232 replies to this topic

[Nick Makiaveli]

VYCanis, on 10 February 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

so let me see if i get this right

Looks like you did as far as I am concerned.

If we have FPS style aiming, then using the TT rules verbatim won't work.

Pht, on 10 February 2012 - 04:19 PM, said:

When the part that the arm is attached to is blown off; the arm falls off.

I never understood why anyone would do it differently...

Because you could disable the side torso without turning it into metallic vapor. Also, game balance issues.

Edited by Nick Makiaveli, 10 February 2012 - 04:33 PM.

[Derick Cruisaire]

I voted yes. The arm is out of commision if the torso it is attached to is destoryed.

However, I don't think (short of an ammo explosion) that a side torso is completely blown off. It is merely rendered to damaged to function any longer, and, the components located there are destroyed.The coreresponding arm is rendered useless because the control components that tie the arm to the torso (myomer, linkage, electronics...etc.) have been destroyed with the torso. I would say that the arm is still physically there however, and can take damage.

Additionally. If the torso were blown out by an ammo explosion, I think it would be pretty cool to see the arm go flying off the mech. Even more cool if the arm could later be picked up and used as a club.

[Pht]

Nick Makiaveli, on 10 February 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

Because you could disable the side torso without turning it into metallic vapor. Also, game balance issues.

Um, I wasn't talking about disabling the side torso; I was referring to it's destruction.

It's possible for a 'Mech with everything *but* it's side torso structure destroyed to still use the attached arm fully. There are control and sensor lines woven through the internal structures for just such cases.

Edited by Pht, 10 February 2012 - 05:24 PM.

[Thor77]

Alaric Wolf Kerensky, on 09 February 2012 - 07:04 AM, said:

You put to much emphasis on "self shielding." If you truly believe you can twist a little bit or change your speed fast emough to throw off my shot, you are very much mistaken. An arm is not going to conceal the side torso, and all you are doing is lowering your speed and putting yourself in a position where you can only return fire every few seconds, because you have to re-twist back around. The excuse of "Just cover it up" has never been a good solution to balance issues in games, and it still holds true here.

In addition, I do not believe that having a torso section destroyed indicates that it has been completely annihilated. It is more as if the area had the armor breached and taken critical damage to the point where most systems are inoperable. Although some systems to the arm might be damaged, remember that BattleMechs usually have triple if not quadruple redundancy for many systems. It is likely that there is still control of the arm unit, but if the design stores ammunition in the torso, then that is probably lost (not like you would want to shoot balistics in the arm anyways at that point, it might shear what is left right off!). However power may still be able to reach laser weapons, and the arm might have some range of motion.

With regard to 'self shielding': Did it all the time in MW4. Torso twist when missiles are incoming to avoid CT hits was the easiest and most profitable. And if you have big guns that have a long recharge, you can target, shoot, twist back to 'damage avoidance' posture, then twist on target when your weapons are nearly charged.

No you can't slip punches like a Roy Jones Jr. or anything, but if you're taking too much damage to one side, you can reverse the direction of your circle strafe. And some mech designs have big arms that do shield their torsos pretty substantially. Black Knight being the obvious example. That huge shoulder shield was such a damage magnet that it was risky to put weapons in there, but fun to pack it with armor and use it to shield.

Good point on the multiple redundancies. For example, maybe you have both wired and wireless connections to your actuators and weapon systems. The real question is how destroyed is 'destroyed?' Is all the functional stuff just no longer functional, or is it literally vaporized, or so shredded as to be structurally unable to bear the arm weight? Might take certain types/quantities of damage to reach that second level. I mean think about how long it would take to remove the entire structure of a mech side torso with machine guns. Way longer than it would on a pure damage-point basis.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Pht, on 10 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

Um, I wasn't talking about disabling the side torso; I was referring to it's destruction.

That was discussed earlier in the thread. In game terms, disabled and destroyed are pretty much interchangeable. Once it stops working, it might as well be considered destroyed as it is no longer a threat.

Pht, on 10 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

It's possible for a 'Mech with everything *but* it's side torso structure destroyed to still use the attached arm fully. There are control and sensor lines woven through the internal structures for just such cases.

Not tracking you here. If the rest of the mech is destroyed, that would include the cockpit and the engine etc.

[Pht]

Nick Makiaveli, on 10 February 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

That was discussed earlier in the thread. In game terms, disabled and destroyed are pretty much interchangeable. Once it stops working, it might as well be considered destroyed as it is no longer a threat.

Actually, the two terms aren't interchangeable. One simply means not working - the other means "no longer there."

Quote

Not tracking you here. If the rest of the mech is destroyed, that would include the cockpit and the engine etc.

I should have been more specific: I was just discussing a side torso, not the whole mech. In other words, if the entire structure of a side torso *besides* the internal structure (bones) has been destroyed, the mech can still use the arm attached to that "bare structure."

[Alex Wolfe]

I wonder how come the first option is so popular. So if you shoot the arm, you destroy the arm... but if you shoot the torso, you get the arm, any weapons in that side torso, AND have a shot at finishing the mech easily too? No point shooting arms at all, then?

3 for 1, sure is balanced !

Still, those games (especially MW3) weren't exactly paragons of multiplayer balance, with one leg knocked out meaning the destruction of the whole mech, for one (and even slight damage meaning slowing the mech down... and the knockdowns... and one hit kills... and free-floating reticule with point accuracy vs. slow-moving targets... and...).

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 10 February 2012 - 08:07 PM.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Pht, on 10 February 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

Actually, the two terms aren't interchangeable. One simply means not working - the other means "no longer there."

Like I said early on, we need to define the terms. If you bomb a factory to the point it is no longer working to produce mechs, couldn't you say it was destroyed? Yet the building could still be mostly intact, some of the machinery still functional etc.

Point being, it all depends on how the game defines it. If it simply means there isn't anything left that is useful in a fight (ie armor, weapons, systems etc) then the arm can stay. If "destroyed" means the vast majority of it has been literally blown away, then yes the arm needs to fall off. So it's up to the devs to decide how they want it to be.

Pht, on 10 February 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

I should have been more specific: I was just discussing a side torso, not the whole mech. In other words, if the entire structure of a side torso *besides* the internal structure (bones) has been destroyed, the mech can still use the arm attached to that "bare structure."

Ok I get ya now. And that is what I mean when saying "destroyed" in one sense means weapons, ammo etc gone.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I had to vote "Yes" because it not only obeys the rules, but it just makes sense. I got very frustrated by playing MW4 and blowing out my opponent's Nova Cat left torso to absolutely no effect. It's like the side torsos are just additional armor for your center torso.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 10 February 2012 - 08:24 PM.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Alex Wolfe, on 10 February 2012 - 08:01 PM, said:

I wonder how come the first option is so popular. So if you shoot the arm, you destroy the arm... but if you shoot the torso, you get the arm, any weapons in that side torso, AND have a shot at finishing the mech easily too? No point shooting arms at all, then?

3 for 1, sure is balanced !

Still, those games (especially MW3) weren't exactly paragons of multiplayer balance, with one leg knocked out meaning the destruction of the whole mech, for one (and even slight damage meaning slowing the mech down... and the knockdowns... and one hit kills... and free-floating reticule with point accuracy vs. slow-moving targets... and...).

Comes from the TT where all damage randomly distributed. And LRM/SRMs had there damage divided up into 5 pt increments and applied randomly as well.

So a LRM 20 that had 8 missiles hit would do 5 and 3 damage to 2 different locations. A SRM 6 that hit with 4 missiles would do the same.

Unless my brain is betraying me Been way too long.

[Caballo]

let's SEE it.



Just hitting one of the red dots you render the weapon or the entire arm useless. It's still there, but it can't work. Anyway, i guess the detail ingame won't reach that far, but for the record, this machines, once the armor is out, are pretty fragile.

Edited by Caballo, 10 February 2012 - 08:44 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

What's this strange Mech design? I can't recall seeing anything like that before, and I've been all over the Inner Sphere. I mean... I get that it has 2 ER PPCs, but those shoulders just look weird.. and .. what? Where did you get this schematic?!

[Zervziel]

And people complain about MW4 being unbalanced. So people basically want it to where you can't aim straight, weapons splay out in the stupidest fashion and now they want it to where they only have to target one location to get rid of half (or over half of the mechs weaponry in some cases).

[Caballo]

Prosperity Park, on 10 February 2012 - 09:02 PM, said:

What's this strange Mech design? I can't recall seeing anything like that before, and I've been all over the Inner Sphere. I mean... I get that it has 2 ER PPCs, but those shoulders just look weird.. and .. what? Where did you get this schematic?!

Hehehe... Information warfare, mate (nah, just forgot once again this is pre-invasion )

Edited by Caballo, 10 February 2012 - 09:10 PM.

[trycksh0t]

While I don't think the arm should come off, it should be rendered inoperable. If the torso takes enough damage to get destroyed, chances are the control units and myomer that lead to the arm have been shredded, leaving it imoperable. Working off the assumption the devs are addressing the 'perfect aim' issue from previous MW entries, the whole two-for-one thing is a non-issue, as specifically targeting the side torso won't mean everything is going to hit there.

[VYCanis]

and yet the same rules that call for that to happen, when applied to a real live hitbox, mean you can send several consecutive gauss slugs right through the searchlight, somehow destroying the entire torso, damaging the xl engine, and making that arm fall off.

also how the hell does that loki hold ammo for that srm 6, those rounds are the size of arrow 4s, jeez. you'd need the entire torso just to pack all 90 reloads into it.

and what the hell is going on with that hip joint?

anyway, like i keep saying, it's not about realism. REALISTICALLY, the first explosive anything that bypasses the armor on a mech is probably more than powerful enough to shred lord knows how many important systems to pieces. Imagine every crit that happens not only being confirmed but a triple crit, if you want to be realistic.

if you want damage to be realistic

-the pelvis would be it's own damage zone and penetrating shots are liable to mess with torso twisting
-any shots penetrating either leg, high up the thigh or hip is almost guaranteed to cut all power to the rest of the leg.
-if a weapon is in an arm and it's ammo is 2 torso locations away, you should model the actual ammo feed and risk having it get damaged in the locations it passes through
-you wouldn't be using mechs

it's about gameplay

does it make for good gameplay if simply popping a side torso, which in every MW game to date, gets popped with ridiculous frequency, and is often the first thing to go, becomes the ultimate goal of every single combat? Mind you the only reason they don't get popped faster is because people have been mostly hitting it in their attempt to hit the CT. If you want an example of just how fast side torsos last when players concentrate on one, see the MWLL hollander. aka i coulda sworn i had that torso a second ago.

less armor than a CT, less armor than legs, just as easy to hit as CT, takes arm out with it, sometimes has ammo in it, sometimes has an engine in it.

where is the incentive to shoot ANYTHING else.

forget about power cables, ammo feeds, joints, support structure. Would it play well!? I don't think so. you'll just get a new generation of whiners saying "DUDE DON'T SIDE TORSO ME, AGAINST SERVER RULES!"

If you wish to rip off the arm, you should have to rip off the arm the hard way..

Edited by VYCanis, 10 February 2012 - 09:23 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

VYCanis, on 10 February 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

...
If you wish to rip off the arm, you should have to rip off the arm the hard way..

Tell that to someone with a broken collar bone or broken ribs.






Edit: Stupid doublepost... *grumblegrumble*

Edited by Prosperity Park, 10 February 2012 - 09:43 PM.

[Kenyon Burguess]

yes. if you wanna spend extra time and ammo cutting thru the LT armor, thru all the critical slots, then cut thru the LT ® armor, then i can see the arm falling off.

or

you could just cut thru the center armor in 1/3 of the time and drop the mech dead.

[DarkReaver]

Realistic rules then core the side torso till 0 structural bypass to the critical systems which mymomer is protecting feeding power to the arm structure lose weapons offline and danging arm just for spare parts which hitting it producing either a kinetic explosion on the ammo pack inside the arm killing the mech or ejecting the arm / pulling it out to use a club.

[Pvt Dancer]

Obviously your bucking for option 3, or you wouldn't have put it in.

Let me put it bluntly... does your computer run on 50% power? No... it is all or nothing. Having 'reduced power' makes no sense what-so-ever. Your AC 20 suddenily turn into a AC 2? Your SRM 6 turn into a SRM 1? Your PPC does 3pts of damage? Ohh...maybe you want reduced range. Think of all of the added complexity your trying to add in for really... no real effect. Even if we do 'game world' reasoning, these would be war machines with built in safety systems in them to prevent the weapon from either further damaging itself or worse yet, blowing up the mech using it.

MW4 obviously was apparently fruit-tastic to make that leap of keeping the weapons active when nothing is there to hold it on. Probably one of the reasons why the series was taking a nose-dive was because of stuff like that.

There is only one answer... 1