199 replies to this topic

[Graphite]

Aegis Kleais™, on 22 January 2012 - 06:45 PM, said:

I'm not for the Mech just being an X ton weapons platform where you can put any type of weapon in any location; Mechs were specialized for different roles.

It's not nearly that simple. Almost all BT mech chassis have many official setups.

For example the Catapult has these official variants:
CPLT-K2
CPLT-K2K
CPLT-K4
which use PPC variants instead of missile launchers.

Aegis Kleais™, on 22 January 2012 - 06:45 PM, said:

Long story short, the majority of a Timberwolf's projectile capabilities are in his "ears".

His "ears" are missile launchers. You would hope (well, I would - fervently) that if they were replaced in game with another weapon then the model you would see in the field would display the new weapons, not the default missile launchers.

Edited by Graphite, 22 January 2012 - 06:58 PM.

[Riordan Lionheart]

Like I said, I support customization, but I also think that the mechs already have such variety considering how each one has multiple variants. I also think it would be better overall for the BT brand if we kept the amount of customization close to the cannon variants of each mech, which would go with the info warfare that the devs have been touting. For example, if they stick to canon variants for the most part, those of us who may not invest the most in sensor modules that show every weapon detail of the enemy mechs would have an advantage if we know that the X-variant of mech-Y has ERLLs instead of PPCs which have less range etc. That also would encourage players new to BT and MW to start researching into BT lore. Heck, if the super serious CoD players will read extensively about guns and grenades, I can't see why a MWO player wouldn't check out Sarna.net or one of the other sites. That also might get them hooked in the stories of the BT verse and strengthening the BT community

[Graphite]

It common for official designs to interchange PPCs, gauss rifles and ACs between variants, for example.

I don't think making players research mech designs to be competitive is a good idea!

I think being able to look at a mech in the field and at least be able to see approximately what weapons it has (or even just what large weapons it has) is very, very important.

Unfortunately that's hard to do when combined with full customisation
So I wonder if we might not see hard-point customisation (which I personally am not a fan of), or none at all...

If it is hard-point customisation I really hope they do it by "size" (like MWLL) and not by weapon class (like MW4) or range (which would be utterly bizarre).

[Semyon Drakon]

Known variants and canon changes that were detailed well, like Yen Lo Wang.

The point is that the technology to do more than maintain and improvise in small ways is laregly lost. The recovery of the helm datacore helped but it is still hard enough for people to maintain mechs, let along modify them willy nilly.

Semyon

[Damocles]

Only posting this because I have seen it before in the numerous canon variant/full customize threads
Yen Lo Wang was not the only Centurion with an AC-20

Obviously there are other differences but many focus on the big gun so here:

CN9-AH - The CN9-AH Centurion is a variant of the 'Mech that removes the Autocannon/10 and the Medium Lasers and adds a single Autocannon/20

Just another example of canon variants covering many options that people seeking "full 'costumization'" try to achieve.

[Karyudo ds]

Riordan Lionheart, on 22 January 2012 - 07:09 PM, said:

Like I said, I support customization, but I also think that the mechs already have such variety considering how each one has multiple variants. I also think it would be better overall for the BT brand if we kept the amount of customization close to the cannon variants of each mech, which would go with the info warfare that the devs have been touting...

I'm half and half on this. If Omni mechs can be acquired you have to give me reason to want one. If this was like MW2-MW3 and I could just swap whatever/whenever then every mech is an Omni and the clans just have slightly better toys. MW4 on the other hand seemed like a decent comprimise but at the same time being able to swap any missile weapon into my Catapult still made it an Omni mech.

In the board game there wasn't much point to "tweaking" a design what with several hundred official other designs. Plus if you look through the existing varriants theres plenty of options. I could have an Axman with AC's, LRMs, or even gunpods...if I didn't want that, there's other mechs out there. In videogame land though we don't have the luxury of unlimited types of mechs. So I think if we say, get 9 mechs that it might make sense to be able to tinker with them...if we were actually going to get say, 100 (total pipdream!) then I wouldn't think we would need any Mechlab at all.

All depends on the crowd they want to bring in. Not letting us customize weapons or limiting us in how we can do it means we would have to adapt. Many of the ADHD kids of today can't adapt it seems as you can see by BF3 totally going left field from where BF2 was going to meet the CoD kids half-way.

Personally, I would be happy with pure stock mechs as long as you had the varriants to pick from as well. Maybe some jury rig options as well. Though I thought they said there would be a mechlab so who knows... I just hope that when I see a hunchback with its big ol cannon that it's not really sporting 16 machineguns instead.

[MuffinTop]

Riordan Lionheart, on 22 January 2012 - 04:24 PM, said:

I think of course mechs should be customizable in game but at the same time I don't want it like MW4 where you could just mount practically anything on the heaviest assault mechs as long as it had room i.e. nothing but PPCs and Gauss Rifles on on atlas etc. thoughts?

So you are prejudiced against omnimechs? So what do you suggest? Only some or none customization?

[vampire seraphin]

Some things, like the mechlab, need to be addressed from a Game Development perspective instead of a lore based perspective. The game first and foremost needs to be FUN. Making the mech lab hard to use, expensive, etc... while perhaps cannonical detracts from the FUN which is the main goal of creating a game in the first place.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

vampire_seraphin, on 22 January 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:

Some things, like the mechlab, need to be addressed from a Game Development perspective instead of a lore based perspective. The game first and foremost needs to be FUN. Making the mech lab hard to use, expensive, etc... while perhaps cannonical detracts from the FUN which is the main goal of creating a game in the first place.

And where is your evidence that this would be the case? It certainly hasn't been proven in the 30 to 40 pages of discussion in the other threads of this subject so far.

[Shalmyan Moonsong]

Keep in mind the Inner Sphere did not really figure out Omnimech technology until 3055-3058, by 3058 the combine had active omnimechs, with prototypes showing up around 3055.

This game is set in 3049, Batlemechs in 3049 were made by automated factories, they had a design, materials, spec and were set on build and left alone. Inner sphere mechs have thier weapons in set hard points, and it takes a TON of money to chage those and a months of time. The Inner Sphere was in the stone age when the clans returned. Yen-lo-wang was a mod, but it was one of the few and it was VERY VERY RARE... you needed to be well the champion of solaris to afford that kind of modification, becuase the the whole damn arm of the Centurion was built, by a factory with the AC 10 built into the whole arm assembely. So to get a AC 20, Justin Allard had to have a custom arm built for the mech which took about a year I belive.

If you want to make a custom mech you will need time and money, it will not happen instantly, for find a mech with a weapon loadout you like and run with it, if you want to make your mech "Look Pretty" I doubt the game will let you down, but I don't think they are going to let you put two gauss rifles on your Awsome in place of the three PPC's, for no cost, nor do I think it will happen instantly.

The clans do not even do that, they have hard points and Omni pods, so for the people who think we will be able to play clan with clan tech (which I doubt will happen for some time) even thier mechs will have hard point fixed weapons, and you will be able to select your omni pod loadout, but I doubt we will be able to make any mech we want, at any time, with any chasis, and be able to jump right into to battle with it.

[Kip Wilson]

Back in the olden days of MW1 and Cresent Hawks Revenge, 'Mech customization was rather limited (actually in MW1 you couldnt customize at all but nor could you repair engine and gyro damage either which a point I bring up below).

Your typical Mech Bay was able to do things like maintenance and repair jobs. But it wasnt equipped for working on very advanced things like fusion engines, sophisticated T&T / Comm systems or gyros. You needed time in one of the very rare BattleMech Repair Facilities in order to mess around with those. And usually these were booked up years in advance taking care of State military hardware.

With that being said, my vote would be to allow modification of weapons, armor, heatsinks and special equipment (masc, TSM, ect.) but engine, gyro, internal structure and cockpit systems are off limits.

(and for those out there that might say that a mech bay can repair internal structure damage so you should be able to say swap out regular internal structure for endo steel. You Could, but it would require tearing the mech completely down and rebuilding it from the ground up. Difficult and time consuming at the very least.)

[Thorn Hallis]

Keep in mind that this is a competitive multiplayer game. The devs wont allow anything that would seriously alter the balance of matches (at least, until the Clans arrive ^^).

Edited by Thorn Hallis, 23 January 2012 - 05:51 AM.

[Aegis Kleais]

Graphite, on 22 January 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

It's not nearly that simple. Almost all BT mech chassis have many official setups.

For example the Catapult has these official variants:
CPLT-K2
CPLT-K2K
CPLT-K4
which use PPC variants instead of missile launchers.




His "ears" are missile launchers. You would hope (well, I would - fervently) that if they were replaced in game with another weapon then the model you would see in the field would display the new weapons, not the default missile launchers.

I understand the issue with variants. With them, you can basically change weapon types at different locations on the Mech. This is something I wasn't too much of a fan of because it turns the Mech into more of a "You have X tons, just add weapons" platform.

I'm fine with (and would love to see) if, for example, you have a LRM20 in a Timberwolf's ear, that you would SEE 20 LRM slots. If there were 2 LRM10's in them, you would see a visual DIVIDER between the bays in 1 ear. That would be neat to see because if you know the look of the weapon, you can VISUALLY ascertain what weapons they are carrying.

I know this is not how BattleTech does things, it's just my preference; but let's also remember, too, that this might not be a straight conversion over for the same of gameplay mechanics. Would love to hear the ipso facto "this is how it is" from PGI. I'm sure with whatever they choose, I'm going to be very happy.

[Kodiak Jorgensson]

Merovigian, on 22 January 2012 - 05:11 PM, said:

This also makes Omnimechs a good thing (I know they're only appearing later on, but it merits mention), as their 'pod space' allows a LOT of freedom, being able to effectively halve the cost of modifying and take less time in the hangar.
And to customise outside the podspace of an Omnimech will take 3x the time and money, as doing so even the SLIGHTEST BIT requires a complete overhaul, hardwired as the standard frame is.

iam not entirely sure i understand what your saying here, but to my knowledge and what ive read, once an omnimechs base chassis is comepleted it stays that way, no modifications what so ever its fixed for ever.

E.G a Warhawk will always have Ferro armour, stnadard structure 340 XL engine and 20 double heatsinks

i could be wrong as i havent read all of the latest rules so please correct me if iam wrong.

[Thorn Hallis]

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 23 January 2012 - 07:12 AM, said:

iam not entirely sure i understand what your saying here, but to my knowledge and what ive read, once an omnimechs base chassis is comepleted it stays that way, no modifications what so ever its fixed for ever.

E.G a Warhawk will always have Ferro armour, stnadard structure 340 XL engine and 20 double heatsinks

i could be wrong as i havent read all of the latest rules so please correct me if iam wrong.

Well, it IS possible to change the engine and the armor - but it takes a lot of time and "money". From a clan point of view it would be a waste of resources to change a proven design for just one warrior.

Heatsinks on the other hand count as omni-equipment, so they can be added "freely".

[Longinus Leichenberg]

Okay, back in here with more suggestions on 'mech customizations.

I'm most interested in this part of the game, so I'd definitely want to be able to build custom 'mechs, even if only with tremendous efforts. I want to build interesting custom setups, becoming more of an engineer than a 'mech pilot.For this, I've come up with a wicked mechanism:


Tech-Puzzle Tinkering

Pilots can tinker with their own 'mechs by studying their schematics and re-wiring panels, redistributing stress on gyros or whatever, but not with your run-of-the-mill "wait until baked" thing.

Make it a real skill-based puzzle module instead! Rotating a 3D circuit panel, looking at the blueprints, trying to figure out where to plug the cables, how to rearrange the gadgets on the panel for maximum efficiency, reprogram the A.I. (by some statistically visualized compromise-system) then fry 3–4 IC's if I screwed up something.

This would make people like me have an important role of preparing the 'mechs for their pilots before battle, and I could make tons of setups based on my routine at tampering with (random and partly symbolic) puzzles to achieve what I wanted. The puzzles should be more and more difficult and tedious to solve based on the difficulty of the thing I'm trying to achieve...

Of course, given the proper (bought) items, the engineer could save valuable blueprints for his or her own 'mech variants!

[Incubi]

Heat management will have an affect. In mw2 you could mount 10 medium lasers on anything 50 tons or larger. That was a rather big issue with legging as you can imagine! but if the heat management is properly done it will serve as a built in limiter.

Edited by Incubi, 23 January 2012 - 03:25 PM.

[TheRulesLawyer]

StratOps field level refits. Mods should be a big deal.

[Outlaw2]

People dog on MW4 for boating not realizing that the TT and prior MW games had even worse boating problems. You won't get rid of boating until you get rid of the advantage of boating. Do that and you'll save yourself a whole lot of headaches designing a fool proof mechlab. Good luck with that....MWLL has to yet release a mechlab for fear it would break the entire game's balance.

Quote

Tech-Puzzle Tinkering

Pilots can tinker with their own 'mechs by studying their schematics and re-wiring panels, redistributing stress on gyros or whatever, but not with your run-of-the-mill "wait until baked" thing.

Make it a real skill-based puzzle module instead! Rotating a 3D circuit panel, looking at the blueprints, trying to figure out where to plug the cables, how to rearrange the gadgets on the panel for maximum efficiency, reprogram the A.I. (by some statistically visualized compromise-system) then fry 3–4 IC's if I screwed up something.

This would make people like me have an important role of preparing the 'mechs for their pilots before battle, and I could make tons of setups based on my routine at tampering with (random and partly symbolic) puzzles to achieve what I wanted. The puzzles should be more and more difficult and tedious to solve based on the difficulty of the thing I'm trying to achieve...

Of course, given the proper (bought) items, the engineer could save valuable blueprints for his or her own 'mech variants!

The problem with that is it would take a grand total of a week for someone to figure out the best system to "tinker" a mech, make a youtube video of it and in the process trivalize the entire thing.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 23 January 2012 - 04:18 PM.

[Graphite]

=Outlaw=, on 23 January 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:

People dog on MW4 for boating not realizing that the TT and prior MW games had even worse boating problems. You won't get rid of boating until you get rid of the advantage of boating. Do that and you'll save yourself a whole lot of headaches designing a fool proof mechlab. Good luck with that....MWLL has to yet release a mechlab for fear it would break the entire game's balance.

You're ignoring the fact that creating a full mechlab is more work, and that models being accurate visual representations of the mech and its weapons is extremely important, and would be incredibly difficult to do with a full mechlab.

So MMLL devs have a hardpoint/pod system that allows any weapon to be swapped out for a similar sized one or group of smaller ones - no limit on weapon type.

If you want the correct weapons to be seen (and I'll happily bet my left arm that MWO will) then there is almost certainly going to have to be compromise between full customisation and feasibility
The MWLL system is the best compromised mechlab I've seen.

The heat system is what should be used to prevent laser boats.