366 replies to this topic

[Teralitha]

PANZERBUNNY, on 12 June 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

360 Rotation, alongside arm flip is stupid.

Stupid? or beyond your personal piloting skill..... I say the latter.



Support 360

Edited by Teralitha, 12 June 2012 - 12:21 PM.

[PANZERBUNNY]

It's something that only really benefits slow and legged mechs.

Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

These aren't Transformers.

Edited by PANZERBUNNY, 12 June 2012 - 12:24 PM.

[Teralitha]

Its not reinventing the wheel, because if it was, that would assume that 360 already existed, Im inventing somethinig BETTER than the old fashioned wheel. View it as... a groundbreakign technology in mech design, Its new, its improved, its.... Oh look... clans!!!

[Aleksander Storm]

Teralitha, on 12 June 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

But your gonna have to accept the fact that simulation lovers share this world, and they will get what they want too.

True, and for that reason it may not happen.

Why?

Simulation lovers are more likely to be thinking of 'immersion from a mechanical perspective', and thus the points Mr. Hogarth made are pertinent, if they cannot be effectively countered.

[SoundTech]

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.

I have to agree with you here, having some limitations allows users to be more creative on how they build their mechs.

[Teralitha]

SoundTech, on 12 June 2012 - 12:36 PM, said:

I have to agree with you here, having some limitations allows users to be more creative on how they build their mechs.

This is an oxymoron... or an ironic statement... or... just plain arse backwards. More creative? Limitations? I think you got it backwards.. less limits, more creative, thats what you mean right.


Support 360

Edited by Teralitha, 12 June 2012 - 12:42 PM.

[SoundTech]

Teralitha, on 12 June 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

This is an oxymoron... or an ironic statement... or... just plain arse backwards. More creative? Limitations? I think you got it backwards.. less limits, more creative, thats what you mean right.


Support 360

Might want take a look at a little something called "Creative Limitation" Just saying.

No need to be mean spirited.

[Teralitha]

Aleksander Storm, on 12 June 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

True, and for that reason it may not happen.

Why?

Simulation lovers are more likely to be thinking of 'immersion from a mechanical perspective', and thus the points Mr. Hogarth made are pertinent, if they cannot be effectively countered.

Good thing they are, or I would have to argue with you


Support 360

SoundTech, on 12 June 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

Might want take a look at a little something called "Creative Limitation" Just saying.

No need to be mean spirited.

Creativity is only limited by your creativity. If your not creative, then your not going to have creative creations. If your very creative, your going to create creations of profound creativity.

[9thFarShot]

Okay, I lasted 6 pages before I got pissed at the ignorance being displayed by the arguers here.

So, in this one post, I'm going to give the technical, lore-wise, gameplay-wise, and reality-based reasons why at least some mechs should have full range of torso motion:

Technical
Turret like mounts are more efficient in mechanical structures for range of motion than hinged joints. In the case of myomer, you have human-like "muscles" that contract, forcing the hinging of joints. But the torso mounting is not like an arm joint for example. It is a rotation between two rigged structures on one central axis. Additionally, the contact points of myomer and the endoskeleton would experience lots of stress. On a circular contact ring, which is what inevitably has to exist at the waist joint of a mech, the joint actuators can be evenly dispersed along the entire apparatus. Additionally, this design allows for structure and circuitry to pass through the center of the joint. And all of this allows the torso to achieve full rotation.

Lore-wise
The Inner Sphere is fractured into many powers, and likewise, there are many mech manufacturers. What if a certain manufacturer may have a penchant for limited range torso rotation and another may want to have full rotation on every mech they produce? Tactically, a full rotation is much more flexible, allowing for more combat awareness and better chances of being able to aim at what you want to. To rebuke arguments that it would be too much for a pilot to handle, it should be a simple matter to program in stops for the rotation. Additionally, a large impact on one side of the torso may cause the mech to recoil. If the torso were at its max rotation, that force of impact would be carried into the rest of the mech and may cause it to fall over. Full rotation would allow the impact to be absorbed, allowing the mech to remain upright while the torso rotates around from the force.

Gameplay-wise
The developers have expressed interest in making lighter mechs tactically viable. It would be easier to actuate a turret-like mount with a light torso. Thus full rotation can be more common in lighter mechs, allowing them to dance around heavier mechs and dish out damage while the heavier mech has to turn itself. Also, I'd like to point out that balancing does not mean getting rid of weaknesses and strengths. It means giving a mech weaknesses and strengths in somewhat equal measures. It is up to the mech pilot to try to cover his weaknesses and exploit his strengths. A full rotation mechanism can be balanced by giving it to lightly armored mechs, or perhaps having it on a mech without arms so they don't impact the mech's legs.

Reality
Tabletop games are limited to certain rules for several reasons. For one, they can't be executed in real time. This opens up a basketcase of issues such as how units must move. Turns have to be taken in which units can only move a certain number of spaces, or turn a certain number of degrees. Real life does not work this way. When the developers say they are making a simulation, that means that they are departing the tabletop rules. A simulation is an attempt to emulate reality. Tabletop games make sacrifices that take them away from reality.

[Okami Ryu]

I played the clicx game where fireing into a rear arc made a big difference and the mechs that had 360 front arc always had ligter armor and that seemed to balance it out nicely

[Teralitha]

exactly... thank you, this topic needs more logical minds..



Support 360

Edited by Teralitha, 12 June 2012 - 01:07 PM.

[Jukebox1986]

I dont think 360° is a good Idea.

First of all, the light and medium Mechs will have a huge disadvantage. Without limited torso-twist, the heavy mechs couldnt be outmaneuvered by one mech alone. And this will steal all the fun from many players.

And from my point of view, id takes a lot less skill to win in a mech with 360°. You dont need to focus your thougts on movement and stuff, just run in one direction and forget movement until you hit a wall. And thats (sry for the hard language) plain stupid.

<S>

[brn4meplz]

I didn't see this on pages 1 through 8. and was having issues loading the other pages.

http://mwomercs.com/...deo/4gEQkyLbCjE


Watch the minimap in this video. The dotted line designates your legs facing(direction of travel) and the 'V' Highlight is your Field of View(FoV)

The Jenner there clearly twists a WHOLE bunch. Almost 180 degrees actually.

That puts the 120 to rest. Now the issue is 360

Edited by brn4meplz, 12 June 2012 - 01:14 PM.

[Max Liao]

9thFarShot, on 12 June 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

When the developers say they are making a simulation, that means that they are departing the tabletop rules. A simulation is an attempt to emulate reality. Tabletop games make sacrifices that take them away from reality.

No, they are simulating a make believe reality, else we'd have chemical based lasers affected by the atmosphere, a radar system that could see much further out, and cannons that could shoot for miles. We probably wouldn't have walking robots either, as there's little advantage to bipedal movement in a machine.

If this was Giant Robots Piloted by Real World Idiosyncrasies 'n' Tech, then you would be right. The simulation comes in simulating the feel of piloting the combat vehicles ('Mechs) of the BattleTech/MechWarrior universe.

Quote

Q. How loyal will MechWarrior® Online™ be to the tabletop rules (heat management, melee, armor penetration, etc.)?

A. We are adhering very closely to the BattleTech® tabletop rules. Some mechanics in the tabletop version of the game do not translate well into a videogame and we are coming up with our own rule sets that mitigate these differences in an intuitive and fun manner.

As noted in every other 'MechWarrior game, twisting is a mechanic that translates very well into a video game/simulation. Now all they have to do is keep it to +/- 60 degrees and they'll meet the TT requirement and the video game mechanic.

Simple.

[SoundTech]

Teralitha, on 12 June 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

Creativity is only limited by your creativity. If your not creative, then your not going to have creative creations. If your very creative, your going to create creations of profound creativity.

Im guessing this is a joke? lol

[9thFarShot]

There are still some people who think when we are asking for 360 we mean for every mech. That's just stupid.

They are rebooting the MechWarrior franchise with this game. To reboot it and go back to flawed and dated mechanics is stupid. I can point out dozens of flaws in the franchise that should be left behind. The limit on rotation is just one of them. As I already stated, it technically makes no sense to limit the rotation. You are simply asking to get taken advantage of. The technology for full rotation has been in our world for almost a century. To think they wouldn't be able to improve upon that in one thousand years is stupid.

Take a look at this crane.
http://www.towercran...crane_01-00.htm
It weighs as much as an assault mech and can rotate. And you're telling me that in one thousand years we can't do better, when we have laser weapons and artificial muscles on the main battle platform of the era?

The BattleTech universe is dated. A reboot such as MWO should distance itself from the illogical stuff you're trying to push on it, not embrace it for the sake of satisfying fanboys.

[Egomane]

This thread has gone through different stages now.

From some form of discussion were arguments from both sides were collected together and ignored by opposing factions,
to some form of angry campaigning, with trolling, for wich in part I may be responsible.
to humorous political campaigning and finally
to arguing about real life mechanics and why a simulation may be different from a boardgame or why not.

What has been forgotten, by those that argue for a 360° torso, is that this game is settled within a universe, that has been constantly updated for 30 years. Nowhere in that universe is a full rotating torso ever mentioned. We hold no rights to this universe. The devs do, for the small part of creating a video game.
The devs may depart from the board game, in fact they already did that, but I doubt they will depart from the universe. They are way to much immersed into it and way to much fans of it, to change it on a whim. They would need a good reason to do so, to convince themself that it is necessary. If they find that reason I am pretty sure they will tell us. But the ******** and bickering about it, shown by its supporters, will not help their cause to implement the idea. Please keep it civil!

Now to the video that brn4meplz mentioned...
The jenner twists twice to 135°. That is above the original but still far from 180° or 360° movement.

9thFarShot, on 12 June 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

it technically makes no sense to limit the rotation. You are simply asking to get taken advantage of.

Congratulation, that is what we are talking about. It is a weakness to be exploited. It is something that needs,to be in the game.

9thFarShot, on 12 June 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

The BattleTech universe is dated. A reboot such as MWO should distance itself from the illogical stuff you're trying to push on it, not embrace it for the sake of satisfying fanboys.

Not the universe is dated, the tabletop system is. But just because a game, settled within the universe is dated, doesn't mean the universe has to change.
Oh... and... is it wrong to be a fanboy? Better tell that the guys at PGI before its to late, because they have said numerous times that they are fanboys of the franchise and the battletech universe.

[Steel Talon]

Mechs with 360 i know:
Raven: pure scout with low combat capability
Urbanmech: light with 33 km/h top speed!
Mad dog: support mech wont use 360 much
Thanatos: may be OP due to 360 twist + JJ, but its far far away - enough time to ballance it somehow

[PANZERBUNNY]

360 twist means less attention given to your movements and actions.

Lazy gameplay. News at 11.

[Banshee Bullet]

I love the 360 twist as well but I don't think it will be a common feature. Only on specific chassis.