52 replies to this topic

[CL_Kodiak]

I loved being able to customize my mechs in MW3, and was a little broken hearted with MW4 - they took away a lot of the meat and potatoes from the Mechlab in MW4.

Did anyone feel the same? I hope the mechlab we get in this new version is more complex than the one I had in MW3!!

I liked being able to swap motors to free up weight at the expense of speed, then being able to add more weapons and heatsinks. You could come up with some pretty unique builds. In MW4 it was all very cookie cutter.

[SilentWolff]

Yes yes and yes

[Marauder3D]

There is a wide spectrum of opinion on this topic. I myself am very curious how MWO online will handle this.

[ApheX]

Well hopefully the mechlab in this game is on par with MW2 Merc or MW3. Being able to replace or remove pretty much anything from the mech was enjoyable. besides, being able to customise the mech completely added a personal touch to the mech you worked on. IT was your mech, not just some modified version of a stock variant.

Edited by ApheX, 04 November 2011 - 09:22 AM.

[Shepherd]

So long as it isn't as simple as Mech Commander's system, I'll be happy with the mechlab

I would prefer a hybrid between MW4's concept of "only this type of equipment can go in this area of the mech" and MW2/3's "you've got to find a spot in your mech for every piece of equipment you chose to use."

[gregsolidus]

I want a hard point system.If I want to have PPCs where my Mad Cat's missile pods are then I should be able to,that's what Battletech is all about.

[Stormwolf]

I would personally prefer a MW2 or 3 style mechlab updated with the latest ruleset.

Now there would be a number of limitations:

1. The internal structure would be fixed, you can't select a different engine or add endosteel to a existing design.
2. Armor can be increased or replaced with ferro, though it would be expensive and time consuming.
3. Weapons or other equipment can be swapped out, there would also be a cost for this along with a long waiting time.
4. Omni's would be able to swap out weapons or equipment between missions, regular battlemechs inbetween campaigns.
5. Omni's have no problems with different weaponloadouts, regular battlemechs can suffer from the quirks mentioned in TacOps (unreliable, etc).
6. All mechlabs are dependant on what's in the inventory, this inventory becomes more limited in a campaign since you are most likely away from your regular supplyline.
7. Repairs might not be 100% completed inbetween missions (due to lack of time), so your mech might not be fully operational during the next fight.


This would force the players to stock up on parts and supplies for the next mission and use them wisely since they can't get replacements while they are out in the field (like in MW2: Mercs).

The partial repair stuff would force a player to reconsider their playing style, many people would consider a fast medium over sluggish assault just to avoid the damage.

The capturing of supplies can also have long term benefits, you can get stuff for free in the field and use it on your mechs later on. You can generate some more C-Bills by selling all the stuff you don't need.

Any thoughts on this?

[Alizabeth Aijou]

Well, if we'd get a MechBay with multiple 'Mech Cubicles, I'd definitely prefer the MW2/MW3 style.
With the more time-consuming alterations removing the 'Mech from availablity for X battles.
Example, a class A or B refit would make the 'Mech immediately available again, with class C and D refits removing it for a single battle, and a class E and F refit for two or more battles.

OmniMechs would count all pod refits as class A/B (its what they're designed for).

[CL_Kodiak]

ApheX, on 04 November 2011 - 09:19 AM, said:

Well hopefully the mechlab in this game is on par with MW2 Merc or MW3. Being able to replace or remove pretty much anything from the mech was enjoyable. besides, being able to customise the mech completely added a personal touch to the mech you worked on. IT was your mech, not just some modified version of a stock variant.

Exactly! This would allow for a much more enjoyable game for me. I remember finding a sweet build that worked well and sharing it with my clan. They would be like - Wait? What did you do? and you would explain the steps to reduce weight enough to add certain things ect ect - it was lots of fun.

[Twilight Sparkle]

I have to admit I was not completely pleased with the system that was seen in Mechwarrior 3. That was only a partial mirror to how Battletech worked and ignored the realities (if you'll excuse my use of the word 'real' when referring to imaginary war machines) of actually customizing mechs. Everything was essentially an Omnimech with how that system ran, and you could do even Factory level refits (engine changes) on the field. This is ignoring the fact that the MW3 system was rife with min-maxing. Yes, I find that, to a degree, even Mechwarrior 4 Mercs was a better model (especially after mektek got their hands on it) because it made you think a little more about what machine you wanted to use.

Looking across all the suggestions and discussions about this before, I think one of the best suggestions was to limit customization on various levels by somewhat (not completely) using the refit levels from the board game. Field level refits (class A and B ) would let you, at the very least, switch out weapons so long as the weapons you were switching out took out the same or less space. Maintenance level refits (class C and D) actually let you change electronics packages, engine rating, equipment and weapons (regardless of size), heat sinks, and armor. Factory level refits (Class E and F) were the toughest, but allowed changes to myomer (mech muscle) type, internal structure, case, and even let you change type of engine.

Besides 'time' limitations as the poster before me (Alizabeth Aijou) suggested, something that might help a lot more on top of his time limitation might be a cost factor. It would likely be cheap to switch a PPC for a Large Laser and a Medium Laser (Class A Field Refit). On the flip side, changing out the entire internal structure (skeleton) of a mech (Class F Factory Refit) might quickly be found to be an expensive and time consuming process. With people suggesting Mechs might be lost in battle, this would be a very serious investment, as if you loose your machine, you've lost that much more. On the flip side, someone who did a cheap Class B refit to turn an AC/20 into a pile of lasers would loose much less if their machine were downed in combat.

Edited by Twilight Sparkle, 04 November 2011 - 09:49 AM.

[wolf74]

What about a Hybrid system: We have the Critical slot of Battletech. But to make Omni-Mechs and Battlemech have some differences in the mechlab.

Omni-Mech: Internals, Engine, Gyros, Armor, and Locked gear can't not be change. Only the Pod-Gear/Weapon can be changed. Weapon Layout can be changed in hours game time.

BattleMechs: You can change out a lot more but each will have a Time delay of a day for a few weapons too a few Weeks for engine game time, but you will also have MW4 Overlay on the critical slot limited to what the CBT versions had.
for an image file so you can see what a few Battlemech would look like:http://home.grandeco...h%20Layouts.pdf

Edited by wolf74, 04 November 2011 - 09:56 AM.

[gregsolidus]

I think we need a better definition of a field refit in order to get a better grasp on customization.I believe a that an MW3 system where you could change out just about anything is the truest representation of Battletech but should only be available when out of matches since that's the equivalent of being in orbit/in your base,when you select to take part in a conquest match your options should become vastly limited since these represent last minute changes where an engine replacement is not feasible.

Edited by gregsolidus, 04 November 2011 - 11:31 AM.

[Heatsink Junkie]

for the sake of liking thinkering with mechs and wanting to have a clue whats going on here, comming from only having the prospective of mw4 mercs, how was the system different in each of these games?

Edited by Heatsink Junkie, 04 November 2011 - 10:09 AM.

[gregsolidus]

Heatsink Junkie, on 04 November 2011 - 10:08 AM, said:

for the sake of liking thinkering with mechs and wanting to have a clue whats going on here, comming from only having the prospective of mw4 mercs, how was the system different in each of these games?

MW4 basically said "you can only put this here and that's that" and "that Beagle will cost you a few more tons".MW3 basically copied the mech readout chart you would you use in table top,you can change the internal frame to the lighter endosteel,change what armor type you had,select a bigger engine,put weapons where you wanted,etc.Just like table top you had to define where things like the Beagle probe, Large Laser,and ammo were situated on the frame of the mech, foresaking armor points in those areas.

Edited by gregsolidus, 04 November 2011 - 10:18 AM.

[Heatsink Junkie]

gregsolidus, on 04 November 2011 - 10:16 AM, said:

MW4 basically said "you can only put this here and that's that" and "that Beagle will cost you a few more tons".MW3 basically copied the mech readout chart you would you use in table top,you can change the internal frame to the lighter endosteel,change what armor type you had,select a bigger engine,put weapons where you wanted,etc.Just like table top you had to define where things like the Beagle probe, Large Laser,and ammo were situated on the frame of the mech, foresaking armor points in those areas.

Um... this clarifies a little, but not really, as this explans the diffrence between mw4's system and mw3's system in terms of the table to game, having not have played the rpg (by this I mean the table top game of the same name, as compared to battletech) the terms arn't as clear as they could be. also, twightlight sparkle said something that suggests mw4 and mw4 mercs had slight diffrences in their systems, so it still dosent quite answer the question.

[CL_Kodiak]

MW4 had hard points where you would just plunk in an item and that was that.

Much like Pen and paper Mw2 and 3 had Crit slots. In certain areas of the mech you had X number of slots. All gear was assigned a value.

Example: If your left torso had 15 slots you could mount 15 slots worth of gear (any gear) that would satisfy the 25 slot requirement. Heatsinks were like .5 slots, weapons were like 5 slots ect ect. Different Engines took various slots, adding jumpjets took x Slots... You would continue mixing and matching gear until were left with your build.

The cool factor was I could totally omit Jump jets and save weight - I could also opt to not use any electronics and take out ECM and BAP to make more room for sinks and weapons.

You could sacrifice weapons to put huge motors in a tiny mech full of ECM and BAP for fast recon. The builds were endless.

[gregsolidus]

fond memories.

[Valerian Mengsk]

I felt that the MW3 mechlab gave too much freedom which devalued the individual chassis. The limitations that MW4 placed on customization provided a certain style to each mech and made them more unique.

[gregsolidus]

I'm sure they'll find a medium between the two.

[Heatsink Junkie]

Kodiak_Steiner, on 04 November 2011 - 10:25 AM, said:

MW4 had hard points where you would just plunk in an item and that was that.

Much like Pen and paper Mw2 and 3 had Crit slots. In certain areas of the mech you had X number of slots. All gear was assigned a value.

Example: If your left torso had 15 slots you could mount 15 slots worth of gear (any gear) that would satisfy the 25 slot requirement. Heatsinks were like .5 slots, weapons were like 5 slots ect ect. Different Engines took various slots, adding jumpjets took x Slots... You would continue mixing and matching gear until were left with your build.

The cool factor was I could totally omit Jump jets and save weight - I could also opt to not use any electronics and take out ECM and BAP to make more room for sinks and weapons.

You could sacrifice weapons to put huge motors in a tiny mech full of ECM and BAP for fast recon. The builds were endless.

so I could for example, if something allong the lines of the mw2/mw3/rpg system is used, spend 50 of my hundrate tonnes in an atlas on armour as usial, but then put a 49 tonn engine in, (got to have heatsinks) and somehow end up with a fast, armoured atlas?