134 replies to this topic

[Paladin Brewer]

Correct me if Im wrong, but the pilot is wearing a neuro-helmet which feeds into the gyro, and it is the pilot's sense of balance that actually helps keep the mech upright. So assuming everyone has the balance to stand on one leg, a mech should also be able to stand on one.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Paladin Brewer, on 22 November 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

Correct me if Im wrong, but the pilot is wearing a neuro-helmet which feeds into the gyro, and it is the pilot's sense of balance that actually helps keep the mech upright. So assuming everyone has the balance to stand on one leg, a Mech should also be able to stand on one.

Not if the Mech's hips are splayed out wider than it's shoulders. Humans can balance on one leg because we have ball-and-socket hip joints and each one of our legs are "designed and rated" to handle the weight of a human while running uphill wearing a backpack and carrying a rifle. Mech legs aren't as redundant, articulate, nor placed as closely to the lateral center of mass, as human legs. But, we are digressing.

The whole point of this conversation, I guess, isn't one of "A Mech should topple if it get's a leg blown off" because it's the wrong Question. I appologize for leading this thread astray. I guess the real question should be "Should a Mech face the possibility of leg-loss during battle?" That question has to be answered first [or the rest of the discussion could be rendered moot]. Once we know if leg-loss is enabled, then we can talk about Mechs toppling. I guess my assertion that "a Mech that looses its leg should fall over and continue firing" is premature, and just my opinion for that kind of scenario.

So, I'll backtrack to the beginning and say that: "I believe a Mech should progressively slow down while accumulating leg damage, culminating in catastrophic limb failure (i.e. complete buckling) and subsequent topplage of the Mech, while leaving the Mech in such a state that it can return fire and possibly exhibit torso rotation [assuming at least one functional anthropomorphic arm remains]. This is in contrast to the idea that a Mech's legs should be able to hold a Mech upright upon critical leg damage."

[Alizabeth Aijou]

Quote

Humans can balance on one leg because we have ball-and-socket hip joints and each one of our legs are "designed and rated" to handle the weight of a human while running uphill wearing a backpack and carrying a rifle.

Wow, never thought that Evolution (or god, if you prefer) would've known that we'd be doing that.

Quote

The whole point of this conversation, I guess, isn't one of "A Mech should topple if it get's a leg blown off" because it's the wrong Question. I appologize for leading this thread astray. I guess the real question should be "Should a Mech face the possibility of leg-loss during battle?" That question has to be answered first [or the rest of the discussion could be rendered moot]. Once we know if leg-loss is enabled, then we can talk about Mechs toppling. I guess my assertion that "a Mech that looses its leg should fall over and continue firing" is premature, and just my opinion for that kind of scenario.

Rules say that they can stand on 1 leg and still shuffle around a bit (only 1 walk MP/turn).
Gotta be some fluff around somewhere that supports that rule.

[Gaius Cavadus]

Honestly, MWO should be modeling and tracking multiple sections of each limb including joints. In MWO a leg should no longer be just a leg, it should be a foot, calf, thigh, ankle, knee, hip joint, and the actuators for each joint.

If we get another MW game that uses the traditional 11 section model (RL, LL, RA, LA, RT, CT, LT, Cockpit, RRT, RCT, RLT) I'm gonna be kinda ******.

Edited by Cavadus, 22 November 2011 - 04:18 PM.

[MaddMaxx]

Here is great pair of examples of how a Mech with a damaged leg should act.

@2:06 and then again 2:39 (the firefly)

Limping Mechs

Edited by MaddMaxx, 22 November 2011 - 06:14 PM.

[ManDaisy]

ahh but what if it were missing the leg? Damaged and missing.. two different things. Lol at the man screams. 1:33 1:37 2:16

Edited by ManDaisy, 22 November 2011 - 08:02 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Yes, "leg damage," but what if that damage were exacerbated to the point of [what would cause] complete failure? What if the knee joint is hit by a Gauss slug that penetrates clean through the hinge and out the other side. Should the leg buckle and render the chassis mostly immobile, or should damage be limited to what is seen in the video where nothing more than limping occurs?

*That* is the crux of this discussion. Many people say we should limit leg damage to where the Mech is still slightly mobile as per Table Top rules, and that implies limping... which further implies protecting legs from catastrophic failure. Others say that motion can be achieved by crawling, but that would be difficult to implement in a real game. Others, like myself, feel that strict adherence to TT rules doesn't have to be the answer, and it won't always make a great video game. Table Top is turn-based strategy, Mechwarrior Online is a Real-Time Strategy/Sim. It's fast-paced: the TT definition for "Combat Maneuvers" doesn't exactly match a physics engine programmer's definition of Combat Maneuvers, nor a Mech pilot's.

I would like to see how many people want leg damage limited to upright, walking Mechs, and how many people would like to see limb failure as an option. I, for one, would love to see my opponents literally fall before the might of my weapons.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 22 November 2011 - 08:08 PM.

[ManDaisy]

I would like to point out that in Table Top I remember,you can only stand on a miracle roll. I cant remember any instance where you could move if you were missing a leg. You could change facing when prone, but move? Nope not unless you wanted to jump and fall the same turn.

Edited by ManDaisy, 22 November 2011 - 08:15 PM.

[UncleKulikov]

MaddMaxx, on 22 November 2011 - 06:12 PM, said:

Here is great pair of examples of how a Mech with a damaged leg should act.

@2:06 and then again 2:39 (the firefly)

Limping Mechs

I know it's not related, but you should be able to equip missiles that are guided by video like the Vulture fired at the end. Mouse would control the missile, but you couldn't see from your cockpit anymore so it would be a tradeoff.

Edited by UncleKulikov, 22 November 2011 - 10:28 PM.

[Red Beard]

UncleKulikov, on 22 November 2011 - 10:27 PM, said:

I know it's not related, but you should be able to equip missiles that are guided by video like the Vulture fired at the end. Mouse would control the missile, but you couldn't see from your cockpit anymore so it would be a tradeoff.

Hmm...that WOULD be rather interesting. I kind of like that idea.

[feor]

ManDaisy, on 22 November 2011 - 08:14 PM, said:

I would like to point out that in Table Top I remember,you can only stand on a miracle roll. I cant remember any instance where you could move if you were missing a leg. You could change facing when prone, but move? Nope not unless you wanted to jump and fall the same turn.

I thought it was just "you have 1 MP from crawling" If you want to use that MP to turn, so be it, if you want to use it to move forward one hex, more power to ya.

But yeah, like I've said many times I don't think anyone's advocating a direct copy & paste of the TT rules into MW:O, that just wouldn't work. But the ideas behind the rules and the concepts they represent should definitely be carried across as much as the technology allows for.

And yeah, even with widely splayed hips mechs can still stand on one leg, though it may be an ordeal, the example I cited of Victor Steiner-Davion doing it in a Daishi/Dire Wolf required him to tilt his torso almost 45deg relative to the remaining leg, and throw both his arms as far to the side with the remaining leg as possible. (hence having to finish the guy off with Torso mount weaponry)

[MaddMaxx]

Here is my thoughts on missing legs.

The Mechs leg is built such that actuators and myomer within the solid steel superstructure allowing it to flex and move similar to a human design. It is then covered with armored plates that are composed of super tough materials. If I am attacked and the enemy feels a need to take the time to strip the Armor and then damage the actuators, I will still have the solid steel superstructure left to limp around on.

Given the time he/she spent focused on doing that, I will have stripped his/her Mech of its armaments and will limp around finishing the job unless they withdraw.

Now if that enemy can run in, take 2-3 shots and remove the leg(s) of my Mech then I will probably go back to the game I played the 3 years prior and that would be a down right shame.

Don't you think?

Edited by MaddMaxx, 23 November 2011 - 11:47 AM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I think a different outcome would result: After stripping the armor and damaging the actuators, the now-uncontrolled hinge would either swing freely like an athlete experiencing torn tendons and fail to support weight, or the actuator itself would rip apart like an athlete experiencing torn ligaments and buckle, thereby failing to support weight.

The solid-steel architecture would not help to keep the damaged joints from freely swinging upon a critical joint hit. Now, if the critical damage was restricted to a solid segment of leg, then the steel architecture would be the only thing to support the Mech but all down-stream actuators would fail since their control mechanism got severed.

Breaking leg damage down into leg sections is not compatible with the 11-segment damage scheme, so we'd need a Dev's input to continue down this path..

[Felicitatem Parco]

Perhaps a collapsed leg could result from a Mech with its left leg damaged so badly that the Mech is now upright, but immobile, but it's then further attacked in that same leg until it collapses. I believe the gradual-loss-of-function scheme should end in leg collapse, rather than turning legs into "invincible crutches."

I didn't like Mechwarrior 4 due to the invincible legs scheme they implemented; you can't hobble on a leg that's received a dozen gauss rounds and has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 23 November 2011 - 01:02 PM.

[MaddMaxx]

Not an "invincible crutch" at all. Just that it would take a lot of time and effort to remove a leg such that the Mech collapses. In the mean time I would have the chance to Core his stupid ****.

Shoot my leg, but I will shoot your weapons systems. Let's see who wins?

Edited by MaddMaxx, 23 November 2011 - 01:13 PM.

[feor]

Like I said, there's two ways for it to happen. The first is a leg damaged to destruction. In this case it should become the MW4 style hobble. This represents continual damage happening to the leg until the actuators fail, or enough myomar is severed that it can no longer flex, and it locks in place.

However, there should always be a chance (getting higher the less armour there is on the leg) of coring an actuator having a joint go "free" like Prosperity Park describes, or otherwise gets damaged in such a way as to leave it unable to support the mech's weight. (for ease of animation probably all shown in game as the mech's leg being blown off) and in this case the mech should fall over, and be restricted to crawling or propping itself up to fire, or somehow getting back up (with a good chance of falling) to balance on one leg while being unable to move.

[rollermint]

Yea, lets make this game into legging fests of "LOL who can alpha strike the enemy's legs first?".

Just because it is "realistic" or because it happened in another earlier form does not mean good gameplay.

Perhaps you should petition being able to shoot the mech pilot in the cockpit dead and players are then forced to recreate another toon. Because, you know, mechwarriors actually die in the BT lore and its realistic.

[ManDaisy]

Omg for once I find someone who completely agrees with me! Rollermint I applaud your support of legging. Also great idea making cockpit shots permanent pilot death! We should all strive for the most realistic game we can get.

But seriously I dont think alpha striking the legs will be much of a problem if they make us stick to stock designs, or fix lasers so that they do damage over time as a laser should instead of instantly. Also, if you dont like legging you might as well be driving a tank.

Edited by ManDaisy, 23 November 2011 - 08:35 PM.

[feor]

rollermint, on 23 November 2011 - 07:53 PM, said:

Yea, lets make this game into legging fests of "LOL who can alpha strike the enemy's legs first?".

Just because it is "realistic" or because it happened in another earlier form does not mean good gameplay.

Perhaps you should petition being able to shoot the mech pilot in the cockpit dead and players are then forced to recreate another toon. Because, you know, mechwarriors actually die in the BT lore and its realistic.

Who said anything about a legging fest? Sure you can alpha strike the legs, and frankly, that's a really good idea overall, when you're fighting a tank, you aim for the treads, if you're fighting a mech, aim for the legs.

However, Loss of a leg shouldn't result in the loss of the mech. You blast the living bejeebus out of an Atlas and it loses a leg. You walk up to it for the Coup-de-gras, only to have it prop itself up with an army and put an AC/20 round through your knee, leaving you in the same predicament as it is.

On top of that hitting the legs can be a pain in the butt, see, they should be always moving, which means that you alpha strike, and some of your shots from that alpha will probably hit, and you're critically overheating and shutting down, at which point ALL of his shots into your torso will hit.

[Xhaleon]

feor, on 23 November 2011 - 09:28 PM, said:

You walk up to it for the Coup-de-gras, only to have it prop itself up with an army and put an AC/20 round through your knee

Mr. Atlas, Tactical Genius Extraordinaire!