655 replies to this topic

[proktor]

as a purist i say minimise the posibilty to make huge changes in the weapons loadouts.
sure you can switch a heavy laser for a pulse laser or LRM for MRM but no swapping autocannons for PPC's.
make the weapons slots like in mercenaries and give them colours(like red for energy weaons).
but also find a way to restrict the creations of frankenstein mechs.

the best way in my mind is to let players buy a basic mech, and then only allow minimal alterations like in the real
mechwarrior universe(so no nova cat with 4 heavy pulse lasers and 80 heat sinks)

[Nik Van Rhijn]

How many mechs in the BTU at this point in the timeline, 350000? How many heavily customised mechs in the whole of the literature, 24?

[Ceefood]

@Proktor as a purist you should know that as of 3049 there are no such things as heavy lasers & MRMs
slots like MW4 will ruin it for many players

I for one hope they dont do this

as Mackoga statedon page 25 there are good reasons to believe frankenmechs wont happen or will be minimal

[FACEman Peck]

When I typed up this topic about a month ago, I never expected it to be in the top 10 most replied/viewed topics in all of MWO. It would be cool if the dev's next QNA was about MechLab, ways to get guns and the like, and to maybe hire up some people for Merc companies and stuff.

Edited by FACEman Peck, 11 January 2012 - 04:06 PM.

[Phades]

FACEman Peck, on 11 January 2012 - 04:04 PM, said:

When I typed up this topic about a month ago, I never expected it to be in the top 10 most replied/viewed topics in all of MWO. It would be cool if the dev's next QNA was about MechLab, ways to get guns and the like, and to maybe hire up some people for Merc companies and stuff.

I'm sure they will do it eventually, but most likely months down the road much closer to launch since it would have most likely be a fully working model at that point.

[proktor]

slots like MW4 will ruin it for many players

why?

[Ceefood]

proktor, on 12 January 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

slots like MW4 will ruin it for many players

why?

quite simply I have read posts by many players (until then I thought I was a minority) that hated the MW4 slot system.
I can only give my reasons & they may or may not be the same as others,
1) it simply wasnt BT - it was a dumbed down version for the only reason that I can figure was to reduce frankenmechs
2) frankenmechs were worse than ever before because of a poorly implemented system
3) the slot system restricted some mechs from variants that existed in canon yet still allowed variants that never existed
4) BT already has a system long before MW4 & IMHO is a system thats works well

the system was so bad I quit playing after only a few weeks - shortest played MW game I ever owned - I still play original MW, mechcommander & when I can find it again I will play MW2

[Tail Gunner]

MacKoga, on 11 January 2012 - 01:14 AM, said:

Here are some concerns I've seen in this thread and why a robust mechlab should not be a problem:

"I don't think I'd be good at customizing," or "I'm not interested in customizing,"
Solution: That's fine. Play a stock or stock variant.


"I'm worried that everyone will play 100T long range sniping mechs"
Solution: The devs are solving this at least three different ways:

* First, they are making the terrain interesting, such as complex urban landscapes where opponents can sneak around, over, or through buildings. That solves a lot of things, importantly shifting the game to being about mech combat, instead of Revolutionary War era style firing lines on ridges shooting at max range.

* Second, they are making detection and counter measures a serious part of the game. This further mitigates the ridiculous design advantage, particularly in complex terrain.

* Third, they are designing game mechanics so that the other weight classes are useful. This suggests that reasons that lead the classic board game or book designs to be balanced might in some way show up as actual game mechanics. Past MW games did not do this.

The end result is that a strangely customized mech design should be significantly unbalanced, having one area where it shines, but likely vulnerable in multiple other areas as a trade-off. Unlike past MW games, those other areas should really matter.


"My mech is OMNI. That should mean something," or "I want mech variations to stay fairly classic, not swapping out an AC/10 for a million small lasers"
Solution: Despite its flaws, MW4 did a decent job of this. Besides tonnage restrictions, your weapons had to mount into weapon pods. Pods had a certain amount of space available, and some weapons took up too much space to fit into an area. But more important, weapon pods came in 4 different styles: missiles, guns, energy, or omni. All weapons and equipment was classified as one of the first three types. I'm sure that system could be improved upon, but it did seem like major progress towards providing some balance between customizability, old canon lore, and actual game play.

I'm worried that everyone will play 100T long range sniping mechs"

Yes well said. That was not a issue in mw3 aside from one map...cant remeber the name but experienced players knew the snipers and there abilitys and would not enter into a game with them that allowed them that option.. Simple enough for the devs 1000 yard weapon's ok no problem...Just dont give a flat clear terrain for a 1000 yard shot. Enough said...Fraken meks..yes its possible to create one...but the devs should take the whole picture into account. Read into that no 1000 yard LRM lock on's avoiding all terrian

Example in m3 one could build a 95 ton avatar wtih speed and armor full of 3 20 auto cannon's very deadly..Yet it was possible to build a high speed scat and with no armor and a bunch of srms and it was a intense battle as to won the day. Not weapons but piloting skill's...what made them equal..range both had to get within 400 yds take a postion and place the shot.

Mw4 well lets not go there...But a great pilot did not have that option as to load speed and excution


http://mwomercs.com/...0-minute-match/


Just read that thread...If that is how people now feel about mechwarrior....Whoa...Maybe a better thread title wuold be in order...Mechwarrior Reboot....a pilots game or a community effort...after all it take a vilage....Ok om out for a while...

Edited by Tail Gunner, 12 January 2012 - 08:19 PM.

[String]

I think that ballancing full customization could work, look at eve online for example, you got a ship high mid and low slots and you put whatever you want there, I admit thay had thier problems but for the most part the game is well ballanced.

Thay even have ships(tech III) that you can change ship parts for diffrent abilities/diffrent slot layouts etc..

The true ballance of the game isnt in the layout but in the weapons and mech(heat thay produce/disperse, speed etc).

Edited by String, 13 January 2012 - 05:38 AM.

[Milo Riker]

When me and my buds played the table top version, we loved the ability to create our Mech from scratch. That was part of the fun, who's design would be superior. However, something gets lost when it comes to video games. That is why I voted for a base package with light customizing. If people could stay true to the spirit of the game, maybe, but you know someone will abuse it without some checks and balances.

[MaddMaxx]

Just as a point of reference.

Quote

"Eve Online was released in North America and Europe in May 2003"

So any talk of Balance and this and that is fine. After 9 years of MWO, one would hope that same level of Balance and STUFF to do will be also available.

Just saying.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Good point - I think we all wan't it to be around in 9 years time.

[FACEman Peck]

topic rejuvenated!

[Omigir]

I was hoping it would stay dead really...

[FACEman Peck]

You can go away if you're gonna be like that.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Well the latest info is; "Each `Mech has a role on the battlefield and is fully customizable by the player using an intuitive menu system called MechLab. Customizations include weapons, armor, along with other accessories, and modules."
As to what it means, please feel free to speculate wildly as we always do. The "menu system" mentioned is unlike any previous 'lab.

[Opus]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 26 January 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

Well the latest info is; "Each `Mech has a role on the battlefield and is fully customizable by the player using an intuitive menu system called MechLab. Customizations include weapons, armor, along with other accessories, and modules."
As to what it means, please feel free to speculate wildly as we always do. The "menu system" mentioned is unlike any previous 'lab.

That makes more sense....

[Randal Waide]

I haven't read all 25 pages of this post but here's 2 cents worth.
Frankemechs-no. Field refits (Imagining a light recon mission on a planet for one month, I am assuming being played out as a series of linked missions)-yes.
This brings up tech support how will that be handled?
Auto techs per level of unit? An additional character class (= more money i'm thinking)
Or a henchman attached to a unit?

[Nik Van Rhijn]

The comment about the Mechlab having a "menu system" has been niggling at me. What if they have decided on their own take on MW4's system? When you click on a weapon, say an AC20 you get a menu up. It says, None, and a list of other AC's, or even just AC10. Clicking on a blank slot (assuming you've dropped things to get spare tonnage) it just comes up with a list of equipment, no weapons. In some ways it would be a very elegant, simple system, which gives the devs a lot of control over what people do at one level. Allowing them to control min/maxing while at the same time allowing personalisation. At the same time you could just click on the mech name and get a drop down list of the variant refit kits available. Seems a workable system to me.

[FACEman Peck]

Wow, I thought this topic was dead, NO LONGER!!!!!