25 replies to this topic

[Arctcwolf]

I think we should have an ejection and self destruct mechanic built into the mechs.

The bigger the engine...the bigger the boom.

Such a move would be counted as a self/team kill, and penalized accordingly, however it would also damage enemy mechs within 400m of the explosion, since it is a small nuke going off after all.

heat spike, massive damage scaled based on distance from self destruct (engine size x 10 = base damage) and (engine size / 5 = base heat)

keep damage distance 1/1 with the size of the engine. example...250 engine has 250m fireball...400 engine has 400 m fireball.

let damage and heat reduce linearly per meter distance. example...250 engine gets damage reduced by half at 125 meters...400 engine gets damage halved at 200 meters.

This would make many players think twice before swarming up close to the very last assault mech on the map.

[Basilisk222]

The only main thing I have to contribute is your idea for the explosion. While I think the explosion effect needs to occur, I think it might be a better plan to make the explosion stock all round. The reason I say this is the game's current playstate.

It's difficult to brawl right now, not that it's actually difficult, but it's not a hugely rewarding playstyle, and this kind of feature might dissuade it further. I propose that all engines make an explosion very similar in size, maybe slight variants, but I think the explosion should be based on the mech size, not the engine size if you do this. Why?

I can fit a 195 in my locust, with that engine size, i'm a 160 KPh nuke. That means that if the explosion effect is concentrated on what it hits first, I should by all rights be able to take down an atlas or dire wolf by getting right up its trumpet, blowing up and completely obliterating both legs. We'd see light mechs be told to kamikaze in game, and players pressured into blowing themselves up, or worse 4 pilots spawning, and taking out big mechs on purpose. You hit 1 KO one death pretty much. you stay in the positives on your K/D there is almost no reason to not build a kamikaze set. again I'll use a locust.

You equip the locust barebones with a lone ppc and a 195, you pepper shot and then head down to blow yourself up. It does not matter how much heat your mech takes, you can fire and so long as you don't overheat, you blow up and literally just take a mech from full health to dead 3 weight classes above you, with almost no skill involved.

I propose that weight class would effect explosion size and damage. if only to balance the fact that lights can do serious damage, probably higher than most "Fighting" lights by effectively committing suicide..

Edited by Kilgorin Strom, 04 September 2014 - 09:09 AM.

[HlynkaCG]

Eject yes, Self destruct, no

[Grayson Sortek]

I've wondered about exploding 'mechs myself. I remember it happening all the time in MW4, but I also know that a Battle'Mech isn't supposed to blow unless the reactor has been compromised (a critical hit in the torso). Maybe add ejects, but also add the ability to crit a reactor and cause an overload? Maybe this is something players use to kamikaze, maybe it's not. Maybe it will make brawlers think twice about ramming someone and throwing everything they have at their CT?

[Bilbo]

While I'd love to give myself something to do when my Atlas becomes a walking stripper pole, I'd be rightly pissed when I get killed because I had the audacity to kill the light standing on my toes.

[zortesh]

We should be able to self detonate, but only if your the last player.. it might convince peeps to try a bombing run instead of hiding in skirmish games.

[IllCaesar]

Would I like an explosion animation? Yes.
Would I like explosion damage? Hell no.

I've played enough online videogames to know that this would be a victim of abuse. You'd start seeing suicide builds - builds with high-power ammunition-based weapons with the goal of maximizing damage in the short term prioritized over longevity. There are already builds like that currently, and I don't really condemn them, but by making explosions that cause damage, you'd incentivize these builds further and give them a, quite frankly, unfair weapon.

Not only incentivizing suicide builds, but it just plain incentivizes suicide. Rather than fighting for as long as you can hold out, once somebody loses a lot of their weapons, they'll just suicide-charge their enemy like if they were somebody with a live grenade running into an enemy trench.

[Draykin]

I do not like your poll because you either have to support both or neither.

Why are people obsessed with the idea of self-destructing? Do you know what "Self-Destruct" means? It means that you just destroyed an entire, not just the engine, but an entire 'Mech that has been rendered into nothing more than a pile of slag and shrapnel. For what? The chance to do damage that is entirely dependent on the size of the engine of your 'Mech? Okay, sure. Kamikaze Assaults. It's not like Assaults are meant to do anything like survive and wreck hostiles. Sure, Lights are meant to try to swarm to an enemy to try to blow up a leg, right? No, Self-Destructing is a bad idea, it doesn't reward positive gameplay, it's not friendly to the setting, and, logically, it is a terrible course of action. Plus, it would have the giant risk of potentially being fatal to the pilot (ESPECIALLY THE GIANT ONES YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT).

What I think you might be looking for is what is known as 'Stackpoling', named after the author of the same name, who would write about engines going critical and then resulting in a "big boom". This was not caused by some magic button a pilot pressed to go "Oh, well. I guess I can't do anything else, so I'm going to destroy millions of C-Bills' worth of equipment and potentially kill myself!". This was caused by a rare shot to an engine, which then caused the reactor's failsafes to fail, containment breached, and then 'boom' as people like to think. Stackpoling is different from self-destructing. Stackpoling is a chance and not a decision.

Ejection? Yes. I want it. It will do nothing but look cool, but I like it.

Self-Destruct? No. No. No, no, no, and No. The last thing this game needs is the kamikaze playstyle. Matches can already go one-sided from just having one 'Mech be disconnected or killed early.

Stackpoling? Maybe. It has to be random, and it can't be super-devastating. Keep in mind that Stackpoling isn't even supposed to be physically capable of happening due to the fact 'Mech use fusion reactors, which work to keep the reaction going, not try to keep it contained.

Edited by Draykin, 04 September 2014 - 04:47 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

i've made a similar topic where i state how it could work in game,
and be balance-able to MWO and the current State of the game,
Mwo Ejection & Self-Destruct

[Big Tin Man]

I'm fine with self destruct as described on one condition:

Your engine is destroyed. Repair cost is 1/2 of a new engine.

If it was anything but this, the sheer amount of trenchbucket 3-c suicide bombers with XL 390's would make the game horrible. Funny for a while, then horrible.

[Bashfulsalamander]

well I do not think ejection is bad as long a kill still counts, but if there was a self destruct then this game would have a massive negative quality to it..... like titan fall...... Sorry but ejection only just for the animation, but it should not be able to kill nor should it alter a kill in progress.

[Taufey]

While the amination might be cool, I see no game incentive to have ejection. If the last light mech left in a skirmish is to just hide, what are the chances the pilot will make use of ejection to end the match. If its intend is give players that know they lost an out, it needs a carrot for them to do so. Something like not having the eject count as a death on their stats.

As pointed out, fusion reactors technically wouldn't explode, but the table top had a couple of optional rules for it. It required massive damage to be inflicted to the CT at one time for a chance to happen. Damage inflicted was based on the engine, but it was at most engine rating/5. The engine could be set to blow, but the mech had to stand still for round while the pilot overroad the safety protocols.

The game doesn't need the random engine booms, but I'm not against the self-destruct option. It just needs to be expensive to give the player second thoughts about doing it to prevent abuse.

• have it count as a team kill
  
• a repair cost bsed on the engine size
  
• a delay between activating and going boom in which the mech is immobile
  
• requires a module

[CocoaJin]

No self destruct, it inevitable will be over used, exploited and griefed...making it only an every match nuisance. Whatever "coolness" factor you attribute to it now will be gone and replaced with angst and frustration by the end of the first weekend.

I've gamed for too many years and have seen a self destruct feature only go bad in every game I've seen it in.

[Johnny Z]

Badly worded question, aye for eject and nay for the other, although mechs randomly going critical would be great. Anyway I didnt choose either.

[Arctcwolf]

Kilgorin Strom, on 04 September 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

The only main thing I have to contribute is your idea for the explosion. While I think the explosion effect needs to occur, I think it might be a better plan to make the explosion stock all round. The reason I say this is the game's current playstate.

It's difficult to brawl right now, not that it's actually difficult, but it's not a hugely rewarding playstyle, and this kind of feature might dissuade it further. I propose that all engines make an explosion very similar in size, maybe slight variants, but I think the explosion should be based on the mech size, not the engine size if you do this. Why?

I can fit a 195 in my locust, with that engine size, i'm a 160 KPh nuke. That means that if the explosion effect is concentrated on what it hits first, I should by all rights be able to take down an atlas or dire wolf by getting right up its trumpet, blowing up and completely obliterating both legs. We'd see light mechs be told to kamikaze in game, and players pressured into blowing themselves up, or worse 4 pilots spawning, and taking out big mechs on purpose. You hit 1 KO one death pretty much. you stay in the positives on your K/D there is almost no reason to not build a kamikaze set. again I'll use a locust.

You equip the locust barebones with a lone ppc and a 195, you pepper shot and then head down to blow yourself up. It does not matter how much heat your mech takes, you can fire and so long as you don't overheat, you blow up and literally just take a mech from full health to dead 3 weight classes above you, with almost no skill involved.

I propose that weight class would effect explosion size and damage. if only to balance the fact that lights can do serious damage, probably higher than most "Fighting" lights by effectively committing suicide..

I agree, its very difficult to brawl right now if in any mech below 100 kph. to brawl, u have to speed tank, meaning using sped and agility to cause missed shots, surviving long enough to do enough damage up close to kill the enemy. I did think of the "pawn suicide bomber" builds that would pop up. Adding a rebuild cost to the mech, as well as repurchasing the engine would make sense to make players think twice before pulling such a move.

Grayson Sortek, on 04 September 2014 - 02:28 PM, said:

I've wondered about exploding 'mechs myself. I remember it happening all the time in MW4, but I also know that a Battle'Mech isn't supposed to blow unless the reactor has been compromised (a critical hit in the torso). Maybe add ejects, but also add the ability to crit a reactor and cause an overload? Maybe this is something players use to kamikaze, maybe it's not. Maybe it will make brawlers think twice about ramming someone and throwing everything they have at their CT?

In lore, all engines had built in safeties designed to keep an engine from going critical, causing the engine to shut down once onboard sensors detected a possible imminent reactor breach. Onboard safeties could be overridden, but only after the pilot took the time to do so. My thinking was more about the lights and mediums who get underfoot on assaults and swarm. self destruct as an assault would make those guys stay back a bit since they would be most likely wiped out up close.

MarsAtlas, on 04 September 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Would I like an explosion animation? Yes.
Would I like explosion damage? Hell no.

I've played enough online videogames to know that this would be a victim of abuse. You'd start seeing suicide builds - builds with high-power ammunition-based weapons with the goal of maximizing damage in the short term prioritized over longevity. There are already builds like that currently, and I don't really condemn them, but by making explosions that cause damage, you'd incentivize these builds further and give them a, quite frankly, unfair weapon.

Not only incentivizing suicide builds, but it just plain incentivizes suicide. Rather than fighting for as long as you can hold out, once somebody loses a lot of their weapons, they'll just suicide-charge their enemy like if they were somebody with a live grenade running into an enemy trench.

I see your points, and they all make sense. So how do we make it a last-ditch tactic and not the norm? make it overall cost prohibitive? skill prohibitive? give a time delay between when it is activated and when it blows where the mech cant move? as it stands, i see many ammo-based builds that have zero energy weapons, so I dont know if we will see more of those walking around.

Draykin, on 04 September 2014 - 04:47 PM, said:

I do not like your poll because you either have to support both or neither.

Why are people obsessed with the idea of self-destructing? Do you know what "Self-Destruct" means? It means that you just destroyed an entire, not just the engine, but an entire 'Mech that has been rendered into nothing more than a pile of slag and shrapnel. For what? The chance to do damage that is entirely dependent on the size of the engine of your 'Mech? Okay, sure. Kamikaze Assaults. It's not like Assaults are meant to do anything like survive and wreck hostiles. Sure, Lights are meant to try to swarm to an enemy to try to blow up a leg, right? No, Self-Destructing is a bad idea, it doesn't reward positive gameplay, it's not friendly to the setting, and, logically, it is a terrible course of action. Plus, it would have the giant risk of potentially being fatal to the pilot (ESPECIALLY THE GIANT ONES YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT).

What I think you might be looking for is what is known as 'Stackpoling', named after the author of the same name, who would write about engines going critical and then resulting in a "big boom". This was not caused by some magic button a pilot pressed to go "Oh, well. I guess I can't do anything else, so I'm going to destroy millions of C-Bills' worth of equipment and potentially kill myself!". This was caused by a rare shot to an engine, which then caused the reactor's failsafes to fail, containment breached, and then 'boom' as people like to think. Stackpoling is different from self-destructing. Stackpoling is a chance and not a decision.

Ejection? Yes. I want it. It will do nothing but look cool, but I like it.

Self-Destruct? No. No. No, no, no, and No. The last thing this game needs is the kamikaze playstyle. Matches can already go one-sided from just having one 'Mech be disconnected or killed early.

Stackpoling? Maybe. It has to be random, and it can't be super-devastating. Keep in mind that Stackpoling isn't even supposed to be physically capable of happening due to the fact 'Mech use fusion reactors, which work to keep the reaction going, not try to keep it contained.

I was actually thinking of stackpoling as well, but those happen so rarely, like dual gauss w/ laser coring the reactor at the same time, that it wouldnt add much to the game. My main focus isnt on the pure kamikaze aspect. It should have penalties involved, and would probably instigate a revamp of the system in regard to repairs of mechs and weapons.

Taufey, on 06 September 2014 - 12:18 PM, said:

While the amination might be cool, I see no game incentive to have ejection. If the last light mech left in a skirmish is to just hide, what are the chances the pilot will make use of ejection to end the match. If its intend is give players that know they lost an out, it needs a carrot for them to do so. Something like not having the eject count as a death on their stats.

As pointed out, fusion reactors technically wouldn't explode, but the table top had a couple of optional rules for it. It required massive damage to be inflicted to the CT at one time for a chance to happen. Damage inflicted was based on the engine, but it was at most engine rating/5. The engine could be set to blow, but the mech had to stand still for round while the pilot overroad the safety protocols.

The game doesn't need the random engine booms, but I'm not against the self-destruct option. It just needs to be expensive to give the player second thoughts about doing it to prevent abuse.

• have it count as a team kill
  
• a repair cost bsed on the engine size
  
• a delay between activating and going boom in which the mech is immobile
  
• requires a module

I like the ideas, minus the mech module. Team kill is a given...repair cost of a whole new engine, as well as half the mech cost...a immobilized delay between setting destruct and the actual explosion...even considering the mech out of service for a 24 hour period. You are right that fusion reactors dont explode, they melt down. I couldnt see designers allowing walking fusion reactors hat could melt down if the core was exposed, better to have a dirty bomb go off than a meltdown to the core of a planet.

I envisioned this to be a part of CW, when we are able to take on contracts for the houses and clans. Where u are either defending a planet or taking a planet, and theres only 1 mech left against 1 or more hostiles. More along the lines of a last stand, last ditch effort to take or maintain control of the planet via a draw.

[Darkdrakon]

I don,t like the idea of explodeing engines also known as the stockpoll efect but I do like the ejection idea after your mech is KIA

[VixNix]

NO!
There are enough players out there that will self destruct or run out of bounds or hide and shut down

DON"T give another way for them to keep you from getting a kill!

[Estonniel]

Meh, i love the idea. common guys push. (me as atlas ok !) tanking loads of direct fire for 10 seconds losing everything in like a few seconds of twisting.
And get into the middle. well im a stick, hmm ARTI STRIKE MYSELF AND EJECTING.
awesome dmg and carnage from the strike. AAAAAaaand a NUKE going off doing a (50% of your engine size in Meters) explosion radius of around blowing even more components off for mechs being all cuddle humping each other. the closer you are to the explosion. the more dmg you take. makes you at least useful still if having no weapons. and adds a nice dynamic to the gameplay rather then simply killing someone. you also need to worry about being far enough away from someone.

However someone needs to be at a minimum of 25% or lower total to activate the Eject and self destruct. because we dont wanna see more running kamikaze jokers that simply go and blow em selfs up to get some good dmg and kills in.

[Arctcwolf]

Estonniel, on 23 September 2014 - 09:41 AM, said:

Meh, i love the idea. common guys push. (me as atlas ok !) tanking loads of direct fire for 10 seconds losing everything in like a few seconds of twisting.
And get into the middle. well im a stick, hmm ARTI STRIKE MYSELF AND EJECTING.
awesome dmg and carnage from the strike. AAAAAaaand a NUKE going off doing a (50% of your engine size in Meters) explosion radius of around blowing even more components off for mechs being all cuddle humping each other. the closer you are to the explosion. the more dmg you take. makes you at least useful still if having no weapons. and adds a nice dynamic to the gameplay rather then simply killing someone. you also need to worry about being far enough away from someone.

However someone needs to be at a minimum of 25% or lower total to activate the Eject and self destruct. because we dont wanna see more running kamikaze jokers that simply go and blow em selfs up to get some good dmg and kills in.

I think a 3 or 5 second timer would be required before the mech blows. it would keep players from running up on overheated mechs, wondering if the pilot set to "pop", and it would give mechs nearby the chance to run away from the potential kamikazi.

the 25% or less rule also sounds like a good modifier

[VixNix]

still just another way for people to keep you from getting a kill...

tell me you haven't seen the spider with 1 leg gone and the other about to be jump as high as possible and fall to steal your kill...