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.