70 replies to this topic

[TheArisen]

Tordin, on 01 November 2016 - 01:33 PM, said:

Makes sense if to hit lower target that the torso mounted weapons cant reach/ aim well towards. Again, wouldnt it be fitting having some kind of cameras, linked to the hud for each arm? Especially if the cockpit wont allow you to look below so well. Take the Maulers cockpit view vs, say a Summoners.


Off topic I know but couldnt resist
I find it a bit arrogant to believe mechs cant be built in real life, similar to BT ones. Some fine tuning in apperance needed for function maybe, while still look like the original deal.
They said we humans wouldnt ever invent something like a car/ take to the skies/ invent internett/ land on the moon/ find other planets/ make stealth fighters/ create artificial diamonds better than the real deal/ gene therapy and so on, look where we are now. NOTHING is impossible.
Tech and vision are evolving, adapting, improving every minute.
As I see it, mechs shouldnt or cant replace tanks but complement each other likke buddies of war.Mechs and tanks working with jets are imo no sci-fi.
Well of course alot are in the BT universe but still! One day....

The most plausible style robot in fiction I've seen are Votoms although the 20t Locust could be pretty useful.

But in practical terms an Atlas sized mech presents a lot of surface area that can't be armored like a tank.

[Charronn]

Unless you want to gimp yourself there is no logic.
If you want hardcore mode be my guest.
You will get ripped apart

[Bud Crue]

Prosperity Park, on 01 November 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

My attitude might not be "useful" but I am right. We have low mounts because PGI won't update the old BattleTech Mech designs in order to not disrupt the Nostalgia factor. Only the old generation of Battletech fans want to retain the classic non-combat designs; the current generation of Gamers actually want something more realistic and immersive, and we get shunned for it.

Oh come now, "more realistic and immersive" is a contradictory statement given this IP. If anyone is looking for realism they are in the wrong game. If they are looking for immersion...oh...I guess they are in the wrong game too.

Anyway to your point, if all we had were "realistic" high mount designs we'd have a few different versions of the Black Jack/Rifleman/Jagger motiff combined with the shoulder mounts of the Hunchy/Shadowhawk and little else. Why would there by anything else. Why would you bother with a Warhammer or even something like a Maddog? That "realism" would be boring and not sell more than those few designs.

[Appogee]

They were designed by Apple. So they look way cool ... but aren't as functional as they should be.

Edited by Appogee, 01 November 2016 - 02:45 PM.

[Bombast]

Dakota1000, on 01 November 2016 - 02:34 PM, said:

In lore mechs could raise their arms, so there actually weren't any low mounted hardpoints, an Atlas would just raise its arm similar to a super battle droid and fire when it needs to for example. Sadly they just don't add that in game.

Battletech: The Video Game is going to be interesting, what with them taking PGI models and making them do thing like punch each other, which presumably means full shoulder rotation. The Atlas is either going to look stupid or awesome.

Wonder if PGI can be convinced to 'take back' some of the HBS movement models. Then maybe the Atlas and other humanoid mechs will get the high points everyone craves.

Edited by Bombast, 01 November 2016 - 02:46 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Bombast, on 01 November 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

Halloween was yesterday, man. You can put the strawmen back in the attic for next year.

Not a strawman. The neckbeards will rip you a new one if you ask for high hardpoints because they say Meta Tryhards always want high mounts.

[Bombast]

Prosperity Park, on 01 November 2016 - 02:50 PM, said:

Not a strawman. The neckbeards will rip you a new one if you ask for high hardpoints because they say Meta Tryhards always want high mounts.

Care to back that claim up? The only thing anyone has brought up in here is variety.

And the fact that there's only 2-4 ways to get high mounts, so if every mech had them, there's only be a handful of ones in game. And the fact that high point mechs of every variety already exist, so if you want to min-max get a Kodiak, every single mech in the game doesn't need to cater to you.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Bud Crue, on 01 November 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

Oh come now, "more realistic and immersive" is a contradictory statement given this IP. If anyone is looking for realism they are in the wrong game. If they are looking for immersion...oh...I guess they are in the wrong game too.

Anyway to your point, if all we had were "realistic" high mount designs we'd have a few different versions of the Black Jack/Rifleman/Jagger motiff combined with the shoulder mounts of the Hunchy/Shadowhawk and little else. Why would there by anything else. Why would you bother with a Warhammer or even something like a Maddog? That "realism" would be boring and not sell more than those few designs.

Why would you want a Warhammer? You wouldn't. It's a dumb design.

And it is possible to get more immersion from a stompy robot game by simply not having ridiculous attributes for a fantasy weapon system. It's just anti-immersive to see such bad designs make it out of the Mech factories. I know that BattleMechs are unrealistic, but you don't need to pour stupidity on non-realism.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I guess I come from a minority of gamers who like the BattleTech/Mechwarrior systems of customization and damage compartmentalization more than the comic-book Mech designs it comes with.

I mean there is no way I would play Mechwarrior games without damage compartmentalization or customization. That's why I am here. The Mech designs? Those are things I have to deal with.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 01 November 2016 - 03:02 PM.

[Dee Eight]

Bud Crue, on 01 November 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

Becasue when FASA stole were inspired by the designs from Harmony Gold, they didn't think they would have to dump all the cool stuff and come up with half-as ed designs like the cataphract.

Harmony had nothing to do with it. FASA used artwork from major japanese anime involving mechs/mecha of the period. That included Fang of the Sun Dougram, Crusher Joe and Super Dimensional Fortress Macross. Harmony themselves licensed their use of the artwork, but ironically in both cases neither H.G. nor FASA actually went to the proper place (the original studios in Japan that actually created the original anime and owned the concepts, artwork, characters, stories, etc) and thus neither properly secured the needed rights. This didn't stop H.G. from trying to bully others over the next fifteen years or so but a Japanese court did in 2006. Harmony btw hadn't even licensed the animation for macross yet to start work on Robotech when FASA was already printing their boardgame and selling it to the public (in fact two of the three super dimensional series whose animation is seen in the opening and closing credits of the Robotech TV series, hadn't even finished their original japanese TV broadcast runs yet).

Quote

Or maybe the low mount designs were derived from ag mechs and the weapons mounts were really intended for ground work. Rather than fix/raise the mounts they left em low since that's where they were in the original frame/chassis of the ag mech from which the new battlemech was manufactured. I.e. the designers were just unimaginative and cheap...in this hypothetical attempt at nerd loreing it.

It had to do with the original source material, who's weapon placements also had to deal with fighting different size targets, not merely other giant sized mechs / aliens. But even in the real world, there are practical reasons as to why not every weapon is placed at the maximum height on a vehicle.

[Blue Boutique]

The fixed targeting reticle is the flaw that makes the low mounted weapons bad. How many times had I lost a grasshopper, black Knight or an Orion while unable to target a hugging light mech with my low mount weapons.

[TheLuc]

Bombast, on 01 November 2016 - 02:45 PM, said:

Battletech: The Video Game is going to be interesting, what with them taking PGI models and making them do thing like punch each other, which presumably means full shoulder rotation. The Atlas is either going to look stupid or awesome.

Wonder if PGI can be convinced to 'take back' some of the HBS movement models. Then maybe the Atlas and other humanoid mechs will get the high points everyone craves.

I really hope that game will turn out good, so back to topic

no logic, its battletech

[Bud Crue]

Prosperity Park, on 01 November 2016 - 02:56 PM, said:

Why would you want a Warhammer? You wouldn't. It's a dumb design.

And it is possible to get more immersion from a stompy robot game by simply not having ridiculous attributes for a fantasy weapon system. It's just anti-immersive to see such bad designs make it out of the Mech factories. I know that BattleMechs are unrealistic, but you don't need to pour stupidity on non-realism.

That's the point: "dumb designs" like the Warhammer ARE THE GAME. You may want something else like an idealized mech with 12 universal shoulder hard points...but that would ruin the game, and be boring. The variety of mechs "dumb designs" and all, is probably 80% of the value of this game. I mean if we went by your standerd of "realism and immersion" the only mech to play would be the Kodiak-3 right? All other mechs should be tossed. Good luck with that game.

You said before you get shunned for wanting such "realistic" designs, well a lack of realism in the name of variety and fun is what this game, hell near any video game is all about. Edit: I'd never shun you for wanting the best, I merely want PGI to fix those "poor designs" you mentioned, in the way they claim to have.

Dee Eight, on 01 November 2016 - 03:01 PM, said:

Harmony had nothing to do with it. FASA used artwork from major japanese anime involving mechs/mecha of the period. That included Fang of the Sun Dougram, Crusher Joe and Super Dimensional Fortress Macross. Harmony themselves licensed their use of the artwork, but ironically in both cases neither H.G. nor FASA actually went to the proper place (the original studios in Japan that actually created the original anime and owned the concepts, artwork, characters, stories, etc) and thus neither properly secured the needed rights. This didn't stop H.G. from trying to bully others over the next fifteen years or so but a Japanese court did in 2006. Harmony btw hadn't even licensed the animation for macross yet to start work on Robotech when FASA was already printing their boardgame and selling it to the public (in fact two of the three super dimensional series whose animation is seen in the opening and closing credits of the Robotech TV series, hadn't even finished their original japanese TV broadcast runs yet).



It had to do with the original source material, who's weapon placements also had to deal with fighting different size targets, not merely other giant sized mechs / aliens. But even in the real world, there are practical reasons as to why not every weapon is placed at the maximum height on a vehicle.

Chill dude, I was just making light of the attempt to look for "realism" in this of all games.

Edited by Bud Crue, 01 November 2016 - 03:05 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Bud Crue, on 01 November 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

That's the point: "dumb designs" like the Warhammer ARE THE GAME. You may want something else like an idealized mech with 12 universal shoulder hard points...but that would ruin the game, and be boring. The variety of mechs "dumb designs" and all, is probably 80% of the value of this game. I mean if we went by your standerd of "realism and immersion" the only mech to play would be the Kodiak-3 right? All other mechs should be tossed. Good luck with that game.

You said before you get shunned for wanting such "realistic" designs, well a lack of realism in the name of variety and fun is what this game, hell near any video game is all about.

Actually, the inclusion of myriad poor designs among few good designs leads to the meta being crushed by a select few Mechs while everything else exists just for the sake of existing.

I guess you could fix that by breaking the good designs and making them as bad as everything else...
In that case I would be inclined to look for a game with damage compartmentalization and customization that DOESN'T leave me face-palming at all the Mech designs.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 01 November 2016 - 03:07 PM.

[Bud Crue]

Prosperity Park, on 01 November 2016 - 03:04 PM, said:

Actually, the inclusion of myriad poor designs among few good designs leads to the meta being crushed by a select few Mechs while everything else exists just for the sake of existing.

I guess you could fix that by breaking the good designs and making them as bad as everything else...

Perhaps. But again, take it up with the Devs. They set the agenda and spent a ton of $ on licenses so that they could use the Mechwarrior and Battletech IP. That includes the crappy mechs and the good ones. It is there problem (and ours, oh how it is indeed ours too) to figure out how to balance those designs.

Edit: How many times has the meta changed in the last 2 years? My poor quickdraws were once meta. Nerfed, what are they now? Any mech can be made meta, even the crappy ones.

Edited by Bud Crue, 01 November 2016 - 03:14 PM.

[jss78]

I just wouldn't underplay the importance of 'mech looks, and the importance of those classic designs. I think it was on the HBS forums where someone put it well -- 'mech designs are dictated by the "rule of cool". Most people came to the franchise, be it during 80s tabletop or later video games, because 'mechs are cool. Maybe there's some baggage there as far as balancing this specific game, but that tradition is why we have a game and the players.

Now I always loved the Rifleman, already in tabletop in my early teens. I love the brutal simplicity -- the mandatory 'mech legs, but then just the essentials: the minimal necessary joints for tracking a target, BIG guns, BIG searchlights, and a BIG radar on top.



But then you had the Wasps, Stingers, Phoenix Hawks, Shadow Hawks. Running around, with a jet pack, steel fists for pounding stuff into oblivion, and a godd*mned laser gun in hand. Now we're talking!

So yeah, for me both pass the "rule of cool" with flying colours. So both please. (But some more structure/armour quirks for the PXH arms, please, as far as this game is concerned.)

[Nik Reaper]

Prosperity Park, on 01 November 2016 - 03:04 PM, said:

...

I guess you could fix that by breaking the good designs and making them as bad as everything else...
In that case I would be inclined to look for a game with damage compartmentalization and customization that DOESN'T leave me face-palming at all the Mech designs.

At this point I would ask why haven't you , as you seem to like only a small, mechanical part of this IP.
Also is there another game with such mechanics, and is it any good? I haven't seen/heard of any and wouldn't mind trying something new.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 01 November 2016 - 03:23 PM.

[HauptmanT]

D8 called it.

If your chassis is 15 meters tall, having everything high mounted puts you at a severe disadvantage against a 3 meter tall Tank that gets in close.

In game, it gives you a fighting chance against a face hugging Locust. Since we have no infantry or other AFVs other than other mechs, the game gives you little benefit. Occasionally it lets you fire through a truss or building though, on a few maps. Hill humping maps arent the only maps we get.

Now onto the practicality of a mech IRL.

The entire reason for using legs is mobility. Even tracked vehicles require a relatively smooth surface. Legs remove that requirement. That's why we can build steps instead of ramps for your front porch. A properly designed mech would be able to step up above it's own height. Something no wheeled or tracked vehicle is capable of. Then there is fording ability, being able to cross water obstacles without a bridge or time consuming preparations would keep a land army on the offensive at all times regardless of terrain.

Ground pressure, aka sinking into soft ground, is also a non-issue, just like it isnt for you. So what if your mech sinks to it's ankles in mud, it does not stop it from continuing to move, like it would for a tracked vehicle. It may lose some speed, but it wont stop it.

As far as how the weapon systems are designed in battletech, we do deviate from reality a little bit here. Having multiple low powered weapons instead of one ginormous cannon, seems like a bad idea, until you realize how armor works in this future.

Battlemechs have ablative armor. That is armor that gets weaker as you shoot it. Steel does not work this way, so we must assume it's some plastic/ceramic compound. Ceramic plates in today's body armor absorb the blow and spread it out amongst the whole plate, leaving it cracked and fractured. So it may stop one bullet, but likely wont stop a second. So hitting one repeatedly does make sense in this future world. Hence necessitating multiple weapon systems. Though a rapid firing auto-cannon would make more sense logically, like the bushmaster on the Bradley AFV.

When we master legged vehicles, expect them to look like the Scorpion and less like these bipedal tall monsters.

[kuma8877]

HauptmanT, on 01 November 2016 - 03:39 PM, said:

D8 called it.

If your chassis is 15 meters tall, having everything high mounted puts you at a severe disadvantage against a 3 meter tall Tank that gets in close.

In game, it gives you a fighting chance against a face hugging Locust. Since we have no infantry or other AFVs other than other mechs, the game gives you little benefit. Occasionally it lets you fire through a truss or building though, on a few maps. Hill humping maps arent the only maps we get.

Now onto the practicality of a mech IRL.

The entire reason for using legs is mobility. Even tracked vehicles require a relatively smooth surface. Legs remove that requirement. That's why we can build steps instead of ramps for your front porch. A properly designed mech would be able to step up above it's own height. Something no wheeled or tracked vehicle is capable of. Then there is fording ability, being able to cross water obstacles without a bridge or time consuming preparations would keep a land army on the offensive at all times regardless of terrain.

Ground pressure, aka sinking into soft ground, is also a non-issue, just like it isnt for you. So what if your mech sinks to it's ankles in mud, it does not stop it from continuing to move, like it would for a tracked vehicle. It may lose some speed, but it wont stop it.

As far as how the weapon systems are designed in battletech, we do deviate from reality a little bit here. Having multiple low powered weapons instead of one ginormous cannon, seems like a bad idea, until you realize how armor works in this future.

Battlemechs have ablative armor. That is armor that gets weaker as you shoot it. Steel does not work this way, so we must assume it's some plastic/ceramic compound. Ceramic plates in today's body armor absorb the blow and spread it out amongst the whole plate, leaving it cracked and fractured. So it may stop one bullet, but likely wont stop a second. So hitting one repeatedly does make sense in this future world. Hence necessitating multiple weapon systems. Though a rapid firing auto-cannon would make more sense logically, like the bushmaster on the Bradley AFV.

When we master legged vehicles, expect them to look like the Scorpion and less like these bipedal tall monsters.

Some good points here. If bipedal mech designs would become a thing, anything larger than a Heavy Gear would be entirely out of the question (a squat 15-20 ft in height). Battlemech designs aren't practical in any sense of the word. Simply too tall. The center of gravity is paramount when fielding enormous weapons with any kind of recoil or physical impact potential. Shots down range, or received from an AC-20 would simply knock them over (properly designed chicken legs would be better than a hominid design). A hunchback should actually have to stop, plant it's feet, then fire in order to stay upright while doing so.

From a realistic sense, a Heavy Gear type vehicle is something that could potentially be a reasonable military application. Battlemechs are giant robo-knights and robo-samurai....From the get go your going on the cool factor.

Edited by kuma8877, 01 November 2016 - 04:17 PM.

[Navid A1]

Knee-level hardpoints ftw.