Sim controls as a gameplay balancer

[madact]

One thing I've seen mentioned in a couple of threads is the bf2-style problem of players not getting a Mech, and the large imbalance between Mechs and vehicles / infantry (just think of the players in Bulldogs going up against a Puma with its ERPPCs...  SHOOM, SHOOM ... 2 down, recharging ... SHOOM, SHOOM ... etc.)

A possible solution or mitigation of this would be a ramping-up of the sim-style control complexity for piloting mechs, at least back up to the MW2 level where torso twist isn't automatic with the mouse, maybe further (e.g. having to worry about tripping, with some king of 'recover from fall' key if you start toppling sideways after stepping on a moving tank). This might partially balance the power of mechs with difficulty of use, and have the added benefit of encouraging the CS / BF2 fps crowd (if any can be persuaded to come over) to stick to infantry work and leave mechs to the Mechwarrior addicts... and develop their mech-swarming-in-elemental-suit skills instead.

[Criminal]

Actually you touch on some very interesting concepts in your post. Now one problem that is already solved is the "bf2" team killing and the "not everyone gets a vehicle" problem. The vehicles are purchasable in MWLL and depending upon your performance in a particular round you will have more or less "c-bills" to work with. Upon purchasing a Mech or any other vehicle for that matter it is specifically locked to only you. HOWEVER, upon exiting the vehicle it is then fair game to your team bu is locked to the enemy team (unless they have a hack tool).

Some interesting concepts though, but one thing i know we won't do is remove the torso twist from the Mouse. This is key for not only for accessibility reasons but for sleekness of control.

A current topic though up for debate is the overall controls of the Elemental and Longinus battlesuits.

[lkavadas]

Why would battlesuits use anything but standard FPS controls?

[madact]

Thats the point, lkavadas ... battlesuits should be pretty close to standard FPS controls - they are 'wearable armour', and filled with the grunts, jarheads and steroid users of the BattleTech universe. Anyone can play - this is the 'easy' side of it.

Mech pilots in BattleTech, on the other hand, are the elite of the elite, piloting, huge, complex war machines (for complex, compare with a tank... more moving parts, eh?) which take skill just to remain vertical. IMO, these should have a full-on sim feel, to reflect this, with a heap of special functions, override controls, weapon grouping & fire control modes etc. Tanks would be somewhere in between - controls which give a bit of that mech 'feel' without the huge complexity...

[Zooch]

You also have to understand that the majority of people who play video games aren't very good at them.  Your point is valid as long is it's still balanced correctly to the point where the good gamers don't immortalize themselves in a mech because it has more features than a person who is already at a disadvantage due to their lack of skill or understanding.

It's all relative, right?

[madact]

Definitely relative - the idea I'm trying to promote here is that with the right balance, you could have the fps players as infantry preying on the noob mech pilots, while the MechWarrior gods would be able to bring the balance closer to the infanrty-frying, tank stomping action we all know is the natural order, at the cost of some concentration and situational awareness.

The idea is that the infantry & vehicle players can concentrate on the whole scene, while the mech pilots are more likely to have battlefield tunnel vision due to all the blinkin' lights, and have enough attention left over to concentrate on maybe two enemy mechs... this then gives infantry etc. a chance to sneak up and leg 'em or swarm them while they aren't looking.

With the simplicity of controls in, say, MW4, the gameplay balance is tilted overwhelmingly towards the mechs, as the mech piloting takes very little concentration. Trying to redress the balance by making mechs less powerful or easier to kill would ruin the premise, IMHO. Making mech piloting a challenge, on the other hand, fits perfectly with the game universe. Perhaps not by overwhelming the player with controls, maybe some trickiness with the movement dynamics would do the trick - taking damage when running into buildings at 100kph, for example, or tripping on vehicles.

I'm not advocating a system which would make the 'good players' practically invulnerable... thats what being in a 'Mech is about, after all. The idea is to make anything less than an uber-expert Mech pilot slightly less invulnerable, so that the infantry and vehicles have more chance than the average greasy smear on the pavement.

What I'd be expecting, on a scale of 0-10 for invulnerability, maybe expert in a mech=9, average player in a mech=8, noob in a mech=6, vehicle=4, Battle Armour Infantry=3, unarmoured guy=0 or something like that, as a rough guide (not accounting for weight classes  ). If a mech warrior fanatic in a medium mech gets taken out by a set of 4 demolishers acting alone, I'd be rather skeptical, but if piloted by a medicre player who gets in too close, has to stop to avoid a building, and gets plastered by half a dozen UAC/20 shots - that I could see.

[Criminal]

Definitely relative - the idea I'm trying to promote here is that with the right balance, you could have the fps players as infantry preying on the noob mech pilots, while the MechWarrior gods would be able to bring the balance closer to the infanrty-frying, tank stomping action we all know is the natural order, at the cost of some concentration and situational awareness.

The idea is that the infantry & vehicle players can concentrate on the whole scene, while the mech pilots are more likely to have battlefield tunnel vision due to all the blinkin' lights, and have enough attention left over to concentrate on maybe two enemy mechs... this then gives infantry etc. a chance to sneak up and leg 'em or swarm them while they aren't looking.

With the simplicity of controls in, say, MW4, the gameplay balance is tilted overwhelmingly towards the mechs, as the mech piloting takes very little concentration. Trying to redress the balance by making mechs less powerful or easier to kill would ruin the premise, IMHO. Making mech piloting a challenge, on the other hand, fits perfectly with the game universe. Perhaps not by overwhelming the player with controls, maybe some trickiness with the movement dynamics would do the trick - taking damage when running into buildings at 100kph, for example, or tripping on vehicles.

I'm not advocating a system which would make the 'good players' practically invulnerable... thats what being in a 'Mech is about, after all. The idea is to make anything less than an uber-expert Mech pilot slightly less invulnerable, so that the infantry and vehicles have more chance than the average greasy smear on the pavement.

What I'd be expecting, on a scale of 0-10 for invulnerability, maybe expert in a mech=9, average player in a mech=8, noob in a mech=6, vehicle=4, Battle Armour Infantry=3, unarmoured guy=0 or something like that, as a rough guide (not accounting for weight classes  ). If a mech warrior fanatic in a medium mech gets taken out by a set of 4 demolishers acting alone, I'd be rather skeptical, but if piloted by a medicre player who gets in too close, has to stop to avoid a building, and gets plastered by half a dozen UAC/20 shots - that I could see.

I really like a few points you bring up here, but at the same time i don't want to completely alienate new players to piloting mechs but i DO agree that there needs to be a learning curve. Another way that the balance is already being done is by simple movement and ability to move in certain areas. For example a mech doesn't stop on a dime, nor does it turn 180degrees very quickly so once you got a large 80+ ton mech in an urban environment his overwhelming firepower really becomes quite nullified in that he will have extremem difficulty just simply navigating through complex terrain and the concentration will be focused on that rather than fighting the enemy. This is where i want some serious learning curve.

You bring up some very good points though and i hope you add Mach10 to msn soon and have a chat with him cause i know we all need to chat with you about a few things.

[anchovy]

Keep in mind that certain terrain will take away a lot of the mech's advantages.

City, swamp, heavy forrest and mountains would all give infantry (for example) a bit more of an advantage.

My 2 cents.



Anch

[Kelembai]

the idea I'm trying to promote here is that with the right balance, you could have the fps players as infantry preying on the noob mech pilots

i'm not sure about this. i mean Mechs should never be vulnerable enough to be easily put down by infantry (well a point of Elementals or a company of foot soldiers might pose a threat). i'm just more of the opinion that each unit type (Mechs, Tanks, Aerospace, Infantry) have their own functions in the game. and if it just happens that infantry platoons got caught in the open by a Firestarter with twin flamers... well, that's just tough luck ain't it? 

balance is one thing, but a 13-meter giant robot and an armored infantry trooper? no way to balance that out. Mechs should be gods of the battlefield, infantry just performs the important missions...

[Criminal]

the idea I'm trying to promote here is that with the right balance, you could have the fps players as infantry preying on the noob mech pilots

i'm not sure about this. i mean Mechs should never be vulnerable enough to be easily put down by infantry (well a point of Elementals or a company of foot soldiers might pose a threat). i'm just more of the opinion that each unit type (Mechs, Tanks, Aerospace, Infantry) have their own functions in the game. and if it just happens that infantry platoons got caught in the open by a Firestarter with twin flamers... well, that's just tough luck ain't it? 

balance is one thing, but a 13-meter giant robot and an armored infantry trooper? no way to balance that out. Mechs should be gods of the battlefield, infantry just performs the important missions...

absolutely agree on that. Another point that i want to mention though is that IF a infanteer has specifically purchased equipment for battle with a mech then as long as he plays it smart he will either be able to harass the mech or disable it using various equipment.

[Iron Hands]

the idea I'm trying to promote here is that with the right balance, you could have the fps players as infantry preying on the noob mech pilots

i'm not sure about this. i mean Mechs should never be vulnerable enough to be easily put down by infantry (well a point of Elementals or a company of foot soldiers might pose a threat). i'm just more of the opinion that each unit type (Mechs, Tanks, Aerospace, Infantry) have their own functions in the game. and if it just happens that infantry platoons got caught in the open by a Firestarter with twin flamers... well, that's just tough luck ain't it? 

balance is one thing, but a 13-meter giant robot and an armored infantry trooper? no way to balance that out. Mechs should be gods of the battlefield, infantry just performs the important missions...

So, when you say infantry do you mean an organized squad team, a mass of invading troops, or just some guys running about acting stupid like in all the other FPS game that combine foot trops with vehicles?

[Defender]

Everyone take a gander at my inspiration and feelings towards this infantry subject @ 2:00 - 2:20:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nm76b8tzzWI

[madact]

So Defender, what you're basically saying is... "RUN AWAAAAAY!! *squish*"?

Just on the subject of torso twist, I recall in MW3 they had weapon aiming and torso twist separate, which, though nominally more complex, I for one found far slicker than the MW4 model of keeping horizontal weapon traverse locked to the torso. Especially with fast moving targets.

(Random thought:) One thing I thought of back in MW3 (AFAIK the only MW game where you could actually squish unarmoured bystanders) that'd be nice in a combined-arms mech game would be anti-infantry alpha-strike: the same as a regular alpha strike, but spreding the weapon aiming points about for an area-saturation effect.

IMHO, "guys running about acting stupid like in all the other FPS game that combine foot troops with vehicles" fully deserve to get fried, slagged, fragged and mushed by the mechs (ERML, anyone?).

But as it says in that very video, the MechWarriors are the 'elite of the elite'. The most talented warriors of the inner sphere and the pinacle of the Clan's several-hundred-year GE / breeding programs, for Blake's sake. Making the mechs more complicated to use than battle armour is more than just pandering to the MW players, it's kinda the point of the Battletech universe, IMO.

[Kelembai]

well, by infantry i mean one dude loaded on armor and SRMs and no matter how good, should not be able to take on a Mech single-handedly (for this sort of experience, we already have MechAssault  ). therefore i see no point in making a Mech's controls more complicated for balance sake. there's no way (IMO) you can balance out an infantry trooper against a Mech.

however, as i stated in my post, an armored squad or probably a company of unarmored troopers could probably threaten a Mech enough or, if said squad/company is simply awesome, take one out.

the whole idea behind combined arms IMO is for each unit type to perform tasks they are specifically suited to. for example, infantry storms buildings and secure objectives, vehicles provide all sorts of support (from firepower to transportation) and Mechs do what Mechs do. so, in the course of a scenario if you're an armored trooper and by dint of bad luck got cornered by a flamer-toting Hermes and the rest of your squad is scattered to hell and back; what do you do? go Rambo?

no. you get the hell outta there and pray your own team's Mech get there in time to deal with it.

[xKamikazex]

well, by infantry i mean one dude loaded on armor and SRMs and no matter how good, should not be able to take on a Mech single-handedly (for this sort of experience, we already have MechAssault  ). therefore i see no point in making a Mech's controls more complicated for balance sake. there's no way (IMO) you can balance out an infantry trooper against a Mech.

I don't agree with this. I think if you are an infantry guy and are decked out with all anti vehicle weapons and have clear shots against the mech's back, you should be able to take him down within 5 minutes. This is of course if you constantly hit him in the rear without dying. The point is that Mechs are going to have small weakspots which Infantry as well as Battlesuits can take advantage of. It shouldn't be all one sided based on who is in a Mech. This is also why we designed light mechs to be more anti-infantry/anti-light armor, where the heavy mechs are more geared to anti-vehicle/anti-mech combat.

For instance - look at the Flea. He's setup with Machine guns and a flamer. He can go at a pretty fast speed and can turn pretty sharply. Now against vehicles that's pretty useless, but against infantry that's a pretty scary mech.

On the flip side look at the Masakari. He has 4 ERPPCs, and 1 LRM 15. Great setup against any Mech or Vehicle, but those long reload times and over heating (and most likely shut downs) and not to mention the limited movement speeds should and will make this mech extremely vulnerable to Infantry and Battlesuits to get on top of him and exploit his weakspots.


In conclusion, I don't think it's a fair assessment to write Infantry off when a Mech comes walking by.