

The Movement Change Is Bad. Modify It A Bit And It Can Be Alright.
#1
Posted 02 July 2013 - 07:52 PM
At the current state, if you are not rocking JJ's you're pretty SOL when it comes to moving up the majority of hills on the numerous maps that have hills. Yes JJ's should enhance map movement. But in the games current state you need JJ's to access some of the most basic paths mechs have been traversing to get to battle since closed beta.
That isnt good. More chokepoints is not good. Being unable to move past a 45 degree angle is blatantly laughable from a design standpoint. Not to mention the fact of players getting stuck in awkward positions, and the ability to simply zigzag to scale terrain up hills.
The idea of stopping at 45 degrees is bad because most of the maps are designed with numerous +45 degree angles (and not in places where PPC campers set up shop).
THE NITTY GRITTY
-At a 20 degree angle mechs begin to suffer reduced speed.
-At a 65 degree angle mechs are unable to move forward.
Now use a flat rate percentage for how much mechs decelerate when climbing.
Scout mechs can now scout again (WHO'D A THUNK IT)
All other mechs can now traverse the numerous basic paths on the map (Hello Tourmaline, Alpine) and Snipe campers will still be mostly unable to get to the high point sweet spots.
#2
Posted 02 July 2013 - 07:58 PM
The maps could use a pass or two to root out these sorts of terrain features. Other than that, I like how it breaks up the movement. Scaling things actually makes sense now.
#3
Posted 02 July 2013 - 07:59 PM
Overall, though, I like the change. It just needs some tweaking.
Pariah Devalis, on 02 July 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:
#4
Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:01 PM
#5
Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:04 PM
#6
Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:04 PM
Of course, it's even better in my shiny new Victor...
#7
Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:44 PM
kind of stupid, and gets mechs stuck on edge of ledges.
#8
Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:03 PM

jf( people!
#9
Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:36 PM
Compared to Artemis apocalypse, ECM etc etc this change has remarkably few issues and brings far more to the game than it takes away.
#10
Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:41 PM
I am not exaggerating at all when I say that 2 different unrelated people are quitting the game until this is fixed because they can't stand abruptly getting stuck in fights.
#11
Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:45 PM
I'd agree with bumping incline reduction to 65 degrees and let mechs just step up onto anything less than knee high.
#12
Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:49 PM
No more stuck on pebbles, no more stopped on small hills, no more stuck on the edge of buildings.
[edit] And while you're at it, give jumpjets some forward impulse so people can use them to get unstuck, or jump up a hill without needing a running start.
Edited by One Medic Army, 02 July 2013 - 10:51 PM.
#13
Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:50 PM
#14
Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:55 PM
One Medic Army, on 02 July 2013 - 10:49 PM, said:
No more stuck on pebbles, no more stopped on small hills, no more stuck on the edge of buildings.
Far easier said than done. A much more likely fix would be to modify the maps so that any feature that is not intended to impede movement is either ignored by the mech entirely (for tiny pebbles, for example) or for larger features, have the model be non-obstructive and use the terrain underneath the feature for the climbing. That is, to have the models themselves not interact with the mechs at all, and create a small hill on the terrain underneath the model which will have climbable inclines.
Edited by The Cheese, 02 July 2013 - 10:59 PM.
#15
Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:56 PM
The Cheese, on 02 July 2013 - 10:55 PM, said:
Going through and editing all the maps is a massive undertaking to fix a system that's basically broken and could be tweaked with numbers.
This is the worst possible approach to take.
#16
Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:58 PM
The Cheese, on 02 July 2013 - 10:55 PM, said:
Yeah probably, not sure how the movement code in Cryengine 3 is.
Doing a complete pass on each and every map to remove issues would take the PGI guy in charge of that like a straight month though, possibly per map.
If there was some way to make the slowdown code less sensitive, perhaps give mechs a 0.25s wait timer before it kicked in so they could get over small bumps before stopping?
#17
Posted 02 July 2013 - 11:05 PM
One Medic Army, on 02 July 2013 - 10:58 PM, said:
Doing a complete pass on each and every map to remove issues would take the PGI guy in charge of that like a straight month though, possibly per map.
If there was some way to make the slowdown code less sensitive, perhaps give mechs a 0.25s wait timer before it kicked in so they could get over small bumps before stopping?
The thing is, we didn't have a problem with 'mechs getting into places they "weren't supposed to." We never have. 'mechs always felt like they could reasonably access every place on the map. So I have no idea what the point of disabling half the map is.
Now, again, performance changes on hills - that's got tons of potential. Mediums clearing hills that assaults take five times as long to crest would be really awesome, without changing the core stats. I'm a big fan of that idea. What we have is not that.

In the future, map makers could exploit this new mechanic by, say, doing a rolling hill kind of map. One where assaults would be bogged down a lot, and lights move. Heck, we could take this up a notch and start applying the same modifiers to water, so we could have things like swamp maps where assaults move far slower than lighter 'mechs.
Tons of options to this speed modifier thing. It's a brilliant idea at it's core, but it's hitting the same invisible wall it feels like we are hitting every time we stub our toe.
Edited by Victor Morson, 02 July 2013 - 11:05 PM.
#18
Posted 02 July 2013 - 11:08 PM
The current maps don't appear to have been designed with this feature in mind (except perhaps Canyon) and as a result there is not nearly enough visual distinction between areas which can be traversed and those that cannot (even in Canyon).
#19
Posted 02 July 2013 - 11:11 PM
Unbound Inferno, on 02 July 2013 - 10:51 PM, said:
Eh, why not. Don't think they read this anyway.
If the "pill" that each mech has also has its own "platform" to stand on in relation to the surface of the ground. Make it so that "platform" can't move in a vertical path alongside an incline that exceeds, lets say... 50-55, maybe 60 degrees tops. Assuming that incline exists in this situation. By doing so that "platform" hits a snag and becomes a no-move situation, removing the ability to move vertically up the hill as seen in that video.
Basically the platform is the mechanical means to say the legs can keep a mech balanced. The system tells it can't keep balance on that hill and stops you from moving in that direction. You can then only move downward from there, to avoid making it into a stuck situation.
All assuming that's part of what can be coded, of course. I mean, I assume so. You got that incline thing in, right?
Anyhow... in the meantime we've got hill climbers needing to realize how to see the terrain slopes to make it up the hill.
If they took that lower "platform" the mech stands on, and adjusted speed acording to the angle it suffers from the ground you walk on, it could work. Then its down to a numbers game with the Mech weight, Engine size and relative speed they are moving for how much that 'momentum' is working.
But I don't think they got such a platform and instead are just working with flat "pills" and using relative angle of direction instead of a larger "platform" to represent the mech's feet.
#20
Posted 02 July 2013 - 11:33 PM
Victor Morson, on 02 July 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:
This is the worst possible approach to take.
Yes, it's a big job, but it's also a reliable solution. The numbers are obviously going to be tweaked to make the current system work better, but there will always be features that will trip it up. Those features will need individual attention. Also, the level builders already do what I suggested. Nearly every map has non-collidable objects (It's just a checkbox in CE3) and they frequently make changes to the collision maps to address stuck points.
The idea isn't to make everything work immediately. The idea is to simplify the system to reduce the amount of screwing around needed to make things work. Also, your suggestion of making the min climbing speed >0 doesn't address the clunkyness of getting stuck on small objects, which is what mine was aimed at.
Edited by The Cheese, 03 July 2013 - 01:16 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users