24 replies to this topic

[GuardDogg]

Always had the thought of Rampstarting a Battlemech.

The role of taking a battle mech out to train, patrol, battle, display can be like any other machine is not just not yourself already in the cockpit, and already in the battle. Their is other things to consider before taking a battlemech into the fields. For example starting up (ramp start). Always thought how would it be. Just like in real life. Every thing in your life has to start up to get it functioning. Like in DCS (combat flight simulator). The pilots have to start up, taxi to runway, then take off. That is the realism (other than walking to the aircraft), everyone dreamt about. And it is happening. Why couldn't it happen in Battletech/Mechwarrior?

A Startup (Ramp Start) Real. (Start up happens at 5:35)



A startup (Ramp start) in DCS



*
The video is about 20 minutes. But when you know it all. It will only take about 5-10 minutes.
*

Lots of people have no patience for this (Just want to game), and some do. For it to be a simulator, you have to have patience. If Battlemechs did exist, how would it all be? The hard core training and now you are off to battle. Walking inside a Mechbay, and knowing you pilot one of four classes of these huge machines. Light, medium, heavy, or assault. One for your skill level and it is in front of you. You get inside the cockpit, and the all the things you know is all around you. And your ready to use em. Following these step procedures. Is starting up the mech. Make it alive, make it you. You will be the machine.
*
Ramp Start/Start Up. Switches, buttons. (T) Toggle, ( Button, (D) Dial

*
1.) Insert Data Drive "Info on mission, waypoints, and what to engage. Timing of each waypoint"
2.) Strap into your cockpit seat
3.) Plug in Neurohelmet (You will be the Mech).
4.) (T.) Battery on (electrical)

Wait for Betty voice, Status

5.) (B.) Turn on Displays. (Each: Map, You computer specs "FFS, temps, CPU..etc", Mech Information, weapons (On, Off, ammo, etc), battle information, waypoint info, time, Heat scale, radio frequency, etc
6.) (D.) adjust display lighting, color
7.) (T.) Engine on (shows up on display)
8.) (T.) Jump jets on (if equipped)
9.) (T.) Connect Neurohelmet to Mech. Betty speaks
10.) (B.) Hud display on.
11.) (B.) Weapons on
12 (B.) Weapons Safety features on/off. (Weapons Free to engage).
13.) (T.) ECM on (if equipped)
14.) (D.) Shutdown Override control "Manual/computer controlled"
15.) (T.) AMS on/Off (if equipped)
16.) (T.) Brakes off

While you are using the switches, dials, buttons, will show on display.

Betty Speaks
Now you are ready to go.

Their is other Switches/buttons/Dials during the use of your mech
Cockpit lighting, hud display (visual of pilots on/off when speaking), Spot lights on/off, Bay doors open/close or when weapons fire. Etc

Yes, I used to play a lot of Air simulators like Falcon 4.0, F-16 (BMS), Lock-on, and others (Some DCS). Just the thought of Mech Simulator just as powerful.

Edited by GuardDogg, 22 October 2019 - 12:07 AM.

[FRAGTAST1C]

I prefer the old fashioned swirly-phone styled pad where you dial in the functions and listen to the dial tone instead of pushing buttons.

*krrrhk ting* Reactor Online

*krrrrrrrrrrhk ting* Systems Online

*krhk ting* Weapons Online

All systems syncing... *bip* *bip* *bip* *bip*

[Prototelis]

No.

[vonJerg]

This would be all nice and dandy for a single player game, but not for MWO.

[GuardDogg]

Just like I wrote. People want realism, but have no patience for anything else. Flight simulators have made it further because of patience. Many have actually made cockpits in their basements to get the realism. Surprised a Mech simulator doesn't have potential. Just the run, and dash. FPS (run and dash). But many think of simulators than gaming.

F-16 (A real F-16 pilot made this)



MWO.



*

Someone built a MWO cockpit when MWO was in Beta. Showing picks of progress, and after. Dunno where it is.

*

Driving Simulator (VR)
*

Edited by GuardDogg, 22 October 2019 - 01:25 AM.

[FRAGTAST1C]

This has nothing to do with patience. It's about separating the MP aspect with a SP one. Full realism is great for SP. For MP, make the game easy to get into and play with friends.

You can turn a SP game into a MP by adding a basic MP support but as a F2P MP game, make it accessible for a wide variety of audience and provide content that's enjoyable. Don't bring a pop fan into a free-form jazz club and say, "You need to have patience and listen along the improv to appreciate it". It doesn't work.

[Prototelis]

GuardDogg, on 22 October 2019 - 01:21 AM, said:

Just like I wrote. People want realism,

Its a game about giant ******* robots. lol.

[Mister Maf]

Pretty sure all this stuff was done on the orbital dropship before the mechs were loaded onto the Leopard for deployment planetside. If you want to do all this in the hangar then wait an hour to actually deploy to the match be my guest but I think I shall skip to the game thank you

[GuardDogg]

FRAGTAST1C, on 22 October 2019 - 01:59 AM, said:

This has nothing to do with patience. It's about separating the MP aspect with a SP one. Full realism is great for SP. For MP, make the game easy to get into and play with friends.

You can turn a SP game into a MP by adding a basic MP support but as a F2P MP game, make it accessible for a wide variety of audience and provide content that's enjoyable. Don't bring a pop fan into a free-form jazz club and say, "You need to have patience and listen along the improv to appreciate it". It doesn't work.

Their is Simulators that been taken to MP (Armed Assault/Operation Flash Point, (actual paced), Flight Combat Sims 250 players per server (can be) for DCS. Battletech can be a Simulator. MWO is sorta a simulator. Why 3rd person is limited. But most treat it as a video game. "Points/Scores/Stats". One good reason why NASCAR can never be removed. But, if a Battletech simulator was made, I am sure many would demand multiplayer. MW5 is not out yet, and many want MP, instead of co-op. And no 3rd person. So Battletech is getting there for a Mech simulator.

Edited by GuardDogg, 22 October 2019 - 04:15 AM.

[50 50]

GuardDogg, on 22 October 2019 - 01:21 AM, said:

Just like I wrote. People want realism, but have no patience for anything else.

Immersion is what I think you are after.
The problem in a PvP game is time and you can't rally fill up game time with these immersion elements when the game play is so quick.
In some of those flight sims you might actually spend 30 minutes or more real time just prepping the plane and heading to the way point.
MWO doesn't have that sort of structure.
Where MWO might have been able to do something like this is in screens like getting the group together where instead of just looking at a list it actually put the players into the mech hanger along with their mechs.
Instead of staring at the spinning search wheel we are in a briefing room which fills up with players as the teams are built etc.
A few cut scenes when the missions are launching.
More voice overs about mission objectives and battlefield changes on the fly while piloting the mechs.

[Daggett]

GuardDogg, on 22 October 2019 - 03:35 AM, said:

MWO is sorta a simulator. Why 3rd person is limited. But most treat it as a video game.

Because MWO is a video game. Just because it has some minor simulator aspects like weapon doors and a visual cockpit this doesn't mean it's anything near a real sim.

In fact, i'm pretty sure MWO would have had much more success with a proper 3rd person view like World of Tanks did. The sim fans willing to endure things like rampstarts are simply to few to make such a competitive multiplayer game profitable.

Edited by Daggett, 22 October 2019 - 06:29 AM.

[FRAGTAST1C]

GuardDogg, on 22 October 2019 - 03:35 AM, said:

Their is Simulators that been taken to MP (Armed Assault/Operation Flash Point, (actual paced), Flight Combat Sims 250 players per server (can be) for DCS. Battletech can be a Simulator. MWO is sorta a simulator. Why 3rd person is limited. But most treat it as a video game. "Points/Scores/Stats". One good reason why NASCAR can never be removed. But, if a Battletech simulator was made, I am sure many would demand multiplayer. MW5 is not out yet, and many want MP, instead of co-op. And no 3rd person. So Battletech is getting there for a Mech simulator.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there 'cause there aren't many people who play MP for simulation in a game that doesn't exactly simulate a light mech that's running at 150kph, suddenly comes to a halt when legged instead of face-planting.

[Dee Eight]

What amuses me is the people who play world of warships and think that you could just "instantly' power up warships back then. The time to answer bells from a cold start because the ship has been in port for maintenance or something is about one week. If the ship has been receiving shore steam power and kept somewhat ready... you might be able to get underway in one hour. That scene in the movie Battleship where all the veterans take the Missouri out to fight the aliens in a matter of hours... after the ship has sat there for a decade... not going to happen. The scenes in the movie of the Missouri underway off Hawaii (shot in 2010) were accomplished by towing the battleship with three tugs as she had not moved under her own power in eighteen years.

[FRAGTAST1C]

Like I said, until a mech moving at 150kph starts doing a face-plant when legged instead of coming to a standstill, I say leave the game's "realism" as is and add content like maps.

[GuardDogg]

FRAGTAST1C, on 22 October 2019 - 10:37 PM, said:

Like I said, until a mech moving at 150kph starts doing a face-plant when legged instead of coming to a standstill, I say leave the game's "realism" as is and add content like maps.

I wrote, "Lots of people have NO patience for this (just want a game) and some do have the paitence want realism."

You have made it very clear you are not into realism, and startup along with good reasons to make it a video game. Some are into realism (graphics), and wouldn't mind a start up to go with the realism (Simulator). We can see in MW5, they made a lot of changes to give more realism. It is Co-op though, and it is a start what is to come. DCS has come a long way from 24 to 250 MP (pilots) per server. That is; The pilots Ramp start, taxi, take off, Way-point missions, air refueling, and if lucky can come back land, and do it all over. I would enjoy that in a Battlemech. Start up in a mech bay, radio chat, walk out, way points, re-arm, repair (repair vehicles) at a location, and if lucky come back and walk into a mech bay. Then make it back if lucky.

Edited by GuardDogg, 22 October 2019 - 10:52 PM.

[Anjian]

Daggett, on 22 October 2019 - 06:28 AM, said:

Because MWO is a video game. Just because it has some minor simulator aspects like weapon doors and a visual cockpit this doesn't mean it's anything near a real sim.

In fact, i'm pretty sure MWO would have had much more success with a proper 3rd person view like World of Tanks did. The sim fans willing to endure things like rampstarts are simply to few to make such a competitive multiplayer game profitable.

It might plus having a limited hanger based respawn like in the game's FP, and is standard in games like War Thunder and War Robots.

[Prototelis]

GuardDogg, on 22 October 2019 - 10:50 PM, said:

You have made it very clear you are not into realism,

It's a game about giant robuts my dude.

[Anjian]

I believe people want realism for real things, not fake things. The very idea of a battlemech is already troublesome to believe for realism, much less having a glass cockpit to be one shotted at. In the Gundam series, the cockpit is hidden in the chest, and the pilot is fully protected by the armor. The pilot is surrounded by a VR environment all around him.


DCS takes great measure for realism but one of its developers got jailed recently because Russians looking to buy F-16 flight manuals is going to get a red flag from the FBI.

[FRAGTAST1C]

GuardDogg, on 22 October 2019 - 10:50 PM, said:

You have made it very clear you are not into realism, and startup along with good reasons to make it a video game

I'm just saying that if you want "realism", make sure that a mech running at 150kph face-plants violently when legged. THEN, worry about pre-flight checks and taxiing on a runway.

[Mister Maf]

Anjian, on 22 October 2019 - 10:56 PM, said:

I believe people want realism for real things, not fake things. The very idea of a battlemech is already troublesome to believe for realism, much less having a glass cockpit to be one shotted at. In the Gundam series, the cockpit is hidden in the chest, and the pilot is fully protected by the armor. The pilot is surrounded by a VR environment all around him.


DCS takes great measure for realism but one of its developers got jailed recently because Russians looking to buy F-16 flight manuals is going to get a red flag from the FBI.

A little bit of lore pedantry that might assuage some of this — the cockpit glass is future space "ferro glass", and to my knowledge in fiction it's typically described as thicker than its presentation in MWO. This is done because technology exists in the BT universe that can easily fool camera sensors, so a mech totally reliant on them would be helpless. Even in MWO the best counter to stealth mechs is the mk.1 eyeball.

That aside, you are very much right in that basically nothing makes sense in the BT universe and I have long since accepted the fact that it takes place in an alternate reality with very different fundamental laws of physics.