85 replies to this topic

[Halfinax]

Bryan, you must get that Centurion in there, and a Trebuchet since they are basically a matched pair. Thanks for this in advance.

[Odin]

Great! Love your "community warfare" gentlemen. The more I read about - how you gonna pull this off - the happier I get!
No really, like your sense of humor and your plans on making the best Mechwarrior, there ever was. I am grateful for your openness.

[Barantor]

Halfinax, on 11 January 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

Bryan, you must get that Centurion in there, and a Trebuchet since they are basically a matched pair. Thanks for this in advance.

Agreed, it would be great to see those two.

[Gorthaur]

for the last couple lines of david's bio at the beginning of this interview he said he wanted to "through this out there". just wanted to state that it is "throw" not "through".

[GuntherK]

CENTURION !

[BlueDog]

Quote

[PAUL] MechWarrior 3 tops my charts, I like the gameplay more than the rest and it was bringing us a more detailed environment and really making use of those new-fangled “texture maps!” The original MechWarrior still holds a place in my heart as well. It was the first MechWarrior and the first to immerse me into a 3D-vector based game.

MW3 was my favorite as well, the immersion level was far above MW4, in spite of being an older game.

Great interview, looking forward to learning more

[SquareSphere]

Decent interview, comfirmed a few things that we kinda knew like how the BattleGrid was a commander's view

[Pht]

InnerSphereNews, on 11 January 2012 - 10:08 AM, said:

[DAVID] As for converting the tabletop rules into a video game, it can be done but there are several things that need to be kept in mind.
The first is to figure out what a specific tabletop component was meant to represent, or how to interpret a tabletop mechanic into a real time game. Attacks in the tabletop game would randomly hit different sections of an enemy ’Mech; this doesn’t need to be recreated in a video game because it’s fully represented by the skill of the player.

[contrarian mode]

I'm presuming that by "skill of the player" you mean the skill of the player in getting his reticule aimed in the right spot and pulling the trigger at the right time...


With all due respect, ... um ...

(where angels fear to tread)

No.

...

The hit locations setup represents how capable the BattleMech is at bringing all of it's various weapons that have been fired by the pilot "on target."

The BT Lore, the tabletop, and etc, doesn't have any way for a MechWarrior to directly aim each weapon in real-time combat; the "layer" between the pilot and each weapon are the Physical structures of the 'Mech involved in the actual physical aiming process, the computers that deliver the aiming directions, and the software that calculates how best to hit what the MechWarrior is aiming at.

The only reference that I can think of that even might be misconstrued such is in the "warrior" Novels where Allard uses "set point" in simulated combat to skewer Morgan's Ghost Mech, but even than, he, (the MW) isn't doing the actual physical aiming, he's telling the computer to aim the weapons at a fixed point, which tells the 'Mech to aim at that point... and in the rest of the lore, weapons fire is virtually *always* (excluding author fiat characters and actions) spread across a target.


[/contrarian mode]

InnerSphereNews, on 11 January 2012 - 10:08 AM, said:

[DAVID]... Though this change may need to be taken into consideration later as it’s suddenly a lot easier to hit a ’Mech’s head than it ever was in the tabletop game.

Yes, especially considering how badly it upends the game balance...

Quote

“Is it fun in a video game?” In the tabletop game, there’s what amounts to a random chance that your ’Mech will fall down and take damage every time it enters water, and every 30 meters it travels through the water. On top of that, every time your ’Mech has fallen and tries to stand (in the water or not), there’s a random chance that it will slip and fall back down again, taking even more damage. This isn’t fun for the player, especially since they don’t have full control over piloting their ’Mech in the way a ‘real’ MechWarrior would.

Yeap. In games where some or the other thing is being simulated that requires more input to the player than the format is capable of giving (no neurohelmet, no G-forces, etc) ... there's a steep roll-off in game play and fun when things become confusing and annoying to the player because they don't have the information being given to them to understand what's going on ...



...


wonders if the devs ever read these replies.

Edited by Pht, 11 January 2012 - 01:02 PM.

[Adridos]

So, nice interview, you basically annouced Centurion and said we will cap multiple points in the game.

*BOOOOO!*

Also, you took ideas from CoD? You should be really cautious about things you implement into this game.

*BOOOOOO...!*

Nothing? I thought you were scared of us.

[Stahlseele]

Wait . . No Mention of MWLL? O.o

[Warbeast]

Once again they have filled me with hope for this game, if it turns out to be a **** it will break my heart. 2012 the year MW:O destroys all pretenders(I Hope).

[Adridos]

stahlseele, on 11 January 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

Wait . . No Mention of MWLL? O.o

Do not worry, they took something from it. The engine.

[Semper Fi]

I'm presuming that by "skill of the player" you mean the skill of the player in getting his reticule aimed in the right spot and pulling the trigger at the right time...


With all due respect, ... um ...

(where angels fear to tread)

No.
I agree with Pht here.

The only guns that might be in this category are the ones on arms/in hands.

Otherwise, the guns are pretty much fixed, and shoot down range with limited accuracy, hence to Phts point locations are then determined.
Which is where the neuro-helmet and gunnery skill come in. The translation of a "point in space" and "computer understanding that point" through concentration and link.

Unless there is a "turret" like appature on each and every gun or in the bore of each gun, on whatever location on the mech, which will then have to have an ~180 spherical degree field of fire, with exact positioning and targeting trajectory analysis function for each based on reticle positioning, sticking to the "somewhat scatter via cone of fire" is the more "realistic" approach.

Pht, if they do not read this, I agree with you, and hope I did not slaughter your point to much.

Semper Fi

[Stahlseele]

Adridos, on 11 January 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

Do not worry, they took something from it. The engine.

Ah . . . no. O.o
MWLL is Crysis1/Crysis Wars.
That's Cry-Engine 2, because FarCry was CryEngine 1.
MWO is going to be CryEngine 3, same as Crysis 2 . .

[Fresh Meat]

good job guys

[Ghost]

Let's not get into another tabletop/Mechwarrior argument here please. There are better threads for that.

[SilentWolff]

Pht, on 11 January 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

[contrarian mode]

I'm presuming that by "skill of the player" you mean the skill of the player in getting his reticule aimed in the right spot and pulling the trigger at the right time...


With all due respect, ... um ...

(where angels fear to tread)

No.

...

The hit locations setup represents how capable the BattleMech is at bringing all of it's various weapons that have been fired by the pilot "on target."

The BT Lore, the tabletop, and etc, doesn't have any way for a MechWarrior to directly aim each weapon in real-time combat; the "layer" between the pilot and each weapon are the Physical structures of the 'Mech involved in the actual physical aiming process, the computers that deliver the aiming directions, and the software that calculates how best to hit what the MechWarrior is aiming at.

The only reference that I can think of that even might be misconstrued such is in the "warrior" Novels where Allard uses "set point" in simulated combat to skewer Morgan's Ghost Mech, but even than, he, (the MW) isn't doing the actual physical aiming, he's telling the computer to aim the weapons at a fixed point, which tells the 'Mech to aim at that point... and in the rest of the lore, weapons fire is virtually *always* (excluding author fiat characters and actions) spread across a target.

PHT, while I respect your point of view and understand fully what you are saying, I just gotta disagree. The last thing this game needs is some artificial process which spreads the shots around your target. If I aim at something I expect to hit it, in the place I'm aiming. Thats the skill aspect that will separate the men from the boys.
Besides the fact, its not believable that 1000 years from now a mech cant hit a target its aiming at. It's 2012 and we can send a cruise missile across the globe and hit a knat's a$$, but a mech cant hit with pin point precision? Lore be damned in some aspects, and this is one of them imo.

Now in WoT, your shot can be affected by the experience of your crew and the accuracy of the weapon of choice. Perhaps something like that can be implemented to make both sides happy.

[Pht]

Semper Fi, on 11 January 2012 - 01:03 PM, said:

I agree with Pht here.

The only guns that might be in this category are the ones on arms/in hands.

Otherwise, the guns are pretty much fixed, and shoot down range with limited accuracy,...

Actually, guns in the arms and such *still* cannot get all their weapons to concentrate onto a single point/armor panel.

The weapons fire being de-concentrated/de-converged is one of the quirks that forms the core of the BT universe/lore and what allows for some really fun combat instead of insta-gib gameplay.

The weapons themselves in the lore are SCARY capable of hitting targets - it's just that the 'Mechs can't get all of them aimed onto a single armor panel/point under 99% of battlefield conditions.

The one exception being when you shoot at an immobile target... than whatever misses misses because ... well, murphys law simulation factors.

Quote

Which is where the neuro-helmet and gunnery skill come in. The translation of a "point in space" and "computer understanding that point" through concentration and link.

Actually, the neurohelmet doesn't figure big at all in aiming. Have a look.

Quote

Pht, if they do not read this, I agree with you, and hope I did not slaughter your point to much.

Semper Fi

Thanks. Really, I want to feel like I'm piloting an armored combat unit more than that I'm playing an fps.

[Morashtak]

Ahh... Pong. Good times were had when that box and two paddles made it home.

Seriously, sounds like people are waking up and looking forward to coming to work. Best job to have, what ever it may be.

A few nuggets to mine and a hint or two were dropped but won't mind if it's kept simple for launch as long as the updates happen on a somewhat frequent and regular basis. Always give us something to look forward to and always craving more.

Now.. back to that grindstone!

[Pht]

Ghost, on 11 January 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

Let's not get into another tabletop/Mechwarrior argument here please. There are better threads for that.

It's not really a "VS" thing...

Anyways, normally I'd agree with you, but I'd like the Devs to see at least some of these comments... The comments they've made so far show no indication that they're even aware of this.

I guess split it off, if it festers? I, for one, certainly won't be uncivil.

SilentWolff, on 11 January 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

PHT, while I respect your point of view and understand fully what you are saying, I just gotta disagree. The last thing this game needs is some artificial process which spreads the shots around your target.

There's nothing artificial at all about simulating how well a BattleMech can converge all of its weapons onto the target that the MechWarrior has under his reticule. What *is* artificial is zero convergence - all weapons hitting a single point - in a game that's supposed to be simulating what it's like to be a pilot in a BattleMech.

Quote

If I aim at something I expect to hit it, in the place I'm aiming. Thats the skill aspect that will separate the men from the boys.

I think this shows some expectations that simply do not fit with the genre at all.. and as far as "skill?" Been over that, in depth: LINK Gunnery skill in a BattleMech simulator (vs fps style aiming direct control) isn't a bad nor an overly simplified thing.

Quote

Besides the fact, its not believable that 1000 years from now a mech cant hit a target its aiming at. It's 2012 and we can send a cruise missile across the globe and hit a knat's a$$, but a mech cant hit with pin point precision?

No, they can't.

So?

Quote

Lore be damned in some aspects, and this is one of them imo.

Why?

Edited by Pht, 11 January 2012 - 01:41 PM.