Jump to content

Jenner Ct Is A Large Portion Of Rear Hit Box. Also Unusually Small Side Torsos.


70 replies to this topic

Poll: Jenner Ct Is A Large Portion Of Rear Hit Box. Also Unusually Small Side Torsos. (154 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you find the Jenner hit boxes wonky?

  1. yes (103 votes [66.88%])

    Percentage of vote: 66.88%

  2. no (51 votes [33.12%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.12%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61 skullman86

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 703 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 27 April 2013 - 10:23 AM

Why would you want such exaggerated side torsos? I don't pilot a jenner, but I was under the assumption that most people ran XLs, and a change like that would probably be more of a death sentence than an improvement.

Edited by skullman86, 27 April 2013 - 10:24 AM.


#62 XSerjo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 386 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 11:22 AM

View Postskullman86, on 27 April 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

Why would you want such exaggerated side torsos?
...


Bigger torso is price for possibility. Possibillity of damage-spread. Now jenner's pilots are not able to do this - they are loosing ONLY CT armor. Yeah, thay may got unlucky shot to rear-torso, but it's so rare.

#63 ryoma

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 30 April 2013 - 12:38 AM

Aside from that I have a large beef with the fact that a large portion of the Jenners rear profile (not top, rear from equal height) is counted as CT.

#64 Jay Z

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Deadset Legend
  • Deadset Legend
  • 436 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 12 May 2013 - 01:07 AM

Actually, just get rid of the rear CT hitbox. Think about it, we could just dump all of there armour on the front CT and not have to worry about damage spread. Alternately, the armour allocations could be proportional to the hitbox size so we can allocate more armour to the CT compared to the the side torsos. I have played many many many matches in Jenners and death by side torso is extremely rare. It has only happened to me a handful of times. ~1-2% of matches

#65 Livewyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 6,733 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 12 May 2013 - 03:57 AM

I don't know if I would complain about the CT taking up more space on a Jenner.. tis where you have the most armor.. STs still are vital due to XL engines but have a lot less armor.

#66 Wispsy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Talon
  • Talon
  • 2,007 posts

Posted 12 May 2013 - 06:59 AM

It would be nice if a portion of the front ct was not on the rear of the mech...

#67 ryoma

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 13 August 2013 - 11:31 AM

Are the issues described still a problem?

#68 DemonRaziel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 646 posts

Posted 13 August 2013 - 12:50 PM

Nothing has changed about Jenner hitboxes AFAIK - these 'Mechs are still CTs on legs.

#69 ryoma

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 13 August 2013 - 01:00 PM

Do the Jenner-D missile rack still counts as CT from the rear?

GG PGI GG.

The best part is that a few ask the devs ago they said "oh, we didn't realize that's a problem. Fix incoming." 3ish months later and it's still a problem :/

#70 PEEFsmash

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,280 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 14 August 2013 - 07:09 PM

Of course the Jenner has awful hitboxes. The CT takes up most of the surface area of the entire mech. Anyone who thinks the Jenner doesn't have **** hitboxes likes the way things are where if you hit a Jenner you probably killed it CT.

#71 ryoma

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 22 August 2013 - 02:33 AM

Never gonna be fixed.





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users