Why I don't like mech omniframe concept

[Vedemin]

Hello everyone!
Everyone seems to love mechs on this forum. Well, I hate mechs, but that's not the thing.

In Firefall we had exoskeletons that gave us a feeling of being a normal soldiers in a heat of battle. We had a gun that felt kinda like a gun. We were humans with somewhat limited possibilities and we weren't invincible. And I liked it. Why a lot of us are playing on HC mode in Firefall and other games like Battlefield? Because we wanted to feel the heat of battle and wanted to make things harder.

With omniframes though, we will feel kinda invincible. Also, my biggest concern, gunplay. We will feel like playing D.VA in Overwatch, clicking fires and we feel no recoil nor emotion. We cannot ADS with a rifle, we don't feel the recoil of a pistol because we just have a damn mech that is super-duper powerful and can negate all recoil for us. We have two giant weapons as attached to arms and we just point at the enemy and click. No recoil compensation needed, your mech will do everything for you. Your abilities will also be limited because a lot of them just doesn't fit mech's theme. There was a thread about omniframe abilities and guess what? Most of them is about how to destroy the mech or leave it for it to return after There won't be any feel to those abilities.

Another thing, look at concept art of omniframe. It is extremely bulky and curvy. It is also walking on high heels for some reason. It won' fit in any door and looks strange.


So what I propose? Remove that mech whatsoever. We have our "battleframes" from Firefall and it is cool. But mechs eliminate a lot of cool gameplay features. Is it worth introducing a mech on cost of gameplay? In my opinion it's not.

 

[MattHunX]

We're brainstorming on the dedicated threads about recoil and weapon-systems and while my initial reaction was essentially the same as your OP, when I first saw the concept-art for the Omni-Frame, we're simply figuring...why couldn't we have recoil? Still. Even with the frame, whether it is holding the larger-weapons, scaled to it, in its hands, or if the weapons are mounted. Scaled-up battle-frames, shooting scaled-up weaponry can and will have recoil, because why wouldn't they. It wouldn't be any different than puny humans (even in powered exoskeletons) shooting weapons. Some of the recoil can be eliminated through mods, of course.

I hate the bulky look, too. But, if we can slim it down, with the appropriate mods, by making a certain build, I, personally, can grow used to it.

And just because it is a mech-type frame, given the build, its layer of protection, it doesn't mean it cannot be a paper-tiger and be perforated, chewed up and spit out. The info on the Tsihu already warns that their morphed forms can shred frames, so we definitely won't be invincible.

 

[NightStroke]

Can I just say I really hope this game doesn't have recoil?

 

[TankHunter678]

Can I just say I really hope this game doesn't have recoil?

If it did not have recoil that would mean very harsh range limits. No recoil also reduces the amount of skill in the game, not to mention removes a balancing metric.

We just do not need excessive recoil.

 

[Thunderstrike]

Hello everyone!
Everyone seems to love mechs on this forum. Well, I hate mechs, but that's not the thing.

In Firefall we had exoskeletons that gave us a feeling of being a normal soldiers in a heat of battle. We had a gun that felt kinda like a gun. We were humans with somewhat limited possibilities and we weren't invincible. And I liked it. Why a lot of us are playing on HC mode in Firefall and other games like Battlefield? Because we wanted to feel the heat of battle and wanted to make things harder.

With omniframes though, we will feel kinda invincible. Also, my biggest concern, gunplay. We will feel like playing D.VA in Overwatch, clicking fires and we feel no recoil nor emotion. We cannot ADS with a rifle, we don't feel the recoil of a pistol because we just have a damn mech that is super-duper powerful and can negate all recoil for us. We have two giant weapons as attached to arms and we just point at the enemy and click. No recoil compensation needed, your mech will do everything for you. Your abilities will also be limited because a lot of them just doesn't fit mech's theme. There was a thread about omniframe abilities and guess what? Most of them is about how to destroy the mech or leave it for it to return after There won't be any feel to those abilities.

Another thing, look at concept art of omniframe. It is extremely bulky and curvy. It is also walking on high heels for some reason. It won' fit in any door and looks strange.


So what I propose? Remove that mech whatsoever. We have our "battleframes" from Firefall and it is cool. But mechs eliminate a lot of cool gameplay features. Is it worth introducing a mech on cost of gameplay? In my opinion it's not.

No. I think a lot of people are forgetting this: Firefall and Ember were/are (respectively) based on the idea of an all-out planetary war. HOWEVER, Firefall and Ember must not be the same game, Ember needs to be its own thing. We have Firefall for Firefall, and now it's time that we try again and try something new. I'm going to miss Battleframes too, but Ember can't rely solely on Firefall's legacy for ideas.

The Omniframe is mostly hollow. The lower legs are thin and the upper legs thick and hollow to fit human legs. The spine is, well, spindly and the shoulders only bulk up towards the top. Remove the wings (which are very thin) and it becomes quite reasonable (perhaps the wings can close up for storage purposes until needed?). It's really just a souped-up, larger Battleframe.

Grummz has said item customization will be a thing with them, this may end up being one of the bulkier variants of the Omniframe design. It's all concepts and theories at the moment, the Omniframe will evolve with time. I, for one, am really hoping that the Omniframe is going to be a "Jack of Trades" vehicle for all purposes alongside more dedicated such as tanks and air vehicles.

You raise a good point on guns still feeling like guns, although if it weren't for the Tsihu it wouldn't be a very good one. There could be a trade-off there, a lightweight gun like an SMG for gunning down humanoid Tsihu and a large, heavy weapon for the Kaiju Tsihu that would be too powerful to waste on the humanoid ones (alternatively, psionic shields?)

 

[TankHunter678]

You would have to remove the head, slim a lot of the bulk, change the limbs to be connected directly to the pilots arms, and put in armor for the player's torso for it to be a souped up larger battleframe.

The head is the most stupid thing with the design, mechs with heads have them because it allows them to enclose the pilot within the armor as next to the reactor core the pilot is the most important part of a mech. So the sensor equipment needed to allow the pilot to see around them is mounted in the head unit.

However with the Omniframe design the head has no purpose at all. The pilot is exposed and can see things without the need for the head unit. Any sensor/scanning equipment would be mounted in the shoulders next to the pilot.

That is going in the direction of turn it into a battleframe, otherwise right now the design leans towards mecha. Which would mean that the spine needs reinforcing and the pilot needs to be in an enclosed self contained atmosphere, especially for the type of planet we are going to be working in, and the head unit would be used to provide the pilot the ability to see their surroundings.

 

[MattHunX]

You would have to remove the head, slim a lot of the bulk, change the limbs to be connected directly to the pilots arms, and put in armor for the player's torso for it to be a souped up larger battleframe.

The head is the most stupid thing with the design, mechs with heads have them because it allows them to enclose the pilot within the armor as next to the reactor core the pilot is the most important part of a mech. So the sensor equipment needed to allow the pilot to see around them is mounted in the head unit.

However with the Omniframe design the head has no purpose at all. The pilot is exposed and can see things without the need for the head unit. Any sensor/scanning equipment would be mounted in the shoulders next to the pilot.

That is going in the direction of turn it into a battleframe, otherwise right now the design leans towards mecha. Which would mean that the spine needs reinforcing and the pilot needs to be in an enclosed self contained atmosphere, especially for the type of planet we are going to be working in, and the head unit would be used to provide the pilot the ability to see their surroundings.

I did suggest the idea of the head-part having all the sensory equipment and that it could be modded, as well, to allow for better detection, weapon range, targeting...etc. And that it could be changed in appearance, going so far as to allow someone to turn into something resembling a proper lion-head or eagle. The head would feed the data to the pilot, projecting it right in the pilot's face, which would be the HUD, in first-person and in third-person view, as well, not depending on whether the frame would have an open cockpit or a closed one. The way the display would work through an enclosed and dark cockpit, the pilot being surrounded by holographic displays and augmented reality, can easily be explained through the science-fiction of it.

 

[Rocket]

With omniframes though, we will feel kinda invincible.

I'm sure I can remember a statement (I'm not viewing anything as a promise) from @Grummz that once outside of the Omniframe, your character will be a dead already. You just don't know it yet. And those aliens look like they've got a trick or two up their sleeves. So I wouldn't go assuming you'll anything remotely close to invincible, even with your Omniframe. Personally, I'm hoping for challenged but balanced, rather than invincible.

This is one of those aspects that I'm not expecting to be happy with myself, until we have the playable mock-up that gives us pointers to the likely flow of gameplay. Once that comes, I'm expecting to get over my own objections to the Omniframe pretty quickly. There's little to be gained with knocking the idea of the it, even if your someone like me who has some reservations.

 

[Thunderstrike]

You would have to remove the head, slim a lot of the bulk, change the limbs to be connected directly to the pilots arms, and put in armor for the player's torso for it to be a souped up larger battleframe.

The head is the most stupid thing with the design, mechs with heads have them because it allows them to enclose the pilot within the armor as next to the reactor core the pilot is the most important part of a mech. So the sensor equipment needed to allow the pilot to see around them is mounted in the head unit.

However with the Omniframe design the head has no purpose at all. The pilot is exposed and can see things without the need for the head unit. Any sensor/scanning equipment would be mounted in the shoulders next to the pilot.

That is going in the direction of turn it into a battleframe, otherwise right now the design leans towards mecha. Which would mean that the spine needs reinforcing and the pilot needs to be in an enclosed self contained atmosphere, especially for the type of planet we are going to be working in, and the head unit would be used to provide the pilot the ability to see their surroundings.

It's an art style. There's numerous "stupid" things about virtually every sci-fi series, HALO, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc... rule of cool is still very much a thing. The Omniframe has a head for the same reason a mech would, whatever the pilot is looking at the head can too instead of being limited to whatever's right in front of it. It gives the Omniframe some personality, and could offer extra customization in the future.

 

[Pandagnome]

In Firefall we had exoskeletons that gave us a feeling of being a normal soldiers in a heat of battle. We had a gun that felt kinda like a gun. We were humans with somewhat limited possibilities and we weren't invincible. And I liked it. Why a lot of us are playing on HC mode in Firefall and other games like Battlefield? Because we wanted to feel the heat of battle and wanted to make things harder.

This is not firefall sadly, and i doubt we will be invincible there is always weakness even on mechs
the risk of shields running out of energy, the less protected joint region vulnerability, guns jamming up if fired constantly, Risk of damage from not repairing certain parts prior to getting in, wrong set up for mech pilot to effectively take on the task etc etc
Mechs are just a bigger version of the exoskeleton and i dont think its pushed on us but its an option of play some of us love.

So what I propose? Remove that mech whatsoever. We have our "battleframes" from Firefall and it is cool. But mechs eliminate a lot of cool gameplay features. Is it worth introducing a mech on cost of gameplay? In my opinion it's not.

Battleframes are cool i agree however i dont think it will eliminate the cool gameplay but add to it! I am saying this because the option to be in a mech or not, or to be in a vehicle or not provides with better ways to deal with the required situation at hand as oppossed to just no mech. Think of the mech as a tool in your tool box its there and it could be handy!

Another thing, look at concept art of omniframe. It is extremely bulky and curvy. It is also walking on high heels for some reason. It won' fit in any door and looks strange.

Mechs are not waffles but if they were it would be eaten really fast :O ! The heel/curvy part well probably for strutting and posing ... seriously though maybe can get custom feet for better traction or better agility etc. They might be lighter depending on how much stuff you carry with you or not carry? Oh and also curvy is good i dont mind boxed shaped mech but then it would be mine craft mech

 

[Earth_Soldier]

I will only say by now the Omniframe has a strong resemblance with this:

 

[Pandagnome]

I will only say by now the Omniframe has a strong resemblance with this:

what big hands it has!

 

[Aphaz]

man, i rly dislike ppl who keep on pushing their views of things just for the sake of themselves...ur annoying as hell and don't contribute cupcake to anything but ur own ego...that said, here's why the head on the mek is usefull (imo)

it simply gives us an extra slot for abilities, such as for example:
-Night Vision (on/off ability): similar to turret mode in ff, u switch it on and it gives you NV until switched off, at which point it goes on cooldown.
-Head Vulcan (short duration ability): fires a "gundam-like" burst of bullets (alternate version could fire laser shots) and fire may be directed at a specific target "using FF-style sin lock" (f key) while the main weapon is used to shoot at something different.
-Tracking System (support ability): allows those "shoulder mounted missile launchers" ability to track specific moving targets, or something.

but what i dislike the most about you "head haters" ( ) is that instead of helping you just want what U think is best and keep on being annoying just for your own selfish selves.
honestly, i don't care if ur offended by what i said just now...but ur cupcakery is (to me personally) annoying as cupcake...

 

[Vedemin]

man, i rly dislike ppl who keep on pushing their views of things just for the sake of themselves...ur annoying as hell and don't contribute cupcake to anything but ur own ego...that said, here's why the head on the mek is usefull (imo)

it simply gives us an extra slot for abilities, such as for example:
-Night Vision (on/off ability): similar to turret mode in ff, u switch it on and it gives you NV until switched off, at which point it goes on cooldown.
-Head Vulcan (short duration ability): fires a "gundam-like" burst of bullets (alternate version could fire laser shots) and fire may be directed at a specific target "using FF-style sin lock" (f key) while the main weapon is used to shoot at something different.
-Tracking System (support ability): allows those "shoulder mounted missile launchers" ability to track specific moving targets, or something.

but what i dislike the most about you "head haters" ( ) is that instead of helping you just want what U think is best and keep on being annoying just for your own selfish selves.
honestly, i don't care if ur offended by what i said just now...but ur cupcakery is (to me personally) annoying as cupcake...

We are not selfish, the game is being created with large support of community, we are posting our ideas and commenting ideas of others to make game we like more. Other people can do the same thing. Anyways, when it comes to your post regarding head, all uses of it would be mostly placed somewhere else in the mech. Why? Because head is an obvious target and it's one part very easy to destroy.

 

[Rocket]

Anyways, when it comes to your post regarding head, all uses of it would be mostly placed somewhere else in the mech. Why? Because head is an obvious target and it's one part very easy to destroy.

You might suggest that the Omniframe head is a place to not place sensors. But let's be real here. It's reasonable. Sensors on planes and coptors sit at prominent points. It's maneuverability that keeps them safe, relatively speaking. And sensor sets on self driving cars tend to be mounted on the roof. Which is to say that the sensors need maximum exposure to as much of the surrounding areas as is possible.

Which means that you will be vulnerable if you are not careful. Because the Omniframe head has already been said to be the main sensor point on the frame. Which in turn answers one of your initial concerns. That you might be invincible. Because I'm guessing that you will not be.

More importantly, the same said sensor set needs maximum exposure to game play balance. Any demand for a distributed sensor set is a demand for the same kind of invincibility that you decried in the first place. And even if you had such a thing, now you have conflict between sensors as to which has priority.

You seem to be demanding it both ways. Your complaining that the Omniframe will be invincible, at the same time as you complain that it should be more invincible, without having singular weakpoints. Bring on the recoil I say. It doesn't matter the size of the platform. Humans have been dealing with it on every single platform out there for as long as we have had projectile weapons.

 

[Maven]

what big hands it has!

All the better to cru..er..hug you with, my dear!

On a serious note, the sooner people realize that we cannot, under any circumstance, have firefall 2.0, the better.

The community is now mostly 3 groups. One that has understood the reasons why we cannot simply take, or create copies of, firefall assets, and have moved on to Ember's art direction, another that's on the fence about the whole thing, and a third that simply refuses to see why we have to avoid any similarities to firefall, and in turn refuses to let go.

That we are getting a game that sticks to the basic design principles of a game that we all loved, in itself should make us feel lucky. Not many fans of dead games get this chance.
So here's my two cents. Let go of firefall. It's dead. Let's not try re-create it line for line.
I'm sorry to be so pointed Vedemin, but every claim you made against the mech design sounds more like an excuse to oppose rather than a valid reason.

Feeling invincible in the mech? You can't claim that unless you have played with the omniframe design. The Tsihu seem purpose built to render you worthless unless you have the skill.

Recoil? The bigger the mech and the bigger the enemy, the bigger the weapon. Recoil will be applicable. You honestly do not expect to go against the Tsihu with a pea-shooter do you?

Abilities? The thread was just a couple of responses old. Let people get creative. The ideas will come. I hope you don't mean to claim that none of the mech based games have cool abilities.

Bulky and curvy? This is the basic design. Wait for the rest of the builds before making blanket statements please. And while we may not get visual upgrades right off the bat, I'm sure they will be implemented down the line.

As for not going through doors...well, they are not mean to fit through the doors of your, or my, or anyone's, home. As it stands Ember is an open world game. No gameplay in closed spaces. I think that should answer that question.

I'm not here to pick a fight. All I ask is that you keep an open mind about this all. Maybe then, it will be a lot easier to accept this design direction.

 

[MollilMayhem]

Well, all I can say is, i just don't like the mech concept or the look. If that's what we end up with, I very well may not bother with the game. We'll see down the road, but at this point, for me....it's just not at all appealing. Meantime, PG is more my style.

 

[TankHunter678]

It's an art style. There's numerous "stupid" things about virtually every sci-fi series, HALO, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc... rule of cool is still very much a thing. The Omniframe has a head for the same reason a mech would, whatever the pilot is looking at the head can too instead of being limited to whatever's right in front of it. It gives the Omniframe some personality, and could offer extra customization in the future.

Besides some vehicle designs I honestly do not find much that is "stupid" when it comes to Halo.

Anyways... the reason mechs would have a head is so that the pilot can be further enclosed in armor and better protected against hostile fire and provide superior arc of vision. Neither of which the omniframe head provides. In fact, its arc of vision is identical to that of the pilot normally. A 360 degree sensor pod behind where the head is would be 10x more useful then that head. Sensor pods mounted in the shoulders would have better view arcs.

That head is pointless. Just like the rest of the suit the moment its energy shields go down and the pilot is breathing toxic fumes and coughing their lungs out because they are burning from the inside out.

 

[Omnires]

I just want point something out to everyone who think recoil is needed.
1) In real life, the newer guns have less recoil than older models and as the technology get better things like recoil is slow becoming a thing of the past.
2) Some models of guns have things like shock absorbers and stabilizers built into them. As technology gets better so does the ability the control and focus the energies of a gun shot.
3) Not all guns have moving parts, this also cuts down things like recoil as the mass if the weapon is not moving around as it is firing.
4) More power does not equal more recoil. A lot of physics and thermodynamics goes into this to be explained without a wall of text. Just know there are ways to make guns more powerful without adding recoil to them or doing things to lower the effect recoil has on your aim.
5) There are real life aim assist systems mostly in the form of laser sights/range finders, cameras attached to the gun, and GPS targeting with smart ammo.
6) This game takes place in the future when things in 1 - 5 would be a lot better than what we have today. Plus the added help of robotics and A.I.
And 7) there are lots of ways to balance a FPS without recoil (because again in real life not all guns have recoil) by focusing on other drawbacks different types of guns have. For example, some guns get really hot as they are being used and it is this heat that can throw off your aim as parts of the warp as well as increasing the odds of something in the gun jamming or breaking.

I plan on being a sniper who uses energy weapons. And these videos help highlight 2 things that bug me in games with energy weapons.

 

[Thunderstrike]

Besides some vehicle designs I honestly do not find much that is "stupid" when it comes to Halo.

Don't suppose by chance you've played or know the plot of Halo 5's campaign?

Anyways... the reason mechs would have a head is so that the pilot can be further enclosed in armor and better protected against hostile fire and provide superior arc of vision. Neither of which the omniframe head provides. In fact, its arc of vision is identical to that of the pilot normally. A 360 degree sensor pod behind where the head is would be 10x more useful then that head. Sensor pods mounted in the shoulders would have better view arcs.

Yeah fair enough. But the Omniframe's head has a greater field of view and range of movement than the pilot does already, and we don't know what types of sensors are on it and how relevant they would be to anywhere else.

That head is pointless. Just like the rest of the suit the moment its energy shields go down and the pilot is breathing toxic fumes and coughing their lungs out because they are burning from the inside out.

Or... just like the moment a mech gets pierced and is irreversibly damaged until it gets back to a repair bay, by which point the person inside is dead? Shields regenerate in most sci-fi universes or are stronger than normal materials (think HALO), it's actually a much better way of protecting the pilot on a mech of this scale.