232 replies to this topic

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Well, despite the multiple arguements to the contrary, 70% of those who bothered to do the poll agree with TT.

[Jacob Davion]

jbone, on 08 February 2012 - 09:40 PM, said:

In Btech you loose the right torso that right arm drops off, very useful if you have hand actuators and feel the need to beat others in the dome with said arm.

Even more fun when you pickup your own arm and use it to take out someone else.

Gives the saying quit hitting yourself a whole new meaning.

Thats very true. And in the FAQ page, it says that they are "adhering very closely to the BattleTech tabletop rules". So, IMO, yes, you'll lose an arm when you lose the same sided torso.

[Yeach]

We'll see how this plays out.

Assuming we are using stock mechs (just for the moment), I just don't want to reach that point where your mech and your opponent's mech have their side torsos shot off (thus all weapons all gone on the side torso from critical hits and the weapons in the arms also) and all you are left with is trying to ram each other.

I think this has happen a few times in MW3 stock games.

[HATER 1]

Yeach, on 13 February 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

We'll see how this plays out.

Assuming we are using stock mechs (just for the moment), I just don't want to reach that point where your mech and your opponent's mech have their side torsos shot off (thus all weapons all gone on the side torso from critical hits and the weapons in the arms also) and all you are left with is trying to ram each other.

I think this has happen a few times in MW3 stock games.

unfortunately, the MW series never really put forth the atmosphere of CBT in the "mechs are scarce" aspect. In every TT game i played that stuck with the fluff, you learned when to withdraw. (or you might be out that mech for good)

[3Xtr3m3]

To try to put the final nail into this subject, take a look at a Black Hawk(Nova). And then tell me how does a hit in the side disable the arm. To my eye the arm is attached to the same (it looks like) one long shaft. It looks like one long shaft, from which, hangs the body in the center, the legs outside that, and finally on the outside of everything is the arms. It is nonsensical that a hit in the side of the main body would drop the arm off. I think the other mechs are designed so that any force drives through the main structure to the legs. The sides are not supporting the arm. At least in any mech worthy of the name.
Also I don't know that they are adhereing to just the TT rules. I think they are saying they are trying to adhere to the canon.
Maybe a compromise. A light mech may try to save weight by using the sides to suport and strengthen the arms, and heavier, defensive or assault mechs would need to not cut corners. Such a mech would need to be designed to take a hit anywhere and not lose functionality. Even a major hit to the side should not hinder the arm functionality.
Just my opinion, but there it is.

[garx8]

imho the side and the sholder are different parts of a mech.bulkheaded off from each other like on a ship. the titanic suffered from the absence of this and went down from a slice to the front right side.now we have watertight bulkheads to prevent damage in 1 spot of a ship sinking the whole thing. quarding of 1 part from another is commin practice already so it would be defenitly used in the future.from a gameplay stance it would make going after the arm a seperate action from going after a arm/torso combo. however if the arm is balistic and the ammo is in the torso then its a sweep.on a seperate note if the arm is to small/thin to transfer shells to an arm mounted gun (mad cat)it should be restricted to a energy wepon or a single clip or drums worth of ammo.

[jbone]

The black hawk and a couple other hunched over chicken walkers have the same problem, but they are the exception to the rule. If you look at a black hawk it looks like this Left Arm, Left Leg, Torso, Right Leg, Right Arm. They don't have special case rules for how hits and things like that work, and who cares. for over 90% of biped mechs out there they are humanoid. The rules in TT are meant to be simple and get things done fast. Yes in a video game it means you have more detail and can have more complex rules, but let's keep in the flavor of the game as it appears that over 70% of the people want.

On a side note, just because you shelled out the mech doesn't mean the mech is truly trashed, it's only "truly destroyed" if the center torso is destroyed by an ammo explosion or by an artillery strike.

Here's the best way to describe it, everything that the arm attaches too is located in the torso it's attached too, if that horse is destroyed how does the arm hang on, per TT it drops, and makes a useful club if someone wants to pick it up, or good salvage after the fact.

Also it's not heavily stressed in MW, but making a tactical withdrawal to protect that 250 year old nearly irreplaceable mech. More than anything keeping it out of enemy hands is very important. I think withdrawing a damaged mech should count towards victory conditions/rewards to be honest. a 5 million c-bill medium mech even severely damaged is a LOT less expensive than ordering up a new one from Defiance Industries, plus wait time (unless you happen to be a house power), add transit times, and working up, etc. Now figure you have a 12 million plus mech, and it happens to have components that came from Mars or Terra, those factories were destroyed according to all reports on file with Ma Bell.... err the holy order of Comstar (The Comgaurd hasn't been officially revealed in the canon in the time period, and those pesky ROM agents will make sure that secret stays hidden, among other little secrets, like the clans).

Personally I take the approach I've always taken to MW, whatever rules you want to play by I'll still beat you, hopefully I will be able to make you scream Uncle as I beat your cockpit in with my fist.

Edited by jbone, 13 February 2012 - 10:14 PM.

[Pht]

Alex Wolfe, on 11 February 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

Umm... emphasis on


By "destruction" I mean in a "physical" sense, not game mechanics. In the visual/common sense terms. There is no condition such as "side torso blown off" in the game, in the same manner as there is "arm blown off" or "limping leg". There only exists the normal side torso model, the torso with some damage textures, and the "mech destroyed" model.

Ah, Ok. The language was confusing me there.

Quote

You cannot physically wreck a side without wrecking the mech first.

What I'm aiming at is, regardless of the mechanics, as long as the mech remains operational, there exists a physical frame for the arm to be attached to.

Um, here's the thing, though ... the armor and internals *are,* as far as the game is concerned, the physical structure of the 'Mech. That is exactly what they represent. That's why I called it a "ghost" side torso. As far as the game is concerned, it's not physically there in any way other than to transfer damage to the CT internals and hold the arm on; but what represents the actual physical structure is gone! Like I said, mw4 is freaky weird; yes, the side is wrecked, all that is there is a placeholder to transfer damage... the side torso is otherwise not there!

I wonder what the MW4 devs were drinking when they came up with ghost legs and side torsos...

[Randal Waide]

Side torso is side torso, location or direction doesn't matter. You lose the torso, you lose the adjacent arm. Sing along with me, "The rt arm bone is connected to the rt torso bone. the rt torso bone is connected to the center torso bone"...etc. In the BT Tabletop rules there is a diagram of how damage is transferred (outward) from the torso slots to the arms.

[LordKnightFandragon]

lose the arm....anything to make this thing as TT as possible =D

[VYCanis]

i think everyone gets it. side torso asplode nothing for arm to hold on to. That much is patently obvious

but i really don't think some of you guys are really giving due consideration to the actual gameplay ramifications of having fresh arms able to be disabled by coring a side torso beyond "yeah do it because of realism or TT or whatever"

Assuming players can hit roughly where they are aiming at.
Assuming armor and internal values/allocations/protection etc are scaled similar to the TT
Assuming the mech's hitboxes are divided up along the classic HTAL areas

Then you run into the following problem
There is never a reason not to attempt to core out a side torso as a shortcut to killing a mech.

Need an arm gone, potential XL damage(or outright destruction on IS mechs), a good chance of an ammo explosion, a bunch of heatsinks usually taken out of the way, and usually a few weapons and misc equipment taken out in 1 fell swoop? Go for the L/R torso EVERY TIME.

no seriously, EVERY TIME

Going for the CT, arms, legs, or head becomes a waste of time when you actually allow gameplay wise for that many important eggs to be stuffed into 1 basket. A basket than in the TT could and would be missed a lot more often. Arms become part of the 2 for 1 deal, head is usually to much a bother to aim for, why aim CT or Legs and chew through all that armor when a mech will die or be mostly toothless upon losing a side torso anyway.

Do you really want every fight to boil down to who can core out a single side torso the fastest?
Think about how the soulless MMO, or former poptart, win at all costs, high efficiency crowd would respond to a feature first, and how they'd invariably shift the dominant game mechanics to exploit a given rule.

I'm not saying i don't like the more than 1 way to skin a cat approach to killing a mech. But i don't want 1 manner outweighing every other or making fights end up feeling short and cheap.

Edited by VYCanis, 15 February 2012 - 06:37 PM.

[FETTY WAP]

I've always wondered about this in-game
I really think that your arm should become destroyed completely when your side torso. But torsos should also be heavily armored so this doesn't happen as easily.

[Pht]

VYCanis, on 15 February 2012 - 06:33 PM, said:

but i really don't think some of you guys are really giving due consideration to the actual gameplay ramifications of having fresh arms able to be disabled by coring a side torso beyond "yeah do it because of realism or TT or whatever"

Assuming players can hit roughly where they are aiming at.
Assuming armor and internal values/allocations/protection etc are scaled similar to the TT
Assuming the mech's hitboxes are divided up along the classic HTAL areas

Then you run into the following problem
There is never a reason not to attempt to core out a side torso as a shortcut to killing a mech.

Need an arm gone, potential XL damage(or outright destruction on IS mechs), a good chance of an ammo explosion, a bunch of heatsinks usually taken out of the way, and usually a few weapons and misc equipment taken out in 1 fell swoop? Go for the L/R torso EVERY TIME.

If the game is a good simulation of what it's like to pilot a battlemech, you won't be able to hit what's under the reticule, every time, all the time. If they use the full (meaning advanced rules where possible) penetrating hits/armor damage/equipment-weapons damage resolution system from the parent system, that would negate the "every time" effect as well.

As far as the arms are concerned - as long as they have enough structure to support them, they are still useable. BattleMechs are built with insane redundancy for controls and such.

Yes, XL engines are a tradeoff; even the clan versions. Of course, they are a game-changer, especially for assaults; which they change from being semi-mobile emplacements to mobile units; with more armor, guns, and heat-dumping capacity. Large bonuses, large downside.

If you opt for the XL route, you better opt to use the extra mobility and tonnage they free up, or you're toast and than some.

[Felicitatem Parco]

OH PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE USE PROPER XL ENGINE MECHANICS!!!

Edited by Prosperity Park, 15 February 2012 - 11:24 PM.

[Destin Foroda]

Cleave off a portion of a man's body starting at his right collarbone and ending at the last rib in the right half of his rib cage.

Don't think he'll be using his right arm.

[MaddMaxx]

Destin Foroda, on 16 February 2012 - 02:46 AM, said:

Cleave off a portion of a man's body starting at his right collarbone and ending at the last rib in the right half of his rib cage.

Don't think he'll be using his right arm.

Is that man dead or alive when you do the Cleaving?

[Karr285]

Is it all possible since we are gaining further advances in game tech and ability to possibly move past the traditional LT/CT/RT to more hitboxes? I mean really could we add even a few ex
LT/LS/CT/RS/RT as even a basic? and possibly even more? upper leg/lower leg?

LS and RS = L and R shoulders

Traditional is always good but im sure it is possible to become more legit considering if I target the lower section of a LT why would the upper portion be destroyed as well? Or if I hit the Shin of a mech and then the Thigh, why are the damages to the total leg armor accumulative. I for one would like a few more hit boxes if not this game eventually.

[Randal Waide]

Torsos have more armor tha arms ( except rear of course) so shooting off an arm should be simple, except the bloody things are always moving. The torso makes an easier target, but takes longer to chew through. The TT game takes that chance to hit in account with torsos being the best odds. Mech warriors who don't move a lot are going to have their opponents reticle glued to hem at all times.
So, if you don't want to lose an arm due to a torso being destroyed, then Move your butt mech warrior!

[Destin Foroda]

MaddMaxx, on 16 February 2012 - 08:25 AM, said:

Is that man dead or alive when you do the Cleaving?

Alive, at least when your fireaxe hits him. Not sure how well he'd hold on to life after getting hit like that.

Point I was making is this: If the left side of your chest/abdomen is sheered off by an explosion, crushed by an car accident, shot up by bullets or whatever.. generally speaking your left arm is either gone, or is useless because all of the muscles and bones and other forms of biological support holding that arm in place are destroyed. Either way the arm attached to that part of the body is no longer going to work for you.

Don't see why that should be any different on a humanoid mech that uses memory shape metal for a muscle system. A ruined left torso means that all the wiring and controls to your weapons in that area are likely crushed, the myomer and coolant arteries leading towards the arm are torn and broken and the mech's skeleton is broken. Maybe the arm will still be attached, but it's going to be limp and unresponsive.

Edited by Destin Foroda, 17 February 2012 - 03:42 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

Destin Foroda, on 17 February 2012 - 03:40 AM, said:

Alive, at least when your fireaxe hits him. Not sure how well he'd hold on to life after getting hit like that.

Point I was making is this: If the left side of your chest/abdomen is sheered off by an explosion, crushed by an car accident, shot up by bullets or whatever.. generally speaking your left arm is either gone, or is useless because all of the muscles and bones and other forms of biological support holding that arm in place are destroyed. Either way the arm attached to that part of the body is no longer going to work for you.

Don't see why that should be any different on a humanoid mech that uses memory shape metal for a muscle system. A ruined left torso means that all the wiring and controls to your weapons in that area are likely crushed, the myomer and coolant arteries leading towards the arm are torn and broken and the mech's skeleton is broken. Maybe the arm will still be attached, but it's going to be limp and unresponsive.

If they use a mostly Stock/Variant Mech setup, the whole whittle down a Mech gets pushed aside as if 1 section goes, you auto lose another. This 2 for 1 sale will make Mechs weak and fragile and have but 2 real target areas. The Left and Right Torso's. Most (Lt. & Med. ) Mech CT's have limited critical space and given the legs may/will be unavailable. Even with a decent weapons fires spread mechanic in place, losing 2 section with the death of one, will suck hard bones.

Everyone can use whatever BT/TT/Human analogies and or references they want. In the end if it detracts from the FUN, it needs to get Round Filed. (imho)

Edited by MaddMaxx, 17 February 2012 - 08:25 AM.