655 replies to this topic

[Ceefood]

there is another way customisation could take place I thought of which includes both a waiting time & instant changes simultaneously!

you can customise a percentage of your mech or an amount of weight then wait a period of time & customise more etc
eg. 10% of mech weight or say 8 tons then wait say a week or a a couple days before the next 10% or 8 tons could be customised (this would make light mech quicker to customise than a heavy making it more desirable to own a light mech)

also you could reduce some wait time by not fully customising
eg if you only customised 5% or 4 tons then you wait 1/2 the normal time - easy for a pc to work out exactly - the computer could even give you the wait time till next customisation before you commited to the current mods so if you trying to decide if fitting that extra ton of armour is worth the wait you use the mechlab & change your armour weight & the lab tells you this change will mean X amount of time before next mods can be done - maybe that extra armour change can wait so you can do further mods sooner like replacing the engine in 2 days rather than 3

thoughts??

[MaddMaxx]

Kristov Kerensky, on 05 January 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ech-magic-maybe

That right there seems to say we'll be seeing full on customization by the TT rules, because the shop discussed..that's what they specialize in, and the fact that PGI made a point of bringing them up on the MercNet....

Hehehehe. From the Border Worlds or Periphery all the way to "Outreach" seems a rather long way to have to send a Mech(s) to get some Custom work done. Shipping costs better have gone down over the last 2K years. Across a Continent gets pricey, let alone 20 Jumps across known Space. I hope they do House calls. LOL!

[Omigir]

up to 23 pages *rubs face* I dont have the patiance to back read the same two opinions over and over agian back to where it was when I last left off... even with all night available to me...

Edited by Omigir, 06 January 2012 - 08:04 PM.

[Halfinax]

Customization is necessary to the BTU, but again taking customization to the extreme shouldn't be an option. Taking a multipurpose/role/range 'Mech and specializing it fine, but taking a Long Range 'Mech and making it an upfront or alternatively long range killer shouldn't be an option. There is little precedent for this kind of customization, and that which does fall into that category is typically faction or field rearmament specific within the cannon variant within question. I really don't mine finer tuning of a Chassis specialization, but do mind a full on re-purposing of a chassis to fit a role that it was never intended to fill.

Yes, you will find cannon variants that do just that, but they are the exception and not the rule unlike the abuse that has been seen in previous MW titles that had a focus on SP campaigns with a MP feature tacked on.

[Vulpesveritas]

Personally I figure that weapons should be rather easily "quick swappable" with weapons of a similar size. I propose this system.
Weight limit for chassis.
3 types of "hardpoints" for weapons: light, medium, heavy
Give a certain number and location for hardpoints on each mech. Weapon swaps could be done in a matter of minutes, however your mech will be limited to what could realistically be placed on a particular hardpoint. two medium weapons could be placed on a heavy hardpoint, two light weapons could be placed on a medium hardpoint for example. Just to have options but nothing gamebreaking. Also means you can't upgrade a mech to be too heavy either.
Cooling: Coolant upgrades could be implemented on a minutes basis, with a full heatsink upgrade available.
Power: This is going to be the main thing taking time, hours.
Chasis: A chasis swap will be the very longest thing to take. Perhaps a 24 hour change out on a mech.
Armor: Allow for sectional upgrades and time taking by size of area.

I figure it won't stray tooooo far from canon by taking that, while giving some realism on what weapons could be loaded as well as well as keeping people from getting bored from having to wait too long to customize their mech.
I also feel a "Scrapbuild" option for when you're buying a mech straightout and buying a complete mech with the layout you want instantly, and also giving a 'test run' option 'simulator' to see whether you like the mech/layout before purchase. it would simplify things and means that you could have quite a bit more fun on the go.

Seeing as the main point of it being a game is to have it fun.

Alternatively we could run a frankenbuild system out of the Armored Core series. And while customization fanatics (such as myself) would love it, canon fanatics would jump boat.

That sort of system would allow people who like a look of a particular chassis or the feel of the movement of one tune things here and there to set up their mech to play the way they like to play. Because once again people, this is a game. It's meant to be fun and make money for the developer.

[MaddMaxx]

I need a Ride? relax

[UncleKulikov]

Complete thoughts for lackluster OP.

I want mechs to be customizable, as flexible as balance allows. And that is the main point, customization can only be allowed as long as it doesn't negatively affect balance.

Within that consideration, customization should be as flexible as possible.

[Virgil Caine]

MaddMaxx, on 05 January 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

I am not trying to be difficult I just don't see how changing out one Part(s) for another (customization) differs in time with replacing Part(s) that were removed simply by another means (damage repair)

If the thought is, players can deal with one (somehow logically) versus the other but they couldn't/don't want to deal with one simply due to gameplay requirements, that is fine. That is a Dev call.

That seperation has little to do with WHY one was dropped and the other kept (logically).

All speculation at this point as well.

Replacing a part is far and away an easier, less time consuming proposition than retooling the whole vehicle to accept an entirely different part.

The difference is that these aren't Omnimechs we're dealing with, they are standard Inner Sphere mechs. The mech was DESIGNED to carry a PPC... jacking in another PPC of the same make isn't so difficult. Remove bolts, apply new part, replace bolts. (Gross simplification, true...)

However, trying to mount an Autocannon to the PPC mount, is quite enother proposition altogether. Ammo feeds just to name one would take a few days, not to mention rebalancing the myomer/actuators in the mech to properly maneuver the weapon, perhaps even having to add new myomers to accomidate the heavier weapon. Putting in new software in the cockpit to register the different weapon, targeting systems, retooling the coolant lines to divert heat away from the new weapon properly. Making sure ejection ports for the shell casings are clear, so they can properly cycle. Given all that, and the time to test it and make sure it functions properly before fielding it. (Yeah, they do that in the military, who knew!?)

Most Mechwarriors would just say, "Slap on a new PPC and I'll make do"

It would be like trying to take the auto-loading gun from the Merkava tank, and mounting it in place of the manual loading Abrams gun. Same gun in theory, both 120mm guns. In practice completely different.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

After years of tabletop experience I wonder why one would need this frankenmech-building at all? There are lots of balanced variants and they make you understand the purpose of each model! But in all scratch-build mech-labs any mech is just a walking tonnage. Only MW4 made some restrictions, but they were too far from ideal and sometimes obstructed creating a classic variant for some mech.

IS mechs are not supposed to be fully customizable at all, and never were. They were produced in several variants and customizing one could be a problem. As for omni-mechs, in theory, they had options for some manual customization, but were mostly used similarly to the IS ones, only that they had more variants and these variants could be switched for the same mech pretty quick in some field mech-lab.

When all you have is pre-made classic variants you start to look and find a use for every weapon you have, make out some tactics, firing cylces etc. Each mech starts to have a face for you, you see a role for every one of them.
But when you are able to scratchbuild you crowd battlefield with some PPC (GR/LRM/SRM/LL/etc) monsters and pack it with heat-sinks, ammo or armor. Lots of weapons are extremely rare to use or never fired at all in some MW games. Like small lasers and machineguns (later are often discarded even in tabletop, many players drop all machinegun ammo in turn 1, but that's another story). Mech model, all those names become some hollow form, and what you see is not what you get.
When I see a Catapult that jumps in and fires 2xAC20 I start loosing my mind. That's not the Battletech I like, not at all.

Edited by Duncan Jr Fischer, 08 January 2012 - 06:50 AM.

[RogueMae13]

I voted the first option simply because of the customisation instead of starting from scratch, which I assume would be similar to that of the MechWarrior 3 mechlab , maybe the MechWarrior 4 mechlab. I'm not sure, but it wouldn't be MechWarrior without the mechlab and the ability to customise your mech, and tailor it to how you want it to be.

[guardiandashi]

Duncan Jr Fischer, on 08 January 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

After years of tabletop experience I wonder why one would need this frankenmech-building at all? There are lots of balanced variants and they make you understand the purpose of each model! But in all scratch-build mech-labs any mech is just a walking tonnage. Only MW4 made some restrictions, but they were too far from ideal and sometimes obstructed creating a classic variant for some mech.

IS mechs are not supposed to be fully customizable at all, and never were. They were produced in several variants and customizing one could be a problem. As for omni-mechs, in theory, they had options for some manual customization, but were mostly used similarly to the IS ones, only that they had more variants and these variants could be switched for the same mech pretty quick in some field mech-lab.

When all you have is pre-made classic variants you start to look and find a use for every weapon you have, make out some tactics, firing cylces etc. Each mech starts to have a face for you, you see a role for every one of them.
But when you are able to scratchbuild you crowd battlefield with some PPC (GR/LRM/SRM/LL/etc) monsters and pack it with heat-sinks, ammo or armor. Lots of weapons are extremely rare to use or never fired at all in some MW games. Like small lasers and machineguns (later are often discarded even in tabletop, many players drop all machinegun ammo in turn 1, but that's another story). Mech model, all those names become some hollow form, and what you see is not what you get.
When I see a Catapult that jumps in and fires 2xAC20 I start loosing my mind. That's not the Battletech I like, not at all.

mechs ARE and have always been customizable in battletech... its just a question of "how customizable" they are, classic non omni mechs are customizable but it usually takes hours to days to weeks to make extensive customization

changing from a ppc, plus heat sinks to an lrm rack plus ammo can be done within a day, changing the heatsinks from singles to doubles (same number) is going to take about a week or so, swapping an entire weapons payload well add up the time for each componant change.

OMNIS big change is the weapons and equipment is mounted as pods and pods work as anything that fits (weapons electronics heatsinks etc) if it fits space (crits) and weight it can be used. the listed configs (prime, a b, c, d, s, etc) are just standard pregeneratred configs, IF I want to take a masakari(warhawk) prime and just swap 2 erppc for large pulse lasers that is valid. if I want to take it and remove the lrm launcher, and replace it with DHS/electronics that is legit also, but may not be accepted in a canon only "game"

Edited by guardiandashi, 08 January 2012 - 01:13 PM.

[statler]

Holmes, on 17 December 2011 - 06:49 AM, said:

I've said it once, and I'll say it again. No MechLab, No Buy.

It's free.

Oh. Well, No MechLab, No Play.

Not even worth the time. I uninstalled MW:LL within hours after discovering there was no MechLab, and it took me days to download on my joke of an internet connection. I don't **** around, MechLab is half the game for me.

I'm the same way with any game. In Gran Turismo I spend hours and HOURS tweaking suspension and gear ratios etc. per car until it is EXACT. I downloaded some bad *** pirate MMO to play with my buddy, found out you couldn't customize how your guy looks... bam game done. Uninstalled.

yep same. i will strait not play, and the MW series is my favorite game franchise by a real good bit.
whats the point of MW without full customization. you might as well play a fps based on people without the design portion imo.

this should not be a simple majority vote: designing mechs is a large part of why i play, so just because it isnt for 70% doesnt mean you should absolutely ruin the game for the other 30%

also, If im going into an open flat land area, i want long rang weaps and nothing else. if im going into a real dense city, i want just short range huge damage burst set ups. most of the pre defined arrangements just dont cut if for all the different scenarios.

on the balance issues....there will be some with or without customization. i would rather be able to build mechs to compensate or match while tweaks are being made by development. and would also rather have them balance the real game by balancing the base equipment then balancing individual mechs in an endless cycle of chasing their tail.
with customization a lot of them get worked out by people building things efficient for some maps, and others building the same or compensation. some things will actually need to be tweeked as things are noticed with some builds. heat balancing may need to be adjusted to prevent single burst leg buster mechs. for some of the srm, guass, or even 30 machine gun builds...might need to tweak explosive chances of ammo on hits, kickback on the mech, ammo to space rations etc.

for the lore fans that are talking about it not being right cuz the need to redesign the whole mech...it makes for an extremely more fun game if you just assume that the components are very compatible with common lego connectors. it also makes a lot of sense in a salvage environment that equipment is designed to be readily interchangeable. sure you can add cool things to make each mech its own, and limit things somewhat, like this 40 ton mech has a right arm with one 6 slot block, so can hold most anything, while this 40 ton mech has a 3 slot block and a 4 slot block so can hold more but not one huge piece. this makes sense from the look/shape of the mech anyway. saying that laser slots are different from ammo gun slots, and missle slots....again, i have to point to a salvage based war environment lasting so many years would go as far as possible to standardize for easy use of whatever you find on whatever you have...also, its just more fun to be able to put anything anywhere without too many constraints.

on time....your just going to have to let that go for the sake of awesome gameplay...sorry. repairs take forever too, but you arent going to make me wait weeks to replay the same mech.

in short, i just want o make the mech i think i should be using for the scenario, and you should be able to defend against whatever i come up with without having to gimp me into unspecialized mechs.

Edited by statler, 08 January 2012 - 03:50 PM.

[Ceefood]

statler, on 08 January 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

this should not be a simple majority vote: designing mechs is a large part of why i play, so just because it isnt for 70% doesnt mean you should absolutely ruin the game for the other 30%

So if 70% wont play if there is a full mechlab like you want does that mean they should ignore that 70% - sorry but thats not reality & PGI wont consider that as it makese the game unviable financially. BTW so you know I also want a full mechlab

statler, on 08 January 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

also, If im going into an open flat land area, i want long rang weaps and nothing else. if im going into a real dense city, i want just short range huge damage burst set ups. most of the pre defined arrangements just dont cut if for all the different scenarios.

Thats why the original TRO mechs from the TT had a balance of weapons so that could work in any environment - if everyone is the same then there is no problem - in open grounds you use your long range weapons till you can close & use your medium to short range. For city environments you use short-medium range stuff unless you get a shot down a long street then you use long range. Why specialise? My only reason is if your are recon & take more electronics in both offensive & defensive measures - this is a reason to specialise - NOT to specialise in weapons

statler, on 08 January 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

on the balance issues....there will be some with or without customization. i would rather be able to build mechs to compensate or match while tweaks are being made by development. and would also rather have them balance the real game by balancing the base equipment then balancing individual mechs in an endless cycle of chasing their tail.
with customization a lot of them get worked out by people building things efficient for some maps, and others building the same or compensation. some things will actually need to be tweeked as things are noticed with some builds. heat balancing may need to be adjusted to prevent single burst leg buster mechs. for some of the srm, guass, or even 30 machine gun builds...might need to tweak explosive chances of ammo on hits, kickback on the mech, ammo to space rations etc.

If the table top rules are used, excluding the later clan stuff which affected balance heavily, then everything was basically balanced - you want to alpha strike someone fine but you get a massive heat buildup immediately & possibly shutdown it doesnt matter that you have the equivalent in heatsink points to match your weapon damage heat points cause this is time based so over ten seconds your heat goes down to zero but for those 10 secs & the time it takes to restart your mech your a sitting duck!!!

statler, on 08 January 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

for the lore fans that are talking about it not being right cuz the need to redesign the whole mech...it makes for an extremely more fun game if you just assume that the components are very compatible with common lego connectors. it also makes a lot of sense in a salvage environment that equipment is designed to be readily interchangeable. sure you can add cool things to make each mech its own, and limit things somewhat, like this 40 ton mech has a right arm with one 6 slot block, so can hold most anything, while this 40 ton mech has a 3 slot block and a 4 slot block so can hold more but not one huge piece. this makes sense from the look/shape of the mech anyway. saying that laser slots are different from ammo gun slots, and missle slots....again, i have to point to a salvage based war environment lasting so many years would go as far as possible to standardize for easy use of whatever you find on whatever you have...also, its just more fun to be able to put anything anywhere without too many constraints.

Some good points - surely with all the years of war they have made some changes to how mechs are build - I know canon says they lost the ability to make new mech designs & are only now relearning but surely after hundreds of years of warfare & salvaging they have made some adjustments?

statler, on 08 January 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

in short, i just want to make the mech i think i should be using for the scenario, and you should be able to defend against whatever i come up with without having to gimp me into unspecialized mechs.

This implies a need for specialising when my above post show there is isnt - sure you may want it or like it but it isnt needed - also how can I or others come up with a defence against what you come up with when you can change your design every match - sure by your arguments some maps with full customisation might bring about PPC boats or whatever & we find a defence against that but what about you change your design to something not used alot like a Large pulse boat setup ie no mimimum range & with reasonable long range where do I start to defend against it & how do I know you will use it so I know what to take against it??

Dont get me wrong I like a full mechlab but even I as a full lab supporter can shoot holes in your arguements without thinking too much & PGI will shoot more holes I am sure. A full mechlab to me is desirable but I also want balance - the TT rules did that to a reasonable degree but in a realtime sim this becomes a bit harder - TT rules had time restrictions which really isnt viable as the TT rules setout - noone will wait 5 days to play again so the game will die. Those that can afford to wait since they have multiple mechs then it isnt an issue & makes it harder on those who cant afford extra mechs. I think my idea of proportional customisation works well & some friends agree with my idea and wondered why it had not been done before - my arguement was cause they were based on single player games with multiplayer thrown in. My idea was that you can customise a set amount for free time & then have to wait some period of time to customise more - like a laybuy - you get your work done now but have to pay back the time later. if you dont use all the set amount you get a discount on time to pay back. this limits how much change you can do at once & means you have to think strategically about what you change so that you dont gimp yourself for some maps.

Also PGI are implementing info warfare, plus maybe other strategies, which may make boats alot less viable or desirable - I hope so

Edited by Ceefood, 08 January 2012 - 04:52 PM.

[Fyrwulf]

One of the cool things about the tabletop game is that you can design any variant you want and give it an interesting backstory, provided you followed the game's rules and stayed within the limitations of the original design. You want a Lyran Atlas to be revamped into some sort of missile boat with an XL engine, endo-composite internal structure, and ferro-fibrous armour? Not a problem, just don't be surprised when your hyper-expensive missile boat becomes a molten wreck because of a critical hit to the engine.

On the other hand, you have the previous Mechwarrior games where no respect was paid to the BT rules and people could tune their mech into something monstrous for no cost at all and without regard to the balance that BT has, never mind tech level.

So, what is needed is balance. You, the player, should be able to go to Mech Magic Inc and ask them to construct a one off variant for you. However, the tech involved should not go past the most recent TRO within the timeline, it should take time to deliver (a month or so), it should cost you at the rate of $1 per million C-Bills as calculated by the BT rules, and finally you should be the sole owner of that variant. You can go even further than that and limit house specific weapons to players that have a certain loyalty rating with a house, which would follow the house rules of BT to an extent.

The end result is that the tinkerers get everything they want, there will be no game-breaking designs, and PGI has a vehicle to fund expansions of the game that goes beyond charging for meaningless aesthetic tweaks.

[statler]

Fyrwulf, on 08 January 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

One of the cool things about the tabletop game is that you can design any variant you want and give it an interesting backstory, provided you followed the game's rules and stayed within the limitations of the original design. You want a Lyran Atlas to be revamped into some sort of missile boat with an XL engine, endo-composite internal structure, and ferro-fibrous armour? Not a problem, just don't be surprised when your hyper-expensive missile boat becomes a molten wreck because of a critical hit to the engine.

On the other hand, you have the previous Mechwarrior games where no respect was paid to the BT rules and people could tune their mech into something monstrous for no cost at all and without regard to the balance that BT has, never mind tech level.

So, what is needed is balance. You, the player, should be able to go to Mech Magic Inc and ask them to construct a one off variant for you. However, the tech involved should not go past the most recent TRO within the timeline, it should take time to deliver (a month or so), it should cost you at the rate of $1 per million C-Bills as calculated by the BT rules, and finally you should be the sole owner of that variant. You can go even further than that and limit house specific weapons to players that have a certain loyalty rating with a house, which would follow the house rules of BT to an extent.

The end result is that the tinkerers get everything they want, there will be no game-breaking designs, and PGI has a vehicle to fund expansions of the game that goes beyond charging for meaningless aesthetic tweaks.

so unlike a lot of the previous games where i could tinker as much as i wanted and instantly test them, i would have to pay a couple bucks for each and wait a month. unplayable and insulting. i'm all for whatever balancing, but not at the cost of being able to build a mech from scratch and test it and redo it and test it...as often as wanted. ill pay for the parts in game cash, and happily pay for the game and a monthly fee.

[statler]

Ceefood, on 08 January 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

So if 70% wont play if there is a full mechlab like you want does that mean they should ignore that 70% - sorry but thats not reality & PGI wont consider that as it makese the game unviable financially. BTW so you know I also want a full mechlab



Thats why the original TRO mechs from the TT had a balance of weapons so that could work in any environment - if everyone is the same then there is no problem - in open grounds you use your long range weapons till you can close & use your medium to short range. For city environments you use short-medium range stuff unless you get a shot down a long street then you use long range. Why specialise? My only reason is if your are recon & take more electronics in both offensive & defensive measures - this is a reason to specialise - NOT to specialise in weapons



If the table top rules are used, excluding the later clan stuff which affected balance heavily, then everything was basically balanced - you want to alpha strike someone fine but you get a massive heat buildup immediately & possibly shutdown it doesnt matter that you have the equivalent in heatsink points to match your weapon damage heat points cause this is time based so over ten seconds your heat goes down to zero but for those 10 secs & the time it takes to restart your mech your a sitting duck!!!




Some good points - surely with all the years of war they have made some changes to how mechs are build - I know canon says they lost the ability to make new mech designs & are only now relearning but surely after hundreds of years of warfare & salvaging they have made some adjustments?




This implies a need for specialising when my above post show there is isnt - sure you may want it or like it but it isnt needed - also how can I or others come up with a defence against what you come up with when you can change your design every match - sure by your arguments some maps with full customisation might bring about PPC boats or whatever & we find a defence against that but what about you change your design to something not used alot like a Large pulse boat setup ie no mimimum range & with reasonable long range where do I start to defend against it & how do I know you will use it so I know what to take against it??

Dont get me wrong I like a full mechlab but even I as a full lab supporter can shoot holes in your arguements without thinking too much & PGI will shoot more holes I am sure. A full mechlab to me is desirable but I also want balance - the TT rules did that to a reasonable degree but in a realtime sim this becomes a bit harder - TT rules had time restrictions which really isnt viable as the TT rules setout - noone will wait 5 days to play again so the game will die. Those that can afford to wait since they have multiple mechs then it isnt an issue & makes it harder on those who cant afford extra mechs. I think my idea of proportional customisation works well & some friends agree with my idea and wondered why it had not been done before - my arguement was cause they were based on single player games with multiplayer thrown in. My idea was that you can customise a set amount for free time & then have to wait some period of time to customise more - like a laybuy - you get your work done now but have to pay back the time later. if you dont use all the set amount you get a discount on time to pay back. this limits how much change you can do at once & means you have to think strategically about what you change so that you dont gimp yourself for some maps.

Also PGI are implementing info warfare, plus maybe other strategies, which may make boats alot less viable or desirable - I hope so

the other 70% dont care about the mech lab, they just want to fight, so they will still play even when dealing with crazy builds in the mix (if there is reasonable balance). a lot of the 30% sees the lab as the main part of the game. without it, there is no real game! the way to get 100% is to add it.

your only reason that i shouldnt be able to specialize weapons is that the standard builds have a variety of weapon ranges and types? there is no reason against it with some balancing measures, as you point out in your example of the overheating mech. the NEED for it, is that it is most of the fun in the game for many. tweaking the perfect tool for a specific strategy in a specific scenario

by defend against my designs means that people will often use certain types of builds on different scenarios, like the ppc boat you mention on a long range map. you should be prepared for long range suited designs on a map like that and bring one yourself and/or take some sort of charge or cover tactics. if i swap to a completely unexpected mech, it probably wont be as advantageous on that map and im taking a huge risk for you to take advantage of with your well rounded standard build mech.

the time trade off doesnt work imo. i will totally gimp myself in some builds for some maps regardless, and i will need to change up again. the time it takes me to design builds from scratch should be a sufficient buffer because i will have to not be fighting for 15 mins everytime i want to try some tweaks. besides, most times ill spend a whole day just tweaking, testing and saving designs, and then a couple days playing them. the playing them part is what impacts other the most, and that will just be simply selecting prebuilt designs from my garage when the right scenarios pop up, exactly like somebody picking a standard mech from there garage for different scenarios. also, again, compare repairs to swapping weapons....repairs is mangled components in random ways and with possibly missing parts you have to rebuild from scratch. you cant limit my weapon change out time for the sake of realism when you dont completely ruin the game by setting repair times.

[Fyrwulf]

Dude, you're speaking as if this is some MW4 clone. There aren't going to be maps, there are going to be planets. In BT it takes weeks to months to secure a planet. And guess what, you're going to be fighting the Clan Invasions in real time for a year. Welcome to the world of MMOs, leave your perceptions of the previous FPS Mechwarrior games at the door. Because, here, there will be no poptarting and no boating unless you want to die quickly and often.

[Omigir]

Fyrwulf, on 08 January 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

Dude, you're speaking as if this is some MW4 clone. There aren't going to be maps, there are going to be planets. In BT it takes weeks to months to secure a planet. And guess what, you're going to be fighting the Clan Invasions in real time for a year. Welcome to the world of MMOs, leave your perceptions of the previous FPS Mechwarrior games at the door. Because, here, there will be no poptarting and no boating unless you want to die quickly and often.

Hear hear! Well said.

Though I just realized something.. there is no 'gray area' option in the OP poll options...

[Ghostrider45]

Mech lab yes adding Lasers PPC missles if they fit the setup for them on the mech each mech has bays set up eather lasers .Missles are PPCs are cannon each bay can onlay carrey the type weapon that fits in that bay than there is the wight to heavey will not fit ether! aromer there are three types Faro reactve and refla aromer ones just plan aromer plate ones react blow up blowing away missle are shells last is reflact think mirrior stops lase but thats all! some are light aromer some are heaver but each mech has a weight limet. trying to make your on mech should mouths to a year in real time hell in world war two the fastest from drawing bourd to fligh air plane they had tuke six mouths!!!!!!!!!

[Vulpesveritas]

Ehem lack of grammar and punctuation aside. While the above may be true it's not so much built from scrap somuch as changing out weapons already in place on a mech, Also give at least a bit of credence that in a millenium industrial capacity my have improved. Also this is a GAME. Who wants to be playing a GAME where you have to wait a year in real time to get that mech you designed to play with your friends,.
Not to mention some of us are customization fanatics. We like control over what we field. Lots of control.