593 replies to this topic

[EDMW CSN]

Part and parcel of gameplay. If you are using the AC-20 and LRM-20 a lot more than the SRM6 on the Atlas, why not rip that SRM out and put on more LRM-20 and AC-20 ammo?

The trade off is more sustained endurance vs more short ranged damage upfront (SRM-6 deals 12 dmg if all missiles hit).

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 04 April 2012 - 11:29 PM.

[Charles Martel]

I like MFBs, like MW3. But also like MW3, they are a potential enemy target if they find them.

[LordDeathStrike]

[EDMW]CSN, on 04 April 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

Part and parcel of gameplay. If you are using the AC-20 and LRM-20 a lot more than the SRM6 on the Atlas, why not rip that SRM out and put on more LRM-20 and AC-20 ammo?

The trade off is more sustained endurance vs more short ranged damage upfront (SRM-6 deals 12 dmg if all missiles hit).

dpending on the map ill be swapping weapons and ammo accordingly. if my atlas is gonna be brawling, ill be dropping the lrm 20 for another srm 6, and additional srm and ac 20 ammo!

if we are gonna be out on a long range map ill have my large lasers/gauss rifle/lrm variant out, with spare guass and lrm ammo accordingly.

[CCC Dober]

Limited resupply might be an option. A couple of supply trucks or depots scattered across the map to deplete or destroy as you please. At least they give the scouts and mediums something to do when the main forces meet and greet. Secondary objectives if you like to see it that way.

[Dimetime]

Totally against the idea of unlimited ammo. THe more MWO stays away from the "instagratification, me-me-me, gimme now, watering down" of thought and action that had plagued all forms of gaming for about the last 7 years, the better.

Go back to the days we walked to school uphill both ways in the snow. Don't be afraid to make people actually have to sit down in front of the computer and actually play the game. Let them run out of ammo.

Now, if they want to strip away some criticals to put a ton or some more ammo there, as long as it doesn't exceed weight, cool. That said, don't go easy on them as that's just more of a chance of getting an ammo explosion if hit right. Factor that in to coding!

[StompyMcGee]

In certain scenarios, MFB's or static repair yards should be able to reload mechs. But in a straight-up fight, once you're out of ammo, you're out.

[CCC Dober]

Dimetime, on 05 April 2012 - 12:41 AM, said:

Totally against the idea of unlimited ammo. THe more MWO stays away from the "instagratification, me-me-me, gimme now, watering down" of thought and action that had plagued all forms of gaming for about the last 7 years, the better.

Go back to the days we walked to school uphill both ways in the snow. Don't be afraid to make people actually have to sit down in front of the computer and actually play the game. Let them run out of ammo.

Now, if they want to strip away some criticals to put a ton or some more ammo there, as long as it doesn't exceed weight, cool. That said, don't go easy on them as that's just more of a chance of getting an ammo explosion if hit right. Factor that in to coding!

It would neither be realistic, nor would it be fun. There are certain Mech variants that have serious ammo problems, such as ArrowIV Mechs and those with UACs. They will be very interested to replenish their ammo at some point and denying this basically forces them to give up their Mechs while letting the team down. This is not fun at all.

[CobraFive]

Unlimmited ammo shound't even be an option (besides we know its not the case). I don't see why anyone would even bother arguing against it, no-one would defend the option.

Whether or not you can get mid-mission reloads, in my mind, should depend entirely on the size of the maps and the average play length.

I think in a 12v12 team deathmatch with no serious objectives there really is no need for reloads, but for example the game mode that involves each player having several respawns ("Dropship Mode", I think), even with each newly dropped mech is fully loaded, ammo-centric designs would be at a large disadvantage here. Once you're "spent" you'd have to just suicide to respawn, or fight under a severe handicap with only secondary weapons. And even if you want to argue realism on battlefield of giant robots, certainly they wouldn't just throw themselves to the wolves and would instead return for resupply.

In longer matches like that there should be a mid-mission reload capability, either returning to a fixed point behind the lines or some type of commander support module (remember also that each ammo-drop module would be one less scout, airstrike, defense, etc module...).

Edited by cobrafive, 05 April 2012 - 12:52 AM.

[Graxas]

IMO an MFB should be part of the resource allocation for the battle taking up a mech slot or something equivalent. Choose to bring one or don't. Would also be good if there were maps or game types where they were prohibited.

I'd like to see a nice thin zone around the edge of the map (or in the centre in the case of a break out/defend mission) where MFB's could be placed/droped. Kinda like a MASH concept, close enough to the front lines to be accessible, close enough to be over run if the enemy breaks through, but far enough away that for the majority of the time they are out of harms way.

[EDMW CSN]

LordDeathStrike, on 05 April 2012 - 12:22 AM, said:

dpending on the map ill be swapping weapons and ammo accordingly. if my atlas is gonna be brawling, ill be dropping the lrm 20 for another srm 6, and additional srm and ac 20 ammo!

if we are gonna be out on a long range map ill have my large lasers/gauss rifle/lrm variant out, with spare guass and lrm ammo accordingly.

Yeap. With the new mech lab, the LRM20 can be removed for another 5 crit missile hard point to put whatever missile weapon you want. The Atlas can possibly use a 7 crit missile slot since it has an SRM6 (2) + LRM-20(5).

This could lead to a long range fire variant of the Atlas though using 2x LRM-15s (3 crits each) and maybe an AC-10 for more intermediate range instead of the AC-20. Oh the possibilities

CCC_Dober, on 05 April 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

Limited resupply might be an option. A couple of supply trucks or depots scattered across the map to deplete or destroy as you please. At least they give the scouts and mediums something to do when the main forces meet and greet. Secondary objectives if you like to see it that way.

Sounds like more stuff to blow up.

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 05 April 2012 - 01:01 AM.

[CCC Dober]

Fielding an MFB would be quite a committment and expensive to boot. The main advantage are field repairs including ammo resupply IIRC.
If you shoot for the latter, you may fare better with supply trucks which are more expendable and able to relocate quicker.

[EDMW]CSN, on 05 April 2012 - 12:57 AM, said:

Sounds like more stuff to blow up.

Exactly, gives the little guys a chance to earn additional exp and contribute to the battle on a more strategic level. Win-win =)

Edited by CCC_Dober, 05 April 2012 - 01:00 AM.

[EDMW CSN]

CCC_Dober, on 05 April 2012 - 12:58 AM, said:

Fielding an MFB would be quite a committment and expensive to boot. The main advantage are field repairs including ammo resupply IIRC.
If you shoot for the latter, you may fare better with supply trucks which are more expendable and able to relocate quicker.



Exactly, gives the little guys a chance to earn additional exp and contribute to the battle on a more strategic level. Win-win =)

MFBs don't appear till 3059 as a prototype.
The best you gonna get ? Coolant trucks and J-27 ammo trucks.

[Dimetime]

CCC_Dober, on 05 April 2012 - 12:51 AM, said:

It would neither be realistic, nor would it be fun. There are certain Mech variants that have serious ammo problems, such as ArrowIV Mechs and those with UACs. They will be very interested to replenish their ammo at some point and denying this basically forces them to give up their Mechs while letting the team down. This is not fun at all.

I disagree. It would be realistic. Have you been in a firefight in real life and ran out of ammo? Show of hands...*raises hand* So let's not throw the "R" word around.

As for fun, you can only determine that for yourself and maybe a few folks you know well. There may be an equal or greater number of folks who believes it "makes sense" and should be so. Personally I find it fun. Makes you work to be a better shot. There is also a measure of pride in taking a mech that not just anyone else can make competitive, so. If it's truly a horrible mech, then we have to question why it was added in the first place.

I've heard MWO compared to World of Tanks. If that's true in actual game play it would seem to me to be a very had thing to do to park your mech in the middle of a battlefield so that people on the ground can reload you. It made sense in the single-player scenarios of MW4. That's not to say they couldn't incorporate it, mind you. If it is, though, then those base should be able to be destroyed and parked mechs should still be able to take damage.

No "timeouts: I'm invincible now" on the battlefield.

[Sylow]

Resupply should be possible, but it shouldn't be easy.

Sensible ways to do it would be:
- Stationary positions on the map. So if you spent 10 minutes to get close to your objective in your slow assault mech, expend your ammo to wipe some defenders and then realize that you'd need some more ammo for the last mile, have fun walking back for 10 minutes, reloading and approaching again. On the positive, these far-back positions might even have the option to repair armour, albeit at another 5 minutes of waiting time, in which you are a sitting duck. As long as both sides have not advanced over the "kill all enemies" tactic, this will work quite well, but if we're for example speaking of a map which is won by the side who at first held both available objectives at the same time for 5 minutes, the mech taking a stroll and being useless for 25 minutes could just as well be destroyed.

- Mobile field resupply, but much harder than the MW3 stuff. Such a mobile field supply would have to be requested by the commander, would have to travel from the starting point to the designated position and would be attackable by the enemy at any time. Restocking ammo would make you a sitting duck for 30 to 60 seconds and it would not perform any more fixes.

[StompyMcGee]

[EDMW]CSN, on 05 April 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

MFBs don't appear till 3059 as a prototype.
The best you gonna get ? Coolant trucks and J-27 ammo trucks.

If you can field some sort of resupply, why not?
I'd agree that resupplying a mech in the field ought to be time consuming, expensive and dangerous(both to the mech being resupplied and the poor suckers doing the resupplying). Rather than the full on MFB(with reloading and armour repair), the best you can hope for is ammo and maybe coolant.
So in order to reload your mech's weapons, you'd have to find a suitable place to RV with the supply trucks(firm, level ground, with reasonable going from their map entry point), shut down and wait while they(relatively slowly) do their thing.
I'd also suggest that the supply trucks should be obtained by a combination of a security deposit(pretty hefty), which you'd lose if the trucks get destroyed; and a charge for summoning and for the supplies you use(fairly trivial next to the security deposit).

[Archtus]

I'm in the "Out of ammo? Sucks to be you" Camp, but after reading a bit, I'm liking the idea of an MFB to an extent. ON certain Maps/scenarios, they could be great. Definitely a destructible structure, and have to shutdown to receive a reload. Heck, having a plucky scout follow you from afar, waiting for you to begin the reload to destroy the base? I would enjoy that so very much. No reloads available when base under attack. Base rebuilds itself a max of 75% HP, and rebuilds at 1hp/2sec. I definitely agree with the vulnerability while being reloaded.

Just some ideas.

[CCC Dober]

Dimetime, on 05 April 2012 - 01:17 AM, said:

I disagree. It would be realistic. Have you been in a firefight in real life and ran out of ammo? Show of hands...*raises hand* So let's not throw the "R" word around.

As for fun, you can only determine that for yourself and maybe a few folks you know well. There may be an equal or greater number of folks who believes it "makes sense" and should be so. Personally I find it fun. Makes you work to be a better shot. There is also a measure of pride in taking a mech that not just anyone else can make competitive, so. If it's truly a horrible mech, then we have to question why it was added in the first place.

I've heard MWO compared to World of Tanks. If that's true in actual game play it would seem to me to be a very had thing to do to park your mech in the middle of a battlefield so that people on the ground can reload you. It made sense in the single-player scenarios of MW4. That's not to say they couldn't incorporate it, mind you. If it is, though, then those base should be able to be destroyed and parked mechs should still be able to take damage.

No "timeouts: I'm invincible now" on the battlefield.

Last time I checked, Mechs always had logistics and supply trains attached to them. Sometimes closer, sometimes farther from the action. That's the kind of 'realism' we're looking at in MW and this is what sets standards, not today's rules of combat that do not even incorporate Mechs because they don't exist IRL.

What I'm reading between the lines is basically that you consider it unfun, when an enemy is level-headed enough to withdraw in time for some R&R. Am I right? I can relate to that somewhat, but you can anticipate this and exploit the very fact to your advantage. As a fellow (ex-)soldier you should know all about that and if not, well that's tough. Also there's a difference between ammo resupply and field repairs. The latter are not part of the OP and as such are not problematic as you make them out to be.

[BerryChunks]

like someone else already said, very succinctly; Whats the point of requiring ammo if you can't run out? We might as well also put in coolant flushes to get rid of heat generation, which can be restocked at the same place as ballistic ammo.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

I agree with many of you saying "No ammo? Sucks to be you" but at the same time, some canon 'mechs are meant to be very ammo dependent an never stray far from supply lines. For a straight up TDM, then there shouldn't be anyway for you to get more ammo. But like I've said before for objective oriented games, having some way to re-arm wouldn't be bad. It would lead to another dynamic to the game / map where now there is a large point of interest to secure or maintain for your team other than the main objective. Having said that, field repairs I think should be out of the question : No. Last thing I really wanna see is a situation (in MW3 or 4) where a player or team can hide around some type of MFB or repair bay and get full armor within seconds... stupid.

[Wild Cat]

I find this a very interesting question/poll.

Ballistic weapon system have, if i recall correctly always been better than energy weapons.
Being limited by ammo and the added risk of ammo exploding when taking damage. This was a calculated sacrifice you had to make when choosing between ballistics or energy weapons.

The pros and cons of each weapon system balance out in combat pretty well.
Adding the option to replenish ammo, I believe might tip the scale in favor for ballistic weapons.


Adding ammo reloads to the game will also effect the overall game length and the way the ammo based weapons are used. Energy weapon can be used in a spray and pray fashion, the only thing holding them back is there heat management. I'm pretty sure players will use there ballistic weapons in a more spare and pray fashion would they gave spare reloads.


Would supply caches be considered, I hope that they can be destroyed and players will have to pay for each ton of ammo per weapon type that like to store in the ammo supply for the mission, risking to lose it all would it be destroyed.