122 replies to this topic

[Sephlock]

Maybe they should just give these mechs better acceleration/deceleration and turning speed.

[Just wanna play]

i personally like having arms thx to better range of motion, and i guess that having low slung arms means they get hit les often, helpig you keep your weapons around longer

they sure do struggle with shooting over cover though...

[Ohgodtherats]

i like my awesome.

[Rhent]

The OP doesn't understand aiming in the game. The Catapult and Stalker have no lateral traverse with their arms, only up and down. Meanwhile the mechs with arm mounts DO. So no the Atlas and Phracts are not a at a disadvantage having low slung weapons. If you want to give them higher slung weapons, then remove their arm traverse.

[Sephlock]

Rhent, on 14 May 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

The OP doesn't understand aiming in the game. The Catapult and Stalker have no lateral traverse with their arms, only up and down. Meanwhile the mechs with arm mounts DO. So no the Atlas and Phracts are not a at a disadvantage having low slung weapons. If you want to give them higher slung weapons, then remove their arm traverse.

I'd actually be glad to make that trade. Heck, why not have that as an option- remove actuators in exchange for higher mounted weapons.

And yes, believe it or not, I do understand aiming. I also understand cover, and not being able to shoot over it. Also, steptarting™.

[ElLocoMarko]

PaladinXIII, on 30 April 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

Sarna said:

"... two Jackson B5c LRM-10launchers. These provide the Stalker with its longest-range punch and allow it to give indirect fire support when needed...."

LRM have longest range punch, milk almost came out of my nose.

Edited by ElLocoMarko, 14 May 2013 - 03:05 PM.

[Sephlock]

ElLocoMarko, on 14 May 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

LRM have longest range punch, milk almost came out of my nose.

QFT

[Liberator]

shabowie, on 30 April 2013 - 04:34 PM, said:

Mechs with arm actuators should raise their arms to fire over obstacles. Also mechs with arms should be able to mantle (climb over obstacles) and punch.

What's the point of humanoid robots and humanoid arm actuators if they aren't useful to engage in humanoid actions?

Indeed, humanoid robots that cannot use their features are actually no better than tanks.
Climbing could be handled like in many action games where you just hold a button to go into "action mode" and start autoclimbing\leaping as needed. The commando sure as hell could benefit from some leaping and climbing.

Melee could just be wide swings with hit detection like in dark souls 2, so you could graze or directly hit opponents.

If you lack hands you would inflict some critical damage to mounted arm gear, or just be unable to attack.

This would bring lots of flavour and FUN!

[Sephlock]

I'd like to be able to hide (say, around a corner in the tunnels in Frozen City), then rush around when a commando shows up and

[Just wanna play]

Sephlock, on 15 May 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:

I'd like to be able to hide (say, around a corner in the tunnels in Frozen City), then rush around when a commando shows up and

settle their dispute and sing along together?? no thx XD ill just crushed him underfoot

[trollocaustic]

Quote

That's because you've angered Zeus.

I didn't know a 125-Ton 3 legged mech can fly.

[Just wanna play]

trollocaustic, on 18 May 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

I didn't know a 125-Ton 3 legged mech can fly.

apparently, an 80 ton mech with 2 legs can 2
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Zeus

[Sephlock]

Also, old Chinese guys.

[TB Azrael]

Well OP as to the title of your post, which doesn't seem to be what your post is actually about. My reply would be 'Nothing'. The mechs are build the way they are and have always been - your job is to figure out how to use them.

Kinda like this crap about wanting mechs to be mirrored for lefties. Nothing personal on lefties, my sister is one, but you are wanting lore to be broken just because you don't want to learn how to work something the way it's been designed for around 30 years. And no there are no lore mechs that have been 'mirrored' in any of the literary titles. Oh maybe the controls were but not the mechs themselves.

[trollocaustic]

Mythbusters debunked the chair.
It actually exploded

[Sephlock]

TB Azrael, on 18 May 2013 - 07:40 PM, said:

Well OP as to the title of your post, which doesn't seem to be what your post is actually about. My reply would be 'Nothing'. The mechs are build the way they are and have always been - your job is to figure out how to use them.

Kinda like this crap about wanting mechs to be mirrored for lefties. Nothing personal on lefties, my sister is one, but you are wanting lore to be broken just because you don't want to learn how to work something the way it's been designed for around 30 years. And no there are no lore mechs that have been 'mirrored' in any of the literary titles. Oh maybe the controls were but not the mechs themselves.

Nice straw man

[Yanlowen Cage]

oh gawd here we go with the totally wrong thought process. IMHO that is. I hear everything from "make it faster, better torso twist, better hard points, and such..." Hey people look at the TT just for a second. Don't thump it and preach. But take a look at it. The major issue with the awesome? It's has no role becuase customizing has broke it's role. Example. Why take a jenner when you can pretty much do the same thing in a raven and it can carry ecm. I know that is a little to wide open. but it is the truth. The various mechs are pointless if the reason the mech was designed is supersede by over customability of every chassis. Hence there is no need to Catapault if pretty much every mech class can be a missile boat. And starngely enuff I think the awesome makes a great missile boat. (not it's intended role). So really in the model that PGI is putting out for mechs all that is really needed is a mech from each tonnage class (20,25,30,.. etc) and not mechs from the same tonnage classes that are (supposedly) different. good example I can build a cent and a hunchie exactly the same minus the weapons location. so why do I need the hunchie and the cent? hope my adhd rant made sense.

[Khobai]

I don't see low slung weapons as being the problem. Rather the problem with the Awesome is that it does absolutely nothing better than the Stalker. There needs to be hardpoint size limitations. A Stalker should not be able to mount more PPCs than an Awesome because an Awesome is supposed to be THE PPC mech. When it comes to boating PPCs no mech should be better at it then the Awesome, and sadly that isn't the case.

Edited by Khobai, 22 May 2013 - 02:35 PM.

[Just wanna play]

Yanlowen Cage, on 22 May 2013 - 03:49 AM, said:

oh gawd here we go with the totally wrong thought process. IMHO that is. I hear everything from "make it faster, better torso twist, better hard points, and such..." Hey people look at the TT just for a second. Don't thump it and preach. But take a look at it. The major issue with the awesome? It's has no role becuase customizing has broke it's role. Example. Why take a jenner when you can pretty much do the same thing in a raven and it can carry ecm. I know that is a little to wide open. but it is the truth. The various mechs are pointless if the reason the mech was designed is supersede by over customability of every chassis. Hence there is no need to Catapault if pretty much every mech class can be a missile boat. And starngely enuff I think the awesome makes a great missile boat. (not it's intended role). So really in the model that PGI is putting out for mechs all that is really needed is a mech from each tonnage class (20,25,30,.. etc) and not mechs from the same tonnage classes that are (supposedly) different. good example I can build a cent and a hunchie exactly the same minus the weapons location. so why do I need the hunchie and the cent? hope my adhd rant made sense.

this has been said already......


of course you did kind of get real scenarios where different mechs are just better and, in the case of the catapult for ex, they really are still possibly the best there is for their intended purpose, people just don't understand why and use "better" mechs

and for some awesome variants using lrms WAS its intended purpose, and its still far supieor then anything except MAYBE catapaults

in the case of people not seeing why their "better" mech isnt actually better, look at lrm stalkers, the 5m in specific, their "100 lrm monster" isnt capable of launching all those lrms at once, they can only fire 42 (even more to the point, the 3H variant is the best for lrms, but no one realizes it and thinks its the worst variant, *******....) at once and are much easier to counter with ams and dodging then REAL lrm based mechs, of course lrms are the only weapon properly balanced for boating thx to tube count

i saw a stalker with only 2 lrm 15s and 2 lrm 10s earlier, saddest thing iv ever since, especially since it was firing in groups 32 while real lrm mechs would be able to fire all of the missiles at once and wouldnt cost their team as much as a stalker does

also hunch back has better torso twist then cent, its the unseen states that make the difference

[Sephlock]

Khobai, on 22 May 2013 - 02:34 PM, said:

I don't see low slung weapons as being the problem. Rather the problem with the Awesome is that it does absolutely nothing better than the Stalker.

Yeah and low slung weapons are part of the reason why, along with the few things that the Awesome does better being irrelevant in the current meta.