19 replies to this topic

[Pariah Devalis]

This is not related to the Hot Drop thread. What I'm wondering is how the developers will use dropships in the missions we, as players, will need to undertake.

Back in Mechwarrior 2, Dropships seemed majestic, deadly, and often were some sort of objective or massive, strategic threat. Whether aerodyne or spherical, the way they interacted with the player and the game space was something that I felt feel flat in the sequels since. I remember missions where you had to hold out long enough for a dropship to get through orbital burn and pick you up, where you were desperately holding the line, hearing your computer chiming away about DROPSHIP ETA: 30 SECONDS, and being rewarded shortly thereafter by seeing the vessel swoop in through the skies, make a loop to bleed off inertia, hover overhead, and touch down, lending fire support all the while.

They seemed more significant back then. More real. Come mechwarrior 3 and 4, they generally seemed to just sit there and shoot. Sure there were a couple scenes where an overlord or union would be lifting off or landing, but those felt pretty linear. Did less to heighten or relieve tension then act as an incredibly well armed count down timer to failure as it flew all of straight up.

TL;DR: So how would you desire the developers to utilize Dropships in game, precisely, to try and make them as substantial as they deserve to be?

[cabadrin]

I think the best way to utilize dropships (if at all) are as objectives to either capture or destroy. They can have weapon emplacements or not, but I think having them be static objectives makes the most sense. If you have played games like League of Legends or DOTA, the idea of static emplacements you need to move around or destroy may be the closest analogy. You could either have one on either side, with the objective to destroy the opponenet's, or have a capturable one that provided benefits to your team.

[Ghost]

cabadrin, on 07 December 2011 - 08:16 AM, said:

I think the best way to utilize dropships (if at all) are as objectives to either capture or destroy. They can have weapon emplacements or not, but I think having them be static objectives makes the most sense. If you have played games like League of Legends or DOTA, the idea of static emplacements you need to move around or destroy may be the closest analogy. You could either have one on either side, with the objective to destroy the opponenet's, or have a capturable one that provided benefits to your team.

I'm laughing to myself just imagining DOTA with 'Mechs.

[Threat Doc]

I agree with Pariah Devalis, a DropShip should be something majestic AND deadly at the same time. I don't know what sort of DropShip they had in the MechWarrior 4 series, but it was most definitely no DropShip I'm familiar with, and certainly not a Leopard-Class. I think calling in a DropShip should be one of those things a Commander can do to be able to jump off a battlefield, if necessary, if your opponent will not allow you a tactical retreat for repairs, etc. I would love to see a Union-Class sweep in overhead, firing its weapons, and allowing for a tactical retreat, and I would also like to see penalties for people who burn down a DropShip. It stands to reason that, were there a live-pilot at the helm of a DropShip, and they are made to understand that a unit burned down another DropShip in a former mission, they would charge more for their services.

Is it just me, or did anyone else have a problem burning down the Union's in MW4: Mercenaries?

[Paladin1]

Nope, just you Kay. I've burnt up more Unions and Leopards than I care to remember in my TT games, but hey that's war, right?

[Skwisgaar Skwigelf]

Kay Wolf, on 07 December 2011 - 08:47 AM, said:

Is it just me, or did anyone else have a problem burning down the Union's in MW4: Mercenaries?

If you aimed specifically at the engines then they came apart pretty easily. Just had to stand back out of weapon range and plink away.

[Ghost]

Skwisgaar Skwigelf, on 07 December 2011 - 09:19 AM, said:

If you aimed specifically at the engines then they came apart pretty easily. Just had to stand back out of weapon range and plink away.

I saw the speedrun had the player in something beefy and jump capable, hiding behind a hill and hopping up and down sniping the weapons emplacements.

[Skwisgaar Skwigelf]

I think I remember having a pair of clan ERPPCs that had longer range than the weapons on the dropship. I just stood back and ordered my lancemates to attack as decoys while I poured PPC fire at the engines on the base of the dropship.

[Alex Wolfe]

Skwisgaar Skwigelf, on 07 December 2011 - 09:28 AM, said:

I think I remember having a pair of clan ERPPCs that had longer range than the weapons on the dropship. I just stood back and ordered my lancemates to attack as decoys while I poured PPC fire at the engines on the base of the dropship.

Why use decoys when you outrange a stationary enemy though?

[Kodiak Jorgensson]

Pariah Devalis, on 07 December 2011 - 08:00 AM, said:

This is not related to the Hot Drop thread. What I'm wondering is how the developers will use dropships in the missions we, as players, will need to undertake.

Back in Mechwarrior 2, Dropships seemed majestic, deadly, and often were some sort of objective or massive, strategic threat. Whether aerodyne or spherical, the way they interacted with the player and the game space was something that I felt feel flat in the sequels since. I remember missions where you had to hold out long enough for a dropship to get through orbital burn and pick you up, where you were desperately holding the line, hearing your computer chiming away about DROPSHIP ETA: 30 SECONDS, and being rewarded shortly thereafter by seeing the vessel swoop in through the skies, make a loop to bleed off inertia, hover overhead, and touch down, lending fire support all the while.

They seemed more significant back then. More real. Come mechwarrior 3 and 4, they generally seemed to just sit there and shoot. Sure there were a couple scenes where an overlord or union would be lifting off or landing, but those felt pretty linear. Did less to heighten or relieve tension then act as an incredibly well armed count down timer to failure as it flew all of straight up.

TL;DR: So how would you desire the developers to utilize Dropships in game, precisely, to try and make them as substantial as they deserve to be?

i would love to see dropships used in the way they where used in Mw2 also, lvoed the hot drop they did on MW2 GBL.

[Threat Doc]

(slaps head, leaves thread shaking head)

[Skwisgaar Skwigelf]

Alex Wolfe, on 07 December 2011 - 09:33 AM, said:

Why use decoys when you outrange a stationary enemy though?

Ok not decoys but extra firepower then. Poor choice of words.

[Kaemon]

Player controlled (in conquest mode only), or semi controlled, and for pickup/drop off only (you would have minimum weaps to use to defend yourself as you would be a live target).

Otherwise it's NPC (hits specific coords and drops mechs), if your mech dies you have the option of continuing to help in teh battle by moving to the dropship, and picking up/moving units around the battlefield.

If your dropship gets shot down, you suffer lack of movement penalties (at least for your heavy/assualts as now they have to walk across the battlefield) and no more reinforcements until the end of battle.

think of the salvage on a downed dropship with mechs inside....*drools*

obviously there's alot of options in that to limit or expand as the devs feel they need to.

[Paladin1]

Skwisgaar Skwigelf, on 07 December 2011 - 09:19 AM, said:

If you aimed specifically at the engines then they came apart pretty easily. Just had to stand back out of weapon range and plink away.

See, this I have a problem with. You shouldn't be able to stand outside of the dropship's weapon range with anything less than an AC/2 or a Clan ER Large Laser. Everything else can be matched by that Union's weapon bays.

[Skwisgaar Skwigelf]

Paladin1, on 07 December 2011 - 10:17 AM, said:

See, this I have a problem with. You shouldn't be able to stand outside of the dropship's weapon range with anything less than an AC/2 or a Clan ER Large Laser. Everything else can be matched by that Union's weapon bays.

I don't disagree with that, especially with this era's IS weaponry. That's just how that particular setup worked in that particular game for me.

[Paladin1]

I don't doubt that it worked, but I do have to wonder if the Union's weapon bays were modeled correctly in the other game. I don't mind using (read: abusing) a trick that works, but I'm also a stickler for making sure that the trick is actually a legitimate tactic and not due to a faulty environmental aspect, such as what I suspect happened with your Union.

Me personally? I'd have wanted to pound it with artillery but I'm more of a TT campaign gamer than a video gamer.

[Tannhauser Gate]

In MW4's game editor I put some mech AIs in a couple of drop ships and dropped against them on a map. They flew all over the map chasing me, shooting gauss and ppcs. It was great fun.

As for MWO, do it right or dont do it at all. Dont make them limp sickly looking like MW4s

[Wolf Hreda]

MW2 style, definitely. MW4's dropships were just... Anemic. Not a real threat to anyone unless you stood still and let it bring its gauss rifles to bear.

[Agasutin]

Dropships + C3 = ridiculous long range radar for Mech pilots.

[MilitantMonk]

The reason dropships where so much more awesome in MW2 then the rest of the series was that they were used as a story or plot device to up the suspense. It was very 'here comes the calvary' rather then the 'there's a big lump of Gauss Rifles on the horizon.' If something like this can be done that'd be awesome. Such as having a commander being able to call in a mobile resupply where a dropship swings down and saves the day allowing your team to continue the advance with full ammo bins.