Awesomes Still Need A Big Buff To Be Viable, What Is Your Idea To Make It Balanced?
#121
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:59 PM
In fact, even if it got 50% more armor, without more wight, I think it might me UP...
#122
Posted 04 June 2013 - 06:24 PM
/end thread
#123
Posted 04 June 2013 - 06:29 PM
#124
Posted 04 June 2013 - 06:35 PM
#125
Posted 04 June 2013 - 10:10 PM
FaelanCaimbeul, on 04 June 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:
"More armor" means nothing when customizing is so easy. In this game, the stalker weighs more, so every single stalker you fight has more armor. The faster thing is also moot in anything except the 9M for the same reasons.
#126
Posted 04 June 2013 - 10:13 PM
Long range direct fire support has been working out pretty well.
Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 04 June 2013 - 10:13 PM.
#127
Posted 04 June 2013 - 10:14 PM
#128
Posted 05 June 2013 - 06:35 AM
FaelanCaimbeul, on 04 June 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:
No its really not. The mech needs a much smaller CT hit box. That is all. Give it a CT similar to the Stalker and it becomes a very powerful mech (probably a bit too powerful).
#129
Posted 05 June 2013 - 06:44 AM
FaelanCaimbeul, on 04 June 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:
The problem here is excessive customisation. With it, there's not point to Awesome, really.
#130
Posted 05 June 2013 - 07:03 AM
Adridos, on 05 June 2013 - 06:44 AM, said:
Pretty much. Just a smaller gun bag than the Stalker, with worse hitboxes.
Id love for them to shrink it down a little bit so the side torsos are not the same as the ct, making XL engines a more obvious choice for them.
Or, if they do go with special mech perks, make it the PPC king.
#131
Posted 05 June 2013 - 07:03 AM
WolvesX, on 04 June 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:
In fact, even if it got 50% more armor, without more wight, I think it might me UP...
Never gona happen.
The issue is the ability to hit the CT consistently. This is because the game is missing a critical design element called convergence. without some form of player controlled damage distribution the frequency of CT hits is always going to be high. Thus art decisions become part of mech survivability. this game is not designed to handle that level of detail. The game was designed to have a multi dimensional aiming systems. it was removed with nothing put in its place,as it is its just one dimensional mouse over and click.
Fix that and all mech performance is readjusted. the mech is at a permanent disadvantage because max armor is based on TT rules once again. meaning it's always under armored vs. anything heaver. its also out gunned by everything heaver or specialized lighter mechs that carry 2 ac-20's or 6erppc stalkers. your just gona die.
The awesome is best used to flank and hunt smaller targets because it is 80 tones and can hold a 300 ish engine thus it moves like a fast heavy mech or a medium speed medium. about 64 kph. it has more armor then smaller targets and can out gun many of them at long range.
Basically to address your concerns and every other issues about other mechs is the game needs a reboot to account for so many many things... goals right now i expect are to complete beta and release game. fix bugs and optimist code. bring money making to sustainable levels, test server... then and only then can a reboot be atempted.
Its really more of a extra heavy heavy mech.
#132
Posted 05 June 2013 - 09:02 AM
aniviron, on 04 June 2013 - 10:10 PM, said:
"More armor" means nothing when customizing is so easy. In this game, the stalker weighs more, so every single stalker you fight has more armor. The faster thing is also moot in anything except the 9M for the same reasons.
Having played a 3F now, I see how they are better in almost every way, save most AWS variants having movable arms, although most dont have weapons on the left one.
Here's my 9M vs my 3F (which isnt even elited : /)
AWESOME AWS-9M 147 83 64 1.30 177 82 2.16 66,039 116,952 13:08:15
STALKER STK-3F 65 44 21 2.10 107 26 4.12 27,535 60,300 06:17:00
The real ********? The Stalker is gonna go 65 after speed tweak. 55 should be the fastest it goes. For real. It's straight cheese.
Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 05 June 2013 - 09:03 AM.
#133
Posted 05 June 2013 - 03:48 PM
Edited by Jackpoint, 05 June 2013 - 03:48 PM.
#134
Posted 05 June 2013 - 06:52 PM
The issue is this. On the other Assaults the center torso is limited to the front facing plate, anything angled to the side or off that front facing plane is a side torso. Thus the Atlas Center Torso is about the same size as the Centurion's. but on the Awesome, the center section thrusts forward by almost as much as it's width and the side panels are called center torso sections when they should be side torsos due to deflection.
The result is that in gameplay turning the Awesome does not shrink the Center Torso target area and to cover it you have to turn 115 degrees to your attacker. So that 73 points of armor doesn't count for very much due to the unliklyhood of anyone ever missing the CT section.
Now I think for a while the Awesome had a smaller center torso and somehow, by accident or design, it had it's original Center Torso restored. Just because for a few months, about when the PB came out, the Awesome was much tougher. I use the Awesome alot and something did change recently, whether HSR or hitboxes, I don't know, but obviously the Awesome needs to have it's center torso allocation limited to that front facing plate in the center torso like all the other Mechs like it do.
and..... I was just in a match with a typical result for Awesomes. My Awesome had taken no damage, none. A Highlander comes around the corner, takes two shots (3-4 seconds) my Awesome is destroyed. I was moving laterally at full speed, it made no difference because the Awesome's CT is just too big. It needs to be fixed so it fits MWO's gameplay.
Edited by Lightfoot, 05 June 2013 - 07:49 PM.
#135
Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:40 PM
Bigger engines are nice to add more heat sinks, but that isn't the true solution. :|
For being 80 tons, it goes no faster then the stalker and atlas really before getting into heatsink issues.
#136
Posted 06 June 2013 - 01:46 PM
#137
Posted 06 June 2013 - 05:34 PM
Lightfoot, on 06 June 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:
Agreed, the hitboxes on the Awesome make no sense... I went up against one today in my Hunchback SP, and the poor "assault" mech was being torn apart... now, I'm not a very good pilot, and I doubt my opponent was either, but there's something wrong when it's that easy to tear an "assault" mech to pieces. I could never do that to a Stalker, Atlas, etc. in a medium.
Please, fix the hitboxes - that can't take that long, really.
#138
Posted 07 June 2013 - 07:53 PM
#139
Posted 07 June 2013 - 08:00 PM
#140
Posted 18 June 2013 - 07:38 PM
Sephlock, on 07 June 2013 - 08:00 PM, said:
I like that idea actually. The Awesome has the big shoulder-guards too. Make the CT and side torso hit boxes smaller and the arm hit boxes bigger by extending over the shoulders.
Also I notice the Awesome is really susceptable to LRM damage to the center torso while other mechs seem to have LRMs bounce off. This is somewhat due to LRM quirks, but also the size of the CT hitbox.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users




















