4349 replies to this topic

[Nightshade24]

This thread stopped getting posts after that person posted that rick roll video.

I sense a disturbance in the universe.

[Arete]

Nightshade24, on 29 December 2014 - 06:18 AM, said:

This thread stopped getting posts after that person posted that rick roll video.

I sense a disturbance in the universe.

The Urbieverse was shocked at it's core. Rickrolling is the achilles heel of the Urbanite.

[wanderer]

Quote

Thank you so much for that. I am happy to find it.

You're welcome. Think I did the first one for that back when I hung out on /tg/ and heard the "Davy Crockett Urbie" story the first time.

Quote

Im sorry but that is just so bad...

And so was the stock Banshee.

And it's one of the best IS assault chassis in MWO. Never judge a MWO 'Mech by it's stock cover.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Except perhaps the Timberwolf

But then...
There are exceptions to every rule.

[Nightshade24]

Shar Wolf, on 29 December 2014 - 02:17 PM, said:

Except perhaps the Timberwolf

But then...
There are exceptions to every rule.

To be honest I do not see what all the hype is for the timberwolf and most people ditch the stock load out in the first week and just go for a laser vomit build. Just saying...

[Cimarb]

Nightshade24, on 29 December 2014 - 04:03 PM, said:

To be honest I do not see what all the hype is for the timberwolf and most people ditch the stock load out in the first week and just go for a laser vomit build. Just saying...

If you look at the stock builds, compared to what people change them to, the difference is usually quite small. Swap a SL for a ML, take a laser off, or swap 2 LRM20s for a couple pair of smaller launchers. All three stock loadouts are actually quite good as is, but most people feel that using a "stock loadout" is taboo, so they will change it at least a little just to NOT have a stock loadout...

[Dawnstealer]

Cimarb, on 29 December 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

If you look at the stock builds, compared to what people change them to, the difference is usually quite small. Swap a SL for a ML, take a laser off, or swap 2 LRM20s for a couple pair of smaller launchers. All three stock loadouts are actually quite good as is, but most people feel that using a "stock loadout" is taboo, so they will change it at least a little just to NOT have a stock loadout...

I am doubting your commitment to Urbanmech™

[Sereglach]

Nightshade24, on 27 December 2014 - 05:50 PM, said:

I came to the sudden realization that PGI is going to **** with us and ruin the quirks for the urban mech.

Imagine this. No Ac 20 quirk, No AC 10 or LBX 10 quirk, instead we get a variant with Ac2 quirk and the rest have pulse laser and PPC quirks.

Reference: Look at the firestarter, what's it iconic for ? Flamers. What quirks it got? literally every energy weapon besides flamer.

First off, as probably the biggest Flamer Weapon System supporter in MWO, I sadly do understand WHY they DIDN'T give the Firestarter Flamer quirks (for now). The Flamer is still set for a reengineering of the weapon system, as they are going to basically rebuild it from the ground up (mechanically). Even though I use Flamers on most of my mechs, I do this knowing that they are not a good weapon in the current balance of things. I treat it as an art form to make them be effective.

However, that said, after the Flamer gets its overhaul I sure as hell expect them to put Flamer Quirks on ALL of the Firestarters (or at least most of them) to some degree or another. They probably won't have the same quirks, but I expect them all to have some sort of Flamer quirks. For example, the A might have high heat gen reduction, the H might have range, the S might have weaker versions of both, and the K might have a strong generic energy heat gen for any weapons while having a smaller range boost for the Flamer. Or hell, we might even see a quirk similar to the Hellbringer that gives the Firestarters more resistance to Flamers, as well.

----------------------------------------------------------------

On the other hand, for the Urbanmechs, I very fully expect stock-based quirks on them. Even if they don't have stock-based quirks, I expect them to have strong enough generic quirks that will certainly make stock-based builds quite powerful in their own right. I don't see them trashing the Urbanmech quirks. It's far too iconic in it's roll as being a little unsuspecting trash can that carries one hell of a punch.

The only Urbanmech I don't see having quirks revolving around the stock weapon is the AC20 variant. However, I could see that variant having 4 ballistic hardpoints and some nice generic ballistic cooldown/range quirks that will let us put on a nice little quartet of MG's to devastating effect. Then it could be paired with a PPC or LPL or other energy weapons (depending on the number of those hardpoints) to make it a great little mech.

Edited by Sereglach, 29 December 2014 - 06:15 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

wanderer, on 29 December 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

You're welcome. Think I did the first one for that back when I hung out on /tg/ and heard the "Davy Crockett Urbie" story the first time.



And so was the stock Banshee.

And it's one of the best IS assault chassis in MWO. Never judge a MWO 'Mech by it's stock cover.

Ah /tg/, the bastion of nerddom in a sea of insanity.

One of the things I am enjoying about MWO is the customization. It allows us to really squeeze every ounce of performance out of a mech.

Sereglach, on 29 December 2014 - 06:15 PM, said:

First off, as probably the biggest Flamer Weapon System supporter in MWO, I sadly do understand WHY they DIDN'T give the Firestarter Flamer quirks (for now). The Flamer is still set for a reengineering of the weapon system, as they are going to basically rebuild it from the ground up (mechanically). Even though I use Flamers on most of my mechs, I do this knowing that they are not a good weapon in the current balance of things. I treat it as an art form to make them be effective.

However, that said, after the Flamer gets its overhaul I sure as hell expect them to put Flamer Quirks on ALL of the Firestarters (or at least most of them) to some degree or another. They probably won't have the same quirks, but I expect them all to have some sort of Flamer quirks. For example, the A might have high heat gen reduction, the H might have range, the S might have weaker versions of both, and the K might have a strong generic energy heat gen for any weapons while having a smaller range boost for the Flamer. Or hell, we might even see a quirk similar to the Hellbringer that gives the Firestarters more resistance to Flamers, as well.

----------------------------------------------------------------

On the other hand, for the Urbanmechs, I very fully expect stock-based quirks on them. Even if they don't have stock-based quirks, I expect them to have strong enough generic quirks that will certainly make stock-based builds quite powerful in their own right. I don't see them trashing the Urbanmech quirks. It's far too iconic in it's roll as being a little unsuspecting trash can that carries one hell of a punch.

The only Urbanmech I don't see having quirks revolving around the stock weapon is the AC20 variant. However, I could see that variant having 4 ballistic hardpoints and some nice generic ballistic cooldown/range quirks that will let us put on a nice little quartet of MG's to devastating effect. Then it could be paired with a PPC or LPL or other energy weapons (depending on the number of those hardpoints) to make it a great little mech.

All the FS9s need is a quirk that reduces the heat generation of the flamers by a big chunk, and I would start running flamers on them. However, I can't wait to see the re-work. I believe they won't start working on it until after the new year, and some of the tweaks to CW, but we'll see. (Originally the re-work was shelved due to CW phase 2 being on the table)

[Sereglach]

IraqiWalker, on 29 December 2014 - 06:55 PM, said:

All the FS9s need is a quirk that reduces the heat generation of the flamers by a big chunk, and I would start running flamers on them. However, I can't wait to see the re-work. I believe they won't start working on it until after the new year, and some of the tweaks to CW, but we'll see. (Originally the re-work was shelved due to CW phase 2 being on the table)

Sadly very aware of this. Thus the reasoning for recent posts on Mr. Berg's thread, as well as starting a new thread to attempt to ask the questions to Mr. Inouye.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I very much look forward to seeing the Urbanmechs and their quirks. If a variant has some really nice energy quirks, I might even run Flamers on an Urbanmech.

An Urbanmech trash can with fire coming out of it. I think there's a few Hobo jokes lurking there. . .

Edited by Sereglach, 29 December 2014 - 07:47 PM.

[King Arthur IV]

Oscar no like jokes made of him.

[Trez91]

so are we the getting the Urbanmech ?

[IraqiWalker]

We should be. There's at least concept art. The same can be said of the flea, but unlike the flea, the Urbie has no problems with MASC.

[Cimarb]

IraqiWalker, on 29 December 2014 - 10:33 PM, said:

We should be. There's at least concept art. The same can be said of the flea, but unlike the flea, the Urbie has no problems with MASC.

It does have a problem with the engine size, though. Honestly, I do not see why either one of these is an issue at all, but...

[Odanan]

Cimarb, on 30 December 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

It does have a problem with the engine size, though. Honestly, I do not see why either one of these is an issue at all, but...

They will figure it out (like they did with the King Crab AC/20s and the Enforcer's lack of variants).

[C E Dwyer]

Cimarb, on 30 December 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

It does have a problem with the engine size, though. Honestly, I do not see why either one of these is an issue at all, but...

well the urbie is a defensive weapon for an city enviroment, not designed for galloping across plains, so I don't see engine size as an issue, and we all know its going to end up two,three times faster than canon by the time PGI first with it, and we have the cash for none stock engines.

so roll out the Urbie PGI

[Jaspbo1]

Cathy, on 30 December 2014 - 08:39 AM, said:

well the urbie is a defensive weapon for an city enviroment, not designed for galloping across plains, so I don't see engine size as an issue,

It's not the speed of the engine, it's how the smallest engine in the game, the STD 100 is 1 ton, whilst it's XL counterpart is 0.5, which would mean the STD 60 engine would be negative tonnage, which makes absolutely no sense at all.

[Ovion]

Cimarb, on 30 December 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

It does have a problem with the engine size, though. Honestly, I do not see why either one of these is an issue at all, but...

The urbie engine isn't a big thing, they just need to shoehorn it in and add some code to account for it in the engine.

Time consuming maybe, but not game breaking.

MASC scares the crap out of PGI, because they've tried it, and it broke the game.
The engine struggles with the speed and the HSR system wets itself at the mere thought of it.

That's why MASC is a hurdle.

[Ovion]

Jaspbo1, on 30 December 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

It's not the speed of the engine, it's how the smallest engine in the game, the STD 100 is 1 ton, whilst it's XL counterpart is 0.5, which would mean the STD 60 engine would be negative tonnage, which makes absolutely no sense at all.

that's just how they've lumped it all together.

Weight of the engine + gyro + cockpit + something else + external heatsinks = actual engine weight.

So while the 'engine' weight is negative, the actual weight is in the region of 4-5T

I have a chart I can post when not on my phone.

Edited by Ovion, 30 December 2014 - 09:39 AM.

[Cimarb]

Ovion, on 30 December 2014 - 09:32 AM, said:

The urbie engine isn't a big thing, they just need to shoehorn it in and add some code to account for it in the engine.

Time consuming maybe, but not game breaking.

MASC scares the crap out of PGI, because they've tried it, and it broke the game.
The engine struggles with the speed and the HSR system wets itself at the mere thought of it.

That's why MASC is a hurdle.

MASC is only an issue on a select few mechs that, combined with it, go over the "allowed" speed cap. Adding it to the Executioner, for instance, would have ZERO issues, since it is an assault and still way lower than the speed cap even with MASC.

Redesigning the engine weight system, to accommodate the STD60, is much more significant than being selective with which MASC mechs to add.