67 replies to this topic

[Wolftrap]

Quoted from JaYmZzz: And don't give me any crap about "military realism." Typically in Succession War operations, populaces were evac'd long before the rompy stompies got anywhere near a city.

Objects yes(was joking about monkeys) but from all the novels I read the only time that the population was evacuated was during the Battle of Tukayyid...and that was just to get them out of the way. Most battles that took place in the succession wars and during clan invasion are surprise assualts and raids.(no time to leave) You think Hanse Davion gave Liao a memo before starting the 4th Succession War? Due to the damage occured to the goals of the raids and such it slowly turned into less fighting in cities and more fighting outside and around the cities...I like that the one city map they've shown us of a city is one already in ruin and covered in snow.

[Adrian Carino]

Destructible building and terrain is always fun. The rest not so much.

[Schtirlitz]

Adrian Carino, on 07 July 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

Destructible building and terrain is always fun. The rest not so much.

Agree. What else?

[ZivyTerc]

No non-combatants, no animals. However I'd welcome if the infantry or battle armors were added sometime in the future.
Destructible buildings and trees? Yes please, first it is kinda standard these days, second it provides realism, third it promises tactical opportunities. Exploding fuel tanks, would it be nice to have them in the MWO? Hell yesssss, blow them up just when enemy is moving close to them and watch mechs fried by the explosion. Enemy sniper ducking behind a building after every shot? Nothing a barrage of LRMs can't solve! etc.

[Juzu]

Destructible objects/enviroment= YES PLEASE!

[R0AHN]

Well, to harp on WoT once more, the only way they didn't have a "M" ESRB rating was by not having the crew actually visible. Simply, they didn't want to limit their audience and get less players. Unless we have a situation where infantry and vehicles actually get introduced, squishy people running around is probably a no. Ditto with animals, unless Piranha wants to go with an "M" rating.

Buildings and terrain? Hell yes. Battlefield: Bad Company was all sorts of fun mainly from that addition. You couldn't camp forever in a single spot that wasn't a large rock and you could (kind of) dig an entrenchment for tanks or people. It wasn't perfect, but it was an awesome addition.

[Damion Sparhawk]

as much as I enjoy realism coding and whatnot aside I imagine people at least would scurry for cover (and in the battletech universe I'm sure they have some very resilient cover) and mechwarriors are supposed to consider non-combatants as null targets, meaning even if some ***** found himself in the middle of a mech battle noone would specifically target him unless he pulled a weapon. Animals may add a level of realism but honestly? I imagine at the first sound of the first mech touching down half the animal life in the forest would hunker down or straight out flee the immediate area, sure you might catch a few who hid in a bad spot, but really is that worth the extra code and latancy adjustments in a game that already has very high system requirements? Destructible objects should be a given but considering the complexity of the game interplay I think I can live without it, maybe they can add some of these things in the future but really as long as I get to blow up mechs I'm good to go XD

they censor ID10T

[Gin Ichimaru]

For right now I'm okay with not having destructibility, I do hope it comes later on though. I will get really annoyed though if I am playing and can't flank a mech because my 60 ton mech can't get past a few trees.

Edited by Gin Ichimaru, 07 July 2012 - 12:59 PM.