49 replies to this topic

[Outlaw2]

"sexual predator" gets my vote

Edited by =Outlaw=, 01 February 2012 - 03:02 PM.

[GargoyleKDR]

I can hear it now, "I'm an assault awesome Awesome assault."

[Omigir]

GargoyleKDR, on 01 February 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

I can hear it now, "I'm an assault awesome Awesome assault."

Or I pilot a Light Assault.. Or an Assault Light.

[Omigir]

Ok now I am confused.. what is confusing about having a Roll named after a weight class? What is an assaults Primary roll!? D:<

[Outlaw2]

GargoyleKDR, on 01 February 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

I can hear it now, "I'm an assault awesome Awesome assault."

Less confusing way to phrase that would be "Im an awesome assault assault awesome".

There we go

[Zanga]

I voted "yes". However, I don't think it will be that big of a deal. But for me, I'd prefer the role to be called "Attacker" to match with the opposite role "Defender". This is just for consistencies' sake though. In the end. I'm sure we will all get used to it, no matter what it's called.

[Strum Wealh]

Well, as a bit of an homage to Chromehounds, which used a similar Role Type (RT) system/concept:

MWO Scout Role -> CH Scouts
MWO Defense Role -> CH Defenders, CH Heavy Gunners (?)
MWO Assault Role -> CH Soldiers, CH Snipers, CH Heavy Gunners (?)
MWO Command Role -> CH Tactics Commanders

As far as the title of the Role: while "Assault" fine (most people should be able to differentiate the Assault Role from the Assault Weight Class), if an alternative should prove necessary, how about "Strike"/"Strikers"?

Edited by Strum Wealh, 01 February 2012 - 06:17 PM.

[Zervziel]

There's no confusion from this player. I play assault mechs enough to know what mechs do best in what roles.

[FACEman Peck]

There should be a 4th option, I don't know what this means. Because I sure don't.

[The Cheese]

Change it. Seasoned BT fans will know that there is a difference without much prompting, but we all know that not everyone who picks up this game will be a seasoned BT fan.

I can imagine people who are new to the game may have a problem with this.

Having the role and the mech class share a name, if you don't know better, might imply that if you're an Assault role player, you can only use Assault class mechs. Or that only Assault role players can use Assault class mechs.

Edited for grammar.

Edited by The Cheese, 01 February 2012 - 06:43 PM.

[Larry Headrick]

Zanga, on 01 February 2012 - 06:12 PM, said:

I voted "yes". However, I don't think it will be that big of a deal. But for me, I'd prefer the role to be called "Attacker" to match with the opposite role "Defender". This is just for consistencies' sake though. In the end. I'm sure we will all get used to it, no matter what it's called.

^^This.^^

[CobraFive]

Just because people are smart enough to be able to tell the difference, doesn't mean we should have to.

I mean people are smart enough to tell the difference between "Five" and "Nine", but when communications are critical (IE: airplanes, military) you say "Niner". See also: Phonetic Alphabet.

And while players will probably learn that "Assault" class players don't need "Assault" class mechs, it certainly could lead to many players being lead to believe, at first, that the mechs are locked to particular roles.

[Pvt Dancer]

Troll troll troll. Pointless thread.

[Dihm]

Two peanut mechs walk into a canyon, one was a salted.

[Mchawkeye]

cobrafive, on 01 February 2012 - 10:20 PM, said:

Just because people are smart enough to be able to tell the difference, doesn't mean we should have to.

I mean people are smart enough to tell the difference between "Five" and "Nine", but when communications are critical (IE: airplanes, military) you say "Niner". See also: Phonetic Alphabet.

And while players will probably learn that "Assault" class players don't need "Assault" class mechs, it certainly could lead to many players being lead to believe, at first, that the mechs are locked to particular roles.

Nah. And the difference of five and nine has nothing at all to do with anything like this. that is a matter for radio interferance confusion, so people can hear things correctly...not a written set of guidelines and instructions.

whilst some people may well be stupid, lets not assume so. Lets be better than that.

Pvt Dancer, on 01 February 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

Troll troll troll. Pointless thread.

Irony award goes to Pvt Dancer, dancer for money.

[SquareSphere]

Actually, the "attack/defensive" theme is probably broken on a few different ideals.

Defensive Mechs

"Line Mechs" these are the ones that hold battle lines/formations together to stretch out the battlefield. These tend to be moderately to lightly armored with a focus on long range and support weapons. Their main defensive strategy is to use distance, terrain and long range fire support tactics.

"Rear Guard" mechs are still in the defensive family but generally are more armored and configured with medium range in mind and possibly fast to moderate run speed. Their primary role is to anchor lance formations' rear in retreat allowing their slower elements that are damage to get away while tying up attackers. Other wise they provide close support fire to "attackers".

Attack Mechs

"Flankers/Calvary" are mechs configured with speed and attack in mind, generally with less of a focus on armor. These mechs are there to chase down weak units or to sow confusion by attacking at different vectors than the main battle formation.

"Assault Mechs" are the TIP OF THE SPEAR. They are designed to soak up damage while charging a line or formation. Their role really is to attract attention and soak up damage while the rest of his team is dealing damage to break the line/formation. Typically they also act as the lance's initial target designator. Their survival is generally dependent on breaking through the line or formation causing enemy mechs to have to choose to turn their backs to bring them down or not. This action causes the break down of focused fire which increase their survivability, since they can't hope to use evasive maneuvers.

----

The problem with MW games is that most people play the "Line Mech" in a Support role using 90+ Ton mechs. This is what causes games to bog down into trench line warfare since the fast light flankers can't hope to bring them down.

[Opus]

Seems to me, Being an Ex-Marine:There are hundreds of different Assaults Roles, and only a few C&C Roles.

And Marauding & Raiding roles, are completely different from Front Line assaults.

Mass Assaults, or Sieges both take Different Arms tactics.

Yada yada yada....

So to go off, and state what is what...is all speculation for now.

I would love to see the game work into these features in the future, but for now, I just want some Pixel Carnage

Edited by Opus, 02 February 2012 - 08:14 AM.

[MeDammit]

Assault is an action that has many roles. Capture, suppress, reinforce, destroy, etc. Assault mechs are best suited to most of these roles, hence their categorization as assaults. Never have I built an assault force out of exclusively assault mechs. there are always roles that they cant do that a medium or heavy can because of speed or mobility that isn't available to assaults. I think the role name should stand lest we get too specialized. The scout role isnt called light.



Anyone who thinks an assault mech is the only one who can assault something might want to inform the guys in the warhammer or hunchback. I don't think they would agree.

Edited by MeDammit, 02 February 2012 - 09:44 AM.

[Outlaw2]

There is no such thing an assault medium mech , but there wil be an medium assault mech... or is it the other way around? Either way you know what I mean................................................................................

Edited by =Outlaw=, 02 February 2012 - 11:57 PM.

[EDMW CSN]

Any mech can assault. Period. If it has 2 or somethings 4 legs with armor and a bunch of guns, you can attack something. It is just that some guys do it easier.