32 replies to this topic

[Almond Brown]

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 08:20 AM, said:

I'd much rather see a modified, working BT-style heat penalties if we're wishing for things that'll never happen.

FTFY

[Dawnstealer]

LORD TSARKON, on 26 May 2015 - 07:02 AM, said:

and thats why Knockdowns will never be in this game... ever.... Because of Trollish behavior..

Its as simple as that

Which is what I was getting at with that original video. I never saw it, but the chance to troll a team...

Imagine a roflstomp 12-man that decides this is a fun diversion in CW...

[Alek Ituin]

Alistair Winter, on 26 May 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

Running up a 10 degree incline results in a considerable speed reduction. Crashing into a body of water and running literally completely submerged has no effect on speed what so ever.

Gravity is listed as around ~1 g on most maps. It's actually 3 g.

#justmwothings

Yeah, but could you imagine what it would be like to have JJ's actually WORK!?

MECHS FLYING THROUGH THE SKIES ON TENDRILS OF FLAME AND SMOKE! MECHS BEING ABLE TO MANEUVER!!! PILOTS BEING ABLE TO CREATE NEW MOBILITY BASED STRATEGIES!!!!

HOW COULD WE LET SUCH A HORRIBLE THING HAPPEN!?!?!?!?!?

Actually...

That sounds pretty good. Lets jack the gravity back to 1g and see what happens.

[Nightmare1]

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 08:20 AM, said:

I'd much rather see working BT-style heat penalties if we're wishing for things that'll never happen.

BT as in TT? No thanks; this ain't TT!

Knock-downs are good though. We had those in he MW franchise along with Death from Above. Too bad PGI is too timid about implementing all that.

[stjobe]

Almond Brown, on 26 May 2015 - 09:21 AM, said:

FTFY

Naturally, hence the "BT-style" moniker. The important part is that heat should be something you battle just as much as you battle the enemy - it should be a gradual degradation of your 'mech's functions, not a "all systems nominal at 99%, shutdown at 100%" system like the one we have now.

Nightmare1, on 26 May 2015 - 09:51 AM, said:

BT as in TT? No thanks; this ain't TT!

You do know that TT stands for tabletop right? And that tabletop is BattleTech, whose digital first-person incarnation is called MechWarrior?

MWO owes everything to BattleTech, and would do well to pay that franchise a lot more respect than it currently does. That "A BattleTech Game" text they added to the logo is almost ironic.

Nightmare1, on 26 May 2015 - 09:51 AM, said:

Knock-downs are good though. We had those in he MW franchise along with Death from Above. Too bad PGI is too timid about implementing all that.

Collisions are good. Knock-downs are... really, really hard to implement without them becoming the griefer's paradise the now-removed implementation was.

I do want them back though; but in a version that is not so griefable. I'd also like to have melee, DFA, working jump jets, a working heat system with proper BT-style heat penalties, working convergence, proper salvage and a non-exploitable R&R system, BT-style quirks instead of the lazy and unbalancing implementation we have now, burst-fire ACs, continuous lasers, beam PPCs, and a lot of other things.

But I don't believe I'll get any of it. PGI isn't up to the task, they're little more than an art department with a cash shop.

Edited by stjobe, 26 May 2015 - 01:09 PM.

[Nightmare1]

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

You do know that TT stands for tabletop right? And that tabletop is BattleTech, whose digital first-person incarnation is called MechWarrior?

MWO owes everything to BattleTech, and would do well to pay that franchise a lot more respect than it currently does. That "A BattleTech Game" text they added to the logo is almost ironic.

You do realize that if you had thought about what I said, or recalled any of the other multitude of posts I've made about this subject, that you need not have asked, right?

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

Collisions are good. Knock-downs are... really, really hard to implement without them becoming the griefer's paradise the now-removed implementation was.

I do want them back though; but in a version that is not so griefable. I'd also like to have melee, DFA, working jump jets, a working heat system with proper BT-style heat penalties, working convergence, proper salvage and a non-exploitable R&R system, BT-style quirks instead of the lazy and unbalancing implementation we have now, burst-fire ACs, continuous lasers, beam PPCs, and a lot of other things.

But I don't believe I'll get any of it. PGI isn't up to the task, they're little more than an art department with a cash shop.

BT heat penalties would not translate well into this game. BT relies too much on dice roll chance and slow, turn-based strategy. What we've got now works, it just needs tweaking.

Convergence isn't needed either. It just leads to CoD style spray and pray, making the descrepancies between "good" and "bad" players even worse.

Burst fire ACs are useless. We've seen that with the Clans. Rotary would be better.

DFA, working JJs, and knock-down/collisions are tops on my list. Those are the three biggest things missing from the game atm.

[stjobe]

Nightmare1, on 26 May 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

You do realize that if you had thought about what I said, or recalled any of the other multitude of posts I've made about this subject, that you need not have asked, right?

Sorry, long day at work. Big release on Saturday, everyone's pulling overtime to get the last bugs out of the way.

Nightmare1, on 26 May 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

BT heat penalties would not translate well into this game. BT relies too much on dice roll chance and slow, turn-based strategy. What we've got now works, it just needs tweaking.

It needs to be a gradual degradation of your 'mech's functions, not a binary on-off like it is now. That's what I mean by BT-style heat penalties. I don't really care how they implement it, but that's what it should be. This on-off stuff is so far from BattleTech it's not even funny.

Nightmare1, on 26 May 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

Convergence isn't needed either. It just leads to CoD style spray and pray, making the descrepancies between "good" and "bad" players even worse.

I beg to differ. One of the major issues with the game - everything from TTK to weapon balance - can be traced back to the fact that if you fire 4 MLs in TT you hit four different locations, but in MWO they all hit the exact same spot. This breaks the armor system. Simple as that.

You can still fix it rather easily (if not crowd-pleasing): Just remove alpha-strikes. Force a short (0.1 - 0.2 seconds) global cooldown between each weapon firing, basically making an "alpha-strike" become a burst. This forces some spread on a moving (or twisting) target.

Nightmare1, on 26 May 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

Burst fire ACs are useless. We've seen that with the Clans. Rotary would be better.

They're only useless because IS ACs are still single-shot. Make IS ACs burst-fire and Clan ACs suddenly look a whole lot better.

Nightmare1, on 26 May 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

DFA, working JJs, and knock-down/collisions are tops on my list. Those are the three biggest things missing from the game atm.

They're a bit farther down on my list, but they are on it.

Edited by stjobe, 26 May 2015 - 01:30 PM.

[Satan n stuff]

Darian DelFord, on 26 May 2015 - 05:53 AM, said:

So like most lights I run into other mechs from time to time and my legs are always damaged. I can run into a mech at 1kph and take leg damage. So why is it I can run 150 KPH into a Rock facing on any map and take 0 damage?

Just dawned on me for some reason and thought it funny and posted about it.

The things that make you go Hmmmmm....

Very early builds did have terrain collision damage, but it was removed because it was deemed too frustrating. That's probably a good thing.

[Nightmare1]

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

It needs to be a gradual degradation of your 'mech's functions, not a binary on-off like it is now. That's what I mean by BT-style heat penalties. I don't really care how they implement it, but that's what it should be. This on-off stuff is so far from BattleTech it's not even funny.

Gotcha

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

I beg to differ. One of the major issues with the game - everything from TTK to weapon balance - can be traced back to the fact that if you fire 4 MLs in TT you hit four different locations, but in MWO they all hit the exact same spot. This breaks the armor system. Simple as that.

Maybe because MWO doesn't rely on dice-rolling chance to determine shot precision? Thus, 4 MPLs would reasonably be expected to strike the same spot. It's when you have weapons of varying projectile speed and/or duration that you should expect a difference in shot placement.

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

You can still fix it rather easily (if not crowd-pleasing): Just remove alpha-strikes. Force a short (0.1 - 0.2 seconds) global cooldown between each weapon firing, basically making an "alpha-strike" become a burst. This forces some spread on a moving (or twisting) target.

Alpha strikes are canonical though. Removing them from MechWarrior makes it less MechWarrior-ish. I can't imagine anything MechWarrior without Alpha Strikes.

stjobe, on 26 May 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

They're only useless because IS ACs are still single-shot. Make IS ACs burst-fire and Clan ACs suddenly look a whole lot better.

That's like saying, "Hmm...Clan ACs are broken. Let's break IS ones too to even them up!"

Bad idea. That will just lead to the game being entirely devoid of ACs and everyone using lasers instead (just like the Clans already do). Exactly where have you been for the last six months?

Instead of busting something that works well just to accommodate something that doesn't, how about fixing the thing that's broken so that it can compete with the item that already works???

[Impyrium]

Satan n stuff, on 26 May 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

Very early builds did have terrain collision damage, but it was removed because it was deemed too frustrating. That's probably a good thing.

We shall also implement aim assist because we want the game to be too easy.

Games were fun when they actually were hard to learn and master, and had consequences for screwing up... right now we're playing a very light rubber 'mech game.

I don't really know exactly how this terrain collision worked but... running a multiton robot into a building should at least result in a sickening crunch and the complete loss of momentum, similar to MW4. Also sliding up walls with JJs should be impossible, although JJs themselves should provide significantly more thrust.

[CptGier]

Hobo Dan, on 26 May 2015 - 06:34 AM, said:

I have never read anyone asking for collisions to return exactly as they were in beta (broken). I am getting quite tired of people using the old broken implementation of collisions as a viable argument for why they should never come back. Of course we don’t want PGI to just copy/paste the old code back in. We want a new version of collisions.

Yeah, really....or the arguement about TT Clans OP so MWO CLans are OP, despite gobs of changes made that make htem not....

[Satan n stuff]

AUSwarrior24, on 26 May 2015 - 03:34 PM, said:

We shall also implement aim assist because we want the game to be too easy.

Games were fun when they actually were hard to learn and master, and had consequences for screwing up... right now we're playing a very light rubber 'mech game.

I don't really know exactly how this terrain collision worked but... running a multiton robot into a building should at least result in a sickening crunch and the complete loss of momentum, similar to MW4. Also sliding up walls with JJs should be impossible, although JJs themselves should provide significantly more thrust.

Mechs are already stopped dead if they run into walls, I don't know how often you play lights but if you run into a wall somewhere the enemy can see you that is basically a death sentence. You don't notice it as much with the heavier mechs because you weren't moving that fast to begin with.
Anything more would have to wait until we can actually damage the terrain.
I'd also like to add that mechs are much tougher than most buildings, in tabletop it's entirely possible to run through a building, intentionally or unintentionally. This allows the building to shield the mech from damage, but the mech will take damage from entering a building hex and will possibly be knocked down. If a building takes enough damage it can also collapse on top of a mech, disabling it completely. Mechs jumping on top of a building can also cause a section of the building to collapse, dealing relatively little damage to the mech but completely destroying that part of the building.
Mechs in tabletop can also generally take much more damage than all but the toughest buildings.

[Lord Perversor]

How come ppl never link the Right Knockdown video.



Just watch at the warping when mechs stands up.

Edited by Lord Perversor, 27 May 2015 - 01:09 AM.