77 replies to this topic

[DarkPulse]

I do think eventually we will have some kind of "blank slate" mech, but I wouldn't be surprised if it cost more to do it (you're trading more customizability for higher price), and if you wouldn't have needed to mastered a few other mechs to make use of it.

[Ch3m1kal]

Now if you check out some of the older videos floating around of pre-alpha builds, you'll see a lot of loadouts that are impossible now so my guess would be that this was extensively playtested and found to be an issue of either balance or one of the mechs being too similar.
We already get the option of visually customising basically everything, and older players will know there are lot more chassis in the game that are available right now and probably even more that have not yet been shown.

As for the points trees the current incarnation seems to be heavily based around the idea of getting a very minor edge in combat while at the same time still emphasizing player skill so higher level players don't simply roflstomp lower level ones just because they have more points invested in their mech. This is in fact a mechanic that encourages variety since you see people in more mechs out there instead of everyone just always playing their highest level one since anything else would be useless.

Now i'm not saying it's all good, there are some things from the alpha and closed beta phases i'd like to see return, but then again it's still a beta so i'm not yet worried.

TL:DR version: the point of all this is that there's supposed to be no "right" to play or build your mech. And even will all that, just look at all the feedback about how the offensive tree is useless and how most secondaries are inferior to the TOW. Now think about it, if customization was fully open, you would have to have X build that was determined to be optimal or GTFO.

[Akriloth]

I agree with everything you wrote. This is a MECH game and i would like to customize my mech as i like. Also i found optimization points pointless since alpha. You have 25 points and they give so little that they are pointless.

[KingDork]

This game does seriously lack customization and variety to the point where replay value is being thrown out of the window. If I start out as a new mech, I wouldn't be that upset if a top level guy can beat me as long there is a fighting chance, that being said, the stat bonus' for stats and gear seems to be very lack luster and nearly pointless. I would like to see some 20% bonus stuff with a -20% drawback. More weapon types (including a secondary only branch of weapons) that are just really sidegrades and heck making them cost points to purchase from playing would greatly prolong the life of this game.

[Rosengren]

One reason for optimisations being weak is probably that they don't show up on your mechs. There is no way to tell at a glance how much tougher or faster a given mech would be. Invisible but major variables are a real pain to deal with in a class-based small-scale game. I think I'd honestly rather see more items and more varied gun choices and have internals and optimisations removed.

[Zavulon]

I agree with everything you say, mech games for me are all about customization.
I was initially lured by the older videos they posted and when I finally tried the game... I was rather disappointed.
There is almost no customization, you have a very limited amount of weapons, witch leads to a very limited playstyle (Spam TOW rockets) and you can't really change your parts around.

TL;DR If your mech game has less customization options than CoD/Blacklight, you are doing something wrong.

[Cypherhalo]

I'll just throw in my two cents FWIW.  

One, I don't think the OP should base too much off a pre-alpha video, that was a marketing tool and clearly through the alphas and betas the game has evolved.  You want to show off everything you can in a marketing video but seriously, being able to switch between nearly every primary and secondary weapon on any chassis_  Why bother buying more then one!

Two, I think the OP has a different perspective then many of the new players because he's had other experiences with the alpha and beta.  A lot of new players are just looking at this from OB and have never known the game another way.  I think he's right that they "nerfed" optimizations for balance purposes.  Honestly, I'm fine with this and it's funny that he brings up League of Legends because I feel that the optimizations here are kind of like runes there.  At the low-level play, they don't really matter and you can do pretty much what you want.  At the high-level play, I imagine those few percentage points might make the difference.  Personally, I've been trying out different optimizations on my mechs, not just all going with the same build so I think there is still some customization.  Still, if customization is your bread and butter you need to play Mechwarrior Online, Hawken is more of an FPS and I think the devs don't want to overcomplicate things.  His proposal about pilot and mech xp is interesting but I leave that one to the devs.  I worry it would be too complicated and give you too many things to keep track of.  Also, not sure how much I trust the matchmaker to only match you with "appropriate" level pilots.  Maybe once there is more development in the game and a bigger population . . .

Three, give too many customization options to each mech and they lose their role.  If I can equip nearly any weapon on any mech, it becomes harder for the mechs to maintain distinct roles, especially the way they've set up Hawken.  It would involve some big changes to core gameplay elements to really open up the customization, IMO.  The way it is now, since I know for sure what a mech's secondary weapon is, I guaranteed have some idea of its strengths and weaknesses right off the get-go.  There are enough mechs that you can find one to suit your playstyle, you don't need to own or play as all of them.

Edited by Cypherhalo, December 28 2012 - 09:10 AM.

[Shkval]

Damn right, the game is shallow as hell now.

[Viruts]

@ cypher: i dont like your first coment because even tho it is subject to chang, i would be much more inclined to just have the 3 mechs (A,B,C) and put what i want on them(for a price) than 20 mechs with pre selected builds.

now that said, i wouldnt like to see a fred runing around with 2 TOEs and i think thats what they were trying to achive but curently there is only 1 mech that is stricly bulet based and its so limited to a suport role i dont play it as much. i think for each mech class (A,B,C)there should be a weight limit and this limit should effect your mobility.

[N_JAW]

Derf, on December 21 2012 - 02:58 PM, said:

I think a combination of vertical and horizontal progression is in order.

I think that pilots/players should have levels as Frenotx suggests, and that those levels should go towards the optimization points available. If a pilot has gained a total of X experience points over the course of all of their games then they unlock a new optimization point up to a cap of 25. Additionally, X should be a reasonably large number and the optimizations should be pretty strong so that there is a good reward for good effort. This gives new players a goal system, which will help them get hooked. In this system matchmaking would be based on pilot level.

For horizontal progression I'd love to see WEAPONS get experience points or some equivilant. You could use the weapon xp to unlock variants of each weapon (e.g. slower rate of fire higher damage, etc.) I'd also love to see more weapon COMBINATIONS available. I know that some weapon combos would be overpowered, and those could be prohibited (or for that matter they could be less powerful when combined with each other. e.g. when you put flak and grenade launcher on an A class they do less damage than if you had one combined with something else. Haven't thought much about that, just throwing it out.).

I believe that long term vertical progression is important so that veterans are rewarded for playing, and it provides a natural system for matchmaking.

I believe that horizontal progression is important so that, as Frenotx said, you feel like your mech is YOUR mech. That pride in how you built your machine will make it more likely that you will pay to upgrade the cosmetics. Plus it is fun to experiment and customize.

I had basically the same idea.
Copied over from another thread:
I notice that on each Mech there is a Level for each of the weapons.  Now I have a lvl 14 Sharpshooter and a Lvl 13 Easy Bake Oven (EBO), but the levels for the weapons never changes.  Now, I do know that you "level" your weapons by earning XP and getting things such as "+6% unzoomed damage," but I have heard that this still doesn't raise the level of your weapon.  Now maybe I am wrong, and please tell me if I am, but it seems that they actually don't level.

I think it would be awesome if they did.  If your weapon(s) got experience for things such as damage dealt, a little bonus for killing an enemy, and a little bonus for getting an assist, I think it would make for a lot more fun gameplay.  Each weapon could have increased rate of fire, increased damage, and/or reduced cooling as the weapons level up.  This could be the same for reduced cooldowns or being sustained for longer with abilities.  Now I know that with Hawken pairing level 1 players with level 25 players I understand that they like to make it so if a lower level player is skilled enough he can still take the higher level players down, but you could make the benefits of level your weapons/abilities have tiny amounts.  For instance, take the EBO.  If you reduced the weapons heating for it's Volcan while it levels up by say 0.10%/level at a max level of 25, this would only decrease the weapons heat by 2.5% at level 25.  Even if you wanted to increase the damage and decrease the cooldown as you leveled it say 0.05%/0.025% for weapon-heat/damage per level it still would not be that big of an increase.

Not only would this make the game more fun and enjoyable, but this would also give players with more playtime and experience a little bit of an advantage against the players who just spent $100 to get all their items right away, and never had to grind for them.  It would also make just one more way that players must play the game to be good or compete at the top.  Not to compare games, but World of tanks, IMO, is a great balance of money spending and skill.  Sure you can buy gold to get in game money and transfer free xp to get new tanks a little faster, but in the end you have to grind the fuzzy bunny out of your tanks to get to the top tiers anyways, no matter how much money you spend.  This gives players who cannot afford everything a reason to keep playing and be able to compete with the players who have mommy and daddy's credit-card on hand

Share you thoughts

[Derf]

Quote

Not only would this make the game more fun and enjoyable, but this would also give players with more playtime and experience a little bit of an advantage against the players who just spent $100 to get all their items right away, and never had to grind for them.  It would also make just one more way that players must play the game to be good or compete at the top.  Not to compare games, but World of tanks, IMO, is a great balance of money spending and skill.  Sure you can buy gold to get in game money and transfer free xp to get new tanks a little faster, but in the end you have to grind the fuzzy bunny out of your tanks to get to the top tiers anyways, no matter how much money you spend.  This gives players who cannot afford everything a reason to keep playing and be able to compete with the players who have mommy and daddy's credit-card on hand

I really like the idea of rewarding people for playing the game, and doing so in a way they can't buy. It is a large part of what gives you a sense of purpose and accomplishment. The statement "I earned that!" is a very powerful good feeling. Personally, I'd like to see this type of reward show up in a way that is tied to a player's account instead of to their equipment. That's what I mean by "pilot level."

Think of it this way: I want to empower the pilot not the machine.

For the weapons I'm more interested in a system where the experience you gain with each piece of equipment allows you to change it in a way that doesn't make it straight up more powerful. The weapon system in TF2 is a good example. Many of the weapons you pick up are stronger than the base version in one area but weaker in another so that the two versions have the same overall strength.

On a related note:

While it is kinda cool to say "the game is so balanced that a level 1 can kill a level 25," it makes the whole "level" concept meaningless. Saying that a level 1 mech fighting a level 25 mech has an even chance is basically saying levels don't matter. Which is a bit of a kick to the fuzzy bunnies for all the people who grind up to level 25.

[Strikermodel]

I want to see more customization as well. They could increase the benefits and increase the costs equally to compensate. I just want the ability to customize more.

[Rosengren]

Derf, on December 31 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:

While it is kinda cool to say "the game is so balanced that a level 1 can kill a level 25," it makes the whole "level" concept meaningless. Saying that a level 1 mech fighting a level 25 mech has an even chance is basically saying levels don't matter. Which is a bit of a kick to the fuzzy bunnies for all the people who grind up to level 25.

Mech level really only matters for unlocking stuff. Alternative weapons, items and the occasional internal have bigger impact than the level bonuses.

A scout with a HEAT cannon probably has a big advantage over a level 1 scout with only a mini flak to its name but the majority of the advantage is in the greater experience of the player who got a scout that high. Saying that the mechanical bonuses of those levels don't really matter is perfectly fine. I'd be happy if you didn't get any bonuses at all and instead got a some extra HC every time you gained a level that didn't unlock gear.

[MechPilot122212]

Well, personally, I got excited about Hawken after seeing a few of the pre/alpha videos a while back, and finally started playing it today, and I have to say that, in comparison to the options that I saw in the earlier builds, I'm really dissappointed. The game is fun, but I don't see it holding my interest very long.
After Armored Core 5 died a painful death (rest in piece, the finest game in the series) at the hands of Namco Bandai's management, I was hoping that Hawken might be able to help me scratch that customization/fast mech shooter itch. There's nothing quite like spending hours in the garage building and testing hundreds of variations on the ultimate death machine, and then finally getting something that works and doing something wonderful with it.
But instead of having a lot of really varied customization options at my finger tips to play with, I have barely any, and those that are available require a huge amount of grinding to get to. Sure, there's some solid shooting mechanics to the game, but beyond that, there's really nothing to sink my teeth into. What was advertised wasn't exactly AC levels of depth, but I was hoping that it wouldn't be as basic as this.

[Gaizokubanou]

Frenotx, on December 26 2012 - 01:15 PM, said:

If you're gonna go with swappable secondaries, then you should scrap the current class system entirely and let us design our OWN classes. You could sell the various chassis (Damage boost B-class, Stealth A-class, etc.), and just allow us to attach whatever we want.

Before I actually got to play the game that was the kind of customization I was hoping to see, with some minor weapon tweaks thrown in as well.

Heck, as of now even the most generic modern military shooters out there have more meaningful customization than we do in this mech game (a genre/topic that's suppose to be the king of customization).  I really hope they bring in reworked optimization tree very very soon.

I mean how cool/fun would it be if certain optimization let your bullets ricochet off surfaces for reduced damage so you can take pot shots to an enemy trying to evade you through tight space, or removal/reduction of splash on TOW for minimum guidance capability, turning vulcan into a weaker version that allows it to shoot down non hitscan weapons (or maybe this would be too imba and end up breaking all non hitscan weapon so probably not but hey just a concept), etc.

[AsianJoyKiller]

More customization does not equal better gameplay.
Imposing limits and restrictions allows for better balance, which leads to a more fun game. Having complete freedom to equip any weapon on any arm on any mech would quickly ruin all balance and only certain weapon combos an weight classes would get used because they would be clearly better than any other combo available. By forcing a class system with limited loadouts, you force variety and balance so there is no "Perfect" combination that can be good at everything all the time. It means that you need to pick the right tool for the job.

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, January 01 2013 - 02:59 AM.

[Mewvg]

There will never be a "perfect" loadout, everyone has their own preferances and skill with each weapon.
As for balance, the devs would have to worry about balancing the weapons themselves (for each range, cqc mid and long, perhaps) instead of the overall mech. It wouldn't make their job that much harder, since right now they have to worry about mulitple factors in balancing (ability, mech class, primary weapon, secondary weapon). Might even make their job easier.

[KaszaWspraju]

Quote

There will never be a "perfect" loadout

I assure you that they will be. If you get a lot of customization options for mech, there always will be the best loadout, despite all efforts to balance these options.

Hawken aims to be a game with an emphasis on team play (skipping here DM). Unfortunately, the players do not think so, play quite selfishly, putting himself in front of the team. Want to do everything, every mech/class kill everything effortlessly.

Edited by KaszaWspraju, January 01 2013 - 05:27 PM.

[Adreni]

Mewvg, on January 01 2013 - 03:04 AM, said:

There will never be a "perfect" loadout, everyone has their own preferances and skill with each weapon.
As for balance, the devs would have to worry about balancing the weapons themselves (for each range, cqc mid and long, perhaps) instead of the overall mech. It wouldn't make their job that much harder, since right now they have to worry about mulitple factors in balancing (ability, mech class, primary weapon, secondary weapon). Might even make their job easier.

Aye, much easier to balance elements over concepts. Make sure all those elements cross well and the concepts will have great variety and balance.

[MasterGeneral]

Fully agree with all of that...

Quote

Internals can be treated in a similar fashion. At the start, internals have fairly low +'s and -'s. As you gain experience with the mech, you can unlock internals that have more significant bonuses, countered by more significant negatives. How specialized you want to be, and in what way you want to specialize is up to you.

how about internals that change according to pilot experience; like a multiplier (x)+0.05% of your level for the beneficial and less so for the detrimental attribute (x)+0.02% of any internal. It would reward higher level players with slight perks and work well even if there are only a select few internals to choose from (cough cough).