New Battlemech Movement Behaviour - Feedback
#141
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:05 PM
#142
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:08 PM
#143
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:12 PM
I hope that next you are able to implement a movement penalty for water/high water.
#144
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:13 PM
To the people angry about Quickdraw being in the category it in... You are silly. The Quickdraw has jumpjets, use them. It is also very tall and will be able to shoot over a lesser incline.
To those worried about Stalkers it seems they have explained that they did a height, width, length assessment and came out with a reasoned method. At either 20%, or 25% capable, it still is severely limited. The taller mechs will be able to see over their inclines better than squat mechs, which is probably why some of the short mechs are in a category with a higher incline capability. Regardless, I am sure it will be tweaked as time goes along.
The thing I am worried about is that the time limit on the larger maps may make for more stalemates. Nothing more boring than repeated stalemates.
Edited by Zwd, 27 June 2013 - 03:14 PM.
#145
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:18 PM
#146
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:24 PM
#147
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:24 PM
#148
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:32 PM
Thanks for putting it in, it will in all likelihood make the game better (and lights will get back some of the maneuverability advantage they by all rights should have).
#149
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:41 PM
#150
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:52 PM
I will be very, very interested to see the strategic ramifications of this - mayhap larger mechs will have to really work to get their fat, PPC toting bodies into commanding positions over the battlefield, unless they are jump-jetted.
Lights and mediums may be able to rely more on finesse than luck in surviving. Interesting.
#151
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:52 PM
Why does a 60T mech have the same movement characteristic on angled surface as an 80T mech (read Quickdraw and Awesome)? What law of physics is this tenant simulating? Seriously, when did volume start to dominate an object's ability overcome gravity and get traction on a slope. 80T mech should have a harder time getting up the hill than the 60T mech. PERIOD.
Am I crazy here? It seems much more logical that engine power and weight should be the defining characteristics, not physical size. Read my earlier post for more on this...
Further, I am a bit disappointed to see the Quick Draw in the "Large" mech category as it implies that the PGI team intentionally made the Quick Draw larger than other 60, 70, and 80 Ton mechs. This is disappointing to me because there dozens of threads and comments since the last patch (at PGI request) providing feedback about how the QD is too large... and not a single post from PGI saying "We did that on purpose." As one of the people who provided some of that earnest feedback that the QD was visually too big, it is kind of a bummer for me to have reverse engineer the truth from another thread, than just get some good ole' fashioned feedback from PGI on their logic for sizing their mechs and when they decide to "jumbo" one over another.
Edited by tuffy963, 27 June 2013 - 03:54 PM.
#152
Posted 27 June 2013 - 03:57 PM
#153
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:00 PM
#154
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:02 PM
As other have said, Stalker should be Huge, maybe that category should just be changed to "ungainly." Seriously, look at that blimp!
I am fine with the Quickdraw being large, every variant available has JJs available to it. If you are not installing at least one, you are seriously doing it wrong.
The one thing I am sadden about is that my Cent is limited in movement due to no JJs. But, maybe in 20 years they will introduce the CN9-D9 variant!
A module I can see would be for mechs with clearly articulated hands (Cents left hand! ) that grants another 10% (15% with G exp upgrade) vertical movement. I would pay for that.
#155
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:02 PM
#156
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:03 PM
#157
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:09 PM
but in Forest colony...is the rest of caves even traversable with this? or all of it for that matter.....
#158
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:09 PM
#159
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:11 PM
Ck
#160
Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:14 PM
This is the kind of thing to implement on day one.
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users