155 replies to this topic

[Snowbluff]

The sad state would be if we wereforced to use the arms.

That is to say, no one uses the warhammer.

Single Mom, on 09 November 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

Anime logic: We couldn't pile enough armor onto this massive fighting robot, so lets design a lightly armored, articulated appendage and use it to wield a shield of an appropriate amount of armor.

Armor is largely meaningless. Lunar Alloy was basically impervious to solid rounds, but Beam Rifles (basically PPCs) are so effective that you're better off maneuvering unless you have a huge amount of armor to the point it's restrictive, or an I Field.

Edited by Snowbluff, 09 November 2016 - 06:41 PM.

[Davegt27]

anyone ever build the robotech model back in the day

I built the VF-1S Valkyrie

http://www.ebay.com/...X-/162056913147

[Tarl Cabot]

Splatshot, on 09 November 2016 - 06:29 PM, said:

In TT you arm can straighten out your arms and fire/it does not matter where weapons are located except for damage rolls against you.

Due to computer limits i would guess, i have never seen a mech straighten it arms to fire, which one would think that is whole purpose of an elbow joint.

And the arm toggle would allow one arm at a time to be raised for x amount of time then drop back down to resting level. Humanoid mechs would benefit more from this than chicken walkers due to the distance from resting to high firing positioning. The arms can be articulated, as seen in their death throes.

[El Bandito]

Quxudica, on 09 November 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

Arguably one of Battletechs most iconic mech designs, it's silhouette is easily recognizable. Even people, of a certain age, that don't have a clue what BT is are likely to have seen the design in passing.

As such I can't help but make note of the statement the chassis makes about the state of the game currently, or more precisely the state of mech design. The effective builds for this weapon platform have a striking thing in common, something seen in many other mechs as well; it's most distinguishing feature - it's arm cannons - are best used by completely ignoring them save as empty shields, with the mechs primary weapons stuffed like sardines into the torso. The mech itself, if designed for MWO's battlefield, would be far better served if instead of those intimidating guns it just had a couple tall shields on its side.

It's a shame really, and a direct result of the lack of limitations placed on where weapons can be mounted in a mech. Oversized cannons and ppcs get stuffed into ports meant for machine guns and small lasers. Sure at least these days the weapons have some physical representation on the model when strapped somewhere they logically shouldn't fit, but that doesn't change the fact that the physical design of many chassis makes no real sense given the combat environment they exist in.

Those long, shiny artillery barrels on the Warhammer serve only to house a couple medium lasers at best if you want to run the chassis to suit MWO's gameplay and that's just kind of depressing. Even the mechs laser vomit builds are best focused on the torso emitters. The arm canons are just.. kind of there, providing no particular benefit beyond some expendable padding.

It is a great shame that PGI didn't go with:

[Metus regem]

Davegt27, on 09 November 2016 - 06:42 PM, said:

anyone ever build the robotech model back in the day

I built the VF-1S Valkyrie

http://www.ebay.com/...X-/162056913147

I've got a 1/55 VF-1S Roy Fokker edition on my desk at work, I've had that thing 10 or 15 years now....

[SpectreHD]

Single Mom, on 09 November 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

Anime logic: We couldn't pile enough armor onto this massive fighting robot, so lets design a lightly armored, articulated appendage and use it to wield a shield of an appropriate amount of armor.

Because in anime, the Gundams themselves are very much characters themselves and are very humanoid due to being the evolution of the ancestor of Japan's very first mecha, Astro Boy.

So Gundams hold their guns with few having weapons on the body itself. They also get shields because melee is very common. I would think the pilots would rather block an attack with a shield on their arm rather than on the body even if adequately armoured.

Davegt27, on 09 November 2016 - 06:42 PM, said:

anyone ever build the robotech model back in the day

I built the VF-1S Valkyrie

http://www.ebay.com/...X-/162056913147

Didn't build any back then but I have this:


http://www.amiami.co...de=TOY-RBT-1184

Edited by SpectreHD, 09 November 2016 - 08:52 PM.

[DaZur]

I hear you pro-"raise arm guys" and understand your points...

That said, I see a couple personal issues with that premise:

1.) It mitigates / obsoletes any mech that has high-mounts (Rifleman, Jagermech, etc.)

2.) On a purely aesthetic level, I'd vomit in my mouth if I had to witness humanoid mechs lumbering around like flipping Frankenstein.

[Ultimax]

DaZur, on 09 November 2016 - 04:28 PM, said:

What's the deal with you anti-lore zealots?

Lore =/= mechanics.


The problem is that the lore is treated like a sacred text, which is silly. This is a video game.

Part of the discovery and joy in a game is being able to make aspects of your own, that's what the mechlab does. I personally think even the creators of BT understood this at some level.


These threads are always full of bad ideas, like forcing mechs into clearly sub-standard builds in order to get quirks (which will never make up the difference).


Nothing is stopping you from putting the damned weapons in the arms, but that's never good enough - other people's fun needs to obey your narrow rules.

Edited by Ultimax, 09 November 2016 - 10:01 PM.

[DaZur]

Ultimax, on 09 November 2016 - 09:23 PM, said:

Lore =/= mechanics.

The problem is that the lore is treated like a sacred text, which is silly. This is a video game.

Part of the discovery and joy in a game is being able to make aspects of your own, that's what the mechlab does. I personally think even the creators of BT understood this at some level.

These threads are always full of bad ideas, like forcing mechs into clearly sub-standard builds in order to get quirks (which will never make up the difference).

Nothing is stopping you from putting the damned weapons in the arms, but that's never good enough - other people's fun needs to obey your narrow rules.

No. Lore =/= the foundation on which the game is based and subset rules that define the mechanics.

Not arguing that the customization aspect is both fun and a principle draw. It is and without it, the meta would converge on a specific mech/class versus a composite across all classes.

That said... One correction "too much" customization has an opposite effect to what you infer is an enjoyable freedom. Reality is, unregulated customization eventually diminishes uniqueness as min/max meta drives a narrow customization corridor.

Might want to re-read... no one is advocating limiting anything. If anything they are advocating rewarding players for ignoring meta driven bastardization and keeping mechs closer to their heritage.

Edited by DaZur, 09 November 2016 - 10:51 PM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

DaZur, on 09 November 2016 - 10:51 PM, said:

Might want to re-read... no one is advocating limiting anything. If anything they are advocating rewarding players for ignoring meta driven bastardization and keeping mechs closer to their heritage.

I find all sorts of nifty combos that deal a hefty amount of damage. Customization and playing with a mech is fun.

meta who, meta where?

[Metus regem]

SpectreHD, on 09 November 2016 - 08:48 PM, said:

Because in anime, the Gundams themselves are very much characters themselves and are very humanoid due to being the evolution of the ancestor of Japan's very first mecha, Astro Boy.

So Gundams hold their guns with few having weapons on the body itself. They also get shields because melee is very common. I would think the pilots would rather block an attack with a shield on their arm rather than on the body even if adequately armoured.




Didn't build any back then but I have this:


http://www.amiami.co...de=TOY-RBT-1184

I do love the VB-6, it's on my want list, right after the VF-4G.... How do you like yours?

[DaZur]

BLOOD WOLF, on 09 November 2016 - 10:54 PM, said:

I find all sorts of nifty combos that deal a hefty amount of damage. Customization and playing with a mech is fun.

meta who, meta where?

Which I agree with... it "is" fun. There is smaller segment of this community (apparently you and I are part of) that are not driven by the meta overlords and are okay with playing around and messing with sub-optimal builds. Conversely, there's a larger segment of players who live and die by resigning to the min/max mantra and the singular goal of customization is to build the apex predator...

Again, no one wants to take that aspect away from anyone... That said, for purists / lore advocates, things like a Warhammer with no weapons in the arms is an abomination. I'm advocating some recognition / accommodation for players who choose not to bastardize lore based iconic visage.

[NoiseCrypt]

How would people feel about making arms less fragile by having them share damage with the corresponding side-torso ?

My suggestion is that all damage dealt to arm armor would be split equally between arm armor and side-torso armor.
Once one of the components goes into structure the "armor damage transfer" will stop.

Like the OP, its hurts me to no end that i never use my Maulers arms for PPCs or AC/UACs... because the game mechanics makes that a stupid configuration.

Edited by NoiseCrypt, 10 November 2016 - 01:15 AM.

[RestosIII]

NoiseCrypt, on 10 November 2016 - 01:14 AM, said:

How would people feel about making arms less fragile by having them share damage with the corresponding side-torso ?

My suggestion is that all damage dealt to arm armor would be split equally between arm armor and side-torso armor.
Once one of the components goes into structure the "armor damage transfer" will stop.

Like the OP, its hurts me to no end that i never use my Maulers arms for PPCs or AC/UACs... because the game mechanics makes that a stupid configuration.

Congratulations. You just made torso twisting terrible while also killing off every IS mech with an XL engine. Good job.

[NoiseCrypt]

RestosIII, on 10 November 2016 - 01:25 AM, said:

Congratulations. You just made torso twisting terrible while also killing off every IS mech with an XL engine. Good job.

I like the irony of your gif and you also score top points for the sassy teen sarcasm

I assume that by torso twisting you mean arm shielding ?
Rolling damage with torso twisting will still be possible, arm shielding would get worse of course.

Its a valid point about the IS XL engines, but theoretically you still have the same amount of armor to shield them with.

I would just like to play a MechWarrior game where i didn't feel like an idiot for mounting "main" weapons in the arms.

[NeoCodex]

Single Mom, on 09 November 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

Anime logic: We couldn't pile enough armor onto this massive fighting robot, so lets design a lightly armored, articulated appendage and use it to wield a shield of an appropriate amount of armor.

Knowledge fail. Shields have a purpose. They are coated with anti-beam reflective surface, while actual mechs have (for example in Cosmic Era) Phase-Shift armor. PS armor is extremely durable against projectiles and explosives, but it drains the suits energy every time it gets hit (kind of works like actual energy shields would).

The handheld shield is not as durable as PS armor, but it does not drain energy. It's advantage is complete deflection of beam attacks (and beam sabers) against which the PS armor is ineffective, so they complement each other.

Edited by NeoCodex, 10 November 2016 - 02:13 AM.

[Adridos]

Single Mom, on 09 November 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

Anime logic: We couldn't pile enough armor onto this massive fighting robot, so lets design a lightly armored, articulated appendage and use it to wield a shield of an appropriate amount of armor.

You're saying that as if Warhammer itself wasn't an anime robot.
Plus, those things do make sense in-universe as far as Gundam is concerned, which is far more than a fairly large number of designs in Battletech. In the end, keep in mind Battletech in itself is basically a western copy of 80s mecha anime and its mechs are a few grades more ridiculous than stuff found in realistic ones of the era (since it's primarily Macross' and Dune's illegitimate child).

[NeoCodex]

Adridos, on 10 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

You're saying that as if Warhammer itself wasn't an anime robot.
Plus, those things do make sense in-universe as far as Gundam is concerned, which is far more than a fairly large number of designs in Battletech. In the end, keep in mind Battletech in itself is basically a western copy of 80s mecha anime and its mechs are a few grades more ridiculous than stuff found in realistic ones of the era (since it's primarily Macross' and Dune's illegitimate child).

There's way more stuff that makes sense in Gundam universe than BattleTech. They were actually trying to explain everything in Gundam trough science (tough it does get a bit ridiculous with some of the death star super weapons), while BT it's just "space magic" nonsense rules made up for tabletop like LRM going only 1.000 meters.

Edited by NeoCodex, 10 November 2016 - 02:40 AM.

[Arctourus]

All arguments aside, when I bought the warhammers I fiddled with laser vomit builds on one of the variants, but eventually went to arm mounted ppcs in all three. They seriously play better for me. Of course, each of them has some lasers in the torso to complement the ppcs, but the fun of nailing mechs with those big cannon arms...nothing like it.

Some mechs just do better non-meta.

[Ultimax]

DaZur, on 09 November 2016 - 10:51 PM, said:

No. Lore =/= the foundation on which the game is based and subset rules that define the mechanics.

The rules and mechanics based on a table top game?

It's pretty clear none of that makes sense here, and I think if the original creators of BT were making a FPS they would be smart enough to recognize that and would have adjusted. (Because no self-respecting game designer wants to make broad-sweeping, blatantly bad design choices on purpose)

They made lore based on a game where the location of your mounts is irrelevant - trying to pretend or force it to not mean anything here is just being willfully obtuse.

1453 R already said it best: "This isn't a MWO problem (not entirely, anyways), it's a physics-of-war problem. The more of your machine you can hide behind something that isn't you to take enemy fire, the more likely you are to survive an engagement."

DaZur, on 09 November 2016 - 10:51 PM, said:

Not arguing that the customization aspect is both fun and a principle draw. It is and without it, the meta would converge on a specific mech/class versus a composite across all classes.

That said... One correction "too much" customization has an opposite effect to what you infer is an enjoyable freedom. Reality is, unregulated customization eventually diminishes uniqueness as min/max meta drives a narrow customization corridor.

Chasing "uniqueness" in a game with over 200 mech variants but a limited number of weapons is a fool's errand, it is a mirage.

Reducing customization is to an extent what we have with Omni-mechs who swap pods but end up with the same overall loadout. They can't customize other bits, and they basically die on arrival.

DaZur, on 09 November 2016 - 10:51 PM, said:

Might want to re-read... no one is advocating limiting anything. If anything they are advocating rewarding players for ignoring meta driven bastardization and keeping mechs closer to their heritage.

Rewarding people for "ignoring meta driven bastardization" has already been attempted, it has failed.

That is exactly what we see with the Omni-mechs that are poorly designed at a stock level are only given quirks if they maintain their stock pods.

Those mechs then default to the basics of this game. Available tonnage, Available Hardpoints, hardpoint location, mech gemoetry.

If they mech doesn't score highly in those attributes it is a failure (Viper).
If the mech does score highly in those attributes it can succeed even when ignoring the quirks (Night Gyr, Timber Wolf, Kodiak-3 when they remove the quirks)


So what you and others are advocating is in fact a limitation, you simply fail to recognize it as such.

The Warhammer for example, does not have particularly fantastic mounts. It has decent mounts, not fantastic ones.

It still has to run an IS XL for most of it's good buids.

Take away the quirks unless the weapons are "lore compliant"? They mech will very quickly slide down into mediocrity and possibly irrelevance.


Forcing people to make BAD build choices in order to get buffs (based on how this game is actually played, slotting in low slung arms) means there was no actual improvement - the result is people just play another mech and the mech disappears.


The idea that people will then play with a failure of a design and then we can see "lore compliant" Warhammers on the field is a fantasy - the Warhammer would just get stomped on by better mechs and the general playerbase would move on.


The "lore compliant" crowd would be happy their pet mech is no longer meta, and probably out of spitefulness probably prefer it isn't used at all then used in a way they deem "bastardized".

Edited by Ultimax, 10 November 2016 - 06:05 AM.