50 replies to this topic

[Mota Prefect]

All I know is the explosions in that MWLL link were pretty darn good, with the exception of the ragdoll physics where the mech flops about like a fish out of water.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Older games were limited to represent destruction of a mech to 1 or a few standard animations. MWO with CE3 could clearly provide much more realistic variations, so imo, it depends on how it was defeated. The effect could be a cumulative mixture of the damage it sustained over the battle. If the engine is destroyed or if there was internal fire or ammo, explosions I could see it being thick dark smoke as the mech falls. If the cockpit is scooped out, but the mech is otherwise undamaged, the mech might go for a long smouldering walk until runs into buildings and collapses. If its electronics are fried due to PPC then it may be a simple stop with alot of arching and the whining of systems as they die. Heat-related destruction would be alot of smoke as materials ignite, small explosions, steaming as cooling systems fail.

Whatever the case, I would be disappointed if the destroyed effect was just one or two standard big explosions. No to over-the-top ragdoll physics as well.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 13 April 2012 - 12:46 PM.

[Thorn Hallis]

pursang, on 12 April 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

I have some candy right here, why don't you come into my van?

Ok. Btw, did I mentioned that my real name is Chris Hansen?

[Havoc2]

I'd like to see dead 'Mechs standing (depending on how they were killed of course) and able to use them as obstacles like buildings ala MW2:Mercs.

Depending on how large the 'Mech is, maybe it can still cause damage to a smaller 'Mech running around and into it.

[TheRulesLawyer]

I don't mind some flashy vented plasma showing that you've killed the reactor. What I don't want is the reactors going off like nuclear bombs and doing AOE damage all the time. 1/1000 games maybe. Otherwise, just falling over, etc is fine.

[Strumtruppen]

the expolsion should not be massive or blinding for that will defat the perpose of close range weapons

[Solis Obscuri]

Piñatamech ftw!

[Grithis]

William Petersen, on 12 April 2012 - 01:38 AM, said:

The only time there should be explosions involved in Mech destruction is in the case of an ammo crit (or ammo cook-off). Fusion. Engines. Don't. Blow. Up.

If no ammo explodes, Mech falls down and smokes a bit.

Sarna.net, under Fusion Engines.

"Because the plasma is held in a vacuum chamber (to isolate the superheated plasma from the cold walls of the reactor; contact with the walls would super-chill the plasma below fusion temperatures), a punctured reactor can suck in air where the air is superheated. Normal thermal expansion of the air causes the air to burst out in a brilliant lightshow often mistaken for a "nuclear explosion" that is only a risk for unarmored infantry close to the destroyed 'Mech."

True, it's not overly dangerous, but it's a little more than "smoking a bit". And it could deffinately affect the terrain. (Knock chunks off of buildings. Blow down trees. Etc.)

[Scarlett Avignon]

Since we'll be tracking internals, why not just say under a rare circumstance (maybe three destroyed engine criticals from one hit) we get to see the 'explosion' animation.

Personally, I like the blast of super-heated air that is harmless to armored units. Good visual that is a rewarding, flashy addition to a kill.

[Fresh Meat]

I like the candy idea, its right there with melee combat and will complement its play style well.

[William Petersen]

Grithis, on 12 April 2012 - 09:30 PM, said:

Sarna.net, under Fusion Engines.

"Because the plasma is held in a vacuum chamber (to isolate the superheated plasma from the cold walls of the reactor; contact with the walls would super-chill the plasma below fusion temperatures), a punctured reactor can suck in air where the air is superheated. Normal thermal expansion of the air causes the air to burst out in a brilliant lightshow often mistaken for a "nuclear explosion" that is only a risk for unarmored infantry close to the destroyed 'Mech."

True, it's not overly dangerous, but it's a little more than "smoking a bit". And it could deffinately affect the terrain. (Knock chunks off of buildings. Blow down trees. Etc.)

Yeah, keep reading there.

Sarna said:

Such dramatic failures are rare, though. It is difficult to sustain the fusion reaction and very easy to shutdown. Safety systems or damage to containment coils will almost always shut down the engine before such an explosion occurs. The massive shielding of the engine (in the case of standard fusion engines, this is a tungsten carbide shell that accounts for over 2/3 of the weight of the engine) usually buys the safety systems the milliseconds needed to shutdown the engine when severe damaged is inflicted.

[Wraith 1]

As several people have stated: in both BT canon and real-world physics, a fusion engine of the sort used in Battlemechs would not create a nuclear explosion after being punctured.

However, this is not BattleTech or real life (no matter how much we might wish it was real life) this is MechWarrior.

I am completely for keeping this game as close as possible to BT and RL, but I personally think that there needs to be a chance for a massive explosion capable of heavily damaging or overheating 'mechs within ~70 meters.

The logical reason for this, is that it discourages 'gun bump' tactics, ramming your face into this other guy's face, and firing an alpha strike. We don't need that, we need the Devs to implement melee.

The less logical reason for this, is that it adds a massive explosion to the game. This will make it more appealing to the general public without turning the whole game into another gosh danged LCD MechAssault type of game.

[Egomane]

Neroese, on 12 April 2012 - 03:32 AM, said:

Well, it's should look's a bit realistic (but it's hard). Ya know, mechs should make ,,bang" like a car in Hollywood movies.

You do know that cars normaly don't explode? That a car door will not stop a bullet unless it is armored (no police car is armored)?
There is nothing realistic about cars in Hollywood!

Back to Topic: I like the candy idea! But only if I can beat the pinata... err... Mech with a stick.

[William Petersen]

Wraith-1, on 12 April 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

However, this is not BattleTech or real life (no matter how much we might wish it was real life) this is MechWarrior.

I really love when people say this. It's like saying "X-wing vs. Tie Fighter isn't Star Wars."

[Zylo]

Wraith-1, on 12 April 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

As several people have stated: in both BT canon and real-world physics, a fusion engine of the sort used in Battlemechs would not create a nuclear explosion after being punctured.

However, this is not BattleTech or real life (no matter how much we might wish it was real life) this is MechWarrior.

I am completely for keeping this game as close as possible to BT and RL, but I personally think that there needs to be a chance for a massive explosion capable of heavily damaging or overheating 'mechs within ~70 meters.

The logical reason for this, is that it discourages 'gun bump' tactics, ramming your face into this other guy's face, and firing an alpha strike. We don't need that, we need the Devs to implement melee.

The less logical reason for this, is that it adds a massive explosion to the game. This will make it more appealing to the general public without turning the whole game into another gosh danged LCD MechAssault type of game.

I think explosion damage at close range should be a risk from ammo as well. If you hit the enemy mech's ammo and it explodes it would make sense that if you were very close (like ramming) you could be hit by the explosion as well. While CASE might limit damage within the mech suffering the ammo explosion it seems like this could result in more of the explosive force being directed out of the ammo rack, possibly resulting in greater damage to external targets.

[Motionless]

Mech opens up and clan tech falls out is my choice.

And if you remember the mechwarrior reboot video, I'm guessing mechs will explode in this game,

[pursang]

Motionless, on 12 April 2012 - 11:11 PM, said:

Mech opens up and clan tech falls out is my choice.

And if you remember the mechwarrior reboot video, I'm guessing mechs will explode in this game,

Ah that brings back memories. If they managed to add the ejection sequence just as your engine goes critical - that would be fantastic.

[Trogusaur]

pursang, on 12 April 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

Depends on if you destroyed the reactor or not, but really - who wouldn't want candy to fall out of the 'Mech like a big pinata?

Wild random thought appeared... how about adding Halo's Grunt birthday party achievement, but with Urbies?!

Edited by Lord Trogus, 13 April 2012 - 12:26 AM.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

Man, I hated those ugly and totally uncalled for explosions in MW4!
Mech explosions should be very rare if any. I liked how it was handled in MW3. You could blow up your mech by alpha-striking many PPCs, but otherwise mech never exploded. See tabletop rules on reactor explosions)
Big explosion is possible when LOTS of ammo explode inside the mech, that's what I love in an ammobox mechs, they may leave no salvage)

Edited by Duncan Jr Fischer, 13 April 2012 - 12:32 AM.

[SideSt3p]

If you've ever read a BattleTech novel you'll know that it alld epends on how the 'Mech dies. Sometimes the reactor goes critical, other times ammo explosions blow out torsos/arms and the reactor shuts down and is dead. Other times 1 PPC to the head and the rest of the 'Mech is pristine.

Either way I feel like this is an area PGI will get to take however they want.