58 replies to this topic

[Soy]

You know what I will conjure up anecdotally?

Here's a nugget for yallz.

How about in MechCommander, using Jump Jets might just arbitrarily lead to your mech falling over and stunlocking itself for about 10 seconds.

Imagine if that type of **** was in MWO.

"OH man I'm poptarting so hard right now omg these scr-wtf noooooooo no get the **** up GET UP WTF NO AHHHH GOD DAMN LRMS **** THIS GAME"

[Flawed]

Fup, I'm saying fix it and bring it in... not bring in the old system. You are stuck in the past dude.

[FupDup]

Flawed, on 12 June 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

Fup, I'm saying fix it and bring it in... not bring in the old system. You are stuck in the past dude.

People keep saying this, but they generally don't say how they would actually "fix" it.

[Soy]

Soy, on 12 June 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

"OH man I'm poptarting so hard right now omg these scr-wtf noooooooo no get the **** up GET UP WTF NO AHHHH GOD DAMN LRMS **** THIS GAME"

Seriously tho

It'd be a nice way to diceroll **** yourself into rage, that'd be so troll I almost want to see it implemented.

Edited by Soy, 12 June 2015 - 03:24 PM.

[Flawed]

Soy, on 12 June 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

You know what I will conjure up anecdotally?

Here's a nugget for yallz.

How about in MechCommander, using Jump Jets might just arbitrarily lead to your mech falling over and stunlocking itself for about 10 seconds.

Imagine if that type of **** was in MWO.

"OH man I'm poptarting so hard right now omg these scr-wtf noooooooo no get the **** up GET UP WTF NO AHHHH GOD DAMN LRMS **** THIS GAME"

i'm laughing so hard right now

[Koniving]

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

Here is my challenge to you. I'm going to list several parameters below based on what I would consider to be a "balanced" system. Your job, should you choose to accept it, is to DETAIL and DESCRIBE a system that adheres to ALL OF THE CRITERION. Ready to begin?

• 2. Must not penalize mechs for being slow. For example, who the hell would use a slow light when a fast light can bowl you over and you have absolutely zero hope of escaping?
  
• 3. Must not penalize mechs that lack JJs, i.e. using JJs during a collision does not help you any more than just being groundbound.

I'm curious so I thought I'd take a stab at these... to give a valid and realistic set of results... while also trying to meet the two goals here.

For number 2: Must not penalize slow mechs. What if slower mechs, whether slow because of going slow or slow because of lacking the ability to go fast (as in their maximum speed is slower than a snail; exaggeration) makes them more stable, granting a defense against being bowled over. After all in charge attacks, DFAs, etc. a target going cruising speed as opposed to running speed are meant to be harder to knock over (even though they were easier to hit) with full rules (basically all of them slapped on).

For number 3: For this, I think that trying to jump kick (something I loved doing) probably should result in you (the one with no way to stablize yourself) tumbling over. Dropping on the enemy in near-misses (or barely hits) would be more likely to knock yourself down. That said: For all this self risk, a straight up DFA with a sufficiently heavier mech (trust me this is nearly an impossible task with how MWO flight mechanics work) should reward you with some crushingly devastating damage.

[Flawed]

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

People keep saying this, but they generally don't say how they would actually "fix" it.

come on dude, stop taking it so seriously. how to fix it, i wouldn't know. I'm just saying it would be nice if PGI brought a new fixed system. And the awesomeness of it all. but hey... keep going... more fun for me

[MechWarrior414712]

Flawed, on 12 June 2015 - 02:58 PM, said:

FUPDUP, I could be wrong, but you are thinking way too much from a Dualing perspective. 1mech vs 1mech, this is a 12v12 game. 1 on 1 yes.... this is a disaster. 12 on 12.... you better watch your ass out there. Thums up on the vids, needed something to cheer me up from my rant. Hence why your are here.

I was in the game on that video. The Dragon solo'd 1v2 later on a Jenner and a Centurion. That stuff was broken as hell, only because the Dragon couldn't be knocked down.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

The devs first need to work on collision code before tackling knockdowns.

I'd be fine applying ramming damage offensively in matches, it would be a big first step and be enough for things like DFAs to work along with adjustments to JJs.

Then once that is settled, than the devs can work on the various animations and systems for knockdowns and would ideally include melee! So really long-term work, and staying on the backburner for now.

[Pjwned]

Flawed, on 12 June 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

come on dude, stop taking it so seriously. how to fix it, i wouldn't know. I'm just saying it would be nice if PGI brought a new fixed system. And the awesomeness of it all. but hey... keep going... more fun for me

That assumes that a system involving the return of knockdowns can even be fixed though, and clearly PGI doesn't have a good idea how to do it either, so if you say "FIX IT" and then respond with what amounts to "well uh...durf hurf slurp..........i dunno how to fix it LOL xDDDD" when asked how it would be fixed then that sounds pretty stupid.

Edited by Pjwned, 12 June 2015 - 05:35 PM.

[LORD TSARKON]

Flawed, on 12 June 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

Fup, I'm saying fix it and bring it in... not bring in the old system. You are stuck in the past dude.

You can't Fix Stupid...... Even if PGI manages to bring the best Collision and knockdown programming in history... the community will STILL ABUSE and TROLL with it... This small niche genre houses a lot of R Tards unfortunately.. plus its ONLINE gaming... not some group of friends that you would play Battletech at a house where the GM would put nick that crap real quick...

This game would die quick if knockdowns... even decently made ones... were put into place... because the players would just ABUSE the crap out of them.... PGI knows this... the majority of online Gamers know this.... its about time some of you old Pencil and Paper Battletech players understand this...

Some things just can't be in the game..

FYI... I played Battletech Twice (Pencil and Paper)... and I had a 60 ton mech with large Engine charge all the time... the DM has to change the rules because I abused them... just as PGI did 20 years later with this game...

[FupDup]

LORD TSARKON, on 12 June 2015 - 05:12 PM, said:

You can't Fix Stupid...... Even if PGI manages to bring the best Collision and knockdown programming in history... the community will STILL ABUSE and TROLL with it... This small niche genre houses a lot of R Tards unfortunately.. plus its ONLINE gaming... not some group of friends that you would play Battletech at a house where the GM would put nick that crap real quick...

This game would die quick if knockdowns... even decently made ones... were put into place... because the players would just ABUSE the crap out of them.... PGI knows this... the majority of online Gamers know this.... its about time some of you old Pencil and Paper Battletech players understand this...

Some things just can't be in the game..

FYI... I played Battletech Twice (Pencil and Paper)... and I had a 60 ton mech with large Engine charge all the time... the DM has to change the rules because I abused them... just as PGI did 20 years later with this game...

I would argue that a system which is abuseable would, by definition, be a "flawed" system. If they somehow found the fabled "sweet spot" goldilocks zone that didn't have any problems whatsoever, it would be kinda hard (or impossible) to exploit/abuse...

[Thunder Child]

I'm quite happy with there being no knockdowns in game. After all, you're meant to risk falling over when you lose a leg, step into water, land poorly after a Jump, Land poorly after stepping off anything higher than 5m, take more than TWENTY POINTS OF DAMAGE!!!

So pretty much, anytime anyone did ANYTHING in MWO, they would pretty much have a chance to Faceplant. Not conducive to a good game.
HOWEVER!
We do need better Collisions. Two 100t mechs should not just rub shoulders at 56kph and have nothing happen. That's at least 10pts of damage each, right there, and depending on the type of collision, possibly more. A light should not be able to run straight into a Direwhales Crotch at 150kph and just warp through it. Both mechs would take considerable damage (the light being worse for wear, being lighter and less armored). Would this be punishing to light mechs? Most definitely, if they don't have any situational awareness, and use a steering wheel. But it would still affect mechs of all weight categories. And with proper collisions, the Highlander Burial could be a thing too.

So yes, Collisions would be good. Knockdowns, not so much.

[Soy]

If collisions were expanded upon in a balanced and comprehensive manner, knockdowns could surely be a significant feature that would likely add to the depth of the game.




shortest way i can say it

[Lindonius]

Lol in a game where switchable ammo is lostech (by the dev's own admission) you guys actually think they're capable of programming a workable collision system?

[Athanos Kerensky]

I would love for collisions to make a come back. As long as they cover a few points. Both mechs take damage according to weight, and the animation of the collision.

[Mahnmut]

Lindonius, on 12 June 2015 - 05:45 PM, said:

Lol in a game where switchable ammo is lostech (by the dev's own admission) you guys actually think they're capable of programming a workable collision system?

^^This. Sad but true.

[Kristov Kerensky]

The original collision system and knockdowns was flawed, that's a fact, and it was removed due to that fact, the clientside auth was part of the issue, and that's been replaced, the physics are the next problem.

HOW to do it properly, well, since I'm not the guy with access to the code, I can't really make that call, nor can any of us, not even the MW:LL folks can help there since they used the clientside based netcode as well.

MW2-4 all had knockdowns AND collisions, they didn't always work together, but they had both. Damage would put you on your ass in MW3 and 4, not collisions. I'd personally avoid the damage knockdowns, most Mechs in MWO have alphas that would put everyone on their ass every time we fired, so that's something to just not do. Same with jumping, unless you happen to land on another Mech, in which case it's dealt with as a collision.

Collisions causing knockdowns are much easier to deal with, mass, velocity, placement, those factors are enough to keep it simple and keep it from being exploitable to the extent we saw with Dragon bowling. Jenners won't be knocking down Atlases unless they hit them just right, and if an Atlas can run into a Jenner, the guy in the Jenner has no business driving it. The physics are easy enough, the game HAS that built into the engine, it's just getting the numbers right, which could be an issue due to the fact that gravity in MWO is NOT set to 1g standard, it's closer to 4g, so the numbers have really got to be played with to make collisions and knockdown via them work properly. 30 tons under 4g is 120 tons, so it'll hit a lot harder and do more damage than it should by a huge amount. That was part of the Dragon bowling problem, they set gravity way too high and the Dragon, with the biggest engine and it's very low center of gravity, was able to knock down ANYTHING it hit while being pretty much immune to being knocked down.

Gravity won't be changed, that's been stated clearly already, as all the animations are based on it and they aren't going to redo all the animations.

According to Russ, this is on the list of things to do, no time frame however, so it will happen at some point.

Edited by Kristov Kerensky, 13 June 2015 - 08:47 AM.

[Rebas Kradd]

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

Here is my challenge to you. I'm going to list several parameters below based on what I would consider to be a "balanced" system. Your job, should you choose to accept it, is to DETAIL and DESCRIBE a system that adheres to ALL OF THE CRITERION. Ready to begin?
1. Must not penalize or reward certain mech tonnages. Must be fair across the board to all weight classes.

Statements like these are why I've found most of your "balance" standards to be total garbage over the years. Give no unique abilities or rewards for piloting certain mechs? Stupid. "Fair" doesn't mean "equalized, bland, and non-personalized."

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

• 2. Must not penalize mechs for being slow. For example, who the hell would use a slow light when a fast light can bowl you over and you have absolutely zero hope of escaping?

Redundant. Who the hell would use a slow light anyway?

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

• 3. Must not penalize mechs that lack JJs, i.e. using JJs during a collision does not help you any more than just being groundbound.

This one I'll agree with, if only because it makes sense in physics. An airborne mech would absorb more of the impact force due to lack of contact with the ground.

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

• 4. Must not render players completely defenseless and unable to perform any action. There has to be some way to fight back.
  
• 5. Must not be an instant death sentence for mechs being affected by it. Consider that in the present day, our mechs can put out large amounts of damage, and that's before we consider multiple mechs per team even. Also note that just dropping an artillery strike on a defenseless guy squiring on the floor would contribute to very fast kills that way. Also, it's just really really easy to shoot at immobilized targets, it's nearly impossible to miss.

What, like heat shutdown? This isn't a Carebears game. If you don't want to be rendered defenseless, don't get knocked over.

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

• 6. Perhaps as a bonus, it doesn't result in complete fusterclucking when teams are moving out of spawn. In the present day, that old system in the video would result in many players getting crippled before they even got out of spawn.

Reasonable.

FupDup, on 12 June 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

7. It isn't overpowered to the point that it becomes a preferred tactic of choice. I.e. there should be a reason for you to NOT mindlessly ram enemy mechs. This ties back to criterion #1 in that even assault mechs should have a reason to NOT just mindlessly ram everything. Aka it has to be high risk.

I think the current state of MWO (i.e. murderballs, higher damage output) would probably provide incentive not to ram.

[FupDup]

Rebas Kradd, on 13 June 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

Statements like these are why I've found most of your "balance" standards to be total garbage over the years. Give no unique abilities or rewards for piloting certain mechs? Stupid. "Fair" doesn't mean "equalized, bland, and non-personalized."

Because it's already skewed in one direction as it is, it doesn't need to get more skewed. "Unique rewards" shouldn't mean almost completely superior in most aspects, which it currently does.

Rebas Kradd, on 13 June 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

Redundant. Who the hell would use a slow light anyway?

See above, we don't need to make the situation worse. This also applies to other classes, like for example a Hunchback not being able to get away from a Clan heavy.

Rebas Kradd, on 13 June 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

What, like heat shutdown? This isn't a Carebears game. If you don't want to be rendered defenseless, don't get knocked over.

Not always possible, see above.

For the record, heat shutdown isn't even remotely the same concept because it's self-inflicted, and it generally takes several moments to climb the heat bar whereas a knockdown is instantaneous. And you don't get an override button for KDs, nor can you change your loadout in ways like using low-heat weapons to avoid the heat shutdown. Even more, the shutdown might not last as long as a KD, depending on just how far over the bar you pushed it.

Rebas Kradd, on 13 June 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

I think the current state of MWO (i.e. murderballs, higher damage output) would probably provide incentive not to ram.

I'm not talking about running across an open field at a firing line.

I'm talking about any general situation where you manage to be near the red team for whatever reason, which tends to happen in most matches (usually towards the middle/end). When that happens, I think it would be pretty cheesy for these so-called "war machines" to have a dogpiling rugby contest against each other, not to mention any potential other issues that might arise (i.e. the list).

Edited by FupDup, 13 June 2015 - 09:16 AM.