I have played quite a bit of the mech simulator games, Mechwarrior 3 and 4, and for one, in that mechs have radars that show all units within 1000 meters to any direction (that is about 3000 feet to those meter system impaired) and I would say that the time the enemy mech needs to run that 1000 meters is well enough for you to notice it and do evasive actions. Also when I played those games my mech was practically never still in combat, even if nobody was attacking me right that moment, but moving all the time even if it was just moving in circle around the enemy while keeping it in my crosshair all the time. Also when in close encounter with another mech, you don't stand still either but both mechs move all the time even if at relatively small area, circling each other etc, although in that you can just (literally) step on vehicles and infantry so the whole basing thing from infantry or vehicles is a bit silly.

OK, and I agree: if a 'Mech charges you from 1 km out, there shouldn't be a problem - but how often is the 'Mech that charges from 24+ inches away in your rear arc?

And as for keeping the enemy in your crosshairs, doesn't that also distract you from other enemies? You're not exactly all-seeing in those games either. I've played each one for MANY hours, and it IS possible for enemies to "sneak up" on you while you're beating their buddy into the ground.

Regarding being based, what can I say? It's how the game works. The fact remains that it is possible for enemy units to box you in.


@ Nickbishop,

Sorry, bringing up counter-logic like "my 'Mech runs faster than a missile" doesn't apply. Just because some things aren't logical doesn't mean none of them should be.

As you've pointed out, it would be entirely possible to base the 'Mech in your rear arc before he charges, you could pog him to death, etc. So I don't see how having the rear arc negate Agility (IF and only IF you started the turn there) is so broken.

I'm not even really pushing to change Agility - I think it's okay as is. I'm just trying to admit that it would be a feasible change. I like discussing this sort of thing, but it's just not that high on my list of priorities.

Well in the simulators, it depends about how aggressively you play I suppose. :) I always first go through each enemy unit showing on radar to determine their relative danger levels (in campaign games that is) and then assign all of my lance mates to take out the most dangerous one (usually the one that can do the most damage the quickest) while myself engaging the next most dangerous one, usually always first destroying all tanks though as they go down in about one shot from most of the configs I use myself. :) (my favorite in mw 4 for example to use myself is a Novacat with 2 er ppcs and 3 flamers.) But yes if you tend to get carried away it is possible for enemy to sneak up on you, and I see that happen way too often to the computer controlled lance mates. :/ In multi player either free for all or team games it is bit different and I usually first see who the others in the game are engaging and only then choosing my target, and always keeping careful note for the kill messages so will know when someone will be looking for new targets. :) In MW3 multiplayer my favorites included a Champion with 5 er medium lasers and a Madcat with 3 er ppcs in energy only games and Madcat with UAC 20, 2 lrm 20 racks and 4 er med lasers in games with all weapons allowed.

A bit off-topic, but have you tried using the MWDA loadouts of Unique and LE 'Mechs in MW3, 4, or 4: Mercenaries?

The Thor loadout from Antonia Chinn is good. The Black Knight loadout from Andre Crawford is a killer - except maybe the one flamer.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make before is that even if a 'Mech were to Charge you from 24+ inches in MWDA, the chances of him being in your rear arc before he charges you are next to nil. Therefore the problem is not really a problem.

Haven't played the MW computer games in long time now so now haven't tried.

Considering, the charge has to start in the rear arc to even get an attack bonus, why is there a beef? If you let yourself be charged from the rear, you deserve to be hit. You trade 4 damage for 2 to yourself, your defense is now a 16, which most decent mechs can still hit on their 5th click, they trade for 2 more energy to you. Do you attack and force the shutdown, and be caputre fodder? Really you just traded 4 for 4, and if the mech is heavier, it's in a much better possition, especially with heat.

Agility is far from over powered.

Not sure what you're saying, exactly, catscan. Care to elaborate?

We've established that few people really consider Agility overpowered. We were just discussing a suggestion that Agility not function when the attacks it normally protects against are made from the rear arc.

ill heard from kelly

that agility and Anti personel supose to be that "powerfull"

i forgot in which tread that she answer on that

so i'm not sure it will be change

Really the only SE that I think is too powerful currently is Armor Piercing, and that only because it counters decoy, which is just plain dumb, also more minor point is that electronic camo should negate improved targeting, but apart from those, I think all SE works as it should.

Dude, I absolutely agree with u. When I started this thread, I never mentioned that agility was broken and my argument was mainly based from the logic point of view. VTOLS are obvious counters for charge and agility.

But the difference between us is that i find that logic does and SHOULD matter in this game. The Rear arc mechanism should be put to more use than current. Btw, I find it rubbish that AP missles can ignore Decoy. I jus dont like things that r illogical.

Sorry if I came off a bit angry, I had just gotten off work.

But as for agility being negated with a rear arc charge/dfa, I have a hard time beleiving that a pilot, especially with a close combat prowess( and would be looking out for charges/dfas) wouldnt be able to notice a mech coming from behind with all those high tech scanners and the like. Mabye electric cammo could affect this, but that sounds way to complicated to work out.

Regardless of whether Agility should be changed or not, there is a matter of logic to consider.

Even if this competent 'Mech-jock sees the 'Mech coming in his sensors, doesn't mean he can get out of the way! You're skirting the issue, Nickbishop. The point isn't that he doesn't see it coming - although if he's heavily engaged, he might be distracted from it - it's that he can't GET OUT OF THE WAY.

Consider the following:

1) The only way a 'Mech can have begun his turn in your rear arc without you doing anything about it is that your 'Mech is in base contact with enemy units;

2) If your 'Mech is based, it is considered hemmed in by these enemy units to the point that it requires a roll to break away;

3) 'Mechs are lumbering war machines that cannot sidestep - even the light ones!

4) In order to properly react, your 'Mech would have to turn on a dime while basically immobile or boxed in;

5) The enemy units would be doing everything in their power to keep you from avoiding the Charge;

6) The front arc-rear arc thing is meant to represent what enemies you're focusing on - if you're not paying attention to a 'Mech, it should be able to take advantage of that.

These are only SOME reasons why the special attacks should ignore Agility if the unit started the turn in your rear arc. This is NOT Gundam Wing, Macross, or any such thing. 'Mechs don't just 'Mech-Fu all over the place, except in the crappy fiction, which has no place in the MW universe.

And this is where the mechs pilot excells. While not sidestepping, he can torso twist or whatnot to skirt most of the attack.

Well first of all, it's NOT where he excels. A pilot with multiple targets is one who presumably excels at taking on multiple enemies at once. A pilot whose front arc is very wide excels at maintaining a wide field of vision on the battlefield. A pilot with a Melee damage slot excels at hitting opponents with his 'Mech.

Agility only means that the pilot is able to reduce the damage dealt to him by close-combat attacks. It means he's better able to move his 'Mech with impact to lessen it.

Torso twist would do strictly nothing. The target 'Mech has to literally get out of the way to avoid the kind of damage CC or Charge or DFA deal - because even were the pilot to simply block those attacks, they would damage the 'Mech's arms.

There's a world of difference between being able to partially dodge an incoming attack and being able to do so from behind while engaged with other enemies. A human being, who's much more mobile than a 'Mech, would have tremendous difficulty in doing so - if it were even possible.

And in any case, picture this scene, which again is the only likely one:

1) Your 'Mech gets based - let's say during your opponent's turn, as a worst-case scenario.

2) Your opponent's 'Mech moves into your rear arc, setting up a Charge.

3) Your turn - you try to break away, but fail (again a worst-case scenario) - you spin to put the opposing 'Mech outside your rear arc. Rear Charge averted.

OR

3_a) Your turn - you don't try to break away, attacking your opponent instead and missing or hitting (it makes no difference). You have purposefully decided to ignore a threat in your rear arc. Too bad! You suffer the consequences.

The choices you make strategically have to reflect the ones supposedly made by the pilots. If you expose yourself, that's either out of distraction or recklessness. In combat, these carry consequences.

Since you start by saying "Regardless of whether agility should be changed . . ." I think we may be mostly in agreement, but it is important to seperate the two questions:

1) Is agility overpowered in game play?

2) Does agility make sense when you try to visualise what's going on?

I think the answer to the first question is that it used to be almost a requirement when people were charging all over the place. I think the change to make charge do more damage to the attacker is a good one, and it also lessens the necessity of having agility on everything. I'll have to play with it more before I make a final decision, but it doesn't seem like agility is overpowered.

The answer to the second question is a matter of opinion. I happen to agree some silly, silly things happened in the Del Rio books that you should not be able to do with a mech. I do find it plausible that a pilot would be aware of threats in every direction. I find it plausible that a pilot might be able to move his mech to minimize damage. The mech's not dancing around like a ballerina, but it can shift to take a glancing hit, or a hit against some heavily armored area, rather than getting bowled over or hit in some vulnerable area by the charge.

As much as it may bother some people that charge seems like an unrealistic idea, we should ultimately judge agility by the first question and not the second. If it makes for an unbalanced game it ought to change, but if it helps balance the power of mechs against other pieces then its ok even if it seems a little rediculous when you imagine what's going on.

Geoff