154 replies to this topic

[Odin]

Thanks Aegis Kleais, Russ and Brian.

Looks like we are still on track, approaching Beta and all
PGI made some good choices regarding the game damage mechanism and match making, no worries, this is all strait forward and common sense, based on experiences with the forerunners.

[John Clavell]

No damage overflow is a big deal! Aside from fast mechs, there is going to be no point in legging a mech. Also, depending on how PGI implement XL Engines, well Standard is gonna be king, and everyone is going to want to go for rear armour CT shots to down a mech as fast a possible. It wont be like MW4 where you would knock out a Side Torso, which had less armour than the CT, and then did damage overflow to take it down as fast as possible. One other interesting thing is, will Left and Right Torso destruction knock out arms?

[Kanatta Jing]

*Deleted*

Edited by Kanatta Jing, 16 May 2012 - 11:30 PM.

[Kreisel]

I'm surprised by the expectations the Atlas will be the assault Mech of choice, given it's the heaviest and most expensive option, I would have expected the Awesome given our current options.

They said no damage overflow (currently) as a balancing tool In regards to a question about legs. There is some possibility the answer was is limited to destroyed legs not overflowing into torso, since honestly, if the leg is destroyed what are you doing shooting down their anyway. There will still be a point to legging Mechs, limping is still crippled, it's a lot easy to dance around a Assults backside once one leg is down if MW4 is any evidence and I'm guessing BOTH legs is still destroyed or at least unable to move but blowing away a single leg wont be a quick easy kill.

It's possible the damage overflow is also in regards to the hit that destroys the section, not subsequent hits (though I'm reaching here...). Having an AC20 round hit slightly to the side and be meaningless would really suck, lasers is wouldn't be so bad on cause it would still drag across damaging sections for part of it, and missiles are always spread around. Missiles and Lasers do get a LOT more powerful with damage overflow if both side torso's are gone, suddenly any hits anywhere on the torso is hammering into the center, and the way they are balanced to spread out damage no longer applies.

Maybe this has something to do with the way crits work? I could be mistake about it, I never played the TT much but I seem to recall that blowing up the armor on a section didn't do the mech in, that further hits in that area checked the crit slots to see which internal got hit and then reacted accordingly. if I recall right peeling the armor off the section didn't automatically mean all the weapons were lost over there. Perhaps they expect players will still be hitting that section for additional effects of blowing up gear on that mech even once it's 'destroyed' being able to focus fire a side torso to smash whats in it, such as heat sinks at the same time as being able to do damage to the CT does seem like it would be a little on the powerful side.

I can't fathom what the point of having CASE would be if ammo explosions don't hit the sections next to them though...

Edited by Kreisel, 17 May 2012 - 12:02 AM.

[Pvt Dancer]

John Clavell, on 16 May 2012 - 11:25 PM, said:

No damage overflow is a big deal! Aside from fast mechs, there is going to be no point in legging a mech. Also, depending on how PGI implement XL Engines, well Standard is gonna be king, and everyone is going to want to go for rear armour CT shots to down a mech as fast a possible. It wont be like MW4 where you would knock out a Side Torso, which had less armour than the CT, and then did damage overflow to take it down as fast as possible. One other interesting thing is, will Left and Right Torso destruction knock out arms?

Well, I think this is to prevent lights from being cored by a weapon that does 10pts of damage or more to a single location. /ALOT/ of people were complaining about this as they felt that it would make lights 'worthless'. Guess what... now lights are pretty much unstoppable. You can't take out the leg, so a limping Jenner is still probably faster than an Atlas. Any hits with weapons that do more than 5pts of damage to a single location are kind of a waste. Might as well save that AC 20 ammo for heavies and Assaults that actually have 20pts of armor/IS in a location to make it worthwhile to fire. They are faster than a mech can turn/torso twist and thus hard to hit, even if they are moving slow. Then you add on top of this people who are crying for DoT weapons and this game really becomes unplayable. Damage is nerfed, effectivily.

The removal of head shots as a insta kill is also a bummer... get ready to see alot of mechs with no armor on the heads! Hard enough to hit the head as it is apparently.

I have to play this as a light in Beta and see how bad this really will be. If it is bad, I hope we can get this fixed to be balanced before release.

[Inappropriate359]

So, let's see..

Legging won't actually destroy the leg (lol?). And no damage overflow so people can make their mech invulnerable by simply turning the destroyed arm/torso/leg to the opponent, leaving only the tiny head (if that, depending on the model) as a viable target?

2 simple design decisions literally made this game not worth playing and certainly not worth the battletech/mechwarrior monikers. Guess it's a good thing beta starts for mechwarrior tactics next week.

I'd love to see the meeting where people sat down, hashed this out, sat back, looked at it and said: "Yea, this is a good idea."

[Siilk]

Aegis Kleais™, on 16 May 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

Legs cannot be separated from chassis on destruction, but result in Mech limping animation — Bryan

Now this is bullshit! I can't believe they screwed it up! MW4's legging mechanics was by far worse in the series and now they are going to make MWO leging work like that. I'm extremely disappointed.

Edit: oh, and no damage transfer? So destroyed side torso becomes an impenetrable shield? What the hell, PGI?

Edited by Siilk, 17 May 2012 - 12:30 AM.

[Qman]

jesus, on 17 May 2012 - 12:16 AM, said:

So, let's see..

Legging won't actually destroy the leg (lol?). And no damage overflow so people can make their mech invulnerable by simply turning the destroyed arm/torso/leg to the opponent, leaving only the tiny head (if that, depending on the model) as a viable target?

2 simple design decisions literally made this game not worth playing and certainly not worth the battletech/mechwarrior monikers. Guess it's a good thing beta starts for mechwarrior tactics next week.

I'd love to see the meeting where people sat down, hashed this out, sat back, looked at it and said: "Yea, this is a good idea."

Siilk, on 17 May 2012 - 12:17 AM, said:

Now this is bullshit! I can't believe they screwed it up! MW4's legging mechanics was by far worse in the series and now they are going to make MWO leging work like that. I'm extremely disappointed.

Good thing that game is free to play then.

(I am just happy the game is coming out )

Edited by Qman, 17 May 2012 - 12:28 AM.

[John Clavell]

Pvt Dancer, on 17 May 2012 - 12:15 AM, said:

Well, I think this is to prevent lights from being cored by a weapon that does 10pts of damage or more to a single location. /ALOT/ of people were complaining about this as they felt that it would make lights 'worthless'. Guess what... now lights are pretty much unstoppable. You can't take out the leg, so a limping Jenner is still probably faster than an Atlas. Any hits with weapons that do more than 5pts of damage to a single location are kind of a waste. Might as well save that AC 20 ammo for heavies and Assaults that actually have 20pts of armor/IS in a location to make it worthwhile to fire. They are faster than a mech can turn/torso twist and thus hard to hit, even if they are moving slow. Then you add on top of this people who are crying for DoT weapons and this game really becomes unplayable. Damage is nerfed, effectivily.

The removal of head shots as a insta kill is also a bummer... get ready to see alot of mechs with no armor on the heads! Hard enough to hit the head as it is apparently.

I have to play this as a light in Beta and see how bad this really will be. If it is bad, I hope we can get this fixed to be balanced before release.

I think it has big implications for all weight classes. There are further parts to this puzzle which have to be discuss. But certainly no damage transfer, assuming it is for all sections, not just the legs, just made CASE obsolete. It's going to also drive where people place things on mechs to protect them when and were possible. My suggestion to the developers would to restrict damage overflow to just the Mechs legs, allow damage overflow within the right and left torsos. But, it will make Mechs much harder to take down that is for sure.

I'm interested to know now, more than ever how certain internals and critical damage will be handled. It effects a good deal of equipment and the risk / reward factor of taking such equipment like XL Engines.

It's interesting as only last night some of us in WSB where discussing how Critical might be handled in MWO, and were indeed theory crafting. I think personally, as fun as TAC's can be, won't be in the game. Such random, and devastating an event would, I feel, enrage many MechWarrior computer game fans. However, all of these things 'creep' on system effectiveness and the risk/reward factor of using some of the advanced tech.

Regarding light mechs speed once taken critical leg damage. We don't know if it will be a system like MW4, where legged speed is base on the mechs max speed. They might have a pre set speed which is a lot, lot slower.

Edited by John Clavell, 17 May 2012 - 12:36 AM.

[verybad]

Sleeping Bear, on 16 May 2012 - 08:51 PM, said:

You need to get your head out of MW4. MWO is about role warfare not weight warfare.

That would be MW2, MW3, and Battletech TT as well...

[Pvt Dancer]

Kreisel, on 16 May 2012 - 11:58 PM, said:

I'm surprised by the expectations the Atlas will be the assault Mech of choice, given it's the heaviest and most expensive option, I would have expected the Awesome given our current options.

They said no damage overflow (currently) as a balancing tool In regards to a question about legs. There is some possibility the answer was is limited to destroyed legs not overflowing into torso, since honestly, if the leg is destroyed what are you doing shooting down their anyway. There will still be a point to legging Mechs, limping is still crippled, it's a lot easy to dance around a Assults backside once one leg is down if MW4 is any evidence and I'm guessing BOTH legs is still destroyed or at least unable to move but blowing away a single leg wont be a quick easy kill.

It's possible the damage overflow is also in regards to the hit that destroys the section, not subsequent hits (though I'm reaching here...). Having an AC20 round hit slightly to the side and be meaningless would really suck, lasers is wouldn't be so bad on cause it would still drag across damaging sections for part of it, and missiles are always spread around. Missiles and Lasers do get a LOT more powerful with damage overflow if both side torso's are gone, suddenly any hits anywhere on the torso is hammering into the center, and the way they are balanced to spread out damage no longer applies.

Maybe this has something to do with the way crits work? I could be mistake about it, I never played the TT much but I seem to recall that blowing up the armor on a section didn't do the mech in, that further hits in that area checked the crit slots to see which internal got hit and then reacted accordingly. if I recall right peeling the armor off the section didn't automatically mean all the weapons were lost over there. Perhaps they expect players will still be hitting that section for additional effects of blowing up gear on that mech even once it's 'destroyed' being able to focus fire a side torso to smash whats in it, such as heat sinks at the same time as being able to do damage to the CT does seem like it would be a little on the powerful side.

I can't fathom what the point of having CASE would be if ammo explosions don't hit the sections next to them though...

The way criticals worked in TT is that once damage gets past the armor (either through destroying the armor or rolls a special hit (snake eyes, which is CT with a auto chance for a crit, even if you don't get past the armor)). Every shot that does Internal Structure damage has a chance to crit. You roll 2d6 and if you get an 7-8, one critial location is destroyed, 9-10 is two locations, and 11-12 is 3 locations. A 6 or less doesn't cause a critical. The Average roll on a D6 is 3.5, thus 7 on a 2d6... you kinda have a 50/50 chance of getting a crit per chance. If your Mech only has a single critical location, it will automacticly be destroyed, even if you rolled more than one location.

So yeah, it is not a TT system, as in TT if a Torso is destroyed, the Arm is automaticly destroyed as well. Case just prevents the damage from transfering. So yeah, your dead on with Case being a waste to even have with how this is describe to us. I might as well put all of my ammo in my legs, as I can't lose them, the damage will not transfer, and I can still move.

Apparently the only way to kill a mech is to destroy the CT due to engine destruction, unless they do XL engines like they are suppose to be. Then maybe Torso shots might be effective. I don't know how effective Gyro hits will even be... so engine hits or nothing.

[Akrasjel Lanate]

Nice stuff

[Murtough]

Great... but i think pink mechs will be probably overpowered

[Marvin Martian]

Redshift2k5, on 16 May 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

I'm sure they could easily tell you the specs of the computers in their testing lab, but that wouldn't really be very helpful for establishing a minimum. Maybe they're counting on crowd-sourcing the minimum specs trough trial and error when they start giving people closed beta access

I think this is how it is going to work as well. The advantage of them telling us what equipment they are running is that you could compare it to what you already have. I'm glad to hear that they will be announcing hardware requirements soon.

[Adridos]

Thank you Aegis. No way I could've joined the tweetchat, so having this info summed up is perfect for me.

Edited by Adridos, 17 May 2012 - 02:54 AM.

[Stormeris]

I really hope devs will add quads even if post release, still very nice info from this chat

[zudukai]

wow, a few of the comments here just made me shake my head, you folks will get it eventually.



thanks aegis, this was much faster then digging around, pretty cool you get to pick your weight class right away.

[pesco]

Kanatta Jing, on 16 May 2012 - 03:12 PM, said:

Russ Bullock @russ_bullock
@QmanGaming RB - I think there are some really neat ideas like notable named hero mechs.#mwochat

Okay, so we might see the Catapult: Butterbee in game.

Really bad idea, IMHO. Every kid on the planet will want one simply because they like to pop up on everyone's radar with their "special" variant name. Making it, you know, not special, notable, or hero anymore.

[Redshift2k5]

Kudzu, on 16 May 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

The whole point of it is that assault mechs are not, and should not be considered, the "end game".

McSniffles, on 16 May 2012 - 04:42 PM, said:

Assault mech should not be an accomplishment. Its just a bigger, more expensive mech. If its something to "get to" it gives the impression that its better than the others which is a poor suggestion IMO.

You should be able to start in any role you want to, but not necessarily the best mech for that role. The scout starting player that wants to bring lots of expensive electronic countermeasures and sensors to the field has to earn his way into a technology-heavy(and much more expensive) Raven. The players who want to start in a big, burly, built-like-a-brick-outhouse mech should be able to start in a large, armoured, nasty mech... But Maybe not in an Assault mech. I'm worried about upwards of half the players all being in Assaults (I expect more informed decisions on the part of the reasonable players here on this forum, but less so from the huge number of less-informed players who will appear on launch) and making the game very top-heavy.

Of course, the matchmaking will probably try to put an equal number of Assaults on each team(and ditto or the other weight classes)

[Shezmu]

Aegis Kleais™, on 16 May 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

• No limit on number of Mechs that can be owned. Confirming dozens of variants (24+?) — Russ

This has intrigued me, might be very interesting to find out what the variants are going to be.