1726 replies to this topic

[Funky Bacon]

Jin Ma, on 06 March 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

It is a little big. But i think mostly the stalker is also very small for an 85 tonner. According to volume theres only a 7ton difference between the 2 mechs, when there should be 20.

http://mwomercs.com/...-and-quickdraw/



Also, has anybody pointed this out yet? They really butchered the catapult revamp like no other:



- Removal of smaller launchers for the C1, A1. So that all missile catapults have large launchers now.
- Addition of unnecessary side straps, for missile addons.
- Misalignment of laser

Actually, they change the alignment of the torso laser cause it was not aligned properly. in fact, they where pointing into the ground when you where aiming straight forward which is why they changed the angle. Now they are pointing forward like they should.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Funky Bacon, on 07 March 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Actually, they change the alignment of the torso laser cause it was not aligned properly. in fact, they where pointing into the ground when you where aiming straight forward which is why they changed the angle. Now they are pointing forward like they should.

I get what your saying, but I think the correction was a bit poorly implemented. Did the weapons need an alignment tweak...yes, did it need to look like crap...no .

[Jin Ma]

Funky Bacon, on 07 March 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Actually, they change the alignment of the torso laser cause it was not aligned properly. in fact, they where pointing into the ground when you where aiming straight forward which is why they changed the angle. Now they are pointing forward like they should.

yeah i know. the reason they changed it was so that when you mounted ballistic weapons the barrel has to be parallel to the ground if you are aiming at the horizon.

however that does not apply to energy weapons (laser weapons because the assumption is that the lense is able to direct the beam, exception is PPC) so if they really wanted to show attention to details. they would have kept the rotation as intended by Alex's concpet art. And only moved it out of its socket when mounting ballistic weapons and PPC

Edited by Jin Ma, 11 March 2014 - 10:15 AM.

[Degalus]

After posting in Forum, Twitter and Support, the only thing i got was silence or the funny answere from the support that the forum would be a better place for my feedback ( yea sure). It doesnt look good for us that we get a good looking Catapult again....
Only way to use Catapults without looking ugly is 2xLrm 20 or a ppc less K2/jester. I dont like the Lasert1ts either but they are not so ugly as this tiny ppcs...

[Degalus]

I know im not a realy good Drawer but this is one of my ideas how a Catapult could look better while using the modular Weaponsystem.
Just an idea:

Edited by Degalus, 12 March 2014 - 06:22 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Personally, I think the add-ons should only be used when the equipped launchers go over the available missile ports.

For example, the Cat has 3 missile hard points and 20 ports. 2xLRM10--OK. 3xLRM5--OK. 1xLRM10+2xLRM5--OK. 3xLRM20--NOT OK.

Doesn't seem like it'd be that hard.....

[Jin Ma]

Degalus, on 11 March 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

I know im not a realy good Drawer but this is one of my ideas how a Catapult could look better while using the modular Weaponsystem.
Just an idea:

with a mech like Catapult. I would not mind if the salvos were limited by number of tubes. i mean shit there are so many tubes it wouldn't make much of a differece.

besides the tube count on the catapult variants used to distinguish them from eachother. Otherwise each catapult is "just another LRM boat."

Edited by Jin Ma, 11 March 2014 - 10:17 AM.

[xXBagheeraXx]

Already posted another thread about this myself....This build is only 3 artemis 6 launchers and 3 streaks....

FUGLY

[KnowBuddy]

Jin Ma, on 11 March 2014 - 10:16 AM, said:

with a mech like Catapult. I would not mind if the salvos were limited by number of tubes. i mean shit there are so many tubes it wouldn't make much of a differece.

besides the tube count on the catapult variants used to distinguish them from eachother. Otherwise each catapult is "just another LRM boat."

That's the thing... the Catapult is supposed to be THE LRM boat. From the beginning of MWO it's been again and again: "Hey, you can use LRMs well on any mech... unless you're in a Catapult, in which case here is a big ol' bushel of bull**** which you have to swallow to use LRMs at all."

[Jin Ma]

KnowBuddy, on 11 March 2014 - 10:42 AM, said:

That's the thing... the Catapult is supposed to be THE LRM boat. From the beginning of MWO it's been again and again: "Hey, you can use LRMs well on any mech... unless you're in a Catapult, in which case here is a big ol' bushel of bull**** which you have to swallow to use LRMs at all."

they really just need to sit down and decide how they want tube count to work. and from there start to standardize things. cuz right now there is no consistency at all with how missile hardpoitn work

[Rebas Kradd]

Otto Cannon, on 05 November 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

*Facepalm*

What, you couldn't find any facepalms from Enterprise and JJTrek?

Both were worthy of facepalms...

[Degalus]

The problem is that they want to show how many hardpoints are used on the mech. I have no problem with that but they just failed on the modulardesign for the Catapult. Its just like more then 1 missleslot was not planed on this mech and they just pined on some racks. It should look like that the 2 -3 missleslots are part of the design.

[Malleus011]

I have no problem with them showing us how many hard points are used on the 'mech.

Why can't three LRM5's or SRM4's fit UNDER the MISSILE COVERS?

They wrecked the Cat's looks with a poor implementation of the launch tubes.

Mostly, at this point, I just want the smaller C1 missile boxes back for 15 tubes and smaller, and the fat PPC barrels back on my K2.

Heck, give me an OPTION to use the old school boxes and barrels. It could be your first optional geometry 'mech. You've already got the stuff ...

[oldradagast]

It's terrible looking and makes no sense. The Catapult has the largest missile launching structure in the game - the box ears. If any mech in the game should be allowed to put out huge missile volleys without add-ons, it's the Catapult.

Part of the problem extends to the insane way in which missile launchers and tubes are implemented in this game. For example, an Atlas has 10 tubes on the top LRM launcher. An LRM 20 will fire in two volleys of 10 because there are only 10 tubes... and yet, somehow, a pair of LRM 10's will fire all at once - pushing 20 missiles through 10 tubes... at least on the DDC... on the other Atlases, the second LRM 10 will get shoved in a spot for an SRM 6... thus resulting in even more wackiness. It just makes no sense and has an effect upon appearance as geometry is updated to match the actual weapon load.

The second part of the problem is caused by the need to "show all the weapons the mech has." That's nice for visible weapons mounted in obvious places - the Atlas's external right torso gun housing, most energy weapons, etc. But the Catapult is designed to house the missiles in an armored box with a missile bay door. Realistically, all the missiles should fit within the box and you'd only be able to see how many missile hardpoints are in use when the missile bay doors are open. That's why the Catapult has those huge ears... for lots of missiles. Doing it the current way just looks awful and silly.

Don't even get me started on the oversized Catapult vs. undersized Stalker nonsense. Catapults now are freakishly huge things with giant ears, while Stalkers are somehow abnormally small while still firing off more missiles per salvo than the Catapults. I guess the Stalkers all have magical Missile Bays of Holding to store their launchers in extra-dimensional space... or Catapults use their ears mostly to store luggage and beer.

Edited by oldradagast, 11 March 2014 - 11:36 AM.

[Degalus]

oldradagast, on 11 March 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

It's terrible looking and makes no sense. The Catapult has the largest missile launching structure in the game - the box ears. If any mech in the game should be allowed to put out huge missile volleys without add-ons, it's the Catapult.

Part of the problem extends to the insane way in which missile launchers and tubes are implemented in this game. For example, an Atlas has 10 tubes on the top LRM launcher. An LRM 20 will fire in two volleys of 10 because there are only 10 tubes... and yet, somehow, a pair of LRM 10's will fire all at once - pushing 20 missiles through 10 tubes... at least on the DDC... on the other Atlases, the second LRM 10 will get shoved in a spot for an SRM 6... thus resulting in even more wackiness. It just makes no sense and has an effect upon appearance as geometry is updated to match the actual weapon load.

The second part of the problem is caused by the need to "show all the weapons the mech has." That's nice for visible weapons mounted in obvious places - the Atlas's external right torso gun housing, most energy weapons, etc. But the Catapult is designed to house the missiles in an armored box with a missile bay door. Realistically, all the missiles should fit within the box and you'd only be able to see how many missile hardpoints are in use when the missile bay doors are open. That's why the Catapult has those huge ears... for lots of missiles. Doing it the current way just looks awful and silly.

Don't even get me started on the oversized Catapult vs. undersized Stalker nonsense. Catapults now are freakishly huge things with giant ears, while Stalkers are somehow abnormally small while still firing off more missiles per salvo than the Catapults. I guess the Stalkers all have magical Missile Bays of Holding to store their launchers in extra-dimensional space... or Catapults use their ears mostly to store luggage and beer.

Stalkers still waiting for thier visual update but you are right with the Atlas. They realy get 10 and 6 tubes while using 2x20 lrms (i dont have tested if they come all at once out of it)
They also talked about size correction (maybe smaller catapult and bigger stalker?) in the past but what realy grind my gear is the ugly quickfix for catapults. Atlas looking good with the new visuals(also when they dont show the correct tubes) but i cant drive a catapult with more then one misslepack in each arm... its just hurting my eyes. And Ppc ... its looks like they put an adapter in an adapter in an adapter for small ppcs.... plz just put some nice looking armor plates on it if its realy such a problem to have big ppc barrels.

Maybe i begining slowly to rage because its feels like they just ignore us...

[LORD TSARKON]

Im abusing the heck out of my Stalkers because I fear they will be the next big (Nerf)... Stalkers are so much better than Catapults.. in terms of size, missile housing, power, hit boxes, high energy hardpoints,ect..

My First Mech was a Catapult.... and they used to be a decent starter Mech... but PGI has killed it and made it inferior to a point that new players should just stay away from this poor abused Step-Child of a Mech that is abused everyday by PGI parents that Beat the crap out of their Catapults with Extension Cords everyday...

Honestly.... Every crap mech in the game currently should get a BUFF... like extra Module slot or something.

[Bloodweaver]

This and the Hunchback change are examples of exactly why so many of us worry about the impending "(f)art pass" that will be applied to Stalkers, Centurions, Cicadas, and whatever else. Not looking forward to whatever hijinks PGI comes up with next.

[Dauphni]

I don't get why the Catapults get all the hate from PGI. First they give it ‘quirks’ which are really just straight nerfs, then they ‘improve’ the geometry, making the most iconic and aesthetically sophisticated Mech (imo) a whole lot less appealing visually.

[SirLANsalot]

Uite Dauphni, on 11 March 2014 - 01:57 PM, said:

I don't get why the Catapults get all the hate from PGI. First they give it ‘quirks’ which are really just straight nerfs, then they ‘improve’ the geometry, making the most iconic and aesthetically sophisticated Mech (imo) a whole lot less appealing visually.

PGI has been going back and implementing things so you can Visually see how many "guns" a mech has. This is why they did that to the Catapult. Now you can SEE how many missiles the mech is carrying, if he is at full hard-points, or is he short a few? So you can tell what the mech has at a quick glance and see if he is a major threat or someone out for a leisurely stroll through a hostile environment.

Besides the A1 is a useless mech to begin with, not enough tonnage to use all 6 hard-points for large LRM's (15+), and NO defensive guns to be had. Outside of an organized 12 or full 4 man lance, the mech has no use in this game and is why I hate using that mech. The C4 is a far better choice, it has 2 ML for backup, and 4 missiles for some nice LRM flinging (2 20 and 2 10).

[Degalus]

SirLANsalot, on 11 March 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

PGI has been going back and implementing things so you can Visually see how many "guns" a mech has. This is why they did that to the Catapult. Now you can SEE how many missiles the mech is carrying, if he is at full hard-points, or is he short a few? So you can tell what the mech has at a quick glance and see if he is a major threat or someone out for a leisurely stroll through a hostile environment.

Besides the A1 is a useless mech to begin with, not enough tonnage to use all 6 hard-points for large LRM's (15+), and NO defensive guns to be had. Outside of an organized 12 or full 4 man lance, the mech has no use in this game and is why I hate using that mech. The C4 is a far better choice, it has 2 ML for backup, and 4 missiles for some nice LRM flinging (2 20 and 2 10).

A1 is not useless, its more a matter of taste. I was running a Splatcat after the Ghostheatpatch and liked it. Some others Player use 6x Streakcats and 6xlrm5 Shakecats.
One Member of my Clan also use 2xlrm10 4xStreaks and the funniest thing i ever saw was a 2xLrm5 2xSrm6 2xStreaks. Dont call a Mech useless only because there is no Loadout that you would use.
Beside of that, yea fine to show us how many weapons they have. No problem with that. But why did they take such a bad design for it?

Edited by Degalus, 12 March 2014 - 12:51 AM.