Armored Core 5 Discussion

[Pendragon]

I agree with both of you. I enjoyed stabilizers because they added another level to the game's design, but if FROM were to remove them, I wouldn't bat an eye at it.

[Genocide]

Crimson, Red and I will probably be an AC platoon, like always. Ready to fuck shit up.

[Rachis]

More like squad. Platoons are huge.

[exogen]

I was watching some vids of the gameplay.

 

I like the fact that lock windows are back in the form of lock circles. But I'm not so sure about the turning, boost mechanics and weapon behavior. What I DON'T want to see in this game is a brute QB or otherwise boost spamming methods in addition to cover. I like the fact that it seems that cover plays an integral part in this but if CQC has been rendered obsolete and all the twisting, turning, flanking and overall matrix style combat that I loved so much about what they did with AC4 (and what they completely botched in FA) is gone, than in my opinion the game will be very shallow.

 

I want to be able to be in people's grills and if I am good enough and have the right type of setup (also assuming that LW's are competitive) I should be able to rush them down and flank the crap out of them till they die.

 

If I can't do that, then I wont be playing this game long.

 

Anyone have any thoughts on the nature of CQC in ACV as it pertains to what I want to do?

Edited November 11, 2011 by exogen

[Densuo]

Stabilizers? Fine. But I want one extra option:

 

When you have stabilizers, they are set with full armament in mind. But if I dump my now expended 10 shot lazer rifle and switch to a handgun my balance is thrown off.

 

Solution?

 

Detaching a weapon and moving to having a spare weapon, or something else dumped, stabilizers are purged to a different formation.

 

My main thing is, if stabilization is to be included, then there needs to be clear cut benefits to them for taking the time to set that shit up properly.

[Aokiryu89]

I was watching some vids of the gameplay.

 

I like the fact that lock windows are back in the form of lock circles. But I'm not so sure about the turning, boost mechanics and weapon behavior. What I DON'T want to see in this game is a brute QB or otherwise boost spamming methods in addition to cover. I like the fact that it seems that cover plays an integral part in this but if CQC has been rendered obsolete and all the twisting, turning, flanking and overall matrix style combat that I loved so much about what they did with AC4 (and what they completely botched in FA) is gone, than in my opinion the game will be very shallow.

 

I want to be able to be in people's grills and if I am good enough and have the right type of setup (also assuming that LW's are competitive) I should be able to rush them down and flank the crap out of them till they die.

 

If I can't do that, then I wont be playing this game long.

 

Anyone have any thoughts on the nature of CQC in ACV as it pertains to what I want to do?

 

I have only played the demo for AC4 so I can't really say how the boosting system differs from ACFA, but given the descriptions it seems that ACV will play similar to being described as the missing link between AC4 and LR. This is strictly speaking toward boosting capabilities and performance.

 

Also from what I've observed of ACV's gameplay I believe CQC will definitly be strong with this iteration especially because of the cover and the fact there is no permanent RADAR system which should allow for players to hopefully adopt play styles similar to Mechwarrior in that you can either choose to make your frame a stealthy low power RADAR CQC fighter. Or a long distance high power RADAR support platform.

 

This is purely speculation though, but considering all the features I have seen and read up on I doubt CQC will suffer in this title. Though Niji and Noob's accounts of he usefulness of shotguns in MP is troubling. The game wont be coming out for a few more months though, and this is the first time I've tracked a FS game during is development so I can't really say for sure if things will be fine in the end.

 

My hopes are that playstyles are more solidified and obvious to new players so that the game seems more approachable yet does not suffer in its' difficulty level.

 

Give them training wheels but don't make the training wheels perform like a high performance vehicle. Make them work for that.

Edited November 11, 2011 by Ogawa L.A

[exogen]

Yeah it will be nice if it really is a missing link between AC4 and LR. AC4 was literally on the edge and FA went over it but I never liked AC much after SL but having an in between system will probably be hot.

 

I am feeling the trade-offs. My hopes are high for this game.

[Rogan]

I want to be able to be in people's grills and if I am good enough and have the right type of setup (also assuming that LW's are competitive) I should be able to rush them down and flank the crap out of them till they die.

 

This

 

Although I don't think it will be enough to stop me from playing the game, I'll just be extremely disappointed.

[Rachis]

Even if it was a qb spam type of game I'm not sure it would matter. You don't go nearly the distance in ACV that you did in FA and it obviously consumes far more energy. Not to mention the lack of permaflight and significant decrease in speed.

[Densuo]

if CQC is difficult to get in and stay in, that means CQC will ikely be ultra lethal.

 

 

Pilebunkers and generator jam rockets please!

[Genocide]

Heh, if the squads are three platoons should be like 9 mechs total. I'd be interested in competing in the regional war system, if ACU has a team or w/e I'll be down to play for ya'll. Also, yeah clowns trying close combat and failing at it should be dead, to say the least. If its like it seems from vids and accounts so far, shotties might be not as good, hopefully blades like the over weapons aren't the preferred method of CQC. It'll be like cinematics instead of fights with beaches getting chopped in half!

[latsttime]

http://www.youtube.com/user/MindFlowgraph you guys should check out this guys vids probly best acv vid yet just saying

[exogen]

Looks good. I think I am getting more optimistic about this game

[Aokiryu89]

I salute you good man!

[Pendragon]

Damn, the game looks even better than the trailers made it out to be. I'm impressed.

[Aokiryu89]

I feel like I was just punched in the balls....and liked it! O___o

 

Take my money FROM, TAKE IT ALLL!!!!!!!

 

If they don't sell a special edition package for this in the NA region...I'll buy the freak'n game twice!

 

This is EXACTLY what I was hoping the game would look like in MP and having the complete demo mission with AC vs AC combat just looked SOOO awesome!!!!

Edited November 13, 2011 by Ogawa L.A

[Moon Walker]

Been watching those videos for two days now ( repeating and limited time thanks to university life ) and my first thought was "THOSE MTs NEED TO DO MORE SERIOUS DAMAGE"

 

Well fine, they are more durable than MTs in AC4~AC4A titles but still not as ones back in AC3 era ( heck even AC1 era gave me hard time killing MTs and put me in trouble when ACs jump in ) However, those defense turrets and emplacements are REALLY dishing out major damage once the target gets in range ( as far as the videos show ). Smart turret placement will most likely play a vital role in territory defense.

 

The video where it showed two tank ACs vs a Mid/Light AC single handedly defending the base caught my attention the most for few reasons:

-No Radar system on ACs whatsoever ( except the scan mode which basically is like a heat sensor but no where as effective as a 360 radar ) and numerous cover mean for once ACs can play hide and seek. Defensive pilots would have slight advantage over Offensive since they can basically track where their turrets are firing at. Offensive pilots would be too busy dodging incoming fire to scan around finding one lousy AC sneaking behind them, relying heavily on operator's scanning and directions.

 

The bright side?

1-Don't need all the team members to defend an area, unless the other side comes fully prepared.

2-Defense ( replacement of escort ) Duty might actually sound fun for once.

3-Operator on defense might not be required unless pincer/sneak attacks are a threat.

 

On another video where there are no defense ACs, the idea of having to destroy all turrets to occupy a territory brought up a very cheap defensive tactic which I'd guess some of you might've already figured out.

-You don't need to risk sending ACs to intercept attackers if they take too long to take out defense targets. In other words, camping is going to be a major issue. Operators are going to have their hands full trying to find them while directing friendlies.

 

Wow, I might not be even interested that much in knowing what's going on in story mode if every conquest and defense skirmish is going to have me playing chess everytime. I just hope there's enough weapon variety to mess around with.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Moon Walker

[Pendragon]

I just hope there's enough weapon variety to mess around with.

 

You're looking at a FROM game that's taking alot of risks, and you doubt the one thing Armored Core does best?

 

I'm pretty sure weapon variety will be no problem.

[Moon Walker]

You're looking at a FROM game that's taking alot of risks, and you doubt the one thing Armored Core does best?

 

I'm pretty sure weapon variety will be no problem.

 

In a sense I am asking for things like FLAMETHROWERS!!!!! or those energy shotguns and all sorts of crazy weapons that every Number ( era ) brings.

 

Heck I'd go nuts for napalm guns! OR OR OR those AS missiles again... just... make them shoot LOTS of missiles at once.

 

And I'm still demanding they bring back that twin rapid sonic beam thing ( back part from Master of Arena ) or atleast like single part version it as a pulse gun.... ENERGY MACHINE GUNS!!!!!.

 

SEE WHAT I MEAN!? VARIETY!!

 

Of course I would settle if weapons of same category have significant differences... like really significant like the difference between Marve and that BFF rifle.

[Aokiryu89]

How about the option to use different kinds of projectiles in the same gun? Who wants explosive Napalm shot in their shotgun shells! Or maybe a good old fashioned heavy slug. Armor piercing arounds, chemical armor eating shells. Heck give me a gun that shoot miniaturized fuel air bombs!

[Pendragon]

So, you want customization in your customization when you customize your weapons?

 

That's like, inception there. I like it.

[Aokiryu89]

I almost forgot about the whole weapon upgrade and armor upgrade system they seem to have in the game, there doesn't seem to be too much detail on it, I wonder is it still in the game?

 

Sometimes you just wanna strap a seemingly clumsy heavy plate on to the left shoulder of your mech for no logical reason whatsoever.

[Peffse]

Well, those videos have solidified my belief that it will not be worth preordering.

Call me crazy, but that looks like all the gameplay AC4 did wrong, except amplified. Inability to dodge slow missiles without quickboost, slow movement unless overboosting, and ineffective UI. And what's with the hovering? Reminds me of Front Mission Evolved.

Maybe it's just the loadout chosen by the player... but I said that about AC4 and every loadout was just as bad.

 

 

EDIT: Might as well express my hatred of the scan mode announcement every time the mode changes.

Edited November 22, 2011 by Peffse

[Aokiryu89]

Well, those videos have solidified my belief that it will not be worth preordering.

Call me crazy, but that looks like all the gameplay AC4 did wrong, except amplified. Inability to dodge slow missiles without quickboost, slow movement unless overboosting, and ineffective UI. And what's with the hovering? Reminds me of Front Mission Evolved.

Maybe it's just the loadout chosen by the player... but I said that about AC4 and every loadout was just as bad.

 

 

EDIT: Might as well express my hatred of the scan mode announcement every time the mode changes.

 

Not worth preordering for you.

As an original AC player, I am quite pleased with the path this game is taking.

The QB doesn't look like the QB of AC4-FA, it reminds me more of the original standard boost of the PSX era.

The invisible cieling is an example of sacrificing looks for gameplay. It might not look pretty, and it's gonna piss of aerial players (heck I like spending some time in the air too.) But the way I see it, this will help balance out fights between aerial frames and low ground heavies. One cannot simply start flying around willy nilly now you have to think about gaining altitude by staying close to a wall which does add some predictability to your movements. Meaning if you keep jumping on a wall and screw up then you better start doing something else.

 

Care to explain what makes the UI ineffective? As far as I can tell it's kinda hard to see considering my laptop isn't exactly a large television screen. But it looks far from ineffective, I can tell what's going on, I can even read the numbers that only the person playing would be able to see. Or do you just don't like having permanent radar anymore?

 

I did think a lot about Front Mission in general when looking at this game. Not because of Front Mission Evolved but more like the game has become a living chessboard where tactics and strategies can be clearly scene just be looking at the map.

 

Last time I checked, piloting a highclass machine always comes with a digital voice informing you of mundane operations. Except this one is fairly important considering you cannot use weapons in scan mode. But something tells me people will still complain about losing with scan mode up even though they had the blue screen staring at them and even the voice telling them everytime they use it.

[Exorcet]

Care to explain what makes the UI ineffective? As far as I can tell it's kinda hard to see considering my laptop isn't exactly a large television screen. But it looks far from ineffective, I can tell what's going on, I can even read the numbers that only the person playing would be able to see. Or do you just don't like having permanent radar anymore?

I second terrible UI. Text is small and in the way. AC4 UI was probably the best the series has ever seen from a practicality standpoint. AC2 cluttered with useless junk was probably the best looking. AC5 is neither practical or attractive. I can't tell what's going on EN or AP wise watching on my laptop. Now of course, that's on my laptop, not the TV, but it still suggests that things won't be as clear as AC4.

 

Last time I checked, piloting a highclass machine always comes with a digital voice informing you of mundane operations. Except this one is fairly important considering you cannot use weapons in scan mode. But something tells me people will still complain about losing with scan mode up even though they had the blue screen staring at them and even the voice telling them everytime they use it.

A plane won't say "radar on" every time you turn radar on. And a car won't tell you "switched to 6th gear" every time you do so. The scan mode announcement is pointless, though I haven't found it annoying, yet. It really depends on how often it's needed. If scan mode only needs to be use 2-3 times a game, then I guess the voice can be bearable. If I'm switching to it every time I get behind cover, it will be a pain.

 

Come to think of it I'll probably be in scan mode a lot seeing as it's the only way to have AP and EN in a good position on the HUD.

Edited November 23, 2011 by Exorcet