66 replies to this topic

[wolf on the tide]

depends on how the devs want to work the game mechanics and physics engine, most of which would be covered by angle of incidence (did mech fall on its back, side, front) LoS (line of sight) and available angle of traverse for any opperable weapons (bearing in mind a mech fall "should" also cause it's own damage)

as to post grounded (limited movement) ie changing angle for firing, first question should be ... has the mech got "proper arms" ..ie lower actuators and hands ?,
are they still functional?
are they capable of changing the mechs orientation? either by "one armed push-up" or by grabbing something and pulling itself to a differing facing?
and might you be able to use 1 functioning arm to achieve this while using the other to gain a fire arc? (huge assumption on my part that torso weapons could well be pointing at the wrong angle (ie towards the ground below the mech) maybe a head weapon could fire if it was on a "turret" type mounting?

(all idle speculation on my part... but i think i do know for sure. when i broke my leg.. i didn't feel like getting up and running about, if i'd broken both, i'm guessing i'd be even less inclined to do so)

i cant supply a link to the "AC20 Versus Locust leg" legal case, because i just made that up,
but i can leave you all to speculate on the ruling and the settlement.

[Blackstorm]

Legging Is for WINNERS!
I hate winners. Ever tried to play a table top or pen and paper, well, anything, with a WINNER?

It's like Chevy chase in community. Just cause you broke the game doesn't mean you should be rewarded-if you haven't seen the d and d episode, do it...anyway...

I'm all for skill being rewarded-so make it hard-movement, weapon fire, damage sustained, the lack of a targeting computer(very imortant) etc etc
And then if you can still group your gause boats slugs in tight enough to leg, more power too you.

But, one things is for sure, theMW2 and MW3 model will not work, period, MW4 has a better idea as did MC1.
functional, limited Mobility so as you can be repaired while your lance mates hold off the oncoming hoard will make for far More Dynamic play and more FUN.

This sirling bloke can eat a bag of D*ck as far as I'm Concerned, imagine being 12 and continually being killed by older and meaner players.
NO FUN. NO. GAME.

If you delight in killing newbs, you could be a serial killer. Just sayin.
Vargyrs post is better than this one, read it instead ^^.

Edited by Blackstorm, 16 November 2011 - 04:53 AM.

[zax]

Kudzu, on 15 November 2011 - 06:24 PM, said:

Lore is what separates Battletech from the other mecha titles out there. It's deep, rich, and compelling in it's own way. Lore, in fact, makes Battletech what it is. The further away you move from it the worse the games get-- see MW4 and the MA titles for examples. Those upset players can go back to trading derogatory comments about each others sexual preferences and race on Bnet and Counterstrike servers for all I care. Here's the thing, those of us who have played the sims that stuck closer to the TT rules than the major titles can tell you how much better it is, can you say the same having no basis for comparison?

Or, you know, they could try to make it closer to the TT and amazingly all those values work rather well and it clears up a lot of the usual complaints about the series.

I've played every Mechwarrior game since the first, so I do actually have some basis for comparison. MW4 actually did a lot of things right, which is why it was the most successful of the MW games. It obviously had problems, but it did the following things:
1. Greatly limited boating. Boating would have been extremely rare if players did not have the option to take clan mechs with omnipoints.
2. Greatly reduced legging as an effective tactic

The TT values do not work when players can aim their weapons at a target, meaning the TT values that you treasure so much are now irrelevant. The TT values are based on the probability of rolling certain numbers, meaning certain body parts do not need to be as robust because there is less of a chance that an enemy will hit them. When players are given the ability to aim at and hit specific body parts, those values no longer work.

What you TT gamers seem to be advocating is a system where players point their crosshairs at their opponent. It doesn't matter if they're aiming at the head, arm, torso or leg. After pulling the trigger, damage is randomly distributed on their enemy according to the all-mighty dice roll. Aside from the fact that it would make no sense to anybody but people with a hard-on for lore, it would greatly reduce the skill-level and add a huge element of total, random luck to the game. Ironically, it would also make the game MORE like the FPS games that you seem to despise so much, since there would then effectively be only one "body" to hit unless you got lucky and rolled a headshot.

TheRulesLawyer, on 15 November 2011 - 11:32 PM, said:

If that were true, nobody would be buying call of duty and battlefield 3. But, hey lets not look at far more popular franchises that do extremely well with this "fatal" flaw.

I have no idea at all what you mean by this, since randomized damage doesn't exist in the CoD or BF franchises either. There is a cone of fire, but that is not what TT games are advocating. People aim at a target, and if they're accurate, people hit that target. There are effectively two damage zones in almost all FPS games; the head and the body. If a sniper aims at someone's head, they will hit the head.

[zax]

Blackstorm, on 16 November 2011 - 04:41 AM, said:

Legging Is for WINNERS!
I hate winners. Ever tried to play a table top or pen and paper, well, anything, with a WINNER?

It's like Chevy chase in community. Just cause you broke the game doesn't mean you should be rewarded-if you haven't seen the d and d episode, do it...anyway...

It's called metagaming, and legging is not metagaming.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Metagaming

[Dihm]

Hodo, on 15 November 2011 - 06:19 PM, said:

I prefer the Multiplayer Battletech version.... 1 Leg destroyed you fall over, you can attempt to get up, by pressing G. Both legs gone, mech is disabled and cant stand.. BUT you can still fire one arm. Lose your center torso Internal structure. Your mech is trash. Nothing more than salvage. If your engine explodes due to massive amounts of center torso damage, or engine criticals, you mech isnt even salvage its just GONE. Nothing more fun than legging a opponent who has whined all day in the forums about something and leaving him till last, Then sitting just out of his reach and picking off parts of his mech till he ejects.

This is my preferred legging system, though with both legs destroyed there may need to be tweaks, like the "sit up" idea discussed earlier, essentially making you a stationary turret. Legging a mech shouldn't mean that the leg is exploded/vaporized/sheered off, just damaged beyond functioning as more than a hunk of metal.

As far as when a mech is "destroyed" and what that means to salvage... I reserve my thoughts on that till we have some clue of how the monetary system will work in the game. How we get paid, what we get for salvage. If we're having to spend millions and millions of credits every time our mech gets destroyed (thus it is gone form our garage), there better be a safety net. You'll need a free mech that players always have access to, otherwise they'll have no way of gaining enough money (since they have no more mechs) to buy a mech.

Edited by Dihm, 16 November 2011 - 06:08 AM.

[Kudzu]

zax, on 16 November 2011 - 05:22 AM, said:

I've played every Mechwarrior game since the first, so I do actually have some basis for comparison. MW4 actually did a lot of things right, which is why it was the most successful of the MW games. It obviously had problems, but it did the following things:
1. Greatly limited boating. Boating would have been extremely rare if players did not have the option to take clan mechs with omnipoints.
2. Greatly reduced legging as an effective tactic

The TT values do not work when players can aim their weapons at a target, meaning the TT values that you treasure so much are now irrelevant. The TT values are based on the probability of rolling certain numbers, meaning certain body parts do not need to be as robust because there is less of a chance that an enemy will hit them. When players are given the ability to aim at and hit specific body parts, those values no longer work.

What you TT gamers seem to be advocating is a system where players point their crosshairs at their opponent. It doesn't matter if they're aiming at the head, arm, torso or leg. After pulling the trigger, damage is randomly distributed on their enemy according to the all-mighty dice roll. Aside from the fact that it would make no sense to anybody but people with a hard-on for lore, it would greatly reduce the skill-level and add a huge element of total, random luck to the game. Ironically, it would also make the game MORE like the FPS games that you seem to despise so much, since there would then effectively be only one "body" to hit unless you got lucky and rolled a headshot.


I have no idea at all what you mean by this, since randomized damage doesn't exist in the CoD or BF franchises either. There is a cone of fire, but that is not what TT games are advocating. People aim at a target, and if they're accurate, people hit that target. There are effectively two damage zones in almost all FPS games; the head and the body. If a sniper aims at someone's head, they will hit the head.

Except for the half dozen plus threads where I and other TT players are actively advocating for an expanding reticule cone of fire system based on your mech's movement, heat, range from target, and system damage.

Quick examples:
http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__33019
http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__27205
http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__29214
http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__29742
http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__30562
http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__32926


You even posted in some of these, pay attention.

[guardian wolf]

jezebel, on 14 November 2011 - 09:05 PM, said:

Not true - Sirlin does not encourage cheating.
He does, however, encourage performing to the absolute pinnacle within the established rules of the given game. He encourages constant improvement, and he encourages avoiding stagnation/plateauing. What is not respectable about trying to constantly improve in everything you attempt?

I guess this deviates from the legging/disabling discussion ... sortof. But the "legging/disablement" debate has been in this community so long that it's become inseparable from the "fair play" discussion.

I think that there are two kinds of gamers.
- players who try to operate to their maximum potential (IE, win). This is how they have fun.
- players who expect others to handicap themselves, within a mental construct of additional rules. These people only have fun if others play within those imaginary rules.
Edit: Maybe there's a third. The "I don't care, just let me shoot stuff" gamer.

Both of them have lives. Both of them have fun playing their chosen game.
One of them wins.

I don't mean to be a firebrand, here. I'm just saying - today, it's legging. I'm sure if the devs fix the ancient mythical "legging problem," a new topic will crop up to kvetch about. Maybe cat-napping. Maybe sniping. Maybe looking at your opponent cross-eyed. All I'm trying to say is, whatever ends up happening, play the game to your pinnacle. Don't make up imaginary "fair/honorable" rules to hold against anyone who is successful.

Try it against me, you will regret it. You may get my legs, but my PPC will get your face. Better hope we're not on opposing sides, or I'll make you my *****.