593 replies to this topic

[Ian MacLeary]

Sparks Murphey, on 08 April 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

(eat THAT, 400 point machine gun explosion!).

Seriously, who takes a full ton of MG ammo? Even a half-ton (which is the minimum you can take) will last 100 rounds of fire with a single MG. You'd need to mount a whole bunch of MGs to use up a ton in a reasonable time-frame... say, 10 or more. I can think of better things to do with 5 tons when designing a 'mech.

[VPrime]

Just to weigh in, I play a certain other MMO that involves large multi ton machines that drive on tracks, and they all rely on historically plausible ammo amounts. Especially the anti-tank guns and artillary pieces. I really think we should ground ourselves in reality here (even though we are driving huge robots in a fictional world). Infinite ammo feels wrong because it is.
In all real battles out there our soldiers have to conserve ammo and make shots count. I have family members who have had to worry about that consideration (both in WWII and modern conflicts) If you can just spray and pray to infinity, what's the point? As for limited resupply MFB style, It should be something that comes up only rarely, and then make it a strategic target or capture the flag type scenario. In Battletech novels they even talk about energy weapons having charge levels, and take a while to recharge capacitors to be able to make shots. So its not like energy based mechs with well balanced heat dissapation can continuously fire either.

[Oswin Aurelius]

Just wanted to thank everyone that liked my post on the first page. So far it's at 31 likes! That's a new record for me. XD

[rolling thunder]

I'll say one thing more,i can live with out reloads in the field because we will basically be fighting an arena game. We are after all limited to a specific area like an arena. If the game was more like a campaign with an entire world to fight on then i'd say reloads would be a neccessity. But then we would have the room to hide & set up a mech reload station in safety.
Having a dropship in the corner of the playing area to which a side can retreat to reload would provide the other team with objectives to destroy{ just an idea }

[UncleKulikov]

In tabletop the ammunition based weapons are weaker overall than the energy based weapons. If that's true, then ammunition should be much less of an issue since the energy weapons don't rely on it and have several other advantages.

[Der Kommissar]

Ian MacLeary, on 04 April 2012 - 09:22 PM, said:

You go with an ammo-dependent design, you risk running out of ammo. (And this is coming from a prospective Commando pilot.)

Come now, the Commando's missile magazines are more likely to explode than run dry.

[eZZip]

Ian MacLeary, on 08 April 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

Seriously, who takes a full ton of MG ammo? Even a half-ton (which is the minimum you can take) will last 100 rounds of fire with a single MG.

100 rounds isn't a whole lot. With WW2 technology, that would be 5 seconds of fire from an MG42. Even assuming that mech MGs are much larger and slower firing, I don't think the MGs would fire slower than 5 rounds per second, or 20 seconds of fire.

rolling thunder, on 09 April 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

I'll say one thing more,i can live with out reloads in the field because we will basically be fighting an arena game. We are after all limited to a specific area like an arena.

I doubt this arena will be like the coliseum from MW4 Mercs. With a 12v12 game, there is still a lot of time to run out of ammunition.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

@eZZip - I think that 100 rounds meant TT turns, ie 1000 seconds.

[SVK Puskin]

developers could make maps with and without mobile field bases

[Antonius Prime]

Wow, this thread has some real interest. I just wanna throw this out there real quick.

I too am looking for more of a simulation. I have also been a long time fan of Ballistic weapons in the PC titles. It seemed each weapon had its own uses and fit a different playing style. Let me say, there are many times I drooled over another yellow (color for Ballistics in the PC games) weapon in my loadout, but the tonnage was just too much. Really, the heat seemed to be one of the few things keeping lasers from ruling the day.

The thing is, we can't rely on reloading venues or the like to balance the game. We won't be playing in a real sim. If lots of new people get drawn into the game, they will all be looking for the perfect loadouts and the easiest tactics to exploit. They will not be looking for a sim. Most will be looking for the easiest way to score the most kills. If there is a MFB it will be exploited by the enemy if at all possible. Adding most any complications like that to the game be exploited.

My recommendation is simply let the weapons strengths and weaknesses do the balancing.

Lasers = "+" No ammo, good at most ranges, low tonnage "-" heat, somewhat less damage

Missiles = "+" big damage with large salvos, very long range potential "-" ammo shortages with large salvos, lock time, some heat

Ballistics = "+" no heat, knock factor, moderate to large damage "-" ammo shortages in long engagements, heavy tonnage, most large damage options are close range

If you go with Big Power with any of these, you will run into some problems:
Lasers will have you constantly watching your heat gauge.
Missiles will have you waiting to lock and needing to make your few shots count.
Ballistics will have you needing to get in close and be selective with your shots.

Ammo based mechs will not likely run the field and will have to rely on their lancemates to do some damage too. If you can't manage this, then the guys with more ammo and smaller guns will outlast you and suddenly the firepower advantage will be theirs. They made you deplete your ammo and that is their moment to gloat with their fingers on a fully powered trigger while you just sit there sweating hearing you Mech go "click, click, click". "Kudos" to them. They worked an effective strategy and we had a fun game.

The only problem I see is if the combat venues are set up in a way that no reasonable Mech will be able to carry enough ammo to possibly last, even will good marksmanship. In that case, the ammo/ton needs to be tweaked up a bit rather than add a whole game changing exploitable feature.

Rather than seek to simulate a TT or a PC game, I think time and energy would be better spent looking to eliminate or change features that open doors for power players to come in and ruin the game for the long time fan base who just want an awesome modern Mech game.

Edited by Antonius Prime, 09 April 2012 - 03:55 PM.

[Ice Dragon]

The devs have talked about matches where each pilot has a 4 mech respawn, and these could go on for a long time. If you manage to survive long enough to run out of ammo (which you should plan ahead with sacrificing spare tonnage for ammo) you shouldn't be SOL. I think a MFB would be a valid way for someone to go refill on ammo (for a premium of cbills, and time), or dropship if they are on the ground at any point. But I don't think there should be field repairs.
Unlesss, maybe there is a mechbay smack in the middle of the map, where it is very dangerous. Actually, forget that. If you have the ability to hold the middle of the map and have time to repair, you probably already have the upperhand and that would make it more unfair.

[CloudCobra]

I think in the matches with the limmited respawn you should also get MFBs the hardcore sim action is in the no respawn games anyway if people want it let them have it we can have it both ways. Let the devs worry about how to make it work.

Edited by CloudCobra, 09 April 2012 - 04:21 PM.

[Ian MacLeary]

eZZip, on 09 April 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

100 rounds isn't a whole lot. With WW2 technology, that would be 5 seconds of fire from an MG42. Even assuming that mech MGs are much larger and slower firing, I don't think the MGs would fire slower than 5 rounds per second, or 20 seconds of fire.

I doubt this arena will be like the coliseum from MW4 Mercs. With a 12v12 game, there is still a lot of time to run out of ammunition.

Nik Van Rhijn, on 09 April 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

@eZZip - I think that 100 rounds meant TT turns, ie 1000 seconds.

Yes, sorry. 100 *combat* rounds of fire, not 100 cartridges on a link-belt.

Der Kommissar, on 09 April 2012 - 12:35 PM, said:

Come now, the Commando's missile magazines are more likely to explode than run dry.

Well, if I get to make my custom variant, then no, not really... it only carries a single ton. But since SSRM-2s aren't going to be that common, I'll probably have to settle for taking a COM-5S, dropping the SRM-6 to an SRM-4 and only using a single ton of ammo for those. The extra 2 tons will go into armor. (This presumes that each ammo-dependent weapon doesn't need a dedicated source of ammunition.)

[wwiiogre]

There are no Mobile Field Bases at this time frame for this game. Read the entire thread and the many times I have posted will tell you what is exactly available for this time frame. Enjoy the reading.

chris

[Aurora2021]

Let's be honest, unless they really do add MFB's into the initial release, it should be as close to real as possible. This means that when you take the risk of loading up with weapons that require ammunition, you are voluntarily submitting to the possibility that you may run out of ammo and be forced to resort to the laser that you have (hopefully) strapped on somewhere, thus adding to the tension-based entertainment value of the game.
If this vote (limited ammo, no MFB for those still not onboard) succeeds than I have to say that this, in my own personal opinion, will add to the overall challenge of the game, and make it a game where you actually have to think about your loadout rather than just slap on as many AC20's as you can and call it good. Additionally, there is no reason that the team cannot add a mode later on that does feature the use of MFB's, and could be something along the lines of a base assault or pseudo-conquest domination mode like you see in MechWarrior Living Legends.
You also have to consider that if there were no ammunition constraints, experience dictates that we would inevitably have those who would spam as many Streak-Short-Ranged-Missiles (SSRM's) as possible and proceed to annoy beyond all reason. These limitations in ammunition load would also weed out those who would perhaps detract from the overall experience by being ah, "less-than-wise" about how they load out their mech'.
Yes I realise that World Of Tanks has limited ammunition as well, but MechWarrior has always been much more in-depth than WOT ever was, plus MechWarrior has a long lineage extending well into the late 90's, which is something else that WOT lacks. This well-aged bloodline means that the team creating the game has much to go on, from literature by MANY different authors to how the games evolved up to the last title, MechWarrior 4: Mercenaries.
I understand that I have been ranting but I feel very strongly about this particular topic, and I believe that so long as the team creates a mode later on that does utilize one or more MFB's, the game should remain as true-to-form and realistic as possible, and not place MFB's in what we assume to be your standard team-deathmatch arena.
That's it, I will stop boring you with incessant nattering, peace.

[MaddMaxx]

Just a couple of points I found interesting in this thread.

"We do not want infinite ammo!" "We just don't want to ever run out during a Match!"

Ummm, never running out is the definition, by most standards, of an infinite resource.

If we hope to get dropped in to the battle, how in hell will the ammo trucks, let alone the MFB's, arrive planetside?

If they arrive by DropShip, which has Mech Bays standard, why would even have need for those Trucks or MFB's?

There is no denying both sides have perfectly valid reasons to argue one or the other side. I would agree with those who state it should be a MODE based game element. Now I also would like to point out that at Launch, the DEV want just one big happy Community. Perhaps if we can help promote and bring new players to the game, the numbers will be such they may be convinced easier to add theses types of game MODES.

So if you want one or the other AMMO type, best get on the blower to your Friends of Friends who know Friends of Friends and get them out to at least try the new FTP MWO game.

P.S. If you have no friends. Then tell Mom, Dad and that brat sibling(s) how much FUN it is going to be. lol

Edited by MaddMaxx, 10 April 2012 - 08:42 AM.

[Kargush]

I'm a fan of the Hunchback.

10 shots for the AC20. I had better be a good shot then.

[Hound]

I liked the idea of having MFB to rearm but I think rearming a mech in the field would be a lengthy time consuming process that would leave you vulnerable for a long period of time. I would prefer more sim gameplay versus an arcade style. So I voted for running out of ammo is the risk you take with that weapon.

Edited by Hound, 10 April 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[Grimm Gunn]

Kylarus, on 04 April 2012 - 09:31 PM, said:

This is my feel on it.
Running out of ammo is something that feels really cool to read about in stories where the length of a battle is generally short and the players(actors/characters/etc) have literary boundaries as opposed to graphical boundaries. In TT, running out of ammo seems like it separates the crafty from the straightforward. I haven't played very much, but in such a game I could see a player making use of nonstandard combat maneuvers to take down a foe. In a more graphical game where one can't hand-wave those things, it limits options, but doesn't have to make it less fun, in that you still have other weapons and possibly DFA and running the enemy into traps and hazards.

In a short sweet match, ammo should last till the end. In a protracted battle with numerous opponents, perhaps being able to cycle frontliners to and from a MFB to reload while you have forces holding a line would be viable. Could lead to the choice of blitz and hope it doesn't backfire or whittle the opponent down from a fortified position.
The sweet spot for battle times should be between running out of ammo for all your weapons (machine guns as well) and necessitating a reload to continue the fight with any decency and not hitting the halfway mark on your primary ammo counter.

I kinda agree with both sides...
A MFB (destroyable) could be used for SOME battles.. paid for out of BATT purses?...
But if you go back to the days of yore.. alot of the scouts mech had energy based weapons if they were designed for extended recon or scouting missions...
BUT if reloading was an option,, it should be a one time limited reload,, say ,,, 50% of your total ammo capacity?...

[firedog25]

You should gear for the scenario/fight. You run out deep in unfriendlly territory in real life, tough luck. Should be the same in game.