1063 replies to this topic

[Terror Teddy]

I have no problem with "boating" but i would actually like SOME restriction to internal space allotment.

Instead of X slots i would have preferred a combonation of and/or.

4 ballistic slots OR 8 critical space so that there is an actual limit to how heavy a singular weapon could be.

yes, in some cases there would be boating but limited to smaller guns.

A jenner with 6 energy slots could have 6 energy AND max 6 criticals.

A mech usually fitted with ac/2's would require such gutting to fit larger weapons it's silly. Same goes for lighter mechs like the spider who perhaps should be able to fit slots x 3 criticals (6) sized ballistic weapon instead of an ac10 or gauss (crippled i know)

This would also enforce a viability of all weapons.

Too late now though and mechlab bastardization is fun.

[Belisarius1]

Honestly, Teralitha, the "seriously skilled" pilots are going to take whatever gives them the edge. Fairly often, that's going to be boats. I have no idea what cloud land you're living on, but it's one quite disconnected from the real world.

Losing because you took a "non-cheese" variant to feel superior != skill.

[Captain Midnight]

If you were actually skilled you'd win with your non-cheese variant anyways.

[MustrumRidcully]

Captain Midnight, on 19 March 2013 - 12:00 AM, said:

If you were actually skilled you'd win with your non-cheese variant anyways.

Even against skilled players in cheese variants?

[Herbstwind]

Teralitha, on 18 March 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

For example... the 9 laser hunchi. So how many of them are in the shoulder? What do you think would really happen when you fire all those lasers mounted together in the same location? It would generate so much heat the mechs shoulder would melt itself. The internals of a mech would take damage from that much concentrated heat. Though the rest of the mech wouldnt feel the burn as much as that shoulder would.

just a short FYI and off topic : in BT physics heat is generated by the reactor which bursts to high stress levels to produce energy for weapons (even more when firing many weapons at once), hence the heatsinks are built into the engine (most of them) and not included in the weapons.

sorry, could not resist

[Pht]

Teralitha, on 18 March 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

What do you think would really happen when you fire all those lasers mounted together in the same location? It would generate so much heat the mechs shoulder would melt itself.

The internals of a mech would take damage from that much concentrated heat. Though the rest of the mech wouldnt feel the burn as much as that shoulder would. Lets face it... this is not a mech simulation. If it really was, pilots would be dying alot just from heat exposure inside their own mechs. Internal structures would be warping and melting from the intense heat some grouped weapons would produce. Grouped missle launchers fired nonstop would explode once the temperature around the launcher got so high.

You know this ... how? From what source?

[Teralitha]

Captain Midnight, on 19 March 2013 - 12:00 AM, said:

If you were actually skilled you'd win with your non-cheese variant anyways.

Actually, if we were driving the exact same mech and build, only skill would be the difference between us.

Pht, on 19 March 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

You know this ... how? From what source?

From reality. But as I said, the game is not a true simulation, so these things do not happen in the fictional world.

Edited by Teralitha, 29 March 2013 - 01:51 PM.

[Colddawg]

Has anyone thought about a metal/myomer fatigue failure from firing a single weapon in rapid succession? The thought behind it being that if you're rapid firing ballistics the actuators/myomer will strain to return to the original firing position and over a short period of time cause internals damage or failure.

I could see this tweaked to help balance out the ballistics a bit, especially the ballistics boating.

I find it feasible because there is already a heat damage to internals component installed into the game. This will just not be able to have an override except to slow your firing and not boat ballistics.

Ppcs could even fit into this category of wear and tear.

[TOGSolid]

Quote

From reality. But as I said, the game is not a true simulation, so these things do not happen in the fictional world.

Please provide us all of video of your real life HBK-4P shooting a ton of lasers out of its shoulder mount. We're all sitting on the edge of our seat in anticipation of this fantastic footage of your real world experiments on mech technology.

Quote

The thought behind it being that if you're rapid firing ballistics the actuators/myomer will strain to return to the original firing position and over a short period of time cause internals damage or failure.

Or we could just not make stupid **** up and just implement a much more logical convergence system that degrades pinpoint accuracy based on logical things like your mech moving too fast, fixed location hardpoints requiring a bit more time to converge due to their location not being as flexible as arm mounts, and your mech redlining on heat.

Edited by TOGSolid, 29 March 2013 - 02:10 PM.

[3rdworld]

Teralitha, on 18 March 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

Mechs like the dragon, and the atlas have a variety of hardpoints and nothing can really be 'boated' on them and for the most part these kind of mechs are the choice of the seriously skilled pilots who dont like the easy way out.

[Rigiroth]

+1. Also, maybe giving some advantage for mechs that have traditionally boated mechs in lore, IE 4SPs mounting dual SRM6s and the K2's dual PPCs.

Edit for clarity

So I guess making it a system that more greatly effects custom mechs. Or jsut put it in on all and call it a game play twist. Would be much more better and add to the uniqueness of the game .

Edited by Steemship, 30 March 2013 - 07:28 PM.

[Pht]

Teralitha, on 29 March 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

From reality.

... and "reality" is ... ?

I mean, besides being an ill-defined catch phrase that usually stands in for lack of knowledge of a topic?

Quote

But as I said, the game is not a true simulation, so these things do not happen in the fictional world.

Even by your own standards these things would not happen in ... well, I'd say "reality" but I don't know what you mean by the word.

Are we all figments of your imagination, beyond which we have no existence?

[Tombstoner]

Reality i

Pht, on 01 April 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

... and "reality" is ... ?

I mean, besides being an ill-defined catch phrase that usually stands in for lack of knowledge of a topic?




Even by your own standards these things would not happen in ... well, I'd say "reality" but I don't know what you mean by the word.

Are we all figments of your imagination, beyond which we have no existence?

Reality is what ever we say it is. This is a science fiction game as such the rules of our world are bent to fit the story.
hence bunched lasers could if the author wanted melt down. over laying reality onto science fiction becomes / is problematic.
creating game mechanics to cover bunched heating i think would be problematically more trouble then any benefits you'd receive. it would fundamentally alter mech balance and add in yet another element to tune. if the game was completely over hauled and i thin its desperately need it. then it would require all new mech design rules and weapon heat dissipation stats and systems.

As things stand. i think the game rules are not going to be changed any time soon. maybe in the future a MWO 2.0 could be considered but for now putting in place the primary game mechanics that are all ready designed that provide for good game play and revenue are taking priority. changing development directions is only done under some form of duress. it simply take too much resources to change course drastically.

This is why i still have some hope for the future that some form of penalty for linked fire is implemented to offset perfect convergence. discrepancy's in mech size vs. ease to hit with no compensation for internal space and weapons per hard point.
some how weapons magically change size depending on the mech. centurions arm and the catapults MG/Gauss conversion.

if you have raven thin legs then you should have no space in your legs vs the atlas with massive legs but still only 2 slots each. This needs to be changed and is just a couple of examples the developers know they could work on, but have decided not too, for now i hope.

[MaddMaxx]

You ask for folks to tell you what mechanics would not translate well and seem dumbfounded that no one has. Well no one has to as you yourself have done it with this simple sentence.

Quote

... and completely destroys the weapons damage vs armor balance of the parent system, requiring endless tweaking.

The board rules has set values for the armor and weapons. When taken over to a RT VG system, where the randomness of the To-Hit mechanic is removed, the game does not play well. So, by happen stance, right off the bat, the TT rules have to be modified to accomadate the new mode of play, from Board to VG.

Yes, some would argue, that perhaps if the armor was left the same and the weapons values were changed, things would be different? Would they be like the Board? No, they would be changed. Word is it is the changes that ****** **** up?

So in the end, yes, change was inevitable, it was ultimately necessary under the new medium. If they change the weapons or the armor, in order to make the game fun, what the hell difference does it make. Change had to be had.

Now, Mech construction rules, which also have been changed from the Board, and we all know for the better, could be tightened up. But as with any system, if it strangles the players options, it is a bad system.

The only way to make the convergence issue be more like on the Board, you know, that place where the players roll dice, would be to eliminate the Mouse and only have WASD control, and have all the arm mounted weapons lag behind the torso reticule by some arbitrary value.

That way the Pilot has control of the vehicle, but not the whole Weapons suite. Imagine in MWO if you pressed D and held it. The target is coming into view now, the Torso reticule will be on target in 2 seconds, the arms are 1.5 sec behind that, no matter how slow you turn. Do you fire the torso weapons now, or wait 1.5 for the Alpha?

Would that be more Fun? Who knows, we never tested that but I am guessing someone did and found it to lack that... good vibe. Waiting for either your weapons to re-load or come to bear, while in a fire fight, generally sucks, unless you have the superior position and cover. Just remember. You can't always have those all the time. The enemy gets them as well on occasion. That is the cause of Forum QQ...

[Pht]

Tombstoner, on 05 April 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

Reality is what ever we say it is.

Well, I say that reality ISN'T whatever we say it is.

By my standard, you're wrong - by your own standard ... you cannot say that I am wrong. Not without contradicting your own standard.

Quote

This is a science fiction game as such the rules of our world are bent to fit the story.
hence bunched lasers could if the author wanted melt down.

... and yet, they don't do so anywhere in the lore.

Quote

over laying reality onto science fiction becomes / is problematic.

If you're using what youve just mentioned as a definition for "Reality ... I don't see how. You can say reality is anything you want, to suit your purposes.

MaddMaxx, on 05 April 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

You ask for folks to tell you what mechanics would not translate well and seem dumbfounded that no one has. Well no one has to as you yourself have done it with this simple sentence.

Interesting unlinked "quote" that not only the forum search engine can't find ... Google can't find it either.

However, to address the content of it:

Yes, it's possible to take things out of context and put concepts in people's mouths (or on their fingers, in this case) that they have never used.

You seem to have missed the rest of this unfindable "quote" that says that the CAUSE of the endless tweaking is the fact that they *did not pick up the combat system from the TT that the damage system values were built to be used in.*

In short, you're saying that I've said the exact opposite of what I've said and have been saying for some time now.

Quote

So in the end, yes, change was inevitable, it was ultimately necessary under the new medium.

First, your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises... and beyond that, it's entirely possible to convert over the TT combat system (minus the human skill simulating parts) into realtime.

Quote

The only way to make the convergence issue be more like on the Board, you know, that place where the players roll dice, would be to eliminate the Mouse and only have WASD control, and have all the arm mounted weapons lag behind the torso reticule by some arbitrary value.

No, that's not the only way to do it.

There are other ways: http://mwomercs.com/...different-idea/

Quote

That way the Pilot has control of the vehicle, but not the whole Weapons suite. Imagine in MWO if you pressed D and held it. The target is coming into view now, the Torso reticule will be on target in 2 seconds, the arms are 1.5 sec behind that, no matter how slow you turn. Do you fire the torso weapons now, or wait 1.5 for the Alpha?

This is a complete strawman - it bears no resemblance at all of what's at the link above.


...

I swear, it's like when the word "dice" is used in an MW video game forum, virtually everyone loses their minds.

Edited by Pht, 08 April 2013 - 02:45 PM.

[Vapor Trail]

The loss of sanity when "dice" are mentioned is along the same lines as the logic behind "if I can't pilot my multi-ton bipedal war machine at tens of kilometers per hour across broken terrain and have perfect pinpoint accuracy at all times relative to my reticle it will take all skill out of the game."

Skill is overcoming everything placed in your way to perform well, whether it's your opponent or the game itself you're fighting.

The only way to take skill out of the game completely is to have it played only by bots. Frankly I see nothing more pointless than a bunch of AI bots playing a computer game against each other.

[Pht]

Vapor Trail, on 08 April 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

The loss of sanity when "dice" are mentioned is along the same lines as the logic behind "if I can't pilot my multi-ton bipedal war machine at tens of kilometers per hour across broken terrain and have perfect pinpoint accuracy at all times relative to my reticle it will take all skill out of the game."

Skill is overcoming everything placed in your way to perform well, whether it's your opponent or the game itself you're fighting.

The only way to take skill out of the game completely is to have it played only by bots. Frankly I see nothing more pointless than a bunch of AI bots playing a computer game against each other.

... does programmer skill count as being "in the game?"

[Tilon]

The amount of morons posting on this thread who clearly don't even understand the concept that single weapons fired are still accurate just blows my freaking mind.

All the people just making emotional hay, saying catchphrases like 'spray and pray' and other crap. You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves, is this how our culture has taught us how to debate these days?

The man makes a valid point, and I think he's right, it would make the game better because it would extend the battlespace and make individual weapons more important again, which would allow armor to be lowered some (maybe not entirely to canon levels, 40-60% maybe?) and therefore the game gains even more suspense.

Like he said, it also allows the devs to add heat penalties, walk/run/jump penalties if it would help the game, and so on.

It's a great idea. Open your minds a little and stop being so closedminded. Chanting "Spray and pray" just makes you look like a fool.

[Gaden Phoenix]

Totally agree with OP. Having inaccuracies when boating and other negatives will help the game alot.

I do not see how such hugh mechs running at high speeds and moving this and that direction and heating itself up like crazy should be accurate always.

[aniviron]

Gaden Phoenix, on 09 April 2013 - 01:32 AM, said:

Totally agree with OP. Having inaccuracies when boating and other negatives will help the game alot.

I do not see how such hugh mechs running at high speeds and moving this and that direction and heating itself up like crazy should be accurate always.

You can argue balance one way or another for why this should or shouldn't be done, but I'm tired of the "reality" argument. The US Navy already makes lasers that can track and shoot down aircraft at ranges of multiple kilometers while the vehicle is in flight and maneuvering.

Given that this is the case, I'd like to imagine that a thousand years from now, when humanity is capable of faster than light travel and instantaneous communication across the galaxy, we'd have computers advanced enough to not need pilots that struggle to hit gigantic, slow moving targets with any precision.

So ask yourself: why do we have to aim and pilot our mechs, instead of just letting the hyper-advanced computers do it for us? Because, it's more fun this way. The only reason that this or anything else in Battletech makes sense is because it is a system designed for us to have fun. All your arguments should center around "is it fun," not "is it realistic." If you can come up with a future as implausible as Battletech's and have people believe it, then you can fudge the smaller details like weapons convergence too.