271 replies to this topic

[Thomas Hogarth]

I have come to the conclusion that this is a clever troll thread. Between experience=utmost defensible fact and the campaign slogan battlecries, people willing to actually discuss the matter in a civil manner are getting harder and harder to pick out.

If you cannot bring yourself to discuss something in a civil manner, don't expect to sway anyone. And if you're not trying to sway anyone, this post and the last one are just wankfests, which I'm assured by medical professionals that you can do without wasting bandwidth.

[CCC Dober]

@Sera
That made me smile. Not that I don't like kittens, which I do, but because it was honest =)

Edited by CCC Dober, 13 June 2012 - 11:56 AM.

[TheRulesLawyer]

I'm a huge supporter of respecting canon and TT rules where possible. However I think its idiotic to think that every battlemech has exactly 120 degrees of rotation. Some have more. Some have less. If there is a mech that has 360 rotation in the fiction, I'm all for it. Who knows. Maybe it'll pay for that extra rotation with a really slow rotation speed. Lots of little things to tweak. Little stuff like exact ranges and speed of torso and arm tracking leave the devs with a really nice way to balance different chassis.

[Gorith]

To clarify I have never thought 360 couldn't be overcome. However unlike storm I believe that it gives a very large advantage to any mech that has it over the other mechs in it's weight class. and that it also gives a major disadvantage to any smaller mech that goes up against it. Also with 360 you can overcome your slow tracking against a target by slowing down to a slow walk and turning the same direction you are also twisting. Yes you can do that with any mech but eventually you will hit your twist limit on a non 360 mech assuming they are running faster than your turn rate.

[CCC Dober]

@TRL
Yeah, it comes down to how options are implemented. In case of 360 torsos I see it more as a compromise. Some Mechs just scream for it, such as the Rifleman, which has a secondary role as anti-air battery and is throughly described in the novels as being able to cover all angles, but getting screwed if caught off guard. Then you have certain Mechs that just don't just flip, but rotate arms around and fire backwards or those with rear firing weapons installed.

If you were a developer and had to make the call, then I can guess that you would want to adhere to the principle of KIS (keep it simple). So instead of just cutting into the Mech's options, the MW4 devs expanded them by introducing 360 torso twist and different twist speeds. This was not a uniform process to my knowledge, but it was rather well balanced and received.

[Torban]

No that's totally ridiculous. Totally undecided on which poll option to vote for because I've only ever played 2-3 TT games but I very much do care about MWO staying close to the TT rules. It would probably help if the poll options weren't so blatantly biased. Likely that was done intentionally to try and reduce the number of votes against 360 by making it hard for someone against it to properly vote. OP should be ashamed of him/herself.

Edited by Torban, 13 June 2012 - 12:26 PM.

[Frostiken]

360 rotation isn't that huge an advantage as some of you are implying. In MWLL it comes up maybe once a game.

[Aleksander Storm]

Torban, on 13 June 2012 - 12:20 PM, said:

No that's totally ridiculous. Totally undecided on which poll option to vote for because I've only ever played 2-3 TT games but I very much do care about MWO staying close to the TT rules. It would probably help if the poll options weren't so blatantly biased. Likely that was done intentionally to try and reduce the number of votes against 360 by making it hard for someone against it to properly vote. OP should be ashamed of him/herself.

Surprisingly, despite the poor option labels, votes against 360 are certainly leading by a hefty margin...

[CCC Dober]

Which is not surprising at all, given the average quality of responses and emotional involvement.

[UncleKulikov]

Negative. It will alter the maneuver dynamic by allowing a mech to flee at full speed, while firing it's full arsenal, while not exposing it's weak back armor to it's pursuer.

[Sychodemus]

I've always wondered how some 'Mechs are able to move forward, much less backward. But then I remember to not care and just go with it and have fun.

However MWO handles torso rotation, I would like there to be a torso locking option.

[Slender Man]

I thought it was a good reason to take out a Maddog over a Timberwolf but if its not canon then its not right. Honestly though they aren't going to completely stick to Canon. PGI seems to stick to canon as long as it makes sense and as you can see by the new Stalker design it really is for the best.

I Voted "[color=#959595]I care about the old TT rules, but I still think adding 360 would enhance this simulation game."[/color]

[Solis Obscuri]

360º seems excessive to me, though it looks like some 'mechs can turn >90º from the gameplay videos. But factors like turn rate/twist rate also need to be figured in to evaluate a feature like twist angle.

[BigBenn]

I think a very small few mechs *should* be able to traverse 360°, even it is isnt BT canon. This is not a turn based TT game, the game has evolved in some major ways and so should rules, mech developement, etc.

More importantly, I hope to see different mechs traverse their torso at difference rates. I have no clue where to begin as to what mech traverses at what speed, but I'd like to think that a Bushwacker (or any other medium mech) can torso traverse faster than an Atlas. Food for thought.

Edited by BigBenn, 13 June 2012 - 01:53 PM.

[Teralitha]

Torban, on 13 June 2012 - 12:20 PM, said:

No that's totally ridiculous. Totally undecided on which poll option to vote for because I've only ever played 2-3 TT games but I very much do care about MWO staying close to the TT rules. It would probably help if the poll options weren't so blatantly biased. Likely that was done intentionally to try and reduce the number of votes against 360 by making it hard for someone against it to properly vote. OP should be ashamed of him/herself.

You want me to add in a vote option that accounts for you having only played TT 3 times? Are you really that dense? If your for 360, you have 2 choices, favor TT and want it, dont care about TT and want it. Or, favor TT and dont want it, dont care about TT and dont want it.

There is no... " I only played TT 3 times and I cant decide. In which case, maybe I will add an option for " Im confused...."

The vote choices are more than fair. Pick one, or dont vote. Dont insult me because you cant make up your damn mind....

Edited by Teralitha, 13 June 2012 - 06:00 PM.

[Tincan Nightmare]

I can't see this as an option for just a few designs. What would be the criteria for judging if a mech has a 360 degree torso twist? Would the decision come down to artwork, weight, armor and weapons loadout, random names picked out of a hat? Now if a Raven has 360 degree TT but a Commando doesn't, look how that affects either mech trying to run from an opponent. The Raven pilot can just aim for relatively open terrain (or even down a road if in an urban setting) and open up the throttle and swing its torso around so that it can fire everything it mounts and present its heaviest armor. A Commando however, has to present its back to its opponent with its thin rear armor. So why does the Raven get this ability but the Commando doesn't? What would be the determining factor for turning Battlemechs into exorcist Mechs.

[Teralitha]

Tincan Nightmare, on 13 June 2012 - 07:19 PM, said:

I can't see this as an option for just a few designs. What would be the criteria for judging if a mech has a 360 degree torso twist? Would the decision come down to artwork, weight, armor and weapons loadout, random names picked out of a hat? Now if a Raven has 360 degree TT but a Commando doesn't, look how that affects either mech trying to run from an opponent. The Raven pilot can just aim for relatively open terrain (or even down a road if in an urban setting) and open up the throttle and swing its torso around so that it can fire everything it mounts and present its heaviest armor. A Commando however, has to present its back to its opponent with its thin rear armor. So why does the Raven get this ability but the Commando doesn't? What would be the determining factor for turning Battlemechs into exorcist Mechs.

The raven and the commando, have different purposes. You would decide what mechs have it, based on design limitations. Or I guess,... the artwork. If it looks like it has 360, then it could have 360

[gamesguy]

TheRulesLawyer, on 13 June 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

I'm a huge supporter of respecting canon and TT rules where possible. However I think its idiotic to think that every battlemech has exactly 120 degrees of rotation. Some have more. Some have less. If there is a mech that has 360 rotation in the fiction, I'm all for it. Who knows. Maybe it'll pay for that extra rotation with a really slow rotation speed. Lots of little things to tweak. Little stuff like exact ranges and speed of torso and arm tracking leave the devs with a really nice way to balance different chassis.

Not every mech in MWO has 120 degree rotation.

[UncleKulikov]

Teralitha, on 13 June 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

The raven and the commando, have different purposes. You would decide what mechs have it, based on design limitations. Or I guess,... the artwork. If it looks like it has 360, then it could have 360

It's an advantage. How would you balance it against mechs of the same tonnage but without the capability to torso twist completely around?

[cinco]

360 all mechs, the tt rules don't make sense and will never translate well to fps video game form.

Edited by cinco, 13 June 2012 - 10:29 PM.