325 replies to this topic

[Alan Davion]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 September 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

I want both. Like in the HBS game.

Down side to burst ACs though...will you lightsaber enough damage to actually kill that hard to hit thing?

Might this be something that will reward actual skill with aiming/leading?

If it is, I personally look forward to such a challenge.

[Bishop Steiner]

Alan Davion, on 17 September 2017 - 12:16 PM, said:

Might this be something that will reward actual skill with aiming/leading?

If it is, I personally look forward to such a challenge.

single shot reward that much more than burst fire does. Hence one of the reasons Laservomit is so popular... wave your lightsaber and you are bound to score some damage...vs none at all if you can't aim with the current ballistics.

Personally, I prefer the MWO style ones, TBH, but I don't mind the option of burst stuff... though I freely admit I don't tend to prefer them.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

So, with access to this article, reading through it, what I'm seeing is:
You can buy equipment via the free market
This equipment essentially functions as sidegrades, IE one manufacturer of an AC may be a single shot slug, while another of the same AC would be a triple shot cassette ala the novels, ect.

Plus you would need this equipment to repair existing harmed mechs. You can also hire techs which may increase the abilities of these weapons, or increase the effectiveness of your heatsinks, ect.

So from a "Granular customization" perspective, this actually sounds, really cool.

[Koniving]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 September 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

I want both. Like in the HBS game.

Down side to burst ACs though...will you lightsaber enough damage to actually kill that hard to hit thing?

Good question.
Considering how easy it is to crit conventional aircraft in tabletop, though, it stands to reason the answer should be yes. Though possibly not on the first try. Same could be said for doing it with lasers.

Far easier than trying to hit helicopters with tanks in Battlefield. Though not quite as satisfying I'm sure. But when it comes to repair and rearm, I'd rather spend a magazine that costs the same as a big bullet, than spend several big bullets perfecting the technique.

[Alan Davion]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 17 September 2017 - 12:36 PM, said:

So, with access to this article, reading through it, what I'm seeing is:
You can buy equipment via the free market
This equipment essentially functions as sidegrades, IE one manufacturer of an AC may be a single shot slug, while another of the same AC would be a triple shot cassette ala the novels, ect.

Plus you would need this equipment to repair existing harmed mechs. You can also hire techs which may increase the abilities of these weapons, or increase the effectiveness of your heatsinks, ect.

So from a "Granular customization" perspective, this actually sounds, really cool.

Keep your eyes open for that coveted Pontiac 100 AC/20 everyone.

[Lord0fHats]

I think the hilarious part is PGI's really shallow logic. Customization is great for multiplayer games, but not single player games?? lolwut? Customization is something players love the feth out of because its fun but makes balance, an important aspect of multiplayer games, very difficult. In single player games balance is kind of an irrelevancy, and customization becomes even better because you don't have to worry about making sure all the various options are greatly balanced. Errors in the balance state can be overlooked as "challenge" and no one will really complain because it's not like you're dealing with team mates bring bad builds and making your experience less enjoyable.

The free market argument is stupid. If I need a light mech for a mission and a Jenner without Ferro is my choice I'll take it and upgrade it later. I'm not going to wait to just be stingy in a single player game. And isn't the cost differential present in the base price of mech? Like most people who harp about how great the single market is, I see PGI is very bad at math

And this whole bit about how people just want to "boat their way to victory" is stupid too. I don't want to boat my way to victory I want to take my mechs and have fun with them, not just throw them onto the field and let them play themselves because I can't change anything about how they play. No customization makes more sense in Battletech than Mechwarrior until you remember that even Battletech is going to have a mechlab! Between these two options only one gives me the option to have fun with mech builds and guess which one I'm buying? It's like PGI want's to kill their business. The loud people in these forums who hate customization aren't as numerous as they might seem.

Customizing mechs is pretty much half the fun for me and why I got into this franchise. Take that away, on top of my extremely low expectations given who is making the game, and I just don't care anymore.

Edited by Lord0fHats, 17 September 2017 - 12:50 PM.

[Sjorpha]

When it comes to single player games the most important aspect is the quality of the story and the AI, I'm sure the game can be good (or bad) with or without a given degree of customisation.

To me the article sounds like there will be some customisation like changing weapons and maybe adjust armour levels or something, but not major things that would require rebuilding the mech like engine swaps and changing the whole skeleton (endo steel). That sounds reasonable for a small merc outfit actually. I hope the economic constraints and limited accessibility of certain equipment will force you to sometimes bring mechs back out without new ammo or a broken weapons and so on. I supposed downtime for repair and customisations will be a thing too.

If they bring the game online with PvP or reboot MWO based on MW5 there should be a mechlab.

Maybe also there could be full customisation for a quick custom mission mode like MW2 mercs had.

[Koniving]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 September 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

I want both. Like in the HBS game.

When it comes to having both.... that stupid commercial comes to mind.

I don't mind single shot cannons, but in BT they're not autocannons.
...and since we're 1) not an actual military force enlisted to a specific faction and thus not entitled to standardized equipment but what we can scavenge ourselves and 2) we start in a Periphery state...

....that should mean that we should be able to find Mech Rifles, the ballistic weapon based on 20th-21st century tank cannons as opposed to Autocannons based on anti-aircraft weaponry.

That would give us both and stick to the lore, would it not?
Sure you're not likely to find many of them in actual military service. But so long as you're doing missions for periphery states against bandits, in defense of colonies (or even attacking colonies), etc. where Mech Rifles are common and even mounted on mechs unique and vehicles to the area (such as the Arbiter) I pretty much figure we can afro-engineer one in place of a ballistic slot or hand-mount them. Knowing PGI it'd likely be mounted to a ballistic slot.

Mounting the large/heavy Mech Rifle for 8 tons, you'd get better accurate range and 6 damage than a "one shot" AC/5, too, and 9 damage after armor is down or against armored targets of a Barrier Armor Rating of (was it 7 or 8? I wanna say 7 but I'm not sure off the top of my head) or lower.

Edited by Koniving, 17 September 2017 - 12:57 PM.

[CanadianCyrus]

At first I was down on the idea. However after playing Battletech and seeing how a lance comes together to form a cohesive attack force, if MW5 does the same thing, I'll be fine with their plan for variants.

[Alan Davion]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 12:48 PM, said:

The free market argument is stupid. If I need a light mech for a mission and a Jenner without Ferro is my choice I'll take it and upgrade it later. I'm not going to wait to just be stingy in a single player game. And isn't the cost differential present in the base price of mech? Like most people who harp about how great the single market is, I see PGI is very bad at math

But here's the kicker.

What if you can't just take your Jenner-D or whatever it is, and slap on Ferro armor?

As I pointed out earlier, when Ferro armor is re-introduced to the IS first by House Kurita in the year 3040, chances are 99% of the Ferro armor they were producing was going to their House units first, like the 2nd Sword of Light. Chances are as a mercenary you'd either not be able to acquire Ferro armor at all, or if you could, you'd have to pay such an outrageous price for it that it'd be cheaper for you to just buy a whole new mech with Ferro armor already built onto it.

Now if you're a merc working for someone like Davion or Steiner, when they introduce Ferro armor, chances are it'll be easier for you to get, but you'll still likely end up waiting a while for it, pay more than the average price, or you can just buy a whole new mech with Ferro armor a lot sooner and a lot more cheaply.

Has someone by any chance read through the article and tallied up how many times they mention or reference lore in it yet?

[Bishop Steiner]

Koniving, on 17 September 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

When it comes to having both.... that stupid commercial comes to mind.

I don't mind single shot cannons, but in BT they're not autocannons.
...and since we're 1) not an actual military force enlisted to a specific faction and thus not entitled to standardized equipment but what we can scavenge ourselves and 2) we start in a Periphery state...

....that should mean that we should be able to find Mech Rifles, the ballistic weapon based on 20th-21st century tank cannons as opposed to Autocannons based on anti-aircraft weaponry.

That would give us both and stick to the lore, would it not?
Sure you're not likely to find many of them in actual military service. But so long as you're doing missions for periphery states against bandits, in defense of colonies (or even attacking colonies), etc. where Mech Rifles are common and even mounted on mechs unique and vehicles to the area (such as the Arbiter) I pretty much figure we can afro-engineer one in place of a ballistic slot or hand-mount them. Knowing PGI it'd likely be mounted to a ballistic slot.

Mounting the large/heavy Mech Rifle for 8 tons, you'd get better accurate range and 6 damage than a "one shot" AC/5, too, and 9 damage after armor is down or against armored targets of a Barrier Armor Rating of (was it 7 or 8? I wanna say 7 but I'm not sure off the top of my head) or lower.

pretty irrelevant at this point as to what does or doesn't count as an Autocannon.

[Lord0fHats]

Alan Davion, on 17 September 2017 - 12:58 PM, said:

What if you can't just take your Jenner-D or whatever it is, and slap on Ferro armor?

That's not a kicker. This is; If weight saving upgrades are locked, then I probably will end up passing on mechs that don't have them and waiting till I can buy mechs that do.

The logic their using to explain this decision is what's laughable about it. If this is how production meetings in house work it's no wonder MWO is such a mess from a design perspective. The underlying thinking process for decisions shows a remarkable lack a causal analysis.

As to Ferro is expensive and the houses would horde it for their own units, I don't care about those aspects of lore, or at least I don't like them being rigidly enforced and diminishing my fun. I've already seen that in MWO in all kinds of stupid ways and turning that up to eleven doesn't encourage me. If I want mechanics to kick my *** I'll go play Dark Souls, or heaven forbid Guild Wars 2 story mode. I didn't get into to Mechwarrior to be punished by the game for simply playing it.

Edited by Lord0fHats, 17 September 2017 - 01:10 PM.

[Koniving]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 September 2017 - 01:00 PM, said:

pretty irrelevant at this point as to what does or doesn't count as an Autocannon.

Fair enough.

Still, having some Mech Rifles would be pretty sweet.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 01:04 PM, said:

That's not a kicker. This is; If weight saving upgrades are locked, then I probably will end up passing on mechs that don't have them and waiting till I can buy mechs that do.

The logic their using to explain this decision is what's laughable about it. If this is how production meetings in house work it's no wonder MWO is such a mess from a design perspective. The underlying thinking process for decisions shows a remarkable lack a causal analysis.

As to Ferro is expensive and the houses would horde it for their own units, I don't care about those aspects of lore, or at least I don't like them being rigidly enforced and diminishing my fun. I've already seen that in MWO in all kinds of stupid ways and turning that up to eleven doesn't encourage me.

Or we can wait and see what actually is or is not limited BEFORE we burn down the joint?

Since the game starts in 3015 and spans 35+ years... that might be a real long wait in game to hold off on gear to get that Mary Sue mech with Endo (for example).... in 3035... meaning probably not in use on any mechs for several years after, since at that point it still needs to go through R&D, mechs have to actually be engineered with it... oh and of course some Merc would OBVIOUSLY have first dibs on those over IDK...the actual House Militaries that are developing the rediscovered Mary Sue tech?

Huh. Yeah. Good luck with that.

Koniving, on 17 September 2017 - 01:06 PM, said:

Fair enough.

Still, having some Mech Rifles would be pretty sweet.

Sure except they aren't re-introduced til what...the Jihad?

[Koniving]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 September 2017 - 01:10 PM, said:

Sure except they aren't re-introduced til what...the Jihad?

To actual military forces (hence why I mentioned we're not a military force).

To paraphrase:
"They didn't so much as go extinct like other technologies as they fell out of favor for general military service in favor of the superior, faster firing autocannons"
It goes on to state that their use "is most common in civilian, pirate, and minor mercenary outfits."

Minor mercenary outfits, civilian defense forces and pirates. I think we're one of these, yes?

Sarna.net, Heavy Rifle:
"The Rifle was phased out of service with most major powers because it lacked stopping power against most battlefield units."

There was a thing that got really detailed on it which I need to find soon. Right now my wife is glaring at me for not getting off the computer so it seems like now is a good time to do that.

Edited by Koniving, 17 September 2017 - 01:24 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Koniving, on 17 September 2017 - 01:14 PM, said:

To actual military forces (hence why I mentioned we're not a military force).

To paraphrase:
"They didn't so much as go extinct like other technologies so much as they fell out of favor and general military service."
It goes on to state that their use "is most common in civilian, pirate, and minor mercenary outfits."

Minor mercenary outfits, civilian defense forces and pirates. I think we're one of these, yes?

*shrugs*

Sorry I don't share your fascination with them, or stuff like Rocket Launchers, etc. If they feel like adding them? Fine. But I won't campaign for em, or make a big deal because "these aren't REAL autocannons".

[Lord0fHats]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 September 2017 - 01:10 PM, said:

Or we can wait and see what actually is or is not limited BEFORE we burn down the joint?

You might consider that people voicing their opinion about a decision are not being hysterical. My interest in MW5 was very low to begin with because my expectations of PGI as a developer are bad. Seeing them parade around bragging about limited to no customization doesn't change my thoughts as much as confirm them.

PGI is plenty capable of "burning down the joint" on their own. They don't need me.

Quote

Huh. Yeah. Good luck with that.

Lore should enhance a game play experience with story, not overburden mechanics and progression with arbitrary limitations. I'm not playing a game that's in that state, so I wouldn't need any luck

And I played through most of MW4 Mercs piloting my Flea once so I could save my money until I get a Fafnir and shoot heavy gauss rifles at everything laughing maniacally. Then I did it again to the end of the game for kicks. Although that started getting really painful on the last two or three planets when you just get bombarded in assault mechs and the AI's aim wasn't that bad, but by that point it was a matter of pride!

[Alan Davion]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 01:04 PM, said:

As to Ferro is expensive and the houses would horde it for their own units, I don't care about those aspects of lore, or at least I don't like them being rigidly enforced and diminishing my fun. I've already seen that in MWO in all kinds of stupid ways and turning that up to eleven doesn't encourage me. If I want mechanics to kick my *** I'll go play Dark Souls, or heaven forbid Guild Wars 2 story mode. I didn't get into to Mechwarrior to be punished by the game for simply playing it.

How have you seen the house units hoarding ferro armor in MWO when you have literally unlimited customization and all you have to do is pay a flat C-Bill cost to upgrade from standard armor to ferro?

I think you're a bit confused here.

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 01:04 PM, said:

The logic their using to explain this decision is what's laughable about it. If this is how production meetings in house work it's no wonder MWO is such a mess from a design perspective. The underlying thinking process for decisions shows a remarkable lack a causal analysis.

MWO is such a mess exactly because of the unlimited customization. Because the players spend so much time trying to find a combination of mech and weapons loadout that is one billionth percentage point more effective than another, they're rendered huge numbers of mech variants basically useless in their search for that perfect meta competitive/effective build.

Look at LRMs for instance, they're next to useless because of their ridiculously slow travel speed, so traditional "fire support" mechs like the Archer or Catapult are berated, chastised, derided and ostracized for trying to play to the mechs strength. Then when they actually close the distance to try and counteract the LRMs flight speed, they're just as useless because they'll get focused down by the enemy mechs cause they don't have enough backup weapons to be able to defend themselves.

So, the players of these mechs are either forced to take a variant that supports a more brawler build, like the 9 missile hardpoint Archer variant where you stuff a crap ton of SRMs into it, or they switch to the more meta friendly mechs that can boat lasers or paired Gauss/PPC with backup lasers.

Now, in a game where those fire support mechs might ACTUALLY be useful, you're still complaining.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Lord0fHats, on 17 September 2017 - 01:19 PM, said:

You might consider that people voicing their opinion about a decision are not being hysterical. My interest in MW5 was very low to begin with because my expectations of PGI as a developer are bad. Seeing them parade around bragging about limited to no customization doesn't change my thoughts as much as confirm them.

PGI is plenty capable of "burning down the joint" on their own. They don't need me.



Lore should enhance a game play experience with story, not overburden mechanics and progression with arbitrary limitations. I'm not playing a game that's in that state, so I wouldn't need any luck

And I played through most of MW4 Mercs piloting my Flea once so I could save my money until I get a Fafnir and shoot heavy gauss rifles at everything laughing maniacally. Then I did it again to the end of the game for kicks. Although that started getting really painful on the last two or three planets when you just get bombarded in assault mechs and the AI's aim wasn't that bad, but by that point it was a matter of pride!

Sorry, the lore is not "arbatrary restrictions" It's literally the bread and butter of the franchise.

You can be pissy a Mechwarrior game is actually sticking to lore for once all you want, but think of all us lore hounds who have been tread all over because of your desire to be a special snowflake?

And YOU have been the one that's been catered to for over 20 years.

**** off and let us have our one, how about that?

[Lord0fHats]

Alan Davion, on 17 September 2017 - 01:23 PM, said:

How have you seen the house units hoarding ferro armor in MWO when you have literally unlimited customization and all you have to do is pay a flat C-Bill cost to upgrade from standard armor to ferro?

I think you're a bit confused here.

No you're just being obtuse

If I were in charge of MWO's development I'd have tossed IS side torso death out the window, brought down the weight of standard engines, and been toying with weapon weights and damage ages ago in the name of balance because good game play is more important than lore accuracy to me. Whenever there's an obvious solution to a balance problem you can bet that "mah lore" will be screamed at the top of several lungs.

Quote

MWO is such a mess exactly because of the unlimited customization.

Now you're just agreeing with me.

MWO is a mess because 1) the developers vision is much vaster than their reach and they keep wasting time and money on dead before they hit the floor ideas, 2) because the developers are unwilling to accept that how they design a game to be played will never perfectly match with how it is actually played causing a lot of game balance whip lash, and finally 3) because the line for "mah lore" is arbitrarily drawn in development. We can swap endo and ferro and double heat sinks and engines at will, but no we can't adjust weapon or engine weights cause that would "be against lore."

PGI as a developer is a case of lunatics running the asylum. They're fans, they love the property, but like most fans they're only passionate about certain things and that imo has effect the overall development of their game in good and bad ways but the bad ways have become a consistent hindrance over the years.

Quote

they're rendered huge numbers of mech variants basically useless

Hard locking upgrades won't change that. The bright side is that as a single player game with chronological progression, the gradual filtering of better mechs into the market over time has bonuses from a progression stand point. On the not so bright side it's not fun for me and presumably others who really got into the series because they love playing with mech lab options.

Quote

meta

It's a single player game. Unless you're trying to compete for speed runs there is no meta (at least not in the sense of MWO).

I will however totally watch Twitch Plays MW5 cause Twitch Plays will always be fun

Quote

Now, in a game where those fire support mechs might ACTUALLY be useful, you're still complaining.

What? I've never complained that fire support mechs get mocked. And this will still happen in MW5. Some mechs will just be better than others, but its a single player game so who cares? There's no comp play here and the AI will probably be too dumb to close distance with your or torso twist your damage so any number of builds will be just fine.

Pointing out the balance and lore bit again if I were a developer I'd have made LRMs dumb fire capable (think artillery mechs from Chrome Hounds if you're familiar) for showering areas in high DPS, low accurace fire, as a means of forcing mechs out of cover/counter death balls because that's a weapon system that might have a use in MWO pug matches, even if it still isn't meta for comp play.