55 replies to this topic

[Graphite]

Orkymedes, on 16 July 2012 - 03:41 AM, said:

He apologized. And to be honest i was asking myself (and im sure a few others too) if he meant MWO. Whats there not to believe?


To the Matter at Hand:

Iam for no restrictions at all. Make the Mechs like Visual Skins only. So a Raven can be a 20t or a 100t Mech and could get as many Hardppoints and Armorpoints as the user wants. That would be Awesome. So i could have a Raven for every Role in the game!

Failing to see relationship between apology and believability, but really don't want to discuss ngl further.

Onward...
Sarcastic arguments like this really don't strengthen your position.

Raven or "RVN" is a particular chassis. RVN-3L is a that chassis with a particular loadout.
So changing the loadout doesn't stop the mech being a "real", "proper" Raven, it just means it isn't an RVN-3L.

Edited by Graphite, 16 July 2012 - 03:53 AM.

[1stStrike86]

yay, again 3 options to check ^^ *checks all 3 options*

[Orkymedes]

Graphite, on 16 July 2012 - 03:45 AM, said:

Failing to see relationship between apology and believability, but really don't want to discuss ngl further.

Sorry but not accepting apologies is nothing to be proud about. It maybe not heartfelt when a moderator has to tell him to apologize, but he did in the end.

Graphite, on 16 July 2012 - 03:45 AM, said:

Onward...
Sarcastic arguments like this really don't strengthen your position.

Raven or "RVN" is a particular chassis. RVN-3L is a that chassis with a particular loadout.
So changing the loadout doesn't stop the mech being a "real", "proper" Raven, it just means it isn't an RVN-3L.

What does that have to do with sarcasm? Its how i want the mechlab to be. I think it would be awesome to be able to have every Mech scale is much as you want. I could make a 100t Raven as big as an Atlas with AS-7D config. And the greatest thing is that it would be balanced, because everyone could do that.

A real or proper Raven is the Prime or another Variant. As long as you use the Mechlab, it wont be a proper Raven anyway. So why not go nuts and let people do what they want`?

[Graphite]

Orkymedes, on 16 July 2012 - 03:58 AM, said:

Sorry but not accepting apologies is nothing to be proud about. It maybe not heartfelt when a moderator has to tell him to apologize, but he did in the end.

Ohh...my apologies to the OP, but I'm starting to think this thread is close to beyond saving...

Did not refuse apology - failed to see how an apology makes something more believable, as you suggested.

Are you sure you aren't ngl in disguise?

Quote

What does that have to do with sarcasm? Its how i want the mechlab to be. I think it would be awesome to be able to have every Mech scale is much as you want. I could make a 100t Raven as big as an Atlas with AS-7D config. And the greatest thing is that it would be balanced, because everyone could do that.

A real or proper Raven is the Prime or another Variant. As long as you use the Mechlab, it wont be a proper Raven anyway. So why not go nuts and let people do what they want`?

Yet more sarcasm... very clever.

Prime is for clan mechs. The "default" Raven is the RVN-3L. A Raven chassis can always be referred to as a Raven, regardless of loadout.

You're welcome to your opinion on how the mechlab should operate, but I suspect you'll be in a tiny minority.

Edited by Graphite, 16 July 2012 - 04:19 AM.

[Thorgar Wulfson]

Saintphoenix, on 16 July 2012 - 03:29 AM, said:

If u think u can change anything about the game with less than a month till the founders ur jokin, the game is basically made now its all just fine tuning and polish and adding things, far less changing and they wont change a core aspect of the game this late anyway

as i have stated repeatedly i am not trying to change minds just wanted to see where people's opinions where. nothing more nothing less. sheesh

[Orkymedes]

Graphite, on 16 July 2012 - 04:15 AM, said:

Did not refuse apology - failed to see how an apology makes something more believable, as you suggested.

Are you sure you aren't ngl in disguise?

Sorry but are you trolling me?

Quote

Yet more sarcasm... very clever.

Prime is for clan mechs. The "default" Raven is the RVN-3L. A Raven chassis can always be referred to as a Raven, regardless of loadout.

You're welcome to your opinion on how the mechlab should operate, but I suspect you'll be in a tiny minority.

There is NO Sarcasm. I never have played Battletech. I only know Mech Commander 2 and MW:4 Mercs, so i dont now much about Clans and Inner Sphere. Therefore i cant contribute to what gets called a prime and what not. I thought the first Variant was always the Prime.

All im saying is that i want no restrictions at all in the Mechlab. That would be awesome. So when i buy a Raven, i could scale it from the 30t it has to 100t and buy new Hardpoints for it, new leg pieces etc. I dont get the sarcasm here. Its 100% customization what is a good thing IMHO. Everyone could buy his favorite mech and still use it as an Atlas for example. IMHO the Atlas is hidious and the Raven the best looking Mech in the game. And i want it to use in as many roles as possible. If you see sarcasm here, then you are either trolling me or not capable of seeing other peoples opinions.

Edited by Orkymedes, 16 July 2012 - 04:26 AM.

[magji]

ngl, on 16 July 2012 - 12:51 AM, said:

An unrestricted Mechlab will be a balancing nightmare. A very restricted Mechlab would be pointless. So what are we discussing about?

I agree

[Thorgar Wulfson]

ngl, on 16 July 2012 - 02:58 AM, said:

Three Admins have approached me via PM and told me that it was wrong of me to fault other peoples opinions as wrong. They also told me that i should state that the game in beta im referring to better be not MWO.

Im sorry guys if i hurt some feelings on the road. Sometimes i can be a internet bully despite the fact that i was bullied most of my life in real life. I will also say that i can neither comment or hint anything about the MWO Beta. The Game in question is a unity based browser mmo thats in open beta right now.

I hope you will continue this great thread without me in that orderly manner it had started before i began to violate the term of use.

Sorry again Folks.

thank you for your apology.

I agree with what you where saying but for two problems;

one: this thread is not about trying to change minds just get the opinions of the forum members.

Two: you were very rude with how you posted.

Other than that i agree trying to use polls to change what the devs have designed is a bad idea, unless its a feature that would really damage the game like The Secret World and its pay to play AND cash shop model. Thankfully nothing like that here.

I was attempting to make a simple way to get opinions sans flaming sadly their seem to be people just intent of flaming no matter what.

[Graphite]

Orkymedes, on 16 July 2012 - 04:24 AM, said:

All im saying is that i want no restrictions at all in the Mechlab. That would be awesome. So when i buy a Raven, i could scale it from the 30t it has to 100t and buy new Hardpoints for it, new leg pieces etc. I dont get the sarcasm here. Its 100% customization what is a good thing IMHO. Everyone could buy his favorite mech and still use it as an Atlas for example. IMHO the Atlas is hidious and the Raven the best looking Mech in the game. And i want it to use in as many roles as possible. If you see sarcasm here, then you are either trolling me or not capable of seeing other peoples opinions.

Like I said, that view will put you in a tiny minority. (Maybe even a minority of 1?)

We're dealing with an imaginary scifi universe here, but there are still attempts to try and make things "realistic".
If you can explain how a chassis which weighs 20 tons empty can be shrunk or expanded, you may be able to convince others your idea is sound. I don't like your chances though

There are rules for construction, that the devs are following as closely as is practical (see my sig), and those rules allow nothing like your suggestion. Buy yourself a copy of the BT Tech Manual to improve your grasp of the subject....

Edited by Graphite, 16 July 2012 - 04:47 AM.

[xRaeder]

I'd like to add something to my vote.

If the Mechlab still works like it does in the Mechlab video at release then it will be a big failure in interface design.

Every change to a Mech requires a confirmation box to pop up. This is bad interface design. Far too many clicks.

I mean just to do my Jenner scout build I'd have to do over 30 clicks when including that damned confirmation box.

Let the player do what we wants and show the player how much it will cost during the process.

At the end is a confirm button that then shows a purchase summary... I dunno... like a regular online store store like Amazon?

Really basic interface stuff here.

[MrGray]

Where is "I do not want mechlab" option?

[Hadaal]

Alaric Wolf Kerensky, on 16 July 2012 - 03:21 AM, said:

Way to start yet another flame war guys. ngl actually had a good argument against customization and you flamed him because his opinion differed from yours.

His comment about game decisions might have been a little harsh, but that held truth as well. If PGI listened to every single request on these forums, we would have P2W players flying Overlord Dropships over the field blasting everything to smithereens. We would have energy shields on our beloved BattleMechs. That kind of stuff is actually in the suggestions forum.

People on here need to chill out a little. We are all on the same team here (mostly). If you want to let out some rage and flame, head on over to the Hawken forums. They will be glad to assist you.



That aside, I am for restricted Mech Lab. If you are selecting your 'Mech based on looks, something is dreadfully wrong. The hardpoint setup is the way to go, as long as it allows some flexibility for each variant, and as long as there is equality of hardpoints. A Catapult should feel like a Catapult. A Hunchback should feel and be different from a Centurion.

great post Alaric and i totally agree with you. restriction is a must have or else all that you suggested in the second statement would be happen.

[XxZylonxX]

Seems to be fine as they currently implement it. (from what ive read)

Edited by XxZylonxX, 16 July 2012 - 06:14 AM.

[xRaeder]

XxZylonxX, on 16 July 2012 - 06:13 AM, said:

Seems to be fine as they currently implement it. (from what ive read)

I think the hardpoint restrictions are fine as they stand. However please refer to my above post about how bad the 'Mech config video is.

[Sept Wolfke]

TheOneGunslinger, on 16 July 2012 - 12:50 AM, said:

think it works how it is atm

last the devs have stated the hardpoint system is in a state of flux, it's yet to be determined how it'll be, so how it is at the moment is '?'

my question about the whole hardpoint thing, is, when I see the screenshots or videos of the game, on the lower right of the screen is the weapon loadout screen in the cockpit - the space available for the weapons list seems rather limited, so if they give us alot of hardpoints, then how will that screen handle displaying more weapons than it has room to display? similarly, when you target a mech, it's condition and loadout appear in the upper right part of the cockpit display - how would it work if there were more weapons on a mech than could be listed there? I sense that hardpoint restrictions will ultimately be set so that these parts of the HUD don't have data overflow.

[bpphantom]

I chose the unrestricted because I understand that these would be changes to existing chassis. A such, there are only certain things that can be done without it being a new factory variant. Can't change the internal structure type, can't change the engine, can't change heat-sink type because of those buried in the engine, etc. Essentially strip out the weapons and the like and let me go to town.

I understand the affection for the middle ground option and I'm quite happy with it, but given my druthers...