Various Suggestions [for MWO]

Quincy McAllister · May 4, 2014

I have written down some ideas for the further development of the game which might also be interesting to some People here in the Forum. Please find the suggestions in the MWO Forum (It is a rather long text).

ADMIN EDIT:We do not redirect people to the MWO website and play "Lets Chase Links". Which is what you have done in 2 out of your 4 total posts to date.

After time has passed and the game has developed I have updated my suggestions and summarized them again below.

Some small quick fixes

Add a filter to allow trial mechs not to appear in the mech selection
Add a filter to separate between Inner Sphere and Clan Tech in the mech selection
UAVs and Turrets are shown with the same symbol in the battlegrid. This should be corrected and two different symbols should be used.

Organizations

Having hard limits of 4/lance, 12/company, etc. could cause some problems. In order to keep room for some more casual people many organizations have to assign more than 4 people to a lance in order for that lance to ever have 4 people online at the same time.

In addition many mercenary setups do not follow a strict four people are one lance, three lances are one company, three companies are one battalion, three battalions are one regiment (4-3-3-3) setup. Some may have command lances or command companies or special groups besides the 4-3-3-3 setup (see http://www.sarna.net...itary_structure). If we look at the Clans they follow a Setup starting with the five People star (see http://www.sarna.net...itary_Structure). Organization setup should have a maximum of flexibility in the setup of lances, companies, battalions etc. thus to be able to define freely the name of the unit (for special purpose battle groups, or that we do not have "Company Bravo" all the time in all Merc Units) and the number of people in it as well as the hierarchy to the next higher unit.

Oculus Rift

Oculus Rift was clearly one of the top shows on CES 2014. It will probably be truly awesome to run MWO with Oculus Rift. I hope you take the suggestion to support Oculus Rift in the future.

Community Warfare: Jump ships, Drop ships, Aerospace Fighters, Economics, Repair & Rearm

With the introduction of community warfare certain strategic elements may become important to the game. Some thoughts on these elements are summarized below.

Jump ships

Jump ships are needed for interstellar transport. A flexible jump ship fleet is an asset that allows for strategic interstellar mobility. I see several levels of jump ship availability: 1. made available (by house transport command), 2. rented (from jump ship operators / merchants); 3. owned. The different levels may see improving benefits, i.e. faster interstellar transport (more attacks, long distance strikes, ability to bring in reinforcements) with the ultimate tool being a very fast â€œpony expressâ€ jump ship system or the use of pirate points (surprise, strategic reserve of â€œhidden troopsâ€ (behind the far side of a moon) in a planetary attack).

Drop ships

Drop ships offer strategic mobility on a planetary scale. Drop ships can give the benefit of determining the battle zone (choice of map) depending on the mission type. They allow for a strategic surprise in connection with a jump ship using a pirate point. And they allow bringing reinforcements to the troops on the ground.

Aerospace fighters

Aerospace fighters might be able to establish space superiority together with drop ships. If space superiority is achieved a regular drop may be a potential benefit. In a regular drop a landing zone is secured and drop ships can actually land that carry certain auxiliary troops (tanks, infantry, support units, etc.). Otherwise if space superiority is not achieved only a combat drop can be made. In a combat drop only mechs could be used. As a consequence in a regular drop repair and rearm would be possible whereas in a combat drop repair & rearm would not be possible (as support troops could not be landed).

In addition aerospace fighters may be able to establish air superiority over a certain battlefield. A potential benefit of air superiority may be the ability to do strafing runs or to deny repair and rearm possibilities to the enemy (by harassing supply routes).

Drop ships and Aerospace Fighters may be available on a C-Bill basis but especially jump ships (with the very limited production facilities left in the inner sphere) should also require a certain prestige in order to be allowed to purchase such a ship.

The current setup of the game is mech focused. Thus establishing concepts of space superiority and air superiority over a certain battlefield may be a game approach different from MWO at the moment as it could only be statistical and or tactical with limited efforts put into their development. Building an aerospace fighter game that works seamlessly with MWO on the ground will probably be a long term effort.

Some strategic benefits on the supply side

Mercenaries may be able to purchase supplies from their employer. However Mercenaries doing so should have some vulnerability to the â€œcompany store syndromeâ€, i.e. that employer overcharge for supplies and try to run the mercenary unit into a debt. Upgrades to this could be independent house sourcing, or independent cross-house sourcing (which would however need some jump ship / merchant drop ship availability). With each step supply costs should be lower and the mercenary unit will get further away from a possible â€œcompany store syndromeâ€.

Shares in weapon producing companies

Mercenary units could own shares in certain weapon and or equipment producing companies earning them revenue and lower prices for goods produced by these companies. Shares could also give a benefit in reduced repair & rearm costs. Shares of mech producing companies may depend on the popularity of certain mech models in the game.

How to implement â€œSurpriseâ€

Allow the party that achieves strategic surprise to move certain seconds earlier in an engagement and position them better, or to allow them to choose a spawn point.

How to implement â€œStrategic reserveâ€

Allow the party that is able to place a â€œstrategic reserveâ€ to add a number of mechs at the spawn point after battle has commenced.

Repair and Rearm

Repair and Rearm has definitely to find its way back into the game with community warfare. An amateur general thinks tactics, a professional general thinks logistics. A lot of military success depends on the ability to properly supply own forces and to deny supplies to enemy forces.

Benefits of special units

Special auxiliary units may be potential benefits that can be obtained. In a regular drop where these units can be brought to battle they could have the following effects.

Coolant trucks: Better heat dissipation

Repair facility: Allow repairs to varying degrees of damage (a small facility may only repair armor, whereas the high end repair facility may also be used to repair fusion engine hits). Logical consequences are different repair times for light and sever damage. Again this may be interesting in a sustained campaign, when the ability of a party to bring fresh troops into follow up battles may be decisive.

Ammunition truck: Ability to rearm

MASH: Ability to care for injured pilots. As a consequence a new status â€œinjuredâ€ would be needed for mechs / pilots that suffered a cockpit hit.

Mobile HQ: Could have many possible advantages, e.g. the ability to relocate forces between different combat zones, advanced information warfare capabilities, etc.

Advanced economics

Instead of paying mercenary units on a C-Bill basis they could be paid on a House Bill basis (K-Bills, L-Bills, etc.) The value of the house currencies could depend on economic strength which itself would depend on some military successes (e.g. successfully defending valuable planets / production facilities). Thereby the economic success of a mercenary unit would also be indirectly tied to overall House success and not only its individual performance. This will include another element than just House prestige to the game.

The ownership of certain production facilities could have an impact on unit / equipment prices, e.g. a â€œZeusâ€ could be cheaper on the Lyran Commonwealth part of the Federated Commonwealth. The ownership of certain important planets / production facilities could also have an influence on repair and rearm costs. Maintaining a â€œZeusâ€ in Liao space is probably more expensive.

Difference between house and mercenary units

Obviously money is more important to mercenary units than to house units. However both rely on a certain prestige. Much of the monetary issues could also be implemented for house units (e.g. through a regimental budget) but the ability to get certain benefits may also be achieved in a different way by mercenary units (mainly money) and house units (mainly prestige).

Benefits of multiple mechs

Players with several personal mechs should have a certain benefit in a sustained community warfare campaign. They could be allowed to take part in multiple campaigns at the same time. They could be allowed to bring in fresh troops, if one of their other mechs is still in repair & rearm or its pilot is injured.

Sustained campaigns

Currently the game consists of single battles of mechs against each other with only some game modes which makes a perfectly fun and short game. However I could really find even more interest in a sustained campaign (e.g. for control of a planet). It would be interesting to have a system of deploying forces on a command scale to different battle areas. This could lead to uneven start positions in matches, making it necessary to withdraw, regroup, attack again. The campaign mode should take time and require rearming and maintenance. This will put some pressure on the pilots who spend all their ammunition in one battle (if cut off from rearmamentâ€¦). A concept of attrition will probably also increase the value of cheaper units, when the commander has the possibility to deploy some of these cheaper forces in a sensible manner.

Combined arms

Combined arms enrich the game â€“ if properly designed.

Artillery

Artillery strikes would be a nasty surprise on the battlefield and would further increase the value of units that can call in such strikes (most probably scouts / light mechs). There are essentially two possibilities tom implement artillery. Off the board (you cannot reach them, and have no possibility to counterattack on an artillery position) or on the on the board (real units that can be searched and destroyed. When considering the range of artillery a on the board solution would require larger maps.

The current system of a module (off the board artillery) works, a system of on board artillery may offer more tactical choices.

Aerospace

Similarly aerospace strikes can be included off the board making some units able to call in aerospace strafing. The more complex solution is what I would call a dual game. Ground combat and Air combat with an overlay over the contested ground combat area. This would make it possible that the aerospace units have a much larger area to maneuver. Only when the fly across the contested ground combat area may they engage in ground combat via a strafing run. Obviously AA Mechs / AA capabilities would then have to be included in the game.

The current system of a module (off the board aerospace strikes) works. Building an aerospace fighter game that works seamlessly with MWO on the ground will probably be a long term effort but the results could be fascinating.

Helicopters

Helicopters would have a similar role as scout mechs, only much faster and more vulnerable. I think their greatest value could be in a campaign mode with fast redeployment over several contested battle areas.

The current system uses a UAV module which is however not truly similar to a helicopter.

Integrating helicopters is probably similar in difficulty to building an aerospace fighter game that works seamlessly with MWO. SO it may be a long term goal.

Tanks

Tanks are a cheap alternative to mechs with generally lower capabilities. They could have a more pronounced role in sustained campaigns where cost and material come into play. One other role are ambushes e.g. in cities where tanks can potentially hide in building. This would make city fighting much more intense and no save turf for mechs. However technically this would require tanks being able to move into and out of buildings (my personal favorite are several tanks in a parking garageâ€¦) and of course buildings would need to be destructible.

Infantry

Infantry can be even deadlier for mechs than tanks if properly deployed in city maps. However it is probably not conceivable to have single player mode on infantry. I would rather suggest that one player may command a whole platoon (similar to Operation Flashpoint â€“ which I very much liked). As a cheap unit, which can be very decisive in the right battle environment, infantry may also have a role in sustained campaigns. However infantry will probably not work with random maps. I cannot imagine a sane commander deploying infantry in caustic valley. Personally I would love to have infantry in the game. What will be the clan invasion without the very special clan infantry (elementals)?

Flight Mechs

Rare but wonderful units to very quickly take out an artillery position or redeploy across several contested battlegrounds in sustained campaign. They would become extremely valuable if able to switch between ground combat and aerospace combat reinforcing the positions in a dual game (ground combat / aerospace combat).

Again this is rather a long term effort.

Mines and Mine Sweeping
In â€œAttach / Defenseâ€ game modes the ability to deploy mines could be interesting. However if mines are integrated into the game (which should be relatively simple), the potential countermeasure (mine sweeping tanks) should be available too (which might be more difficult).
Click to expand...

Blagg Zear · May 31, 2014

I like to have a new Game Mode. Let's say Capture the Flag. And a new Map. But before that i like to have a Story Mode...

Well, just dreaming a bit

epikt · May 31, 2014

Blagg Zear said: ↑

Capture the Flag
Click to expand...

It's a game type for fast gameplay with respawn. Quite the opposite of MWO.

Blagg Zear · May 31, 2014

epikt said: ↑

It's a game type for fast gameplay with respawn. Quite the opposite of MWO.
Click to expand...

Respawn, yes! I knew i forgot something. Thx for the reminder!

Sucitraf · May 31, 2014

May we please get dropship mode? I was very excited when it first was announced, and it hasn't really come up anymore. It's a kind of respawn mode!

Remarius · Jun 2, 2014

Just want a new map at this point tbh.... one that penalises poptarts.

Falconium · Jun 2, 2014

Agreed, a new map is long overdue. And penalizing poptarts? I heartily approve of this, except that the only terrain which can truly do that is open terrain, (so there's nothing for them to hide-behind-and-poptart-from). So perhaps a wide-open prairie map, with a slope at each end? I guess what I'm thinking of here is really a valley bowl, so that everything converges around an open space down in the bottom (center). However, a map like this would be pretty impractical, as the team with the most Gauss and LRMS would win!

So I don't know. . . . They were supposed to be giving us a Jungle map for a while now, but we haven't even seen screenshots to show their progress on it, let alone some actual content to test. Still waiting.

Log in or Sign up

Various Suggestions [for MWO]

Quincy McAllister New Member

Blagg Zear Star Lord

epikt Benefactor

Blagg Zear Star Lord

Sucitraf Well-Known Member

Remarius Star Lord

Falconium Administrator Staff Member

Log in or Sign up

Various Suggestions [for MWO]

Quincy McAllister New Member

Blagg Zear Star Lord

epikt Benefactor

Blagg Zear Star Lord

Sucitraf Well-Known Member

Remarius Star Lord

Falconium Administrator Staff Member

Useful Searches