Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Vanu do it for the Tentacles.
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
View Poll Results: Would you like a single person mech in the game? (Please read the thread before posti | |||
I don't like single person bipedal mechs and don't want them in the game | 153 | 75.37% | |
I want single person mechs, but don't like this implementation. (Explain below) | 11 | 5.42% | |
I support this implementation | 28 | 13.79% | |
Other Reason (Explain below) | 11 | 5.42% | |
Voters: 203. You may not vote on this poll |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
2011-07-21, 01:06 AM | [Ignore Me] #1 | ||
Colonel
|
Before I begin, this thread isn't about BFRs. It's about a single person mech designed from scratch. Looking for input that would balance the idea. I get that some people don't like the look of mechs though. It would be appreciated that if you don't like mechs explain why. I'd be curious what you'd want if they were in.
I always felt that a mech in Planetside should have been a single person outdoor evolution to the MAX units. That is each faction has it's own variant. The design would be similar to a Mad Cat in BattleTech with a custom design for each of the empires geared toward uniform movement. (The vanu would have scale plated armor for instance). The height would be scaled down to the height of 2 players stacked so not very tall but still enough room for a driver. The armor would be twice as much as the lightning offset with weaknesses I'll describe later. The big change is to move a lot of features off to the skill tree such as shields and flight so having those would cost extra. Also the ammo would be reduced especially on the secondary shoulder weapons so it would need to resupply often. Since vehicles will have components that can be individually damaged, as explained by Higby, this will work in well. The mech's components can be broken down into:
The skill tree would allow upgrades on the following for instance:
More often than not the mech would become immobalized or useless before dying. For instance if some players attacked the legs it might slow down too much to be useful so the player would need to get out and repair it. Ideally it would need to be backed up by other players and would be vulnerable by itself. Check Repco Catalogue and Autobarn Catalogue. (Bailing onto it for instance, would probably be a valid strategy). I know some people are going to think this sounds complex, but honestly the amount of skill upgrades Higby said was in the thousands for weapons and vehicle which leads me to believe vehicles are going to have very complex upgrade choices. I left some stuff out to make the discussion open. I'm also not 100% sure my poll has all the possible options. I've been reading the mech threads from a long time and the recent ones to get an idea of the community's thoughts. |
||
|
2011-07-21, 01:16 AM | [Ignore Me] #3 | ||
Lieutenant General
|
I'll admit your mech idea is different then BFRs. The problem is a vehicle so powerful that only one person operates. It totally messes with the value of other vehicles. A 3man vehicle crew that has each spent a lot of skills in their trees in my opinion should be more powerful then anything one guy can bring.
This promotes cooperation
__________________
Last edited by Lonehunter; 2011-07-21 at 01:18 AM. |
||
|
2011-07-21, 01:19 AM | [Ignore Me] #4 | ||
Colonel
|
Yeah I'm imagining a tank shell doing some serious damage to it. Imagine hitting an arm or a shoulder slot on the top (assuming the player didn't unlock the shield and didn't turn it on in time). It might turn off and force the player to retreat. The idea would be an upgraded outdoor MAX so yeah not aiming for an uber killing machine. Just another vehicle.
Last edited by Sirisian; 2011-07-21 at 01:20 AM. |
||
|
2011-07-21, 01:44 AM | [Ignore Me] #6 | ||
Colonel
|
I don't entirely agree with the ideas for the vehicle, but I have no issues with mechs, provided the walking animations are done properly so that there is no foot sliding or standing at an angle on the side of a hill. Its just another vehicle, with a different look.
Ideally they would be slower than wheeled/tracked/hover vehicles, but would have the greatest ability to climb, and would be a unit suited to mountainous terrain. I would also call them BFRs just to piss people off. Last edited by CutterJohn; 2011-07-21 at 01:45 AM. |
||
|
2011-07-21, 02:06 AM | [Ignore Me] #7 | ||
Contributor Major
|
No thanks.
More for the "single person" than the mech aspect. We have single person mechs. They're called MAXes. And it should stay that way. Anything more powerful, and it's too good for a singler user. Hell, I'd get rid of Lightnings, if it were up to me. And Reavers would be either two-seaters or lose a lot of their ground support efficacy. Now, if you want to make MAXes a bit more relevant outdoors, I have no objection. AV MAXes have always struck me as a bit of a joke, for instance, and certainly AI MAXes suffer heavily at outdoor ranges. |
||
|
2011-07-21, 02:22 AM | [Ignore Me] #8 | |||
Colonel
|
This would be a pretty cool mech. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_AaB...tailpage#t=46s as would this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSXyz...ailpage#t=124s Last edited by CutterJohn; 2011-07-21 at 02:26 AM. |
|||
|
2011-07-21, 02:48 AM | [Ignore Me] #9 | |||
Staff Sergeant
|
But I hate the idea of mechs. I think they look stupid, and they don't fit in with the theme of of the game, nor with the theme of the technology in the game.
__________________
|
|||
|
2011-07-21, 02:39 AM | [Ignore Me] #10 | ||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
The biggest problem with them is they serve no purpose other than being "cool." They have no role in the game that isnt' filled by other vehicles, which means having them either makes them redundant/irrelevant, or OP because they render the other vehicles useless. And they absolutely need to be multi-manned vehicles, not doing so screws up the entire balance of vehicles which was one of the biggest problems with BFRs.
Just no, christ, people like you wanting something completely valueless in the game is what destroyed Planetside, so please excuse me if I kindly tell you to take your idea and sod off. |
||
|
2011-07-21, 03:22 AM | [Ignore Me] #11 | |||
Colonel
|
Also, there are always more roles that can be added. More nuanced options that split the difference between other vehicles, or add previously missing roles on the battlefield. Yes. All of them. Theres a ton of AA because there is a ton of air, and AA is the only viable counter to air, a role held by two units(well, three, counting bfrs). All other ground vehicles, and all infantry, have troubles with air units. Deli's could be a halfway decent AA platform, but even with 3 people, it was less effective than a skyguard. Last edited by CutterJohn; 2011-07-21 at 03:26 AM. |
|||
|
2011-07-21, 03:43 PM | [Ignore Me] #12 | |||||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
I'm of the rather solid opinion mechs have no role on their own because they are basically tanks with legs. So you have either tanks or mechs, and tanks are a lot better because 1) they have lower & smaller profiles (thus taking less damage while still peforming their job) 2) more stable shooting platforms (smooth ride vs bobbing from walking) 3) better serve the "armor" role by shielding infantry from small arms (mech legs dont do that very well) 4) faster & more maneuverable And the only thing mechs have is height for better firing angles, but that comes at the cost of being much easier to hit and thus taking a lot more damage. Steep price.
* They stated that there would be "viable" infantry anti-air. * Flying will take a lot more skill so we'll likely see fewer pilots from that alone (and at least fewer effective pilots) * cert roles means the one-man-army mosq/reaver pilots are unlikely to exist, those players will likely gravitate towards being full on pilots or more infantry-oriented since they cannot do both simultaneously as in PS1 * vehicles can get various upgrades, including anti-air capabilties * we don't know the state of repair/rearm in PS2 - this was a HUGE factor to the popularity of aircraft in PS1. Before repair-rearm you actually didn't see a lot of aircraft. * we don't know what sort of vehicle timers exist in PS2 and whether they are on shared cooldowns - this made a big difference also when they cut the timer from 10 and 5 and made it easy to have both mosquito and reaver in a bundle in PS1. That + repair rearm had a drastic increase in aircraft population. That's a lot of different stuff there and that makes it very difficult to gauge whether we need specific anti-air. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Skyguard get replaced by an empire-specific buggy anti-air upgrade. Though the Thresher with flak guns does sort of seem ridiculously OP. |
|||||
|
2011-07-21, 06:13 PM | [Ignore Me] #13 | ||||
Colonel
|
2. I fear you have not spent enough time off road in a wheeled or tracked vehicle, nor on a horse. The ride on rough ground will definitely be smoother on the horse at a canter or gallop since they adjust their legs to the terrain rather than bouncing over it, and the turrets will be stabilized for both anyway. 3. Not all vehicles serve this role, or need to. 4. Faster over certain types of terrain and not as maneuverable. A mech would not be heavily armored. Foot loading would be too high. They could never be walking tanks, and would fail at the job. Their purpose would be highly mobile scouts/fire support in rough terrain, like mountainous areas and thick forests. They could step over obstacles that would be insurmountable, possibly even climb somewhat with the right foot and leg design. They are tall, sure, but they can turn, sidestep, etc, to fit through tight areas, and are much narrower than tanks/apcs/trucks. Anything you can do or anyplace you can go on legs a mech could pretty much follow, so long as whatever it was supported its weight. Mechs would suck as badly on flat desert as tanks do in the mountains. Last edited by CutterJohn; 2011-07-21 at 06:15 PM. |
||||
|
2011-07-21, 02:48 AM | [Ignore Me] #14 | ||
Colonel
|
Mechwarrior was a popular game in the days of yore when PS was launched. I think they were trying to attract the disenchanted MW players with the BFRs. I think Microsoft had announced no more MW games, ever.
Problem is, MW was a simulator that was very well done, where you fought OTHER customizable 'mechs. BFRs were not. Not simulators. Not customizable to any great extent. Not fighting other BFRs (they prefer to pick on softies, and run away shrieking if anything near their weight comes along), and not well done. BFRs drastically decreased the quality of the game. Last edited by Traak; 2011-07-21 at 02:50 AM. |
||
|
2011-07-22, 02:16 PM | [Ignore Me] #15 | |||
Corporal
|
Completely OT but is your a Mech fan. http://www.mechlivinglegends.net/ |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
Tags |
mech |
|
|