63 replies to this topic

[Alan Davion]

N0ni, on 10 October 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:

I like how the comparison was between a Jenner F and Jenner D, which are completely different.

Also, customization was a thing in just about every other mechwarrior campaign with included logistics, why stop now?

Lore builds might be fun for some, but they are miserable for everyone else. Giving the player more choice is a good thing.

Here's the thing that a lot of people seem to be forgetting about MW2/Mercs, 3 and 4. With those games, you had exactly one mech model and you could assemble it anyway you wanted. You could make any version of the Commando, Jenner, etc etc provided you had the right gear.

Now that we're in the territory of actually equipping mechs with hardpoints specific to that variant, which actually affects the model itself, instead of unlimited customization like 2/Mercs, that has to be taken into consideration, as it's much more lore friendly than any previous games have been.

It also significantly increases replayability, unlike what some would try and have you believe. Especially as we have yet to understand how and where exactly you'll start the game. It's been said we'll start in the Periphery, but there's 5 Great Houses worth of Periphery out there. Will we get to choose which Great House we'll start nearest to?

For instance, while I might run my first campaign with Davion, I'd want to start other campaigns after I play the first and see what it's like starting out with the other Houses. Does anything change as far as, for example, which mech you start with depending on which House you start with, what sort of contracts you get with each House, etc etc.

There's a lot we just don't know, and some things we have to extrapolate for ourselves based on what's come before.

[VitriolicViolet]

i love how most of are against customisation in a single player game. the reason most of you are against it has been stated as 'replayablilty' and 'min-maxing'. whats the problem with that? as the only one in your game you know you can actually choose to run your mechs stock still? that you dont have to min max? if thats how you guys play games, cant help but minmax and power game, then thats your problem.

I dont want customisation limited because you cant resist minmaxing.

[Bigbacon]

Lets take one of the best thing about MW/BT and remove it....

WAY TO FING GO

[James Argent]

The problem with allowing min-maxing in a single-player game is that the game then has to balance the AI difficulty around min-maxing, making it nigh unplayable unless you min-max. By it's very name there's only truly one way to min-max, so it severely reduces the replayability factor. But if the AI doesn't have to account for hyperlasergaussvomit, success can be possible with many more configurations, boosting the replayability.

[Wintersdark]

VitriolicViolet, on 11 October 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

i love how most of are against customisation in a single player game. the reason most of you are against it has been stated as 'replayablilty' and 'min-maxing'. whats the problem with that? as the only one in your game you know you can actually choose to run your mechs stock still? that you dont have to min max? if thats how you guys play games, cant help but minmax and power game, then thats your problem.

I dont want customisation limited because you cant resist minmaxing.

who's saying that? I'm not.

With that said, as James Argent says below, if you allow customization you need to balance around that customization, which either leads to customization being required, or customization trivializing the game. Still, that's not what I've been talking about at all.

The problem is that customization wrecks what they want to do with the game, making mech purchasing/discovery interesting. Once you have customization, you largely make different variants pointless, and they're looking to follow along with Battletech and have variants BE the customization.

I respect that some would rather play in the mechlab, I totally get that. Hell, I have more fun in the MWO mechlab than I do in game (and always have). But it does really just break a major part of the game they want to make. *Shrugs*

Whatevs.

[ForceUser]

VitriolicViolet, on 11 October 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

i love how most of are against customisation in a single player game. the reason most of you are against it has been stated as 'replayablilty' and 'min-maxing'. whats the problem with that? as the only one in your game you know you can actually choose to run your mechs stock still? that you dont have to min max? if thats how you guys play games, cant help but minmax and power game, then thats your problem.

I dont want customisation limited because you cant resist minmaxing.

This would be like arguing that making Dark Souls difficult was a stupid idea, they should have just made it easy and people could artificially challenge themselves if they wanted a challenge.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Wintersdark, on 11 October 2017 - 05:37 PM, said:

Once you have customization, you largely make different variants pointless, and they're looking to follow along with Battletech and have variants BE the customization.

Is that really a problem though? I mean am I really the only one that thinks that having a single variant that captures the defacto spirit of a mech is a problem? I mean I guess if we are considering that in cases like the Mist Lynx it should be replaced by the Arctic Cheetah then I guess that's fine but that seems silly to me. I'd much rather the Mist Lynx have upgrades that eventually allow it to compete with the Cheetah which means in some way these must have niches carved out.

[Jun Watarase]

The structure of a mech is just the bones inside the mech. You can replace it by pulling everything out...kind of like replacing the insulation in your house walls i guess. Its just time consuming.

Actually...i'm not sure why it would be time consuming since you could in theory just buy the same leg/arm/whatever with endo steel internals and replace it. Removing and replacing an entire limb is not that hard, its maintenance level repairs IIRC.

[Alan Davion]

Jun Watarase, on 11 October 2017 - 09:43 PM, said:

The structure of a mech is just the bones inside the mech. You can replace it by pulling everything out...kind of like replacing the insulation in your house walls i guess. Its just time consuming.

Actually...i'm not sure why it would be time consuming since you could in theory just buy the same leg/arm/whatever with endo steel internals and replace it. Removing and replacing an entire limb is not that hard, its maintenance level repairs IIRC.

Except if you just replace an arm or a leg that uses normal structure with endo steel, you create a weight imbalance that the gyro might not be able to compensate for. That's why endo steel values are calculated the way they are.

Because it has to be the whole mech structure, not just one piece here, one piece there.

[Jun Watarase]

Alan Davion, on 11 October 2017 - 09:46 PM, said:

Except if you just replace an arm or a leg that uses normal structure with endo steel, you create a weight imbalance that the gyro might not be able to compensate for. That's why endo steel values are calculated the way they are.

Because it has to be the whole mech structure, not just one piece here, one piece there.

I meant replacing every location with one that has endo-steel, not just replacing one limb by itself.

[Kin3ticX]

so basically salvage a Hunchback-4P and an Awesome-8Q and ignore everything else

[Kotzi]

There is absolute no logic in having less costumization regarding if its a PVP or PVE game. If he would have used balancing as an argument that might have been more convincing. But then it is more balanced to have less options in a PVP game because balancing is easier. Shame, trying different configs is what makes mechwarrior a battletech game for me.

[Bombast]

Jun Watarase, on 11 October 2017 - 10:00 PM, said:

I meant replacing every location with one that has endo-steel, not just replacing one limb by itself.

...And why aren't you just putting all of those piece together and making a second mech?

[Vellron2005]

Again, I see PGI not understanding the simplest concept..

The fact you have a "black market" in MW5 does not mean you need to hunt for that specific variant.. it means you still need to get money and go buy things..

It's like saying "oh we don't want you to have a cow, but instead go and buy milk in a store".. Yeah, I can have a cow, and still go to the store to buy bread, cose' I'm not a bakery.

Also, removing mech customization completely is stupid.. ok, so a Jenner varaint can't have Ferro.. great.. but can I switch small lasers for mediums or small pulse? No? Well shucks..

[Thorn Hallis]

Vellron2005, on 12 October 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:

Also, removing mech customization completely is stupid.. ok, so a Jenner varaint can't have Ferro.. great.. but can I switch small lasers for mediums or small pulse? No? Well shucks..

Well, atm noone said you couldn't.

[A Shoddy Rental Mech]

Kael Posavatz, on 11 October 2017 - 08:43 AM, said:

"Fortunately, Russ Bullock is all about the little details."

Which might explain how some big details *cough*long tom*cough* have gotten missed.

He didn't miss it.

He didn't get it

https://www.reddit.c...able_recording/

• 2h35m Long Tom - Russ wants to hear a fix, not a removal. Xavier points out correctly that Long Tom is an activity killer when it's acquired on a planet. Pat Kell mentions that having something else deal huge damage is very unpalatable and cheap and is still way too strong in its current form, and mentions that the specific player that it locks onto is super ******. Aylward concurs, Long Tom is queue-clearing. Shimmering Sword agrees. Seemingly there's consensus on the idea of an Arty amount of damage with Long Tom explosion radius might be a good fix (and a rename so people aren't scared off). Some discussion that the initial implementation of Long Tom was too ****** and has soured people beyond salvage. Lots of talk about "Air Superiority" idea: enemy can't use Arty/Air Strikes but Russ not really on board."

Details like driving players out of faction warfare and many out of MWO entirely.

Edited by The Nerf Bat, 12 October 2017 - 05:29 AM.

[Vancer2]

Why set the game in 3015?!?! Why are we going back? Can we not go further? I'd like to see mechs from the Dark Ages.

[Alan Davion]

Vancer2, on 14 October 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:

Why set the game in 3015?!?! Why are we going back? Can we not go further? I'd like to see mechs from the Dark Ages.

Because Jihad/Dark Ages brings Mix Tech into the game and in an online game that just means everyone would slap Clan stuff on IS mechs.

And at that point, most stuff is completely obsolete because everyone has access to the best stuff.

I don't think any BT/MW PC/Console game will ever go past the FedCom Civil War for that reason right there.

You want Jihad/Dark Age and Mix Tech? Play the TT game. Leave that stuff out of MWO, we've got enough problems with balance as it is, Jihad/Dark Age/Mix Tech would render 90% of gear for the IS totally obsolete.

I think the only IS stuff that wouldn't end up obsolete is their standard, single shot ACs, but everything else would no doubt be relegated to the trash tier.

Edited by Alan Davion, 14 October 2017 - 11:43 AM.

[FupDup]

Alan Davion, on 14 October 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

Because Jihad/Dark Ages brings Mix Tech into the game and in an online game that just means everyone would slap Clan stuff on IS mechs.

And at that point, most stuff is completely obsolete because everyone has access to the best stuff.

I don't think any BT/MW PC/Console game will ever go past the FedCom Civil War for that reason right there.

You want Jihad/Dark Age and Mix Tech? Play the TT game. Leave that stuff out of MWO, we've got enough problems with balance as it is, Jihad/Dark Age/Mix Tech would render 90% of gear for the IS totally obsolete.

I think the only IS stuff that wouldn't end up obsolete is their standard, single shot ACs, but everything else would no doubt be relegated to the trash tier.

It's pretty easy to ignore the small number of mechs/variants that use tech from both factions, and retain the puretech rule for customized builds.

And IMO the IS single-shot ACs aren't exactly doing well even in this current era...

Edited by FupDup, 14 October 2017 - 11:46 AM.

[Thorn Hallis]

Vancer2, on 14 October 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:

Why set the game in 3015?!?! Why are we going back? Can we not go further? I'd like to see mechs from the Dark Ages.

Who knows, maybe Mechwarrior 8 will cover that era.