243 replies to this topic

[zorak ramone]

Dlardrageth, on 22 March 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

Not much sympathy/pity to be expected from those of us who got denied to use some standard variants completely, due to the sillyness that was the so-called MW4 "MechLab". Which in retrospect I pretty much see as a tool to cater to munchkins mainly.

The reason certain variants weren't used in MW4 isn't because of the mech lab. Its because certain weapons were nerfed to hell because of previous games (medium and small lasers) and other weapons weren't designed to work well with other weapons (all missle weapons). The MW4 mech lab was a vast improvement over previous iterations of the mech lab, and allowed for a much wider variety of mechs than in previous games. In my time, I've seen all of the following used effectively: ERLL boats, ERPPC boats mixed ERLL/Gauss, mixed Gauss/ERPPC, fast heavy/med harassers with the same, LBX assaults, mixed LBX/ERLL fast meds, LRM boats, fast LRM harassers, SSRM boat shock mechs, LGR snipers, and so on.

As for "munchkins," they will exist no matter what you do about it in a PVP environment. Alot of players are going to try and find the best config and go with it. The best thing you can do is to regulate customization (and balance the weapons in the context of customization rules) to ensure that a variety of configs are viable.

[Siilk]

I think it might be interesting for the people here to watch the MWLL pod system introduction video. A video is a bit outdated but the core concept behind the pod system haven't changed. The system works a lot like some of the suggestions, posted here, so I think it's worth your attention.

http://www.youtube.c...vqRHszJho#t=26s

[Dlardrageth]

zorak ramone, on 22 March 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

The reason certain variants weren't used in MW4 isn't because of the mech lab. Its because certain weapons were nerfed to hell because of previous games (medium and small lasers) and other weapons weren't designed to work well with other weapons (all missle weapons).

You overlook the fact that some variants were physically impossible to recreate with that "MechLab". And thus...

Quote

The MW4 mech lab was a vast improvement over previous iterations of the mech lab

I beg to differ here decisively. It might have been a step in the right direction as far as weapon's balancing goes, but the "MechBuilding" system there was pretty horrible. With regards to engines, heatsinks et al. in particular. Didn't have much to do with BT/MW any more.

Quote

[...]
and allowed for a much wider variety of mechs than in previous games.[...]

Matter of taste maybe, but variety, and thus quantity, doesn't guarantee better quality as well in my book.

Quote

As for "munchkins," they will exist no matter what you do about it in a PVP environment. Alot of players are going to try and find the best config and go with it. The best thing you can do is to regulate customization (and balance the weapons in the context of customization rules) to ensure that a variety of configs are viable.

I absolutely agree to them being a fact of life/game. Doesn't mean you'd have to cater to them, though.

[zorak ramone]

Siilk, on 22 March 2012 - 12:20 PM, said:

I think it might be interesting for the people here to watch the MWLL pod system introduction video. A video is a bit outdated but the core concept behind the pod system haven't changed. The system works a lot like some of the suggestions, posted here, so I think it's worth your attention.

http://www.youtube.c...vqRHszJho#t=26s

Untill the MWLL devs release their construction rules, their pod system doesn't really impress me except as a technical demonstration of how you can change a mech's appearance based on loadout. The 4xLBX20 Fafnir and other impossible designs make doubt that they have a solid/balanced set of contruction rules, if they even have any at all. It just looks like "oh hey wouldn't it be cool if mech X could carry all these cool things?"

[zorak ramone]

Dlardrageth, on 22 March 2012 - 12:30 PM, said:

You overlook the fact that some variants were physically impossible to recreate with that "MechLab". And thus...



I beg to differ here decisively. It might have been a step in the right direction as far as weapon's balancing goes, but the "MechBuilding" system there was pretty horrible. With regards to engines, heatsinks et al. in particular. Didn't have much to do with BT/MW any more.

The inability to recreate certain CBT variants did not make it a worse game. It made it a worse representation of CBT ... which is a game that has alot of serious balancing issues (all clan energy and missle weapons, Gauss rifles), including the rules for configuring omnimechs.

Quote

Matter of taste maybe, but variety, and thus quantity, doesn't guarantee better quality as well in my book.


I absolutely agree to them being a fact of life/game. Doesn't mean you'd have to cater to them, though.

Its not just quantity of mechs, but variety of configurations. The variety of configurations reflected a variety of tactics that were available to the player. More variety of tactics leads to more diverse, interesting gameplay, which is arguably qualitatively better. I'm not saying MW4 was perfect (I called it out in my OP for its lack of transparent build rules), but it was a vast improvement over the days of hovering JJ MPL boats in MW2, and lagged out ML/SL SCats and watermechs of MW3.

As for catering to munchkins, what exactly do you mean? Any form of customization will allow the "munchkins" to min/max their configurations.

[Monky]

I would just like to say, throwing time in as a factor for refits is a terrible idea. When you get home and unlock/purchase your shiny new mech and maybe shiny new weapons for it, the LAST thing you are going to want is to have to wait for a refit to complete. If it were a table top game where you're sitting across from someone sure maybe that mech doesn't play a part in your next battle - but that doesn't mesh with what is effectively playing against a random group of people in each individual battle.

The main point I'm trying to make is - since these are random players in pub matches you're going to be fighting most of the time to earn creds/exp, you're not going to see any effect. If player A has to wait 2 months (or even 2 hours) to refit his Panther or Catapult, he can't play it. So what happens? He plays a different mech and player B who has not refit/already completed refit is put into that match instead.

End result - you notice no actual change from this feature in actual battles regarding other players, it only affects you, and that is really pretty sucky. Do you want to have to run a default mech knowing you'll be put up against players who are likely already refit? Do you want to have to wait to be able to use an upgraded mech, when you've sold your old one just to buy it? Probably not.

What works in other models (for instance world of tanks) is your 'upgrade time' is rolled into earning each piece of equipment for that chassis with exp, then you can swap out at will provided you have the money to afford it. This model works incredibly well and you don't feel inhibited by it - at the same time you don't get to just walk out the door pimping the biggest/best gear. Please take this argument into consideration.

[Dlardrageth]

zorak ramone, on 22 March 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

As for catering to munchkins, what exactly do you mean? Any form of customization will allow the "munchkins" to min/max their configurations.

I actually keep arguing for making customization limited in the sense of making it somewhat meaningful. You should have to think twice, and not only for 5 seconds, if you really want to do the changes to Mech A. Meaning you would have to factor in a number of consequences, like e.g. time out of service for the implementation of the customization. Like general downsides in terms of monetary investment and long-term higher upkeep. Maybe even as much as having to do the customization process all over again once the custom build got destroyed in battle. And so on.

IMHO customization should be an option that has to be deliberated upon. As soon as it goes beyond just re-speccing to another canon variant (even that should take some time, tbh). That would maintain it being a meaningful and also somewhat rare/unique feature. Having simply the option to refit your Mech with e.g. a different engine, heatsink complement and weaponry in a matter of 5 minutes doesn't achieve that at all. It just turns every chassis into a "pseudo-Omni", effectively negating the need for true Omnis somewhat. In that case might as well drop the pretense that MWO has anything to do with BT any more and call it "Mecha Online". *shrug*

monky, on 22 March 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

I would just like to say, throwing time in as a factor for refits is a terrible idea. When you get home and unlock/purchase your shiny new mech and maybe shiny new weapons for it, the LAST thing you are going to want is to have to wait for a refit to complete. If it were a table top game where you're sitting across from someone sure maybe that mech doesn't play a part in your next battle - but that doesn't mesh with what is effectively playing against a random group of people in each individual battle.

So are you either trying to say that you have to customize your Mech to render it playable? Because with a stock variant you cannot? Wonder how all those other people do... Or are you saying that due to personal issues/shortcomings you feel unable to compete against other players in stock variants? Seems rather a matter not really related to general gameplay, to be honest...

Unless you claim there is someone standing behind you with a gun pointed at your head forcing to, I don't see why anyone has to customize a Mech. On coming home and wanting to play. It is your choice, and yours alone to do so, and if you don't like the consequences it does entail, then just don't do it, that easy. Why change mechanisms that are there for a reason (customization time i.e.)? Just to grant you "instant gratification"? Seriously?

Edited by Dlardrageth, 22 March 2012 - 02:25 PM.

[Lycan]

Agent CraZy DiP, on 22 March 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Only problem with time is that... well... The game runs time as a 1:1 day cycle. So changing something that would take a month on TT would, well... you see where this is going. If it takes time to change something on your only mech leaving you without something to play with... They'd lose business.

There's really no problem with that. From my understanding, Eve Online runs on real time and there are people that still play that. As long as the clock runs down both on and offline, there shouldn't be a problem.

If you want to completely customize your only mech from the ground up, then you should have to wait the time as well as pay the c-bills. If you don't want to wait that long, then either go with slightly less radical modifications, check on the availability of a variant that gets close to what you want or just don't make the modifications till you can afford a mech to use while the one you want to customize is in the shop.

Edit: I'd also like to state that I agree with Diardrageth's post above me.

Edited by Lycan, 22 March 2012 - 02:18 PM.

[Sears]

I don't agree with having to wait to play the mech you've customised, however i do agree about making it a decision you have to think about.

Perhaps instead of having to wait, once you've been given a quote for how much the customisation will cost there is a submit button and once it's pressed that mech is unchangeable for a set period of time, say 24 hours, so if you've messed it up you have to live with your decision until it becomes available to be customised again. But in turn you get to play the mech you've customised. I know it isn't lore worthy or fitting with the 1:1 timeframe.

I believe the 1:1 timeframe will only be applicable to upcoming events anyway and believe it shouldn't affect some aspects and not others. If it takes a long time to customise a mech it would take a long time to get to a planet to battle it out. I guess it's where you draw the line between simulator and game.

Edited by Sears, 22 March 2012 - 05:46 PM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

In the thread about matchmaking someone said "spend 90 seconds in the Mechlab" by this I presume he ment that when he had all the details of the drop he would then call up one of his preset custom variants to configure the mech for that match. This is what a lot of players are expecting, be it MW3 or 4 style instant change for each & every match. A number of people have stated that if they don't get full, immediate customisation that it isn't MW and they won't play. The other one, with reference to custom mechs, is that either "balance is unecessary" or "balance isn't a problem" or "the devs will find a way to balance it".
I think that when the dev's do announce what Mechlab is a lot of people will be ranting on the forums. The devs keep saying that this is a reboot, while a good proportion of the posts are effectively saying I want MW3/4 with better graphics and netcode.

[Johannes Falkner]

I have mixed feelings on instant modifications. On the one hand, I want modifications to be canon because the rules for modifications in TT seem to be pretty comprehensive and reasonable for in universe application. Unfortunately, the realities of games, particularly online ones, argue strongly against modifications taking hours/days/weeks/months.

I would like to see instant changes to ammo loads, standard vs. inferno SRM for example, up to the point of treating all ammo on the mech as interchangeable. By that I mean, if you carry 5 tons of total ammo for three weapons, say an SRM, LRM and AC, you could carry any combination of 5 tons of ammo without incurring any real delays. Also, tuning heatsinks/fire rates, jump jets and myomers for different atmospheric temperatures, pressures and compositions should be instant (or automatic).

I think more extensive mods should take longer, say max ~30 minutes. The ability to mod you mech should not be unlocked until you have more than one mech. There should be a progress bar indicating how far along the mod is. I think it would be really cool if they did something like a time lapse video showing the modifications in progress that you could view from the mech bay.

[Dlardrageth]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 22 March 2012 - 04:47 PM, said:

A number of people have stated that if they don't get full, immediate customisation that it isn't MW and they won't play.

People talk a lot, and a lot of **** on top of that on a long, slow day. Won't hold my breath for them to go through with all they say.
*shrug* Apart from that puerile kind of attitude not being constructive at all. Heck, anyone can play the spoiled kid and flail madly arms and legs while rolling on the floor shouting: "Give me my candy now or I'll hold my breath till I asphyxiate!" Didn't work out as a 5-year-old, why would it work now?

Quote

The other one, with reference to custom mechs, is that either "balance is unecessary" or "balance isn't a problem" or "the devs will find a way to balance it".

Similar issue here. People now claiming that balance is no issue are probably among the first that later on will come to the forums and start a whinefest about "OP this" and "nerf that". Considering even rather simplistic boardgames (in comparison to computer ones) often need quite meticulous balancing (try playtesting a new boardgame in development, folks, you'll see what I'm getting at), they probably have simply no clue what they're talking about. And of course the devs will balance it somehow. Although that balancing could end up the customization options remaining would be ones for paintjobs only.

Quote

I think that when the dev's do announce what Mechlab is a lot of people will be ranting on the forums.

Wouldn't bet against it. But we can still hope for some quality trolling from Paul or Garth to shut them up.

Sears, on 22 March 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:

I don't agree with having to wait to play the mech you've customised, however i do agree about making it a decision you have to think about.

Probably just a matter of taste, really. I won't shed tears if your all-new Mech is ready after ten minutes or something (Server might take that long for remodeling and storing the info and what not.). I wouldn't mind having to wait a full day or longer, too, though. What would really tick me off is more the "omnification" of all standard IS Mechs that renders the later-to-come OmniMechs redundant. If thanks to that the technological leap that is Omni technology introduction in the IS becomes pretty meaningless, we could as well skip ahead to 3070 and start an all-out munchkin- and cheese-fest, I won't care any more.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

My guess for next months Mechlab. It will take the MW4 hardpoints but specific variants will be premade to avoid that problem. All heatsinks, ammo, AMS, JJ etc will need to be accounted for with regard to both weight and crits as in TT.
Major hardpoints will be limited, perhaps with a drop down menu of what you can install. The cost,and any time penalties for the changes will be displayed, as will the total wieight and heat generation/dissipation. There may be some smaller (1 to 3 crits) hardpoints which are unlimited in what you can place in them.
I would like to see the ability to put differing computers in the mech with different sensor and targetting abilities in line with those that were available. We already know that we will be able to put modules in and out.
I would assume that we will also be able to customise "skins".
Armour would be able to added/reduced to cover other changes.
There will possibly be the option for minor changes to the engine.
To start with we will only have access to Level 1 tech.

Be interesting to see if any of those are right. It is what I think we will get rather than what I would necessarily personally want.

[00dlez]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 22 March 2012 - 04:47 PM, said:

A number of people have stated that if they don't get full, immediate customisation that it isn't MW and they won't play.

IMHO... Good riddance. If anyone I play with says anything to the effect of "Your mech's DPS isn't high enough, you should do X, Y, Z..." we will have words.

[guardiandashi]

heres my thought on customizations, and for the record I went through a few customizations using the strategic ops rules to figure out just how long a few refits seem to take.

a 10shs to 10DHS would take ~40hrs by the refit rules and have ~80% chance of being successful on the 1st attempt if you spent additional time the odds get better.

however there are a few possible adjustments to the time. this according to those same rules.

1 you can have up to 3 tech teams working on 1 mech simultaniously
2 most techs work 8-10 hr days aka 40 hr weeks
3 more experienced tech teams either have better chances of success or work faster, or both

now with all that in mind
I would prefer using the "official" battletech refit times personally but a couple possible tweeks could be made.
1 automatic time compression for refits and repairs IE hours are now minutes, minutes are seconds
2 additional (in game currency) spent assigns better techs and or additional crews to your repair or refit
example it is going to take 40 hours for the refit you choose, at cost X, you hire an additional tech crew for y additional cbills and it halves the time, you hire a 3rd tech team and it reduces the time by 2/3. you choose to pay x fee for additional crews, to turn it into 24 hour shifts
3 being a f2p certain speedups are common, someone that is unwilling to wait the 40 hours for their refit could spend real $ (or "gold currency") to speed up the refit process.

note that option 2 is actually a canon solution

[Outlaw2]

I like it Zorak. If you are going to make a mechlab that allows a lot of customization and still somewhat follows TT, it'll look like this. Though honestly I care less about it following the TT rules to the T.... and more about having a mechlab that makes mech building interesting, allows each mech to still retain a certain character and doesn't drive viable builds onto a few mechs.

I would make engine size and type, armor type and internal structure all locked to the variant. If a players wants an XL engine on a Catapult, they acquire the variant with an XL engine...and the hardpoint layout that comes with it. Variants would mean much less if you can freely exchange these weight saving components.

[00dlez]

=Outlaw=, on 23 March 2012 - 06:52 AM, said:

I like it Zorak. If you are going to make a mechlab that allows a lot of customization and still somewhat follows TT, it'll look like this. Though honestly I care less about it following the TT rules to the T.... and more about having a mechlab that makes mech building interesting, allows each mech to still retain a certain character and doesn't drive viable builds onto a few mechs.

I would make engine size and type, armor type and internal structure all locked to the variant. If a players wants an XL engine on a Catapult, they acquire the variant with an XL engine...and the hardpoint layout that comes with it. Variants would mean much less if you can freely exchange these weight saving components.

This would be more to my liking than a blank slate mech lab where chassis becomes no more important that paint job.
Making a few minor tweaks to 1 of 4 mech chassis variants should provide plenty of custimization options in the long run. I shudder at the thought of entire company's clicking the "Strip" option and completely refitting their mechs before every battle.

[zorak ramone]

=Outlaw=, on 23 March 2012 - 06:52 AM, said:

I like it Zorak. If you are going to make a mechlab that allows a lot of customization and still somewhat follows TT, it'll look like this. Though honestly I care less about it following the TT rules to the T.... and more about having a mechlab that makes mech building interesting, allows each mech to still retain a certain character and doesn't drive viable builds onto a few mechs.

I would make engine size and type, armor type and internal structure all locked to the variant. If a players wants an XL engine on a Catapult, they acquire the variant with an XL engine...and the hardpoint layout that comes with it. Variants would mean much less if you can freely exchange these weight saving components.

I'm not one of those people who think that MWO needs to mirror CBT exactly. However, I think that there is something really really valuable to having a concrete, transparent set of construction rules. MW4 had some mechs with quirks, and it was annoying to not know why they had it and how it was balanced (i.e. 360 torso twist, the Thanatos's and Masakari's slow heat scale, the Glad's engine upgrades). It wasn't so obtrusive in MW4, but take a look at MWLL: no concrete construction rules have been offered and you're seeing impossible (and broken) configurations like 4xLBX20 fafnirs, instagib bombers, etc.

Using the CBT construction rules as a baseline that can be modified is advantagous as it is familiar and provides a universal standard by which all mech base designs are balanced by.

EDIT: I also would like to see Engine, internals, and armor locked down as well. However, this might be too much for most people.

Another possibility: engine swaps. Take the AS7-D and AS7-K. Both have normal internals (i.e. the use the same underlying skeleton/chassis). However the K has an XL. Maybe if you salvage a K, you can swap the XL into your D and vice versa. Maybe if the mechs have the same structure/armor, you could swap parts (arms, torso panels).

Edited by zorak ramone, 23 March 2012 - 07:30 AM.

[zorak ramone]

Dlardrageth, on 22 March 2012 - 01:58 PM, said:

I actually keep arguing for making customization limited in the sense of making it somewhat meaningful. You should have to think twice, and not only for 5 seconds, if you really want to do the changes to Mech A. Meaning you would have to factor in a number of consequences, like e.g. time out of service for the implementation of the customization. Like general downsides in terms of monetary investment and long-term higher upkeep. Maybe even as much as having to do the customization process all over again once the custom build got destroyed in battle. And so on.

IMHO customization should be an option that has to be deliberated upon. As soon as it goes beyond just re-speccing to another canon variant (even that should take some time, tbh). That would maintain it being a meaningful and also somewhat rare/unique feature. Having simply the option to refit your Mech with e.g. a different engine, heatsink complement and weaponry in a matter of 5 minutes doesn't achieve that at all. It just turns every chassis into a "pseudo-Omni", effectively negating the need for true Omnis somewhat. In that case might as well drop the pretense that MWO has anything to do with BT any more and call it "Mecha Online". *shrug*

Couldn't this be accomplished by making modifications cost money? Money that has to be earned by playing/winning?

E.g., I get my starter mech (say, a hunchback). I like it and all, but I'd really like to modify it (say AC20->10, SL-ML, balance is heat sinks). Lets say that this modification takes money that has to be earned by playing well. So I have to take my Hunchback and win some games before I can modify it. Furthermore, if it turns out that my modification sucks, I have to go back and earn the money all over again to fix it or change it back.

You can balance this by making certain modifications cost more money (say ML->HS is cheap but AC20-GR is very expensive). The time factor wouldn't be necessary, as it requires time to play the game and earn the money. Only now, the time spent is just waiting. Its time spent playing the game.

A customization = costs system would require people to think about their modifications and prevent people from modifying like crazy.

[Jonas]

If we add time to custom jobs what happens when you only have 2 mechs and well you decide to get them modded to your specs at the same time? You just sit around for 2 or 3 weeks for the job to get done before you can play? Or if you do one at a time and the one you piloting in a match gets wasted?

On another note I do have an idea switch out hard points. Ie: some small A/C and lasers ports look the same same for some of the big ones the issue really comes in to play with Lrms and srms, I hated seeing lasers come out of a missile rack or a missile come out of a laser/ac. Or when I ran my Madcat but didnt have the missiles on it but still had the racks on it. What if you just remove the hard point and replace it with a hard point that fits the weapon style you want. Say I do want to make my Centurion in to a Yen lo Wang clone or modded it further in to the the one the Dragoons Modded for Kai then I can. ( I would like all mods to be with in reason ) But say I wanted to drop the missile racks to add beagle active prob or ecm or targeting computer. It would allow a mech to reflect its mods and you don't see the all the same mechs on the field but with different weapons.