413 replies to this topic

[Lightfoot]

What I am reading is that there will be "Variants" you have to qualify for with XP progression. This implies there will at least be some type of hardpoint system for 'mechs. Hopefully there is also a robust Mechlab.

Half of the skill and competitiveness of MechWarrior games is from what players can do with Mechlab customization, not to mention making each encounter something new, or potentially new.

[Polymorphyne]

Quote

What I am reading is that there will be "Variants" you have to qualify for with XP progression. This implies there will at least be some type of hardpoint system for 'mechs. Hopefully there is also a robust Mechlab.

Actually "variants" means there would be no weapon hardpoints- in battletech a variant is a mech with a specific set of weapons.
Lets look at the centurion for example. The basic Centurion (CN9-A) ALWAYS has an AC/10 2 med lasers and an LMR/10.
Then its variants have different weapons:
CN9-AH (AC/20, LRM-10)
CN9-AL (Large Laser, Small Laser, 2 Med Lasers, more heat sinks, more armour, LRM-10)

So I would say weapon hardpoints where you put whatever you like on a mech are out, they never really should have been in any of the mechwarrior games from a Canon and balance point of view.

Instead they are giving us module slots to customise a mechs role rather than its firepower.

[Fluffinator]

Taking out customization does not stop power mechs...what it does do it make 95% of the mech unplayable due to defaulting to weak weapons. All making it so you can't change weapons will do is make people play a battlemaster or awesome that comes with a powerful load to start with. IE no customization just means only 2-3 mechs will be used by 90% of the people. It in no way will cause variety.

[MaddMaxx]

Fluffinator, on 19 February 2012 - 09:02 AM, said:

Taking out customization does not stop power mechs...what it does do it make 95% of the mech unplayable due to defaulting to weak weapons. All making it so you can't change weapons will do is make people play a battlemaster or awesome that comes with a powerful load to start with. IE no customization just means only 2-3 mechs will be used by 90% of the people. It in no way will cause variety.

And that is where some form of Drop limitation balances the equation between Teams.

If the limit is set at X, with one side selecting 3 BattleMaster's, the other team can counter with 3 Hunchbacks, a Catapult and Jenner. Who do you think wins that battle?

[fallonsky]

i like the mw 4 mechlab so people dont sit there for 5 houres and come out with a mech that can kill everything.

[Fluffinator]

MaddMaxx, on 19 February 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

And that is where some form of Drop limitation balances the equation between Teams.

If the limit is set at X, with one side selecting 3 BattleMaster's, the other team can counter with 3 Hunchbacks, a Catapult and Jenner. Who do you think wins that battle?

While I see what you are saying this in no way effects that there will be 1 of each weight class that has the best choice of default weapons...if you can't change the default weapons 1 mech of each class will be used and the rest will just collect dust

[Jake Valeck]

Full customization? why the hell not! Seems to me that the more customized the mech the more in-game (RL) days it would take and the higher the costs would be to complete. Since these modifications are not factory standard there should be some random errors/problems/jamming with said custom jobs. there you have it full customs with balance. Also please lets add the graphics for said custom jobs or dont do it at all. just my 2 c-bills

[MaddMaxx]

Fluffinator, on 19 February 2012 - 09:24 AM, said:

While I see what you are saying this in no way effects that there will be 1 of each weight class that has the best choice of default weapons...if you can't change the default weapons 1 mech of each class will be used and the rest will just collect dust

Then use a Variant to suit. Are you trying to say that NO Variant can/would satisfy your gun bagging needs? There are plenty of solid Variants to be had. Having played Stock Leagues for 2.5 years and having experienced it first hand, it was a hella lot of FUN, without ever changing a Load-Out.

More players should try it before condemning it for the gun bag versions that allowed Full MechLabs, (which were based around a Single Player Campaign btw) If everyone is driving a Variant, then everyone is playing the same game (and its is self balancing)

[Pht]

MaddMaxx, on 19 February 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:

Then use a Variant to suit. Are you trying to say that NO Variant can/would satisfy your gun bagging needs?

Red herring - allowing for some customization does not make 'Mechs into gun-bags... for that matter, customization can actually make *more* variants show up, when done right; and they will be unique.

Quote

There are plenty of solid Variants to be had. Having played Stock Leagues for 2.5 years and having experienced it first hand, it was a hella lot of FUN, without ever changing a Load-Out.

And being able to customize some things, to an extent, is a blast too.

Quote

More players should try it before condemning it for the gun bag versions that allowed Full MechLabs, (which were based around a Single Player Campaign btw) If everyone is driving a Variant, then everyone is playing the same game (and its is self balancing)

Yep; it's self balancing ... everyone will go for a garage with the same mechs for whatever roles, and drop rules won't change that; all it will do is make sure everyone has the same five or six mechs instead of the same four or three.

[MaddMaxx]

Pht, on 19 February 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

Red herring - allowing for some customization does not make 'Mechs into gun-bags... for that matter, customization can actually make *more* variants show up, when done right; and they will be unique.

Tried a Red Herring one time. It was to slow.

Quote

And being able to customize some things, to an extent, is a blast too.

Where do you draw the line? So little, as to be basically a Moot exercise?

Quote

Yep; it's self balancing ... everyone will go for a garage with the same Mech's for whatever roles, and drop rules won't change that; all it will do is make sure everyone has the same five or six Mech's instead of the same four or three.

We already know what allowing Customization (to an extent to please even close to most of the player base) does. Gun Bags Online.

So we have 1 or 2 Builds that everyone will eventually have to drive in order to compete. No thanks.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 19 February 2012 - 01:54 PM.

[Maris]

People argue that no customization may lead to only a few mechs being viable and the rest being ignored by the playerbase.

Yet true customization is the same thing, if not worse. There will be a FOTM build for that specific weight tonnage that is superior to all other builds. In that case, why bother with introducing so many mechs since they are all the same? Just introduce a single mech for each of the different weight classes and launch the game next week In fact, don't even bother with canonical mech names. Just put it as a Light Mech, Medium Mech, Heavy Mech and Assault Mech. Tada!

They shouldn't even bother with the Clans Invasion since who cares about Omni-Mechs now anyway...

Personally, a hybrid of Mw2/3 and Mw4 would be alright...but I rather have variants only for now. There are hundreds of mechs and even more variants out there, I'm pretty sure that the devs can choose the ones that are actually good and put them in game.

Edited by Maris, 19 February 2012 - 03:06 PM.

[Karmack]

My two cents: limit Battlemechs to canon variants. Limit omnis to what will fit in the pods. Govern those limits (pod space and location) by the canon weight, size and locations from the table top games.

You should also pay a stiff time penalty if you swap variants on a standard Battlemech. LIke a month out of action.

[Yeach]

Longsword, on 19 February 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

Actually "variants" means there would be no weapon hardpoints- in battletech a variant is a mech with a specific set of weapons.
Lets look at the centurion for example. The basic Centurion (CN9-A) ALWAYS has an AC/10 2 med lasers and an LMR/10.
Then its variants have different weapons:
CN9-AH (AC/20, LRM-10)
CN9-AL (Large Laser, Small Laser, 2 Med Lasers, more heat sinks, more armour, LRM-10)

So I would say weapon hardpoints where you put whatever you like on a mech are out, they never really should have been in any of the mechwarrior games from a Canon and balance point of view.

Instead they are giving us module slots to customise a mechs role rather than its firepower.

I'm going to assume that in all variants
-the LRM10 is in the same spot and hence a hardpoint
-the Medium lasers (on the two variants) are at the same spot hence hardpoint
-the AC10, AC20 (and maybe Large Laser) are in the same spot; variable hardpoint

Also asuming that the left arm is kept clear of weapons (hence no hardpoint)

Anyways I don't have the TRO specsheets so someone confirm for me.

[Siphonaptera]

lf the weapons were balanced against each other, it wouldn't matter what players put on their mechs. This requires deviation from tabletop, where an AC/20 was deadly because it always did 20 to one spot while four medium lasers would most likely not hit at the same time and even if they did the odds of them all hitting the same spot in the same round was low.

Guass/lasers didn't translate well to FPS because players could alpha strike constantly on specific locations.

Edited by Siphonaptera, 19 February 2012 - 06:47 PM.

[Maris]

The problem with introducing fully customisable Mechlabs is that...you quite effectively make having Mech variants wholly obsolete.
I mean who in their right minds would ever use canonical mech variants when you have access to MW2/MW3-style mechlabs?

No one.
If they want to have a chance at winning and be competitive, they are forced to adopt the FOTM builds or lose the majority of the time, its that simple.
The whole dev resources spent on preparing the variants and the xp skilltree to unlock them will be wholly redundant and useless. So I doubt the devs are going to shoot a PPC at their collective feet by making us grind XP to unlock mech variants yet at the same time, allow a full custom Mech labs. It doesn't make sense.

[Strum Wealh]

Yeach, on 19 February 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

I'm going to assume that in all variants
-the LRM10 is in the same spot and hence a hardpoint
-the Medium lasers (on the two variants) are at the same spot hence hardpoint
-the AC10, AC20 (and maybe Large Laser) are in the same spot; variable hardpoint

Also asuming that the left arm is kept clear of weapons (hence no hardpoint)

Anyways I don't have the TRO specsheets so someone confirm for me.

Solaris7 (especially when cross-referenced with Sarna) is pretty good for that in a fair number of cases.

CN9-A Centurion (2801)
CN9-D Centurion (3052)
CN9-D5 Centurion (3062)
CN9-YLW Centurion (Yen-Lo-Wang, Justin Xiang-Allard version)

Each of the above variants has the main weapon (AC-10, LB-X AC-10, RAC-5, AC-20) in the right arm, a LRM-10 in the left-torso (except YLW), and two Medium Lasers (sometimes one is converted to a Medium Pulse Laser) in the center-torso.

Though, should the center-torso location count as a single hardpoint, or two?

Also, apparently the original record sheet for YLW ("Battletech Record Sheets 3025 & 3026 product # 1695", cited in the Solaris7 link) states that the left arm is equipped with a hatchet rather than a claw/nails...

[Sug]

It depends on the gameplay, which we're still months away from seeing probably. The word "variants" has come up multiple times in the blog/podcasts but there's been no mention of customization beyond the module system. I don't believe that we're going to see a mechlab with the release of this game.

From what they've revealed about weapons and aiming it doesn't even sound like boating would be viable even if we could. Missiles are not going to be 100% hit with a lock and weapon convergence will be a factor eliminating the pinpoint accuracy of groups of lasers or canons.

I'm hoping they reduce the ammon per ton and make overheating/shutdown have a larger consequence than just 10 seconds of inaction. Add that in and boating goes out the window.

[Durant Carlyle]

Siphonaptera, on 19 February 2012 - 12:34 AM, said:

MWLL is FULL of boats already:

• Vulture with 4 LRM 20's
  
• Awesome and a Clan mech with 4+ large lasers/ppcs
  
• Fafnir with 4 LBX20's

Are 3 quick examples...


Plus a ton of other boats that fit in fine and are balanced because of how they handled heat (I'd make the heat generation a little higher and cooldown faster than they have currently) which discourages most alpha strikes but allows many high heat weapons to be fired in a few seconds.

People picking the same thing in the mechlab isn't any different than everyone taking the same premade mech. The fix is to discourage alpha strikes by forcing players to alpha strike over a few seconds, just like how alpha strikes are firing all weapons in a turn (10 seconds IIRC).

The four-LRM20 Mad Dog isn't official, and neither is that Fafnir you mention. In any case, the official TRO "boat" 'Mechs are more balanced than a boater would make in the MechLab.

[Strum Wealh]

Sug, on 19 February 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

It depends on the gameplay, which we're still months away from seeing probably. The word "variants" has come up multiple times in the blog/podcasts but there's been no mention of customization beyond the module system. I don't believe that we're going to see a mechlab with the release of this game.

From what they've revealed about weapons and aiming it doesn't even sound like boating would be viable even if we could. Missiles are not going to be 100% hit with a lock and weapon convergence will be a factor eliminating the pinpoint accuracy of groups of lasers or canons.

I'm hoping they reduce the ammon per ton and make overheating/shutdown have a larger consequence than just 10 seconds of inaction. Add that in and boating goes out the window.

The thing is, there are a number of canon boats:

Firestarter (flamer boat)
Piranha (machine-gun boat)
Komodo (medium laser boat)
Black Hawk KU primary configuration (medium laser/medium pulse laser boat)
Nova primary configuration (Clan ER medium laser boat)
Supernova (Clan ER large laser boat)
Crab (laser boat)
Awesome (PPC boat)
Longbow (LRM boat)
Yeoman (LRM boat)
Bowman (missile boat)
Thunder Hawk (Gauss Rifle boat)
Annihilator (canon variants include AC-10, LB-X AC-10, Clan UAC-10, PPC, Clan Gauss Rifle, Light AC-2, and iHGR boats)
And probably many more...

As indicated earlier:

• A "robust MechLab" means min-maxers and munchkins will prefer to build boats of certain weapons and gravitate to those 'Mechs that allow for the most effective boating of said certain weapons.
  
• No customization and restriction to canon-only 'Mechs means that the same min-maxers and munchkins will gravitate to those 'Mechs that are already boats (or even "near-boats") of whatever weapon type(s) they favor.
  
• Anything in-between will yield a mix of the above.

Changing things like ammo-per-ton and heat sink efficiency too far beyond their canon values will also affect - often adversely - non-boats (including, and perhaps especially, canon non-boats) as well, while not actually stopping people from boating (as the min-maxers and munchkins will sacrifice some other aspect - speed and/or armor, for example - or just learn to live with the limitations imposed).

Short of allowing no customization and not allowing any of the canon boats/near-boats into the game, there is pretty much no way around the fact that said boats will find their way into matches without also hurting the viability and/or balance of the non-boats as well...

[Magnificent Bastard]

I'd like something similar to what MW4 had. Not total customization but a respectable amount. Obviously there would be a riot if MWO offered no customization options so I think it's just a matter of how limited they think it should be. Personally, I like freedom but restriction is what makes games challenging. It's a trade off that seperates the men from the boys.