30 replies to this topic

[ManDaisy]

Notice: This is changing trajectory mid air only, not on launch. The implication that it would only be used to correct landings, and not jump skate.

Note: dont forget that inertia would have a say in it so most of the fuel would be burnt counteracting it.

Edited by ManDaisy, 05 March 2013 - 04:04 PM.

[Zordicron]

I do not recall this being possible in cannon, though i am not expert, just a long time mech player. I am sure someone else has a better official word on that.

otherwise, it reminds me too much of gundam.

[FrostCollar]

Currently jump jets are a bit underwhelming for movement (compared to use for sniping). This sounds like a useful change. Yes.

[Chou Senwan]

If you can adjust your jets' orientation, logically you should be able to reaim in midair. I'd also like to see a bit of lateral drifting, maybe to the extent of 5 or 10 meters over the course of the whole jump.

I'm talking something more akin to what a helicopter can do by tilting a little to the side, rather than the 'streaking sideways dash' of Gundam fame that so many people worry about (and that absolutely no one is asking for).

[Iacov]

a slight direction change midair sounds like a good idea to me
not that i use jump jets even at all...but i could imagine that it would be useful, especially for pilots of lights...
jump jets should be another defensive maneuver for lights...and not make them a target

[Torquemada]

Other MechWarrior game have included it. Also once collisions are restored it would mean one of my favourite tactics back from MW4 Mercs Solaris at MWL can be achieved, jumping onto the head of an Atlas in a light mech. Loads of head damage to the Atlas if done correctly. Even better the heavier the jumping Mech gets!

[Cpt Beefheart]

Iacov, on 06 March 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

a slight direction change midair sounds like a good idea to me
not that i use jump jets even at all...but i could imagine that it would be useful, especially for pilots of lights...
jump jets should be another defensive maneuver for lights...and not make them a target

Lights are already a hard enough target for heavy and assault. If jump jets are made to change trajectory mid-flight I would like to see the addition of a giant fly swat for heavy mechs that are swarmed by 2 or 3 hovering Ravens.

[Fooooo]

I wouldn't mind this with 1 condition, ok maybe somewhat 2.


1. Only mechs that in the lore that are agile in the air or for gameplay reasons have a good place to be agile in the air should have jets that can adjust quickly.
Example : Spiders

All other JJ mechs I would hate to see get major ability to adjust in the air. It could be offered as an upgrade option for the JJ's much like Endo-steel is etc, however I would still limit its use on certain mechs.

Example : Catapaults with upgraded JJ's wouldn't be able to turn or strafe or slow down in the air as good as a treb. A treb is nowhere near as agile in the air as a spider. Some mech variants with JJ may also be locked out of the upgrade. etc etc

Edited by Fooooo, 06 March 2013 - 04:38 AM.

[buttmonkey]

makes sense to me, you jump and in mid air turn so why does your mech go the same way. it defies physics in fact

[Volthorne]

buttmonkey, on 06 March 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

makes sense to me, you jump and in mid air turn so why does your mech go the same way. it defies physics in fact

Actually, no, it doesn't. Let me see if I can find the post where the math on air speed was done... Found it:

Phaesphoros, on 02 March 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

Let's estimate this.

IIRC, you can use the drag equation for a first approximation. So you need the area and cd value (drag coefficient) of a mech. Unfortunately, cd is determined experimentally, but we can use the cd of a human (at least for COM mechs) which is about 1 [dimensionless]. Air density is also about 1 kg/m^3. For surface, I refer to this forum post, so it's about 1.2 m^2/t * 25 t = let's say 25 m^2. Initial speed 100 km/h = about 30 m/s

F_{drag} = 0.5 * 1 * 1 * 25 * v^2 [N/(m/s)^2]
Err well this will become more simple if we neglect the 0.5; say a higher cd or surface area. Nvm.

F_{drag} = m*dv/dt
DEQ, 25*v^2 = -25000 * dv/dt; v(0) = 30 m/s
solution: v(t) = 30,000 / (3*t + 1000)

Now, v slowly reaches 0; it's smaller than 0.5 m/s or 1.8 km/h only after about 20,000 s or 6 h.
This is either ridiculous or I did some mistake (which is quite probable, I'm not good at guessing).


TL;DR a COM needs about 6 h to be slowed down from 100 km/h to 1.8 k/h by drag / air resistance. It's probably not air which is slowing them down, but Garth.

So, if it takes a Commando 6 hours to slow down form just drag, there's no hope in hell of jump jets being able to maneuver it around like this thread wants. In fact, you'd be MORE maneuverable the HEAVIER you are.

[Eddrick]

It would be cool if you could change your flight path. But, with the way Jump Jets point down. The direction you go is based off of momentum. Same goes for speed traveled.

[Chou Senwan]

If you have leg-mounted jets, and the thrust is coming out of your feet, you should be able to adjust which way your feet are pointing in order to get a little lateral thrust.

Even Harriers, which came out in the 1970s(?), can angle their jump jets to let them 'sidestep'. I know Battletech has a bunch of lost technology, but if we're allowing lasers and fusion engines, I think 1970s tech should be permissible.

[Maven Cole]

I don't know about Canon but I think it would greatly increase the value of Jets. At the moment I jumping mech's just make good targets.

[ohtochooseaname]

This would wreck current chase mechanics with jets: they allow you to move backwards while turning around and that is actually one of their most important features: you can keep moving and have an abrupt change in direction.

[ManDaisy]

I dont see how(this would hurt) , as you could just add a few more buttons for thrust vectoring instead of overwriting rotation entirely. We can have both.

Edited by ManDaisy, 07 March 2013 - 06:39 PM.

[Volthorne]

ManDaisy, on 07 March 2013 - 06:38 PM, said:

I dont see how(this would hurt) , as you could just add a few more buttons for thrust vectoring instead of overwriting rotation entirely. We can have both.

No, we can't have both. See above post with maths.

[Fooooo]

Volthorne, on 07 March 2013 - 11:37 PM, said:

No, we can't have both. See above post with maths.

I don't see what all that math is trying to say about JJ's.... its talking about "throwing" a commando into the air and watching how long it takes to come to a stop on its own. (if it didn't fall to the ground after throwing it via gravity)
You could do the same thing with a truck, have it rolling down a road at 100km/h. How long would it take for wind / rolling resistance to stop it do you think ?

So does that mean that brakes on that truck should not be viable ? Or that having rockets on the front of the truck, and then firing them would not stop it faster than wind / rolling resistance ??

Are you saying that our modern rockets should not be able to adjust their trajectory also ? What about f-22's and other jets with vectored thrusters ?

Surely with enough power you could stop a commando from 100km/h in the air pretty quickly, however that is probably not something I would exactly like to see with agile JJ's.

Slowing down, yes, instant stops ? no.

Edited by Fooooo, 08 March 2013 - 12:32 AM.

[Volthorne]

Fooooo, on 08 March 2013 - 12:30 AM, said:

I don't see what all that math is trying to say about JJ's.... its talking about "throwing" a commando into the air and watching how long it takes to come to a stop on its own. (if it didn't fall to the ground after throwing it via gravity)
You could do the same thing with a truck, have it rolling down a road at 100km/h. How long would it take for wind / rolling resistance to stop it do you think ?

Not as long as you think, I think. Then again, that all depends on the conditions. Is the engine off? Is the truck in neutral? What state of repair is the road in?

Quote

So does that mean that brakes on that truck should not be viable ? Or that having rockets on the front of the truck, and then firing them would not stop it faster than wind / rolling resistance ??

Neither of those options deal with changing the direction the truck is moving, only slowing its forward momentum (arguably you could say the truck is slowly - and increasingly - moving in a backwards direction until zero momentum has been reached).

Quote

Are you saying that our modern rockets should not be able to adjust their trajectory also ? What about f-22's and other jets with vectored thrusters ?

Even jets with vectored thrusters cover a good chunk of distance when executing turns (plus they don't have the aerodynamics of a brick, so...).

Quote

Surely with enough power you could stop a commando from 100km/h in the air pretty quickly, however that is probably not something I would exactly like to see with agile JJ's.

Slowing down, yes, instant stops ? no.

Yes, "given enough power". Said number of jump jets would probably number in the 10+ range, and even then you'd have great difficulty (read: near impossible) getting it to do anything other than move in a single direction per "jump".

Edited by Volthorne, 08 March 2013 - 12:56 AM.

[Jetfire]

ONLY FOR THE SPIDER

[Alois Hammer]

As I recall, from MechWarrior 2 onward Jump Jets were basically "nerfed" with regard to maneuverability as time went on. They went from basically being able to fly, with full directional control, to eventually being nothing but "jump boosters" as they are now.

And as I recall this was done deliberately to get rid of what amounted to "Land-Air Mechs on the cheap" as any mech could mount jets then fly complex aerobatic maneuvers without ever touching down so long as the jump time held out.

And I like it that way...they're called "Jump" Jets, not "Advanced Maneuvering Thrusters." Some of the side-thrusting, missile-dodging hijinks in MW2 were comically absurd, and we're not losing anything worth having by not implementing such flight capabilities now.

Just say no.

Edited by Alois Hammer, 08 March 2013 - 06:25 AM.