268 replies to this topic

[Thariel]

As we all know there's hardpoints for weapons and these are limited by numbers, not weight, like 1 Slot energy-weapon can be re-equipped with just one e-weapon, no matter what kind (if the tonnage and max-crits fit).

first i'd like to have this more strictly. like not just energy-slot but Laser-slots, PPC-slots, AC-slots, Gauss-Slots etc.

So you can change your PPC for the ER-Variant , but not for lasers.

Same goes with this: (From the dev-Corner-thread Q& A no. 5)

Quote

Will you be able to freely (C-bills aside, ofc ) upgrade/downgrade between single/double heat sinks, normal/XL engines, normal/endo steel internals and normal/ferro armour, or will these be strictly variant/chassis specific? –Gigaton

[DAVID] Currently these are unrestricted, though that may change with further testing.

I hope this gets changed so the engine can't be altered at all, armor can be upgraded only and only a little and no further heatsinks can be added, no change from normal to endo- structure, normal to ferro-fibrus armour, normal to xxl engine.


Why do i want it this way? Well if we can change whatever we want, what's the use of different mechs. I chose the speed i want, take a mech builder programm, find out what weight gives me most free tonnage for my desired speed and buy that mech and then just rebuild it.

Example:
I want to play a warhammer? Sure, but why stick with it, I need 4/6 movement (tabletop). So with a xxl reactor, a 95 ton mech gives me the most free tonnage. So I can take any 95 ton mech, boost it to 4/6 speed, pick one of the dozens of variants that has 2 e-slots in the arms, put the ppc's in, add 2 med lasers srm6 and a machine gun, add a huge amount of double heatsinks and have still about 10 tons left, means I have an even better warhammer with way more armour, way more heatsinks and room for another ppc+ heatsinks at no disadvantage (this doesn't even include ferro-fibrus or endo steel, with both I have more than 15 tons free).

If we do so, why do we need lots of different mechs. One of the fun parts of battletech is having lots and lots of different mechs. If I could change 1 mech into whatever I need atm, I lose one major part of the game.


Would like to hear you unbiased ("I want want want want to play MY build") opinions on that.

[Phasics]

Or we could leave it as is

[Jadel Blade]

I vote option B

[Black Sunder]

nvm. my blood pressure is high enough.

Edited by Black Sunder, 23 June 2012 - 05:38 AM.

[Caspanova]

Thanks but no.

If I have have limited mechbay space it seem to be the case then it is hard enough keeping it stocked with a K2 as well as a regular Catapult before having to limit your self to every single possible varient.

I think you should be able to chose to vary it within the weapon type "Oh I like the ***-4F but I think it runs hot with those 2 PPCs, I want to take one out and put in a Med Laser" rather than being strictly held to exact type.

As always, if you don't like it to be played like that, you have the option to only exchange lasers for laser etc. But please don't try to remove my ability to up or downgrade my mech's weapons.

[Gorith]

He could slap on more armor, increase ammo count, maybe ad JJs.

Though OP this has been debated to death (go digging in the suggestions forum you will find PLENTY) Some people want 100% no limitations, Some want what is described ot be in place now, and others like myself feel the game would be better if everyone were forced to use stock only mechs... Regardless this topic is not a dead cow it's a pile of fleshy pulp

[ScrapIron Prime]

With Mechlab it looks like you can pretty much strip and rebuild the mech according to the tabletop construction rules. The only constraint is weapon placement, and that's what the variant chassis are for.

With the prime Hunchback that you get with a founder subscription, for example, you can mount two ballistic weapons in the right torso, two beam weapons in each arm, and one beam weapon in the head. You otherwise seem to be able to fill the internal spaces however you want, like adding or subtracting ammo, heat sinks, ECM gear, etc. And you can swap out the engine. All for amazing amounts of cBills I'm sure.

So... an AC 10 and 5 medium lasers... a Gauss and two medium lasers... maybe even twin machine guns, 2 large lasers, and 3 mediums. The question I have is whether I can put a PPC in each arm or not. If you can, you can practically make an Uziel out of it, albeit an ugly one.

What you cannot do is make it a missile boat. And I would assume that a Hunchback is a LOT cheaper to mod out than an Atlas.

Yeah, Founder Hunchback should do it for me. At least until they decide whether I can swap it for a sexy Centrurion instead.

[Loki Farseer]

1. It will take them a LONG time to get us "Lots and Lots of Mechs" so we would have the variety being able to swap out.

2. Half the fun IS being able to tear it down and remake it as you will (within the hardpoint and weapon class restrictions)... this means you'll never really "Know" what that Catapult is running till it fires.

3. Even if you find the perfect Min/Max for what you want the same thing over and over doesn't always work depending on situation, team's loadout, map etc etc etc.

4. I'm going to take a stab here but I'm guessing your REALLY against the freedom to tinker Omnimechs would give us. Not an attack just a statement.

Me I personally can't wait till we "Hopefully" get Omnimechs and can really turn things upside-down. Not that I want or need the clans... just the freedom they give you to alter everything. When it's all said and done a PC game can't rigidly follow a TT games rules... it just won't work.. there has to be some give.

[Valron]

I can not figure out why so many people want to limit the mechlab to the point of almost being useless. Can someone enlighten me? I am not against stock mech matches, but the option should be mine.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Loki Farseer, on 23 June 2012 - 05:43 AM, said:

2. Half the fun IS being able to tear it down and remake it as you will (within the hardpoint and weapon class restrictions)... this means you'll never really "Know" what that Catapult is running till it fires.

And I believe there's a scout ability to detect that on the tree. Go scouts!

[OpCentar]

People will always find the best mathemathical builds no matter what restricitons you place on them.


Now they will find the best variant per weapon category, change that to weapon types - no difference except you will reduce the number of variants played.

Why? because now you have a mech which can have variants effective in multiple weapon categories - IE one variant balistic build, another energy etc etc. If you further restrict that to particular weapon type then some of those variants may become useless.

[Phasics]

Valron, on 23 June 2012 - 05:45 AM, said:

I can not figure out why so many people want to limit the mechlab to the point of almost being useless. Can someone enlighten me? I am not against stock mech matches, but the option should be mine.

I think it comes from some peoples incessant need to change a game they've never played to leave their mark on it

[DELLMONSTER]

i don't normally post but that is the stupidest thing i've herd MW or BT is designed to allow for a cornucopia of options and the only reason i can see for any limits is your scared some one more inventive then you will kick your but ..

[ScrapIron Prime]

Valron, on 23 June 2012 - 05:45 AM, said:

I can not figure out why so many people want to limit the mechlab to the point of almost being useless. Can someone enlighten me? I am not against stock mech matches, but the option should be mine.

Proabably because battletech canon says that mechs are really hard to modify. There's a reason that 90% of the mechs in the inner sphere run their factory-built options.

But in defense of the mech lab, 3050 was the dawn of "hey we know what we're doing now, lets customize!" And besides, the game has to bow at least a little to the reality of being a video game, and video gamers want a greater degree of control over things.

Compromise.. the art of making everyone unhappy.

[VX Seraphin]

i miss my laser boat puma....

[Valron]

Not to mention if you keep stock mechs you wont have min/maxing you will just have 1-3 mechs which are viewed as more powerful than other counterparts and everyone will run with those mech. Atleast with the current mechlab people can tailor a sub-par mech to meet their specific needs.

[Athena93]

Not being allowed to switch weapon types? Negative! I want my Swayback!

[Gorith]

Valron, on 23 June 2012 - 05:45 AM, said:

I can not figure out why so many people want to limit the mechlab to the point of almost being useless. Can someone enlighten me? I am not against stock mech matches, but the option should be mine.

The general Idea is that it forces you and your team to weigh more carefully what you are bringing to the field. Also it gives each mech it's own feel rather than just being a "skin". Along with this comes the ability to identify a mech for scouting purposes and each mech having it's own set of weaknesses. It comes from the idea that doing well with what you are given is much harder than doing well with what you feel is the ideal setup.

[NovaJaguar]

I.. Was seriously hoping this was a trol thread. But no i vote option "b".

[Adrienne Vorton]

nah sry, thats way too much... in that case we could just leave the whole mechlab out and just stick to variants... (like we used to play TT back in the day. You could chose between the given variants, but not change any setups)

i think the restrictions are ok by tonnage, critspace and category. gives you some freedom to play around, but not so much that you can build some weird setups