

Question About Eject Or Lack Of
#1
Posted 25 February 2013 - 02:31 PM
#2
Posted 25 February 2013 - 02:37 PM
#3
Posted 25 February 2013 - 02:41 PM
Aside from depriving your team of a warrior (or at least a potentially distracting target) what purpose could ejecting possibly serve in this game?
#4
Posted 25 February 2013 - 02:51 PM
Note: The above is purely opinion and suggestion based on the expressed desire for such a feature and the commented lack of reason for having it.
#5
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:12 PM
PGI could place weapons platforms around the map that you could get into to attack other mechs that are trying to take over capped area as well and still be able to help out the team.
Just my 2 cents worth.
#6
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:15 PM
#7
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:19 PM
ShadowDragon, on 25 February 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:
PGI could place weapons platforms around the map that you could get into to attack other mechs that are trying to take over capped area as well and still be able to help out the team.
Just my 2 cents worth.
So, you want "Mech Assault"?
#8
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:24 PM
#9
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:25 PM
#10
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:27 PM
ShadowDragon, on 25 February 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:
Meat outside a mech is useless. You're not in an Elemental suit inside the cockpit of your mech. You're not carrying a 500lb missile launcher (not to mention the ammo) and it certainly ain't ejecting with you.
You have fun running right up to the foot of that mech (assuming you can catch it while it is moving at 50-150 kph) and punch it with those bare knuckles. Sounds like a plan.
#11
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:27 PM

I am more concerned about the many "no signal" monitors and rather see some more readouts or datastreams there.
I too would like an ejection sequence, but according to Q&A #31 is is unfortunately not something that is on the radar for the foreseeable future. It might be neat if manual ejection would grant a percentage bonus to XP (or, the other way around, dying without ejection incurs a small penalty), but this level of detail is merely a fleeting idea I do not deem realistic for the time being. As far as prioritization is concerned, I'd prefer the Art Department to allow pilot customization first, or finish hardpoint visualization (meaning, putting a PPC into where a laser used to be will switch that arm into a PPC).
#12
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:38 PM
That tournament run must have my brain still a little fried.
But I back onto the real thread topic, I have to say that I'm against any form of autoejectulation for mech cockpits
#13
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:38 PM
ShadowDragon, on 25 February 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:
PGI could place weapons platforms around the map that you could get into to attack other mechs that are trying to take over capped area as well and still be able to help out the team.
Just my 2 cents worth.
This isn't Living Legends now. Also, you try ejecting from battle and walking away from that. I couldn't imagine infantry making any headway in maps the size of what we have now. Some maps are even downright hostile environments.
#14
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:39 PM
Rakashan, on 25 February 2013 - 02:41 PM, said:
Aside from depriving your team of a warrior (or at least a potentially distracting target) what purpose could ejecting possibly serve in this game?
I'd love it, purely for style reasons. Tryin not to sound too grognard here, but this is a MechWarrior game after all. Not all lore related things have to serve a purpose. So if they get around to it somewhere down the line, yeah, I'd love it.
Players who eject could be "rewarded" with a little cbill boost. People ejecting too early hurt their team, but guess what: This is actually a simulation of real life cowardice, and i'd love it.
#15
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:41 PM
Nostram, on 25 February 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:
Note: The above is purely opinion and suggestion based on the expressed desire for such a feature and the commented lack of reason for having it.
Umm.
So you can spam the eject button and it will only do something when it is good for you?
That seems ... like a horrible idea.
You hit eject ... You should eject.
If you hit it early, bummer for you and your team.
If you hit it late same.
#16
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:44 PM
#17
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:45 PM
Oy of MidWorld, on 25 February 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:
Players who eject could be "rewarded" with a little cbill boost. People ejecting too early hurt their team, but guess what: This is actually a simulation of real life cowardice, and i'd love it.
So without repair and rearm, etc. the only type of reward you could implement would be a bonus to the payouts. My problem with it is that it is not like a heat override... You don't stay in the mech if it's not destroyed.
I have no problems if you want to implement an eject cut-scene instead of a mech falling down but I don't want to see anything encouraging people to pop out and deprive their team of a functional mech, especially not when you are more likely to make a larger reward just for shooting back at the guy shooting at you. I mean... Heaven forbid that he should miss while you get a luck head-shot and win the match.
I'm not against the flavor-text here. I'm against the change it would bring to the actual game. The change in tactics and game-play that would affect your teammates.
#18
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:53 PM
Rakashan, on 25 February 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:
I have no problems if you want to implement an eject cut-scene instead of a mech falling down but I don't want to see anything encouraging people to pop out and deprive their team of a functional mech, especially not when you are more likely to make a larger reward just for shooting back at the guy shooting at you. I mean... Heaven forbid that he should miss while you get a luck head-shot and win the match.
I'm not against the flavor-text here. I'm against the change it would bring to the actual game. The change in tactics and game-play that would affect your teammates.
Yeah, i understand that. And there's always griefers who'd abuse the system. If they'd work out some kind of mechanic that'd make sense, i'd love it. Shouldn't be a priority though.
#19
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:55 PM
#20
Posted 25 February 2013 - 03:56 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users