Anyone noticed something on that change to hitbox ?
0
Dragon Hitbox Change
Started by Verrue, Dec 04 2013 04:48 PM
5 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 04 December 2013 - 04:48 PM
#2
Posted 04 December 2013 - 04:56 PM
I ran my Fang for a few drops last night. Honestly, I couldn't tell much of a difference. But then again, I couldn't tell much of a difference from the Awesome changes either, yet many on the Forums swear the AWS is much better. I'm skeptical.
#3
Posted 04 December 2013 - 06:04 PM
I loaded up my Flame with 4 ML, gauss and the requisite 350xl to blow the dust off of it.
There seems to be a marginal difference in damage soaking. Speed and twist is the essence of the Dragon, never thought it was all that bad to begin with. The gauss change is what really hurt it with the fire delay (eta need to MOVE and TWIST.)
Same with the Awesome, it's still far from Awesome but the change to the hitboxes made it very marginally better.
There seems to be a marginal difference in damage soaking. Speed and twist is the essence of the Dragon, never thought it was all that bad to begin with. The gauss change is what really hurt it with the fire delay (eta need to MOVE and TWIST.)
Same with the Awesome, it's still far from Awesome but the change to the hitboxes made it very marginally better.
Edited by Ice Cream Mech, 04 December 2013 - 06:06 PM.
#4
Posted 05 December 2013 - 11:11 AM
I wouldn't expect more than a marginal improvement. Unlike the Awesome, who had both large hitboxes AND some eronious errors that were fixed, the Dragon was large because, well, it's packing something serious in the chest. Until it gets a chest reduction of some kind, it's always going to have some issue (Either it will core too easily, or it will lose it's side torso too easily). Part of the problem is a Dragon, much like the Awesome, is simply a wide load. The Dragon is a wide load at any profile though.
#5
Posted 06 December 2013 - 09:06 AM
The problem with the Dragon is that in Battletech the artwork wasn't designed for functionality in mind. So you have the BT lore saying this mech was badass and the main heavy for the DCMS, but in practical translation (MWO) a giant center torso means you die easy and can't take cover well.
Specific shapes of mechs don't play a huge part in TT effectiveness. In MWO they do.
Specific shapes of mechs don't play a huge part in TT effectiveness. In MWO they do.
#6
Posted 10 December 2013 - 05:33 AM
after some (3) field run :
1 death to side torso left (playing side torso armor (36 front, 20 rear)
observation: sniping mech seem to hit side torso more often. will try raise side armor a bit, adapt play tyo be less static.
1 center torso death (normal run)
1 great win (4 kills) : raised side armor to 38 , lower rear side to 16, playing hide and seek. Side torso seem to draw more splash dmg then before from missiles salvo and lbx-10.
1 death to side torso left (playing side torso armor (36 front, 20 rear)
observation: sniping mech seem to hit side torso more often. will try raise side armor a bit, adapt play tyo be less static.
1 center torso death (normal run)
1 great win (4 kills) : raised side armor to 38 , lower rear side to 16, playing hide and seek. Side torso seem to draw more splash dmg then before from missiles salvo and lbx-10.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users