Mech building differences... why?

So... I got the ban hammer (kinda... cant post or reply) over on MWO for certain things I said & questions I asked I guess... not sure really... but to the point of this thread

Why didn't they keep the same mech building rules as Battletech..? The engines being most glaring, they are all overweight and you dont get "10 free heatsinks" anymore, just the ones that come in the engine... the others have to be paid in crits & Tonnage on top of being to heavy to start with... but then I would ask... why the heatsinks internal/external difference... which leads me to why a bigger heatbar instead of a faster dissipation... which would lead to why no real penalties to heat besides shut down/cool off instead of stacking penalties to speed/torso twist/targeting... which would wonder why ghost heat... when those things would correct PPC/Laser boat builds just like it does in the TT system.... but somewhere in there you get the ban hammer after being a forum member for over a year when I was trying to get into closed beta...

Nathan

P.S. this was really just a mini rant but if there are actual answers I'd love to hear them... thanks

 

That makes perfect sense... then I remembered ECM awesomeness of balance... so basically it's just PGI telling battletech lovers to go €♡

 

I guess I'll go back to TT for another decade hoping someday I'll get a good battletech computer game again... MW2 was pretty solid in its day... why can't ppl just leave stuff alone..? They designed a game loved by millions for 3 decades... they are smart and better game designersthe PGI ever will be... hense why they are copying not creating... so just copy!!! Been like watching a slow motion Wrath of the Titans remake where they threw athenas owl in the trash and called him garbage...

Nathan

....and Ban Hammer

 

Again.... whatever!!! I refused to get in anyway invested in this game cause I KNEW in my soul they would betray us & ruin it... it was stated as a design pillar of the game "No 3rd Person" but I guess after nerfing everything into the ground AND adding Cool Shot which they also said they wouldn't do... they were running out of options on how to turn a strategic game into another mindless CoD... but not as good as CoD...

Nathan

as I said... I was just ranting a little... so unless you wanna join the rant or have any logically sound reasoning to my basic question of why didnt they just copy a great game since they are game copiers not game creators besides their egos refusing to believe they just copying great work... pretend to be the devs and ignore it...

 

Being from Europe, I refrain the generalization applied here to what Europe likes and not likes u.u

Also Zhoul, I can kinda see why you were banned in the first place.

That said, why did they not copy BT? Because you can't copy a rigid, dice-based system into a real time event. Just take the way you roll for damage, to-hit, etc and then build the game from that small aspect and change, shift and adjust the variables. And you get a lot of stuff no longer matching table top rules.

Am I agreeing with PGI's decisions? Most of the time, no. But I do enjoy running with my Lancemates and have fun.

 

I got to be honest, I'm starting to get tired of reading rant after rant about how this game has been messed up. I think most of the people that take the time to post on MWO forums are people have have problems with the game and want everyone and their mothers to know about it. There are plenty of us that sit back and don't post because we are generally satisfied with the game. Honestly the only time I start getting upset with one aspect of the game it's after ready 20 negative posts I start getting infected with negativity. As for cool shots and 3PV I still can't believe people make such a HUGE deal out of this. Can you get a slight advantage if used right, yes you can but come on people how many times have you actually been killed or lost a match because someone had a coolshot or used 3PV. I've tried 3PV and absolutely hate it, I think they tried to balance it way to much and made it shitty. No minimap and your basically fixed to arm lock when using it. Just my two cents guys, feel free to keep complaining, if I was extremely unhappy I might join you. However, I post here today as a generally satisfied customer that has minor gripes and hopes the improvements keep on coming.

 

I love MW/BT, but the thing to remember is that MW != BT, or vice versa. While they're based in the same universe, the easiest way to think about it is that, typically, MW is real-time and BT is turn-based. Real-time rules do not apply to turn-based rules due to the way time and timed events unravel between them.

This isn't about telling the tabletop fans to go eff themselves, it's about the fact that you simply can't apply some rules to a real-time environment.

I'm not going to sit here and say PGI hasn't screwed up. All you have to do is talk to several of the people around here, specifically Vergere, and you'll know that I don't agree with PGI's approach to some things *cough*balance*cough, but I'm completely understanding when they can show and prove that tabletop mechanics just aren't going to apply to the real-time environment of the game.

What comes to mind immediately is SSRMs. When they had the huge debacle about streaks and streak-cats being way OP for what they are, the initial implementation was close to TT. (FTR: Close != exactly the same) Streaks had 100% accuracy, flew towards their targets, and unless the target ducked into cover at precisely the right time, they would hit. They always flew towards the center of mass and they almost always hit. The TT streaks had a "guaranteed hit" mechanic. If they weren't going to hit, they didn't fire. You can't make that determination prior to firing in a real-time environment. So they had to break TT, they first reduced the chance to hit to 90%, then forced them to spread out over the center of mass. Then, when that still wasn't working and people were bitching at the top of their lungs, they dropped the damage to 1 per missile, went back to a 100% chance to hit moved the targeting points to "any random part of the mech". They tinkered with damage off-and-on until we got where we are today with them. No one complains, the streaks now target limbs first, and it's fairly random with which limb is targeted, then moves to other parts of the mech. The streaks now have little resemblance to tabletop mechanics, but no one complains about them anymore. The streaks were just not able to translate well into a real-time environment.

Other weapons and mechs will and do have similar issues with being translated over. My understanding is that the Flea, along with the MASC that will be introduced with it, have given them similar problems, and that's why it hasn't been released yet.

PGI can really be idiots with some things. They have proven it over and over again, with no end in sight. However, I'm not going to stand idly by when erroneous and blatantly incorrect assumptions are dished out undeservingly. I have been learning programming and studying game development for quite some time, I'd love to do it one day. But when it comes to making assumptions about how it is done: "OMG WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE x YET? IT CAN'T BE THAT HARD!" or why can't "JUST DO IT THIS WAY AND STOP WORRYING ABOUT IT!", I'm more understanding than most. It takes MANY MAN HOURS to achieve what is seemingly simple in a way that scales across thousands or millions of PC configurations, that scales at macro-levels that we can't see (game communities call this "meta") without looking at their data, that is reliable when put under the scrutiny of hundreds of thousands of games, millions of hours played and trillions of weapons fired. (Link to beta stats: http://bit.ly/17TDMqe)

No, this isn't the best game. It was "launched" early and without many key, high-profile features. That is stupid on PGI's part. However, blaming them for things that really aren't their fault, are out of their control, or are simply not possible due to the constraints of the medium, aren't fair.

That all being said, I love this game. I love the complexity and depth this game has over its competitors (Hawken, namely) and the teamplay elements. I'm happily waiting for UI2.0, CW and a few other features that I know are coming, and just aren't here yet. I miss the campaigns of the first 4 games, and the variety of mechs offered in them (I love omnitech mechs), but I still love MWO for the fun I have with the community, the consistent effort of getting better, landing better shots, developing better team tactics and... GIANT STOMPY INTERNET ROBOTS.

And honestly, I'm with Tsume on this one:

 

Very objective view @ZXeno. The problem with programming is you'll never please everyone and the problem with companies is they have to try and chase what they think will bring them more profit. We might not agree with it but that's life.

 

As a software developer by day, my co-workers and I roll our eyes when we hear "Oh, that should be a cinch to add x to our software" from the sales department or operations...

 

Truthfully Zhoul, it sounds like you want to play Battletech on the computer. You should really look into Mechwarrior: Tactics, which is in closed beta right now. Or you could always try to see if you can get Neveron.com to work correctly in your browser, though they should have let that site die nearly a decade ago.

 

Oh I understand. I've learned long ago you can't please everyone and still make good money. 3PV is the absolute epitome of that. No one in the community wanted it, but it's apparently driving in more players. I have no issue with it right now. It's exactly crappy enough to drive people to FPV, which is their stated goal.

[quote author=IntX link=topic=3705.msg22684#msg22684 date=1379710727]
As a software developer by day, my co-workers and I roll our eyes when we hear "Oh, that should be a cinch to add x to our software" from the sales department or operations...
[/quote]

As I've gotten deeper into my, now numerous, projects that are unfinished, I've really come to get pissed off every time someone says "it can't be hard to implement X feature." "For the stars, if it is so damned easy, why don't you just code it up and send it to them?" is the reply I always want to send people who say that. I tinkered a bit with creating a MW clone, just to experiment and see how hard some of the stuff is. I'm no 3D modeller (though, I see one has joined the boards!), so my tests were very blocky, but it drove the point home well enough. I've known what they were doing is hard, but it also showed me that they really need to figure out how to balance the weapon mechanics without layering on additional heat mechanics for every weapon. They're creating a completely unmaintainable mess with the current heat mechanics.

I love MWO. I'll probably love it until they shut down the servers and piss the fanbase off even more. I'll love it until I'm dead and rotten, and probably even after I'm in a coffin. There's nothing like giant, 25-100 ton machines piloted by dedicated people stomping around on a battlefield, knocking over trees and melting ferro-fibrous plates of armor off of other machines of war.

Admittedly, the reason we all get so pissed off is because we have such dedication to the game. We've vested parts of ourselves into this, and when it doesn't go the way we want, we get upset. (this is actually pretty-well covered here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOIZXxB1nlI) This (the whole of MWO) community is no different from any other in that regard. We chose this game and vested parts of ourselves into it. We've vested time, effort, money and energy into this, and so yea, we're going to get angry. I just don't see the OP's point of coming in, getting angry beyond all belief (evidenced in that I had to translate what he said because he was so angry when he typed it) and then announcing: "whatever!!!", saying he wasn't going to get invested in it. Clearly he is already invested in it, otherwise he wouldn't be so angry.

I approach all of this from my own, completely biased and fanboyish point of view: MWO helped me get through one of the hardest times of my life, right when it went into open beta. The timing couldn't have been more perfect in that regard. Since then, I've devoted hundreds more hours and many dollars to the game. I'm vested, there's no uncertainty there. I love it, and I'll continue to love it. My wife plays, my two best friends play (AdmiralBeran and Jikininki404, for those who've dropped with us), I've made new friends through MWO: Vergere, Skullshot, and those of you here... MWO is great, the community is great and I'm not going to let it go. There are going to be toxic players who come and go (like OP), there will be competitive players who brag and beat their drums on their hilltops, and there will be great and poor decisions by PGI on where to take the game. I love MWO, and I'm not going anywhere any time soon.

 

You want actual answers? Okay...

Calculate out an engine's tonnage in MW:O, including the tonnage of heat sinks to get to the 10 minimum required.

Compare that tonnage to BattleTech tabletop engine weight PLUS the weight of the Gyro.

What do you get? THE TONNAGES MATCH!!

HOLY SHNIKIES, BATMAN! WILL WONDERS NEVER CEASE?

In other words, to make things easier for themselves MW:O devs added the weight of the gyro to the weight of the engine. That's why they appear overweight. And they worked it out so that the total engine+gyro+10HS tonnages match. BAM! Your "most glaring" problem, all nicely fixed and even wrapped up in a bow for you.

I won't get into the other stuff, as most of it has been discussed to death for the past year-plus.

 

@ I_AM_ZHOUL: are you a girl? Because Zhoul posesses Dana Barrett (played by Sigourney Weaver) in Ghostbusters. Seems an odd choice of screen names for a male. Just saying.

 

For a mild rant thread I got some real answers and provoked a decent reponse... (the real reason I feel I got the probation...) so I'll address each post in order and edit to include everyone...

@Tsume... I understand that there will be differences but my point is that most of the more glaring problems are caused not by sticking to the letter let alone intent of the TT rules but by straying away from RAW & RAI (Rules As Written & Rules As Intended)

@fire... I'm glad that your able to exist in a state of blissful ignorance & I will apologize on the behalf of everyone who posts the issues that have gotten more frustrated and toxic as they have been mainly ignored by PGI in "open beta"... the point of which is to at least have some kinda communication about perceived issues...

@ZXeno... the SSRMs are another key example of my point not a rebuttal of it, cause what made them OP? The fact that if you got a target lock they hit..? No... The fact they did 2 damage per missle..? No... what made them OP was the fact they hit every time, did 2 damage per missle AND it was to the CT!!! So after like 4 patches they finally went back to TT rules for spreading the damage around in some kind of random fashion... we as players introduce that randomness ourselves by defending ourselves with torso twists, moving different directions, jumping, etc with other weapons but the SSRMs are pretty much unavoidable (which is kinda the point of having a guided missle in the first place)

So much original point stands... all the issues that MWO has past/present/future is easily identifiable by just looking at how they have strayed away from the original rules... or was just poorly translated. ..

@IntX... I know there isnt a magic wand but they spend a lot of time & money trying to "fix" the symptoms not the cause of the main issues... SSRM is a key example of this kinda behavior and a far cry from being unique one...

@Sass... I know, I didn't get lucky enough be to be included but what I've been hearing has been good... I'm cautiously optimistic...

@Durant... I got really excited cause that seemed like a good point and was hoping that I was completely wrong and this was not issue number 478 against what PGI had done... so I opened up my Tech Manual & Smurfys to been amazed how clueless I was even though after 2+ decades I know the more common engine weights off the top of my head.... you are not correct, heres the smurfy example I used...

Smurfy
Death Knell-Standard 210 (13 tons) + 2 HS (2 tons)=15 Tons(3T gyro inculded free)
Tech Manual
Death Knell-Standard 210 (9 tons) + Gyro (3 tons)= 12 tons (10 free sinks-2 not in engine that take crit slots but not tonnage)

Still a good theory even if it was incorrect though it did come wrapped up with a bow which was very sweet... Thank you for considering presentation...

@Iron... yes, Zhoul does possess Dana but it's not female or even male.... Zhoul is a transdimensional being who ultimately has no sex as we would understand the concept... Dana just happened to occupy the transdimensional gate that was built to bring Gozer... Ghostbusters is one of my favorite movies and so we I picked a screenname at 12 years old almost 20yrs ago I picked Zhoul... (though I spell it zuul for a very long time)... go back and rewatch the first 5 minutes... when she opens the fridge, thats Zhoul not Dana... but thank you for the just saying comment... was truly thought provoking... ;-)


I hope that I have demonstrated at least a mild grasp of the basics that we are discussing in a logical manner... I tried to respond to all posts and that I'm not just "b*tching & whining" for no reason... but to show the cause of so many of the issues currently surrounding MWO not just the symptoms that result in endless patches and nerfs without addressing the cause of those symptoms...

Nathan

P.S. @ZXeno... yes, BT is turn based but if you are playing under the advanced rules in Tactical Options with firing on the move, overwatch, forced initiative... it becomes a much more fluid game and thats not even counting the Solaris rule system with 4 "turns" inside of 1 turn which is what I really cut my teeth on... I mean TT isn't even that challenging if my opponent isnt also a Solaris mechwarrior... but that is one of the main attractions to me is the real time aspect... I dont need a computer monitor to provide me the visual effects... the Great Reality (however you personally choose to define that concept) gifted me with this awesome thing called an imagination... I've seen the canopy shattered by every through armor critical that destroyed the cockpit slot in the past 19 years... ;-)

 

Stackpole was such a good writer, I have read every since Classic book at least twice and the whole Dark Age series as well ... not only is playing "Chess but the pieces shoot each other" (what I was told the first time I saw BT in the gameshop at 12yrs old... when I asked what they were playing) plus RPG systems that came out, with all the sourcebooks that can really change how you veiw the universe when certain pieces of info come to light. Like how Hanse Davion is Sun-Tzu Liaos father... just really cool stuff that can still entertain and engage you even after all this time ... or remember those full size Mech Simulators that cost like $5 for 5 minutes... I would save up all my money to play those when I was younger...


My real issue is that so many of these issues are so simply fixed (maybe the programming is impossible) by just using the existing system that has a vibrant 3 decade history... they made 5mil just by announcing they were gonna make MWO & having some stompy mechs... at which point they stopped following the rule system... and have just gotten farther and farther away by only addressing symptoms not what causes those symptoms... though I will give them credit the Guass mechanic was well implemented and cool, set a clear limit on how it functions and shows why it had a minimum range on TT... but then I think about how every other fix was clumsy, heavy handed, & arbitrary... makes me sad that it becomes the exception that proves the rule instead of being the rule on how issues are fixed...

Nathan

 

If PGI's engine weights were off, no canon designs would work in MWO at all. They'd all be overweight. One thing that both of you forgot to take into account with the engine weight is that for some, bizarre (and possibly problematic situation in the future...) reason, the weight of the cockpit is also included in the weight of the engine. Reload TDK with no equipment on it. What weight is being used? 2.5 tons. That is *only* the weight of the chassis.

Smurfy
TDK: Chassis (2.5 tons); Standard 210 (13 tons) + 2 HS (2 tons) = 17.5 tons (7.5 tons left for weapons and armor)

Tech Manual
TDK: Chassis (2.5 tons); Standard 210 (9 tons and not standard construction); Gyro (3 tons); Cockpit (3 tons) = 17.5 tons (7.5 tons left for weapons and armor)

Now, my curious question is why on earth did they roll the Cockpit weight into the weight of the engine? All standard cockpits, regardless of the weight of the mech, are 3 tons. Why not just have an automatic 3 tons added right off the bat, but like structure? I have a feeling this is going to come back to bite them in the ass when small cockpits become available. *Assuming* they include those? (Likely unnecessary due to the Hardpoint system (Few mechs with Hardpoints in the head) and would be an auto-include since you couldn't replicate the problems it has in game.)

 

Winner=Azakael!!!!

Thank you for answering the original question... I never just stripped the mech bare before so I missed the cockpit... as to your question... because at 1:1 ratio it will be a very very very long time before small/torso mounted cockpits or XL/compact gyros exist in MWO... so I guess they didn't think it was very important since it wont be a cause for concern any time soon...

Nathan