25 replies to this topic

[BduSlammer]

Lams would be great what do yall think

[Havoc2]

IIRC LAMS is Clan tech, don't expect to see it for a few years.

[BduSlammer]

ahh Lams were the scouts of the old star league

[Thomas Hogarth]

Ah, Land-Air Mechs. Gonna have to vote "hell no".

[Hayden]

LAMs would be fun, but since they're not including vehicles (yet) I can't imagine these making the cut. Would it be awesome and fun? Yes. But they still haven't appeared in a MW game, and I can't imagine them starting now.

[CoffiNail]

Laser Anti Missile System, damn yes. Though the sounds of a AMS churning out rounds to fend off the incoming missiles would be a awesome sound, LAMS in a few years would be great.

Land-Air Mechs. If they do vehicles in the future, and impliment them, I will get one or two for my unit. Be damn amusing to fly in behind the enemy lines and storm them with some LAMs XD

[Suko]

BduSlammer, on 17 November 2011 - 09:46 AM, said:

Lams would be great what do yall think

Did you even think about how difficult this would be to put in-game before you wrote this!?

Not only would they need a great mech simulator engine, but they would also need to somehow produce a realistic flight engine for the fighter mode of the LAMs. Then they'd have to worry about transformation mechanics of the LAM and how this totally different combat vehicle will impact the balance of gameplay in this system, not to mention the gameplay elements unique to LAMs, like critical hits, locked mechanisms, crashing when in fighter mode, etc.

Seriously, it's a terribly impractical idea. If you stop and thought for just a moment before you posted this, I think you would have came to the same conclusion.

Edit: Sorry to take my frustration out on you, but since this forum started I've seen one too many ridiculous posts asking for unrealistic or impractical gameplay features. Honestly, I can't wait until this game is almost out and all the ultra-hard fans get pissy that what they wanted didn't ship with the game and they go away to rant or sulk. Then the game can be left for the rest of us who're just happy to have a new Mechwarrior game.

Edited by shadowvfx, 17 November 2011 - 10:15 AM.

[BduSlammer]

Ah so the people that did battlefield is better than these i dought it and they have nice air battles . Was just thinking would be a good scout

Edited by BduSlammer, 17 November 2011 - 10:19 AM.

[CoffiNail]

They so far have stated there is no Vehicle in games yet, just BattleMechs. So, it is a whole new can of worms allowing Mechs to fly.

[Nill Zenath]

CoffiNail, on 17 November 2011 - 10:04 AM, said:

Land-Air Mechs. If they do vehicles in the future, and impliment them, I will get one or two for my unit. Be damn amusing to fly in behind the enemy lines and storm them with some LAMs XD

I don't think vehicles need to be included to include LAMs. Just because there is overlap and simularities doesn't mean they have to include both at the same time.

shadowvfx, on 17 November 2011 - 10:10 AM, said:

Did you even think about how difficult this would be to put in-game before you wrote this!?

Not only would they need a great mech simulator engine, but they would also need to somehow produce a realistic flight engine for the fighter mode of the LAMs. Then they'd have to worry about transformation mechanics of the LAM and how this totally different combat vehicle will impact the balance of gameplay in this system, not to mention the gameplay elements unique to LAMs, like critical hits, locked mechanisms, crashing when in fighter mode, etc.

Seriously, it's a terribly impractical idea. If you stop and thought for just a moment before you posted this, I think you would have came to the same conclusion.

Edit: Sorry to take my frustration out on you, but since this forum started I've seen one too many ridiculous posts asking for unrealistic or impractical gameplay features. Honestly, I can't wait until this game is almost out and all the ultra-hard fans get pissy that what they wanted didn't ship with the game and they go away to rant or sulk. Then the game can be left for the rest of us who're just happy to have a new Mechwarrior game.

I think the underlying difficulty is the game engine and modeling more than anything else. They could short cut the "conversion" and just treat it as "spawning" the new form to reduce system demands or instead of physically flying the fastest mode were handled as a recharging "teleport" that spits you out in the intermediate form. It has 3 modes, one is just like any other mech, the other is effectively in a perpetual state of using "jump jets" which are already in the game and would just be a case of implementing a slower heat build. Flight mode is where its hardest; you should be able to move faster than any other mech's movement and there are considerations about the turning radius, altitiude, how high you can physically climb before hitting the edge of the battle zone. The flight controls don't even need to be that good given that LAM's aren't the greatest of aircraft either.

Game balance is easy when a unique capability comes on as fragile a mech. You're in the air and every one can see your soft underbelly and shoot at you. You're not well armored and you carry a relatively light set of weapons with limited weapon range. The main advantage is scouting and moving great distances quickly to support teammates... thats it.

Edited by Nill Zenath, 17 November 2011 - 10:53 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Thomas Hogarth, on 17 November 2011 - 09:57 AM, said:

Ah, Land-Air Mechs. Gonna have to vote "hell no".

What if we had 100 ton LAMs Tommy?

[Nill Zenath]

CoffiNail, on 17 November 2011 - 10:41 AM, said:

They so far have stated there is no Vehicle in games yet, just BattleMechs. So, it is a whole new can of worms allowing Mechs to fly.

LAM's are battlemechs. I don't get how a prohibition of non-battlemechs prohibits LAMs. Is it because they are a uniquely different experiance?-Every mech has its advantage and quirks, theirs are just so much more apparent.

[Joseph Mallan]

Nill they are also Aerospace fighters and Highbreds of both. Since no fighter are in game yet there can be no LAMs! I'd like to have 'em, but I'm also glad they are not in game. Poor Nova Cats! No LAM factory to raze to the ground!

[CoffiNail]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 November 2011 - 11:06 AM, said:

Nill they are also Aerospace fighters and Highbreds of both. Since no fighter are in game yet there can be no LAMs! I'd like to have 'em, but I'm also glad they are not in game. Poor Nova Cats! No LAM factory to raze to the ground!

^^ No ASF, no LAM They are not just a battlemech, they are a mix of ASF and Battlemech. If they give us ASF in the future then LAMs are possible.

[Joseph Mallan]

That is true Coff. But for now... No LAMs for you!

[Nill Zenath]

CoffiNail, on 17 November 2011 - 11:17 AM, said:

^^ No ASF, no LAM They are not just a battlemech, they are a mix of ASF and Battlemech. If they give us ASF in the future then LAMs are possible.

So far the only rational reason given for not implementing is game engine and system demand. I'm not arguing for ASF's... I think they should be left out. Just because LAMs are mix doesn't mean you need both things to implement it. LAMs simply have unique abilities and those could be implemented without ASF's being in the game.

For example, what if ASF-mode on LAM wasn't free control, flying around, and dog fighting... where it was implemented not as a controled mode of operating the mech but as a series of unique abilities like delivering a strafing run where click the ability and you click where you want to go and you fly to that location able shoot only along that straight path at a highspeed, where you return to the intermediate LAM mode upon the completion of the move and it has a recharge time. In that way its no different than a very fancy jumpjet that goes further and faster.

Joseph Mallan, on 17 November 2011 - 11:06 AM, said:

Nill they are also Aerospace fighters and Highbreds of both. Since no fighter are in game yet there can be no LAMs! I'd like to have 'em, but I'm also glad they are not in game.

I think you missed how I've said I think it should be implemented and that I don't think its necessary to have player piloted ASF just to have LAMs no matter how much of a hybrid LAMs are. Why can't the game developers say no vehicles but we will do LAMs, even if with that the other is easier.

[CoffiNail]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 November 2011 - 11:54 AM, said:

That is true Coff. But for now... No LAMs for you!

1 year?

[Redtail]

LAMs are way too Robotech for my taste.

Remember what cost us our cinematic single-player campaign to begin with?

[phelanjkell]

LAMS = A big no in my books, that being said it may be something to discuss on the NGNG Podcast... I know that old guy named Bombadil (Daeron) sure loves that retro stuff... haha

[CG Anastasius Focht]

The main problem with Land/Air Mechs is mapsize.
Once you convert to Aerospace fighter mode, the movement isnt measured in hex's but rather whole hex boards, You need really really large maps to use any aero vehicle.

i have 3 of them in my large scale collection, but since they are used for playing CBT outside, mapsize isnt an issue



But in a computer game there is a real problem with aerotech of any sort, within a few seconds they cover a huge area, as i said measured in mapsheets rather than hex's.
The maps would need to be tens of kilometers wide

And not just wide, the gamemap would need a ceiling suitable for aerotech as well, with just mechs the map only needs to be as deep as the jump capacity (plus a bit) of the mechs, Add aerotech and you need to deepen that considerably

Edited by [CG]Anastasius Focht, 17 November 2011 - 01:56 PM.