23 replies to this topic

[Marvin Martian]

I was looking at Mechwarrior Tactics today and saw their new posts of the Mech bios. I compared that to what we've seen in MWO's mechlab so far, and realized that MWO is really geared toward the experienced Mechwarrior. The setup in mechlab is very reminiscent of MW4.

I was thinking in the context of being a new player, unfamiliar with Mechwarrior, that the information provided when choosing a mech to purchase isn't very helpful unless I do a lot of research. For new players, I think the graph that Tactics has to show how powerful the mech is at different ranges and its comparitive speed and armor, gives anyone, especially a novice, a quick way to see the mech's capabilities.

I also liked the bio they came up with each mech. It's nice for immersive purposes.

I'm not suggesting cutting a pasting what Mechwarrior Tactics has done, but I'm thinking something that presents information easier to a novice might be a good idea.

Here is an example:

[Redshift2k5]

I'm sure when we get closer to launch (Not until mid-late July at the least!) there will be exactly that sort of information available either in-game, on this website, or on a wiki (or all of the above)

[Aelos03]

well this isn't strategy game so you can't explain via graph is you need to use it to know how capable it is so want to help novices give
them some movement/firing tutorial (like in mw4) and then throw then in battle against other novices thats best learning experience, only info they need is about weapons and mech classes/role warfare and that can be included in tutorial.

[Roland]

One thing to bear in mind is that one of the key aspects of mechwarrior is that you don't buy your mech... you BUILD your mech.

Now, in this game, you'll be buying a chassis and stuff, but the whole notion of the mechlab is that you get to customize it to suit your needs.

That means that the actual mech you'll be buying, in many ways, is a platform upon which you can put stuff that you want. Each chassis will have different capabilities in this regard. They'll have different hardpoints, allowing you to carry different weapons, different engines, etc.

To start out, you'll probably just want to decide on your overall role:
Light - Scouting, harrassment, etc.
Medium - More punch than lights, less mobility
Heavy - Main force on the field. Can be providing ranged support for rest of lance, as well as brawling
Assault - Slow moving, capable of making a huge difference wherever they happen to be, but can't really move around that much. Large amounts of armor, but can be an easy target for long range support mechs.

Generally, if you have no idea what you're doing, I'd go with a medium mech. The hunchback's a tough little ****** too... I loved playing that mech in MW4 with a longtom.

If you want more info, given that the devs here seem to be holding some respect for the canon, I'd check out some of the old Battletech TRO stuff, which will give you information about different mechs, weapons, etc. as they exist in Battletech. This game won't be exactly like battletech, but it may give you some background on what exists in the battletech universe.

[Gremlich Johns]

you are going to have to do SOME research if you want to be effective as both a player and as a team mate.

This is not your normal shooter like MW3/BF whatever or counterstrike. Go to sarna

[Owl Cutter]

I agree, I hope a newb-friendly summary is available when choosing a 'mech to purchase. I pretty much trust Piranha to see the importance of such a basic design principle, though, so I don't see its not being obvious in what we've already seen as reason to worry about it not being in the launch build.

I am a really big fan of polygon graphs in particular, though, like that hexagonal one there. I can blame all my knowledge of Pokemon on a pentagonal summary initially catching my eye, if not for which I'd probably be even more ignorant of the game and the stuff in it. I don't expect that particular tool to be used or not used for MW:O, but hope it is used.

[Gremlich Johns]

Having played a number of MW-based games helps the most - practical application is the best teacher.

currently there are Mektek and MW:LL. I recommend tuning up with either of those.

[farrel wolf]

well it kinda sucks for new players but they'll get the hang of it

[Ktooosiek]

You're implying that MW4 weapon management system was a cluster**ck? You haven't played MW3, then. THIS is a cluster****.

[Corpsecandle]

I like this idea. I know a lot of folks who won't bother to try a game if they have to do a lot of research before hand. If the game can present a fair bit of information about stock variants and intended uses, that will speed up the "get in and play process" and therefore attract more players and possibly keep them playing the game past cursory single battle.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I read/heard that MW:Tactics will also have a MechLab, but this kind of introductory material is a plus.

[Gremlich Johns]

Corpsecandle, on 30 May 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

I like this idea. I know a lot of folks who won't bother to try a game if they have to do a lot of research before hand. If the game can present a fair bit of information about stock variants and intended uses, that will speed up the "get in and play process" and therefore attract more players and possibly keep them playing the game past cursory single battle.

So much exists outside of the game to look that has relevance, the game does not need to be cluttered up with other crap.

New players, if you want to know about mech basics, go to sarna or other such sites. In game mechs will differ somewhat, but not enough to warrant extra bits like a reference. The mechlab and HUD will have all the salient game info for the mechs.

[Yeach]

I believe MWO already has this.

Speed, tonnage, armor, firepower, heat efficiency.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Don't get shot unless you expect too.

Probably best to buddy up with people and do what is asked if it doesn't sound really dumb.

Have an idea what kind of machine you want to run and tweak around in them mech lab. Diversifying your armaments too much is a liability more than a blessing. Stream line you designs.

[Corpsecandle]

Gremlich Johns, on 30 May 2012 - 03:50 PM, said:

So much exists outside of the game to look that has relevance, the game does not need to be cluttered up with other crap.

New players, if you want to know about mech basics, go to sarna or other such sites. In game mechs will differ somewhat, but not enough to warrant extra bits like a reference. The mechlab and HUD will have all the salient game info for the mechs.

All right, I work in Software QA and you're presenting a mentality that I have a hard time dealing with. You can't expect a consumer to take a product seriously if you don't present some basic resources to introduce someone to the product. How can any product expect to succeed in bringing in new revenue sources if it expects users to go outside it's system in order to gain at least a basic understanding of the product? Those first steps are so important for a new user who only has a rudimentary understanding of what the product is that it's worth taking the time to develop these features. In addition these features need to be introduced at the outset, or else the product misses out on a great deal of startup income.

[Roland]

While I would tend to agree that what you're presenting is a commonly held belief, there are some games which have shown that large scale success can be achieved, even with extremely steep learning curves.

EvE is probably the best example of this, whose learning curve has been illustrated by this graph:

[SilverWolf]

LOL way to go Roland

[Roland]

Ah, I don't deserve any credit for that graph. Someone else made it a long time ago... Possibly the best description of EvE there is though.

[IceSerpent]

Corpsecandle, on 31 May 2012 - 07:22 AM, said:

All right, I work in Software QA and you're presenting a mentality that I have a hard time dealing with. You can't expect a consumer to take a product seriously if you don't present some basic resources to introduce someone to the product. How can any product expect to succeed in bringing in new revenue sources if it expects users to go outside it's system in order to gain at least a basic understanding of the product?

I have to disagree - certainly, information along the lines of "what key do I press to move forward" should be in-game, but basic understanding is usually obtained elsewhere. A calculator requires basic understanding of math, but doesn't teach it. A word processor requires basic understanding of a given language, but doesn't teach it, etc. In other words, help specific to the application should be included (and usually is), while basic understanding of the underlying concept is usually expected to be there already.

[Merrik Stryfe]

Well I'm afraid you guys can argue all you want about whether or not it's needed but it's not going to stop me from continuing work on my New Player's Guide to Mechs. As a new player who really would have liked having relevent information handy and in one place but instead had to look it up in overwhelming encyclopedia entries (sarna is great and I love it but it throws a LOT of information at you at once), I figure I should do what I can to make sure other players don't have to suffer the information scatter and overload.