51 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

Alistair Winter, on 18 April 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

Bingo. Hence the comment about CPLT-K2 not being able to put a tiny medium [or small] laser in the arms, which are designed to carry 7 ton PPCs. I would have it work both ways.

• No 9 MPL Black Knight
  
• No 9 MPL Warhammer
  
• No 7 MPL Thunderbolt (or 9 if you count the Top Dog)
  
• No 8 MPL Grasshopper

etc

So lemme get this straight...

If a robot come stock with a 3-slot weapon, I somehow can't find the physical space to put in a single 2-slot or 1-slot weapon? That really makes no sense.

[Alistair Winter]

FupDup, on 18 April 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

So lemme get this straight...

If a robot come stock with a 3-slot weapon, I somehow can't find the physical space to put in a single 2-slot or 1-slot weapon? That really makes no sense.

Honestly, I'm not very concerned if other people find that it makes sense or not. It's all academic anyway. We're never getting sized hardpoints. I could write up some arguments, but I just can't find the enthusiasm.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 18 April 2016 - 03:22 PM.

[Afuldan McKronik]

Are you suggesting that only matching crit slot weapons, plus matching type of hardpoint?


HERESY DETECTED!

/s

Love this idea.

[zeves]

that would limit things to almost stock, only reason it sounds good is it would mix things up again, and we already are mixing things up evry balance pass, nerf buff.

[Impyrium]

FupDup, on 18 April 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

So lemme get this straight...

If a robot come stock with a 3-slot weapon, I somehow can't find the physical space to put in a single 2-slot or 1-slot weapon? That really makes no sense.

As far as I'm concerned, being able to freely pull out and replace weapons systems designed by different manufacturers as well as completely replacing entire engines, doesn't make sense from a BT perspective at all either.

'Simulating' the fact that weapon housing wouldn't be 100% lego via sized hardpoints would probably make more sense, but then again, MWO isn't really concerned with making sense.

[Miodog]

I believe boating is only an issue because instead of having balanced weapons "some" are better than others and you're able to boat the "some".

[DrxAbstract]

FupDup, on 18 April 2016 - 02:53 PM, said:

As it turns out, the Commando was in fact a pretty bad mech even in BT. It was called the Metal Babby for a reason.

Its uses were having low BV and low C-Bill cost. That's it. It was cheap and expendable, it was like a Zergling if we compare it to Starcraft. If your Commando got killed, it was inconsequential because you could just buy another one for mere pennies. But when it came to actual combat power, the Commando was bad.

And to think they started you out with a couple of them in Mech Commander. Those bastids!

[occusoj]

Alistair Winter, on 18 April 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

I was never really big on the idea at first, but now, in 2016, I'm starting to think that sized hardpoints would have been better after all. Basically, I wish people couldn't put medium lasers in the PPC slots on a CPLT-K2, and vice versa.
...

That would make a good deal of mechs totally obsolete with no chance of fixing them. Lets use the K2 you mentioned as example.
Basically it could run 2x(ER)PPC, machine guns and 2 ML/MPL/SP/SPL. Probably flamers too.
Honestly, who would drop in that mess? Hands up.
PPCs are already terrible weapons, and a pair of ML aint gonna make that chassis viable. Such changes make it even more of a freekill than it already is.

Things like the AWS-8Q will just silently cry in a corner if you dont at least allow PPC-LPL interchangeability. Vindis will be worse than they are now, if thats even possible. Imagine the 1X, so much fun.
Meanwhile, FS9s, Oxides and others of the future masterrace can continue wrecking face.

Alistair Winter, on 18 April 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

4 MGs on the CPLT-K2, Thunderbolt, Raven 4X, Timber Wolf or Summoner, for example! That would be so much fun!

It would be completely worthless in case of the K2. Doesnt look too bright for the 4X either and Timby-S would lough at their tears.

Alistair Winter, on 18 April 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

Bingo. Hence the comment about CPLT-K2 not being able to put a tiny medium [or small] laser in the arms, which are designed to carry 7 ton PPCs. I would have it work both ways.

• No 9 MPL Black Knight
  
• No 9 MPL Warhammer
  
• No 7 MPL Thunderbolt (or 9 if you count the Top Dog)
  
• No 8 MPL Grasshopper

etc

No 9MPL Blacknight thats right. But its not that big of a loss since 2xLPL+6M(P)L could still be built. Only 2 points less lolpha but a bit more punch at medium distances. That thing would walk through the stock-locked underhive like no tomorrow.

Edited by occusoj, 18 April 2016 - 04:28 PM.

[Xhaleon]

What exactly is the reasoning for limiting the size to strictly the same number of slots? An LPL would be a perfectly legit replacement for a PPC, both from an in-universe and meta perspective.

Sized hardpoints should limit the upwards climb of weapon size, no more than that. If we go into this territory though, we're going to start to see hardpoint size bloat as a brand new alternative problem... Oh well. Nothing wrong with a BLR having some big lasers up on the shoulders, but it should be no more than two. The way MWO works, everyone just dumps their biggest lasers up there anyway and all on one side to boot.

[Karl Streiger]

its not even the big lasers its the small lasers as well.

size hardpointss only because of aesthetics with sized hard points the devs don't bother to squeeze a PPC into a Locust while the same PPC would look like toothpick on a assault.

But seriously the problem is not the PPC in the locust the problem is that his locust guy have to be either very skillerd or totally mad - because a single PPC would give you what? 6 Medium Laser and a heatsink if space is available?

Nope the issue is still that all weapons hit the same spot - what on the other hand is a system nerf for all big guns. Seriously a AC 20 or a Gauss are only an issue when you have at least two because this time you reach the "critical" alpha damage of around >30 pp

[kapusta11]

Eh, Black Knights have 8E hardpoints in their stock configs and, for the fans of sized hardpoints, 3 of those are classified as "Large".

Edited by kapusta11, 19 April 2016 - 12:39 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

kapusta11, on 19 April 2016 - 12:38 AM, said:

Eh, Black Knights have 8E hardpoints in their stock configs and, for the fans of sized hardpoints, 3 of those are classified as "Large".

In other words, they would run precisely the same builds as now (3xLPL + 3-5ML) and the only thing that might change is the location of the LPLs? yeah.

Its moot, because we wont ever get them, but i personally dont like the idea of sized HPs because they kill customisation, and dont fix any of the percieved problems since some chassis will still be able to run the preferred builds, it would just kill off the ones that cant. (i.e. can my energy based IS heavy run 3xLPL? No? Move on to next mech)

[627]

Sized Hardpoints depend on implementation imho. For Lasers, when LL, LPL and PPC are all together "Large" then it should work. If you take crit space you have only the two PPCs so there's no real choice. I would agree that you can't build a tiny small laser into the large empty space that is normally filled with a massive PPC, it is like fitting tiny racing wheels on a tractor. But a MPL should fit into a LL hold, shouldn't it?

For ballistics it gets even more complicated, will you have small and large or MGs and ACs? Where will the gauss be which is heavy but small (crit wise)?

And missiles are not that easy, either. Divide into short and long range or size? What about artemis, that changes crit space, too?

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

ArchSight, on 18 April 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

PGI has already designed a new heat scale system to balance the alpha strikes. After CW/FW phase 3 is done and is working well on the live server, PGI might focus their efforts on making a working version of their new heat scale system next. Russ said something like it depends on what the community wants to do next.

If I heard Russ correctly this is just going to cap damage output.

Which won't affect lights or mediums at all....
And nerf THE **** out of assaults...

Aka, killing lights in a dire is going to be EVEN HARDER.

[Karl Streiger]

Ex Atlas Overlord, on 19 April 2016 - 03:16 AM, said:

If I heard Russ correctly this is just going to cap damage output.

Which won't affect lights or mediums at all....
And nerf THE **** out of assaults...

Aka, killing lights in a dire is going to be EVEN HARDER.

well don't have to when done right
Well although there is still the jump jet heat ramp, when this system is the master piece of balancing i fear for any "brand" new system.
A reminder class i creating more heat because they have reduced thrust in comparison to class III or IV but weighting twice or even four times the mass and moving more mass.
OK to be fair - if those jets create enough thrust and heat to be balanced by weight - they would have 3-4times the thrust of the current system.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Alistair Winter, on 18 April 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

I was never really big on the idea at first, but now, in 2016, I'm starting to think that sized hardpoints would have been better after all. Basically, I wish people couldn't put medium lasers in the PPC slots on a CPLT-K2, and vice versa.

With sized hardpoints, there would be:

• No 6LL Stalkers
  
• No cockpit-level triple PPC Thunderbolts
  
• No dual gauss Catapults
  
• No 9MPL Black Knights

And the list goes on. Yes, we would lose the AC20 Raven. Yes, we would lose the dual PPC Cicada. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, to be honest. And yes, there would be less customization. But on the flip side, every Inner Sphere heavy mech with 7+ energy hardpoint would be running identical builds in different skins. Mechs would actually be more unique. And more similar to what we recognize from lore.

It took me a long time to realize, but I wish we had sized hardpoints.

Imagine if all the mechs with 2 stock MGs had 4 machine gun hardpoints. 4 MGs on the CPLT-K2, Thunderbolt, Raven 4X, Timber Wolf or Summoner, for example! That would be so much fun! But nay. Alas, it was not to be.

My only issue with sized hard points is that it hurts mechs with lesser hardpoints. The Cat K2 by example only has 6 hard points and if you take away the ballistics and force large energy into the arms, what is 2 PPCs and 2 MLasers really going to do against a Black Knight with the 8 energy it has? The BK can at least mount 2 or 3 large energy by lore, so it will already wipe the floor with a 2 PPC mech (especially when it has min range issues). Even if the K2 runs 2 LLasers and 2 MLasers, when was the last time that was an effective heavy load out.

Also, it really doesn't stop boating because there are mechs designed to boat. The Hunchback 4P has 9 energy hard points. Even if you restrict the head hard point to lore SLaser, that's still 8 MLasers. That is a powerfull boating medium after other mediums have tgeir hardpoints shrunk.

I just don't feel hard point restrictions are the clean answer people think it will be.

P.S. Please stop picking on the K2. Yes it can dual Gauss, but a 30 point alpha ain't squat anymore (especially when the weapon doing it is as fragile as a dried out leaf). Just because it got some people angry 3 years ago when the game was different is no reason to still hunt it down now in the world of 50+ point alphas. The K2 doesn't have the energy hard points to ignore the ballistics let alone shrink the torso energy to MLasers in some hard point restriction scheme.

[Karl Streiger]

MeiSooHaityu, on 19 April 2016 - 03:45 AM, said:

Also, it really doesn't stop boating because there are mechs designed to boat. The Hunchback 4P has 9 energy hard points. Even if you restrict the head hard point to lore SLaser, that's still 8 MLasers. That is a powerfull boating medium after other mediums have tgeir hardpoints shrunk.

things will become interesting when the Swayback is not better than the Hunchback.... or when a single bigger weapon is worth its weight.

[Alistair Winter]

MeiSooHaityu, on 19 April 2016 - 03:45 AM, said:

My only issue with sized hard points is that it hurts mechs with lesser hardpoints. The Cat K2 by example only has 6 hard points and if you take away the ballistics and force large energy into the arms, what is 2 PPCs and 2 MLasers really going to do against a Black Knight with the 8 energy it has?

I'm not saying that I'm against hardpoint inflation. I don't really mind if the K2 can equip 2 MPLs in each side torso, for example. I just think that sized hardpoints would both provide more variety and keep the mechs more true to lore. I think it's a shame that people play both the CPLT-K2 and the Warhammer as laserboats with AC10s instead of MGs, for example.

MeiSooHaityu, on 19 April 2016 - 03:45 AM, said:

Also, it really doesn't stop boating because there are mechs designed to boat. The Hunchback 4P has 9 energy hard points. Even if you restrict the head hard point to lore SLaser, that's still 8 MLasers. That is a powerfull boating medium after other mediums have tgeir hardpoints shrunk.

I have never wanted to stop boating. The Hunchback and the Nova should always be laserboats. But I'm saying not every mech in the game should be laserboats.

MeiSooHaityu, on 19 April 2016 - 03:45 AM, said:

P.S. Please stop picking on the K2. Yes it can dual Gauss, but a 30 point alpha ain't squat anymore (especially when the weapon doing it is as fragile as a dried out leaf). Just because it got some people angry 3 years ago when the game was different is no reason to still hunt it down now in the world of 50+ point alphas. The K2 doesn't have the energy hard points to ignore the ballistics let alone shrink the torso energy to MLasers in some hard point restriction scheme.

This has nothing to do with my criticism, at all. I'm upset because the CPLT-K2 is an iconic PPC carrier, and people are stripping its arms to equip gauss or AC10 in the side torsos. Whether it's OP is irrelevant, as long as it's a common build.

It's like playing a Star Wars game and seeing people use TIE Fighters as troop carriers while TIE Interceptors become torpedo-wielding capital ship hunters, because of some wacky game mechanisms. If I play a Star Wars game, I want it to be like Star Wars. I don't want Stormtroopers with Wookie bowcasters, I don't want Sandpeople with lightsabers and I don't want AT-AT walkers to fly.

[Karl Streiger]

Alistair Winter, on 19 April 2016 - 04:14 AM, said:

I'm not saying that I'm against hardpoint inflation. I don't really mind if the K2 can equip 2 MPLs in each side torso, for example. I just think that sized hardpoints would both provide more variety and keep the mechs more true to lore. I think it's a shame that people play both the CPLT-K2 and the Warhammer as laserboats with AC10s instead of MGs, for example.


I have never wanted to stop boating. The Hunchback and the Nova should always be laserboats. But I'm saying not every mech in the game should be laserboats.


This has nothing to do with my criticism, at all. I'm upset because the CPLT-K2 is an iconic PPC carrier, and people are stripping its arms to equip gauss or AC10 in the side torsos. Whether it's OP is irrelevant, as long as it's a common build.

It's like playing a Star Wars game and seeing people use TIE Fighters as troop carriers while TIE Interceptors become torpedo-wielding capital ship hunters, because of some wacky game mechanisms. If I play a Star Wars game, I want it to be like Star Wars. I don't want Stormtroopers with Wookie bowcasters, I don't want Sandpeople with lightsabers and I don't want AT-AT walkers to fly.

TLDR: i want aesthetics

And this is the only reason to support hard point sizes....


It could have been a short living balance mechanic during closed beta - but not today.

[Corrado]

Ex Atlas Overlord, on 19 April 2016 - 03:16 AM, said:

If I heard Russ correctly this is just going to cap damage output.

Which won't affect lights or mediums at all....
And nerf THE **** out of assaults...

Aka, killing lights in a dire is going to be EVEN HARDER.

yes i heard about a 30 damage cap... in case of assaults, there will be 6xUAC5 whales, 2xAC20 chainfire crabs + SRM and lasers for added dps, 12xCERSL gargoyles new meta, 1xUAC20+6xCERSL executioners. the almighty 2xUAC10 6xCERSL timber.

i think it will go like that, if russ didn't joke.