100 replies to this topic

[arcangelS7]

I have a few ideas for how they could implement melee attacks in a balanced way:

1) Ramming and Death from Above have to be included
2) Punches, and Weapon attacks only, no kicks
3) Hands are required to pickup Clubs (ie. Tree Trunks, or Limbs)
4) Mechs without lower arm actulators (ie. Catapult, Jenner) should not be able to punch
5) Punches without Hands or Weapons should do damage to the arm
6) Melee attacks need to be big, showy and SLOW

[Ennui]

I get that melee combat makes sense in the Battletech universe, but from a game design perspective it's kind of difficult... how do you implement it in an intuitive, balanced way?

I wouldn't be adverse to hyper simplified melee combat, e.g. you can punch by pressing a button and it will hit if you are close enough... and if you press that same melee button while in midair with jump jets or whatever you get a special Death From Above melee bonus. Plus maybe some kind of melee weapon you can equip on one hand/arm that increases melee damage.

To be honest though I wouldn't mind melee not being included... when given the choice of having a truly 100% realistic depiction of the BT universe vs making the game streamlined and fun, I prefer fun.

[Hallstatt]

Why make giants robots with arms, if they don't use them?

I vote for 2 (3) types of melee: Punch and push (and death from above).
Collisions should also do damage to the 'mechs.

If a 'mech comes closer enough, you should be able to push it (damaging lightly your arms) into the building behind it, with some great effects of the building being destroyed and the enemy taking damage.

[Valerian Mengsk]

While melee attacks are part of the BT universe I do not mind if they are not included because I think most melee attacks would not be very combat effective and for good reason. The amount of firepower that a mech possesses should make getting within melee range disastrous.

Edited by Valerian Mengsk, 04 November 2011 - 08:46 AM.

[Tal Kath Naabal]

Ennui, on 04 November 2011 - 08:26 AM, said:

I get that melee combat makes sense in the Battletech universe, but from a game design perspective it's kind of difficult... how do you implement it in an intuitive, balanced way?

I wouldn't be adverse to hyper simplified melee combat, e.g. you can punch by pressing a button and it will hit if you are close enough... and if you press that same melee button while in midair with jump jets or whatever you get a special Death From Above melee bonus. Plus maybe some kind of melee weapon you can equip on one hand/arm that increases melee damage.

To be honest though I wouldn't mind melee not being included... when given the choice of having a truly 100% realistic depiction of the BT universe vs making the game streamlined and fun, I prefer fun.

^ good job, maybe i like realism slightly more.
and

Hallstatt, on 04 November 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

Why make giants robots with arms, if they don't use them?

HA! yes.

[wanderer]

Valerian Mengsk, on 04 November 2011 - 08:45 AM, said:

While melee attacks are part of the BT universe I do not mind if they are not included because I think most melee attacks would not be very combat effective and for good reason. The amount of firepower that a mech possesses should make getting within melee range disastrous.

Not at all. In the Battletech universe, there are melee-equipped machines that can deal damage equivalent to double that of an AC/20 in a single swing, and many who can use melee weapons that deliver enough damage to decapitate a 'Mech in a single attack, or deliver lethal levels of damage to other parts of a 'Mech. And kicking? Our friendly neighborhood Atlas kicks as hard as it hits with it's AC/20, which is itself an infighting-range weapon.

Heck, some 'Mechs hit harder up close with physicals than they can with their normal short-range weaponry...for a few optimized for long range, punches and kicks ARE their short-range weaponry. And for a game that's going to have urban combat featured, I long to be able to step out and put a size 60 boot in someone as they run by, if I can manage it.

[Roh]

Yes, Melee would be awesome and great and all of that. But I don't feel it is a good idea to press for it too hard. The fact that this game went free to play instead of full on five in the series was a lack of backing.

I take this to mean that they are now working with less funding and time then would be idea. It seems to me like bashing for features that overly challenging, not in the original features list, and aren't absolutely necessary could be a very bad thing. Most of all because what if eventually they listen to you.. Try to force something they haven't planned or developed for... And ***** up the game. I've seen it happen before.

So in short melee would be lovely, but not at the cost of good gameplay over all.

[Valerian Mengsk]

wanderer, on 04 November 2011 - 09:17 AM, said:

Not at all. In the Battletech universe, there are melee-equipped machines that can deal damage equivalent to double that of an AC/20 in a single swing, and many who can use melee weapons that deliver enough damage to decapitate a 'Mech in a single attack, or deliver lethal levels of damage to other parts of a 'Mech. And kicking? Our friendly neighborhood Atlas kicks as hard as it hits with it's AC/20, which is itself an infighting-range weapon.

Heck, some 'Mechs hit harder up close with physicals than they can with their normal short-range weaponry...for a few optimized for long range, punches and kicks ARE their short-range weaponry. And for a game that's going to have urban combat featured, I long to be able to step out and put a size 60 boot in someone as they run by, if I can manage it.

My point of view is that while melee attacks are part of the lore they do not make sense for a war machine such as a battlemech. I feel that melee attacks are a mechanic in CBT that does not translate well into a Mechwarrior game.

The best real life analogue I can think of is tank warfare, even if tanks had some sort of melee weapon that could destroy another tank, they would be destroyed long before they reached melee range. MechWarrior is a simulator but do we want it to simulate CBT at the cost of not simulating actual combat between mechs? Of course this is a game and there is some suspension of disbelief but most of the suggestions that have been made for implementing melee combat break mine.

Edited by Valerian Mengsk, 04 November 2011 - 09:39 AM.

[wanderer]

Valerian Mengsk, on 04 November 2011 - 09:39 AM, said:

My point of view is that while melee attacks are part of the lore they do not make sense for a war machine such as a battlemech. I feel that melee attacks are a mechanic in CBT that does not translate well into a Mechwarrior game.

The best real life analogue I can think of is tank warfare, even if tanks had some sort of melee weapon that could destroy another tank, they would be destroyed long before they reached melee range. MechWarrior is a simulator but do we want it to simulate CBT at the cost of not simulating actual combat between mechs? Of course this is a game and there is some suspension of disbelief but most of the suggestions that have been made for implementing melee combat break mine.

Tanks don't have arms that can lift multiple tons or feet that can stomp a turret in like a cardboard box, either.

CBT has weapons that measure their long range at approximately 300 feet (90 meters). I frequently get into point-blank range in Mechwarrior fights online. And if I could add in an effective, zero-heat weapon more often I'd get closer more often- which is what a punch or a kick is. A range zero, zero-heat weapon.

Mechwarrior IS Battletech: the video game. And Battletech has plentiful reasons for melee combat- indeed, many classic designs are severely weakened by removing the ability to use physical attacks. I believe that's just wrong.

[Jack Gallows]

I'm fine with melee as long as they can find a good way to implement it that won't unbalance combat or feel like it's something you want to add in all the time (unless you're wielding a weapon like the Axeman.)

[Omega59er]

Please, read the FAQ people. Piranha has already said "NO MELEE MECHS."

[Jack Gallows]

omega5-9er, on 04 November 2011 - 11:49 AM, said:

Please, read the FAQ people. Piranha has already said "NO MELEE MECHS."

Actually, it says none at launch. They said they may try to work it in if they can make it feasible.

[Valerian Mengsk]

omega5-9er, on 04 November 2011 - 11:49 AM, said:

Please, read the FAQ people. Piranha has already said "NO MELEE MECHS."

I have and I still think it is a worthwhile discussion to have. The game is not out yet so we just want to express our opinion.

[Omega59er]

Valerian Mengsk, on 04 November 2011 - 11:52 AM, said:

I have and I still think it is a worthwhile discussion to have. The game is not out yet so we just want to express our opinion.

Well if I really must put more into this. (lol) I do support melee mechs. Before the clans came into the picture Melee were a very feasible type for mech. Yes, they had to get in close to be effective, but they did not have to worry about ammo or any such thing. Just weather or not their weapon broke. I watched the entire Battletech animated show, and it shows how the Axeman is an effective mech, but when met with all new weapon variants it was too outmatched. Melee mechs would just not be worth the work it would take to put them into the game. Different hit types than ranged weaponry plus the animations would be hard to make correctly. To be honest melee mechs have not been shown in a "Mechwarrior" type of combat before. In the animated show the mechs were (heaven forbid) more Gundam "humanistic" movements.

Edited by omega5-9er, 04 November 2011 - 01:26 PM.

[Alizabeth Aijou]

Which is kinda sad, since Battlemechs (fully humanoid ones, at least) are capable of doing handstands and the like.
They can also move faster than gundams...
In SSW I can make a 'Mech that moves close to 4/5th the speed of sound (around 702 km/h), that's *running* speed.

[simon1812]

but lorewise, there are mech equiped with melee combat capabilities in the Bettlemech universe. so why not?

[VYCanis]

I am fully in support of melee.

the thing is, in battletech, when it comes to melee you need to stop thinking in terms of standard vehicle combat doctrine, and start thinking of it more along the lines of demolition derby.

Part of the reason melee is so effective in BT is that while your average plate of armor is ridiculously good at stopping hypersonic rounds, extreme temps from energy weapons, and missile barrages dead in their tracks with only a relatively thin amount of material, its still only relatively thin amounts of material spread over a large surface area. Collisions will mangle it good.

[CrescentHawk]

I would love to see some good melee in the game. The Axeman has allways been one of my favorite mechs, and in the later portions of the time line there was the Berserker. Whats not to like about a fast moving 100 ton mech with an axe that breaths fire?

[ironhammer]

I like the idea that physical attacks, because of the huge mass that's moving, are big, slow haymakers, that do significant damage, but they require you to commit to them a good .5 to 1 second before they could connect, and take an additional 1 to 1.5 seconds to "reset" from. Like no coolant Alpha Strikes they should be a tactical option that means something. In CoD, the knife is a no brainer, "If up close, press X to win". This is patently silly. If someone can survive a 9mm shot to the chest, they certainly can survive a knife wound to the same chest... but I digress.

Have it be based on tonnage in terms of animation speed as well as damage. I.E. a Commando punches faster than an Atlas, maybe even 4x faster as it's 1/4 the tonnage. Of course it does 1/4 the damage as well.

I agree that mechs that have no lower arm actuators shouldn't have a punch animation, I've done it a few times on tabletop and the looks I get are always hilarious. "Did you just punch me with a http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Yeoman ?" On the other side of the coin though, those mechs can fire arm mounted weapons while using their rear view mirrors. Maybe even discourage melee in handless mechs with the tabletop rule of doing half damage. So the Warhammer or Marauder takes a clumsy strike with their PPC hands that animates as a downward smash/chop under the same kind of animation code of the Hatchetman axe, but instead of double punch damage of a punch, it does half.

*Tosses his 2 C-bills into the pot*

Edited by ironhammer, 05 November 2011 - 08:05 AM.

[ice trey]

Unfortunately, Melee just boils down to one of those things that appear in the tabletop, but can't be easily reflected in game engines.

There's a wealth of stuff from Battletech that we're bound to be missing: Concrete requiring Piloting skill checks while running to avoid slipping on it like your 'mech were in the ice-capades. Water flooding any locations where the armor is completely destroyed, rendering any components therein useless...

But melee has always been something that is tough to do. Mechwarrior has been and always will (should) be a simulator, making any attempt at including melee attacks a difficult task. Even "Death From Above", an iconic move in the game, rarely works, often sending your 'mech bumping off the target and barely doing as much damage as a small laser. Charging attacks do next to no damage, and not being turn-based, the computer can't tell who charged whom. Pushing attacks... well, you might be able to walk into your target, but falling does next to no damage in the game... There are just too many limitations to the game engine.

On the other hand, I really hope that if they have a game intro for MWO, there is some sort of melee-combat depiction, if only just to make it clear that "Yes, mechs can kick and punch. No, we can't program that".

I have tried a fan-made mechwarrior'esque game that more accurately tried to represent the board game. It included punching and kicking attacks. Needless to say, it was very cumbersome to use and not at all impressive.