145 replies to this topic

[Lomack]

IMHO, its a fair shot. The cockpit is a hella small target to hit from any kind of range.

While I am sure I will be annoyed if someone gets up near me and does an AC10 or PPC to my face. Its my own damn fault for letting them get that close.

Medium+ ranged headshots, I hope, will require a bit of luck in addition to skill to pull off with any thing that resembles consistency.

[AngelEyes]

Headshotting was always more of a statement of skill than a "cheapshot" when I played. I always aimed for the head on those mechs where it was buried in thier centor torso, cause even if you miss, you do center damage. Same with the Atlas... aim for the chin of the skull, a little high and you HS him, too low and at least you pop him dead center. I do remember Cata's being notoriusly hard to HS cause of the way it was on the very top of the CT, but if I remember correctly they were also the easiet mech to headstomp.

As stated before, there's no such thing as a "cheap shot," there's the alive guy who took it, and the dead guy who ate it.

[Steamroller Stig]

Melcyna, on 06 June 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

Neg, because as big dog shows, the military is concentrating on mules and non combat roles.

The moment combat is involved, you run smack straight into the holy trinity of combat vehicle

ie: how to balance between
1. mobility
2. firepower
3. protection

Legs by virtue of it's mechanism is inherently inferior in payload and speed to conventional land vehicle which makes their balance equation completely out of whack against conventional forces.

The military know this and that's why they are not considering legged vehicle platforms for combat roles, but instead concentrated them on non combat support roles. You can't defy physics, and legged platforms are inherently worse at combat roles so until a new advancement that defy conventional physics arrive, combat oriented legged platform is essentially a dream.

with advances in BMI tech or AI I can see legged combat vehicles having a role on the battlefield. when we could replicate or even surpass the performance of organic extremities than we could make machines far more agile than wheeled and treaded vehicles though rough terrain.

Edited by Steamroller Stig, 06 June 2012 - 08:21 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Steamroller Stig, on 06 June 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

with advances in BMI tech or AI I can see legged combat vehicles having a role on the battlefield. when we could replicate or even surpass the performance of organic extremities than we could make machines far more agile than wheeled and treaded vehicles though rough terrain.

Also the neural helmet thing-a-ma-bob I cant remember what its called lol
As I remember Mechs not being joystick controlled?
Could be wrong, dont remember

[tBG Caesar]

As with every game i would expect that depending on the Mech your opponent has and you have, you would try to attacking in a fashion which uses you mechs strongest features while denying the enemy theirs.

This related to the argument of would you aim for the cockpit during battle?

Well my answer is a question unfortunately: Can you aim and attack the enemy cockpit while attacking in a fashion which uses you mechs strongest features while denying the enemy theirs?

Sorry for these statements sounding a bit vague but there are too many factors to include for me to make any bold statements or scenarios.

Sorry for these statements sounding a bit vague but there are to many factors to include for me to make any bold statements or senarioes.

[Melcyna]

Steamroller Stig, on 06 June 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

with advances in BMI tech or AI I can see legged combat vehicles having a role on the battlefield. when we could replicate or even surpass the performance of organic extremities than we could make machines far more agile than wheeled and treaded vehicles though rough terrain.

Which would then face directly against infantries, and given that infantries will have easier time to hide themselves than you do with a legged machines larger than human, your fate is essentially sealed since there's no way to protect the legged vehicle against the firepower infantry carry today even, and certainly not in the future.

Given that weight capacity on legged platform is inherently weaker than normal vehicle, we can't exactly expect any decent armoring on them since limbs by virtue of it's mechanism is much harder to armor as well on top of it's lower weight capacity. Now you are going to throw that headlong against Modern infantry which carry enough firepower to knock out armored vehicles at short range, and anything beyond they simply forward the coordinate to CAS.

You can't hide either since your size effectively makes you stick out like a sore thumb and would be instantly recognized and spotted either via aerial observation or just plain eyeball MK1.

Then of course there's the natural question, what would you do if they just simply improve infantries with the very same artificial limbs tech? Voila you get power armor, and right now that's exactly where the military is progressing towards... ie: improving their infantries either via exoskeleton frame or otherwise to increase their capability.

Either way you are looking at:
A. facing increasingly lethal infantries in 'rough terrains' where they simply have better adaptability than you do thanks to their smaller size and faster deployment with transport and sufficient firepower to knock you out at close range (which is all they need since engagement range at rough terrains are not exactly 'long ranged' per say).

B. being shot by whatever infantry support they have, be it CAS, guided anti armor artillery shells, etc.

So now you can see why the military don't even consider armed combat version of legged platforms, and why they are investing a hell a lot on exoskeletons.