43 replies to this topic

[invernomuto]

In some BT novels I've read hits of particular strenghts (e.g. a big LRM salvo or a PPC hit) could knock down a mech. I know that in the early days in MWO the gameplay had a knock down feature: how it worked?
Why it was removed?
I think it could be interesting to bring it back, some weapons with big pinpoint damage (e.g. PPCs) could trigger a knock down chance for each mech.
IIRC also the BT TT game has a knock down percentage if mech were hit or tried some difficult manouvers.
What do you think about it?

[MeiSooHaityu]

And not just s knock down for the target, but maybe a knockdown (or at least stagger) for the mech firing as well if they alpha strike with a lot of heavy kick weapons .

Knockdown was removed because of two reasons.

1. It could be abused and not very fun for a target that is being continuously knocked down with no chance to retaliate (see the video on YouTube of Paul being repeatedly knocked to the ground)

2. The game (or maybe I should say the net code) has a hard time calculating the position of a downed mech. Often when a mech was knocked down, it would warp and rubber band as it fell and as it got up. Also, as a mech laid on the ground, shots wouldn't register (probably because the mech wasn't really in the position you saw it in as far as the server was concerned).

Basically the mechanic was a hot mess. In it's previous implementation it was only fun to trolls (see Dragon Bowling) and it didn't work right.

That's why I HIGHLY doubt knockdown will ever make it back into MWO.

[DerMaulwurf]

MeiSooHaityu, on 02 June 2016 - 03:46 AM, said:

And not just s knock down for the target, but maybe a knockdown (or at least stagger) for the mech firing as well if they alpha strike with a lot of heavy kick weapons .

Knockdown was removed because of two reasons.

1. It could be abused and not very fun for a target that is being continuously knocked down with no chance to retaliate (see the video on YouTube of Paul being repeatedly knocked to the ground)

2. The game (or maybe I should say the net code) has a hard time calculating the position of a downed mech. Often when a mech was knocked down, it would warp and rubber band as it fell and as it got up. Also, as a mech laid on the ground, shots wouldn't register (probably because the mech wasn't really in the position you saw it in as far as the server was concerned).

Basically the mechanic was a hot mess. In it's previous implementation it was only fun to trolls (see Dragon Bowling) and it didn't work right.

That's why I HIGHLY doubt knockdown will ever make it back into MWO.

I'm not convinced by the first point. Doing that requires you to have a significant numerical advantage over your opponent. Which is a situation where you die without much chance to retaliate anyway.

It was glitchy as ****, though.

[Depressing-Fire]

Dragon Bowling.

[Alistair Winter]

I agree that it would be interesting to bring it back. There are a lot of people who claim it will ruin the game, because PGI couldn't get it to work in closed beta.

I would suggest that there are many ways in which knockdowns could be implemented. Just because one way proved inadequate doesn't mean that knockdowns are fundamentally bad for the game.

However, PGI hasn't mentioned knockdowns in years and since NGNG doesn't ask about them during Town Halls, I guess we won't know if it's still something PGI wants to do in the future.

[MeiSooHaityu]

DerMaulwurf, on 02 June 2016 - 04:01 AM, said:

I'm not convinced by the first point. Doing that requires you to have a significant numerical advantage over your opponent. Which is a situation where you die without much chance to retaliate anyway.

It was glitchy as ****, though.

Well, there are many matches (most matches really) where one team eventually outnumbers the remaining mech. I could see a team having fun with a remaining player and knocking him/her around a bit before finally finishing them off.

Besides, one point I didn't remember to mention. If the knockdown was fixed and not glitchy, it would severely nerf lights and many medium mechs.

Knockdown was supposed to take a mechs weight into account. Light mechs would get knocked down fairly frequently (even by bumping into heavier mechs), and we all know what happens to a light that isn't moving...Boom!

If you wanted a good way to kill a light, shoot it, knock it down, and then blast it before it gets up. Lights would drop like flies...litterally.

[Zuesacoatl]

Dragon bowling. I think it was the goons that did it to Paul. There were plenty of trolls who abused it, and nothing would change now. People would find a way to exploit the mechanic.

[Karl Streiger]

Really is there a price to say the two words "Dragon Bowling" as soon as somebody ask for Knockdown?

Was the Knockdown mechanic great - it was; was it working no it wasn't. But the main issue was the speed - move backward hit an Atlas in your Centurion and you went down.
So it has to dependend on speed, mass and vector... might need some heavy coding

When you run into a catapult from 6 o'clock - the Catapult might not even fall it stagger but thats it. But comning from 3 o'clock moving with some decent speed as does the Catapult, well Hail to the concrete.


While it would be a nice addition, I'm currently not convinced that it would something to the game that is worth the afford.

[invernomuto]

Thanks for the explanations. I saw in a video that the knock down was tied with collisions: if you run into another mech, it could fall back to the ground. I agree with you that this kind of feature could be exploited easily.
My idea was to have knock down "tied" only to the damage received: some weapons (again, PPCs or AC/20 or similar "high damage" weapons) could have as "a bonus effect" to trigger a chance to knock down the enemy mech that is hit. Some piloting skill could reduce this chance. Light could have a less chance to be knocked down and a "fast recovery" after knock down due to their size and agility (IMHO they should get up a lot faster than an Atlas or a Kodiak).
I think it could be a nice feature if implemented correctly.
I agree that maybe there are better thinks to spend resources on, it's just for the sake of discussion, some food for thought.

Edited by invernomuto, 02 June 2016 - 04:35 AM.

[SmoothCriminal]

Someone post the video of the Goons and Paul to explain why this is not going to happen for a while.

[Ted Wayz]

You know those things that sound good in novels and games but do not make any sense according to the laws of engineering and physics? Knockdown is one of them.

[Novakaine]

Because a group of jackasses decided it was funny to knock down a dev.
And post stupid videos oi on YouTube.
Simple truth.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I think that if knockdown was strictly tied to weapon strikes and not collision, that would be better.

Assuming the net code wasn't an issue and it could be implemented tomorrow with no hiccups...

Maybe weapons like the LBXs could have a higher knockdown chance to help buff them a bit (they need all the help in the world). Maybe because the shots are spread out, the could be considered more of a blunt shove on contact vs a piercing hit of a standard round.

Also, maybe knockdown chance could be reduced in the skill tree. Remove pinpoint (which does jack squat anyway) and replace it with a knock down avoidance perk.

Lights still seem to be a problem though. Even with a buff to aid in a quick recovery, they still would be very vulnerable (same with lighter medium chassis).

It's tricky. Even if it could be implemented easily and hit detection was really good, it still seems to really hurt a lighter chassis more than a heavier one (not to mention a heavier chassis is probably the only mechs capable of knocking anything down in the first place).

It just seems too unbalanced of a mechanic

[invernomuto]

Ted Wayz, on 02 June 2016 - 04:48 AM, said:

You know those things that sound good in novels and games but do not make any sense according to the laws of engineering and physics? Knockdown is one of them.

Also 100 tons humanoid mechs does not make any sense according to the same laws.

[Ted Wayz]

invernomuto, on 02 June 2016 - 04:56 AM, said:

Also 100 tons humanoid mechs does not make any sense according to the same laws.

Why not? I can use the actual laws of physics to prove my point, and have in various threads. What supports your supposition? Have you seen the advances in PBA and robotics in the last ten years?

[Nightbird]

Picture a 100 pound woman sprinting full speed into a 200 pound man, is the woman going to bounce back and fall over? No, and moreover if she runs into the mans back she'd probably knock him down. If you want to ask for this, be prepared for the consequences cuz 100-200 pound people can sprint at the same speed, but not mechs. The physics and result is not what you imagine it to be.

P.S. knock down with weapons don't happen, not unless they also knock down the shooter.

Edited by ironnightbird, 02 June 2016 - 05:16 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

ironnightbird, on 02 June 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

P.S. knock down with weapons don't happen, not unless they also knock down the shooter.

That would create yet another reason for mechs to stick with lasers. We wouldn't need another reason to support laser vomit :/.

BTW, in a game like this I think you can fudge the physics a bit to accomplish a desired result for a mechanic. Sure it won't really be accurate, but it really needs to SEEM believable enough to satisfy the majority of the players. As long as it could pass as believable on the surface without thinking too hard about it, it is probably acceptable.

Gameplay occasionally has to come before accuracy (as long as it doesn't butcher it so bad you are left thinking WTF?).

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 02 June 2016 - 05:29 AM.

[invernomuto]

Ted Wayz, on 02 June 2016 - 05:02 AM, said:

Why not? I can use the actual laws of physics to prove my point, and have in various threads. What supports your supposition? Have you seen the advances in PBA and robotics in the last ten years?

Square-cube law, for example:

https://en.wikipedia...Square-cube_law

When something increases in size, its volume increases faster than its area. If you double the size of an object for instance, surface area increases by four times, but the volume of that object, which is all the space inside it, increases eightfold.

So you will have to deal with a weight that increase exponentially: That's why, for example, modern main battle tanks are limited to 40-50 tons and we do not have huge monstruosity like the 188 tons Maus of late ww2 era.

Also aircrafts have the same limitations: you cannot make a larger aircraft by simply doubling the proportion of a 747 and think that it will fly: it needs greater wingspan to lift the increased weight.

Imagine a 100 tons robot with its enormous weight distributed on 2 legs: Those legs are going to punch through anything remotely pliable like dirt, sand, grassland, concrete, streets, etc...

Cheers,
D.

Edited by invernomuto, 02 June 2016 - 05:33 AM.

[Hit the Deck]

also:

[invernomuto]

ironnightbird, on 02 June 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

P.S. knock down with weapons don't happen, not unless they also knock down the shooter.

Could you please elaborate this point?