Mechwarrior 3 had the best looking (ignoring resolution) mech damage imo. There'd be spots where the armor plating came off, and you could see little colored wires behind it. If you got hit in the head with machine gun fire, etc, it would make little dings, and crack the ferroglass. This last thing I'd especially like to see come back. Headshots = cracked windshield is a must! (Or, melted, depending on weapon type)
	
A More Detailed Damage System Please!
#21
Posted 21 March 2015 - 02:39 PM
Mechwarrior 3 had the best looking (ignoring resolution) mech damage imo. There'd be spots where the armor plating came off, and you could see little colored wires behind it. If you got hit in the head with machine gun fire, etc, it would make little dings, and crack the ferroglass. This last thing I'd especially like to see come back. Headshots = cracked windshield is a must! (Or, melted, depending on weapon type)
#22
Posted 21 March 2015 - 08:13 PM
Praetor Knight, on 20 March 2015 - 04:57 PM, said:
This was already in the game in closed beta, they just couldn't keep up that level of quality. There is no long haul. This game was beautiful back when they first let us into the closed beta.
					
					#23
Posted 21 March 2015 - 11:00 PM
Leetskeet, on 21 March 2015 - 08:13 PM, said:

They removed it, so people with toasters could run the game better.
But as a person with a toaster, i can say that it didn't do ****, apart from making the game look worse with no performance change.
#24
Posted 22 March 2015 - 12:26 AM
Juodas Varnas, on 21 March 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:
But as a person with a toaster, i can say that it didn't do ****, apart from making the game look worse with no performance change.
There was no performance change, in fact, it might have made performance even worse. The game looks like trash in comparison. I mean, it's REALLY REALLY REALLY bad.
Seems like a fake excuse, and more like they got a bunch of premade assets/had actual Cryengineers working on the game early on, and then had to try to try to mimic that level of quality with their in-house people but couldn't, OR simply decided that they only wanted to do the bare minimum but couldn't simply leave the old mechs with real quality textures while they put Moon Surface Barnacle textures on all of the new mechs, so everything had to look like a minimum viable product.
It baffles me that a game with an "active" development team actually goes backwards. Not even in something like balance, but actual quality. How? Closed Beta felt like a finished game that just needed more mechs, "Live" feels like a beta with tons of placeholders. That is an incredible accomplishment.
#26
Posted 23 March 2015 - 01:40 AM
right now damaged legs can be used to entirely shield the good one if you know what you are doing, which is total bull. it's not an exploit, exactly but it's definitely not intended if you ask me. the legs should be gone, or mangled and dragging such that it cant be kept in the way of your good leg to soak damage. not just walking around still in slow motion.
but yeah, more interesting overall damage would be wonderful.
#27
Posted 24 March 2015 - 01:36 PM
#28
Posted 24 March 2015 - 02:23 PM
#29
Posted 24 March 2015 - 04:37 PM
Nik Kerensky, on 24 March 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:
I understand the concept. But the thing is - the changes? They haven't done anything to make the game easier to run on low-end machines. It's really just that the art team couldn't keep the level of quality up for each 'mech that was getting released, so they downgraded damage effects to something only slightly better than the MW4 "just make it all black" approach.
#30
Posted 25 March 2015 - 06:46 AM
Bloodweaver, on 24 March 2015 - 04:37 PM, said:
Yep agree with your assessment, definitely a cutting corners approach taken. Which is sad to see as they are missing a huge trick here by not actually building on what was a decent level of damage fidelity, at least in terms of decals. They really do need to revisit the actual limb destruction variety and eventually look to keep adding to the number of ways a mech can be damaged. I mean, isn't that the very core of this game??
Edited by Nik Kerensky, 25 March 2015 - 06:46 AM.
#31
Posted 25 March 2015 - 01:09 PM

I doubt it will happen. Thing about Star Citizen is that the guy wanted to push the PC to the limit. He wanted to make the experience he had always wanted to make but couldn't because that level of technology didn't exist. PGI just wants to make money I think. I haven't been hear long, but I don't get that dedicated vibe from PGI based on their reputation.
Edited by AkoolPopTart, 25 March 2015 - 01:10 PM.
#32
Posted 25 March 2015 - 07:20 PM
Reference the level of detail and Pc requirements.
For Star Citizen, they are handing off quite a bit of the code to the GPU that the CPU was crunching.
- Yes, PGI could also do this as it's the same engine, but they don't have the crytek engineers 'on staff'.
- Even adding in a Tesla GPU to the server(s) could speed up operations, 1000's of cores to crunch instead of 4 to 8.
It's quite a bit of code work initially, effects everything, but once complete everyone's jobs get easer. Even the artists and animators will see the improvement. Dx11 can be used to it's full potential, tessellation, bump mapping, physix all pushed to bring us visual quality 2015 should be using. Even lower quality machines will see the improvement, everyone wins.
As a note here:
Some time ago, Karl mentioned that PGI does have 4k versions of all the 'Mechs that were tested. But running these on old or lower grade machines basically crawled the game to an unplayable state. (should be a download 'DLC' for high end clients)
- In fact, there is probably much higher detail content avail from PGI, terrain, objects and structures. But too much of a load on lower end systems. (again, DLC for those that can run it.)
- PGI is working on destructible terrain and converting simple art elements to rigid bodies. (trees, poles, you get the idea.) But at what point will it effect gameplay and LOS for so many players? A balancing act indeed.
Just some thoughts,
9erRed
#33
Posted 26 March 2015 - 01:21 PM
AkoolPopTart, on 25 March 2015 - 01:09 PM, said:

I doubt it will happen. Thing about Star Citizen is that the guy wanted to push the PC to the limit. He wanted to make the experience he had always wanted to make but couldn't because that level of technology didn't exist. PGI just wants to make money I think. I haven't been hear long, but I don't get that dedicated vibe from PGI based on their reputation.
I really do hope that last bit about PGI not really giving a **** about giving us the best possible mech game and just wanting to make money is not true. If that is, I don't see them making money for too much longer. Surely Chris Roberts has proved if you put your heart and soul into the DETAILS, the fans will follow with their wallets.
#34
Posted 27 March 2015 - 08:59 PM
Nik Kerensky, on 26 March 2015 - 01:21 PM, said:
I really do hope that last bit about PGI not really giving a **** about giving us the best possible mech game and just wanting to make money is not true. If that is, I don't see them making money for too much longer. Surely Chris Roberts has proved if you put your heart and soul into the DETAILS, the fans will follow with their wallets.
You mean like hoe pgi over prices popular franchise mechs? 55 for a timber wolf is ridiculous.
#35
Posted 28 March 2015 - 08:39 AM
AkoolPopTart, on 27 March 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:
Now this I can somewhat agree with. My point is, for the money they are charging they really ought to be adding a more detailed damage system. Their main product (mechs) I feel, is just too simplistic/arcadey at the moment to have any real depth/fun in the long term.
#36
Posted 31 March 2015 - 01:06 PM
Mods, any chance we can get someone from the dev team to opine on whether there are any plans to improve the damage model??
#37
Posted 01 April 2015 - 10:58 PM
Each leg has four actuators (Hip, Upper Leg, Lower Leg, Foot).
- A Hip critical hit reduces your top speed by 40%.
- An Upper Leg critical hit reduces your top speed by 15%.
- A Lower Leg critical hit reduces your top speed by 10%.
- A Foot critical hit reduces your top speed by 5%.
These are cumulative, so an Upper Leg, two Lower Leg, and one Foot critical hits would reduce your speed to (0.85 * 0.9 * 0.9 * 0.95) = 65% of normal.
The Center Torso has six Engine slots, and XL-equipped Mechs have 2 to 3 Engine slots per side torso.
- Each Engine critical hit reduces your cooling per second by 0.5.
These are also cumulative, so one Engine hit is equivalent to losing 5 SHS, and two Engine hits is equivalent to losing 10SHS.
Each Arm has three actuators, Shoulder, Upper Arm, and Lower Arm.
- Each Shoulder hit reduces arm tracking speed by 50%.
- Each Upper Arm hit reduces arm tracking speed by 25%.
- Each Lower Arm hit reduces arm tracking speed by 20%.
These are also cumulative, so losing both Shoulders and one Upper Arm will reduce arm tracking speed to (0.5 * 0.5 * 0.75) = 19% of normal.
Note that all of these numbers already exist and are adjustable, so you just have to do some really simple math on the client and server side to make all of this work.
To make Gyro hits mean something, we'd need to bring back knockdown - which would, of course, be awesome.
#38
Posted 07 April 2015 - 01:09 PM
#39
Posted 22 August 2015 - 04:27 AM
#40
Posted 22 August 2015 - 07:53 PM
FerrolupisXIII, on 23 March 2015 - 01:40 AM, said:
Fixed this for you - no 'Mech in MWO shows ST destruction in any way whatsoever. In fact, NO Mechwarrior game, ever, has done this. The closest we've ever gotten is the loss of the "S1" and "S2" sections on some specific 'Mechs in MW4, such as the Timber Wolf - the missile boxes were not considered part of the side torso hitbox, each one had its own hitbox with its own separate health value. But ST loss has never been shown in any MW games, which is a real shame.
I agree with you on the legs, as well - having the destroyed leg at least drag lifelessly would be a significant improvement over what we have now. It would be cool if a component's destruction didn't necessarily mean it was knocked off the model, too - it could simply become a blackened husk, devoid of internal elements, limply hanging in the wind, full of holes letting you see through to the other side. That's not gonna be possible here of course - it'd just be cool to see...
HammerMaster, on 24 March 2015 - 02:23 PM, said:
Not sure why you remember that about the 'Phract, it never happened... although it'd be awesome if it did. Different weapons should defo create different damage effects too.
9erRed, on 25 March 2015 - 07:20 PM, said:
Some time ago, Karl mentioned that PGI does have 4k versions of all the 'Mechs that were tested. But running these on old or lower grade machines basically crawled the game to an unplayable state. (should be a download 'DLC' for high end clients)
- In fact, there is probably much higher detail content avail from PGI, terrain, objects and structures. But too much of a load on lower end systems. (again, DLC for those that can run it.)
- PGI is working on destructible terrain and converting simple art elements to rigid bodies. (trees, poles, you get the idea.) But at what point will it effect gameplay and LOS for so many players? A balancing act indeed.
A note to your note: the 4k textures Karl mentioned, have nothing to do with damage decals. If you look at the picture of the damaged Atlas from Closed Beta that Leetskeet posted here, you will see that the underlying damaged "skin" has various unique details that only coincide with specific parts of the Atlas' body. I've seen this on Catapults and Commandos as well, so its likely that all of the first eight 'Mechs in MWO had specific underlying "unpainted/damaged" skins.
The reason they stopped doing this was not a lack of ability, but pure workload. To keep up that pattern, each 'Mech they put into the game would have to have its own unique "skeleton" skin. That adds a lot of work, as its basically creating an additional, unique camo pattern for each 'Mech.
BTW, I'd love for destructible terrain to affect gameplay. That's, like, 90% of the fun in having destructible terrain. Maybe you don't notice an enemy because he's hiding behind a tree - but what if he shoots the tree, exposing him to sensor readings? What if YOU shoot the tree? Should your weapons still hit him, or should they be blocked until after the tree is destroyed? Shouldn't you be able to use trees, light posts, etc. to your advantage - even if only momentarily? What about buildings?
One of the biggest reasons MW3 is still my favorite MW game, even to this day, is how destructible the terrain was. Non-destructible buildings were rare, and usually justified in their durability. Normal buildings, upon being destroyed, fell apart in a realistic way. Trees would light on fire. Birds and pedestrians would explode in a bloody mess. Telephone wires would snap and fall towards the ground. The earth itself was moldable, if you hit it with missiles the explosion would create a small crater - and you could even use this for cover or to slow down an enemy's movement if you were quick enough.
Edited by Bloodweaver, 22 August 2015 - 07:56 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
						
				

						
				




						
				
						
				










								

