155 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Snowbluff, on 10 November 2016 - 12:08 PM, said:

That's an SPL not as SL. :0

I could use SLas, but I found that SPL had better synergy with the MG's... and the ROF was awesome.

[Ryoken]

A bump for this thread full of good ideas how PGI could incentive appropiate weapon loadouts. Hardpoint size, hardpoint specific quirks... there is much of good suggestions.

PS: To all the meta clowns not grasping the intention of this topic, please go play with your Kodiaks until the next patch shifts the meta or cry about it...

[Dimento Graven]

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.

I think the point of this post can be boiled down to a simple:

"Y'know, sometimes elbows suck."

Any 'mech with elbows is definitely gonna have that "too low to hit something below you and "too low to hit something above you" situation.

I experience it EVERY DAY with my KGC.

It doesn't help that so much of the terrain objects have invisible walls you can have shot blocked with... Ug.

[Gentleman Reaper]

For the sake of gameplay, I'd say the best way of trying to mitigate torso hoarding is to globally slow down torso twist speeds, and tie the twist rate to the chassis, rather than the engine. This introduces a bevvy of changes in the meta-game:

Light and medium mechs are harder to hit in general, encouraging arm mounted weapons to engage them.

Flanks and ambushes are more effective since you have more time to deal damage to someone's rear before they can face you.

Tying twist rate to the chassis allows you to buff some mechs to overcome disadvantages (walking turrets like the Jagermech, and brawling mechs like the Victor).

Mounting larger engines is less incentivized since you don't get the advantage of better rolling damage than mechs with small engines.

Edited by Gentleman Reaper, 08 December 2016 - 09:43 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Sized hardpoints would be a great addition...


...to MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries.

[Y E O N N E]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 December 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

Sized hardpoints would be a great addition...


...to MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries.

nathanexplosionno.gif

[Metus regem]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 December 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

Sized hardpoints would be a great addition...


...to MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries.

[Gas Guzzler]

Yeonne Greene, on 08 December 2016 - 09:47 AM, said:

nathanexplosionno.gif

Sounds like we won't have the full mechlab we have here based on what was said in that article... can't remember which one, but sounds like each variant will have its own archetype, and compared to MWO will have a much more limited mechlab.

[C E Dwyer]

When I made my comment on this mech, now that it's back on the front page, was purely from aesthetic point of view.

From the way the game plays, any mech with high hard points does well, those without them not so well, this is purely down the the mechanic's of the game, and will not change, whether it's the Warhammer, Timberwolf, Kodiak, or any other mech in the game.

Sized hard points won't help any mechs, but will make sure that fewer get used, and I'm saying this from a perspective of a person that thinks the optimal builds for the Whammy are abortions, that insult the very core of the franchise.

One of the last drops I made, some try hard and forumite, was swearing about useless F'in Noobs that can't shoot down the UAV I've been screaming about for the last three minutes.

This apparently useless F'in noob, told him, if he wasn't such a worthless try hard he'd have weapons in his Blackwidows arms and could shoot the f'in thing down himself.

That really is the only crumb of comfort I can give to those like me that think the hard point system, ruins the look of mechs and makes this game less appealing.

[Y E O N N E]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 December 2016 - 09:59 AM, said:

Sounds like we won't have the full mechlab we have here based on what was said in that article... can't remember which one, but sounds like each variant will have its own archetype, and compared to MWO will have a much more limited mechlab.

Yeah. I haven't decided how I feel about that. Then again, since it's 3015, that means equipment choice is pretty limited in the first place so...meh

[Shiroi Tsuki]

That weapon convergence idea sounded pretty neat.

It also makes sense from a logical standpoint (I understand that logic is LosTech)
Arm mounts (with lower arm actuators) could have weapon convergence as they have the actuators to do so. Torso mounted weapons are fixed and don't move. They shouldn't be able to converge unless they're angled to certain degrees. But even if you could angle all torso mounts so that the weapons would converge on a single point, it'll only stay on that single point. If my basic understanding is correct, every torso mounts will have a specific range where all weapons can converge to that one sweet pinpoint accuracy.

IMHO it's a fair trade off, especially with this long range meta that we have right now. People wouldn't be able to just poke out, shoot based on their reflexes and go back to cover. If they wanna do that, they'd have to compensate for EACH weapon barrels and calculate accordingly.

Honestly, a minor UI update would be needed though, perhaps having those lines in WW2 tanks, instead of the ones found in the Abrams or something

[Rakshasa]

Quxudica, on 09 November 2016 - 02:00 PM, said:

This is a misconception. In the Lore of Battletech, mechs can be almost as agile (as in range of movement, not necessarily speed of movement) as a flesh and blood human. Some chassis are better than others of course, and it's very much dependent on the pilots skill, but a mech can jump, crawl, kneel, scramble, go prone and all other manner of maneuvers not found in MWO if the pilot is good enough. It's certainly true that a Battletech mech is absolutely not a Gundam, at all. there are major differences, but this idea that every BT mech chassis functions like a clunky giant old tank with legs just isn't accurate. The reason for it is almost certainly technological - the early Mechwarrior games ran on machines in an era where such things weren't feasible.

Pacific Rim's Jaegers are good examples of lore BattleMech mobility, in my opinion - full range of human movement, but with weight and mass behind every motion.

Spoiler

Spoiler

As for the Warhammer, I keep PPC's in the arms because anything else would be heresy Why yes they do run lava hot, thanks for asking Even if MWO's mechs could move their elbows though, would it benefit the WHM? It has lower arm actuators, but those cannon pods don't look like they could be raised like a regular elbow without problems

Edited by Rakshasa, 08 December 2016 - 11:21 AM.

[Davegt27]

Quote

That weapon convergence idea sounded pretty neat.

It also makes sense from a logical standpoint (I understand that logic is LosTech)
Arm mounts (with lower arm actuators) could have weapon convergence as they have the actuators to do so. Torso mounted weapons are fixed and don't move. They shouldn't be able to converge unless they're angled to certain degrees. But even if you could angle all torso mounts so that the weapons would converge on a single point, it'll only stay on that single point. If my basic understanding is correct, every torso mounts will have a specific range where all weapons can converge to that one sweet pinpoint accuracy.

IMHO it's a fair trade off, especially with this long range meta that we have right now. People wouldn't be able to just poke out, shoot based on their reflexes and go back to cover. If they wanna do that, they'd have to compensate for EACH weapon barrels and calculate accordingly.

Honestly, a minor UI update would be needed though, perhaps having those lines in WW2 tanks, instead of the ones found in the Abrams or something

it logical to assume that in the 31 century that all weapons would have advanced maglav weapons convergence
that is to say all weapons systems have the ability to aim
you just need to advance your thinking

all this anti convergence talk is just a bunch of BS

you might as well argue that AC ammo cant possible be stored in the legs and have the AC gun in the arms

we have to accept the idea that the weapons converge exists because that is how the game is designed
if you don't you end up beating your head against the wall for years and years as some people have been doing

Edited by Davegt27, 08 December 2016 - 12:55 PM.

[Mole]

Honestly this is less a MWO problem and more a reality of how actual combat works vs. entirely fictional machines that were designed to look cool rather than function. Low slung weapons are not a good idea in real-life practice.

[Pers0nne]

To stay on topic, it's pretty obvious that the game need "sized hardpoints" to keep the weapon placement as they should be.

Warhammer is the perfect example of that, OF COURSE the make is designed with the fact in mind that some weapon are way bigger than others. Big gun should be put on BUG slot like thos arms, not the damn torsos !
But their is also the same problem on the other side of the spectrum, you want your HBK-4G to have a BIG gun on his shoulder, not three little ones !

Missiles have the same problem and could be fixed even more easily. Just remove "missile hardpoint" and put "missiles tubes" on mech, they already have that hidden stat anyway !

Edit : just thinking about it for a second I got an idea (sorry if it already been posted).

If you look at Mech like Warhammer, they are made with big arms specifically made to old specific BIG gun, so why not give them "weapon bearer quirk" giving them tonnage reduction if they fit specific weapon on specific part.
Imagine something like "-50% tonnage on PPC mounted on arms".
That way you don't just go the power creep path with a damage bonus, you just heavily (well, lightly) incentivize people to mount weapon on arms made to hold them.

What do you think about that idea ?

Edited by Pers0nne, 08 December 2016 - 03:46 PM.

[Carl Vickers]

If PGI tried to restrict it now they would loose the whole comp side of the game, e-sports, feel so dirty just saying that when it comes to BT, and we all know Russ wants MWO to be e-sports so it will never happen.

Sorry to put a dampener on it but it is reality.

[Quxudica]

Davegt27, on 08 December 2016 - 12:26 PM, said:

it logical to assume that in the 31 century that all weapons would have advanced maglav weapons convergence
that is to say all weapons systems have the ability to aim
you just need to advance your thinking

all this anti convergence talk is just a bunch of BS

you might as well argue that AC ammo cant possible be stored in the legs and have the AC gun in the arms

we have to accept the idea that the weapons converge exists because that is how the game is designed
if you don't you end up beating your head against the wall for years and years as some people have been doing

The reason to address convergence is purely gameplay regardless of if it makes logical sense or not, it's just a happy coincidence that it actually does make logical sense. BattleTech takes place in the far flung future yes. The far flung future of the 1980's, hence why everything is big and bulky and not nearly as advanced as you would think it would be. That, in turn, is neatly explained in lore by the constant apocalyptic warfare the galaxy never seems to recover from, causing entire technologies to be forgotten (thus, "LosTech"). Many of the mechs we are piloting are actually family heirlooms passed down generations that have been blown up, rebuilt, destroyed, patched, broken down and jerryrigged to keep running because the tech to build new ones is either lost or not widely available.

[Gas Guzzler]

Nope. Sized hardpoints is still a bad idea.

[Quxudica]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 December 2016 - 04:15 PM, said:

Nope. Sized hardpoints is still a bad idea.

Your argument is both well reasoned and compelling. 8/8, would subscribe to your newsletter.

[Gas Guzzler]

Quxudica, on 08 December 2016 - 04:16 PM, said:

Your argument is both well reasoned and compelling. 8/8, would subscribe to your newsletter.

I've had this argument before, don't really care to have it again, and frankly my mind is having trouble comprehending why people still push for this. It's way too late in the game to change such a fundamental mech build customization aspect.

MechWarrior 2/3 didn't even have hardpoints, you could put weapons wherever. Don't see why its needed other than the arbitrary "The Warhammer is supposed to have the PPCs in the ARMS!" In the end, all this would do is make a couple mechs who have the right size weapons in the right locations be dominant, and you end up having less variety than we have now.

And literally someone just said that you want the big PPCs on the arms because they are the big spots, and then went on to say "except for the Hunchback where you want the big weapon in the shoulder." It's like... really?? It can't get any more arbitrary then that.