Armored Core 6 Speculations

[Lord_Leperman]

It's so nice to see many familiar names again, its almost bringing a tear to my eye.

I agree with Zefyr that they really should focus on creating a great single player experience first and foremost, to really suck in the player into the world of this new Armored Core timeline. Then good multiplayer with an established playerbase should extend the longevity of the game further. I keep referring Ace Combat again, but I'm not sure how the multiplayer scene in that game is holding up.

I for one, am wishing for more co-op multiplayer, and world-boss type enemies that take multiple tries to conquer. Or, something like Ace Combat Infinity's multiplayer where it's competitive co-op, where two teams in the same battlefield race to get a higher score by knocking out as many AI opponents they can within a certain time limit. Is it gonna be like that? The only confirmed multiplayer mode is one-on-one pvp, the classic AC duel. No word on other game modes, but it's nice to hope.

[Wakeangel75]

Evening all 

Multiplayer wise I'm kinda hoping we get a squad (team) building option 5v5 is plenty enough as I did enjoy some nights just login chat to your team mates mess with your builds and do any co-op if that also becomes an option. I'm hoping that from do a few live streams to show us parts of the game as they did with V and VD.

[Zefyr]

The Operator view from ACV/Verdict Day was so cool.

Also I hope we don't get near-infinite flight like AC4/fA, as much as I enjoy them even while I play its multiplayer right now, I vastly prefer the frantic cat and mouse of V/Verdict Day.

[Grim]

Also I hope we don't get near-infinite flight like AC4/fA, as much as I enjoy them even while I play its multiplayer right now, I vastly prefer the frantic cat and mouse of V/Verdict Day.

The 4/fA era pretty much tried to give players the fantasy of piloting a Gundam. It wasn't bad in retrospect, because it definitely broke away from the game's slower pace in the AC1-LR era and gave the games a different identity than the previous generation.

I didn't play a lot of V/VD so I may be wrong, but from what I've watched it definitely looked like a more grounded game, and emphasized the use of cover even more than the originals, so it was a bit like Front Mission in that aspect - basically, those games screamed "if wanzers could fly" to me.

I'm excited to find out how 6 will feel.

[Lord_Leperman]

I'm more inclined towards the ground and pound nature of the earlier titles and ACV, the sense of weight and mass is much more realized that way. Spot on with the assesment about Gundam fantasy for AC4 though, Grim. Zeitgeist of the times I guess.

Twin-Skies and I had a short talk about what could possibly the some of the mechanics of AC6. The mention of something akin to Monster Hunter but with giant robots, suddenly makes sense if the game is heading for the boss-hunter mode. If From Soft's Elden Ring is akin to Breath of the Wild, maybe this could be their take on the Monster Hunter formula?

“Boss battles are the highlight of the game in this title,” Yamamura said in a separate statement. “The essence of the battles, in which the player reads the enemy's moves and then plays games with them, is of course provided, as is typical of FromSoftware. In this title (AC6), both the enemy and your own machine are aggressive and violent in their attacks. We are developing the game so that players can enjoy the dynamic and intense boss battles that only mechas can offer, along with the unique aspects of AC, such as how to assemble the right parts to take on the strongest enemies.”

What are the odds? Personally I think its unlikely, but if they go that route then we'll have awesome replay value in both solo-and team based play. That said, I'm curious about how they'll handle the game's replay value besides online multiplayer. Like will there be secret bosses, hidden parts, and secret missions?

[v074]

Other things I think I can at least confirm:

- Overboost is in if the spooling-up noise preceding the 'main' AC's boost away in the trailer is any indicator.  So we're probably up to third-generation mobility at minimum.
- I always figured that that EMP-esque weapon displayed was more of the return of Assault Armor in some shape or form.
- Handheld energy shields are also

I think, given everything we've seen in both videos and interviews, the most likely we're going to see is probably a feel merging aspects of the third and fourth generation?  ...admittedly it'd be nice if we retained the kicking from fifth generation but we'll see on that front.  I suspect considering the aimed-for single-player focus, multiplayer may be pared back to the classic Versus matching.  Which...honestly that'd still be pretty nice.  For some reason I have trouble imagining AC as AC without at least the 1v1, even if we probably won't get AC5-style team skirmishes back.

I think my other hope for AC6 is that we get some more complicated route branching; it's often demonstrated that no force in an AC is really hegemonic, and I am kind of hoping that there will be some faction calculus in AC6 that leads to a larger number of endgame routes, probably calculated via mission choices.

[Grim]

I just thought of something, focusing on PvP. Since it's gonna be on PC, I wonder how much MnK players are going to take to the game.

In the past few years I got pretty deep into FPSs - Destiny/Destiny 2, Rainbow Six: Siege, Valorant, and some CS:GO again. I started Destiny on console but eventually moved to PC, which is where I'm playing the others. And over here, for the games which support it, it's clear: MnK is simply superior.

But in a third person perspective game, how much advantage is it going to have? Especially considering how big the lockboxes got in the newer games, and how most AC weapons are auto-aim anyway... will aiming even matter then? Will movement?

[Lord_Leperman]

Other things I think I can at least confirm:

- Overboost is in if the spooling-up noise preceding the 'main' AC's boost away in the trailer is any indicator.  So we're probably up to third-generation mobility at minimum.
- I always figured that that EMP-esque weapon displayed was more of the return of Assault Armor in some shape or form.
- Handheld energy shields are also

I think, given everything we've seen in both videos and interviews, the most likely we're going to see is probably a feel merging aspects of the third and fourth generation?  ...admittedly it'd be nice if we retained the kicking from fifth generation but we'll see on that front.  I suspect considering the aimed-for single-player focus, multiplayer may be pared back to the classic Versus matching.  Which...honestly that'd still be pretty nice.  For some reason I have trouble imagining AC as AC without at least the 1v1, even if we probably won't get AC5-style team skirmishes back.

I think my other hope for AC6 is that we get some more complicated route branching; it's often demonstrated that no force in an AC is really hegemonic, and I am kind of hoping that there will be some faction calculus in AC6 that leads to a larger number of endgame routes, probably calculated via mission choices.

I also had to re-look that hand held energy shield, and I gotta wonder are we gonna have Trick Weapons in AC akin to Bloodborne? That shield was a bomblet dispenser just a few moments ago from that trailer. Could it be that weapons will have secondary functions now?  I'm already suspecting different core functions now aside from just OB, so that EMP burst might be another one, maybe core functions will be selectable now as well?  

Completely agree on 1v1 gameplay, that's the classic AC gameplay that really doesn't go away, as well as 6 being a culmination of gen 3, 4, and 5.

I remember AC:LR's 6 different endings, hopefully AC6 has more lengthy, and meaningful branching paths if ever, as well as factions you can ally with and get a faction specific rewards at that.

I just thought of something, focusing on PvP. Since it's gonna be on PC, I wonder how much MnK players are going to take to the game.

In the past few years I got pretty deep into FPSs - Destiny/Destiny 2, Rainbow Six: Siege, Valorant, and some CS:GO again. I started Destiny on console but eventually moved to PC, which is where I'm playing the others. And over here, for the games which support it, it's clear: MnK is simply superior.

But in a third person perspective game, how much advantage is it going to have? Especially considering how big the lockboxes got in the newer games, and how most AC weapons are auto-aim anyway... will aiming even matter then? Will movement?

That got me thinking, but we'll have to see how the targeting mechanics work first. 

If it's gonna be a lock-on type like in Dark Souls, then I suppose gamepads would be more intuitive to use since all the button functions are on all the fingertips. If it's similar to any of the past AC games with a lock box/area with manual aim, then mouse and keyboard would be better IMO.

Even in other third person games like in Warframe, or in other mech games like Mechwarrior Online I find myself gravitating to the mouse and keyboard option as well. If it's gonna be similar to Souls, I'll stick to the gamepad.

The problem now is, will gamepads have enough buttons to support the AC6's new features along with movement and combat mechanics? They did a great job streamlining everything for something like Elden Ring, but with the added vertical dimension expected in AC are they gonna stick with V/VD's control scheme, or will they streamline it further?

[v074]

I also had to re-look that hand held energy shield, and I gotta wonder are we gonna have Trick Weapons in AC akin to Bloodborne? That shield was a bomblet dispenser just a few moments ago from that trailer. Could it be that weapons will have secondary functions now?  I'm already suspecting different core functions now aside from just OB, so that EMP burst might be another one, maybe core functions will be selectable now as well?  

That is a prospect that I never considered before, and I am genuinely fascinated if that is the case.  Core Functions as a part slot (say, OB vs. EO vs. AA) is an interesting idea, if that is going to be tied to a part instead of to the core itself.  Though considering the ubiquity of OB in the series as a whole, I'm not sure if they would return to the trade that essentially was between them in 3.  It sure is something to think about, though.

[Lord_Leperman]

So, I spent the weekend speculating on AC6 instead of writing a new article for RR's front page (Don't worry, a new article will come up soon).

The following quote from IGN's interview struck me:

IGN: So it sounds like you're incorporating some kind of counter mechanic to Armored Core VI, maybe similar to what was in Sekiro.

Masaru Yamamura: Rather than calling it a counter mechanic, what we want to stress is this reason to continue attacking and to continue on the offensive. You want to create chances for yourself in combat and turn the battle to the player's advantage. So what we feel is this is going to create a really nice back and forth flow in battles in Armored Core VI, and create this nice mix of offensive and defensive play… but we want the player to feel like they're constantly able to pressure the enemy and that's why we incorporated some of these systems.

So on my thoughts, which I'll be copying a lot from Starsector's combat mechanics.

ACs would have three points of survivability. The first layer, would be Primal Armor (PA), which every AC would have (can be turned off when needed). The second would be the actual armor of the AC that we'll call Vanguard Armor (VA) which reduces the damage of any projectile that bypasses the Primal Armor, and then third is the traditionally called Armor Points (AP), akin to the health of your AC.

Every AC or enemy in the game would have some level of Energy Capacity (EC), or energy cap as known traditionally, and the generator of an AC will gradually replenish that EC. Firing a weapon, quick boosting, or taking damage through shields, diminishes any stored energy from your EC. Completely emptying your EC causes your AC to genbust/blow out, leaving you slower, defenseless, and open to attacks without any form of retaliation. The system incentivizes what Yamamura described as an aggressive and offensive playstyle. Since shields regenerate, a player must press on an attack in order to fully destroy any target.

The combat loop I'm envisioning in my head is to strip down all three layers of defense in order to finish off an opponent. Force an opponent to turn off their shields, otherwise they risk genbust/blowout, break through their armor, and maximize the damage output your AC has in the window of time your opponent's shields are down.

That said, here's the control scheme I'm speculating on if they're going for that system.

L Analog, Move
R Analog, Look
L Analog Button, Core Functon (OB, EMP, whatever)
R Analog Button, Lock-on (That souls influence)
[] (X)Button, Toggle Primal Armor
/\ (Y)Button, Prompts, Toggle autofire weapons
X (A)Button, Boost toggle / double tap to Jump (Boost hop!) and hold to boost in the air.
O (B)Button, Quick boost/evade
D-pad Up, Inside/Utility slot
D-pad Left, Left extension toggle
D-pad Down, hold + weapon to drop weapon.
D-pad Down + /\ for Manual Recharge (refill EC at x1.5 speed, but you'll have genbust status while recharging, has audio/visual que) 
D-pad Right, Right extension toggle
L1 (LB), fire Left back weapon, Toggle with /\ to auto fire
R1 (RB), fire Right back weapon, Toggle with /\ to auto fire
L2 (LT), fire Left arm weapon, Toggle with /\ to auto fire
R2 (RT), fire right arm weapon, Toggle with /\ to auto fire

Anyway, enough of my rambling.

On a side note, what do you guys think of AC abandoning the lockbox system AC has used all these years? I personally think it was one of the hurdles the game had in terms of game accessibility, and I'm fine with them shelving it for a lock-on system.

[atdsutm]

They should get rid of the whole lock-on FCS mechanics in the game. Rather, they should be expanding on it further to add variables for weapons. A lot of weapon balancing also revolves around how it locks and etc. Some guns are harder to use due to lock sizes, lock times and etc...

[Grim]

post

The whole back and forth/pressure thing reminds me a LOT of the rally system in Bloodborne, where the game rewards players for going on the offensive immediately if they take damage by giving some of their lost health back on a confirmed hit, even in PvP. Now while it's not gonna be health regen, VI is probably gonna have a lot of that kind of measured tempo when it comes to battles.

Side-note: It's tiring to keep talking about the Soulsborne games in the context of AC, but I guess that's just how big of an impact the series has had on FromSoft - everyone's looking at how some of their gameplay elements will seep into a completely unrelated universe/genre.

I agree, FCSes are a bit of an antiquated idea. But sometimes you shouldn't go all-out in giving players power and agency; you have to set some hard limits to what they can do in-game. I honestly liked the additional layer of customization and management they brought into the meta, not to mention the skill floor they imposed onto gameplay. Remember how we marveled at how well Imori read his opponent's intentions and kept him on screen and in his lockbox (3:20 mark onwards)? In an incoming age of full-screen and deep-range lock-on weapons, how will the developers manage to keep battles engaging and challenging?

[Lord_Leperman]

They should get rid of the whole lock-on FCS mechanics in the game. Rather, they should be expanding on it further to add variables for weapons. A lot of weapon balancing also revolves around how it locks and etc. Some guns are harder to use due to lock sizes, lock times and etc...

I kind of get what you mean, like say, an accuracy stat or a recoil stat for each weapon (which can be mitigated by arm parts for example) and sort of like the targeting circle akin to World of Tanks. The ring continuously shrinks, up to the weapon's max accuracy when not firing, and expands whenever it's shooting.

In this case, skill measured in distance control, movement, evasion, and timing when to fire your weapons. Aiming is still there, but it's now tied to knowing what weapon to use at what situation. 

That's all in theory though.

post

The whole back and forth/pressure thing reminds me a LOT of the rally system in Bloodborne, where the game rewards players for going on the offensive immediately if they take damage by giving some of their lost health back on a confirmed hit, even in PvP. Now while it's not gonna be health regen, VI is probably gonna have a lot of that kind of measured tempo when it comes to battles.

Side-note: It's tiring to keep talking about the Soulsborne games in the context of AC, but I guess that's just how big of an impact the series has had on FromSoft - everyone's looking at how some of their gameplay elements will seep into a completely unrelated universe/genre.

I agree, FCSes are a bit of an antiquated idea. But sometimes you shouldn't go all-out in giving players power and agency; you have to set some hard limits to what they can do in-game. I honestly liked the additional layer of customization and management they brought into the meta, not to mention the skill floor they imposed onto gameplay. Remember how we marveled at how well Imori read his opponent's intentions and kept him on screen and in his lockbox (3:20 mark onwards)? In an incoming age of full-screen and deep-range lock-on weapons, how will the developers manage to keep battles engaging and challenging?

I'm guessing the "rewarding aggressive gameplay" is much more evident in Sekiro, where you have to break an opponent's posture in order to really finish them off. Yeah, the comparisons are unavoidable with From's other games, but they do plan to use their experience on those, so it's safe to say they'll be taking a thing or two from their recent games.

For AC, I'm still banking on that PA break to have a genbust effect, sort of like breaking posture in Sekiro, where an AC would be defenseless.

As for lock boxes, you make a good point that there probably would be a skill floor with the game, but as to how low they plan to set it I honestly have no idea. If they want to make accessibility as wide as possible, then the Souls style lock-on. If they want to increase the floor a bit more, then ACV's lock ring. Pure hard core would mean the classic AC:LR Type-B controls using L2 and R2 to look up and down. There's also the issue of Mouse and Keyboard users who're gonna have a way easier time with lockboxes (or worse if the only control option is keyboard mapped AC:LR Type-B controls, with no mouse aiming ), so I'm thinking that knowing when and where to use your weapons would play a bigger factor than the actual act of aiming this time around.

[Lord_Leperman]

Pardon the double post, but I'd like to dispel the rumors that AC6 might be something like Monster Hunter.

The The original Japanese IGN interview (updated on my first post) unfiltered included a few additional questions that gave insight into multiplayer and some game systems that we can expect in AC6. In short, no co-op multiplayer, real single-player focus (They're banking big on this one, and one that I really look forward to), AC6 is also not a sequel to any of the previous games, and part tuning is gonna be back.

How do you think From is gonna surprise us with AC6 given those caveats? I'm now doubling-down on the idea that it will be more of Ace Combat, with a lot of customization, really putting you in the shoes of the real robot hero you always (or secretly) wanted to be all this time. I just wish they'd expand on the consort system of previous games, maybe allowing you to bring in a small contingent of grunts to fight alongside you, especially in the bigger missions.

[ZaruForever]

They said no coop for story campaign, but perhaps there could be coop-only missions as extra. What do you think?