8 replies to this topic

[Bjorn JorgenssonX]

I never understood why in MWO an AC20 takes up just as many hard points as a machine gun. MW 4 wasn't that way. You had a location that was a hard point type, but you could fill it up with however many weapons of that type that would fit. Instead of an AC20 I could have 10 machine guns. Or instead of 1 ER PPC I could have 6 (or 7 if IS) ER medium lasers. I know, its probably just another "balance" thing, but I don't have to like it...

[Jay Leon Hart]

Bjorn JorgenssonX, on 01 December 2017 - 06:49 AM, said:

I never understood why in MWO an AC20 takes up just as many hard points as a machine gun. MW 4 wasn't that way. You had a location that was a hard point type, but you could fill it up with however many weapons of that type that would fit. Instead of an AC20 I could have 10 machine guns. Or instead of 1 ER PPC I could have 6 (or 7 if IS) ER medium lasers. I know, its probably just another "balance" thing, but I don't have to like it...

Sized hardpoints have been asked for a lot, but it's probably too late in the life of the game for such a drastic change..

Now, MW5 is another matter...

[process]

MW4's loadout system was an outlier that, for better or worse, simplified the mechlab process. MWO is more consistent with MW2, MW3, and tabletop.

[FupDup]

The downside of MW4's system is that it let big-gun mechs boat tons of tiny guns, like the Annihilator with 16 MG Arrays or an Awesome with 13 Medium Lasers. It basically was a "flavor" or "identity" problem of mechs doing things that other entirely different mechs were purpose-built to do.

IMO an ideal system would try to find a compromise between the two extremes of MW4 and MWO. Something like combining a max size limit and a weapon quantity limit within that specified size.

This could even be used to differentiate Omnimechs from Battlemechs. Let Omnis keep an MWO-like system of entirely sizeless hardpoints (because they have to suffer locked internal stuffs), while applying the limits described above to Battlemechs.

And yes, the majority of stock mechs would have inflated hardpoint size in addition to quantity to allow reasonable customization (that doesn't step on the toes of other chassis/variants) and allow bad stock mechs to be viable. It's about capturing the "spirit" of the build rather than the letter of it. Like, I don't think anyone would complain about Heavy PPCs (bigger than stock PPCs) in the arms of a Catapult K2. Even Heavy Cap PPCs when/if we get those. Those fit the mech.

Of course, all of this would be way too late for MWO. The game has been balanced for years around the current system and trying to tweak it would require rebuilding a lot of the balancing from the ground up. This would have to be for either a future MW game or an entirely separate "ripoff" IP...

Edited by FupDup, 01 December 2017 - 08:35 AM.

[Trenchbird]

Honestly, I like that it doesn't. It allows for some pretty interesting builds.

For example, do you imagine how crappy the new Loyalty Victor would be with sized hardpoints? "Oh, so you brought in another useless Victor config. Wow. Okay."

EDIT; I mean, I guess you could just make some HP Spaces larger than the weapons mounted there. (IE, some HPs, despite only mounting one light weapon, would have space to mount a much bigger weapon). But somehow I doubt that PGI would do that.

Edited by Catten Hart, 01 December 2017 - 08:18 AM.

[Snowbluff]

I actually like how it works quite a bit. Combined with quirks, it lets the mech keep some identity without (for the most part) being locked out of certain equipment arbitrarily. IE, it strikes a fine balance in my mind.

For example I played some games for the first time in a while. Made a new tech 2 Heavy PPC + 4 LMG + 2 MPL build for my Pay2Widow (which I reskilled from guns to heat management, range, velocity), and had a lot of fun. Sure the PPCs are technically in the wrong place according to lore, but it works together nicely.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Honestly, if they did implement hard point sizing, as many or more people would hate it as are asking for the different system. In the end, a portion of the player base would be ticked at them.

But then, a portion of any player base is ALWAYS ticked...

[Khobai]

signature hardpoints is a better way of doing basically the same thing as sized hardpoints

you have hardpoints that give quirks when specific weapons are placed in those hardpoints

that way youre not penalizing mechs. youre just rewarding mechs for using the weapons theyre supposed to be using in the locations theyre supposed to use them.

its the carrot approach instead of the stick approach. which is better.

Edited by Khobai, 01 December 2017 - 01:30 PM.

[Escef]

I think the current system of hardpoints with the table top critical slot system is probably the best hybrid you're going to get. Could I be wrong? Sure I could. The real question becomes if it is worth trying when we are already as deep as we are into the current system? The time for tinkering on that fundamental a level, I think, is long past. Maybe MW5 or an MWO 2, but not in the game we have now.