93 replies to this topic

[Polymorphyne]

Urban environments were specifically chosen for this game to get away from circle strafing- you wont be able to circle strafe in a narrow alley. Instead you will move around and flank the enemy from a sidestreet.

[Valcoer]

glory, on 08 December 2011 - 01:07 PM, said:

But is the Circle of Death even a problem that needs to be fixed?

Circle of Death is not a problem in team fights. why because the solution to every problem is concentrated firepower. Now in an arena match the circle of death will happen because eventually two pilots with short range weapons will meet and neither will want to be the one standing still and dying " speed is life".

WardNine, on 09 December 2011 - 10:18 AM, said:

There should be HUGE accuracy penalties while moving (not token ones like some First person shooters) (this includes rotating the torso, but not the the extreme of an accuracy penalty while moving.


Followed up with if you stop moving or stop rotating your accuracy increases, but over several seconds (not almost instant).


This way there is an advantage to the fast movers to get behind a mech and still hit him in the rear due to being close and even though their accuracy is bad they can still hit. This will also allow for a heavy to sit still to "aim' in on a surgical shot.


You should not be able to hit the broad side of a barn if you have distance from your enemy and are trying to circle strafe.


Also, for things like missile locks, of you are the one with the missiles and are trying to lock onto a target, the lock should take exponentially longer to obtain if you are moving. Jump jets, walking, torso twisting all should have a varying effect to the length of a lock on, or how soon the accuracy recital settles in.

There should never be a penalty of any kind applied to a pilots shot. With jBeam weapons if he can get you in his reticule and pull the trigger you should get hit. With ballistics if he can lead you and pull the trigger and the trajectory of the bullet intersects your position you should get hit. With lock on missiles if he can hold you in his reticule for the required amount of time the lock should engage and wether you are moving or not should have absolutely no effect on how long it takes to lock. Other wise you should be playing the table top game or an exact replica of that game and leave real mech fighting to the pilots. I want my skill to be the deciding factor in a fight no the roll of the dice.

WardNine, on 09 December 2011 - 12:23 PM, said:

It is about Game play. Even with your example the aircraft that is moving can lock on, but I am sure it would be quicker and even more accurate if it was not moving.

Let me reword from moving should make accuracy worse, to Sitting still should be more accurate then moving

It will be fun if everyone is running in circles or jump jetting over a building to fire a barrages. Let them do so, but the person that is sitting still have more accuracy. Running and then stopping should not give you accuracy almost instantly after you slow down.

It is easy to role play that Mechs have ECM's and if you are moving it takes more calculation time to cut though your opponents Eletronic Counter Measures in order to get an accurate shot.

I cant help myself but to say this if an airplane is not moving it should fall from the sky unless its a vtol jet. But as to the point of what you are saying moving already affects accuracy in mwIV by moving the reticule in tiny bounces. standing still increases the stability of the reticule and hence the accuracy of the shot.

Brakkyn, on 12 December 2011 - 02:21 PM, said:

Thanfully, the developers said they wanted to avoid the typical "circle of death" and jump-sniping fragfests of the past and move into "realistic" 'Mech combat. I hope those days will soon be over, personally. A focus on strategy and tactics is above and beyond pulling a series of Tasmanian devil attacks on your enemies or an endless whack-a-mole with jumping BattleMechs.

I hope the devs realize that they will be just changing one method for another if they adjust the maps to prevent jumpsniping and circle of death they remove two possible tactics from the game hence making tactical selection more predictable and making whichever other tactic that is available the dominant one which I imagine will be slugfesting. so if you deny the two of the three types of play you are left with only one. so we are all going to be running around in the variant of mech that most closely resembles an annhilator.

Longsword, on 13 February 2012 - 12:32 AM, said:

Urban environments were specifically chosen for this game to get away from circle strafing- you wont be able to circle strafe in a narrow alley. Instead you will move around and flank the enemy from a sidestreet.

once again annhilator

in mpbt solaris the tactic of choice was line abreast four dragons carrying ac2 fading the enemy at range could take almost any lance other than four dragons carrying ac2 trying to fade. and of course the valkry light mech with its single ppc could take the annhilator every time unless the light pilot charged.

in mechwarrior 4 the tactic of choice was highlanders carrying light guass and jump jets and the terrain was quite varried unlike mpbt where the terrain was always flat. jump sniping was a result of more varried terrain and extreme long range weapons

heading and legging have always been around for as long as shooting a mech in the back. in the immortal words of Duncan Fischer " any tactic that is not expressly forbidden is fair game" The circle of death is the reality of the knife fighters world where a pilot can equip his loki with two ac20 and run practically backwards if he chooses. but the knife fighter always lost to the jump sniper and heaven forbid all the maps be city maps the inner sphere will never recover from all those home wreching maps. so make them all city maps and watch as the slugfest beggins.

[Havoc2]

WTFClock, on 12 February 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

I personally try to stay away from circle fighting. I'll walk backwards, away from the enemy mech, and fire. I generally use PPCs or missiles to nudge the enemy mech so it loses accuracy.

A very useful tactic assuming that you out-range your opponent(s).

A useless tactic if your enemy out-ranges you, or you both have the same loadout.

Circle of Death allows you the benefits of being a moving target, which is harder to hit. It also helps you to maintain your range which is VERY important if you out range your opponent. Hitting them while they can't hit you is a good thing. This is why the CoD works and why it's used.


I have a feeling it's some TT purists who think that BattleMechs should be walking turrets, not mobile weapons platforms.

[Yeach]

}{avoc, on 13 February 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

I have a feeling it's some TT purists who think that BattleMechs should be walking turrets, not mobile weapons platforms.

+1

[3Xtr3m3]

Technocide Rex, on 09 December 2011 - 10:32 AM, said:

Amazing. The word filter blocked my legitimate use of the word "N*a*z*i" fighters. Political correctness has gone to ridiculous extremes...

Did somebody mention my name? Though I take umbrage at the "ridiculous". Just wait till I get you in a circle of equals.

[Rastan]

Stormwolf, on 08 December 2011 - 12:36 PM, said:

I don't mind a good old circle of death.

It is the best way for lights and mediums to destroy a assault.

+1

This is just good tactics.. never played the dice game but this was a consistant strategy in the video games.
also coming in from behind with fast mechs and hitting the rear armor.

there is no way you can take a light/med mech and go face to face with a heavy/assault mech and expect to survive any other way.
and even then your chances ain't great.

with really fast mech's I'd also go full bore, jump jet, and leap frog and attack from behind, that also worked pretty well.

I don't know why they would wanna limit the circle fight, it's bread and butter tactic.

[Yeach]

From all the new videos I don't see how circle of death fighting will be reduced from what it was in previous mechwarrior games.

Edited by Yeach, 08 May 2012 - 08:11 PM.

[Pyotr]

Yeach, on 08 May 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:

From all the new videos I don't see how circle of death fighting will be reduced from what it was in previous mechwarrior games.

I disagree - the high degree of variability in the terrain on the map shown would make it quite difficult to circle of death in 'mechs with high turning radii. They'd keep running into ravines and hills, which limits circle of death fighting by making it difficult or impossible to maintain for an extended period of time.

[StandingCow]

I think it will happen a lot 1v1... but you also have to keep your eyes peeled for a 2nd mech joining the fight.. Also, a heavy/assult mech wouldn't do well just trying to get into a circle fight with a light/med mech since they wouldn't only even get a shot off the the light made a mistake.

[warner2]

Obelus, on 08 December 2011 - 12:51 PM, said:

The combat was pretty simple in the earlier PC games. The hardest part was looking one way while moving in another. Generally the battles were all the same - you run around in circles and shoot off one of their legs so they fall over and blow up while hoping you don't run out of LRMs or off a cliff.

Hope they can add some real tactical complexity to this game.

That's so off base. Not sure where you got that experience from, but organised games in leagues such as MWL and NBT almost never turned out into teams running circles around each other.

There is a tendency on these forums to over egg this idea that prior MW games were somehow tactically inferior whereas actually what was inferior was the group of players playing it and the rules they played by (e.g. re-spawn on some open server). Any NBT vet will tell you that this simply isn't the case.

[warner2]

WTFClock, on 12 February 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

I personally try to stay away from circle fighting. I'll walk backwards, away from the enemy mech, and fire. I generally use PPCs or missiles to nudge the enemy mech so it loses accuracy.

This is a bad tactic for equally matched mechs since you will be the easier to hit as you are backing up in a straight line whereas the other guy is moving perpendicular to you.

This is a good tactic for a larger mech being attacked by a smaller mech who is running circles around it. Did you see in the assault video at IGN where the Atlas had trouble tracking a circling Jenner? A good tactic here is to do what you suggest, reverse and turn, hopefully keeping the Jenner in your sights for longer.

[Mike Silva]

}{avoc, on 13 February 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

I have a feeling it's some TT purists who think that BattleMechs should be walking turrets, not mobile weapons platforms.

A turret is a weapons platform. Walking is a form of mobility. Therefor BattleMechs are mobile weapons turrets.

I really don't understand the difference between the two things you're trying to highlight. To me it's the same as saying "I have the feeling that math purists think that 1.0 + 1.0 = 2.0, not 1 + 1 = 2."

Circle strafing is a valid tactic.... and shooting circle strafers in the back because they aren't paying attention to you is also a valid tactic.

[warner2]

Mike Silva, on 09 May 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

A turret is a weapons platform. Walking is a form of mobility. Therefor BattleMechs are mobile weapons turrets.

I really don't understand the difference between the two things you're trying to highlight. To me it's the same as saying "I have the feeling that math purists think that 1.0 + 1.0 = 2.0, not 1 + 1 = 2."

Circle strafing is a valid tactic.... and shooting circle strafers in the back because they aren't paying attention to you is also a valid tactic.

In-fact I think you two are violently agreeing with one another, as they say.

[PANZERBUNNY]

GaussDragon, on 08 December 2011 - 12:27 PM, said:

I remember the devs saying they wanted to limit circle-strafing. Personally, I have no problem with it because I can't see two mechs standing still and exchanging blows. Seems like a rather organic by-product of close-range combat IMHO. One way the devs plan to limit it is by having a significant amount of urban maps though I specifically remember Bryan Ekman saying in one post close to a month ago that not all maps are going to urban.

I would think that open field confrontations are rare as combat takes place near points of interest or in the rare case of large operations, ambushes with troops in transit etc.

I always thought it was weird that lances would be facing off against each other like Napoleonic warfare.