35 replies to this topic

[BlackCephie]

Still love this game, but to me there are some major issues with playstyle diversity as it relates to your mech class. Right now, the main determining factors of playstyle are your chassis type and your secondary weapon, not really your class. For one thing, mechs of the same chassis type basically play the same, regardless of your class. If you are piloting an A, you are pretty much going to be using the same battle maneuvers, but your class is almost negligble. They have unique abilities, but for the most part these abilities are lack luster, and some just straight up suck. There are times where I think "Dang I miss my Inf" but really what I'm saying is "Damn I miss dem nades", since having the nade launcher was a more significant factor in my playstyle than being an Infiltrator itself.

The other issue, which has been brought up before, is the secondary weapon placements. Right now, there are too many mechs that are SUPPOSED to be different that share secondaries. Zerk and Scout both wield a TOW, as does the B chassis assault and one of the fatties if I'm not mistaken. I think that each INDIVIDUAL CLASS should have a unique secondary. No class should have a secondary in common. By making each class have special weapon that is unique, you force those classes to play significantly differently. This means we need more secondary weapons in general, OR weapon mods that are unique across classes, that lend to the fundamental idea behind that mech design. When I use an Infiltrator, I don't really feel especially infiltratory just because I have a half-assed cloak ability. I want a secondary that plays to that strength of being covert and also makes me play in a way that maximizes the idea of being a covert unit that is hard to find/detect (I still love nades, but whether the inf had nades or a TOW, sneaking up on someone will have similar effects). I'll use an example from an earlier post I made; a secondary that functioned like a nade launcher, or a nade launcher mod, that fires canisters of volatile material that ate away at an enemy's armor gradually, functioning as a DoT, but has a much lower cooldown than other secondaries because you lack the front loaded burst damage. Maybe it leaves a cloud of the chemical after the initial explosion that sticks around in an AOE, dotting enemies that run through it and increases the time that they are dotted. Maybe it also functions as a debuff, making enemies take 5% more damage from subsequent attacks. This would be a more subtle but sadistic weapon, more cloak and daggerish, which seems to me would be more befitting something like an Infiltrator than "Hey I got a grenade launcher and a machine gun". Might as well change the name to Terminator. Every class should have some secondary that emphasises and illustrates the idea behind the class itself, not the chassis.

My next point deals with affixes on classes that are unique to each class. Now, I think that weapons could do with some cool affixes as well (like the DoT chemical weapon, or a high impact kinetic weapon that sends harmful shrapnel flying around the primary target. Its not like most of the weapons in the game don't already have AOE effects, why not make them more diverse and interesting_), I also think that each class should have maybe 2 major affixes attached to them. So for example, the scout could have significantly higher base walk/run speed, and above average flight fuel usage. The Inf could have significantly lower radar signature on all actions, and above average boost speeds. The Zerk could have significantly increased base damage or rate of fire, with a default bonus 50 or 75 armor points. Something like this would not only add to the uniqueness of each class, but make optimization point spending more fun and impactful. Do you want to stack radar signature optimizations on your inf to make their base affixes that much better, or do you want to balance it out with other stuff you may want_ Would also be nice to have chassis parts that are unique to classes, so everyone isn't running around with the same sleek chassis just cus it happens to be the coolest one of all available for that chassis type.

So that's my novella of ideas. All of these suggestions apply to all the classes and chassis, not just A's. In closing, I will say that I have gone out of my way to really pull out the uniqueness of the classes I've used, but at the end of the day I find that there just isn't enough difference between the classes per chassis type, and the differences that are currently present are not heavy enough or stand-out enough to really affect playstyle.

Edited by BlackCephie, December 06 2012 - 04:05 PM.

[Analysis]

BlackCephie, on December 06 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

They have unique abilities, but for the most part these abilities are lack luster, and some just straight up suck.

BlackCephie, on December 06 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

The other issue, which has been brought up before, is the secondary weapon placements. Right now, there are too many mechs that are SUPPOSED to be different that share secondaries. Zerk and Scout both wield a TOW, as does the B chassis assault and one of the fatties if I'm not mistaken.

I have to disagree with these statements. The scout and the berserker play quite different. I have played both. The ability is what determines the playstyle even if the mechs share weapons. The berserker has a damage boost which means better burst fire and the scout has a fuel boost which means better maneuverability. The abilities ask the question do you want to kill fast or be a harder target to hit. A tow and a flak play way different then assault rifle and a tow. For the scout one must get in close(point blank) to do damage and the berserker has nice medium to long range damge potential. They can have the exact weapons of heat/tow at level 20, but this setup clearly favors berserker since the damage boost(burst damage) is way better then running around(fuel boost) in between shots with the scout.

You also mention some abilities suck. I'm curious which ones you are refering to. I can't comment on the C class since they are far to slow for my playstyle and enjoyment. The abilities I have used are damage boost(berserker), weapons coolant(assualt), and scout(fuel boost). All three of abilities I have used have strengths and weaknesses.

The weapon coolant is very good in long battles because it allows continuous firing(huge damage over time potential)

The damage boost is very good if the pilot can land there shots consistently and quickly(fast kill potential)

The fuel boost is very good since you have twice the thrusters which means you can catch any escaping mech, use thrusters when your opponent runs out(good luck dodging with no thrusters), and general map movement is quicker(faster paths and easier trick jumps). The fuel ability is the only ability useful in combat and out of combat.

The camouflage(untested) says it masks radar signature and visibilty. The potential of this ability for surprise attacks is unmatched. If a opponent doesn't know where you are then you get the first attack. Often an opponent can get disorented during an attack which means you might get two free shots. Suddenly you might be fighting a mech with half health vs your full health. I imagine using cloak with the radar jamming item and the opponent would never know where you are. The cloak is the ultimate cat and mouse ability.

The damage absorb(untested) also has huge potential. I don't know what percent the ability gives for reduction or if the ability gives invincibilty, but there is a unique and useful advantage. If the ability grants a sufficient reduction or temporary immunity, then the usefulness in team games is exponentially high. With the improved tankyness of a mech they could charge head first into a mech group(surviving the damage) while creating an excellent distraction for your team to flank.

I have not and probably won't be testing the C class mechs, but even their ability can be useful.

Fortfied Turret(untested)/Mobile Turret(untested) can be quite useful for holding important points on the map. The obvious candidate would be objective game modes such as siege or missle assualt. However in team deathmatches a C class mech in turret mode can be quite powerful in a hall way or tight space. You also become a slightly smaller target.

TLDR here are the ability strengths weapon coolant(allows continuous firing in long battles), damage boost(faster kill times), fuel boost(better manueverability in and out of battle), camuoflage(instant stealth and first strike potential), damage absorb(live longer by taking more damage), Fortified Turret/Mobile Turret(improved armor and free repair in battle/improved armor and less reduced speed).

In my mind all of the abilities have potential, but if some of the abilities are to weak I'm sure the respective ability can be boosted until useful. Even with similar weapons the mechs play different and I would hate to see less options for the player even if some don't see the difference.

[defekt]

Analysis, on December 06 2012 - 11:11 PM, said:

Fortfied Turret(untested)/Mobile Turret(untested) can be quite useful for holding important points on the map. The obvious candidate would be objective game modes such as siege or missle assualt. However in team deathmatches a C class mech in turret mode can be quite powerful in a hall way or tight space...

I respect your valiant attempt to put a positive spin on C-class abilities.

Analysis, on December 06 2012 - 11:11 PM, said:

You also become a slightly smaller target.

The size of the hitbox would suggest otherwise.  Smaller, a bit but as small_  Not IME.

[BlackCephie]

Analysis, on December 06 2012 - 11:11 PM, said:

BlackCephie, on December 06 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

They have unique abilities, but for the most part these abilities are lack luster, and some just straight up suck.

BlackCephie, on December 06 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

The other issue, which has been brought up before, is the secondary weapon placements. Right now, there are too many mechs that are SUPPOSED to be different that share secondaries. Zerk and Scout both wield a TOW, as does the B chassis assault and one of the fatties if I'm not mistaken.

I have to disagree with these statements. The scout and the berserker play quite different. I have played both. The ability is what determines the playstyle even if the mechs share weapons. The berserker has a damage boost which means better burst fire and the scout has a fuel boost which means better maneuverability. The abilities ask the question do you want to kill fast or be a harder target to hit. A tow and a flak play way different then assault rifle and a tow. For the scout one must get in close(point blank) to do damage and the berserker has nice medium to long range damge potential. They can have the exact weapons of heat/tow at level 20, but this setup clearly favors berserker since the damage boost(burst damage) is way better then running around(fuel boost) in between shots with the scout.

You also mention some abilities suck. I'm curious which ones you are refering to. I can't comment on the C class since they are far to slow for my playstyle and enjoyment. The abilities I have used are damage boost(berserker), weapons coolant(assualt), and scout(fuel boost). All three of abilities I have used have strengths and weaknesses.

The weapon coolant is very good in long battles because it allows continuous firing(huge damage over time potential)

The damage boost is very good if the pilot can land there shots consistently and quickly(fast kill potential)

The fuel boost is very good since you have twice the thrusters which means you can catch any escaping mech, use thrusters when your opponent runs out(good luck dodging with no thrusters), and general map movement is quicker(faster paths and easier trick jumps). The fuel ability is the only ability useful in combat and out of combat.

The camouflage(untested) says it masks radar signature and visibilty. The potential of this ability for surprise attacks is unmatched. If a opponent doesn't know where you are then you get the first attack. Often an opponent can get disorented during an attack which means you might get two free shots. Suddenly you might be fighting a mech with half health vs your full health. I imagine using cloak with the radar jamming item and the opponent would never know where you are. The cloak is the ultimate cat and mouse ability.

The damage absorb(untested) also has huge potential. I don't know what percent the ability gives for reduction or if the ability gives invincibilty, but there is a unique and useful advantage. If the ability grants a sufficient reduction or temporary immunity, then the usefulness in team games is exponentially high. With the improved tankyness of a mech they could charge head first into a mech group(surviving the damage) while creating an excellent distraction for your team to flank.

I have not and probably won't be testing the C class mechs, but even their ability can be useful.

Fortfied Turret(untested)/Mobile Turret(untested) can be quite useful for holding important points on the map. The obvious candidate would be objective game modes such as siege or missle assualt. However in team deathmatches a C class mech in turret mode can be quite powerful in a hall way or tight space. You also become a slightly smaller target.

TLDR here are the ability strengths weapon coolant(allows continuous firing in long battles), damage boost(faster kill times), fuel boost(better manueverability in and out of battle), camuoflage(instant stealth and first strike potential), damage absorb(live longer by taking more damage), Fortified Turret/Mobile Turret(improved armor and free repair in battle/improved armor and less reduced speed).

In my mind all of the abilities have potential, but if some of the abilities are to weak I'm sure the respective ability can be boosted until useful. Even with similar weapons the mechs play different and I would hate to see less options for the player even if some don't see the difference.

But see, those abilities DON'T make the zerk and scout play dramatically different. The fact that you only have one ability, and that ability lasts a couple of seconds but has a fairly long cooldown means that all it realy does is effect what you can do in your clutch moment. More often than not, you are going to pop your ability mid battle, which will then say "Ok I got damage boost maybe I can kill this guy instead of run away" which may or may not work OR its gonna be "Ok I have fuel boost, maybe I can get away instead of fight a losing battle" which still may or may not turn out in your favor. But those abilities are not really determining your overall tactics for the larger portion of a match, you are just using them when it counts the most. Your weapon loadout is what is really determining playstyle right now. In terms of the scout needing to get point blank, well not really. Your approach will normally still be mid range because you have a tow, which is your burst. You are going to shoot your TOW and weave your way closer to the target between those shots to blast them with your primary, but you can anihhilate someone from mid range with a flak that has been taking TOW rockets to the dome since the start of your engagement. No real significant change there.

The Inf ability is the most interesting in my opinion because it does mask radar sig even while boosting, and yes I have snuck up on people that way time after time. It also just so happens that it has the nades, so it is already the most stark in contrast to the other 2 A's. All they need to do to fix the cloak ability is mask the boosters along with the rest of the mech.

The defense boost ability on bruiser is garbage. If you are going to die, then that's what's going to happen. Hardening your armor for a few seconds against a skilled player means nothing when their aim is on point and they are still blasting you dead on with all manner of high explosives.

C class turret abilites = doodoo butter. I don't even think I need to explain why.

In fact now that I think about it, the A's plus the B assault abilities are the only useful ones to any great extent, and even still, they are going to pop in the clutch moment, but its not like you can spam them, so no, they are not effecting your playstyle for the vast majority of play time.

[Analysis]

Quote

You are going to shoot your TOW and weave your way closer to the target between those shots to blast them with your primary, but you can anihhilate someone from mid range with a flak that has been taking TOW rockets to the dome since the start of your engagement. No real significant change there.

I use the mini flak and at midrange you will miss most of the damage do to the spread. With a berserker the piliot will always be medium/long range do to the assualt rife/smg. The berserker doesn't need to worry about splash damage from the tow, but the scout does. As mentioned before the fuel guage is the only ability useful out of combat. If I see a weakened mech in the distance I will chase them and catch them due to the fuel guage. I believe the timer for the fuel boost is 30 seconds which is low enough to allow frequent use. I can't remember what the timer of the damage boost is, but unless you are confident that you will win a 1v1 mech fight their is no reason to ever save the damage boost for the middle of the battle. By waiting this just gives your opponent a better chance of winning. Some pilots begin to panic when they have low health so it is best to lower the health of your opponent as fast as possible.

You may still feel there isn't any differences, but I have seen and played with both and to me they play quite different due to the ability.

[BlackCephie]

Analysis, on December 07 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

Quote

You are going to shoot your TOW and weave your way closer to the target between those shots to blast them with your primary, but you can anihhilate someone from mid range with a flak that has been taking TOW rockets to the dome since the start of your engagement. No real significant change there.

I use the mini flak and at midrange you will miss most of the damage do to the spread. With a berserker the piliot will always be medium/long range do to the assualt rife/smg. The berserker doesn't need to worry about splash damage from the tow, but the scout does. As mentioned before the fuel guage is the only ability useful out of combat. If I see a weakened mech in the distance I will chase them and catch them due to the fuel guage. I believe the timer for the fuel boost is 30 seconds which is low enough to allow frequent use. I can't remember what the timer of the damage boost is, but unless you are confident that you will win a 1v1 mech fight their is no reason to ever save the damage boost for the middle of the battle. By waiting this just gives your opponent a better chance of winning. Some pilots begin to panic when they have low health so it is best to lower the health of your opponent as fast as possible.

You may still feel there isn't any differences, but I have seen and played with both and to me they play quite different due to the ability.

I use the flak over mini flak, and you can easily pop people for solid damage on the approach. 30 second cooldowns don't make an ability spammable, it still comes down to clutch timing and use almost always. You can have all the fuel in the world, but chasing a low health mech down from a distance will almolst always result in you just pulling aggro from the rest of their team, its usually not worth it to chase someone who is very far away.

Also note, my point isn't that there is NO difference whatsoever, but that tghere isn't enough of it. Each mech could be so much more unique than they are now. If you are going to have skill trees, a leveling system, custom paint jobs, interchangeable parts, and all the other cool things in the game, then what you are really expecting is that players trully own and identify with their creations. By having multiple mechs with the same secondary, you are only diluting that notion. Why should each class not have a unique secondary_ Why not make the impact of the abilities more drastic. You wouldn't be limiting anyone by those inclusions, only diverisying gameplay further.

[D20Face]

Zerker. All round A class
Scoot. A class best suited to kill C class mechs
Inf. A class best suited to kill other As

Sharpy. Cover fire
Assult. Damage dealer
Bruiser. Damage soak

Brawler. A class mincer
Rocketeer. lolseekers
Grenadier. area denial


The A class differences stem from primary weapons and abilities. The B class differences come from secondary weapons and abilities. The C class differences stem from primary and secondary weapons.

I don't see an issue with class differences right now.

Edited by D20Face, December 07 2012 - 09:15 AM.

[Analysis]

Quote

Also note, my point isn't that there is NO difference whatsoever, but that tghere isn't enough of it. Each mech could be so much more unique than they are now. If you are going to have skill trees, a leveling system, custom paint jobs, interchangeable parts, and all the other cool things in the game, then what you are really expecting is that players trully own and identify with their creations. By having multiple mechs with the same secondary, you are only diluting that notion. Why should each class not have a unique secondary_

I won't ever oppose the inclusion of additional weapons, but removing certian weapon pairs(unless they are imbalanced) just for the sake of having unique weapons isn't good. My favorite secondary is the TOW and would hate to see it removed and replaced with a weapon I don't care for. Another useful attritibute to having some similarity between mechs is balance. If mechs share a weapon or a possible weapon pair the power and effectiveness can be easier to guage.

Quote

I use the flak over mini flak, and you can easily pop people for solid damage on the approach

The flak does have more range at the cost of a lower rate of fire and less overall damage compared to the mini flak. I said point blank because I personally noticed a huge damage reduction at medium range. For example if I'm fighting a rocketeer with seekers I know unless I'm basically touching the mech I'm dead. If the rocketeer thrusts vertically backwards that hieght difference is enough to reduce the mini flak damage enough that I will die way before the rocketeer. The above mentioned scenario also partially highlights the absurdity of the seeker. In fact the only way to beat a rocketeer(assuming equal skill) head on(with a scout) is to get close enough where the seekers splash damage hits the user and you have the additional mini flak damage going constantly.

[BlackCephie]

D20Face, on December 07 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

Zerker. All round A class
Scoot. A class best suited to kill C class mechs
Inf. A class best suited to kill other As

Sharpy. Cover fire
Assult. Damage dealer
Bruiser. Damage soak

Brawler. A class mincer
Rocketeer. lolseekers
Grenadier. area denial


The A class differences stem from primary weapons and abilities. The B class differences come from secondary weapons and abilities. The C class differences stem from primary and secondary weapons.

I don't see an issue with class differences right now.

But why would they not all be different based on, oh I dunno, all their attributes_ And it doesn't make sense that the primary differences between A's come from primaries, while the main difference in C's are their primaries and secondaries. You are siting their role differences, but the roles themselves are convoluted at best do to shared weaponry and no fundamental stat differences between classes (not chassis). I've been playing this game since alpha, and honestly, you can pretty much own anyone in anything as long as you are smart. If an Inf is best at killing other A's, then a Zerk is just as good at killing A's. For that matter, so is a Rock, and so is a scout. Those roles are there, certainly, but they are not nearly as specialized as you describe them. I been busting up C's with every A since the game was made playable, and not a single instance of those outcomes was because I was piloting one A class over another. What it was contingent on was the fact that I shot the hell out of them without missing, while making them miss, because I was in an A, period. It didn't matter whether that was a zerk, inf, sniper, or scout, the point was that I had both speed and fire power. You could easily accomplish the same goal (speed and power) while also making each class GREATLY different. Once again, GREATLY. Not slightly, or marginally. At this point, you don't even need classes at all. You could make all the abilities customizable per chassis, and just have 3 chassis type, A, B, and C. 2 out of the 3 A's have a TOW, assault, HEAT etc. If you are not going to make the classes themselves vastly varied, why have classes. I feel like I am basically using the same mech, just with a different name. I COULD change my playstyle, or try to, but there is no point. Either way, I'm going to roll up on someone and basically use the same maneuvers and tactics that have proven tried and true, with no need to even take into account my class.

Edited by BlackCephie, December 07 2012 - 12:07 PM.

[fwip]

Against Rocketeers, you shouldn't be attacking them head on with a Scout. You should be utilizing cover, dodging around and under and over them, and generally keeping them from getting a bead on you. If they thrust backwards and upwards, dash under them and behind them. Not getting hit is the name of the game as an A class.

I've also found success just wearing them down with TOWs and flak at medium range with sufficient cover - Seeker & Hellfire have significant travel times, and cannot be airbursted. This would probably not work as well against those using the EOC, though.

More on topic - mech frames share weapons partly because it's easier. If every frame had its own unique secondary, the devs would have many more weapons to design and balance than they currently do. There are currently 11 primaries, 4 secondaries and 9 frame types - even adding one more secondary creates several possible frame loadouts. A frame using an SA Hawkins and a GL would play very differently than one using an SA and Sabot.

I feel that sufficient play-style diversity has been achieved without requiring unique secondaries for every frame. (That being said, I do like some of your suggestions for new/modified secondaries).

[BlackCephie]

Maybe I'm just bored. I personally get tired of using the same three weapons on mechs that are supposed to be different, and I don't feel the present distinctions are strong to incentivize major shifts in playstyle. I pretty much run all my A's the same and wreck fuzzy bunny using the same boring tactics.

[D20Face]

BlackCephie, on December 08 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

Maybe I'm just bored. I personally get tired of using the same three weapons on mechs that are supposed to be different, and I don't feel the present distinctions are strong to incentivize major shifts in playstyle. I pretty much run all my A's the same and wreck fuzzy bunny using the same boring tactics.

You probably play against bads. The better the opponent the more pronounced matchups get.

I actually think that there are a number of weapons that would be better off removed.(smc, ar, and hawkins, miniflak)

If something new gets added, it needs to add new dynamics to gameplay, not just have a different fire/range/spread rate.

Edited by D20Face, December 08 2012 - 11:07 AM.

[Astrolis]

D20Face, on December 08 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

BlackCephie, on December 08 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

Maybe I'm just bored. I personally get tired of using the same three weapons on mechs that are supposed to be different, and I don't feel the present distinctions are strong to incentivize major shifts in playstyle. I pretty much run all my A's the same and wreck fuzzy bunny using the same boring tactics.

You probably play against bads. The better the opponent the more pronounced matchups get.

I actually think that there are a number of weapons that would be better off removed.(smc, ar, and hawkins, miniflak)

If something new gets added, it needs to add new dynamics to gameplay, not just have a different fire/range/spread rate.

Playing bads or goods doesn't matter. Its all about timing. The tactic is still the same, no matter what skill level your enemy is.

[D20Face]

Astrolis, on December 08 2012 - 11:24 AM, said:

Playing bads or goods doesn't matter. Its all about timing. The tactic is still the same, no matter what skill level your enemy is.

Different mechs do better in different situations. In order for those situations to not really matter you'd have to be playing against bads.

A scout excels in close range surprise head on confrontations. An infiltrator excels in corner bursting. A berseker excels at mid range skirmishing.
All A class, all better suited to different situations.

A HEAT infil will have the advantage over the Miniscoot in most cases since the long refire time allows it to duck behind cover and mitigate the miniflak dps at any range but humping distance.
A brawler will do well against a miniscoot because he's got the same weapons but more health.
A Grenadier will win against a Heat infil because they can deny the cover locations and bounce nades around the corners that infils love so much.
A sharpshooter will do well against people who don't use shields.
A miniscoot will trounce a bruiser if he gets the drop on him because the assault will die before the scoot does.

Those sorts of matchups become much more pronounced the better the players you're going against. If you're using the same strategy on multiple mech types your opponents just aren't good enough for it to matter.

[The_Silencer]

Scouts will not survive against C or A classes firing guided weapons in a proper way. The problem is certain C class weapons not being so useful on the field, thing which should be adressed. To remove he Mini-Flak weapon_ Are you flipping or are you a Bruiser/C-class pilot_. There's nothing wrong with Mini-Flak and Flak weapons. Or you want them to be nerfed down as is the case of the B-class weapons_

Besides pilot skills (which is undoubtfuly an important factor, of course) I'd like to differentiate 1vs1 fights in between team based ones. Two different approaches which make a difference when we talk about class/weapons performances.. Just my 2 cents.

[BlackCephie]

I play against bads and goods. I'm sure we all do. There are matches I play where I recognize everyone in the game, and they are all good. Even if my tactics change slightly, its never because of the mechs being used, its because of the players I know are piloting them. I might switch mechs, but I don't want to use a. TOW launcher AGAIN. Id rather use a completely unique weapon that still fulfills the role of that mech. As of now, I'm just playing a A like an A, almost disregarding the class completely cuz it doesn't make enough of a difference, mainly because I am rolling with well coordinated duos with Astrolis, which means we are constantly double teaming singular targets, in which case again, the class means very little. I just want more weapon diversity. Now, its obviously very possible that the devs have other weapons in the works (we've. Already seen the repair torch), and will more than likely release more weapons and items as DLC later on in the games life. As I've said, I am cureently working on some concept art for weapon ideas that I plan on pitching to the dev team, and maybe, hopefully, the might consider one or some of them. That would be frakkin awesome.

Edited by BlackCephie, December 08 2012 - 03:40 PM.

[fwip]

Sure, it'd be nice to have more secondary weapons - but saying "each mech needs a unique secondary" doesn't magically result in more secondaries - it results in less mechs.

[BlackCephie]

fwip, on December 09 2012 - 08:58 AM, said:

Sure, it'd be nice to have more secondary weapons - but saying "each mech needs a unique secondary" doesn't magically result in more secondaries - it results in less mechs.

Lt
But...it wouldn't result in less mechs. It would result in exactly what I've been saying, the same amount of mechs to pilot that would all be profoundly different, provided it were implemented properly. The issue, as previously stated, is that that is way more work for the devs. I just think that should have been the original route. But clearly I am the only one who is tired of using the same weapons, even when switching mechs, so I digress.

Edited by BlackCephie, December 09 2012 - 09:24 AM.

[h0B0]

This thread is full of well thought out points and counterpoints there is not much i can add to these.

However considering the game has yet to be released for OB i don't think 15 weapons is an unreasonably small amount of weapons. Shall we compare this with MWO which is a game inspired by the battletech universe. Battletech has been around for 25 years and the newly released MWO has a total of 12 distinct weapons. Please note MWO actually has 26 different weapons but most of them are the same weapon with very minor differences. These differences could in theory be obtained to a lesser extent with Hawken's optimization trees.

As for customizing and having different stats on each class i do like the idea and fully support it, but that would be more work for the devs to implement and balance. Furthermore isn't that the point of the optimization tree_ Of course it didn't mean much in CBE3, but back in CBE2 I ran with defensive optimization on my zerk and offensive on my infil and these optimization allowed me to create a more distinct feeling/playstyle between the two. I would like to hope the new horizontal progression will help create an even more distinct feeling of uniqueness between mechs.

Lastly i don't think i am exaggerating if i resume it your point to: I want to have only 4 different mechs considering the current state of the game instead of the 9 we had a chance to try.
As for you half fuzzied defence on the topic

Quote

But...it wouldn't result in less mechs. It would result in exactly what I've been saying, the same amount of mechs to pilot that would all be profoundly different, provided it were implemented properly. The issue, as previously stated, is that that is way more work for the devs. I just think that should have been the original route.

The game is still young and only the future will tell us if they will opt for a route of unified indistinguishable mechs or If the new optimization and items combined with still to be released mech, weapons, abilities will provide a better feeling of diversity.

When i got bored of pub stomping in CBE2 i tried to find a group of people to help challenge myself and give the game a bit more depth. thankfully SK has provided me with just that. In CBE3 i had the chance to play with people of varying skill levels on mostly near full servers in organised or disorganized matches and it has shown me the game has the possibility of being a lot deeper than you make it sound. Maybe the problem here isn't hawken but human nature and your repetitive behavior in the game ( duo with Astrolis ). No offence

I look forward to what hawken has yet to bring to its gameplay and having the opportunity to challenge you and astro on the battlefield .

[BlackCephie]

h0B0, on December 09 2012 - 10:37 AM, said:

This thread is full of well thought out points and counterpoints there is not much i can add to these.

However considering the game has yet to be released for OB i don't think 15 weapons is an unreasonably small amount of weapons. Shall we compare this with MWO which is a game inspired by the battletech universe. Battletech has been around for 25 years and the newly released MWO has a total of 12 distinct weapons. Please note MWO actually has 26 different weapons but most of them are the same weapon with very minor differences. These differences could in theory be obtained to a lesser extent with Hawken's optimization trees.

As for customizing and having different stats on each class i do like the idea and fully support it, but that would be more work for the devs to implement and balance. Furthermore isn't that the point of the optimization tree_ Of course it didn't mean much in CBE3, but back in CBE2 I ran with defensive optimization on my zerk and offensive on my infil and these optimization allowed me to create a more distinct feeling/playstyle between the two. I would like to hope the new horizontal progression will help create an even more distinct feeling of uniqueness between mechs.

Lastly i don't think i am exaggerating if i resume it your point to: I want to have only 4 different mechs considering the current state of the game instead of the 9 we had a chance to try.
As for you half fuzzied defence on the topic

Quote

But...it wouldn't result in less mechs. It would result in exactly what I've been saying, the same amount of mechs to pilot that would all be profoundly different, provided it were implemented properly. The issue, as previously stated, is that that is way more work for the devs. I just think that should have been the original route.

The game is still young and only the future will tell us if they will opt for a route of unified indistinguishable mechs or If the new optimization and items combined with still to be released mech, weapons, abilities will provide a better feeling of diversity.

When i got bored of pub stomping in CBE2 i tried to find a group of people to help challenge myself and give the game a bit more depth. thankfully SK has provided me with just that. In CBE3 i had the chance to play with people of varying skill levels on mostly near full servers in organised or disorganized matches and it has shown me the game has the possibility of being a lot deeper than you make it sound. Maybe the problem here isn't hawken but human nature and your repetitive behavior in the game ( duo with Astrolis ). No offence

I look forward to what hawken has yet to bring to its gameplay and having the opportunity to challenge you and astro on the battlefield .

I agree on most of your points. As I've said before, there is certainly bound to be changes, add ons, and new weapons down the line, and I'm sure they will be obtainable through microtransactions, I'm only stating what I would like to see. I also said that I have gone out of my way to try out different strategies with different mechs, the problem is that I find that in doing this, I usually just end up employing some round about tactic for the sake of creativity and artistry, because that the kind of player I am, and come to the inevitable conclusion that, regardless of the mech, flanking maneuvers almost always reign supreme. I remember the optimizations from CBE2, and that defense/movement build on A's was godlike, then CBE3 came along and the entire tree became watered down. I even tried an offense build, and it really didn't make a difference.

On base stats, take any game with class and rpg elements like skill trees and leveling. Take diablo for example: You play a wizard differently from a barbarian because they have different base stats. One is intelligence based, while the other is strength. So obviously you build and play those classes completely differently based on those statistic distinctions. There would be no point in even designating classes if 4 out of the 5 classes were strength based, wielded the same weapons, and only having contrast through one, or even two abilities. In Hawken, sure you can make the effort to play your scout differently from your zerk, but the game isn't incentivizing it especially. The gameplay overall is incredibly deep, no doubt, but I find that complexity fairly uniform across the classes. Now, across the frames themselves there is huge distinction in playstyle, but that's primarily just due to weight and size difference. No matter what class you are playing, you can flank and kill pretty much anyone because the sheer element-of-surpise tactic takes far more precendence over any minor distinctions between classes. Once again, there are most certainly difference, but how heavy are those differences overall, and how much do those differences actually effect you match to match tactical approach_ In my experience, not so much that I am getting a greatly different feel between classes.

In this regard I will say that my favorite class is the Infiltrator, because it has the most impactful combination of special ability and weapon loadouts of all the other A's. Flanking is probably the most effective offensive maneuver in the game, but any class can pull it of, as long as the pilot isn't boosting around all willy nilly. That being said, the cloak ability allows you to boost and not show on radar if I'm not mistaken. This means that the Infiltrator can flank, but can flank more quickly than other classes. In other words, the Inf can take a ubiquitous strategy, and employ it to max efficiency due to its inherent class distinctions. This is what I think there should be more of. If the inf is amazing at flanking and corner bursting, its because of its ability and nade launcher, so why should the scoot and zerk have the same secondary_ The abilities are fine, and useful in different situations, but the inclusion of another secondary could bump up the two classes distinct playstyles ten fold, as it could with all the mech classes.

Lastly, I imagine that the C abilities will shine greatly once the repair torch becomes playable. Having a C in turret mode holding down a position, or laying siege to and enemy position, all while being constantly repaired by another mech behind it has amazing potential, but I still maintain that the Brawler could have a different, unique secondary as a default. I also think a more receptive idea would be giving players the ability to simply switch between different secondaries, even if the default were a unique one, while making the optimizations and abilities a little more umph. Obviously, the special ability of each class should define that mech's role in battle, and the secondary should compliment that definition, but to an extremely high degree. Even better, keep things the way they are now, and make a unique secondary for each class unclockable at level 20, along with other primaries, and make that unique secondary an amazing compliment to respective class and its special ability. I'll use the chemical weapon example for the infiltrator from before: what if you could fire that particular weapon without breaking cloak_ Too broken_ Make it a high velocity grenade that fires faster, further, and has a bigger blast radius and does bonus damage if your use it to decloak, similar to other games where if you attack out of cloak you get a "crit". Or a unique secondary on the scout that can be fired while boosting. A zerk weapon that gains bonus damage the lower the targets armor gets. The bruiser could have a weapon that gets more powerful as the bruiser takes more damage. The rocketeer can jump off of a cliff and die horribly if it fires more than 3 seekers in a span of 3 seconds. Just some thoughts. They can even just be weapon mods that lightly change the look and feel of current secondaries, with added affixes, but retain the weapons primary attributes. I love this game, and I only bring this whole thing up because I want it to be the best game it can be. I think that details like the above would further allow players to identify more strongly with their favorite classes, plus you have more toys to play with :}

Edited by BlackCephie, December 09 2012 - 05:10 PM.