33 replies to this topic

[MechWarrior319348]

Destructible buildings.

Edited by Delta 62, 30 May 2016 - 07:18 PM.

[Gorgo7]

Probably be better if said objects had value for destroying or protecting them...come to think of it perhaps they could move...say follow a road in a convoy...of soft skinned vehicles that a machine gun armed Locust could obliterate...

[MechWarrior319348]

Yeah that kind of stuff is fun. I wonder how hard it would be for them to design buildings that can crash in on themselves if you shoot them enough.

you would end up with a pile of rubble that could still be used for some cover. But if someone were standing on that building... ooooooo

Maybe what we need is a propane bottle launcher weapon. It would roll to the enemy and then you would shoot it,

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Ever since the old MechCommander days, I've thought that it'd be great to have explosive fuel tanks, pressurized gas canisters, and other means of environmental destruction. Give us a spaceport with hazards, a mech factory with dangerous molten rivers of metal, and a munitions depot with ammo crates and lots of secondary explosives.

[BearFlag]

Nooooo. Pleeeease.

If PGI is going to devote time to Cryengine, please save the cutsie stuff for last. No more domino trees.

Things that have a direct impact on game play should come first. Variable base locations, initially hidden base (or other objective) location, preset but randomized drop locations, alternate drop locations, variable exclusion zones, releasable exclusion zones...

Code for things that will improve existing game modes and allow richer and more dynamic play in future modes.

Sorry. The proposal would be fun ... I just think there are greater priorities.

[Raubwurst]

Same optinion as BearFlag. In addition: To make such destructible things wouldn't be the problem. Pretty sure PGI could do it without much trouble. The problem would be, that explosions and crashing things eat up performance and I'd say that most people in MWO would rather play a game with a decent amount of FPs and without destructible/volatile things, then the other way around.

[MechWarrior319348]

BearFlag, on 28 May 2016 - 09:27 PM, said:

Nooooo. Pleeeease.

If PGI is going to devote time to Cryengine, please save the cutsie stuff for last. No more domino trees.

Things that have a direct impact on game play should come first. Variable base locations, initially hidden base (or other objective) location, preset but randomized drop locations, alternate drop locations, variable exclusion zones, releasable exclusion zones...

Code for things that will improve existing game modes and allow richer and more dynamic play in future modes.

Sorry. The proposal would be fun ... I just think there are greater priorities.

You know what I wonder about though?

MW2 had buildings that you could destroy; even separate levels of the building. In MW3 and 4 Im pretty sure there was stuff you could blow up. And even Mechassault (xbox game, the first xbox) had buildings that you could blast chunks out of, and if you ran into something then it would cause it to crumble.

So I dont understand why they could did these kinds of things in the past with limited hardware, yet its such a struggle to do in a modern game.

Also I dont know too much about creating maps and programing... and stuff. So maybe I'm not seeing it clearly?

Edited by Delta 62, 28 May 2016 - 09:56 PM.

[LordNothing]

i would love more destructable objects, but they have to serve a purpose beyond eye candy. like blowing up a bridge for strategic value. or demolishing a barricade to gain a shortcut. perhaps destructible fuel tanks that will overheat any mech near by.

i also want more map hazzards, like the lava on terra therma or the hot zone in caustic valley. walking through fire should overheat you.

the maps in this game are really dead and have no character. pls work on that.

[MechWarrior319348]

LordNothing, on 28 May 2016 - 10:29 PM, said:

i would love more destructable objects, but they have to serve a purpose beyond eye candy. like blowing up a bridge for strategic value. or demolishing a barricade to gain a shortcut. perhaps destructible fuel tanks that will overheat any mech near by.

i also want more map hazzards, like the lava on terra therma or the hot zone in caustic valley. walking through fire should overheat you.

the maps in this game are really dead and have no character. pls work on that.

Im diggin what you're saying.

[Juodas Varnas]

Volatile map objects? You mean teammates?

[wanderer]

Delta 62, on 28 May 2016 - 06:31 PM, said:

Would it be a bad idea to have things like gas tanks around the map that explode when you shoot them, causing some damage in the area oround it?''

We Doom now?

Give me cover I can reduce to rubble and the like before we start in with the giant robot equivalent of exploding barrels.

[MechWarrior319348]

wanderer, on 28 May 2016 - 11:20 PM, said:

We Doom now?

Give me cover I can reduce to rubble and the like before we start in with the giant robot equivalent of exploding barrels.

Hmm, my excellent reading comprehension tells me you are for this.

[wanderer]

Delta 62, on 28 May 2016 - 11:52 PM, said:

Hmm, my excellent reading comprehension tells me you are for this.

I'm looking forward to the first wiseguy who sets off an artillery barrage from thousands of meters away while your team is navigating those liquefied gas storage tanks.

PUG_Punchingbag was destroyed by Map
WHAT_THE was destroyed by Map
LOLIdunno was destroyed by Map

Etc, etc.

Give me terrain features that I can level, sure. Turning parts of the maps into bombs that stray fire can detonate, not so much.

[LordNothing]

i also want death pits. no game is complete without death pits.

falling hazzards. i want large structures that i can climb, and falling should break your legs.

Edited by LordNothing, 29 May 2016 - 12:39 AM.

[TheArisen]

I like this. Not on every map but it'd be fun.

If done well there could be a tradeoff between risking the dangerous route & safer but less advantageous one. Maybe the ship on River city could be destroyed & it could do some area DMG. It would need a fair amount of fire to set off but it'd be cool.

I'd prefer objects that take considerable fire to set off because then there's a fair chance ppl will go there if the position is otherwise strong enough.

But I admit, I'd also like destructible buildings, etc.

[El Bandito]

Delta 62, on 28 May 2016 - 07:55 PM, said:

Yeah that kind of stuff is fun. I wonder how hard it would be for them to design buildings that can crash in on themselves if you shoot them enough.

you would end up with a pile of rubble that could still be used for some cover. But if someone were standing on that building... ooooooo

Like this? https://youtu.be/OC2lsZU_Y4A?t=48

[MechWarrior319348]

El Bandito, on 29 May 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

Like this? https://youtu.be/OC2lsZU_Y4A?t=48

Yep

Also, i was trying to embed a video the other day and have it start at a certain time, but adding the code in the link messed it up.

Judging from your link, is it simply not possible? At first I thought it was just me messing it up.

[MechWarrior319348]

wanderer, on 28 May 2016 - 11:20 PM, said:

We Doom now?

Give me cover I can reduce to rubble and the like before we start in with the giant robot equivalent of exploding barrels.

hehe..... why not though? Don't this look fun?

[Mechwarrior1441491]

If we could take out buildings and someone is standing on one, yes. More non mech avenues of damage should be discouraged. We already have 2 arty and a Long Tom in Invasion. You don't need your mech gimped because you were standing next to something. People would simply avoid those areas and make the areas of contact even smaller on our already small maps.

[MechWarrior319348]

So instead of volatile and dangerous objects around the map; we would rather just have destructible buildings?

I can dig that. It would be very influential in the tactics we see in the game. You might have to demolish a building to get a good firing line for example.