87 replies to this topic

[Baron Kreight]

Well how about this.

[Grajo]

Viper Centurion, on 22 November 2011 - 09:05 AM, said:

Anyone who ever played Mechwarrior 4 Mercenaries/Vengeance mostly know that a single Flea (20 Tons) VS Atlas (100 Tons) will win againts the Atlas, because the Atlas can't target the Flea if it stick to the Atlas feet (The Atlas unable to rotate his torso Y Axis to shoot the small size Flea) and the Flea can shoot the Atlas legs till both destroyed without fear and the Atlas will blow up, judging from this, can Piranha Games prevent this happen in MWO?

I was thinking about it and laughing.

The atlas only have to land a kick and the fun will continue (shame that there isn´t any melee in MWO).

[Yankee77]

I'm not sure how valid a scenario this is at all.

Nobody deploys assault mechs on their own. They're not meant to be singlehanded engines of death and destruction.

Assault mechs are highly armoured concentrations of firepower meant to punch a hole in the enemy lines so it can be exploited by faster units, or conversely hold an important position long enough for the more mobile mechs to reinforce it. Regardless, Assault mechs are never deployed alone. They have lance mates, and should never find themselves on their own.

Sure, 1 light mech might be able to outmaneuver an assault and wittle it to death... but 2 light mechs will get smoked by 2 assault mechs any day of the week. Any skilled lance will not allow a light mech to harass an assault to death.

Assault mechs are basically like WWII Heavy Tanks, such as the Tiger (forget WOT here, talking real world here). They bring their firepower to bear where the concentration of force needs to be achieved, with lighter elements either exploiting the the outcome.

Of course, historically the concept of light/medium/heavy tanks gave way to the Main Battle Tank (mostly as technical advances made the advantages of light and heavy tanks obsolete), but I guess mech development returned to that doctrine (probably because it's more fun ).

Itkovian

[Purlana]

If they had melee we could just swat the light mechs away..

[Skoll Lokeson]

Use teamwork and combined arms tactics.

I currently play a lot of battlefield and tanks get owned by infantry all the time, unless they are supported by friendly infantry. Attack helicopters get get shot down by jets unless they they are protected by friendly fighters. Assaults (riflemen) and recon players are completely dependent on AT-units to protect against armored vehicles. I'ts not a problem that every unit/class can't solve every problem, it's what makes role warfare possible and teamwork interesting. I personally don't find games that allows you to solve every problem with a hammer to be very challenging or interesting.

I hope MWO isn't going to be stuck on easy mode when it comes to tactics and teamwork.

Edited by Skoll Lokeson, 12 July 2012 - 07:06 AM.

[Wydell]

Yeach, on 22 November 2011 - 11:54 AM, said:

And how is this bad. Its like a rock-scissors-paper approach
Light > Assault
Medium > Light
Heavy > Medium
Assault > Heavy

But in reality in MW4 although 1v1 a light mech can run circles and kill an assault mech based on attrition, when there are more mechs and better coordination, the assault mechs will beat the light mechs most of the time.

It's never that simple, and breaking it down to a rockpaperscissors setup is misleading. I actually like the idea of a light taking on a heavy or assault and being able to inflict serious damage or even destruction, but being able to crowd up like that would be cheap if there wasn't a risk of damage from getting kicked by something 60-90 tons heavier then it is.

While there are weapons systems IRL that actually have a minimum firing distance (sometimes dependent on the mount itself), It doesn't really make sense in this case, to not be able to target something nearly at your feet, at least with the arm mounted weapons. It's part of the reason battlemechs are shaped like people, for the flexibility that body form provides.

[Wydell]

Itkovian, on 12 July 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

Of course, historically the concept of light/medium/heavy tanks gave way to the Main Battle Tank (mostly as technical advances made the advantages of light and heavy tanks obsolete), but I guess mech development returned to that doctrine (probably because it's more fun ).

Itkovian

Actually, the roles outside of the MBT are taken up by Bradleys, HMMWVs, Bearcats and MRAPS. They didn't disappear, they specialized.

[Blitzstop]

Hohiro Kurita, on 22 November 2011 - 09:22 AM, said:

Yes and fortunately MW4 was literally the worst BT/MW game ever made - including MechAssault 1 and 2. That happened in MW3 and MW2 as well, but it isn't unrealistic. If you are a good enough pilot, a medium mech (not sure about a light - maybe) can take down an assault mech with some effort.

i dissagree. MW4 was a rush job no doubt. Mechassault however should have been sacked instead of released. it was not even canon on tech. MW4 was at least canon.

[WrentheFaceless]

Good thing this is a team game and you can have your buddies take out that pesky Light Mech so you can light up the rest of the enemy team.

[High Roll]

EDMW CSN, on 22 November 2011 - 09:52 AM, said:

If you hate lights, instead of begging devs to prevent lights from raping assaults, train up to be a proper light pilot then. When you realized you can pretty much regularly kill light mech players in multiplayer with a light yourself, you can easily stand toe to toe or outright destroy any other heavier classes. Even if you can't shoot straight in a light at least get handy with a narc, you will help your LRM boats kill many mechs far more than your tonnage.

So basicly if I got this you are recomending that the solution to light mechs being virtualy unkillabe by a larger mech is only use light mechs?

I do have a very real concern about the potential for light mechs to dominate combat.

In a game like MWo there are essentially three forms of defence.

1) chassis armor (light mechs lack this compared to heavyer chassis)
2) Small target profile (less area is less target light mech have this)
3) Mobility (not being in fire arc is not being hit.Light mechs benifit most from this)

Then there is info warfare and how sensors appear to work (as observed from videos).A mech remains detected only as long as someone has LoS to it.Light mech mobility grants them the ability to exploit this sensor limitation by being capable of rapid movement and redeployment.This allows light mechs to potentially have the most time off sensors,effectivly invisable to the enemy.A huge advantage.
And the best means of countering this is of course is to use light mechs for scouts so another potential reason larger mechs are not as useful.

Player will gravitate to whatever has the edge in winning and as I see it it may very well be drops with all light mechs.

[Yankee77]

Wydell, on 12 July 2012 - 07:15 AM, said:

Actually, the roles outside of the MBT are taken up by Bradleys, HMMWVs, Bearcats and MRAPS. They didn't disappear, they specialized.

Not really, WWII had equivalent vehicles back then, from which the above vehicles are descended. APCs, IFVs and light scout vehicles are not a new innovation and were part of maneuver warfare doctrine in WWII.

Tank doctrine at the time did have light/medium/heavy tanks, and the roles these accomplished were basically all merged in the MBT. Light tanks, for example, were generally seen as highly mobile tanks that could exploit the breakthroughs created by heavy tanks. As the concept of the MBT emerged - a tank practically as well protected (though not through pure weight of metal) and armed as a heavy tank but still extremely fast - the traditional roles of the light and heavy tank vanished.

Granted, there are still light tanks in service, but they fill a different niche now (amphibious assaults, easy transportation, access to areas a normal MBT cannot reach). The Heavy Tank, meanwhile, is completely gone.

Itkovian

[MeiSooHaityu]

A light Mech can take down an assault, but The situation would have to be right I would imagine. Using experience from other MW games...

The light Mech is quick, but would need cover. If caught in the open, I think that would be bad. Basically hit, fade, and hide. Get in behind the Assault Mech and when he goes to turn to face you, run and hide. Basically a lot of out flanking.

Problem is, while you are doing this, the enemy might still have up to 11 more players playing around you. You would have to stay so focused on the Assault Mech and his movements, you might not notice the the Heavy or Medium Mechs closing in on you to save their Assault buddy, and those lighter Mechs will be able to track you and hit you a lot easier. Turn to deal with them, and that Assault puts you down.

I suppose a Light Mech would want to try and pull the Assault Mech away from the others and try to divide and conquer. Even then, the Assault probably won't fall for it (since he has the advantage at range).

Either way you look at it, taking down an Assault with a Light is a tall order.

[Argon3]

I would guess we will all need to learn something that seems diffecult for most people to grasp

TEAMWORK

When your little light or med starts running around my legs my teammate in his med/heavy will kill you or slow you down enough that I can kill you
Is this such a hard concept.......

BTW
I took down a Kodiac in my Raven in a free for all
I caught him away from everyone else and just legged him to death

[donkeybas]

Adridos, on 22 November 2011 - 10:32 AM, said:

I think they should balance the fight, but exploiting isn't they way the should do it.

Lights are intended to be able to out-maneuver heavier mechs. If it is intended, it is not an exploit.

[Project_Mercy]

Circle strafing is another example of poor MW CG designs from them ignoring TT rules. In TT, turning costs 1 point per hex facing. To constantly drive yourself behind the other one, you basically have to halve your speed and still run. It will work, but it assumes the light mech always has initiative. Then the assault can possibly have rear-facing weapons, or can flip their arms behind them. There's also the kicking as previously mentioned. One kick, and the lights leg is off. It's still possible for a light to out-pilot an assault in TT, but it's not a sure thing like it was in MW2-4.

But since turning doesn't have a major disruption of speed in MWO, and they removed rear-facing weapons and didn't put in arm flips. And they removed physicals other than Charge and DFA, they're basically building the game for circle-stafing in all it's boring and retarded glory.

As pointed out, all you can really do at this point is hope there's someone there to swat the light while it's buzzing around you. It's why I feel people will gravitate away from assaults and heavies, due to all the bonuses given to lights and mediums to make up for them not including BV/Tonnage.

[pistolero]

just a quote from "An Average Day In Beta"


"Other than that fight, things aren’t going so well. Our Jenner pilot accidentally crashes into another Atlas, knocking himself to the ground. The Atlas pilot, unimpressed, proceeds to Alpha Strike into the Jenner, killing him. "

this lets me hope that the cheap MW4 tactics "The Atlas unable to rotate his torso Y Axis to shoot the small size Flea" dont work here

[Wydell]

Wraeththix Constantine, on 12 July 2012 - 08:50 AM, said:

Circle strafing is another example of poor MW CG designs from them ignoring TT rules. In TT, turning costs 1 point per hex facing. To constantly drive yourself behind the other one, you basically have to halve your speed and still run. It will work, but it assumes the light mech always has initiative. Then the assault can possibly have rear-facing weapons, or can flip their arms behind them. There's also the kicking as previously mentioned. One kick, and the lights leg is off. It's still possible for a light to out-pilot an assault in TT, but it's not a sure thing like it was in MW2-4.

Circle strafing was touted as the "Go-to" strategy in MW2:Merc's handbook. It's a legit strategy in the video game. I can understand why there would be limits in the TT version.

Gotta think, these maps they keep showing us don't have very many wide areas where it would be an effective tactical decision to do that. I think the hit and runs are going to be a decreasing radius on the target mech, and you will see a lot of it, but it's going to leave the attacking mech wide open for a much longer period to get into the safe zone.

[Akaryu]

Viper Centurion, on 22 November 2011 - 09:05 AM, said:

Anyone who ever played Mechwarrior 4 Mercenaries/Vengeance mostly know that a single Flea (20 Tons) VS Atlas (100 Tons) will win againts the Atlas, because the Atlas can't target the Flea if it stick to the Atlas feet (The Atlas unable to rotate his torso Y Axis to shoot the small size Flea) and the Flea can shoot the Atlas legs till both destroyed without fear and the Atlas will blow up, judging from this, can Piranha Games prevent this happen in MWO?

the only way they can prevent a light from mopping the floor with an unsupported assault is by removing a lights mobility and that will destroy the point of light mechs so no they cannot break the rule of speed and agility almost always beating unsupported brute force. better said treat that atlas you will likely be piloting not as an unstoppable juggernaut but as a battleship capable of dishing out incredible amounts of firepower but without support and faced with enemies with vastly superior mobility is very vulnerable. in other words if your going into an area you suspect holds light mechs or a few of the more agile mediums take a couple buddies along as an escort to watch your flank while you do what you need to do in said new position weather its capturing an enemy base taking the fight to an enemy assault mech or finding a new position to shell the enemy from.

Edited by Akaryu, 12 July 2012 - 09:18 AM.

[Project_Mercy]

Wydell, on 12 July 2012 - 08:59 AM, said:

Circle strafing was touted as the "Go-to" strategy in MW2:Merc's handbook. It's a legit strategy in the video game. I can understand why there would be limits in the TT version.

Just becuase MS decided to design to it, doesn't mean it's a good idea.

The MW games have always had the same fundamental issue/failing compared to BT. They're all death-matches with the occasional side-objective to suggest you should maybe do something other than kill people. When you're placed in an enclosed space with the success or failure commensurate on murdering the other team, then the only reason to participate is if the weapons you're using are optimum for that. You have serve different roles in that environment (Sniper, defender, close assault, etc), but for the most part they're balanced on a 1v1 basis.

BT wasn't designed around that. Different mechs serve different roles and do so at different costs. If you had to attack a planet, maybe you wanted to strike hard and heavy into one spot, so you brought some expensive iron to bash through. If you had to defend a planet, maybe you weren't sure where they were going to attack, so you put out faster/lighter armed mechs to scout and provide defenses from simple conventional armament, and then they would withdraw. There's a strategic aspect to things. If you were an attacker in a sub-optimum build, you would just punt. You can't punt in death-matches.

The advantages of the light (and especially medium) mechs are basically gone as a result. So instead of fixing the battlefield so it was objective-based and the strategic advantages to some designs where present; we just keep making death-match games and try to nudge the classes to somehow be roughly equal 1v1. It's a cop-out.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I wouldn't be too worried about circle strafing. It will be there and be a legit tactic, but ultimatley level design will prevent that tactic from being used everywhere.

Those old MW games (due to the computer limitiations of the time) pretty much had flat land where circle strafing could be used a lot. This game seems to have more clifs, ravines, and obstructions (from what videos have been released). I can imagine there will be Mechs trying to circle strafe that will end up running into a rock face or falling off of a cliff