Matrix Games Forums

korg: i did say some of those things should not be included, since it would make things to wierd, and just so you know, never read any mekton stuff, just thinking around some...if it came from any place, it would be macross, not mekton.

different types of jets are definitly on my wish list, a type where you can actualy move around in the air would be real nice(like turning and stuff.), wich the original MF did have, yes i am a classic MF fan, i also tried a patch for MF, where you could get alot better(with EXTREME cost), and build better mech's, modding weapons, different reactor sizes, faster actuators, and all kinds of kewl stuff....we made somewhere around 30+mil mechs....they where worth it though.

//discord

ps. why the frelling hell do you make jumpjets without vectored thrust? in a mech that would mean close to sure crash&burn, since would would have next to no balance, and little way of controlling the **** thing...btw. with vectored thrust, you SHOULD be able to turn around, and change heading.... ds.

There is a very easy answer why jump ports don't have vectored thrust and will not allow turning in flight : game balance.

This is the same answer I would give to more than 50% of all suggested so called improvements to ToS while rejecting them.

This will include of map artillery strikes, air combat, nukes, infantry and killer snails.

larkin: ah, you mean the fact that large mechs would suddenly become faster, and so would wreck game balance? well, most of my suggestions where marked with a "not bloody likely unless you practicly create a new game" but i thought it would be good to think abit on them, and see if someone could get some idea from them.

for instance, engines, more output is good, size/weight are the only drawbacks...why not make it more dynamic(although would only be suitable for campaign setting, wich is what i am interested in anyway, i REALLY want to get my hands on a scenario editor.), like heating, most engines would generate heat, no? how effective the engines internal coolant system is would add in another, cost/rare yet another. generate's heat/output seems rather logical to me, although STILL not likely to be around in 2.0, but perhaps 3.0.

but one thing that i really think should exist is modularized equipment slots, for example,

The deployable sensor station,

A decoy(must do a scan, or get into close combat to see it's not a real mech).

Somekind of extra weapon, like twin machine gun(not much weight, with some 20 rounds, it's still rather small, like 2 tons)for extra staying power...or something else.

A actual honest to god metal shield, could prolly only be used to actively block close combat attacks, but passive defense of a shield(since you can just hit it) would make it useful anyway.

and a few different models of each, and you get some variation.

bah, the mechs are just to **** pre designed. you want them to be versitile, not prefabbed chunks.(that's what I would want out of em as a commander atleast.)

yes, i understand (atleast to a degree) the amount of coding that would be needed for these changes, wich is WHY i am saying it could be good for the NEXT release, not the current one. although one thing that i think SHOULD be if not in the release as so, then as a addon or something, namely more rpg parts, and the ability to create stuff BETWEEN missions, want more of that stuff....generaly i just want to create missions/campaigns, preferably with random elements, and player interaction(wich will change the mission profile, the all around setting and such, and if i could, limit/expand the amount of hardware the players can access), internet multiplayer in a fully functional "world server" for online gaming (MPORPG style.) etc. got tons of ideas, never gotten enough of a game editor to actualy do what i want with it.

//discord
//discord

most of us seem to get the versatility from them that we desire. I don't know how long you have been playing ToS, but perhaps if you get into it against online veterans such as hetzer you will begin to see the depth and variety that appears not to be there.

Discord: question why do you disagree with hover jets? i mean a light titan can get to flight lvl 2 using jump jets for a short term but an assualt can't get crap air for more than about 40 seconds so thats why i suggested something with less lift and more thrust which would give even MORE variation for heavier classes at the cost of some weight slots and still requiring skill checks to stop it like a jump jet i mean an assualt titan going fullspeed with a hover jet that fails a skill check isn't gonna stay standing for very long *makes a falling wall gesture with his hand -> | / -- __* and would take an assualt titan to the point where it really could be used for more of an assualt then defense/support use and the hover jets could be used on recon titans for lightning quick recon whoosh found enemy jets off turn around whoosh* or for close combat titans to close in quickly on there target (god forbid)

princecorrin: well, #1 i cant seem to find any mission objective's except "kill'em all", there where a small bunch of different mission objectives in good old MF, aslong as the only objective is "blow'em all to small mech pieces" there cant be MUCH variation, although a large map, four way warzone, could prolly be rather messy, but still, it's just about destroying eachother.

recover item,
escort item,
destroy item,
destroy installation,
defend installation,
just get your own *** through hostile territory(as in get reinforcements to out besieged units over there),
stop opponents from doing so,

just to mention a few, or maybe that was all, i dont remember, but i dont think so....
wichever, i see no mission objectives yet(will prolly be there in 2.0 though), in a millitary campaign, you would want flexible mechs, so that a single mech could cover more "functions" so to speak, get my idea?

and to answer your question, not played ToS long at all, just comparing ToS with good old MF, and seeing things that i miss from MF, and stuff i would have wanted added.
a return question to you Princeling, how much have you played good old MF?


whitefoxfire: never said i was against "hover jets" i DID say that i wanted more diverse jump jets, so that you dont have a single "#2 is better then #1, it just weighs more" because that is very unlikely in reality, more factors would play in, like heat generation, boost regeneration, speed, air time, the allmighty cost, and prolly a few more that i am to tired to think of now.

//discord

if you miss it so much go back to it

Please remember that v1.X of ToS is no longer officially supported by Vicious Byte.

If it was, Larkin and co would probably never have any time to work on ToS, Warring Suns.

AFAIK, more detailed mission objectives are probably going to be added to ToS, Warring Suns. Coding in things like buildings and static ground installations shouldn't be very hard, so I have faith that they will be included.

I imagine that the jump jets do have some vectored thrust, but probably no more than is needed for balance purposes. Again, it's a case of wether it's believed it will be goof for game balance.

Also, keep in mind that turning 40+ tons of bipedal fighting machine would probably be an obscenely difficult thing to do. Harrier jets are difficult enough to land, let alone something with the aerodynamic capabilities of a brick!

I do agree that hoverjets, with only 1 level of jump and no flight capabilities (as in, if you Hoverjet off a Large Hill/Mountain into a plane you will crash) but double the amount of boost time and recharge speed do sound like a fantastic idea.

I agree they'd be extremely useful for assault titans and CC units. I also think they wouldn't be too harmful for game balance or difficult to code. But I will leave the verdict to Larkin on wether he thinks it's a good idea...afterall he is the one coding the thing.

Also, remember to think carefully about suggestions for improvements. If we keep Larkin and co too busy toying around with fundamental modifications to the gtame, they are going to run out of time and money to develop it and it will never get released...either that or the price will have to go up!

Heaps of people seem to think developing a game is really fun, but it's horrible awful programming like anything else. So cut them a little slack, OK. It's not a dream job like so many kiddies seem to think it is.

WhiteFoxFire: hmm, was just curious as to why these things where removed, as it does not ADD anything to the overall gaming experience...and how should i put this bluntly, although the game idea is great...it's still kinda lacking in several aspects(read graphics, whatcha expect, the game is from <90's, and designed for the A500, wich was released .... was it 85/86 somewhere?)

korgmeister: well said, and i'll take it as a personal reproach for my....obscene amount of loonie talk, but as i said, i did not expect the ideas to be around in 2.0, since i DO understand the amount of effort that goes into creating the thing, but they could be a good thing to keep in mind for 3.0 .

and the only thing that i really think should be around in 2.0, would be none mech related skills, for use in between mission scenes(where all the fun and kewl stuff would happen, and make it differ from all the other games.), and add a serious amount of rpg'ing experience to the game.

#1 make a fourth category of skills(should not be very hard to code, it's just another set of variables, char generation/upkeep might be abit trickier, but i dont think it would be THAT hard to do.)

#2 ingame objective's changing(ergo. choose mission you want to perform, and have new mission options appear if certain between scenario scene's have happened.), should not be difficult to code, just another variable to change, namely wich mission should be next(what i want here is to remove the 'ladder' missions, like it is in starcraft/warcraft, failure should be possible, and should NOT end the game, unless you keep failing, then you lose the war.).

#3 extensive support of if/then/elseif/else usage with variables, for control of stuff, rutines/subrutines...basicly i want a small scale programming language, not just simple scripting.

#4 and just so you know it, i dont want to change your deathmatch games, i am ONLY interested in the campaign possibilities, i dont want to change YOUR game, i want the option to create my own(or close to it atleast.), or to say it bluntly, i want the options to be there for campaigns, so that as a campaign creator i have the option to create what i want.

//discord

I think the Computer RPG genre died with Final fantasy 8, but AFAIK I'm alone in that opinion

It was mentioned that the HQ module is based on the Champions RPG system. If you really wanted to, it could be possible to use the statistics for the TOS pilots in your HQ module to play as Champions characters, and roleplay the out of cockpit stuff over IRC or something with a few other willing players.

I'm not that much of a fan of RPgs on computer. I find there's rarely the option of making the character do what I want, NPC interaction is frequently repetetive and boring, and then there's the issue of mute vs spoken characters.

Mute characters have annoying kids with no imagination going:
"Why doesn't my character say something?"
There's not much point explaining that the unwritten dialogue is meant to be written up in their own heads (It's called imagination! You remember? That thing you had before Mum bought you that Playstation?)

And if the character is voiced, they almost inevitably end up being a complete jerk that I utterly hate (Dave from Metal Gear Solid being the only exception) or something utterly stilted and cliched.

Take for instance the game Heavy Gear.

That game was hella fun! However I would cringe during those horrible, plasticky FMV plot sequences between missions, AAARGH!
All in all, I think it's best to take the 'lingerie' approach to the RPG elements and make it about what's not revealed rather than what is.

The 'Earthsiege' games did a fairly good job of this. The few cutscenes they did have were well acted, without prescribing the character too much.

Besides, I know that if they did have a hard coded plotline, I bet they wouldn't allow the hero to be an Android named Bob as the hero.

What's the point of an RPG element if you can't imagine the hero charging into battle screaming "FEAR THE WRATH OF BOB!!!"

Ok, maybe that's just me. I'm odd like that.

korgman: thats just the point, i dont want it hardcoded i want it to have the possibility, so that i can do it for single plyer(and if possible multiplayer online, in mud style perhaps?), bah, i dont want a singleplayer game, i want to MAKE games, and i really like the basic idea of MF/ToS, so therefor i want to make games in that style, but i want the game to take place outside of the cockpit aswell, and i am curious about one thing, how good is my char with a knife? driving a bike? how much street knowledge, administration(as in taking care of a estate), haggling, etc. i DONT want to change the game, understand this, i want the possibilities to be there if someone wants to make it(like i do), make it flaggable in the creation system or something, and the save files specific for that "scenario" wich removes compatability issues, i want to create a world with random events, so that every campaign is different, but as it is right now, it would not support the "off battle" scenarios, wich would make it impossible to do anything like that wich i want....well, you get the idea.

and just so you know, i have NEVER considered the final fantasy games to be 'rpg's', since there is no roleplaying in the games whatsoever it CANT be a role playing game.(fallout1&2 on the other hand are atleast abit better, where you have some choice in the matter.) and i have played FF 4-9, so i should know abit about them, and just so you know, #6 is the best in the series.

//discord

Originally posted by discord
princecorrin: well, #1 i cant seem to find any mission objective's except "kill'em all", there where a small bunch of different mission objectives in good old MF, aslong as the only objective is "blow'em all to small mech pieces" there cant be MUCH variation, although a large map, four way warzone, could prolly be rather messy, but still, it's just about destroying eachother.

recover item,
escort item,
destroy item,
destroy installation,
defend installation,
just get your own *** through hostile territory(as in get reinforcements to out besieged units over there),
stop opponents from doing so,

just to mention a few, or maybe that was all, i dont remember, but i dont think so....
wichever, i see no mission objectives yet(will prolly be there in 2.0 though), in a millitary campaign, you would want flexible mechs, so that a single mech could cover more "functions" so to speak, get my idea?

and to answer your question, not played ToS long at all, just comparing ToS with good old MF, and seeing things that i miss from MF, and stuff i would have wanted added.
a return question to you Princeling, how much have you played good old MF?

I beleive the whole premise of the ToS universe is that these titans are used in competitions. Sort of a deadly NASCAR. As such, you should expect to see heavy regulation. I was simply pointing out that there are really a lot of things you can do within those restrictions. I too felt a little contained when I first started playing ToS, but after a while you will begin to see just how far a little creativity will take you.

corrin: ah, make a tournament out of the whole thing...okey...that could be fun...NOT, atleast for me that would make it about as interesting as watching forementioned nascar racing, see the cars go round and round and round, only 400 laps to go, round and round.....only 300 laps to go now...boring.

the one thing that can lift a game up, is variation, take a look at Half Life, the original game engine is actualy pretty crappy compared to most other FPS games around, why do ppl play it so much? because you can mod it beyond belief, simple as that.

well, read my other posts, and you will understand what i am saying.

//discord

Sorry, what you want is a full open gaming system which lets YOU create whats going on.

Try pen & paper. No computer game can give you that.

ToS was NEVER aimed at being a full grown RPG system. I don't care what my jocks knife skill is.
ToS is about squad level combats with RPG elements. Its main element is fighting, spiced up with some character improvements to continue fighting at a higher level. Followed by fighting.

A bit like Nascar perhaps

larkin: to bad, and just so you know, it would not be quite as difficult as you seem to think...although not easy, it does however require a totaly different way of thinking....ahwell, i'll leave the nascar racing to the people that actualy like it.

have a blast.

//discord

Just curious : tell me one game which does implement the not-so-difficult-to-do-as-I-expected open engine you are talking about.

Your half-life example is more than limited in every way. Mechforce ?

Perhaps you should do it and offer it to Matrixgames. I'm sure it would be a blast to play.

actualy all i really want is something to put between missions, wich can put up text, read/write permanent variables(and handle such), change the next mission, and preferably be able to put up a simple jpg and maybe some sound....the rest is wishful thinking, as it is said, if wishes where wings, pigs would fly.

and no, there exists no totaly open comp game, such a thing could not exist, due to the linear/logical nature of computers, but game creation systems do exist, most are crap, but some decent ones do exist....somewhere, i am sure....

//discord

http://rifel.net/rm2k/ <---- not a really good one, but you CAN work with it, and it's relatively easy to use, programming wise, who the heck knows.

//discord

personnaly i think that its the newer people getting into games that will buy a few rpgs at first then find the strategy/fps games and go with those more or less but rpgs for the pc are still around (albiet a bit crappy but hey what can you expect?) just in smaller numbers because from what ive seen in other games they ALL have bad areas if they have an rpg element because you CANNOT make something that will please each and every individual person in the world without the price of the something sky rocketing (like the ps2 for example they promise modems and stuff and what happens to the price? whammo! through the roof) personnaly i don't care i generally turn a blind eye to a games fualts unless there really serious things (like a knife doing more damge than a tank would be something well you get the idea.....) and if you do decide to jump on the little fualts and show them off like it was the end of the world then your going to either drive the price up on the something if the developers listen or give them major head aches (or both) for a major thing or annoy the **** out of them for minor things here and there

like vernie for example (ariel thrust system) these things are only so strong even in the gundam series which has a pretty much monoply on the things there still used only for quick stopping and slight turning but unless in space they don't really turn the 2 ton things in a split second and here we are with about 40 tons which has the aero/hydro-dynamics of something like the titanic carrying big weapons that probably all have an at least minor kick back which would create havoc for flying things so i say this now if ya don't like it suggest it like you did at first and drop the "i want this and this" or ask for the games coding and change it yourself to see just how hard some of the programming for these things really are

i know myself as i tried programming an rpg awhile back and it well lets just say that hard drive is now floating around in a trash heap somewhere (never thought id see my computer case smoking)

now im probably sounding like a snob here about now so lemme say that all this is IMHO

WFF: just so you know, the only decent "rpg" i have found for the pc....or on any platform for that matter is the fallout series(even if there are only two games), and the seriously crappy spinoff fallout tactics, what i am looking for in this is not a rpg, although i would like that, but i understand the problems involved, and i'll not even bother with it, so what i'll settle for is millitary campaigns, with alternable routes(and hopefully the possibility of failure without creating a game over), kinda like the wing commander games, atleast #1 was that style....dont remember about the later games....

as i said before, if wishes where wings, pigs would fly.

no matter how much i would want a fully fledged open ended system, it will not appear, so...i'll have to do with what CAN be, wich is a strategy game, with a non-linear story line, is that to much to ask for,

all i am really asking for is a prompt "choose next mission" and a list to choose from...should not be entirely impossible....(and a campaing editor, or something, so i can actualy can do these missions/campaigns.)

//discord