Necessites of Mek' Operation/Customization
#21
Posted 02 November 2011 - 07:57 AM
I would love to see customization but have it be realistic in the manner in which it is accomplished. Have all the components (TAG / C.A.S.E, Sinks etc.) available but a player has to start with a chassis of type and weight that can't be stripped and made into a walking gun that simply would explode first trigger pull in the Table Top rule set. Oh and a switch in game to deny any customization (Stock Mech's baby as noted already.
#22
Posted 02 November 2011 - 07:59 AM
I just hope they have an option for stock only battles...
#23
Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:04 AM
Though I hope these two ideas aren't considered "hardcore." They seem necessary to make the game feel like a battle between giant machines- not an odd-Giant Robot version of Call of Duty. And, in my humble opinion, they add a great deal of depth to mech piloting without increasing the learning curve an unreasonable degree.
Edited by Vance Diamond, 02 November 2011 - 08:05 AM.
#24
Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:04 AM
theforce, on 02 November 2011 - 07:59 AM, said:
I just hope they have an option for stock only battles...
After all these years you still like stock only... ;P
#26
Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:08 AM
#27
Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:14 AM
Vance Diamond, on 02 November 2011 - 08:04 AM, said:
Though I hope these two ideas aren't considered "hardcore." They seem necessary to make the game feel like a battle between giant machines- not an odd-Giant Robot version of Call of Duty. And, in my humble opinion, they add a great deal of depth to mech piloting without increasing the learning curve an unreasonable degree.
Ya I don't want battles that end with 2 or 3 shots to the CT with 8 grouped lasers either
If the pinpoint accuracy and grouping fire was addressed i think customization would be OK. Here's a good thread on this:
http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1
As Mr_Blastman said...I still prefer stock only though
#28
Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:31 AM
#29
Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:46 AM
I'm also an advocate of extensive customization taking a large amount of player skillpoints and money to do, starting off with more or less Stock only, moving on to other TRO designs, then letting you swap out a few similar weapons, replace large ones with multiple small ones or vice versa, and finally move on to where you can get more or less a full customization experience... within the reasonable design constraints of the mech. Swapping a large lazer for a PPC, I think, should be more of a mid-range thing. Swapping a large Lazer for an SRM rack? More endgame. Changing to an XL engine or something like that? Pretty much maxed out in the customization category.
Speaking of which, Omni's probably shouldn't even be pilotable until you hit the mid-range.
#30
Posted 02 November 2011 - 09:43 AM
As for the scaling customization- you're granting greater power to the older players- thus making the new player experience much less friendly. I think that's a bad idea. You want to attract players, and the best way to do that is to make it fun, exciting, and fair right from the get go.
Edited by Vance Diamond, 02 November 2011 - 09:44 AM.
#31
Posted 02 November 2011 - 09:46 AM
#32
Posted 02 November 2011 - 10:03 AM
I don't understand the need for this advancing customization idea- the only thing it gives the game is something for the older players to hold over the heads of the new ones. Its a huge tactical advantage- and it makes new players feel like they aren't playing the real game yet.
I have to jump into Call of Duty analogy again- like in Modern Warfare 2- when you have to advance four or five levels before you can even make your own class. Those were pretty lame levels. Why not have the stock options available for use if the new player doesn't want to use it just yet- but still have it open if they do want to mess around first.
I just don't see any advantage to denying such a cool feature for any length of time.
#33
Posted 02 November 2011 - 10:10 AM
#34
Posted 02 November 2011 - 10:13 AM
Energy weapons pump out a great deal more heat per damage than ballistics.
AC10 - 3 heat
PPC - 10 heat
Big difference and they both deal 10 damage.
Though those are table-top rules, and I would anticipate some tweaking for MWO.
#35
Posted 02 November 2011 - 10:23 AM
Edited by UncleKulikov, 02 November 2011 - 10:23 AM.
#36
Posted 02 November 2011 - 10:30 AM
Its a trade.
You can have a more reliable- ammo-less heat machine that you must fire with discipline. 3 times for 30 heat and 30 damage
Or a longer ranged, finite, potentially dangerous weapon that you can fire 10 times for 30 heat and 100 damage.
Are you a play-it-safe pilot who likes to dodge out of line of sight to cool off? Or do you want to keep your enemy in front of your blazing guns, trusting your marksmanship will end the foe before he can end you?
Two different playstyles, two different sets of tactics- all in one simple trade.
Edited by Vance Diamond, 02 November 2011 - 10:32 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users