7 replies to this topic

[Teralitha]

Its quite true we have varients that no one likes. That are seemingly useless compared to the other varients of the same chassis.

How could those varients have a purpose? Well... I have the answer.

We will have all these componants for electronic warfare, but it doesnt really make sense for every mech to be able to use them. You can take a varient that no one likes or uses and only plays for the purpose of getting master on the varient they really want, and make those varient be the only varients that can carry certain electronics or systems.

For example... ravens are limited in their speed compared to jenner and commando, so, to make ravens more desireable, and jenners less desirable, you make it so only the raven can carry scout equipment or ams(as an example)

Only allow artemis to be upgraded on missle focus mechs like the catapult varient A1 and A4 but not the K2(just as another example)And to balance those, do not allow those mechs to carry ecm.

Another example - the K2 has very desirable hardpoints, and considered OP by many. This hardpoint imbalance could be balanced by removing its ability to carry AMS.

You can split up all sorts of electronics across all the popular and unpopular varients so all varients will be desirable for either the componants they can carry, or the hardpoints they have.

This could also have the side effect of making boats less desirable if they are lacking in something... like... an AMS?

I think you see where I am going with this. Comment?

Edited by Teralitha, 26 November 2012 - 05:26 PM.

[Teralitha]

hmmmm

[Poisoner]

Tera, I had no idea you posted on these forums,

But you do have a great point. I would like to see electronic warfare become actual warfare and not just electronic jokes.

[Asmudius Heng]

The developers have a strange fear of keeping mechs more differentiated.

If each mech had more unique asepcts to them each variant would be more valued by the user rather than just a few of the best ones being the mech of choice.

• More differentiation means people will want mroe mechs for more variety.
  
• People wanting more mechs means mroe people playing the game
  
• People wanting moremechs with innate advantages and disadvantages means mroe diverse playstyles as you cannot custom any mech to the best of the best weapons/sensor builds.
  
• More players wanting mroe content means ...

Drum roll please ...

MORE CHANCES OF PEOPLE PAYING FOR MECHS!

It is int he absolute best interest for the bottom line of PGI to have more restrictions on mechs to create diversity and encourage people to OWN more mechs.

Restricted equipment is already there with JJs and makes a huge difference to people looking at a mech. A single module slot is not enough.

Give mechs more character, create mroe diversity, and improve the money you are making PGI - it is a win-win for everyone except those people who demand open customisation who are never satisfied.

[Dracol]

They have implemented this already but not by equipment. Traditionally, any mech could equip any weapon or piece of equipment if it has the tons and crit slots for it.

So instead of limiting equipment, they went with module limitations and hard points.
Example: cicada 2a has torso based hard points but only one module slot. The 2b has arm based hard points (which is often seen as less desirable) but two module slots.

Before the last patch I never considered module slots when choosing a chassis. Now though, the radar increase, base cap speed increase, and quicker enemy identification are all really nice and that 2b chassis is looking really desirable to me.

[VoidConductor]

there should be balance between:

- hitboxes
- weapon slot layout
- module amount
- extra equipment like JJ / ECM / BAP / AMS
- torso twist range
- engine limitations
- engine scaling
- heat rejection scaling
- heat capacity scaling
- amount of criticals (norrow tiny profile, difficult to hit but less criticals etc.)

etc.

Not that easy to achieve, but feasible.

Edited by VoidConductor, 27 November 2012 - 09:49 AM.

[Teralitha]

VoidConductor, on 27 November 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:

there should be balance between:

- hitboxes
- weapon slot layout
- module amount
- extra equipment like JJ / ECM / BAP / AMS
- torso twist range
- engine limitations
- engine scaling
- heat rejection scaling
- heat capacity scaling
- amount of criticals (norrow tiny profile, difficult to hit but less criticals etc.)

etc.

Not that easy to achieve, but feasible.

Also torso twisting speed, and even possibly... a few mechs with 360 degree twist capability.... <ducks>

[Lokust Davion]

Teralitha, on 28 November 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

Also torso twisting speed, and even possibly... a few mechs with 360 degree twist capability.... <ducks>

I still wonder why mechs cant do 360...