Jump to content

Let Us Side-Step/strafe.


257 replies to this topic

Poll: Side stepping / strafing (460 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you think mechs should be able to strafe?

  1. Yes! Awesome! (74 votes [16.09%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 16.09%

  2. Voted No! I hate your idea! (356 votes [77.39%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 77.39%

  3. Other - discuss with a reply! (30 votes [6.52%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.52%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 Homeless Bill

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,968 posts
  • LocationA Box Near You

Posted 29 July 2013 - 01:42 AM

For the love of god, no.

This game is already dangerously close to being a mindless FPS. The tank movement is essential to the MechWarrior experience. This is not Hawken. Please, just no.

#42 William Rahn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 154 posts
  • LocationHilbert space

Posted 29 July 2013 - 01:51 AM

Books often ignore BT rules - as for sidestepping the 'mechs can move forwards or backwards and cannot move into any other direction without first changing its facing (in BT).

That said it should be possible for a 'mech to do so in general - if they are supposed to get up after falling dawn their joints can't be too restricted - but realistically movement speed sideways would have to be severely restricted and having to stop before going ahead would easily make the maneuver a death-trap (humans can "jog" sideways at sort of normal speeds - if you allow them to make little jumps, but physics do not scale well and these jumps could damage the 'mech...). Given all that I do not think it would be useful for the devs to spend time implementing this. Also - in my opinion it would look kind of strange (unless they put a lot of time into the animations and some sort of reverse kinematics...).

Edited by William Rahn, 29 July 2013 - 01:53 AM.


#43 GRiPSViGiL

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 1,904 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationHillsboro, OR

Posted 29 July 2013 - 02:35 AM

View PostHomeless Bill, on 29 July 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

For the love of god, no.

This game is already dangerously close to being a mindless FPS. The tank movement is essential to the MechWarrior experience. This is not Hawken. Please, just no.

Have to agree with Homeless Bill.

#44 Elder Thorn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,422 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 29 July 2013 - 02:37 AM

crouch: yes, it was part of mechwarrior in games before.

sidestep: hell no!

#45 Belorion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 5,341 posts
  • LocationEast Coast

Posted 29 July 2013 - 02:39 AM

Strafing already exists.

Run forward.
Torso Twist 90deg.
Shoot the direction you are TTed.
You are strafing.

The whole TT mechanic is like strafing on crack.

#46 Typhoon Storm 2142

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 302 posts
  • LocationHamburg

Posted 29 July 2013 - 02:55 AM

View PostBelorion, on 29 July 2013 - 02:39 AM, said:

Strafing already exists.

Run forward.
Torso Twist 90deg.
Shoot the direction you are TTed.
You are strafing.

The whole TT mechanic is like strafing on crack.

So, running forward and twisting the torso is called "strafing"?

You don't know what you're talking about. Better stop posting forever, smart boy.

#47 William Rahn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 154 posts
  • LocationHilbert space

Posted 29 July 2013 - 03:13 AM

View PostTyphoon Storm 2142, on 29 July 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

So, running forward and twisting the torso is called "strafing"?

You don't know what you're talking about. Better stop posting forever, smart boy.


Of course he is wrong - strafing is the action of attacking from a low-flying aircraft, as any dictionary worth its name will tell you...

#48 Lord of All

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 580 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationBottom Of a Bottle

Posted 29 July 2013 - 04:22 AM

View PostTyphoon Storm 2142, on 29 July 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:


You don't need to use it. But having it would be awesome. If it feels so strange, then just keep running forward. But there are people out there who can handle the additional flexibility without getting confused.




Sorry but some random animation is not evidence if that was why you posted it. I can animate a model to do cartwheels, so we should allow Cartwheeling mechs now?

THERE ARE NO Ball ends in the hip joints. Learn some basic anatomy those that think you can sidestep without a ball in a fixed point.

Posted Image

#49 Typhoon Storm 2142

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 302 posts
  • LocationHamburg

Posted 29 July 2013 - 04:33 AM

View PostLord of All, on 29 July 2013 - 04:22 AM, said:

Sorry but some random animation is not evidence if that was why you posted it. I can animate a model to do cartwheels, so we should allow Cartwheeling mechs now?

THERE ARE NO Ball ends in the hip joints. Learn some basic anatomy those that think you can sidestep without a ball in a fixed point.

Posted Image

Evidence? I just wanted to show a robot that can do it. But of course you know better.
However, some 'Mechs are able to, and I know I have read it in some of the books. Pilots are using sidesteps. But of course you know better, because you are so smart.

Edited by Typhoon Storm 2142, 29 July 2013 - 04:34 AM.


#50 Belorion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 5,341 posts
  • LocationEast Coast

Posted 29 July 2013 - 04:35 AM

View PostTyphoon Storm 2142, on 29 July 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

So, running forward and twisting the torso is called "strafing"?

You don't know what you're talking about. Better stop posting forever, smart boy.


If you can't tell that those are equivalent movements... well. :)

#51 Lord of All

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 580 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationBottom Of a Bottle

Posted 29 July 2013 - 04:35 AM

View PostTyphoon Storm 2142, on 29 July 2013 - 04:33 AM, said:


Evidence? I just wanted to show a robot that can do it. But of course you know better.
However, some 'Mechs are able to, and I know I have read it in some of the books. Pilots are using sidesteps. But of course you know better, because you are so smart.

Fluff from stories is only cannon if it does not contradict rulesets.

#52 Typhoon Storm 2142

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 302 posts
  • LocationHamburg

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:10 AM

View PostBelorion, on 29 July 2013 - 04:35 AM, said:


If you can't tell that those are equivalent movements... well. :)

If you can't tell that running forward and twisting the torso by 90 degrees is not strafing...well. I feel sorry for you.

View PostLord of All, on 29 July 2013 - 04:35 AM, said:

Fluff from stories is only cannon if it does not contradict rulesets.

The noun canon can refer to a few things, including (1) a code of laws, (2) an established principle, (3) a group of exemplary literary works, and (4) the works of a writer that are accepted as authentic. Cannon mainly refers to a large weapon that fires heavy projectiles. It has a few senses unrelated to ordnance, but they are rare. Unlike canon, it works as a verb, meaning, chiefly, to bombard with cannon.

Edited by Typhoon Storm 2142, 29 July 2013 - 05:12 AM.


#53 Lord of All

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 580 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationBottom Of a Bottle

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:37 AM

View PostTyphoon Storm 2142, on 29 July 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:


If you can't tell that running forward and twisting the torso by 90 degrees is not strafing...well. I feel sorry for you.


The noun canon can refer to a few things, including (1) a code of laws, (2) an established principle, (3) a group of exemplary literary works, and (4) the works of a writer that are accepted as authentic. Cannon mainly refers to a large weapon that fires heavy projectiles. It has a few senses unrelated to ordnance, but they are rare. Unlike canon, it works as a verb, meaning, chiefly, to bombard with cannon.


yeah, yeah auto-correct fail. Never seen that before. :)

Now try to dispute the facts instead of distracting from them. Too bad those posts got Mod action-ed out they showed you true mentality.

#54 Marlekh

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 43 posts

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:40 AM

beside the discussion if mechs CAN have the ability to strafe, there is no such option in the TT.. so no strafing for my mech please... :)

#55 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 19,190 posts
  • LocationBlood if the Isle

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:47 AM

Not Strafing....not sidesteping with 150kph not even with 70kph - so only for basically movement. A step left a step right... nothing that could be that difficult....
however i would call it active doging incoming fire and has to be a skill learned by your pilot... and it has to virtually reduce your ability to counter fire... because you try to keep standing and not to topple to the ground.

So yes it could be a vaild movement... but for what reason? Why not the allready described moving in one direction looking in another?

Maybe with better JumpJet controll Strafing could become a option for Mechs with Jump Jets...but i don't think it is a must have movement.

#56 Rawyn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • General
  • General
  • 166 posts
  • LocationGER | BW | HCH

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:56 AM

No, thank you.

I don't think it's neccessary, if you want to avoid incoming fire, you should have to do more then side stepping, i.e. proper positioning before engaging, be prepared for return fire etc. Not just ninja sneak out of the way.

By the way, I don't think standard neuro helmets and onboard controllers could handle the additional work load and the poor Ravens circling around and trying to strafe would end up with their legs twisted in all directions. Or at least sprain an ankle.

#57 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 10,299 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 29 July 2013 - 06:04 AM

Crouch, yes. Sidestep, no. It would make the game feel even more COD and less MW.

In any case, not much point even discussing this, IMHO. PGI haven't executed so many basic things (eg. convergence, dropships/hangars, MASC, more game modes, more maps) after two years.

There's ZERO chance they're going to add sidestepping, given all the animations and other changes that would entail.

#58 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 29 July 2013 - 07:23 AM

Karl Streiger gets what I mean

the reason being, mediums need some sort of quirk to help them survive. Lights generally accelerate/decelerate quickly enough that I don't think it's needed, but a hunchback being able to creep around a corner to fire without having to reorient its legs would allow it to a) peek around the corner to begin with, and ;) have the legs already oriented to make a quick retreat. I don't want to see mechs running around sideways, I'm thinking a max of 1-2 steps.

Also, just noticed - only a trickle of replies for the first few days, then yesterday it blew the heck up! Wonder why...?

I know most won't bother to read before replying, but my goal isn't to force PGI to do something, it's to see what the community thinks about it. Additionally, I'm not trying to turn the game into hawken - mechs are superior to tanks because of their ability to *maneuver* - if you constrict a mech to the same movement mechanics as a tank, then why not just take a tank? Tanks in MWO *would* be fun :)

Edited by Fierostetz, 29 July 2013 - 07:25 AM.


#59 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 29 July 2013 - 08:29 AM

A thought - in forest colony, a powered down commando goes completely underwater.... crouching could make BAP a necessity to find powered down or crouched ecm mechs :)

#60 Volthorne

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,929 posts
  • LocationCalgary, Canadia

Posted 29 July 2013 - 08:46 AM

View PostFierostetz, on 29 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

mechs are superior to tanks because of their ability to *maneuver* - if you constrict a mech to the same movement mechanics as a tank, then why not just take a tank? Tanks in MWO *would* be fun :)

Wrong. 'Mechs are superior to tanks in being able to more easily traverse terrain that the tank cannot. Also being able to move faster (tracked vehicles can only move so fast before their treads become a liability).

Maneuvering comes into play when taking into account the skill of the pilot and/or his commander. If the machine is physically incapable of an action (in this case side-stepping), then most skilled pilot in the world still won't be able to make his machine perform said action.

As someone pointed out earlier, 'Mechs have hinged joints, not ball-and-socket.

Edited by Volthorne, 29 July 2013 - 08:47 AM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users