New single person mechs designed from scratch for PS2

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Xyntech

A mech as a replacement for a heavy battle tank is just a bad idea. A mech as a versatile light armor unit sounds much easier to balance.

Please explain, in detail, the exact difference between a heavy tank and a heavy mech.

[Captain B]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Please explain, in detail, the exact difference between a heavy tank and a heavy mech.

Huh? I don't think he was comparing heavy tank and heavy mech. He was implying that if there were mechs, they shouldn't be "heavy" but rather "light" vehicles.

[I SandRock]

Don't like one-many army vehicles. Though I will miss 'big game hunting' sessions. It was great fun forming a mag / tresher party to hunt down BFRs

What I COULD see work is a support-type mech. Firepower would be equal to average infantry, less than specialized infantry. It's armor would obviously be better than infantry. It's role would be for commanders / support. So they can have a better overview of the battlefield without getting headshot by a sniper the moment they stick their head out. Perhaps allow the mech to have some information-system build-in to give battlefield readouts. See-through canopy with infared, etc.

Support function could be repairing vehicles, ammo resupply, etc.

So not so much a combat-unit as a commander/squad leader unit.

[Talek Krell]

Mechs as described by the OP do not work here because they overpower the role of infantry in an area where infantry are supposed to dominate. There's no reason to have regions where ground vehicles can't go if you then design a ground vehicle that can go there.

Mechs as a concept do not work here for two primary reasons.
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.
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 thread should have ended 18 pages ago, but Sirisian will no more admit defeat than accept that he is not the spokesman of the Silent Masses and the rest of us seem to have forgotten how to not feed trolls.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by I SandRock

Don't like one-many army vehicles.

Ideally they would be weaker than a tank overall as described and suffer from disadvantages to air. Ideally they'd need to work with others or they'd be taken out fast.

Regarding using them as a support role it's been brought up in a few of the pages. It's an interesting idea for engineers as a way to keep up with the battle.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Mechs as described by the OP do not work here because they overpower the role of infantry in an area where infantry are supposed to dominate. There's no reason to have regions where ground vehicles can't go if you then design a ground vehicle that can go there.

Actually they don't have to go where infantry go. MAX units already do that. Their bipedal feet really aren't that much better at going up hills than treads. It all comes down to balance.

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.

Can I get someone who is an actual science fiction fan to post. Seriously you sound like a troll making those kinds of statements.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

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.

You're a professional animator? T-Ray already said he's wanted to redo mechs for PS2. I think he understand how to animate them.

These are the kinds of arguments though that I like to see. Ones where people bring up problems that they see and they can be "solved".

[Redshift]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Can I get someone who is an actual science fiction fan to post. Seriously you sound like a troll making those kinds of statements.

Actually someone has already posted in the thread way earlier explaning why Mechs would never seriously be considered more useful than tanks etc in reality

[Xyntech]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Can I get someone who is an actual science fiction fan to post. Seriously you sound like a troll making those kinds of statements.

Well, he's right in the sense that walkers like in MechWarrior or Star Wars would never be practical fighting machines at any technological level. Even if you had the technology to make them, tanks would still be more practical.

Admittedly, some of the downsides of mechs would be diminished by the Planetside nanite system, such as difficulties in manufacturing and maintenance, but it still would probably be a pretty poor choice in a futuristic "real world" situation.

On the other hand, the whole "science fantasy" thing is a ridiculous argument. 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.

[Malorn]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

T-Ray still wants them, and I'm confident in his ability to make change. (That and he sounded like he'd like to model them and bring them into the new PS2 style).

Also I've yet to see a solid argument against this thread. The only legit argument has been that a person doesn't like the chassis design. Other than that it's been a spew of irrational, as Vancha put it, comments. This community can do better than that.

There's lots of solid arguments in this thread. You don't see them because you don't want to see them.

You're on a personal crusade to add something to a game that only you really want. The one good thing about all this is the fact that you aren't on the PS2 team because you would absolutely ruin the game for your own little science fiction fantasy world. I'm pretty sure most of the community flipped the idiot bit on you a few hundred posts ago.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Redshift

Actually someone has already posted in the thread way earlier explaning why Mechs would never seriously be considered more useful than tanks etc in reality

Okay. Now go read about what fiction means and science fiction. Unless you're suggesting the game should play more like a military future simulation then I'll have to disagree. Though you wouldn't be alone if you made that argument.

Also as a side note I never said they'd be more useful than a tank. That's been the paranoid BFR haters in this thread.

Originally Posted by Malorn

There's lots of solid arguments in this thread. You don't see them because you don't want to see them.

And I've refuted all of them. Keep up.

Originally Posted by Malorn

You're on a personal crusade to add something to a game that only you really want.

Yes, I want PS2 to be a game that I'd enjoy. The changes I've currently suggested would not degrade the gameplay of other players unless they feel so strongly against mechs that they can't play a game where one is featured.

Originally Posted by Malorn

I'm pretty sure most of the community flipped the idiot bit on you a few hundred posts ago.

Just because I refuted your weak arguments doesn't mean you need to go on the attack. Just stay on topic please.

Also CutterJohn brought up a lot of good points. I wish more of the PSU community has his rational thinking toward chassis designs.

[Redshift]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Okay. Now go read about what fiction means and science fiction. Unless you're suggesting the game should play more like a military future simulation then I'll have to disagree. Though you wouldn't be alone if you made that argument.

So i could go on a crusade to get a space laser that turns people blood into cheese included in the game? Or would that be farcical because it's unrealalistic? like any serious military deliberatly building shit vehicles?

[Captain B]

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Mechs as a concept do not work here for two primary reasons.
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.

But respawning and continuing to fight a war that thus cannot be won under any circumstance with an endless supply of continuously learning soldiers isn't fantasy?

I'm all about variety so long as it's balanced and fun. And since you'll still need to have the skill/cert tree trained up to get bigger vehicles (I'm sure, anyway), it still serves a purpose. "We need to assault that facility through the canyons and up the plateau." Treads and wheels may not be the most useful; that leaves MAXes and infantry and air. I like the difference between a MAX and a mech in the sense that if MAXes were too powerful they'd just crush everything in a tunnel/CQB setting, which they should definitely have the advantage in, but not be unstoppable without a tank or gunship attacking it. The mech provides that extra punch against enemy air or base defenses on the assault.

It's too bad; I may not have used 'em myself, but it would be cool seeing a few march along a bunch of infantry with air cover on a secluded facility.

[Malorn]

You didn't refute shit sirisian. People stopped bothering arguing the point because they know logic and reason take to your delusional mind like oil takes to water.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Redshift

So i could go on a crusade to get a space laser that turns people blood into cheese included in the game?

That would be science fiction. I think you're getting the general idea. A good example would be to watch the really bad sci-fi movies and the stuff they come up with like that.

[321]

Originally Posted by Malorn

You didn't refute shit sirisian. People stopped bothering arguing the point because they know logic and reason take to your delusional mind like oil takes to water.

^This.

Let Sirisian tremble at an Anti-Mech revolution. PS players have nothing to lose but mechs. They have a game to create.

PS players of all ISPs, unite!

[PrISM]

I love how he keeps saying T-Ray will put them in the game as if he outranks the CEO.