Jump to content

Mw5 Variants Are Underwhelming


35 replies to this topic

#21 Prototelis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 4,789 posts

Posted 30 December 2019 - 10:29 PM

Engine swapping fine. Especially if you're restricted to what happens to be in a market, forcing you to get creative in a build.

Locked ferro/endo/XL and a normal hardpoint system like MWO would have been enough to differentiate. Especially considering Endo/Ferro/XL are magic freebies in this game.

That way a mech that doesn't have endo/ferro can down-engine and get a decent build at the expensive of speed, heat, or both.

Likewise, with decent nearly but not min/maxed optimized builds the AI mechs themselves could be actual threats instead of having to throw **** tons of fodder at you to artificially create difficulty. I mean stomping tanks and shooting copters out of the sky is hella satisfying, but lets be honest people play big robut games to fight big robuts.

Bonus points; with less things on the screen fidelity could be improved and the game wouldn't have to look like it came from before MWO.

Edited by Prototelis, 30 December 2019 - 10:46 PM.


#22 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 2,868 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 31 December 2019 - 12:19 AM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 30 December 2019 - 10:19 PM, said:


Being forced to deal with what we have, to "make do" does not mean we settle with terribad mechs, it just means that we have to be a lot more creative with available materials. You want to talk about arguments falling flat, yet you couldn't even understand that.

You do know that, even in real life, there are those that make custom cars, custom bikes? Hell, people restore vehicles? While they may not be as fast as a Ferrari, but the point is with their own handiwork they can pump out better performance out of otherwise underwhelming vehicle due to be worn out, or just poorly made by doing it better themselves.

You know, guess what, we can also put guns on a car.


Except now, you're talking about the kind of retro-fitting that goes beyond the scope of what that cheap old car was meant to do. To add NOS, you'd need to customize a lot more than screwing a bottle of it with a fancy switch to operate and let it pump it into the fuel. Just an analogy.


View PostThe6thMessenger, on 30 December 2019 - 10:19 PM, said:

Never said that we should be able to swap engines, nice strawman there. I just said that they should be a bit more customizable, add more variety. Even if you add more hardpoints, there will still be objectively better mechs, exactly because of weight brackets, along with speed.

Consider the Ferrari and the regular-old-car in your previous analogy, you can upgrade the old-car into working condition, hell put even Nitrous-Oxide to put it into speed that can match the Ferrari, but if the Ferrari was similarly tweaked it will steal leave the old car behind. The point is that, the tweaked car is still pretty fast than it would be otherwise, when not tweaked.

The problem as I see with your line of thinking is that you want to restrict their performance regardless of whether they are customized or stock, and that is bad by the way. All you could see is the floor, when we're talking about the ceiling.



Yes, thank you.

Stock mechs aren't supposed to be the best, they are just supposed to be cost-effective, that is why the cheap ones like the Urbanmech are bad -- for a good reason, and it takes fine-tuning them to perform satisfactorily.



Yeah, but you know, having weapon mounts just restricted to what the weapons the mech have isn't exactly a fun mechanic. By all means, sure don't put an AC20 on just a supposedly AC2-sized hardpoint, but it's not like that should only be the hardpoint of a mech.



I didn't limit it to the engine, so yeah...

Read above... A merc unit would need access to proper retrofitting tools and supplies to accomplish that. Am I saying that it shouldn't be the case? No. In fact, I've said it plenty of times in chat elsewhere that the hardpoints in MW5 need to be tweaked so that a Mauler or an Annihilator can carry at least 1 Gauss rifle instead of not being able to at all.

There needs to be a Faction-oriented industrial hub where you can go and customize your mechs further and make it almost unrecognizable, like carrying a Gauss Rifle on a Blackjack. That'd make it sort of neat to have in the game. You could even role-play that you befriended a great house so much that you can turn a lowly Blackjack into an insane long-range sniper thanks to their help.

Edited by FRAGTAST1C, 31 December 2019 - 12:19 AM.


#23 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 6,284 posts
  • Locationinside a K9, punishing lowlifes

Posted 31 December 2019 - 01:28 AM

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 31 December 2019 - 12:19 AM, said:

Except now, you're talking about the kind of retro-fitting that goes beyond the scope of what that cheap old car was meant to do. To add NOS, you'd need to customize a lot more than screwing a bottle of it with a fancy switch to operate and let it pump it into the fuel. Just an analogy.


But that is the level of customization I was arguing for. Are you just arguing past me? Pushing the envelope of performance is exactly the point of customization. You reinforce that car that wasn't meant to do, so that it could do it regardless -- it is part of the customization process. Why is that a hard concept to understand?

Forget the stock-mechs, they are supposed to be as bad as they are cheap, because the buyers were supposed to buy thousands to outfit armies. Are you going to buy thousands?

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 31 December 2019 - 12:19 AM, said:

Read above... A merc unit would need access to proper retrofitting tools and supplies to accomplish that. Am I saying that it shouldn't be the case? No. In fact, I've said it plenty of times in chat elsewhere that the hardpoints in MW5 need to be tweaked so that a Mauler or an Annihilator can carry at least 1 Gauss rifle instead of not being able to at all.

There needs to be a Faction-oriented industrial hub where you can go and customize your mechs further and make it almost unrecognizable, like carrying a Gauss Rifle on a Blackjack. That'd make it sort of neat to have in the game. You could even role-play that you befriended a great house so much that you can turn a lowly Blackjack into an insane long-range sniper thanks to their help.


But whyyyyyyy?

Why assume that they DON'T have that kind of supplies? What the hell are we paying for in the mechlab? Why assume that they aren't that they do not have the tools? You need factories? Wouldn't that just be about mass production by mechanical assembly-lines? You know, like every other factories in the world?

If we're in to roleplaying, why not save a step and just roleplay that you got engineers good enough to do those sort of things? That you got good enough equipment and enough supplies to properly retrofit them?

While I realize that this really might be just explained away by different preferences, I really would like to point out that it's a question of game-design from PGI.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 31 December 2019 - 01:34 AM.


#24 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 2,868 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 31 December 2019 - 02:06 AM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 31 December 2019 - 01:28 AM, said:


But that is the level of customization I was arguing for. Are you just arguing past me?



After re-reading everything, I think I did. Sorry, my bad Posted Image

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 31 December 2019 - 01:28 AM, said:

While I realize that this really might be just explained away by different preferences, I really would like to point out that it's a question of game-design from PGI.


Yeah, I'd like to gain favour from Liao or Steiner and gain access to their top secret facilities to rework the hardpoints on some of my mechs. That way, we can have some bad variants and/or entirely bad mech chassis but we could turn that around by having 1 or two unique hardpoints, like my e.g., with the Blackjack carrying a Gauss Rifle.

#25 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 6,284 posts
  • Locationinside a K9, punishing lowlifes

Posted 31 December 2019 - 02:25 AM

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 31 December 2019 - 02:06 AM, said:

Yeah, I'd like to gain favour from Liao or Steiner and gain access to their top secret facilities to rework the hardpoints on some of my mechs. That way, we can have some bad variants and/or entirely bad mech chassis but we could turn that around by having 1 or two unique hardpoints, like my e.g., with the Blackjack carrying a Gauss Rifle.


Look, I would like my own Gauss BJ too, but seriously that 1-2 unique hardpoints is rather small thinking. If that is all you could muster, all you are doing is setting mechs up to a completely specific build, thereby they are less flexible because if you aren't building them to said specific specifications then you are wasting the mech's potential.

Why not save a step and make that BJ also capable of an AC20?

#26 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 2,868 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 31 December 2019 - 03:20 AM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 31 December 2019 - 02:25 AM, said:


Look, I would like my own Gauss BJ too, but seriously that 1-2 unique hardpoints is rather small thinking. If that is all you could muster, all you are doing is setting mechs up to a completely specific build, thereby they are less flexible because if you aren't building them to said specific specifications then you are wasting the mech's potential.

Why not save a step and make that BJ also capable of an AC20?


That's basically what I'm saying. In MW5, the hardpoints are differentiated not just by weapon types but also by weapon size. So, a ballistic hardpoint that can mount a Gauss Rifle can mount an AC20 also, which is how it is right now but the problem is, not enough mechs have that large ballistic hardpoint. So, like in the e.g., if a 4 small ballistic Blackjack can be retrofitted to have one large ballistic hardpoint and energy as well, then we can have a Gauss or AC20 or whatever there.

#27 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 6,284 posts
  • Locationinside a K9, punishing lowlifes

Posted 31 December 2019 - 04:38 AM

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 31 December 2019 - 03:20 AM, said:

That's basically what I'm saying. In MW5, the hardpoints are differentiated not just by weapon types but also by weapon size. So, a ballistic hardpoint that can mount a Gauss Rifle can mount an AC20 also, which is how it is right now but the problem is, not enough mechs have that large ballistic hardpoint. So, like in the e.g., if a 4 small ballistic Blackjack can be retrofitted to have one large ballistic hardpoint and energy as well, then we can have a Gauss or AC20 or whatever there.


Pretty sure AC20 is waaay larger, likewise what I am actually asking is more hardpoints, not necessarily larger ones.

#28 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 11,208 posts

Posted 31 December 2019 - 04:45 AM

View PostApplejack, on 29 December 2019 - 04:54 AM, said:

I find it laughable that they made the customization system more restrictive than in MWO when, arguably, MWO is where you'd make the case for more restriction because it's a multiplayer game so balance is more important.

This is a single-player game, where you're supposed to let the player do more of what they want and less of what they don't want.


i kinda feel like the mechlabs need to be swapped. letting people go nuts in an sp game makes sense, pgi's ai doesn't get butthurt when it gets seal clubbed after all, it doesn't spew salt, it just lines up to die more or less. meanwhile in mwo the sized hardpoints would have done a lot to help reduce balance issues early on, reduce bloating, you wouldn't have needed ghost heat, or gauss charge, or gimp traditionally powerful weapons like the 20 class autocannons, etc. its too late to add now that were in maintenance mode, but its an idea for next time, if there is a next time.

though i dont think id have made it as restrictive as it is, allow limited engine changes and armor/structure upgrades, maybe give some of the lower end mechs slightly larger than stock hardpoint sizes. for omnimechs i would have made the weapons fixed to the omnipods, so rather than swapping the weapons individually you swap the whole pod (arm or whatever) instead with whatever weapons and equipment were installed in it. lighter pods could have higher armor ceilings or more heat sinks to make use of the saved tonnage. for future clan dlc, id like to see field omnipod swaps.

Edited by LordNothing, 31 December 2019 - 04:45 AM.


#29 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 2,868 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 31 December 2019 - 05:40 AM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 31 December 2019 - 04:38 AM, said:


Pretty sure AC20 is waaay larger, likewise what I am actually asking is more hardpoints, not necessarily larger ones.


The problem, the way I see it is, you'll end up making all mechs like gunboats instead of actually being different, just like in MWO.

#30 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,166 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 31 December 2019 - 07:31 AM

Some of them are bad, some are not so bad.

This hard point and engine restriction makes sense.

I actually think this system is far better than MWO over generous system.

It's the correct way of doing it from both lore and engineering perspective.

M.W.O hey I can fit 24 tons of weapons on an arm that was only designed to take ten tons, because the bad game mechanic allows me to, my Panther rocks..


Or crap.. i'm in the tail end of Marik space, and I haven't got a PPC and I got the crew to pay. screw it a large laser will have to do.


Also fun is different for everyone.

I personally got fun from, and frankly the only way to make the game challenging, is to only use stock designs.

If I could abuse mech designs as badly as I can with M.W.O it would be dull and pointless to play.

#31 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 6,284 posts
  • Locationinside a K9, punishing lowlifes

Posted 31 December 2019 - 06:38 PM

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 31 December 2019 - 05:40 AM, said:

The problem, the way I see it is, you'll end up making all mechs like gunboats instead of actually being different, just like in MWO.


Depends on the implementation. Sure you can make them gunboats, but realistically it's all about the builds, such as what if one variant is missile-inclined? What if another variant is ballistically-inclined? What if the other is energy-inclined?

You are thinking so small with this.

#32 Prototelis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 4,789 posts

Posted 31 December 2019 - 07:03 PM

The best recieved game in the series threw most of the build rules out the window.

It's almost like the mechwarrior series is well known for customization of foam robuts.

#33 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 2,868 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 31 December 2019 - 07:58 PM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 31 December 2019 - 06:38 PM, said:


Depends on the implementation. Sure you can make them gunboats, but realistically it's all about the builds, such as what if one variant is missile-inclined? What if another variant is ballistically-inclined? What if the other is energy-inclined?

You are thinking so small with this.


Let's take the Grasshopper 5P for e.g., It has 2 Large energy hardpoints and some Medium energy hardpoints. How do you want to customise this? Convert one of the ME hardpoints into a LE or a L Ballistic? If you do the latter, it basically turns into the Mjolnir but with torso-only mounts. If you do the former, it is more like a 5t lighter Black Knight. Do you want to increase the number of hardpoints so that you can mount smaller energy weapons? It ends up like the Top Dog. If you put in ballistic hardpoints to mount AC2s, it turns into the Black Widow or the Ilya Muromets.

So, converting too many things will only end up creating similarities, not uniqueness.

#34 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 6,284 posts
  • Locationinside a K9, punishing lowlifes

Posted 31 December 2019 - 08:25 PM

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 31 December 2019 - 07:58 PM, said:

Let's take the Grasshopper 5P for e.g., It has 2 Large energy hardpoints and some Medium energy hardpoints. How do you want to customise this? Convert one of the ME hardpoints into a LE or a L Ballistic? If you do the latter, it basically turns into the Mjolnir but with torso-only mounts. If you do the former, it is more like a 5t lighter Black Knight. Do you want to increase the number of hardpoints so that you can mount smaller energy weapons? It ends up like the Top Dog. If you put in ballistic hardpoints to mount AC2s, it turns into the Black Widow or the Ilya Muromets.

So, converting too many things will only end up creating similarities, not uniqueness.


Gunboats =/= Unique. Why do you feel the need for mechs to be completely unique? Won't their small differences and form-factor be enough of a choice? The actual placement of hardpoints? Do you really just feel the identity of the mechs if the are just doing one exact specific thing?

So what if it turns out to be a lighter Black-Knight? So what if it's a Mjolnir with only torso-mount? So what if it ends up like a Top-Dog? Top-Dog is 5 tons lighter -- so if you are short for weight you can just opt for a Top-Dog, else if you have too much weight unused, why not just get a Black-Knight? Options are nice because of situations.

Here is a thought, why not add a custom missile-oriented grasshopper? Or three small energy hardpoints on the arms? And if we're beyond hardpoints, why not change engine-ratings? Or add endosteel?

I get with your inclination of pet-mech, I really do, but in the end you are too rigid with your need to be completely unique, never mind that they already are different because of the different chassis alone. It's like the question of a red Ferrari and a black Lamborghini, both of them go fast, why not let your own preference just do the picking?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 31 December 2019 - 08:30 PM.


#35 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 2,868 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 31 December 2019 - 10:09 PM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 31 December 2019 - 08:25 PM, said:

It's like the question of a red Ferrari and a black Lamborghini, both of them go fast, why not let your own preference just do the picking?


That's a terrible analogy but here goes...

If a Lamborghini Aventador's naturally aspirated goodness gets a turbo charger, it'll become something else, like a V8 Urus. Sure, they're both Lamborghinis, but the uniqueness of the Aventador is lost. It isn't all about aesthetic, it's about what it is like to handle and how it sounds.

Similarly, if you go Ferrari vs Lamborghini, Lambos are usually 4WD whereas Ferraris have amazing RWD tech. Both are naturally aspirated. If you turn a Ferrari 458 into a 4WD, it'll lose its amazing and unique handling and become a road-hugging Lambo Aventador. These differences are what makes owning those cars valuable, else they'd be like any other, like the pathetic Hondas and Nissans. It isn't just about the looks.

Likewise, Mechs aren't just about the tonnage. It's the hardpoints that define them. If you start removing the core element of mech chassis, then why not just build a mech of our from scratch? We all know what a good mech. It needs to be mobile, needs high hardpoints, it needs a lot of pod space, etc.,

If you're just going to say, "Oh, so what if the Grasshopper turns into a 5t heavier Top Dog?". Well, the simple answer would be, "Why not make a Javelin have a siren and give it a big boom stick? So what if it turns into a K9?" Too much alteration removes the uniqueness and makes owning different variants pointless. Just buy a whole of Javelins and make it like the K9 then. What's the point of a K9?

#36 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 6,284 posts
  • Locationinside a K9, punishing lowlifes

Posted 31 December 2019 - 11:43 PM

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 31 December 2019 - 10:09 PM, said:

Spoiler


Likewise, Mechs aren't just about the tonnage. It's the hardpoints that define them. If you start removing the core element of mech chassis, then why not just build a mech of our from scratch? We all know what a good mech. It needs to be mobile, needs high hardpoints, it needs a lot of pod space, etc.,

If you're just going to say, "Oh, so what if the Grasshopper turns into a 5t heavier Top Dog?". Well, the simple answer would be, "Why not make a Javelin have a siren and give it a big boom stick? So what if it turns into a K9?" Too much alteration removes the uniqueness and makes owning different variants pointless. Just buy a whole of Javelins and make it like the K9 then. What's the point of a K9?


I don't think you really even understand, so I'm going to tell it to you. Why not make a Javelin have a siren and give it a big boom-stick? Did you really think I would disagree with that? Go right ahead, if that is what you want, more power to you. Also I think you're confusing "variants" with "chassis".

Likewise, I don't need the Javelin to act like a K9, i never said that them 30 tonners should be the same, but I just said that IF they became the same in terms of being gunboats, so what? There are PLENTY of differences between a Javelin and an Urbanmech, with the Urbie stuck at STD60 but the Javelin at STD180, doesn't matter if hardpoints are the same, the Urbie would still have more tonnage to load the K9 loadout and it's still be different enough because obviously the K9 is still waaay slower. What, do you want the Javelin to be as slow as the Urbanmech? Lol.

The problem with your approach is that you fixate on something specific, when the mech could be judged as a whole -- hell there is still the fixed speed, the different placement of them hardpoints on the body such as some got highmounts others have low-mounts. As far as I'm concerned, a Javelin is a Javelin, an Urbanmech is an Urbanmech, Ferrari being a 4WD won't make it an Aventador.

Even if it is the case that the performances are near similar which defeats the point of different chassis and variants, so what? It just so happens that it's normal for companies to compete with similar products, for certain roles, how many 5.56mm Assault Rifles out there? The Bullpups? The Steyr-Aug versus Tavor-21 versus SAR-21 versus FN2000? The same 9mm Handguns like Beretta 92 vs CZ75? In reality, these manufacturers compete with another, as pointless as it seems, that is just the reality. Remember that these people are trying to sell something.

"Why not built a mech from scratch?" Do you really think I would disagree with this as well? I would like to build my own mech, but guess what, customization is **** on MW5 and we literally cant with how MW5 is programmed.

With the past two questions, did you really think you fired two silver-bullets? Why don't you try again, and this time actually compare gun-boats to gun-boats as close as they could get? Because you couldn't get any more wrong with that Urbanmech and Javelin comparison.

And wrong, performance isn't only what makes the car valuable, its the brand, the design. There are many products that are ****, but still bought for hefty price just because of the brand, case and point, iPhone. I admit, I recognize that people have their own preferences, have their values, their own way of judging things, and while I respect your way of judging things, seriously those are just fallacious reasoning.



View PostC E Dwyer, on 31 December 2019 - 07:31 AM, said:

I personally got fun from, and frankly the only way to make the game challenging, is to only use stock designs.


Oh please. PGI is just incompetent with AI that they have to compensate with numbers.

View PostC E Dwyer, on 31 December 2019 - 07:31 AM, said:

If I could abuse mech designs as badly as I can with M.W.O it would be dull and pointless to play.


I'm sorry what:

View PostC E Dwyer, on 31 December 2019 - 07:31 AM, said:

Also fun is different for everyone.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 01 January 2020 - 02:53 AM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users