123 replies to this topic

[The Boz]

stjobe, on 29 September 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

Yeah, the pilot efficiencies really need a reworking. Not only do we have two that do absolutely nothing, but many of them are borderline OP; heat efficiencies, speed tweak, twist rates; all these are supposed to be balancing factors for 'mechs, and the efficiencies negate those balancing factors very effectively.

Those and the modules need to be reworked into an unlock-all-select-few system. Again, similar to how LoL manages masteries.

[Nryrony]

MustrumRidcully, on 29 September 2013 - 09:50 AM, said:

Simple question.

In the days of the Quad PPC Stalker and Jagerbombs, it seems clearly that high mounted arms was better than fully articulated arcs. But how are things now, or in general?

Note that you can use cover sideways - ofc being able to shot over cover is an advantage, but what you make out of it depends on you. - As well as the sacrifices you need to make for it..

[GODzillaGSPB]

The question might be simple, the answer isn't. When standing at the ridge in Frozen City, high mounted weapons are the most important. When standing on top of a hill, mountain or canyon, aiming down at an enemy, articulated arms are more important.

It always depends on the situation.

[PEEFsmash]

MustrumRidcully, on 29 September 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

Does your verdict come from the fact that the actuators actually cost crit space as hindrance, or is it really only the high points, so even if we'd give you an extra crit slot in each arm, it wouldn't matter?

Do you also consider it this way when thinking about mechs with low torso twist ranges? Jenner, Catapult and Jagermech are pretty awesome in that regard, but the Stalkers are pretty bad at this.

(I would not be surprised if you said: Yes, even with a Stalker like torso twist radius and without actuators costing crit space I think a high arm position is superior. But I don't just want to assume.)

High mounted arms are superior for peeking reasons. Articulated arms are bad because, as you point out, they are lower mounted AND that low-mountedness comes at the cost of losing a critical slot, which matters on many mechs. Even if the articulated arms had the same critical slots, most people would take high mounted. I'll even say that even if having high mounted arms COSTED an extra slot, they would be superior.

Edited by PEEFsmash, 29 September 2013 - 01:22 PM.

[The Boz]

GODzillaGSPB, on 29 September 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

The question might be simple, the answer isn't. When standing at the ridge in Frozen City, high mounted weapons are the most important. When standing on top of a hill, mountain or canyon, aiming down at an enemy, articulated arms are more important.

It always depends on the situation.

Some situations come up more than others. Some situations have more of an impact. Some situations can be forced, others you just find yourself in.

[Fajther]

There are mechs with both high weapons (on the torso) and elbows. Examples? Quickdraws, and cataphracts have high weapons on the torso and elbows.

[Grey Ghost]

Shouldn't Mechs with all those arm actuators be able to raise/extend their arms for a better firing position? The old intro to MW2 shows this. MW:O just seems to have made them a pure detriment to have. I wish they extended automatically, and independently Left / Right, depending on where your aiming (Pilots Line of Sight vs Arms LoS). Then adding in crits for Actuators might be a sensible idea.

Just tired of all the knuckle dragging.

[OneEyed Jack]

Grey Ghost, on 29 September 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

Shouldn't Mechs with all those arm actuators be able to raise/extend their arms for a better firing position? The old intro to MW2 shows this. MW:O just seems to have made them a pure detriment to have. I wish they extended automatically, and independently Left / Right, depending on where your aiming (Pilots Line of Sight vs Arms LoS). Then adding in crits for Actuators might be a sensible idea.

Just tired of all the knuckle dragging.

Yes, they should. They should be able to move their arms in most of the ways a human could. Human-like movement is kinda the reason they're mechs instead of tanks. Instead, we get "arms" that are locked in place from shoulder to elbow and the only motion we get is a fairly small pivoting around the elbow joint.

Of course, they should also be able to step over rocks and look down enough to see a Spider standing in front of them....

[stjobe]

MWO should have a button to Lock S-Foils in Attack Position... Er, I mean, raise arms to firing position

[Drehl]

stjobe, on 29 September 2013 - 11:30 PM, said:

MWO should have a button to Lock S-Foils in Attack Position... Er, I mean, raise arms to firing position

this would be great.
the only real advantage of fully articulated arms is in shortest range brawls and or to track lights. otherwise the high mounted arms are more valuable (hello there ridgehumping and ac20s)
why not give the "armed" mechs the ability to raise their arms? maybe with triggered a .. cooldown for all armmounted weapons? and not to full shoulder heigh but... higher and with forced armlock.


voted role dependend.. even though I know that in most cases high mounted arms are superior. nevertheless there are cases where the fully articulated arms are still better. namely self tagging lrm boating (the arms are great in a treb, not just for tagging but also to keep the lock while moving) and victor or highlander jumpbrawling.

[MustrumRidcully]

Drehl, on 30 September 2013 - 12:02 AM, said:

this would be great.
the only real advantage of fully articulated arms is in shortest range brawls and or to track lights. otherwise the high mounted arms are more valuable (hello there ridgehumping and ac20s)
why not give the "armed" mechs the ability to raise their arms? maybe with triggered a .. cooldown for all armmounted weapons? and not to full shoulder heigh but... higher and with forced armlock.


voted role dependend.. even though I know that in most cases high mounted arms are superior.

If you say "most cases high mounted arms are superior", are you certain your choice is really appropriate? The choice says "Almost entirely dependent on your role", but if you think in most cases high mounted arms are superior, is it really almost entirely role-dependent?

[stjobe]

Drehl, on 30 September 2013 - 12:02 AM, said:

the only real advantage of fully articulated arms is in shortest range brawls and or to track lights.

And for lights. Articulated arms is a real advantage to lights, as it enables you to track your target during high-speed maneuvering, and to keep your target under your reticule in a much wider arc than the torso ever could. It also enables you to shield your CT (a favourite trick of the CN9).

[Tincan Nightmare]

stjobe, on 29 September 2013 - 11:30 PM, said:

MWO should have a button to Lock S-Foils in Attack Position... Er, I mean, raise arms to firing position

Yah, seems crazy to have a fully 'articulated' arm that never moves and sits glued in place, even when it means your shot hits the terrain in front of you. The advantage of giving up slots for lower arm actuators should be more than an increase to left/right firing arcs. Its going to suck for T-bolt pilots if that large laser arm is positioned bent at the elbow so the barrel is around the hip, when it could be fully extended to shoot from around shoulder height. Makes you wonder how the Wolverine and Griffin will carry there AC and PPC (respectively).

[Dirus Nigh]

It depends on what I want to do with a mech. I like the high arms of the jager for sniping, and direct fire support. I like articulated arms for their range of motion. However there is another aspect that comes into play.

High mounted arms do not shield the torso. If I am targeting a jager, or black jack I will hit our vulnerable side torsos, no matter what angle I am firing from. The low slung arms will shield my side and center torsos. It may be a small amount depending on the angle of attack, but its some thing.

[The Boz]

On an entirely unrelated note, what the HELL are hand actuators FOR!?

[Drehl]

MustrumRidcully, on 30 September 2013 - 12:18 AM, said:

If you say "most cases high mounted arms are superior", are you certain your choice is really appropriate? The choice says "Almost entirely dependent on your role", but if you think in most cases high mounted arms are superior, is it really almost entirely role-dependent?

well .. I forgot to say, that no matter how much better the high mounted arms are, I still prefer the full articulated arms. most of my assaults are brawlers and as a pure brawler it's better to have articulated arms. thats why I voted role dependend.. even though I know that in most cases the higher arms are better.

stjobe, on 30 September 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

And for lights. Articulated arms is a real advantage to lights, as it enables you to track your target during high-speed maneuvering, and to keep your target under your reticule in a much wider arc than the torso ever could. It also enables you to shield your CT (a favourite trick of the CN9).

.. I wrote tracking lights. thats also true for light vs. light dogfights.

[Flapdrol]

articulated arms is not 100% useless, but high arms are better on pretty much anything, usually gets you 3 or 4 extra crits as well.

[stjobe]

Drehl, on 30 September 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:

.. I wrote tracking lights. thats also true for light vs. light dogfights.

It's true for lights in any engagement, not only light vs. light.

[Huntsman]

*Technically* its entirely dependent on your role...

1- brawlers are better with lower arms which protect their side torsos while allowing for a greater range of lateral shooting

while

2- higher arm actuators are better for sniping as they allow the mech to take shots while exposing less of itself, and they take up less crit slots so as to allow more stuff on the arms.

I do say "technically" however because in the current state of the game these two benefits are not equal, and on most mechs the higher arm actuator are more important.

[Satan n stuff]

It has very little to do with role, but everything to do with the situation you're in.
If you're circling and torso twisting for your life then being able to aim sideways is a huge advantage. Fully articulated arms give you a lot more freedom to aim, allowing you to hit targets while running away from them for example.
If you're near cover that you can shoot over having the arms higher up will make it easier to shoot without exposing your mech too much. On most maps there are plenty of obstacles you won't be able to shoot over unless you're far enough away from them or your weapons are mounted high, so having high mounted arms and staying near these gives you a significant tactical advantage. That being said if your arms are placed higher than your cockpit you'll still need to expose part of your mech just to see what you're supposed to shoot. Both can be very useful for any playstyle, but it's up to the player to take advantage of them.