Jump to content

New Jenner Missile Tube Visuals


5 replies to this topic

#1 LoneUnknown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 04 December 2013 - 10:59 PM

Just noticed, that the secondary missile tubes on the Jenner are a bit illogical from a practical standpoint.

Considering the shape of the torso/head, the lower tubes are dangerously close to the jenner's own body. Just looking in mechlab you will notice that they would barely clear the antenna coming from the head, and would zip directly over the top of the head. Might work if the mech were firing from a stationary position....,

However, the Jenner is designed for speed, jumping, and maneuverability, and would most likely shoot itself with missiles launched from such a location.

Battlemech 101! Don't shoot yourself in the head with your own missiles!


Edit: This is regarding the lateral fire of SRMs. I realize that LRMs make sense there and were probably the intention (looking at the Oxide default configuration).

If stacking on top of the top launcher looks ridiculous (probably would) how about two side lanchers (think the side pod on atlas 3rd missile slot) up by the head?

Edited by LoneUnknown, 04 December 2013 - 11:36 PM.


#2 Durant Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 3,877 posts
  • LocationClose enough to poke you with a stick.

Posted 05 December 2013 - 02:52 AM

The arm pods are good on all standard variants of the Jenner. Haven't seen them on an Oxide yet.

They should have left the torso hole alone, as it's an iconic feature of the Jenner. The missile launchers should have been put in the same place the standard 4-tube launcher was.

SRM2 should have been a small flat 2-tube.
SRM4 should have been the standard flat 4-tube (or a square pattern).
SRM6 should have been the standard flat 4-tube plus a flat 2-tube stacked on top (or two mirrored triangle patterns side-by-side).
SRM4 x2 should have been the standard flat 4-tube with another flat 4-tube stacked on top (or two square patterns side-by-side).
LRM5 should have been a slightly larger flat 5-tube (or an X pattern).
LRM5 x2 or LRM10 should have been a flat 5-tube with another flat 5-tube stacked on top (or two X patterns side-by-side).

#3 Sen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 05 December 2013 - 05:21 AM

After working to master out the Oxide over the past few days, I've noticed that you don't have to worry about shooting yourself in the head. . . 3 racks LOOK like they're all firing from the right arm...

:D

I hear what you're sayin' tho ^^

#4 LoneUnknown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 11:05 PM

View PostSen, on 05 December 2013 - 05:21 AM, said:

After working to master out the Oxide over the past few days, I've noticed that you don't have to worry about shooting yourself in the head. . . 3 racks LOOK like they're all firing from the right arm...

:D

I hear what you're sayin' tho ^^


LoL

I want my old JennerD back (x2 streaks without looking stupid) :/

#5 Cest7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,781 posts
  • LocationMaple Ditch

Posted 09 December 2013 - 01:15 PM

$5 to anyone that figures out how to use the 15 tubes in the CT.

#6 Durant Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 3,877 posts
  • LocationClose enough to poke you with a stick.

Posted 09 December 2013 - 09:58 PM

Easy -- Clan LRM-10 + Clan LRM-5.

Inner Sphere weapons cannot do it.

I've actually switched my setups back to using either a single SRM-4 or a single SSRM-2 because the dual-launcher setups are too damn ugly. I also dragged out my JR7-F because it's cool now that it shoots three lazor beemz out of each arm.

Edited by Durant Carlyle, 09 December 2013 - 10:02 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users