47 replies to this topic

[Armored Yokai]

Choose the way you would like them

Edited by Cementblade, 02 December 2011 - 04:19 AM.

[Rhinehart]

Have to say even though it didn't match up with canon well I really did like the MW 3 pulse laser video effect. I also liked that the trigger for them was essentially hold and released, meaning you could choose the length of the weapon burst up to it's maximum allowed duration. I sometimes used pulse lasers in MW 3 as targeting aids for other weaponry since you could essentially track them over the body of the target until hitting the location you wanted.
Pulse laser Energy boats would make such pretty colors!

Perfect for christmas rofl

[Psydotek]

I think it should be more like a laser shotgun if anything or a quick burst of 5-10 small laser beams with a shotgun like spread to increase hit probability and potential damage with increased heat and weight being the penalty over a regular laser.

[feor]

one of the very very few thing MW4 got right

[Rhinehart]

This something I may have been wrong about but I thought pulse lasers were supposed to be a LESS heat intensive option vs ER lasers. That was why I always mounted them in the MW2 and MW3 titles. When MW4 came out the heat cost was so intense I never bothered with them much.

Edited by Rhinehart, 01 December 2011 - 06:02 PM.

[feor]

Rhinehart, on 01 December 2011 - 06:01 PM, said:

This something I may have been wrong about but I thought pulse lasers were supposed to be a LESS heat intensive option vs ER lasers. That was why I always mounted them in the MW2 and MW3 titles. When MW4 came out the heat cost was so intense I never bothered with them much.

They are less heat intensive, assuming you fire them only as often as you fire the ER lasers. MW4 screwed up their recharge times, however, so they were going off almost constantly, when you should get a beam stream only every 2.5, 5, and 7.5 seconds for them. (same recharge times as for ER lasers, IIRC)

[Project Hunchback]

i pretty much like mechwarrior 2 the most...the only thing is the lasers, i feel that lasers and pulse lasers should act like light...meaning no projectile travel time, just pulse lasers should just be low power rapid fire laser beams

[FACEman Peck]

feor=one of the very very few thing MW4 got right

MW4 Mercs got a LOT of things right.

[EDMW CSN]

MW4 pulse lasers was actually wrong.
The closest pulse laser iteration that is correct is MW:LL

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 01 December 2011 - 09:46 PM.

[feor]

FACEman Peck, on 01 December 2011 - 08:33 PM, said:

feor=one of the very very few thing MW4 got right

MW4 Mercs got a LOT of things right.

Like what? 360deg torso twisting Vultures and Thantoses? Or amybe it was the class 20 autocannons (and variants) that could hold 10+ rounds per ton? Or maybe the Missiles that would immediately reverse course if they missed and hit you in the rear? Or the 8 man Arena death matches on Solaris VII? (you know, the dueling capital of the inner sphere)

MW4 was a fun game, but there was plenty of stuff that had almost no resemblance to the background material it as based on.

[Alex Wolfe]

feor, on 02 December 2011 - 05:00 AM, said:

Like what? 360deg torso twisting Vultures and Thantoses? Or amybe it was the class 20 autocannons (and variants) that could hold 10+ rounds per ton? Or maybe the Missiles that would immediately reverse course if they missed and hit you in the rear? Or the 8 man Arena death matches on Solaris VII? (you know, the dueling capital of the inner sphere)

MW4 was a fun game, but there was plenty of stuff that had almost no resemblance to the background material it as based on.

Background material isn't sanctum sanctorum, there's a lot of stuff that don't make much sense or doesn't lend itself very well to a different type of gameplay than the tabletop, turn-based, RNG-dependent it was created for.

Mechs with no torso twist, 60-ish kph max speed medium mechs, critical hits, one hit kills, extremely low ammo counts (which are being spent within seconds in real time, not "several turns" which means they may last for an entire battle in tabletop), Solaris being 1v1 which would be dull and nearly impossible to lose because of AI limitations... those things are good for their original medium, but don't stand their ground in real-time. Mechs are still mechs, Davion is still Davion, Jade Falcon is still Jade Falcon, LB20X hit still hurts, but no use clinging to every little single thing.

Instead of striving for a literal translation of tabletop to computer, MW4 did a great job of showing how 'mech combat could look, and how they could be effective in a real-time environment, making it "believable in-universe", scrapping things that simply wouldn't work out and make a 'mech obsolete without an omniscient player and a tight-quarters hex grid, where low speed and low ammo aren't as limiting, and paper-thin armor as hindering (turns take a lot of time either way, providing a good experience for the players, even if a mech is destroyed in two shots).

Same as when Dawn of War was made, the tabletop Warhammer's RNG checks, reserves, deployment rules, point values, instant death mechanics, most leadership tests, infiltration, broken units, routing and tank shock mechanics (just to name a few) had to go, because of media limitations and possibilities.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 02 December 2011 - 06:09 AM.

[Dlardrageth]

Alex Wolfe, on 02 December 2011 - 05:31 AM, said:

Background material isn't sanctum sanctorum, there's a lot of stuff that don't make much sense or doesn't lend itself very well to a different type of gameplay than the tabletop, turn-based, RNG-dependent it was created for.

Mechs with no torso twist, 60-ish kph max speed medium mechs, critical hits, one hit kills, extremely low ammo counts (which are being spent within seconds in real time, not "several turns" which means they may last for an entire battle in tabletop), Solaris being 1v1 which would be dull and nearly impossible to lose because of AI limitations... those things are good for their original medium, but don't stand their ground in real-time. Mechs are still mechs, Davion is still Davion, Jade Falcon is still Jade Falcon, LB20X hit still hurts, but no use clinging to every little single thing.

Instead of striving for a literal translation of tabletop to computer, MW4 did a great job of showing how 'mech combat could look, and how they could be effective in a real-time environment, making it "believable in-universe", scrapping things that simply wouldn't work out and make a 'mech obsolete without an omniscient player and a tight-quarters hex grid, where low speed and low ammo aren't as limiting, and paper-thin armor as hindering (turns take a lot of time either way, providing a good experience for the players, even if a mech is destroyed in two shots).

Same as when Dawn of War was made, the tabletop Warhammer's RNG checks, reserves, deployment rules, point values, instant death mechanics, most leadership tests, infiltration, broken units, routing and tank shock mechanics (just to name a few) had to go, because of media limitations and possibilities.

Are you trying to say here MW4 was a dumbed down version of BattleTech for the FPS crowd? Because of either technical limitations or the inability of the average FPS player to cope with the oh-so-complex TT mechanics?

And let's not forget that in terms of balancing, MW4 was pretty crappy, actually a real letdown from MW3 times. I remember having actual debates with friends if MW4 should even remain part of the "BattleTech" universe due to its weirdness. Back in the day when I played it, shortly after release.

Instead of calling up DoW, which belongs to a different genre somewhat, how about just thinking which MW game you want MWO to orient itself at? I sure as hell would rather like something geared towards MW2/MW3 than the disgrace that was MW4 for large parts with regards to the "BattleTech" label, tbh.

[Alex Wolfe]

Dlardrageth, on 02 December 2011 - 07:32 AM, said:

Are you trying to say here MW4 was a dumbed down version of BattleTech for the FPS crowd? Because of either technical limitations or the inability of the average FPS player to cope with the oh-so-complex TT mechanics?

And let's not forget that in terms of balancing, MW4 was pretty crappy, actually a real letdown from MW3 times. I remember having actual debates with friends if MW4 should even remain part of the "BattleTech" universe due to its weirdness. Back in the day when I played it, shortly after release.

Instead of calling up DoW, which belongs to a different genre somewhat, how about just thinking which MW game you want MWO to orient itself at? I sure as hell would rather like something geared towards MW2/MW3 than the disgrace that was MW4 for large parts with regards to the "BattleTech" label, tbh.

It's entirely subjective, don't you think? It's not the matter of perspective (FPS), rather a matter of real-time, hands-on gameplay as opposed to turn-based, omniscient, third-person tactical gameplay. Those mechanics don't mesh. It's not that FPS gamers aren't able to grasp the tabletop mechanics, it's that those mechanics don't serve their purpose well in a different environment. Besides, players wouldn't need to "cope" with the complexity (nice expression of perceived superiority there, by the way), since the calculations would be handled by the computer and most likely invisible to the player, so this point is moot. It's just that they don't need to be added in the first place.

MW3, while grasping the TT rules "better" (rather: more accurately), and great with its immersive briefings and radio chatter, presented quite a wretched experience from a gameplay standpoint (opinion, of course, but not solely mine). Legging was too powerful, incapacitating any mech in a couple of shots, tripping too prevalent and too easy to force with small-caliber weapons, leading to exploitative tripping builds and had to be mitigated by server rules. Floating reticule makes targeting a simple point-and-click, which combined with sluggish movements made combat an exchange of potshots and hoping for a trip. Heat dissipation was too efficient, letting you mount 4 ER PPC and just hold the trigger down with enough tonnage, mowing any target down with impunity. Medium mechs maneuvered nearly on par with assault ones, and even slight damage to leg (supposedly leg armor) was enough to cripple the whole machine.

Even in applauded by you MW3 there had to be compromises. Turns out that strict adherence to TT rules means armor is too fragile and ammo too scarce for an actual mission (as opposed to TT level of "skirmish", which those numbers are balanced for), to the point that the developers had to use a band-aid solution of MFB (fixing the whole armor, actuators and refilling ammo in seconds, how's that for "in-universe realism"?), or missions would be nearly impossible to finish, or extremely short with few combat encounters. Omnimechs were virtually identical to Battlemechs, and mechs of equal tonnage were nearly identical in weapon fit and performance. Centurion's speed was boosted to around 90 kph, since in real-time a medium mech with an assault's speed would have no way to operate. It had a very fair share of its own "crimes" against the prized canon, but perhaps it's easier to view it with rose glasses while ragging on MW4, as seems to be popular to do.

Lastly, again subjective, but mechs presented as in MW4/MechCommander seemed to simply make more sense. Again, rules such as "X shots per Y tons of ammo only" make sense from a TT perspective, but it begged a question what role exactly something as fragile, lacking staying power, ammo-limited and service-dependent as MW3 mechs, that planted face-down on the ground with a few small-caliber shots all the time, ever played on a battlefield?

The game itself showed how much that system failed to work, as you needed the MFB to trail behind you and repair a few times per mission. Throughout the entire game, nothing is done that couldn't be performed by an equal value in tanks. Real-time mechs needed to be a bit sturdier, maneuverable (at least the smaller ones, they all have muscles after all) and have a bit more staying power to feel plausible as "main weapons of war". Otherwise, they seemed like a gigantic, clumsy, walking cash sink. I personally feel MechCommander and MW4 had that part right.

As to the DoW argument - if a turn-based tactical game required this much remodeling to be a functional and believable real-time tactical game, then how much more remodeling is needed to turn a turn-based tactical game into a real-time first-person simulation?

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 02 December 2011 - 08:44 AM.

[Haddock]

I'd like to see Pulse laser like in Mechassault. PPC, MW4. Gauss Rifles, MW4. AC, MW2. Missils, MW3.

[VYCanis]

MWLL has got weapon effects pretty much how i'd like to see them, or pretty damn close.

and pulse lasers should never be goofy looking bolts or segmented lines, thats just dumb. Pulse lasers are simply strobe lasers.

[Orzorn]

VYCanis, on 05 January 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

MWLL has got weapon effects pretty much how i'd like to see them, or pretty damn close.

and pulse lasers should never be goofy looking bolts or segmented lines, thats just dumb. Pulse lasers are simply strobe lasers.

Yes, this.

MWLL has pretty much perfect weapon effects. From lasers to autocannons to missiles. Pretty much everything was spot on, although I think the flamers could have looked better. I know they're supposed to be "puffy" because they're just plasma from the fusion engine, but I think they should actually have more..."weight" to them, if you know what I mean.

[That Guy]

the only one i feel very strongly about is the gauss rifle. the MW4 GR is just so... stupid! is so dumb! why is there big blue rings! WHY! the MW3 one was alright, but why was it a green thing? MW2 had the best gauss, a large fast moving silver ball thing (though it should be going way faster)

as for pulse lasers, MW3 had the right idea, just shorten the burst time. auto cannons MW3 had the best with a burst of rounds that could be spread about if you were going fast (if i remember correctly the MW2 acs were pretty OP and broken, MW4 AC are exactly the same as lasers). missiles, MW3 did it best. a large cloud of missiles that could be avoided (!!!) if you were good enough (not like freaking MW4), wile MW2 was also quite good, if the missiles obeyed physics

[Stone]

I like how the polls do not have anything from MWLL X_x


maybe branch out from MW eh? there were a few other projects that did it better in my opinion!

[Xhaleon]

I prefer ball pulse lasers if only for the visual distinction between them and normal ones. Mechanics could be anything, really. Pulse lasers are one of those things that can be really hard to translate into real time, depending on what aiming system is used.

Edited by Xhaleon, 05 January 2012 - 07:28 PM.

[Skwisgaar Skwigelf]

Mwll really does have the best weapon mechanics of any of the mw games so far. I especially like that the lasers have the extended beam that you have to hold in place for maximum damage if only just for a little while. That's the way it sounds like they work when you read the novels.