While I definitely make use of it in Firefall and am decked out in battle-frame parts that all give a +10 to e.g.: Ability Potency...should they?
Should an arm-part or omni-frame head or leg parts affect offensive abilities in such a way? Defensive stats, resistances and mobility, yes. But, ability potency, AoE, range, duration...etc.? Don't think so. Those stats should exclusively be affected by either weapon-mods or mods slotted into frame parts that would feed the additional power into the offensive-systems to raise specific stats. But, one cannot and should not be able to slot both defensive and offensive mods into the same part of the frame. Choosing one should mean sacrificing the other, in the particular part it would be slotted/installed into. One or both arms could have all the recoil and/or melee mods, the head could have the sensors and/or range effecting mods...etc. but could the mods in the legs be built to add the same boost or should it be limited to what one would suppose those body parts could enhance. In Firefall, leg parts couldn't modify e.g.: critical damage and arms couldn't add additional sprint speed. But, with mechs, speed boosts and mobility boosts could come from e.g.: the arms or head being modded to be made of lighter materials. The legs or chassis could be modded to have clamps, spikes, more weight or counter-acting boosters to reduce recoil both on the ground and in the air. In Firefall we could not modify certain body-parts towards a certain build, but in Ember, the mech could allow for such customization.
(@Grummz , I'm starting to see the good thing in mechs, here
Makes for a MOAR in-depth customization)
But as it was pointed out here and elsewhere, modding certain stats should be counter-balanced with the reduction of others. If we choose to mod the legs to help dampen recoil we'd be, in effect, sacrificing or just foregoing modification that would build it towards speed or jump-height. If we'd modify our arm(s) to have less weight for more speed, we'd give up some control over recoil and even some melee effectiveness if we'd use our mech's fists for the latter. If we'd want better melee damage with weapons and not fists, faster swings or the strength to wield heavier weapons, we'd modify our servos accordingly. With that said, the modification of servos and the weight reduction on the material could be two separate mod-slots for two separate parts of the mech. Maybe.
With weapons e.g.: recoil-dampeners in both the weapon and the hand and arm that would need to hold it, would need to be slotted for better handling and performance, depending on whether the weapon would be mounted on or held by the mech. Perhaps we could also have the option to either mount or hold a weapon. For example, a blade could be mounted and would spring forth (or activate if its energy-based) from the wrist, while an assault rifle would be held. With a dual-wielding system, both at the same time.
Or perhaps...
Certain weapons or weapon-builds would need to be mounted (or could only be mounted) as it would be problematic if it was held by the mech. There could be a transition point, a threshold, where the weapon would require mounting, either because it would be necessary and unavoidable, or for maximum effectiveness, as it would be much less effective and much more difficult to handle, causing e.g.: reduced aim and mobility when not mounted.
Of course, all of the above, with the aim to have horizontal progression, would need an extensive modding system. And "extensive" is putting it mildly.
Should an arm-part or omni-frame head or leg parts affect offensive abilities in such a way? Defensive stats, resistances and mobility, yes. But, ability potency, AoE, range, duration...etc.? Don't think so. Those stats should exclusively be affected by either weapon-mods or mods slotted into frame parts that would feed the additional power into the offensive-systems to raise specific stats. But, one cannot and should not be able to slot both defensive and offensive mods into the same part of the frame. Choosing one should mean sacrificing the other, in the particular part it would be slotted/installed into. One or both arms could have all the recoil and/or melee mods, the head could have the sensors and/or range effecting mods...etc. but could the mods in the legs be built to add the same boost or should it be limited to what one would suppose those body parts could enhance. In Firefall, leg parts couldn't modify e.g.: critical damage and arms couldn't add additional sprint speed. But, with mechs, speed boosts and mobility boosts could come from e.g.: the arms or head being modded to be made of lighter materials. The legs or chassis could be modded to have clamps, spikes, more weight or counter-acting boosters to reduce recoil both on the ground and in the air. In Firefall we could not modify certain body-parts towards a certain build, but in Ember, the mech could allow for such customization.
(@Grummz , I'm starting to see the good thing in mechs, here
Makes for a MOAR in-depth customization)But as it was pointed out here and elsewhere, modding certain stats should be counter-balanced with the reduction of others. If we choose to mod the legs to help dampen recoil we'd be, in effect, sacrificing or just foregoing modification that would build it towards speed or jump-height. If we'd modify our arm(s) to have less weight for more speed, we'd give up some control over recoil and even some melee effectiveness if we'd use our mech's fists for the latter. If we'd want better melee damage with weapons and not fists, faster swings or the strength to wield heavier weapons, we'd modify our servos accordingly. With that said, the modification of servos and the weight reduction on the material could be two separate mod-slots for two separate parts of the mech. Maybe.
With weapons e.g.: recoil-dampeners in both the weapon and the hand and arm that would need to hold it, would need to be slotted for better handling and performance, depending on whether the weapon would be mounted on or held by the mech. Perhaps we could also have the option to either mount or hold a weapon. For example, a blade could be mounted and would spring forth (or activate if its energy-based) from the wrist, while an assault rifle would be held. With a dual-wielding system, both at the same time.
Or perhaps...
Certain weapons or weapon-builds would need to be mounted (or could only be mounted) as it would be problematic if it was held by the mech. There could be a transition point, a threshold, where the weapon would require mounting, either because it would be necessary and unavoidable, or for maximum effectiveness, as it would be much less effective and much more difficult to handle, causing e.g.: reduced aim and mobility when not mounted.
Of course, all of the above, with the aim to have horizontal progression, would need an extensive modding system. And "extensive" is putting it mildly.
Likes:
NitroMidgets
