13 replies to this topic

[Ant_Monster]

I don't know, It just seems a little stiff. Players can't move around too much while flying, especially in the heat of battle.

Edited by Ant_Monster, November 11 2012 - 03:21 AM.

[Juodvarnis]

I pilot a C-class and, well, it should feel a clunky shouldn't it_

[MajorAjer]

Typically pilot A or B and it's fine. It is really map dependant.

[Nitris]

These mechs are heavy, the fact that we can fly at all is incredible. You try putting jump jets on a tank and seeing how easy it is to fly and control! =D

[Beemann]

I view it more as risk-reward when repositioning, or a highly risky manoeuvre (because if they aren't surprised and can aim worth a damn you're a goner)

At best I could see someone wanting to raise the flight ceiling just a wee bit so mechs aren't always scraping their feet on platforms they're jetting onto
Oh and 180 dash in midair, because mech ballet and such

[Immie]

IMO, the amount of aerial mobility you can get is just fine, except for 2 things:

• Jetting drains energy too quickly; I don't think boosting gracefully through the air is an amazing combat maneuver, and it wouldn't be even if you could do it for longer, but with the way jets drain right now, any part of the map that requires you to do some platforming (climbing up stuff without ramps or jump pads) is extremely annoying. You currently have to jet up one thing, sit around and wait for recharge, repeat. I'd like to see the energy cost of jump jets reduced to make these moments less painful. Considering how much more slowly your energy carries you through the air compared to on the ground, I think this would be totally fair.
  
  
• Where is inertia_ Jetting seems to cancel all of your lateral speed. If you were boosting and start jetting, your speed vanishes into thin air. Objects in motion will stay in motion... not only is this intuitive in a sense of physics, it would also add some depth to the movement system, allowing for "long jump" techniques by doing short boosts followed by jetting, and other similar tricks.

Edited by Immie, November 11 2012 - 09:23 AM.

[kreel2]

I think that the vertical thruster is fairly good the way it is, a little bit stiff on the rookie (that's the only one I tried for now) but it gives a good sense of weight, and even if it can make you a sitting duck on mid range it can help you confuse your unexperienced enemies from up close.

I would like to have a short frontal/lateral burst in air though, just to be able to reach some platforms faster (when you jump from one building to another sometimes the fuel isn't enough, but with this you could be able to make it with a good timing), and it could be used as a fighting tactic along with the ground frontal/lateral thruster.

I also like the idea of the sprint/jump to cover longer distances forward (of course the lateral dodge should give less speed considering that theoretically it's not done using all the engines as opposed to the forward thrust).

Edited by kreel2, November 11 2012 - 10:12 AM.

[bacon_avenger]

Immie, on November 11 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

   Where is inertia_ Jetting seems to cancel all of your lateral speed. If you were boosting and start jetting, your speed vanishes into thin air. Objects in motion will stay in motion... not only is this intuitive in a sense of physics, it would also add some depth to the movement system, allowing for "long jump" techniques by doing short boosts followed by jetting, and other similar tricks.

This.

Inertia, or lack there of, was brought up in the first beta round.  CBT2 seems to have improved it somewhat (or my perception may be off), but it's still not where it should be IMO.  The atmosphere isn't that thick, is it_

Otherwise, no, I think the current 'flight' system is fine.  These are mechs, not mobile armor systems like a Gundum or an elemental from MW.  

Edited by bacon_avenger, November 11 2012 - 04:15 PM.

[DarkPulse]

It should generally be harder to steer in the air. As it is, I think it feels fine.

[RedVan]

As soon as any of you who are saying "its fine" get in the air, you just made yourself the easiest target in the world.  My pro tip:  Keep your feet on the ground.  Because you will die vs even a half way descent player if in the air.

Game needs more use for jetting.

[Beemann]

RedVan, on November 12 2012 - 12:05 AM, said:

As soon as any of you who are saying "its fine" get in the air, you just made yourself the easiest target in the world.

That`s kinda the point
You have plenty of ground movement options. Vertical thrusting is used for gaining the high ground and repositioning
I use it for continuing to blast people who run behind walls, and for hopping onto platforms or to slow a fall down below fall-damage speeds

RedVan, on November 12 2012 - 12:05 AM, said:

Game needs more use for jetting.

Aside from gaining the high ground, keeping LOS, the occasional surprise vertical juke, readjusting your trajectory after being launched off of a jump pad, slowing a fal and flanking_
Why_ I already get plenty of use out of it, all things considered

Edited by Beemann, November 12 2012 - 03:35 AM.

[KaszaWspraju]

Immie, on November 11 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

IMO, the amount of aerial mobility you can get is just fine, except for 2 things:

• Jetting drains energy too quickly; I don't think boosting gracefully through the air is an amazing combat maneuver, and it wouldn't be even if you could do it for longer, but with the way jets drain right now, any part of the map that requires you to do some platforming (climbing up stuff without ramps or jump pads) is extremely annoying. You currently have to jet up one thing, sit around and wait for recharge, repeat. I'd like to see the energy cost of jump jets reduced to make these moments less painful. Considering how much more slowly your energy carries you through the air compared to on the ground, I think this would be totally fair.
  
  
• Where is inertia_ Jetting seems to cancel all of your lateral speed. If you were boosting and start jetting, your speed vanishes into thin air. Objects in motion will stay in motion... not only is this intuitive in a sense of physics, it would also add some depth to the movement system, allowing for "long jump" techniques by doing short boosts followed by jetting, and other similar tricks.

Ad 1
You can surely build mech for this :
In movment tree you have two options for that, and Functionl internal You have next two item for fuel.

Something for something, don't do one optimal build for mech.

Edited by KaszaWspraju, November 12 2012 - 06:00 AM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

KaszaWspraju, on November 12 2012 - 05:55 AM, said:

Immie, on November 11 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

IMO, the amount of aerial mobility you can get is just fine, except for 2 things:

• Jetting drains energy too quickly; I don't think boosting gracefully through the air is an amazing combat maneuver, and it wouldn't be even if you could do it for longer, but with the way jets drain right now, any part of the map that requires you to do some platforming (climbing up stuff without ramps or jump pads) is extremely annoying. You currently have to jet up one thing, sit around and wait for recharge, repeat. I'd like to see the energy cost of jump jets reduced to make these moments less painful. Considering how much more slowly your energy carries you through the air compared to on the ground, I think this would be totally fair.
  
  
• Where is inertia_ Jetting seems to cancel all of your lateral speed. If you were boosting and start jetting, your speed vanishes into thin air. Objects in motion will stay in motion... not only is this intuitive in a sense of physics, it would also add some depth to the movement system, allowing for "long jump" techniques by doing short boosts followed by jetting, and other similar tricks.

Ad 1
You can surely build mech for this :
In movment tree you have two options for that, and Functionl internal You have next two item for fuel.

Something for something, don't do one optimal build for mech.

Even when mobility upgraded, trying to get on top of a missile silo will take most of your fuel.
If you fuzzy bunny up (or more likely, get caught on the finicky geometry), then you have to land and have to wait several seconds just to try again.

That sort of thing is a basic maneuverability issue that everyone should be able to perform without problem.

[The_Silencer]

Juodvarnis, on November 11 2012 - 03:31 AM, said:

I pilot a C-class and, well, it should feel a clunky shouldn't it_

Juodvarnis got a point there. The weight of your mech, according to what your class is, should make the difference. Another thing would be improving the current air combat scheme by adding balanced and new moves to it. That would undoubtfuly add more tactical value to the game.. and the most important.. more fun and freedom factor.