MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries by Piranha Games - now on Steam and GOG

[Cael]

The canon does not have any restrictions. There is nothing contradictory about it. This is in all the splatbooks and tech manuals. That is where I got the "Marik is selling retrokit kits" from. The tech manuals themselves have examples of customised 'mechs, particularly if you read the "famous pilots" sections. The variants are just the popular variants that exist within certain Houses. They are by no means restrictive in any way. There is nothing wrong with a Davion variant fighting in the Kuritan army, for example. I simpy do not see the contradiction you mentioned. The entire system is built around customisation and making up your own 'mechs. That is the whole point of the game. That's why the rules exist and why they are such a big selling point.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Contradictory more in the sense that modification of BattleMechs is supposed to be extremely time-consuming and difficult process due to the complex nature of the machines themselves (which is why OmniMechs are supposed to have built-in logistical and tactical advantage), but this is usually then swept aside by either going to the extreme of not really having it be an issue at all or by having any sort of rules that attempt to control it be a slap on the wrist. Which is sort of the whole thing with the core of the customization rules starting with original boxed sets approach of setting that after you apply the mandatory basics (tonnage and derived weights, criticals, etc) it's anything goes within those limits. And in the scope of the boardgame it does have the problem that the higher tech is being used, the more it causes the whole thing to collapse when the number of tools for breaking the game increase. Later attempts to establish some sort of framework for that customization to take place within through things like Battle Value have never really worked, for example Battle Value being borkered from the get-go and ultimately just extra paperwork (not particularly popular in my experience with players in general, usually in games I've played the opposing forces were balanced "manually", since an experienced player will understand the rough value of a Banshee against other Assaults).

My point wasn't really so much in regards to the system and story background for it, but its relation to the video game adaptations as a sort of built-in "baggage", or perhaps the better word is "expectation" that the games are required to meet and have themselves established as the norm for the franchise. The pre-MW4 system of having the 'mech itself be a superficial element to full customization of all its internal elements is essentially the easy way of handling the no-holds-barred customization of the original boxed game. The way I see it, this sort of presents a longer term problem if you wanted to make a more genuinely interesting system like an Armored Core style process of building the 'mech from ground-up, since it'd be highly iconoclastic within the franchise.

Also I have to point out that I'm talking about restrictions and rules for customization in the boardgame from a different view than for its game adaptations. In the boardgame these are generally needed to help preserve the balance of the game, but such measures if imposed on a MechWarrior game (or any single player game really) would probably just feel obnoxious and annoying. So I suppose in this sense "pick from variant only" approach would be a worse choice than "fully customize within weight class and cosmetic chassis." I'd also probably put this issue lower down the list of things to do with MechWarrior 5 than improving core gameplay of the franchise.

 

[Cael]

Contradictory more in the sense that modification of BattleMechs is supposed to be extremely time-consuming and difficult process due to the complex nature of the machines themselves (which is why OmniMechs are supposed to have built-in logistical and tactical advantage), but this is usually then swept aside by either going to the extreme of not really having it be an issue at all or by having any sort of rules that attempt to control it be a slap on the wrist. Which is sort of the whole thing with the core of the customization rules starting with original boxed sets approach of setting that after you apply the mandatory basics (tonnage and derived weights, criticals, etc) it's anything goes within those limits. And in the scope of the boardgame it does have the problem that the higher tech is being used, the more it causes the whole thing to collapse when the number of tools for breaking the game increase. Later attempts to establish some sort of framework for that customization to take place within through things like Battle Value have never really worked, for example Battle Value being borkered from the get-go and ultimately just extra paperwork (not particularly popular in my experience with players in general, usually in games I've played the opposing forces were balanced "manually", since an experienced player will understand the rough value of a Banshee against other Assaults).

My point wasn't really so much in regards to the system and story background for it, but its relation to the video game adaptations as a sort of built-in "baggage", or perhaps the better word is "expectation" that the games are required to meet and have themselves established as the norm for the franchise. The pre-MW4 system of having the 'mech itself be a superficial element to full customization of all its internal elements is essentially the easy way of handling the no-holds-barred customization of the original boxed game. The way I see it, this sort of presents a longer term problem if you wanted to make a more genuinely interesting system like an Armored Core style process of building the 'mech from ground-up, since it'd be highly iconoclastic within the franchise.

Also I have to point out that I'm talking about restrictions and rules for customization in the boardgame from a different view than for its game adaptations. In the boardgame these are generally needed to help preserve the balance of the game, but such measures if imposed on a MechWarrior game (or any single player game really) would probably just feel obnoxious and annoying. So I suppose in this sense "pick from variant only" approach would be a worse choice than "fully customize within weight class and cosmetic chassis." I'd also probably put this issue lower down the list of things to do with MechWarrior 5 than improving core gameplay of the franchise.

Actually, there were rules for it. The difference is something along the lines of 15 minutes for Omnimechs and anywhere betwen 3-6 hours for normal 'mechs. I can't remember where the heck I read it. In most cases, it is not practical to customise unless you know you have an extended down time. I am, of course, speaking from a campaign point of view, not an individual game point of view.

Battletech suffers from being far too bloated in terms of dice rolls. It takes too much time to run a single fight, let alone an entire campaign. A simple 2 vs 2 fight can last hours. That is where computerisation comes in. What I would give for a tool that has ALL of the rules of BTech built into it together with a mapmaker and 'mech maker, so that I and a bunch of friends can either hot seat or play over a connection/server, selecting 'mech to move and weapons to fire and the computer takes care of all the rolls. It would make running a BTech RPG campaign so much easier.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Well, there's MegaMek.

 

[Cael]

Well, there's MegaMek.

Don't think it does the auto fire and hit thing very well. Isn't it just a 'mech maker? Or am I thinking of the other one, TH-something or other.

EDIT: Heavy Metal Pro was what I was thinking of.

 

[udm]

https://www.megamek.org/

My first entry into CBT rules. Played quite a lot of it years back.

 

[Dayyālu]

Megamek is superior way to play BT.

You know it's true.

 

[Cael]

https://www.megamek.org/

My first entry into CBT rules. Played quite a lot of it years back.

I am going to check it out. If it simplifies all of the actual 'mech fighting, I might start a Battletech campaign using the system I was using a while back. It was the length of the 'mech combats that was the major hurdle.

 

[Cosmic Bane]

"Total customization" or standardized mechs, that is just being able to slap in anything at all within the tonnage limit, is in truth the worst possible system of all.

At the most basic level, all it does is reduce each 'mech chassis into nothing more than a set of hitboxes and choice between humanoid and chickenwalker walking animation. This is a system which renders the mech itself essentially meaningless, and even if one has a more interesting level of underlying mech customization like in Heavy Gear 2 you will end up with a completely discarded cosmetic layer.

The alternative of rendering every mech into stock+upgrades is too restrictive, and limits possibilities of mech design to what the developers added in.

Within the context of the MechWarrior series alone, hard points were by far the best solution to presenting 'mechs with unique flair and design possibilities. Despite being 100-tonners, Atlas and Daishi were distinct from each other beyond simply hitboxes and walking animation.

Having upgrades is less restrictive than the bullshit that is MW 5 customization. You could have literally any upgrades you wanted, it is totally at the discretion of the DM/dev. And you could also limit when and where the upgrading occurs, which is also very handy for keeping a sanity check on the player. This can also allow the player to keep on playing whatever mech he wants through the game. Like your robotech looking mech? You can find an upgrade path to keep it useful until the endgame.

If you have standard mechs then you can know exactly what each mech does, aside from maybe a few bosses with special mechs. Very importantly, the mechs look like they are supposed to look! That is, your warhammer still looks like a warhammer and so on

In MW 2:mercenaries you have 'unlimited' customization, but you don't have unlimited parts so you can't just stock up with 20 ER small lasers and one kill hit any mech you get into range of. So this also works out much better than the retardation of MW 5.

MW 5 is the worst of all worlds. You can change out all the weapons which means your mech doesn't look right, but you can't change what kind of weapon is in this location which means it's also totally fucking useless. Can't even switch from missiles to lasers? lol what garbage. Doing a big change like that is pretty much the whole point of customization, and without that then you should just keep it standard and not pretend to allow the player to customize things.

"
However, by far the ideal implementation of mech customization is that done by FROM in Armored Core games: Completely custom built mecha where design starts at chassis construction and generator capacity. When mech design is decoupled from hard defined weight classes and tonnage and instead shifted into a free floating purpose and capability defined design and classification the end result provides for a much more involved and interesting game experience. In this sense there's a fundamental flaw in BattleTech as an IP as it will never be able to shake itself from the constraints of its board game roots and needing to have 'mechs presented as per their counterpart units from the tabletop game. It has no option but to structure itself around including iconic 'mechs like Mad Cat.

So you never played a FASA then. Armored Core is gay.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

The general problem with 'mechs not being useful until the end in MechWarrior games has nothing to do with the mechs not being analoguous to DnD classes and getting leveled up. It's that the MechWarrior franchise has fundamental flaws in gameplay which prevent skill being the critical factor than hardware math. Basic example of this is that 'mechs in MechWarrior are slow and clumsy in movement but relative to that fast at aiming, and starting with MW3 many weapons being hitscan or homing. This has overall meant that the franchise is tilted towards the heavier end of the scale in terms of weight balance, deviations coming largely from balance issues regarding specific weapons and heat mechanics of the given game (a good example of these being from MW3 the two-hits-at-most "I win" effect of Clan UAC20s with dial-a-knockdown or flamer spam with instant overheat and subsequent reactor explosion).

Similarly, it is irrelevant to talk about "endgame" in MechWarrior games, or the campaign limitations on amount of equipment available (which IIRC has been a thing even in SNES port of MechWarrior 1). This is pretty much a basic thing that the campaign MUST have to provide some sense of progression within the context of the campaign. But you must look at the full extent of mechanics as established, in case of MechWarrior games off-campaign MechLab to use for example in deathmatch multiplayer or single player bot fighting without limitations on weight or equipment. And this is where the flaws in mech customization design I listed earlier are glaringly apparent. This is why it needs something like the band-aid of the MW4 hardpoint system or you reduce any chassis of identical weight to a cosmetic skin and hitbox set (good example being that the ONLY difference between Mad Cat and Orion in MW3 is how they look and their hitboxes) which is the actual worst state of affairs for customization because it renders customization to work against chassis variation. It also leads to the sort of bizarre situation where critical space is actually hammerspace which is constant for all 'mechs no matter how big they look on the outside. On a similar vein, the weapons in MechWarrior and BattleTech as a whole don't really look like anything, sometimes even missiles aren't signaled by launch pad tubes (some 'mechs have a single tube missile launchers, which sort of means it might as well look like any other weapon).

Perceived importance of 'mechs looking "like they're supposed to look" also exemplifies what I was talking about as a baggage for the BattleTech franchise. As an aside I don't personally see a big issue with this because the source material has some of the most hideous artwork ever, so every game has had to worry about their own interpretation of how to translate that to not look like a disaster (except arguably MW2 due to the limitations of early 3D graphics technology), one could say this also applies to every tech readout in relation to 3025.


Also, you do know RPG Codex is for fags, right?

 

[Cael]

On a similar vein, the weapons in MechWarrior and BattleTech as a whole don't really look like anything, sometimes even missiles aren't signaled by launch pad tubes (some 'mechs have a single tube missile launchers, which sort of means it might as well look like any other weapon).

Wait... whoa! Can you name the 'mechs on which you have seen this? One of the strengths of the BTech 'mechs for me has always been the fact that the you can match the weapons to the drawing/diagram.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

On a similar vein, the weapons in MechWarrior and BattleTech as a whole don't really look like anything, sometimes even missiles aren't signaled by launch pad tubes (some 'mechs have a single tube missile launchers, which sort of means it might as well look like any other weapon).

Wait... whoa! Can you name the 'mechs on which you have seen this? One of the strengths of the BTech 'mechs for me has always been the fact that the you can match the weapons to the drawing/diagram.

This is not that common, usually missiles are pretty consistent in having the pad or pod tubes look. And if I recall correctly, the one I'm thinking about had those too for LRMs, the tube was its SRM unit. I'll check Sarna since it was in either 3025 or 3050 and if memory is not completely off anyway it was a Light or Medium. I'll edit that in if I find anything. EDIT: 3050 version of Firefly has nothing but barrels and a hose, mystery launcher probably concealed by angle, I'm probably recalling Firefly.

But as an aside, to me it's not really the case of "matching" the weapons, you can clearly see what weapon is what and where, but gist of what I was trying to say is really that the weapons don't actually have any sort of consistency beyond "pad or pod" for missiles and "barrel or hole" for everything else, since Defiance Industries whateverwhatever Autocannon does not actually look like anything, it just changes its shape for every 'mech it's installed in (actually now I wonder if there's ever actually any weapon names that show up for more than one 'mech, have to check that too, I don't recall any autocannons reoccurring at least). Then again the boardgame's weapons are more like arbitrary designations around general purpose and capability than specific weapons, most notable with autocannons since AC20 can mean anything from a 200+mm slow-firing cannon to a 20mm bulletstorm, with some guy later coming up with random weapon model names for the weapons installed in each 'mech.

 

[Cael]

But as an aside, to me it's not really the case of "matching" the weapons, you can clearly see what weapon is what and where, but gist of what I was trying to say is really that the weapons don't actually have any sort of consistency beyond "pad or pod" for missiles and "barrel or hole" for everything else, since Defiance Industries whateverwhatever Autocannon does not actually look like anything, it just changes its shape for every 'mech it's installed in (actually now I wonder if there's ever actually any weapon names that show up for more than one 'mech, have to check that too, I don't recall any autocannons reoccurring at least). Then again the boardgame's weapons are more like arbitrary designations around general purpose and capability than specific weapons, most notable with autocannons since AC20 can mean anything from a 200+mm slow-firing cannon to a 20mm bulletstorm, with some guy later coming up with random weapon model names for the weapons installed in each 'mech.

That was a problem in the early part of the game. The most eregious example being the Demolisher tank (185mm gas-fire autocannons or some drek like that). Later on, a lot of that was standardised and they had standardised lists of manufacturers for different weapons. You can actually find the lists in Sarna, I believe. It has been a while since I looked.

In the novels, the writers tried to standardise a lot of things, but seeing as they were playing around with at best theoretical stuff, they mainly went with the damage rating of the weapons (hence Large Lasers became a 8cm laser, and Medium Lasers were 5cm). Autocannons were a bit more ad-hoc, but there were some standardisation around AC-20 being 120mm (including at least the LB-X version), AC-10, being about 80mm and AC-5 being 40mm. I have my own list of standardised weapon sizes, of course, but then again, I have been in the game for a very long time, and created and runned a RPG system around it.

 

[Cosmic Bane]

The general problem with 'mechs not being useful until the end in MechWarrior games has nothing to do with the mechs not being analoguous to DnD classes and getting leveled up. It's that the MechWarrior franchise has fundamental flaws in gameplay which prevent skill being the critical factor than hardware math. Basic example of this is that 'mechs in MechWarrior are slow and clumsy in movement but relative to that fast at aiming, and starting with MW3 many weapons being hitscan or homing. This has overall meant that the franchise is tilted towards the heavier end of the scale in terms of weight balance, deviations coming largely from balance issues regarding specific weapons and heat mechanics of the given game (a good example of these being from MW3 the two-hits-at-most "I win" effect of Clan UAC20s with dial-a-knockdown or flamer spam with instant overheat and subsequent reactor explosion).

Well, I don't think this is a big issue. Also it's not really true. If you are a good mech player then you can (and I have) run through MW 2 and MW 2: mercenaries in a locust or flame moth (whatever it's called) and it's actually one of the easist ways to win.

However this is pretty boring and people like to either trade up on mechs or else upgrade them. Customization is what we were talking about after all

Similarly, it is irrelevant to talk about "endgame" in MechWarrior games, or the campaign limitations on amount of equipment available (which IIRC has been a thing even in SNES port of MechWarrior 1). This is pretty much a basic thing that the campaign MUST have to provide some sense of progression within the context of the campaign. But you must look at the full extent of mechanics as established, in case of MechWarrior games off-campaign MechLab to use for example in deathmatch multiplayer or single player bot fighting without limitations on weight or equipment. And this is where the flaws in mech customization design I listed earlier are glaringly apparent. This is why it needs something like the band-aid of the MW4 hardpoint system or you reduce any chassis of identical weight to a cosmetic skin and hitbox set (good example being that the ONLY difference between Mad Cat and Orion in MW3 is how they look and their hitboxes) which is the actual worst state of affairs for customization because it renders customization to work against chassis variation. It also leads to the sort of bizarre situation where critical space is actually hammerspace which is constant for all 'mechs no matter how big they look on the outside. On a similar vein, the weapons in MechWarrior and BattleTech as a whole don't really look like anything, sometimes even missiles aren't signaled by launch pad tubes (some 'mechs have a single tube missile launchers, which sort of means it might as well look like any other weapon).

You are talking about problems in MW 2: ghostbear's legacy. The real problem here is there are no resource constraints.

The same system works fine in MW 2 mercenaries because you only have certain weapons and because it costs money.

Perceived importance of 'mechs looking "like they're supposed to look" also exemplifies what I was talking about as a baggage for the BattleTech franchise. As an aside I don't personally see a big issue with this because the source material has some of the most hideous artwork ever, so every game has had to worry about their own interpretation of how to translate that to not look like a disaster (except arguably MW2 due to the limitations of early 3D graphics technology), one could say this also applies to every tech readout in relation to 3025.


Also, you do know RPG Codex is for fags, right?

I don't mind that the iconic looks are broken, the problem is that they don't look like they should look for what they are. If you take a hunchback and put LRM5s all over it then it doesn't look right.

Maybe a compromise is to have hardpoints that are weapons only and some that are systems only, and some both. And do away with missiles only or lasers only which makes no sense and makes customization worthless.

The things I don't like about it is you can just jam 50 heat sinks into the arms and legs which is totally ridiculous. Especially since heat sinks don't cost very much, so it is easy to load up on ER small lasers or ER PPCs and blast the holy hell out of anything that moves. You could also solve that by simply not allowing heat sinks in the arms and legs except on large mechs and only in limited numbers.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

I'm not looking at a sheet now, but I am not sure it's possible to fit in 50 heat sinks to a 'mech even if you use advanced rules to remove things like hand actuators, IIRC there's only some 34 or so critical space total in a 'mech. But anyway.

Overall that's where Mektek team developed the Hardpoint system towards as they expanded MW4 Mercs, adding new types of hardpoint slots ie there's slots that can fit ballistics or energy, or other such combinations, rather than just Omni slots for ones that can fit more than one type. With the expanded selection of 'mechs that leads to a considerably larger selection of builds.

Also I'm not talking about it like it's a problem in itself, but that it's a problem that BattleTech as an IP due to having iconic 'mechs has to deal with because its its' own elephant in the room every time around of how to handle trying to make 'mech selection genuinely diverse but without causing Hunchbacks with LRM5s everywhere because it's actually just a skin for generic 55 tonner. It's the old cake dilemma, really, and I think hardpoints are a good enough problem and I think that Mektek improved the idea considerably by adding additional categories of possible hardpoint types. It's a system that can be worked with and that provides a good answer to the problem that franchise has to deal with when it comes to iconic design vs customization. It's certainly better than what I understand MWO did (I had little interest in that because I think campaign is pretty important to MW games) by just having variants and deluxe variants, or limited customization (this I'm not sure about, just something I heard later).

 

[Cael]

I'm not looking at a sheet now, but I am not sure it's possible to fit in 50 heat sinks to a 'mech even if you use advanced rules to remove things like hand actuators, IIRC there's only some 34 or so critical space total in a 'mech. But anyway.

Overall that's where Mektek team developed the Hardpoint system towards as they expanded MW4 Mercs, adding new types of hardpoint slots ie there's slots that can fit ballistics or energy, or other such combinations, rather than just Omni slots for ones that can fit more than one type. With the expanded selection of 'mechs that leads to a considerably larger selection of builds.

Also I'm not talking about it like it's a problem in itself, but that it's a problem that BattleTech as an IP due to having iconic 'mechs has to deal with because its its' own elephant in the room every time around of how to handle trying to make 'mech selection genuinely diverse but without causing Hunchbacks with LRM5s everywhere because it's actually just a skin for generic 55 tonner. It's the old cake dilemma, really, and I think hardpoints are a good enough problem and I think that Mektek improved the idea considerably by adding additional categories of possible hardpoint types. It's a system that can be worked with and that provides a good answer to the problem that franchise has to deal with when it comes to iconic design vs customization. It's certainly better than what I understand MWO did (I had little interest in that because I think campaign is pretty important to MW games) by just having variants and deluxe variants, or limited customization (this I'm not sure about, just something I heard later).

The maximum number of criticals in a 'mech is 51 (12 in either side torso, 10 in each arm if you remove both actuators, 2 each in the centre torso and legs, 1 in the head; later tech can give another 2+ extra crits using things like compact gyro, cockpit, and engine). The engine itself can hold rating/12 heat sinks, so a maximum of 16 with a 400 rated engine. Therefore, you can get 50 heat sinks in a 'mech if you wanted to but your other payload is going to be significantly compromised. In fact, one of the first 'mechs any newbie tends to make is one with 6 Large Pulse Lasers (Clan) and 29 double heat sinks :D

There is actually a Hunchback with a whole bunch of SRM instead of the autocannon. In game canon calls them Swaybacks, and they are in the 3025 tech readout. Switching SRM for LRM isn't a big leap. Hunchbacks are 50 tonners, by the way

As I mentioned before, in my RPG, I use the hardpoint system myself, so you aren't going to get an argument from me about that. It adds to the game and prevents everyone running around in laser boats.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Well point was more in regards to the iconic status of the Hunchback with a trashbin on its shoulder. Overall construction based customization could handle a variant like that organically, in theory (for example I could for instance think of some ways to modify the Armored Core body plan and weapons placement structure to accomondate something like this, with separate left/right torso sections or with just one torso section; main demand would be consistent graphical presentation in all part combinations), so alternative for BattleTech is naturally hardpoints. MekPak 4 included some of the more extreme variants as different chassis, like the cannon-shoulder Vulture config or Catapult K2 heavy energy weapons in place of pod arms variant.

EDIT: And that's my memory being bad on number of criticals, it's been a looong time since I last played the boardgame or tinkered with any chassis in any game adaptation (tho I do have the formerly freeware MekPak 4 release of MW4 in a rar ready to deploy whenever). On the subject of which as a random aside, the worst part of MW4 is that automatic fire volley ballistic weapons are presented in such an odd way in it since the entire salvo is presented in a single projectile with generally REALLY odd sound effect choices.

 

[Cael]

Well point was more in regards to the iconic status of the Hunchback with a trashbin on its shoulder. Overall construction based customization could handle a variant like that organically, in theory (very hard in practise), so alternative for BattleTech is naturally hardpoints. MekPak 4 included some of the more extreme variants as different chassis, like the cannon-shoulder Vulture config.

Considering the Vulture is an Omni, that doesn't make sense. The whole point of Omnis is that they can be anything you want them to be. They are the original blanksheet chassis. In fact, in the original readouts, they basically put in "x tons of pod space" and then put in the Standard and A-D configs.

People get too hung up on this and cry about "realism", but the fact of the matter is, BTech's great appeal is not only the customisation, but also the history and fluff that goes with it. Personally, I find the whole idea of "realism" to be tiring and, in many case, just plain aggravating. I am quite sick of people crying about realism in a DnD game, for example, especially when they are playing a spell casting class. You are there to play a game. Roll with it. If you don't like it, then play another game. Stop ruining it for others.

MekPak4 sounds like something I would not want to touch with a bargepole.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

That's really just the only way to do it justice in the limitations of the core game (MW4 Mercs) the team worked with and preventing 'mechs from being just skins. It's a bandaid solution aesthetically and mechanically really, but one I appreciate since it adds a lot of variety to the 'mech selection and which is to me a better choice than reduce 'mechs to simply being skins for the tonnage with either humanoid or chickenwalker hitbox (like, biggest alteration between 'mechs than in MW4 then would be the maximum torso twist arc).

EDIT: Also to correct, MekPak 3.1 was the last one completed and one integrated into the freeware release of MW4 Mercs, MekPak 4 was the one that they called it quits on after Microsoft reversed the freeware decision or whatever it was that happened, some legal shenanigans but they just decided it wasn't worth the effort to deal with Microsoft on trying to resume support on the freeware release. MekPak 4 looked like it'd have been quite cool, since it would have made terrain and weather variably obstruct weather, redo targeting reticle accuracy, and bring back directional jump jets (tho IMO directional jump jets have always been too sluggish to be truly interesting in MechWarrior) among other things, big plans and such, but it's gone now so it's all old talk and promises today.

 

[Cael]

That's really just the only way to do it justice in the limitations of the core game (MW4 Mercs) the team worked with and preventing 'mechs from being just skins. It's a bandaid solution aesthetically and mechanically really, but one I appreciate since it adds a lot of variety to the 'mech selection and which is to me a better choice than reduce 'mechs to simply being skins for the tonnage with either humanoid or chickenwalker hitbox (like, biggest alteration between 'mechs than in MW4 then would be the maximum torso twist arc).

I am not even the slightest bit bothered by that. MW2M has some of the better in-game 'mech graphics and UI and it didn't bother with the whole "missiles coming out of the cannon arm! Unreal! Unreal!" thing. Just plain ignored it. In many ways, MW2M was the pinnacle of the series. MW4 is OK, but a bit meh, and it didn't address the issue in any case (my Sunder sometimes had a big arsed Cluster Thunderbolt launcher in the left arm, for example). And MW4V was horrible with the knockdown (Mercs fixed that, thankfully). I killed the final boss without him ever having a chance to do anything to me. A dual LB20-X blast to the chest and he is lying on the ground permanently after that just trying to get up.

There are other bigger problems with MW4 than just aesthetics.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Personally I do not see that much of a difference between MW2 and any of the subsequent MechWarrior games, in large part because none of them sport particularly good gameplay for a mech simulator, merely average. They've all been born dated and lacking in the level of player skill and mechanical depth. That's why Morgoth alluded that there's not that big of a reason to get hyped for MW5 because Miyazaki is not involved. But that's off-topic really.

I do however consider that consistent visual presentation but most importantly genuine mechanical difference are pretty important to making customization have actual meaning.

 

[Cosmic Bane]

I'm not looking at a sheet now, but I am not sure it's possible to fit in 50 heat sinks to a 'mech even if you use advanced rules to remove things like hand actuators, IIRC there's only some 34 or so critical space total in a 'mech. But anyway.

Overall that's where Mektek team developed the Hardpoint system towards as they expanded MW4 Mercs, adding new types of hardpoint slots ie there's slots that can fit ballistics or energy, or other such combinations, rather than just Omni slots for ones that can fit more than one type. With the expanded selection of 'mechs that leads to a considerably larger selection of builds.

Also I'm not talking about it like it's a problem in itself, but that it's a problem that BattleTech as an IP due to having iconic 'mechs has to deal with because its its' own elephant in the room every time around of how to handle trying to make 'mech selection genuinely diverse but without causing Hunchbacks with LRM5s everywhere because it's actually just a skin for generic 55 tonner. It's the old cake dilemma, really, and I think hardpoints are a good enough problem and I think that Mektek improved the idea considerably by adding additional categories of possible hardpoint types. It's a system that can be worked with and that provides a good answer to the problem that franchise has to deal with when it comes to iconic design vs customization. It's certainly better than what I understand MWO did (I had little interest in that because I think campaign is pretty important to MW games) by just having variants and deluxe variants, or limited customization (this I'm not sure about, just something I heard later).

50 heatsinks is just hyperbole, though when you count double heat sinks you can go quite high, something like 44.

I don't think the looks issue is a huge 'problem' especially since you are in the mech itself and can't see it. It is something to consider but not the main issue. The only real issue with omnimechs is that it can be very munchkiny. Aside from loading up on more heatsinks than any normal mech could have, you can also negate the main disadvantages of certain mechs by putting all of the ammo containers into areas where you don't have to worry about them. Usually the arms but if you are a true munchkin you will realize that putting ammo in the legs or head is even more munchkin because you lose those and it's game over anyway and they are much less hit prone and are highly armored. Then you can have lightly armored arms full of double heat sinks and all the weapons in the belly.

With a mech like that it is not hard to take on 4 powerful mechs all at once with no problems. In ghostbear's legacy you can easily take a 20 ton mech and run through the whole game because of this. Well, if you are really good you could run through them with a standard locust too but that requires real skill.

That is the main reason to restrict unlimited omnimech stuff. But in MW 2: mercenaries this is largely overcome because you can't just grab whatever equipment you feel like at all times. You can't ever get enough ER lasers for all your mechs let alone to turn them all into frankenstein abominations.

With the hardpoints system though it is kinda weak to replace an AC 20 with a gauss gun, that is not a real customization at all.

I think you could adjust that idea a bit to come up with something that works well, though. For example if hardpoints were restricted to weapon, system, or any then you could make each mech very interesting.

Marauder is my favorite mech by far. So in that case you could put say 6 weapons mounts on each arm and then a bunch of system mounts in the shell and maybe a couple 'any' mounts in both. That way you can make it so the customization does not go crazy, and also make it so you can just swap out the weapons models on the arms and ensure it all looks right. Which is not the most important thing but also desirable.

So you could make a marauder that had two PPCs in one arm and 6 small lasers in the other, and make a mech that is a brutal killer at any range.

 

[Cael]

Personally I do not see that much of a difference between MW2 and any of the subsequent MechWarrior games, in large part because none of them sport particularly good gameplay for a mech simulator, merely average. They've all been born dated and lacking in the level of player skill and mechanical depth. That's why Morgoth alluded that there's not that big of a reason to get hyped for MW5 because Miyazaki is not involved. But that's off-topic really.

I do however consider that consistent visual presentation but most importantly genuine mechanical difference are pretty important to making customization have actual meaning.

MW2's jump jets were worth something. MW4's were pretty meh.

And the zoom window in MW4 was... let's just say bad.

There were also other things, like how MW4 on the highest difficulty level meant you can ignore armour in just about every other part of the 'mech other than the centre torso.

The customisation in BTech has always been about what you can put on a 'mech and what systems you lost when parts of your 'mech goes flying. Which reminded me of another strike against MW4: blowing out the side torsos only meant you lost weapons there. In MW2, you lost the arm as well, which is what happens in the boardgame.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Oh that's definately true, MW4's jump jets are almost as sluggish as the ones in MW3. As for why the torso doesn't blow off the arm anymore, my guess is that this is a decision based on multiplayer tests from previous titles to alter the target value of different body parts (similar to this the head hitbox in MW4 is absolutely miniscule, or how you are only overall fucked if one leg is blown up). BUT, no MechWarrior game ever has had genuine mobility overall, or genuinely fast jump jets. This is one of the major elements that work against skill as a factor in the series. They need more speed, they need more functions, they need more features, they need more mechanical depth.

That is the main reason to restrict unlimited omnimech stuff. But in MW 2: mercenaries this is largely overcome because you can't just grab whatever equipment you feel like at all times. You can't ever get enough ER lasers for all your mechs let alone to turn them all into frankenstein abominations.

Like I said before the real reason to consider outside of this is because campaign restrictions do not apply to deathmatch. You cannot limit the consideration of the mechanics to simply single player where restrictions are applied.

With the hardpoints system though it is kinda weak to replace an AC 20 with a gauss gun, that is not a real customization at all.

I think you could adjust that idea a bit to come up with something that works well, though. For example if hardpoints were restricted to weapon, system, or any then you could make each mech very interesting.

Marauder is my favorite mech by far. So in that case you could put say 6 weapons mounts on each arm and then a bunch of system mounts in the shell and maybe a couple 'any' mounts in both. That way you can make it so the customization does not go crazy, and also make it so you can just swap out the weapons models on the arms and ensure it all looks right. Which is not the most important thing but also desirable.

The ideal solution would really be to ditch the critical space and engraved in stone chassis design and instead construct a customization system based around individual parts and their specific capabilities and how you bring the construction blocks available to you together.

But outside of ideal solutions and on a more practical level (this why I see the hardpoint system added in MW4 as a move in the right direction, albeit nowhere near perfectly or possibly even adequately implemented), yes having a more fleshed out and expanded hardpoint system would be the better way to handle things while retaining the chassis-centric mechanical basis. Separation of systems from the hardpoints was indeed a bit of a dull move on part of MW4, though they also axed vast majority of the systems anyway (tho by MekTek 3 even MASC had been put back in, tho systems possible is still defined by chassis alone).

 

[Cael]

Oh that's definately true, MW4's jump jets are almost as sluggish as the ones in MW3. As for why the torso doesn't blow off the arm anymore, my guess is that this is a decision based on multiplayer tests from previous titles to alter the target value of different body parts (similar to this the head hitbox in MW4 is absolutely miniscule, or how you are only overall fucked if one leg is blown up). BUT, no MechWarrior game ever has had genuine mobility overall, or genuinely fast jump jets. This is one of the major elements that work against skill as a factor in the series. They need more speed, they need more functions, they need more features, they need more mechanical depth.

MW2's jump jets allowed you to strafe and do all sorts of funky things, like having a 100 tonner go at 100kph for a short period of time. I have done a lot of fun stuff with them, including DFA. I installed them on everything, even my Atlas. They were just that useful.

In MW4, they are the first things I take out.

Sad how the game evolved.