72 replies to this topic

[CloakRogue]

In Developer Anwsers #5 David said that one of the ways to kill a mech' is to destroy both of its legs...
so does that mean that if you destroy only one leg that it'll start hopping around? Waching an Atlas hop around on one leg, fireing lasers, would be a very memorable sight!
What do the rest of you guys think?

[DaZur]

Reading into that statement I postulate that a Mech can have one leg destroyed and rendered disabled with high probabilities of falling over.

Conically, these Mechs still can torso-twist and train their weapons on target within it's arc of damage,

[Dlardrageth]

There might be that slight balancing issue... The TT used increasingly difficult dice rolls to simulate that. But hey, when in MWO the Mechs can happily hop around on one leg doing combat, basically like kids playing hopscotch with the addition of an arsenal of weaponry, then we prolly can also expect them to sprout wings and fly when they lose the second leg, right?

[zCrispy]

Watching a heavy mech trying to wobble around = priceless

[Kiyoshi Amaya]

No sprouting wings...



He'll bite ya knee-caps off!

Edited by Shrekken, 15 March 2012 - 08:45 AM.

[MilitantMonk]

I imagine you'd fall over with one leg gone. A stationary weapons platform with very limited torso twist could still be dangerous if you blundered into it's sights though.

[Mana211]

Have you never played MW4?

A destroyed body part can mean that all the armor and (if applicable) weapons/equipment are destroyed but the structure is stil attached.

In MW4 this left you with a limping mech not a hopping one.

Edited by Mana211, 15 March 2012 - 09:08 AM.

[CloakRogue]

Mana211, on 15 March 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:

Have you never played MW4?

A destroyed body part can mean that all the armor and (if applicable) weapons/equipment are destroyed but the structure is stil attached.

In MW4 this left you with a limping mech not a hopping one.

No, as a matter of fact i never did play MW4(although i probably should). That would probably be due to the fact that ive heard it's not as good as the others.

[Bryan Ekman]

We have two test cases.

• Destroy and remove the limp a la arms. (mech disabled)
  
• Cripple and make the mech limp. (mech intact)

We haven't decided which yet.

[CloakRogue]

Bryan Ekman, on 15 March 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

We have two test cases.

• Destroy and remove the limp a la arms. (mech disabled)
  
• Cripple and make the mech limp. (mech intact)

We haven't decided which yet.

Ah! Thank you for enlightening us.

[Dlardrageth]

Bryan Ekman, on 15 March 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

We have two test cases.

• Destroy and remove the limp a la arms. (mech disabled)
  
• Cripple and make the mech limp. (mech intact)

We haven't decided which yet.

So you're saying it's an A or B decision already? No chance for a gradual process like functional -> damaged -> disabled -> destroyed?

[fakey]

Bryan Ekman, on 15 March 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

We have two test cases.

• Destroy and remove the limp a la arms. (mech disabled)
  
• Cripple and make the mech limp. (mech intact)

We haven't decided which yet.

I'd personally go with the limp option over the disable option. Makes it a viable tactical choice, particularly if the battle is taking place in multiple locations and ranges about a fair bit, and yet doesn't completely remove the pilot from the game.

It also makes it a much more complicated choice depending on the style of mission. If/when game modes other than deathmatch are introduced (base capture/destroy, defend VIP, whatever) a legged mech could still be a viable defender with a gimp leg (or two whatever the case may be) or be an effective support fire mech if they have the proper weapondry.

From a lore point of view I'd also assume that while the weapons of the time should be able to strip most of the functioning bits off the leg, it'd take quite a bit of doing to take a leg clean off, however those with more experience with the background feel free to correct me.

Anyhow, I'm sure you guys are considering all of the above already.

[Tannhauser Gate]

I prefer the disabled limping / dragging the leg using only the hip actuator to move the seized up leg like a big crutch. If its severed then the mech falls over and can fight in a limited fashion from the ground. This was was done in Heavy Gear and it was fun to both fight from the ground "with my last breath I spit at thee" and to be the one to walk up and put a downed mech out of its misery. If you think its lame, then you havent played it. I remember being on my face with no leg, and I was still able to get missile lock and destroy some other mechs before I was taken out. This is a sim, not a shooter.

Standing with only 1 leg? Its kinda silly to have a mech stand and still be able to fight with half its ability to remain standing while taking direct fire. It would make sense to be able to stand in a non-combat / no strong wind environment but in combat, youd fall over quickly anyway from any respectable impacting force.

Edit: That said, Ill probably be fine with whatever PGI decides is best for balance. Being able to shoot from the ground, while cool in HG, may not be a match for MWO. Most pilots would probably climb out of their legged and toppled mech even if they could continue the fight albeit disabled. It depends on if its worth it or not. It was a no respawn match with league-like importance then it would be great to have that last opportunity to fight to the very end. So maybe have it as an option. meh

Edited by LakeDaemon, 15 March 2012 - 10:40 AM.

[DaZur]

Bryan Ekman, on 15 March 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

We have two test cases.

• Destroy and remove the limp a la arms. (mech disabled)
  
• Cripple and make the mech limp. (mech intact)

We haven't decided which yet.

Can we have both for variety?

Heavily damaged / Crippled Limb = Greatly reduced maneuverability (but still able to rotate / face the Mech ) giving a greater chance to defend itself.

Destroyed / Detached = Limb gone, Mech goes stationary, arch of fire limited to it's torso rotation. Double the chance of knock-down (even as a result of firing it's own weapons that have recoil).

Addendum edit:

Both legs heavily damaged / crippled = See Destroyed / detached results.

Both legs destroyed / detached... "Time to buck-up buttercup and punch-out"... dead Mech.

The pretense that it could not stand on one limb is arguable as the Mech "balances" via neural input from the pilot... One or two legs is relevant with the exception of having double the chance of knock-down via weapon impact or it's own weapon recoil.

Lastly, we also have to factor in JJ capabilities under these conditions as well...

Edited by DaZur, 15 March 2012 - 10:12 AM.

[Brakkyn]

If both legs are "disabled", the 'Mech should collapse and be considered out of action. 'Mechs should not "hop", but walking on one leg while using the other as a "crutch" is acceptable. Walking on two disabled legs is not.

This would, however, negate the ability to destroy legs in a similar fashion to arms. Maybe that's best.

[Siilk]

Bryan Ekman, on 15 March 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

We have two test cases.

• Destroy and remove the limp a la arms. (mech disabled)
  
• Cripple and make the mech limp. (mech intact)

We haven't decided which yet.

Looks like a choice between bad and worse. Either MW4-like eternal limping with non-removable legs or "Both legs are gone, you have to eject!". If it only comes down to this, dismemberment is the better choice but frankly, it really shouldn't be only this or limping. Animations are hard to do, I know, so make legless mech simply fall and lie on the ground. With torso twist still functional, there's a good chance it could still be oriented so that it could do some farewell salute right into it's enemies' faces. Scouts with their enhanced sensors could still be of use to the lance, commanders could still issue orders and call in artillery fire. You don't need legs for that. There's a lot of things downed pilots could do, don't rob that from them. Simply let them pull the eject lever themselves. Nothing bad would come out of this, it would only add realism to the game.

[Solis Obscuri]

Does it violate Zellbriggen to challenge a one-legged 'mech to an ***-kicking contest?

[TheRulesLawyer]

I'd rather see the mech move extremely slowly and limp than be disabled completely. At least for playability. It makes legging a less viable tactic. In any case, the only limb removal is on a critical hit when you roll a 12, right? So actual removal should be rare. So damaged it can't take weight, or move should be the normal failure mode.

[Seth]

In that recent game play video, we saw the Hunchback eat dirt when it had one of its legs taken out. I hope it will stay that way. MW3 destroyed the mech when a leg was taken out, MW4 had it limp with the leg still there (and shooting the destroyed leg would eventually destroy the whole mech). I hope MWO takes a different approach and disables the mech but still allows it to act like a turret.

[Catharsis]

Flashback to the Mechwarrior 2 days when you could blow off BOTH a Stormcrow's arms and one leg, and it would still shoot you with its little chin laser. "JUST DIE ALREADY!"

Though frankly, when a mech loses a leg, it would be better to have a mech turn into a stationary turret or hop around retardedly then have a single leg loss be an instant kill like in Mechwarrior 3. By having leg loss be an instant kill, it took ALL the strategy out of aiming and simply made it a game of legging.

I think probably the best solution would be to, instead of legs being completely blown off, the devs could make it so a leg is "crippled" and the mech simply drags it along behind it at a VERY slow pace.