51 replies to this topic

[GioAvanti]

QuantumButler, on 31 December 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:

nothing's wrong with this at all, more customization is good.

Actually there is something wrong with this.... it totally takes the spirit of the game from the game. Why not ask for no hard points... because we all want an atlas with ecm and 25 ssrm 2's.... or 12 srm6's.....

More customization eventually backfires.

Edited by GioAvanti, 31 December 2012 - 01:33 PM.

[RiceyFighter]

An option for wild card on your mechs kind of like Call of duty Black Ops 2 system.

Sacrafice one thing for another befefit. If it was balanced well I don't mind taking it.

Example:
Atlas:
Increase heat efficienty by X%, but loose the ability to mount ballistics.

Awesome:
Decrease PPC heat generated, but loose both arm acutators.

[Prophet of Entropy]

more customization leads to more threads of " W T F!!! ....... MECH IS OP!!!! NERF IT NOW!!!!"

[xRaeder]

I'd also like to point out that these Mech bonuses are not in the content or feature roadmap. Neither is the CW.

GioAvanti, on 31 December 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

Actually there is something wrong with this.... it totally takes the spirit of the game from the game. Why not ask for no hard points... because we all want an atlas with ecm and 25 ssrm 2's.... or 12 srm6's.....

More customization eventually backfires.

I think it is a leap to say that adding 10 points of armor to a vulnerable location would lead to them removing the hardpoint system.

[p00k]

xRaeder, on 31 December 2012 - 01:43 PM, said:

I think it is a leap to say that adding 10 points of armor to a vulnerable location would lead to them removing the hardpoint system.

yes, let's forget changing the hardpoint system and stick to the ability to over-allocate armor
what do you think about my build

atlas d-dc
head: uac5 ammo
ct: std325, dhsx3, ecm
rt: uac5 x2, uac5 ammo x2
lt: srm6 x3, srm ammo x6
rl: uac5 ammo x2
ll: uac5 ammo x2

upgrades: dhs, endosteel

armor
head: 18
ct: 140
rear ct: 40
rt: 105
rear rt: 35
lt: 105
rear lt: 35
ra: 0
la: 0
rl: 65
ll: 65

feel free to shift things around a bit, i think i even have a free ton (maybe a std330 instead?). point is, that seems pretty silly, right?

so you don't want full armor freedom, just an extra 10 here on this one mech. why 10? why not 5? why not 15? cuz you like the number 10?

fine, say we grant that totally arbitrary determination. after all many things are arbitrary. i want an extra 10 armor in the side torsos of my atlas. i want an extra 10 armor in the cockpit of my catapult. i want an extra 10 armor on the legs of my light mechs. would it be a good idea though? no, not really.

[Tickdoff Tank]

BlackSquirrel, on 31 December 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

I figured mechs should have bonuses similar to eve ships... So cent has a faster % torso twist, and acceleration, Hunchback that much more armor. Awesome a cooling bonus with PPCs If you think about it certain mechs and engine sizes already do this...and say the spider will as well. (Allow for more) That way it's easier to understand what they're designed for. Skirmisher, anti light, etc etc.

They are starting to give mechs "perks", such as the YLW, which has a faster torso twist than other Cents. They have also said that all mechs will eventually have small differences to them. Such as the Catapults excellent torso twist and the YLW twist speed.

[shintakie]

p00k, on 31 December 2012 - 01:54 PM, said:

yes, let's forget changing the hardpoint system and stick to the ability to over-allocate armor
what do you think about my build

atlas d-dc
head: uac5 ammo
ct: std325, dhsx3, ecm
rt: uac5 x2, uac5 ammo x2
lt: srm6 x3, srm ammo x6
rl: uac5 ammo x2
ll: uac5 ammo x2

upgrades: dhs, endosteel

armor
head: 18
ct: 140
rear ct: 40
rt: 105
rear rt: 35
lt: 105
rear lt: 35
ra: 0
la: 0
rl: 65
ll: 65

feel free to shift things around a bit, i think i even have a free ton (maybe a std330 instead?). point is, that seems pretty silly, right?

so you don't want full armor freedom, just an extra 10 here on this one mech. why 10? why not 5? why not 15? cuz you like the number 10?

fine, say we grant that totally arbitrary determination. after all many things are arbitrary. i want an extra 10 armor in the side torsos of my atlas. i want an extra 10 armor in the cockpit of my catapult. i want an extra 10 armor on the legs of my light mechs. would it be a good idea though? no, not really.

I think that Ron Burgundy clip is spot on there. You took a small extra perk, somethin that PGI plans to do for every mech, and turned it into somethin ridiculous. Do you not understand how to make a coherent argument or are you just trollin? I can't honestly tell.

[p00k]

shintakie, on 31 December 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

I think that Ron Burgundy clip is spot on there. You took a small extra perk, somethin that PGI plans to do for every mech, and turned it into somethin ridiculous. Do you not understand how to make a coherent argument or are you just trollin? I can't honestly tell.

you must not have read the last paragraph
i know, internets, short attention span
i could mock you and explain the difference between variant specific mech perks and changing one of the fundamental rules of the game, but in the spirit of the holidays, i'll just reiterate why this is silly, and not an overdramatic escalation

every mech has weaknesses
the catapult has a big cockpit, just like the hunchback has a big right torso. should the catapult get 28 cockpit armor? just 10 more armor, right?

the one remaining weakness of lights is getting legged. should ravens get 42 leg armor? even if they have to drop armor from elsewhere?

and yeah, feel free to read the whole post next time. happy holidays!

[shintakie]

p00k, on 31 December 2012 - 02:10 PM, said:

you must not have read the last paragraph
i know, internets, short attention span
i could mock you and explain the difference between variant specific mech perks and changing one of the fundamental rules of the game, but in the spirit of the holidays, i'll just reiterate why this is silly, and not an overdramatic escalation

every mech has weaknesses
the catapult has a big cockpit, just like the hunchback has a big right torso. should the catapult get 28 cockpit armor? just 10 more armor, right?

the one remaining weakness of lights is getting legged. should ravens get 42 leg armor? even if they have to drop armor from elsewhere?

and yeah, feel free to read the whole post next time. happy holidays!

What fundamental rule of the game are we breakin by givin a small bonus to maximum armor in a single location while lowerin armor in another location to compensate?

[JP Josh]

i do not like this idea.

sry but you alerady got double armer.

[Lykaon]

QuantumButler, on 31 December 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

And we don't want something for nothing, we want the hunch to have about 10 points higher MAX armor rating than the non-hunch side, the difference in total armor points can be deducted from other hit locations.

I'd gladly sacrifice a couple points from every hitlocation [even the head] to have my AC20 hunch not explode quite as fast, or my Cent gun arm to not fall off after the first 10 seconds of fighting.

The Hunchback 4SP would keep the current max armor values.

There is a way to impliment the desired results without messing with armor values or tonnage.

Internal components all have hitpoints.

3 for gauss rifle criticals
15 for engines
10 for everything else.

Once armor is breached internal damage is inflicted.Critical locations are randomly assigned and that specific item recieves damage.

So if for example any item mounted in a centurions right arm had 10 more hitpoints it would absorb more damage before being disabled.

[BlackSquirrel]

People are too focused on the armor aspects of it... That's just one idea.

Another would be extra ammo storage... Instead of 7 rounds per ton this mech can carry 25% more of xyz ammo type etc.