Jump to content

The Case Against Unlimited Customization


46 replies to this topic

#1 Malleus011

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,854 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:16 PM

Posted Image

Unlimited Customization belongs in Solaris, not the Battlefields of the Inner Sphere

PGI faces the law of diminishing returns with every new ‘mech it releases. Since our mechs are totally customizable machines limited only by tonnage, engine caps and hardpoints, new ‘mechs offer little new gameplay or reason to purchase. The health of the game would be best served if customization was limited in some way.

(Case in point: "The Rifleman is just a lighter Jagermech" ... "why do I need a Warhammer when I have a Cataphract/Black Knight?")


There are a number of gameplay advantages to limiting customization.
  • Omnimechs would actually have greater flexibility (instead of less) – as they were intended to have.
  • Every ‘mech would have a role and unique flavor, not just a very slightly different set of hardpoints and quirks.
  • Stock or Superstock ‘mechs would be easier to balance, allowing for quirk reductions.
  • C-Bill participation costs for new players would be vastly reduced.
  • PGI could continue to count on future income from new ‘mech releases.


There are a number of different ways in which customization could be limited, offering various levels of restrictiveness. Each have their strengths and weaknesses.

Stock Mode: No customization. This is the toughest mode of the game, because design decisions made by PGI have relegated single heat sinks to the trash heap, nerfed double heat sinks, and crippled some stock designs through other faults not present in canon. While Tech 1, unquirked battles work quite well in MWO, the imbalance between Tech 2, Clantech, and crippled stock values of some systems makes a pure Stock Mode extremely challenging to implement. It could be done, if a commitment was made to make Stock ‘mechs workable. However, this would require a tremendous commitment from PGI that is unlikely to occur.

Superstock Mode: Very limited customization. Quite close to pure stock, Superstock would allow sharply limited modification or upgrading of Stock designs to allow them to function in the MWO environment. A limited menu of customization options would allow the upgrading components to advanced technology – SHS to DHS, PPC to ERPPC, AC to UAC, etc. Tearing the ‘mech down to the skeleton, swapping engines, or other radical overhauls would not be possible. (Note that Omnimechs would be quite flexible and powerful under this system)

Posted Image
​In Stock or Superstock mode, this 'mechs load out is a known quantity

Field Refit Mode: Limited customization, including all ‘Superstock’ options, and allowing small changes akin to those permitted under Battletech ‘field refit’ style rules. A ‘mech could make modest changes, possibly removing 1-2 tons of one system in exchange for armor or heat sinks, but radical refits are not permitted. Field refit mode could be ‘graded’ to remain fairly restrictive or relatively liberal, depending on the amount of leeway PGI wanted to grant Quick Play and/or Faction Play mechwarriors.

Degraded Performance Mode: A middle ground which still allows heavy or unlimited customization, but imposes stronger and stronger negative quirks the more radical the rebuild. Minor changes – 1-2 tons, or straight tech upgrades – impose only small global penalties to agility or twist speed. The greater the changes, the more negative quirks, and the more areas they apply to. This allows players to drive anything they want, but the more the ‘mech had to be altered from factory, the less effective it is; incentivizing Stock or Superstock ‘mechs without making full customization impossible.

Specific Quirk Mode: Much less restrictive than those options listed above, Specific Quirk mode only influences customization. Major changes to the ‘mech can still be made, but weapon quirks, agility quirks, etc; would be tied to specific hardpoints or engines (the ‘mech is designed for PPCs in the arms, and a 300 engine, for example, and loses quirks if those elements are changed). This encourages Stock or Superstock builds but it less punitive than a global performance hit, only removing advantages instead of imposing penalties.

Financial Penalty Mode: The least restrictive, allowing unlimited customization but imposing an increasing financial penalty for using heavily customized ‘mechs. Stock or superstock would be the most profitable builds to run (benefitting newer, poorer players) while extreme custom ‘mechs would struggle to earn C-Bills due to enormous repair bills. This would fit best with a true R&R system, should such a thing ever be intelligently implemented in modes like Faction Play.

(IMHO, the best thing for the game would be something akin to the field refit mode; gaining most of the benefits of limiting customization without locking down the Mechlab entirely)

But I like customizing my ‘mechs!

Me too. Players enjoy their mechlab, and rightly so. Battletech has great construction rules and it has been a staple of every Mechwarrior game to allow the player to customize their ride(s). We could retain the freedom of the full, unfettered ‘mechlab in Solaris – where unlimited customization belongs.

Customize your arena dueling ‘mech as much as you wish; but for the battlefields of the Inner Sphere (and PGI’s long term financial health) the game should encourage Battlemechs that resemble factory designs.

But we've had full customization for three years!

Yep. And when there were only six or eight 'mechs that was fine, but now it will slowly eat away at PGI's bottom line. Add them in first to Community Warfare/Faction Play, and then populate them out to the Quick Play queue if they work. Naturally, it's not fair to people who love the Mechlab best to take it away entirely, so it we be fairest not to implement any restrictions until after a Solaris mode has gone live.


TL:DR summary: The game would be better served if unlimited customization was confined to Solaris mode, and one of several possible limited customization solutions applied to quick play/faction play.

#2 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:20 PM

ok?

Still not going to happen.

We have unlimited customization here. That's how the entire game was coded, prepared, presented, and sold for nearly 4 years now.
This isn't "beta", this is a full retail game that's been in commercial launch for years now. These kinds of ideas would have been relevant 3 years ago, but it's unrealistic to think that PGI or the customers and community would completely destroy and revamp this kind of system

#3 S 0 L E N Y A

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,031 posts
  • LocationWest Side

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:21 PM

hmmmmmmmmmmm..... uh yeah.

Nope

#4 Tyler Valentine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Senior Corporal
  • 1,472 posts
  • LocationChandler, Arizona

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:25 PM

View PostMalleus011, on 25 February 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

Posted Image

Unlimited Customization belongs in Solaris, not the Battlefields of the Inner Sphere

PGI faces the law of diminishing returns with every new ‘mech it releases. Since our mechs are totally customizable machines limited only by tonnage, engine caps and hardpoints, new ‘mechs offer little new gameplay or reason to purchase. The health of the game would be best served if customization was limited in some way.

(Case in point: "The Rifleman is just a lighter Jagermech" ... "why do I need a Warhammer when I have a Cataphract/Black Knight?")


There are a number of gameplay advantages to limiting customization.
  • Omnimechs would actually have greater flexibility (instead of less) – as they were intended to have.
  • Every ‘mech would have a role and unique flavor, not just a very slightly different set of hardpoints and quirks.
  • Stock or Superstock ‘mechs would be easier to balance, allowing for quirk reductions.
  • C-Bill participation costs for new players would be vastly reduced.
  • PGI could continue to count on future income from new ‘mech releases.

There are a number of different ways in which customization could be limited, offering various levels of restrictiveness. Each have their strengths and weaknesses.

Stock Mode: No customization. This is the toughest mode of the game, because design decisions made by PGI have relegated single heat sinks to the trash heap, nerfed double heat sinks, and crippled some stock designs through other faults not present in canon. While Tech 1, unquirked battles work quite well in MWO, the imbalance between Tech 2, Clantech, and crippled stock values of some systems makes a pure Stock Mode extremely challenging to implement. It could be done, if a commitment was made to make Stock ‘mechs workable. However, this would require a tremendous commitment from PGI that is unlikely to occur.

Superstock Mode: Very limited customization. Quite close to pure stock, Superstock would allow sharply limited modification or upgrading of Stock designs to allow them to function in the MWO environment. A limited menu of customization options would allow the upgrading components to advanced technology – SHS to DHS, PPC to ERPPC, AC to UAC, etc. Tearing the ‘mech down to the skeleton, swapping engines, or other radical overhauls would not be possible. (Note that Omnimechs would be quite flexible and powerful under this system)

Posted Image
​In Stock or Superstock mode, this 'mechs load out is a known quantity

Field Refit Mode: Limited customization, including all ‘Superstock’ options, and allowing small changes akin to those permitted under Battletech ‘field refit’ style rules. A ‘mech could make modest changes, possibly removing 1-2 tons of one system in exchange for armor or heat sinks, but radical refits are not permitted. Field refit mode could be ‘graded’ to remain fairly restrictive or relatively liberal, depending on the amount of leeway PGI wanted to grant Quick Play and/or Faction Play mechwarriors.

Degraded Performance Mode: A middle ground which still allows heavy or unlimited customization, but imposes stronger and stronger negative quirks the more radical the rebuild. Minor changes – 1-2 tons, or straight tech upgrades – impose only small global penalties to agility or twist speed. The greater the changes, the more negative quirks, and the more areas they apply to. This allows players to drive anything they want, but the more the ‘mech had to be altered from factory, the less effective it is; incentivizing Stock or Superstock ‘mechs without making full customization impossible.

Specific Quirk Mode: Much less restrictive than those options listed above, Specific Quirk mode only influences customization. Major changes to the ‘mech can still be made, but weapon quirks, agility quirks, etc; would be tied to specific hardpoints or engines (the ‘mech is designed for PPCs in the arms, and a 300 engine, for example, and loses quirks if those elements are changed). This encourages Stock or Superstock builds but it less punitive than a global performance hit, only removing advantages instead of imposing penalties.

Financial Penalty Mode: The least restrictive, allowing unlimited customization but imposing an increasing financial penalty for using heavily customized ‘mechs. Stock or superstock would be the most profitable builds to run (benefitting newer, poorer players) while extreme custom ‘mechs would struggle to earn C-Bills due to enormous repair bills. This would fit best with a true R&R system, should such a thing ever be intelligently implemented in modes like Faction Play.

(IMHO, the best thing for the game would be something akin to the field refit mode; gaining most of the benefits of limiting customization without locking down the Mechlab entirely)

But I like customizing my ‘mechs!

Me too. Players enjoy their mechlab, and rightly so. Battletech has great construction rules and it has been a staple of every Mechwarrior game to allow the player to customize their ride(s). We could retain the freedom of the full, unfettered ‘mechlab in Solaris – where unlimited customization belongs.

Customize your arena dueling ‘mech as much as you wish; but for the battlefields of the Inner Sphere (and PGI’s long term financial health) the game should encourage Battlemechs that resemble factory designs.

But we've had full customization for three years!

Yep. And when there were only six or eight 'mechs that was fine, but now it will slowly eat away at PGI's bottom line. Add them in first to Community Warfare/Faction Play, and then populate them out to the Quick Play queue if they work. Naturally, it's not fair to people who love the Mechlab best to take it away entirely, so it we be fairest not to implement any restrictions until after a Solaris mode has gone live.


TL:DR summary: The game would be better served if unlimited customization was confined to Solaris mode, and one of several possible limited customization solutions applied to quick play/faction play.


I'd love for at least a game mode along these lines but... This one isn't even on the Soon™ list.

#5 Barantor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,592 posts
  • LocationLexington, KY USA

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:33 PM

Yeah it's too late for this unfortunately. It's sad that Omni-mechs have less customization than IS mechs....

#6 Quicksilver Aberration

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nightmare
  • The Nightmare
  • 11,767 posts
  • LocationKansas City, MO

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:38 PM

View PostMalleus011, on 25 February 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

Battletech has great construction rules and it has been a staple of every Mechwarrior game to allow the player to customize their ride(s).

I wouldn't say the construction rules are great, and they actually weren't a staple for MW4.

#7 Malleus011

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,854 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:41 PM

Granted it wouldn't be a simple or easy change to implement, but doesn't resigning to that doom PGI to steadily declining income from new 'mech packs? What are they to do about that?

#8 PurpleNinja

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationMIA

Posted 25 February 2016 - 02:53 PM

Simple solution: 3025 stock mode.

#9 LegendaryArticuno

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 664 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 03:49 PM

Stock would just wind down to a few mechs being played... customizing gives each chasis a fighting chance.

#10 brroleg

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 245 posts
  • LocationUkraine

Posted 25 February 2016 - 03:55 PM

View PostMalleus011, on 25 February 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:


The health of the game would be best served if customization was limited in some way.

For example like this(hardpoints size system from MW4) http://mwomercs.com/...81#entry4988881

Posted Image

#11 Brandarr Gunnarson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 847 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 04:43 PM

This is a no-go. The 'Mechlab and customization of 'Mechs has been a primary feature of MWO since inception. It's nearly half the game!

Now, introducing a "Stock Mode" would be just fine and dandy. I wouldn't play it, ever; but its being there wouldn't bother me at all and those that want it could enjoy it to their heart's content.

#12 Kaeb Odellas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,934 posts
  • LocationKill the meat, save the metal

Posted 25 February 2016 - 04:48 PM

Even Stock mode would have massive problems since the vast majority of mechs (mostly IS) would be completely useless due to a variety of factors (SHS, paper-thin armor, paucity of ammo, etc.)

#13 Brandarr Gunnarson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 847 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 04:54 PM

View PostKaeb Odellas, on 25 February 2016 - 04:48 PM, said:

Even Stock mode would have massive problems since the vast majority of mechs (mostly IS) would be completely useless due to a variety of factors (SHS, paper-thin armor, paucity of ammo, etc.)


It's true. That's probably why we don't have it.

After the novelty of it wore off no one would play it. I wouldn't play it for this very reason.

#14 sycocys

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 7,600 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 05:34 PM

The case FOR customization - Without it PGI would never sell a single mech and you wouldn't have a game to play.

#15 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 05:38 PM

Not allowing customization is stupid. Customizing your own mechs is an integral part of the mechwarrior franchise.

Customization isnt the problem. Poor mech and weapon balance is the problem. And a system that rewards you more for boating weapons than using mixed loadouts is the problem (i.e. convergence).

Edited by Khobai, 25 February 2016 - 05:39 PM.


#16 sycocys

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 7,600 posts

Posted 25 February 2016 - 05:41 PM

View PostKhobai, on 25 February 2016 - 05:38 PM, said:

Not allowing customization is stupid. Customizing your own mechs is an integral part of the mechwarrior franchise.

Customization isnt the problem. Poor mech and weapon balance is the problem. And a system that rewards you more for boating weapons than using mixed loadouts is the problem (i.e. convergence).

Also the total lack of a heat scale with penalty system. Seems to me that was a pretty integral part of the TT balancing.

#17 Barantor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,592 posts
  • LocationLexington, KY USA

Posted 25 February 2016 - 05:42 PM

View PostKhobai, on 25 February 2016 - 05:38 PM, said:

Not allowing customization is stupid. Customizing your own mechs is an integral part of the mechwarrior franchise.

Customization isnt the problem. Poor mech and weapon balance is the problem. And a system that rewards you more for boating weapons than using mixed loadouts is the problem (i.e. convergence).


You have to admit though that when you limit weapons to certain mechs you reduce the amount of work it takes to balance things properly.

It is like when you have an MMORPG, it is harder to balance pvp when there are 5 different weapons per class than when you have 2.

I don't think it is possible to undo what has been done now without financial losses by PGI, but I think they should've limited the way customization worked in IS mechs because they are better than Omni-mechs atm.

#18 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 25 February 2016 - 05:51 PM

View PostMalleus011, on 25 February 2016 - 02:41 PM, said:

Granted it wouldn't be a simple or easy change to implement, but doesn't resigning to that doom PGI to steadily declining income from new 'mech packs? What are they to do about that?

start providing more revenue streams than relying almost exclusively on mechs.
introduce a better pricing schedule for their cosmetic stuff
Actually get their asses in gear and stop taking a year plus to make any headway on developing the game to help retention

The community has offered and literally handed them dozens if not hundreds of easy, micro style pricing, and viable ways to generate new revenue streams.

Custom decals
Custom camos
Cosmetic changes to weapon colors (IE laser beam colors and such)
Merchandise (no brainer? can't think of a company out there that doesn't merchandise their product) IE offer dogtags with a plyer's call sign and unit or faction information
Private server hosting for player run leagues
Custom warhorn sounds

I could go on but you get the picture.

I actually posted something very similar to what you're saying here though and agree with you. PGI is, and always has been in every facet of this game, VERY shortsighted. Eventually they're going to hit a point where the customers are over saturated with mechs. I'm already at that point.

Other than MAYBE 1-2 chassis (Madcat MKII and possibly Longbow), I've hit the point where I have no need or want to purchase new mechs. I have 70 now, the "free" mech selection is so huge on the IS side now that there's no role you can't fill efficiently.

So what do I spend money on then?
I'm not going to spend money on converting GXP, that's jut the silliest revenue stream I've seen, but that's just my opinion.
I'm not going to spend much on premium time, I mean for what about $10/month I can buy a block for a year and never spend another dime for that entire year if I really want premium time. Playes with hundreds of millions of cbills could care less about premium time.
I'm not going to spend money on camos because their value isn't there. I'm not going to spend money on colors for the same reason.

and that pretty much lists every single one of PGI's revenue streams. In another year the number of mechs will be so large that nobody but diehard "collectors" (i use that term loosely here because one day eventually MWO will shut down and then you've "collected" nothing) are going to buy or random purchases for sentimental values.

Many have tried explaining these kinds of concepts to PGI but it seems to be impossible for them to grasp for some reason.

View Postsycocys, on 25 February 2016 - 05:41 PM, said:

Also the total lack of a heat scale with penalty system. Seems to me that was a pretty integral part of the TT balancing.

it was and it was honestly one of the single most important parts of the game balance. It held munch builds in check if the GM didn't. Now past 3025 it got hairy because of clan tech introduction and implementation but even the creators acknowledge clan tech broke the game and shouldn't have been implemented like it was because it was just flat out too powerful.

#19 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 25 February 2016 - 05:54 PM

View PostSandpit, on 25 February 2016 - 05:51 PM, said:

Cosmetic changes to weapon colors (IE laser beam colors and such)

For this one in particular, I think that laser color changes might cause confusion because currently laser effects are based on their size. For example, Large Lasers are blue and Small Laser are red. If I made my Large Lasers green or something, then that might confuse people to think I'm hitting them with only Medium Lasers instead of Larges.

#20 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 25 February 2016 - 05:58 PM

View Postbrroleg, on 25 February 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

For example like this(hardpoints size system from MW4) http://mwomercs.com/...81#entry4988881

Posted Image

that's not a hardpoint size, that's simply available slots just like you have in MWO, you're just not shown all of the empty slots on the paper doll like you are in MWO





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users