Jump to content

Mwo 2023 Plans Devlog


187 replies to this topic

#61 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,451 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 14 January 2023 - 12:19 PM

View PostKursedVixen, on 14 January 2023 - 07:23 AM, said:

They can use any silloute they want but I sincerly hope it's not another IS mech... we need more clan mechs. Even if it's just some of the IICs like the locust IIC conjurer (WolverineIIC) Shadowhawk IIC etc. I'd be happy but clans really need new chassis to work on, and it's high past time for the HAG 20,30,40


New Clan 'mechs would be balanced, and preferred, but if we're being realistic about a floundering company with limited resources: any missing 'mechs from TRO 3025, or TRO 3039, would be eligible for dual-use in MWO and MW5. It makes perfect sense for PGI to want to get paid twice for the same work.

#62 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 14 January 2023 - 12:36 PM

View PostMechWarrior5782621, on 14 January 2023 - 12:16 PM, said:

I'm excited to finally have a new clan mech, clan snub PPCs, clan MRMs, clan heavy gauss, etc. It's about time!


Hate to break your dreams, but neither of these exist in battletech universe as far as i know, so there is little to no chance any of these will make it in game.

I think new mech could potentionally be stone rhino however.

Edited by MechB Kotare, 14 January 2023 - 01:12 PM.


#63 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,451 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 14 January 2023 - 12:37 PM

View PostCrashburn, on 14 January 2023 - 08:40 AM, said:


I won't deny that some of the Siege maps need to be redesigned, but to completely remove them and leave only the select QP maps. Might as well just can the whole FP at that point. I know a lot of guys who left FP back in the day had the same viewpoint as Skymaster (no real point or incentive to play the mode). Yes maps became stale...especially due to the fact that 2 or 3 of the Siege maps came up the vast majority of the time. Before some of the QP maps came into the mode, I would play Siege for a few hours (about 50% solo/50 grouped). The vast majority of the games I would get Boreal Vault, or Helebore. Which are probably the two worst Siege maps based on the chokepoint complaints. I think the 2 best Siege maps were Emerald & Vitric (choke points weren't nearly as bad) but those rarely were the maps played, and usually only if you had a good amount of players active in FP that day. I'm actually surprised Skymaster didn't bring Boreal up for his choice for reworked chokepoints. Most guys would not play faction attack if they knew they were getting Boreal, and back when it was those zone circles you pretty much could tell what map was coming up in the next drop.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, what killed faction for me, was just getting the same map over and over. It's my same complaint for QP, when sometimes the same map selection of 4 comes up 3x in a row. People tend to vote for the same maps. I think any game mode gets boring & stale getting the same map 3, 4 times in a row.

Getting rid of Siege maps/mode...honestly that would kill FP for me. Especially since you don't get all the QP maps in that mode, I believe PGI said some of the QP maps were too small to incorporate in FP. So we really only get the big QP maps, and the radomization of the QP FP maps tends to drop you into the same maps time after time if you play consecutive matches. 3x Respawn on Polar, Alpine, Terra, Forest, Frozen, and HPG the thought makes me want to slit my wrists. Posted Image

In response to MechB Kotare, if you don't want to play Siege mode...if I'm not mistaken after a few hours (maybe it's 1/2 way) into the 8 hour FP windows, you are pushed into the non-siege modes (if FP has been active enough), at that point you have no chance of playing a Siege map(except if the other Faction wins enough to push it back into Siege, but once it's moved that far into QP maps it's pretty much done for that window). You could try a FP QP drop without having to worry about playing Siege. At the very least you are able to click on the FP tab in game and see the mode it's in. So if Siege is your biggest hangup with FP, you can find FP drops, that you know will be a QP map for sure before you are committed to the drop. As long as you happen to be online during those points in the FP windows.


I picked on Grim Portico because you could literally just walk around the gate, and all the associated choke points, except that your onboard computer goes "out of bounds" and blows you up. There's nothing in the terrain that gives ANY indication that you have to go through the absurd choke points set up for the attack. All the other maps have giant cliffs and impassable mountains that at least make some amount of visual sense. Hellebore Springs is the other one that you should be able to just jump over the back of the defender spawn area, and you can't because of out-of-bounds and invisible walls (I've tried it with Vipers and Shadow Cats, which should be able to make it through the out-of-bounds before the timer runs down).

Otherwise, yeah, I agree with the entire sentiment that the whole idea of chokepoint attack is overall bad strategy, and whoever planned the op should be demoted at least, and shot at worst. Any competent commander would have found a different way to attack the ground facility without sending equal numbers through a choke point. (Conventional wisdom in the books is that you need a 3:1 numbers advantage to even consider attacking a fortified ground emplacement, and here we are going through a choke point at 1:1).

The other thing that I would want to see, which makes more strategic sense, and changes up the gameplay quite a bit, is instead of an aerodyne dropship hovering over the drop zone (don't think aerodynes could ever hover), you have a spheroid drop ship (probably a Union, since we've got 12-man teams) that grounds at the drop zone, and provides a permanent defensive structure (and a potential target for shortening up foregone conclusions) to minimize spawn camping. Any and all respawns happen inside the Union, hits to the union's engines count for 1.5x damage, the Union can shoot back with the full arsenal typically associated with them (AC/20's, LRM's, lasers, ppcs, etc), and if a spawn-camping team can destroy the Union Dropship, they get a massive bonus and automatic win, without making the clearly outmatched team waste time playing through three more waves.

#64 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,451 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 14 January 2023 - 12:46 PM

View PostMechWarrior5782621, on 14 January 2023 - 12:16 PM, said:

I'm excited to finally have a new clan mech, clan snub PPCs, clan MRMs, clan heavy gauss, etc. It's about time!

Another suggestion: give us the option to save a loadout & skill tree together. This would make it much more convenient instead of having to switch both of them separately each time.


So weapons missing from the near-future timeline:
Anti-Personnel Gauss (Clan)/Magshot Gauss (IS)
Hyper Assault Gauss 20/30/40 (Clan)
Light Autocannon 2/5 (IS)
Improved Heavy Gauss (IS)
Improved Heavy Lasers (Clan)
Reflective/Reactive Armor (both?)
Streak LRMs (Clan, 3080's or later)
Chemical Lasers (Clan, super-far-future)
Artemis V (vs current Artemis IV. Not sure when, or what the real difference is).
Not likely to see any artillery systems due to crit-splitting and range longer than biggest map diameter (so no Arrows, Snipers, Long Toms, etc).
EDIT: Plasma Rifles (IS)/Plasma Cannons (Clan) (ammo-based giant flamers).
EDIT2: MML (IS). Kuritan take on ATMs, but with only two range/damage brackets instead of 3.
I like the paired save suggestion. I'm thinking it'd simply come with an overall cost that you either can or can't afford. I think that would lend itself well to choosing loadouts pre-match, which is something lots of people have requested over the years, but which only makes sense for Omnimechs, and would lead into a good reason to introduce IS Omnis.

Edited by C337Skymaster, 15 January 2023 - 05:30 PM.


#65 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,451 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 14 January 2023 - 12:59 PM

View PostHorseman, on 14 January 2023 - 09:07 AM, said:

As opposed to the ones built by PGI and then the ones built by community consensus?
Also, according to [redacted], only two members of Cauldron knew anything about it so PGI's claim that they discussed the mechs with the Cauldron is at best disingenuous.
Same will happen with any new pre-built mechs no matter who designs them. Meta changes, there's no escaping that unless your game has no balancing patches and no new content being added - at which point it is dead.
A lot less than it seems on face value. There's plenty of variants that do not exist in lore, or that have different loadouts than in canon.
FWIW, I'd expect the Standard versions of these variants to come with the lore loadout.
Maybe it's time to accept that MWO cannot be "true to the spirit of the franchise" the way you dream of because of a LOT of things baked into its' foundations that it's around 8 to 9 years too late to backtrack on.


There are SO many 'mechs in the record sheets which haven't had the chance to see the light of day in MWO, we are a very long way from exhausting our options in that source pool. I've been very disappointed with the decision to do -P variants instead of merely choosing a different 'mech or loadout which fills the desired purpose (the KFX-P, for example, has absolutely no reason to exist, when it could have been replaced by the HBR-C and still fit the theme of "Common Jade Falcon 'mechs". I specifically passed on that pack for that reason).

If there's going to be a record-sheets "standard" version, which is what shows up in the store, then I'm okay with anything else folks want to do with it, but if its "default" loadout is gonna be some off-the-wall build that is designed specifically around today's meta, I have a problem with that.

#66 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 14 January 2023 - 01:25 PM

View PostCrashburn, on 14 January 2023 - 08:40 AM, said:

.
.
.
In response to MechB Kotare, if you don't want to play Siege mode...if I'm not mistaken after a few hours (maybe it's 1/2 way) into the 8 hour FP windows, you are pushed into the non-siege modes (if FP has been active enough), at that point you have no chance of playing a Siege map(except if the other Faction wins enough to push it back into Siege, but once it's moved that far into QP maps it's pretty much done for that window). You could try a FP QP drop without having to worry about playing Siege. At the very least you are able to click on the FP tab in game and see the mode it's in. So if Siege is your biggest hangup with FP, you can find FP drops, that you know will be a QP map for sure before you are committed to the drop. As long as you happen to be online during those points in the FP windows.


Yeah, but like you and C337Skymaster already mentioned. Siege gamemode is what defines FP. I dont really want to play FP just so i can play QP mode with respawns.

I'd much rather have the siege mode redesigned, so it suits you, me and wider chunk of commmunity. I'd much rather have even larger maps, base in a middle, with 360degree (lower) wall around it, caliope turrets in each corner, turret generators, smaller orbital gun batteries destructible from more angles, turrets actually around them, so attackers cant just bumrush it... Something that gives attackers more variety to approach situation, while forcing defenders into more active defense. Not just positioning behind gate and waiting for attackers to start swarming after the gate is open.

Edited by MechB Kotare, 14 January 2023 - 02:03 PM.


#67 C337Skymaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,451 posts
  • LocationNew England

Posted 14 January 2023 - 01:40 PM

View PostMechB Kotare, on 14 January 2023 - 01:25 PM, said:


Yeah, but like you and C337Skymaster already mentioned. Siege gamemode is what defines FP. I dont really want to play FP just so i can play QP mode with respawns.

I'd much rather have the siege mode redesigned, so it suits you, me and wider chunk of commmunity. I'd much rather have even larger maps, base in a middle, with 360degree (lower) wall around it, caliope turrets in each corner, turret generators, smaller orbital gun batteries destructible from more angles, turrets actually around them, so attackers cant just bumrush it... Something that gives attackers more variety to approach situation, while forcing defenders for more active defense. Not just positioning behind gate and waiting for attackers to start swarming after the gate is open.


I wish I could like this more than once.

I'd still opt for higher walls, though. In lore, defending 'mechs could often "peek" over walls by standing on firing platforms behind the walls. Walls should probably be 1000 HP for a 100m section. Breachable, but not easily.

Edited by C337Skymaster, 14 January 2023 - 01:44 PM.


#68 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 14 January 2023 - 02:00 PM

View PostC337Skymaster, on 14 January 2023 - 01:40 PM, said:

.
.
.
I'd still opt for higher walls, though. In lore, defending 'mechs could often "peek" over walls by standing on firing platforms behind the walls. Walls should probably be 1000 HP for a 100m section. Breachable, but not easily.


You are right. And too low would definitely change course of engagement into more stagnant and campy/snipey play style. I'd just appreciate more angles to engage from, while not being focused by 12 enemy mechs already knowing where you will to peek,

I'd definitley use the incursion walls. Adding more HP to them, but they need to be destructible so defenders are forced to react accordingly. But as we already agreed upon i think. Maps, and thus the gamemode itself needs be completely redesigned (imho).

Edited by MechB Kotare, 14 January 2023 - 02:02 PM.


#69 Kotis77

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Star Colonel
  • Star Colonel
  • 253 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 02:05 PM

Grim, Vitric, Emerald(90%) is only working FP maps atm. But they are biased against defenders too. Need work to be more equal.

FP used to be two stage mode. "Attack mode" and then "counter attack mode(without blast doors,turrets, gens and omega)" so you needed to play them back to back on same map to win one round out of 13? to win a planet. So it used to be "more" balanced game mode than this useless and shallow defend stackin game. So theres why these map suck as is.

So save good maps or do more work on every map to make siege working. Personally i would just go back to counter attack mode, fix the maps and add some other winning objective than omega on one side. Because counter attack with current player population aint working, too much ratting.

Edited by Kotis77, 14 January 2023 - 03:58 PM.


#70 Steve Pryde

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,470 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 14 January 2023 - 02:07 PM

This is what I want to see as a new mech:

Posted Image

No IS mech again, please. We had three in a row.

#71 Flanking Boy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 129 posts
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 14 January 2023 - 02:10 PM

View PostLordNothing, on 14 January 2023 - 10:02 AM, said:

id be willing to buy legendary mechs if the pricing is acceptable. im willing to drop $10-20 a couple times a year. but if you are going to make $40+ mechpacks and legendaries, id be better off buying some other game. ive spent a lot on this game over the years, many times the $90 average claimed on the recent q&a. having spent that much i don't much like seeing permanently ungrindable paywalled content, especially considering how little development actually happens. i also do not like subscription model for the same reason.

i think you need to figure out how to market content to those who have never bought a mech pack before rather than relying on the whales. if legendary mechs were to allow new players to grind mc and unlock all the other content with some grind, that might be more conductive to turn f2p players into contributors. for the whales set it up so that every time you buy content in the web store, you get a permanent discount towards future web store purchases on the same account. this would be cumulative the more you buy (though with a minimum so you still have to pay for stuff). the value proposition goes down the more stuff you have.

market the battle passes as an alternative to individual purchases. you should be able to grind all in-game currencies with them, and make them stack with premium time, if its not going to be a full replacement of it. premium time has never really had much value to me as an in store purchase.

that said if you add new weapons, it will bring me back to the game in a significantly more involved way. and if its tied to a specific pack i will probibly make a purchase to show my gratitude. i kind of wish the weapon model system was more dynamic though, rather than based on static submodels as part of the mechs. would make it a lot easier to add new ones, make possible the sale of premium weapons with *** for tat tweaks, faction-specific variants, or different effects/colors. and you can make distinct models for every gun, laser, and missile. if thats not possible, make it a request for mwo2.

i would also prefer to put the f2p model to bed in future mw games. even if i was able to port all my purchases i still wouldn't want the f2p baggage. id rather have sequels coming out every couple years than ongoing purchases on a stale game that sees no real core updates. you could have a common core built on an engine with long term upgrade path. thus each sequel could share code assets and still get the upgrades that come with the most recent engine version. this will give the game a more polished look and might attract more new players than a game that frankly looks like it was made in 2009. mw5 is of course a good starting point for this. build something that is both upgradable and easy to maintain. seeing the trouble mwo has had with its code base.


i would say that 5-10$ would be fair if L-mech comes alone.
i think that the last couple of mech package was a little expensive for my taste.

#72 Solomon Birch

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 66 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 14 January 2023 - 02:17 PM

Legendary 'Mechs? Can I have the Black Marauder? Posted Image

#73 Aram Banjo

    Member

  • Pip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 15 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 02:21 PM

View PostSteve Pryde, on 14 January 2023 - 02:07 PM, said:

This is what I want to see as a new mech:

Posted Image

No IS mech again, please. We had three in a row.


Me too!!!! Stone Rhino!

#74 Curccu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 4,623 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 04:18 PM

Bane for unlimited dakka.

#75 Audacious Aubergine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Death Wish
  • The Death Wish
  • 1,034 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 04:35 PM

View PostKursedVixen, on 14 January 2023 - 05:43 AM, said:

Now if we ge the Hyper assault guass I've already come up with a possible way for them to work in MWo


Or, have them fire on the existing gauss charge mechanic, but fire a burst instead of a single shot. You'll have to pardon my potential ignorance though, I don't know enough about them to know what the firing pattern is meant to look like (burst like an UAC or continuous like a RAC)

#76 sycocys

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 7,600 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 05:24 PM

Posted Image

Just putting it out there, there's not any need to build an entirely new game when you already have a base engine that is vastly superior to the current one, a way to integrate your entire player base into one center without having dozens of gigs of installs and separate launchers(with much of the same code and assets), and a way to more or less solve the NPE that so many think is a major concern, buy MWO and let them unlock a limited quick drop version of the single player games which may also interest them into buying the full games/dlc.

For MWO2, the brunt of the gameplay development is done already and being done on the next game, a unified launcher allows for near endless expansion in single,coop and pvp games. You can sell your dlc/mechpacks/patterns and whatever else from one central source instead of sending people to a bunch of different sites and they have eyes on the other versions of the game every time they play one of them.
Promote events, updates, player created campaigns/maps, take the most popular/best mods and start considering incorporating them to some extent right into the games - even if they are just options.

#77 Ralph Edwards

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ravenous
  • The Ravenous
  • 199 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 06:01 PM

GIVE ME H.A.G. IN ALL OF ITS GLORY!!!!

That aside, please do not go the route of custom builds for the legendary mechs we already have heroes and champions that do that. If you must please go the route like in the TRO there are certain chassis with named builds based off of a certain MechWarrior. The Banshee has at least 3 for example.

#78 Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 71 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 06:05 PM

New PvE? GREAT!
But, I am also super scared after unplayable (ofc for me) MW5.
Potential was great, but the story was driven horribly, so unmature, that I wasn't able to pass it.
Also, it was damm arcade game, not a great tactical game. Not a true Mechwarrior, rather something like player-based-mod. MW5 is super boring after few hours. Automatically generated maps? Nope. I need properly desinged ones. By human.

Also story - the Battletech universum is HUGE. I wasn't able to smell it in MW5.
On the other hand, the Battletech - there was a great story. Really great story. Gameplay has been superb, but the story itself was able to handle the game. Not like in MW5 - where both story and gameplay... sucks :'-(

I really, really wish you best. I hope you can do something similar to MW4 - Mercenariers. And with way more press on tactical and simulation than on arcade feeling.

Yours long-term battletech fan.

#79 Solomon Birch

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 66 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 14 January 2023 - 06:28 PM

View Postsycocys, on 14 January 2023 - 05:24 PM, said:

Posted Image

Just putting it out there, there's not any need to build an entirely new game when you already have a base engine that is vastly superior to the current one, a way to integrate your entire player base into one center without having dozens of gigs of installs and separate launchers(with much of the same code and assets), and a way to more or less solve the NPE that so many think is a major concern, buy MWO and let them unlock a limited quick drop version of the single player games which may also interest them into buying the full games/dlc.

For MWO2, the brunt of the gameplay development is done already and being done on the next game, a unified launcher allows for near endless expansion in single,coop and pvp games. You can sell your dlc/mechpacks/patterns and whatever else from one central source instead of sending people to a bunch of different sites and they have eyes on the other versions of the game every time they play one of them.
Promote events, updates, player created campaigns/maps, take the most popular/best mods and start considering incorporating them to some extent right into the games - even if they are just options.

I want that as a wallpaper. I want that as a game.

#80 Rhaelcan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Driven
  • Driven
  • 348 posts

Posted 14 January 2023 - 06:47 PM

View Postsycocys, on 14 January 2023 - 05:24 PM, said:

Posted Image

Just putting it out there, there's not any need to build an entirely new game when you already have a base engine that is vastly superior to the current one, a way to integrate your entire player base into one center without having dozens of gigs of installs and separate launchers(with much of the same code and assets), and a way to more or less solve the NPE that so many think is a major concern, buy MWO and let them unlock a limited quick drop version of the single player games which may also interest them into buying the full games/dlc.

For MWO2, the brunt of the gameplay development is done already and being done on the next game, a unified launcher allows for near endless expansion in single,coop and pvp games. You can sell your dlc/mechpacks/patterns and whatever else from one central source instead of sending people to a bunch of different sites and they have eyes on the other versions of the game every time they play one of them.
Promote events, updates, player created campaigns/maps, take the most popular/best mods and start considering incorporating them to some extent right into the games - even if they are just options.


Ok that would be amazing, not going to lie. Also, if we ever get another variant pack, i'd love the mad dog S





22 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 22 guests, 0 anonymous users