Mechs

[Flashingfish]

Warborn, if every single thing had been discussed before, and if there had been a definite conclusion made, would I have said that in every post made here? no.

There were so many mech discussion forums, and extremely long discussions, and there was a huge majority who agreed that it was a bad idea. And this was on the official forums. Which the devs read. Seeing as so many were against the idea, do you really think they would implement it into the game? Somehow I think not.

I'm sorry if I somehow angered you, and I take back whatever I've said.

[Warborn]

Seeing as so many were against the idea, do you really think they would implement it into the game? Somehow I think not.

Reading the forum and official website of a game does not make you a part of the development process. If a majority of ill-informed people agree, then that's good for them. Glad they can agree. But that doesn't mean they know what's best for the game, given the fact that they haven't even played the game before.

Now, once again, my point is that just because some little clique of forum people agreed on something, doesn't mean Planetside was in any way, shape or form affected. Honestly, who cares what other people decided. Let's let people discuss it again, with new people. If that's a problem, by all means, don't contribute. Or if you're feeling helpful, share with us the bounty of knowledge that the forum people somewhere else uncovered which led them to an agreement. Maybe everyone will agree that Mechs are a bad idea again. Or maybe things will turn out differently. After all, we have no clue what we're really talking about, so who knows what could happen.

I'm sorry if I somehow angered you, and I take back whatever I've said.

It's how I type. I don't litter my posts with emote-icons, and I don't try and sugar-coat what I say, so to the casual observer which is use to little heart shaped smiley faces and whatnot, I look angry. But trust me, I'm not.

[Flashingfish]

It's how I type. I don't litter my posts with emote-icons, and I don't try and sugar-coat what I say, so to the casual observer which is use to little heart shaped smiley faces and whatnot, I look angry. But trust me, I'm not.

I'm sorry, but I interpret this as an insult. Maybe I should say it less subtly: end it now.

[Warborn]

only way i could see something that big working in ps is if it didnt have hardly any combat capability. like a giant walking AMS. Or perhaps it could be like an AMS, but more combat oriented instead of stealth. Like instead of a cloaking device it could have long range artillery and machine gun mounts.

/agree

Having a walker serve as mobile artillery would be a good use for a Mech. NC would fire heavy mortar shells, VS would have something like extremely volitile globes of energy, and TR maybe something that fires a series of high-explosive shells in rapid succession. Each shell would do less damage individually, but still retaining the same overall power, while sticking with the theme of that Faction.

[Hamma]

Stop looking for a flame war :\

[Warborn]

Fixed.

[Camping Carl]

Mechs might be cool, but I doubt they would ever make it into the game. Sure, they're cool in games like mechwarrior, but wheels are more efficient. They just don't have any advantage over tank treads, I take wheels over legs any day.

[Warborn]

A tracked vehicle is far more stable and can support a lot of armor (legs are also a major weak point), but a vehicle which uses bipedal locomotion could in theory traverse much tougher terrain than a tracked tank, and would be more agile in combat. But, yeah, overall, a tank is a far better combat vehicle than a walking robot. For the same tonnage, you could get a hell of a lot more durable of a tank than you could a Mech.

[Camping Carl]

Exactly!

[Stalefish]

Mechs wouldn't unbalance the game at all. They're just like tanks with legs, you don't really have to give them alot of weapons, maybe just a couple of cannons and a machine gun. They could take two or three people to man (one driver, two gunners, although that might make them too big, maybe just a one-man mech) and they could have maybe less armor than a tank (easier for rockets to take them out). How would they be less balancing than a tank? You have to shoot a tank with a rocket too.

And as for it not fitting Planetside, the MAX armors are already basically mechs. You just supersize them and give them some bigger guns and wham, you've got a mech. If you think about how they did it in Neo-Cairo for Unreal Tournament, I believe they implemented them very well. If you have a problem fighting ground troops against mechs, fight them with your own.

Also, Warborn, with your post about the legs vs wheels. I believe they both have their advantages as well. Mechs stand higher, so in flat ground battles they'd have a longer range than a tank, and they'd also have the infamous "stomping" ability that everyone loves. But, instability is the price you pay for the extra advantages. Maybe make a mech with four legs to have increased stability and the range modifier as well?

[Sputty]

That'a good idea although I think all mechs should be two man at least as the heavy tanks are two man and it's more powerful than a tank

[Zatrais]

Mechs..

They're tall, big, lumbering.. the perfect target =)

[Warborn]

Also, Warborn, with your post about the legs vs wheels. I believe they both have their advantages as well. Mechs stand higher, so in flat ground battles they'd have a longer range than a tank, and they'd also have the infamous "stomping" ability that everyone loves. But, instability is the price you pay for the extra advantages. Maybe make a mech with four legs to have increased stability and the range modifier as well?

In order to stop anything but a soft target (like infantry) the Mech would have to be quite big, otherwise it wouldn't have enough weight to crush whatever it was stepping on, and that would most likely lead to the Mech toppling. Kicking might be a possibility, though.

Anyway, the negatives outweigh the positive from what I can tell. Having your movement centered around bipedal or even quadrupedal locomotion is a huge liability in some instances. Many ways to trip, or have a leg blown off or at least crippled, the fact that the Mech is a tall biped/quadruped would make it more vulnerable to being knocked over by a forceful blow. And beind knocked over would be a death sentence in most combat situations.

All the realism talk aside, Mechs weren't thought of for their battlefield usefulness. They're cool. Giant robots with lasers and missiles are really fun to fight and fight with in my experience, and in the experience of many others, given the success of the Mechwarrior franchise. All specifics aside though, for the same cost, and weight, a tank (or couple of tanks) can do what a Mech can do, but better.

[The Eternal]

To those of you who think you've come up with something original and a new explaination to balance mechs, trust me its been said and done a million times before you.

The Dev's gave a solid no on this once which i can't quote but it went something like, we won't have mechs because they would be unbalanced AND change the genre of the game.

And the MAX armors are closer to power armor from fallout series,
which by the way i opened a new discusion on power armor to which devs admited a type of power armor; then the dev's revealed the first MAX armor screenshots shortly after...
Theres a history lesson for you.

[Warborn]

And the MAX armors are closer to power armor from fallout series

Helluva lot more bulky than those suits of armor were. They're actually extremely similar to Spacemarine Dreadnaughts from Warhammer 40,000.