413 replies to this topic

[Pvt Dancer]

Jesus... I stopped reading after page 6...

OK, my thoughts.

What alot of folk seem to forget is that right now, we do not have a tech level set in the game... is that a 3025 Commando or a 3050 Commando with all the new tech and double heatsinks and what-not. If they are using old tech, then you know what? Full custumization is fine, because a Commando with 6 Medium lasers and 10 heat sinks via the engin is going to get one alpha strike off and then blow up or shut down from heat. At least the guy will have some /serious/ heat issues. That same Commando with Pulse or ER lasers for the same weight with free 20 heatsinks due to the new engin... yeah, that is where lines have to be drawn.

This whole thread is moot till then, because the new tech is soooooooo overpowered vs the old tech. The other factor is how combat will actually work. I never played MW4 and it sounds like it sucks. But a mech can't have more than 9 armor and 3 internals in the head...so PPC or better to the head usally takes down the mech. In MW4, that is a valid tactic... who knows in this game. Might be like WoT where you might be able to repair on the fly, thus never being able to shoot off a leg, you just cripple it.

But, I want to see customization, because who didn't take of the MGs and ammo to throw on a extra heat sink or some armor on a WarHammer? You just make it so it is unlockable, once all of the mech variants has been unlocked. Then you make it cost in-game money, like triple the cash. This makes small modifications (like mentioned above) fairly cheap yet workable. Then all they have to do is control the amount of in-game cash people get. If someone wants to drop a boat load of cash to totally re-work their mech, fine. They deserve it for grinding out the cash.

Till we know more about combat and the tech level to actually make base judgements from, all we can do is speculate.

[cardinal vice]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 01 March 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

.Using the economy as a dis-incentive to min/maxing merely reduces it to those who, either through cash or massive hours played, can afford it. Most people who want to "tweak" their mech will end up maximising it rather than working around the disadvantages. Mechs were originally designed to have drawbacks as part of the game. If they had not intended it to be that way then they would have maximised the mechs for mech v mech combat.

I got the impression that cash would not be a factor for min/max as they have stated the desire to avoid a P2W, but it makes sense that someone with many hours played would be able to afford more... that's the whole idea of developing your character, right?

Isn't maxing out your mech and working around disadvantages the same thing? Sorry, I guess I'm not understanding what you mean by that.

Overcoming drawbacks of a particular chassis confirms the likely-hood of more customization options, as we will be encouraged to develop skills within that particular mech variant.

Edit: Thanks for the reply! I think shooting holes in this concept would be beneficial and interesting

Edited by cardinal vice, 01 March 2012 - 02:07 PM.

[KANE LIVES]

Haeso, on 07 December 2011 - 03:35 PM, said:

Actually, a kick or punch from an assault 'Mech is going to be far more devastating than anything but ship-mounted weaponry. Something that large moving at high speeds? The atlas punching a masakari should be a fine illustration of what melee combat should be like.



It really is a matter of game design and code, plus the ever present input method issues. You really don't understand how much would go into making melee combat and making it right, it's not as simple as having an arm jutt forward and registering damage unless you want it to look and feel idiotic. It's along the same lines as overall agility, there isn't an input method that can handle it.

OWWWWWWWWWWWW

[Sassori]

I wonder (Haven't read all 20 pages yet) why there's been no mention of /why/ arm weapons are important in BT? It was about fields of fire. If you have an arm weapon you've got a much greater field of fire swing than you do on a torso weapon. Ie. You get immobilized, you can torso twist only so far, but if you have a weapon on the arm, you can swing that arm to get behind you, torso twist the other way and swing the arm, shoot behind you again. You can't /do/ that with torso mounted weapons which is a large part of why most of the mech's in Canon have arm mounted weapons.

Also, customization is one of those things that is essentially great in TT, not so great in MMO format. In TT the customization can be controlled by the players, or by the guy running the game if it's a true consistent character MW RPG Game. Those kinds of controls won't be there in MWO, so in my opinion we're better off without customization.

I think there should be the book/dev decided variants, that are in print, and we simply build up to that. HOWEVER: It's been noted that modules will be purchased through the store, which means, we'll get some sort of customization out of the game.

Lets just hope it's not to open or we'll see nothing but min-max and no variety at all.

MW3 got so boring when it devolved to UAC 20 Madcats, LRM 20 Madcats, and Laser Shadowcats. I don't want that to happen again. I'm hoping that the modules we can buy give us access to book variants. I could live with that.

PS: The people who take off machine guns for that extra heat sink are just /begging/ to get their mech killed by infantry

[NikkoKilla]

I'm not a fan of the mech being a giant amorphous sack for guns and heat sinks. However, A huge amount of the game for me (MW2 and variants, MW3 and battletech) has always been customization. I understand it causes issues and can be abused.. and honestly I don't know what is the best way to deal with it (although this insanely long thread suggests some 500 options). I just miss the days of the mech lab in MW2 Mercenaries.

It would make sense if you had the ability to modify hard points, and create MekTek like variants (or simply have access to variants).

Touchy stuff =]

[Sarlic]

To be honest i find visually customization far more likley them using the so called perks. Dont get me wrong, i like perks but it has to be minimal. Otherwise it will just confuse and probaly will run in balance issues.

[HeavensDaemon]

I believe that MW:O is going to be based on using specific BT variants instead of allowing full customization. This can be observed in the recient trailer where the hunchback in the background is a swayback 4p variant that replaces the shoulder mounted AC/20 with 6 medium lasers.

[Javelin156]

Pht, on 07 December 2011 - 05:07 PM, said:

I wonder how many times this is going to come up...








---------------------------------------------

"Blue" is mislabeled. It should be "equipment" which mostly means you can put heatsinks there, maybe ammo.

Should be pretty straight forwards.

Things that those familiar with the MW4 lab and the parent game won't see so obviously:

Don't allow internal structure type to be changed - don't allow engines to be changed (instead, look to the things in Tac Ops, like sprinting, for a wide 'Mech performance envelope). cockpit, gyro, and actuators (hip, arm joints) should not be allowed to be messed with (with the single exclusion of omnimechs with omni arms removing the hand and I think the lower actuators for using ppcs and gauss?).

Omnimechs can't modify their armor or otherwise do anything that would cross over from non-omni areas into omni-slots - otherwise, they're no longer modular, in addition to the above restrictions.

This gives a quick way to resolve penetrating hits and allows for the armor/damage behaviors to be ported with ease in a way that fits the fluidity of a VG with ease, and it stops (as much as the original mechs meant to!) munchkins from lunacy.

Omnimechs might have to be somehow restricted in number, because they'll be (as they should be and as the Lore blurbs them) scary, as far as loadouts are concerned.

One of the other things this would necessarily bring with it is that all the variant chassis of a base chassis (non-omnimech chassis, that is) would actually have to be in the game. There would be a large field to choose from - which would be even more fun if they managed to get the combat setup where they could handle the 'Mech quirks (marauder is supposed to be deadly in combat, that sort of thing).

This would stop the MW3 problem where all 'Mechs are rendered into nothing more than visually different bags full of guns - munchkin min/max Sheol misery, and still allow for a LOT of customization.

I love what your saying but the MWO dev team has dumbed down the mechlab for all the derps. They dont care about the people who actually like the game. They are catering to the first person shooter crowd. I mean 12 mechs to choose from, limited customization. This is a joke of an MMO. There better be alot more to it. Luckily its free to play.

After you play this (REMOVED) of a game once you will uninstall it and be like *** how could you mess up something so simple that has been given to you rule wise in a book thats over 25 years old. Derp!

Aww muffin sorry if the truth hurts.

Edited by Javelin156, 05 April 2012 - 02:21 PM.
Grimm Wuz Here and removed my offensive comment since it was totally uncalled for.

[Dymlos2003]

Javelin156, on 05 April 2012 - 01:56 PM, said:

I love what your saying but the MWO dev team has dumbed down the mechlab for all the derps. They dont care about the people who actually like the game. They are catering to the first person shooter crowd. I mean 12 mechs to choose from, limited customization. This is a joke of an MMO. There better be alot more to it. Luckily its free to play.

After you play this (REMOVED) of a game once you will uninstall it and be like *** how could you mess up something so simple that has been given to you rule wise in a book thats over 25 years old. Derp!

Aww muffin sorry if the truth hurts.

Truth? You're raging for no reason.

You tell people to play MW4, 3 instead because of the mech lab eventhough this concept of a mech lab is just a combo of Mech2: Mercs and Mech4.

You also say you want customization like the books. Ok so you want barely any customization because canonically customization is extremely rare and risky to boot.

I really think you're just over reacting and acting like a baby.

[Javelin156]

dymlos2003, on 05 April 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Truth? You're raging for no reason.

You tell people to play MW4, 3 instead because of the mech lab eventhough this concept of a mech lab is just a combo of Mech2: Mercs and Mech4.

You also say you want customization like the books. Ok so you want barely any customization because canonically customization is extremely rare and risky to boot.

I really think you're just over reacting and acting like a baby.

Its not risky it just costs alot of time and c-bills. Its obviously something that is going to factor in since we are playing an MMO. I just dont want to see it non existent because someone is crying that someone will have an advantage over them. Thats all it is, whiners... waaaaaaaa they will have a better mech than me because i can actually THINK and DESIGN it myself, or even modify something i own.

[Seabear]

The place for total custom jobs is not the battlefield but rather a Solaris style enviroment. Yes ,a design should be able to be tweaked but not rebuilt into a custom mech. There will be variants that should allow for differences in combat style. The dev discussion on the mech lab should answer and questions on cutomization

[Javelin156]

Seabear, on 05 April 2012 - 05:04 PM, said:

The place for total custom jobs is not the battlefield but rather a Solaris style enviroment. Yes ,a design should be able to be tweaked but not rebuilt into a custom mech. There will be variants that should allow for differences in combat style. The dev discussion on the mech lab should answer and questions on cutomization

Well before the battle you could do this. Once on the field i totally understand only having minor options. I just see it being very limited taking full customization out of the game. There isn't much point to customize your mech right now from what the devs have given us. Maybe that's what they are going for though. Its my favorite part of the game second to blowing peoples legs and arms off lol.

Edited by Javelin156, 06 April 2012 - 07:39 AM.

[Ragotag]

IMO, true/comprehensive 'Mech customization is not BattleTech, and past MechWarrior games have been nothing more than Activision's/Micro$oft's loose adaptation of their games to the BattleTech universe; not saying this was bad, just stating what they were not -- BattleTech. This was most noticeable in terms of mechlab and 'Mech customization, which have always been way over the top with respect to BattleTech canon; the single chassis that can "do it all" concept is just not BattleTech. (MW4 improved on this with the hardpoint system, but also had other huge flaws.)

PGI seems intent on producing the very first game having "MechWarrior" in the title that actually attempts to adhere to BattleTech table top roots, which will likely seem somewhat radical and limiting to the fans of past MechWarrior games who are unfamiliar with the combat mechanics and nuances of BattleTech table top. I know that not everyone likes this, but personally I'm thrilled that PGI is taking this route in their game design. It can't end up exactly like BattleTech table top due to the adaptation as a real-time combat simulator utilizing a physics model, but it looks like it will come closer to BattleTech than any past MechWarrior title has ever come before.

I like what's been described in the latest Dev blog regarding MW:O mechlab; it limits customization to hardpoint types (ballistic/energy/missile) that are specific to a chassis variant, not just the chassis as in MW4. Variants are one of the most interesting dynamics in BattleTech since each faction's military may all have access to a given chassis, but each faction will also likely have only one or two stock variants of that chassis that their military's are equipped to support from a resource/tech perspective; variants and the limits of their unique hardpoint formats are one form of customization that *is* very much BattleTech. Such a system also forces pilots to learn the strengths and weaknesses of their own 'Mechs verses opposing 'Mechs, even when the opposing 'Mech is the same chassis.

Perhaps one concern that has come about from the Dev Blog's description of the mechlab, is the question of will the 'Mech chassis visually represent customization in game? Nothing breaks immersion more than seeing a PPC on a 'Mech that emits laser fire from 3 Medium Lasers. I can only hope that mechlab customization will also effect the chassis visuals accordingly.

[Javelin156]

Ragotag, on 06 April 2012 - 10:02 AM, said:

IMO, true/comprehensive 'Mech customization is not BattleTech, and past MechWarrior games have been nothing more than Activision's/Micro$oft's loose adaptation of their games to the BattleTech universe; not saying this was bad, just stating what they were not -- BattleTech. This was most noticeable in terms of mechlab and 'Mech customization, which have always been way over the top with respect to BattleTech canon; the single chassis that can "do it all" concept is just not BattleTech. (MW4 improved on this with the hardpoint system, but also had other huge flaws.)

PGI seems intent on producing the very first game having "MechWarrior" in the title that actually attempts to adhere to BattleTech table top roots, which will likely seem somewhat radical and limiting to the fans of past MechWarrior games who are unfamiliar with the combat mechanics and nuances of BattleTech table top. I know that not everyone likes this, but personally I'm thrilled that PGI is taking this route in their game design. It can't end up exactly like BattleTech table top due to the adaptation as a real-time combat simulator utilizing a physics model, but it looks like it will come closer to BattleTech than any past MechWarrior title has ever come before.

I like what's been described in the latest Dev blog regarding MW:O mechlab; it limits customization to hardpoint types (ballistic/energy/missile) that are specific to a chassis variant, not just the chassis as in MW4. Variants are one of the most interesting dynamics in BattleTech since each faction's military may all have access to a given chassis, but each faction will also likely have only one or two stock variants of that chassis that their military's are equipped to support from a resource/tech perspective; variants and the limits of their unique hardpoint formats are one form of customization that *is* very much BattleTech. Such a system also forces pilots to learn the strengths and weaknesses of their own 'Mechs verses opposing 'Mechs, even when the opposing 'Mech is the same chassis.

Perhaps one concern that has come about from the Dev Blog's description of the mechlab, is the question of will the 'Mech chassis visually represent customization in game? Nothing breaks immersion more than seeing a PPC on a 'Mech that emits laser fire from 3 Medium Lasers. I can only hope that mechlab customization will also effect the chassis visuals accordingly.

I have the compendium infront of me. Mw2 and 3 followed customization by the book. Everyone keeps saying no they didnt but they did. I could read the directions to you verbatim, and yes this can be held to some interpretation. I just hope you realize its going to get boring extremly fast with nothing more than fighting a battle, clicking repair and fighting another battle. Yes there are tons of variables like once on the field you have limited repairs and what not. Some say only mechwarriors in solaris, the rich, or merc companies did this, especially merc companies. Well they are probably right. its not something that is typically done for every mission. But the fact is it could be done if needed. I dont get everyones apprehension against being able to customize how you see fit. This is something that could make the game amazing.

I also was wondering if anyone even knows what the point of the game is even going to be yet. I cant seem to find any information about it.

Edited by Javelin156, 06 April 2012 - 06:26 PM.

[Damocles]

Javelin156, on 06 April 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

Hopefully they tell us what the main objective of this game is going to be at some point.

Kill mechs and beat the other team? O.o

On customization availability: I was always by the idea that Battlemechs are rather ummm...difficult to work with (techwise), That there were plenty of ways to fudge up the removal of a system or that the removal of said system would outright wreck internals. All of this is Inner Sphere oriented mind you, and I felt this idea was further reinforced by the Clans and how OMG AMAZING their techs were.

[Javelin156]

Damocles, on 06 April 2012 - 06:29 PM, said:

Kill mechs and beat the other team? O.o

On customization availability: I was always by the idea that Battlemechs are rather ummm...difficult to work with (techwise), That there were plenty of ways to fudge up the removal of a system or that the removal of said system would outright wreck internals. All of this is Inner Sphere oriented mind you, and I felt this idea was further reinforced by the Clans and how OMG AMAZING their techs were.

There has to be more than that. I really hope theres a working econmoy. I hope you can fight against computer controlled mechs as well as people. There has to be some way to make money and advance. Maybe you can take a merc,innersphere, pirate, or periphery route.

Edited by Javelin156, 06 April 2012 - 06:42 PM.

[Terick]

Javelin156, on 06 April 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

I have the compendium infront of me. Mw2 and 3 followed customization by the book. Everyone keeps saying no they didnt but they did. I could read the directions to you verbatim, and yes this can be held to some interpretation. I just hope you realize its going to get boring extremly fast with nothing more than fighting a battle, clicking repair and fighting another battle. Yes there are tons of variables like once on the field you have limited repairs and what not. Some say only mechwarriors in solaris, the rich, or merc companies did this, especially merc companies. Well they are probably right. its not something that is typically done for every mission. But the fact is it could be done if needed. I dont get everyones apprehension against being able to customize how you see fit. This is something that could make the game amazing.

I also was wondering if anyone even knows what the point of the game is even going to be yet. I cant seem to find any information about it.

No, MW2 and MW3 did NOT match the books. Simply because of Endo Steel and Ferro. Per the rules, even with the original rules Omni mechs could not move where endo steel and ferro armor slots were. This means that the space in omni mechs was limited by things that couldn't be moved. Lower arm actuators and hand actuators could be removed, and usually were when mounting bigger weapons.

MW2 and MW3 both let you move the endo steel and ferro armor slots around so you could ft what you wanted anywhere.

Second, in MW3 being able to do ANY modifications to NON-Omnimechs wouldn't happen. By your own admission it takes time and money. In MW3 there is no way your tech team had time to modify non-omnimechs like you were allowed. You can't just remove a PPC and put on seven medium lasers in the space they had between operations. Especially since some were only a few hours apart...

The short of it is that some things HAVE to stay where they are because of the chasis, Endo and ferro. Other items could theoretically happen.... but the cost should be high, really high. Since unlike the rules there isn't a roll to see if it was successful. Yes there was a roll to see if your techs could make the changes, you want the target number lower. You need to spend even MORE money and time. Time won't happen, so more money to compensate. Maybe even real money to allow changes like that.

Still certain things have to stay the way they are since they are part of the chassis. Those being endo and ferro slots. You want them in a different place... get a different mech.

Edited by Terick, 07 April 2012 - 11:16 AM.

[Kiyoshi Amaya]

So customization works something like this...

The scene: A mech sitting in a bay for its 500,000th mile service.
Mechanic: "Right mate, I've tuned up your fusion reactor and it'll give you 10% extra power."
Pilot: "Great! Could you possibly fit this PPC I salvaged in place of the AC10?"
Mechanic: "Sorry mate, it's not possible."
Pilot: "What?"
Mechanic: "Well building, installing and tuning a fusion reactor is one thing, But what you're asking is impossible."
Pilot: "Oh.... Well how about fitting an air conditioner in the cockpit then? It gets really hot in there."
Mechanic: "What's an air conditioner?"

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

[Ragotag]

Javelin156, on 06 April 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

I have the compendium infront of me. Mw2 and 3 followed customization by the book. Everyone keeps saying no they didnt but they did. I could read the directions to you verbatim, and yes this can be held to some interpretation. I just hope you realize its going to get boring extremly fast with nothing more than fighting a battle, clicking repair and fighting another battle. Yes there are tons of variables like once on the field you have limited repairs and what not. Some say only mechwarriors in solaris, the rich, or merc companies did this, especially merc companies. Well they are probably right. its not something that is typically done for every mission. But the fact is it could be done if needed. I dont get everyones apprehension against being able to customize how you see fit. This is something that could make the game amazing.

I also was wondering if anyone even knows what the point of the game is even going to be yet. I cant seem to find any information about it.

I simply could not disagree more with you on this, but we are both voicing opinions based on what we believe to be factual information.

I've stated my opinion. Full customization has never really been a huge part of BattleTech TT. I still assert that past "MechWarrior" titles were not very BattleTech, they just took place in the BattleTech Universe.

However, you imply that the only fun dynamic in MW:O is 'Mech customization, something that I would heartily disagree with. My experience with past "MechWarrior" games is that full 'Mech customization reduces the number of viable configurations to only a handful -- those being the Uber configs that most players will be forced to gravitate to just to be competitive. Using a minimal customization system on stock variants forces variety on the battlefield, and turns a snap-shooting FPS-style simulator of past "MechWarror" titles into more of a real-time strategic and tactical 'Mech combat simulator. Again, opinions on the limits to mechlab customization comes down to preference... like me, many in this community seem to prefer a BattleTech-based game verses a "MechWarrior"-based game.

[Ketzktl]

Yeach, on 05 December 2011 - 07:05 PM, said:

How common is the Timberwolf S in 3049? Most (other than the Pryde variant) were non-jumpjet versions.
Did it even exist in that time period?

When people mention jump-capable Clan omnimechs, the MadCat is not the one that one thinks of.
The Thor, Dragonfly, Blackhawk, Gladiator are the omnimechs that are thought of because they ALL have jumpjets as STANDARD equipment.

Anyone think of it strange if a Thor did not have jumpjets.

Clan jumpjets are mounted in standard pods. They can be added to any omnimech.