206 replies to this topic

[Solis Obscuri]

The answer is: we haven't seen any actual variant configurations yet, so this is all groundless speculation.

[Famous]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 12:47 PM, said:

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).

You don't know this to be true! Take a look at the 'MechLab post yourself, specifically- Section 1: Swapping Out Weapons (http://mwomercs.com/...-blog-6-mechlab)

That 'Mech has 12 crit slots in the arm, but you'll notice that only 2 of those are really free slots. There is no I'm taking out my elbow joint to add in a PPC. Now is this TT direct copy? Probably not, but it resolves your issues of all Hunchbacks will have 2 PPCs in the arms.

At this point it really seems like you are bound and determined that 'MechLab will break leveling, so please stop. Your concerns are unfounded and at this point absurd. How many other posters and employees of PGI have to tell you that you're wrong before you'll let this go?

[Sprouticus]

Famous, on 20 April 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:

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

On point 2, why would you assume that they would limit the size. Nothing in what they have said has indicated this. There are 8 open criticals on a Hunchies arm. They have stated clearly that hardpoints and crit slots are not connected in any way. Unless they are not telling us something (which is possible, I agree), you will absolutely be able to run the 2 PPC Hunchie. In both configs. Which means my #2 example is correct.

@Verybad, I'm not saying it is OP or even horrible. I'm just saying that it makes a variant based leveling system nonsensical and counteractive to their goals with the leveling system.

Guys, Im just going to step away form this for now.. I have expressed my concerns, and a bunch of you plus Garth and David kindly replied. I dont feel their replies addressed my concerns, but as Garth said he cant say much. I will just step back and trust PGI do their work. If it turns out that I am wrong and this was a silly discussion, I will gladly apologize for wasting all of your time. If it turns out that I am right, I will bring the subject up during the beta.

Famous, on 20 April 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

You don't know this to be true! Take a look at the 'MechLab post yourself, specifically- Section 1: Swapping Out Weapons (http://mwomercs.com/...-blog-6-mechlab)

That 'Mech has 12 crit slots in the arm, but you'll notice that only 2 of those are really free slots. There is no I'm taking out my elbow joint to add in a PPC. Now is this TT direct copy? Probably not, but it resolves your issues of all Hunchbacks will have 2 PPCs in the arms.

At this point it really seems like you are bound and determined that 'MechLab will break leveling, so please stop. Your concerns are unfounded and at this point absurd. How many other posters and employees of PGI have to tell you that you're wrong before you'll let this go?

sigh....the example given has Endosteel internals. Endosteel takes up a large ## of crit slots as it is lighter but bulkier. Thats is the tradeoff. A Hunchback uses normal internals and has 8 free crit slots in the arm after actuators, etc. Plenty of space for a PPC.

Unless PGI is going to diverge from standard TT crit slot configurations (which is possible) it WILL fit.

[Lightfoot]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 12:47 PM, said:

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).

Well, then there is nothing to limit boating in the hardpoint system. So I don't think it's going to work that way since the ability to load a PPC into a Medium Laser slot negates the purpose or need for hardpoints.

Perhaps they mean you could load several Medium Lasers into a large energy slot or one PPC, etc.

Edited by Lightfoot, 20 April 2012 - 01:20 PM.

[Peiper]

The Awesome 9Q. This would be my goal if owning an Awesome. I wounder if it would be possible, though. It was a 3057 upgrade, switching the heatsinks to double heat sinks, adding ECM, and adding a 4th PPC. This would not work, unless they created the variant itself, which would require them to animate the left hand as another PPC. They've said you can't place weapons where there currently are none, so they'd HAVE to create the animation first, eh? I guess this whole post isn't saying anything, really, is it? LOL

Carry on!

[Famous]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

On point 2, why would you assume that they would limit the size. Nothing in what they have said has indicated this. There are 8 open criticals on a Hunchies arm. They have stated clearly that hardpoints and crit slots are not connected in any way. Unless they are not telling us something (which is possible, I agree), you will absolutely be able to run the 2 PPC Hunchie. In both configs. Which means my #2 example is correct.

@Verybad, I'm not saying it is OP or even horrible. I'm just saying that it makes a variant based leveling system nonsensical and counteractive to their goals with the leveling system.

Guys, Im just going to step away form this for now.. I have expressed my concerns, and a bunch of you plus Garth and David kindly replied. I dont feel their replies addressed my concerns, but as Garth said he cant say much. I will just step back and trust PGI do their work. If it turns out that I am wrong and this was a silly discussion, I will gladly apologize for wasting all of your time. If it turns out that I am right, I will bring the subject up during the beta.




sigh....the example given has Endosteel internals. Endosteel takes up a large ## of crit slots as it is lighter but bulkier. Thats is the tradeoff. A Hunchback uses normal internals and has 8 free crit slots in the arm after actuators, etc. Plenty of space for a PPC.

Unless PGI is going to diverge from standard TT crit slot configurations (which is possible) it WILL fit.

So what we've come down to is that you have found a single 'Mech (of the ones we know are in the game) that can be configured to work outside its canon role. To make your long range Hunchback you give up the AC/20 that makes the Hunchback the Hunchback. So what are we left with? A very slow Medium 'Mech with no jump jets and decent range. Now I can't say for certain, but I'm fairly sure that the other Medium 'Mechs designed for longer range engagements will outclass your PPC Hunchback.

If the extent of the broken leveling is a single 'Mech that is customized completely outside of its intended purpose then there is absolutely nothing to worry about. Anyone who wants to bring an urban 'Mech to a mid to long range engagement just to get around the leveling the variants is obviously more concerned about 2.5% increases than actually winning games, I will take that trade off

Edited by Famous, 20 April 2012 - 02:11 PM.

[renegade mitchell]

Sprouticus, on 19 April 2012 - 06:27 AM, said:

This is pulled from another mechlab thread. I wanted to talk about what the mechlab will mean to the MWO leveling system, and how it will IMO break it or make it absurdly meaningless.



But the problem is that variants can be customized, the XP/leveling system gets borked.

As a review, the training system in MWO will rely upon training in each variant of each mech to open up bonuses for that mech and variant and to get pilot points for modules.


Now, let's say the Awesome has the 8Q, 8R and 8T. You can take an 8T and turn it into an 8R. Which means from a training standpoint you are using the EXACT same mech to 'train up' two different variants.

What is the problem with that you ask? It circumvents the entire idea of leveling variants to achieve extra pilot points and modules. They might as well just have 1 leveling tree per mech and call it a day.

You could make it even more extreme. Take a stock Hunchie, take out the AC20 and put in 2 PPC's. Now you are leveling a Hunchie, but it is NOT a Hunchie, it is an Uziel with a different profile.

I want the variants to mean something, and I want the leveling system to mean something. With the extreme level of customization allowed currently, the leveling system becomes meaningless. If they Devs want this level of customization, Im ok with it (not happy, but ok).

But in that case they should revise the leveling system to account for it and at a minimum remove variants as a factor in leveling.

More and more I am leaning toward Zorak's suggestions in the thread below. If you have not read this thread, it is worth the time.

http://mwomercs.com/...bt-build-rules/

In particular I think each hardpoint should have a MAXIMUM size for weapons (if you had a ML in the arm, it can only be replaced with a ML or SL. If you have a LL it can be replaced with LL, ML, SL, and if you have a PPC it can be replace with anything). This will limit customization some, but it will also make variants very important. And make leveling a variant MEAN something. It may also cause some variants to be shelved, but that is a topic for discussion in another thread.


What does everyone think about this? Do you care about the leveling system? Should it matter that you are cheating it by using custom mech which completely re-purpose a mech and still allows you to level the mech?

I totally agree with you and Zorak's posts.

[renegade mitchell]

}{avoc, on 19 April 2012 - 07:48 AM, said:

Sure there is, but not for energy weapons unless there are extra energy hardpoints available elsewhere.

That is assuming hardpoints are weapon specific. Ballistics being color coded yellow, energy weapons red, etc...

[renegade mitchell]

MaddMaxx, on 19 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

We have confirmation form the DEV, just yesterday, in the Q&A, that a Hard point will be weapon Type specific but not Size. So that means an Energy Hard Point can mount any Energy weapon regardless of size, if the Location on the Mech (CT, LT, RT, LA, RA) has sufficient critical slots open and the weight necessary such that the weapon mounting does not exceed the chassis maximum rated weight. Please if anyone wishes to modify or outright dispute the above claim based on yesterdays DEV information exchange please do? P.S. Everything is still Subject to Change (as per the DEV)

Ok thanks for that. Came to this thread late. Nevermind my previous post Havoc.

Edited by Renegade Mitchell, 20 April 2012 - 03:06 PM.

[Jonas]

What I think is that we are all getting worried over the leveling and custom Mech's. Look in every game there will be people that are going to take every advantage they can. This game is no different. We are in a War, a fictional one but a War none the less, & in war you do the best to have the best. The best in this case is taking a role then picking a mech then devoting the time, and C-bills to make it the best. If that means you figure out how to build a gun boat out of a commando then awesome.

We are going to spend hours in the labs building and rebuilding our Mech's. Will some people figure out a loop hole or two " YES " will that give them a short term gain " YES ", but long term not likely. They will be the ones that do it first but then some one else will match them or one up them. In the long run though play testing and XP both in game and out of game will make those advantages a lot less game breaking. Also remember the more you mod your mech the more it will cost to repair and rearm and redesign later.

Also if someone is willing to spend the time "grinding" in every match to improve his or her skills, kills, & C-bills to build him/her self a better Mech then they have to say they earned it.

Edited by Jonas, 20 April 2012 - 02:32 PM.

[Kartr]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

On point 2, why would you assume that they would limit the size. Nothing in what they have said has indicated this. There are 8 open criticals on a Hunchies arm. They have stated clearly that hardpoints and crit slots are not connected in any way. Unless they are not telling us something (which is possible, I agree), you will absolutely be able to run the 2 PPC Hunchie. In both configs. Which means my #2 example is correct.

Them limiting the size of hardpoints makes a lot of sense. That way you have available crits, tonnage, hardpoints and hardpoint size as limiting factors for modifying 'Mechs.

However I still don't see what's wrong with running a 2 PPC Hunchback. Most 'Mechs it will either be impossible or extremely difficult to make them identical based on what Garth has said/implied. Even if you can why is it a big deal? I've found a config that works best for me, but I want to get every last bit of experience on the chassis and variants as possible to improve my pilot as much as possible, why shouldn't I be able to swap my weapons around to a config I actually like?

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

@Verybad, I'm not saying it is OP or even horrible. I'm just saying that it makes a variant based leveling system nonsensical and counteractive to their goals with the leveling system.

Except that it sounds like the variants that are easiest to modify in between are going to get folded into the same variant. This means your Missile launching Awesome and its 2 LLas variant will not be separate variants. However the multiple PPC stock Awesome will be different variant from the missile carrying version. The Hunchback example shows how certain 'Mechs could make that difficult unless hardpoints have a size restriction as well as a type restriction. However the problem (if there even is one) isn't really in the 'Mechlab, its in the 'Mechs themselves. The 'Mechs with the most flexible stock armament are going to be the ones with the greatest variation in modification, 'Mechs that are one trick ponies to begin with are going to stay one trick ponies.

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

sigh....the example given has Endosteel internals. Endosteel takes up a large ## of crit slots as it is lighter but bulkier. Thats is the tradeoff. A Hunchback uses normal internals and has 8 free crit slots in the arm after actuators, etc. Plenty of space for a PPC.

Unless PGI is going to diverge from standard TT crit slot configurations (which is possible) it WILL fit.

Unless hardpoints have size limitations as well. Besides why shouldn't I be able to throw PPCs in the arms if I don't want an AC/20?

[renegade mitchell]

Check out this thread, http://mwomercs.com/...talk-feat-paul/

[Soviet Alex]

Sprouticus, on 20 April 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

I am assuming you refer to me re: hating the mechlab. To be clear, I LOVE the mechlab. I spent more time testing, tweaking , and building goofy loadouts for NBT drops than I care to admit.

No, I wasn't aiming that at you personally. There are several people who ripped into Mech-Lab in the dev-blog, said they'd never play the game, but are still active on the forums. You started with a valid concern, and now it's been answered.

[Solis Obscuri]

I love how everyone seems more interested in their abilities to min/max crap than in the actual gameplay...

[Mad Pig]

I think you're worrying about something that isn't there... sometimes it is just best to wait.

[pursang]

Can we let this thread die, please?

[Rejarial Galatan]

I didnt take the time to read 8 pages or so of replies, but, I gotta say it: We just do not know for SURE what the actual leveling system will be when we as players <the lucky ones> get invited to closed beta, then the rush into open beta, then when the game is solidified into something final for launch. We know not of what we speak in full. Time will tell.

[MechRaccoon]

Sprouticus, on 19 April 2012 - 06:27 AM, said:

This is pulled from another mechlab thread. I wanted to talk about what the mechlab will mean to the MWO leveling system, and how it will IMO break it or make it absurdly meaningless.



But the problem is that variants can be customized, the XP/leveling system gets borked.

As a review, the training system in MWO will rely upon training in each variant of each mech to open up bonuses for that mech and variant and to get pilot points for modules.


Now, let's say the Awesome has the 8Q, 8R and 8T. You can take an 8T and turn it into an 8R. Which means from a training standpoint you are using the EXACT same mech to 'train up' two different variants.

What is the problem with that you ask? It circumvents the entire idea of leveling variants to achieve extra pilot points and modules. They might as well just have 1 leveling tree per mech and call it a day.

You could make it even more extreme. Take a stock Hunchie, take out the AC20 and put in 2 PPC's. Now you are leveling a Hunchie, but it is NOT a Hunchie, it is an Uziel with a different profile.

I want the variants to mean something, and I want the leveling system to mean something. With the extreme level of customization allowed currently, the leveling system becomes meaningless. If they Devs want this level of customization, Im ok with it (not happy, but ok).

But in that case they should revise the leveling system to account for it and at a minimum remove variants as a factor in leveling.

More and more I am leaning toward Zorak's suggestions in the thread below. If you have not read this thread, it is worth the time.

http://mwomercs.com/...bt-build-rules/

In particular I think each hardpoint should have a MAXIMUM size for weapons (if you had a ML in the arm, it can only be replaced with a ML or SL. If you have a LL it can be replaced with LL, ML, SL, and if you have a PPC it can be replace with anything). This will limit customization some, but it will also make variants very important. And make leveling a variant MEAN something. It may also cause some variants to be shelved, but that is a topic for discussion in another thread.


What does everyone think about this? Do you care about the leveling system? Should it matter that you are cheating it by using custom mech which completely re-purpose a mech and still allows you to level the mech?

Personally, I don't think that your special bonuses and abilities should be tied to your mech, (I think that's how it's supposed to work for the moment. i could be misinterpreting it though.) instead, the powers should be more tied to your character. To explain this better, I shall use Battlefield Heroes as an example. In BH, you earn experience by killing stuff, and you earn levels and points to spend on your character, etc, BUT, you do not put points into modifying your gun. Instead, you purchase abilities that can be used with most weapons. That's how the leveling should work in my opinion. In other words: Level up your character, not your war machine!

Another example: Let's say i have a Wolfhound. Instead of modifying said Wolfhound with my (insert name of thing you buy abilities and stuff with), the game should make me buy a new ability with (previously mentioned thing you buy abilities with). These abilities could be making your lasers recharge faster for a few seconds, or letting you go 1.5x faster for 5 seconds.

Keep in mind that i may have completely misinterpreted your post. if i have, well...that just proves that i'm as dumb as I think I am.

[IceSerpent]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 19 April 2012 - 07:32 AM, said:

Because it has 2 energy HP's for the 2 MLs which are also dropped. Nothing in the present system prevents you replacing the 2 MLs with PPCs as long as you have the weight and crits free.

Nik, do we know for a fact that there will be enough free crits there (I didn't follow the forums for about a week)? I sort of assumed that energy hard point designed for a single ML will not have enough crits to fit a PPC. I.e. number of crits is governed by the actual hardpoint instead of "location X always has N crits in it".

[BarHaid]

IceSerpent, on 20 April 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:

Nik, do we know for a fact that there will be enough free crits there (I didn't follow the forums for about a week)? I sort of assumed that energy hard point designed for a single ML will not have enough crits to fit a PPC. I.e. number of crits is governed by the actual hardpoint instead of &quot;location X always has N crits in it&quot;.

We *don't* actually know this. The general inference is that hard points are one "point" per weapon and weapon size isn't a factor, but ths hasn't been explicitly confirmed. Given the Devs desire to keep the crit system faithful to TT, there should generally be plenty of crits in any location (except legs, of course) to pay around with weapon size.