29 replies to this topic

[ThornScythe]

So I saw pictures of mechs that actually are not bipedal next to some I right out of the bat saw where from the battletech Universe, I got curios and went to battletech wiki and found some, but all I found where very late development like the Ares (which even has the problem of being a superheavy), also found the jaguar and antlion wich I found pretty sweet, but they all share the same thing developed quite latte in the batletech Universe nowhere near the 3050, so my question is, is there any actual mech that can make it's appearance? also even if it could would it be a good idea? also seems like it would be a hell to code it.

Thanks

[wanderer]

There's actually plenty of quad-leggers in the tabletop game- Scorpions and Goliaths being the first of note - but PGI's unable to model them properly.

It is a long-term disappointment to many.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Ask Juodas Varnas about Quads.

[Bishop Steiner]

wanderer, on 08 January 2016 - 07:35 PM, said:

There's actually plenty of quad-leggers in the tabletop game- Scorpions and Goliaths being the first of note - but PGI's unable to model them properly.

It is a long-term disappointment to many.

I believe it's not a "unable to" but limited returns on investment. Quads do take a LOT more in rigging, kinematics, etc to make work, and there are relatively few Quads, overall in game, and those quads all have extremely limited crit capability, and no waists for tracking targets.

Almost none would ever be competitively decent (maybe some Light Quads where space ain't an issue), and the comparative returns and demand, are small.

Basically, unless they were Starcitizen flush with cash, it would be a poor investment that would bring them more grief from the "watchdogs" than gratitude (and cash) from the handful of guys like Juodas.

[Trauglodyte]

Plus, you can't easily translate the benefits of being a quad legged mech from TT to this game. In TT, you didn't have to turn to change directions as you could just "side step" into the diagonal hex. Also, your weapons were on turrets which means that you didn't need front/back facing weapons. Though, I think that they changed that in edition 2 - one of the more diehards that aren't currently drinking single malt would know better.

[VinJade]

in the PS mw game they had a quad mech, so if a PS game can do it why can't PGI?
sure it would need smoothing and retexturing but it was proven to work.

replace the arms with legs, remove the 'head' , smash the torso some, add weapons to it & place the cockpit someplace else on the torso.

because some Quads look like turrets with legs

[Pariah Devalis]

Trauglodyte, on 08 January 2016 - 07:44 PM, said:

Plus, you can't easily translate the benefits of being a quad legged mech from TT to this game. In TT, you didn't have to turn to change directions as you could just "side step" into the diagonal hex. Also, your weapons were on turrets which means that you didn't need front/back facing weapons. Though, I think that they changed that in edition 2 - one of the more diehards that aren't currently drinking single malt would know better.

Ezpz translation. Give just quads the sort of movement people expect from FPS: W and S are throttle, A and D are side step, and mouse no longer rotates the torso, but instead rotates the mech itself. It would move totally differently to any bipedal mech in the game, but I suspect would be disadvantaged in a circle fight due to mousepads being only so big - unless you're a trackball kinda person.

Scorpion, Tarantula, Goliath, my gorgeous Stalking Spider.... Later the Barghest.... There are a few quads, and few variants. I don't think the demand is there for the effort required by PGI, but, man, I would love to pilot a quad.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 08 January 2016 - 08:00 PM.

[ThornScythe]

wanderer, on 08 January 2016 - 07:35 PM, said:

There's actually plenty of quad-leggers in the tabletop game- Scorpions and Goliaths being the first of note - but PGI's unable to model them properly.

It is a long-term disappointment to many.

Ok I just did some more digging and fell a bit stupid beacouse it actually is in the front main page of battletech wiki on battlemech description

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/BattleMech

says there that the first models where only around 3060, in other words 10 year game time, so it actually would be an issue gamewise right (seems a bit silly our real technology is far easier to make a several legged make then a bipedal)

[Bishop Steiner]

ThornScythe, on 08 January 2016 - 08:02 PM, said:

Ok I just did some more digging and fell a bit stupid beacouse it actually is in the front main page of battletech wiki on battlemech description

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/BattleMech

says there that the first models where only around 3060, in other words 10 year game time, so it actually would be an issue gamewise right (seems a bit silly our real technology is far easier to make a several legged make then a bipedal)

that's when you started seeing more, but the Scorpion (2570), Xanthos (2579)and Goliath (2652) far predate that, and even the Tarantula(3054) was out before then.

For the clans, you had the fire scorpion (2852) and thunder stallion (2850).

But all total, not counting the QuadVee Convertible Mechs, you only have 25 total chassis, and about half of those don't exist until post Jihad/MWDA era.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 08 January 2016 - 08:14 PM.

[Escef]

Trauglodyte, on 08 January 2016 - 07:44 PM, said:

Plus, you can't easily translate the benefits of being a quad legged mech from TT to this game. In TT, you didn't have to turn to change directions as you could just "side step" into the diagonal hex. Also, your weapons were on turrets which means that you didn't need front/back facing weapons. Though, I think that they changed that in edition 2 - one of the more diehards that aren't currently drinking single malt would know better.

This is almost completely wrong. The "side-step" movement did not do much for quads. Nice extra, as was the buffed structure on the front legs and mule-kicks; but the loss of 12 crit slots, limited firing arcs, inability to punch, etc. made for a BAD trade off. Also, turrets on mechs, even quads, is a purely optional rule (which requires refitting most mechs because they weren't initially designed with them) and they are only found on a very small number of mechs.

[Bishop Steiner]

Escef, on 08 January 2016 - 08:28 PM, said:

This is almost completely wrong. The "side-step" movement did not do much for quads. Nice extra, as was the buffed structure on the front legs and mule-kicks; but the loss of 12 crit slots, limited firing arcs, inability to punch, etc. made for a BAD trade off. Also, turrets on mechs, even quads, is a purely optional rule (which requires refitting most mechs because they weren't initially designed with them) and they are only found on a very small number of mechs.

and until Quadvees came along, they weren't full turrets, like on tanks, but essentially just turreted weapon clusters. Good luck aiming those without multiperspective cameras

[Karl Marlow]

I want a tripod mech

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 January 2016 - 07:41 PM, said:

I believe it's not a "unable to" but limited returns on investment. Quads do take a LOT more in rigging, kinematics, etc to make work, and there are relatively few Quads, overall in game, and those quads all have extremely limited crit capability, and no waists for tracking targets.

Almost none would ever be competitively decent (maybe some Light Quads where space ain't an issue), and the comparative returns and demand, are small.

Basically, unless they were Starcitizen flush with cash, it would be a poor investment that would bring them more grief from the "watchdogs" than gratitude (and cash) from the handful of guys like Juodas.

In TT they can kind of crab walk right? So if they had some strafing they'd be pretty interesting. Not worth the man hours of course but

Escef, on 08 January 2016 - 08:28 PM, said:

This is almost completely wrong. The "side-step" movement did not do much for quads. Nice extra, as was the buffed structure on the front legs and mule-kicks; but the loss of 12 crit slots, limited firing arcs, inability to punch, etc. made for a BAD trade off. Also, turrets on mechs, even quads, is a purely optional rule (which requires refitting most mechs because they weren't initially designed with them) and they are only found on a very small number of mechs.

Eh... I find side stepping useful so long as the quad is fast saving it a few movement points and thus letting me move further or move the same distance but letting me walk instead of run and thus improve my modifiers by a step.

Problem is the only quad that this is often a factor for is the scorpion. The rest are just big slow assaults or far in the future.

[VinJade]

tri-pods are 200+ tons only.
also there is no way in hell that those things are stable.
Quads that lose a leg has to make Piloting Skill Rolls iirc.

[KuroNyra]

We should have boss battle against Tripods mech controlled by AI.
Even if only stationnary, that would be awesome.

[VinJade]

oh man I hated the things when they first showed up in DA and I still hate them to this day....

Edited by VinJade, 09 January 2016 - 12:30 AM.

[martian]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 09 January 2016 - 12:09 AM, said:

Problem is the only quad that this is often a factor for is the scorpion. The rest are just big slow assaults or far in the future.

The Tarantula is from 3054. That's not that far in the future.

VinJade, on 09 January 2016 - 12:16 AM, said:

tri-pods are 200+ tons only.
also there is no way in hell that those things are stable.

That's incorrect:
1) Canon Tripods have 75 tons (the Triskelion), 125 tons (the Poseidon) and 135 tons (the Ares). So no 200 tons.
2) Actually, Tripods are very stable. They have some Quad movement bonuses, even though they have only three legs. And because they have dedicated pilot, they have additional piloting bonus.

Edited by martian, 09 January 2016 - 12:40 AM.

[VinJade]

I heard they required a pilot and a gunner along with being 200 tons.
they clearly had to have changed it to allow it for game play.
also the things have no right to have the quad bonus to it.
I hate TW even more now....

Edited by VinJade, 09 January 2016 - 12:36 AM.

[wanderer]

Trauglodyte, on 08 January 2016 - 07:44 PM, said:

Plus, you can't easily translate the benefits of being a quad legged mech from TT to this game. In TT, you didn't have to turn to change directions as you could just "side step" into the diagonal hex. Also, your weapons were on turrets which means that you didn't need front/back facing weapons. Though, I think that they changed that in edition 2 - one of the more diehards that aren't currently drinking single malt would know better.

Actually, turreted weapons on any quad are a very recent development in terms of production models- most quads don't have them at all, and none in the 3050 era. But the different movement capacity is definitely one of the positives. Being able to crabwalk at high speeds sidewise does give you some new tricks...

Bishop Steiner, on 08 January 2016 - 07:41 PM, said:

I believe it's not a "unable to" but limited returns on investment. Quads do take a LOT more in rigging, kinematics, etc to make work, and there are relatively few Quads, overall in game, and those quads all have extremely limited crit capability, and no waists for tracking targets.

Quads gain a considerable piloting bonus due to the more stable arrangement in tabletop- which could translate to better agility here, Make them able to turn wickedly quick and sidestep to help compensate for the lack of torso rotation, and they also have superior resistance to mobility kills- you'd have to saw off two legs to gimp one to the equivalent of legged status, and pretty much burn all four off to kill it in such a fashion (in other words, usually you'll have to torso/head burn it).

Plus, they tend to either be low-hugging (like the Scorpion or have exceptional high firing platforms (like the Goliath). It'd be an interesting evolution of design for MWO- but again, I don't think we'll see them make the effort. Alas.

[martian]

VinJade, on 09 January 2016 - 12:36 AM, said:

I heard they required a pilot and a gunner along with being 200 tons.

Tripods have never had 200 tons.

VinJade, on 09 January 2016 - 12:36 AM, said:

they clearly had to have changed it to allow it for game play.

Even those WizKids Dark Age Tripods had 135 tons, not 200.

VinJade, on 09 January 2016 - 12:36 AM, said:

also the things have no right to have the quad bonus to it.

Of course they have. Three legs make them more stable than classical bipedal designs. And because they have dedicated pilot, such pilot can concentrate only on piloting (under normal circumstances he doesn't have to aim weapons etc.).

VinJade, on 09 January 2016 - 12:36 AM, said:

I hate TW even more now....

What's wrong with Total Warfare? It's the basic rulebook.