71 replies to this topic

[Shumabot]

None of the cats really needed the nerf. It doesn't actually address what made them so powerful and does little to re-balance them. Torso twist and engine size are a boogyman punishing the chassis for bad overall weapon balance.

[NRP]

I don't think these torso twist nerfs are going to be a big deal. The Cats will still rock.

[LordBraxton]

Vermaxx, on 19 March 2013 - 10:51 AM, said:

I don't care. I own three Cats, and will probably buy the Six Pack again eventually. I liked the twist, since it has no arms...but even then I can't argue that it twisted much better than even a mech with an outstretched arm.

ADD TO THAT the outstretching arms requires free look and is basically useless, yes, they kind of turned too far. I don't know if I'll notice a difference. My general reaction is to resist change, and I started to get up in arms, and then I realized I don't care.

this

a catapult will still be more flexible than a cataphract in a brawl dont complain

[FuzzyLog1c]

To wit:

1. The Catapult was given an extended torso twist range because its arms lacked the proper actuators. Now it has a similar torso twist relative to other heavy mechs that have arms and mediums. For instance, the CTF and Dragon both have a full set of arms and a 90 degree torso twist. The CTF has a 30 degree arm pitch and 20 degree arm twist, and the dragon has 30/40 degree pitch/twist, respectively.

2. No idea why the K2 received a greater nerf than any other mech. It's the only mech that was intended to not be a missile platform, and it's questionable whether anyone was able to accurately aim direct-fire weapons at maximum torso twist while running away from the enemy. It was primarily used to gain situational awareness.

3. While I appreciate the K2 model depicting the weapons placed upon it, it's very strange that this is the only mech that received that update. It's effectively a nerf--one that should be applied to every single mech simultaneously, not just one.

While we're at it, why wasn't the convergence speed and torso twist of the Stalker nerfed? If PGI wanted to deal with a clear and present problem through chassis quirks nerfs [there aren't any positive "quirks," period], that would be the mech to do it on.

Edited by FuzzyLog1c, 19 March 2013 - 11:34 AM.

[Corbon Zackery]

With the right pilot ability you could do close to a 180 degree torso twist.

Yea with the right pilot ability's you could do close to a 180 degree torso twist.

[Suko]

I will live with the reduced torso twist in the C1, but I felt that it was one of the most balanced chassis in MWO. It's never been on the cover of cheese builds magazine and it's just overall well designed. I don't think the twist nerf will hit it too hard, but I still don't think nerfing the C1 was necessary.

A1? Hell yeah. K2? Maybe a bit. But the C1 and C4? Nah, not really. Maybe 10 degrees or so, but 20 is a bit harsh.

[TheRulesLawyer]

Its almost like they want them to be completely ineffective vs light mechs when engaged. No arm movement, now reduced torso movement. Might as well power down and wait to die I guess.

[VagGR]

"hey look i can almost see my butt..... farting srms"

yes it did...and in any case its not that big of a nerf..cats will still be very effective mechs both as supports and as browlers (which are not supposed to be). no need for a poll on that...cats will be fine

Edited by VagGR, 19 March 2013 - 11:44 AM.

[Gaan Cathal]

Ransack, on 19 March 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

Why not fix the missiles THEN re-evaluate the torso and arms instead of the other way around. Lights and some mediums already play ring around the rosie with a Catapult. This is nerfing the ability for the cat to fight back.

Because the torso twist reduction brings it in line with other similar mechs like the Raven, Jenner, Cicada, Stalker etc. There's no reason the Catapult needed more twist than similar-bodyform mechs.

[Ph30nix]

Ransack, on 19 March 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

grrrrrrrr is all I say. Cat's were nerfed as LRM support when ECM came and destroyed locks. Now it will be a less effective brawler thanks to the torso twist and arm angle nerf. Yet the stated problem is with SRM's and splash damage.

Color me sad that I have three cats in my bay. They will get let out even less now.

how you think i feel i only have 4 mechs in my bay period.... 3 cats and a 3L lol

[Byk]

If you thought the Catapult A1, K2, and C4 needed it, but not the C1, you're a hypocrite. The Catapults had a ridiculous torso twist angle compared to any other mech. It needed to be brought into line. It was always a glaring issue with any Catapult variant. That said it's not a huge nerf at all, Catapults will be completely fine. And those chassis that were being abused will suffer rightfully so.

[Xandergod]

People really shouldn't be surprised. What two mechs are complained about NONSTOP? The two that got nerfed in this patch. I understand the arguments about the catapult C platforms and how they are "support mechs", but the K2 nerf is unjustified.

Also, you know what's helpful when you are a missile platform behind your allies... The ability to twist your torso and maintain a lock on light mech that's humping your leg.

[Pale Jackal]

Byk, on 19 March 2013 - 12:10 PM, said:

If you thought the Catapult A1, K2, and C4 needed it, but not the C1, you're a hypocrite. The Catapults had a ridiculous torso twist angle compared to any other mech. It needed to be brought into line. It was always a glaring issue with any Catapult variant. That said it's not a huge nerf at all, Catapults will be completely fine. And those chassis that were being abused will suffer rightfully so.

I actually don't think the other Catapults needed a nerf since long range maps and weaponry have nerfed the A1, and the introduction of the Jager 'mech provides a potentially superior chassis for boating AC20s. I would have nerfed the K2 if the Jager was rarely used.

However, the K2, A1 & C4 have often been declared OP. The K2 because of its ballistic hard points in the side torsos, and the A1 and C4's ability to boat SRMs. So, I understand why PGI nerfed them. However, I've never heard anyone say the C1 was OP.

Edited by Pale Jackal, 19 March 2013 - 12:19 PM.

[Xandergod]

The C variants are missile platforms with little in the way of close range defense. When the enemy is baring down, I'm going to run. I have to run. Is being able to defend myself for a little while before someone gets within 180m to much to ask?

[Monky]

I would have been fine with just the A1 and K2 being nerfed, but it is a bit silly for the mech to have such a huge torso turn, unprecedented on any other mech, and it's not a bad hardpoint layout. I would like to see the head hitbox being a little harder to hit on all of them still.

[Xandergod]

The mech is designed to have a high torso twist. That's why the hard points are located at the top of the mech. This feature also makes it easy to castrate. The cats ears being it's major weakness.

[Calem]

I wonder how many people misread the poll title as A1 instead of C1 ... good thing I'll never know.

[Barghest Whelp]

I own one, and I voted I don't care.

It just puts it in line with the other mechs. Still a fantastic mech.

[Pale Jackal]

Barghest Whelp, on 19 March 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

It just puts it in line with the other mechs. Still a fantastic mech.

It's not a bad 'mech, but it didn't need a nerf. If I want a slow, heavy fire support platform I'd pilot a Stalker. If I want a speedy harasser, I'd pilot a TBT 5J. The 5J would have less fire power at range, but it'd have more close in fire power and it'd be quicker. The amazing torso twist is the one thing the C1 had in its favor.

[ego1607]

Some time ago someone complained how K2 was a totally useles chasis. I told him how he was wrong because with the crazy torso twist it's a really manouverable and fun to play chasis. Now the guy is basically right. There is no reason to use a K2, or any cat chasis other then A1 for a missle boat...