|
I just got round to looking at that latest bit of legalese in the HG case and it is a beautiful smack down.
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 21:27 |
|
|
Post some highlights so the rest of us don't have to read through that word soup.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:Don't get autocannons poo poo on now. Them finally being worth their weight is a blessing. Energy weapons don't need to rule everything. Even ignoring the whole "But heatsinks don't run out of ammo!", I think a big part even for newcomers opinions will be down to the comparative availability of ballistic hardpoints, along with a bigger logistics headache trying to use multiple AC types (above machineguns) until you hit heavy mechs. Not the One to One "AC type VS laser type", or how PPCs will make you a freshly baked pie every time they hit an enemy. But the difficulties in using MULTIPLE lasers vs Multiple ACs, of different sizes. Even for downgrading, one laser in a group only costs you that particular weapon's performance. Downgrading one of your autocannons means one more type of ammo to bring. If you could end up with a net gain in tonnage, that's still more awkward to deal with. More so if you are new to the series and the mechlab is already have no idea "How much ammo is enough/too much?" for a single type. There is already talk among goons about how useless three ballistic hardpoints are on the Shadowhawk, for example. I forget if three AC2s was deemed "still too loving heavy to work" or not, but even with their buffs that's a shitload of effort to put in the three smallest possible weapons. TL;DR: It's probably going to be more down to CONVENIENCE than "My logistics!", for playing with your laser setup over playing with (customized) autocannon setups. peer posted:Speaking of Battletech grognards, early in the beta period of MWO years ago I argued on the official forum that the game shouldn't charge you for repairing your mech and restocking ammo after a match, because that's the kind of feel-bad money sink you should avoid in your multiplayer game and also penalises ballistics and missiles in an unfun metagame way. Most of the replies were calling me a crybaby noob or telling me to go back to Call of Duty because MWO was a simulation, not an "arcade game", and so realism should take precedence over fun Asking for a handheld spear in a scuba game gets the "Go back to call of duty  " It's loving amazing what a revolving door "Because realism!" is depending on whether or not it's common sense QoL, or just another meter or inconvenience to flagelatte yourself with. Or just to make the gameplay you want to put in your game sound like you did it out of some grand artistic vision.Hey Elite Dangerous, hook us up with some tractor beams for this ore scooping garbage. "Tractor beams are not REALISTIC! And do not fit the lore. Our team is dedicated to an authentic Oldschool Elite experience" Okay how about those set and forget mining machines from said Oldschool Elite games? Realistic, Lore friendly, legit olschool. "Um, uh... That doesn't fit the gameplay we're going for." Section Z fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Apr 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
I'm not saying energy weapons shouldn't be useful, just that they don't need to surpass ACs in every regard. Energy boating is a tried and true tradition, and it'll certainly be easy if you just don't want to mess with poo poo. But I like autocannons.  Also, Battletech is on the Top Sellers list on the front page of Steam now!  It's in the last slot, but that's still climbing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:I'm not saying energy weapons shouldn't be useful, just that they don't need to surpass ACs in every regard. Energy boating is a tried and true tradition, and it'll certainly be easy if you just don't want to mess with poo poo. But I like autocannons. Though it certainly makes dreaming of heavier mechs added to your roster have more of an impact. It's going to feel more impressive to dual wield guns bigger than an AC2 without awkward sacrifices, than deciding you want to cram a pair of large lasers into something not quite meant for it. One big gun is cool, more than one gun is cooler. Meanwhile, less than two lasers unless they are large makes me sad. You can talk about efficiency all day, a single medium laser is just depressing to watch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
I like the changes they've made to Autocannons, they feel much more balanced and distinct from one another. If only the TT would take a que from them or god forbid,  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:Post some highlights so the rest of us don't have to read through that word soup. It's a slow burn, there isn't anything particularly worth highlighting, the whole thing is just "HG are either dishonest, morons, or dishonest morons" Also: Apparently one of the Banshee variants has 8E6S hardpoints, which means if you just want to go ham and fill it up with medium lasers and MGs it does 200 damage at 270M, 290 damage at 90M, and melees for 220 damage. And every time the MGs fire you get 18 crit rolls with a 75% crit chance bonus  I guess having most of your mech filled up with a rediculously huge engine is fine if your weapon loadout doesn't actually weigh anything and you can dump heat by casually dropping your orbital cannon melee attack on people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Section Z posted:" that isn't just regurgitating "But lasers don't use ammo!" for the thousandth time. Sure, but it is also a pretty big loving deal in-universe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Sure, but it is also a pretty big loving deal in-universe. Regardless, "In-Universe" means you may as well throw most mech design chat out the window anyways. "Do you have any IDEA how much a logistical nightmare ammunition is for our forces!? PPCs are superior in every way!" "I agree, let's get on installing PPCs on everything! Now... where did you find an entire warehouse full of the most expensive energy weapon in the inner sphere for us to use because you hate ammo so much?" Section Z fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Apr 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
Section Z posted:It's always a big deal. One ton of AC20 ammo is just sad, for a single example. But even a good reason when it's repeated often enough all on it's own can start to get glossed over. So I was thinking out loud to try and figure out some other HBS design snags I hadn't considered yet as much as anything. Like how for as great it is Machineguns are cool, it does kind of mess with your hardpoint spread sometimes (See again, the Shadowhawk's three ballistic points) The in-universe cheap energy replacement for medium-ish sized autocannons isn't PPCs, it's large lasers. You see a LOT of designs that drop an AC5 or AC10 for a LL plus some sinks. LLs are basically the ubiquitous, cheap, good enough weapon that everything defaults to if it doesn't have the means, ability, or need to use something else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
Back Hack posted:I like the changes they've made to Autocannons, they feel much more balanced and distinct from one another. If only the TT would take a que from them or god forbid, ACs are ok in mwo, aren't they? I like shootinh the robots with the guns anyway
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
Not all of them, but a decent number, yeah. MWO is a real-time game, and it has to account for player aim so stuff like damage spreading and DPS leave ACs more room to find a niche.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Apparently one of the Banshee variants has 8E6S hardpoints, which means if you just want to go ham and fill it up with medium lasers and MGs it does 200 damage at 270M, 290 damage at 90M, and melees for 220 damage. And every time the MGs fire you get 18 crit rolls with a 75% crit chance bonus I think I have a new favorite mech. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Radio Free Kobold posted:I think I have a new favorite mech. I really hope that there's at least one other mech in weight between the Firestarter and the Banshee which is obviously designed to be melee friendly with a large number of support HPs on a relatively fast chassis. The dragon would probably be a good candidate purely on the basis that it's over-engined and has a battlefist but that might not mean anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Back Hack posted:I like the changes they've made to Autocannons, they feel much more balanced and distinct from one another. If only the TT would take a que from them or god forbid, Honestly I would love to see a completely modern edition of Battletech (and especially Shadowrun!) that take direction hints from how HBS have been redesigning the systems. Both of those are games I'd love to run with my nerd games group, but both are a bit byzantine by modern game rule standards. They have such cool loving lore and settings though, I just wanna run these games and not have my friends get repulsed by the very dated rulebooks. Something like D&D 5e for Battletech would be great, where you keep most of the complexity but streamline the systems a ton, and the computer games HBS have made would be a good stepping-off point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
Section Z posted:For how notable stability damage seems to be, autocannons will certainly have that going for them. ACs have plenty of cool reasons to bring. I was just trying to think of "Why people wouldn't prefer them, or have a hard time even if they did" that isn't just regurgitating "But lasers don't use ammo!" for the thousandth time. In HBScom, Lasers come with a +1 bonus to hit while ballistic weapons suffer from a cumulative recoil penalty for each turn of consecutive firing. PPCs (I believe) do not have the accuracy boost, but deal stability damage and also inflict -1 penalty to accuracy on their target's next turn of shooting. HBS are not inept and there is more nuance to their weapon design than you can see at a glance. You should really write less words about the potential design flaws of systems you have not interacted with or observed yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 23:43
|
|
|
Fewer words
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
Less pedantic
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:07
|
|
|
I've gotten the sense it's more down to timing. Which is how I get both defending autocannons over lasers, AND defending lasers over autocannons considered equally wrong 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
Section Z posted:I've gotten the sense it's more down to timing. Which is how I get both defending autocannons over lasers, AND defending lasers over autocannons considered equally wrong It's all about the robo punches, philistine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
But how many ppcs can you fit on a Jenner?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
Feindfeuer posted:I just hope this does well so we'll get a vehicle-DLC down the line, so i can reinforce my lance of Urban Mechs with some Po-Tanks. Aye. Despite mostly falling apart like tissue paper in megamek, they are tons of fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:But how many ppcs can you fit on a Jenner? At least two, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I really hope that there's at least one other mech in weight between the Firestarter and the Banshee which is obviously designed to be melee friendly with a large number of support HPs on a relatively fast chassis. The dragon would probably be a good candidate purely on the basis that it's over-engined and has a battlefist but that might not mean anything. At least one variety of Grasshopper is in, here's hoping for a half-dozen tiny guns on that thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:45
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:At least two, right? Barely two, and you'd have to strip off almost all its armor to manage that. I just want to stick two AC/20s on a KGC and pop fools. Skippy McPants fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Apr 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:Less pedantic Fewer pedantic
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:51
|
|
|
Great Beer posted:Fewer pedantic Fewer pedants
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
fewers pedant
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:At least two, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
Xarbala posted:At least one variety of Grasshopper is in, here's hoping for a half-dozen tiny guns on that thing. HBS Dev Andrew posted:Murderbug GHR-5H (heavily modded, as the name would suggest. Imagine a Grasshopper with 7x medium lasers, 6x small lasers, 4x jump jets, maxed armor, and enough heat sinks to make it basically heat-neutral. It's an absolute monster, but not without its drawbacks - outside of small laser range, it's nothing more than a MUCH more expensive Swayback), with a high-piloting, high-guts pilot (for Bulwark and Juggernaut) Murderbug 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:03
|
|
|
Forward pendants!  I didn't know ppcs impose a to hit penalty now that's snazzy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Murderbug  That will end up being my command mech.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:08
|
|
|
Grasshopper is high up on my list of "mechs I want" but I'm not sure I'd fit it that way for general use. The guy says it'd get wrecked bad on hot maps.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Murderbug 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:But how many ppcs can you fit on a Jenner? Now that's what I call a loving call back right there. All hail the Jenner-z
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:Now that's what I call a loving call back right there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
Can we please close this thread until release? You guys are enabling my addiction. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 03:19
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Can we please close this thread until release? You guys are enabling my addiction. Thanks. No, then I won't get my fix.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Can we please close this thread until release? You guys are enabling my addiction. Thanks. i'm already releasing
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 05:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 21:27 |
|
|
You know what we need once the game is released, since Gauss Rifles are apparently a rare drop? Gausszilla.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 05:53
|
|