49 replies to this topic

[Immitem]

For clarification I am not talking about fast moving Japanese mechs, I am talking about stuff that for no conceivable reason the mechs shouldn't be able do with what they are already capable of doing.

Something I have noted is that for that vast majority of its existence the way mechs handled in the videogames has seen little alteration beyond large tanks. At the same time the fluff often details the superior maneuverability of the mechs with fantastical examples such as doing a forward hand spring **** (f-l-i-p is now a censored word... WHAT?!) in a light mech to more realisticly lunging suddenly in any direction.

With all this detailing of maneuverability being one of the main pros of the mech over the much more ergonomical tank why has none of this ever appeared in any of the games?

I am not asking to suddenly do gundam style flips and other hokey stuff but being able to lunge in any direction with a chance of falling over if you are going too fast at the gain of cover can add more strategy to navigating your environment .

Pivot on a foot to partially leave cover and quickly return (40 seconds into the video)


Give a small running jump to clear low level obstacles.

What happened to crouching?!

Or even rolling or engaging jumpjets after being knocked down at the cost of damage and taking longer to get up.

So what do you think? The books have established the mechs can do more than simply be a walking tank with a larger profile, should they be given more options of maneuverability?

Edited by Immitem, 04 September 2012 - 09:32 PM.

[Clever Raccoon]

No thanks, it's Mechwarrior, not Japanese ****.

[Immitem]

Clever Raccoon, on 04 September 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

No thanks, it's Mechwarrior, not Japanese ****.

I already established that. I am not asking for flips I am asking for something to differentiate it from a tank. Stuff that has already appeared in the books.

[Awesome0n3]

I don't think posting about it is going to do any good whatsoever, but I think being able to crouch and do very - we are talking about many tons on spindly legs - small leaps wouldn't be over the top. You could crouch in MW3 and MW4, but it wasn't really all that useful unless you were sniping, something that MWO has (thankfully) tried to do away with.

[Stormwolf]

Mechs are supposed to be walking tanks so to speak.

[Immitem]

Stormwolf, on 04 September 2012 - 10:15 PM, said:

Mechs are supposed to be walking tanks so to speak.

Then why go with a mech instead of tank which is far better at doing the exact same thing?

A mechs supposed advantage is its superior maneuverability. Something that has never been properly explored.

Edited by Immitem, 04 September 2012 - 10:19 PM.

[capt potato]

I remember the intro movie for Mechwarrior 4 Vengence having a Vulture take a sitting stance prior to releasing an alpha strike on the enemy mechs in the courtyard. I imagine this kind of thing could perhaps have a good translation as a game mechanic; reduced chance of being knocked down for example.

I agree that crouching would be nice to have. It's not often used but sometimes you just wish your cockpit wasn't sticking our above the rocks you're hiding behind.

With regards to dive rolling. That **** will just break something off a mech. I will say this however; if a mech's legs can survive a jump let landing then surely a small hop is within its capability.

[Immitem]

capt potato, on 04 September 2012 - 10:19 PM, said:

With regards to dive rolling. That **** will just break something off a mech.

I agree. Will you dive behind something and risk falling and losing an arm or face a barrage of missiles when your frontal armour is gone or if knocked over rolling around and suffering damage? But at the same time if you are going slow I do not see why lunging to either side would knock you over. I am not actually talking about rolling to the side when running however so much as a quick sideways hop.

Edited by Immitem, 04 September 2012 - 10:26 PM.

[Razor Kotovsky]

I'd like to sidestep, jump in various directions (max payne style, but very short and low) and crouch.

[Immitem]

Razor Kotovsky, on 04 September 2012 - 10:26 PM, said:

I'd like to sidestep, jump in various directions (max payne style, but very short and low) and crouch.

My thoughts exactly however I personally believe that there should still be consequences for doing said maneuvers when going too fast or smacking into obstacles, ie.

Tripping after trying to jump over an obstacle that is too high.
Jumping to the side into a building causing damage.
Side stepping at full throttle tumbling your mech.
Crouching at full speed face planting your mech (a possible emergency cover mechanic?)

Just my personal opinions.

[Sander the Shark]

I voted within reason.

Crouch is a must especially for direct-fire support (sniper) 'mechs and scouts.

Also I'd like the ability to punch with with humanoid-arm 'mechs. I can't remember which book - might be Measure of a Hero - but there's one memorable scene in which a Commando runs at an Atlas at full speed, jumps off a rock or a small rise or something, punches it in the face and fires its wrist-mounted SRMs, instantly killing the much-bigger 'mech. I don't expect to be able to pull moves like that but having the option to punch out enemy 'mechs at point-blank range would be sweet. You could treat it like a weapon with a maximum range of 5m - whatever's in your crosshairs, you hit it when you fire the "punch" or "melee" weapon.

[Cantid0]

I prefer the MW movement mechanics the way they are as walking tanks with jump jets and missile interceptors. I don't know if adding crouching, or crouch walking will enhance the game very well. A lower profile might be beneficial in the urban environments, were cover will help to camo ur mech. But who knows.

[Immitem]

Sander the Shark, on 04 September 2012 - 10:33 PM, said:

Also I'd like the ability to punch with with humanoid-arm 'mechs.

You could treat it like a weapon with a maximum range of 5m - whatever's in your crosshairs, you hit it when you fire the "punch" or "melee" weapon.

I wonder what kind of draw backs and advantages this could have. Maybe doing so destroys the weapon on the arm if there is no armour and if there is ammo and case the damage could be directed at it? I like the idea of punching but since I never put much thought into it I will not delve much deeper.

[Tardstrong]

The problem with a running jump is that one leg is used to jump. It is the same leaping to the side and I don't see one leg being able to do that.
When mechs jump they land with both feet. If a mech were to leap to one side the mech lands on one foot.
This just seems improbable in this game world.
Of course I'm going to be piloting a light mech killing mechs that weigh 100 tons which seems unlikely in this world. And watching an Atlas bunny hop would be funny as ****.

[Sander the Shark]

Immitem, on 04 September 2012 - 10:17 PM, said:

Then why go with a mech instead of tank which is far better at doing the exact same thing?

A mechs supposed advantage is its superior maneuverability. Something that has never been properly explored.

Another advantage battlemechs have over tanks is if tanks only have two parts, a hull and a turret, and if either of those suffer an armor blow-through the tank is pretty much history.

'Mechs, on the other hand, can lose parts like arms or a leg and still survive and even continue fighting.

[Immitem]

Tardstrong, on 04 September 2012 - 10:37 PM, said:

The problem with a running jump is that one leg is used to jump. It is the same leaping to the side and I don't see one leg being able to do that.
When mechs jump they land with both feet. If a mech were to leap to one side the mech lands on one foot.
This just seems improbable in this game world.
Of course I'm going to be piloting a light mech killing mechs that weigh 100 tons which seems unlikely in this world. And watching an Atlas bunny hop would be funny as ****.

Those are valid points but the problem is that light mechs (and sometimes medium and heavy) leave the ground with every push when running full speed. That proves that the legs are strong enough to take the punishment over a long duration. Additionally I do not think that the assault mechs would be afforded such abilities given their power to weight ratio and higher center of gravity. Just my two cents.

[Immitem]

Sander the Shark, on 04 September 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

Another advantage battlemechs have over tanks is if tanks only have two parts, a hull and a turret, and if either of those suffer an armor blow-through the tank is pretty much history.

'Mechs, on the other hand, can lose parts like arms or a leg and still survive and even continue fighting.

This is negated buy that fact that everything on a mech is larger and provides a much easier profile to target and engage over long distances (multiple times the range of any mech's weapons) and the easiest part to hit being the largest is the center torso which is a gameover component.

I really want the mech to be the superior fighting vehicle but as they are currently depicted in games would be shredded by today's very own weapons. Arguing in favour of the mech's ablative armour does not really work as conventional building materials and environmental obstacles depicted in the books and pre-rendered trailers provide a certain level of resistance that can give a good idea of the power of the weapons the mechs use to take each other apart and thus in turn allow for a rough estimate of our own weapons effectiveness against them.

I will say once again I want, want, want the mech to be the superior fighting machine but sometimes suspension of disbelief is just not enough, you need to give a little oomph to make one realise that this is a legitimate badass machine that can engage dozens of todays conventional weapons!

I enjoy the Mechwarrior games all the same but the same formula can only be used so much.

Edited by Immitem, 04 September 2012 - 10:55 PM.

[Escorpion]

I agree that crouching while immobile and more tight turning of lighter 'Mechs could be implemented without hurting too much the game and the BattleTech feel, but I don't agree with jumping, rolling and dodging in a martial artist fashion. As you said, this is BattleTech not a japanese animated TV show.

Superior maneuverability of the BattleMech over the conventional tanks do means that BattleMechs can operate in terrains a tank cannot. A BattleMech can cross a river, can traverse a forest, can climb a rough hill, can go almost anywhere to concuct combat. A tank don't. That is stated to be BattleMechs as conceived in BattleTech universe, and doesn't mean they can have a behaviour like an infantryman as showed in the Heavy Gear video: that's almost a Call of Duty, Counter Strike or Battlefield, you only need to replace the 3D model of the robot by one of a soldier. If you lose the BattleTech feel of the game, then better change the name of the game.

[Netrunnerzer0]

In my opinion, the feeling is great at the moment. The Movment is not like hawken. It is slow and heavy. Thats great. I think the big advantage with two legs is to be free in movement, You are able to step over walls. Cross a small canyon. Woods and hils are no problem. Its a walking over everthing machine Hope you understand what i think about. Sorry bad english the only movment i think is usefull is strafing. But with the torso twist you have the strafe. So its not neccesary. ... "Long time no english ... dame it "

Edited by Netrunnerzer0, 04 September 2012 - 11:18 PM.

[Adran]

To everyone who keeps saying things like "what they already do is already superior to tanks", I gotta say you're rather wrong on that. While they DO have a bit of an advantage over tanks, the advantage provided by mechs in the game right now is NOT enough to make them worth the cost. Also, I feel I should point out (since all of you seem to have only glanced, not read the many posts made by the author of this topic) that the OP repeatedly states "things found in the books", which means they are referring to CANONICAL abilities of mechs as shown in in other mediums that are simply not present in the games so far. Or at least I am assuming as much, since that is the general meaning I get from what they're saying. Regardless, some of the elements talked about as Enhanced Movement are things I would totally support, and all of which these massively overcomplicated war machines SHOULD be able to do, for how much they cost.