655 replies to this topic

[Ceefood]

actually Foxmoan you can fire a ppc at point blank range in the TT game it was just harder to hit (+1 or +2) for each range increment closer than minimum - same with LRMs - it is harder to replicate this is the pc game - I personally would make it just not hit or do any damage at range closer than minimum or at least give it a chance not to with the chance of missing increasing for every 30 metres closer than minimum
eg. 10% miss at 90-60 metres, 15% at 60-30 metres & 20% at 30-0 metres

then add in all that heat with a slow dissipation rate over 10 secs & you have a PPCzilla that isnt as effective at short range & may even be a sitting duck due to shutdown!! go for it light mech lance

[Stone Profit]

i like the slot system from mechwarrior 4. If you pulled a ballistic weapon out, you can only put ballistic weapons in that slot, or perhaps energy weapon since it doesnt need an ammo feed. But then again the hunchback swayback variants put missile launchers or lasers in place of the autocannon, but definitely space restrictions would bein order

[Wolvers]

As it's been pointed out, TT allows full customization and it appears that MWO wants to be closer to the TT than prior games. As Kristov also pointed out, you don't see fully customized mechs running around all the time. In my TT games, it very very rarely happened and when it did, it was literally a year or more of real time gaming, which translated to years in the game. It's all canon, time to get over it.

It's restrictions were time and cost for the most part. Creating a brand new mech was a little more expensive since that would require a factory refit. Not that factory owners would be keen on doing stuff like that, especially pre Clan, while they're rolling out your 1 mech, they are losing money not rolling out other designs the factory already has contracts for to make. Now we can forget about time being a factor in MWO, so increase the cost. We're certainly not going to see mechs with every tech every created on it rolling out in 3050. If the devs keep the timeline accurately enough, then that won't be a problem, we'll see new tech over the years once it starts getting made as per TT.

I've read a lot of "I want limited customization" and a general "people don't want to see boats", but what exactly is your idea of limited customization? What exactly constitutes a boat, how many guns of similar types makes it a boat? Do you then not want to see canon mechs that could be consider boats based on that?

The Mech 4 mechlab system was very far removed from canon, I doubt very much we'll be seeing that.

[Strum Wealh]

Wolvers, on 03 January 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

As it's been pointed out, TT allows full customization and it appears that MWO wants to be closer to the TT than prior games. As Kristov also pointed out, you don't see fully customized mechs running around all the time. In my TT games, it very very rarely happened and when it did, it was literally a year or more of real time gaming, which translated to years in the game. It's all canon, time to get over it.

It's restrictions were time and cost for the most part. Creating a brand new mech was a little more expensive since that would require a factory refit. Not that factory owners would be keen on doing stuff like that, especially pre Clan, while they're rolling out your 1 mech, they are losing money not rolling out other designs the factory already has contracts for to make. Now we can forget about time being a factor in MWO, so increase the cost. We're certainly not going to see mechs with every tech every created on it rolling out in 3050. If the devs keep the timeline accurately enough, then that won't be a problem, we'll see new tech over the years once it starts getting made as per TT.

I've read a lot of "I want limited customization" and a general "people don't want to see boats", but what exactly is your idea of limited customization? What exactly constitutes a boat, how many guns of similar types makes it a boat? Do you then not want to see canon mechs that could be consider boats based on that?

The Mech 4 mechlab system was very far removed from canon, I doubt very much we'll be seeing that.

I believe that when people speak of "limited customization", they are referring to a system of salvaging and "basic retrofitting" of a limited set of components (weapons and ammo, additional equipment) to an existing chassis, but being restricted from performing "major structural modifications" (e.g. changing a given individual BattleMech's internal structure from standard to Endo-Steel, or vice versa) and having limited access to other "higher-level repairs and retrofits" (e.g. changing a given individual BattleMech from using standard heat sinks to using double heat sinks, or changing a 'Mech's myomers from the standard version to TSM, engine replacement/upgrades, and so on).

By contrast, "full customization" would entail unrestricted access to major structural changes as well as higher-lever repairs/retrofits and basic retrofits at all facilities.

Such major structural changes and higher-level repairs/refits, the proponents of limited customization argue, should be generally be the sole province of BattleMech factories and highly specialized outfits (such as Battle Magic), while basic repairs and retrofitting through the use of salvaged weapons and equipment can be handled by the technicians attached to House and merc units and smaller "freelance 'Mech garages" (for the lone wolves); the argument is that no individual BattleMech should be able to be subject to a "Ship of Theseus" paradox.

The issue with this, as I see it, is that it drastically undermines the 'Mech market (by allowing the players to do the next best thing to constructing completely new BattleMechs, rather than purchasing specific variants from the marketplace) and makes it much easier to bring about an environment where heavy boats (IMO: 'Mechs whose primary armament is centered around three or more individual weapons of a single type (e.g. the Thunder Hawk, with its three Gauss rifles as its primary armament, is a "Gauss boat") or four or more individual weapons from a broad weapon family (e.g. the Longbow, with 4 LRM launchers (two LRM-20s and two LRM-5s), is a "LRM boat"), often but not always to the exclusion of other weapon types/families) are disproportionately represented (by allowing unrestricted access to modifications that affect the number and distribution of free criticals, effectively turning every BattleMech into an Omnimech and/or "gunbag").

As oft-maligned as it it, I must confess that I feel that the hardpoint system of MW4 was a step in the right direction (albeit not a terribly well-implemented one), as it would represent the restriction of the size and type of weapon(s) or equipment that may be mounted in a given location as a function of how the mounts on, and reinforcements of, the individual 'Mech's frame (skeleton) are set up (which would vary even between different individual 'Mechs that are variants of the same type; an ANH-1A Annihilator, an ANH-1Z Annihilator, an ANH-4P Annihilator, and a "Gausszilla" would have substantially different (in terms of available mounting and reinforcement points) skeletons between them, despite all of them being Annihilators).

Personally, I would like to see a hybrid of the hardpoint system and the traditional criticals system, with vastly different variants of the same chassis (as with the Annihilators, above) being sold (in the marketplace) as separate units where one variant cannot be "turned into" another variant due to how how the hardpoints are assigned and distributed (both of which are fixed and immutable for a given variant chassis), while the hardpoints and non-hardpoint areas are each generally subject to the abilities and limitations of the criticals system (similar to an idea I believe another poster has also suggested, IIRC).

Your thoughts?

Edited by Strum Wealh, 04 January 2012 - 07:09 AM.

[Seidh]

Red Beard, on 16 December 2011 - 11:28 PM, said:

What Gorith said. Stock variants only. No Frankenmechs.

Play some Mechassault, we want customization. NEVER take away mech customization. It's a whole element of the game in and of itself.

I read a little bit more I realize you guys now are saying limited customization. But really, why does it matter? Fighting heavier enemies just means trying harder or biting it till you can hold your weight. (of course if you only get points by winning, and no-one can beat omnimechs/boats/w/e, of course that's lame, but idk, MW3 and 4 u can kill a clanner with an inner sphere mech... In the story the Inner Sphere fights off an invasion of omnimechs lol.)

Of course this talk of buying mechs off the "marketplace" reminds me of Sony, so gonna go read up on that lol.

Edited by Seidh, 04 January 2012 - 12:20 AM.

[Dlardrageth]

Seidh, on 03 January 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

Play some Mechassault, we want SOME customization. NEVER take away mech customization. It's a whole element of the game in and of itself.

Think with that version you'd get more widespread support.

[Irvine]

Why wouldnt you want the customization? That will keep players! Also the mechlab IS IN THE GAMES! You say that their can't be such an such part but if its allowed in the most recent version...well then i guess it can be mounted that way then

[Seidh]

Dlardrageth, on 04 January 2012 - 12:18 AM, said:

Think with that version you'd get more widespread support.

I may get more widespread support, but I still stick to the idea of full customization. It's about a thousand times sicker to run around in YOUR Madcat with, as far as you can see, NO copies. But you start limiting the customization to take out builds that have every right to be around, and it steals from the available tactics and gameplay styles, and puts it in the field of World of Warcraft, the cash cow... This may be MY warlock, but it's very similar to all the other warlocks out there, because u get 30 points to spend on ur own, and then gear, which everyone is going for BiS so they are all going to be various stages of development with the end goal.

Now I know that using WoW doesn't entirely work cause these are two different genres, but the point remains, even if you do the abovementioned idea where there are several variants of each mech, with general limitations to each one (I'm not sure what the "critical" system is, is it in terms of mass? are there critical hits? is it the critical juncture of the pie? ), it's just going to be one of many, instead of your unique vision of that mech(of course it will be unique if you make it up, but if you are fitting to molds, you're bound to find repeats or very similar), and what if the mech you want doesn't have the variant to fit your playstyle? (yes, I do enjoy customization a LOT)

For the single weapon builds, urban combat alone is going to reduce the value of medium and long range setups, and short range... get mobile lol.

I just read Kristov?s post the page before, and so all this is pointless, and yes, the model is sick, I'd rather customize right off the bat but it makes a lot more sense the way they are doing it lol.

That's the second of my 2 cents

I also read the synapse thing just now, lol if they are doing the Inner Sphere wars, and not bringing in the Clans, at least not atm, where are the omnimechs and associated advancements gonna come from?

Edited by Seidh, 04 January 2012 - 01:05 AM.

[Riptor]

What it boils down to is that full custimsation will make all mechs of a given tonnage the same.

What counts is the tonnage and not the mech. For example: A Raven wouldnt be any better at scouting anymore then any other mech of his tonnage cause you could simply take any given mech, rip out enoug weapons and armor to make room for scout equipment and be done with it.

If that would be the case mechs would simply be cosmetic and nothing else. Degrading them down to their tonnage is not the way to go and thats why im against the mechlab we had in mechwarrior 2 and 3

Thought despite being the same system basically i like what they had in Mechwarrior 2 Mercs cause custom fits where really REALLY expensive.

You might have burned up a whole contracts money just to put the weapons from your commandos hands into his torsos.(something you had to do since arms usually came off the first and everything in them would be destroyed on a regular basis)

Also im very much in favour of MW4s hardpoint system !DONE RIGHT! (meaning the designs are canon and not made up like in MW4 with some cases)

If you want to put medium lasers or LRMs in your hunchback instead of the AC/20 just buy the version of the hunchback that has the fitting slots.

Those other versions of the hunchback where entirely different production lines and not field refits, as was mentioned before with the anihilator variants those other hunchbacks have a different skeleton and a different structure. Just cause they look the same doesnt mean they all are the same just with different weapons.

Also a hardpoint system would give mechs atleast a little bit of uniqueness instead of turning them all basically the same machine just with different looks.

For example the Jägermech and the Catapult could be configured to be exactly identicall with the scratch build system.

[Fooooo]

I'd like to be able to customize just like mw mercs or mw2.

Min/maxxing comes with drawbacks, at least in a well designed/balanced game.

If I go full armor, I have no tonnage left for many weapons. (tank)

If i drop all armor, I can fit tons of weapons, but im weak as hell.....(glass cannon)


For me it seemed (in mw2net and mercnet...even heavy gear had them) the people who constantly lost to those builds attributed that to the other guys custom build being OP, instead of their own lack of skill / situational awareness, and then proceed to leave the game, or think they "have" to use the same build to win, which is complete folly.


That said, a badly designed/balanced game can create a "one and only build", like say if PPCs had absolutly no drawbacks (no heat) and used half a slot and hardly any weight..... of course people will stack their mechs with them if they can customize.....but that's the weapon causing the problem, not the customization system.


I'd also love for the customizations to actually show up visually on your mech (like others have asked )

If I took the LRM's off the timberwolf it would lose its 2 iconic missile boxes on its shoulders and be replaced with whatever weapons I put there instead etc etc.



Also there was a post before about BF and an example of a weak pistol beating 4 or 5 players with assault rifles and stuff about the skill gap.....

Games that try to remove some of the skill factor to close the gap between newbies and pros will fail, prime example of this is BRINK (its a FPS), that game tried to remove the gap of the 1 man pro demolishing 5 or 6 + players who can't really aim and the game TANKED....nobody likes it because its artificially restricting you and player skill doesn't mean much at all.

Going that route is almost an insult to most players for a FPS style game imo. (MWO included)

[Wolvers]

Strum Wealh, on 03 January 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

I believe that when people speak of "limited customization", they are referring to a system of salvaging and "basic retrofitting" of a limited set of components (weapons and ammo, additional equipment) to an existing chassis, but being restricted from performing "major structural modifications" (e.g. changing a given individual BattleMech's internal structure from standard to Endo-Steel, or vice versa) and having limited access to other "higher-level repairs and retrofits" (e.g. changing a given individual BattleMech from using standard heat sinks to using double heat sinks, or changing a 'Mech's myomers from the standard version to TSM, engine replacement/upgrades, and so on).

That's pretty much what I'm thinking as well, but it would be nice for people to actually spell out what they are thinking rather than "I want limited" and leave it at that.

Strum Wealh, on 03 January 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

By contrast, "full customization" would entail unrestricted access to major structural changes as well as higher-lever repairs/retrofits and basic retrofits at all facilities.

Such major structural changes and higher-level repairs/refits, the proponents of limited customization argue, should be generally be the sole province of BattleMech factories and highly specialized outfits (such as Battle Magic), while basic repairs and retrofitting through the use of salvaged weapons and equipment can be handled by the technicians attached to House and merc units and smaller "freelance 'Mech garages" (for the lone wolves); the argument is that no BattleMech should not be able to be subject to a "Ship of Theseus" paradox.

I would think all those that advocate full customization would agree, major changes in the mech would require a factory, some would require a factory refit itself. Factories are built to produce specific parts for specific mechs, any changes would also require some retooling of the factory as well. Not easy and certainly not cheap.

Strum Wealh, on 03 January 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

The issue with this, as I see it, is that it drastically undermines the 'Mech market (by allowing the players to do the next best thing to constructing completely new BattleMechs, rather than purchasing specific variants from the marketplace) and makes it much easier to bring about an environment where heavy boats (IMO: 'Mechs whose primary armament is centered around three or more individual weapons of a single type (e.g. the Thunder Hawk, with its three Gauss rifles as its primary armament, is a "Gauss boat") or four or more individual weapons from a broad weapon family (e.g. the Longbow, with 4 LRM launchers (two LRM-20s and two LRM-5s), is a "LRM boat"), often but not always to the exclusion of other weapon types/families) are disproportionately represented (by allowing unrestricted access to modifications that affect the number and distribution of free criticals, effectively turning every BattleMech into an Omnimech and/or "gunbag").

Given that the devs are trying to make this game a lot closer to the TT than prior games, I don't see how this would be a problem given the costs involved in designing and making major changes to mechs. Adding to that, they'll be more expensive to repair. Imagine a 1 off car design, if it gets damaged in any way, imagine how expensive it would be to not only get parts, but find someone who could repair it. All that can be translated into bigger costs. I don't think there's a need to just arbitrarily say no to full customization when the system itself already makes it extremely difficult.

Strum Wealh, on 03 January 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

As oft-maligned as it it, I must confess that I feel that the hardpoint system of MW4 was a step in the right direction (albeit not a terribly well-implemented one), as it would represent the restriction of the size and type of weapon(s) or equipment that may be mounted in a given location as a function of how the mounts on, and reinforcements of, the individual 'Mech's frame (skeleton) are set up (which would vary even between different individual 'Mechs that are variants of the same type; an ANH-1A Annihilator, an ANH-1Z Annihilator, an ANH-4P Annihilator, and a "Gausszilla" would have substantially different (in terms of available mounting and reinforcement points) skeletons between them, despite all of them being Annihilators).

Personally, I would like to see a hybrid of the hardpoint system and the traditional criticals system, with vastly different variants of the same chassis (as with the Annihilators, above) being sold (in the marketplace) as separate units where one variant cannot be "turned into" another variant due to how how the hardpoints are assigned and distributed (both of which are fixed and immutable for a given variant chassis), while the hardpoints and non-hardpoint areas are each generally subject to the abilities and limitations of the criticals system (similar to an idea I believe another poster has also suggested, IIRC).

Your thoughts?

Hated the Mech 4 system, but then I also thought the Mech 3 system with instant changes, and major ones at that, was also stupid as the expense of doing that wasn't that bad.

What we could end up seeing, if they limited customization, is the same mechs out on the field. People could just pick the canon boats and not anything else.

[Fooooo]

Also I should point out, I understand the people saying it can turn the game into all mechs are pretty much the same, but that is only weapons wise and only in some cases (a firefly obv cant outfit like a timberwolf or something ,it doesn't have the tonnage to do so)

The mechs each have different speeds, armor values, weights etc etc, that is the main difference in the mechs......... they all at some point have had very similar loadouts to another mech from what I've seen over the years. (stock and variants)

[Dragorath]

I love to modify my Mechs over all, but I also know that if you can do what ever you want, the game also gets boring.

Most people will try to get the alpha everything away mech and it will never be possible to recognize a mech or it's armament, respectively. So you can't use enemy based strategies... Because how do you want to discriminate bewtween Mechs? Two different Mech-Types, but equal armament or other way round equal Mechs with armaments which have absolutely nothing in common? This would also be stupid. Even if some Mechs like this also exist within the readouts...
And it was already said several times, but why do you think Omnis exist if every Mech could designed 100% on your choice? So wait for the Omnis to confugure more or less freely. Just be a little bit patient.
Maybe you will be able to do some "simulation" with your own designed Mechs from scratch, but why is it necessary to destroy the fun of everyone else fur such a little bit of personal freedom?

Isn't it fun to see a Mech and to know, which Variants are existing and behave accordingly? Some small changes are definetely fine with me, but for sure not full customization.

[Dlardrageth]

Dragorath, on 04 January 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

[...]
And it was already said several times, but why do you think Omnis exist if every Mech could designed 100% on your choice? So wait for the Omnis to confugure more or less freely. Just be a little bit patient.
Maybe you will be able to do some "simulation" with your own designed Mechs from scratch, but why is it necessary to destroy the fun of everyone else fur such a little bit of personal freedom?
[...]

Uh-oh, you touched a very big contemporary taboo there. You actually dared to ask people to be patient? Gutsy, I'll give you that, now the whole instant gratification crowd will be hating on you. And the additional reference to personal freedom and the "common good"... whoa... don't expect the majority of gamers to like hearing that, much less even bothering to heed that call.

The point about full customization rendering the whole OmniMech technology somewhat redundant and useless in game has been made a couple of times. People keep ignoring it - go figure.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 04 January 2012 - 07:56 AM.

[Wolvers]

Dragorath, on 04 January 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

I love to modify my Mechs over all, but I also know that if you can do what ever you want, the game also gets boring.

I don't know how it would get boring, but that's a personal issue there and would not necessarily be the case for everyone.

Dragorath, on 04 January 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

Most people will try to get the alpha everything away mech and it will never be possible to recognize a mech or it's armament, respectively. So you can't use enemy based strategies... Because how do you want to discriminate bewtween Mechs? Two different Mech-Types, but equal armament or other way round equal Mechs with armaments which have absolutely nothing in common? This would also be stupid. Even if some Mechs like this also exist within the readouts...

They may try, but it should be very expensive and I certainly would not expect anyone to even contemplate doing a scratch build for some time.

A lot of the variants have a lot of differences between each other, but I would assume that information would appear on the HUD giving the mech name and it's variant name. I would assume if someone has stripped an Orion say, it would still come up as an Orion on the HUD at the very least.

Dragorath, on 04 January 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

And it was already said several times, but why do you think Omnis exist if every Mech could designed 100% on your choice? So wait for the Omnis to confugure more or less freely. Just be a little bit patient.

what do Omnis have to do with the price of fish? IS mechs could be completely redesigned prior to the Clans. Omni's exist because their loadouts can be changed in 30 minutes or so, that's the difference between them and IS mechs. Any changes you want to make to your IS mech on the TT took hours/days/weeks depending on how many and what changes you were making. All the prior MW games allowed changes to be done quickly and at minimal cost. Since time can't be considered in an online game, I hope they up the cost so we don't get constant mech changes for each game.

Dragorath, on 04 January 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

Maybe you will be able to do some "simulation" with your own designed Mechs from scratch, but why is it necessary to destroy the fun of everyone else fur such a little bit of personal freedom?

Overally dramatic don't you think? Why are those against full customization coming across as if those advocating it are expecting people to be able to change designs on a whim with minimal cost? I'm expecting big costs with possible limitations on how many changes you can make before each game maybe to represent a time factor?

Dragorath, on 04 January 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

Isn't it fun to see a Mech and to know, which Variants are existing and behave accordingly? Some small changes are definetely fine with me, but for sure not full customization.

In so far as seeing mechs and knowing them, there's a lot of mechs out there, very few people would know them all in their standard configs, let along their variants as well.

Define small changes.

[Wolvers]

Dlardrageth, on 04 January 2012 - 05:57 AM, said:

The point about full customization rendering the whole OmniMech technology somewhat redundant and useless in game has been made a couple of times. People keep ignoring it - go figure.

Except it doesn't make it redundant, at least not on the TT. Prior MW games certainly made them redundant though as changes could easily be made each game, who's advocating that?

[Dihm]

How does this thread keep going over the same arguments again and again?

Just place restrictions (like those found in the TT rulebooks) to customization. Time, cost, factory access requirements. Omnimechs reduce all those requirements to varying degrees.

Internal structure can't be changed, obviously, otherwise it isn't even the same mech any more.

Done.

[Wolvers]

Dihm, on 04 January 2012 - 07:12 AM, said:

How does this thread keep going over the same arguments again and again?

Just place restrictions (like those found in the TT rulebooks) to customization. Time, cost, factory access requirements. Omnimechs reduce all those requirements to varying degrees.

Internal structure can't be changed, obviously, otherwise it isn't even the same mech any more.

Done.

Exactly, although can't do time in an online game really, so just increase the cost or make limitations on the number of changes each game. I'm sure the devs can work out something that's fairly similar to the TT and will be balanced, allowing customization in the future.

[Dihm]

Sure you can do time, we aren't going to be limited to one mech, so you'll just have to play with your others while the mech you want to customize is being worked on. Swapping a weapon? 20-30 minutes. Tons of changes? They all add up, but there is a max limit of an hour or something.

Access to better facilities than the minimum lower the time.

Edited by Dihm, 04 January 2012 - 08:52 AM.

[Excalibaard]

Riptor, on 04 January 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

What it boils down to is that full custimsation will make all mechs of a given tonnage the same.

What counts is the tonnage and not the mech. For example: A Raven wouldnt be any better at scouting anymore then any other mech of his tonnage cause you could simply take any given mech, rip out enoug weapons and armor to make room for scout equipment and be done with it.

If that would be the case mechs would simply be cosmetic and nothing else. Degrading them down to their tonnage is not the way to go and thats why im against the mechlab we had in mechwarrior 2 and 3

Thought despite being the same system basically i like what they had in Mechwarrior 2 Mercs cause custom fits where really REALLY expensive.

You might have burned up a whole contracts money just to put the weapons from your commandos hands into his torsos.(something you had to do since arms usually came off the first and everything in them would be destroyed on a regular basis)

Also im very much in favour of MW4s hardpoint system !DONE RIGHT! (meaning the designs are canon and not made up like in MW4 with some cases)

If you want to put medium lasers or LRMs in your hunchback instead of the AC/20 just buy the version of the hunchback that has the fitting slots.

Those other versions of the hunchback where entirely different production lines and not field refits, as was mentioned before with the anihilator variants those other hunchbacks have a different skeleton and a different structure. Just cause they look the same doesnt mean they all are the same just with different weapons.

Also a hardpoint system would give mechs atleast a little bit of uniqueness instead of turning them all basically the same machine just with different looks.

For example the Jägermech and the Catapult could be configured to be exactly identicall with the scratch build system.

This is what I want.
Have a unique model
have several variants of it with different hardpoints, that are based on Canon variants
according to those hardpoints it can be customized with other weapons, with a price of course.

there won't be any frankenmech/everything-is-an-omni problems, and we can still have customization, because that's what I and many other people love about games.