Weapon Brackets, Ranges, & Optimum Range

[Temphage]

Temphage is back!  Welcome!

Out there you'll find that Devs told that the playability will always win with Battletech Canon.

Is this anything but rhetoric? Have they actually tested these CBT implementations or just saying 'sounds like it'll suck, scrap it'?

Hmmmm..... and... what does the "CBT implementations" have to this what I've told?
Also - what Aposiopesis wrote came out to be an informative post, so the stuff before is kinda invalid unless we want to turn this into another "nerf nerf nerf, change change change" topic.


Aposiopesis - you plan to continue counting out the differences? It was actually one of most interesting topics about CBT on the boards in recent weeks... if not months.

I'm going to give each design in a different post. In that regard, I think there is a fair amount of insight to be gained for anyone not totally familiar with CBT (perhaps people who came from MW3/MW4) who may be wondering how a particular mech loadout makes sense (perhaps one that doesn't work so well in real-time); the intro is designed to help said people understand why that mech design exists in CBT and how the mechanics differences in MWLL might change its effectiveness.

We always need more "nerf nerf nerf, change change change" topics!

I think I'm just more annoyed by the assumption that CBT won't work as a justification to avoid doing things. We're all smart people, I don't think a single one of us is saying the 'instant mega blast doom laser' mechanic of previous MW games was functional in a video game setting at all. Of all the suggestions / ideas boards I've seen this is probably the least retarded one, with legitimately good ideas on it (the issue is implementing those ideas ).

But... in my opinion MWLL has lots of design that is really, really unpleasant gameplay-wise *and* doesn't fit CBT, so I wonder why it exists at all (jumpjets, autocannons of ALL types, equipment implementation are probably my hot-button items). Just saying 'this isn't CBT' does not an argument make. I just wonder why there seems to be such staunch opposition to turning this game into the most faithful-to-CBT Mechwarrior game around? Basically, like MW3, but, you know, good.

Of course you'll have to change things (like legging) for gameplay but... there's a lot of potential I think all of us are just DYING to see unleashed here The 'Gamplay > CBT' attitude is just pooing on my dreams

[Aposiopesis]

Temphage is back!  Welcome!

Out there you'll find that Devs told that the playability will always win with Battletech Canon.

Is this anything but rhetoric? Have they actually tested these CBT implementations or just saying 'sounds like it'll suck, scrap it'?

Hmmmm..... and... what does the "CBT implementations" have to this what I've told?
Also - what Aposiopesis wrote came out to be an informative post, so the stuff before is kinda invalid unless we want to turn this into another "nerf nerf nerf, change change change" topic.


Aposiopesis - you plan to continue counting out the differences? It was actually one of most interesting topics about CBT on the boards in recent weeks... if not months.

I'm going to give each design in a different post. In that regard, I think there is a fair amount of insight to be gained for anyone not totally familiar with CBT (perhaps people who came from MW3/MW4) who may be wondering how a particular mech loadout makes sense (perhaps one that doesn't work so well in real-time); the intro is designed to help said people understand why that mech design exists in CBT and how the mechanics differences in MWLL might change its effectiveness.

Absolutely. However, with 0.3.0 just around the corner, I'm holding off, as I expect some mechanics and designs to change. From what I understand, 0.3.0 is intended to be quite a large release that greatly shifts things towards CBT/BTU values as compared to the more random system we have now. As such, I think it would be better to wait until said release to start such comparisons. I am looking forward to it, however.

[(TLL)Sky_walker]

Temphage - you really should see the 0.3.0 when it comes out it won't be CBT-fanboy haven but something you gonna like more than .2 for sure

Absolutely. However, with 0.3.0 just around the corner, I'm holding off, as I expect some mechanics and designs to change. From what I understand, 0.3.0 is intended to be quite a large release that greatly shifts things towards CBT/BTU values as compared to the more random system we have now. As such, I think it would be better to wait until said release to start such comparisons. I am looking forward to it, however.

Yep true.
Looking forward for it than

[Temphage]

Temphage - you really should see the 0.3.0 when it comes out it won't be CBT-fanboy haven but something you gonna like more than .2 for sure

Yeah I'm anxious to see it - unfortunately, as I'm still in Afghanistan, I won't actually be able to play it for several more months - when 0.4.0 is about to come out

I'll have to be content to play the changelog

[sgnl05]

HOLY SHIT TEMPHAGE IS BACK

[Brainwright]

I think I'm just more annoyed by the assumption that CBT won't work as a justification to avoid doing things.

Well, you have to admit, it takes a little bit of creativity to implement something close to CBT rules in real time.  I mean, we got burst-fire ultra autocannons because someone read the rules exactly.

You could even point to the legging issue as a matter of poor translation.  In CBT, torso hits are more common because there are more spots on the torso, more sections models an area as being larger, but in real time, less sections makes a part more vulnerable.  Hell, most people hit the hip when going for the torso, there isn't even enough distinction between parts.  It's just another little fudging in regard to the intent of CBT.

[Jonttu]

You could even point to the legging issue as a matter of poor translation.  In CBT, torso hits are more common because there are more spots on the torso, more sections models an area as being larger, but in real time, less sections makes a part more vulnerable.  Hell, most people hit the hip when going for the torso, there isn't even enough distinction between parts.  It's just another little fudging in regard to the intent of CBT.

It'll most likely never be exactly like in CBT but one way to try and fix the legging issue is to give modelers or whatever they are called some work on the models. They could actually make the rest of the mechs run not speedwalk. I'm talking about the bigger and heavier mechs. If the legs moved around more, legging would be a little more harder to pull off. After that if legging is still too common, they could modify the hitboxes... Or what do you think??

I hope the answer that I receive this time won't be: But Crysis' engine doesn't support that
Cuz I've heard that a lot. If nothing can be done with this shitty engine, why did you decide to go with this engine? Just for the graphics? Correct me if im wrong but i thought crysis didnt support walking mechs in the first place. I heard you had to hack it or something.. Well if that's the case, hack it to pieces.