Topic: New Mechwarrior!!!

[Lieutenant_Q]

Victor-Phoenix Hawk.

Well... the VTR-9S and the PHX-1D models.  Mobile devastation with the AC/20 SRM-6 on the Victor, and harassing fire from the P-Hawk's large laser.

[marstone]

That's true.  A ground pounding mech isn't going to move like ZOE. 

One of the things I've not liked about the Armored Core games is their lack of an adequate fire control system.

Feel the same way about Armored Core.  If an M1 Tank can move at 60 mph over uneven gound and track a target (and stay right on it) with its main gun.  The computer tracking the target and adjusting the targeting sight for the speed of both the M1 and the target, with corrections for direction of movement and distance.  No reason a futuristic mech shouldn't have the same fire control system.

Good point, but where is the main gun located on the mech? In a tank or Bradley, you can have the computer locked adjustments on the main guns and coax machine guns, the turret can adjust while the rest of the tank is bouncing around. How do you get a Treb to launch it's LRM's accurately while it's on the fly?.

My BT question is always the same: Grasshopper-Wolverine or Victor-Phoenix Hawk?

Well, a LRM should be a long range guided missile.  So  a lock on to a target should be valid as the missle can correct its path in flight.  Any weapon carried by arms should also be able to stabilize.

[KBFLordKrueg]

That's true.  A ground pounding mech isn't going to move like ZOE. 

One of the things I've not liked about the Armored Core games is their lack of an adequate fire control system.

Feel the same way about Armored Core.  If an M1 Tank can move at 60 mph over uneven gound and track a target (and stay right on it) with its main gun.  The computer tracking the target and adjusting the targeting sight for the speed of both the M1 and the target, with corrections for direction of movement and distance.  No reason a futuristic mech shouldn't have the same fire control system.

Perhaps because of the fact it's not a tank, a flat platform moving flat on the ground...it's running, jumping, spinning, twisting, climbing...it wouldn't be as fun if all you had to do was point in the general direction and fire and forget...it nice to have to have some tiny resemblence of skill needed to actually fight in one, don't ya think?

[marstone]

That's true.  A ground pounding mech isn't going to move like ZOE. 

One of the things I've not liked about the Armored Core games is their lack of an adequate fire control system.

Feel the same way about Armored Core.  If an M1 Tank can move at 60 mph over uneven gound and track a target (and stay right on it) with its main gun.  The computer tracking the target and adjusting the targeting sight for the speed of both the M1 and the target, with corrections for direction of movement and distance.  No reason a futuristic mech shouldn't have the same fire control system.

Perhaps because of the fact it's not a tank, a flat platform moving flat on the ground...it's running, jumping, spinning, twisting, climbing...it wouldn't be as fun if all you had to do was point in the general direction and fire and forget...it nice to have to have some tiny resemblence of skill needed to actually fight in one, don't ya think?

a tank hardly moves flat on the ground, ride in one sometime.  But I do agree, with the need to aim to make it better.   Sure make it that even with lock-ons and such it doesn't mean a hit.   

But I do understand your point but sometimes the need to aim and hold a target in some games is over done.  Computer assisted sighting is doable.  The computer knows what motions it is making in the mech so it can compensate for it in the targeting sight (at least have it hold smoother), now being hit by enemy fire should knock it off as the computer doesn't know the reaction the mech is going to make to the hit. (although maybe it can learn that too).

[Commander La'ra]

I always chalked the poor stabilization up to the 'degradation of technology over centuries of total war' thing the older source material liked to harp on.