205 replies to this topic

[Nik Van Rhijn]

"common sense" has never been common that said it is a part of the game that a lot of people would like to see implimented. If you don't like it - kill them/cripple them before they get that close. A DFA when done right gives a great feeling of achievment - although it often means the oponents lancemates then blow you apart I'd trade a Wasp for an Atlas any day -especially if it helped my lancemates win the battle.

Edited by Nik Van Rhijn, 17 December 2011 - 05:22 AM.

[VYCanis]

The thing with melee centric mechs is that yes, they are close range brawlers in the very literal sense, but they get one unlisted benefit to having that close range.

They are attention grabbers, shock units.

These are the units that players want to avoid at all costs getting in among them, because once they do, they will beat the crap out of any mech that relies on long range stuff, or is preoccupied shooting at others. They are a diversion too dangerous to ignore. At the same time, smart players will support those 1 or more melee mechs so the enemy can't reliably focus on those hanging back and pounding them or those in among them.

An 80 ton charger might look like crap with its 5 small lasers, but that thing was brutally effective against many mechs, namely those that couldn't get the hell out of the way. All but some of the lightest mechs could easily outgun it, but more often than not they didn't have the firepower to drop it in the time it took for it to close the gap and started charging people or kicking their legs right off.

Edited by VYCanis, 17 December 2011 - 10:10 AM.

[Gorith]

Ahh charger only reliable scout mech in the entire steiner lineup

[FACEman Peck]

I like not having melee fights, you take out a 'Mech that close to you and the reactor goes critical, then you die too. Right? Besides, stuff like PPC or Gauss is really effective at close ranges.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

FACEman Peck, on 17 December 2011 - 11:53 AM, said:

I like not having melee fights, you take out a 'Mech that close to you and the reactor goes critical, then you die too. Right? Besides, stuff like PPC or Gauss is really effective at close ranges.

Not if they enforce the short range limitations oon them. Also reactors going crit should almost never happen.

[Dredger]

If I remember right, mech reactors only "explode" if the outer containment casing has been breached to allow air into the cooling chamber. This is due to the air becoming superheated and expanding rapidly, thus the explosion. The only other reason for a mech to explode would be if the pilot intentionally overcharged the unit and then shut down the containment field, allowing the superheated material to touch the supercool walls of the reactor chamber (suicide). As far as I know, Mechs should never explode like a nuclear warhead.

In theory, a melee attack would not breach the reactor.

Edited by Dredger, 17 December 2011 - 12:09 PM.

[FACEman Peck]

Dredger, on 17 December 2011 - 12:09 PM, said:

If I remember right, mech reactors only "explode" if the outer containment casing has been breached to allow air into the cooling chamber. This is due to the air becoming superheated and expanding rapidly, thus the explosion. The only other reason for a mech to explode would be if the pilot intentionally overcharged the unit and then shut down the containment field, allowing the superheated material to touch the supercool walls of the reactor chamber (suicide). As far as I know, Mechs should never explode like a nuclear warhead.

In theory, a melee attack would not breach the reactor.

We all know that what looks good on paper sure doesn't always do well in combat. So, we will all see what happens when the game is made.

[Dredger]

If you still want pretty explosions, there are always unused munitions inside a mech...

[Phades]

Eh?

The axeman or the berserker would like to have a word with you...

[pcunite]

Looking at the Melee drawings online makes me laugh out loud ... funny stuff ...

I can't speak for everyone ... but for myself, one of the reasons I don't want Melee, is because of all the mechs that don't have hands and such. They are to me giant computers. You control them with intelligence and it is a thinking man's game ... there are screens to read, radars to look at, information to digest and act upon ... not bouts of anger to punch stuff ... this is not street fighter ...

I don't want to run around with a gun in my hand oozing blood from everyone ... I don't want to kick and punch and then do a "Fatality" move on someone ... we have games for that now ... let's don't ruin MWO ... I know it was in the lore ... but hey, everybody makes mistakes and that would be a good way to kill this game ...

Edited by pcunite, 17 December 2011 - 07:14 PM.

[VYCanis]

chop chop!

Edited by VYCanis, 17 December 2011 - 07:36 PM.

[Valdor Constantine]

J Echo, on 17 December 2011 - 04:59 PM, said:

If they add melee (other than a realistic mechanic like punching with your gun barrel by twisting your torso), this game will be merely yet another Japanese-style generic giant-robot fighting game. Mechwarrior has been distinguished from the masses of cheesy, corny, effeminate giant-robot fighting-game clones by its gravity and seriousness; the previous games in the series have all been as down-to-earth as a game about giant walking war machines can be. The omission of axe-wielding humanlike/fairylike robots is a vital element in this, and abandoning this immersive element in favor of the cartoon-like Gundam axe-fighting will, at once, spell the death of Mechwarrior Online as a believable game and make it nothing more than yet another drone in the great hive of lame robot-pirouetting games.

"Keep your children's picture-books out of my hardcore mech battles."

and what makes you think that this is how melee would feel if it were implemented? you make it sound as if mechs would be doing backflips and summersalts around the battlefield while performing a gundam barrel roll. if they do im sure they would stick to the model that battlemechs are indeed slow and clunky machines compared to their Japanese cousins. i just wouldn't rule melee out right now. untill we see some examples of what it would look like and how it will be controlled.

[VYCanis]

J Echo, on 18 December 2011 - 02:16 AM, said:

The media for the Mechwarrior P.C. games, as well as the gameplay, has established since Mechwarrior 3 that battlemechs (realistically) lack the articulation to perform melee. If this were altered back to the corny old Battletech style of over-articulated robots, then it would no longer play like Mechwarrior but instead like a Japanese cartoon, if a slow and clunky one. In other words, Mechwarrior games established that in the Mechwarrior universe, battlemechs are rather non-articulate (for reasons of sturdiness), and that rules out melee and other human-like actions on the part of the battlemechs. Such things wouldn't even be desirable because the articulation required to do them would render the robot highly vulnerable to damage.

Most of my game time has been spent on MW games, I rarely actually get to play the TT, so I'm not about to "dicebag" ya, but your argumebt makes no sense. Like at all.
Mechwarrior and Battletech are not 2 separate continuities. The former is a video game representation of the latter. Mechwarrior mechs ARE battletech mechs. The reason there was no melee going on in previous MW games, if anything, had more to do with technological limitations at the time, not by intentional omission. And never ANYWHERE in the MW games, manuals, or any sort of reference material did it say mechs couldn't melee. You just didn't have the option in game. Thats like saying that since tanks in the battlefield games couldn't do X or Y for whatever gameplay reason at the time that they shouldn't be able to do X or Y later in a sequel when the designers figure out how to implement it.

Edited by VYCanis, 18 December 2011 - 09:54 AM.

[Damocles]

Just because you constantly try to cram this image of "acrobatic gundam melee and swordplay" at us doesn't mean that is anywhere NEAR what melee could appear and function as.

Nor is it what many of us want.

IMO; melee SHOULD be clunky and slow. Mechs shouldn't be dodging and juking.

But I am sure none of that will put an end to the nonsense.

[Demi-Precentor Konev]

J Echo, on 18 December 2011 - 02:15 PM, said:

I've debunked the "technical limitations" argument before and I'll do it again: it isn't true, because the in-game part isn't the only place where you see it pointedly not-happening. The intro movies have intricate animation, with no technical limitation at all to it, and yet the mechs are still portrayed as being not articulate enough to do things like you tabletoppers want. For example, the mechs with hands are portrayed as not having movable fingers, and this isn't a lack of ability to model it--the intro to Mechwarrior 4 (and the 2009 trailer by Piranha) are very advanced technically and show a level of detail far above movable fingers.

So, no, the omission of movable fingers and the like was a design choice, not a technical limitation. Mechwarrior may have originated as a representation of the board game (don't correct me--tabletop game = boardgame, practically speaking), but at some point (around Mechwarrior 3 it diverged hugely. It is no longer a strict representation of the tabletop game. It isn't necessarily a representation of the tabletop at all, really.

Like it or not, they are separate continuities. The media for the boardgame states that mechs with hands can pick things up, but the media for Mechwarrior shows that they cannot. Not just gameplay, but all of the media. No technical limitation about it. Not simple omission, but active proof of the contrary.

Your reasoning does not follow. What you are currently experiencing is a logical fallacy. Because the MechWarrior games did not represent advanced articulation or melee, it does not mean that they were intentionally omitted due to the views of the developers. For that to be proven true, you would need actual statements from the developers. As such, the evidence you are providing is not sufficient for your conclusion. The absence of melee articulation in the earlier MW games does not imply that melee articulation does not exist in this (allegedly) separate setting - merely that it was not included in the game.

Moreover, as I have stated elsewhere, the MWO website is very clear that the game is set in the BattleTech universe. This is made clear in the Mechwarrior games as well. Indeed, the basis for these games is the MechWarrior RPG which is also a part of the BattleTech continuum. Again, your qualifier for a break in MW/BT continuity is the absence of melee articulation in MW media. I suppose by this standard the Lord of the Rings movies would not exist in the continuity of the LotR novels because they don't mention Tom Bombadil? Why are you doing this?

I don't mind you having such an overt anti-BT agenda (although I certainly can't understand it). What does bother me is your dangerous use of syllogistic arguments to erroneously support your position. If you're going to debate something it is best to do it with clean methods.

[pcunite]

Gentlemen,
A friendly reminder, we have nine more months to go ... thousands of new people will be signing into this board ... let's pace ourselves. Those of you who want Melee, well ... I don't BUT the devs said they'd do it only IF they could do it right. It was in the lore, so I'll just have to trust them. We've had at least three previous games (excluding MW4) that took the game very seriously and the MWO trailer took the game very seriously as well. I think if Melee is introduced it won't be done so badly that I'll have to play this game in secret.

[Mchawkeye]

J Echo, on 18 December 2011 - 02:38 PM, said:

"Acrobatic gundam melee and swordplay" refers to the way that your robots have hyperarticulate limbs, so that they do things like picking things up, put their hands on their hips, and other stupid stuff which, in reality, would handicap you because it makes your mech super delicate to include the complexity & number of joints required to do that. I've gone over this again and again, and am starting to wonder why you seem to be incapable of grasping it.

We grasp it. We simply disagree.

[Damocles]

J Echo, on 18 December 2011 - 02:38 PM, said:

"Acrobatic gundam melee and swordplay" refers to the way that your robots have hyperarticulate limbs, so that they do things like picking things up, put their hands on their hips, and other stupid stuff which, in reality, would handicap you because it makes your mech super delicate to include the complexity & number of joints required to do that. I've gone over this again and again, and am starting to wonder why you seem to be incapable of grasping it.

You fail to comprehend what I am saying.

I know what you mean, but it doesn't make you right. You go over it again and again, but it doesn't make you right.
The way you describe melee combat/animations to be is not the only way it can be done.

and Pcunite is right anyway, we are speaking to the wind here. Piranha will either add these features or they won't and there isn't that much we can do about it.

[Valdor Constantine]

J Echo, on 18 December 2011 - 02:48 PM, said:

There are only three potential options for melee: articulate, non-articulate, and none. I'm cool with the middle one and the last one, but not the first one. Most people want the first one. See my other posts today in various threads for explanation of "non-articulate melee." I'm done repeating myself (for now, anyway).



This, at least, is wisdom. I shouldn't have given into the temptation to descend into the argument--but it's awfully difficult to hear everyone crying, "Devs, please make the game suck!" without adding my objection--even knowing that it won't make any difference whether or not I object. ; )

as far as i can see the MAJORITY of people who want melee want it to be non articulate and clumsy as it should be with western style battlemechs....i dont see people shouting out "I want mechs that can cartwheel, and back flip" we want mechs that can lift its arm and brink it down in a brutal non articulate strike.........its that simple something that pretty much every mech that has arms can do, and i dont see a prob with that as far as melee goes if they can implement that awesome if they cant oh well. the same goes for charging and DFA

[Orzorn]

If you want an example of satisfying, kinetic, but still slightly clumsy melee combat, go play Gundam Side Story 0079: Rise From the Ashes. I imagine Mechwarrior melee combat like that but without the standard Gundam ability to jump jet left/right/straight forward. You could bash by rushing into the target. You had a shield to block, you could block with your beam sword, and melee was powerful, as it took about 5-6 good hits to take down a target, but also dangerous to pull off with more than one enemy around, as you would get bombarded to hell and back by the guy you weren't engaging. Due to this, you didn't try to melee all the time, because it could put your at a disadvantage.
http://www.youtube.c...RzttAGFE#t=2m9s

I'd just like to add, if you have a Dreamcast, I totally recommend this game. Its definitely the best Gundam game I've ever played, and even without that, its a damn good mecha game. They pull off the in-cockpit view very well.

Edited by Orzorn, 19 December 2011 - 09:38 PM.