155 replies to this topic

[Mole]

Carl Vickers, on 08 December 2016 - 08:27 PM, said:

Yeah, mobile device and on a train with a few bumps, proof read fail too, oh well.

No worries. Gotta admit it was good for a little laugh.

[Y E O N N E]

Carl Vickers, on 08 December 2016 - 08:27 PM, said:

Yeah, mobile device and on a train with a few bumps, proof read fail too, oh well.

I got a genuine chuckle out of it. The resulting babble-speak was on the same level as "I accidentally the whole bottle."

[RestosIII]

Speaking of mobile... Pers0nne, if you have anything else to add, you'll have to talk with someone else, or wait until I can get back to you tomorrow. On mobile ATM, and dear lord I'm not going to post a wall of text on this thing.

[Carl Vickers]

I think this thread needed a good chuckle so despite the fail it worked out alright.

[Carl Vickers]

Yeonne Greene, on 08 December 2016 - 08:29 PM, said:

I got a genuine chuckle out of it. The resulting babble-speak was on the same level as "I accidentally the whole bottle."

I brain my damage, why I laugh.

[Pers0nne]

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

Imagine it: A Warhammer with its PPC quirks only in its arms, or with most of said quirks in its arms. Now you have a choice between having 50% bonus velocity, but with low slung wide arms, or PPC nippes that can go over most obstacles with good grouping, but slower. There would be people choosing one or the other, instead of always going for the PPC nipples, or, with your plan, being forced to go to a mech that just runs high mounted PPCs if they want to have a mech without it being punished.

And you don't see the problem here ?
Why people are putting PPC on the nipples ? Because they have quirks, if they didn't have the said bonuses nobody would bother puting them here in the first place.
Nobody is using nipple based PPC because it's the best thing to shoot over obestacles, they do it because it's on the torso, it's quirked and with that you have a nice pair of expandable arm shields !

Just moving the quirk will remove on the intensives, and it's not the most important at all.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

Unless you try to run not-crap versions of the mech, aka high mounts because you never actually buffed those weapons to be good in low mounts. Then you'll have less tonnage for equipment.

Damn, you REALLY don't want to understand don't you ? If EVERY MECH have the same treatment (aka put you weapons on your arms first) then it's the norm, and you aren't "crap" for doing it. And AGAIN, STOP asking for MORE bonuses. Their is already a bonus, it's the tonnage reduction. You don't need to add more than that.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

Oh no, I get your point. I get your point of wanting to punish people because they dared to move a weapon to a side torso, where you don't want it to be.

Why are you trying to act like if I you don't see the problem here by pretending my point is just "I don't like that".
Can you just stop ? It don't serve your point at all.

The thing is, right now, because of the current fitting rules, it's ALWAYS more advantageous to put your gun in your torso. Because they are safer here, and because if you manage to keep your hands free you also have the second bonus of having expendable shields.

This is a bad thing design wise and gameplay wise. Don't try to act like if it wasn't the case.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

People will go to mechs that have high hardpoints with those weapons already in place, and not deal with a mech that is forced to keep its weapons in low slots without having to drop armor/heat sinks/engine size. So the only "problem" you'd be fixing is making certain mechs a lot less viable. But the rare ones you do see would have PPC barrels on their arms unless they're masochists, so good for you?

Yeah, because OF COURSE the height of the hard point is the ONLY important thing on a mech. NOTHING ELSE matter at all ! Mech are only made of ONE important thing, Weapon height and nothing else ! Welp, good to know !
Ho and please, don't strawman me by pretending I only talk aobut PPCs, I've always talked about "big weapons".
If we are talking about CPLT-J we are talking about large energy weapons, if it's CPLT-BB it's missiles, ext ect.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

Punishing players for moving weapons around in the mechlab is an absolutely massive change. I don't see how you can't see that.

Punishing players for puting their weapon in arms is an absolute massive problem, I don't see how you can't see that.
And please, stop using "punishing" like it would make the idea look worst, it's as uncalled for than saying PGI is "punishing players" for not letting them stuffing their Locust with 10 20LRMs.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

Making a change like that would be the equivalent of, for your own examples of MOBAs, punishing a carry for buying a support item by lowering its effects if he buys it.

Funny that you use that example because it's pretty much how moba works. Stop trying to use other games examples you just keep showing how little you know about games in generals.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

A nonsensical change that would change how a lot of people play, while making a good deal of people angry, only to make a tiny amount of people happy.

So... we are talking about game mechanics and game balance and you are talking about player happiness ?
So no change should EVER be made if some players are unhappy ? Nice, let see how many changes you can do with that phylosophie.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

And yes, they would "adapt" to this change. They'd adapt by just not using these mechs any more for, you guessed it, mechs with high mounts traditionally. Prepare to see a lot less Warhammers, and a lot more Catapult K2s and Jagermechs.

Yeah because like previously established, mech are only made of one stats.

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

TL;DR: Stop trying to force people into suboptimal weapon placements just because you find it ugly. No-one will go along with it, because we play this game for fun, not to make you happy.

-Sincerely, someone that bloody runs almost only lore builds

TL;DR : Stop trying to talk about game balance and mechanics if you have no idea what you are talking about. And again, stop you lame strawmaning, my point was never that "I just find it ugly", and stop talking for everyone, you are not their representative and can't speak for them.

And using lore builds should be something you have to go out of your way to do, but something the game promote, the simpe fact you don't get that says long.

Carl Vickers, on 08 December 2016 - 08:15 PM, said:

Lol, me a white knight, you assume too much young padawan. RestolIII is big enough to defend himself, im just here adding that your ideas are bad and you should feel bad.

Its not going to get fixed, the game should have had role warfare to begin with but minimally viable product.

PGI dont read this forum, much, so trying to white knight a this is a forum and feedback doesnt wash either, you are just trolling, nothing more, nothing less.

You kidoo should learn the definition of "trolling", you use it way too much and have clearly no idea what it's supposed to mean.

With that I'll go to sleep, it's way too late for me to deal with you two.

Edited by Pers0nne, 08 December 2016 - 08:39 PM.

[Mole]

Pers0nne, on 08 December 2016 - 08:38 PM, said:

Nobody is using nipple based PPC because it's the best thing to shoot over obestacles,

Uh, dude? That's actually EXACTLY why they are doing it. Shield arms are just a nice bonus that comes with it. Trust me. If the Warhammer's arms were higher mounted than the torso hardpoints you'd see Warhammers with PPC arms all the time. Really, you would. I'm not even joking.

[Y E O N N E]

We are also using torso guns because that allows us to strip armor from the arms to strap bigger guns or more supporting equipment (engine, heatsinks) for already big guns. Forcing me to keep both arms armored because they house most of my firepower requires that my firepower be less, be hotter, or move slower.

[Carl Vickers]

Unfortunately once someone meta's if people want to compete they are going to have to meta too.

[Tarl Cabot]

Issue with most humanoid mechs is that they not have the full functionality of their arms to where the arms can actually be raised. Previous MW/MPBT games did not have the type nor amount of terrain that MWO current has. Even though the boardgame could have some interesting terrain, rarely did one have to worry about firing over terrain.

The animations for the arms are there, we see it all the time during a mech's death throes. Now, should a mech be able to raise both arms at the same time? No but it should be able to temporarily raise one for an x amount of time before it automatically lowers, even if a weapon is being fired. And dependent on mech, the arms could come forward, sideways or angled.

As for torso twisting, etc, slowing it down would be even more of a handicap for many mechs, especially for IS mechs utilizing the currently glass encased isXL engine simply to be halfway effective with a decent payload.

When your mech has to expose a hefty portion itself before it can fire a weapon successfully, there is an issue. Some mechs get around it due to speed and agility but most lower tiered/non-preferred mechs suffer and those in the middle could improve their game play.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 08 December 2016 - 08:52 PM.

[no one]

Simple fix -

gun-sight module/skill:

Put a camera on the arms of each 'Mech. You activate your gun site like you would advanced zoom and toggle between your two gun-arm cameras. That way you can torso twist and fire around corners with a small window of visibility. Gunslinger arms on 'Mechs are now useful.

[Nutta88]

Being able to raise a.mechs arms, least for a while, would go along way into making a lot of really rubbish humanoid mechs ok and lead to a good reason to put weapons in the arms.

The more I have read this thread the more I think that it is silly to have mechs arms locked at the elbows... around some of the mechs hips. If I had a mech with a shoulder joint wouldn't I use that shoulder so I could hit something!?! This wouldn't be hard to do and would drag a lot of poor mechs into being ok...even good.

If fact the ability to raise a mechs arms would do a lot for "balance". As high mounts seem to have been a decider for what mech is successful in mwo. If all mechs had "high mounts" via their arms it would remove this somewhat as a differentiator.

Edited by Nutta88, 08 December 2016 - 09:23 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Saying we should be able to raise arms, etc. is all well and good, but the limitation is in the control schema. How do you intuitively make that work as cleanly as what we already have? That's what really has to be addressed.

[Nutta88]

Yeonne Greene, on 08 December 2016 - 09:18 PM, said:

Saying we should be able to raise arms, etc. is all well and good, but the limitation is in the control schema. How do you intuitively make that work as cleanly as what we already have? That's what really has to be addressed.

So have a key raise arms like the open missle door or claws mechanic. It could be nicer if they ever place melee in the game to have multiple keys etc for where your arms are gestures strikes etc.

[Nutta88]

You would definitely want a mechanic to raise and lower your arms, as for most mechs having your arms raised would limit your field of view.

[Evil Goof]

Quxudica, on 09 November 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

Arguably one of Battletechs most iconic mech designs, it's silhouette is easily recognizable. Even people, of a certain age, that don't have a clue what BT is are likely to have seen the design in passing.

As such I can't help but make note of the statement the chassis makes about the state of the game currently, or more precisely the state of mech design. The effective builds for this weapon platform have a striking thing in common, something seen in many other mechs as well; it's most distinguishing feature - it's arm cannons - are best used by completely ignoring them save as empty shields, with the mechs primary weapons stuffed like sardines into the torso. The mech itself, if designed for MWO's battlefield, would be far better served if instead of those intimidating guns it just had a couple tall shields on its side.

It's a shame really, and a direct result of the lack of limitations placed on where weapons can be mounted in a mech. Oversized cannons and ppcs get stuffed into ports meant for machine guns and small lasers. Sure at least these days the weapons have some physical representation on the model when strapped somewhere they logically shouldn't fit, but that doesn't change the fact that the physical design of many chassis makes no real sense given the combat environment they exist in.

Those long, shiny artillery barrels on the Warhammer serve only to house a couple medium lasers at best if you want to run the chassis to suit MWO's gameplay and that's just kind of depressing. Even the mechs laser vomit builds are best focused on the torso emitters. The arm canons are just.. kind of there, providing no particular benefit beyond some expendable padding.

This is not an issue.