164 replies to this topic

[DocBach]

Youngblood, on 28 April 2012 - 04:31 AM, said:

I'd rather not have to listen to people munchkin-ing out with a straight face on some dream combination of in-universe companies' armament loadouts, especially when said combination would never be possible in canon.

The thing is, in a lot of cannon, there are mentions to certain weapon systems being superior in different ways... "the diffusion pattern of the blah blah laser is more condensed, making it more effective against armor," or "the blah blah large laser comes from the factory with a faulty heat shielding jacket and has known to make a bit more waste heat then other models."

Examples like that are all over the technical readouts, and the game could have a whole new level of customization and salvage added by just a couple tweeks to the stats.

You could have the baseline "Medium Laser" that you could buy with the standard stats (it could be like a gray item in other MMOs), then you could have your more exotic weapons where the standard stats have been tweaked a bit to give it an edge somewhere -- by making it less effecient in a different category.

A great example was how Star Wars Jump to Lightspeed handled space loot - different weapons had differe nt stats, in fact all weapons had different stats, so there were some exceptional examples of even the exact same component. It doesn't have to get that in detail, but a little variation would be a lot of fun.

I've been a BattleTech player in all forms, mostly the tabletop, for almost 20 years now - I'm feircely defensive about most changes in MWO that would divert it from cannon, but I believe that variations with weapons couldn't be translated well into a game where each turn represented 30 seconds; there wasn't any way to have a game feature to show the difference between the weapons manufacturered by different firms in the table top game. Here in a live-fire, real-time game like MechWarrior Online we've got a perfect system where we could really highlight the differences between weapons and manufacturers while adding a fun (being rewarded for playing keeps people playing, collecting stuff is always fun, so is customizing) and deep (figuring out the best weapon systems for you) layer to the game.

Edited by DocBach, 28 April 2012 - 06:39 AM.

[Soviet Alex]

Whilst I don't like the idea for MW-O (Mech-Lab is big enough already), it is being considered for MW-T. The collectability of different flavours of weapons works well with their booster-pack idea. Whilst the weapon stats might be virtually identical, the interview talked about a bonus for having banks of the same make of weapon.

[Cyote13]

While this would be very cool, I would rather the devs spent there time on more mechs and maps and match types rather than trying to balance 4 different medium lasers against each other, where the whole balancing of them would mean that there would be very little difference anyway.

[Youngblood]

There's also the added risk of the consequences of these different brands of the same weapon NOT being perfectly balanced against each other, especially when developers DON'T have the time, like the above poster mentioned. Stats in practice say more than just the numbers, and so forth....

Don't mind me, I've just been traumatized by too many MMOs that devs don't playtest enough...

Edited by Youngblood, 29 April 2012 - 04:21 AM.

[Migdon Atlas]

Absolutely yes, not a night a day difference for most weapons no, but slight little variances could really help you tweak a loadout i think, such as trading a little power for less heat buildup, or rate of fire for distance. Maybe one or two weapons in the game could be the holy sought after type, but just a small difference here and there between manufacturers would be great.

[Rasmus]

As pilot proficiency improves so should weapon variety. I would appreciate the option to spec for high alpha, sustained dps, range & heat within each weapon class.

Edited by Rasmus, 29 April 2012 - 11:19 AM.

[Cattra Kell]

I have spoken in the past about my want for different weapons with different stats, such as a laser made by X company may do more damage but generate more heat then Y laser of same size. I voted No in the poll just because I think "not at launch", though I would LOVE to see this in the game at a later date. I would not mind different manufactures weapons having a different cosmetic look to them though.

Edited by Cattra Kell, 29 April 2012 - 11:36 AM.

[Vodkavaiator]

I would agree with the "not at launch" but "later" option.

In the beginning everything will be new and then I think a general level of balance is important, as time goes by however and we(players, developers, space pirates) become used to the game it may prove fun to add some more variation.

[Sneak]

IIRC correctly, some BT MUSEes used to bring in the concept of different manufacturers, but not so far as to give the equipment different stats - instead, they focused on reliability. IE; a laser from cheapo-r-us would malfunction more often, their AC's would jam more often, etc.

If someone would incorperate this into the game, I'd be in favor of it if it is being kept in reasonable terms - Reliability, perhaps heat production - but to give weapons increased range or damage I am VERY much against, seems to me that doing that would just lead to min-maxing munchiness, that this game will have plenty of even without the options, considering the possibilities of changing loadouts on mechs.

[Cyrusxs]

This would be a cool and in depth thing to add to base game so, I vote yes. On the other hand I can see the very large challenge this would present to the developers and as a result I would understand and I wouldn't mind if it was never implemented into the game.

[Siilk]

Youngblood, on 29 April 2012 - 04:20 AM, said:

There's also the added risk of the consequences of these different brands of the same weapon NOT being perfectly balanced against each other, especially when developers DON'T have the time, like the above poster mentioned. Stats in practice say more than just the numbers, and so forth....

I don't think it would be a disaster. Firstly, vital stats, like DpS or damage per ton of ammo should stay the same for all weapon variants. As for secondary characteristics(range, heat, RoF/damage per shell etc), slight variation is acceptable if any and all advantageous deviations from baseline design would be accompanied by some sort of disadvantageous ones of the same scale. All the rest could be easily balanced out by weapon's price/BV.

[Havoc2]

Siilk, on 30 April 2012 - 12:52 AM, said:

I don't think it would be a disaster. Firstly, vital stats, like DpS or damage per ton of ammo should stay the same for all weapon variants. As for secondary characteristics(range, heat, RoF/damage per shell etc), slight variation is acceptable if any and all advantageous deviations from baseline design would be accompanied by some sort of disadvantageous ones of the same scale. All the rest could be easily balanced out by weapon's price/BV.

So then what is the point of spending even a second of the devs' time "balancing" 4 weapons of the same type, same damage, similar heat and range?

[Tannhauser Gate]

The "too difficult to balance or too minor for the devs to implement" are not real reasons.

The game already has Modules that will enhance your abilities, ranges, effectiveness ect. Also, there will be mech components (i.e engines) that already vary according to design and specs. ALL of these affect balance and are included in the game. So, for weapons, just treat manufacturer variations like an engine or a module where you get better or worse speed, range, damage, reliability on the same order as a Module already does (+/- 2.5% to 10%? just a guess).

I support letting the manufacturer affect the specs of a weapon but I support the devs and the plan for MWO first so maybe do this down the road at some point.

[UncleKulikov]

LakeDaemon, on 30 April 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

The "too difficult to balance or too minor for the devs to implement" are not real reasons.

The game already has Modules that will enhance your abilities, ranges, effectiveness ect. Also, there will be mech components (i.e engines) that already vary according to design and specs. ALL of these affect balance and are included in the game. So, for weapons, just treat manufacturer variations like an engine or a module where you get better or worse speed, range, damage, reliability on the same order as a Module already does (+/- 2.5% to 10%? just a guess).

I support letting the manufacturer affect the specs of a weapon but I support the devs and the plan for MWO first so maybe do this down the road at some point.

These points ring truer for a game that will be in a constant state of development, like MWO. As the devs add more layers of complexity they can continually tweak them as their relative power in the balance of the game shifts.

It is a feature I would like in the future.

[Sassori]

Ok, let's think about this a minute: A variety of mech's have 'problematic' issues, such as the stock Wolverine having 'issues' with it's jump jets according to (and here is the important part) FLUFF. In game? There is /zero/ difference between the jump jets on a wolverine and the jump jets on anything else.

FLUFF does not change the rules. A medium laser is a medium laser is a medium laser.

FLUFF is awesome, because it adds depth to the /universe/ and the lore. It isn't necessary for the game to mimic every last bit of FLUFF.

Why? Because FLUFF is contradictory. It is contradictory all over the place. Take FLUFF for what it is, it's empty detail for the sake of detail and fun to read. In the TT? Unless playing actual MechWarrior and the GM wants to be a punk, everything is considered to be working flawlessly so as to not UNBALANCE anything.

The weapons need to be the same so that everyone knows what they're dealing with. There's already a layer of complexity with chassis, engine (Being able to change the engines out is already pretty crazy imho), hard points, heat sinks, armor, etc that we do not need seven different kinds of medium lasers all with their own stats.

a .45 caliber pistol is a .45 caliber pistol no matter /WHO/ makes it. A different caliber is a different type of pistol.

EDIT: P.S. Novels? All FLUFF. They defy the rules of the game in every single book. Heck they can't even figure out wether or not every mechwarrior has a cooling vest or not.

Edited by Christopher Dayson, 30 April 2012 - 12:58 PM.

[Pht]

LakeDaemon, on 30 April 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

The "too difficult to balance or too minor for the devs to implement" are not real reasons.

Why? ... because ... you say so?

They have to sleep some time, you know ...

[Tannhauser Gate]

Pht, on 30 April 2012 - 09:03 PM, said:

Why? ... because ... you say so?

They have to sleep some time, you know ...

Guess you didnt read the rest of my post. People are citing reasons that dont make sense imo. Whatever PGIs plan is for MWO I support it but yeah Id like to see this level of detail eventually. They are already doing it with modules and engines.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 30 April 2012 - 09:59 PM.

[Havoc2]

LakeDaemon, on 30 April 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

The "too difficult to balance or too minor for the devs to implement" are not real reasons.

The game already has Modules that will enhance your abilities, ranges, effectiveness ect. Also, there will be mech components (i.e engines) that already vary according to design and specs. ALL of these affect balance and are included in the game. So, for weapons, just treat manufacturer variations like an engine or a module where you get better or worse speed, range, damage, reliability on the same order as a Module already does (+/- 2.5% to 10%? just a guess).

I support letting the manufacturer affect the specs of a weapon but I support the devs and the plan for MWO first so maybe do this down the road at some point.

No one is saying "too difficult to balance". The whole point is THERE'S NO POINT IN WASTING THE TIME DOING IT.
There are hundreds of 'Mechs I'd rather see, thousands of worlds, bug fixes (there will be, don't kid yourself) stability issues and on and on and on related to game play that I'd rather see in the game than 6 different kinds of MLAS that all have the same range, damage, slightly different heat and reload times.

Hell I'd rather give the devs a day off so they don't get burned out/sick of/whatever the game and can continue to give us the quality of game that we're all hoping for.

Comparing different stats of manufacturers to modules is comparing apples to pears. Sure they're similar but they are not the same thing. Modules you earn via play, c-bills (assuming you need XP to unlock, then buy the module). Weapons you simply buy or salvage.

If you think there will be a run on min/maxing because of custom weapons loadouts, just add a few weapons that have lower heat and/or faster reload times and watch the mad scramble to load out all your 'Mechs with XYZ Industries weapons.

This game will be free to play. WASTING their time is not something we want the devs to make a habit of.

[-Ramrod-]

It won't even let me vote. But no...no variety like that. Too much of a balancing issue. To be honest I like the mech games more reminiscent of the TT. ALL medium lasers do the same damage, etc.

[Tannhauser Gate]

}{avoc, on 01 May 2012 - 03:39 AM, said:

No one is saying "too difficult to balance". The whole point is THERE'S NO POINT IN WASTING THE TIME DOING IT.
There are hundreds of 'Mechs I'd rather see, thousands of worlds, bug fixes (there will be, don't kid yourself) stability issues and on and on and on related to game play that I'd rather see in the game than 6 different kinds of MLAS that all have the same range, damage, slightly different heat and reload times.

Hell I'd rather give the devs a day off so they don't get burned out/sick of/whatever the game and can continue to give us the quality of game that we're all hoping for.

Comparing different stats of manufacturers to modules is comparing apples to pears. Sure they're similar but they are not the same thing. Modules you earn via play, c-bills (assuming you need XP to unlock, then buy the module). Weapons you simply buy or salvage.

If you think there will be a run on min/maxing because of custom weapons loadouts, just add a few weapons that have lower heat and/or faster reload times and watch the mad scramble to load out all your 'Mechs with XYZ Industries weapons.

This game will be free to play. WASTING their time is not something we want the devs to make a habit of.

Perhaps I didnt frame my post correctly. I'm not *pushing* for this feature. I wouldn't suggesting that devs waste time, or never take a day off, or deviate from their schedule and planned features. I'm just saying that it would be a fun idea at some point and that it wouldnt affect balance any more than modules which already exist. I was suggesting a variance in manufacturer quality of +2.5% to 10%... tops. It would add to the min/maxing but no more than modules do already.

Ideas like this are pure speculation since we havent seen the game yet but I think this would add interest to salvage, give another way to tweek your mech (and only tweek at the same level or less than modules). Im omitting engines as an example because they will probably vary alot more than 2.5% to 10% and weapons shouldnt vary that much.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 01 May 2012 - 07:48 AM.