321 replies to this topic

[Phromethius]

EyeOne, on 28 March 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

This is slightly off subject but what the hell is going on in this picture?



I can't figure out where the legs are attaching to the hips. There looks like a circle joint right above the knee, but there is more leg behind that part. Then the right leg doesn't match the left let. I've been confused by this picture for years.

My makes me think of this:

Gah!! that hurt my eyes! the feet!

What mech is that? it looks like an assault version of the Bushwhacker?

[EyeOne]

Phromethius, on 28 March 2014 - 11:29 AM, said:

Gah!! that hurt my eyes! the feet!

What mech is that? it looks like an assault version of the Bushwhacker?

It is the Bushwacker. The picture for the main article on Sarna: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Bushwacker

[Strum Wealh]

EyeOne, on 28 March 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

This is slightly off subject but what the hell is going on in this picture?



I can't figure out where the legs are attaching to the hips. There looks like a circle joint right above the knee, but there is more leg behind that part. Then the right leg doesn't match the left let. I've been confused by this picture for years.

My makes me think of this:

So... the canonical Bushwacker has the design Quirks "Low/Narrow Profile" (a three-point positive quirk) and "No Torso Twist" (a two-point negative quirk).
In fact, the Bushwacker is explicitly mentioned as the exemplar in the rules for the "No Torso Twist" quirk (Strategic Operations, pg. 198).

"Some ’Mech designs, like the Bushwacker, lack the flexibility to twist at the waist (or don’t possess a waist to twist). A ’Mech with this quirk cannot torso twist."

So... the Bushwacker's hip joints are the circular/conical assemblies just below the arms' attachment points/shoulder joints, and the canonical Bushwacker is incapable of torso-twisting.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 28 March 2014 - 03:19 PM.

[Jin Ma]

Strum Wealh, on 28 March 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

So... the canonical Bushwacker has the design Quirks "Low/Narrow Profile" (a three-point positive quirk) and "No Torso Twist" (a two-point negative quirk).
In fact, the Bushwacker is explicitly mentioned as the exemplar in the rules for the "No Torso Twist" quirk (Strategic Operations, pg. 198).

"Some ’Mech designs, like the Bushwacker, lack the flexibility to twist at the waist (or don’t possess a waist to twist). A ’Mech with this quirk cannot torso twist."

So... the Bushwacker's hip joints are the circular/conical assemblies just below the arms' attachment points/shoulder joints, and the canonical Bushwacker is incapable of torso-twisting.

that is very saddening

Edited by Jin Ma, 28 March 2014 - 03:08 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

Jin Ma, on 28 March 2014 - 03:08 PM, said:

that is very saddening

Well, the canonical Cicada, Jenner, and JagerMech all have the same "No Torso Twist" quirk, but are able to do so in MWO.

As such, there is a good chance that if the Bushwacker is ever implemented in MWO (third variant becomes available in 3056), it would probably be made to be capable of torso-twisting (as seen with the Uller, Puma, and Black Hawk).
There is a good chance that the same would hold true for the King Crab and Mauler, both of which we know PGI has some plans for.

[EyeOne]

Strum Wealh, on 28 March 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

So... the canonical Bushwacker has the design Quirks "Low/Narrow Profile" (a three-point positive quirk) and "No Torso Twist" (a two-point negative quirk).
In fact, the Bushwacker is explicitly mentioned as the exemplar in the rules for the "No Torso Twist" quirk (Strategic Operations, pg. 198).

"Some ’Mech designs, like the Bushwacker, lack the flexibility to twist at the waist (or don’t possess a waist to twist). A ’Mech with this quirk cannot torso twist."

So... the Bushwacker's hip joints are the circular/conical assemblies just below the arms' attachment points/shoulder joints, and the canonical Bushwacker is incapable of torso-twisting.

So was this lack of torso twist fixed after they redesigned it from a captured Vulture? Because it could twist in MW3 and in this picture it looks like it can twist:


Either way that first picture is a mess.

[Strum Wealh]

EyeOne, on 28 March 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:

So was this lack of torso twist fixed after they redesigned it from a captured Vulture? Because it could twist in MW3 and in this picture it looks like it can twist:


Either way that first picture is a mess.

MW3 made a lot of the same changes that MWO would likely end up making (I recall the Cauldron Born and the Black Hawk having limited torso twist, as opposed to zero torso twist), and none of the video games (including MWO) are canonical, anyway.

Also, several of the Bushwacker minis on CamoSpecs (which more-closely resemble the version from the TRO cover) show that there is no actual joint between the elongated section of the body and the legs' attachment points; it's especially clear in the second picture in this set.

Though, I would expect MWO to put a joint there, as they did with the other normally-non-twisting 'Mechs.

[EyeOne]

Strum Wealh, on 28 March 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

MW3 made a lot of the same changes that MWO would likely end up making (I recall the Cauldron Born and the Black Hawk having limited torso twist, as opposed to zero torso twist), and none of the video games (including MWO) are canonical, anyway.

Also, several of the Bushwacker minis on CamoSpecs (which more-closely resemble the version from the TRO cover) show that there is no actual joint between the elongated section of the body and the legs' attachment points; it's especially clear in the second picture in this set.

Though, I would expect MWO to put a joint there, as they did with the other normally-non-twisting 'Mechs.

Ok, I don't remember if the Nova or Cauldron had twisting in MW3, but I know the Nova and Jenner did not have it in MW2.

[Strum Wealh]

EyeOne, on 28 March 2014 - 04:44 PM, said:

Ok, I don't remember if the Nova or Cauldron had twisting in MW3, but I know the Nova and Jenner did not have it in MW2.

IIRC, it was very limited (like, 5 to 10 degrees to each side).

[EyeOne]

Strum Wealh, on 28 March 2014 - 04:49 PM, said:

IIRC, it was very limited (like, 5 to 10 degrees to each side).

I believe the Nova was very limited, but the Jenner didn't have any at all. I could be wrong.

[Nathan Foxbane]

Strum Wealh, on 28 March 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

MW3 made a lot of the same changes that MWO would likely end up making (I recall the Cauldron Born and the Black Hawk having limited torso twist, as opposed to zero torso twist), and none of the video games (including MWO) are canonical, anyway.

Also, several of the Bushwacker minis on CamoSpecs (which more-closely resemble the version from the TRO cover) show that there is no actual joint between the elongated section of the body and the legs' attachment points; it's especially clear in the second picture in this set.

Though, I would expect MWO to put a joint there, as they did with the other normally-non-twisting 'Mechs.

That is actually the cover art for TRO:3058. Inconsistancy from the very first publication of the Bushwacker. On the right arm... Smallest. AC/10. Ever.

[Ryvucz]

Utilyan, on 28 March 2014 - 12:23 AM, said:

Says the guy who wants LRM's Nerfed. You couldn't find cover if cover slapped you upside your head.


You need an urbanmech.

It isn't a nerf smart guy, it's firing them as they should be fired.

Name one missile launcher that fires every missile at once.

[Whatzituyah]

Ryvucz, on 29 March 2014 - 12:09 PM, said:

It isn't a nerf smart guy, it's firing them as they should be fired.

Name one missile launcher that fires every missile at once.

This one technically does....

[Ryvucz]

Whatzituyah, on 29 March 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

This one technically does....

Considering MWO doesn't have SCUD launchers.... no.

[Whatzituyah]

Ryvucz, on 29 March 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

Considering MWO doesn't have SCUD launchers.... no.

You said name a missle launcher that could and there you go.

[Ryvucz]

Whatzituyah, on 29 March 2014 - 02:09 PM, said:

You said name a missle launcher that could and there you go.

I'm sorry, I had no idea my wording covered launchers that can only fire one missile at a time.

I shall clarify for you next time.

[verybad]

Strum Wealh, on 28 March 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

MW3 made a lot of the same changes that MWO would likely end up making (I recall the Cauldron Born and the Black Hawk having limited torso twist, as opposed to zero torso twist), and none of the video games (including MWO) are canonical, anyway.

Also, several of the Bushwacker minis on CamoSpecs (which more-closely resemble the version from the TRO cover) show that there is no actual joint between the elongated section of the body and the legs' attachment points; it's especially clear in the second picture in this set.

Though, I would expect MWO to put a joint there, as they did with the other normally-non-twisting 'Mechs.

The Bushwacker was made for MW3, and then it got put into the Battletech TRO later. So essentially, Battletech screwed up...

[Procyon Alpha]

Can I get a Robotech crossover episode....lol.

Damn u HG

[InRev]

verybad, on 29 March 2014 - 03:02 PM, said:

The Bushwacker was made for MW3, and then it got put into the Battletech TRO later. So essentially, Battletech screwed up...

Uh, what? The Bushwacker was the cover mech of TRO 3058 which came out in 1995. MW3 came out in 1999. The Bushwacker predates MW3 by 4 years . . .

[Jin Ma]

verybad, on 29 March 2014 - 03:02 PM, said:

The Bushwacker was made for MW3, and then it got put into the Battletech TRO later. So essentially, Battletech screwed up...

wait for real? bushwacker started in MW3 before TRO? that can't be right, the TRO art looks completely unlike the MW3 one.