65 replies to this topic

[PapaKilo]

Kartr, on 07 March 2013 - 10:13 PM, said:

How does the timeline take a hit? ECM was redeveloped by the Capellans in 3025, almost 25 years ago. So yeah how does the timeline take a hit?

They are basically saying that what we have right now is the more powerful Angel ECM Suite a couple of years early, instead of the base Guardian ECM Suite that should be in the timeline now.

[Mercules]

PapaKilo, on 08 March 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

They are basically saying that what we have right now is the more powerful Angel ECM Suite a couple of years early, instead of the base Guardian ECM Suite that should be in the timeline now.

The Angel doesn't do what MWO ECM does either, not even in Double Blind rules. It basically does what Guardian ECM does but counts as 2 when you try and counter it.

[PapaKilo]

Mercules, on 08 March 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

The Angel doesn't do what MWO ECM does either, not even in Double Blind rules. It basically does what Guardian ECM does but counts as 2 when you try and counter it.

Agreed. Still, we have something that's more powerful than Guardian ECM already -- the equivalent of Angel ECM. And it's a couple of years early.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 06 March 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

which leaves us with the not-very-attractive Kintaro.

Look at what the art team did to the Fugly JagerMech! They can save the Kintaro!

[Stone Profit]

Mercworks, on 06 March 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

When I first started playing (when Open Beta started), they had quite a few of the really cool mechs of Battletech. The Atlas, Jenner, Hunchie were always classics. I was always a big fan of the Catapult, even back during TT play. Now it seems like they're going out of their way to pick the least regarded, or most redundant, choices.
For example, the Trebuchet is a good mech, standing on its own, but is yet a third addition in the 50 ton category. This has left the 55 ton sweet spot for mechs completely open yet again. I understand the whole legal issue with "Unseen" mechs, but there are still a number of chassis which are owned by Catalyst that could be used as a frame to fill that slot. We desperately need a 55 ton jump capable mech to be that balance point between scout and fighter.
I would also question why we need a Cataphract when we don't have an entry in the 75 ton slot. That's the perfect tipping point between Fast Heavy and Assault, and yet it's not covered.
The same is true with the over-tweeking of the Cicada. I actually have used that mech a few times in TT play, and have the ECM version in MWO, but the Phoenix Hawk (or whatever 45 tonner they use to substitute) is a much better mech, and a lot more fun to play.
Now with the Jagermech coming up, it just seems like there another useless class to add on, and so many optimal spot still open to put really interesting (and sellable - HINT) mechs.

Yet another poster who doesnt realize that just because he cant use certain mechs they are "bad". Perhaps they dont fit your playstyle? I dont use the stalker. For me it is not a fun mech. But thats an opinion, not a fact. See how that works?

[Znail]

The MWO ECM doesn't follow the TT logic, so you can't really compare it with TT items. The closest you can get in TT is combining an ECM with Stealth Armor, but the MWO version also gives your allies Stealth Armor. So the best way to describe the MWO ECM is to call it magic.

[AlexEss]

People need to let go of the unseen/reseen. There are a good amount of the current designs that work as proxies layout wise and the looks are gone. I do not see PGI getting proper rights just to please a fairly small group of people.

For an example

SDR-5K match the STG-3R pretty much to a tee (one hardpoint is off CT instead of LA)

So i think they will go with FASA designs and then let people work with the hard-points to recreate their unseen.

[Joe Mallad]

Stone Profit, on 08 March 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Yet another poster who doesnt realize that just because he cant use certain mechs they are "bad". Perhaps they dont fit your playstyle? I dont use the stalker. For me it is not a fun mech. But thats an opinion, not a fact. See how that works?

have to agree. I'm the type of player that I don't like the Dragon because I love my AC20s but don't like having an AC20 in my arm so the Dragon is not a great mech for my play style. But once I got the Flame Dragon, I was in love with THAT Dragon because I could put the AC20 in the side torso where it feels right for my play style. But... I have team mates that run the various Dragon variants and love them all. So its player preference for sure.

[Mercworks]

Stone Profit, on 08 March 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Yet another poster who doesnt realize that just because he cant use certain mechs they are "bad". Perhaps they dont fit your playstyle? I dont use the stalker. For me it is not a fun mech. But thats an opinion, not a fact. See how that works?

I think that you missed the point. It's not that I think the mechs are "bad" necessarily, it's that PGI keeps adding new mechs to overly represented tonnages and roles (Centurion, Hunchback AND Trebuchet) while completely ignoring some iconic mechs or mech slots (such as the Phoenix Hawk medium scout leader or the Wolverine jumping brawler). Also, the 55 ton and 75 ton classes are actually mathematically the "sweet spot" for mech design. The 75 tonner (mostly because of the 300 engine) gives the most payload for the 4/6 movement class (until you get to endo steel, which takes a crapton of crit slots). The 55 ton chassis has the most payload for a 5/8/5 jumper. The Phoenix Hawk is either the best frame for 6/9/6, or is tied with the 40 ton slot, but can carry more armor. There's nothing comparable in the current line up. My point was that PGI keeps adding more mechs into either niche roles (like the Cicada) or already overburdened slots (like the Trebuchet and the Jagermech).

[Dredhawk]

Yoseful Mallad, on 06 March 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

We do have a 75 ton mech coming. The Orion.


Also... The locust, griffin, shadow hawk, thunderbolt, wolverine and Battlemaster have all now been moved from the unseen list to reseen. These mech may now be legal to use again. At least in their updated reseen looks.

Don't really care about those designs just give me a WarHammer and Marauder......

[Joe Mallad]

AlexEss, on 08 March 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

People need to let go of the unseen/reseen. There are a good amount of the current designs that work as proxies layout wise and the looks are gone. I do not see PGI getting proper rights just to please a fairly small group of people.

For an example

SDR-5K match the STG-3R pretty much to a tee (one hardpoint is off CT instead of LA)

So i think they will go with FASA designs and then let people work with the hard-points to recreate their unseen.

true but it would be nice to have other mech even if they have the same use and same hard point set up. Why? Because I may like the way a Stinger looks over the way the Spider looks. And that alone is enough for some in their justification on what mech to take and what mech not to take.

[Joe Mallad]

Dredhawk, on 08 March 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

Don't really care about those designs just give me a WarHammer and Marauder......

have you seen the new Marauder design from the experimental tech read outs? If we get the Marauder... It probably will look close to that design.

http://www.google.co....43287494,d.dmg

[Sephlock]

Mercworks, on 06 March 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Now it seems like they're going out of their way to pick the least regarded, or most redundant, choices.

YES. YES THEY ARE!

Quote

For example, the Trebuchet is a good mech, standing on its own, but is yet a third addition in the 50 ton category. This has left the 55 ton sweet spot for mechs completely open yet again.

Granted, once they release a 55 ton mech unless it has serious limitations (like the awesome- no ballistic slots for you!), everyone is going to switch to it. Well, the medium mech pilots anyway...

Quote

Now with the Jagermech coming up, it just seems like there another useless class to add on, and so many optimal spot still open to put really interesting (and sellable - HINT) mechs.

Yeah...

[Sephlock]

AlexEss, on 08 March 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

People need to let go of the unseen/reseen. There are a good amount of the current designs that work as proxies layout wise and the looks are gone. I do not see PGI getting proper rights just to please a fairly small group of people.

They did, though... at least at one point.

[CDLord HHGD]

Kdogg788, on 06 March 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

Please tell me where I can find a link for this information as I want the Locust badly!

-k

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Unseen
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Reseen

[Novakaine]

I think just used folded pieces of paper in a derby.

[Xeren KelDar]

Mercworks, on 08 March 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

Also, the 55 ton and 75 ton classes are actually mathematically the "sweet spot" for mech design. The 75 tonner (mostly because of the 300 engine) gives the most payload for the 4/6 movement class (until you get to endo steel, which takes a crapton of crit slots). The 55 ton chassis has the most payload for a 5/8/5 jumper.

I think this is overstated a lot of the time especially for the 50-55 tons gap. At 5/8/5 the difference in payload potential with max armor is half a ton. That's it. Factoring in the newer tech (XL, Endo, Ferro) you can expand that to about a 2 ton difference. Breaking it down even further, Endo-Steel and Ferro Fibrous do not increase the tonnage gap (keeping it at .5 ton difference) so the massive advantage most people associate with the 55 ton weight is....a small laser.

[Sephlock]

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Bushwacker

I don't give a poop about the timeline.

DO WANT!

[General Taskeen]

Sephlock, on 08 March 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Bushwacker

I don't give a poop about the timeline.

DO WANT!

If its modeled after the TRO 3058 artwork, then hell yes indeed.

[Lyrik]

How is the Kintaro a crappy mech? The KTO-18 can have 55 Tons, 4xSRM6, 2xML ... I call that a beast ;-)

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Kintaro