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

#81 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 29 July 2013 - 03:49 PM

Looking at the cutaways, the atlas and warhammer would be capable of side stepping, but the vulture and madcat would not. The vulture and madcat don't appear to have a "hip" type pivot, but the atlas and warhammer do. Also, the mechs appear to be hydraulic. No mention of myomer bundles?

Side note - I'm totally going to print the cutaways out and stick 'em on the wall next to my other cutaways (of cars and motorcycles) - very neat - thanks!

#82 Levi Porphyrogenitus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 4,763 posts
  • LocationAurora, Indiana, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:02 PM

A proper side-step not only makes sense, it's in the fiction.

I'd be fine with it being balanced by having it only be possible when your throttle is set to 0. Have it be done one step at a time, and have the animation take long enough that you can't side step more than once without it being far better to turn the legs and walk.

#83 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,022 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 29 July 2013 - 05:26 PM

View PostLevi Porphyrogenitus, on 29 July 2013 - 05:02 PM, said:

A proper side-step not only makes sense, it's in the fiction.

I'd be fine with it being balanced by having it only be possible when your throttle is set to 0. Have it be done one step at a time, and have the animation take long enough that you can't side step more than once without it being far better to turn the legs and walk.

FWIW, I would find such an implementation agreeable. B)

It does not allow for proper "strafing" (which generally(?) implies continuous motion) or even the typical-FPS "peek-and-shoot" movement, but it does allow for a little bit of extra maneuverability.

#84 Volthorne

    Member

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

Posted 29 July 2013 - 06:38 PM

View PostFierostetz, on 29 July 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

I'll keep asking until you actually come up with a realistic answer, to be honest. I read your reply and immediately disregarded it. Go laterally traverse a slope without moving your hips, then come back and reply. I'd recommend keeping quiet until then. You probably won't, but it's still my recommendation. Until you do, and realize that you can't do it without pivoting your hips (thats why your spinal column is flexible, by the way), you're just trolling.

Clearly you're imagining a different slope than I am because I haven't ever run across a hill where I would absolutely NEED a ball-and-socket hip to traverse it laterally (there is a hill right by my house with about a 50-60° incline, you can't get much steeper than that before it becomes a wall and not a hill). You could physically do it with hinged joints. Would a ball-and-socket be nice? Yeah, it would, but you don't NEED it.

Also, would you kindly point out where my premise is any less valid (or "realistic" as you put it - we're talking about giant stompy robots, how ******* "realistic" do you want?) than anyone else's?

#85 SgtMagor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 3,538 posts

Posted 29 July 2013 - 06:40 PM

it would have its uses to strafe, crouch, and do all those other neat movements mentioned in Lore.

#86 Typhoon Storm 2142

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 302 posts
  • LocationHamburg

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:49 AM

View PostLord of All, on 29 July 2013 - 05:37 AM, said:

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.

Lame excuse for incompetence. But it's alright, I won't discriminate the handicapped.

And I don't need to put more facts into this, already said everything. Re-read my post instead.

Quote

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.

It is actually you who needs to get educated on that matter, professor Knowitall. You don't have to have "ball ends" to move something in several directions. Especially not for 'Mechs Myomer fibers.

But how comes that the Atlas and Highlander and some other 'Mechs, suspiciously look like they are able to sidestep?

Anyways, why is everyone so much against additional flexibility? It does not turn this game into Hawken if you add a mechanic, that allows for slow sidesteps. If anything, it will make MWO more of a simulator, because it adds realism.
If you don't like it, don't use it.

So add sidesteps already. And crouching, proning and all that. So we can finally feel like we are actually steering bipedal, humanoid (in some cases birdlike) Robots, and not Tanks.

Edited by Typhoon Storm 2142, 30 July 2013 - 02:54 AM.


#87 Randalf Yorgen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,026 posts
  • Locationwith in 3m of the exposed Arcons rear ct

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:57 AM

realistically they don't have the actuators for it nore the suspension needed to handle the extra stress that this would place on the chassy. We aren't talking about 200lb people here with bones that can handle 10 times the stress, we are talking about 100T machines that are loaded out to the maximum of safe stress limits. They also need both multi ton gyros AND human neural interface helmets for direct input to keep them from falling over once they start to move, the added dynamic that straffing would introduce woulf be too much for the system to handle.

tl;dr? Massive robots with metal shoes, not a teenager playing basketball.

#88 Randalf Yorgen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,026 posts
  • Locationwith in 3m of the exposed Arcons rear ct

Posted 30 July 2013 - 03:01 AM

View PostTyphoon Storm 2142, on 30 July 2013 - 02:49 AM, said:

Lame excuse for incompetence. But it's alright, I won't discriminate the handicapped.

And I don't need to put more facts into this, already said everything. Re-read my post instead.


It is actually you who needs to get educated on that matter, professor Knowitall. You don't have to have "ball ends" to move something in several directions. Especially not for 'Mechs Myomer fibers.

But how comes that the Atlas and Highlander and some other 'Mechs, suspiciously look like they are able to sidestep?

Anyways, why is everyone so much against additional flexibility? It does not turn this game into Hawken if you add a mechanic, that allows for slow sidesteps. If anything, it will make MWO more of a simulator, because it adds realism.
If you don't like it, don't use it.

So add sidesteps already. And crouching, proning and all that. So we can finally feel like we are actually steering bipedal, humanoid (in some cases birdlike) Robots, and not Tanks.



Sorry dude but the Myomer fibers are the muscles not the frame. without the frame that allows the muscles to move the body just pulls into a ball. Muscles can't make the frame move in a way it's not designed for and the guy you are talking to is right, without a ball socket joint you don't have the flexability needed to side step.

Also the type of game you are describing, crouch, prone, etc etc.... these are 100T giant robots, do you think they are made out of rubber? they don't have the flexability in their frames or in their armor skins to move like that. sorry but you're off the mark here.

#89 Typhoon Storm 2142

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 302 posts
  • LocationHamburg

Posted 30 July 2013 - 04:01 AM

View PostRandalf Yorgen, on 30 July 2013 - 02:57 AM, said:

the added dynamic that straffing would introduce woulf be too much for the system to handle.

Would it now? Interesting. Last time I checked, the utopic 100t 'Mech technology wasn't even invented, yet you seem to have an astonishing knowledge about it. You know what? I think you're just assuming you do, so I will just ignore your "facts".

View PostRandalf Yorgen, on 30 July 2013 - 03:01 AM, said:

Sorry dude but the Myomer fibers are the muscles not the frame. without the frame that allows the muscles to move the body just pulls into a ball. Muscles can't make the frame move in a way it's not designed for and the guy you are talking to is right, without a ball socket joint you don't have the flexability needed to side step.

Also the type of game you are describing, crouch, prone, etc etc.... these are 100T giant robots, do you think they are made out of rubber? they don't have the flexability in their frames or in their armor skins to move like that. sorry but you're off the mark here.

Okay, so you're the expert on Myomer fibres? Tell me all about Myomer technology, I heard you invented it. And why does a joint have to be a ball to allow for two-dimensional flexibility?
Posted Image

[Redacted]

Edited by Niko Snow, 30 July 2013 - 06:42 AM.
Quote Clean-up


#90 Leafia Barrett

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 355 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 04:37 AM

View PostVolthorne, on 29 July 2013 - 06:38 PM, said:

Clearly you're imagining a different slope than I am because I haven't ever run across a hill where I would absolutely NEED a ball-and-socket hip to traverse it laterally (there is a hill right by my house with about a 50-60° incline, you can't get much steeper than that before it becomes a wall and not a hill). You could physically do it with hinged joints. Would a ball-and-socket be nice? Yeah, it would, but you don't NEED it.

Also, would you kindly point out where my premise is any less valid (or "realistic" as you put it - we're talking about giant stompy robots, how ******* "realistic" do you want?) than anyone else's?

Unless the mechs' feet are really ****ing flexible (and they don't appear to be, from what I've seen), walking across a hill laterally would definitely require some kind of ball or pseudo-ball joint. Otherwise, the mech would be forced to tilt to the side, simply because they would be forced to put their feet down flat, and considering how poor mechs' capabilities to tilt their torso back and forth is, I very much doubt they'd be able to tilt their torsos to the side enough to compensate (or if any amount of torso tilting would help, for that matter). Bending the knee doesn't mean that the feet tilt as well.

Because I'm lousy at explaining things, here's an illustration of what I mean. Behold my artistic prowess with GIMP!
Let's assume the mech can tilt its ankles 10° to the side. Any hill above ~10°...
Posted Image
is simply not going to work.

#91 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,068 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 30 July 2013 - 04:48 AM

Ok some of you have some serious problems with arguing.... please stop behaving like children.

Instead of throwing extremes or exceptions at each other, you should make a break.

At fist stop thinking of Mechs as robots.
The humanoid for example should have the same - maybe even better mobility as a human beeing.
The have joints, they have mucles.
So can you as human - make sidesteps?
Yes you can do?
Can you as human beeing run making sidesteps?
Some maybe - I'm not able to do this, at least the best thing i can do is a kind of jump... and I don't think that it is a olympic movement.

So the question of the OP for side steps is valid.

However it is not a general movement - it is limited for BattleMechs with human leg only? Mabye some of you has seen a chicken side stepping.

That we don't have sidestepping is derivated from the TT rules - and to have them will not turn MWO more towards FPS - we are allready there.

#92 Typhoon Storm 2142

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 302 posts
  • LocationHamburg

Posted 30 July 2013 - 05:41 AM

I would like someone explain to me how a 'Mech is able to turn on the spot, but not be able to make a sidestep. The same mechanics are used in both movements. EVEN THOUGH they supposedly have no ball-joints or such.

#93 Randalf Yorgen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,026 posts
  • Locationwith in 3m of the exposed Arcons rear ct

Posted 30 July 2013 - 07:24 AM

why can't they strafe , side step at an angle. well it's up to you if you want to get into the lore of the mechs but I found some blueprints from the old TT game. The first two are from everyones fav mech the Warhammer and the third is the Timberwolf.... or MADCAT for those who didn't know. If you look you will see Axels and Planetary Gears in the hip joint where there would have to be a ball and socket joint if the mech could strafe/sidestep.



Once the first one loads you have to scroll down the page a little, just past the map of the Innersphere and it will be there

http://fencig.over-b...s-61908742.html


The second one goes right to it,

http://www.battletec...pic.php?f=2&t=9

And the third one is from another thread here in MWO Forums, the poster was pointing out the name of the sheet but it is an excellent blue print.

View PostPromptus, on 24 October 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

Posted Image



I hope this helps make my point and my argument clear and I hope that some people out there don't get too upset and call these childish.

View PostTyphoon Storm 2142, on 30 July 2013 - 05:41 AM, said:

I would like someone explain to me how a 'Mech is able to turn on the spot, but not be able to make a sidestep. The same mechanics are used in both movements. EVEN THOUGH they supposedly have no ball-joints or such.


A planetary gear at the bottom of the torso connecting the hip axels to the spine of the mech would easily allow for the twist action you are asking about.

#94 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 30 July 2013 - 07:30 AM

View PostRandalf Yorgen, on 30 July 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

why can't they strafe , side step at an angle. well it's up to you if you want to get into the lore of the mechs but I found some blueprints from the old TT game. The first two are from everyones fav mech the Warhammer and the third is the Timberwolf.... or MADCAT for those who didn't know. If you look you will see Axels and Planetary Gears in the hip joint where there would have to be a ball and socket joint if the mech could strafe/sidestep.



Once the first one loads you have to scroll down the page a little, just past the map of the Innersphere and it will be there

http://fencig.over-b...s-61908742.html


The second one goes right to it,

http://www.battletec...pic.php?f=2&t=9

And the third one is from another thread here in MWO Forums, the poster was pointing out the name of the sheet but it is an excellent blue print.




I hope this helps make my point and my argument clear and I hope that some people out there don't get too upset and call these childish.



A planetary gear at the bottom of the torso connecting the hip axels to the spine of the mech would easily allow for the twist action you are asking about.



Is it just me, or is there no myomer mentioned on there? Someone on the previous page uploaded a higher res version of the last thing you put on there. As it's not a real engineering diagram for an actual working thing, we're all farting into the wind here, but as drawn above, it's hydraulic instead of myomer actuated. I really wish we could get some of the original "progenitors" of the canon on the forum, I know they'd be *mobbed* with questions. i.e. why weren't they all omnimechs from the start? etc.

#95 Lord of All

    Member

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

Posted 30 July 2013 - 07:33 AM

View PostFierostetz, on 30 July 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

... i.e. why weren't they all omnimechs from the start? etc.



They were.

#96 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 30 July 2013 - 07:38 AM

View PostLord of All, on 30 July 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:



They were.


I know they're treated as such, but then why are omnimechs such a big deal? the mercury had modular hardpoints.
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/OmniMech

but in lore, they were swapping out weapons all the time... good lord the data for battletech is all over the frickin map!

ps I like Lord Of All as a forum name

Edited by Fierostetz, 30 July 2013 - 07:39 AM.


#97 Lord of All

    Member

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

Posted 30 July 2013 - 07:46 AM

View PostFierostetz, on 30 July 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:


I know they're treated as such, but then why are omnimechs such a big deal? the mercury had modular hardpoints.
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/OmniMech

but in lore, they were swapping out weapons all the time... good lord the data for battletech is all over the frickin map!

ps I like Lord Of All as a forum name


Thank you, I used to go by Lord but someone on my Lan stole it as a joke so I became Lord Of all and have used it ever since. My guess is hard points were introduced knowing that when the clans were introduced then that advantage could be theirs. You see Companies needed a reason to force everyone to but the new product and releasing OP product that obsoletes the old ones is the tried and true method that is still in use today. I'm sure you've noticed this. ;) I quit playing TT when Aerotech was released so I don't know for sure.

#98 Belorion

    Member

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

Posted 30 July 2013 - 07:56 AM

View PostLord of All, on 30 July 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:



Thank you, I used to go by Lord but someone on my Lan stole it as a joke so I became Lord Of all and have used it ever since. My guess is hard points were introduced knowing that when the clans were introduced then that advantage could be theirs. You see Companies needed a reason to force everyone to but the new product and releasing OP product that obsoletes the old ones is the tried and true method that is still in use today. I'm sure you've noticed this. ;) I quit playing TT when Aerotech was released so I don't know for sure.


You should totally get the overlord package...

Edited by Belorion, 30 July 2013 - 07:56 AM.


#99 Lord of All

    Member

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

Posted 30 July 2013 - 08:06 AM

View PostBelorion, on 30 July 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

You should totally get the overlord package...

I love Battlemaster, It is my favorite mech, But I will not support this game until the issues are worked out. I don't believe in selling a beta product. Guess I'm just stubborn and old-school. I'll pay for this by having to wait till January when everyone else has theirs in OCT.

#100 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 30 July 2013 - 08:17 AM

View PostLord of All, on 30 July 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

I love Battlemaster, It is my favorite mech, But I will not support this game until the issues are worked out. I don't believe in selling a beta product. Guess I'm just stubborn and old-school. I'll pay for this by having to wait till January when everyone else has theirs in OCT.


I've literally *poured* money into this game, but thats just because it's fun. Spending a pile of cash on this game has been much more fun than what I usually do over the summer, which is buy and rebuild a few motorcycles ;)
I know it's a beta, but it's also the first game I've really played much since mechwarrior 2 mercenaries. I tried mw3 and mw4 and was unimpressed.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users