53 replies to this topic

[adamts01]

<a href="http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/mechlab#i=212&l=80bf0648e2cfddc42dfaddab0c265254f111bf98">MDD-PRIME</a>
I think this would be a decent candidate. With only 2 tons of ammo for 2 LRM20s, it could get quirked to hell and not be OP. Like half lock-on time, 2x tracking, half group size and 1.5x velocity. 50% mpl range and 40% lpl cooldown. It would be fun to play, unique, wouldn't be OP, really good at anything or ever compete with any meta builds.

[Soultraxx]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 21 January 2016 - 01:29 PM, said:

I keep asking for random 3025 stock mech mode but it's never gonna happen

I really like this idea, but the cost of reverting my mechs back to stock would be a limiting factor.

[Wolfways]

I've been playing "stock weapon mechs" since CB, but it's hard. Pgi's heat system makes stock mechs extremely hot and there is not enough ammo/ton on stock mechs as they were designed for battles that lasted a few minutes not 15mins+.
If you change engine size and add Endo to IS mechs you can run stock weapons. Clan mechs are almost impossible to run...unless you like overheating every time you fire

[Red Shrike]

Wolfways, on 22 January 2016 - 02:39 AM, said:

I've been playing "stock weapon mechs" since CB, but it's hard. Pgi's heat system makes stock mechs extremely hot and there is not enough ammo/ton on stock mechs as they were designed for battles that lasted a few minutes not 15mins+.
If you change engine size and add Endo to IS mechs you can run stock weapons. Clan mechs are almost impossible to run...unless you like overheating every time you fire

That's mostly because stock builds rely on TT values (afaik) and PGI has made it so that things like heatsinks are wholly inefficient compared to their TT counterparts. (I heard double heatsinks in MWO have 1.4 times the cooling efficiency of single heatsinks compared to 2 times in lore/TT)
Other example: I assume the Warhammer is a good mech in TT, as I read it was designed (in lore) to go 1v1 with a mech from the same weight class, but in MWO it can't. Its PPCs are gimped, either through hitreg, lack of damage, or both. Most other mechs can make up for it since they don't carry PPCs as their primary armament. The Warhammer can't.

Edited by Red Shrike, 22 January 2016 - 02:51 AM.

[Wolfways]

Red Shrike, on 22 January 2016 - 02:49 AM, said:

That's mostly because stock builds rely on TT values (afaik) and PGI has made it so that things like heatsinks are wholly inefficient compared to their TT counterparts. (I heard double heatsinks in MWO have 1.4 times the cooling efficiency of single heatsinks compared to 2 times in lore/TT)
Other example: I assume the Warhammer is a good mech in TT, as I read it was designed (in lore) to go 1v1 with a mech from the same weight class, but in MWO it can't. Its PPCs are gimped, either through hitreg, lack of damage, or both. Most other mechs can make up for it since they don't carry PPCs as their primary armament. The Warhammer can't.

I always expect to have low damage in a match when using PPC's, like my CPLT-K3.
Most useless weapons in MWO (imo)
MG's, flamers, PPC's, ERPPC's, LRM's.

[Sigmar Sich]

Hans Von Lohman, on 21 January 2016 - 12:06 PM, said:

Would it be a good idea to have good perks for a default weapon build, and lose perks as you change the mech to be something else, perhaps going into negative quirks as you move toward a problematic build (aka the 6 PPC stalker).

I love this idea. And i believe this "encouragement" is better than "limitation" of only stock mode (though i want it too).

Combining this idea with zonal quirks - maybe apply it not for the whole mech, but independently to it's part. Lets say Warhammer get bonus for one PPC only if it mounted in its arm. And do not get if this PPC mounted in torso.
But aside from PPC arms player could mess with torso weapons any way he want - changing it, and losing their stock bonus, but not affecting stock PPC arm bonuses. For example Atlas - you can get bonus to all weapons if you leave mech with stock weapons; or you change your ballistic weapon, losing bonus for it, but don't change missiles - and keep bonus for them.

And, i really want penalties for ammo placed far away from weapon. 100% cooldown time for same or neighbouring locations (or even small bonus for same location, lets say -5% CD time); and lets say +10% cooldown per each location between weapon and ammo. Lets take Centurion for example - AC in right arm, ammo in right torso. 100% cooldown time. Put ammo in center - 110% cooldown time. In any leg - 120% cooldown time.

[Skoll]

Stock mode would be fun with very limited customization. I.e. sacrificing a weapon for more heat sinks or swapping a bigger weapon into a small one. The kinds of limited customization that was in lore or you did on campaigns.

[Omi_]

Hmm, I like the intention here, but I don't think this would work out as intended. Inevitably, some stock builds will be better than others, and this would just empower the better ones above all else. It's just a different sort of gamification whereas the existing quirks (usually) support the stock builds anyway. What I'd rather see is some sort of other balance for Ferro Fibrous or Single Heatsinks so that builds that use these are more viable.

Maybe an XP bonus for running a mech stock?

[Skoll]

That's it though, some stock builds WERE better than others.. TT was never meant to be completely balanced ( see: clans ).

[Malleus011]

I'm all for anything that encourages Stock, or super-Stock builds. The problem with getting a lot of 'mechs and full customization becomes blandness; what makes this new 70 tonner worth getting when I already have three? With quirked hard points, stock quirks, or stock mode (whichever we can get PGI to do) there becomes a reason to own or drive the different models.

[Skoll]

I don't think we will ever get a stock mode besides private matches / leagues solely because the powergaming / comp player crowd will never go for it if they can't minmax everything about their mechs. That is the reality of the situation and you can bet your *** PGI won't cater to a minority of the population who do want a stock game mode.

[JC Daxion]

El Bandito, on 21 January 2016 - 07:06 PM, said:

I just want sized hardpoints.

This would go a very long way to helping balance over powered mechs.

It would also mean that people would be running lots more shorter ranged weapons, keeping the long range snipe meta to just certain mechs, verse anything that can mount a few lasers. Brawlers would gain some ground with this.

[Darwins Dog]

Just to clarify, do you mean perks like xp and cbill boosts (like clans get for using a full set of omni pods)? Or do you mean quirks like weapon and structure buffs?

I think perks for stock loadouts (or at least near stock) would be neat. You get 10% more cbills if you use all of the original weapons from the mech (or at least the signature weapons). So you can strip the MGs off of a CAT-K2 for instance and still get a bonus, but replace the PPCs and you get noting. XP bonus is fairly meaningless, especially once that variant is mastered. Call it additional maintenance costs for using non-standard equipment.

Quirks for stock loadouts is basically what we have right now. It could be limited to what a mech is built with, and that might be interesting. So out K2 could get the buffs for PPCs mounted in the arms, but not in the torso. That could be fun too.

[Khobai]

Quote

I just want sized hardpoints.

I would much rather have signature hardpoints than sized hardpoints. Where you have to put a weapon in a specific hardpoint in order to get a quirk bonus (like PPCs have to go in the arms of a Warhammer to get a quirk bonus)

Sized hardpoints dont solve any of the games problems. Laser vomit is still prolific with sized hardpoints. Whereas signature hardpoints can reward mechs for using weapons other than lasers.

Quote

And, i really want penalties for ammo placed far away from weapon

Why? ballistic/missile weapons arnt really overpowered. Plus it screws over mechs that physically cant put the ammo near the weapon. Theres no point to that idea.

If you want to make ammo explosions more common, it makes way more sense just to make ammo explode 100% of the time for 10% of the damage (rather than 10% of the time for 100% of the damage)

Edited by Khobai, 22 January 2016 - 09:19 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Hans Von Lohman, on 21 January 2016 - 12:06 PM, said:

So perks are a bit of a weird topic. I like them as they make under-performing mechs better, but cheese builds are also a problem.

Would it be a good idea to have good perks for a default weapon build, and lose perks as you change the mech to be something else, perhaps going into negative quirks as you move toward a problematic build (aka the 6 PPC stalker).

Just an idea.

In the case of the 6 PPC Stalker, 107 extra heat, per Alpha, could be seen as a "negative".

[Narcissistic Martyr]

ChapeL, on 21 January 2016 - 11:29 PM, said:

Sounds alot like perks one gets for equipping certain pieces of armor together in a fantasy MMO. I like the idea!

"If your Awesome 8Q has 3 PPCs equipped it's heat generation is halved" .. or some such

I'd love the 8Q to have no ghost heat with 3PPC but have a longer cooldown to compensate.

[Red Shrike]

Darwins Dog, on 22 January 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

Just to clarify, do you mean perks like xp and cbill boosts (like clans get for using a full set of omni pods)? Or do you mean quirks like weapon and structure buffs?

I think he means quirks that become less and less as you deviate more from stock. What I'm not really sure about, is if stock should include (lore) upgrades and retrofits of the same variant, or whether stock really means stock.

[Barantor]

Hell, I wouldn't mind if the more customized you get the more heat inefficient you get.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

I'm always in favor of minor changes.

Like removal of unused weapons [removal of the MG's on the WHM 6R for instance] or upgrading of Heatsinks to Dubs... or even upgrading PPC's to ERPPC's, or shifting Lasers to Pulse variants. [or to ER in the case of Large Lasers], and I can even understand Engine, and Structure/armor changes.

They are "relatively" minor changes, still keeping the flavor of the mech, but sensable upgrades that a typical Mechwarrior with the means might make.

But when people take a Warhammer, strip everything off it, then toss on 9 small lasers and the biggest engine it can fit. I can't help but feel that you're not only disrespecting the mech, but the overall flavor of Mechwarrior and Battletech.

I really, REALLY think, Sized Hardpoints is the only way to really fix this, but even that allows problems... I get the desire to want to customize, but at the same time, totally destroying the flavor of a mech is so imersion breaking it hurts.

Red Shrike, on 22 January 2016 - 02:49 AM, said:

That's mostly because stock builds rely on TT values (afaik) and PGI has made it so that things like heatsinks are wholly inefficient compared to their TT counterparts. (I heard double heatsinks in MWO have 1.4 times the cooling efficiency of single heatsinks compared to 2 times in lore/TT)
Other example: I assume the Warhammer is a good mech in TT, as I read it was designed (in lore) to go 1v1 with a mech from the same weight class, but in MWO it can't. Its PPCs are gimped, either through hitreg, lack of damage, or both. Most other mechs can make up for it since they don't carry PPCs as their primary armament. The Warhammer can't.

I'll happily duel anyone with my warhammers honestly, and I run Dual PPC, Dual Mlas, Dual Slas, SRM6 [drop the MG's basically]

And they work fine, I pull 300+ damage a match, and generally get at least one kill within, or above my weightclass a match.

[Hans Von Lohman]

The goal I had in mind was for stock weapon perks to replace Ghost Heat/Heat Scale. With this idea in place you actually would sort of have a different version of Ghost Heat or such. Your stats change downward if you go for a cheese build.

Also, for those who think that certain mechs become better based on their stock loadout, well you can still have great quirks for the "bad" mechs, and only modest quirks for the "best" ones.

I'm also a bit of a purist. I prefer that a Warhammer have two PPC's in the arms, and yet it is fine to change it. Just know that you're performance is going to suffer if you do that.

Armor, Engine type and size, the Upgrades are not part of this. Those are fine to be changed as much as you want.