287 replies to this topic

[Pariah Devalis]

Again: Tonnage limits. That is the specific reason (besides nostalgia or just liking how the mech handles) that people will run it. Not to belittle the other reasons, but straight up comparing the two seems unfair considering the 15 ton difference between the two.

[Monsoon]

Of the two, my preference has always been the Mad Dog/Vulture.

It was the clan mech of choice for me back in the Virtual Worlds pod game, though even more so I'd take the I.S.'s Sunder or Avatar.

[Craig Steele]

CyclonerM, on 24 February 2014 - 12:27 PM, said:

But in MWO armor values will be changed.

Oh, and how are you going to use a Mad Dog as a support 'Mech with only two tons of LRM ammo?

Catapult, Crusader, both support mechs with only 8 shots for their 15 racks.

Dervish has only 1 ton for its 10 racks, trebuchet had 1 ton for its 15's, both support mediums.

[Mark Brandhauber]

The mad dog was primarily used for support role, as an omni-mech it could be configured for all Roles; The Alpha configuration is not a support weapons loadout. With the advent that we will be able to change omni-mechs armour values; the mad dog will easily serve in many roles when it comes to MWO.
And it should be noted the Timber wolf has a headbox larger than a catapult and that makes it entirely unsuited for brawling "the end".

Edited by Mark Brandhauber, 24 February 2014 - 05:38 PM.

[Grey Black]

Stormcrow.

./thread

[GalaxyBluestar]

maddog for looks

timber wolf for flexibility in the field

reopened thread

[FireSlade]

Mark Brandhauber, on 24 February 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:

The mad dog was primarily used for support role, as an omni-mech it could be configured for all Roles; The Alpha configuration is not a support weapons loadout. With the advent that we will be able to change omni-mechs armour values; the mad dog will easily serve in many roles when it comes to MWO.
And it should be noted the Timber wolf has a headbox larger than a catapult and that makes it entirely unsuited for brawling "the end".

Why does everyone think that you need to brawl to be effective? Really tell me why... The way I see it the Timber Wolf Prime is going to be absolutely brutal between 500-180meters where all (minus the MGs and MLP) the weapon systems are in range and chewing away at the enemy (that is 78 damage every salvo). Then under 180 meters you have the MGs and MPL to finish off what ever is left of the enemy. Only the truly stupid cannot do well with this mech and instead blame the large head hitbox and missile racks for their failure instead of their lack of skill.

[Summon3r]

FireSlade, on 24 February 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:

Why does everyone think that you need to brawl to be effective? Really tell me why... The way I see it the Timber Wolf Prime is going to be absolutely brutal between 500-180meters where all (minus the MGs and MLP) the weapon systems are in range and chewing away at the enemy (that is 78 damage every salvo). Then under 180 meters you have the MGs and MPL to finish off what ever is left of the enemy. Only the truly stupid cannot do well with this mech and instead blame the large head hitbox and missile racks for their failure instead of their lack of skill.

lol cause u will see stock builds on the field right. ....

[GalaxyBluestar]

FireSlade, on 24 February 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:

Why does everyone think that you need to brawl to be effective? Really tell me why... The way I see it the Timber Wolf Prime is going to be absolutely brutal between 500-180meters where all (minus the MGs and MLP) the weapon systems are in range and chewing away at the enemy (that is 35 damage every salvo). Then under 180 meters you have the MGs and MPL to finish off what ever is left of the enemy. Only the truly stupid cannot do well with this mech and instead blame the large head hitbox and missile racks for their failure instead of their lack of skill.

PAUL INOUYE: FTFY

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 24 February 2014 - 11:06 PM.

[B0oN]

Hey guys, one thing I´m really wondering about : Will the Maddog have 360° torsotwist as it has/had in other MW-titles ?

That´d be mucho glorioso !

[CyclonerM]

Summon3r, on 24 February 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

lol cause u will see stock builds on the field right. ....

With minor tweaks i see no reason why the Timberwolf Prime should not work in MWO.

Rad Hanzo, on 24 February 2014 - 11:59 PM, said:

Hey guys, one thing I´m really wondering about : Will the Maddog have 360° torsotwist as it has/had in other MW-titles ?

That´d be mucho glorioso !

We are still wondering if they will add it to the game

It would be great however..

[Strum Wealh]

Rad Hanzo, on 24 February 2014 - 11:59 PM, said:

Hey guys, one thing I´m really wondering about : Will the Maddog have 360° torsotwist as it has/had in other MW-titles ?

That´d be mucho glorioso !

Personally, I would count on "probably not" - Even 180° torso-twist doesn't exist in BattleTech, and no 'Mech had 360° torso-twist in BT canon.

That being said, there are Design Quirks, described in Strategic Operations, that modify the ability to torso-twist:

• Standard torso twist is 60° to 90° to either side (depending on whether one takes "one hex side" to extend to the far corner of the hex side, or only to the center of the hex side).
  
• Extended Torso Twist (StratOps, pg. 194): "Unlike most ’Mechs, one with this quirk can turn its torso much further. When torso twisting, the ’Mech can change its facing by one or two hexsides."; the ETT quirk extends the torso twist range of a 'Mech to 120° to 150° to either side (depending on whether one takes "one hex side" to extend to the far corner of the hex side, or only to the center of the hex side).
  
• No Torso Twist (StratOps, pg. 198): "Some ’Mech designs, like the Bushwacker, lack the flexibility to twist at the waist (or don’t possess a waist to twist). A ’Mech with this quirk cannot torso twist."; the NTT quirk reduces the torso twist range of a 'Mech to 0° to 30° to either side (depending on how literally one interprets "no torso twist").

However, PGI's renditions of such 'Mechs as the Jenner and the Locust show that they are willing to add torso joints to 'Mechs that do not canonically have them (thus largely eliminating the NTT quirk), while all of the 'Mechs in MWO thus far have torso-twist limits that fall into either the standard range (60° to 90°) or around the lower bound of the ETT range (generally no more than 130°, versus the range of 120° to 150°)... and even 'Mechs that do have both high torso-twist limits and actuated arms (such as the Griffin and the Wolverine) are set up such that there is a small gap to their rear that they cannot cover without changing the facing of the legs.

[Pariah Devalis]

Marack Drock, on 25 February 2014 - 06:31 AM, said:

In MechWarrior 4 Mercs Mekpak they gave Nova, Locust, etc. Its called lazy programming. They don't want to program a mech to have no Torso because they will have to then give it different perks.

Plus, in MW2, MW3, and MC1 the Mad Dog did not have 360* torso twist.

Beat me to it. Mad Dog never had 360 torso twisting in any prior game to MW4. Honestly, it was a weird choice by Microsoft to do so.

Now that I have MW4 and Mad Dog in my head, I keep getting flashbacks to Mad Dog HIGH EXPLOSIVE bowling.....

[FireSlade]

Summon3r, on 24 February 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

lol cause u will see stock builds on the field right. ....

With Innersphere builds? No you do not see stock builds. This is because 90% of them came with single heat sinks which can barely keep up with the heat of the engines nevermind the fast firing rates of MWO. Stock Clan mechs on the other hand, mostly run doubles. Stock Clan > Stock Innersphere.

GalaxyBluestar, on 24 February 2014 - 11:06 PM, said:

PAUL INOUYE: FTFY

Thanks for that... Guess I am too stupid to realize that Paul is why you think MWO sucks and because of that he will ruin the Clans. Maybe we can wait until they release that Clan mechs before making assumptions that they will suck.

Edited by FireSlade, 26 February 2014 - 10:09 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

...FFS. Where are the Clan Mechs nerfed again? I keep hearing people say that, and I do not think it means what they think it means, considering they are pretty much spot on with Table Top omnimech rules - except we trade total hardpoint flexibility for EXTREMELY flexible hardpoint modularity and added armor value flexibility.

Cannot even point to the weapon systems as being totally nerfed, considering the one keystone argument used to support nerfed clan tech, the POSSIBILITY of extra heavy LRM20, is clearly identified as a last ditch option that everyone, including PGI, wish to avoid. I mean, I can maybe understand people complaining about the minimum range damage drop off - arguably reasonable change, but there are other functional ways they could have balanced it like ripple firing. Cannot complain about the SSRM4/6 stagger, though, as it is a reasonable change, as is the increased laser burn time, for balance.

No, what people mean to say is that IS mechs are too flexible. Not that the Clan Mechs are nerfed, but that the IS mechs are too good.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 26 February 2014 - 05:15 AM.

[CyclonerM]

Pariah Devalis, on 26 February 2014 - 05:14 AM, said:

No, what people mean to say is that IS mechs are too flexible. Not that the Clan Mechs are nerfed, but that the IS mechs are too good.

Oh, i always say it. Every time that i can actually

But. Yes, there is a but **. I am fine with the nerfs to damage and the SSRMs change (i do not like however what they are planning for CLRMs..) but in my opinions OmniTech has been nerfed or, at least , it has lost its meaning.

If Clan tech will be implemented as they have asaid, we will not have OmniPods, but only "swappable hardpoints" which is quite not the same. Supposedly, if you buy an OmniMech, you can fit every kind of weapon in a OmniPod. In MWO, however, as i understand it, you will have to buy two "variants" of an OmniMech (though it should have no variants) just to be able to swap an arm, trading a laser for a ballistic hardpoint for example. Now, i see it as a nerf and as a loss of meaning.

Sized OmniPods, maybe, but Lego 'Mechs no please. This is not Armored Core..

[Pariah Devalis]

CyclonerM, on 26 February 2014 - 07:08 AM, said:

Oh, i always say it. Every time that i can actually

But. Yes, there is a but **. I am fine with the nerfs to damage and the SSRMs change (i do not like however what they are planning for CLRMs..) but in my opinions OmniTech has been nerfed or, at least , it has lost its meaning.

If Clan tech will be implemented as they have asaid, we will not have OmniPods, but only "swappable hardpoints" which is quite not the same. Supposedly, if you buy an OmniMech, you can fit every kind of weapon in a OmniPod. In MWO, however, as i understand it, you will have to buy two "variants" of an OmniMech (though it should have no variants) just to be able to swap an arm, trading a laser for a ballistic hardpoint for example. Now, i see it as a nerf and as a loss of meaning.

Sized OmniPods, maybe, but Lego 'Mechs no please. This is not Armored Core..

Well, technically you can just buy the "pods" according to their post. The key difference between BT Lore Omni pods and MWO Omni pods is just that while MWO Omni pods are mech and section specific with preloaded hardpoints, Lore was plug and play with any weapon system in any part of any mech. I cannot even begin to imagine how hard it would be to balance a video game like that, however.

At this point in time, my only major gripes with the Clan inclusion are that Clan mechs will not be Clan use only (but then IS mechs should, likewise, have the same sort of restriction so short of a new account it hurts existing players by denying use of their mechs), and that the game modes we have may not be able to appropriately support 10v12. I know I said it in the other thread, but I feel it gets severely overlooked, that while combat 10v12 should be easily balanceable correcting two out of the three game modes (and ESPECIALLY conquest) we have to be fair and balanced with unequal team sizes is a hell of a lot harder.

Well, that and the absolute lack of a true scout mech. PGI, why you no Arctic Cheetah?

[Pariah Devalis]

Marack Drock, on 26 February 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

And the Clan weapons will be nerfed because of balancing other wise they will be able to kill an Atlas with an AC2 alone.

How? First off, pointing to Clan ballistics of all things.... They just weigh less and take less space (and hit SLIGHTLY farther out than IS). They do no more damage. Oh, and there is no option for a standard autocannon. So either you have a gun that jams or a shotgun. I would love to see how useful an LB-2X AC is in MWO.....

Missiles? They also never did more damage. They *just weighed less and took up less space. Do the current plans have this in place? Check and check.

*Except for LRMs, which had no minimum range. As how PGI is currently deciding how to handle this, exactly, yet have explained that they intend to change the mechanic somehow, it is unfair for me to argue in regards to this. To what extent it will be toned down is to be seen, and it might be a light rap on the wrist or it could be with full on lock and chains. Neither you nor I know, so nobody can go off the rails about LRMs yet.

Energy weapons are where the Clans had their biggest advantage. Not only were they slightly longer range than their (when appropriate) Inner Sphere versions, they hit harder and took up less space for less weight. Downside: No standard variants so you are either using an ER weapon or a Pulse weapon. Considering in even the ERLLas example they used in the Clan tech thread had a damage increase over the IS ERLLas, the damage advantage is there. The weight and crit size advantage is there. The heat disadvantage is naturally there (nothing but ER means you need more DHS to fire as often). If range gets slightly reduced, considering how obscenely cluttered most maps are in MWO that is of negligible impact. Increased beam duration from, what, one second to one and a quarter second? I would call that a fair trade, and that does little to impact Pulse lasers and ERPPC.

So, no. I still see no outstanding Clan Nerf you or anyone else speaks of.

Edit:

Until we have some hard numbers on Clan weapon damage values and beam durations, saying they are nerfed is one hell of a stretch, and in the case of beam duration it will take time using the weapons to get a feel for if it makes that big of an issue or not. Until such time, we have the data that is available to us and zero reason to assume anything other than what we already have access to.

I only ask that if someone is going to make an argument, back it up with rationality. Show me numbers. Show me facts. Just because someone you know screamed something is something bad does not make it so. Not even if 50 people do so. These forums spread negativity like wildfire, even if it is unfounded. Mass hysteria is still hysteria, so give up the evidence or give up the argument.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 26 February 2014 - 08:58 AM.

[CyclonerM]

Pariah Devalis, on 26 February 2014 - 08:22 AM, said:

Well, technically you can just buy the "pods" according to their post. The key difference between BT Lore Omni pods and MWO Omni pods is just that while MWO Omni pods are mech and section specific with preloaded hardpoints, Lore was plug and play with any weapon system in any part of any mech. I cannot even begin to imagine how hard it would be to balance a video game like that, however.

Sized omnipods. They should have done it with hardpoints too... Sized hardpoints were the only good thing in the mechlab in MW4..

Quote

Well, that and the absolute lack of a true scout mech. PGI, why you no Arctic Cheetah?

Because Adder and Kit Fox are more iconic 'Mechs

[Strum Wealh]

Pariah Devalis, on 26 February 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

Until we have some hard numbers on Clan weapon damage values and beam durations, saying they are nerfed is one hell of a stretch, and in the case of beam duration it will take time using the weapons to get a feel for if it makes that big of an issue or not. Until such time, we have the data that is available to us and zero reason to assume anything other than what we already have access to.

I only ask that if someone is going to make an argument, back it up with rationality. Show me numbers. Show me facts. Just because someone you know screamed something is something bad does not make it so. Not even if 50 people do so. These forums spread negativity like wildfire, even if it is unfounded. Mass hysteria is still hysteria, so give up the evidence or give up the argument.

Such truth (not a shiba/"doge" reference! ), especially in the second paragraph.
(I recently made a similar point about how one must "either provide something of substance to defend [one's] position or to concede to [the opposing stance]").