86 replies to this topic

[Mchawkeye]

I think I like the idea.
Sounds like it's going to be some where between mech4s slots and a standard crit list; I expect they relate to various areas of a mech (i.e. three modules in the head, six in an arm etc. etc.) and I think they tread that fine line between wanted customisation and requested stock mechs.


Or it could be terrible and painfully simplistic and treat us like five year olds.

Thoughts?

[Skwisgaar Skwigelf]

I think the modules will be completely separate from the standard weapons/heat sinks/internals critical slots, more like an "accessory" system.

[Fatty Limes]

Quote

Or it could be terrible and painfully simplistic and treat us like five year olds

Just considering the abundance of sensor types, I think/hope it's unlikely that anything will be painfully simplistic.

Edited by Fatty Limes, 04 January 2012 - 11:53 AM.

[Mechteric]

Skwisgaar Skwigelf, on 04 January 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

I think the modules will be completely separate from the standard weapons/heat sinks/internals critical slots, more like an "accessory" system.

Thats what it sounds like to me, most likely these would be physically seen as a computer board you hooked up to your radar so you can't really think of the device as a 0.5 or 1 ton usage thing

[Mchawkeye]

"In order to evolve the concept of MechWarrior®, we needed a new layer of customization. After several scrapped ideas, we settled on a module concept."

it seems to almost contradict it's self. "we need a new LAYER of customisation" suggests that there will be other layers of customisation; this could be crit slots and heat sinks, or it could simply be referring to paint jobs and hula girls.


"Modules allow players to customize their BattleMech with functionality without having to deal with the existing slots and tonnage rules."

Suggests that the TT/Mech2/3 system is pretty much out. which may mean there isn't a separate, more complex layer of customisation.

Edited by Mchawkeye, 04 January 2012 - 11:58 AM.

[Ghost]

I've reasoned out three ways I think it's going to work. It could look like a RPG-style equipment tree (head/torso/legs), with every 'Mech having the same slots. It could also look like a hardpoint list like we're used to, or it could even be a hybrid of the two (role-based, with space for weapons and equipment depending on what role the 'Mech is and what the module is). All of this will be balanced by other factors, like weight or heat or space.

It kind of reminds me of how Shattered Galaxy does equipment--depending on your character growth, you have access to various pieces of equipment for your units: engines, reactors, weapons, sensors, utility equipment, armor. What you could actually fit on your unit was determined by weight, energy and computational power needs -- whether you could actually purchase or use the module was determined by the level of your particular unit AND the way you'd developed your character.

[fallonsky]

really i would welcom the chainge to a system with all the costomisation. it would be awsome

[Dihm]

Skwisgaar Skwigelf, on 04 January 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

I think the modules will be completely separate from the standard weapons/heat sinks/internals critical slots, more like an "accessory" system.

Yeah, I'm going to go out with you on this pretty sturdy limb and say that this has nothing to do with a "mech lab". I wouldn't view the comments about "slots and tonnage rules" as anything more than a reference to past "mech labs." I doubt it gives us any information as to the customization (armor/engine/weapons/etc) that will be available to us.

I read it as this being the system to tweak your role.

Edited by Dihm, 04 January 2012 - 12:05 PM.

[Flawless]

I love the Idea of having different sensory equipment and Electronic packages that you can get. Also, LOS being the primary way of detecting an enemy is awesome.

[Kaemon]

Ghost, on 04 January 2012 - 11:57 AM, said:

I've reasoned out three ways I think it's going to work. It could look like a RPG-style equipment tree (head/torso/legs), with every 'Mech having the same slots. It could also look like a hardpoint list like we're used to, or it could even be a hybrid of the two (role-based, with space for weapons and equipment depending on what role the 'Mech is and what the module is). All of this will be balanced by other factors, like weight or heat or space.

It kind of reminds me of how Shattered Galaxy does equipment--depending on your character growth, you have access to various pieces of equipment for your units: engines, reactors, weapons, sensors, utility equipment, armor. What you could actually fit on your unit was determined by weight, energy and computational power needs -- whether you could actually purchase or use the module was determined by the level of your particular unit AND the way you'd developed your character.

Not sure why but this felt like the lightest Q&A release yet (compared to the community warfare, that may not be a fair assessment, that was a juggernaut of info).

The more info I get for this, the more I want to hear about the sidegrading options, are they going to have different manufacturer's have differerent specs or even durability (will this stuff break down over time and require replacement?)

Am I going to do the 'only 10K more pilot XP before I can get the C3a from Fusion Designs Ltd' dance? Do I really want to?

Let's not confuse minimum items/availability with lack of complexity, 1 item could be configured multiple ways (with slightly different attributes) on multiple mechs (which I'm hoping), and if you get into a 'crafting/modding' discussion, sprinkled with some salvage thrown in, that might be something worth biting into.

Or we might get 'put the round peg in the square hole....good boy' which would be disappoint.

[Mchawkeye]

It's true, It could be read as a way to quickly tweak your role, or if extensive customisation does take a while, perhaps it's a quicker way to let you fit your mech to a mission?
but I'm still not sure.

"without having to deal with the existing slots and tonnage rules."

Still suggests to me, even if there is another layer of weapon choice and such like, that they are trying to move away from the truly comprehensive customisation we were pleasured with previously.

[Stormwolf]

I think that the modules are strictly add-ons for the cockpit, this is information warfare afterall.
Those modules would enhance existing equipment like ECM, BAP or C3. It would also give your teammates extra options for things like indirect fire.

This could ofcourse lead to many other possiblities:
- NARC would only work for people who fired it, installing a NARC module would allow your mech to do the same if you are on the same team.
- Some modules could upgrade AMS functionality (hit more missiles).
- Targeting computers might need a module to increase efficiency (the more expensive modules would have better targeting)
- ECM modules could have ghost targets if you get the right module (let's face it, we don't have a piloting skill modifier here)
- The same would go for ECCM.
- BAP upgrades will allow you detect enemies more easily, extra upgrades could allow for tapping their communications
- Clan cockpits might have enhancements for EI (better linkup, less craziness)
- A sceen module that plugs into recon cameras
- A special controller for Sattelite Uplinks

Just my two cents.

[MaddMaxx]

Sounds like a neat way to possibly make each Cockpit somewhat unique as well. This assumes the need for "space" is Console space as you add additional modules to the Mechs Electronics Suite.

[Mason Grimm]

Agreed... I've posed the same questions over at MechSpecs.com to see what people think but I tend to think Stormwolf is right; they will enhance existing chassis specific equipment.

[Kaemon]

Mchawkeye, on 04 January 2012 - 12:15 PM, said:

It's true, It could be read as a way to quickly tweak your role, or if extensive customisation does take a while, perhaps it's a quicker way to let you fit your mech to a mission?
but I'm still not sure.

"without having to deal with the existing slots and tonnage rules."

Still suggests to me, even if there is another layer of weapon choice and such like, that they are trying to move away from the truly comprehensive customisation we were pleasured with previously.

Of course the $63,999 question then is, do slot/tonnage rules apply to weapons or are they gone from this iteration of MW altogether?

/helmet on

[Mchawkeye]

Stormwolf, on 04 January 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

I think that the modules are strictly add-ons for the cockpit, this is information warfare afterall.
Those modules would enhance existing equipment like ECM, BAP or C3. It would also give your teammates extra options for things like indirect fire.

This could ofcourse lead to many other possiblities:
- NARC would only work for people who fired it, installing a NARC module would allow your mech to do the same if you are on the same team.
- Some modules could upgrade AMS functionality (hit more missiles).
- Targeting computers might need a module to increase efficiency (the more expensive modules would have better targeting)
- ECM modules could have ghost targets if you get the right module (let's face it, we don't have a piloting skill modifier here)
- The same would go for ECCM.
- BAP upgrades will allow you detect enemies more easily, extra upgrades could allow for tapping their communications
- Clan cockpits might have enhancements for EI (better linkup, less craziness)
- A sceen module that plugs into recon cameras
- A special controller for Sattelite Uplinks

Just my two cents.

Mason Grimm, on 04 January 2012 - 12:17 PM, said:

Agreed... I've posed the same questions over at MechSpecs.com to see what people think but I tend to think Stormwolf is right; they will enhance existing chassis specific equipment.

Sounds viable.

It would be great if it was a cockpit customisation station, ECM in this slot...hula girl in that slot, rear camera screen in this slot here....

[Mchawkeye]

Kaemon, on 04 January 2012 - 12:17 PM, said:

Of course the $63,999 question then is, do slot/tonnage rules apply to weapons or are they gone from this iteration of MW altogether?

/helmet on

I prefer to think of it as the £41,079.30 question...but it is a fair question none the less...

[Chuckie]

I'm praying its not like the WoW tree thing for talents or spells.. although it maybe..

For Pilot or Specific Mech ability skills (What the PILOT knows and how to use in a specific Mech) the tree thing would work well.

But as a customization tool for Mechs. Not so much. Mechs can be bought and upgraded, and downgraded.. I don't see a Tree system working well at all on that. ESPECIALLY if its linear.. and you can't go back and mix and match.

As long as its better than MechAssault that sucked

[Skwisgaar Skwigelf]

Aegis Kleais™, on 04 January 2012 - 12:25 PM, said:

Well, I'm looking for clarification.

Are Modules just Info Warefare-specific or are Modules used to equip armor and weapons onto your Mech as well? (I'm hoping for the former, not the latter)

Basically, modules are just modular packaging. And since they tie into your Pilot Tree, it's possible to say that unless you're trained in certain technology, you may not have the perks which allow you to equip certain modules. But on the other hand, you may be highly trained in particular modules.

My guess is that the modules relate ONLY to the electrnoic warfare gear, as far as weapons/armor/internals it will be the same as or at least similar to a traditional mechlab.

[Mchawkeye]

Skwisgaar Skwigelf, on 04 January 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

My guess is that the modules relate ONLY to the electrnoic warfare gear, as far as weapons/armor/internals it will be the same as or at least similar to a traditional mechlab.

ok,..but what make you think that? you sound kinda certain...