37 replies to this topic

[ManDaisy]

Mech Tracks,
Tank Tread Marks,

These things are bound to leave at least a few meters deep scars into "most" of the kinds of terrain they travel thru. Not having them fade would be a good way to add a kind of tracking to moving targets are far as where they are headed, what size the are, what mech / vehicle. etc. This would especially add value to a LOS, no radar kind of game.

Edited by ManDaisy, 24 February 2012 - 03:22 PM.

[Kenyon Burguess]

it would be a nice addition if the system can handle it

[Adridos]

Too bad there exists 101 reasons all games in the past had disappearing footprints.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Adridos, on 24 February 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

Too bad there exists 101 reasons all games in the past had disappearing footprints.

#1. RAM

#2. RAM

#3. RAM

#4. RAM

#5. RAM

#6. RAM...

Edited by Prosperity Park, 24 February 2012 - 05:43 PM.

[Mautty the Bobcat]

At the very least...footprints that take much longer to fade than the previous game installments would be a welcome addition. Even our mid-grade computers should be able to handle a couple dozen foot steps staying behind each mech without too much of a problem.

[Naduk]

great idea

im getting quite tired of people arguing against this kind of thing based on hardware limitations of old games

people need to wake up and realize its 2012
my phone is thousands of times more powerful than the computer i had to run Mechwarrior 2
and infinitely more powerful than the systems that ran the original Mechwarrior games
and my phone is considered old by current standards

Mechwarrior 4 had foot prints that lasted a very long time (tank prints ect included)
there are zero reasons for computer of today being unable to record and display this information for the entirety of a match

if you are running pc gear older than Mechwarrior4 (12 years old now)
you are joking your self if you think this game will run on your pc
time to start saving your pennies for a new rig

with today's capabilities mech prints should be more than the simple decals of old
they should be literal depressions in the ground, easy to do with a normal map as a decal
if they really wanted to it could be a actual depression in the ground geometry, if they did that it would fill with water when raining or snow and sand in storms... ect

i can play a 64 player game of battlefield 3 find constant evedence of battles taken place
bullet holes, burn marks, burning wrecks, craters, fallen trees, destroyed buildings
and its found on every inch of the map for the entire duration of the game

i think Mechwarrior in 2012 can handle a 12v12 permanent foot prints

[FinnMcKool]

The reason people think this cant work is they been brainwashed by Consoles,!

Im sorry but consoles could have been something great but they been abused by those who make them, they dumbed down everything they touch including the players.

back to the subject, if anyone reading this has ever done any kind of scouting or hunting for real (I never meet a Canadian who didnt but then I am from the northlands myself) First rule is "Tracking " (lots of clues in a footprint)

This would add a level of realism and game play no other game to date has achieved .

Dont listen to the console! This can be done and to great effect!

[Morgana]

America's Army Online (FPS) was able to achieve this, albeit they were decals instead of impressions. And as Finn stated, was very useful in identifying where your enemy fire was coming from. They actually offered it in 3 or 4 variations in regards to decal strength, and the time they lasted. Unfortunately, I had to use the lowest setting, to get the most out of my then not-top-of-the-line comp.

We do need to keep in mind that this is to be F2P, what we're hoping for may be beyond the scope of that.

[Halfinax]

I agree that they should leave tracks in appropriate terrain, but a "few meters deep?" I don't think 'Mechs sink up to their arm pits in the terrain. As a matter of fact iirc a tank would actually sink less deep into terrain than a Toyota pick-up, and a 'Mech has about the same tread surface area and weight as a modern tank.

[Naduk]

thats not possible halfnax
if you built a tank the same weight as a human
the tank would exert less pressure on the amount of ground the human uses
the tank, spreads its weight over a much larger surface area than any foot design
thus a human would have a deeper foot print that a tank of the same weight (like johnny5)

as most mechs are bipedal they would display similar surface compression dynamics as a human would
albeit a much heavier scale

the tracks a mech would leave on regular ground would be closer to what a human does on the beach
the effect of a tank rolling across the ground while not as extreme as a mech is, would still be more than deep enough to track with the naked eye

so a few meters is much to exaggerated, but mechs most certainly would have deeper prints than tanks would
and they are pretty clear (they would at least be several cm deep)

[Zakatak]

Maybe desert/snowy maps can have some "dust" that passes across the map periodically which causes footprints to erase.

[TimberJon]

@ Halfinax, I agree. Not a few meters deep. A 200,000 pound atlas has a footprint that might be approximately be 36-40 square feet of area but I could be wrong. I drew up alot of 'Mechs to scale in AutoCAD years ago and might be getting some mixed up. (im being overkill here because the entire surface of the foot does not contact the ground. It likely has high-low points like a hiking boot and will have some kind of tread). High grade concrete with adequately compacted backfill today on terra should be able to withstand 6000 pounds per square inch, which equals with the worst case (worn foot?) 40 square feet of Atlas boot: A resistance of ~2,880,000 pounds. Based on its supposed weight, it should be putting something like 10,000 pounds per square foot of pressure down per slow, gentle, sneaky footfall. So that's 120,000 pounds per square inch.

Whoa an Atlas wouldn't dent it then! Not necessarily true. High grade concrete would be at the starport where dropships land. Ferrocrete is probably an order stronger even than our typical high-grade crete. More likely medium grade will be lining the city streets, since they still need to support the weight of construction 'mechs and other heavy utility vehicles. Medium grade is supposed to withstand somewhere around 4000 pounds per square inch which converts to a resistance per 40 sq-ft atlas boot of 1,920,000 pounds. See if you factor that the bottom surface area of the foot actually has more like 20 feet of square footage, or even a little less... that brings the resistance to nearly a million pounds per square inch.

While the math suggests you shouldnt have any footprints, many factors abound. It might be old and not at full-strength, there might be sand, dirt, stress fractures or decay, etc... there SHOULD be footprints. Because all the above numbers are based on the fact that we are gently setting the foot down. If he is stalking something, it might not leave a depression, but the math changes exponentially when you are slamming 200,000 pounds of death into the ground with inertia and a near jog. I don't know how to do that math exactly, but I am sure you might leave a depression of a few inches in either, but not much more than 6 inches or so by my reasoning. With all factors of concrete psi, initial construction, curing, etc... etc... the Atlas might be bringing down its foot at close to 30,000 lbs per square foot, but the concrete should still hold or just barely give.

As usual, feel free to correct me if I screwed up math class again.

SIDE NOTE!

I'm not sure we should consider persistent footprints despite the technology and capability to do so even on a low to medium grade computer. The reason is a possible tactical imbalance. Your team drops and their team drops. You aren't supposed to know what kind of 'Mechs they have until you spot a scout, or engage their other elements.. but if footprints are persistent, you not only know where they went, you should be able to tell what type of 'Mech it is based on the tread and footfall pattern. If you all tuned down radar (I dont recall reading whether this would be possible or not) and circled the city a few times, each team might stumble upon multiple treads and be able to determine the type of 'Mechs they are up against. I'll agree that would be a classic bait tactic but then a scout 'Mech is such a lightweight, based on the math upstairs, it might not make an impression even on medium grade crete.
Pro / Con. Footfalls can be a good thing! Is it realistic? Absolutely. Will the Devs consider it.. I dunno. It does need to be put on the table and tossed back and forth. I am sure persistent footfalls would challenge the current vision of gameplay and tactical balance even at this fairly early stage. To give those geniuses some credit, they might already have it ironed out and included, but it would be one of the tiny details that they might leave out and just surprise us with at launch/beta day.

My 2 cents.

Edited by TimberJon, 25 February 2012 - 12:52 AM.

[neodym]

I know theres problem with this becose of ram,but I remember clearly as it was yesterday setting graphics to ultra when MW4 demo 12 years back came out and just being so happy seeing nice footprints on that snow map from my uziel,12 years later I want it like then,ok ram is problem,dont make them be there forever but decently long time would be nice

Edited by neodym, 25 February 2012 - 11:52 AM.

[SI The Joker]

24 player x 2 legs per mech = 48 footprints

How many steps would a mech take in a 20 minute game? 500? 1,000? Let's use 750.. an in the middle value

48 x 750 = 36,000 footprints to be laid and tracked by the game.

That's alot 'O footprints!

[TimberJon]

But the footprints don't have to be persistent in the environment. Like when a building blows up and collapses, it sits there as a husk but it does not stay in memory. It only stays in memory if it is programmed to appear, then disappear on a timer. If the world map terrain layers were programmed with this response to a footprint event, that area would permanently alter and therefore only use a fraction of system resources to create the event locally. So accumulatively, only a small fraction of resources would be used on the local client system during walking, but it shouldn't be nearly enough to destabilize fps performance for all the other draw orders happening on screen.

There are many creative ways to handle things like a permanent movement of an object today, even with less advanced platforms than the Cry3 engine.

It can be done. Easily? Im not sure. Should it be done? Other than the reservations I mentioned, I am really not sure how to even begin going into the gritty details of this subject... at this time. =)

[SI The Joker]

I definitely agree with you TimberJon, it can be done... and it's probably pretty easy once you have all the assets lined up... and to some extent probably already is implemented... and we're all sitting here waxing poetic on a point that the Devs are shaking their heads over saying "Silly speculators.... don't you know it works like THIS!".

36k footprints is alot though, and could get muddy to render which is why I'd lean towards a decay timeout.

Edited by SI The Joker, 25 February 2012 - 02:34 PM.

[ManDaisy]

suddenly everything is made outta rubber. If they have to decay thats better then nothing, but .

[FinnMcKool]

Well Timberjon has a valid point, not that its hard to do but what about game balance? .but if infow war is all that ,why not a good tracker seeing the tracks knowing the Terran so he knows what tonnage the mech is ,maybe he knows what mech? Where is it going how long ago did it go by?
could I leave a trail on purpose to give missinformation ??

ok I dont expect any of this but it would have been cool.

[TimberJon]

You may still see it. It might have been one of the things they first though of. For all we know they figured out how it could not advantage / disadvantage anyone. The only way I see that happening is if they figured out a way for the footprints to fade without eating memory, left them out altogether, or made them all the same pattern. I don't like any of these options really. Make 'em realistic or don't add them. As my math shows, a footprint might only leave a print in the "dust". Which likely would fade. Dust on the street means that lots of wind is bringing it in and depositing it so it would be realistic to say that the wind came by and obscured the footprint again.

[neodym]

I have an idea,what about three graphical options

1. no footprints
2. short term footprints
3. persistent foorprint

you select option depending on your hardware,if your rockin 8gb ram I dont see reason why you should not enjoy persistent footprints,if you have weak machine turn of all footsteps so you get maximum FPS,its win or win situation

you may say this will put people with strongers pc to advantage,to this I say,why should we,with good pc loose this great feature becose of low end users? I say if your pc cant handle it turn it off but dont take my persistent footprints as its no problem for my machine and its great thing to have for visual and tactical reasons

Edited by neodym, 25 February 2012 - 05:08 PM.