1726 replies to this topic

[MasterGoa]

I will add my 2 cents to this conversation.

REMOVE THE PODS... Simple as that.

It has 20 missile tubes under the covers.

Yes, it is THAT simple...

[wanderer]

Seriously, we have the very definition of missile boat here...but you've turned it into Dumbo with ear cancer, obliterating it's classic lines in the process.

Fit however many tubes you want it to have, but do it inside the box.

[531st]

At least the theard is being sustained

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

Missiles should go in the box. That is the reason there is a box. And scale the thing down a bit already!

[Dauphni]

Bigger launchers means bigger missiles. Clearly Catapults should get a double damage missile quirk

[KnowBuddy]

The Boz, on 14 December 2014 - 11:26 PM, said:

Can someone please explain one thing...
If the A1 has missile bay doors... that only cover one third of the missile bays, does the damage reduction work for the entire component, even if the launchers outside are hit?
Should it be possible to fire no-delay SRMs from the VCRs with the main LRMs behind closed doors, and still keep the damage reduction? I have a feeling that PGI knows this, and is overemphasizing the importance of the missile bay door damage reduction...

IIRC, all tubes are affected by both bay door delay and armor bonus, whether they are inside the box or exposed. Which is understandable, but still stupid. (In addition to the base stupidity of the situation.)

[Vassago Rain]

My cats have been collecting dust for over a year now.

[The Boz]

KnowBuddy, on 28 December 2014 - 08:08 PM, said:

IIRC, all tubes are affected by both bay door delay and armor bonus, whether they are inside the box or exposed. Which is understandable, but still stupid. (In addition to the base stupidity of the situation.)

Tested this exhaustively. Nope, launchers outside the doors are not affected by the doors; they fire before the doors open. So technically, yes, you could stick your LRMs behind doors, your SRMs outside, and have protection for both with minimum drawback (because LRMs launching a fraction of a second is not that big a deal).

[XphR]

Vassago Rain, on 28 December 2014 - 09:31 PM, said:

My cats have been collecting dust for over a year now.

Save for my Jester, I just cant bring myself to pilot them for whats been done to them.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Vassago Rain, on 28 December 2014 - 09:31 PM, said:

My cats have been collecting dust for over a year now.

I always played the K2, but it is seeing a lot of use post quirk pass. The PPC quirks have been kind to it. I run 2PPCs with 2LPLasers and it's fun and productive. 2PPCs and an A/C10 with 2 MLasers would also wreck.

As for the missile variants, yea they have been collecting dust for me too. The A1 never got played and I sold it. It's missile pods (especially with VCRs) are like having 2 mini Awesomes hanging off the torso.

I never understood how to properly use the C4, so I wont comment on him.

Heck, even the C1 was done incorrectly the last quirk pass IMO. The C1 of all missile variants should be more of a skirmisher and have a chance to be aggressive in a fight. It should be the "mini-madcat" of the group. Change the LRM15 quirks to LRM10 quirks and do some nice buffing to MLasers and LLasers (duration, ranfe , and heat).

As it stands, my C1 has 2 LRM15s and 2MLasers and 1 LPLaser. Its boring. *sigh*.

[MATRAKA14]

So, 1000 replies, that's a lot. How much you say? well, as much as fat ugly launchers in this image.

[MeiSooHaityu]

MATRAKA14, on 29 December 2014 - 07:56 AM, said:

So, 1000 replies, that's a lot. How much you say? well, as much as fat ugly launchers in this image.

The arms/launchers in MWO still look bigger than the ones in this image.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 29 December 2014 - 09:05 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

MATRAKA14, on 29 December 2014 - 07:56 AM, said:

So, 1000 replies, that's a lot. How much you say? well, as much as fat ugly launchers in this image.

well, at least your problem doesn't leave you with the appearance of performance problems, like my poor K2...I WISH, mine were too big.....

[MATRAKA14]

MeiSooHaityu, on 29 December 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

The arms/launchers in MWO still look bigger than the ones in this image.

I can't make a version with view/launcher. Seriously 63,357 views, they can say whatever they want but this is relevant. We need a really high quality rework/resize for this chassis, and we can't wait another hole year.

Bishop Steiner, on 29 December 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

well, at least your problem doesn't leave you with the appearance of performance problems, like my poor K2...I WISH, mine were too big.....

I would like to get the ppcs back, what about this alternative, scale down the hole chassis and keep the old ppcs, boom there you go same size ppcs as now but with the mech sice proportion.


Also why is this closed?

http://mwomercs.com/...me-models-back/


P.D. keep this thread running until the end of the days if needed, keep the good work.

[Bishop Steiner]

MATRAKA14, on 29 December 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

I can't make a version with view/launcher. Seriously 63,357 views, they can say whatever they want but this is relevant. We need a really high quality rework/resize for this chassis, and we can't wait another hole year.




I would like to get the ppcs back, what about this alternative, scale down the hole chassis and keep the old ppcs, boom there you go same size ppcs as now but with the mech sice proportion.


Also why is this closed?

http://mwomercs.com/...me-models-back/


P.D. keep this thread running until the end of the days if needed, keep the good work.

I think they intentionally archived it because it was rattling too many cages.

[RedlineHunter]

Fix the cats! They deserve the love.

[MATRAKA14]

RedlineHunter, on 29 December 2014 - 08:19 PM, said:

Fix the cats! They deserve the love.

Please, PGI, please...

[XphR]

Yes PGI, Please?!

[cSand]

it does seem silly, now that I own some cats, that 20 lrms can fit in the box... but that very same box can only fit 1 ssrm2

[RedlineHunter]

bump!