69 replies to this topic

[Mason Grimm]

Durant Carlyle, on 04 February 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

I would say that each different model in the TROs is a variant. That means the Locust has 17 official variants, the Phoenix Hawk has 18, and the Marauder has 19.

Reduce that number being that we are limited by tech in the timeline?

[armitage]

I think though they may have an idea as too what they are planning to implement as far as weapons customization goes, but I bet they are waiting for further play testing before they decide whats best. There's a lot of general balance and gameplay that needs to be done before you can focus on balancing the customization.

[zverofaust]

Good post Strum Wealth!

I like that idea. Each weapon hardpoint could be given a type -- Energy, Projectile or Missile which determine what sorts of weapons can be fitted, and an overall weight scheme to determine how many and of what size can be fitted. A Mech with an AC/5 and a Large Laser could swap them out for an AC/10 and a Medium or Light Laser and remain the same variant. LRM-10 can be swapped out for an MRM-20. Changing those actual hard points, as well as modifying Module Board size, could be what makes a variant a variant.

[Alicorn]

So, what I'm getting from this is a possibility of both variants and custimization - at the same time. (I think this is what Stum Wealth is getting at as well.)

Imagine the MW4 hardpoints system - each mech came with set hardpoints that could take various weapon types (ballistic, missile, energy, omni) and these slots had various sizes. (in a three-space slot you could fit either three medium lasers or a PPC) If we apply a "variants" model on top of this, each variant would have different set of hardpoints, which then accomodates different custom designs.
To use the Marauder as an example again, the stock marauder mounts 2xPPCs 2xMedium Lasers and an AC-5. Within that framework, you could customize to build the 3R - it swaps the PPCs fo Large Pulse Lasers and the AC-5 for an Ultra AC-5 - it retains the basic framework of the stock, yet has been significanly modified.
The 9M however, is a significant deviation from this frame, however - it has a larger need for energy weapon spacing, (now bearing 4xER Large Lasers) as well as an accompaniment of 2xStreak SRM launchers while the original Marauder had no allocation at all for missile weapons. It also mounts a new XL engine, and an extended electronics suite. (ECM, TAG)
The Marauder could be customized to make a 3R version, but you would have to use a chassis variant to create the 9M.

While it seems a nice system,I don't know if this was the intended system. I can't understand completely what the developers intend until we actually see the release.

[El Loco]

Actually, the only thing I really care about in terms of customization, is that it should be rather expensive. What I mean is, that it costs a lot of man power (= C-bills) to remove one weapon and replace it with a different one. The more so, if you plan on replacing weapons of different categories, e.g. replacement of a PPC with an AC/2 or AC/5, if it is going to be possible at all.

Sticking to a more rigid customization model for the 'Mechs has another uge advantage: It makes the impact of OmniMechs more drastic. We are close to the Clan invasion, and they had two huge advantages: weapons of higher quality and the option to adapt their weapon loadouts quickly and at low costs.

[Damocles]

I just hope that each and every recustomization will reset your mech tree progress

hahaha

[Floydii]

Alicorn, on 04 February 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

So, what I'm getting from this is a possibility of both variants and custimization - at the same time. (I think this is what Stum Wealth is getting at as well.)

Imagine the MW4 hardpoints system - each mech came with set hardpoints that could take various weapon types (ballistic, missile, energy, omni) and these slots had various sizes. (in a three-space slot you could fit either three medium lasers or a PPC) If we apply a "variants" model on top of this, each variant would have different set of hardpoints, which then accomodates different custom designs.
To use the Marauder as an example again, the stock marauder mounts 2xPPCs 2xMedium Lasers and an AC-5. Within that framework, you could customize to build the 3R - it swaps the PPCs fo Large Pulse Lasers and the AC-5 for an Ultra AC-5 - it retains the basic framework of the stock, yet has been significanly modified.
The 9M however, is a significant deviation from this frame, however - it has a larger need for energy weapon spacing, (now bearing 4xER Large Lasers) as well as an accompaniment of 2xStreak SRM launchers while the original Marauder had no allocation at all for missile weapons. It also mounts a new XL engine, and an extended electronics suite. (ECM, TAG)
The Marauder could be customized to make a 3R version, but you would have to use a chassis variant to create the 9M.

While it seems a nice system,I don't know if this was the intended system. I can't understand completely what the developers intend until we actually see the release.

This.

With Clan Omnimech technology meaning you can pull the Madcat's energy weapon arm 'pod' off and replace it with a Thor's AC arm 'pod'.. cheaply. Mounting new weapons in IS mechs should cost a bit.

[verybad]

I think that variants will entail differences that can't work visually. For instance a large weapon like the Hunchback's AC-20 woulf be hard to replace or remove without making it look very funky. I don't know that changes will be visual, though I'm certainly hoping they are. For that to work however, you have to have a vey modular system, and there has to be limitations, you can't put anything anywhere because eventually you "break" the system.

Just a variance in weapon onboard doesn't make much sense, there should be something that requires a different model.

[maisjack]

Think about modern equipment that is visually different but meant for the same job... A Terex rock truck won't accept parts from a Cat truck without significant modification or fabrication. Some parts might jump from model to model, but most may not.

Another example might be a Cat 750 front loader vs a Cat 730 front loader. They do the same job. They are the same manufacturer. They are roughly the same size. But the hydraulics froma 750 won't fit on the mounting pins of a 730 without major reconstruction.

To take this even further, a 1968 Cat D8H is the same model as a D8R, but because of current technologies when each was built, may have (and do have) incompatible parts. This may even be due to where the machines were built (a euro or latin american model may have parts in primarily SI, while American models will be in English measurements). These dissimilarities alone can cause much aggrovation to the tech or mechanic peicing them together, let alone putting together something with different manufacturers.

[Randal Waide]

I don't care if I pilot a stock 3025 locust. Getting in a cockpit and trying to get the most out of mt Meck for my lance is what I am looking forward to. Untill we get hard facts on any of this it's all beer-soaked wet dreaming. I for one can't wait until we get a release, Ill roll the dice like everyone else. At that time I will decide if it sucks or not.

[Alaskan Viking]

Half of the fun of Mechwarrior has always been the customisation, I don't care what the TRO's for the table top game said about customisation. It is niether here not there. The biggest complaint about Mech assault I heard from most people was the total lack of customisation. PGI would be shooting themselves in the foot if they abandoned customisation entirely.

Now, if they wanted to have some kind of MW4 style limit to customisation, based on the mech model, that would be ok. Being able ot mount weapons in the foot of your mech in MW2 was a little lame, but nowhere near as lame as the ZERO custimisation of Mech Assault.

[trycksh0t]

While I would be perfectly happy to have only stock variants available and no customization beyond modules, I know the majority of the community here would probably start WW III over it. So, here's another thought I just came up with that kinda fits the feel of the thread here in regards to cusomization:

We know from previous Dev information that holding Faction Planets grants a bonus to your Faction (though no information on what that is, I'll address this later.) We also know that players will earn LP for factions based on their actions. We know that Mercenary units will gain significant bonuses for holding planets (though, again, no details).

So, in regards to planetary bonuses for factions and mercs, what if it was to provide equipment for the MechLab? Say, if your faction is holding a planet that has an AC/10 factory on it, you have AC/10's available in the MechLab. If your faction doesn't own an AC/10 factory, tough luck, you can't have one. This will make duking it out for planets much more interesting, because everyone is going to want to keep as much tech within their faction as possible.

For Mercs and Lone Wolves, they gain access to what equipment a Faction has available at certain Loyalty levels. With a high enough loyalty, they may have nearly unlimited access to what a faction has available, although obviously at a higher cost than regular units. With low loyalty, they may have limited/no-access or have to pay exorbantly high prices.

And finally, in regards to faction alligned players, rank should be a factor in what equipment they can access outside of stock variants, by putting rank restrictions on equipment/weapons/whatever. No one in their right mind is going to let a just out of 'Mech school private full customization of his 'Mech with full armory access. Minor tweaks, maybe, but even that is pushing it. So, until you get to higher ranks, you're limited in what you can slap on your tin beastie.

[Paul Inouye]

I want you people to realize the greatness that is my trolling ability... I trolled this thread without even posting in it!!!

[Paul Inouye]

Now to the OP:

This one is for you buds...

Spoiler

The information you're seeking is part of Mech Warfare month. Sorry to make you wait but you're gonna get hit with a storm of information when we talk about Mech Warfare which includes how and what gets customized as well as how combat is going to play out on the battlefield.

[guardian wolf]

Paul.... to the rescue? What did I hear that right?

Paul Inouye, on 04 February 2012 - 10:45 PM, said:

Spoiler

The information you're seeking is part of Mech Warfare month. Sorry to make you wait but you're gonna get hit with a storm of information when we talk about Mech Warfare which includes how and what gets customized as well as how combat is going to play out on the battlefield.

Whoah, sorry I ever doubted you paul, wait, darnit, I'm going to pay for later aren't I?
On a more serious note, customization should be allowed, to an extent, and there has to be a visual change as well, or any Hunchback, will look just like the rest of them, instead of each being that person's mech.

Edited by guardian wolf, 04 February 2012 - 11:16 PM.

[John Warhammer Hartman]

which version of the mech lab is going to be use my personal hope is the mech lab from mech3 and not the sorry excuse they had in mech 4

[Slyck]

I've brought up this idea before, but I think it applies here. I'd like the mechlab customization to happen through the models of equipment that has never really been explored in gameplay before.

Lore tells us that it is difficult to swap out the class of weapon or equipment in a mech and to do so requires that it be redesigned as a new variant. I'm cool with that. But lore also empasies that these are Classes of equipment and that within each there are numerous manufacturers and model that are similar, but not exactly the same.

So I think that they should included several models of each piece of equipment, each slightly different then the others in its class. Then in the mechlab we would be able to swap these models to tweek the mech to better match the mission and our play style.

For example, every stock Centurian would have 2 med lasers, an LRM 10 and AC/10 and we wouldn't be able to change that without switching to a variant. But we would be able to select between a slow recycle, high damage AC model and a high fire rate, low damage model. They'd both have the same effective damage and heat over time, but one would be more suitable for sniping in open terrain and the other would be prefered by brawlers in close quarters.

[FACEman Peck]

Don't judge, MW4 Mercs had it awesome. You couldn't build frankenmechs in it. Nuff said.

[Habokku]

I tend to be torn.

While I appreciate the classic battletech system that was used in MW3, I for one don't really like the ability to totally customize a 'mech from top to bottom.

I like that MW4 tried to utilize hardpoints that kept the 'mechs armed in a similar fashion. Energy weapons can be mounted where energy weapons should go, same for ballistics, and missiles.

Bear in mind, in the canon the 'mech's targeting computers were programmed at the factories that produced the 'mechs for the weapons that are mounted on the chassis when it rolls off the assembly line. If a 'mech has a Large Laser, two Medium Lasers, and an LRM 10 rack, it's targeting computer is made to accomodate those weapon systems and provide targeting information for their effective use. If you go changing out that Large Laser and pair of Medium Lasers for a PPC for instance, you have to now reprogram the targeting computer for that weapon, further adding to the time it took to alter the 'mech. (You might have to wait days or weeks for a qualified 'tech to arrive that can make that kind of change to the computer, or worst case scenario completely replace the targeting computer with a different one suited for the weapons.)

I like variety as much as anyone, but I am going on record to say I think that there should be three levels to it.

First, you have your factory default variant, the tried and true Atlas AS7-D for example. Then you've got X number of variants to that design, and in order to utilize them you've got to get the upgrade kit, which essentially transforms that AS7-D to an AS7-RS with no other changes.

Second, for a fair sum of Cbills, and moderate waiting time, you've got limited tweaking you can do. Replace an LRM 20 with an LRM 15 to free up tonnage for an extra couple of tons of ammo for your AC 20, or Sub-out the SRM 6 for an SRM 4 for the same added ammunition. Limited small modifications to individual weapons or systems on the 'mech that will be expensive to accomplish, but not bank-breaklingly so. Even swapping an LRM launcher for an SRM launcher wouldn't be out of the question for a little extra cost. The bottom line is you're maintaining the same style of weapon in the same place on your machine (Missile, Beam/Energy, and Ballistic)

Thirdly, for an extreme price, and a fair ammount of down time, you can make drastic changes to your 'mech. Replace the AC in the arm with a PPC, or subbing out the Medium Lasers in the torso for SRM launchers or Machine Guns. Taking the SRM launcher off the hip and replacing it with a pair of Flamers, the more drastic and numerous the alterations, the more expensive and time consuming it gets.

Now having your preferred 'mech out of action for days (or even weeks) on end wouldn't be ideal, but if you want that custom Atlas with an AC 5 on each arm, a PPC on one hip, a flamer on the other, and a pair of SRM 6's in the torsos, you're going to have to pay the price and wait for the techs to break down your machine and rebuild it from the ground up essentially.

That's just how I see it.

<S> Just my thoughts on the matter.

-Havoc
A.K.A. Habokku

[Outlaw2]

Don't be surprised if we see something similar to MW4 or what MWLL plans on having, maybe even more restricted in some parts.

Exact replica of TT customization is not gonna happen.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 05 February 2012 - 12:57 AM.