Jump to content

Weight Based Drops


  • You cannot reply to this topic
64 replies to this topic

Poll: Weight Limits on Drops (150 member(s) have cast votes)

8v8 Weight Limit

  1. YES, 480 Tons, Average weight of mechs is (60 Tons X 8 players) (91 votes [60.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 60.67%

  2. NO Weight Limit, lighter mechs are inferior and have no place in 8v8 combat other then 1 to scout with ECM or Backdoor(cape base or bases). (2 votes [1.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.33%

  3. NO, an Atlas is equal to Hunchback anywhere on the field and similarly skilled pilots would be on equal fighting terms vs each other at nearly all times respective to loads outs. (11 votes [7.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.33%

  4. YES But Higher Weight, I really only want to see the limit of all Assault teams, I also do not like to play lighter mechs they are weaker. (23 votes [15.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.33%

  5. Choice not stated please state choice below. (23 votes [15.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.33%

4v4 Weight Limit

  1. Yes 240 Tons (4 players X 60 Tons or average weight of a mech) (81 votes [54.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 54.00%

  2. NO Weight Limit, lighter mechs are inferior and have no place in 8v8 combat other then 1 to scout with ECM or Backdoor(cap base or bases). (6 votes [4.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.00%

  3. NO, an Atlas is equal to Hunchback anywhere on the field and similarly skilled pilots would be on equal fighting terms vs each other at nearly all times respective to loads outs. (12 votes [8.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.00%

  4. YES But Higher Weight, I really only want to see the limit of all Assault teams, I also do not like to play lighter mechs they are weaker. (24 votes [16.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 16.00%

  5. Choice not stated please state choice below. (27 votes [18.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 18.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61 AlixX

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 12 February 2013 - 01:38 PM

View PostRipnfly, on 12 February 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

Really the more I talk about this type of limitation the more people really want to see it atleast in some form in the game.

We really want to see Atlas' be omfg an Atlas when we play.


exactly

But the total weight of the team should be lower than 480 imo. Medium mechs should be the main force on the battlefield.

#62 Anony Mouse

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts
  • LocationSabaku no Hana, Misery, Draconis Combine

Posted 13 February 2013 - 11:41 PM

Taking lobbies as a given, I can see the weight limits as described here as a mainstay, however noone wants a situation where its a P.I.T.A. to get a game in with their AS7, or STK or whatever. So there needs to some tiered levels of play, wherein assaults are commonplace but not necasarrily a prerequisite. Same with lights, and mediums and heavies and so on. Perhaps Lights and Mediums in one tier, Heavies and Assaults in another, again these being the common class but not the only class.

Edited by Anony Mouse, 13 February 2013 - 11:42 PM.


#63 idle crow

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 13 February 2013 - 11:57 PM

I don't mind the idea of tonnage limits. Its what we used in MW4 during NBT. But don't think for a minute it won't result in new cookie cutter builds.

#64 lsp

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 1,618 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:08 AM

Yes please.

#65 Xinaoen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 382 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:10 AM

One of the "pillars of the game" is this whole Role Warfare concept. The devs have stated a desire to move away from previous Mechwarrior games, where bigger meant better. Your mileage may vary on whether they've accomplished that. When and if they do, weight-based drops will make absolutely no sense.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users