199 replies to this topic

[Longinus Leichenberg]

Graphite, on 25 January 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

!!!? Surely you aren't serious? You think 90% don't want any customisation?

Wasn't there a poll on this? I'll try to find it...

In the mean-time, why don't you try a poll of your own. Make one of the options: "No customised mechs of any sort. They don't belong in this game, at all."

...and I'll bet you that option gets less than 50% of votes.

MW:O without some customization would be like NFS:UG without the parts shop. ****ing boring.

[Dlardrageth]

Graphite, on 25 January 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

!!!? Surely you aren't serious? You think 90% don't want any customisation?

I don't think that is what he wrote. Would make no sense at our current state of knowledge anyway, as the modular system for info warfare already guarantees some degree of/option for customization. Not enough for some, too much for others already, but it's there (according to the devs).

Quote

Wasn't there a poll on this? I'll try to find it...

In the mean-time, why don't you try a poll of your own. Make one of the options: "No customised mechs of any sort. They don't belong in this game, at all."

Not sure it would be very helpful with this specific phrasing. One reason... see above. Or does anyone expect PGI to backpedal on the modular system for info warfare all of sudden?

It is actually too bad we don't have a reference table with "levels" of customization (10 levels perhaps?). That could enable us to make a somewhat more meaning- and useful poll. Not only for us, but also for PGI to "gauge the mood" of the community.

[Pinkamena Pie]

I'm all for a flexible level of customisation, as long as customisation comes with a drop in effectiveness. These customisations haven't had the mech built around them in the same way as the stock design and variants, so it's only to be expected that they perform at 90-95% instead of 100%. Such a system would allow players to have fun with a mechlab, but stop the gameplay being dominated by mechs that have been totally rebuilt for maximum efficiency.

[Dlardrageth]

Pinkamena Pie, on 25 January 2012 - 12:57 AM, said:

I'm all for a flexible level of customisation, as long as customisation comes with a drop in effectiveness. These customisations haven't had the mech built around them in the same way as the stock design and variants, so it's only to be expected that they perform at 90-95% instead of 100%. Such a system would allow players to have fun with a mechlab, but stop the gameplay being dominated by mechs that have been totally rebuilt for maximum efficiency.

Oh, you mean an in-built random chance that any modified/customized component will fail on use? Now that is one sexy idea... though I expect you'll get some hate from people complaining about anything that even smells of RNG...

[Paul Stern]

Graphite, on 24 January 2012 - 07:57 PM, said:

We need younger players too.
It would also be popular with older players. (I'm "old").

[...]

BTW, don't go thinking I'm against canon - I have actually been in other arguments here where my views are considered the pro-canon point of view!

Canon is good, gameplay is vital. I (and plenty of others) will be disappointed if there's no customisation.

i agree with this position! there is nothing to add in this point!

+1rep

[Fiachdubh]

Not vey far.

Ability to make any changes should be dificult to earn.

[Graphite]

Dlardrageth, on 25 January 2012 - 12:49 AM, said:

I don't think that is what he wrote. Would make no sense at our current state of knowledge anyway, as the modular system for info warfare already guarantees some degree of/option for customization. Not enough for some, too much for others already, but it's there (according to the devs).

There's always the possibility I misunderstood him, but I doubt it: "...no user-built mechs. It doesnt belong in this game.. at all" seems pretty clear...

I (and LD, I think) were talking about modification apart from the IW modules.

Quote

Not sure it would be very helpful with this specific phrasing. One reason... see above. Or does anyone expect PGI to backpedal on the modular system for info warfare all of sudden?

It was based pretty heavily on what he typed...
As above: ignoring the IW modules.

Quote

It is actually too bad we don't have a reference table with "levels" of customization (10 levels perhaps?). That could enable us to make a somewhat more meaning- and useful poll. Not only for us, but also for PGI to "gauge the mood" of the community.

They've probably already got a pretty good idea of what they'll do - all we are really doing is guessing what we'll see.
I really thought there was a poll on this already, but maybe I was dreaming...
Ignoring IW modules, I'd bet only a minority of players want absolutely no customised designs at all.

[Graphite]

As per the poll: how much mech customisation should be allowed?

Note I've deliberately not put methods of customisation in the poll: think of the type of customisation you'd like to see and then choose the poll option category that best fits, in your opinion.

This poll is not referring to MWO's information warfare modules customisation - only to all other customisation.

Edited by Graphite, 25 January 2012 - 04:24 AM.

[Baba Yogi]

I think it should be free to customize anyway we want. Mech lab is half the fun of game, its like tuning your car in racing games. If you understand what you'r doing its loads of fun. But i do agree at some point there should be limitations. For ex a medium chasis designed for small engines should not be able to carry huge engines like 350 xl. And how much customization avaible to you should be determined by how good your crew is. (I'm not sure if we'll have a crew but i think it'd be a great idea, it makes customization more realistic and fun, think about it you have crew talent trees as well:) I think that is canon as well, you need a bloody good mechanic to replace stuff, especially internals. if that option is there i know i'll be reachin for it

Edited by Lordhammer, 25 January 2012 - 06:17 AM.

[Longinus Leichenberg]

Pinkamena Pie, on 25 January 2012 - 12:57 AM, said:

I'm all for a flexible level of customisation, as long as customisation comes with a drop in effectiveness. These customisations haven't had the mech built around them in the same way as the stock design and variants, so it's only to be expected that they perform at 90-95% instead of 100%. Such a system would allow players to have fun with a mechlab, but stop the gameplay being dominated by mechs that have been totally rebuilt for maximum efficiency.

Dear Princess Celestia,

Today, Pinkamena said something very silly to me while we were enjoying our freshly baked cupcakes. She said that adding different ingredients to a cupcake inevitably makes it taste worse. I strongly disagree, especially knowing her 'special' ingredients that make her's so irresistably delicious.

On the other hand, I do agree that you can't just mix any amount and any kind of ingredients. It takes skill, time and even expense of money to organize an ideal selection of materials, the same way it happens with my alchemic studies. But as in alchemy, the aim is creating a better substance that reflects the essence.

Your faithful student,
—Longinus Leichenberg

[sheradin]

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?

while that was possible in MW 3 you couldnt do that in MW4

[sheradin]

Shalmyan Moonsong, on 23 January 2012 - 12:54 AM, said:

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.

coect Me if I am wrong but the yen lo wung had a gauss rifle not a ac 20 at least according to the books

[Mason Grimm]

sheradin, on 25 January 2012 - 07:57 AM, said:

coect Me if I am wrong but the yen lo wung had a gauss rifle not a ac 20 at least according to the books

Yen-Lo-Wang started off with an AC/20 but after Kai gave the machine to the next pilot from his family line it was upgraded to a Gauss Rifle. Read the Warrior Trilogy if you are interested in hearing about the AC20 variant and it's fights on solaris.

Edited by Mason Grimm, 25 January 2012 - 08:02 AM.

[HIemfire]

Voted the second option, though I would prefer that the "laser boat" reference was nixed. Alpha strike boats I agree are not really a balanced option. "Laser boats" as a term would also include the stock Crab, Wolfhound, and a few others.

[Warbeast]

Just an idea, but I would like to see replacement stock variant available all the time once you unlock/buy that mech at no extra cost C-Bill wise, however if you spend credits modding a mech, costs loads to mod (loads for parts with rare pares being not always available) and if that mech is destroyed in the feild it is lost. You would then have to pay out C-Bills to mod it again. This would make modding available but dangerously expensive and encourage people to use stock mechs for the most part.

[Sidewinder619]

I really preferred the MW3 Lab as opposed to MW4 - you could put any weapon, equipment etc in any location as long as you had the weight and critical spaces to do so - As a player I would have to expect other veteran players to gather the best weapons and equipment and use it against me as I would against them - you run what you brung as they say - as with any combat vehicle, it's always the fine line of balancing speed, weapons and protection no matter what the tonnage. Also. I would love to see unlockable mechs - my vote goes to the Exterminator EXT-4D - love the sleek appearance

[Thorn Hallis]

Mason Grimm, on 25 January 2012 - 08:01 AM, said:

Yen-Lo-Wang started off with an AC/20 but after Kai gave the machine to the next pilot from his family line it was upgraded to a Gauss Rifle. Read the Warrior Trilogy if you are interested in hearing about the AC20 variant and it's fights on solaris.

Justin gave it to Kai. It was upgraded while on Outreach.

[KingCobra]

I think this topic needs to be locked there is nothing more to gain here for MW:0 except for the fact some want to take us back to the (Dark Ages) by suggesting no mechlab or a chopped up mechlab that would be no fun and no use to anyone.

MW2 mechlab



MW3 mechlab


MW4 mechlab

[Tritarian]

I think one way to help curb the "boating" would be to induce an cycle time penelty.
Ex. With 2 weapons (of the same type) you would gain an small decrease in ROF.
With 3 it would moderate, with 4 well the ROF decrease would just plain suck.

Call it from addional load on the reactor (only so much power and a big load spike from having to rechage so much all at once should take some extra time and maybe some extra heat from the reactor to meet the demand), ballistic recalibration from salvo, barrel cool down, having to program the guidance on so many missiles all at once ( especially if you scale it with the number of missiles ieLRM 20 vs LRM 10)

and combine that with earlier over certain "brands" of weapons that can offset this by a very small margin (not to get around it mind you just to blunt the drawback by like 10-20%ish area if a full set of brand name weapon is used in the same group, ie Intek medium class lasers (-10% drawback from weapon grouping with same model of this laser) against the total draw back not per laser and all have to be the same

[Tannhauser Gate]

Graph,

Graphite, on 25 January 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

"No customised mechs of any sort. They don't belong in this game, at all."

I never said that. You clearly didnt understand my opinion.

Im not against "modifications" that are either canon or in line with canon.
Im not against modifications that PGI has determined to be features in-balance with the game they want to create such as modules.
Im not against mounting and repurposing salvaged parts on areas of a mech that can support them if its done properly (i.e. energy for energy, ballistic for ballistic, no non-canon uber configs.)

I am against "full mechlab" user-constructed mechs because players will make uber mechs that will make the iconic designs obsolete. MWO is being designed as an iconic game and keeping the game on track with BT iconic mechs and timeline Letting users build their own mechs would derail that and therefore doesnt belong in this game.

If you disagree then thats fine. Amping up the exclamation points and quoting lines I post with a deconstruction is lame. I simply dont respond to that kind of posting. Its flaming and drags the board down for all. If you want to argue then do so in a private conversation.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 25 January 2012 - 11:54 AM.