New single person mechs designed from scratch for PS2

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

1. They break the setting. Mechs are not science fiction they are science fantasy. There is no technological level at which mechs make more sense than other propulsion methods. Planetside hews closer than most seem to realize to hard Sci-fi and mechs are anything but that.

So is magical vanu hover tech. Pure sci fantasy. There is no physical phenomenon that could be used to explain its behavior. If you really want I could start listing off the completely illogical, irrational, and impossible things in PS1.. It would be quite an extensive list. PS is in no way a 'hard' sci fi game.

Mechs would be useful in situations where their added dexterity is necessary to negotiate terrain. They would not be overlords of the battlefield as mecharrior portrays them, but they would have niches in extreme terrain and urban environments.

2. Animating, programming, and implementing a mech is more expensive and less efficient than implementing a ground or air vehicle to fill the same role. Much like in real life, ironically enough.

This is valid criticism. Getting the legs to move right is important. Though I think you overestimate its difficulty. Mechwarrior 3 did this stuff properly 10 years ago.

[Talek Krell]

Originally Posted by Xyntech

Planetside already features some pretty bullshit made up sci fi elements, so it is far from "hard core sci fi." Maybe mechs would stray a bit further out of the realism belt, but it would hardly be immersion breaking if PEW PEW lasher orbs and whatnot aren't.

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

So is magical vanu hover tech. Pure sci fantasy. There is no physical phenomenon that could be used to explain its behavior.

See this is what I meant about Planetside being harder Sci-fi than a lot of people realize.
Lasher: Electrical charge bottled in a shaped magnetic field. Could be self-propelled or launched magnetically. Mag bottle will degrade over time and the charge will try to find it's way to ground through the most conductive route. And people are much better conductors than open air...
Magrider: Vectored thrust, electromagnetic repulsion, artificial/antigravity...

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Mechs would be useful in situations where their added dexterity is necessary to negotiate terrain. They would not be overlords of the battlefield as mecharrior portrays them, but they would have niches in extreme terrain and urban environments.

But they wouldn't! Think about it, in what sort of environment would this actually come into play? Give me an example. A pass so narrow tanks can't fit through? They'd have to be nothing but unusually slow and expensive max units. A mountainside so steep that a tank can't climb it? If your tank doesn't have the engine power to climb a slope then putting the engine into a mech isn't going to help anything. And then of course a rock shifts and the thing plummets. Urban warfare? Mechs would be even more vulnerable than tanks since they'd have to carry lighter armor and would be larger targets.

[MasterChief096]

I'm not going to advocate mechs, but the whole, "its a shit vehicle for a military to use in the future" argument is pretty damn stupid.

Compare a vanguard, prowler, and magrider to a modern day abrams. The abrams wins, easily, from over a mile away if it wants to. Same goes for all the AA, and aircraft. Realism is very low in PlanetSide. Modern day AA systems would smoke the shit out of planetside aircraft from miles away. The only realistic thing about PlanetSide is the scale.

[Captain B]

Still didn't answer the respawn/infinite soldier with no fear of death or consequence issue.

As far as examples, I've already given some:

1) Steep, narrow passes that tanks can't traverse and would have to detour significantly to reach. The mech could fit between the boulders and land formations that clutter the path or even jump on top of some of the smaller rocks (I said I didn't like flying or high jumping, but doesn't mean they can't propel themselves up a proportionate or slightly less than proportionate distance to a human). This would allow them to maneuver through such terrain with ease and maintain an appropriate speed with the other infantry.

2) As far as an urban environment, you'd be able to turn about and face your opponents quickly. Sure it's a bigger target, but smaller than tanks (or roughly the same size, especially if they can crouch and move). In fact, that right there is its advantage: it can provide close support of infantry with its bigger hull (than a MAX or just heavy infantry), but if you're flanked or ambushed in such confined spaces you can turn about and engage to the front armor as opposed to being a tank in a cramped alley going "well shit" before the big boom.

All vehicles are going to be vulnerable in such a situation, but if any vehicles are going to get the advantage it'd be something extremely fast like a buggy to zip through the streets, using hit-and-run tactics, or something on even pace with infantry that can lead the charge down a death corridor where its bulk can protect the squishies and suppress the enemy, or simply provide less support but still be viable where cover is available in sporadic locations and moving slowly through AV swept streets, covering advancing infantry with strafing quick bursts of AI fire to allow the infantry to kill the enemy AV before proceeding.

[Talek Krell]

Originally Posted by Captain B

Still didn't answer the respawn/infinite soldier with no fear of death or consequence issue.

I figured the fiction had covered that well enough. They're building the bodies at the atomic level using a stored reference and data/materials from nanite recycling of corpses in the field. They just have to be precise when making the neural network and the clone will effectively be the same person that just died. It's crazy tech, but they're borrowing it from a species that apparently built a planet.

Originally Posted by Captain B

1) Steep, narrow passes that tanks can't traverse and would have to detour significantly to reach. The mech could fit between the boulders and land formations that clutter the path or even jump on top of some of the smaller rocks (I said I didn't like flying or high jumping, but doesn't mean they can't propel themselves up a proportionate or slightly less than proportionate distance to a human). This would allow them to maneuver through such terrain with ease and maintain an appropriate speed with the other infantry.

2) As far as an urban environment, you'd be able to turn about and face your opponents quickly. Sure it's a bigger target, but smaller than tanks (or roughly the same size, especially if they can crouch and move). In fact, that right there is its advantage: it can provide close support of infantry with its bigger hull (than a MAX or just heavy infantry), but if you're flanked or ambushed in such confined spaces you can turn about and engage to the front armor as opposed to being a tank in a cramped alley going "well shit" before the big boom.

1)It depends on the size of the mech your talking about, but if it's anything significantly larger than an infantryman having to navigate that rough terrain without tipping would slow it down considerably. It would also have to do it under heavy fire given that the infantry and more conventional vehicles would probably be using the rocks for cover, thus making it the only available target. If it isn't significantly larger than an infantryman then it might work better, but it sounds more like an exosuit (which we already have) and I suspect it wouldn't fit Sirisian's rather strict definition of a mech.
2)Tanks do not turn that slowly. Mechs do not turn that quickly (it's harder than you'd think). In addition the armor has to be lighter in order to make the thing work which means that a tank might well have armor on it's back thicker than a mech has on it's front and will almost certainly expose fewer critical components. All of that also compromises it's ability to act as mobile cover, and if you scale it down until it can use cover itself then it's basically just a max again. The idea of having it crouch isn't that bad but it seems like it would be more sensible to just make a tank with a variable height turret.

[Captain B]

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

I figured the fiction had covered that well enough. They're building the bodies at the atomic level using a stored reference and data/materials from nanite recycling of corpses in the field. They just have to be precise when making the neural network and the clone will effectively be the same person that just died. It's crazy tech, but they're borrowing it from a species that apparently built a planet.

Do you see where I find the inability to connect this explanation of high tech that can only be explained with "aliens did it"...

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

1)It depends on the size of the mech your talking about, but if it's anything significantly larger than an infantryman having to navigate that rough terrain without tipping would slow it down considerably. It would also have to do it under heavy fire given that the infantry and more conventional vehicles would probably be using the rocks for cover, thus making it the only available target. If it isn't significantly larger than an infantryman then it might work better, but it sounds more like an exosuit (which we already have) and I suspect it wouldn't fit Sirisian's rather strict definition of a mech.
2)Tanks do not turn that slowly. Mechs do not turn that quickly (it's harder than you'd think). In addition the armor has to be lighter in order to make the thing work which means that a tank might well have armor on it's back thicker than a mech has on it's front and will almost certainly expose fewer critical components. All of that also compromises it's ability to act as mobile cover, and if you scale it down until it can use cover itself then it's basically just a max again. The idea of having it crouch isn't that bad but it seems like it would be more sensible to just make a tank with a variable height turret.

to this?

It's like you're applying make believe in one hand and real world physics in the other, hehe. It's a sci-fi game that has absolutely no bearing on reality. Hell, look at the armor our heavies are wearing. You wouldn't be able to move in real life with that kind of gear on, and even if you could, it wouldn't guarantee to stop or even hinder the kind of power most of these weapons would exert. Great, it didn't breach the plate, but it vaporized my leg on the sub-atomic level or completely shattered it into pulp and dust.

It's just a game, after all. It can turn quicker than a tank or quicker than other mechs, real life prototypes or other game. It can crouch and jump well, and it can have armor to make it versatile and useful without making it unstoppable. It can because it's a game.

And who said we'd have to fit Sirisian's definition? Last I checked there were 20 pages in this thread with a lot of input from people for and against mechs. I think we should keep it open-minded so that when it does happen (and let's face it, it will eventually) it's done right.

[Xyntech]

Sirisian does come off as a little fanatical and obsessed with the mechs, but not nearly as fanatical or obsessed as some of the people against them.

He is not a troll. He is discussing something that he thinks could be successfully put into Planetside 2. There is no reason to attack him personally if you disagree with him.

It's not like he is suggesting something too far out of the realm of possibility either, like cheese rays or whatever. Planetside has always had MAX armor. Planetside 1 got BFR's. One of the developers of PS2 has stated an interest in revisiting the subject, to get it right this time.

Mechs aren't something that is high on my personal wish list, but if and when they do put mechs into this game, I want them to get it right, I applaud Sirisian for making a thread on that subject.

The biggest failings of BFR's were not the fact that they had legs. But this has already been discussed ad nauseum in this thread.

[Talek Krell]

Originally Posted by Captain B

Do you see where I find the inability to connect this explanation of high tech that can only be explained with "aliens did it"...

Not really, no. The planet is practically crawling with nanites, the nanites work as previously described. The aliens had to be the ones to set it up, if it had been the humans the whole story would have collapsed.

Originally Posted by Captain B

And who said we'd have to fit Sirisian's definition.

No one. It's just a side effect of having to argue with multiple people simultaneously. That said "mech" does usually refer to a large, stompy vehicle. You were after the avatar suits if I recall, and that's more along the lines of a heavy exo-suit.

Originally Posted by Captain B

It's like you're applying make believe in one hand and real world physics in the other, hehe. It's a sci-fi game that has absolutely no bearing on reality. Hell, look at the armor our heavies are wearing. You wouldn't be able to move in real life with that kind of gear on.

Those are exo-suits. They use motors to assist user movement, allowing infantry to use armor and weapons that they'd normally be unable to lift. In terms of whether mechs are realistic it's not a matter of whether they'll become feasible. It is whether they'll become effective enough that they'd be chosen for production over competing designs for their role.

If you'd prefer to argue from a gameplay standpoint then that's fine. I do ask that you stick to it, I'm getting tired of people skipping around. As you've observed the model of a vehicle is unimportant gameplay wise. Assuming no budget issues, there's no reason it can't be a mech. There's also no reason it should be a mech, though, so that works both ways. If you want something implemented, then you'll need two things that I can think of:
Role: You need a purpose for what you're making. Function first, then form. If I've understood correctly what you want is an ultralight vehicle to operate in what would otherwise be an infantry/MAX fight. I'm not convinced we need that, I like the idea of having some outdoor fights center on infantry and air.
Theme: This is where the realism argument becomes relevant. Planetside has a relatively practical design theme to it, and I don't feel mechs (via the wiki definition) fit that. Now provided the niche I described does need to be filled, something like the avatar suits would probably work well for it, and do so without violating the theme. They're functioning as ultra-heavy infantry, so it's reasonable that they would essentially be an overgrown exo-suit. Make it look stocky and thickly armored to protect all the servos and electronics it would need to keep upright, with a low center of gravity so it feels stable. Have it move at about infantry speed and give it equipment intended to support an infantry advance.

[Traak]

So, Mechs that didn't have magical fairy-like abilities far exceeding anything else in the game would be more acceptable? I can see that not being too bad.

But waving the wand of ridiculous invulnerability over BFR's helped ruin the game. Ooh! You can't shoot me with big weapons, because my magical regenerating fairy dust shield protects meeee! And I can leeeap away from harm faster and higher than almost anything in the game, hehehehehehe!

LOL I wonder if they expected 90 percent of the playerbase to cert mechs?

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Lasher: Electrical charge bottled in a shaped magnetic field.

There is no physical phenomenon that can explain a self perpetuating magnetic field, nor one that would be stable outside of some controlling apparatus.

Fantasy.

Mag bottle will degrade over time and the charge will try to find it's way to ground through the most conductive route. And people are much better conductors than open air...

Enemies refuse to add a tiny bit of metal to the outside of their suits that leads to ground, since conductive metals are much better conductors than people.

Illogical.

The fantasy mag bottle completely lacks any mechanism to determine friend from foe, yet it not only does so with 100% accuracy, it even detects enemy cloakers that high technology gizmos are barely capable of.

Fantasy stacked on top of Fantasy.

Magrider: Vectored thrust, electromagnetic repulsion, artificial/antigravity...

1. No thrusters visible on model. Would be the most fantastically inefficient method of land vehicle propulsion ever devised, and FOD would destroy the thrusters in short order. Irrational.

2. Relies on something superconducting to repulse against. Fantasy.

3. There are no known or theorized methods of accomplishing this. Fantasy.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

1)It depends on the size of the mech your talking about, but if it's anything significantly larger than an infantryman having to navigate that rough terrain without tipping would slow it down considerably.

We *know* we it is possible to make machines that are incredibly agile and have incredible endurance, can turn fast, don't trip all that often, and aren't helpless when they do trip. We know this for the same reason we knew flight was possible.. There are plenty of examples of complex biological machines doing exactly that.

2)Tanks do not turn that slowly. Mechs do not turn that quickly (it's harder than you'd think).

Yeah, early generation robots, still in there infancy. Shall I bring out a video of some early aircraft, cars, tanks, etc and use those for examples of why the technology will never work?

[Captain B]

Well, CutterJohn nailed it.

It is interesting though that mechs could be awesome in a few centuries from now on a planet where magi- nanites are everywhere, and yet tanks are still the same damn treads since the 20th century.

Minus VS's hover vehicles, which clearly relied on aliens thinking outside the box on that one.

[Talek Krell]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Fantasy stacked on top of Fantasy.

Look as fascinating as it would be to dig through research journals to try and determine exactly how a Lasher might work, I have more topic-relevant concerns. If you want to keep with the realism thing then entertain yourself with this while I talk with CB.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

In terms of whether mechs are realistic it's not a matter of whether they'll become feasible. It is whether they'll become effective enough that they'd be chosen for production over competing designs for their role.

Originally Posted by Captain B

Well, CutterJohn nailed it.

So you're going to skip back to the realism argument then? It's kind of a shame, because for a while I thought the thread might actually become productive.

[Redshift]

I think the best argument is just to say they look rediculous, well they look rediculous unless you through tonnes of cash at them.
remember bfr's walking across uneven ground or up a hill? tall vehicles just look silly when they're spose to fall over but dont.

i still don't see an actual role for them though

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Look as fascinating as it would be to dig through research journals to try and determine exactly how a Lasher might work, I have more topic-relevant concerns. If you want to keep with the realism thing then entertain yourself with this while I talk with CB.

The only thing I could said to be arguing is bad logic. I really don't care if mechs are in or not. Pretty ambivalent about the subject. People bring up BFRs? I point out that graphics has nothing to do with balance. People bring up realism? I point out PS is chock full of fantasy. People bring up technical issues regarding the legs? Inverse kinematics is pretty mature tech. Like as not its already implemented on the infantry in order to make their feet fall correctly on slopes(and if its not it should be).


Stop making bad arguments in order to justify the fact that you just don't like them. But if you just don't like them because of a bad argument, perhaps you should reconsider.

Originally Posted by Redshift

i still don't see an actual role for them though

I see no role for treads. They do nothing wheels can't do.

[Xyntech]

Mechs aren't in at launch. Confirmed. However, mechs are still a possibility at some point in Planetside 2's future.

A lot of valid arguments have been made in this thread, along with a lot of senseless ones. I don't see this subject getting any further right now though.

Maybe we should shelve this until after launch, or at least until beta arrives. Then we can see what the game play in PS2 is like and whether or not there is a valuable role that some certain type of mech could fill.