|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Hmm so aside from having quite similar mechanics which was apparent early on, just like HBS redid their previous franchise combat system in the style of Xcom, even pointing out that "they implemented many elements from this rather successful strategy game, which plenty of others have chosen to copy as well" is just ridiculous You are at completely terminal THAT'S THE JOKE level here dude. People are making fun of you for complaining that battletech coppied XCOM because battletech came out years before fuckin XCOM did. This game is completely centered around the classic tabletop version that's been around for ages, with the only real difference being the new pilot skills, some re-balancing of numbers that is 30 years overdue, and improvements that are not actually possible on TT, like actual tracing from your weapon mounts to enemy mechs to see if there is terrain (or friendlies!) blocking your line of fire. You're going to continue to get mocked, but I guess you get off on it or something so keep going and feed the thread more entertaining laffs.
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Ok, let me explain further.  Were you someone that always tried to brawl in a catapult while your atlas sniped in the back or something? Most (well designed, no stalk shadowhawks need apply) 'Mechs have always had well defined roles and anyone worth their salt would bring a good mix. Obviously if you're just playing 2v2 then that's pointless, but, well, the very basic unit of Battletech combat in 3025 is a Lance of 4 'Mechs. Which, gee, is enough to open up some specialization, and is a great unit size to use for a combat mechanics beta test. I'm going to go out on a WILD LIMB here, and bet that the campaign will involve building up from a collection of 2-3 lights or mediums in to a force of multiple lances in strength, just like all the past Mechwarrior games.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
This is an exceptionally good troll I have to hand it to you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
Both games involve a variety of units good at filling different roles, maneuvering to get the best shots, have lasers, guns, and missiles, and feature random chances for things to fail horribly. Checks out, battletech really IS xcom. You guys need to give Ham Sandwiches a break. He's opened my eyes to the truth.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:I can't believe the final crux of "this is like XCOM" was that "light mechs aren't tanky enough while moving". This is actually true, to be fair. This game only has 3 defensive movement mod brackets, vs the 4 that you could reasonably see in 3025 era mechs. The major difference is, even a Locust can't reach the max move mod without sprinting. In which case in this game it can't also shoot. The current brackets require moving at least 60, 180, or 300 (magical space units, I guess we're still using meters). A Locust's max walk radius in this game is 210, while it can sprint 368. One other option (currently not used) is to also grant a damage reduction effect to different defensive movement mods, in addition to the harder to hit part.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:Yeah so if we imagine hard roles and soft roles, in Xcom I'd say the soldiers have hard roles - your rocket guy is the only guy that can rocket, the sniper is the only guy that can shoot out of los, so if you want that functionality you bring that guy. I think you're just making things up out of whole cloth at this point. All the mechs in this game are stock designs that do everything they did in the stock tabletop game. The singular (noted and remarked upon many many times ITT) difference so far is the relative tankiness of light mechs, and the LRM induced knockdown spams. Neither of which are a fundamental issue since if you feel like it you can change two numbers in a file and see how the game plays differently. There's no hard and fast roles in this game that did not already exist in tabletop. There's no special equipment that means only certain mechs can do certain things. As it exists now the pilots we're playing with have single skills while the full game will have provisions for 4+. Just like the TT game you can build generalists or specialists, although, just like the TT game again, if you try and build all generalists you're probably going to get smoked by someone that puts together a more specialized force of complimentary brawlers + fire support + scout.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
You keep talking about all these xcom things that literally don't exist in battletech while claiming that battletech is copying them, as a reason you don't like battletech.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Weapon ranges in this game are literally the same as they are in TT (A Medium Laser's max range is 270 meters!) . Movement is the same as it is in TT. The two Initiative systems are different, but being able to use it strategically is straight up better than "Welp I lose the die roll I'm gonna get boned this turn"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Nope, just like the 4v4 gameplay is definitely the only format.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
kingcom posted:You can already rig them on your mechs by editing config files. Someone posted the jaegermech with like 12 gauss wiping out a lance of atlases or something. I don't think it has special effects or anything yet though fwiw.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
kingcom posted:This just screams to me that people never touched jihad era TT play because holy poo poo is 3025 table top the slowest and most uninteresting poo poo imaginable. Nothing hits, everything takes like a million turns because you have no firepower and it hinges even harder on lucky hits just decimating everything. Jihad era turns the game into a maneuver fest which I guess can be a bit of a turnoff but because everything has a much higher baseline of firepower its way less of a game changer to get a lucky hit taking someone out because its the difference between 6 turns of firing or 2-3 to kill the same target. On top of that due to the really fancy set up and stock mechs the IS has gotten by that point they actually outperform Clan mechs if you're using BV (and assuming your not playing on some super huge map). The game turns into a really interesting jockeying back and forth for those range brackets but for the most part every mech has a gun that can at least fire across the map even if its just for symbolic damage. Yeaaaaa my man right here.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:No, this is un cool. I don't thiiink high ground alone gives you better head hit chances but DFAs most certainly do.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
There's a "Top" hit table, but I think it just gets used for DFAs. Elevation definitely gives you greater chances to hit period though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Honestly I think the way to do that might be to tone down the AC 2 and AC5 just a touch. Maybe from 25 to 20 and 50 to 40 or somesuch. Then an AC10 at 60 would make sense without having the 2 and 5 be pointlessly poo poo. You're paying an awful lot of tonnage for an AC2 over a medium laser if it does less damage though. With existing map sizes the AC2's range doesn't really offer 6 tons of advantage over the typical ML. Hell, even at it's newly buffed damage, the choice to take an AC2 over another weapon is still really iffy. Even before considering potential ammo explosions. Amechwarrior posted:Ah yea, good point. But I wonder what will become of the actual Gauss Rifle? If it does 75dmg, is massive to mount and explosive, then why not take a much more available AC/10? If they raise the dmg to near 100 it becomes a god weapon even with the minimum range. I think the vastly scaled up armor and damage values gives them a lot of room to make gauss in to an actual more sniper-like weapon. Lots of damage but it can only fire once per 2 or 3 turns.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Yea, I expect campaign maps to be much larger than current skirmish maps. (And I'd rather campaign balance being first priority). I think a lot of fun would be had experimenting with spotting range, (currently 200meters base, modified by tactics skill and individual mech chassis), sensor range, and visible detection/sensor detection range. A Jenner for example gets 1.25x spotting range, 1.4x sensor range, and -.5 sensor signature. (This seems to be the same for all Light 'Mechs too.) Conversely Assaults get .5x sensor range, with normal 1x multipliers for the other factors.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
"Balance" or "Giving Lights a reason to exist" typically.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
The chassis definition for each mech has all the stats in it, so it's per mech and not per class.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
How much does the mod you were mentioning increase LoS by default? Like 1.5-2x?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Psion posted:"I could turn my rear armor away from this Panther, but that'd turn it towards the AC/20 Hunchback, hmmm" This is basically the essence of "How to win battletech.txt" anyhow~! (combined with make my dice odds better than his")
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
I played a game on death valley with 350 spotting distance, and a few other tweaks: Slightly lower base gunnery (65->60%) Lower speed needed to get defensive move mods (The top move mod bracket by default is unreachable by any mech that isn't sprinting) and bumped up the top move speed defensive mod by 15% Ended up being really fun, and it did feel like the AI played it better than usual. It actually came down to two of my mechs (Both with damage, one missing an arm, one with CT internal hits through rear armor) left standing at the end. I even had an SRM commando that almost lasted the whole way through. e: Stuff like a Spider or Locust should still be able to get good defensive mods for just running, and not sprinting. I feel like the game really needs the extra bracket for the 8/12 speed lights to be able to appropriately stretch their legs. Next game I'm going to try making the walk speed the equivalent of TT "Run" speed, while making sprint the equivalent of the actual Tacops sprinting rule- Double walking MP, no weapons fire allowed. Will probably be hilarity. Gwaihir fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
School Nickname posted:My centurion did this to a pristine hunchback that had taken out both my arms and mauled it, but it was a headshot. If something shoots your 'Mech from the left side arc and hits your right arm, that's definitely a bug. The hit table looks like this: "HitMechLocationFromRight" : [ { "k" : "Head", "v" : 1 }, { "k" : "CenterTorso", "v" : 4 }, { "k" : "LeftTorso", "v" : 0 }, { "k" : "RightTorso", "v" : 28 }, { "k" : "LeftArm", "v" : 0 }, { "k" : "RightArm", "v" : 28 }, { "k" : "LeftLeg", "v" : 0 }, { "k" : "RightLeg", "v" : 28 }
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
Not sure what you mean about facing angles, the game ignores torso twisting entirely really. The only thing that should matter are the 4 quadrants you see when you have a mech selected. When you get shot, one of them will be highlighted in red to show which angle your getting shot from. Similarly, when you're choosing a movement option, it will highly on enemy mechs to show you which arc you'll shoot them from. In this shot, not that it's really questionable where I'm getting shot from, but you can see the front arc is highlighted on my Battlemaster.  Cyrano4747 posted:God I love that this is possible this early. Extremely same.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:Mechashiva is not a crime  But what about indecent mech-sposure??? 
Gwaihir fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Jun 7, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
School Nickname posted:Headshot a pristine Orion who is set to gently caress up my flanked Hunchback. Yea, going by the files it just ads a flat % to hit your chosen section. Depending on how the math works it's somewhere between +28 and +37.% (So if you call the head for a target you're only going to bring it up to rough parity with other locations, since headshots are like ~1.75% chance default).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
The MekTek version of MW4 Mercs works just fine for me on Win10 + Nvidia card.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
I'll have to see if I did anything a while ago, when I checked just now I just mashed mw4mercs.exe and it fired right up.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Asimov posted:I'm not really a battletech follower and have only seen this game in gif form. If they could make one improvement to the game, I think it would be to change the melee animation so it goes: This would be by far my ideal, too, but I think Amechwarrior has the totally right read of it  Amechwarrior posted:I've made suggestions like that in the post-match surveys. I think the problem comes down to time/money/people spent on making sure such animations work across a wide range of mech shapes, differences in attacker/defender hight, forms of physical attacks, hit locations, weapon locations and then to top it all off - player mech customization. This is a team that is porting over assets from another game to save time and money. In a thread on pilot ejecting on the official forums, a dev broke down how such requests end up eating up a ton of resources, even without changing the way the game calculates things. As awesome as such things would be, it takes a ton of work in a game like Battletech.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Same, +1 greatbeer
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Q_res posted:Honestly, even if you can only make use of that once a turn it's still pretty good. I feel like that skill is really undervalued by some people. I definitely undervalued it before really playing more games and getting used to the initiative system for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Great Beer posted:Patently ridiculous. We all know no brown sea poster will ever be that close to a woman. im the windows XP UI
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Time to mount a defense based on "THESE ARE BATTLEMECHS THEY ARE NOT ROBOTS"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Ammo explosions in this game are also less so a death sentence than they are in tt to start with too.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
I mean explosions in this game don't do many times the internal damage of an entire Mech, they're like a gauss rifle that might or might not take out the segement that it's in but probably won't also one shot your CT.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Psion posted:Just curious - if the Commando and Spider are still one-hittable, why not the Locust? Stock Commando and Spider don't have maximum head armor. e: (Then again, neither does the Locust, so  ) No reason you can't make those mechs un-one shottable with a custom version though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Wellll, except on a Locust, where the -1M with L1 tech has is literally no armor anywhere anyhow. Locust legs have 1 armor stock, and the CT has 2. The head with 3 armor is the tankiest part of the 'Mech! The 1E or 1V with 4 whole tons of armor is way better off than the 1M at least.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
These look like very good changes all around.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:That doesn't sound like the fun part of tactical giant robot combat to me, but I am still eager to give it a shot. Not to bring back XCOM time, but... That was a key part of XCOM 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
I think it just comes down to what difficulty level you feel like picking. Against an easier ai, (or just plain bad humans) then don't worry about it. Rule of cool, Yolo turns, it'll work out well enough and five still guarantee hilarity will happen. I'm happy that the depth exists to go harder in to power game land too though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Affi posted:I wish we'd have company on company fights and not only Lance on Lance. Maybe in SP campaign mode?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2017 11:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
Remora posted:waitwaitwaitwaitwait You know the game is set with you as a Merc, right? Who might have to buy things?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2017 21:59
|
|