206 replies to this topic

[MaddMaxx]

GargoyleKDR, on 20 April 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

The HB uses a Nissan 200 engine. That engine fits 8 heat sinks (single or double) internally. Only 2 DHS have to be fit into the chassis to make the total of 10 DHS. There are ample crits and available tonnage to place those 2 DHS into the LT while still fitting 2 PPC and 4+ ML's into the hardpoints while still having full armor. If you doubt that check the math here.

I even added 3 more DHS to your config and it still runs at 34/26 Heat. Perhaps I messed up somewhere but 8 extra heat per turn sounds on the high side...

[Havoc2]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

Im confused. Are you saying that the system that exists right now is optimal or even useful. Don't you think modifying the leveling system to account for how the mechlab works might make the game better? Using variants as a lynchpoint of leveling when variants dont mean anything is not particularly immersive and the entire point of a leveling system is to:

1) give pilots a reason to pilot more mechs (more points/modules)

It sounds to me like the current proposed leveling system does that. You pilot more chassis, you unlock skills that will allow you more flexibility of roles and/or class of 'Mech to pilot so you're not pigeonholed or specialized into 1 role or class.

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

2) Reward them for playing a mech longer (bonus values)

Also sounds like the proposed system does just that. You can unlock abilities until you hit a maximum level. A cap.
If you want to go beyond that cap and truly specialize in that chassis, you will need to buy/salvage a different variant of that chassis. You can use that time to outfit it into a different weapons platform than what you're currently using and fill the same role OR fill a different role. Maybe you don't like the hard point configuration of that variant so you'll need to grind the XP to maximize it and move on. Sorry.
Maybe you'll love it and can't believe that you didn't try it out in the first place. Sorry, you'll need to move on once it's maxed on XP.

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

3) Provide an immersive environment where pilots feel the need to pilot a specific chassis (some would cal lthat grind, I disagree)

Um. . . isn't that EXACTLY what the point behind needing to level multiple variants of the same chassis is?

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

At least that's what I see from the configuration they put forth. There may be other reasons

Maybe that 3rd point does not mean anything to you, and if it doesn't then I see why you would not care. But having a leveling system that makes sense and is internally(it itself) and externally(to the rest of the game) consistent is important to some of us.

Sounds like it makes sense to me.
If you want to call yourself a "specialist" in a specific chassis, you need to know what the other variations of your chassis are and what they can do. If you decide that you don't like Hunchback 2 but you love Hunchback 1 and 3, good for you but it doesn't make you a specialist in the Hunchback chassis because you aren't familiar with a 2 and what it can and can't do.

Edited by }{avoc, 20 April 2012 - 11:05 AM.

[GargoyleKDR]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

Are you saying that the system that exists right now is optimal or even useful.

Yes.

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

Don't you think modifying the leveling system to account for how the mechlab works might make the game better?

No.

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

3) Provide an immersive environment where pilots feel the need to pilot a specific chassis (some would cal lthat grind, I disagree)

You see, I trust the developers to establish variant structures that may be mutually exclusive to one another. By that I mean each variant will have the capability of being configured in way that only that variant can do. The fact that there may be some level of cross over within variants that WE DON'T HAVE CONFIRMED INFORMATION ON is, well, not important to the system.

The system design answers the question "how do we expand a pilot's skill while also ensuring a stream of income." I see the design satisfying that by using variants as the mechanism. [note: I am intentionally projecting that I believe a variant chassis will be able to be purchased within the game, and that the purchase price will directly correlate to some unknown real world dollar value.]

Edited by GargoyleKDR, 20 April 2012 - 11:22 AM.

[GargoyleKDR]

MaddMaxx, on 20 April 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

I even added 3 more DHS to your config and it still runs at 34/26 Heat. Perhaps I messed up somewhere but 8 extra heat per turn sounds on the high side...

10 DHS balances the heat of the PPCs when they are fired together. They produce a cooling effect when just the ML's are fired. The imbalance you see if from a desire to alpha strike all the time. My approach to the heat curve is to fire groups of weapons in an alternating pattern.

[Lightfoot]

to the OP's speculation:

Well the Hunchback would need to have two large Energy hardpoints for the PPC's which means it could not also have the large Ballistic hardpoint for the AC 20, however you could probably fit a Gauss Rifle on a Hunchback by dropping some armor (etc.) and the AC 20.

As far as I know you will not be able to change hardpoint functionality, so you would need a Hunchback variant that had two large Energy Hardpoints for the PPC's, if such a variant existed.

So the reason you train for variants is to get the unique hardpoint configurations that they will feature. Those hardpoints might not vary much or they might vary a great deal, which would affect the value of the variant to the player.

Mechlab really only affects the strategy used on the field of play, not the player's need for other variants and their unique hardpoint configurations.

Make no mistake though, correct use of Mechlab, variants, and battle strategy will have a major impact on the battle's outcome. However, each team get's the same opportunity to succeed.

So no, Mechlab will have no effect on the need to level into other variants. You will still need those, as far as I can tell from what we have been told.

[Cassius Brown]

I think I can see the core problem the OP is talking about.

For the sake of example, let's forget variant C. Let's just compare 1A and 1B.

So, I'm new, and I level 1A. The level tree for 1A is all about the energy weapons. I unlock all these great energy weapon skills and bonuses because I levelled 1A.

Now it's time to level 1B. 1B's tree is all about the ballistic skills and ballistic bonuses. If I was forced to use 1B out of the box, then I'd be levelling with no advantages, because I'd be learning to use ballistic skills by using those skills with ballistic weapons.

The problem comes if I can turn a 1B into a 1A via the MechLab. Suddenly, I'm levelling the ballistic tree without ever using a ballistic weapon. Worse, I'm levelling the ballistic skills without ever using them, all the while gaining the full benefits of my previously learned top tier energy weapon skills. In effect, I'm not suffering any hardcoded negatives for using an energy weapons mech to level the ballistic tree.

That sounds like an issue that should be considered. Whether it is actually a problem or not will be decided as it gets tested and iterated. It will probably be more or less apparent depending on the chassis being used. Something easily swappable might be more glaringly broken than something that can't just directly port over a configuration between variants.

[Famous]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

Im confused. Are you saying that the system that exists right now is optimal or even useful. Don't you think modifying the leveling system to account for how the mechlab works might make the game better? Using variants as a lynchpoint of leveling when variants dont mean anything is not particularly immersive and the entire point of a leveling system is to:

1) give pilots a reason to pilot more mechs (more points/modules)
2) Reward them for playing a mech longer (bonus values)
3) Provide an immersive environment where pilots feel the need to pilot a specific chassis (some would cal lthat grind, I disagree)

At least that's what I see from the configuration they put forth. There may be other reasons

Maybe that 3rd point does not mean anything to you, and if it doesn't then I see why you would not care. But having a leveling system that makes sense and is internally(it itself) and externally(to the rest of the game) consistent is important to some of us.

I've said this twice before, but now I'll quote you to reply- you seem to be oblivious to the fact that a TT/Canon variant chassis and a MWO/'MechLab variant are separate things.

This has not been confirmed, but I'm fairly certain Garth speculated in this thread that the number of variants will be limited to the number of distinct weapon load outs. In plain English- you will not be able to make Variant 1 and Variant 2 have the exact same weapons load out, so the fear that players will pick a load out and carry it across chassis is completely unfounded.

[Garth Erlam]

Famous, on 20 April 2012 - 11:29 AM, said:

I've said this twice before, but now I'll quote you to reply- you seem to be oblivious to the fact that a TT/Canon variant chassis and a MWO/'MechLab variant are separate things.

This has not been confirmed, but I'm fairly certain Garth speculated in this thread that the number of variants will be limited to the number of distinct weapon load outs. In plain English- you will not be able to make Variant 1 and Variant 2 have the exact same weapons load out, so the fear that players will pick a load out and carry it across chassis is completely unfounded.

Basically this.

If the difference between variant 1a and variant 2a is that it loses 1 ton of armour to get 1 heatsink, it's not a unique variant we'll add. All variants will be distinguished between eachother, in various ways.

[Havoc2]

Cassius Brown, on 20 April 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

I think I can see the core problem the OP is talking about.

For the sake of example, let's forget variant C. Let's just compare 1A and 1B.

So, I'm new, and I level 1A. The level tree for 1A is all about the energy weapons. I unlock all these great energy weapon skills and bonuses because I levelled 1A.

Now it's time to level 1B. 1B's tree is all about the ballistic skills and ballistic bonuses. If I was forced to use 1B out of the box, then I'd be levelling with no advantages, because I'd be learning to use ballistic skills by using those skills with ballistic weapons.

The problem comes if I can turn a 1B into a 1A via the MechLab. Suddenly, I'm levelling the ballistic tree without ever using a ballistic weapon. Worse, I'm levelling the ballistic skills without ever using them, all the while gaining the full benefits of my previously learned top tier energy weapon skills. In effect, I'm not suffering any hardcoded negatives for using an energy weapons mech to level the ballistic tree.

That sounds like an issue that should be considered. Whether it is actually a problem or not will be decided as it gets tested and iterated. It will probably be more or less apparent depending on the chassis being used. Something easily swappable might be more glaringly broken than something that can't just directly port over a configuration between variants.

Incorrect.

Each variant has its own skill tree, in order to advance into Elite tier skills, you need to level the base tiers of each variant. If you maximize Hunchback 1A and it grants you a 5% bonus to all imaginable energy weapon skill, those skills are not carried over to variant 1B.
Your PILOT skills are carried over, so you could theoretically advance your pilot skills in energy weapons or at least make use of them if you were somehow able to make variant 1B similar to 1A, but you wouldn't be gaining bonuses from all of your previous work.

Also, I seriously doubt that each variant will be able to be made similar to another variant IF the bonuses effect weapon types. I believe examples that the devs have given for skill trees are things like torso twist speed, weapons convergence speed etc. These bonuses would work for all weapon types and would again be lost when you change variants until you earned enough XP to get them back.

Edited by }{avoc, 20 April 2012 - 11:39 AM.

[Cassius Brown]

Garth Erlam, on 20 April 2012 - 11:34 AM, said:

[/i]
Basically this.

If the difference between variant 1a and variant 2a is that it loses 1 ton of armour to get 1 heatsink, it's not a unique variant we'll add. All variants will be distinguished between eachother, in various ways.

Question answered.

[GargoyleKDR]

Cassius Brown, on 20 April 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

The problem comes if I can turn a 1B into a 1A via the MechLab. Suddenly, I'm levelling the ballistic tree without ever using a ballistic weapon. Worse, I'm levelling the ballistic skills without ever using them, all the while gaining the full benefits of my previously learned top tier energy weapon skills. In effect, I'm not suffering any hardcoded negatives for using an energy weapons mech to level the ballistic tree.

The Battlemech efficiencies examples don't quite line up with your hypothesis. The example given in Dev Blog 4 - Role Warfare (Cont.) are much more generic to the chassis. They include things like "+2.5% speed," or "-2.5% Weapon Cooldown Time." Take a look at the example chart below.



The variants simply become the mechanism to expand into the elite level stats for the Battlemech efficiencies. And, as Garth states above, variants will be distinguishable between each other, therefore the "I can make this variant similar to that variant" is moot to the design of the system.

[And for those who are reading aloud, "moooooo...t" ]

Edited by GargoyleKDR, 20 April 2012 - 11:49 AM.

[Sprouticus]

Garth Erlam, on 20 April 2012 - 11:34 AM, said:

[/i]
Basically this.

If the difference between variant 1a and variant 2a is that it loses 1 ton of armour to get 1 heatsink, it's not a unique variant we'll add. All variants will be distinguished between eachother, in various ways.

Two points Garth,

1) I will take you on your word regarding the uniqueness of the variants. However some mechs will not really allow for that kind of setup. An example is the Jenner. How will like a Jenner work where ALL the variants are close. As I pointed out a few pages back, I can recreate the A variant from every single other variant. I understand moving weapons to differnet locaitons makes a difference due to convergence, and perhaps that is enough to differentiate. But if that is true, the variant which converges better will always be the one used, and the other will be shelved.

2) My concern is twofold. First is the variant overlap as stated above. The second is the ability to reproduce the same unique configs with multiple variants, thereby making the idea of leveling up multiple variants pointless. If every hunchback I level has 2 PPC's, and the only difference is having to purchase the variant and customize it,then the idea of leveling individual variants becomes meaningless. You are effectively leveling the same mech 3 times (or 2 or whatever).

[Cassius Brown]

GargoyleKDR, on 20 April 2012 - 11:43 AM, said:

The Battlemech efficiencies examples don't quite line up with your hypothesis. The example given in Dev Blog 4 - Role Warfare (Cont.) are much more generic to the chassis. They include things like "+2.5% speed," or "-2.5% Weapon Cooldown Time." Take a look at the example chart below.


The variants simply become the mechanism to expand into the elite level stats for the Battlemech efficiencies. The possibility of making one variant behave like another in combat, as I said up-thread, is moot to the system.

I get what you're saying, but having one variant of three shown doesn't really give us much of a basis to determine what the other two thirds of the skills will be like. I'm not disagreeing, I'm just pointing out that:

A) We don't have much data and
My example scenarios were just that, example scenarios.

In a situation where there is a lack of information, there is no shame in pointing out a worst case scenario in order to prevent it. Certainly it's possible (or likely) that the hypothetical Variant B on the chart you quoted is all about movement speed (back, forward, turning) and generic weapon damage/range, and that Variant C is all about Armor effectiveness and sensor use, but without them being shown, it's hard to say. They could just as easily be filled with +2.5% energy weapon range and +2.5% missile accuracy, since some chassis and variants are known as much for their weapons as their profile.

However, as has been pointed out, I was confusing chassis skills with Pilot skills, so the issue is probably moot. It's academic, at best.

[Sprouticus]

Lightfoot, on 20 April 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:

to the OP's speculation:

Well the Hunchback would need to have two large Energy hardpoints for the PPC's which means it could not also have the large Ballistic hardpoint for the AC 20, however you could probably fit a Gauss Rifle on a Hunchback by dropping some armor (etc.) and the AC 20.

As far as I know you will not be able to change hardpoint functionality, so you would need a Hunchback variant that had two large Energy Hardpoints for the PPC's, if such a variant existed.

So the reason you train for variants is to get the unique hardpoint configurations that they will feature. Those hardpoints might not vary much or they might vary a great deal, which would affect the value of the variant to the player.

Mechlab really only affects the strategy used on the field of play, not the player's need for other variants and their unique hardpoint configurations.

Make no mistake though, correct use of Mechlab, variants, and battle strategy will have a major impact on the battle's outcome. However, each team get's the same opportunity to succeed.

So no, Mechlab will have no effect on the need to level into other variants. You will still need those, as far as I can tell from what we have been told.

This has been answered multiple times in the thread. The Hunchback has 2 Energy hardpoints in the arms, and it CAN handle the heat of 2xPPC's. Especially if you give it endosteel.

[Garth Erlam]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

Two points Garth,

1) I will take you on your word regarding the uniqueness of the variants. However some mechs will not really allow for that kind of setup. An example is the Jenner. How will like a Jenner work where ALL the variants are close. As I pointed out a few pages back, I can recreate the A variant from every single other variant. I understand moving weapons to differnet locaitons makes a difference due to convergence, and perhaps that is enough to differentiate. But if that is true, the variant which converges better will always be the one used, and the other will be shelved.

2) My concern is twofold. First is the variant overlap as stated above. The second is the ability to reproduce the same unique configs with multiple variants, thereby making the idea of leveling up multiple variants pointless. If every hunchback I level has 2 PPC's, and the only difference is having to purchase the variant and customize it,then the idea of leveling individual variants becomes meaningless. You are effectively leveling the same mech 3 times (or 2 or whatever).

I can't go into a lot of detail, but basically to both: Hardpoints.

[Havoc2]

Cassius Brown, on 20 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

I get what you're saying, but having one variant of three shown doesn't really give us much of a basis to determine what the other two thirds of the skills will be like. I'm not disagreeing, I'm just pointing out that:

A) We don't have much data and
My example scenarios were just that, example scenarios.

In a situation where there is a lack of information, there is no shame in pointing out a worst case scenario in order to prevent it. Certainly it's possible (or likely) that the hypothetical Variant B on the chart you quoted is all about movement speed (back, forward, turning) and generic weapon damage/range, and that Variant C is all about Armor effectiveness and sensor use, but without them being shown, it's hard to say. They could just as easily be filled with +2.5% energy weapon range and +2.5% missile accuracy, since some chassis and variants are known as much for their weapons as their profile.

However, as has been pointed out, I was confusing chassis skills with Pilot skills, so the issue is probably moot. It's academic, at best.

I believe it's already been stated in the dev blogs (and I'm done work soon and not about to look for it lol) that the PILOT skills will stick with the PILOT and apply to all chassis/variants driven. The MECH skills are a little more vague. I remember seeing that they apply to the MECH being piloted only, however I'm not sure if that means to the specific CHASSIS or the specific VARIANT.
The MECH skill tree may be the first tiers 3 times (or 2 or 4 or however many variants there are) and the ELITE levels are where they start to get more specific on improving energy weapon damage or reduce missile lock time or whatever.

As you said though, with the current information all we can really do is panic for no reason and wildly speculate.

[Famous]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

Two points Garth,

1) I will take you on your word regarding the uniqueness of the variants. However some mechs will not really allow for that kind of setup. An example is the Jenner. How will like a Jenner work where ALL the variants are close. As I pointed out a few pages back, I can recreate the A variant from every single other variant. I understand moving weapons to differnet locaitons makes a difference due to convergence, and perhaps that is enough to differentiate. But if that is true, the variant which converges better will always be the one used, and the other will be shelved.

2) My concern is twofold. First is the variant overlap as stated above. The second is the ability to reproduce the same unique configs with multiple variants, thereby making the idea of leveling up multiple variants pointless. If every hunchback I level has 2 PPC's, and the only difference is having to purchase the variant and customize it,then the idea of leveling individual variants becomes meaningless. You are effectively leveling the same mech 3 times (or 2 or whatever).

I appreciate you asking Garth even though he's said twice now that I've got a good handle on this.

Point 1- See my post earlier in this thread citing the Jenner specifically. There will be two variant chassis for the Jenner, a Laser chassis -C, -F, -K, -C/C3 and a Missile Chassis -C2/4. In the blog where they announced that there will be variant chassis they also noted that the experience trees for 'Mechs will vary with the number of available chassis ie. it will take longer to max out the Jenner because there are only two variants.

Point 2- We've established that your variant overlap concern is pointless because it's not happening. In all likelihood the Hunchback will not hold PPC's in the arms, I'd expect the designers to limit the free slots in the arms ie. there are 8 slots but 6 of those are filled with actuators, myomers, etc. (See the 'MechLab post it confirms that they take up slots). So with that being said you probably won't be able to put PPCs on a Hunchback, just on the Swayback and then they'll be in the torso and not the arms.

It's not that I don't see your concern, its just that your concern is based on a partial reading of what we know will be in the game and an apparent willingness to ignore anyone who provides point by point refutation of your concerns

[verybad]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

This has been answered multiple times in the thread. The Hunchback has 2 Energy hardpoints in the arms, and it CAN handle the heat of 2xPPC's. Especially if you give it endosteel.

But it's got a small engine, (of the ten base heatsinks, 2 will have to be placed on the body and unless you're using double heatsinks, it won't handle those PPCs very well. Double heatsinks will take up a lot of space (you want at least 11, so 9 slots with IS DHS), so will that endosteel. An XL engien isn't a great option for a 50 tonner unless it's used to speed up the mech, not give it extra free tonnage.

Note, this should be possible still on a doubleheatsinked swayback but that doesn't mean it will be overpowering. 2 PPC are nice, but if you move up to a Catapult K2, you get jets, better armor, some medium lasers, etc.

I don't see a huge problem with a Hunchie/Swayback getting a pare of PPCs. *shrugs* Doesn't suddenly make it all powerful, the Crab has 2 Large Lasers a medium, and a small, and it's a good mech, but not superpowerful. Simply turns the Hunchback fro ma strong brawler to a strong direct support medium. It's still outclassed by larger mechs with mroe tonange to use in that role.

You simply end up with a less capable mini-Warhammer I guess.

Edited by verybad, 20 April 2012 - 12:26 PM.

[Lightfoot]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

This has been answered multiple times in the thread. The Hunchback has 2 Energy hardpoints in the arms, and it CAN handle the heat of 2xPPC's. Especially if you give it endosteel.

Apparently not.

PPC's are large hardpoint weapons. The Hunchback does not have two large Energy hardpoints. PPC's require hardpoints with, let's just say 3 critical slots, but the Hunchback only has 1 critical slot Energy hardpoints so it would be impossible to fit large Energy weapons on it. That's how hardpoints limit boating and keep 'mechs realistic in weapons loadout. Otherwise you could fit 3 Gauss Rifles in one arm. See what I am saying?

Edited by Lightfoot, 20 April 2012 - 12:48 PM.

[Sprouticus]

Lightfoot, on 20 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Apparently not.

PPC's are large hardpoint weapons. The Hunchback does not have two large Energy hardpoints. PPC's require hardpoints with, let's just say 3 critical slots, but the Hunchback only has 1 critical slot Energy hardpoints so it would be impossible to fit large Energy weapons on it.

please reread the information on how the mechlab will work, your statements indicate you do not understand it fully. Im not trying to be a jerk here, I hope Im souding like it. But you have some critical misunderstandings.

To give you the basics, critical slots and hardpoints are completely separate. There is no relation to hardpoints and slots. I can take a ML out of a hunchback and replace it with a PPC (assuming I have the tonnage and critical slots in the arm which you do on a stock Hunchback). This has been confirmed by the Devs as how it is currently configured (nothing is set in stone of course).