Brian Eckman is ******* lying when it comes to smurfy, it's so easy a 5 year old can understand. Hell, it's 90% just like the Mechwarrior 3 Mechlab
I think the Mechlab has been pretty much easy to use in the other MW games. It's just MWO that has needlessly complicated that (and further complicated in UI 2.0). Other than trying to explain what stuff does in the mechlab or what each weapon does (you know, TUTORIALS), PGI has to go back in time and reinvent the wheel.
It's almost as if they've never seen the MW2, MW3, MW4 mechlabs. ALL of them are so easy, anyone can figure out how to build their mech pretty quickly.
Quote
UI2.0 is the one that needs to be scrapped, and once again Brian the Cicada-man doesn't know what he is talking about.
Thats not exactly "humanoid" or controversial.... upright legs instead of digitigrade[color=#373737] [/color]legs would make the Jenner "humanoid". Itd be neat for the Urbanmech to finally make it but I'm guessing its going to be another originally "Unseen" mech, or something that looks more human, like the Warhammer, Rifleman*, Phoenix Hawk, Wasp, etc. any others that are humanoid from the formerly "Unseen" list . If its not one of those then idk it'll probably be another mech that no one is really expecting, just like with the Kintaro, they've been picking mechs that haven't really had the limelight in previous titles.
*just an example, it would be redundant to have it [Rifleman] and the Jagermech
* I also say formerly unseen, because just look at project phoenix.
Iron Harlequin, on 07 November 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:
Thats not exactly "humanoid" or controversial.... upright legs instead of digitigrade[color=#373737] [/color]legs would make the Jenner "humanoid". Itd be neat for the Urbanmech to finally make it but I'm guessing its going to be another originally "Unseen" mech, or something that looks more human, like the Warhammer, Rifleman*, Phoenix Hawk, Wasp, etc. any others that are humanoid from the formerly "Unseen" list . If its not one of those then idk it'll probably be another mech that no one is really expecting, just like with the Kintaro, they've been picking mechs that haven't really had the limelight in previous titles.
*just an example, it would be redundant to have it [Rifleman] and the Jagermech
* I also say formerly unseen, because just look at project phoenix.
Think I'm with Peiper here -- the description given sounds an awful lot like the Firestarter...
So it appears that sometime next year is 3 weeks after launch on Canadian calendars. And people really think we will see any bit of CW within 6 months of launch.
Think I'm with Peiper here -- the description given sounds an awful lot like the Firestarter...
Shar Wolf, on 07 November 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:
Here is hoping - Firestarter is near the top of my wishlist XD
Right next to the Urbie >_>
Only problem is, almost no one uses flamers, and with their near complete useless-ness other than blinding people you've got the majority of Firestarter builds using flamers [stock]. Yea, "oh but you can pull the flamers out and put other stuff in there", then what would have been the point of the Firestarter, if its just "Gunbag Warrior Online", you could've put in another mech that does that same thing or better. Well they wouldn't have to, since the Jenner and Cicada [even though its a medium] have builds like that already. The only hints were "specialty mech, controversial, and humanoid".
Below in spoiler, I've crossed out Firestarter builds due to technology restrictions and/or time restrictions.
Spoiler
FS9-A The original Firestarter, production on it ceased with the introduction of the FS9-H. It carried Small Lasers instead of machine guns and mounted an additional ton of armor.
FS9-B Following the capture of Coventry, the Word of Blake converted the Firestarter line to produce a new variant that could be better integrated into their units. An additional ton of armor is added when compared to the S and it is upgraded to Light Ferro-Fibrous. Five Flamers are devastating to conventional units, while an ER Medium Laser provides firepower against hardened targets. A C3i Computer allows it to share targeting data from other units. The use of single heat sinks is confusing in such a unit, and it means that the -B can build heat quickly Word of Blake, need I say more?
FS9-C Manufactured by the Circinus Federation, the -C is similar to the -S, but it uses ten double heat sinks. It removes the defensive and scouting equipment, as well as a half-ton of armor to add and additional Small Laser and a pair of SRM-2s. The missile launchers are commonly loaded with Inferno rounds.This one can get a pass because you can just not have Inferno rounds, however that defeats the "specialty" purpose.
FS9-K The K variant mounts two flamers, a Large laser and two small lasers. While it was designed to be a companion model, the H variant proved more popular and dominated production after it was introduced.
FS9-M Nicknamed the Mirage, this variant of the Firestarter converts it from an incendiary 'Mech to a frontline 'Mech by removing the flamers and adding in their place two small lasers and three tons of armor. The variant was in production for only one year before the catastrophic battle which transformed the Argile plant, and the capital of Skye, into a desert wasteland. The Skye Rangers maintained several Mirages, including a lance with one arm painted black in commemoration.
FS9-M2 Manufactured on Coventry for the mercenary market, possibly a descendant of the -B and almost the polar opposite of the -M variant, the -M2 variant of the Firestarter is an upgrade that is built on a Foundation Ultralight Endo Steel chassis and is armored with seven tons of Durallex Nova standard armor. Eleven Double Heat Sinks attempt to keep the -M2 cool, while a single ER Medium Laser mounted in the head and three Flamers in each arm work to tax those same heat sinks. The life support system was substantially redesigned to be more rugged in support of the -M2's primary mission, and as a result the -M2 has the Improved Life Support Design No ER tech yet, and no Ultralight Endo Steel
FS9-M3 The -M3 is a modification of the -M2 Firestarter that has been optimized for artillery spotting. The 'Mech has removed the three Flamers mounted in the left arm, replacing them in the arm with a single ER Small Laser, and added a TAG laser designator to the right torso, allowing it to spot for artillery, and MASC, which allows it to move at up to 129.6 km/h. The -M3 also dropped a single double heat sink but added another half ton of armor, giving it a total of seven and a half tons of standard armor.No Masc yet
FS9-M4 Another reworking of the -M2 variant, the M4 strips out a double heat sink, the ER Medium Laser and the three Flamers mounted in the left arm. The -M4 upgrades the engine to 210 XL and mounts a single Rotary AC/2 in the left arm, supplied with a single ton of ammunition stored in the left torso. The -M4 also adds another half ton of standard armourRotary AC's and ER Tech
FS9-P The FS9-P is an upgrade of the Firestarter manufactured by Coventry Metal Works for the Periphery. The armor has been upgraded to Ferro-Fibrous and the 'Mech carries two Flamers, two Medium Lasers, two Rocket Launcher 15s, and four Rocket Launcher 10s, giving it an incredible one-shot kill capability against heavier 'Mechs. The already overwhelming number of Firestarters in the near Periphery led to the failure of this variant.No rocket launchers
FS9-S The FS9-S is an overhaul of the FS9-H. The structure has been upgraded to use an Endo Steel chassis. The weapons carried are four flamers, two medium lasers, and a single small laser. An Anti-Missile System with one ton of ammo has been added to protect against missile attacks, and a Beagle Active Probe has been installed to enhance the Firestarter's scouting role.
FS9-S1 The FS9-S1 is identical to the FS9-S except that it carries a Guardian ECM Suite instead of the Beagle Active Probe
FS9-S2 This variant is a direct copy of the FS9-S except ER medium lasers replace the standard medium laserER tech
FS9-S3 This variant is a direct copy of the FS9-S1 except ER medium lasers replace the standard medium laserER Tech
Custom Variants FS9-81X This is a Experimental prototype of the Firestarter that was created by Defiance Industries of Kwangjong-ni. Only three prototypes were produced as of 3074, and suffered from developmental problems with their components. Using the FS9-H as its base, the 'Mech is fitted with an XXL Engine and a pair of Medium X-Pulse Lasers, both mounted in the right arm. Its principle weapon is a Plasma Rifle with 10 shots of ammunition. The 'Mech retains the original base model's Flamers and jump capabilities. Magic tech
Firestarter(Omni) - This OmniMech version of the venerable Firestarter debuted around 3058Look at the year
Yea, you get 6 variants out of it, which is a good amount. However you've got 2 other mechs that definitely do a better job than it. But the same thing could be said for a lot of the mechs. Although, I'm just not understanding where this whisper on the wind came from that said firestarter, from: "specialty mech, humanoid, controversial".The vast majority of mechs are "specialty mechs", a large number of them are "humanoid" and a good number are "controversial". If its controversial I'd put a big bet on it being another formerly unseen. Firestarter might make it, but the magical conclusion that "thats gotta be it" is rather silly. I mean hell I thought the Flea was going to be the "next mech" 3 times now, imagine how I felt seeing a Kintaro or whatever some of the others were. Now I will say that it has a tiny small miniscule chance to be a Firestarter. But go look at all the "humanoid" mechs, that have a "specialty role" and then narrow them down to "controversial", and then see which of them is a light mech.
RG Notch, on 07 November 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:
So it appears that sometime next year is 3 weeks after launch on Canadian calendars. And people really think we will see any bit of CW within 6 months of launch.
MoonUnitBeta, on 06 November 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:
First of all, THANK YOU, for doing this.
Second: I think this is the image they were referring to. It is in the UI2.0 command chair post with all the mock-up images, but I suppose they're still taking the info in from them and putting them into the UI.
Yep thats what I'd like to use. But I played with this kind of mechlab since MW2 and MW3 (where you still had to switch sections).
It just need to be there to see if everything is where it should be, or if you have a ton of armor/ammo where you don't want it
I'm kind of worried with the rate they've been adding/fixing content for UI2.0. Latest test didn't even have the camo spec stuff Bryan tweeted and it says Decals will be in BEFORE UI2.0 and that could be months!
LocationA fog where no one notices the contrast of white on white
Posted 01 December 2013 - 02:22 AM
Edweird, on 01 December 2013 - 01:55 AM, said:
I'm kind of worried with the rate they've been adding/fixing content for UI2.0. Latest test didn't even have the camo spec stuff Bryan tweeted and it says Decals will be in BEFORE UI2.0 and that could be months!
38:00 Q: Decals soon?
Part of rendering team workload. After Dx11, not before UI 2.0.
Checking Bryan's Twitter stream, I don't see any mention that we'd get decals BEFORE UI 2.0. I do remember him saying that decals are another layer of graphics that must be applied over the current skins, and must also be compatible with the damage effects shown on a mech. The rendering engineers/programmers who would be working on that kind of stuff are currently 100% involved with implementing Dx11. When they are done, they will have time to work on decals. HOWEVER this little team will also have to work on SLI/Crossfire stuff too. So, don't expect decals any time soon. Certainly not until after Dx11, and most likely not until UI 2.0 is out. As a further comment, I do believe that when people asked about decals - I don't recall if it is in this interview or not - he said there would be a selection of decals units can choose from, and that personal/private unit decals would be well on down the road (you know, when computers are rendered obsolete).
Personally, I care less about decals and about this monstrosity of a UI 2.0 mechlab. I really think they are slowly, achingly slowly drawing out the release of the mechlab and UI 2.0 not because they can't create a streamlined, intuitive, smurfy mechlab for us but because the really don't have a freaking clue on how they're going to implement Community Warfare. They KNOW the success and longevity of this game rely on the depth and functionality of inner sphere wars. But as Russ explains in his last big NGNG interview: these guys are console game developers. Such games are for short-attention span twitchy pimply children who could care less about a galactic map and more about their kill-death ratio. It's part of the reason they disregarded or otherwise were inept at responding to the feedback of the traditional PC gaming/old mechwarrior community so far. They don't understand the depth of what they dived into. But they're learning, painfully and slowly like most people.
The lack of progress on ui 2.0 over the last month is worrisome. I didn't test it myself but I tested the first version and almost nothing seems to have changed. What have they been doing all that time?
I'm actually convinced that PGI will deliver an awesome product with UI2.0 and the new CW (hah). What we have so far is awesome. I can't imagine the 'mechs looking any better than they do, huge props to Flyingdebris and the rest of the visual team for that. MWO has to consider that a new player could join at any time, and if they put out a buggy product and that's the first thing a new player sees, that could seriously hurt the title's reputation, which would be bad for those who already play.
PGI may be small, but when they implement a feature, they're professional about it. Let them take their time and ensure that each new feature is as well thought out and executed as the rest of the game. In the meantime, enjoy the highly balanced PvP Battletechy stomp fest. It can only get better.
I'm actually convinced that PGI will deliver an awesome product with UI2.0 and the new CW (hah). What we have so far is awesome. I can't imagine the 'mechs looking any better than they do, huge props to Flyingdebris and the rest of the visual team for that. MWO has to consider that a new player could join at any time, and if they put out a buggy product and that's the first thing a new player sees, that could seriously hurt the title's reputation, which would be bad for those who already play.
PGI may be small, but when they implement a feature, they're professional about it. Let them take their time and ensure that each new feature is as well thought out and executed as the rest of the game. In the meantime, enjoy the highly balanced PvP Battletechy stomp fest. It can only get better.
Sorry to be a downer......but are you new here? You must be, because the fiascoes of the past are obviously not burnt into your memory, like they are in mine.
And to be perfectly honest, professionals don't set dates then miss them.....repeatedly. Then go silent about the fact, and leave the player base wondering.
I understand your enthusiasm, i was once just as enthusiastic. But too many times i have had expectations set, by PGI, and then not delivered on.
It gets old.....faster than you expect.
/ontopic
Well done Peiper as always. Thank you for doing PGI's forum work for them.
Rhys Erlykov, on 01 December 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:
Back end code for plugging in the CW metagame things, most likely.
According to the recent announcement about the state of the game they just now finished roadmapping everything that the engineers need to do to start implementing Community Warfare.
So no, that's not what they've been doing they haven't even started that part of development yet.
3
gavilatius, on 07 November 2013 - 04:14 AM, said:
