158 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

Imperius, on 10 September 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

Get back on topic! This is about how to implement collisions not a heavy vs light debate. If you want to have that debate create a topic for it.

Well, it is on topic. The implementation of collisions (how collisions would be implemented) directly effects how light mechs fight.

[Imperius]

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

Well, it is on topic. The implementation of collisions (how collisions would be implemented) directly effects how light mechs fight.

Wrong it effects how "ALL" mechs fight. Quit twisting topics to fit your self created facts. Back on topic please.

[Kaldor]

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

Would you like to throw some supporting points in there? Otherwise.. it looks like an opinion, stated as fact..with a claim that PGI says it's fact too..

(Were you here were collisions were in? Being a light pilot had a pretty good chance of having your match ended early with a tumble in front of an assault mech if you aren't careful.)

To answer your question, yes he was here. And yes, if you were a bad light pilot, and tried to pinball and facehug, it was going to end badly. This game is not just about shooting. Its also about being a good pilot. Playing a light just magnifies that because the errors are much more severe because you have alot more speed and less area to make those mistakes in because of that speed, and when those mistakes are made, it is alot less forgiving.

As a reply to your other state. Why not? Are Assaults supposed to be better than everything? Or should it require entire lances of (insert mech here) to kill an assault? Or maybe you prefer the game degenerate into Assault Warrior Online? As it is right now, it takes a good length of time to kill a well played assault, and the danger of getting killed is not so much the assault, as it is his buddies that are close.

[Mehlan]

Imperius, on 10 September 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

Wrong it effects how "ALL" mechs fight. Quit twisting topics to fit your self created facts. Back on topic please.

However it does NOT impact all the mechs the same...which you well know.

[Blood78]

Not sure how much of performance hit it would be but my suggestion made in past during early days of closed beta was an algorithim to calculate if object would topple or not. Something along the line of...

Weight of Mech multiplied by its speed generates a Force number multiplied by direction of applied force multiplier vs. Weight of other mech multiplied by its speed generates a Force number multiplied by direction of applied force multiplier. With number triggering condition rule.

Weight of Mech x Current Speed x Direction of Force Multiplier vs. Weight of Mech x Current Speed x Direction of Force Multiplier

Direction of applied Force Multiplier

• Mech is applying force toward to front of the mech either by moving forward into it or reversing into it = 1
  
• Mech is applying force toward rear of other mech = 3 (i.e. someone rams you from rear and you are moving forward)
  
• One mech is applying force from top of the mech = 5 (i.e. jumping on top of or jump down from higher elvation to lower)

Condition Rules

• Force Difference = 0 to 10. No topple unless boths mechs were traveling above 30 kph
  
• Force Difference = >X. Mech with lower force topples. Mech with higher force do not topple and get slightly shake as if it walked over something.
  
• Force Difference = >Y. Mech with lower force topples. Mech with higher force do not topple but gets shaken
  
• Force Difference = >Z. Mech with lower force topples and take massive damage. Mech with higher force do not topple but gets shaken.

For example...

- Two Jenners facing each other at 0-5m and moving into each other should cause collison but not a topple because they can't generate enough force to topple (calculated number would be equal and no topple)

- Two Jenners running at 150kph and run into each other, both should be knocked on their butt (calculated number would be equal but both are moving fast so they should both topple)

- Jenner standing still behind and an Atlas which reverse into it. Jenner should topple and Atlas move on. (Atlas would have much greater force and because of that, Jenner should definitely topple but Atlas shouldn't get much shake)

- Jenner is running around at 150 kph turns corner and rams into leg of Atlas moving at 55 kph. Jenner topples, Atlas gets shaken violently but no topple. 35 ton moving 150kph ramming 100 ton moving at 55 kph directly should be violent.

- Jenner running at 150 kph jumpjets and rams into back of the head of Atlas moving at 55kph from the ear. Both should topple. 100 ton moving forward at 55 kph suddenly gets a 35 ton ramming you in back of your head at 150kph should cause both to topple.

- Jenner is standing still and Highlander Jumps on top of it (aka highlander burial). Jenner should topple and take massive damage. While Highlander does not but should get shaken up. It did just Jumpjet and land on top of a mech and buried it.

Edited by Blood78, 10 September 2013 - 12:19 PM.

[John Buford]

If at first you don't succeed just start a new thread? This was the original post http://mwomercs.com/...ng-out-of-hand/ that the OP started just that not many people agreed with him.

[Soda Popinsky]

Galenit, on 10 September 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

f=ma
Force=mass x acceleration
Newton=kg x m/s²

Here is your 100ton, 48kph Atlas:
f =100000 x 13,3² = 17689000 N

Now lets look on a 150kph 25 tons commando
25000 x 41,7² = 43472000 N

That commando has nearly the triple force with 3 times speed and 1/4 weight.

Bad physics. You substituted velocity for acceleration. You should be trying to calculate Energy, not Force. Big difference.

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 m*v^2
(I'm not going to bother converting to a standard unit of energy, since this is simply for comparison - same units anyway)
Atlas
K.E. = 0.5 x 100t x 48k/h x 48k/h = 115,200 tk^2/h^2

Commando
K.E. = 0.5 x 25t x 150k/h x 150k/h = 281,250 tk^2/h^2

So the Commando has 2.4x the energy of the Atlas. Not too far off from your 3x, just wanted to clarify.


As far as knock-downs go. I like the idea that a mech is more susceptible to getting knocked down if it's moving, preferably from a lateral or rear hit. I'd also add if Crouch ever gets implemented, it should reduce the probability of knock-down, as it lowers the center of gravity of the mech, and can be thought of as bracing for impact or going into a sprawl.

[Livewyr]

Imperius, on 10 September 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

Wrong it effects how "ALL" mechs fight. Quit twisting topics to fit your self created facts. Back on topic please.

It isn't twisting facts- as stated here.

Mehlan, on 10 September 2013 - 11:50 AM, said:

However it does NOT impact all the mechs the same...which you well know.

(Dramatically effects the way light mechs fight, doesn't effect Assault mechs as much..)



Rather than separate the quotes, I'll just answer within yours.. look for the bold.

Kaldor, on 10 September 2013 - 11:41 AM, said:

To answer your question, yes he was here. And yes, if you were a bad light pilot, and tried to pinball and facehug, it was going to end badly. This game is not just about shooting. Its also about being a good pilot. Playing a light just magnifies that because the errors are much more severe because you have alot more speed and less area to make those mistakes in because of that speed, and when those mistakes are made, it is alot less forgiving.

As a reply to your other state. Why not? Are Assaults supposed to be better than everything? Nope, just the best at straight up engagements.. they're ASSAULT mechs.
Or should it require entire lances of (insert mech here) to kill an assault? Well, other assaults and use of tactics.. Or maybe you prefer the game degenerate into Assault Warrior Online? Where exactly did you get that? You seem to be working yourself up. As it is right now, it takes a good length of time to kill a well played assault, and the danger of getting killed is not so much the assault, as it is his buddies that are close.

Ok, that still doesn't explain why light mechs should not have the risk of falling/colliding while running around at high speed...

[Imperius]

John Buford, on 10 September 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

If at first you don't succeed just start a new thread? This was the original post http://mwomercs.com/...ng-out-of-hand/ that the OP started just that not many people agreed with him.

I guess it's a good thing PGI listens to the minority in the forums instead of the majority... Where were we... Oh yes! How do you think collisions should be implemented in the game.

[Mehlan]

John Buford, on 10 September 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

If at first you don't succeed just start a new thread? This was the original post http://mwomercs.com/...ng-out-of-hand/ that the OP started just that not many people agreed with him.

Bingo.. I think this is a...side approach to the same 'end'. First, to be blunt where is the 'proof' there's a real 'problem' what the actual problem is and the cause. Everything so far is really anecdotal, and as there's as much anecdotal instances to counter. Now another poster in his 'suggestions' states a jenner behind an atlas should be knocked down and the atlas notice little impact... why? Where does the Jenner stand in height compared to the Atlas, how does the atlas leg operate and where is the atla's center of gravity in as compared to the jenners? A jenner weights roughly 1/3 an Atlas.. say you weigh 180lb, what happens you walk backwards and hit something knee or hip height that weighs 60lbs? Particularly if your focused on something in front of you. Even if your walking, or much less 'running' forward?

[Imperius]

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 12:18 PM, said:

It isn't twisting facts-  as stated here.
(Dramatically effects the way light mechs fight, doesn't effect Assault mechs as much..)

No really it does effect them the same it makes everyone watch where they walk and what they walk into. I said DMG and stun should be biased on percent of max speed making the stun even for all classes. I really don't see the argument you have effecting "light mechs more". You tell an assault pilot to aim better, I will tell a light pilot to watch where they run. Yes and assault is less likely to run into something because they are slow, but also easy to hit. Then again a light mech is less likely to get hit due to their exceptional speed, but more likely to run into something because they are moving fast and not watching where they run. It's balanced period.

Any light pilot worth his salt can avoid hitting things.
Any assault pilot worth his salt can aim and hit a light.

Edited by Imperius, 10 September 2013 - 12:51 PM.

[Livewyr]

Imperius, on 10 September 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

No really it does effect them the same it makes everyone watch where they walk and what they walk into. I said DMG and stun should be biased on percent of max speed making the stun even for all classes. I really don't see the argument you have effecting "light mechs more". You tell an assault pilot to aim better, I will tell a light pilot to watch where they run. Yes and assault is less likely to run into something because they are slow, but also easy to hit. Then again a light mech is less likely to get hit due to their exceptional speed, but more likely to run into something because they are moving fast and not watching where they run. It's balanced period.

Any light pilot worth his salt can avoid hitting things.
Any assault pilot worth his salt can aim and hit a light.

Straight forward example of why it effects light mechs more than assault mechs:

Fast(ish) assault mech is running and gets knocked over for some reason. Will take some punishment, possibly lose limbs, maybe die while on the ground.. he has *armor*

Fast light mech is running and gets knocked over for some reason. Unless there is NOBODY in the area.. that light mech is not likely getting back up. He has no armor to protect him while he's on his face.



Effects light mechs more.

[Kamies]

When mechs collide the smaller one should get little wobbly and walk out of control for 1-2 seconds. That is it. No sitting around or falling to the ground. No many sudden movements, just little wobbly or one fast cockpit movement and then smooth recovery from that: no motion sickness.

[Imperius]

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

Straight forward example of why it effects light mechs more than assault mechs:

Fast(ish) assault mech is running and gets knocked over for some reason. Will take some punishment, possibly lose limbs, maybe die while on the ground.. he has *armor*

Fast light mech is running and gets knocked over for some reason. Unless there is NOBODY in the area.. that light mech is not likely getting back up. He has no armor to protect him while he's on his face.

Effects light mechs more.

Hmmm I never said anything about knockdowns. I said stun it's completely different, but do keep trying to put words in my mouth this community loves to try that.

[Raidyr]

Missed the last two pages of debate but I'll just say that I've seen a lot of **** in my time but I've never seen someone's lack of accuracy labeled "evasion tanking" before. Never in Mechwarrior, and certainly never in any FPS game I've played. The fact that this concept is held by more than one person on the balance forum is kinda scary.

If we absolutely need collisions, fix the warping when impacting enemy mechs and add a simplistic damage model based on size and speed. No stunning, no knockdowns. Lights pay for their speed with less armor, less weapons, and less tonnage to work with. We don't need to waste time working in stun locks and knockdowns so bad heavy and assault players can kill lights.

[stjobe]

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

they do trade up armor and firepower for speed, that doesn't mean it should be without risks. (Especially since the speed defense attribute doesn't degrade with successive hits..until a leg is removed- unlike Armor which takes damage and doesn't regrow.)

I'm not saying lights shouldn't be able to go fast, I'm saying they should not be able to exercise the unlimited defense attribute (speed) without the risks that inherently come with it. If you go so fast that you can't control what your mech runs into.. you shouldn't get off scott free for that.

Lights are not meant to stand up to assault mechs. (evasion tanking) They only get away with that because there is no drawback to evasion tanking. (Unlike Armor tanking, which wears down.) Light's are meant to scout (duh) and to perform guerrilla attacks. (Hit and run attacks, ambushes, etc..)

• Speed isn't without risk; the faster you go the harder it is to maneuver and not get stuck up on terrain, other 'mechs, what have you. These little moments are anything but "getting off scot free"; a stopped or even significantly slowed light is a dead light. Improved collision damage would increase the damage taken from these risks to where a light would be in real danger of suiciding - or getting grief-killed by team mates running into it. Any collision mechanic would have to be very, very, finely balanced indeed so as to not invalidate lights as a combat class.
  
• Speed also comes at a very real cost (or risk if you will) of less armour and less firepower, making the speedy 'mech not able to take a hit as well as a slower opponent (although this is compensated somewhat by being harder to hit in the first place), and not able to kill as effectively (or at least as fast) as a slower, more heavily armed opponent.
  
• Evasion tanking? Generally a "tank" is the unit intended to take the damage and live long enough for the rest of the team to kill the enemy, and it is usually accomplished by two equally important means: The ability to take or evade damage, and the ability to take and hold aggro. While I might give you that lights are good at avoiding getting hit, they really don't have any means of getting or keeping aggro - that Atlas that just crested is a much more aggro-inducing target than a light will ever be. In short, lights aren't tanks, so talking about "evasion tanking" makes little sense.
  
• Lights in lore are Scouts and Skirmishers, and some even Snipers, true, but in MWO there's only a single role for everyone, and that's to do as much damage as possible; therefore any arguments that "lights are meant to scout and do hit-and-runs" are nonsensical - you may as well say that you don't want lights to be combat effective at all. If there were a (proper, well-paying) Scout role, or a Skirmisher role, or a Guerilla role, I think most light pilots would be happy to conform to them, but since there isn't we'll have to do what everyone else does: Damage. The fact that we're much less suited to it than our heavier brethren is something people tend to overlook or brush aside.

In short, I think you (purposely?) understate the drawbacks of speed, and cling to a lore-based definition of light roles that have very little bearing in the current MWO. Your idea about lights "evasion tanking", while interesting, is ultimately flawed in that a tank without a means of getting and holding aggro is not a tank at all; it's just a random target.

[Mehlan]

Imperius, on 10 September 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

Hmmm I never said anything about knockdowns. I said stun it's completely different, but do keep trying to put words in my mouth this community loves to try that.

It's still an 'action' or effect that takes a player out of 'control' and leave him vulnerable and based around your suggestions, as you know more likely to impact 'light' pilots than any other.

[Monky]

Knockdowns/stuns/etc are just going to result in griefing, whether it's of the enemy or friendlies. One of my most common thoughts during closed beta when a light would wreck into me was 'learn to drive!'. I would then be thinking that thought the next 4 or 5 times that same person ran into me. Additionally, it was a really annoying way to deal with enemy lights - run into them and let your team shoot them while they try to get back up.

Really, it's a bad mechanic no matter which way you slice it in a game where time to live is measured in seconds, one mistake or intentional ramming can be death, and with no respawns, we have a very player unfriendly feature.

Instead, collisions should be focused on consequences. If you ram someone (ie; are the faster moving player) you suffer some damage based on the collision's impact speed (if you run into someone heading into you, more damage for the faster party, if you run into someone heading away from you, less damage.). This puts some basic melee in the game and makes an emphasis on watching where you are going. An Atlas would be able to damage a mech that runs into it as it would usually be the slower party, but they could switch it up and use their throttle to deal a sneaky blow. The lower the speed of course, the less damage should be done. How much overall is the big question in my opinion.

[Prezimonto]

I completely miss knockdowns. I look forward to having collision damage added back into the game. I don't have a problem with Jenner or Dragon Bowling and the strategy typically allows a well placed team to focus fire on individual targets... causing the team doing the bowling to lose mechs at an even up rate.

If collision damage is also reasonably stiff, larger mechs will be able to afford a little bowling/collision, but lights will suffer.

I hope it's done well. GL since this is MWO and PGI.

[Corvus Antaka]

lights running into and blocking mechs at whim with almost no dmg and knockdowns is ********. lights can actually pin an assault mech in place right now, it's stupid. I love my light mechs, but collisions and knockdowns need to return, without collisions and DFA this is only half a mechgame, and is one thing I am very dissappointed won't be in for release.