Haven't seen this topic brought up much anywhere, sooo thought I'd ask.
There are MANY apocryphal PGI variants in MWO, and how would you guys feel if PGI included them in MW5 (including hero mechs)?
Personally, I'm rather averse to the idea, because many of the PGI variants create even more overlap between mechs, and they also tend to "break the mold" of the original variants (ballistics on the Panther 10P, which has no ballistic variants, for example (I can't find any, anyway)).
Also, many of PGI's variants don't seem to follow the same paradigm that most of the BT variants follow, especially the lower tech variants. Specifically, some PGI variants are noticeably more optimized than cannon variants, and I feel this could generate unfavorable balance in MW5 (especially if the mechlab is very limited/nonexistent).
Also, on a somewhat unrelated topic, what do you guys think will happen to variants which are nearly identical to others except for the fact that they have a rear-facing laser switched forward? (see Wolfhound).
Without a mechlab or actual rear-facing weapons, I feel like it would be pretty hard to differentiate these variants from others, at least not without quirks (which I hope PGI largely avoids in MW5 soo badly ugh).
I'd rather they use more lore centric builds and only resort to their own when they have to but there are a ton of legit mechs so they shouldn't unless its for bonus content or east egg. Finding a mostly intact cptl-c1(f) that gets you bonus game money once you salvage/repair it would be nice. We've already seen the cptl-k2 with its presumable stock load out although I'm not sure what type of ppcs it had.
Some mech variants just plain out right suck and I wouldn't mind pgi using a new or hero variant instead. Screw the spider 5v, I'll take one of the other two or even the ansi hero.
Haven't seen this topic brought up much anywhere, sooo thought I'd ask.
There are MANY apocryphal PGI variants in MWO, and how would you guys feel if PGI included them in MW5 (including hero mechs)?
Personally, I'm rather averse to the idea, because many of the PGI variants create even more overlap between mechs, and they also tend to "break the mold" of the original variants (ballistics on the Panther 10P, which has no ballistic variants, for example (I can't find any, anyway)).
Also, many of PGI's variants don't seem to follow the same paradigm that most of the BT variants follow, especially the lower tech variants. Specifically, some PGI variants are noticeably more optimized than cannon variants, and I feel this could generate unfavorable balance in MW5 (especially if the mechlab is very limited/nonexistent).
Also, on a somewhat unrelated topic, what do you guys think will happen to variants which are nearly identical to others except for the fact that they have a rear-facing laser switched forward? (see Wolfhound).
Without a mechlab or actual rear-facing weapons, I feel like it would be pretty hard to differentiate these variants from others, at least not without quirks (which I hope PGI largely avoids in MW5 soo badly ugh).
Thoughts?
lorewarriors unite!
From what I had seen and heard of MW5... unless there's a home base to settle in or a series of facilities that could be rented or a modding center of sorts to find, the mechlabs we have seen so far have actually been the hangar inside of a Leopard Dropship.
Hangars offer the ability to do modest repairs and rearm. Advanced repairs and hefty mods are extremely difficult to impossible in such a setting in lore. (Edit: What one could do with reasonable success in the setting though is utilize a refit kit in this setting in lore). Refit kits in Battletech offer plans, schematics and all the parts necessary to modify a mech extensively into a different mold. For example until after a certain point after 3030, all Hunchbacks OTHER than the 4G are made entirely through refit kits and are not sold from factories. They can be bought second hand already modified, but refit kits are the primary means to produce them. (Edit: In such a setting though, usually needs sufficient cranes/lift arms, or preferably a Powerman or PGI's Alex Iglesias' "Loader King")
(Edit: PGI has not fleshed out the Loader King that their Sarna reference for the canonized Roughneck. I did, however, take it upon myself to make a design which I am including in a spoiler at the end of this post.)
A self-mod of extensive changes, i.e. replacing the Panther's PPC with an Autocannon, requires a number of changes to the arm in order to accomodate it and as such the entire arm might even need to be rebuilt from scratch in order to funnel the ammo feed through inside, otherwise it would need to be fed from the outside through a belt or cassette transfer system that might as well be put on with duct tape.
In another announcement for MW5 Mercs, complaints about a limited mechbay kept going around, which it actually said that you'd be able to do granular changes to everything about your mechs, but things like ferro armor were going to be special. Which it is, as the Jenner with ferro armor isn't even invented until the year the game will end. Still, I tried to invent it 10 years earlier in Battletech with all the rules Megamek HQ can handle + the Battletech RPG rules which more extensively covers true to lore mech modifications... and out of three attempts, one with renting the factory that would eventually make the mech in then only 5 years, I had a single partial success...permanently ruining parts of the mech in the process.
One failure was so collosal despite having (in all three cases) god-modded impossible-in-Battletech-tier technicians and a full assortment of assistant techs and up to 39 million cbills to spend on making a single Jenner change from standard to ferro armor... that the mech was utterly left with a permanently fused leg and became little more than an expensive paper weight that I sunk close to 19 million into on top of the original cost of getting it.
So without finding on planet facilities to make more extensive modifications, about the best you can hope for is...changing your Armstrong J11 80mm AC/5 for a Pontiac Light 40mm, or a Defiance Type J 75mm, or for the biggest bang you can get AC/5s in within lore, a 120mm GM Whirlwind/5 ripped right off the top of a Marauder for a whopping 3 shots to come out to 1.67 damage each totaling an expected 5 damage (give or take depending on how and where it hits, as AC/5s can do as little as 2 damage total to as much as 8 damage total for a single cassette, and can churn up to 2 damage ratings if you really push them to dangerous levels -- though there's no sign of weapon specific overheat and therefore we won't see that mechanic.. and that we still have a Mech Rifle on the Shadowhawk also tells me that PGI won't actually dig into weapon lore when producing their weapon variants as there's no such thing as a single shot 5 damage AC/5.)
----
Thoughts on rear facing weapons. The Unreal Engine, unlike the CryEngine, has native support for picture in picture, and as such rear-aiming can be achievable. Even better they could put the rear viewport onto a MONITOR in the COCKPIT if they wanted to. Which is what I hope they do if they are LISTENING, right PGI?
Note: It is 50 tons instead of 65 tons, because industrial materials are heavier than military materials and not as strong, and 50 tons, such that a 50 ton mech's industrial skeleton weighs almost the same as a 65 ton mech's military skeleton. Since the skeleton and the mech needs to be roughly the same size, a heavier skeleton would not actually make sense and therefore I reasoned that the mech would be significantly lighter than the Roughneck eventually produced, much the same way another mech by the same company (Achernar Battlemechs) produced another industrial mech turned Battlemech which also gained tonnage in the process.
Compare to the Powerman that PGI's Sarna.net article for the Roughneck says that the Loader King competed with.
Similar prices, similar ability with good reasons to go with either choice (being 65 tons would also make it too heavy to be practical for its purpose; another reason for the choice of 50 tons which still pushes it but also gives it an advantage and still lets it tank like a boss which the lore says it does).
They are economically comparable, in terms of tons carriable the Loader King trumps, but in terms of diverse things to carry at once the Powerman is superior. The non-combat maintenance costs over a 6 month storage followed by a 6 month use period are similar between the two with the Loader King being a bit lower in weekly and monthly costs despite its higher initial price tag. Its base unit even has minor armament, while the Powerman only has it if modified at a sacrifice to its primary purpose.
Many of the PGI variants only exist for the Rule of Three, but some also fill roles that don't exist or aren't viable in table top. We'll have to see how the pace of MW5 differs from MWO, have to remember it will be a game played for 90% of the time with Single Heat Sinks...
Battletech is a completely fictional universe and PGI is the company which kept the IP alive on the PC. I don't think Microsoft and most other companies would have done anything useful with the IP. Hence I think PGI should be able to create canon content for the universe, both in tech and lore. They worked long and hard on MWO and they probably worked long and hard for their chance to develop MW5. PGI is really underappreciated by the BT crowd(imo).
Edited by Bluttrunken, 02 December 2017 - 03:39 PM.
I wouldnt mind if they added their own variants to Mechwarrior 5 (as long as they arent stupid and fit the mech)
I'd actually consider their Roughneck canon, it's really lore friendly.
Since lots of PGI variants only exists to give certain chassis not only the famed R3 but rather to create enough different variants, because some lore variants just replace minimal things in MWO mechlab terms that wouldn't change the hardpoints or anything....there is just no reason for bringing them in MW5.
Keep in mind there is no godmode Mechlab in MW5 where you can magicaly change the makings of your mechs internal skeleton or just do some wichcraft and remove and replace the whole movement system of your mech by a more or less powerfull one or simply recreate the complete outer hull of your mech out of a completely other material than it was formerly made or any other stupid nonsense.
Also MW5 plays before ferrofibrous, endosteel, XL engines and all other starleague class weapons and equipment.
Edited by The Basilisk, 02 December 2017 - 04:05 PM.
Bluttrunken, on 02 December 2017 - 03:38 PM, said:
Battletech is a completely fictional universe and PGI is the company which kept the IP alive on the PC. I don't think Microsoft and most other companies would have done anything useful with the IP. Hence I think PGI should be able to create canon content for the universe, both in tech and lore. They worked long and hard on MWO and they probably worked long and hard for their chance to develop MW5. PGI is really underappreciated by the BT crowd(imo).
I'm not opposed to PGI adding stuff as long as it fits well with the original mech and the like.
Armored Yokai pretty much said exactly what I was going to say lol
I do expect to see the roughneck in MW5 and it would fit just fine.
The mechs I'm worried about are things like the Pather 10P (as mentioned), and the Crab hero (ballistics and missiles on a strictly energy mech).
Koniving, on 02 December 2017 - 03:27 PM, said:
[huge write-up]
WOW, wasn't expecting such a detailed response lol
Yeah I do wish that they went the more lore-friendly route and made ACs fire multiple shells at once. Would love to see different manufactures too.
In regards to rear firing weapons, I have a feeling PGI won't be implementing it, sadly, even if Unreal does support something like that. For one thing, none of the mechs are modeled with rear-facing weapons, and I don't see PGI going back to retrofit them.
The Basilisk, on 02 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:
Since lots of PGI variants only exists to give certain chassis not only the famed R3 but rather to create enough different variants, because some lore variants just replace minimal things in MWO mechlab terms that wouldn't change the hardpoints or anything....there is just no reason for bringing them in MW5.
Keep in mind there is no godmode Mechlab in MW5 where you can magicaly change the makings of your mechs internal skeleton or just do some wichcraft and remove and replace the whole movement system of your mech by a more or less powerfull one or simply recreate the complete outer hull of your mech out of a completely other material than it was formerly made or any other stupid nonsense.
Also MW5 plays before ferrofibrous, endosteel, XL engines and all other starleague class weapons and equipment.
Your last point is pretty good. The lack of all the fancy tech will really reduce the number of variants available. Hadn't realized that before oops
Perfectly fine with PGI adding their own touches to MW5. Roughneck and anything else.
Would LOVE to find and salvage a Boar's Head or a Grey Death. Be even better if they gave bonus credits.
I don't get purists at all.
Yeah finding legendary mechs like hero mechs would be pretty nice.
Not sure how well a c-bill boost would make sense narrative-wise, though. I guess they could say that the mech gives you some status on the contract market, so employers are willing to pay you more for missions.
Haven't seen this topic brought up much anywhere, sooo thought I'd ask.
There are MANY apocryphal PGI variants in MWO, and how would you guys feel if PGI included them in MW5 (including hero mechs)?
I actually figure we'll eventually see a TT tech readout with the various unique hero chassis and variants. Catalyst will want to tie in the other parts of the BT universe eventually, and at that point, having TT-canon stuff in MW5 won't cause much grief.
I just wonder about available Mechs for the time frame referenced
I am not a lore person it just seems strange to limit the game so much
Truth be told, the game is probably the most expansive Mechwarrior title to date. 34 years, so basically your character's life span assuming you don't "die" (permanently) along the way.
Ther'es a LOT of mechs available in the time frame between 3015 and 3049. In fact so many that if it weren't for MWO already having the models, I don't think PGI could have even a fraction of the amount in MW5...
Consider this: Most mech games had a staple of barely more than 20 mechs.. and usually one variant of each
For example Mechwarrior 3 only had the CN9-D, one variant of the Orion, a single Bushwacker, a few other mechs and a number of Clan mechs. That was it. The expansion added another 5 or so mechs and meh. The roster was definitely less than 25 mechs.
Bluttrunken, on 02 December 2017 - 03:38 PM, said:
Battletech is a completely fictional universe and PGI is the company which kept the IP alive on the PC. I don't think Microsoft and most other companies would have done anything useful with the IP. Hence I think PGI should be able to create canon content for the universe, both in tech and lore. They worked long and hard on MWO and they probably worked long and hard for their chance to develop MW5. PGI is really underappreciated by the BT crowd(imo).
It was kept alive by MekTek and Mechwarrior Living Legends. PGI brought in a wider than normal audience into the game and got Microsoft to see that there is money in the IP that they've been sitting on. They vitalized it further, they did not keep it alive.
Yeah I do wish that they went the more lore-friendly route and made ACs fire multiple shells at once. Would love to see different manufactures too.
They did...
Note the shells from the AC/2s and AC/5s here?
They just didn't do it for the Shadowhawk.
It makes great sense to do it for the Jagermech since it is an anti-air mech and lets face it, hitting helicopters and jets with tank cannons isn't easy (not to mention lore breaking in that sense). But the Jagermech's Acs are of the exact same caliber as the Shadowhawk...
Specfically Mydron Model D, according to Threads of Ambition is 30mm and 14 shots counts as a single "round" on the ammunition readout monitor.
Actually I stand corrected I don't have Mydron Model C's caliber, and I'm thinking of the Rifleman Imperator A 80mm AC/5s which according to Price of Glory are full auto and somewhere between 5 and 10 shots will tick the counter down 1 unit.
Armstrong J11 (Shadowhawk 2D, 2H and 2D2) is either 80mm or 90mm according to Thunder Ridge (I suspect a typo) and is burst fire with between 6 to 8 shells per ticker (which ticks a single digit on the display which starts on a full load of 20 ticks and the Shadowhawk in question has a single bin that can hold a single ton of ammunition, meaning between 120 to 160 bullets) and a couple of bursts per reload (which is when the tick goes down by 1). The issue is a burst doesn't always say how many bullets fly leaving me with a guesstimate based on when they are specific, and he's only maxed out at 3 short bursts to a cassette. So the bursts are pilot controlled (and in theory you can burst the entire load at once if you want, or do as he does and split it between two or more targets or spread it against infantry).
They did...
Note the shells from the AC/2s and AC/5s here?
They just didn't do it for the Shadowhawk.
It makes great sense to do it for the Jagermech since it is an anti-air mech and lets face it, hitting helicopters and jets with tank cannons isn't easy (not to mention lore breaking in that sense). But the Jagermech's Acs are of the exact same caliber as the Shadowhawk...
Specfically Mydron Model D, according to Threads of Ambition is 30mm and 14 shots counts as a single "round" on the ammunition readout monitor.
Actually I stand corrected I don't have Mydron Model C's caliber, and I'm thinking of the Rifleman Imperator A 80mm AC/5s which according to Price of Glory are full auto and somewhere between 5 and 10 shots will tick the counter down 1 unit.
Armstrong J11 (Shadowhawk 2D, 2H and 2D2) is either 80mm or 90mm according to Thunder Ridge (I suspect a typo) and is burst fire with between 6 to 8 shells per ticker (which ticks a single digit on the display which starts on a full load of 20 ticks and the Shadowhawk in question has a single bin that can hold a single ton of ammunition, meaning between 120 to 160 bullets) and a couple of bursts per reload (which is when the tick goes down by 1). The issue is a burst doesn't always say how many bullets fly leaving me with a guesstimate based on when they are specific, and he's only maxed out at 3 short bursts to a cassette. So the bursts are pilot controlled (and in theory you can burst the entire load at once if you want, or do as he does and split it between two or more targets or spread it against infantry).
It could be balance, or being an alpha/demonstration build.
Then again, they were planning on having unique weapon models (Like different brands of AC); Could be that they could be making up a new model of AC/10 the Shadow Hawk uses.
If I'm not mistaken, didn't it have an AC/5 in the video (it does in the lore). If that's an AC/10... I still wanna slap the **** out of them (AC/10s don't go above 120mm at least according to the 13 novels I've been through so far as AC/10s have only appeared in 80mm to 120mm)
Either way.. Now I wanna look back and see if that was an AC/10. That would tell us we could at least raise autocannon sizes in lore builds... which means some substantial tonnage changes.
They did...
Note the shells from the AC/2s and AC/5s here?
They just didn't do it for the Shadowhawk.
It makes great sense to do it for the Jagermech since it is an anti-air mech and lets face it, hitting helicopters and jets with tank cannons isn't easy (not to mention lore breaking in that sense). But the Jagermech's Acs are of the exact same caliber as the Shadowhawk...
Specfically Mydron Model D, according to Threads of Ambition is 30mm and 14 shots counts as a single "round" on the ammunition readout monitor.
Actually I stand corrected I don't have Mydron Model C's caliber, and I'm thinking of the Rifleman Imperator A 80mm AC/5s which according to Price of Glory are full auto and somewhere between 5 and 10 shots will tick the counter down 1 unit.
Armstrong J11 (Shadowhawk 2D, 2H and 2D2) is either 80mm or 90mm according to Thunder Ridge (I suspect a typo) and is burst fire with between 6 to 8 shells per ticker (which ticks a single digit on the display which starts on a full load of 20 ticks and the Shadowhawk in question has a single bin that can hold a single ton of ammunition, meaning between 120 to 160 bullets) and a couple of bursts per reload (which is when the tick goes down by 1). The issue is a burst doesn't always say how many bullets fly leaving me with a guesstimate based on when they are specific, and he's only maxed out at 3 short bursts to a cassette. So the bursts are pilot controlled (and in theory you can burst the entire load at once if you want, or do as he does and split it between two or more targets or spread it against infantry).
ooo I was not aware of that image. That's very interesting
And I'm pretty sure the Shadowhawk in the video did have an AC/5. They probably just went with the single shot AC/5 since that's what people are used to from MWO. I do hope it's temporary, though, since the burst fire would be pretty fun and overall more useful in a combined arms scenario. Would give the Shadowhawk a bit more AA capability.
If I'm not mistaken, didn't it have an AC/5 in the video (it does in the lore). If that's an AC/10... I still wanna slap the **** out of them (AC/10s don't go above 120mm at least according to the 13 novels I've been through so far as AC/10s have only appeared in 80mm to 120mm)
Either way.. Now I wanna look back and see if that was an AC/10. That would tell us we could at least raise autocannon sizes in lore builds... which means some substantial tonnage changes.
Sorry, I think he meant AC/5 and I forgot to fact check. Sorry.
0
