366 replies to this topic

[Tincan Nightmare]

Honestly a 360 torso twist is a bad idea simply because it takes away the advantage of trying to manuever to an enemies rear. Using terrain or a light mechs speed to get behind someone and blasting their rear armor (which is almost always fairly thin, even on assaults) would become nearly impossible on a machine that has this advantage, as it wouldn't even have to turn to keep its front armor and total weapon payload fixed on you, it could simply spin its torso. Also a machine that can 360 torso twist, if it wishes to disengage and run, suffers no penalty since it won't have to 'expose' its back to the enemy, and can continue to fire all of its weapons. Irregardless of canon or TT, this would give a large benefit to machines that possessed this ability, compounded if only a few units could make use of it.

[Tyra]

Were there any books with a mech that had a near 360 degree rotation? If there were, than that chassis should allow it.

[Slepnir]

360' torso twist-no need- thats what arms with no lowers are for. just flip the amrs and you have effectively 360'

[Steel Talon]

Slepnir, on 12 June 2012 - 02:42 AM, said:

360' torso twist-no need- thats what arms with no lowers are for. just flip the amrs and you have effectively 360'

mostly armless chassis are capable of 360 (Raven)

[Egomane]

Steel Talon, on 12 June 2012 - 02:51 AM, said:

mostly armless chassis are capable of 360 (Raven)

You got that from where?

Even Ravens have arms (or wings, if you actually mean the birds).

[Max Liao]

Flipping arm and rear weapons I remember reading about in the novels in in the TT rules. Never once do I remember reading about 360 degree marry-go-round or exorcist 'Mechs.

[Victor Morson]

PewPew2, on 09 June 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

Ya theres no such things as 360 degree twist for mechs in battletech. I understand you want super-mechs that do absolutely everything but there has to be a balance somewhere.

That's not really exactly true. 360 degree torso twist is for example a great way to simulate the Urbie's 360 degree firing ability, without the ability to flip arms.

Because I really want to see 360 torso twisting on an Urbanmech, does that mean I want a super-mech that can do everything?

Max Liao, on 12 June 2012 - 04:37 AM, said:

Flipping arm and rear weapons I remember reading about in the novels in in the TT rules. Never once do I remember reading about 360 degree marry-go-round or exorcist 'Mechs.

There's no reason for it not to work on a 'mech, and as I noted, it's a great way to simulate rear firing attacks like arm flips when game technical limitations prevent them from happening. If I was in PGI's shoes, I'd consider adding it to any 'mech with it's primary armament on flippable arms and a compatible graphic design.

By contrast, I'd absolutely love 'mechs like the clan Nova/Blackhawk when it is introduced to not have any torso twisting and rely entirely on arm movement. It'd make them very unique.

EDIT: The only 'mech announced so far that honestly has reason to have it is the Raven, really. The Jenner can flip arms too, sure, but the design would look strange doing 360.

EDIT 2: I find it really silly people are getting mad about canon on this. We can't have some canon things like flipping arms and rear firing weapons for technical limitations, so why the anger about adding something that while not exactly canon, is hardly out of place? 'mechs aren't human beings with human skeletal structures, you know. There's zero reason that some 'mechs would not have the ability to turn their torso entirely, as a torso is effectively a turret. It's hardly universe-breaking.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 June 2012 - 05:20 AM.

[Victor Morson]

Slyck, on 11 June 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

From a battlefield role they act as a fusion of armour and infantry. But structurally they have more in common with a person then any vehicle.

Tell that to a Stalker, Locust, Sirocco (Or any quad), Black Hawk/Nova, Firemoth, etc. They have nothing in common with humans aside from "4 limbs." By what your saying, no pilot should be able to drive any chicken-walker design without ripping their legs off horribly.

Slyck, on 11 June 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

-The have a skeleton that acts as the load bearing structure, not a hull.

A mechanically designed one that does not need to adhere to any of the rules of OUR skeletal system. The reason we didn't evolve ball socket style limbs, for example, is that they would wear out from stress and use; with a machine, these parts can be replaced so it's not nearly as big an issue. In short they don't need to play by the rules of nature, at all, with their mechanical skeleton. They're not Terminators trying to blend in.

Slyck, on 11 June 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

-They use muscles for mobility, not motors.

Indeed, they use Mymoer Bundles. In fact, we've basically developed the tech for these fairly recently (on a small scale); do you understand how they work? They're not exactly "muscles" despite acting that way. Basically you have a fairly soft, pliable material that when electrical current is applied becomes extremely rigid and forms a "remembered" shape.

This shape can be anything an engineer designs it to be. Look at a 'mech like the Firemoth, surely it's arms have a full range of movement completely incompatible with human skeletal structures.

Slyck, on 11 June 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

-They are tied into their pilots nervous system for the autonomic minutia of movement on top of manual controls.

They're tied into the pilot's sense of balance to help maintain the gyros. They're not brain controlled really. Though various novels have contradicted each other on how much the automatic movement impacts / doesn't do anything so your free to fill in the holes, I guess.

Again, can you seriously look at an Urbanmech and tell me it doesn't look as if the top half could rotate in a 360 degree arc easily enough? Would it really offend people to give a design like this a 360 degree twist? It'd really be feel out of place NOT to have it:



EDIT: Last but not least, table top rules aren't perfect. Sometimes they are even silly.. like how you can punch with Catapult arms. I'm OK with PGI taking creative license on things that naturally fit into the universe and 360 degree torso twist is totally on that list.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 June 2012 - 05:34 AM.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Simply no.

[Egomane]

Victor Morson, on 12 June 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

There's no reason for it not to work on a 'mech, and as I noted, it's a great way to simulate rear firing attacks like arm flips when game technical limitations prevent them from happening. If I was in PGI's shoes, I'd consider adding it to any 'mech with it's primary armament on flippable arms and a compatible graphic design.

But you can achieve that with a 179°/180° degree twist as well. You don't need to make your mech a merry-go-round carousel just to fire into the rear arc.

And what is the primary weapon of a mech? How do you define that?
Example (not not based on a real mech):
You have a mech with flipping arms. Two medium lasers in each arm and one AC/20 in one of the sidetorsos. Is the, soon to be out of ammo but punching bigger holes, AC/20 the primary weapon, or will it be the, we will fire till we die and do the same amount of damage then our friend the AC, four medium lasers?

Victor Morson, on 12 June 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

By contrast, I'd absolutely love 'mechs like the clan Nova/Blackhawk when it is introduced to not have any torso twisting and rely entirely on arm movement. It'd make them very unique.

Never liked the clan designs very much. They looked more like trains, then beasts of war to me. But the way they are designed they have real problems with torso twisting. But PGI has hired someone who re-designs every single mech before it gets added to the game. Problem solved.

Victor Morson, on 12 June 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

EDIT: The only 'mech announced so far that honestly has reason to have it is the Raven, really. The Jenner can flip arms too, sure, but the design would look strange doing 360.

Why? Look again, the Raven has arms!

Victor Morson, on 12 June 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

EDIT 2: I find it really silly people are getting mad about canon on this. We can't have some canon things like flipping arms and rear firing weapons for technical limitations, so why the anger about adding something that while not exactly canon, is hardly out of place? 'mechs aren't human beings with human skeletal structures, you know. There's zero reason that some 'mechs would not have the ability to turn their torso entirely, as a torso is effectively a turret. It's hardly universe-breaking.

It may not be universe breaking, but so far I have not seen any convincing argument why it would not be game balance breaking.

There is a reason why, in this universe mechs can only move at two thirds of their speed backwards. Making a mech run in all direction at flank speed, while always facing the opponent with the strong front armor, is just plain silly and in no way balanced. Yes, I know that even my stated compromise would allow that, but at least there is still a way to outmanouver it.

[Teralitha]

360 is in, get over it.

[Egomane]

Teralitha, on 12 June 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

360 is in, get over it.

Since when? Got any proof?

[Mild Monkey]

I am absolutely pro 360-twist. liked that feature in MW4. However, this should be only feasible with mechs whose anatomy provides for it. AAaaaand: Twist speed is a limiting factor. So you have your 360 mech, Thanatos or Thor, whatever, but imagine that it takes them longer to go through the full circle, because the twist speed is limited. This would, to some degree, negate the advantage of the full twist, now wouldn't it? Just a few arc minutes less per second compared to a 120° twist mech that can twist faster?

Edited by Mild Monkey, 12 June 2012 - 06:00 AM.

[Egomane]

Mild Monkey, on 12 June 2012 - 05:59 AM, said:

Twist speed is a limiting factor. So you have your 360 mech, Thanatos or Thor, whatever, but imagine that it takes them longer to go through the full circle, because the twist speed is limited. This would, to some degree, negate the advantage of the full twist, now wouldn't it? Just a few arc minutes less per second compared to a 120° twist mech that can twist faster?

No, it would not balance it. We have already gone over that and adressed it.

[Mild Monkey]

Egomane, on 12 June 2012 - 06:04 AM, said:

No, it would not balance it. We have already gone over that and adressed it.

Care to elaborate for me? Sorry, I can't seem to find that one. you don't need 360 in long range engagements, whereas in short range brawling it might give you an edge, if not for the speed of the twist. Just my thoughts.

[Teralitha]

Egomane, on 12 June 2012 - 06:04 AM, said:

No, it would not balance it. We have already gone over that and adressed it.

Make it just like in MW4, and its balanced. We have already gone over that and addressed it.

Nuff said

[Egomane]

You have to add your turning speed to the equation. Meaning, that on a light and fast mech (like the often mentioned raven), you remove a weakness without adding another.

On bigger mechs, you still have to add both turning and twisting speed together, meaning that, if a light mech should have a chance fighting it, the bigger mechs turning and twisting need to be considerably less then then those of other mechs of the same caliber, making them nearly impossible to use in normal combat, because they can not adapt fast enough to what is in front of them compared to everyone else.

You have to remember that the primary goal of the devs is, to make sure that all mechs have their place in this game. They even said, that light mechs can take on assaults in this game with a good chance of winning, because of their better maneuverabilty. If you add a heavy or assault mech with full torso rotation those light mechs would no longer be as viable as before and lose their place in the game.

Teralitha, on 12 June 2012 - 06:09 AM, said:

Make it just like in MW4, and its balanced. We have already gone over that and addressed it.

Nuff said

You will not get another MW4. If you want to play MW4, go play it. MWO is a different beast with different mechanics working in the background. You can not compare one to the other, no matter how often you repeat yourself.

Edited by Egomane, 12 June 2012 - 06:21 AM.

[Steel Talon]

Egomane, on 12 June 2012 - 04:25 AM, said:

You got that from where?

Even Ravens have arms (or wings, if you actually mean the birds).

I may got small arms with very limited firing arc
But that 360 turntable under hull is far more visible

[Egomane]

Steel Talon, on 12 June 2012 - 06:18 AM, said:

I may got small arms with very limited firing arc
But that 360 turntable under hull is far more visible

We don't know how limited those arms are. We also do not know how limited or unlimited, the "turntable" will be. It could very well be, that cables, power lines, munition feeds and a lot of other things we don't see, but that are probably inside the mech, will hamper a total rotation.

Mech may often be described as walking tanks, but unlike tanks, their legs and their torso are not seperate entities like the turret and the body of a tank.

[Teralitha]

Egomane, on 12 June 2012 - 06:17 AM, said:

You will not get another MW4. If you want to play MW4, go play it. MWO is a different beast with different mechanics working in the background. You can not compare one to the other, no matter how often you repeat yourself.

You will not get another TT BT game here, if you want to play TT BT, go play it. MWO is a different beast with different mechanics. You can not compare one to the other, no matter how often you repeat yourself.

How you like them apples.

Edited by Teralitha, 12 June 2012 - 06:30 AM.