Jump to content

Mw5 Mech Customization


325 replies to this topic

#261 Raso

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sickle
  • The Sickle
  • 1,298 posts
  • LocationConnecticut

Posted 19 September 2017 - 06:45 AM

View PostGreyhart, on 19 September 2017 - 04:26 AM, said:

This thread could be a case study in the power of confirmation bias.

Clearly there is going to customisation as it says they are adding different weapons in later in the game, but it is not the same level of customisation as MWO. So likely no armour, structure or engine swapping. Possibly sized hard points, but that's a guess.

As to why limitations make for better games.

A good game is about cost benefit balances and making hard choices. This is why generally wizards have light armour but do high burst damage and warriors have heavy armour and to sustained damage. If you had the ability to make a warrior that does the same thing as a wizard why would you take a wizards?

Don't get me wrong being able to slap anything on anything is fun in the I am all powerful sort of way , but it is shallow and ultimately not rewarding, because the game is not challenging.


We already have this so called "cost benefit balance" built naturally into Mech Warrior and Battle Tech. Different weapons perform different roles with different specification. Do you take 3 Mlas and accept the extra heat or do you settle for a single LLas and enjoy better range. Do you choose the DPS of an AC5 or the burst damage of an AC20 and if so what other considerations must one make to fit either weapon system into your mech. And I'm not talking strictly MWO. These have been questions Mech Warrior fans have grappled with across numerous games.

Also limitation is not the only way to achieve this "cost benefit balance". For example in the Armored Core franchise you often have a plethora of options for customizing your mech from legs to arms to generators to weapon systems and more. Each part alters the way your mech performs. Light legs make you fast but unstable. Heavy torsos make you durable but slow. Reactors provide a balance of equipment energy and booster energy and it is your job to determine which specs best fit your mech's play style. The considerations one had to make in producing a viable mech were numerous and rightfully so there were numerous viable builds in competitive matches to suit various play styles and roles.

If you're using limitation as a means to foster choice odds are either the developer is lazy, on a budget or they don't have faith in the cognitive skills of their player base. That said, if what PGI comes out with is well polished and put together than I can't complain. But don't let modern game developers trick you into believing that somehow less is more and limitations are freedom.

#262 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 19 September 2017 - 06:45 AM

View PostLightfoot, on 19 September 2017 - 05:59 AM, said:

Nope, PGI is wrong on this one. Mechlab is the core feature of MechWarrior, or one of them. Deny it at your peril. 'MechWarrior 5 was okay, but no Mechlab' could be the epithet. MechAssault is a prime example.

Makes me wonder if the game is going to be driven by elite Mech Packs, because Mechlab is such a powerful game seller for MechWarrior, why would any rational person want to leave it out completely? MechWarrior 4 had a couple of Mech-Packs..

I know the psyche of the MechWarrior enthusiast and they want a full return to MechWarrior 2's dynamic Salvage and MechLab. It could be limited to changing the weapons loadout, but none at all? That's just turning a blind eye to the fan base.

Huh. Except there are plenty of mechwarrior players in this thread that don't agree with you. Oddly I don't think you speak for some giant homogeneous Mechwarriors Union.

You want that. That's cool. So do some other people. Others don't. And some want something in between.

#263 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 19 September 2017 - 06:49 AM

View PostRaso, on 19 September 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:


We already have this so called "cost benefit balance" built naturally into Mech Warrior and Battle Tech. Different weapons perform different roles with different specification. Do you take 3 Mlas and accept the extra heat or do you settle for a single LLas and enjoy better range. Do you choose the DPS of an AC5 or the burst damage of an AC20 and if so what other considerations must one make to fit either weapon system into your mech. And I'm not talking strictly MWO. These have been questions Mech Warrior fans have grappled with across numerous games.

Also limitation is not the only way to achieve this "cost benefit balance". For example in the Armored Core franchise you often have a plethora of options for customizing your mech from legs to arms to generators to weapon systems and more. Each part alters the way your mech performs. Light legs make you fast but unstable. Heavy torsos make you durable but slow. Reactors provide a balance of equipment energy and booster energy and it is your job to determine which specs best fit your mech's play style. The considerations one had to make in producing a viable mech were numerous and rightfully so there were numerous viable builds in competitive matches to suit various play styles and roles.

If you're using limitation as a means to foster choice odds are either the developer is lazy, on a budget or they don't have faith in the cognitive skills of their player base. That said, if what PGI comes out with is well polished and put together than I can't complain. But don't let modern game developers trick you into believing that somehow less is more and limitations are freedom.

So HBS is lazy or doesn't have faith in their playerbase?

Because they very specifically have made it a point to have limited customization in their game ... and it wouldn't alter their budget much to allow engine swapping or unlimited hardpoints. Yet they, a very well respected studio... decided it benefited gameplay to do so.

I think your statement is made on some very shaky premises.

Games impose limits for many reasons. Lore. Immersion. There is a reason you have classes in many games. For an FPS, those details are much less important. For a truly enjoyable and replayable PvE single player game? They are crucial.

#264 Alan Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 2,333 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 06:54 AM

View PostLightfoot, on 19 September 2017 - 05:59 AM, said:

I know the psyche of the MechWarrior enthusiast and they want a full return to MechWarrior 2's dynamic Salvage and MechLab. It could be limited to changing the weapons loadout, but none at all? That's just turning a blind eye to the fan base.


Except clearly you don't know the psyche of the BT/MW enthusiast, because quite a few people here seem quite ecstatic that there may not be completely unlimited mech customization like there has been in pretty much all prior MW PC games.

You don't speak for me, and you don't speak for others like CMDR Sunset Shimmer, so don't act like you do.

#265 Raso

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sickle
  • The Sickle
  • 1,298 posts
  • LocationConnecticut

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:09 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 19 September 2017 - 06:49 AM, said:

So HBS is lazy or doesn't have faith in their playerbase?

Because they very specifically have made it a point to have limited customization in their game ... and it wouldn't alter their budget much to allow engine swapping or unlimited hardpoints. Yet they, a very well respected studio... decided it benefited gameplay to do so.

I think your statement is made on some very shaky premises.

Games impose limits for many reasons. Lore. Immersion. There is a reason you have classes in many games. For an FPS, those details are much less important. For a truly enjoyable and replayable PvE single player game? They are crucial.


I attest that the lack of customization in a mech game where customization has been the norm for ages is like a car racing game removing their garage mode from a game. Customization is an integral part of the spirit of mech games much akin to a car racing game. If Forza swapped developers and suddenly dropped the garage feature people would be rightfully pissed. Especially if the game was passed onto some 2nd rate developer opposed to whoever normally works on the franchise. The lack of a customization feature in either case is either the sign of incompetence, laziness or from reading demographic charts. It's no a move you make to take the IP in a new and exciting direction it a move you make because your hand is forced or because you don't know any better.

Edited by Raso, 19 September 2017 - 07:10 AM.


#266 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:10 AM

View PostRaso, on 19 September 2017 - 07:09 AM, said:


I attest that the lack of customization in a mech game where customization has been the norm for ages is like a car racing game removing their garage mode from a game. Customization is an integral part of the spirit of mech games much akin to a car racing game. If Forza swapped developers and suddenly dropped the garage feature people would be rightfully pissed. Especially if the game was passed onto some 2nd rate developer opposed to whoever normally works on the franchise. The lack of a customization feature in either case is either the sign of incompetence, laziness or from reading demographic charts. It's no a move you make to take the IP in a new and exciting direction it a move you make because your hand is forced.

Or....

It's a recognition of one thing that's been broken all along and a belated move to fix an issue.

#267 Raso

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sickle
  • The Sickle
  • 1,298 posts
  • LocationConnecticut

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:17 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 19 September 2017 - 07:10 AM, said:

Or....

It's a recognition of one thing that's been broken all along and a belated move to fix an issue.


If you think these guys are somehow reading the pulse of the market or tapping into the spirit of hardcore mech warrior fans you're sadly mistaken. Yet I'm not surprised people are celebrating the loss of a standard game feature. People have celebrated the gutting of numerous game play elements for ages.

#268 Composite Armour

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God
  • The God
  • 201 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:22 AM

I like the sound of it.

Just depends on the execution. How important will salvage be and how will they do the different types of AC/10s, LLs and so on.
I don't really see a need for a full mechlab.

#269 Alan Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 2,333 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:23 AM

View PostRaso, on 19 September 2017 - 07:17 AM, said:


If you think these guys are somehow reading the pulse of the market or tapping into the spirit of hardcore mech warrior fans you're sadly mistaken. Yet I'm not surprised people are celebrating the loss of a standard game feature. People have celebrated the gutting of numerous game play elements for ages.


Yeah, a standard game feature that people blissfully ignored.

I bet you 9 times out of 10 the people that played the previous Mechwarrior PC games did one thing with the mech lab.

Rip out whatever weapons the mech had.

Replace them with as many lasers as they could.

Win.

BORING~!

#270 poopenshire

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Referee
  • The Referee
  • 684 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:25 AM

[mod]

I have been keeping track of the discussions here, and a few times you guys have pushed the limits too far, I have not locked nor moved this thread as I feel you have had some legitimate discussions that I won't want to stifle.

Please remember to keep it civil and on topic. Please keep the images related to your posts and the topics in your posts. while funny, the image should reinforce you point of view or at least expand upon your actions or discussion.

[/mod]

#271 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:25 AM

View PostRaso, on 19 September 2017 - 07:17 AM, said:


If you think these guys are somehow reading the pulse of the market or tapping into the spirit of hardcore mech warrior fans you're sadly mistaken. Yet I'm not surprised people are celebrating the loss of a standard game feature. People have celebrated the gutting of numerous game play elements for ages.

Yes, I'm sure you have much more time and money invested in reading the pulse of the market than even a middling company that is reliant on it.

And that you speak for hardcore mechwarrior fans everywhere. I'm a hardcore mechwarrior fan, and I disagree. As have many others here. It's a feature you like and want. That's fine. But kindly don't presume to speak for me or the Mechwarrior Hardcore as a whole.

Also as best I can tell we still don't know what level of customization WILL be allowed.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 19 September 2017 - 07:27 AM.


#272 Valhallan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 484 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 07:44 AM

Ehhh so it moved over here huh, imo if there is "none" it was likely more of a money/coding issue than lore. As i said in the original thread, they could put it in but have full campaign costs attached (with boosted maintenance costs cuz the base is too low) that way market hunting is still the prime deal and mechlabbing is just a prestige project for the end-game uber wealthy. Win win all around.

View PostKoniving, on 18 September 2017 - 08:03 AM, said:

Mekhq stuff

Posted Image, how do you budget money for refit in mekhq? also the failure types, how did that even happen? are those new features? in the version i'm using i don't see any budgeting it just checks if you have the parts (or is this + the maintenance and salaries the budgeting?). Also when i fail at most i just end up with double refit time, is the "fun" stuff critical failure? (if so man i'm glad i didn't let my techs near refitting till they got good by just repairing armor and stuff.)

#273 Alan Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 2,333 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 08:01 AM

View PostValhallan, on 19 September 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

Ehhh so it moved over here huh, imo if there is "none" it was likely more of a money/coding issue than lore. As i said in the original thread, they could put it in but have full campaign costs attached (with boosted maintenance costs cuz the base is too low) that way market hunting is still the prime deal and mechlabbing is just a prestige project for the end-game uber wealthy. Win win all around.

Posted Image, how do you budget money for refit in mekhq? also the failure types, how did that even happen? are those new features? in the version i'm using i don't see any budgeting it just checks if you have the parts (or is this + the maintenance and salaries the budgeting?). Also when i fail at most i just end up with double refit time, is the "fun" stuff critical failure? (if so man i'm glad i didn't let my techs near refitting till they got good by just repairing armor and stuff.)


I don't recall where it is in MekHQ as I haven't used it for a while, but I know the version I have allowed for budgeting, salaries and everything else.

#274 Thorn Hallis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,902 posts
  • LocationUnited States of Paranoia

Posted 19 September 2017 - 08:35 AM

View PostLightfoot, on 19 September 2017 - 05:59 AM, said:

I know the psyche of the MechWarrior enthusiast and they want a full return to MechWarrior 2's dynamic Salvage and MechLab.


You mean the bugged salvage system from MW2 Mercenaries, where you would salvage 'Mechs that weren't even on the battlefield? Ok, that has indeed a dynamic on it's own. Posted Image

On a side note, the Mechwarrior enthusiast in me is more interested in a proper sequel to the original Mechwarrior 1.

#275 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 19 September 2017 - 08:40 AM

View PostThorn Hallis, on 19 September 2017 - 08:35 AM, said:


You mean the bugged salvage system from MW2 Mercenaries, where you would salvage 'Mechs that weren't even on the battlefield? Ok, that has indeed a dynamic on it's own. Posted Image

On a side note, the Mechwarrior enthusiast in me is more interested in a proper sequel to the original Mechwarrior 1.

No dude, sorry you are WRONG. HE KNOWS what all true mechwarrior fans want and need... even if they don't.

#276 Thorn Hallis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,902 posts
  • LocationUnited States of Paranoia

Posted 19 September 2017 - 08:46 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 19 September 2017 - 08:40 AM, said:

No dude, sorry you are WRONG. HE KNOWS what all true mechwarrior fans want and need... even if they don't.


But but but...

#277 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 19 September 2017 - 09:45 AM

View PostValhallan, on 19 September 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

How do you budget money for refit in mekhq? also the failure types, how did that even happen? are those new features? in the version i'm using i don't see any budgeting it just checks if you have the parts (or is this + the maintenance and salaries the budgeting?). Also when i fail at most i just end up with double refit time, is the "fun" stuff critical failure? (if so man i'm glad i didn't let my techs near refitting till they got good by just repairing armor and stuff.)



Most of it is Mek HQ, and some of it is "Mechwarrior RPG referencing" in order to get the full compliment of Customization rules (Battletech RPG also works but it isn't as harsh and the inclusion of Clan crap makes it a bit confusing too as opposed to the far more straight forward Mechwarrior RPG 1st edition).

You know how it shows the presets when you start an HQ campaign?

Those are just collections of settings. First I started (the very first time) with Total Warfare standard and then tweaked. I now have my own preset, of course. Most important is to have literally EVERYTHING checked under Repair (notice the "Use quirks" tidbit? It also makes it prone to giving bad quirks to bad repair jobs when combined with damage/destroy parts by margin of failure.). Maintenance, do not check "only damage parts of the worst quality (important). Must log maintenance rolls in log file as unless you have some scripting skills, you'll need to do some of the work with a rulebook and by hand. Posted Image Sucks I know.

Tech limits, do not disallow extinct (the game treats them very poorly so that precious gem is precious). Do not allow purchasing of foreign parts (as applicable) as this prevents accidental confusion of buying "the wrong stuff." Did that once, got **** all ****** up. Allow only canon units for purchase and limit units and parts by year.

This ramps up the difficulty with 'new' tech and ensures you don't accidentally end up with a refit kit roll if you do 'perfectly' replicate an existing mech in your cache. Refit kits are a LOT easier than developing a brand new design, and so once making that Jenner I'd get a refit kit making the next time much easier. This is why I had to reload every time to remove it or I'd have to do a new design every single time.

Personnel. Check everything here. Procreation is optional. If you have it included, "parental" concerns can come up and require your techs/jocks/etc. to take a leap of absence. Usually in pairs. Had one time where some unlucky dog had knocked up 7 different women in less than 3 months. Lets just say it causes a LOT of problems... but makes **** fun. Just remember if it auto-picks display avatars for children, don't be surprised if the child looks like they're 50+. It's...disturbing. Base salaries are fine, or modify using "Mechwarrior" RPG 1st through 3rd, or using Battletech RPG for the most current rules. I use Mechwarrior 1st edition salaries. They're less...generic and apparently can result in some infighting and unhappy people if they don't get raises when they go up in skill (as opposed to rank; I have no idea why it is based on skill instead of rank, but that kinda makes sense. Probably because of the "experience" multipliers. Work your ranks around experience and it fits better.)

MAKE SURE YOU HAVE AN ADMIN/HR. Without that, unhappy employees are prone to leaving without any chance to meet their needs. And when they leave, they STEAL your ****! Even if your Admin/HR sucks, you'll at least get a reason when they leave. Otherwise it just says either "Leaves" or "Defects". That's boring; so you need an Admin/HR skilled person for the cool reasons. Sometimes you even get that "X wanted to leave because of (reason), but was talked out of it." (or talked out of it with condition).

Finances: Check everything. People can't get unhappy unless they're earning wages! Note: I prefer to play with limit loan parameters by rating, however, that whole exercise I did would be impossible if it was checked for the experiment. Even if I did just get the money by the default "Rich uncle." Percentage based maintenance costs is optional, but it makes more sense than the default method. Which reminds me, "reverse status letters", because "A" for terribad trash and "F" for pristine condition are confusing as hell.

Budgeting your refit is the cost of the parts, the cost of the maintenance, the cost of transportation (excluded in my example since I God Modded it into my warehouse.), cost of overhead (to "own" a mini-factory in order to make the attempt has quite the overhead cost and so I rented one at 2.7 million a month and kept overhead down by literally just having what I needed to achieve the experiment; so if I had a real unit with all the fixings, I'd be broke during this experiment), cost of personnel salaries and finally cost of overtime (remember I said I allowed them to overtime so that each technician was performing 60 hour work weeks. This helps produce fast work but stressed employees. Stressed employees are unhappy ones that will make mistakes. Very important if you want the fun stuff.)

Also recall that "Skill" = hefty multipliers to salaries, and with Mechwarrior first edition's own multipliers and wages, Techs make a LOT when they are god-tier skilled. This and overtime is part of the extreme cost [and anything less than god-tier would have be a lot more likely to flop and fail], and when it wasn't enough to counteract the stress, Scotty stole the mech we worked so hard on and he quit. Thus why I dedicated that extreme budget [you dedicate a budget by having set amount of money on hand to cover expenses and you stop continuing even if you didn't succeed when you run out of money, hence its a "budget"] for the "third" attempt to make sure they were getting paid enough to not quit on me before they were done.

I had two god-tier Techs named Scotty the engineer and Miles O'brian the tinkerer of...things. Yes his callsign was "The Tinkerer of...things." (Deep Space Nine reference to a condsecending nickname) No, I didn't include his wife or the daughter as that would have added even more issues to making the change. Though it would have been interesting.

Mercenary tab: Whatever you want.

Skills. Do not touch.

Special ability. Do not touch for normal play. Though I did create a couple to help make less work in referencing the book on technician rolls and to make sure the log informed me by announcing that the special ability was used. And if it was used, the ability had the name of the book I had to reference and the page for what to do. That way I didn't have to manually hunt for them and remember every little thing.

Personnel Market: Strat Ops, FM: Mercenaries Revised, or Dylan's Method. ATB is far too forgiving and nobody likes Random. I used Dylan's method.

The ATB tab is optional. I use it for single player and multiplayer against the bot, but for experiments like that Jenner from STD armor to Ferro, it's best to leave ATB off.

Books required: Mechwarrior RPG (any edition) or Battletech RPG. A large chunk of what you need, how you need it, etc. is found there. I used 1st edition for most of the rules that I went by and customed in as "Special Abilities".

Apps required: BT Dice Roller. (Handy for handling dice rolls that Megamek itself doesn't handle without creating specific skills/traits for your techs to handle them for you; surprisingly it isn't frequently needed). Mech Factory (detailed references). (Sarna works, too, but between the two Mech Factory pulls its stuff direct rather than having a bunch of wiki-nerds change each other's work every other day)

Don't forget you also need to set your Megamek options to include most of the rules, too, otherwise you'll have issues when dropping onto missions like the flawed design quirks not having any effect.

And finally, some notepad edits to give mechs starting design quirks, as for some reason the game isn't inclined to give mechs design quirks if they don't already have some. Combine this with TROs and Mech Factory to come up with them.

Design quirks must be enabled in both Megamek HQ and Megamek in order for them to be assigned on failures. And if for some reason it doesn't do it on its own you can always manually do the rolls (I used to have to do this and because manually doing it was prone to a limited selection of flaws, I had to create my own tiered dice system so the first roll would denote the flaw level and the second would denote a flaw within that range. For the Jenner experiment though I did not use my own system and instead used the Mek HQ + Mechwarrior 1st edition rules. Otherwise the flaws and issues might have been more varied as the number of flaws the base thing will actually use is very...very limited. And sometimes it gives benefits...which doesn't make any sense, how do you fail at something and make it better?)

Edited by Koniving, 19 September 2017 - 09:58 AM.


#278 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,459 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 19 September 2017 - 10:04 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 19 September 2017 - 06:49 AM, said:

So HBS is lazy or doesn't have faith in their playerbase?

Because they very specifically have made it a point to have limited customization in their game ... and it wouldn't alter their budget much to allow engine swapping or unlimited hardpoints. Yet they, a very well respected studio... decided it benefited gameplay to do so.

I think your statement is made on some very shaky premises.

Games impose limits for many reasons. Lore. Immersion. There is a reason you have classes in many games. For an FPS, those details are much less important. For a truly enjoyable and replayable PvE single player game? They are crucial.

Its a strategic Roundbased Game who you command more Mechs ..mW5 you alone against more as one Enemy ;)in real Time..or the Bots have a low Level AI and not more as Canonfodder ...with a light and MGs and small lasers against 2 lances ?...my most horrible Miission in MW2 the Escape with the hovertank and the Fight against Couldron Born and many Enemys..and the last with a custom Mech ...horrible to fight with Weapons thats not my playstyle ..im never a brawler

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 19 September 2017 - 10:12 AM.


#279 Lightfoot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,610 posts
  • LocationOlympus Mons

Posted 19 September 2017 - 10:08 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 19 September 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:

Huh. Except there are plenty of mechwarrior players in this thread that don't agree with you. Oddly I don't think you speak for some giant homogeneous Mechwarriors Union.

You want that. That's cool. So do some other people. Others don't. And some want something in between.


You don't think that the most asked for MechWarrior feature is the Dynamic Salvage from MechWarrior 2? For those who don't remember MW2, when you salvaged your kills you got what was left undamaged during the fight and nothing else. So if you wanted the mech or a weapon from it, it had to be left in decent shape. Mechs that were too damaged were not salvageable, however any mech that was left repairable could be salvaged.

In the list of things people ask for from a MechWarrior game, dynamic salvage like MW2 has to be near the top. Or maybe it's the top complaint when players get random salvage instead of what they left on the battlefield. It's a moot point with no Mechlab though.

@Thorn, I think those were mechs that were purposely placed for story or balance.

Edited by Lightfoot, 19 September 2017 - 10:12 AM.


#280 Thorn Hallis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,902 posts
  • LocationUnited States of Paranoia

Posted 19 September 2017 - 10:14 AM

View PostLightfoot, on 19 September 2017 - 10:08 AM, said:

Salvage


I expect salvage to be a rather heavy part of MW5, as PGI seems to rely more on lore then on rules for the game.

View PostLightfoot, on 19 September 2017 - 10:08 AM, said:

@Thorn, I think those were mechs that were purposely placed for story or balance.


Maybe, but then its hardly dynamic, isn't it? Posted Image
I fondly remember the one moment where the game told me I salvaged a Dasher in the results screen, then crashed and after I reload the game the Dasher suddenly became a Masakari. Posted Image





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users