120 replies to this topic

[DEVASTATOR]

I'd like to se smaller hit boxes for the legs and possible two of them per leg. You need to take both hitboxes out to cripple the leg and crippling one leg only just slows you down. You need to take out both legs to kill the mech. I suspect that doing this would make legging a mech to kill it harder than coring the CT.

[Maximilian Thorn]

I love to pilot Assault Mechs due to their ability be giant weapons platforms; however, I am not a "Min/Maxer" (in the old days they were called "Powergamers" ). I have another very good reason I love Assault Mechs...they have the best armor. Bearing this in mind, no matter what tonnage of Mech I have ever played, I maxed out the armor points every single time...always. If this meant I would lose MGs or a small laser or two...so be it. Having that maxed armor, no matter what the tonnage, allowed me to engage the target from a distance or up close and personal (within reason). As for legging, it depends on the situation. If a Mech's leg is already damaged, I may consider it as a viable target. But as a general rule, I aim for the head/torso/rear torse.

[TRK]

Legs should NOT have more armor than either the left or right torso. I can get behind the legs having two hitboxes and the armor distributed. Not being able to leg a mech isnt Mechwarrior. Seems like a lot of people want to turn this into an arcady button mashing type afair. War isnt fair, life isnt fair, get over it. If you are legged, you fall down. You can possibly roll to a different position if you have some kind of arms and fire on targets in your firing arc.

Why why why all the whining about legging.

Edited by TRK, 20 January 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[plodder]

Listless Nomad, on 19 January 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

I concur..in real life. The books worked on a system similar to what Vulpes described above - which would be the best and most realistic - but also most difficult to do. I agree with what has been proposed recently. Make the legs have more hit boxes, plain and simple. If as a mech pilot you can leg a mech running full speed in the exact same spot enough times to disable it - you deserve to take it out.

Alternatively - I do think that if you sever the leg from a mech it should topple over - but have the pilot eject and just leave the mech sitting there as a obstacle. Much better than a fusion explosion and the joy of being able to look out over a battle field and see the smoking ruin of numerous mechs after a battle would make victory so much sweeter.

Sounds good to me, and you know? a downed mech could still play a part in the battle. You think a mech down is out of commision, then twang.....a gauss takes out all your back armour. The amputee mech scores! Imagine that!

[plodder]

TRK, on 20 January 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

Legs should NOT have more armor than either the left or right torso. I can get behind the legs having two hitboxes and the armor distributed. Not being able to leg a mech isnt Mechwarrior. Seems like a lot of people want to turn this into an arcady button mashing type afair. War isnt fair, life isnt fair, get over it. If you are legged, you fall down. You can possibly roll to a different position if you have some kind of arms and fire on targets in your firing arc.

Why why why all the whining about legging.

What most here are are proposing is not so much anti legging, but make the legging realistic, the ballistics true to form, and NOT arcady.

Two hit boxes is still not enough for me. 21 per leg sounds like a good starting point.

Whining? duh... it is a forum..LOLJK

[Graphite]

TRK, on 20 January 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

Legs should NOT have more armor than either the left or right torso. I can get behind the legs having two hitboxes and the armor distributed. Not being able to leg a mech isnt Mechwarrior. Seems like a lot of people want to turn this into an arcady button mashing type afair. War isnt fair, life isnt fair, get over it. If you are legged, you fall down. You can possibly roll to a different position if you have some kind of arms and fire on targets in your firing arc.

Why why why all the whining about legging.

No-one said you shouldn't be able to, it's just that it might have been a bit too easy in the past - makes the rest of the mech's armour irrelevant, above a certain level.

[SumthinBurnin]

sorry this is gonna be long.
Anyone who has ever shot at a living thing knows it doesnt work like video games do.
There is a reason why police/military are trained to shoot center of mass and not to shoot at someones head/legs/arms(unless they are snipers). That reason is maximizing potential damage. You need to hit the target to put it down, the easiest/fastest way to do that is center of mass(torso) because the chance you will hit the torso is far greater..

Since TT is what it was based on here are some clues for the masses.

From the front/rear chance to any leg is a 2 in 12chance(to break it down a little more each leg itself is only a 1 in 12 chance). from the side 3 in 12 chance to hit any leg.
Arms are a 4 in 12 chance from the front/rear, oddly enough from the side arms are a 3 in 12 chance.
Head is always a 1 in 12 chance.
The chest is 4 in 12 from the front/rear one of which is a crit hit. side is the same.

The way to simulate this is to not give you pin point accuracy. You aim in that general area, but you should never recieve a 100% chance to hit exactly what you are aiming at. Leg hunting will go away quickly if "perfect" accuracy goes away.

On to leg damage---

the only thing that should shut a mech down is loss of power aka the reactor goes down or implodes. loose a leg drag it. loose both crawl. no arms,..sit it out, eject, or self destruct. there is absolutely no reason for a machine to stop being usable just because the legs are gone. It didnt stop the terminator lol

[KingCobra]

Eather yes less pinpoint accuracy or smaller hit boxes on chassis parts and ratios of hit percentages like Ct(center torso)=40% chance to hit Lt&Rt(torso)=30%chance to hit LL&RL(legs)=20%chance to hit Ra&La(arms)=10% chance to hit and head=5%chance to hit the hit boxes should be the smallest on the head to the biggest on the CT(center torso) same with back weapons ,ect. IF MW:0 is like MW4 where your chance to blow off a leg or arm or crit your enemy in a few shots is all that is required then chances are i wont play MW:0 that long.

[Duke Pitt]

Geist Null, on 02 January 2012 - 04:57 PM, said:

use the terrain to your advantage and protect every part of your mech you can for as long as possible till your friends can circle behind your opponent and put an LRM in his knee

And then they become town gaurds?... Sorry, Skyrim joke.

[Alaric Wolf Kerensky]

Technoviking, on 03 January 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

Having a leg with 10 hit boxes on it would certainly make it harder...

This. A leg should not take cumulative damage from strikes in 4 different locations. Who cares if the armor on the lower part is perforated by AC/2 hits, when a PPC strikes the upper thigh? If the impact doesn't damage the same area, then in should not knock the entire system out simply because it is all refereed to as "R Leg".

[Graphite]

Alaric Wolf Kerensky, on 22 January 2012 - 12:03 AM, said:

This. A leg should not take cumulative damage from strikes in 4 different locations. Who cares if the armor on the lower part is perforated by AC/2 hits, when a PPC strikes the upper thigh? If the impact doesn't damage the same area, then in should not knock the entire system out simply because it is all refereed to as "R Leg".

Sounds good, except then how do you model a single AC20 shot taking a leg off?

How much armour do you give to each section? If you had 4 sections do you give 25% to each?

Do you have to kill all 4 sections or only one?
If you need to take out all 4 then you get the problem of the AC20 (and other large slow firing weapons) suddenly becoming relatively ineffective against legs.
If only one then that would make the leg easier to take out with a single more-powerful weapon e.g. a single PPC shot might not take out a normal leg (100% armour) but would take out a quarter section that had 25% armour.

Edited by Graphite, 22 January 2012 - 04:10 AM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I still say the best way to prevent legging is to avoid getting shot in the leg...

Modern combat vehicles take advantage of firing stance called the "Hull Down" position. You basically drive your tank up to the crest of a hill and stop right when your cannon is just poking over the hilltop, but your hull and treads are still obscured by the hill. You can fire away without exposing your hull or treads (read: Legs) to return-fire because they're not targetable from that position - You have the luxury of aiming at full-sized targets who are fully exposed, but they can only hit you in the turret, which is quite small in comparison to the overall size of your combat vehicle.

So, if you want to prevent Legging, then don't get shot in the legs!!!

[Lt Shortcut]

t

StaggerCheck, on 02 January 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

Wondering if leg targetting will be a major factor in the game. I know some servers of other Mech games frown upon it greatly, but it seems to be a solid tactic. Hey, my Great Uncle told me stories about how the best way to knock out a Tiger in WWII was to target the treds with the rocket launcher. Seems to make sense that the same would apply to Mechs. Having said that, I'd be just as happy if they beefed up the leg armour on the Mechs by as much as a 2.5x ratio, just to prevent that.

Otherwise, I'd be fine with a random damage location after hitting the firing button. Nothing wrong with the random locations of missile clusters and LB-X sub-munitions, in my mind. Worked for the board game, so it should work fine for the computer game.

No Way! If I'm actually piloting a mech I want to shoot whatever part of an enemy I am able to hit!

[Nik Van Rhijn]

I should think that by now PGI have made whatever provision they intend for legging, after all they are playtesting.

[Felicitatem Parco]

... or are they...?

Most games have some sort of marketing campaign that takes place within the last 6 months prior to game release, and those campaigns quite often contain some sort of evidence that the game exists.

We do have picture and video evidence that Mechwarrior, as a game, has rudimentary function in the Unreal Engine as made evident by the marketing campaing a few years ago.

We do not have any evidence that a Mechwarrior game exists in the Cry3 Engine yet.



(edit: tongue-in-cheek)

Edited by Prosperity Park, 25 January 2012 - 02:35 PM.

[FinnMcKool]

Legging was a Mechwarrior 3 issue.
the mech games before; Mercs,and mechwarrior 2 the mech didnt fall over and die {they had a gyroscope thingy}
and I think they could hop home also ? , i could be wrong about that , but i know for sure that i used JJ s to get a 1 legged Atlas home many times.

I really hope that somthing allowed buy the games software isnt disallowed because of a bunch of people who dont like it.

so if it can be done, either take it out , or shut up.
sorry but we all will face the same problems out there, its a cruel universe.

[Agent CraZy DiP]

Why not just make it so that leg dmg has a direct correlation to the chances of falling over when taking a hit? It's not over-powered, it's not under-powered, and it's a workable strategy for a light mech taking on an assault mech. Would work for me. I like to live by "Keep It Simple".

This could also lead into an extra module that would decrease the risk of toppling over on damaged legs! It's a win-win!

You could go as far as making it so the "wounded" mech couldn't reach top speed without risking a topple. You can even make it so they take dmg when they fall based on how fast they're going. and once the legs reach enough dmg, they can only limp.

Edited by Agent CraZy DiP, 23 January 2012 - 01:30 AM.

[sheradin]

in the table top just case you had a leg blown out you could still fight or retreat from the field

[Longinus Leichenberg]

Two Three things:

• up to -50% reduced chance to hit a 'mech's leg when it's moving (according to its speed)
  
• there's still crouching which could shield the legs in case of big 'mechs
  
• does a 'mech become unable to shoot when it loses its balance? I don't think so... I'd love to see agonizing 'mechs recklessly continuing their attacks until they get turned into "low quality salvage material".

Edited by Longinus Leichenberg, 25 January 2012 - 01:01 PM.

[davidusmaximus]

For anybody, what do you think of trying to get the game more like the novels, which ruled thusly!