532 replies to this topic

[Krivvan]

Kaziganthi, on 06 November 2012 - 12:33 AM, said:

Then call it Robotech as half the mech images actually came from that series.

They didn't use the mech images that were taken from Robotech. And although they look the same, the speed, pacing and movement of Battletech mechs are very different from Robotech.

This is the way I see it. It's like a fan of the Warhammer 40k Tabletop getting extremely worked up and demanding that Relic stop calling Dawn of War a 40k game because it doesn't follow the Tabletop rules. I mean, if Dawn of War doesn't follow TT rules, then why not just call it "Starcraft"? (And as a side note, Dawn of War originally followed the Tabletop until they were advised to change it to make for a better game and that religiously following the TT wasn't worth it, and they were right)

Edited by Krivvan, 06 November 2012 - 12:38 AM.

[Cole Allard]

Rifter, on 05 November 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

The thing is they are BREAKING THE GAME with the changes lately to DHS, its getting to the point where this isnt mechwarrior anymore. Lets take a look at what they are doing with the heatsinks and use some examples and some very light math from mechs currently in game, this isnt even touching the clan mechs which are more reliant on double heatsinks and will be even more broken than the below example...


We have an awesome AWS-8Q, this is a first gen awesome that uses old tech with no tier two equipment, its the workhorse awesome from the IS. It has 3 PPC's as its main weponry and 28 SHS. This is an all around good mech, not expensive to run or buy or repair and packs a punch, with barely enough heatsinks but it is a workable design.

Then after tier two tech comes in they redesign this mech with tier two tech to combat the clans. They release the AWS-9M. They replace the standard PPC's with ER models and the standard heatsinks with doubles to combat the extra heat of the ER PPC's. It has 20 DHS so 40 SHS worth of cooling which is a substantial upgrade over the 28 SHS of the previous AWS-8Q model but this is NEEDED to cool the much hotter ER PPC's as well as the addition secondary weaponry this mech has. They also add a larger XL engine to boost speed while also reducing weight. This mech is Very expensive to buy and repair due to all the tier two tech and is a clear and definate upgrade over the older model, and you pay for this as its way more expensive to buy.

With the DHS nerfed down to 140% cooling, less than half their intended effectivness that puts the AWS-9M at 28 SHS worth of cooling, the exact same as the AWS-8Q. But remember its got ER PPC's so will run way hotter than the 8Q, like to the point of being useless in battle hotter. So what is supposed to be a clear and expensive upgrade over the 8Q turns out be much much more ineffective and boarderline useless to field. You are paying a huge premium for tier two tech that is WORSE than the tier one mech it is replacing.

When you start to break stock canon designs such as descibed above to the point where tier two tech is WORSE that tier one tech but still alot more expensive you are now in a place where you are just making a mockery of battletech and the lore involved and should stop using the BT/MW name.

If you want to make a big stompy robot game fine im ok with that, i like big stompy robots, but dont try and pawn this crap off as BT because it clearly is NOT in the direction this game has taken. Call it hawken, world of mechs, gundam robots online, whatever you want but dont abuse the BT/MW name like this if you are going to clearly step away from it to the point where stock designs are unplayable and worse than the designs they are supposed to be a upgrade from because you have broken the game mechanics to the point that makes them useless more expensive upgrades.

Just something to think about, and if you think that example is bad i can throw some clan deisngs in there that are alot more broken than that awesome example.

Dear OP,

you thought so much about the battletech canon and everything that you forgot the most important feature that brakes your whole story. TIME !
The old Awesome...the upgraded Awesome...in Battletech both can exist, due to the timeline. One comes before the other. One is the upgrade of the other, as you wrote: in different technological levels.

How much time went by from the old Awesome to the upgraded? In Years? Thats Battletech Tabletop...

In this game, both have to exist at same time...AND BE BALANCED...

What you will not see, and hopefully NO ONE will ever have to see is a mech or a component (single heatsinks for example) that becomes obsolete. Or a component, what ever you might take for example, that HAS to be taken to be able to survive. No one wants "have or die" Items.


I still think this is Battletech as I know it...but Battletech needs to get flexible if it wants to get older, if it wants to reach a new and fresh public. Games do NOT stay alive over 20 years because they do not change...its because their players grow with it. My 2 cents.

Edited by Cole Allard, 06 November 2012 - 12:36 AM.

[Kaziganthi]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 12:34 AM, said:

They didn't use the mech images that were taken from Robotech. And although they look the same, the speed, pacing and movement of Battletech mechs are very different from Robotech.

Really, so then that wasn't a Maurader, Rifleman, Ostroc, Ostol, wasp, Stinger, Land Air mechs that I was seeing everytime I watched. My eyes must be decieving me.


And how can they look the same, yet not use the images.

[Krivvan]

Kaziganthi, on 06 November 2012 - 12:42 AM, said:

Really, so then that wasn't a Maurader, Rifleman, Ostroc, Ostol, wasp, Stinger, Land Air mechs that I was seeing everytime I watched. My eyes must be decieving me.


And how can they look the same, yet not use the images.

I mean this game, MWO, not Battletech. Battletech stole quite a number of mech designs yes. But it had its own theme and universe. What's your point?

[Kaziganthi]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 12:43 AM, said:

Seriously, this is almost childish. Look at any other video game series that radically changes everything in the game in each sequel. People don't complain about changing damage numbers and things behind the scenes like that. What really matters is that the theme is Battletech. The devs didn't say they were going to stick with TT values, they said they were going to start with TT values and change them


I mean this game, MWO, not Battletech. Battletech stole quite a number of mech designs yes. But it had its own theme and universe. What's your point?

You first quote was they said things would change. Fine I'll accept the universe is battletech, but the damage system is far from it as it currently stands.

1. No mechwarrior in their right mind would rip out all the weaponry on any medium, heavy or assault mech to only replace it with small/med lasers or streak srm2's. The only assault mech that had all med lasers was the 3025 Charger and it was a joke of a mech delegated to garision duty on backwater planets.

2. You want the BT universe, but then go against it when people say it's current development goes against the lore.

3. You want a rock em sock robots match, then call it something other than MWO is what the OP is stating from my reading.

4 Mechwarrior was actually about the person in the mech, not the mech itself. Battletech is the mech side of the combat. Mechwarrior was out of mech roleplaying with BT thrown in. In the PC games there was always a storyline you followed, mission selection and so on. This is more correctly Battletech Online.

Edited by Kaziganthi, 06 November 2012 - 01:04 AM.

[The Basilisk]

I think if Piranha / PGI stays to Canon is already far out of question for me.
Here in MWO are loughable to many things that are genearly frowned upon in the board game.
If you are intrested read why:

- General Mech customization to a hilarious cheap prize ( Mercenaries normaly would barely be able to ceap their mechs working large scale customisation i.e. other engine DHS endosteel or replacing a MG with a gauss is far far of limits and would take weeks or even months in a construction facility.)

- Availability:
Dragon is Kurita only Mech
New tech weapons that were recently ( timeline wise ) reintroduced, would be available only to some line crack units.
Hundrets of Atlases stalking the Battlefields. (normaly even in the Steiner military the light assault relation would be 20 to 1. Most "usual" BATTLE mechs are medium)
The combined strength of the FC military when Phelan Kell was captured was 150 regiments.
[Blood of Kerensky trilogy 2nd book]
A standart IS lance is made up from 4 Mechs, a Company counts 12, a batalion 36 Mechs and a standart Regiment 108 Mechs plus support units. So there would be roughly 16200 Battlemechs in the FC line Units scattered over hundrets of worlds. The combined production capacity of all Mech Factorys in the VC is an Number within the lower half of two diggits sphere.
Mechs are very valuable and scarce.
Most common weapons are still infantry and tanks. As you may have noticed there are neither.

- Mechanics:
All weapons would be semi automatic to fire. Target aquisiton and fire.
Autocannons would normaly generate bursts of fire like a Battlemech siced sub machine gun. Try to shoot straight with a Scorpion or an Uzi and you know what I mean. Thats why their range is limited.
Normal lasers would generate much shorter "flashes" of fire. Pulse laser would generate semi auto aimed waves of pulses. ( Yes Pulse laseres are autoaiming weapons this is why they are that heavy and useful in TT -2 to to-hit modifier)
SRM would be semi guided Missles.
Gauss would be to shoot seperately because of their massive energy consumption (Chainfire). I.e. trigger... ...wait... shoot.
Projectile speed won't be an issue because Computer would calculate the weapons trajektories.
The only weapon they got right would be the PPC, at least considdering their animation.

And many many more.

Still the game is fun to play for me I like it.....but in my weekends I gather with my friends playing MegaMek or the CBT Board game.
None of them will play MWO its just too much shooter and too much "Can I Haz my Maz Catz pleaZe ?"

[Insidious Johnson]

It is big stompy robots. I dont' care what you call it. I've been waiting forever for it. Just keep dice out of my cockpit unless they are fuzzy.

[Krivvan]

Kaziganthi, on 06 November 2012 - 01:03 AM, said:

You first quote was they said things would change. Fine I'll accept the universe is battletech, but the damage system is far from it as it currently stands.

1. No mechwarrior in their right mind would rip out all the weaponry on any medium, heavy or assault mech to only replace it with small/med lasers or streak srm2's. The only assault mech that had all med lasers was the 3025 Charger and it was a joke of a mech delegated to garision duty on backwater planets.

2. You want the BT universe, but then go against it when people say it's current development goes against the lore.

3. You want a rock em sock robots match, then call it something other than MWO is what the OP is stating from my reading.

4 Mechwarrior was actually about the person in the mech, not the mech itself. Battletech is the mech side of the combat. Mechwarrior was out of mech roleplaying with BT thrown in. In the PC games there was always a storyline you followed, mission selection and so on. This is more correctly Battletech Online.

1. Aren't most IS mechs around this time from light to assault packed with medium lasers? And you don't really see heavy and assault mechs stripping off everything for small lasers, medium and large lasers are still preferred. The only mech with excessive streaks is the streakapult. I don't know where you are seeing heavier mechs dropping everything for short range small weapons, but it isn't happening (a small laser Atlas would be hilarious by the way).

2. The exact numbers behind equipment is not lore. I'm saying the theme is being kept. The mech designs and names are here, the atmosphere is here, and the weapon designs and names are here. That's what lore is.

3. What about this is rock'em sock'em robots and what will be? You have people saying that only close range weapons are viable in one thread then people saying only gauss rifles and LRMs are viable in another. Seems like a diverse range of ranges to me.

4. Are you really going to argue between Mechwarrior Online and Battletech Online? Just from a marketing perspective it makes more sense to call it Mechwarrior since it is far more widely known than Battletech.


MechAssault was sold as a Battletech game (and is technically canon). I think you'll survive whatever this game is called.

Edited by Krivvan, 06 November 2012 - 01:12 AM.

[AC Rimak]

Krivvan, on 05 November 2012 - 09:04 PM, said:

AC2s to AC20s are very useful. LRMs are strong, perhaps a few steps under OP, but they aren't unstoppable. And your point about lag armour has nothing to do with small lasers, it has to do with small fast moving mechs. They could be packing medium lasers and it would be the same thing (and most end up doing more damage via streaks). What Helmer was referring to was when Swaybacks ran around at high speed with 11 small lasers firing constantly getting instant head killshots.

AC20 is garbage right now.
YES! it has the punch and 20 damage and ****, but there is just no reason to get it.
Heat generated negates the option to fire it with lasers, there is just NO REASON not to get gauss instead of it.
And this really hurts me.
I am a big fan of AC20, basically it's a #1 weapon for me from all the MW series.
But it is just not smart to use it, when you have Gauss.

[Krivvan]

AC Rimak, on 06 November 2012 - 01:29 AM, said:

AC20 is garbage right now.
YES! it has the punch and 20 damage and ****, but there is just no reason to get it.
Heat generated negates the option to fire it with lasers, there is just NO REASON not to get gauss instead of it.
And this really hurts me.
I am a big fan of AC20, basically it's a #1 weapon for me from all the MW series.
But it is just not smart to use it, when you have Gauss.

I prefer the AC/20 over the Gauss. I don't fire it often so it's an excellent weapon for finishing blows.

But I also prefer PPCs over the Gauss, so just call me crazy.

Basically, I used to like the Gauss Rifle a long time ago, but I don't think it's that great anymore.

And I also know that, as a Jenner, I'm far more afraid of a good pilot with an AC/20 than a Gauss.

Edited by Krivvan, 06 November 2012 - 01:33 AM.

[van Uber]

Rifter, on 05 November 2012 - 08:26 PM, said:

Thats exactly the point, clan mechs are SUPPOSED TO WIPE THE FLOOR with IS designs, its supposed to be 5 clan(star) against 8 IS mechs and get a even fight. If you are going to stick with the BT/MW name then you need to stick with the lore, why else use the name.

Changing the mechanics is fine but there is a line that can be crossed, and IMO PGI has now crossed it.

No feature can ever routinely "wipe the floor" with another feature in a persistent online pvp environment. This takes precedence over TT-rules and even lore. "Feature creep" is bad. The introduction of DHS can not under any circumstances make SHS obsolete, they absolutely must be able to coexist, even if it is on the expense of old and iconic designs. Anything else is bad game design and would end up being boring.

And before anyone mentions it: cost is not a valid balance mechanic, it does not motivate one features superiority over another.

[Stormwolf]

van Uber, on 06 November 2012 - 01:33 AM, said:

No feature can ever routinely "wipe the floor" with another feature in a persistent online pvp environment. This takes precedence over TT-rules and even lore. "Feature creep" is bad. The introduction of DHS can not under any circumstances make SHS obsolete, they absolutely must be able to coexist, even if it is on the expense of old and iconic designs. Anything else is bad game design and would end up being boring.

And before anyone mentions it: cost is not a valid balance mechanic, it does not motivate one features superiority over another.

DHS pretty much made SHS obsolete in both the TT and storylines.
Just look at any post 3050 TRO, mechs with SHS get rarer and rarer as newer TRO's come out.

Edited by Stormwolf, 06 November 2012 - 01:45 AM.

[Krivvan]

Stormwolf, on 06 November 2012 - 01:45 AM, said:

DHS pretty much made SHS obsolete in both the TT and storylines.
Just look at any post 3050 TRO, mechs with SHS getting rarer and rarer as newer TRO's come out.

That's his point. It is not a good idea to follow the TT making SHS obsolete. Good game design would be to ignore the TT and make both SHS and DHS useful.

[MiG77]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 01:32 AM, said:

I prefer the AC/20 over the Gauss. I don't fire it often so it's an excellent weapon for finishing blows.

When playing Atlas, me too. As my main config is close range (all weapons have max 270m effective range), AC20 let me finish opponents quicker than with Gauss. In Caustic, that build may feel little too short ranged tought.

[Stormwolf]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 01:46 AM, said:

That's his point. It is not a good idea to follow the TT making SHS obsolete. Good game design would be to ignore the TT and make both SHS and DHS useful.

SHS went the way of the autocannon, in 3050 it's pretty much obsolete. It only survives in the current era since mechs like the AS7-K have them and the old TRO3025 mechs gradually get sold to merc units (CN9-A's get replaced with CN9-D's for instance).

New mechs like let's say the Bushwacker, Avatar, Sunder, etc all come with DHS.

[Slanski]

Of course you cannot directly translate TT into online sim.

The proportions are off since they went from 10s cycles to 3s cycles, while maintaining 10s costs on each firing round.

If you tweak weapons you need to realise that TT had them balance in cost, heat, weight and crits. Once you start substantially altering their effective DPS, you cannot have the TT loadout and resource costs without drastically reducing variety. I would prefer for PGI to tweak weapons so they reach their intended (world law/BT flavour) effectiveness while making each system viable against its incurred costs.

Currently heavy energy weapons and AC10/20 just cost too much versus their relative killing power. (If you tell me you kill just fine with AC20, then I dare you mount double smaller ACs instead and notice that you get range and DPS).

Incidentally lack of proportion is the curse of our age in almost everything.

[Krivvan]

Stormwolf, on 06 November 2012 - 01:55 AM, said:

SHS went the way of the autocannon, in 3050 it's pretty much obsolete. It only survives in the current era since mechs like the AS7-K have them and the old TRO3025 mechs gradually get sold to merc units (CN9-A's get replaced with CN9-D's for instance).

New mechs like let's say the Bushwacker, Avatar, Sunder, etc all come with DHS.

I...I get that's what happened in the TT. But the entire point was that this aspect of the TT should be ignored. Autocannons shouldn't become obsolete.

Slanski, on 06 November 2012 - 01:59 AM, said:

(If you tell me you kill just fine with AC20, then I dare you mount double smaller ACs instead and notice that you get range and DPS).

That DPS is useless when it's all over the place. I do much better with an AC/20 than multiple smaller ACs because I like having single strong burst shots. I can't keep firing at the same spot over and over again.

[MustrumRidcully]

Krivvan, on 06 November 2012 - 01:46 AM, said:

That's his point. It is not a good idea to follow the TT making SHS obsolete. Good game design would be to ignore the TT and make both SHS and DHS useful.

Good Game Design would also give us mechs build so that they work with balanced DHS, or adjust weapons so that they don't need DHS (and are not as good as they were with DHS).

ER PPC could keep its range but produce less damage instead of more heat than another PPC.

[Krivvan]

MustrumRidcully, on 06 November 2012 - 02:02 AM, said:

ER PPC could keep its range but produce less damage instead of more heat than another PPC.

Why is reducing damage preferable to increasing heat? Reducing the ER PPC's damage completely negates its entire strength as a PPC moreso than increasing heat. Increasing heat doesn't impact its effectiveness as a sniping weapon nearly as much.

Heat only balances by limiting how many times you can fire it. It doesn't limit the effectiveness of each time you fire it. If you don't fire the weapon often then heat is much more preferable than a loss of damage or anything else. That's why heat is personally the least important factor for me when looking at weapons.

Edited by Krivvan, 06 November 2012 - 02:05 AM.

[Triggerhippy]

Really? Do you know the heritage of some of the guys involved in the development? There are guys who were part of fasa when they invented battletech involved in this game (me thinks they have every right to call this game battletech - intact more right than anyone! + I would imagine they have some sort of vision of what they want and how to implement it. This DHS issue only seems to really affect the laser boat mechs in a negative way - oh dear no 8mplas hunchie 4p I could just cry, wot? You can't alpha 3 ERPPC 4 times in a row! - try chain fire. The game is adapting - perhaps you should too?