100 replies to this topic

[MaddMaxx]

Not a fan really, here is why. If 20 is the decider, then any Mech knocked down by a Hunchback dies, unless it can get back up and running before the AC reloads. Assuming the smaller Mechs get up faster then this will hurt the larger, slower to get up Mechs, while the little guy gets back up quicker, here is more susceptible to the initial 20 points of damage.

Knock down an Atlas, walk around to the head and Boom. Game over. Or stand at range, and kills the Atlas's legs one at a time as it tries to regain its balance.

The AC20 is King and any Mech that carries one is supreme ruler of the battle field. Save a few other 20 point generators.

Percentages are moot as once down any Mech simply becomes weapons fodder. Same problem Over-Heat shutdowns can/do create accept it is a Pilot issue in that case, not so with the knock down.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 28 December 2011 - 06:31 PM.

[Pht]

Aegis Kleais™, on 28 December 2011 - 06:27 PM, said:

Both armor and weapons are being made to balance for the way the game is being developed, so I'm not sure how useful moving over armor ratings directly would be.

It depends if they want to honor the BTU or do what mw4 did... create a nearly completely arbitrary damage system, with the unintended consequences unknown and all that madness.

Quote

As far as a gyro goes, I thought it had to do with keep its balance. When a force connects with the chassis it attempts to impart momentum into an opposing direction in order to maintain itself upright. But would it not be possible for such a force to be inflicted that the gyroscope could not counteract the force and cause them to be overloaded, fail, and the Mech falls over.

...or am I missing something?

Incoming weapons fire from a 'mech just does impart enough KE to a 'mech to knock it over. Maybe a large group of 'mechs shooting a bunch of Heavy gauss or gauss at a single target might do it... but at that point, it doesn't matter, because that target is dead anyways.

[Pht]

Aegis Kleais™, on 28 December 2011 - 06:35 PM, said:

OK, so sate my thirst o' knowledge here.

What fails when a Mech is DFA'd? Is it the actuators?

The KE from a DFA is an entire magnitude of order larger than the KE from incoming weapons fire.

You might as well equate shooting a .22cb short round with firing a non-recoil compensated .50 BMG from the shoulder...

Quote

So what was behind the mindset of dual LBX20's in MW4 knocking down light Mechs? It wasn't kinetics?

It's the nearly instant armor loss that, in the BTU terms, does the "knocking around." You "fall away" from where the armor has been blasted (or evaporated) off, because the gyro sensing systems don't pick it up fast enough to compensate for it.

[Flawless]

I think it should be based on physics and not on damage points. Seems like an easy way to make high damage weapons over powered. I.E. If a mech is hit while in motion it should have a greater chance of falling than a stationary mech.

[verybad]

Hey Pht nice to see you over here. Aegis is correct regarding the Kinetic mass of the hit versus armor falling off from damage. The kinetic force is MUCH higher than the mere mass of ton or so of armor (which isn't necessarilly lost in any case, just damaged.)

Energy involved is E_k=1/2mv² (in joules)
So a modern tank round (120mm) has a speed of about 1,740 m/s, and a mass of about 4.5 KG (for the penetrator, not the entire round) The resoulting energy is 6,812,100 Joules.

A Charger (80 ton fast mech max speed 84.8kph/23.5 mps) charging you imparts 22,194,566 joules. So while a fast assault mech is doing more damage than a MODERN tank round (this is not even an AC-5), the amount of kinetic energy is comparable, it's not an order of magnitude higher.

So an 80 ton object moving at 84 KPH has about 3.25 times the kinetic energy of a 10 point tounk penetrator...

The falling armor doesn't even compete.

Edited by verybad, 28 December 2011 - 09:59 PM.

[guardiandashi]

actually bad your numbers are off

the charger at a RUN not a sprint is actually moving 86.4 kph not 84.8 kph but even using your 84.8 kph that works out to 23.55555(repeating 5's) mps and since all tonnage in battletech is metric it weighs 80,000 kg which aproximates to 44,389,135 joules

also as a point of order a modern tank round ~120mm is at best a light -medium rifle round per tech manual and would likely bounce off mech grade armor, or at best do minimal damage it sure as heck is NOT a 10 point hit.

plus as a point of order battletech armor is very resistant to single concentrated penetrating hits (aka modern antitank rounds) and yet does horrible against low velocity large area impacts

in other words a modern tank round is likely to do minimal damage to a battlemech, (at best ~3-5 points most likely less)
wheras a charger charging can do up to 64 damage thus peeling off or rendering useless up to 4 tons of armor

[verybad]

The numbers... I don't think you halved the numbers...23.5 and 23.55 mps aren't going to result in 20 million extra joules.
Energy involved is E_k=1/2mv² (in joules)

The running number I was going from memory of each unit of speed being 10.6 KPH. I was running all numbers as metric, the only time I went out of metric was to mention how a penetrator is about 10 pounds.

Regardless, it illustrates my point, that the impact of a very light (in comparison) object can have immence energies in it even using modern weapons, let alone the firepower available in 3049.

Edited by verybad, 29 December 2011 - 12:03 AM.

[Skygrunt]

I disagree with the 20 damage equals knock over. That would mean any thing that could knock a flea over could topple an atlas. That just doesn't make much sense.

[Skygrunt]

Also something should be said for the localization of the damage. For example taking into account leverage and opposing forces.

[verybad]

It's just the rules for the Table Top game. It could be varied for different tonnage units and leverage etc without slowing the game down on a modern computer.

As "20" it's a reasonable place to start, but that "20" stands for all the damage a mech of 20-100 tons takes during a ten second period. It could certainly be revised and made more complex as it's not making anyone sitarround a map with their dice while looking at a chart.

[Brakkyn]

I think having a set number with a gurranteed knockdown is a bad idea, at least if a wide range of customization is allowed. It would lead to autocannon favoritism and boating and...

/violin, plays the same old song

[Xhaleon]

Having a measure of how much you can take before being knocked down isn't an option; you have to do it on the developer side if you want knockdown at all.

If you don't like the flat 20 damage, TacOps provides rules for additional difficulty for every multiple of 20 damage reached, so it gets harder the more you get hit. Additionally, there are also optional rules for making it harder to knock down heavier mechs, by weapons fire or physical attacks.

Port that over from rules to gameplay calculations, and you get a fairly believable falling-down model.

[guardiandashi]

note 20 damage was not an auto fall it is a "hey you took 20+ damage in 1 turn, this destabalizes the mech enough that it COULD fall over and generates a piloting check to see if the pilot manages to keep it on its feet.

there was an optional rulle that adds a +1 modifier for each increment of 20 damage

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Also the 20 damage was not just for 1 weapon, 4 ML's (a common loadout) also apply 20 damage, as do 2 PPC's. Xhaleon's post of the modified rules is probably the best way to go. When you get hit it should have consequences, even if you just get knocked about a bit, and lose aim for a moment.

[MaddMaxx]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 29 December 2011 - 04:40 AM, said:

Also the 20 damage was not just for 1 weapon, 4 ML's (a common loadout) also apply 20 damage, as do 2 PPC's. Xhaleon's post of the modified rules is probably the best way to go. When you get hit it should have consequences, even if you just get knocked about a bit, and lose aim for a moment.

Even a lot of knock about would be preferable to a knock down mechanic.

You reel left from an impact. he gyro compensates to keep the Mech up, it returns the Mech to center +20%, then the Gyro manages to compensate for the +20% and properly and stabilizes the Mech. Same would hold true for a front to back hit scenario.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Why not the knockdown chance? It's always been there it's just not always been properly implemented. There's absolutely no gaming reason for taking it out (I don't like it doesn't count as a reason, just an opinion). You have more chance of surviving a knockdown than you do a headshot, and 20 damage is an instant kill there. It should also apply to airborne mechs. It's a great way to make a poptarters day by causing him to land on his head.

[MaddMaxx]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 29 December 2011 - 10:43 AM, said:

Why not the knockdown chance? It's always been there it's just not always been properly implemented. There's absolutely no gaming reason for taking it out (I don't like it doesn't count as a reason, just an opinion). You have more chance of surviving a knockdown than you do a headshot, and 20 damage is an instant kill there. It should also apply to airborne mechs. It's a great way to make a poptarters day by causing him to land on his head.

Pretty much much the same reason many don't like the CoF idea about aiming. It introduces an RNG element and when things can't be controlled then things can get out of hand.

If you are trying to deter Pop-tarting there are better ways. A good knock effect would work as well, assuming the Pilot would have to spend time compensating for a poor, unexpected landing after getting hit.

One example might be the use of the NARC system. It's short range forces a Scout to close, hit and run. If he/she could get knocked down during the attempt, not even by the targeted Mech, attempting to do so may be considered to dangerous and a good means (Narc-ing) of helping your Long Range buddies goes by the way side.

As noted by the Dev, all efforts should be made to allow all weigh classes to be useful in their area of expertise. getting knocked down by a random chance shot from as much as 600-700M out takes away some of those options (even if it is only a small chance)

[Dlardrageth]

Assuming it is such a devastating feat to be knocked down at 600-700 meter range by itself (beckons the question: "Why?", not like you are dead, just prone), what is the alternative? Eliminating knockdown for good? That is way off any realism, especially with the inclusion of melee combat which is to be in the game according to PGI.

So a Charger running into a Locust at full speed with a proper charge does nothing but grind a few metal plates, and both keep standing up facing each other? Right... how useful... I'd rather have a somewhat RNG-based knockdown mechanics in game than a completely over the top sillyness like Mechs being immune to simple laws of physics. It's not like you have some sort of immunity in your little car in real life when a ten-wheeler truck smashes into you. Why should you in game?

It's not a good balance if assault Mechs can pretty much oneshot most of the lighter Mechs on the battlefield with ease, but it's neither when a 20-ton Mech going at full speed sustains a perfect hit by double LRM20 salvos and just shrugs it off like it never happened to him. And as a dislike for RNG woul eliminate anything but either full missile salve hit or a total miss, that would mean that 20-ton Mech just "tanked" 40 damage points and just keeps moving on like it never happened, right?

[CeeKay Boques]

Why RNG?

Maybe the Mech is built like a huge ragdoll, and physics will apply and too much force will defeet* the mech!

I mean, if this is possible... Mechs should be so much easier, they don't bend as much!



*You can 'puni'sh me later.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

This wasn't actually about physical combat. It is the fact that from the rules 20 points or more of damage from weapons fire (in TT in one round) at the same time gives a chance to be knocked down.