342 replies to this topic

[Yiazmat]

No, they won't need to split crits. Just build it like the others. They could do two things with the arms though: make them like stalker arms, but let/right only + torso yaw. Or just pull out the actuators like the highlender/ylw/victor.

either way, gimme dat crab! Maybe it'll be that unannounced assault after the Orion?

[Iron Hyena]

Kiiyor, on 11 July 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

+Eleventy Billion, because WE NEED MORE DAKKA.

If this is what Alex can come up with as a rough sketch, imagine what he could do if he unleashed the full fury of his creative awesomeness on it.

Whats that mech next to the king crab?!

[Yiazmat]

ummm, the crab. ...

[General Taskeen]

Yiazmat, on 12 July 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

No, they won't need to split crits. Just build it like the others. They could do two things with the arms though: make them like stalker arms, but let/right only + torso yaw. Or just pull out the actuators like the highlender/ylw/victor.

either way, gimme dat crab! Maybe it'll be that unannounced assault after the Orion?

You missed the point. Split critting is required or we will never be able to mount an IS Arrow IV.

So yes, we do need split crits. It adds to the complemity of build rules and a proper Mech Lab.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Yiazmat, on 12 July 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

ummm, the crab. ...

I don't blame Dornhal, it doesn't look like the same mech. The one on the left looks like a Marauder with crab hands.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Looking at the TRO I am not sure what they are talking about when they say spliting the AC/20 crits.

The King Crab only has Shoulder and Upper Arm Acuators despite what the artwork looks like. This means that the arms would fuction exactlly like a JagerMech and only have up and down movement but would otherwise be fixed. This configuration allows for AC/20s to fit in the arms....just like the Jaggy.

Hardpoints would probably be.

RA: 1 Ballistic
LA: 2 Ballistic
RT: 2 Energy
LT: 2 Missile

Aside from it being 100 tons with lots of armor, not super out of balance compared to other mechs already in game.

[Belorion]

General Taskeen, on 12 July 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

You missed the point. Split critting is required or we will never be able to mount an IS Arrow IV.

So yes, we do need split crits. It adds to the complemity of build rules and a proper Mech Lab.

I would guess that splitting crits for a specific piece of equipment is a might different than splitting a common piece of equipment only on one chassis. After all XL engines, FF, and Endo already split crits.

[Yiazmat]

Sorry Taskeen, I just don't believe PGI has it in them to add in that kind of hardware. Don't those also come in uranium flavor?
Long toms, MAYBE, ICBM arrow4 launchers? They just won't. So no need for split crtis.

[blacklp]

Giant slow AC40 assault. Not very scary... Unless your brain dead.
Giant slow dual gauss one ppc assault. Not very frightening... oooo 40 pinpoint... never seen that before.

Edit:Heck make it one energy CT, no ppcs at all.

Split crits, don't need em. If PGI wants to do it fine.

No good reason not to have this mech.

Edited by blacklp, 12 July 2013 - 08:32 AM.

[Kraven Kor]

cdlord, on 12 July 2013 - 04:26 AM, said:

PGI has said before that they retain creative license over variants in case they needed to fill out a mech. So to say there are not enough variants, while true on Sarna.net, doesn't mean the Mech is DOA for us. Let's speculate on what we'd like to see though...

KGC-000 -- This is the original variant so should be included. Ballistics both arms, Missile in LT, Energy in RT.
KGC-??? -- Flip the above, put Ballistic in RT and Energy in both arms.
KGC-??? -- Mix and match, Energy in one arm, Ballistic in the other, and Missiles in both R/L Torsos.
KGC-??? -- All Energy variant.
KGC-??? -- All Ballistic variant.

More ideas please.

EDIT: Another idea.

Eh, have one with 1 Ballistic in each arm, 1 energy in each side torso, and 2 missile in each side torso.

Then another with 2 ballistic in each arm, 2 energy in one side torso, and 1 missile in the other side torso.

Then another with 2 energy in each arm, 1 energy and in each side torso, and a missile in one torso location.

Edited by Kraven Kor, 12 July 2013 - 08:21 AM.

[oldradagast]

It's an interesting mech, for sure, that probably has a very unique playstyle - monstrous area effect, but easy to hit in return. I'm for it - it'll add some variety and some more strange builds and playstyles.

[Kraven Kor]

blacklp, on 12 July 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Giant slow AC40 assault. Not very scary... Unless your brain dead.
Giant slow dual gauss one ppc assault. Not very frightening... oooo 40 pinpoint... never seen that before.

Split crits, don't need em. If PGI wants to do it fine.

No good reason not to have this mech.

Yeah and canon or no, if they can't make it work, drop the split crits. Or make it "hardcoded" with the AC/20 in each arm, unremovable.

[Yiazmat]

Yeah, what Belorion said. Just split the crit on the ArrowIV. That way anyone could hold it not Just the KC. (if they do add the launcher)

Also, I'm on my phone, which won't let me quote. Bloody formatting.

[MeiSooHaityu]

blacklp, on 12 July 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Giant slow AC40 assault. Not very scary... Unless your brain dead.
Giant slow dual gauss one ppc assault. Not very frightening... oooo 40 pinpoint... never seen that before.

Edit:Heck make it one energy CT, no ppcs at all.

Split crits, don't need em. If PGI wants to do it fine.

No good reason not to have this mech.

If this Assault can only carry a maximum of about 350 armor maximum with Dual A/C20s or Dual Gauss, then I am on-board.

[Voivode]

I want the King Crab and the Crab.

There really isn't a reason to worry about the dual ac20 since firing more than one ac20 at a time will produce extra heat after the 16th, and we all know what happens to shut down assault mech.

[3rdworld]

split crits is probably a bad idea. well not probably, it is a bad idea for this game.

If u want the king crab just pull the lower and hand actuators off.

[blacklp]

Give it 100 ton assault values. Why not. Atlas isn't hard to take down. This would be shorter but wider. With no real arm movement. It's not going to have the ability to ridge hump... This mech would not be the be all end all game breaker some of you think it would be.

[General Taskeen]

Yiazmat, on 12 July 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Sorry Taskeen, I just don't believe PGI has it in them to add in that kind of hardware. Don't those also come in uranium flavor?
Long toms, MAYBE, ICBM arrow4 launchers? They just won't. So no need for split crtis.

Why? No need for split crit is not enough of a reason for me. I believe in staying true to the build rules and practically every mech so far has followed a record sheet. That's what I like most about the game so far, more so than the game-play itself. The only way for them to do it is take away the unique flavor of the King Crab with full actuators and claw covered (hand) guns, and have exposed guns with only 2 actuators instead.

For instance, as I outlined, if you split crit and have all actuators, it doesn't matter, because you still only have vertical movement. That's the disadvantage of attaching the big gun on a Mech to its arm and also its torso. Lateral movement isn't possible from what I have read, since it trys to be "realistic" in that if you have something huge attached to a full motion arm, but part of it is attached the adjacent section it "locks" the arm to only a forward firing arc.

One way or another, it will have to be addressed rather than avoided in the Mech Lab. The game may have issues, but they have been fairly competent in being able to emulate the build rules in the Mech Lab, so I don't see it is as an impossible task for them to undertake. Endo and FF technically 'split crits' and move around your Mech as you fill up every available slot.

Another example is the IS LB 20-X, which is 11 slots (one more than an AC/20), it would be impossible to add any Mech with LB 20-X in its arms barring removing everything but the shoulder, but is that even possible in the build rules? The future King Crab 005 comes with 2x LB 20-X, so it would be impossible to add it or any other Mech that also arm mounts that gun.

[Crackerbox]

BUMP for great justice.

With the current (and even upcoming changes to the) meta, the King Crab would still stand out from other assault mechs by being the only one thus far to be a ballistic heavy assault mech. On anything larger than a Cataphract, I don't believe there are any mechs that have multiple ballistic locations. Though it might encourage the double AC20 load out since it's a standard, this should be a non-issue from the fact it's 100 tons, slow, and has a MASSIVE profile from the front.

[General Taskeen]

3rdworld, on 12 July 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

split crits is probably a bad idea. well not probably, it is a bad idea for this game.

If u want the king crab just pull the lower and hand actuators off.

Then it would be impossible to add the KGC-005, the Stalker-8S, and many more Mechs.

Saying it is a "bad idea" is not enough of a reason, unless you define how it is bad. At the very least, if its so much of a "problem" that hasn't even been seen, then make it so only a Mech variant or Mech that did split its crits on a record sheet, be only able to do it on that Mech or allowing only Mechs with All actuators removed but the shoulder and lower arm to do so (This will mean that something like a Highlander or Centurion-YLW or AH, or Jager, would be able to mount a future IS LB 20-X, for instance). Hence the King Crab would be given "Split Crit Ability - Mount Any Heavy Ballistic In HP Location."

Very few Mechs mount huge guns in their arms, so what's the problem with that? The answer is, there wouldn't be any problem with allowing that Mech to have the gun split crit. Absolutely Zero.

Perhaps it would be if every Mech could. Like say a Dragon with lots of actuators, but even then the gun could only fire forward anyways.

The following all split crits:

AC/20
LB 20-X
Heavy Gauss
Improved Heavy Gauss
Arrow IV
Long Tom Artillery