58 replies to this topic

[Asakara]

I suggest PGI starts any PvE with just AI armor and infantry, no AI mechs.


Here are 11 of my personal reasons why:

1) It would not cheapen the core game of Mech on Mech PvP by having clumsy AI Mech bots.
2) It would provide a totally different experience than the PvP one we have now.
3) PGI could reuse the turret code.
4) PGI would not need to create new code to animate mechs; just wheels, treads, and hover (and possibly rotors).
5) PGI would not need to worry about heat scale as all vehicles have enough sinks to fire all weapons.
6) Infantry (and infantry in bunkers) would give more reasons to take machine guns and flamers as well as giving a reason to put A-Pods in the game.
7) Possibly simpler pathing and combat AI especially if custom maps with triggers/scripts are used.
8) Infantry and Armor defenders are common in BT lore.
9) PGI would not have to worry about internal hits as the first point of damage which breaches a vehicle's armor knocks it out.
10) Smaller objects need less detail and less time for artists to create.
11) It could be a good stepping stone for adding combined arms into community warfare.


My $0.02.

[Sabazial]

I doubt we'll ever see pve in the lifespan of this game.

[Alistair Winter]

I wonder how many infantry this game could take, even in a PvE match with only 1 mech (or 2-4 mechs if you allow coop).

I have a sneaking suspicion that a full company of infantry, in addition to tanks, LRM carriers and hovercraft, would set most people's computers on fire.

[FupDup]

I suspect that PGI would use this as an excuse to keep MGs mediocre and Flamers useless. It would be even more sad because people would still find effective ways to kill this cannon fodder even without using either weapon.

[Heffay]

Belphegore, on 29 January 2015 - 02:09 PM, said:

I doubt we'll ever see pve in the lifespan of this game.

I'm sure we will. Would make for a great expansion pack.

[Alistair Winter]

Heffay, on 29 January 2015 - 02:11 PM, said:

I'm sure we will. Would make for a great expansion pack.

Frankly, PvE and Solaris are the only things I would still spend more than a few bucks on, for this game.

[Sabazial]

Heffay, on 29 January 2015 - 02:11 PM, said:

I'm sure we will. Would make for a great expansion pack.

Don't get me wrong i'd love to see it personally ala the previous mechwarrior titles. I'm just kind of skeptical.

[Rebas Kradd]

No offense, but...

* UI2.5

* New player experience

* Hit registration

* Performance optimizations

* Heavy tweaking of original maps

* Ghost Heat revisitation

* Player tools (spectator, social, in-game polling)

These are ALL things that need to pass through PGI's design/review/QA process before they go anywhere near new AI assets. I'm all for new gamemodes any day, but we've got the Steam release to be thinking about.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 29 January 2015 - 02:16 PM.

[Gamuray]

@Rebas
I couldn't agree more. One should always fix the old stuff (assuming still in use) before making or getting something new. It's better to have a well polished, limited game, than a massive, but junky one.

[Brody319]

I'd rather they just add a MOBA like game mode.

Troops and tanks advancing down paths to the enemy base and your 12 man teams in mechs fighting the enemy team.

[blood4blood]

As long as PvP is fixed first and remains the priority, I have nothing against developing PvE stuff too. I also have very little interest in playing mech-based PvE. (If I really want to, I still have MW2, MW3, MW4, and MechCommander plus old computers and an original PlayStation that will play them...)
EDIT: And a copy of StarSiege. I almost forgot about that.

Edited by blood4blood, 29 January 2015 - 02:39 PM.

[Heffay]

Brody319, on 29 January 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

I'd rather they just add a MOBA like game mode.

Troops and tanks advancing down paths to the enemy base and your 12 man teams in mechs fighting the enemy team.

That would be tough to do with no respawns.

Unless they made an FPS MOBA hybrid, where you do get the respawns, but you play the game from the first person view.

Oh man, that's actually a pretty good idea!

[DEMAX51]

Rebas Kradd, on 29 January 2015 - 02:14 PM, said:

No offense, but...

* UI2.5

* New player experience

* Hit registration

* Performance optimizations

* Heavy tweaking of original maps

* Ghost Heat revisitation

* Player tools (spectator, social, in-game polling)

These are ALL things that need to pass through PGI's design/review/QA process before they go anywhere near new AI assets. I'm all for new gamemodes any day, but we've got the Steam release to be thinking about.

I hear what you're saying, but AI/PvE can be a huge step forward for the New Player Experience (which, in turn, would result in a better Steam release).

The biggest complaints you hear about the New Player Experience are:
PvP can be incredibly rough on newbies (especially in the group queue, which makes it hard for Vets to help "train" new guys)
The lack of training missions or an actual tutorial
The c-bill grind

AI/PvE can be used to solve two of those three issues.

Personally, I think some sort of AI/PvE functionality is almost a requirement before they can really consider a Steam release.

Edited by DEMAX51, 29 January 2015 - 02:45 PM.

[Brody319]

Heffay, on 29 January 2015 - 02:39 PM, said:

That would be tough to do with no respawns.

Unless they made an FPS MOBA hybrid, where you do get the respawns, but you play the game from the first person view.

Oh man, that's actually a pretty good idea!

No it would just be our current 12 v 12, but the bases aren't captured they are destroyed. so having large amount of tanks and troops attacking increase your likelihood of destroying it. Destroy all the enemy mechs and you win, destroy the enemy base you win.

protecting and destroying troops breaks up the map more and keeps people from pushing to the middile
stops death balls
tanks and troops don't have to have very complex AI, just move along these paths, and shoot at the enemy or base if they see it.

would give flamers and machine guns a really good use for mowing down large amounts of troops at once.

I said MOBA Like, not a MOBA game mode.

[Rebas Kradd]

DEMAX51, on 29 January 2015 - 02:42 PM, said:

I hear what you're saying, but AI/PvE can be a huge step forward for the New Player Experience (which, in turn, would result in a better Steam release).

The biggest complaints you hear about the New Player Experience are:
PvP can be incredibly rough on newbies
The lack of training missions or an actual tutorial
The c-bill grind

AI/PvE can be used to solve two of those three issues.

Personally, I think some sort of AI/PvE functionality is almost a requirement before they can really consider a Steam release.

It's a fair point, but using already-existing assets like mechs and turrets would be less work than developing tanks and aircraft.

[DEMAX51]

Rebas Kradd, on 29 January 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

It's a fair point, but using already-existing assets like mechs and turrets would be less work than developing tanks and aircraft.

I never said they needed to go balls-out and make a ton of new assets. I'm just pointing out how some form of AI/PvE would be a huge boon for the game, and is easily as important as most of the other things you've mentioned.

Edited by DEMAX51, 29 January 2015 - 02:49 PM.

[Brody319]

Rebas Kradd, on 29 January 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

It's a fair point, but using already-existing assets like mechs and turrets would be less work than developing tanks and aircraft.

not like a tank is very complex, and the humans could be sprites which are easy enough to make, and they wouldn't take very many resources from servers.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Alistair Winter, on 29 January 2015 - 02:10 PM, said:

I wonder how many infantry this game could take, even in a PvE match with only 1 mech (or 2-4 mechs if you allow coop).

I have a sneaking suspicion that a full company of infantry, in addition to tanks, LRM carriers and hovercraft, would set most people's computers on fire.

LOL, have you seen the size of the cars? We wouldnt even be able to see or HIT the infantry in this game......they likely wouldnt even render on our screens, nor could we aim low enough to hit them.....

You could give us 2000 infantry and it wouldnt even matter...aside from the CPU power to process that many....

I would much rather have AI Mechs, even if they are clumsy.....If we got AI even as good as Mechwarrior 4, then this game would be golden...



I drummed up ideas for an entire campaign based just on the maps we have now...it sounded fun in my head......start on Crimson, go out to Canyon, then head off to Mining, then were on to River, we defend River in the day and then the night again, we finally evac River night, we get our Dropship shot down in Tourmaline, we wander off to the Caustic, stumble upon Forest Colony where we are evac'd to Alpine.

At Alpine we defend the base from a huge attack, then we are on the attack and head off to frozen city..and that is about where my ideas ended.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 29 January 2015 - 03:11 PM.

[Brody319]

LordKnightFandragon, on 29 January 2015 - 03:10 PM, said:

LOL, have you seen the size of the cars? We wouldnt even be able to see or HIT the infantry in this game......they likely wouldnt even render on our screens, nor could we aim low enough to hit them.....

You could give us 2000 infantry and it wouldnt even matter...aside from the CPU power to process that many....

I would much rather have AI Mechs, even if they are clumsy.....If we got AI even as good as Mechwarrior 4, then this game would be golden...



I drummed up ideas for an entire campaign based just on the maps we have now...it sounded fun in my head......start on Crimson, go out to Canyon, then head off to Mining, then were on to River, we defend River in the day and then the night again, we finally evac River night, we get our Dropship shot down in Tourmaline, we wander off to the Caustic, stumble upon Forest Colony where we are evac'd to Alpine.

At Alpine we defend the base from a huge attack, then we are on the attack and head off to frozen city..and that is about where my ideas ended.

that isn't a proper scale because they increased the "size" of the cockpits to give pilots more POV. thats why the map and mech scale can feel off even if its correct.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Brody319, on 29 January 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

that isn't a proper scale because they increased the "size" of the cockpits to give pilots more POV. thats why the map and mech scale can feel off even if its correct.

I kinda wish MWO would go with proper scale, even if it cost us some FoV.....make us feel like were in mechs.....

Strangely enough, only game that ever made me feel like I was beast mode in a mech was BF2142....prolly why I played it so much. Verdun Map, L5 Riesig, rushing tanks and mowin' em down, plus dat dual minigun it had...gun walker....BF2142 had the walker leg sounds and the wobbling cockpit to really give that in a walker feel...wish MWO gave that to us.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 29 January 2015 - 03:19 PM.