Belisarius†, on 06 April 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:
I really don't think hitboxes are an issue that's relevant to this thread. I totally agree that they're important, but I doubt they're customizable, and so they're just a behind-the-scenes feature that needs to be taken into account when the devs assign features, hardpoints etc. As I said, outlaw had a thread on this a while ago, and they said they were aware of it and would take hitboxes into account in balancing. That's about as far as the discussion needs to go.
Yeah it is a derail.
To keep the thread relevant and alive, since I think that a solid set of construction rules is really important. Here are some ideas I had about modifying the CBT construction rules.
Shared Missile Ammo
The LRM5, 10, 15 and 20 all fire LRMs, the SRM2, 4 and 6 all fire SRMS, and the MRM10, 20, 30 and 40 all fire MRMs. Yet, each launcher has its own ammo type. For example, the Longbow carried LRM20s and LRM5s, carried LRM5 ammo and LRM20 ammo, but if the LRM5s were destroyed, the LRM20 launchers could not use the LRM5 ammo. This doesn’t make sense as they’re still the same missiles. In fact each launcher ammo type carries the same ammo: 120 LRMs, 100 SRMs, or 240 MRMs. The only exception is SRM6 ammo which has 90 SRMs because 6 doesn’t divide evenly into 100.
I suggest unifying the missile launcher ammo so that you don’t buy, for example, LRM5, 10, 15 or 20 ammo, but just LRM ammo at 120 missiles per ton. So, at least going into the 3050 era, you would have 4 types of missile ammo (not including special LRM ammo): LRM ammo (120), SRM ammo (100), MRM ammo (240), and SSRM ammo (100). This just makes more sense and would make it easier to combine different types of launchers on a mech.
Splitting crits for IS double heat sinks.
In 3025, you could put HS in the legs, CT or head of IS mechs. In 3050, DHS arrive and basically become a necessity. The problem is that legs still have only 2 crits each and DHS take three crits, so you can’t put them in the legs CT or head. This is kind of a pain, because there aren’t a whole lot of things that you can put in the legs aside from ES/FF crits and GR ammo. Weapons in the legs can only shot forward (and are really just plain silly) and ammo other than GR ammo can explode.
For the sake of IS mechs everywhere, I suggest that we allow IS mechs to spread DHS crits to adjacent locations like Size 20 ACs. So, if you had at least one crit free in the CT, you could put a DHS in the leg, and spread to the CT (and vice-versa). This would also mean that if you found yourself with one crit free in a torso section and 2 free in the connected arm, you could attach a DHS. Of course, if any crits of the DHS get hit/destroyed, the entire DHS is destroyed (so from the last example: you lose the arm, the DHS is destroyed). If we are going to adopt more restrictive customization rules, I think that IS mechs could use some more flexibility.
Reworking targeting computers
Let’s be honest with ourselves: the idea of a multi-ton computer is just stupid. No really. It’s stupid. It’s been stupid since the 50s or 60s. Also, if you plan on creating tech-hardpoints (as I’ve suggested) to make tech heavy mechs (like the raven) more uniquely capable, then the unfixed size of TCs is problematic. It’s also especially problematic for mechs like the warhawk where the TC is (at least by fluff) fixed equipment.
I suggest changing the way TCs are implemented. First of all, conceptually, I would think of a TC like this: one central unit with a camera/rangefinder/something that coordinates with the mech’s targeting system, and linked units in each location carrying a direct fire weapon for fine adjustment of aiming, coordinated by the central unit.
The whole system would weigh the same as TCs in CBT (1 ton for every 4 tons (IS) or 5 tons (Clan)). The central unit would be two crits and have to be mounted in a T2 hardpoint (i.e. it would be the same size and fit in the same slots as BAP/ECM). In addition to the central unit, you would need to mount a linked unit (the aim coordinating/adjusting mechanisms) in each section with a direct fire weapon. Linked units would be mounted in equipment space. For weapons in the CT/H, I would allow it to be mounted in adjacent sections as space is tight in the CT/H. If the central unit is destroyed, then the entire TC is destroyed. If one of the linked units is destroyed, then only the weapons in that section loose the benefit of the TC.
The player would only need to drop the TC into the appropriate tech hardpoint. Linked units would be allocated automatically, and weight would be scaled up and down automatically. Since the crits are more fixed, modifying mechs would be easier, as the TC wouldn’t be constantly contracting and expanding. From a conceptual standpoint, the increasing weight of the TC wouldn’t be due to a “computer” increasing in mass, it would be because heavier weapons require heavier equipment for stabilization/aim coordination (i.e. the linked units).
Edited by zorak ramone, 10 April 2012 - 07:54 AM.