74 replies to this topic

[Joe Mallad]

I for one just want to keep it simple and only have to worry about Mech... BUT, if they did add vehicles at some point, why not use them like how we will be getting Air Strikes in the game. If we are getting the ABILITY to call in fighters for air strikes... then at some point have abilities to call in a tank unit or fast attack hover craft for harassment? You could call in attack choppers in this manor as well. Having a few attack choppers on the board with their pesky AC/2s picking at anything that moves can really drive the other team nuts lol. They dont have to be playable but more like Call of Duty... use calling in support vehicles (tanks,hover craft, Air strikes and choppers) as PERKS (command module abilities)

[FLAKPANZER]

Definitely. Vehicles of all types, including Aerospace vehicles. And Dropships as objectives.

[CCC Dober]

I wouldn't mind PGI expanding the game with other military assets at some point, provided that MW:O does well enough.
It's gonna be tricky to pick the 'right' content because there is a lot available.

[KailKromier]

I dont bark up much, but lately ive been playing a LOT of MWLL(mechwarrior: Living Legends) and ive seen a LOT of missing players in a REALLY well done game. (mostly i think cause of the DRM **** but) i think the system was way out of wack, with a single pilot that gets a few destroyed mechs on his board able to go out and buy a Blood Asp or an Atlas in 10 minutes flat, or being able to bring in an Artillary that can chop a heavy atlas health in half with one shell. VTOLs and Aerospace that dance circles around tanks and Mechs simply cause that could dive bomb a target and be safe while dropping missiles that vaporize targets....

The adding Anything but mechs until the clans come to play would be a mistake...make people LEARN the mechs first without catering to the Tread jockeys too, otherwise youll get an overabundance of tanks on the field to mechs eventually i think, same with Aerospace and VTOLS

[Vasces Diablo]

Could be fun, but in theory they ate supposed to be pretty inferior to mechs. Maybe a person would control a group of vehicles that blow up as hits are taken (like bombers in Aces High).

Also, I could see sending out vehicles as a command tree perk, like air or artillery strikes.

[Rixx]

I'd like to see aerospace and VTOLs handled through the commander tier of skills. You can call for an arty strike, or to have a small squad of VTOLs provide air cover for an area, or call in an air strike from a couple aeorspace fighters. That would be a nice way to handle it and keep it tactical.

As for tanks, vehicles, battlearmor and infantry. I have a completely different idea here. Since these are more direct combat vehicles I'd prefer to see them on the battlefield with the mechs. Allowing us to buy infantry/vehicle assets and command them on the field would be very interesting. Everyone could buy 1 or 2 slots to fill with ground support. Then they could buy assets just like they can buy mechs. Infantry would be cheap to buy and maintain, while vehicles and tanks would be considerably more expensive. Battlesuits (when we get them) could ride on mechs. These assets would respond to simplified commands. You could have them follow you, assign them to defend a target or area, you could tell them to attack targets. Some could even have additional commands like infantry being able to dig in to increase defense, or certain vehicles deploying to increase attack abilities.

Light mech pilots could pick some light, quick assets to back them up. Or maybe some support vehicles that would increase their radar range and help them locate targets. Or maybe they want to take a couple heavy tanks and try to lure scout killers into a trap. Or maybe they'd take a couple missle carriers into the field and provide their own long range support.

Think of all the tactics you could add.

You could even have a seperate unit command experience system that would unlock forces that you could recruit.

I think it could be a very interesting system...but honestly, I'd put it on the back burner for now.

Launch the game, fine tune things, do the clan invasion, retune, then do the vehicle thinng as an expansion like the clan invasion.

Forgot to add a secondary effect of the vehicles. If your mech is blown out from under you, your direct control could then change to one of your other assets. This would mean that getting head sniped early or that bad luck descision to follow that light mech into a trap wouldn't be so devestating. As for infantry/battlesuits, you'd control one and the others would follow you...if your guy dies, you simple jump to another.

[CCC Dober]

@Vasces
That idea is pretty neat. I'd just suggest to throw a swarm AI into the mix to make them at least more difficult to hit/dangerous. AI rarely holds a candle to human players in FPS games, unless it is cheating blatantly.

[Major Tom]

No. I think it would detract from the sexy mech-on-mech action that is the heart and soul Mechwarrior/Battletech.
I think any vehicles should be AI controlled and part of a commanders skill set (call in air strike, call in artillery, call in armor support). I have no desire for player manned vehicles other than tanks (its bad enough they may be piloting urbanmechs)

[Vasces Diablo]

Rixx, on 15 June 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

I'd like to see aerospace and VTOLs handled through the commander tier of skills. You can call for an arty strike, or to have a small squad of VTOLs provide air cover for an area, or call in an air strike from a couple aeorspace fighters. That would be a nice way to handle it and keep it tactical.

As for tanks, vehicles, battlearmor and infantry. I have a completely different idea here. Since these are more direct combat vehicles I'd prefer to see them on the battlefield with the mechs. Allowing us to buy infantry/vehicle assets and command them on the field would be very interesting. Everyone could buy 1 or 2 slots to fill with ground support. Then they could buy assets just like they can buy mechs. Infantry would be cheap to buy and maintain, while vehicles and tanks would be considerably more expensive. Battlesuits (when we get them) could ride on mechs. These assets would respond to simplified commands. You could have them follow you, assign them to defend a target or area, you could tell them to attack targets. Some could even have additional commands like infantry being able to dig in to increase defense, or certain vehicles deploying to increase attack abilities.

Light mech pilots could pick some light, quick assets to back them up. Or maybe some support vehicles that would increase their radar range and help them locate targets. Or maybe they want to take a couple heavy tanks and try to lure scout killers into a trap. Or maybe they'd take a couple missle carriers into the field and provide their own long range support.

Think of all the tactics you could add.

You could even have a seperate unit command experience system that would unlock forces that you could recruit.

I think it could be a very interesting system...but honestly, I'd put it on the back burner for now.

Launch the game, fine tune things, do the clan invasion, retune, then do the vehicle thinng as an expansion like the clan invasion.

Forgot to add a secondary effect of the vehicles. If your mech is blown out from under you, your direct control could then change to one of your other assets. This would mean that getting head sniped early or that bad luck descision to follow that light mech into a trap wouldn't be so devestating. As for infantry/battlesuits, you'd control one and the others would follow you...if your guy dies, you simple jump to another.

I really like this idea. Allowing players to purchase support assets could really add some interesting twists to how people play.

Stationry probe stations that can be set up
Repair trucks to patch armor
Etc...

[Arthwys IronHand]

The idea of vehicles in the game is great. The reality imo is something else entirely. There's a reason the devs haven't gone this way. I can imagine a few reasons that may or may not be shared by them.

1: It's quite time and resource intensive to design, and incorporate new elemements into an already built game, especially interactive elements like player controlled vehicles.

2: You're basically talking about incorporating a new game into an existing one... this isn't done save on the most superficial levels usually.

3: This game is about Mech warfare, not wholesale innersphere battles. Adding vehicles into this mix will detract from the game as it has been conceived and designed.

4: Look at the main competitors in the F2P MMO segment of the game industry and you'll see a commonality among them. They'ne not going crazy building huge universes of game options for the most part, and those that are (STO for example) aren't delivering as good of a product overall as those producers that are choosing a limited scope and making it the best it can be. There's a reason that World of Tanks doesn't have infantry, other vehicles or aircraft in it. It's too much, and the quality of the game would seriously suffer. They've chosen a smarter route and are creating separate games for aircraft and Naval combat.

5: biggest reason. They start adding stuff like that and doing it the justice we gamers would want to see and you can kiss this being a free game goodbye.

Edited by Arthwys IronHand, 15 June 2012 - 07:37 AM.

[Madddog]

Nah mechs only. If you want combined arms go play MWLL. Love the game but its been in a state of constant flux with balance issues. Really don't want to see cheap ASF or arty kills or hovercraft that can take ungodly amounts of damage (for their weight) in this game.

[Cerlin]

I hope they dont. The only thing I may like to see is the "Call in" type so an air support run or artillery. I do not want to see player controlled vehicles. That is MWLL's niche.

[Quentin Yatoki]

I also have to say no to non mech assets. First, it screws up the KISS principle. The more complex the game becomes, the harder it is to balance, the more likely it is to become broken, and the less happy the players become.

Second, the game is called Mechwarrior Online, not Battletech Online, but Mechwarrior Online. Let's face it, most of us are here to fight in massive mechs, not drive tanks or ASFs. Any amount of time they put into developing other kinds of player controllable assets takes away from their ability to include new mechs. I honestly think most of us would rather see our favorite mech designs make it in game then tanks or ASFs.

I'd rather the game just stick with Mechs, and have fun and engaging game play and meta campaign, then a broken or easily exploited game with ASFs and tanks. It's the same reason why I'd like to see a 3025 server and let us re-fight the Fourth Succession War using just level 1 tech.

[Sylow]

And here we have the vehicle tree:




Next to that, while it would be nice to also have tanks and helicopters on the field, the focus should first be to get the mechs up and running and do that right. Vehicles can be added later.

[CCC Dober]

Arthwys IronHand, on 15 June 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

...
4: Look at the main competitors in the F2P MMO segment of the game industry and you'll see a commonality among them. They'ne not going crazy building huge universes of game options for the most part, and those that are (STO for example) aren't delivering as good of a product overall as those producers that are choosing a limited scope and making it the best it can be. There's a reason that World of Tanks doesn't have infantry, other vehicles or aircraft in it. It's too much, and the quality of the game would seriously suffer. They've chosen a smarter route and are creating separate games for aircraft and Naval combat.

5: biggest reason. They start adding stuff like that and doing it the justice we gamers would want to see and you can kiss this being a free game goodbye.

The WoT dev team has never shown any capability of delivering in this department. Game characters specifically. In fact, nothing would suggest that their dev team can do more than shop a few 3d models and 'adjust' them as they see fit. One of the hints/slips was the first incarnation of the T54, which was flattened in such a way that made it look like a 'cockroach' in order to give it better angles to bounce more shots than it had a right to. Perfectly balanced and never admitted to be wrong, although proven otherwise ... repeatedly. This is not a professional dev team you are looking at over there, with neither the capacity, nor the capability of delivering state of the art games any time soon.

Please do not mix them up with this dev team, please, as there is an incredible gap in talent and capability. MWO devs are not limited in the same way the WoT devs are and continue to be. Just look at their engine for crying out loud and pray tell why they haven't licensed a solid engine like PGI yet? Because they aren't professionals and are severely lacking in that department. It's not that they couldn't afford it, far from it. The CryEngine can achieve all that we could wish for and more, if not for the fact that it has been proven to make all kinds of vehicles and infantry work in the same game *coughCrysiscough*.

[Blackfire1]

To be honest?

Yea, kinda. I'd pilot one knowing I'd be no match for a mech. But I think it would be fun to have games with 15-16 players, 12 mech 2-3 "other"

[Cool will never die but you will]

If you want tanks, go Play WoT.

Me, I'm a purist, give me my mech of mech action and leave the ground pounding to the AI. I can see to need for Tank being playable by PC's. possibly by AI for missions but not in a competitive style server. besides, if they where to hold true to the TT feel, Tanks will be sorely out matched (they tend to be a bit fragile) tho I would like some Inferno srm to cook a few tankers with

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

no.

No vehicles other than mechs.

MW:LL is a great game if you want mixed unit tacitcs, so the game is already there guys. I've been playing it since early beta and honestly, it furstrates the living hell out of me at times.

Tanks get ignored by soo many people, and i can never seem to get backup against a tank... [might I also add they feel like they can take WAY more damage than they should in MWLL]

MWLL has left a sour taste in my mouth for this idea. Thus, no thank you. no aerospace fighters, no tanks, just mechs in my MWO.

It's Mechwarrior...not Tank Commander

[Kael Tropheus]

I want to see a real battlefield in game.Vehicles, VTOLs, and battlearmor(post clan) are just as much a part of the game as the mechs are. Unbalancing, not really, the ICE vehicles may not have to worry about heat, but remember that they have no internal structure. VTOLs have what 2 armor points on their rotors max? Savannah Masters are fast as hell mounting a single Medium Laser, but have jack for armor. i think a single large laser hit would take them out if memory serves. I dont understand why players would not want to see them, it makes for a much more diverse and interesting battlefield. Its one of the huge selling points of BF3 over modern warfare, getting to face off against vehicles and pilots. Someone who wants to concentrate just on flying has that option with both heli's or jets. Granted the heli's do not operate anythign like they do in real life both in function and in tactics(take a chopper directly over the field and you have a dead chopper), but the option is there. I think it would actually increase the popularity of the game extensively. While we are at it, infantry. Anti-mech infantry especially in urban environments would be awesome. All of these options would be so easy to implement it would be silly not to later on in an expansion(note I want more mech types for opening).

[ltmyndonos]

I concur with a few of these post: I like the thought of support vehicles on the maps, but I would rather they be NPC supports. Even at that, I would like to see that down the road a bit, after the kinks are worked out of the mechs. Besides, we need a Mad Cat before we get a tank.