201 replies to this topic

[Hayashi]

Corbon Zackery, on 18 April 2012 - 11:59 PM, said:

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

IIRC a Jenner has 8 points of armour in each arm, 12 points of armour in the front centre torso, 9 points in the back centre torso. Could be wrong, haven't played it in a while. But the general principle I wanna bring across is: while some of the more sadistic players out there might choose to shoot off your arms for a total of 16 points just for the sake of seeing you run around like a headless chicken, you can bet I would rather core you instead.

And please show me a single Hunchback official variant in either TT or MechWarrior canon or MechWarrior games that contains weapons in its left torso. Just because players had the ability to always hide 7 medium lasers in the legs, centre torso and head in MW3 and MW2 doesn't make that system the way it should have been. The chance to lose weapons is something any true MechWarrior would have to face.

Say we abandon the hardpoint system. Now give me a single good reason to put my weapons -and armour!- on the side torsos and arms instead of in the centre torsos, legs and head. There isn't one. I'd throw all my armour and armament into the those places, and charge you with 2-3 points of armour in my side torsos and arms, and laugh when you shoot them because they're freaking redundant.

3 large pulse lasers is immensely destructive, and it's not hard to fit that into the centre torso and legs.

[Fooooo]

Corbon Zackery, on 18 April 2012 - 11:59 PM, said:

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

Sorry for the snip but I was also thinking the same things.

Not that it "really" bothers me a ton, as it means protecting those places is more important.(hiding your ac20 behind a wall/hill/tree until enemy are closer etc etc)

However, maybe in the future there will be a way to pay c-bills to "migrate" an existing weapon hardpoint from your left arm to right arm , or arm to torso etc etc.

Other then that the mechlab seems ok, I'd maybe prefer more leeway with much weaker weapons eg, MGA's and SLAS's being able to use half a weapon hardpoint or something but its not a big problem for me.

Edited by Foòóoo, 19 April 2012 - 01:43 AM.

[Reno Blade]

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

Each LOCATION has a MAX TONNAGE, MAX CRITICAL SLOTS and HARDPOINTSMAX </p>
TONNAGE determines the maximum amount of weight that can be equipped in any given LOCATION. (As you add items to the location, there is less available tonnage)

may i ask for clarification on this.i never heard of tonnage other than the mechs maximum.

Corbon Zackery, on 18 April 2012 - 11:59 PM, said:

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.

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.

this is where all these hundred of mechs and the variants come in!you dont want the jenners arm lasers?, just go with a javelin! 4 MLaser in the torsos!you dont want to risk your Marauder/Warhammer/Rifleman arms? go with a Ostsol/Ostroc etc.It is perfectly fine to focus on your worst enemy first if you want to survive!It doesnt matter, if thats the RT of the Hunchback rushing you, or if its a single mech of that incoming lance.If the lance is not protecting that hunchback, or the hunchpilot is rushing in before the rest of his team - BAD JOB! This is a tactic team game, not a 1 man army, last man standing singleplayer MW3/4

Edited by Reno Blade, 19 April 2012 - 02:33 AM.

[LordDeathStrike]

as mr burns would say *evil old man voice* "Excellent"

we can upgrade to larger versions or smaller of the weapon already in place if theres enough crits and weight avail, but no one will be boating say at atlas with 4 ac 10s or an awesome with 12 med lasers, because there arent enough hard points avail (theyve kept TT canon rules in play).

yet we can easily tweak our build to suite range of engagement/heat levels and ammo by picking our weapons wisely, in a way that maintains good game balance. ( sure you can strip all your armor off to have the biggest weapons you can carry and enough heat sinks to fire alot, but now you aint got any armor)

[Name136774]

The current hard point system seems pretty restrictive, much more than hardpoint system in MW4.
Its kind of sad there are no free hardpoints, so we can use only hardpoints which are given by basic weapon configuration for specific variant.

[Soviet Alex]

Hayashi, on 19 April 2012 - 12:43 AM, said:

And please show me a single Hunchback official variant in either TT or MechWarrior canon or MechWarrior games that contains weapons in its left torso.

Hunchback-4SP (Record Sheets 3025 & 3026, FASA, 1996): 1xSRM-6 LT, 1xSRM-6 RT, 2xMed-Laser LA, 2xMed-Laser RA, 1xSml-Laser H, 2 tons SRM-ammo CT, 19 heat sinks. Nice & symmetrical for weapon convergence. I'd hope that this is the missile Swayback variant in the game, because it has a hardpoint coniguration unique amongst 3025-era Hunchbacks.

[EDMW CSN]

eRSkaarj, on 19 April 2012 - 03:20 AM, said:

The current hard point system seems pretty restrictive, much more than hardpoint system in MW4.
Its kind of sad there are no free hardpoints, so we can use only hardpoints which are given by basic weapon configuration for specific variant.

It is not set in stone. A Centurion could have 4 energy hardpoints even though the stock uses only 2 energy hardpoints. Just wait till the game is out.

[Soviet Alex]

eRSkaarj, on 19 April 2012 - 03:20 AM, said:

The current hard point system seems pretty restrictive, much more than hardpoint system in MW4.
Its kind of sad there are no free hardpoints, so we can use only hardpoints which are given by basic weapon configuration for specific variant.

Firstly, we don't know exactly what hardpoints each mech has. Secondly, different variants of a mech with different hardpoints give you far more choice than MW4. And thirdly, there are only 3 flavours of hardpoint: Energy, Ballistic, Missile. You can do a lot with this system, it just requires more thought.

[Hollister]

Soviet Alex, on 19 April 2012 - 03:23 AM, said:

Hunchback-4SP (Record Sheets 3025 & 3026, FASA, 1996): 1xSRM-6 LT, 1xSRM-6 RT, 2xMed-Laser LA, 2xMed-Laser RA, 1xSml-Laser H, 2 tons SRM-ammo CT, 19 heat sinks. Nice & symmetrical for weapon convergence. I'd hope that this is the missile Swayback variant in the game, because it has a hardpoint coniguration unique amongst 3025-era Hunchbacks.

I also hope this variant makes it as well since this model can be mechlabed very easy to the same loadout as a WVR-7K with a few extra weapons since it does not have jump jets

[Scott Wolfpack Rider]

<sup>What I get from all of this is that the hardpoint system will be a limiting factor to the number and type of weapons available to be placed on a chassis and varients will have different hardpoint configurations from "base" models.

Just because a TRO "stock" mech has 1 med laser in the right arm doesn't mean that there is only 1 energy hardpoint there. We can confirm that there is at LEAST 1 but that doesn't mean there is ONLY 1. There may be 1 energy and 1 ballistic, or 3 energy, or 2 energy and 2 ballistic. We won't know for certain till we are in game, in the mechlab, and looking at the possibilities unless the Devs deem to release that information beforehand which I highly doubt they will do.</sup>

[Dihm]

Thomas Hogarth, on 18 April 2012 - 05:30 PM, said:

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.

Yeah.... I'm going to ahhhhh.... have to go ahead and... agree with Thomas here, m'kay? Thaaaanks.

Swapping out the INTERNAL STRUCTURE is a "big f'in' deal". If you want Endo, you should need to buy a Variant that comes with it from a FACTORY. You guys talked about how you won't be having us build mechs from scratch because it would cost us 6 billion c-bills for a "one-off", but that's exactly what is being advocated by allowing people to swap out the bones of a mech. That's DEFINITELY making a one off IN THE FIELD. Insanity.

XL engines aren't AS big of a deal, but allowing those to go in to ANY variant also takes away some of the uniqueness of the variants. As others have said, now the only difference is hardpoints. You're eliminating one of the potential variant balancing trade-offs, at least one I would pay attention to any way.

Why would I bother buying that new Variant that just came out with Endo Steel and an XL engine, which I then have to gain Mech XP in, when i can just put those features in my existing maxed out variant? The only reason to change would be Hard Points, so we're running in to that "different shaped bag of guns" problem.

[Aegis Kleais]

William Petersen, on 18 April 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

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...[).

You're under the assumption the devs have somehow confirmed a 100% from TT/BT rules transfer to MWO, and that hasn't been confirmed.

[Aegis Kleais]

Reno Blade, on 19 April 2012 - 02:24 AM, said:

may i ask for clarification on this.i never heard of tonnage other than the mechs maximum.
this is where all these hundred of mechs and the variants come in!you dont want the jenners arm lasers?, just go with a javelin! 4 MLaser in the torsos!you dont want to risk your Marauder/Warhammer/Rifleman arms? go with a Ostsol/Ostroc etc.It is perfectly fine to focus on your worst enemy first if you want to survive!It doesnt matter, if thats the RT of the Hunchback rushing you, or if its a single mech of that incoming lance.If the lance is not protecting that hunchback, or the hunchpilot is rushing in before the rest of his team - BAD JOB! This is a tactic team game, not a 1 man army, last man standing singleplayer MW3/4

It's what I've TAKEN AWAY (ie, this is all a personal evaluation of what I believe via the information I've heard), don't take it as a list of any official decree.

To me, logically, if there's a 70Ton Mech, you shouldn't be able to put 50 tons of items in an arm. To restrict items in a location by space and tonnage seemed more realistic, and that's the (again, personal) reasoning I used for that bullet point.

[Damocles]

Diggin this version of the mechlab.

[JadeTimberwolf]

There is one major issue regarding Hardpoints that has been bothering me. If the Clans will be playable (and at that playable early in the Invasion) this issue is closer at hand then if not. How do you plan on working Hardpoints in regards to OmniMechs which do not have the same issues with weapon switchouts as Mechs with Fixedpoints such as the Atlas?

[Aegis Kleais]

JadeTimberwolf, on 19 April 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

There is one major issue regarding Hardpoints that has been bothering me. If the Clans will be playable (and at that playable early in the Invasion) this issue is closer at hand then if not. How do you plan on working Hardpoints in regards to OmniMechs which do not have the same issues with weapon switchouts as Mechs with Fixedpoints such as the Atlas?

IMO, any Clan chassis that is an OmniMech would have some hardpoints that are weapon-type and others that are omni-mounts (allowing for any type of mounting) In the end, it would just provide a wider array of desired loadouts on a single chassis variant.

[Cyote13]

Hard points in my mind are more like computer linkages...since hard points are totally separate from crit spaces

if I have a PPC in an arm I can only put one energy weapon in that arm, not due to weight or crits, but because there is only one plug (hardpoint) for the computer interface....

Crits and hardpoints are totally independent

I am really liking this system. And yes some of the variants are going to have very similar hardpoints...but oh well

[MaddMaxx]

At first glance, the supposed possible "use" of "unused" HardPoints on any Variant/Stock chassis would seem to be more helpful to the smaller Mech chassis/weights.

If we take the Stock HunchBack, it has 27 crits open while the Atlas has 13 and the Dragon a whopping 36.

Given that ALL Mechs start with the same value, it appears the use of "unused" could substantially beef up some of the small to Medium chassis' as far as weapons load out goes.

Stats: 3 known in game Mechs chosen.
H, CT, RT, CT, RA, LA, RL, LL

HB Stock left ------ Crits. 0, 1, 10, 2, 7, 7, 0, 0

Atlas Stock Left -- Crits. 1, 0, 0, 0, 6, 6, 0, 0

Dragon Stock ----- Crits, 1, 0, 10, 9, 5, 7, 2, 2

Depending on HP types placed in these so called "unused" spaces. Could it become a possible Can of Worms? Hmmm.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 19 April 2012 - 11:13 AM.

[Corbon Zackery]

You cant put 3 L pulse lasers in the CT it only has 2 open slots for weapons.

Try building a mech in this mech lab its based off the battletech rules.

http://remlab.source...mlab30/mech.lab

You can put one in the CT everything else is Eng, and Gyro That why the CT has the most Armor and internal structure.

[William Petersen]

Aegis Kleais™, on 19 April 2012 - 05:34 AM, said:

William Petersen, on 18 April 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

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...[).

You're under the assumption the devs have somehow confirmed a 100% from TT/BT rules transfer to MWO, and that hasn't been confirmed.

Look...harder.