201 replies to this topic

[RoboCyberMummy]

In regards to custom decals: I really don't want to see a bunch of wangs on the battlefield. I've played enough Black Ops to know that sometimes custom decals are just not a great idea. I know this is a very different game but let's be honest here, someone's going to do it. Just my two cents.

[Emerest]

The Mad Cat and the Catapult are not the same at all. The Owens is the 'Mech similar to the Catapult. The Mad Cat has missle pods and normal arms.

[Thomas Hogarth]

Garth Erlam, on 18 April 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

(Personally, without company backing) I disagree - you're glossing over the fact that what used to be 'damage' is now 'incapacitating'. You go from being able to take a couple lucky shots to one. Also saying certain 'Mechs simply can't use EndoSteel is simply unfair to people who choose a 'Mech because they like it. If it comes to the point where peole feel the need to balance individual 'Mechs by banning certain items like endosteel on them, then we'll all chase David with torches for getting us to that point

On the other hand, it doesn't make sense to be able to swap out the entire skeleton of a 'Mech in a dropbay. That'd be like replacing the unibody in your car to a complete steel spacecage armed only with the toolset in your garage and a few weekends. Only swapping the skeleton of a 'Mech would be more difficult since it's articulated.

Per TacOps, swapping standard for endo is one of the most difficult things you can do to a 'Mech. If it's as easy as checking a box in MWO, there's a lot of us that'll lose immersion.

[William Petersen]

Aegis Kleais™, on 18 April 2012 - 03:42 PM, said:

OK. THIS is what I have taken away from everything so far.

• Erroneous bullet list

Where did you get this idea of location-specific tonnage? O,o I've never heard of that ever. The closest that comes to being familiar is that each location can only hold a certain number of armour points. I.E. maximum head armour is 9; all other location-armour maxes are dependent upon the weight of the chassis (and type, biped vs quad, but only fans have said anything about quads. /cough). Everything else seems pretty right.

It also *is* known how much armour FF gives per ton, it increases armour points per ton by 12% for IS and 20% for clan (granted, "known" might be a little strong, since this does make an assumption, namely that they stick to CBT which seems to be more or less the M.O.).

Also, minor note, only IS CASE is torso limited. Clan CASE has no such restriction, and also takes no tonnage or critical space (but still costs C-Bills [or K-bills... /cough Which now that I mention it, doesn't have a Sarna page, but I *know* I read about them in my Clan source books...[).

Edited by William Petersen, 18 April 2012 - 05:45 PM.

[Sprouticus]

Thomas Hogarth, on 18 April 2012 - 04:31 PM, said:

I think evidence points out that some sort of valuing of individual chassis for matchmaker to work with is in order. Some have noted that a straight Battle Value based system would not work correctly, and I agree. I think at the very least a system based on BV with less value given to speed and jump ability would work quite well.

Consider: Individual calculations could be entirely back-end and not displayed to the user, so: A) it would be relatively simple for the devs to change the way the system balances various values on the fly and B: with the values hidden, it would be rather hard for users to "game" the system by making configurations that were relatively powerful for low values. Also note that the BV system, even if modified, is relatively simple, so values could be given to custom designs with ease.

Add some weighting for teams that join the queu as groups, and the role you queue up with and perhaps skills and you have a nice solid matchmaking system. As much as I know everyone hates WoW comparrisons, their basic group queuing system is pretty straightforward and effective. How you would queue for skill and goruping is more difficult.

[Helmer]

Hayashi, on 18 April 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

Snipped for space reasons.

GREAT write up Hayashi, Thank you!



Cheers.

[Rejarial Galatan]

I hate to be the fly in the ointment here. But, the hardpoint system seems very limiting. By that I mean, if a mech's default setup has no weapon in the LT then it has no hardpoint for a weapon to be set in? I know, I know, it was said that this is so, but, again, it feels very limiting to me. I mean, weapon convergences to me mean: a pair of weapons focusing impact points of fire at a given location from the right and left of the vertical center line and above and below the horizontal center line. Saying that a mech by default has no weapon to the left of vertical center line but one to the right of vertical center means to me no true convergance just 1 beam/bullet/slug/missile arcing out to hit where the TC says to go. Again, not trying to be a fly in the ointment here, just felt I had to voice my personal concerns.

[syngyne]

It's limiting in that you can no longer basically scratchbuild a 'Mech, yes. But it also now gives purpose to having multiple 'Mechs of the same tonnage. Whereas in MW2/MW3 you had an array of different looking but functionally identical 60-ton buckets, you now have distinct 'Mechs like the Dragon and the (ugh) Champion. You won't be able to load them out exactly the same, so you'll have to think about which one (and which variant thereof) is going to best do the job you need it to before you put c-bills down on it. Unfortunately, if the job you're wanting it to do is be the ultimate pwnmobile, that's probably not going to happen (or at least it's going to be a lot harder than before).

On a more pragmatic level, giving the 'Mechs these differences also gives more things for a player to spend c-bills and experience on (since you can't just have one 60-ton chassis do everything now), and probably simplifies dev time on the 'Mechs since for a given variant they won't have to deal with weapons suddenly appearing where the model didn't allow for them. I kind of like the last point for a bit of realism* as well.

*yes yes it's a game etc.

[Rejarial Galatan]

Im not looking to be the ultimate in ownage machine here, but, again, it seems odd that they say we have weapons convergance speeds when it seems some mechs have no true convergance. Now, given that I pilot Timberwolves, Mad Dogs, Direwolves, Stone Rhinos, Warhawks, Marauders <the IIC version> I get weapons clear across my RT, CT, LT, RA, LA, RL, LL it IS moot for me, but, I am just thinking about those who like the smaller mechs.

[Samuel Maxwell]

Sad to hear that we can't have custom paintjobs, but the reasoning for it not being there is sound. At least we can always edit the images.

Edited by Samuel Maxwell, 18 April 2012 - 08:23 PM.

[Rejarial Galatan]

If I read the dev blog on the Mech Lab, we will get SOME customability to our paint jobs.

[Rejarial Galatan]

Something else is bugging me. Why is it, I cannot put jump jets on my direwolf? If I can find the room and make the right sacrifices on my mech, why cannot slap a set into the chassis? I may not be able to leap far, but, for shock and awe seeing a direwolf lift off is well shocking.

[FinnMcKool]

who is this Uncle Bob you speak of?




Ill bet hes a Clanner

[Myst Lynx]

I like these mech lab rules, it makes it harder to custimize mechs like they would be in the TT, other wise why would I waste money on an omnimech if it is just as easy to do so on a regular mech. Omnimechs could be loaded up as you choose while regular mechs had to be balanced.

[Thomas Hogarth]

Rejarial Galatan, on 18 April 2012 - 09:04 PM, said:

Something else is bugging me. Why is it, I cannot put jump jets on my direwolf? If I can find the room and make the right sacrifices on my mech, why cannot slap a set into the chassis? I may not be able to leap far, but, for shock and awe seeing a direwolf lift off is well shocking.

That's an Omnimech. We don't know what they'll be allowing for omnis.

[Thorn Hallis]

To sum it all up: Before we can make any plans on how to customize a certain mech we simply have to wait for its details to be released.

€dit: And as it is Thursday, which means I'm allowded to be a smartass: Every Hunchback-variant without the AC20 is called a Swayback, not just the ML-variant.

Edited by Thorn Hallis, 18 April 2012 - 11:55 PM.

[Corbon Zackery]

Hardpoints change everthing because now if I know your AC/20 is going to be in your left arm since your driving a mech with a left arm hardpoint I can single it out and gimp your mech.

I hate being negative but Hardpoints really are a bad idea.

Classic battle tech gives you:
1 open slot in the head
8 open slot in the arms
12 open slots in the RT, LT torso
2 open slots in the CT
2 open slots in the legs

So taking a Jenner JR7-F for example 3025 mech from what your saying its going to have weapon hardpoints in only the arms so if I blow both of them off you can just run around the board until I finish killing everything else. Since you don't have any other weapon points.

Thats not fun for the player.
I would adopt a mech lab like Mechwarrior 3 were you just build the mech you want. Most hardpoints are interchangeable if you open up your computer tower you have a rail system that allows you place a CD ROM, Harddrive, floppy, Thats what the inside of a mech looks like you slide in the weapon bolt it down and your ready to go.

If wasn't set up like that it would make field repairs nightmares because you would have perfectly good mechs but because the mechanic could not attach your arm in time for the battle you loose all of those hardpoints. to mount a weapon

Basicly you can cripple mechs now because everyone going to know were all your hard points are.

This was a bad move in my book.

Sorry

Edited by Corbon Zackery, 19 April 2012 - 12:01 AM.

[pursang]

Thorn Hallis, on 18 April 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

To sum it all up: Before we can make any plans on how to customize a certain mech we simply have to wait for its details to be released.

€dit: And as it is Thursday, which means I'm allowded to be a smartass: Every Hunchback-variant without the AC20 is called a Swayback, not just the ML-variant.

Well then. I'm gonna call mine the Throwback just to annoy you.

[Thorn Hallis]

pursang, on 19 April 2012 - 12:01 AM, said:

Well then. I'm gonna call mine the Throwback just to annoy you.

Lemme guess - your Hunchback will have a catapult with a trashcan in the left torso?

[Siilk]

I am curious, would there be a way to change weapon grouping during battle?