46 replies to this topic

[Xtrekker]

MWLL had some cool ammo cook-off effects. The missiles were awesome. They'd pop off and fly out for a short distance in a squirrely pattern. I remember aiming for ammo bins just to see the effect. As I recall it was one volunteer guy handling those effects, so...not sure why PGI can't do it.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

[MannishBoy]

I just want to have more of a visual indicator of which leg is blown out if you kill a leg. Right now, I have to generally look at the paper doll, then translate in my head which way the guy is facing. I want the dead leg on fire, covered in oil, or something clearly visible if they can't actually get blown off.

[Xtrekker]

Xtrekker, on 13 October 2014 - 04:45 PM, said:

MWLL had some cool ammo cook-off effects. The missiles were awesome. They'd pop off and fly out for a short distance in a squirrely pattern. I remember aiming for ammo bins just to see the effect. As I recall it was one volunteer guy handling those effects, so...not sure why PGI can't do it.

Here you go, right at 4:10 you can see the missile cook-off effect.

https://www.youtube....yNAwUUsc0#t=240

And again at 4:40...

https://www.youtube....yNAwUUsc0#t=270

[Johnny Z]

Yoseful Mallad, on 13 October 2014 - 02:51 PM, said:

oh i know we "see" them. But im saying we need greater variations of them and explosions that not only harm the mech the explosion happens in, but can possibly harm other mechs in a "so many" meter area "if too close" to the mech that has the explosion happen.

Tell me something I dont know.

+1 for reactors going critical and a small mushroom cloud thats worth of the title Mechwarrior!!!! Well maybe a medium sized mushroom cloud. Make it a 5% or even 2% chance! Throw us a bone here.

Make it a stealth addition on top!!

I can already see the chat now. "^%&$& *&#^#^@ @^#^@#&*$ @*#&$^ did you see that?"

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 October 2014 - 05:18 PM.

[Greziz]

I would like to see the catastrophic meltdowns that we are all so used to in mechwarrior IF you COCKPIT kill them.

The reason? Well the controls are are jacked and the engine is mostly unharmed but no longer being regulated and it meltdown into a big BOOM! Maybe like 100-200 meters of 10-20 dmg? Obviously it wouldn't be instant but like 5-10 seconds after the hit?

Maybe even get an achievement for killing some one with the explosion call it collateral?

[MauttyKoray]

Yoseful Mallad, on 13 October 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Im not talking about Mech core meltdowns as the Devs already said that would not happen.

I mean Ammo explosions.

Yes we already have ammo explosions in the game and you do have them happen, but we need different levels of explosions.

For example, If a missile mech is caring 6 tons of ammo and something causes that Ammo to cook off, chance hit by enemy fire, pilot error and running too hot... whatever! If 6 tons of any ammo cooks off, why dont we see a mech explosion that rips throughout the mech?

Yes we have some light and mediums that can be missile mechs but for the most part, your dedicated big boy missile mechs are in the heavy and assault classes. And whats usually the best way to kill them? Get within their minimum range where they cant be that effective right? Now... what if you run up on a missile or even ballistic boat that WE ALL KNOW is filled to the brim with as much ammo as they can carry, and you are hugging it and laying into it and kill it? BUT... there is that chance that you hit his ammo and a catastrophic explosion ripps through him and the explosion can actually do damage to you or even take you down?

Would you not think twice before ALWAYS getting in close to kill that missile or ballistic boat?

I think different levels of explosions in the game, like engine, Ammo or even flamer fuel should be present and have a chance to happen and even do damage to other mechs too close to the explosion.

People brawl and HUG each other because there are NO real threats or repercussions for doing so. No explosions to do damage to anyone caught in the blast and no knockdowns.

Put these two things in the game and watch how fast the brawling tactics change up and how cautious some people get with the smash mouth brawling we see SOOOOO MUCH OF!

Ammo explosion force dependant upon ammo tonnage remaining in mech section (rounded up to nearest tonnage for each ammo type) creating not only a great visual effect but outward damage above a threshold and increasing beyond that would be pretty great. I'd love to hear PGI's opinion on something like this.

[Lynx7725]

But oh so pretty...



More badda boom is always interesting.

Whether or not the guy dry humping the exploder should take damage... well....

[Tincan Nightmare]

Yoseful Mallad, on 13 October 2014 - 04:31 PM, said:

let me give you a lesson in physics. I'm an industrial inspector for the US government. I test welds and armor types of different military vehicles. Have you seen what a crude but effective IED can and will do to a APC or a light combat vehicle? I have, its not a nice sight. Now have you seen a M1 Abrams tank filled with 40 to 50+ high penetration rounds and 500 gallons of fuel take a hit that cooks off its ammo? Iv seen that very ammo and concussive force of the explosion rip through a second tank sitting next to it. Physics is a *****!

The second tank had 3 of the exploding tank's HP rounds rip into its side, disabling its track and engine and would have killed crew in the second tank. So yes, it does happen.

I was not suggesting it happen ALL THE TIME in the game but there should be a chance for it.

And for those worried that someone would use a mech as a kamikaze mech, that's why I suggested to put knockdown a back in. Mech should fall and should be able to be knocked down. And if someone was willing to try this tactic, I say let them. More times than not, the ammo would not cook off by way of ramming. But ramming to an extent is and should be a viable tactic. In cannon Battletech/MW lore, factions like Liao had fanatical units that did just this.

The Abrams carries its ammo in an armored storage unit that has blow off panels designed to vent any explosion upwards away from the crew (kinda like CASE in MWO). During Desert Storm, there was one Abrams that got bogged down and the decision was made to destory it in place. 3 shots later from a friendly Abrams at close range, they retrieved the tank and brought it back to base as it wasn't destroyed, and even sent the turret back home for study. So how did this ammo explosion occur and damage a tank next to it, especially as the rounds are stored pointing upwards so how did 3 shoot sideways to hit another tank?

And considering how many times I've had to deal with infantile players deciding how hilarious it is to shoot their own team at the begining of a match, I'd rather not tempt fate by giving them the chance to explode next to me as well. Kamikaze tactics should be left out of MWO.

[Monkey Lover]

I love to see damage done to other mechs standing around them

[Dock Steward]

Tincan Nightmare, on 13 October 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

The Abrams carries its ammo in an armored storage unit that has blow off panels designed to vent any explosion upwards away from the crew (kinda like CASE in MWO). During Desert Storm, there was one Abrams that got bogged down and the decision was made to destory it in place. 3 shots later from a friendly Abrams at close range, they retrieved the tank and brought it back to base as it wasn't destroyed, and even sent the turret back home for study. So how did this ammo explosion occur and damage a tank next to it, especially as the rounds are stored pointing upwards so how did 3 shoot sideways to hit another tank?

And considering how many times I've had to deal with infantile players deciding how hilarious it is to shoot their own team at the begining of a match, I'd rather not tempt fate by giving them the chance to explode next to me as well. Kamikaze tactics should be left out of MWO.

Abrams tanks aren't powered by reactors. I like to imagine that the ammo explosion is really just the trigger and the explosion that kills the mech is the core. Honestly, if you have to rationalize the explosion, you're missing the point.

[MauttyKoray]

Dock Steward, on 13 October 2014 - 09:05 PM, said:

Abrams tanks aren't powered by reactors. I like to imagine that the ammo explosion is really just the trigger and the explosion that kills the mech is the core. Honestly, if you have to rationalize the explosion, you're missing the point.

The explosion that kills the mech is DEFINITELY not the core. If it were, it would be likely that all the mechs in that match would be destroyed from the core meltdown as a result of its meltdown. From what I can tell of the lore I've read, core meltdowns are very rare and extremely catastrophic if they occur.

[Dock Steward]

MauttyKoray, on 13 October 2014 - 09:09 PM, said:

The explosion that kills the mech is DEFINITELY not the core. If it were, it would be likely that all the mechs in that match would be destroyed from the core meltdown as a result of its meltdown. From what I can tell of the lore I've read, core meltdowns are very rare and extremely catastrophic if they occur.

You're missing the point too.

[Whatzituyah]

What about this as an explosion?



It will bring back some memories.

Edited by Whatzituyah, 13 October 2014 - 09:16 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Dock Steward, on 13 October 2014 - 09:05 PM, said:

Abrams tanks aren't powered by reactors. I like to imagine that the ammo explosion is really just the trigger and the explosion that kills the mech is the core. Honestly, if you have to rationalize the explosion, you're missing the point.

Of course their missing the point, they are trolling making stuff up as they go regardless if it is reasonable or not in a completely fictional game.

Look at the game Fallout 3 for example. Those cars went boom and it was even more unrealistic but it added to the game. Whats being talked about here is a rare occurance that would add some realism and variety to the game. These mechs are powerfull machines that shouldnt always just fall over like nothing.

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 October 2014 - 09:21 PM.

[Dock Steward]

Whatzituyah, on 13 October 2014 - 09:16 PM, said:

What about this as an explosion?



It will bring back some memories.

Is it exploding, or time traveling?

[Whatzituyah]

Dock Steward, on 13 October 2014 - 09:19 PM, said:

Is it exploding, or time traveling?

http://www.sarna.net...i/Fusion_Engine

Quote

Unlike popular belief, there is absolutely no risk of a fusion engine accidentally becoming a nuclear weapon. There have been a number of cases of fusion engines being "over revved" and exploding with devastating force, but this is more akin to a boiler explosion than a true nuclear explosion. More often a destroyed engine will be punctured by weapons fire. Because the plasma is held in a vacuum chamber (to isolate the superheated plasma from the cold walls of the reactor; contact with the walls would super-chill the plasma below fusion temperatures), a punctured reactor can suck in air where the air is superheated. Normal thermal expansion of the air causes the air to burst out in a brilliant lightshow often mistaken for a "nuclear explosion". This thermal expansion damages anything within 90 meters of the destroyed 'Mech.

So yeah a fusion engine explosion.

Edited by Whatzituyah, 13 October 2014 - 09:22 PM.

[Dock Steward]

Whatzituyah, on 13 October 2014 - 09:21 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net...i/Fusion_Engine



So yeah a fusion engine explosion.

Guys, the point is EXPLOSIONS ARE AWESOME AND WE WANT MOAR! I don't care how you have to explain it to yourselves.

The pilot was strapped with a bomb and told his wife that if his mech lost its left leg one more time, he was just going to kill himself and anyone in a five block radius.

A chemical reaction between the ammo ignitor and the coolant created a shock wave of epic proportions.

Nanobots are possessed by the devil and also...KABLAAAAAMMM!!


It doesn't matter why. More explosions would be amazing.

EDIT: Good call on the link, though

Edited by Dock Steward, 13 October 2014 - 09:29 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

Some people are so unbelievably paranoid when it comes to griefing. This is why we can't have nice things.

"No because then people would form 12-man teams of Locusts with 10 tons of ammo each, creating a chain reaction that would destroy teh whole univarse!"

How about this? When someone suggests an idea, try to imagine all the ways that would make this idea work, instead of the one worst case scenario that would make it not work. For example, don't let mechs equip AC20 ammo unless they have an AC20. Boom. No more kamikaze Locusts. NEXT!

[SweetJackal]

Yoseful Mallad, on 13 October 2014 - 04:31 PM, said:

let me give you a lesson in physics. I'm an industrial inspector for the US government. I test welds and armor types of different military vehicles. Have you seen what a crude but effective IED can and will do to a APC or a light combat vehicle? I have, its not a nice sight. Now have you seen a M1 Abrams tank filled with 40 to 50+ high penetration rounds and 500 gallons of fuel take a hit that cooks off its ammo? Iv seen that very ammo and concussive force of the explosion rip through a second tank sitting next to it. Physics is a *****!

The second tank had 3 of the exploding tank's HP rounds rip into its side, disabling its track and engine and would have killed crew in the second tank. So yes, it does happen.

I was not suggesting it happen ALL THE TIME in the game but there should be a chance for it.

And for those worried that someone would use a mech as a kamikaze mech, that's why I suggested to put knockdown a back in. Mech should fall and should be able to be knocked down. And if someone was willing to try this tactic, I say let them. More times than not, the ammo would not cook off by way of ramming. But ramming to an extent is and should be a viable tactic. In cannon Battletech/MW lore, factions like Liao had fanatical units that did just this.

Congratulations on starting this argument comparing what happens to a lightly armored combat vehicle. Your entire point sits on that the cooked rounds actually hit the second tank. Correct me if I am wrong but I am also assuming that they weren't HEAT rounds and instead you are referring to high kinetic rounds? High Penetration rounds isn't being clear enough for me.

If just general explosives where effective against tanks then we would be hearing losses of tanks due to cars filed with explosives plowing into them and detonating. Unshaped explosive charges? Heavily armored combat vehicles like tanks don't care.

Alistair Winter, on 13 October 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

Some people are so unbelievably paranoid when it comes to griefing. This is why we can't have nice things.

"No because then people would form 12-man teams of Locusts with 10 tons of ammo each, creating a chain reaction that would destroy teh whole univarse!"

How about this? When someone suggests an idea, try to imagine all the ways that would make this idea work, instead of the one worst case scenario that would make it not work. For example, don't let mechs equip AC20 ammo unless they have an AC20. Boom. No more kamikaze Locusts. NEXT!

Never said anything about 12 mans forming of it, telling you what griefing it may promote. Your solution still does nothing to address how this mechanic would randomly punish mechs built for CQC in a game that has had Long Range weapons being the dominant choice for a long, long time.

Whatzituyah, on 13 October 2014 - 09:21 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net...i/Fusion_Engine



So yeah a fusion engine explosion.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that light show only able to deal damage to lighter armored units, like non-power armored infantry?

Tincan Nightmare, on 13 October 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

The Abrams carries its ammo in an armored storage unit that has blow off panels designed to vent any explosion upwards away from the crew (kinda like CASE in MWO). During Desert Storm, there was one Abrams that got bogged down and the decision was made to destory it in place. 3 shots later from a friendly Abrams at close range, they retrieved the tank and brought it back to base as it wasn't destroyed, and even sent the turret back home for study. So how did this ammo explosion occur and damage a tank next to it, especially as the rounds are stored pointing upwards so how did 3 shoot sideways to hit another tank?

And considering how many times I've had to deal with infantile players deciding how hilarious it is to shoot their own team at the begining of a match, I'd rather not tempt fate by giving them the chance to explode next to me as well. Kamikaze tactics should be left out of MWO.

Thank you. The entire "3 rounds of cooked off ammo struck the second tank" didn't sound right to me.

Edited by SuckyJack, 13 October 2014 - 11:11 PM.