT." An idiot could realize that when you base something like Mechwarrior, an action oriented game, off a TT, a turn based game, things will NOT directly translate. However you can still use things like the TT rules as a basis for an ADAPTATION to a real time game. My favorite being weapons "What, you only want us to fire every 10 seconds?" ... "No, you're stupid, it does the amount of damage WITHIN A 10 SECOND PERIOD. Not just ONCE every 10 seconds. It could fire two, three, even four times within that 10 seconds and do its damage...ffs."
You're the one who made the complaint about "3x weapons and 2x armor," not me. The natural conclusion that I'm going to draw when I read that is that you want 1x weapons and 1x armor.